asdf The post Leftist 6 appeared first on Frontpage Mag.

Kamala Harris spoke briefly today at a recognition event for NCAA champions, and she only cackled once. However, it is worth mentioning that she said Joe Biden did more in three years than most do in two terms. His “legacy of accomplishment is unmatched in modern history,” she claimed. Depending on how you look at […] The post Wonderful Joe Biden, “Unmatched in Modern History” appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

The man accused of killing two Delphi, Indiana, teenagers back in 2017 has lost his latest bid to remove the trial judge from his case. Attorneys for Richard Allen, 51, had attempted for a second time to get Special Judge Fran Gull removed from Allen’s upcoming trial, citing bias against the defense. Their latest attempt argued that Gull had violated court policies by failing to rule on two defense motions within the 30-day time frame, the Journal & Courier reported. The attorneys argued that due to Gull’s lack of a ruling, the case must be withdrawn from her, and a new special judge must be appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court. Justin Forkner, chief administrative officer of the Indiana Supreme Court, disagreed. “However, Mr. Allen is mistaken, and the matter should not be removed from the trial court,” Forkner ruled on Friday. Forkner argued that Allen’s attorneys should have filed to remove Gull shortly after the 30-day deadline passed, not several months later, though nothing in the cited Indiana Trial Rule 53.1 suggests such a deadline. In March and April, Allen’s attorneys filed motions seeking hearings to allow the defense to present evidence that law enforcement made false statements in its affidavit that resulted in Allen’s arrest in October 2022. The refusal to remove the judge is the latest drama in an already contentious legal case. Allen is charged with the kidnapping and murder of 13-year-old Abby Williams and 14-year-old Libby German on a hiking trail in 2017. In May, Judge Gull refused to hold Allen’s defense attorneys, Andrew Baldwin and Bradley Rozzi, in contempt following allegations from Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland. Gull did, however, call the defense attorneys “incompetent” during her ruling. Gull said that McLeland “proved by a preponderance of the evidence that defense counsel was sloppy, negligent and incompetent in their handling of discovery material.” However, she added that the prosecutor failed to prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the attorneys were “willful and intentional” in their actions. But she also agreed with defense attorneys that McLeland failed to show they should be held in contempt because they violated a gag order. McLeland’s evidence of this was a statement the attorneys made before the gag order was put in place. Judge Gull also previously forced Allen’s defense attorneys to withdraw by threatening to harm their reputations in open court. The attorneys withdrew but filed a petition to represent Allen pro bono. Judge Gull then barred them from representing Allen in any capacity. The transcript, first obtained by WTHR, shows that the judge planned to remove the two attorneys before she publicly announced their withdrawal. At the meeting, which included McLeland, the group discussed a leak of documents from Baldwin’s office, but Judge Gull stated that was not the only reason she wanted the attorneys removed from representing Allen. Gull said the attorneys “potentially” violated the Rules of Professional Responsibility. She told Baldwin he was “grossly negligent” for sending a sensitive email to a “Brad” who was not Rozzi, and questioned whether the two attorneys had fully cooperated with a gag order she had filed. She also said she had evidence the attorneys “left materials all over a conference-room table, accessible to anyone.” The defense attorneys have also tried to have Judge Gull removed previously, to no avail. Prior to this trial, the defense attorneys had not been accused of incompetence or contempt.

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson will join Elon Musk at Gigafactory Texas Monday for a wide-ranging interview that will stream live exclusively on DailyWire+ and X at 3 p.m. ET / 2 p.m. CT. Their conversation will be Musk’s first major interview following a newsworthy month for the tech mogul, who “fully” endorsed former president Donald Trump shortly after Trump survived an assassination attempt at a rally in Butler County, Pennsylvania. Musk followed his endorsement with the announcement that he would donate $45 million a month to the pro-Trump America PAC. He also announced that he will move the headquarters of both SpaceX and X, formerly Twitter, from California to Texas, the site of Monday’s interview with Peterson. Musk came to the decision after California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed a law barring schools from informing parents when children began identifying as transgender. My conversation with @elonmusk. Live today at 3pm ET. https://t.co/RyaZFmvC8i — Dr Jordan B Peterson (@jordanbpeterson) July 22, 2024   “This is the final straw,” Musk wrote on X, noting that he had informed Newsom “that laws of this nature would force families and companies to leave California to protect their children.” Musk also pointed to rising crime in California as a reason for the move, writing on X that he has “had enough of dodging gangs of violent drug addicts just to get in and out of the building.” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott cheered the move, saying that SpaceX’s relocation “cements Texas as the leader in space exploration.” The Lone Star State is already home to NASA’s Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center. Last year, Peterson invited Musk to join his lawsuit against the College of Psychologists of Ontario, which threatened to rescind Peterson’s clinical psychology license in response to his social media activity. Musk has emerged as a leading advocate of free speech since purchasing X. Monday marks Musk’s return to DailyWire+. He joined Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro in Krakow for a wide-ranging conversation streamed on the platform in January.

