Movies & TV Star Trek: Strange New Worlds Unfound Footage — Star Trek: Strange New Worlds: “What is Starfleet? This week’s episode tackles a confusing bit of Star Trek lore: how exactly does Starfleet function? By Keith R.A. DeCandido | Published on August 21, 2025 Credit: Paramount+ Comment 0 Share New Share Credit: Paramount+ One of the dumbest lines of dialogue ever uttered on a Star Trek TV show—and in a lot of ways, one of the most damaging to the franchise—was put in the mouth of Jean-Luc Picard in the second-season TNG episode “Peak Performance.” He said, “Starfleet is not a military organization, its purpose is exploration.” Those words are utter fucking nonsense, and are borne of Gene Roddenberry’s tendency late in life to believe his own bullshit—and also, apparently, forgetting that “military” and “militaristic” are two different words that mean different things. First of all, the dichotomy Picard implies in that line of dialogue doesn’t exist: being a military and having your purpose be exploration aren’t mutually exclusive. Secondly, of course Starfleet is a military organization. It has a rank structure. It has rules and regulations that must be obeyed. Those rules are enforced via courts-martial that are independent of the civilian legal system. Roddenberry served in the military (he was a lieutenant in the Army Air Corps during World War II), so you’d think he’d have remembered that. This philosophy in general and that line in particular has been the source of a great number of arguments and a great deal of confusion about what Starfleet is supposed to be. It’s also led to silly things like Archer’s crew on Enterprise saying they need a military presence on board when going into the Expanse, even though they are a military. The latest episode of SNW tackles this head-on with the aptly titled “What is Starfleet?” It’s done in the form of the documentary that Beto Ortegas was given permission to film in “Wedding Bell Blues,” and which we’ve seen him recording in “Through the Lens of Time.” And it is absolutely fantastic, a brilliant episode of Star Trek. The entire episode is Beto’s documentary, with interviews with the crew intercut with footage both from Beto’s free-floating cameras and security footage from the Enterprise computer, with captions explaining that they’ve been declassified for this documentary. It opens with the titular question, and pointing out one other issue with the whole military thing: Starfleet ships have enough armament on board to lay waste to a planet, plus they’re incredibly heavily stocked with hand weapons. The capability for violence is huge on a starship, and Beto starts off questioning that. What’s the difference between a starship and a warship? The mission that’s at the heart of the documentary involves the Enterprise assisting the Lutani, who are in the midst of a conflict, and Starfleet is to provide aid. Part of that aid is to escort a life-form called a Jikaru that is listed as “livestock” to the Lutani homeplanet. Over the course of the mission it becomes clear that the Jikaru isn’t livestock, it’s sentient, and has been enslaved. Watching this conflict play out is a joy, and having it be through the documentary just makes it more fascinating. It’s a trope that Trek has revisited plenty of times, indeed is one of the franchise’s signature moves: an alien being that they think is one thing turns out to be something else, and they have to adjust their assumptions and their actions. And yes, Starfleet is a military organization (sorry, Jean-Luc), and that means they have to commit violent acts in the name of keeping the peace. It also means they sometimes have to kill—and sometimes be killed. And, as is mentioned plenty of times on this mission that grows ever-more distasteful as it goes on, it means they have to follow the orders of their superiors. But it doesn’t mean they can’t be compassionate and understanding. As the episode goes on, Spock and Uhura find ways to communicate with the Jikaru, and they eventually realize, not only that she has been enslaved, but that she is sentient and wants to commit suicide. (Her initial attacks on Enterprise were in the hopes that the Starfleet vessel would kill her in retaliation.) The focus shifts from escorting the Jikaru to a war zone to helping her die with dignity and stopping the Lutani from exploiting the other Jikaru. Along the way we get some lovely character insights, mostly through the interviews. Spock discusses the prejudice he encountered as a halfbreed on Vulcan (as also seen in the animated series’ “Yesteryear,” the 2009 Star Trek, and Discovery’s “Brother” and “Light and Shadow”), and says that Starfleet allows him to explore his human half in a way he would not be permitted to on Vulcan. Uhura discusses the loss of her immediate family (as first revealed in “Children of the Comet”), and also is told that one of her Academy friends died on the Cayuga back in “Hegemony.” La’an talks about how important it is for her to protect people. M’Benga makes it clear that he very much wants to bury his past (as established primarily in “Under the Cloak of War”) and has no interest in discussing it. Pike and Number One are