The original image shows Hanks wearing a jersey representing the U.S. women’s national soccer team.

Will and Adam are exploring the high flying stunts of The Fall Guy from 1981, but can’t help themselves from gushing about other 80’s adventure shows, especially Knight Rider. Plus, you’ll learn about their favorite CONTINUE READING... The post Remember That Show? Ep. 14: The Fall Guy appeared first on The Retro Network.

The bipartisan border bill failed in the U.S. Senate Thursday, even losing the support of two key negotiators who helped craft the legislation. This marked the second time the Senate voted against moving forward with the bill. The vote on the border bill “is not an effort to actually make law, it is an effort to do political messaging,” Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., said Thursday ahead of the vote. Lankford worked to negotiate the bill with Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., but he and Sinema voted against the bill Thursday, criticizing the reintroduction of the bill as being politically motivated.   Sen. Lankford helped to craft the border bill, but voted against it today. "Everyone sees this for what it is. It is not an effort to actually make law, it is an effort to do political messaging." pic.twitter.com/0Ab0M2l2fe— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) May 23, 2024 The bill, which needed 60 votes to pass, failed with 50 senators voting against it and 43 voting in favor. The vote broke largely along party lines with Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska being the only Republican to vote for the bill. Six Democrats joined Republicans in voting against the bill. WATCH: Border bill fails in the Senate a second time. pic.twitter.com/bM9PfY3UZl— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) May 23, 2024 During the first vote in February, Lankford voted in favor of advancing the border bill, along with Murkowski, Susan Collins of Maine, and Mitt Romney of Utah.  Analysts expected the latest vote on the bill to fail following Republicans’ outspoken criticism of the measure.   The bill “spends $20 billion to not secure the border, but to more efficiently encounter, process, and disperse illegal migrants,” Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said during a news conference Wednesday.   Johnson and other GOP senators bashed the bill for allowing up to 5,000 illegal aliens to enter daily in a seven-day period.   The bill directs the Department of Homeland Security to close the southern border “during a period of seven consecutive calendar days, [if] there is an average of 5,000 or more aliens who are encountered each day.” Over 1.8 million illegal aliens a year still would be permitted to enter the United States under the now twice failed legislation.   Republicans bashed the bill as an election year stunt.   Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and the Democrats are promoting the bill because “poll numbers are showing [Democrats] that, after months and months of throwing the border open to anyone who wants to come in, that the public doesn’t like the policy.”   Gallup reports that immigration is the No. 1 issue not specifically related to the economy on the minds of American voters right now.    “And now, all of a sudden, six months before an election, Chuck Schumer and the Democrats have got religion on border security,” Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio., said ahead of the vote.    Under the Biden administration, Customs and Border Protection has encountered over 9.5 million illegal aliens on America’s border and at ports of entry. With five months remaining in fiscal year 2024, CBP encounters of illegal immigrants under President Joe Biden’s leadership are expected to far surpass 10 million before the start of the new fiscal year.   An additional nearly 1.8 million illegal aliens have crossed the border managing to evade Border Patrol. Authorities refer to them as “known gotaways.” It is impossible to know how many unknown gotaways have entered the country in recent years.  Senate Republicans continue to advocate for the passage of the border security bill known as H.R. 2, which the House passed in May 2023. If passed into law, H.R. 2 would end “catch and release,” restart construction of the border wall, and reinstate the Trump-era “Remain in Mexico” policy, among other things.  “The Democrats don’t want border security,” Sen Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said in a statement. “Every single Democrat in the Senate supports these open borders. And I can say that because every single time we push to implement real border security to stop this invasion—to stop Joe Biden from releasing criminal illegal aliens that are threatening our families—every single Democrat votes no.” On Tuesday night, Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., and Cruz, spoke on the Senate floor and called for the Senate to pass H.R. 2 by unanimous consent. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., reserved the right to object and blocked the bill.    