Alarming new research has revealed that consuming reused deep-fried cooking oil may lead to higher levels of neurodegeneration in rats and their offspring. Given that the practice of re-heating the same batch of oil for multiple meals is common in homes and restaurants worldwide‚ the study’s findings could have major implications for human health.Deep-frying involves completely submerging food in hot oil and is an extremely popular cooking technique that can be used to prepare everything from doughnuts to falafel. Unfortunately‚ however‚ the delicious treats that emerge from deep fryers have been linked to a range of illnesses including cancer and diabetes.It’s thought that these dangers are enhanced when oils are reused‚ as the repeated heating destroys the antioxidants and other healthy components contained within the grease‚ while also adding dangerous compounds like trans fats and peroxides. However‚ until now‚ the consequences of consuming reused oil had not been properly investigated.“Deep-frying at high temperatures has been linked with several metabolic disorders‚ but there have been no long-term investigations on the influence of deep-fried oil consumption and its detrimental effects on health‚” explained study author Kathiresan Shanmugam in a statement. “To our knowledge we are first to report long-term deep-fried oil supplementation increases neurodegeneration in the first-generation offspring.”Over the course of 30 days‚ the researchers fed female rats either standard chow or food that was enriched with regular or reheated oils. At the end of the month‚ they found that the animals raised on reused oil displayed elevated liver enzyme levels‚ indicating high levels of inflammation and oxidative stress within this key organ.“As a result‚ liver lipid metabolism was significantly altered‚ and the transport of the important brain omega-3 fatty acid DHA was decreased‚” said Shanmugam. “This‚ in turn‚ resulted in neurodegeneration‚ which was seen in the brain histology of the rats consuming the reheated oil as well as their offspring.”Such findings illustrate the importance of the liver-gut-brain axis and demonstrate how its disruption can lead to neurological damage. In addition‚ rats fed on reheated oil displayed increased cholesterol and higher levels of inflammation markers like high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP)‚ which is linked to heart attacks and strokes.Cellular damage within the colon of these rats was also noted by the researchers‚ as was the degeneration of neuronal support cells known as glia. In a series of follow-up experiments‚ the study authors exposed the rats to monosodium glutamate (MSG) and found that this common food additive induced further neurological damage in the rats that had been reared on reused oil.The results of the study were presented at Discover BMB‚ the annual meeting of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology‚ which was held from March 23 to 26 in San Antonio.

Ancient deserts were treacherous terrain for dinosaurs‚ as the environment had a nasty habit of burying its inhabitants. Their loss would be palaeontologists gain a few tens of millions of years down the line‚ as the unique fossils reveal animal behavior in a way that more scattered remains just can’t‚ helping us to tackle a big question about Oviraptor: were they egg thieves‚ or just great parents?The best Oviraptor fossilsThe moment of death can have a big impact on our capacity to learn about extinct animals‚ particularly when it comes to their behavior‚ which is rarely captured in fossils. Exceptions to this have been found in Mongolia’s Gobi Desert where ancient animals sometimes died from sudden dune collapse.“Say there was a rainstorm‚ and the dunes collapsed on top of dinosaurs‚ you often get them [preserved] in these life positions‚ which is really neat‚” Dr Darla Zelenitsky of the University of Calgary told IFLScience. “So you'll [find] Oviraptors sitting on a clutch of their eggs actually brooding them. The famous specimen that's known from Mongolia was a dune collapse‚ and it's the Velociraptor and Protoceratops that are actually physically interlocked and fighting one another.”Oviraptor: egg thief?The oviraptor “egg thief” idea also began in the Gobi Desert‚ where the fossil of an as-of-yet unnamed theropod was discovered in incriminating proximity to a clutch of eggs. The eggs were believed to belong to Protoceratops‚ meanwhile‚ the theropod with jaws perfect for egg crushing was thought to be the invader‚ and so it was named Oviraptor by palaeontologist Henry Fairfield Osborn back in 1924.Oviraptor nesting behavior appears to share similarities with modern birds.Image credit: Danny Ye/Shutterstock.comOviraptor is‚ however‚ a misnomer‚ as subsequent research has concluded they weren’t thieving eggs‚ but trying to protect them. That realization came with the discovery of more eggs in the mid-1990s that contained the precious preserved remains of dinosaur embryos. Oviraptor embryo "Baby Louie"Looking at the most famous embryo specimen nicknamed "Baby Louie" proved they weren’t Protoceratops as the palaeontologists of Osborn’s time had believed‚ but instead‚ an Oviraptor. That “thief” that earned them their name was‚ in all likelihood‚ the creator of the eggs it was accused of stealing.We’ve since discovered several fossils that show Oviraptor sitting atop their eggs like birds‚ including one world-first specimen that included embryo-bearing eggs and was also the first nesting oviraptorid to be discovered outside of the Gobi Desert. Oviraptors: actually great parentsSo in the case of Oviraptor: egg thief or parent of the year? It seems these dinosaurs fall into the latter category. As scientists‚ we must resist the urge to anthropomorphize animals‚ but as a fan of fluffy dinosaurs‚ it’s hard not to like these guys. Oviraptor were also behind arguably the first evidence that dinosaurs liked snuggling‚ as three 70-million-year-old Oviraptor fossils were discovered preserved as if sleeping in a group. It seems they were just doing what they could do to survive‚ which as the first discovery of fossilized theropod stomach contents demonstrated‚ wasn’t a guarantee for these dinosaurs and their chicken-drumstick-like gams.Stupid delicious Citipes legs.

