The US has the lowest life expectancy of high-income English-speaking nations, while Australia continues to lead the pack with the highest. Poverty and poor health are big influences on the differing outcomes, but a major factor is also the number of young Americans dying from drug abuse, car accidents, and guns, researchers say.Researchers from the University of Southern California and Pennsylvania State University compared life expectancy in six Anglophone countries – the US, Canada, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand – between 1990 and 2019. They broke down the data by sex, age, and 18 causes of death categories, including a range of diseases plus "preventable deaths" like accidents and overdoses. Australia has led the English-speaking world in life expectancy for the last three decades and these findings suggest they’re still top of the class. As per the recent findings, life expectancy for men in Australia, the best-performing country, was 4.75 years higher than in the US, the worst-performing country. "One of the main drivers of why American longevity is so much shorter than in other high-income countries is our younger people die at higher rates from largely preventable causes of death, like drug overdose, car accidents and homicide," study co-author Jessica Ho, associate professor of sociology and demography at Penn State, said in a statement.It’s also noteworthy that Americans also suffer from higher rates of cardiovascular disease mortality, impacting the life expectancy of middle-aged people. “Some of the latter could be related to sedentary lifestyle, high rates of obesity, unhealthy diet, stress and a history of smoking. It’s likely that these patterns of unhealthy behaviors put Americans at a disadvantage in terms of their health and vitality,” Ho explained.The data also indicated that the US has huge geographical inequalities across different parts of the country. California and Hawai'i had some of the highest life expectancies at birth, with women averaging 83 to 83.9 years and men averaging 77.5 to 78.4 years. On the other hand, the American Southeast had some of the lowest life expectancies at birth, with women averaging 72.6 to 79.9 years and men averaging 69.3 to 74.4 years.Another interesting tidbit: the UK dropped to the second worst-performing country in recent years, while Ireland showed the largest gains in life expectancy, with men's lifespans increasing by approximately 8 years and women's lifespans by more than 6.5 years. The study provides a few pointers for high-income Anglophone countries looking to increase their life expectancy: be more like Australia. Australia does have the second-highest obesity rate of the group, but it does have relatively low rates of smoking, gun ownership, and drug-related mortality, all of which the study credits to “strong public health efforts.”“What the study shows is that a peer country like Australia far outperforms the US and was able to get its young adult mortality under control. It has really low levels of gun deaths and homicides, lower levels of drug and alcohol use and better performance on chronic diseases, the latter of which points to lifestyle factors, health behaviors and health care performance,” said Ho."Australia is a model for how Americans can do better and achieve not only a higher life expectancy but also lower geographic inequality in life expectancy," she added.The new study is published in the journal BMJ Open.

On Thursday's Morning Joe, Mike Barnicle echoed the Harris talking points:"It's literally -- the campaign is yesterday versus tomorrow." Donald Trump calling America a "Third World country" now is bizarre. "I don't know anyone who believes that," he said. He said Trump's act is old and plays on fear factors about "immigrants raping your daughter," lots of "huge, huge, ugly racial overtones, especially when it comes to the Vice President." Then Barnicle predicted that Kamala Harris will finish Trump off in their debate: "You wonder how long will it be before he really goes out of control. And I think what's going to happen is that when that debate occurs, and he's in the ring with the Vice President of the United States, a woman, a very sophisticated, very intelligent, woman, and she hammers him like a prosecutor, and doesn't let him off the hook, he will go -- I can't say it. But something will snap [see screencap] in him, and that'll be it. Earlier, Katty Kay struck a much more cautious tone: "I think Donald Trump is one of the hardest people to debate.  