The post Border Bill Goes Down in Flames on Senate Floor appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A new study has revealed that roughly 10% to 27% of noncitizens living in the U.S. are illicitly registered to vote, which could result in up to 2.7 million illegal votes being cast in the November elections. Experts say the significant amount of potential illegal votes could be enough to alter election results. The study, released last week by the research institute Just Facts, notes that the 2022 U.S. census recorded approximately 19 million adult noncitizens living in the country. “Given their voter registration rates, this means that about 2 million to 5 million of them are illegally registered to vote,” the report observes. “These figures are potentially high enough to overturn the will of the American people in major elections, including congressional seats and the presidency.” On Tuesday, James Agresti, president of Just Facts, joined “Washington Watch” to discuss the scope of noncitizens casting ballots and the implications of the study’s findings. “[T]here are very broad openings for noncitizens to vote,” he explained, adding: In no state in the nation are they required to provide proof of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote. Now, a couple of states like Arizona tried to enact that requirement, but they were blocked by a court ruling supported by the Obama administration. And if you look at the federal voter-registration form, it says you can submit all different forms of ID to register. That could be a Social Security number; it could be a driver’s license number; or it could just be a utility bill. I mean, these are things that anyone can get by living here. They do not prove you’re a U.S. citizen. And more than that, a lot of noncitizens have faked Social Security numbers, especially illegal immigrants. That’s what they do to work. A recent estimate by the Social Security Administration tallied 2.5 million noncitizens who had Social Security numbers gained by using fake birth certificates or stealing those numbers from somebody else. Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation and board member of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, concurred. (Heritage founded The Daily Signal in 2014.) “[T]he problem is, states aren’t doing very much to verify citizenship, so it’s extremely easy for someone who’s not a citizen to register to vote and to vote in elections,” he remarked during Monday’s edition of “Washington Watch.” “And when that is discovered, oftentimes nothing is done about it.” Agresti went on to point out the effect that lax enforcement of citizen verification could have in November. “[B]ased on the latest available data, approximately 1 million to 2.7 million noncitizens are going to vote in the upcoming presidential election unless something changes. And that is more than enough to tip the results of congressional races, Senate races, and yes, the U.S. presidency.” Von Spakovsky echoed Agresti’s concerns. “[I]t doesn’t matter whether they’re black or white, Asian or Hispanic. It doesn’t matter which political party they support. Every time an alien illegally votes, that alien is voiding, negating the vote of a citizen, no matter which political party they support,” he contended. “And the Democrats just don’t seem to want to understand that or to basically ignore it.” Agresti further reflected on the motivations behind the Democrats’ opposition to efforts to improve election integrity. “[I]t’s always hard to read people’s minds, but I can tell you this: The vast bulk of these noncitizens are voting for Democrats. According to the best data we have, about 80% of them will vote for Democrats when they vote illegally. And Democrats are fighting tooth and nail to prevent any kind of checking of people’s citizenship. It does benefit them. Is that their reasoning? It’s an obvious incentive, but I can’t read their minds.” Earlier this month, House Republicans attempted to address the issue by introducing a bill that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and would remove noncitizens from existing voter rolls. But Agresti expressed doubt about the bill’s chances of passage. “My guess is it will move in the House and die in the Senate, but that’s just an educated guess. And again, even if somehow it got through the Senate, there’s no way [President] Joe Biden’s signing that bill.” “However,” he added, “I do think in the aftermath of the election, and we hate to have a repeat of 2020, that there should be some accountability, some lawsuits that demand proof that people are who they say they are in tight races. None of that was secured in the last round of election lawsuits, and it needs to be there.” Agresti concluded by urging candidates involved in tight elections to demand verification that only citizens voted. “A candidate has to make a plea and say, ‘Hey, I want this data to prove that these people who are registered and voted actually are citizens.’” Originally published at the WashingtonStand.com The post Up to 2.7 Million Noncitizens Could Vote Illegally in November, Study Warns appeared first on The Daily Signal.

