Fans will no longer get the chance to meet him.

The media has been buzzing overnight with debates about Vice President Kamala Harris’s role in handling the border. Some news outlets claim she was never tasked with being the border czar, while others point to numerous past reports that affirm her title and responsibilities. In April 2021, Axios reported that “Harris, appointed by Biden as border czar, said she would be looking at the ‘root causes’ that drive migration.” They also said that “[t]he number of unaccompanied minors crossing the border has reached crisis levels.” In June 2021, Ed Lavanadera, a senior national correspondent for CNN, said, “The vice president is expected to be in El Paso… and this will be her first visit to the U.S.-Mexico border region since she was appointed as the border czar by President Biden.” NEW: “Fact-Checker” @PolitiFact has issued a fact check stating the claim that Kamala Harris was the border czar is “Mostly False.” This is called propaganda. Despite Harris being known as the “Border Czar,” as previously reported by Axios, PolitiFact has decided they need to… pic.twitter.com/pOmbSdv2gC — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) July 24, 2024 Many Republicans have emphasized her role in border policy to reveal political vulnerabilities. At the Republican National Convention, Nikki Haley said, “Kamala had one job… And that was to fix the border. Now imagine her in charge of the entire country.” Since Harris has emerged as the sole contender to win the Democratic nomination for president, many media outlets have backtracked on previous reports. On Wednesday, Axios said: “In the past few days, the Trump campaign and Republicans have tagged Harris repeatedly with the “border czar” title — which she never actually had.” CNN reported yesterday that “President Donald Trump… falsely claim[ed] Harris had been appointed Biden’s “border czar.”  Other media companies such as NBC, Time Magazine, and the New York Times claim that only Republican critics previously labeled Harris as the border czar. PolitiFact claims that her being the border czar “contains an element of truth, but it ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.” USA Today declared that Kamala Harris was never put in charge of the border. While it is accurate that Harris was not tasked with the day-to-day operations of border security, her role did encompass addressing broader issues related to migration.  In 2021, NBC reported: “Vice President Kamala Harris [was] leading diplomatic efforts to stem the flow of migrants at the Southern border… She has held calls with Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei and Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador to discuss migration.” Yesterday, former President Donald Trump held a rally in in Charlotte, North Carolina. This was his first rally since Biden dropped out of the presidential race. He brought Brandon Judd to the stage, the former president of the National Border Patrol Council. This is the union that represents border agents. Judd clarified Harris’ role in border policy: “Kamala Harris knows what she needs to do. I was there. I gave her all the policies she needed. All of them. And she refused to implement them. She does not care about you.” The mainstream media continues to gaslight Americans by rewriting history, making it more and more difficult to trust their reporting. As the debate continues, one thing remains clear: the Biden–Harris administration has created the worst border crisis in U.S. history. The post Left-Wing Media Outlets Rewrite Kamala’s Role as ‘Border Czar’ appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Fifty-two million Americans, for reasons ranging from investing to decentralizing economic control, own a cryptocurrency. While only a small fraction of these are voters who mark their ballots primarily on cryptocurrency issues, those voters do exist. Those who put cryptocurrencies first in importance may live in states where margins of election victory may number in the tens of thousands of votes. All of this means that Donald Trump’s modified stance on crypto could matter in 2024. Earlier in July, Trump announced that he would be speaking at the 2024 Bitcoin Conference. The event is located in Tennessee, but the convention attracts attendees who vote and influence others in all states. Trump’s appearance at the Bitcoin conference boosts crypto and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) as a political-economic force, says writer George Kaloudis. Following Trump’s brush with assassination, an update was published to Coindesk assuring readers of Trump’s continued intent to address the gathering. (READ MORE: The Bloodless Coup of Joe Biden Will Not Work Out Well for Democrats) The evolution of Trump from a critic of Bitcoin to an apparent adopter of cryptocurrency is marked. Previously, Trump suggested that cryptocurrencies compete against the U.S. dollar and fail to benefit the majority of Americans holding more traditional investments. Trump’s Support of Cryptocurrency Is a Distinct Change Twenty-eight percent of Republicans use cryptocurrencies and they tend to be slightly more interested in investing in them than Democrats. At first, Trump was arguably outpaced on currency transaction issues by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a former Democrat and current independent presidential candidate who recognized cryptocurrencies to be a 21st-century investment in American