“Twisters” blew away opening weekend box office expectations, bringing in a whopping $80.5 million. Early projections estimated that the action flick sequel to the 1996 movie “Twister” would earn between $40 million and $50 million, with some guessing high at around $70 million, per The Hollywood Reporter. But audiences flocked to see the movie beginning on July 19, leading to a record-breaking opening weekend for any natural disaster film. That record was previously held by “The Day After Tomorrow” (2004), which brought in $68.44 during its first weekend. The massive success gave theaters a much-needed boost after a slow start to the year and a string of box office disappointments. “Twisters” has the third-highest opening of the year, THR noted. The original “Twister” (1996), starring the late Bill Pullman and Helen Hunt, also scored big at the box office. It had a $41 million opening weekend, which, adjusted for inflation, is closer to $82 million. It ended with $494.5 million globally, or the equivalent of $992.08 million in today’s dollars. “Twisters” follows Kate Cooper (Daisy Edgar-Jones) as she attempts to test a new type of tornado tracking system and forges a partnership with Tyler Owens (Glen Powell), a popular storm chaser who documents his experiences on social media. The movie currently has a 77% critic score and 92% audience score on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes. Despite the movie’s subject matter of dangerous tornadoes, filmmaker Lee Isaac Chung told CNN that the film isn’t meant to preach or push climate change hysteria. “I just wanted to make sure that with the movie, we don’t ever feel like (it) is putting forward any message,” he told the outlet, as The Daily Wire recently reported. “I just don’t feel like films are meant to be message-oriented.” “I think what we are doing is showing the reality of what’s happening on the ground … we don’t shy away from saying that things are changing,” Chung added. “I wanted to make sure that we are never creating a feeling that we’re preaching a message, because that’s certainly not what I think cinema should be about. I think it should be a reflection of the world.”

The “Gen Z is aging like milk” type of talk has peppered the internet over the last six or more months as claims that Gen Z looks much older than their actual age have continued to surface. Seemingly paradoxically, modern beauty trends are all the rage among Gen Z, and it’s not just heavy makeup; it’s filler, Botox, and even plastic surgery. But if these procedures are supposed to make you look younger, what’s really going on? Has Gen Z undergone some kind of generational, genetic change? Or is it possible that filler and Botox are backfiring, causing Gen-Z women to actually look older? One of the first videos I ran across that addressed this issue was one in which a guy explains that no one believes he is Gen Z, though he is, in fact, 26-years-old. He says when he is with his mom in public, people think she is his younger sister. He concludes that Gen Z definitely looks older. Screenshot: TikTok While the internet at-large is wondering what’s going on, he is just one of the numerous Gen Zs panicking about this. There has been so much discussion about it that journalists have written entire articles contemplating what’s going on. The New York Times jumped in with one titled, “Why Does Gen Z Believe It’s ‘Aging Like Milk’?” From Dazed, an article asks, “Is Gen Z really ageing faster?” with a subheading that reads, “According to social media, young people are ageing prematurely due to their penchant for Elf Bars and retinol — but is there really any truth behind these theories?” The New York Post joined the conversation with “Gen Z is aging worse than millennials — here are the alarming reasons why.” The overall consensus from journalists — and Gen Zs themselves — is that there are a myriad of reasons contributing to Gen Z’s rapid aging. Some argue it’s due to stress. They pose that we’ve lived through September 11, political unrest, COVID, Biden’s presidency, and a now-atrocious economy. But although today’s world is stressful, we must admit that older generations have objectively lived through far tougher times. So stress doesn’t really seem to be a logical conclusion. WATCH: The Comments Section with Brett Cooper on DailyWire+ I tend to think Gen Z looks older because of our diet and the terrible processed foods we put in our bodies every single day. While it might sound cliche, it’s true that your skin health and its radiance starts from within. Alcohol, cigarettes, vapes — my generation loves a vape — all have an impact on skin’s elasticity, coloration, and overall appearance. What we put inside of our bodies definitely affects the outside of our bodies. However, I think what is mainly causing rapid aging among Gen Z women is the trendy makeup and skincare routines. Young skin does not need retinol or the heavy duty chemical products that my generation is slathering on their skin morning, noon, and night. But celebrities and social media have worked hard to convince women that they do need such products. They rave about how they’re necessary and every woman — from their mid-20s down to 12-year-olds — should be spending hundreds upon hundreds of dollars on daily skincare products, facials, and procedures.  