It took far longer for Americans to build a floating pier on the Gazan coast to deliver aid for civilians caught in the Israel-Hamas war than for the aid to be looted. President Joe Biden announced the pier project during his State of the Union address March 7. After delays, the pier was in place by May 7. However, due to “high winds and high sea swells,” as deputy Pentagon press secretary Sabrina Singh described it, no aid could be delivered immediately. The first 10 truckloads of food aid were landed on the floating pier last Friday and were subsequently delivered to a warehouse for the U.N. World Food Programme eight miles away. On Saturday, 16 more trucks landed with aid. However, “11 of those trucks never made it to the warehouse,” said Stéphane Dujarric, spokesman for the U.N. secretary-general. “Crowds had stopped the trucks at various points along the way. The Associated Press reported gunfire erupting at the scene, leaving at least one man dead. “There was, you know, what I think I would refer to as ‘self-distribution,’” Dujarric said. In response to the looting, the U.S. military halted further aid deliveries Sunday. Due to a lack of specific reporting, it’s not clear who was responsible for plundering the aid caravan. U.N. officials planted the suggestion that the aid was looted by Palestinian civilians, brought to the brink of starvation by Israel’s blockade in its war with Hamas, the terrorist organization that governs the Gaza Strip and massacred some 1,200 civilians Oct. 7 in Israel. Following this lead, most media reports have attributed the “self-distribution” simply to “crowds.” However, it would be strange if civilian crowds in Gaza had enough firearms to cause a shootout over aid. This is Gaza, not Chicago. Since its bloody coup in 2007, Hamas has governed the territory with an iron fist, brutally eliminating any perceived threat to its control. It’s hard to believe that any Palestinian in the Gaza Strip has firearms besides Hamas and its allied terrorist groups. Perhaps the U.S. military drew the same conclusion. Perhaps it suspected the supplies plundered from aid trucks eventually wound up in the hands of terrorists—even if the terrorists happily used crowds of hungry civilians to stop the caravan initially. Perhaps that’s why the U.S. military halted further aid deliveries. Meanwhile, of the food aid that made it through to the U.N. warehouse, U.S. officials say they believe none has been distributed to those in need. When asked Tuesday whether aid had reached Gaza residents, Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder responded: “I do not believe so.” That makes two problems with the American military’s Gaza food delivery mission. First, international and nongovernmental aid organizations on the ground aren’t effective at distributing aid to those in need. Second, once aid enters Gaza, it’s hard to prevent it from falling into the hands of nefarious actors. Any U.S. aid delivery strategy that fails to account for these two problems is doomed to misfire. Biden promised no U.S. military “boots on the ground” in Gaza (are boots on a floating pier anchored to the ground much different?). This means the U.S. must, at some point, hand off the aid to groups already handling it so ineffectively and insecurely. When asked Tuesday “who was responsible for security” of the looted aid trucks, the U.N.’s Dujarric admitted, “There is no—we don’t have any armed security.” The current U.S. plan to get the pier’s terminal up and running again is for the aid convoys to travel to the World Food Programme warehouse by “new routes.” This, obviously, solves none of the problems. This new plan is likely to last only as long as it takes for the same “crowds” to ambush a convoy on its new route. If the crowd still has guns and the men in the trucks don’t, it’s hard to imagine any other outcome but more looting. Neither problem should have surprised the Biden administration, if officials were willing to listen to America’s close friend and ally, Israel. Israel has known all along that Hamas commandeers confiscate aid shipments and that Gazan aid organizations are ineffective. As of Tuesday, Israeli border guards had outworked international aid agencies to the point that “650 truckloads [were] waiting for collection and distribution … on the Gazan side of the crossings,” according to an Israeli