Covid Conspiracy Fact: Vindication Is Bittersweet

Yay! Time for Another Brandon Johnson Hissy Fit - ShotSpotter Edition

Northwestern's President Didn't Do Well Under Congressional Questioning

In a chaotic interview on Wednesday’s The Source between Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) of Texas and CNN host Kaitlin Collins, what started out as a relatively tame discussion (by CNN’s standards) on in vitro fertilization (IVF), soon turned into a pointed clash on Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and potential voter fraud. The former Daily Caller reporter, who found herself repeatedly flustered as Cruz schooled her, chose to inhibit Cruz from answering about accepting the 2024 results as it was not a simple yes or no.  Regardless of the unprofessional interruptions made by Collins, Cruz answered confidently, pointing out the clear bias of his interviewer. All throughout, it was evident that there was an ulterior motive to her questions. When the answer was not to her liking, she either shifted the dialogue in hopes of forcing Cruz to answer a pointed question or spoke over his response entirely.     Between the clear prejudice in each question and her defense of every leftist view, Collins proved herself to be a perfect depiction of the Leftist Media. As such, she proceeded to corner Cruz into a strictly “yes or no answer” question regarding election fraud: “In 2024, will you certify the election results? Do you plan to object? Or will you accept the results regardless of who wins the election?” Cruz blasted this as “actually a ridiculous question” and, from there, the races began. Collins would, truthfully, not let Cruz answer the question, even when Cruz repeatedly asked her whether she’s talked to Democrats about their own troubles with accepting elections.  Collins countered by invoking January 6 in order to support allowing leftists to question elections with Cruz reciting the history and lambasting the liberal media’s false choice demanding the public believe voter fraud never exists (as opposed to a nuanced view). Collins didn’t want to discuss any of this, including direct precedent to 1876 (click “expand”): COLLINS: It’s a yes-or-no question, though. CRUZ: No, it’s not. Let me explain why it’s a ridiculous question. It’s not a question. You’ve ever asked a Democrat that? COLLINS: Of course. CRUZ: What Democrat? COLLINS: But what Democrats — CRUZ: — whoa, no, but hold on a second. What Democrats challenge it? COLLINS: What Democrats — CRUZ: Hill — COLLINS: I know. I know. I’ve been down this road many times. CRUZ: — but — but — but— COLLINS: No Democrat — you cannot compare the two situations. We have talked about that. We’ve seen the audio of that when they protested on the Senate floor. CRUZ: Okay, but — but hold on a second. COLLINS: But have they ever — have you ever had a sitting president, who refused to facilitate the peaceful transition of power — CRUZ: And by the way — COLLINS: — refused to acknowledge that his successor won the presidency? CRUZ: — uhhh — sooo, A, we did have a peaceful transfer of power. I was there on January 20. I was there on the swearing-in. COLLINS: Barely. CRUZ: B, if you look at in — in 2000, Democrats went to the Senate — or 2001, Democrats went to the Senate floor and objected to George W. Bush. In 2004 — COLLINS: And what did the Vice President do? CRUZ: — they went and objected. In — COLLINS: And what did the President do? CRUZ: — in 2016, Democrats went and objected to Donald Trump. (....) CRUZ: [Y]ou’re asking, will you promise, no matter what, to agree an election as illegitimate, regardless of what happens? And that would be an absurd thing to claim. Like, we have an entire election law system that people challenge elections, elections get overturned, voter fraud gets proven. That happens all the time and the media engages in this weird game, post-Donald Trump that you insist no voter fraud has ever existed. Why does every state have laws in place to challenge voter fraud, if it occurs — COLLINS: The media doesn’t — CRUZ: — why do you have election challenges? COLLINS: — this isn’t a game. There was no widespread voter fraud. CRUZ: It is a game. It is — you only ask Republicans that. COLLINS: There was this — CRUZ: You ask what — COLLINS: — because it was Republicans, who tried to block the transition of power. You have to acknowledge that. CRUZ: So — COLLINS: We’ve never seen it on a scale of what happened in 2020 and we’ve never seen the President refuse. He wouldn’t even let Joe Biden get classified briefings at the beginning. I recall that. CRUZ: — so — so, let me be— COLLINS: So, my question for you, again, free and fair election, will you accept the results regardless of who wins? CRUZ: Look, if the Democrats win, I will accept the result, but I’m not going to ignore fraud, regardless of what happens? COLLINS: But was there fraud in 2020? CRUZ: Of course, there was fraud in 2020. COLLINS: No, there wasn’t. (....) CRUZ: I tried to look through history and precedent and the best precedent I could find was the election of 1876. Elect — 1876 was between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel Tilden and what happened there, there were serious allegations of voter fraud. And — and Congress didn’t throw its hands up and say, you know what? CNN demanded that I accept the results no matter what. So, ignore the fraud. I got to go. COLLINS: It’s not on — it’s not— CRUZ: So, but hold on. What did Congress do in 18 — COLLINS: It’s the President of the United States. How did the President— CRUZ: — what did Congress do in 1876? COLLINS: How did the President handle it? CRUZ: What did Congress do in 1876? COLLINS: Senator, I have to go. CRUZ: What — I’m asking a question. COLLINS: You can’t answer yes or no, to this question. CRUZ: I’m asking a question. What did Congress do in 1876? COLLINS: You can’t answer yes or no, to this question. CRUZ: Can you answer my question? COLLINS: And Republicans — CRUZ: Why are you refusing to answer my question? COLLINS: — well I’m conducting the interview with all due respect, Senator. (....) COLLINS: And what’s your answer? Is it yes, or is it no? CRUZ: So, in 1876, what Congress did is it appointed an election commission that consisted of 15 people, five House members, five senators, five Supreme Court justices. The election commission was charged with studying the evidence, and making a determination of what voter fraud occurred, and that determined the winter and what I called for in 2020 was to do the same thing, appoint an election commission. At one point, Cruz leveled a brutal takedown of CNN’s double standard: “It was CNN that relentlessly pushed....propaganda....that voter fraud doesn’t exist and anyone who says it does is wearing a tinfoil hat. That is propaganda and by the way, you never ask Hillary Clinton this. You never ask Stacey Abrams this. You never ask Al Gore this. And every one of them said the Republicans who won were illegitimate.” Collins again scoffed: “I haven’t had any of them on my show. We’ll talk to them. But I don’t remember there being a president, who was refusing to turn over the transition of power, and facilitating it.” When Cruz tried to say “let me say a final point”, an infuriated Collins endinged the interview: “Senator Ted Cruz, no answer to that question. Thank you very much.” CNN’s snarky chyron had a different take: “Straight to the Source; Cruz refuses to commit to accept 2024 results.” The interview began with Cruz’s IVF bill and Collins being concerned about a wholesale ban and prosecution. Cruz ripped this “fear-mongering” attitude she shared with other Democratic politicians, so she shifted to the story of Kate Cox, asking if he agreed with the Court's ruling. Cruz calmly stated the Court was “right in saying that the Texas Medical Board should set the rules,” which makes perfect sense, and makes us wonder why the journalist then defended the idea that lawmakers should clarify such medical standards. Before a break, Collins invoked the flags kerfuffle over Justice Alito’s homes. Cruz dismissed this as “entire hoopla” as “greatly overstated” and part of “a concerted effort…driven by Democrats in the Senate, to try to delegitimize the court, and to try to demonize” conservative justices. Collins stubbornly stuck to her left talking points: “Do you not worry that it undercuts his credibility, as a justice, when he does something like this?”