This was a point made by the New York Post, who explained what happens when women seek out procedures at too young of an age: While it may seem like Gen Zers are taking good care of themselves, practitioners aren’t so sure — in fact, starting injectables too young can affect the natural development of facial features. Yes, injecting a toxin into your skin that stops nerve endings from working would hinder and even stunt skin’s development. It’s a toxin. So of course it likely has a negative consequence. That’s just common sense. The Post continues, writing: It is not uncommon to see 18-year-olds with lip filler,” Dr. Ross Perry, the medical director of Cosmedics Skin Clinics, told the Daily Mail this week. He added that “20-year-olds are [getting] Botox and fillers, semi-permanent makeup in the form of eyebrows and lips.” These procedures “combined can make you appear older,” Perry said, and “actually once you start down this route, it’s very hard to go back to being entirely natural, especially when the ‘affirmations’ start on social media.” … “Having these treatments before they’re truly needed can sometimes make someone appear older, with an almost mask-like appearance,” said Shotter, who also blamed interest in the procedure on the trendy full-glam makeup look touted by social media influencers. One prime “trendy full-glam makeup” Gen-Z social media influencer comes to mind: Kylie Jenner. She caught some flack online last year with people saying she looks decades older than she is — naming all her cosmetic procedures as the culprits. Just three months after her 26th birthday, the Mirror published an article in the midst of her being “slammed over fillers as fans complained that she looks ‘too old.’” Apparently, “fans were shocked” by her appearance at a Hollywood party, citing “her prematurely ageing features, despite her only being in her mid-20s.” They specifically blamed her fillers. Some suggested she should have them dissolved, but others said if she had them dissolved at this point, her skin would sag from being stretched. Screenshots: The Comments Section Kylie is far from the only face who’s gotten this kind of scrutiny. You can find these “I look old” confessions all over TikTok. One girl tells about someone who asked her boyfriend how old she is, and he jokingly said 47. The response? “Oh, I thought she was early 30s.” Come to find out, this girl is 23-years-old. Though 10 years older is an extreme jump, the comments didn’t disagree. One commenter genuinely seemed confused, suggesting perhaps Gen Z’s style could be to blame because they are not “wrinkley or anything.” But the problem is the opposite of wrinkles. It’s the baby Botox, it’s the lip filler, and it’s everything they are doing not to have wrinkles. Screenshots: Instagram Another Gen Z posted a response video to someone who had told her she looks 45 and should stop getting filler or Botox. She was shocked — because she is 22 years old. She goes on to explain that she’s gotten a lot of hate about her “come get filler with me” TikToks from people who believe you shouldn’t get cosmetic procedures but concludes saying, “I feel like no one should stop you from getting filler because it’s your own face.” The commenters thought otherwise.  Screenshots: TikTok Screenshots: X She is correct that it is, indeed, your prerogative to make decisions about your own face. But the reality is, it does make you look older, and young women should be warned about the consequences of these types of procedures. The pressure to get them is real, but it is insane, especially at such a young age. They have been made out to seem completely normal when there is nothing normal about them. There is absolutely no need to have brows laminated to the sky nor a full set of lashes glued on top of an already perfectly beautiful pair. Furthermore, this is why so many girls online and in real life look exactly the same today. When I scroll through Instagram and see a group photo of girls, some of whom I know and others who are mutual acquaintances, they quite often look just alike. They have had their nerve endings frozen in the same way, used the same type of filler, had their faces puffed and poked in various areas so they appear more symmetrical, had their smile adjusted one way or another, and undergone a whole slew of other procedures. The end result, sadly, lands them all looking the same. It is a total loss of individuality. Maybe it’s true that Gen Z is aging faster because of stress. Maybe it’s the environment, or maybe it’s our diet. But the solution is not this. Pumping toxins into your skin and slathering chemicals all over your face will only make this worse for young people. Instead, we should be focusing on the types of food we’re eating, the freshness of air we’re breathing, the level of sunlight we’re getting, and the amount of water we’re drinking. In a chemically driven world, these are the things that are far better for you in the long run. After all, no one wants to age like milk.