agency, Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories. “Crossings” is plural because Israel worked to open a second border crossing to aid trucks May 1, after Hamas damaged the crossing in its Oct. 7 terrorist attacks in southern Israel. Meanwhile, Hamas stole the first convoy of aid to enter the Gaza Strip through the newly restored crossing under the coordination of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. In February, a U.S. diplomat denied that Hamas seized any aid shipments into Gaza, but he also acknowledged that Hamas could “shape where and to whom assistance goes.” America’s difficulties delivering aid to the Gaza Strip underscore who is the villain and who is the hero in this story. Reporting from international and mainstream media outlets would convince you that Israel is out to maximize the suffering of people in Gaza, including by starving them to death. The International Criminal Court recently issued “preposterous” indictments against Israeli leaders, “saying that Israel has starved Gazans to death,” as Eugene Kontorovich, director of the Center for Middle East and International Law at George Mason University’s Scalia Law School, said on “Washington Watch.” “It’s not clear that anyone has starved in Gaza,” Kontorovich said. But, he added, “to the extent there’s a problem with food supplies there, it is well known that Hamas steals and plunders all the civilian, all the humanitarian supplies that are coming in. So it’s not clear why it’s Israel rather than Hamas that is being accused of this.” The International Criminal Court has no official jurisdiction, so it “can’t really do anything directly against Israel,” Kontorovich said. The charges nevertheless are “blood libel against the Jews,” he said, a classic example of antisemitism that will be used “in a further diplomatic campaign to delegitimize Israel.” But the claim that Israel is trying to starve Palestinian civilians by not allowing aid into Gaza is simply false. Since the beginning of the war, Israel has allowed 19,981 truckloads of food, 1,752 truckloads of water, 4,213 truckloads of shelter equipment, 2,002 truckloads of medical supplies, and 1,784 truckloads of mixed supplies into Gaza, as well as 297 tanks of fuel and 541 tanks of cooking gas. That adds up to 572,300 tons of humanitarian aid on 29,746 trucks. (Meanwhile, Gaza’s other neighbor, Egypt, has closed its border crossing and is allowing no aid into the strip.) Israel has done this, even though they know much of the aid will end up in their enemy’s hands, to alleviate the suffering of Gazan civilians. The Israelis have delivered thousands of leaflets, broadcast their targets in advance, and otherwise sacrificed operational efficiency in countless ways to spare Palestinian lives. Israel has done all this, and then the international community blames them when Hamas, a terrorist organization, steals humanitarian aid from civilians and uses those civilians as human shields. No country in the world is doing more to help the people of Gaza than the nation of Israel. Yet Biden’s decision to build a floating pier on the Gaza coast was essentially a rebuke to our ally, a declaration that Israel isn’t doing enough. It took only two days of real-world interactions for the Biden administration to discover that Gaza aid delivered through an American port of entry faces all the same barriers as aid delivered through an Israeli port of entry—none of which are Israel’s fault. Biden’s floating pier is an inefficient, costly alternative to Israeli border crossings. U.S. officials claimed the pier initially could handle 90 trucks per day, possibly up to 150 trucks. Yet only a couple dozen trucks have left the pier since its completion two weeks ago. For comparison, 403 aid-bearing trucks entered Gaza on Monday alone, nearly all through Israel. The floating pier involved the labor of 1,000 U.S. servicemembers and a price tag of $320 million, Reuters reported. “The administration got what it wanted” out of the pier, speculated National Review’s senior political correspondent, Jim Geraghty, “which was a couple of ‘U.S. military starts delivering aid to Gaza through floating pier’ headlines this past weekend.” But for the civilians of Gaza, the Biden administration has delivered next to nothing. Originally published by The Washington Stand The post Gaza Aid Promptly Looted After Landing at US-Built Floating Pier appeared first on The Daily Signal.