much more mature in their interviews, with Pike solemnly telling the story of having to put down an injured horse as a boy, and Number One very calmly discusses the realities of having to follow orders. Credit: Paramount+ The biggest character revelation, though, is about the documentarian. Talking to Beto, Uhura realizes that a big reason for this documentary is Beto working out his anger at Starfleet for what was done to his sister in the “Hegemony” two-parter. Erica Ortegas nearly died, and Beto is furious at Starfleet for letting that happen to her, and furious at his sister for staying in Starfleet after it happened. Tellingly, the interviews with Ortegas are the only ones that aren’t structured and settled. Everyone else is interviewed while sitting calmly and talking into the camera. Ortegas, though, is in her quarters tinkering, constantly moving around, and also constantly giving her brother shit. She’s unwilling to sit still for an interview—or for Beto’s issues. That’s one of many excellent touches by director Sharon Lewis, who did a superlative job here. The documentary feel is expertly captured, but she also makes use of that feel to do some excellent visual work. In particular I love the use of closeups (the security footage from the different consoles, which give extreme looks at the faces of the crew), but also of distance. One of the most effective shots is of Pike and Number One speaking with Starfleet Command. The camera is very far away, so the captain and first officer are extremely small, reflecting how small they feel in the face of this mission, which keeps getting more insane. We also can’t hear what Starfleet Command is saying, a nice touch that shows the Enterprise’s isolation. This is a brilliant episode of Star Trek, a fantastic hour of television, and one that reinforces the Trek ethos of compassion over violence, of understanding over blindly following orders. And it reminds us that a military organization doesn’t have to be brutal or unthinking or cruel.[end-mark] The post Unfound Footage — <i>Star Trek: Strange New Worlds</i>: “What is Starfleet? appeared first on Reactor.

U.S. Rep. Chip Roy announced Thursday he’s running for Texas attorney general.  First elected to the U.S. House from the 21st District of Texas in 2018, Roy, a Republican, has been a staunch conservative in Congress, opposing most big spending bills. Texas has a long and proud tradition of rising to defend our homes, our freedom, and our communities. I’m running for Attorney General to carry on that legacy… unafraid to fight, unafraid to win, and unafraid to defend Texas at every turn. #LiveFree pic.twitter.com/eqQNwx0XHm— Chip Roy (@chiproytx) August 21, 2025 “Texas has a long and proud tradition of rising to defend our homes, our freedom, and our communities,” Roy said in a post on X. “I’m running for attorney general to carry on that legacy … unafraid to fight, unafraid to win, and unafraid to defend Texas at every turn.” Current Attorney General Ken Paxton is running against incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in a Republican primary for U.S. Senate.  Roy’s campaign video warns about problems facing Texas: “Radical Democrats and George Soros are funding DAs [district attorneys] and liberal judges hellbent on coddling criminals and putting Texas in danger,” Roy says in the two-minute campaign video. “Open border politicians have flooded our streets, hospitals, jails, and schools with illegal immigrants and dangerous fentanyl, empowering cartels while endangering Texans and the immigrants they use as political pawns.” He also talked about election integrity and the push for woke policies in public schools.  “Today, we draw a line in the sand. Texas’ next attorney general must have a proven record of fighting to preserve, protect, and defend our legacy,” he continued.  Election integrity was a major focus for Roy in the House of Representatives. He sponsored the House version of the SAVE Act, short for the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act. The proposal twice passed the House, and would require proof of citizenship to register to vote. Roy has placed conservatism over party loyalty in the past.  He has for the most part been an ally to President Donald Trump on policy matters. However, after Trump’s 2024 election victory and before he took office, the president-elect and Roy clashed. Trump wanted to raise the debt limit, while Roy thought there should be spending restrictions before agreeing to increase the limit.  Roy had also endorsed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024. He endorsed Trump after DeSantis dropped out of the race shortly after coming in second place in the Iowa Caucuses.  Trump briefly floated pushing a primary challenger to run against Roy for his House seat.  In 2020, Roy had called on Paxton to resign as attorney general at a time the attorney general faced allegations of wrongdoing. Paxton was accused of using his office to benefit a donor and his business interests and was impeached by the Texas House in 2023 but acquitted by the Senate. The post Rep. Chip Roy Running for Texas Attorney General in 2026 appeared first on The Daily Signal.