Democratic Rep. Dwight Evans of Pennsylvania announced that he recently suffered a "minor stroke."The congressman said that he anticipates being able to get back to voting in D.C. in around six weeks.'The main impact seems to be some difficulty with one leg.'"I wanted to let my constituents know that I am recovering from a minor stroke, and I want to emphasize the word minor. It was minor enough that I didn't even realize what had happened for a few days," Evans said in a statement."The main impact seems to be some difficulty with one leg, which will probably impact my walking for some time, but not my long-term ability to serve the people of Philadelphia," he noted. "I'm recovering at an inpatient rehabilitation facility and expect to be there about a week longer, followed by outpatient therapy. I currently expect to be back voting in Washington in about six weeks from now. I'm focusing on my healing and would ask for privacy during these six weeks."Lawmakers including Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, who suffered a stroke shortly before winning a Democratic U.S. Senate primary in the Keystone State in 2022, expressed well wishes in response to Evans' announcement."It's not an easy thing to face but know that we are all pulling for you, Congressman," a post on the @SenFettermanPA X account noted. — (@) "From years of working alongside @RepDwightEvans, I know that you can't keep a Philly kid down. I send my best as he makes a speedy recovery while already raising awareness and breaking down stigmas. I'm looking forward to welcoming him back to the dais in the very near future," Democratic Rep. Richard Neal of Massachusetts noted.Earlier this week, Republican Rep. Greg Murphy of North Carolina announced plans to undergo surgery to remove "a base of skull tumor called a pituitary macroadenoma."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