I think Kamala Harris is excited about the prospect of debating him. But he's not an easy person -- ask anyone who has debated him -- he's not an easy person to debate....And be careful about prepping for the debate, right, because it's not going to be easy for them. You have to assume that the Harris campaign would prefer not to set debate expectations as high as Barnicle did. The way he projects it, unless Kamala scores a Mike Tyson-esque KO, she will have failed, in liberal lingo, to "meet the moment." At least in theory—unless one of the moderators goes Donna Brazile and supplies the questions to Kamala in advance—debates are unscripted events where candidates must be quick on their feet. If Harris's handlers were certain of her ability to speak spontaneously—without stumbling into a word salad or musing on the passage of time—why haven't they dared let her do a sit-down interview or hold a press conference? Which in turn raises the question: what makes Barnicle so confident about Harris's ability to relentlessly "hammer" Trump until he snaps? Questions for Barnicle: If, as you claim, Harris is "very intelligent," why did she flunk the bar exam on her first go-round? And if she's "very sophisticated," why does she believe that in cloud computing, data is literally up in the sky? Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 8/15/24 6:13 am EDT KATTY KAY: When it comes to debating him, I think Donald Trump is one of the hardest people to debate. I think Kamala Harris is excited about the prospect of debating him. But he's not an easy person -- ask anyone who has debated him -- he's not an easy person to debate because of all of this. And I think Democrats have to be careful not to underestimate how, yes, everything is moving in their direction. Yes, like you say, Kamala Harris is a massive TikTok phenomenon at the momen. But they have to make sure that those young people actually turn out and vote. And historically, obviously, young people turn out to vote than older people. And be careful about prepping for the debate, right, because it's not going to be easy for them. . . .  MIKE BARNICLE: It's literally -- the campaign is yesterday versus tomorrow. I mean, we just saw it yesterday. We saw a man standing there on the stage saying we are literally a Third World country. I don't know anyone who believes that we are literally a Third World country.  WILLIE GEIST: Of course not. BARNICLE: And the thing about the Trump campaign now that makes me wonder a lot about it is, Suzie Wiles and Chris LaCivita, running the campaign, are extremely good at what they do. But they seem to have lost control of their candidate. Their candidate has a tired, 20-year-old act. We just saw it. The, updates with figures from the past two or three years. But it's a tired old act. The election was stolen, we're a Third World country, crime is up. Immigrants are going to rape your daughter. All sorts of fear factors. And a lot of it, a lot of it with huge, huge, ugly racial overtones, especially when it comes to the Vice President. And you wonder how long will it be before he really goes out of control? And I think what's going to happen is that when that debate occurs, and he's in the ring with the Vice President of the United States, a woman, a very sophisticated, very intelligent, woman, and she hammers him like a prosecutor, and doesn't let him off the hook, he will go -- I can't say it -- MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Yeah. GEIST: Yeah. BARNICLE: But something will snap in him, and that'll be it.

In normal years, which were not that long ago, students would look forward to returning to or entering college as freshmen. After violent anti-Israel and antisemitic demonstrations on some college campuses, many fear this semester might see a repeat of the prior ugliness. This is how bad it has gotten. Police in Montgomery County, Maryland, are investigating after antisemitic and pro-Palestinian graffiti was discovered outside Bethesda Elementary School Sunday morning. An elementary school! Rather than condemning the incident, the pro-Hamas lobby group known as CAIR issued a statement that sounded like “what can you expect,” given Israel’s justifiable attempt to wipe out the terrorist group in Gaza. Columbia University in New York, where some of the worst rioting occurred last semester, is reportedly considering granting arrest powers to campus police, hoping it will curb the demonstrations. That’s fine, but it’s not just about the arrests, most of which have resulted in quick releases, it’s about prosecuting lawbreakers. In liberal New York that has become nearly impossible to do thanks to District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who often releases and fails to prosecute even violent offenders. Columbia is also employing a “lockdown” system to keep “non affiliates, with bad intentions” off campus. Good luck with that. If current laws and regulations are being violated why should anyone believe new laws and regulations will be obeyed, especially when some professors