ASHBURN, Va.—The father of a high school boy punished by the school district for expressing shock at seeing a girl in the boys’ locker room says he would take his son’s case to the Supreme Court, if necessary, as his lawyer says the case illustrates “blatant religious discrimination.” “Are you in this for the long haul? If it ends up having to be a lawsuit, if you end up having to appeal, you’d go all the way to the Supreme Court?” The Daily Signal asked Sean Wolfe, the punished boy’s father, in an interview at Stone Bridge High School Wednesday. “Yes,” he replied. “I think as a father, that is a father’s duty, and we need men and women to stand up for our children.” Wolfe had spoken during a press conference at the school organized by the Family Foundation of Virginia. The Founding Freedoms Law Center, the Family Foundation’s legal arm, is representing his son, who is one of three boys who shared their surprise at seeing a girl in the boys’ locker room at Stone Bridge. The girl, who identifies as a boy, had filmed the encounter, even though that violates Loudoun County Public Schools’ privacy policy. The school system did not investigate her, but instead brought claims against the boys under Title IX, a federal law banning discrimination on the basis of sex. Religious Discrimination? Loudon County Public Schools later dropped the claims against one boy, who is Muslim, while not only keeping the original charge but adding another against the two other boys, who are Christian. “We think it’s blatant religious discrimination,” Josh Hetzler, the boys’ lawyer, told The Daily Signal in an interview before the press conference. While the school system brought “identical facts” against all three boys, it eventually dropped the case against the Muslim boy. While the district “didn’t say Muslim,” Hetzler said “that was the only difference we could find.” While the lawyer said exonerating the Muslim boy “was the right thing,” he faulted Loudon County Public Schools for keeping the cases against the two Christian boys. Loudon County Public Schools Suspends a Boy Who Left the School On Friday night, Loudoun County Public Schools found both the Christian boys guilty of Title IX sexual harassment and sex-based discrimination, according to Hetzler. The district suspended Wolfe’s son for 10 days, ordered him to avoid contact with the girl who identifies as a boy, and required him to develop a “corrective action plan” with the district to avoid such behavior in the future. While Wolfe’s son remains at Stone Bridge High School, the other Christian boy has since moved. “According to their rules, they can drop a Title IX investigation if someone moves or disenrolls,” Hetzler explained. Yet he said Loudon County decided, “Nope, we’re going to keep him on. Not only did they find him guilty, but then they decided to suspend him for 10 days, even though they knew he’s no longer at the school.” “It seems vindictive to us,” the lawyer added. The Title IX finding, if finalized, will appear on the boy’s permanent record. At the press conference, Hetzler announced that the school board had temporarily lifted the suspension while the boys appealed the finding inside the public school system. The Founding Freedoms Law Firm and America First Legal threatened to file a lawsuit if Loudon County does not drop the Title IX claims. The Broader Context Loudon County Public Schools’ Policy 8040 allows students to use their chosen names and gender pronouns, and opens sports, restrooms, and locker rooms to students on the basis of claimed gender identity, rather than biological sex. The policy drew scrutiny in May 2021, when a 15-year-old male student forced a girl to commit sex acts in the girls bathroom at Stone Bridge. The school district moved the male student to Broad Run High School, where he then sexually assaulted another girl in a girls restroom in October of that year. The Loudoun County Juvenile Court had found the perpetrator “not innocent” of charges of forcible sodomy and forcible fellatio. The student also pleaded “no contest” to charges of abduction and sexual battery on Oct. 6. That case spurred the parental rights movement that elevated Republican Glenn Youngkin in the 2021 gubernatorial election. The Department of Education has withheld federal funds from Loudoun County after finding that Policy 8040 violates Title IX. A ‘Biased’ Investigation Sean Wolfe, the boy’s father, agreed with Hetzler that the case may involve religious discrimination. “I think there’s a potential for that, correct,” he told The Daily Signal when asked about the discrimination claim. He also said Loudon County Public Schools seems to be hostile against his son. “I personally believe that the whole investigation process was very biased,” he said. When asked how the situation makes him feel, the father expressed sadness but also pride in his son. “I’m saddened, disheartened, that we’re going through this as a family, but at the same time, I am proud that my son is willing to speak up [for] the truth,” Wolfe said. The post ‘BLATANT RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION’: Father of Punished Christian Boy Says He Would Take Case to Supreme Court appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Prostitution has taken center stage in the New York mayor’s race, as front-runner Zohran Mamdani is pushing to decriminalize it in the city.  This has prompted one of his opponents, incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, this week to question the religious principles of Mamdani, a Muslim.  ?BREAKING: NYC Mayor Eric Adams just slammed Muslim Communist Mamdani for vowing to decriminalize prostitution.“I don’t know where in his Quran it states that it’s OK for a woman to be on the streets selling her body.”God bless Eric Adams. pic.twitter.com/DOK4XjyFm3— Bo Loudon (@BoLoudon) August 19, 2025 Mamdani, the Democrat nominee for mayor and a self-professed socialist, championed legalizing “sex work” in the New York state Assembly when he was representing Queens. He now says he wants to emulate proposals by former Democrat Mayor Bill de Blasio.  “What I want to do is look at the ways in which the previous administration addressed this issue,” said Mamdani, according to the New York Post. He added, “I found that it created far more safety than what the current administration has done.” In the final year of his administration, de Blasio proposed decriminalizing prostitution to shift focus on arresting traffickers. Adams argued prostitution leads to more sex trafficking.  “I’m a man of God, just as Mamdani says he’s a Muslim. I don’t know where in his Quran it states that it’s OK for a woman to be on the streets selling their body,” Adams told reporters. “I don’t know what Quran he is reading. It’s not in my Bible. As a man who said he is of faith, I don’t quite understand what religion supports prostitution.” Adams added, “You’re not doing any service to a woman who is on the street who is forced to sell her body for whatever reason.” The post In NYC Mayor’s Race, Adams Asks Mamdani ‘Where in His Quran’ Prostitution is OK appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Efforts to finalize a trade agreement between the European Union and the United States have run into roadblocks, with unresolved disputes over digital policy and market access holding up the release of a long-anticipated joint statement. Talks have dragged on as Washington pushes back against what it labels “non-tariff barriers,” a term it has used to include the EU’s censorship law, the Digital Services Act. This regulation compels major tech platforms to enforce stricter content moderation. EU officials say the United States is attempting to secure room for future concessions on the digital law, a move the European Commission flatly opposes. One EU source to the Financial Times stated that changing the bloc’s digital rules is “a red line.” Still, an American official insisted digital trade issues were part of the initial understanding. “We continue to address digital trade barriers in conversations with our trading partners, and the EU agreed to address these barriers when our initial agreement was struck,” the official said. The joint statement was meant to follow the July 27 tariff deal announced by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and President Donald Trump in Scotland. But instead of moving forward, the text has been passed back and forth between Brussels and Washington without resolution. The delay stands in sharp contrast to how the US handled a similar deal with the UK, where the “general terms” were made public the same day the agreement was announced. While implementation of that deal took weeks, the terms were at least immediately available. Though, this was all before the wider dangers of the UK’s online censorship law had caught the attention of the wider public. In the case of the EU, the lack of transparency has raised doubts, particularly as some sectors remain exposed to higher tariffs despite the deal setting a general cap at 15 percent. Certain EU products, such as aircraft components, specific pharmaceuticals, and key minerals, have been exempted. But across the bloc, there is a growing perception that the EU got the short end of the deal. The agreement has come with obligations to increase spending on American energy exports and investments in the United States, all while absorbing increased costs on various exports. US representatives maintain that this level of uncertainty was always expected. “As with the UK, the Trump administration and the EU agreed to a framework for a comprehensive deal. Both parties were clear when the agreement was reached that many details were going to be worked out at a later time,” a US official told the Financial Times. “The administration is working closely with EU officials to finalize those details as quickly as possible to expand market access for American exports.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post EU-US Trade Deal Stalls Over Digital Censorship Disputes appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

A segment on Target’s financial woes on CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip, colloquially known as the Thunderdome, laser-focused on the retailer’s recent financial woes. A liberal panelist took an opportunity to try to make hay at the expense of Scott Jennings, and it did not end well. Watch as Meidas bro Adam Mockler tried to run through a series of talking points, only to get made to admit he didn’t know what drove increases in the price of vegetables: .@Scott JenningsKY takes a Meidas Bro to school: "I think if you're going to throw out Donald Trump is responsible for vegetable prices, you should come and know what's going on around the world." pic.twitter.com/huUSxh82cs — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) August 21, 2025 ABBY PHILLIP: I mean, when you look at Target's stock from January until now, I mean, it has plummeted 28 percent. So, most of that time, it is the backlash that is driven by the boycotts. ADAM MOCKLER: Yes. Target turned on one of their huge consumer bases, which is the opposite of what Phil was saying, and it feels like conservatives spent a decade saying, go woke, go broke. Once the wokeness was removed, now Target is immediately going broke. But, again, I think we'll see a lot of CEOs doing the same thing. We just saw U.S. bankruptcies at the highest rates since Trump's last presidency. We see the economy shuttering due to tariffs. We see vegetable prices going up 40 percent. There are a bunch of different -- SCOTT JENNINGS: You know why? MOCKLER: PPI just said that vegetable price going up 40 percent. JENNINGS: Why? You know why? I'm asking if you know what. MOCKLER: Not sure. JENNINGS: Storms, weather, droughts all over the world. MOCKLER: What about electricity prices going up 10 percent? JENNINGS: It has to be. MOCKLER: DO you know when liberation -- JENNINGS: I think if you're going to throw out Donald Trump is responsible for vegetable prices, you should come and know what's going on around the