freedoms. Since cryptocurrencies first emerged in the late 00s, they have been seen as something of a pro-outsider 21st-century “revenge of the nerds” with a particularly sharp bite, as they allowed a wide range of people outside of the corporate, banking, military, government, and establishment investment sectors to gain wealth and mint money. Essentially tied only to the mathematical and technological performance of the crypto mines and digital wallets themselves, cryptocurrencies seemed to be an untameable new alternative with almost unlimited upside. Cryptocurrency investors see the “web 3.0” blockchain, a central nervous system for digital financial technology, as equal in importance to the future economy as industrial revolution technologies were to the last few hundred years. For central banks and government regulators to steer cryptocurrency to a future under their economic reins, taxation is one of their few major tools. (READ MORE: Google’s Report on AI Abuse Isn’t Comforting) Cryptocurrencies were first taxed by the Internal Revenue Service in 2020 after years of examining NFTs and issuing guidance. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives passed a change to the SEC’s guidance on cryptocurrency accounting that would favor individual owners, but Biden, urged on by Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, vetoed to keep the SEC status quo. The Biden-Harris administration has also proposed a tax of up to 30 percent on cryptocurrency mining, which would be a potentially lethal blow to the independent cryptocurrency economy in the U.S. NFT investors are looking for opposing candidates to present alternatives. Trump has signaled a friendlier climate for American NFT mining. Central banks may also assume the power to issue their own digital currencies. Central Bank Digital Currencies could impersonate the original innovations of cryptocurrency but could be more easily turned towards government interests in controlling, corralling, tracking, regulating, and, of course, taxing people more frequently. The Constitutional Debate to Protect Crypto Researchers have argued that launching a CBDC and reserving the capability to regulate its use in purchasing and contracts would be an end-run around the Constitution’s supreme laws keeping Americans free from eyes prying into their papers and effects. To hold onto liberty-minded voters, candidates must show their interest in preserving financial freedom. State legislatures such as North Carolina and governors like Florida’s Ron DeSantis, eying potential federal CBDC’s, have taken preventative actions. Debate over the constitutionality of a central bank has raged in America since its founding. To finance war debt, according to the Federal Reserve Bank’s historical publication, a central bank was created in the U.S. in 1791. The bank was found unconstitutional and allowed to expire in 1811. Then, the War of 1812 kicked up more war debt, and Congress created another central bank in 1816. Andrew Jackson ended the bank in 1836, ushering in the “free banking” era. “Panic” once again put pressure on lawmakers to recreate a central bank, resulting in the post-Civil War “National Bank” system and then the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, which has delivered us the last 111 years record of unprecedented inflation, government intrusion into citizens’ affairs, and a seemingly forever state of war criticized by cryptocurrency supporter JD Vance, who is Trump’s running mate. (READ MORE: We’re Missing the Plot When It Comes to AI) If CBDC’s would increase centralized control over the people, then Bitcoin, the giant of crypto, points to a freer path. Privacy coins like Monero use technology to even further align with the underlying principles of the 4th Amendment. There may be more to learn about crypto than any previous economic technology. If voters know nothing else about cryptocurrency, the history of banking shows that financial policy is legislatively fluid and tied to human opportunity, peace, war, and massive turns of events. Aspiring leaders of Americans ought to have something to say on the range of cryptocurrency policy options, and should lean towards principled freedom and peace. Per an announcement, Donald Trump plans his speech at 2 p.m. on July 27 at the 2024 Bitcoin Conference in Nashville. Robert Kennedy Jr. and Vivek Ramaswamy are also among the speakers. The post Trump to Speak at Tech Conference in a Political Landmark for Cryptocurrency appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Fresh is usually best, but there are plenty of things you didn't know you could do with canned peaches as well. We've consulted the experts to find out more.

Site has no Description

At 11:22 in the Body Cam 3 video footage release by Sen. Grassley, someone on the radio asks, "Do you have eyes on the water tower?" Here's the frame where you can see the exact local time (19:00:33) This indicates the water tower was in play, and law enforcement was concerned… pic.twitter.com/67OdrqfWHI — HealthRanger (@HealthRanger) […]

by Paul Craig Roberts, Paul Craig Roberts: There is competent analysis on the Internet of acoustic evidence indicating more than one shooter involved in the attempt on Trump’s life. Obviously, what is needed is a credible, brave, credentialed acoustic expert to analyze the acoustic evidence. This should be arranged by committees of the US Congress, […]

from The Dan Bongino Show: TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/