agree with and encourage the demonstrators? DePaul University in Chicago is preparing to reopen its campus Quad before students return for fall classes. Demonstrations last semester caused$180,000 in damages, resulting in the Quad’s closure for three months for necessary repairs. What’s to prevent a repeat performance? Columnist Jason Riley wrote in The Wall Street Journal: “The Philadelphia Inquirer reported this month that Penn suspended several students who were part of an illegal anti-Israel encampment that ended in May with the arrest of 33 people. Yet Penn looks to be an outlier. … Harvard reversed an earlier decision to suspend students who participated in pro-Hamas demonstrations on its campus that violated school policy and local ordinances. The Harvard Crimson wrote that it was at least the second time administrators caved in to pressure from student activists and sympathetic faculty members.” Jewish students wishing to return to certain college campuses don’t seem optimistic they will receive better treatment than last semester. While some university presidents resigned after being accused of aiding and abetting the protests and antisemitism, the problem will remain so long as administrators allow students (and non-students) to dictate to those who are in charge and supposed to be enforcing the rules. Here’s what might work. If students wish to demonstrate they should be assigned a secure area where their presence won’t impede other students from attending classes, visiting libraries, or exercising other rights. If professors encourage the demonstrators and make anti-Jewish remarks making Jewish students feel unsafe, they should be placed on leave or fired. By following through on law enforcement and prosecution perhaps students will get the message that a criminal record will likely harm their prospects for future employment and a successful career. When police in Boston went on strike in 1919, unleashing looting and other criminal activity, Massachusetts governor and later president Calvin Coolidge sent a telegram to American Federation of Labor Samuel Gompers which said in part: “There is no right to strike against the public safety by anybody, anywhere, any time.” The same should be said of rioting students who impede the rights of other students to feel safe and attend classes without mobs confronting especially Jewish students. They have a right to feel safe and protected from persecution.

Pro-life citizen journalist and Center for Medical Progress founder David Daleiden published undercover videos in 2015 showing Planned Parenthood officials callously talking about butchering, playing with, and trafficking baby parts. Then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris, whose various campaigns have netted substantial contributions from Planned Parenthood, evidently could not tolerate this exposé of the abortion regime's apparently lucrative and unlawful repurposing of victims' remains. After allegedly meeting with executives from the abortion organization, Harris targeted Daleiden and authorized a raid on his home, kicking off what would become a years-long effort to punish the pro-life activist and to hide his damning evidence from the American people. Daleiden, who still faces eight felony charges, revealed Wednesday to "Blaze New Tonight" who in Washington, D.C., helped him surmount the Democratic suppression campaign and ultimately publish the videos for the edification of the American public: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and other Republican elements of the House Oversight Committee. "Big shout-out goes to ... the House Oversight Committee and especially Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene for finally being able to release this footage unredacted, in full, which was subpoenaed by Congress during their initial investigations in 2015," said Daleiden. 'You can see exactly what they were so afraid of the public being able to see for themselves.' Greene announced on July 30 that she was releasing the full versions of the undercover videos, which were previously featured at a March congressional hearing titled "Investigating the Black Market of Baby Organ Harvesting." During the March hearing, Greene expressed concern that the abortion regime operates with little to no federal or independent oversight, meaning it can engage in the types of conduct alluded to in the undercover videos. Blaze News reached out to Greene's office for comment but did not immediately receive a response. Daleiden further explained to "Blaze News Tonight" that thanks in part to Greene and in large part to the perseverance of his team, "the cover-up plan by Planned Parenthood and Kamala Harris has not been totally successful. They tried to bury these facts and this evidence for the past