CBS’s Stephen Colbert has used The Late Show to routinely condemn Supreme Court rulings after it rejected his legal theories from way out in left field. On Monday‚ Colbert welcomed former liberal Justice Stephen Breyer to the show to promote the latter's new book and seek affirmation that his views of the Court are correct. Unfortunately for him‚ Breyer refused to play along. In the first segment with Breyer‚ Colbert asked‚ “Do you‚ former Justice Breyer‚ believe that former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for crimes committed while in office? Do you think‚ does that seem like a natural yes from you?” Breyer may be retired‚ but he has not shaken the idea that a judge should not comment on a case before the court‚ “That seems like a general idea.”     Colbert tried again‚ “It‚ that is a general idea. Do former presidents have absolute immunity? It's not specific about one person. Would any president have that? I'm just curious‚ what you‚ snap judgment‚ don't think about it. Go.” Holding firm‚ Breyer repeated himself “I agree that you have a general idea. I can't go farther. I can't because of the—” Switching tactics‚ Colbert tried a case that the Court has already heard‚ “You're no fun‚ but I'll ask you something that I think you can answer. What do you think the purpose of the Insurrection Clause was…Why does it need an actuating law or action by Congress to impose the sanction for insurrection? Do you have any thoughts on them?” Again‚ Breyer offered no opinion on the case that went 9-0 against Colbert‚ ultimately declaring‚ “I am tempted to say something like ‘But I wasn't there when it was written.’ My grandchildren think I was. But in fact‚ I wasn't and really what I'm doing is avoiding the question.  After a commercial break‚ Colbert observed that “Politico says only 24 percent of people trust SCOTUS to issue a fair and nonpartisan ruling.” He then wondered‚ “Is the fear that the public has of political influence on the Court valid? And is the Court's fear that the public will no longer believe they are impartial about?” Breyer answered “That's why I wrote this book… I've been for 40 years with other judges and 28 on the Supreme Court‚ I think the people who try to get them appointed may have a lot to do with politics‚ but they want a judge who will think that the law really requires those things that then they then politically like‚ but the judge's point of view is he or she is deciding according to law and that's why I write this.” Instead of politics‚ “it is a question of what approach you use. You say‚ do you just read text? Or do you look back to the values and purposes and consequences of the Constitution or what we're about in this country? Which of those do you choose and I think that's important and does make a difference and that's what people should focus on.” Colbert then tried one more time‚ “But to believe that there is no partisan backing a judgment into the result you want. If they were always consistent on their judicial philosophy and always consistently textualists. Do you find that to be the case that your fellow justices are consistent in the lens that used to judge the constitutionality of a case?” Breyer answered that “You aim at it and you never know if you get there.” Surely‚ those weren’t the answers Colbert was hoping for. Here is a transcript for the March 25 show: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 3/26/2024 12:07 AM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: Do you‚ former Justice Breyer‚ believe that former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for crimes committed while in office? Do you think‚ does that seem like a natural yes from you?  BREYER: That seems like a general idea.  COLBERT: It‚ that is a general idea. Do former presidents have absolute immunity? It's not specific about one person. Would any president have that? I'm just curious‚ what you‚ snap judgment‚ don't think about it. Go.  BREYER: I agree that you have a general idea. I can't go farther. I can't because of the-- COLBERT: You're no fun‚ but I'll ask you something that I think you can answer. What do you think the purpose of the Insurrection Clause was?  