'Censorship Files': Big Brother 'Misinformation' Censorship Complex Plots Return in 2024

UNC Board of Governors Repeals DEI Policy, Student Protesters Are Unhappy

Another ministry of truth operation tried to go after MRC Free Speech America’s credibility with a big swing and a miss. Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC) bills itself as an “independent website that has promoted awareness of media bias and misinformation by rating the bias, factual accuracy, and credibility of media sources, large and small.” The website traffic cop went after MRC Free Speech America’s new website on May 17. It rated MRC Free Speech America’s “Factual Reporting” as “MIXED,” citing without any specific evidence that MRC Free Speech America promotes “propaganda,” “some conspiracy theories,” and uses “sources that fail fact checks.” The ratings website did link out to two reports: one on leftist billionaire George Soros and the other on Facebook’s sordid election interference since 2008. However, the so-called ratings website provided no evidence where MRC got the facts wrong in either report. Furthermore, none of the MRC Free Speech America staff are aware of any attempt to be reached for comment by MBFC. The so-called ratings website also targeted MRC Free Speech America, not for work we have done, but for the comments and works of one of our advisory board members, Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. Pointing to Kirk's association with the Media Research Center, MBFC alleged that Kirk promoted “various conspiracy theories” about Soros and the “Great Reset.” MBFC made a strawman argument, claiming that Kirk depicted Soros “as a puppet master behind global events, such as funding migrant caravans to influence U.S. elections.” But the example from Kirk’s webpage that MBFC links out to had nothing to do with Soros funding the migrant caravans. Rather, the CharlieKirkShow.com website article correctly referenced how an “open border” advocacy group financed by Soros, United We Dream, created an app to help illegal immigrants “with the click of a button, to alert family, friends and attorneys of encounters with federal authorities.” The article referenced by MBFC only made mention that a Soros group was doing this amidst the “migrant caravan,” not that Soros was specifically funding the caravan itself. Soros doled out no fewer than $5,800,000 between United We Dream and its sister organization United We Dream Action, according to Open Society Foundations records.  MBFC also classified Kirk’s promotion of the “Great Reset” theory as a conspiracy theory, despite the globalist World Economic Forum having been on record making the concept a focal point of its organization and exploiting the COVID–19 pandemic to do it. WEF Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab even wrote a column in July 2020 headlined: “Now is the time for a 'great reset.’” He wrote in the piece: “Clearly, the will to build a better society does exist. We must use it to secure the Great Reset that we so badly need.” In fact, the video MBFC links to of Kirk discussing the Great Reset pulls content from Schwab’s book COVID-19: The Great Reset (2020)” to back up his arguments. Whether MBFC disagrees with the characterization of the concept is its own affair, but the Orwellian idea is most definitely not a conspiracy theory.  Ostensibly treating it as a standalone website, MBFC even attempted to undermine MRC Free Speech America’s CensorTrack.org database the same day (May17) it targeted MRC Free Speech America’s webpage. It did so, apparently not realizing that the database is now a part of the same website with multiple URLs: mrcfreespeechamerica.org and censortrack.org. That mistake led MBFC to cherry pick an old highlight from Censortrack.org, “CensorTrack Database Surpasses 6,000 Documented Cases of Big Tech Censorship,” to claim that an issue regarding a single broken link — now fixed — “could impact the report’s credibility and the overall reliability of the database.” Absurd. Nevertheless, had MBFC done its due diligence and realized that the two URLs were merged, leading to the same web domain, it could have easily found the report in question. While criticizing MRC Free Speech America and one of its advisory board members for statements concerning Soros, it should come as little surprise that MBFC claims to “primarily” rely on fact-checkers affiliated with the Soros-funded International Fact Checking Network at the liberal Poynter Institute for Media Studies for its “methodology.” In fact, the ratings website even admits that it “rarely conducts original fact checks as many other sources are faster and do a better job.” But here’s the kicker: The alleged ratings website notes that MRC Free Speech America hasn’t failed any IFCN fact checks to date, but it still managed to label the MRC Free Speech America website as being “MIXED” on factual reporting and “MEDIUM” on credibility.  