eight years, but it's all starting to come out, and you can see exactly what they were so afraid of the public being able to see for themselves." — (@) The videos The Center for Medical Progress posted a video on July 14, 2015, showing a senior director of medical services at Planned Parenthood, Deborah Nucatola, state between sips of wine, "We've been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, 'I'm not gonna crush that part, I'm gonna basically crush below, I'm gonna crush above, and I'm gonna see if I can get it all intact.'" "I'd say a lot of people want liver. And for that reason, most providers will do this case under ultrasound guidance, so they'll know where they're putting their forceps," continued Nucatola. "The kind of rate-limiting step of the procedure is calvarium. Calvarium — the head — is basically the biggest part." Nucatola, who was later reprimanded but ultimately faced no actual consequence, indicated further that body parts could run interested parties anywhere from $30 to $100 per specimen. It soon became clear that this would be nowhere near the CMP's most provocative undercover video. 'Oh, there's some lungs, there's some kidneys.' An undercover reporter from the CMP recorded conversations at the National Abortion Federation's commercial trade show posing as a laboratory wholesaler. The reporter spoke with Ann Schutt-Aine, then chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, as well as with the branch's vice president of abortion access, Tram Nguyen. "I'm like, 'Yeah, I have a leg for you.' I'm like, 'Oh s**t, if other people were to hear me, they'd like, "You are f****** evil,"'" Nguyen says in the video. "You have to come and play with our tissue and see if it's cool enough for you." Responding to the reporter's suggestion that there is competition for baby organs that are "more profitable," Schutt-Aine says, "You told me about the proposition, and so now every time I do a [dilation and extraction], I'm like, 'Oh, there's some lungs, there's some kidneys.'" "If I can't get [the baby] out intact, I can still get you a good sample," Schutt-Aine boasted, adding that she can cannibalize livers and lungs for buyers "without much difficulty at all." Rather than address the possible criminality raised in the videos, Kamala Harris and other Democratic officials have targeted the group that brought it to light. The lawfare "As California attorney general, Kamala Harris had a choice," Daleiden told "Blaze News Tonight." "When our reporting was first being released in the summer of 2015 showing Planned Parenthood's top-level leadership callously negotiating the harvesting and sale of aborted baby body parts from late-term, partial-birth abortions, Kamala Harris could have chosen to investigate Planned Parenthood and investigate the taxpayer-funded Planned Parenthood mega centers." Daleiden indicated that Harris instead decided to investigate him and his undercover team. Following the initial release of the footage, then-California AG Harris said she would look into whether the pro-life activist broke laws when exposing Planned Parenthood. Daleiden's house was reportedly raided, and his computer and hard drives were seized. She was cheered on by the abortion outfit and other activists. "David Daleiden engaged in an elaborate criminal conspiracy to deceive the public and ban abortion in this country, and now he’s paying the price," a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman told Politico following the raid. "The only people who engaged in wrongdoing are the extremists who broke multiple laws to spread lies about Planned Parenthood — and it looks like they're finally being held accountable." 'What Kamala Harris did was unconstitutional and vindictive.' Daleiden was slapped with multiple lawsuits and a raft of criminal charges, including those brought by Harris' replacement and future Health Secretary Xavier Becerra. Emails obtained by the Washington Times revealed that Harris' office also collaborated with Planned Parenthood to draft legislation effectively targeting Daleiden — to amend the law to criminalize the secret recording and dissemination of communications with health care providers. The late legal scholar Ronald D. Rotunda noted at the time the correspondence between Harris' office and the abortion outfit made abundantly clear that the Democratic AG is a "tool of Planned Parenthood" and that she was "working with Planned Parenthood to protect it from criminal prosecution." "The state attorney general is supposed to represent the people of California, not a particular industry in California," Mr. Rotunda told the Times. "What would people say if the attorney general would be working with the local slaughterhouses to help them cover up instances of cruelty to