BREYER: I haven't looked at-- well.  COLBERT: It's in the Constitution. It's an excellent little read.  BREYER: Yes‚ it is. COLBERT: It's only the 14th Amendment. Tell me you read that far. Okay‚ there it is. Okay‚ all right. Someone's got a Constitution all the time. All right. All right‚ but so‚ anyway‚ you know this document. I'm just curious why does it include no definition of what insurrection is? Do you have any idea? Because it does say how someone could be reinstated and it says that someone who committed insurrection can't run for office. Why does it need an actuating law or action by Congress to impose the sanction for insurrection? Do you have any thoughts on them?  BREYER: I am tempted to say something like "But I wasn't there when it was written." My grandchildren think I was. But in fact‚ I wasn't and really what I'm doing is avoiding the question.  … COLBERT: Politico says only 24 percent of people trust SCOTUS to issue a fair and nonpartisan ruling. Okay. Is the fear that the public has of political influence on the Court valid? And is the Court's fear that the public will no longer believe they are impartial about?  BREYER: I think of that is a very good question for a particular reason. That's why I wrote this book. It is. Because I wanted to show people that what most think‚ that this is all politics‚ that is not my experience. You never say zero about anything‚ but when I've been for 40 years with other judges and 28 on the Supreme Court‚ I think the people who try to get them appointed may have a lot to do with politics‚ but they want a judge who will think that the law really requires those things that then they then politically like‚ but the judge's point of view is he or she is deciding according to law and that's why I write this.  Because I want to say it isn't a question of what the judge just likes or doesn't like. It isn’t a question of just politics‚ it is a question of what approach you use. You say‚ do you just read text? Or do you look back to the values and purposes and consequences of the Constitution or what we're about in this country? Which of those do you choose and I think that's important and does make a difference and that's what people should focus on and that's why I try to explain here what that consists of‚ how they might focus on it‚ and why it might make a difference to your life and my life and a life of every American and I hope for the better.  COLBERT: I would hope for the better too. And my follow-up‚ your honor‚ is that I agree that I'm sure that justices have a judicial philosophy through which they read the Constitution. But to believe that there is no partisan backing a judgment into the result you want. If they were always consistent on their judicial philosophy and always consistently textualists. Do you find that to be the case that your fellow justices are consistent in the lens that used to judge the constitutionality of a case?  BREYER: You aim at it and you never know if you get there. Of course people are influenced by their backgrounds‚ of course they’re influenced by the lives they've had‚ by the philosophy they have. But suppose that you‚ and not you‚ it wouldn't be you personally‚ but that you were an unpopular person. Impossible‚ but suppose you were.  COLBERT: Can't be done but go ahead‚ yes. BREYER: But an unpopular person is in front of a judge for trial— COLBERT: Yes. BREYER: -- you don't want that judge to be influenced by how the public feels about that person. You don't want a judge to be influenced by popular opinion when he's judging the case‚ but what Professor Freund said‚ great professor said at Harvard Law School‚ a great professor‚ and he said the way that politics works in the Court is this: no judge‚ not you or me or anyone else‚ should ever be influenced by the political temperature of the day. Every judge will and probably should be influenced by the climate of the era. A little profound‚ a little obscure‚ but the more you think about that phrase‚ the more it sort of rings a bell in my mind. 