Meanwhile, for comparison, MBFC rated leftist CNN as being “MOSTLY FACTUAL” and having “HIGH CREDIBILITY.” Yes, you read that right. MBFC listed two failed fact-checks by CNN in its analysis of the leftist outlet’s so-called “HIGH CREDIBILITY,” but apparently didn’t see the double standard in demoting MRC Free Speech America’s website, which has no documented failed fact checks. This is the same CNN that spent months trying to shove Bidenomics down the American people’s throats, despite the continued growth of inflation nationwide.  MBFC’s write-up took particular issue with MRC’s recent study illustrating how Soros groups joined an open letter to jawbone Big Tech into upping the ante on their censorship operations prior to the 2024 elections in the U.S. and abroad. At least 45 of the 200 signatories to the letter were financed by Soros to the tune of over $80 million between 2016 and 2022 alone. “The headline itself is loaded with negative connotations toward Soros and suggests a deliberate and sinister agenda against conservatives,” MBFC claimed. But none of the facts or arguments asserted in the report were disputed by MBFC. But that’s not all. MBFC apparently also had a problem with MRC’s most recent Big Tech study, “39 Times Facebook Interfered in US Elections Since 2008.” Specifically, MBFC complained that the “language used in these articles often includes charged terms such as ‘censorship,’ ‘interference,’ and ‘anti-Americanism,’ which are intended to evoke strong reactions from a conservative audience.” Again, MBFC complained, but none of the facts within MRC’s research into Facebook were disputed.  Finally, as though suggesting the fox should guard the hen house, MBFC ridiculously claimed that MRC Free Speech America has “limited engagement with the least biased or liberal sources, which could affect the overall credibility.” And it even dinged MRC Free Speech America for daring to cite from “conservative sources or other divisions of the MRC, such as NewsBusters,” because it “could lead to an echo chamber effect where information is repeatedly reinforced without external verification.” MBFC is seemingly oblivious to the fact that MRC Free Speech America also publishes its stories on NewsBusters where most of its past research appeared for years prior to the launch of its new website. It’s also worth noting that news outlets routinely do this as a matter of course as a common tactic to boost search engine optimization (SEO). MBFC made much ado about nothing.  Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.  

With President Biden on the road Monday and Tuesday then a joint press conference Thursday with the Kenyan president, reporters jammed a lot of questions into Wednesday’s press briefing to the ever-inept Karine Jean-Pierre. Thankfully, NBC’s Peter Alexander woke up ready to do his job with probing questions to the press secretary, even if they’re on the same side of the aisle. The topic was even more surprising: student loan debt cancelations. Alexander went about it like the man who usually sits next to him (but not on this day) in Fox’s Peter Doocy. Alexander first pointed out she “opened today’s briefing by talking about the latest student loan cancelations” and asked her to respond to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) calling it “a massive wealth transfer for Americans who did not attend college to those who did” and “a shameful play to buy more votes”.     Jean-Pierre gave a classic, rambling answer worth reading in full (click “expand”): I will say to the congressional member Mike Johnson — obviously, the speaker — is that what is shameful is that Republicans continue to get in the way of helping us deliver a little bit of breathing room for Americans who deserve that opportunity — who deserve you — heard me talk about — uh — uh — about Tiffany, the young woman who — who — um — one of the things that people should know and if — if you don’t is that when folks are — are receiving these — these — um — debt relief — uh — uh — announcements from President, they have an opportunity to tell their story.  