animals?" Former Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, who has represented Daleiden, recently told the New York Post, "What Kamala Harris did was unconstitutional and vindictive." "Kamala Harris opened this investigation at the behest of Planned Parenthood, and the two AGs that followed her have kept it alive," added Cooley. The Post indicated that neither Harris' office nor the California Attorney General's Office responded to their requests for comment. "There has been a lot of twists and turns with the lawfare over the year that really was engineered by Planned Parenthood and Kamala Harris," Daleiden told "Blaze News Tonight." "They are the first ones who started to use this really unprecedented kind of lawfare to try to suppress free speech." Now, however, the cat is out of the bag. Daleiden stated last week, "Planned Parenthood repeatedly told Congress, the courts, and the public that it had 'rebuffed' any opportunity to sell aborted baby body parts in Texas." "This finally-released undercover footage shows that in reality, Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast was ghoulishly eager to rip healthy babies out of vulnerable patients whole and alive and mutilate their bodies after to sell body parts for top dollar," added Daleiden. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Boston Red Sox outfielder Jarren Duran saw a surge in his jersey sales on the MLB merchandise website despite serving a suspension for responding to a heckler with vulgar language.Duran was suspended for two games on August 12, 2024, after he responded to a heckler in the sixth inning during a 10-2 blowout loss to the Houston Astros."Tennis racket, tennis racket, you need a tennis racket!" the fan can be heard yelling.Duran then turned to the crowd and was heard saying, "Shut up, you f***ing faggot!"Despite an apology from Duran and an outpour of dramatic statements from team officials, the All Star was still suspended for the pair of games with his pay ($8,172) being donated to a pro-transgender organization.During his absence, fans reportedly supported Duran with a flood of social media remarks while many others supported him with their wallets by buying his jersey.According to Fox News, Duran's jersey became the top seller on the MLB's official online store on Wednesday. Japanese star Shohei Ohtani jerseys reportedly took the next three spots.At the time of this writing, Duran's jersey is nowhere to be seen on the page. However, a customizable Red Sox jersey with which customers can select Duran's name (or any Red Sox player) is No. 6 on the bestseller list. Ohtani still has the top three spots.Duran conspiraciesOther rumors swirled about Duran during his return regarding standing ovations and record-breaking sales.One video in particular alleged to show a standing ovation for Duran upon his return to the batter's box, however, the video was spliced together with different sets of audio and video."Two of [the videos] were from August 13, 2023 for Detroit Tigers legend Miguel Cabrera's final game at Fenway Park," a community note on X said.At the same time, a reporter for the Boston Herald said that Duran received "a louder than usual cheer when his name was introduced in the pregame lineups," along with "another hand" as he stepped up to the plate in his return. — (@) 'I'm glad they didn't fine me. They just gave me a warning.'Other claims that Duran's jersey sales broke a single-day record for the MLB Shop appear to be uncorroborated and do not seem to have an official source.Several outlets cited a post on X from a user named Simon Charles, however, no citation appeared to exist.There were also suggestions that Duran responded to his suspension by wearing a shirt that says "f*ck 'em."Particularly Dan Shaughnessy, sports columnist for the Boston Globe, said that "after getting suspended for 2 games for aiming homophobic slur at Fenway fan, Jarren Duran chose to wear this shirt in his pregame presser today." Duran did indeed wear the shirt, however, a quick search revealed that Duran has been wearing shirts branded with the same phrase for some time, with the MLB even warning him about a possible fine in early July 2024."I'm glad they didn't fine me. They just gave me a warning," Duran said at the time.The phrase, along with "I'm still here" and "still alive," are references to Duran's struggle with mental health, which he has openly expressed in the past.