world. The same thing occurred last week, when Congressman Maxwell Frost (D-FL) tried to run off some talking points on Jennings, getting quickly shut down and shut out. Both Mockler and Frost learned that things are different when you step outside the leftwing echo chambers. In Mockler’s case, admitting that he didn’t know the causation behind the numbers he was throwing out was terrible. The segment itself was built upon a shaky premise, to wit: that Target’s financial woes are the result of their abandonment of DEI and a boycott convened by Black Lives Matter (some say Manors). This is demonstrably false. Target’s problems go further back than the Second Trump Adinistration. Target stock (TGT) currently trades in the high $90s a share, but went for as high as $261 a share at the peak of the pandemic. The stock took a monster hit in May of 2022 after a huge earnings miss, once the stimulus checks ran out and the supply chain started hiccuping. These things happened as Target decided to insert themselves into the wrong side of every culture war issue. Stocking merchandise from black-owned was, in hindsight, the least of their problems. The writing scrawled itself across the wall when Target began allowing men in women’s restrooms, selling satanic-adjacent onesies and shoving LGBTQalphabetplusplusplus paraphernalia down everyone’s throats during the month of June- including chest binders and “packing” underwear for kids.  Target indeed went “woke”, caught themselves going broke, and attempted a course correction that was too little, too late. To exclude the long train of Target missteps when discussing their current problems is disinformation in furtherance of narrative. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned segment as aired on CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip on Wednesday, August 20th, 2025: ABBY PHILLIP: Tonight: abandon woke, go broke? That is how some progressives are describing the sudden announcement the Target CEO is now stepping down. The brand has taken a serious hit since rolling back its DEI efforts back in January. But unlike other companies who did the same thing, Target's commitment to diversity and inclusion programs has been ingrained in the core of its business for many years. And that included a goal to increase its black workforce by 20 percent after George Floyd's murder, a commitment to add more products from black-owned vendors to stores and pledging millions of dollars to black-led nonprofits. But since its policy changed, Target stock has plummeted nearly 30 percent in sales. They have slumped for the third straight quarter. Black Lives Matter, their official X account, noted that black consumers hold $1.8 trillion in spending power before saying the boycotts will continue. Joining us in our fifth seat is Sheila Kolhatkar. She is a staff writer at The New Yorker. And this is sort of the opposite of the narrative that everybody in corporate America is eager to cave because DEI is bad for business. Clearly, this really upset their customer base and Target is paying the price for it. SHEILA KOLHATKAR, STAFF WRITER, THE NEW YORKER: Well, not every DEI program is immediately going to show up in increased profits, but in Target's case, yes, it was actually a big success. Their program promoting black-owned small businesses was a huge success. It drew a lot of consumers from new kind of demographic groups into the store. But we're in this environment where a lot of CEOs are bumbling around, trying to figure out how to avoid drawing negative attention from this administration. They're not necessarily making business decisions based on what's good for their companies. They're trying to kind of preemptively please the president. And it's -- really, it's not good for business. And we're going to see a lot more stories like this where you have these kind of poorly-motivated decisions, political business decisions blowing up, and CEOs resigning as a result. WILLIAMS: I think who they're trying to please is the shareholders. I think what you're finally seeing is a shareholder revolt. Companies that are not profitable but have shareholders, they have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders. If they're not profitable and leadership's in the way of that, you get new leadership. That's the way of the world. Corporate America is just watching their bottom line now where, for several years, they were told that ESG and DEI and CRT and everything else that you could virtue signal about was the way of the future, that did not affect their bottom line. And so what we're actually seeing now is a return to actual free market capitalism. And if you're going to watch a company go down the tubes, at some point the shareholders are going to go, stop, we invested, we would prefer you make some better decisions, and they change out leadership. PHILLIP: Well, I feel what you're describing is exactly the opposite of what happened to Target, because Target is actually seeing their business decline because they -- rather than listening to their customers and doing -- making business decisions based on that, they made business decisions based on political backlash. Like that's actually the opposite of what you're suggesting. And the shareholders are paying the price for that. I mean, when you look at Target's stock from January until now, I mean, it has plummeted 28 percent. So, most of that time, it is the backlash that is driven by the boycotts. ADAM MOCKLER: Yes. Target turned on one of their huge consumer bases, which is the opposite of what Phil was saying, and it feels like conservatives spent a decade saying, go woke, go broke. Once the wokeness was removed, now Target is immediately going broke. But, again, I think we'll see a lot of CEOs doing the same thing. We just saw U.S. bankruptcies at the highest rates since Trump's last presidency. We see the economy shuttering due to tariffs. We see vegetable prices going up 40 percent. There are a bunch of different -- SCOTT JENNINGS: You know why? MOCKLER: PPI just said