They have an opportunity to — to say why this matters to them and we’re talking about millions of Americans who now have an opportunity to start a life, have an opportunity to move forward in a way that where they can reach that American Dream or reach whatever it is that they wanted to do not just for themselves for — for — for them for their families, so we believe — and the President is not going to walk away from doing that. He believes it’s an important commitment that he made to — to Americans. It is a broken system. It is a broken system. Alexander then unleashed his hardball: [W]hat then is the White House’s message to those Americans who did not attend college for a variety of reasons, perhaps — including perhaps that they didn’t want to take on all the debt that went with it right now that they feel like, in some form, they are responsible for allowing those who did not to pay their fair share? Jean-Pierre insisted this was proof Biden is “building an economy that leaves no one behind”, which Alexander immediately interjected with a reality check: “Are those people being left behind? The ones who didn’t get support because they didn’t go to college?” The press secretary wanted nothing to do with this and plowed ahead with her world divorced from reality except for those whom the Biden camp needs to secure reelection. To his credit, Alexander didn’t back down (click “expand”): JEAN-PIERRE: I hear your question, but this is — if you look at what the President has done more holistically over the past 3.5 years, he has tried to build an economy for everyone. This is one part of his economic policy. When you think about creating — creating 15 million jobs, many of those jobs if you think about the different — uh — uh — uh — different — uh — legislation that he’s obviously passed into law, whether it’s the bipartisan infrastructure legislation, Chips and Science Act, it’s creating jobs that are good, union-paying jobs that — where you don’t need a college education —  right — where you can make six figures and actually have that opportunity to start your family. He is creating an economy from the bottom up, middle out, making sure that the millionaires, billionaires and corporations are paying their fair share — fair share — right — not like Republicans in Congress who want to give them a tax giveaway. So, he’s trying to make sure — this is one part of his economic policy, but as he’s thinking forward, as he’s looking at all Americans, all communities, he wants to make sure that there is an economy that doesn’t leave — again — doesn’t leave anybody behind and as — historically, that trickle down economics does not work, and he does not want to see that, so we have given opportunities and we want to continue to give opportunities for folks who feel like they need a little bit more help. ALEXANDER: And I guess to put just a fine point on it right — JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. ALEXANDER: — now for the 4.7 million Americans who have received this debt relief, the averages, you said, at the start of this —  JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. About 35,000. ALEXANDER: — this was $35,000 their relief has been for, so I guess why don’t those individuals who didn’t receive $35,000 in debt cancellation deserve a $35,000 check from other Americans for what other means they would want to use it? JEAN-PIERRE: You’re talking about the —  ALEXANDER: The people who didn’t go to college, so they’re not getting debt relief — the $35,000 that they don’t get because they didn’t go. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, we’re talking about folks who are in debt who are literally being crushed — literally being crushed....financially. Um — and — uh — so, they’re trying to get their lives back on track — right — they’re trying to get into a place because they took — they took a bet on themselves in a different way — right — and betting of — of themselves and going to college and some of them, it is difficult to do that, right? And they did that financially. It’s hurt them, and we want to give them that breathing room. But it’s not just folks who have debt because of colleges. We’re trying to help people in different — in different communities as well. Uh — folks who don’t have to get that college degree and can get — make six figure salary. That is one of the things that the president was very proud of when he passed the bipartisan infrastructure legislation, when he signed the Chips and Science Act. Those are really important components of what he’s trying to do as well. Let’s — if you think about making sure healthcare — healthcare is more affordable, getting that prescription drugs — many for diabetes, for cancer, making sure those costs are lower — insulin, so there are many ways that the President has made sure that Americans have what they need to move forward with their lives, create and build a family where they feel like they’re going after their dreams as well. And so, look, you know, we want to make sure that, again, the student loan piece is one part — one part of the President’s economic policy, and the President’s not going to step away from it. He’s not going to back down because he believes it’s the right thing to do. A few minutes later, the Fox Business Network’s Grady Trimble returned to student loans, wondering why those who took out loans are, in the words of the undersecretary of education, “due forgiveness”. “Everybody has a different story as to why they need student loans. Everybody has different reasoning as to why they want to go to college. I cannot speak