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Now that Elon Musk has endorsed Donald Trump, will the presidential candidate return the favor and lay off electric cars? Well, he won't be driving a Model X any time soon, but Trump did recently concede to a crowd at an Atlanta rally that he's in favor of a small percentage of American cars being EVs. “I have to be, you know, because Elon endorsed me very strongly," Trump added. The slow progress has sparked condemnation from both sides of the political aisle. While Dems continue to argue that opposing Biden's EV push will hurt Trump with voters, those of us in the real world just hear somebody advocating for consumer choice. If you want an EV, feel free to buy one ... but let the rest of us have our gas-guzzlers. Our ranks are swelling — especially with people who went electric and regretted it. A recent McKinsey and Company study says that nearly half of electric vehicle owners — 46%, to be precise — are likely to switch back to gas, with most of the participants citing difficulties with charging. Here are the details: According to the consulting firm’s latest Mobility Consumer Pulse report, U.S. EV owners are the second-most likely to have signaled they intend to switch back to internal combustion engine vehicles, right behind Australia. Respondents spanning the globe presented a wide range of reasons for switching back — with many saying charging was an issue. 35% cite that public charging infrastructure is not up to par, while 24% stated they could not charge at home. 21% noted that worrying about charging was “too stressful.” For reasons unrelated to charging, 34% reasoned total costs of ownership were too high, 32% said that long-distance traveling was impaired by the vehicles, 16% stated they would have to change mobility requirements, and 13% stated they did not like the driving experience. Here’s why this is important: While the report notes that global purchase intent for EVs is continuing to rise — slowly — nearly half of U.S. drivers admitted they are likely to change back to traditional gas cars. This underlines the difficulties the U.S. and other governments will face in getting consumers to transition to EVs permanently. The report also found that building out charging infrastructure isn’t only a U.S. problem — it’s a problem for many countries looking to electrify their fleet and lower their emissions. That said, excitement around EVs is still real. Among current non-EV owners, the share considering a battery EV or a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle has grown between three and four percentage points from December 2021 to February 2024. The number of those who want a new or used internal combustion engine vehicle has stagnated or declined within the same time period. 27% of European consumers are likely to consider a Chinese EV brand — which could prove tricky for the EU, considering it decided to impose additional tariffs on electric vehicles imported from China. McKinsey surveyed two groups of car owners: those who own an electric vehicle and those who own gas-powered cars but have thought about buying an EV. The survey found that 46% of Americans who own EVs are ready to switch back to owning a gas-powered vehicle. EV owners listed several reasons why they were having buyer’s remorse: 35% said there is a lack of charging infrastructure; 34% said the costs are too high; 32% said planning a long trip was becoming too difficult; 24% said they had no way of charging their car from their home; 21% said worrying about keeping their vehicle charged was becoming too stressful; 13% said they did not enjoy the comfort when driving their EV. That number shocked Philipp Kampshoff, the leader of the McKinsey Center for Future Mobility, who said he'd assumed "once an EV buyer, always an EV buyer." The McKinsey survey found owners of gas vehicles won’t buy an EV for these reasons: 45% said electric cars are too expensive; 33% had concerns about charging them; 29% said they had range anxiety on how far the car could go before charging it again; 58% said there was no way they were ditching their current vehicle; 53% of electric car owners said on their next car purchase, they would trade down; 18% admitted their skepticism of electric cars because they enjoy driving their gas-powered cars. The other countries included in the survey were Brazil, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and Norway. Across all countries surveyed, the average share of respondents who want to ditch their EVs was 29%. U.S. Democrats passed infrastructure legislation in 2021 that committed billions of taxpayer dollars to building a half-million charging stations in the U.S. by the end of the decade. But three years later, only seven federally funded chargers have been built to date, and the slow progress has sparked condemnation from both sides of the political aisle. Rather than forcing the market to adapt to a government-mandated technology, the government should let innovation and competition drive the adoption of EVs. This will lead to more efficient and cost-effective solutions rather than a top-down approach that will ultimately fail.