that vegetable price going up 40 percent. JENNINGS: Why? You know why? I'm asking if you know what. MOCKLER: Not sure. JENNINGS: Storms, weather, droughts all over the world. MOCKLER: What about electricity prices going up 10 percent? JENNINGS: It has to be. MOCKLER: DO you know when liberation -- JENNINGS: I think if you're going to throw out Donald Trump is responsible for vegetable prices, you should come and know what's going on around the world. MOCKLER: Liberation day tariffs only went into effect -- JENNINGS: I don't know why Target's having a problem. I remember a couple of years ago, the conservatives were mad at them and now the liberals were mad at them. So, it seems like they swung -- PHILLIP: I know, but, Scott, we do know why Target's having a problem. Because they've been the target of a boycott because their customers are set -- JENNINGS: And a couple of years ago, the conservatives reminded them. PHILLIP: Yes. But, clearly, the power dynamic is such that this particular boycott has had a very clear effect on their bottom line. JENNINGS: Okay. I'm just telling you from a couple of years ago, they had a problem with -- PHILLIP: But I guess that's the thing. It's like if the premise is, to Adam's point, if the premise is that woke is bad for business, then why is Target struggling? JENNINGS: Well, I think it depends on who you are and what your brand is. I mean, it was clearly bad for Bud Light when they went down that road. And so some corporations have certainly suffered when they've gone down that road. You know, I don't know how -- what Target's core marketing policies or principles are, but every company has to take a look at their, you know, customer base and how they make money and make decisions based on that. It's not smart for corporations necessarily to swing wildly on the political pendulum. And if that is not core to your -- you know, what you're trying to do -- (CROSSTALK) JOHNSON: The boycott started because people felt as though Target did abandon a key part of its base, a lot of black consumers, that even before the George Floyd protests and the response to that, Target was putting black-owned businesses on their shelves and people saw themselves there and they were purchasing, they were using their dollars to show their power. And so this conversation around woke doesn't work, and I hate that we're using that term, but what you're trying to say is DEI policies aren't working. But the reality is, if we look at since January, the companies that have doubled down on their DEI policies, like the Costcos and the Delta Airlines and Apple, they're actually doing well. And so here's what I'll say about this Target CEO stepping. That's kind of just like smoke and mirrors. They haven't changed their policies yet. So, do we know if this is going to reverse course with what -- PHILLIP: I don't that it's a sign, Sheila, that Target is changing course. It probably isn't necessarily, but it's a recognition that the company's performance is not what they would like it to be, it seems. KOLHATKAR: Yes. You know, you don't have a CEO stepping down when things are going swimmingly. I mean, that is not typically what happens, but I think it's really hard to be a business leader in this environment. I mean, everything is upside down. You don't know what's going to happen from one day to the next. And I think a lot of them are being influenced by factors that are actually not related to what's best for their shareholders. And the other groups who have an interest in the company doing well. They're trying to placate the president who seems to want to put himself in the middle of all of these private companies and sort of have an influence on how they're running themselves. PHILLIP: That's a perfect segue to our next segment. So, hold your thought, Phil, because we have a lot more on that.  

Beloved Texas brand Buc-ee's announced a partnership with one of the most historic universities in the country, and with it came two more big reveals.Buc-ee's is an iconic country store and gas station started in 1982 in East Texas, and it has exploded in popularity in the digital age. The store has become a tourism hot spot known for its beaver mascot and pristine customer experience.At the same time, the store's food and merchandise has never been available outside of its travel centers, until now.'It's incredibly special to bring Buc-ee's to the heart of the campus.'In a one-of-a-kind announcement, Buc-ee's has partnered with Texas A&M University to bring its brand to not one, but three locations on the school's main campus in College Station, Texas.The locations will see the Buc-ee's Beaver Nuggets, beef jerky, and beaver-branded merchandise in the campus commons and dining centers.Consumers may be wondering why the brand has connected solely with this university, especially with such a large splash, but they should look no further than Buc-ee's founder, Arch "Beaver" Aplin III, who has long had ties with the institution.RELATED: Fear the beaver: How a gas station became a cult (and why you should consider joining) Image courtesy Texas A&M University"As an Aggie, it's incredibly special to bring Buc-ee's to the heart of the campus," Aplin said, according to a Texas A&M press release.The founder and CEO, who graduated from the school in 1980, said he was thrilled to share a piece of his brand with the student body on a daily basis.In 2022, Aplin gave Texas A&M a whopping $50 million to start a hospitality entrepreneurship program."When Beaver Aplin does something, it's never halfway!" Texas A&M University System Chancellor John Sharp said at the time.This spawned the Aplin Center, which hosts programs in hospitality, retail studies, and food product development. The facility also has development labs and food tasting centers to be used in partnership with other industries.RELATED: The A&W Drive-In in Cortland, New York, isn't just a lunch spot — it's a time machine Buc-ee's has become a noted piece of Americana over the years, likely because of its focus on customer service. Many may not be aware that every location has a staff member dedicated to cleaning the bathroom continuously at all times.The company boasts having the "cleanest restrooms in America" and even won an award for the claim in 2012.