On Sunday night‚ the hatchet-job specialists at 60 Minutes were back on the attack against conservatives. It was a 13-minute segment provocatively titled “The Right to Be Wrong.” On one side of this cockeyed chronicle were the allegedly non-ideological‚ nonpartisan “misinformation researchers” – Kate Starbird‚ Darrell West‚ Katie Harbath – who are presented as people in favor of “fact checking” and opposed to “hate speech.” They line up neatly with the CBS narrative. On the other side was Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)‚ the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee‚ who was presented as someone who doesn’t favor facts‚ but does support freedom for “hate speech.”  Stahl refers to “conservatives” or “the right wing” eight times‚ but never finds a label for her favored “misinformation experts.” It started out funny‚ as she told viewers "Conservatives claim that the companies have engaged in a conspiracy to suppress their speech." The rest of the segment is Stahl unfurling a "conspiracy theory" that conservatives are engaged in an effort to "chill" the "misinformation researchers‚" those nonpartisan truth-tellers.  Reminder! Stahl had 13 minutes to report‚ but was never going to revisit her comical interview with Donald Trump before the 2020 election (sections of which she wouldn't put on the air). Trump talked of the Biden family taking millions from China and other countries‚ and Stahl shot back "All these things have been investigated and discredited." Biden scandal? "It can't be verified." Hunter's laptop? Again‚ "It can't be verified."  The joy of being CBS News is being able to only choose the facts you want to choose‚ and to refuse to verify what you do not want to be verified. When someone suggests there are other facts and other stories‚ you turn to "misinformation researchers" to pluck out how the conservatives are the ones who are sloppy with information. Stahl avoided any mention of Big Tech giants suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story before the election in 2020. She questions Jim Jordan about questioning the 2020 election‚ but not about the pro-Biden suppression. Stahl also wasn't going to tell you that her expert Kate Starbird worked from a National Science Foundation grant from the Biden administration and donated to many Democrats.  WATCH: 60 Minutes profiled a misinformation academic researcher named Kate Starbird a "leader of a misinformation research group" that tried to get Big Tech companies to silence conservatives during the 2020 election. 60 Minutes failed to point out that Starbird is a serious… pic.twitter.com/ygogCh9ybr — Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) March 25‚ 2024 Stahl asked her alleged nonpartisan expert "Did your research find that there was more misinformation spread by conservatives?" Starbird said "Absolutely‚" that in the 2020 election "there was more information spread by people that were supported by Donald Trump or conservatives. And the events of January 6 underscore this." The tweets from the CBS show weren't subtle:  After Elon Musk took over X‚ most fact-checkers were fired. The site is now rife with trash talk and lies. "The toothpaste is out of the tube‚" says Darrell West of the Brookings Institution. https://t.co/ShSbzksR7L pic.twitter.com/2y9pvdgcJT — 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) March 24‚ 2024 Jordan insisted to Stahl that the American people are smart enough to figure out what's misinformation‚ but of course‚ liberals think the American people are idiots when they don't vote for liberals. The best part of the segment was Jordan marveling at how he's supposedly the chilling effect! His probe is "intimidating" The poor "nonpartisan" researchers!  Lesley Stahl asks Rep. Jim Jordan: Is his goal to chill misinformation researchers? https://t.co/rlNyIsbg8R pic.twitter.com/Ls8Hu8yQbk — 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) March 24‚ 2024

In case you haven’t heard yet‚ spring has sprung. Rather than realize that because of the calendar‚ I was made aware of it when our resident woodpecker arrived and started pecking on the metal cap to our chimney. The post Spring Cleaning and prepping appeared first on Survivopedia.

NYPD Officer Jonathan Diller was gunned down Monday evening while conducting a routine traffic stop in Queens. The suspected shooter and his wing man are both career criminals. One of the thugs reportedly has at least 21 previous arrests and walked free in 2021. The other was last arrested in April 2023 on gun charges but cut loose. "April of 2023‚" Mayor Eric Adams reiterated during a press conference Monday night. "Less than a year‚ gun charge‚ he's back on the street. This is what you call — not a crime problem — a recidivist problem. Same bad people doing bad things to good people. Less than a year he's back on the streets with another gun." Officer Diller‚ 31‚ and his partner pulled over Lindy Jones‚ 41‚ and Guy Rivera‚ 34‚ near 19-19 Mott Avenue in Far Rockaway‚ Queens‚ around 5:50 p.m. on Monday. NYPD Chief of Detectives Joseph Kenny said the officers asked Rivera to exit the gray Kia SUV‚ which was stationary in front of a bus stop. "He was given a lawful order numerous times to step out of the car and he refused‚" said Kenny. Police indicated that when Diller approached the vehicle‚ Rivera‚ seated in the passenger seat‚ brandished a