An advocacy organization for people with autism partnered with a New York state agency to create a guide to child sex changes, condemning efforts to protect children from irreversible medical interventions as “based on lies.” The 198-page document, titled “A Self-Advocate’s Guide to Gender-Affirming Health Care,” was published by the Autistic Self Advocacy Network in conjunction with the New York State Developmental Disabilities Planning Council. The guide advances the core tenets of gender ideology and condemns laws that protect children from irreversible medical procedures that can render them infertile. The document includes a step-by-step guide for children to change their sex through various medical interventions. “Some transgender and nonbinary children who have not yet gone through puberty do not want to go through puberty yet,” states the document, which includes illustrations of people undergoing medical interventions that seek to change their sex. “They want to put off puberty until they are old enough to take hormone replacement therapy. These children can take puberty blockers.” The Autistic Self Advocacy Network is a non-profit that “seeks to advance the principles of the disability rights movement with regard to autism.” Its decision to promote irreversible medical sex changes has worried advocates who warn that children with autism could be deceived into believing that they are the opposite sex. “Children on the autism spectrum are especially vulnerable to the lies of gender ideology and falsely believing they have been born in the wrong body due to a variety of reasons, including their tendency toward dichotomic thinking and atypical social functioning,” January Littlejohn, a parent advocate with Do No Harm, told The Daily Wire. “It has been reported that up to 40% of children experiencing sudden onset of distress over their sex are on the autism spectrum.” Studies show people on the autism spectrum are significantly more likely to attempt sex changes. The guide describes a hypothetical scenario of an eleven-year-old child deciding that she is a boy and attempting to artificially block her puberty. “Sean is an eleven-year-old trans boy. He is starting to go through puberty. If Sean goes through puberty now he will grow breasts. Sean does not want to grow breasts,” the document says. “Sean wants to wait to go through puberty. Sean wants to have hormone replacement therapy when he is older. Sean takes puberty blockers.” The guide goes beyond explaining the means by which people attempt to transition into the opposite sex, however, wading into the political fight over irreversible cross-sex medical interventions. “One big barrier to care for transgender and nonbinary people is new laws about gender-affirming health care,” it reads. “A law might say that nobody under 18 years old in the state can get gender-affirming health care.” It goes on to categorically condemn laws that seek to protect children from irreversible medical procedures intended to change their sex. “All these laws are bad. All these laws are wrong. These laws are not based on science. These laws are based on lies about how gender-affirming health care works. These laws do not keep transgender and nonbinary people safe.” Other portions of the document explained how one could find a therapist who would encourage a patient to undergo a transition attempt. “Chantelle is a Black trans woman … she wants a therapist who works with trans women. She wants a therapist who is Black,” it reads before going on to warn against those who encourage patients to embrace their birth sex. “Some therapists say they help transgender and nonbinary people. But these therapists really do conversion therapy. Conversion therapy is not real therapy.” “The only word to describe this document is awful. It is full of misinformation as well as a complete failure to outline any of the complications associated with such things as puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapies, or genital or breast surgeries,” Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, a former dean at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and the Board Chair of Do No Harm told The Daily Wire. “The people who put this together to confuse, and in fact, groom, vulnerable, autistic, children should be ashamed of themselves.”