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The State Department admonished the U.K. this week against continuing its clampdown on free speech and persecution of Christians, once again blasting the penalties handed out to those Britons who dare to engage in silent prayer near abortion facilities.It turns out that British pork lovers may similarly be in need of such advocacy.A Englishman in the northwest of the country was arrested on Aug. 16 for expressing an affinity for bacon — a food forbidden by the Quran but essential to a full English breakfast. Apparently, such an utterance now qualifies as "racial abuse."Census data indicates that the number of people in England and Wales identifying as Christian dropped from 59.3% in 2011 to 46.2% in 2021. During the same 10-year stretch, the number of respondents identifying as Muslim rose from 4.9% to 6.5% — an increase of well over 1 million people.To accommodate England and Wales' fast-growing Muslim population, there has in recent years been an explosion in the number of mosques across the isle. This expansion has made its way to the town of Dalton-in-Furness in the English county of Cumbria, which is set to get its first mosque.The South Lakes Islamic Center, spearheaded by Muslim doctors at Barrow's Furness General Hospital, was greenlit for development in 2021, and construction began in earnest earlier this year. It is set for a grand opening next year.'Enough with the inclusivity BS.'Some of the townsfolk are less than pleased over the construction of a $3.35 million, 3,234-square-foot mosque just outside their town of under 8,000 souls.RELATED: The Islamification of America is well under way Photo by Finnbarr Webster/Getty ImagesSome critics are concerned parents who are worried that the planned mosque's proximity to a Catholic elementary school will prove disruptive, affect the safety of the town's children, and increase traffic congestion. Other critics have suggested that the mosque would be a "sign of conquest and occupation."The leader of the U.K. Independence Party, Nick Tenconi, noted in June that "Dalton-in-Furness has a population of 7,827 and there are 3 mosques already in Cumbria. Only 0.4% of people in Cumbria are Muslim. Mosques like this are being built to facilitate Operation Scatter."Critics have referred to the Starmer goverment's campaign to move asylum-seekers and illegal aliens around the country and house them in empty homes or former student blocks instead of military bases and migrant hotels as "Operation Scatter.""The takeover of the U.K. continues," Tenconi said in a video posted to social media. "Enough with the inclusivity BS. That argument has been utterly lost by the woke left and proponents of the Islamist caliphate in Britain. People simply aren't buying it any more and are rightly outraged. There is absolutely no need to put a mosque here, and the sole reason is to artificially flood the area with Muslims as an extension of Operation Scatter."According to the BBC, the Cumbria Police have increased patrols in the area, monitored online comments, and begun investigating potential thought crimes in response to criticism over the mosque.On Saturday, hundreds of townsfolk protested at the construction site.In anticipation of the demonstration, Cumbria Police pre-emptively issued a dispersal order, meaning police could "direct individuals who are causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to leave the area and not return for a defined period."Viral footage taken at the protest shows two police officers hauling away one of the peaceful protesters for simply saying, "We love bacon."'We British do love it, and there is nothing wrong with saying so.'When the young man asks why he is being handcuffed, one of the officers informs him that he is being arrested under Section 5 of the Public Order Act of 1986, which prohibits the use of "threatening or abusive words or behavior, or disorderly behavior" within "the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm, or distress thereby."RELATED: Rubio’s warning to UK: Persecuting Christians for prayer is an ‘egregious violation’ of free speech, religious liberty Muslim procession honoring the grandson of Mohammed in the English capital. Matthew Chattle/Future Publishing via Getty Images.The officer suggests in the video that the expression "we love bacon" might be "perceived to be racially abusive.""Okay, listen," said the arrestee. "A full English breakfast, yeah? What does that consist of?"British journalist Isabel Oakeshott noted that bacon is a fundamental part of the full English breakfast, stressing that "it is part of our culinary culture — which is why there should be nothing remotely controversial about saying so.""Nonetheless, a 23-year-old single father is currently facing the possibility of court action after stating this simple fact at a public protest," wrote Oakeshott. "Saying 'We love bacon' is simply a truism. We British do love it, and there is nothing wrong with saying so."Cumbria Police confirmed to the NWE Mail that a 23-year-old man was arrested at the protest on suspicion of a public order offense but later released on police bail.Blaze News has reached out to the Cumbria Police and to the South Lakes Islamic Center for comment.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