firearm‚ then took aim. The suspect opened fire‚ striking Diller in the gut beneath his bullet-resistant vest. Despite catching lead‚ Kenny indicated Diller "stayed in the fight and was trying to unarm the person that had just shot him." "The gun hit the ground and as the perpetrator was still reaching for it‚ this cop was able to grab it‚ although he was still shot‚" added Kenny. Diller's partner reportedly returned fire during the exchange‚ successfully hitting Rivera in the back. Melissa Morgan‚ a witness who saw the shooting unfold less than two blocks away from the NYPD's 101st Precinct station house told the New York Daily News‚ "It happened so fast." "The police officer fell on the floor and the other officers dragged the two guys out of the car. I was running for cover‚" continued Morgan. "It's unbelievable." "We need a bus here ASAP!" an officer reportedly roared into his radio. "We have an officer shot!" The NYPD shut down the Van Wyck Expressway to rush Diller to the Jamaica Hospital Medical Center‚ where he later succumbed to his wound. Diller was on the force for three years. The New York Times reported that Diller was thrice recognized for "excellent police duty." Police Commissioner Edward Caban stated‚ "Tonight this city lost a hero‚ a wife lost her husband‚ and a young child lost their father." "We struggle to find the words to express the tragedy of losing one of our own‚" continued Caban. "The work that Police Officer Jonathan Diller did each day to make this city a safer place will NEVER be forgotten." — (@) Rivera‚ on the other hand‚ is expected to survive. Rivera‚ who has 21 arrests under his belt‚ was released from a New York Prison in 2021 after serving a five-year stint for criminal possession of a controlled substance‚ reported the New York Post. Rivera's parole ended in 2023. He previously did time from 2011 until 2014 for a first-degree assault charge. Jones was arrested last April but swiftly set loose again on New York City. Jones reportedly has 14 prior arrests and was convicted of attempted murder and robbery in 2003. A weapon was recovered from the scene and nearby streets were cordoned off as police conducted their investigation. Below is the firearm recovered at today's officer involved shooting in the confines of the @NYPD101Pct. — (@) Adams called the shooting a "senseless act of violence‚" stressing that the shooter had a "total disregard for the safety of this city." Adams stressed the incident made the moral binary abundantly clear: "It is the good guys against the bad guys. And these bad guys are violent‚ they carry guns‚ and the symbol of our public safety‚ which is that police uniform‚ they have a total disregard for." "These attacks on New York City police officers have to end right now‚" said Patrick Hendry‚ the president of the city's Police Benevolent Association. "We have a family upstairs right now that’s devastated. We have police officers in this hallway who have lost a brother. It has to end now." — (@) Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Those who suffer from a rare neurological disorder see the stuff of their nightmares come to life. A condition known as prosopometamorphopsia causes the perception of facial features to be distorted in surreal and terrifying ways‚ according to Fox News Digital. A recent study published by the Lancet described how 58-year-old Victor Sharrah saw "demonic" faces for over two years.The description of the study said: A 58-year-old man with a 31-month history of seeing peoples’ faces as distorted and‚ in his words‚ appearing "demonic" visited our laboratory for assessment. The patient stated that the distortions — severely stretched features of the face‚ with deep grooves on the forehead‚ cheeks‚ and chin — were present on every person's face he encountered‚ but he reported no distortions when looking at objects‚ such as houses or cars.The patient said that even though faces were distorted‚ he was still able to recognise who they were. Notably‚ he reported no distortions when viewing facial images on a screen or on paper. The distortions were not accompanied by delusional beliefs about the identities of the people he encountered — such as his family or friends.A curious element to the man's experience is that he didn't appear to see the strange distortions while looking at two-dimensional faces on paper or digital screens. And despite experiencing the distortions‚ he was still able to recognize the people he was looking at.Smithsonian magazine reported that Sharrah said‚ “I tried to explain to my roommate what I was seeing‚ and he thought I was nuts. Imagine waking up one morning and suddenly everybody in the world looks like a creature in a horror movie.”The report mentioned that researchers from Dartmouth College showed the 58-year-old man images of an individual on a screen and then had him compare the image with the individual's real face.After the man described the key differences he experienced‚ researchers used computer software to edit the image to capture what he was really seeing.Antonio Mello‚ a Ph.D. student in psychological and brain sciences at Dartmouth‚ said‚ "Through the process‚ we were able to visualize the patient’s real-time perception of the face distortions."Dr. Jonathan Tiu‚ a neurologist and assistant professor of neurology at Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine in New Jersey‚ was not involved with the study but suggested the study was "fascinat[ing].""This suggests that the brain's way of visually ‘displaying’ faces‚ and the brain's ability to recognize a person's face‚ might be occurring in two different parts of the brain." Experts don't know how people come to experience PMO‚ and it's still uncertain who may be likely to experience such a terrifying diagnosis. Fewer than 100 cases have been reported since 1904‚ and some doctors have never even heard of PMO. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