British political figure Nigel Farage has noted that while he will not mount a bid for office during his nation's upcoming elections, he plans to campaign both at home and abroad.In a statement, he explained that he plans to assist "with the grassroots campaign" in America. 'Whether you like him or not, Donald Trump believes in peace through strength.'"I have thought long and hard as to whether I should stand in the upcoming general election. As honorary president of Reform UK, I am fully supportive of Richard Tice's leadership and urge voters to put their trust in him and Lee Anderson. I will do my bit to help in the campaign, but it is not the right time for me to go any further than that."Important though the general election is, the contest in the United States of America on November 5 has huge global significance. A strong America as a close ally is vital for our peace and security. I intend to help with the grassroots campaign in the USA in any way that I can," he noted. — (@) "I think Trump back in the White House makes the world a much, much safer place," Farage said in a video that he shared on social media.During an interview on GB News, Farage was asked whether he will be working for the Trump "campaign in an official capacity.""No," Farage replied. "I don't believe I will," he noted, explaining that he has been offered a position to work for a large "grassroots conservative movement in America.""World War III matters more to this country than who wins the next election," he said. "We saw the Biden withdrawal from Kabul" and the "Taliban taking back over. That was followed by Putin invading Ukraine. The Chinese [are] now rattling their sabers over Taiwan. We're in a very bad place," he noted. "Whether you like him or not, Donald Trump believes in peace through strength," he said. "That must be good for us."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Georgia police are taking action against squatters after the Republican-controlled government passed new protections for rental landlords. A video report from WSB-TV showed police mocking suspected squatters who were previously able to take advantage of loopholes in the law. Before House Bill 1017, a dispute between the owner of a home and a squatter was a civil matter and could take weeks or months to be decided in court. Meanwhile the landlord would have to pay the mortgage while the squatter stayed for free. 'All these fake leases. ... Nope! Nope! Nope! That's over with!' The new law makes squatting a criminal offense if the suspect cannot prove that they belong in the home within three days. The criminal citation then becomes a felony if the lease is fraudulent. WSB reports that some departments are still trying to determine how to implement the new law, but South Fulton Police have already created a task force to root out squatters. "All these fake leases, and I got receipts, and this, and I rented this. Nope! Nope! Nope! That's over with!" says an officer with the South Fulton Police. “I know everybody thinks you can go in the house and squat and sit there. That all changed the other day,” said another officer. The law also allows other entities, including HOAs and neighbors, to report suspected squatters. 'The police can’t put them out. What justice is that?'Folks at WSB patted themselves on the back for their squatter coverage that they claim led to legislators passing the new law. In one infuriating example from 2023, an Army officer said that a squatter moved into her home while she was on active duty. She discovered the housing stowaway after trying to sell the home and finding someone inside. But police could not evict them because it was a civil matter. “I can’t ask them to leave. I can’t put them out. The police can’t put them out. What justice is that?” said Lt. Colonel Dahlia Daure to WSB at the time. Ironically, under the old laws, the squatter was protected against adverse action by Daure. “I want to go shoot out the windows, turn off the water, cut wires, but I can’t," she said. "That’s a crime. Law-abiding citizens can’t do that." 'This is no longer a civil matter. Once this law was passed, it’s now become a criminal offense.' South Fulton Police Lt. Jubal Rogers told WSB that the new law will let police shut down suspected squatters in days instead of months. “We’re basically putting these squatters on notice. The law changed," he said. “This is no longer a civil matter. Once this law was passed, it’s now become a criminal offense to unlawfully squat in a residence where you do not have a lease,” Rogers added. "I think with the current law that is now in effect, we will be able to react more proactively." In one instance, police determined that a suspected squatter was in a home with a corporate owner who was seeking to be reimbursed $60,000 in delinquent rent. In February, a report from the National Rental Home Council found that as many as 1,200 vacant homes were taken over by squatters in just Atlanta, Georgia.It appears that the new law may just turn the tide against squatters. "House Bill 1017 says to squatters, 'No more freeloading, no more free rides, no more fraud on the paperwork. If you falsify documents and you get caught, you're going to serve jail time on that. That's wrong,'" said Republican state Representative Matt Reeves. "These squatters are stealing the American dream." Georgia has a Republican governor with Republican majorities in both chambers of the legislature. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

143 Democrats Vote Against H.R. 192 Which Bars Noncitizens From Voting in Local D.C. Elections

CNN Looked Sad to Be Covering Trump's Massive Rally in 'One of the Bluest Counties in the Country'

Russian border guards seized navigation buoys from the Estonia side of the Narva River, representatives from the Baltic nation said on Thursday.