“It's one thing to get a story wrong; it's one thing to misunderstand … but it's an entirely other thing to intentionally take things out of context, intentionally leave things off the table, intentionally paint a picture that you know is not true,” says Glenn Beck.If you didn’t already guess, Glenn is talking about the mainstream media — specifically its reporting on President Trump’s recent initiatives targeting the Smithsonian Institution, which has long insisted on portraying slavery as America’s defining story.On August 12, the White House, in accordance with President Trump's vision of American exceptionalism, initiated a comprehensive review of eight Smithsonian museums, focusing on exhibition content, curation, and operations. A few days later, President Trump followed up the directive with a Truth Social post, explaining the need for reform in Smithsonian museums.Unsurprisingly, the mainstream media cherry-picked from Trump’s words and published stories implying that he thinks slavery wasn’t so bad. The New York Times ran a piece titled, “Trump Says Smithsonian Focuses Too Much on ‘How Bad Slavery Was.’” The Washington Post, NPR, and Reuters, among many other outlets, published similar pieces.Despite the fact that President Trump has repeatedly and publicly condemned slavery, the media is pushing the narrative that Trump’s desire to highlight the whole picture — America’s failures and her accomplishments — equates to whitewashing slavery.Glenn, a history lover and the founder of the American Journey Experience, a state-of-the-art museum and research library, knows the importance of studying the darkest parts of human history. “If we don't teach our kids that these dark things happened in this country, two things happen,” he says. “One, they don't believe us on the good things. … The second reason it is really important is if you don't teach [the bad stuff], you will repeat it.” But the problem with the Smithsonian and other historical institutions, he says, is that they’re only telling the dark parts of American history. They’re trying to “make history about now,” examining it through the lens of modern ideas, cultural trends, and political agendas.“Well, history is about the past,” says Glenn, adding that if we are to view history rightly, we need to ask questions, such as, “How did people think back then? Why did they think that way back then? Who fought against that at that time? What was the real argument?”When we fail to ask these honest questions and instead view history as a means to accomplish an agenda, we get academics and scholars pushing information that is “absolutely dishonest” — like the idea that “Frederick Douglass never, never said a good word about the Constitution,” when in fact he called it “the greatest freedom document of all time.”Why do they push false narratives like this?Because “their goal is to get rid of the Constitution,” says Glenn. From academics and liberal politicians to progressive activist groups and, of course, the mainstream media, the overarching agenda is to convince Americans that the United States is “a bad nation and communism is neat.”President Trump’s insistence that the Smithsonian put more focus on America’s long list of incredible accomplishments is a bold and necessary effort to reverse this insidious anti-American agenda.“You want to [talk about] slavery? Tell both sides of slavery — not just the horrors of slavery, but the miracle of those who were white who stood up and tried to stop it,” Glenn pleads.“I absolutely want the story of slavery told, but I want it to be told in context. And it's not the story of America. It is one of the stories of America that, thank God, we fought.”To hear more of Glenn’s analysis and commentary, watch the clip above.Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

A Democrat New York judge ordered President Donald Trump and his sons in February to pay hundreds of millions of dollars over a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James.The civil lawsuit claimed that the president defrauded banks and other organizations by overestimating the value of his properties in order to secure favorable bank loans and other benefits. The bank denied any wrongdoing, and critics attacked the case for comically devaluing the president's iconic and profitable properties.A New York state appeals court delivered to Trump a major boon on Thursday, noting that while the injunctive relief ordered by New York Judge Arthur Engoron "is well crafted to curb defendants' business culture, the court's disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution."Appellate Division Judge Peter Moulton called out Letitia James in his concurring opinion, writing that the "Attorney General did not carry her initial burden" of establishing an approximate total of the profits directly linked to Trumps' supposed violations.Moulton added, "Indeed, the calculation of the disgorgement in this case was far from a reasonable approximation."The president celebrated the ruling, writing on Truth Social:TOTAL VICTORY in the FAKE New York State Attorney General Letitia James Case! I greatly respect the fact that the Court had the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision that was hurting Business all throughout New York State. Others were afraid to do business there. The amount, including Interest and Penalties, was over $550 Million Dollars. It was a Political Witch Hunt, in a business sense, the likes of which no one has ever seen before.Trump further characterized this instance of lawfare as a case of election interference and emphasized that Engoron was a "Political Hack" and that James is a "Corrupt and Incompetent Attorney General who only brought this Case in order to hurt me politically."'NO MORE LAWFARE!'The president thanked the court, especially David Friedman, associate justice of the New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Department.Eric Trump, who operates the Trump Organization with his brother Donald Trump Jr., said of the ruling, "Total victory in the sham NY Attorney General case!!! After 5 years of hell, justice prevailed!"Donald Trump Jr. wrote, "It was always a witch hunt, election interference, and a total miscarriage of justice[,] and even a left leaning NY appeals court agrees! NO MORE LAWFARE!"Trump ally and Turning Point USA CEO Charlie Kirk noted, "They tried to impeach him, bankrupt him, imprison him, and assassinate him. They failed."This is a developing story.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!