On March 27‚ 2023‚ Audrey Hale perpetrated a mass shooting at the Covenant School in Nashville‚ Tennessee. Hale‚ a 28-year-old woman and former student at the school‚ murdered three 9-year-old children and three school employees at random before Metropolitan Nashville Police Department officers ably responded and bested her in a gunfight. Details quickly emerged that Hale identified as “transgender” and used the male name “Aiden.” The MNPD still leads the shooting investigation and has yet to provide the public with any official information about Hale’s motives. According to court filings‚ Hale left behind a suicide note‚ 20 journals‚ and a “memoir.” When insiders leaked three images from Hale’s writing to podcast host Steven Crowder in November‚ Nashville Mayor Freddie O’Connell directed an investigation‚ and MNPD placed seven police officers on administrative leave. Sadly‚ the FBI’s lack of transparency on this issue lays bare its own transparent biases. The Nashville Police justify their obfuscation by citing policy to refrain from revealing details of an ongoing investigation. The rationale is easily subverted by the fact that Hale is dead and there is no risk to her presumption of innocence. Moreover‚ public safety and the necessity to prevent future‚ similar mass shootings unquestionably outweigh privacy concerns voiced by some Covenant School parents. Uncovering Hale’s motives is critical to fully investigate the shooting. In light of her self-identification as “transgender‚” an obvious consideration is any biases Hale harbored against Christians who traditionally eschew the notion that humans can overcome genetics to change their sex via hormone therapy and surgery. Such bias would qualify Hale’s actions last March as a federal hate crime and demand participation by America’s premier law enforcement agency on the subject: the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI routinely advertises its willingness and enthusiasm to pursue hate crime investigations and began reviewing Hale’s writings as early as May 2023. But like the MNPD‚ the FBI has yet to offer any speculation as to whether Hale bore any anti-Christian animus. Why so much secrecy? FBI Director Christopher Wray routinely pledges full transparency from his agency. The problem is rooted in pro-LGBTQ+ bias permeating throughout the agency and guiding its actions to the detriment of the American people the FBI is duty-bound to protect against fraud and force. Like the rest of the federal government‚ the FBI is wholly given over to the LGBTQ+ agenda that holds almost every institution in the country hostage. But rather than token participation‚ the FBI proactively endorses the radical ideology. The bureau flies a rainbow flag outside its headquarters‚ specifically recruits employees from LGBTQ+ events‚ and dutifully pledges support every June. Last year‚ Wray even honored avowed satanist and occultist Demetre Daskalakis with an award. So it’s understandable — and tragic — that a historically revered institution like the FBI would refuse to enlighten the country as to the basic facts its special agents have unearthed from the contents of Hale’s writings. Sadly‚ the FBI’s lack of transparency on this issue lays bare its own transparent biases. It is safe to assume that if Hale’s manifesto exonerated her of fostering anti-Christian prejudice or demonstrated anything other than a tragically demented and disturbed mind captured in the throes of psychological disturbance manifesting as “transgenderism‚” the FBI would dutifully offer a full report to the American people. Last week‚ as part of a lawsuit filed under the Freedom of Information Act by the Tennessee Star‚ federal Judge Aleta Trauger ordered the FBI to deliver copies of Hale’s writings to the court. In contravention to its stated commitment to transparency‚ the FBI seeks to dismiss the lawsuit. Trauger will review the material and decide if it should be made public. Trauger must unveil this information to the country. Public safety within our schools is a paramount concern necessitating a full assessment of the threats and vulnerabilities to our children. But equally important is the extent which America’s premier law enforcement agency is captured by the radical LGBTQ+ agenda. Federal law enforcement must stand for equal justice‚ due process‚ and the rule of law. Americans deserve to know if the FBI abandoned these principles in deference to an intersectional hierarchy prioritizing transgender mass shooters above innocents at a Christian school. A full year has elapsed since the atrocity at the Covenant School‚ and we have few answers about why it happened. Transparency delayed is truth denied‚ and America should not endure another minute under the oppression of a woke and weaponized FBI hell-bent on protecting its allies and targeting its perceived political foes.