for everyone,” Jean-Pierre mumbled, leading Trimble to ask it again. Jean-Pierre doubled down about this “crushing financial burden” and insisted a “majority of Americans agree” with the regime on mass forgiveness. When Trimble pointed out a Fox “poll show[s] more than half disagree with using tax dollars” and then asked if inflation is made worse by these moves, Jean-Pierre stood pat. Trimble’s Fox colleague Jacqui Heinrich had the Fox News seat and closed the briefing by stating the obvious that one could see Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) reintroducing of the failed Senate border bill as “a cynical attempt to try to show Americans that Democrats care about the border”. Some following the five D’s of dodgeball by Jean-Pierre later, Heinrich fact-checked her on who ultimately has responsibility to control America’s borders: “[Y]ou opened briefing by saying it’s up to Republicans to do something to solve the problem or continue to use it as a political issue. The President has the authority to do something about this unilaterally.” Later in the briefing, she really dropped the hammer on the border crisis to the point that Jean-Pierre could only say she’d defer to Senate Democrats: Well, just because, in the framework through which is coming up again, again, not allowing for any changes, no indication this votes’s going to be different and it looks like, if anything, bringing up this vote again and setting it up to fail again, is really just an indication that Democrats know that they’re vulnerable on this issue? To see the relevant transcript from the May 22 briefing, click here.

PBS was more than willing to help Congressman Jamie Raskin (D-MD) harass an important American industry during a critical time in the inflation-rattled economy.  During the May 22 edition of PBS NewsHour, PBS correspondent Lisa Desjardins egged on Raskin to compare fossil fuel companies to the tobacco industry for supposedly hiding the impact of their emissions on “climate change.” Raskin called for the Department of Justice to investigate them for “costing humanity hundreds of billions of dollars,” leaving the door open to both possible criminal and civil liability. Desjardins not only pushed this tobacco analogy but also took four and a half minutes to briefly mention the elephant in the room: America still needs fossil fuels.  The U.S. gets the vast majority of its energy from fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas. Fossil fuels are also critical for the production of fertilizer, plastic, cement, steel and other much-needed products, but this was apparently lost on PBS. Desjardins did eventually read a statement by the American Petroleum Institute (API) Senior Media Relations Manager Andrea Woods. “This is another unfounded political charade to distract from persistent inflation and America’s need for more energy, including oil and natural gas. U.S. energy workers are focused on delivering the reliable, affordable oil and natural gas Americans demand and any suggestion to the contrary is false,” Desjardins read.  Desjardins then asked Raskin for his response to the API statement given that “obviously moving to renewable fuels can’t happen immediately.”  “Well we’re at levels of gas and oil production higher than we’ve seen before and the economy remains deeply invested and engaged in carbon production,” Raskin stammered out before returning to bashing the industry.  But this was misleading, and PBS didn’t bother pushing back.  Americans have paid the price for Biden’s eco-extremist policies by suffering stubbornly higher gas prices. Average gas prices have risen to $3.73/gallon under Biden in April 2024 from $2.24/gallon under Trump in Jan 2021. This is even though Biden massively drained the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve starting in 2021. The president just recently sold off even more oil designated for emergencies, a million barrels from the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve. President Joe Biden has repeatedly restricted oil and gas production and discouraged future investments. In addition, Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency recently passed a rule that CNN Climate Correspondent Bill Wehr said is designed to not only shutter existing coal plants, but also to place new burdens on new natural gas plants. The Biden Administration has also announced a “pause” on new liquified natural gas projects, restricted drilling in Alaska, and reversed several of former President Donald Trump’s pro-energy executive orders.  [WATCH: Senator Mike Lee Confronts Jennifer Granholm on Anti-Energy Policies] Conservatives are under attack! Contact ABC News at 818-460-7477, CBS News at 212-975-3247 and NBC News at 212-664-6192 and demand they hold Biden and his cronies accountable for attempting to restrict fossil fuel production and Americans’ choices.