UFC fighter Julian Erosa called out infamous swimmer and transgender athlete Lia Thomas‚ encouraging the college athlete to become a mixed martial arts fighter so the two can fight.Following a first-round submission victory at UFC Vegas 89‚ Erosa was asked by a reporter to clarify a "goofy call-out" that the fighter had alluded to. A "call-out" refers to when a fighter names an opponent he would like to fight in the near future‚ following a victory.Erosa took the opportunity to challenge transgender athlete Thomas to become a mixed martial arts fighter:"I was going to say that I don't like cheaters‚ and I don't know how you guys feel about this whole situation‚ but I don't like cheaters and so I wanted to callout Lia Thomas‚" Erosa said in a press conference."I wanted to encourage her to or encourage him to transition from women's swimming into women's MMA‚ and then I'll transition to becoming a woman and I'm going to beat that dude's ass."Thomas‚ who is known for identifying as a woman and competing in women's swimming after years of male competition‚ was not the only transgender athlete whom Erosa named."The world that we're living in is just ... you know there's no common sense any more. ... I just don't agree with men in women's sports‚ you know? Even the whole Fallon Fox thing ... guys that are fighting in women's MMA and knocking them out. It's a bad look."Fox is a fighter who was born a man but fought six women between 2012 and 2014‚ winning five fights. In his second fight‚ he brutally knocked out a woman in 39 seconds. In his final fight‚ he reportedly broke his opponent's skull. Julian Erosa planned to call out Lia Thomas during his post-win octagon interview at #UFCVegas89.\n\n"I don't like cheaters. ... I wanted to encourage him to transition from women's swimming into women's MMA‚ and then I'll transition into become a woman and beat that dude's ass." — (@) Erosa was asked by the same reporter if there are any instances in which he believes male athletes competing against women would make sense."Absolutely not‚" the fighter immediately replied. "There's nothing you can do‚ there's nothing you can give yourself to shrink your bones down. There's nothing you can do in that kind of sense‚ I mean‚ and the proof's in the pudding‚" he said regarding Thomas.According to Essentially Sports‚ Thomas was ranked 65th in the country in the 500-yard freestyle as a man‚ only to be ranked first as a woman the following year.He was also 554th in the men's 200-yard freestyle and fifth as a woman."I'm not the smartest crayon in the box‚ but I could tell you — if I don't know anything about anything — I could still tell you that's unfair."Erosa closed his statements by alluding to the fact that he believes women's sports will become obsolete if they continue to allow men to compete against them."It's so funny to me that that women will fight for their own spaces and then they also fight for transwomen to be in those spaces. Those are just men‚ there's going to be hundreds of men in these sports‚ and then it just becomes another man sport."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A thief in Washington state who went on a crime spree was eventually chased down by the authorities before getting stuck high above the ground on a telephone wire‚ according to the Vancouver Police Department.The spree reportedly took place on Saturday‚ when the authorities responded to a report that a suspect broke into a vehicle and stole several items before taking off on foot. He eventually made it to a nearby yard‚ where he stole a bicycle.A neighbor in the area witnessed the bike theft and decided to chase down the suspect‚ whom the police later identified as Romando E. Stanley‚ according to the New York Post. Stanley finally abandoned the bike and took off on foot.While the authorities were responding to the initial reports‚ they received information that a man who matched Stanley's description had entered a business‚ taken an employee's cell phone‚ and punched the employee in the chest before fleeing the scene.Officers quickly made it to the scene to conduct an area check when they received yet another report that a man‚ eventually discovered to be Stanley‚ was on the roof of a business tossing bricks down onto the sidewalk‚ according to KPTV. While the Vancouver authorities tried to negotiate with Stanley to get him off the roof‚ they were unsuccessful.Stanley attempted to cross the street hanging onto a telephone line and dangled from the lines for around 45 minutes‚ according to reports. The authorities kept trying to negotiate with Stanley to come down to safety. A Vancouver fire engine was moved just under where Stanley was hanging from to help break his fall if he decided to let go. Stanley ultimately lost his grip on the wires and fell. He was arrested around 7:00 p.m. and booked into jail after an evaluation at a hospital. After the suspect was examined‚ utility company technicians checked on the cables and determined that they did not include any electrical elements and therefore did not present any danger.Stanley has been charged with robbery‚ theft‚ and malicious mischief. Reports did not indicate how much time behind bars the man faced or what the motivation was for the crime spree.Fox News Digital has reached out to the Vancouver Police Department for more information about the incident. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!