The mainstream media continues its smear campaign against Donald Trump — this time by taking a segment from Trump and Musk’s wildly viral X Spaces interview out of context to suggest that the duo made light of nuclear war. Which, of course, is an insidious lie. Glenn Beck, who watched the entire interview and understands the full context of Trump and Musk’s statements, was infuriated when he heard how CNN tried to suggest that Trump is a proponent of nuclear war when the exact opposite is true. - YouTube www.youtube.com “I want to play one exchange that was kind of classic [Donald Trump],” said CNN’s Dana Bash, who then played the following 10-second clip: Musk: “Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed, but now they’re, they’re like full cities again." Trump: “Right, well that’s great.” Musk: “So it’s really not something that, you know —” Trump: “That’s great.” Musk: “So it’s, it’s not as scary as people think basically.” After the clip, Bash accused the duo of “suggesting that what happened almost 80 years ago ... the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki,” is “okay” and that they were “trying to blow off the impact of [nuclear war].” Lies. So what’s the truth? “Donald Trump is truly terrified of nuclear war,” Glenn corrects. “He understands that it’s the end of the world if we have nuclear war.” In his interview with Musk, Trump “warned maybe seven times — ‘we cannot get into nuclear war,”’ Glenn recounts, adding that “his main point was that nuclear war is on the horizon, and it cannot be an option.” So what were Trump and Musk actually talking about when they broached the subject of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? They were conversing about nuclear electricity generation and how it gets a bad rap because it’s associated with nuclear war, which Musk said himself is “very bad.” Musk compared nuclear electricity generation with mining to show that the former has far fewer deaths and injuries than the latter, making it a safer way to generate energy. “It’s underrated as an electricity source, and I think it’s something that’s worth reconsidering,” he told Trump, who agreed and added that the practice has “a branding problem” because of the horrors it’s associated with. This is the point when Hiroshima and Nagasaki came up. Trump, expanding on why nuclear electricity generation leaves a bad taste in people’s mouths, said: “When you see what happened in Japan where they say, ‘You won't be able to go on the land for about 3,000 years’ and in Russia ... they say that in 2,000 years people will start to occupy the land again. You know, you realize it's pretty bad.” To that Musk replied, “It’s actually not that bad. After Fukushima happened in Japan, like people were asking me in California, you know, are we worried about like a nuclear cloud coming from Japan. I'm like no, that's crazy. It's actually, it's not even dangerous in Fukushima. I actually flew there and ate locally grown vegetables on TV to prove it. ... You know Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed, but now they're like full cities again, so it's really not something that, you know, it's not — it's not as scary as people think basically.” “So was he trying to excuse and say what happened 80 years ago was not so bad? Is that what Donald Trump was talking about? Is that what Elon Musk was talking about?” asks Glenn. “No, not at all.” Glenn speculates that this "Goebbels-style propaganda” is going to backfire and “do Donald Trump a favor.” To hear more of his 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 Florida couple's celebration on a date night earlier this month turned terrifying after police said three thugs followed them home and then shot them both in a heinous robbery.Security video captured the moment when Kim Chambliss tried to escape the armed robbers while they scuffled with her boyfriend Val Delacruz in front of their home in Riverview. 'We didn't even realize that people were following us every step of the way. It's scary.' The couple said the armed men surrounded their car and demanded money after they returned home from the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Hollywood where they won a jackpot and cashed out with about $3,000. The video captured the horrific attack, including Delacruz getting shot in the legs. "I ran, and I fell in the door, and the other guy came out and shot me again for the third time in my left leg," he recalled. Chambliss said, "I hear another gunshot, and my first thought was 'they've killed him.' I was hysterical, I screamed and cried." The men drove off after a neighbor came outside. Investigators said they found surveillance video from the casino showing two men watching the couple for about two hours before following them to their home. The Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office said they arrested two suspects identified as Marcus Jennings and Tristin Wright. They are seeking a third suspect who escaped. Jenkins is facing an attempted murder charge, and Wright is facing a charge of principal to attempted murder. Delacruz said that responding deputies had to put a tourniquet on his leg to stop the bleeding."I lost so much blood, if they didn’t do that, I wouldn’t have made it," he said. Chambliss told WTVT-TV that the couple have a monthly date night, but they don't get out much because they work so much. "We're just average people, you know, who are out having a good time, you know, who love each other and enjoying each other's company," she said. "And to know that we didn't even realize that people were following us every step of the way. It's scary. It's scary." The thugs were able to steal the couple's watch, jewelry, and Chambliss' purse.You can view interviews with the victims — along with video showing the shootings — here. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

In Episode 359 Jeff Belanger and Ray Auger visit Fenway Park in Boston, Massachusetts, to explore the story behind Red Sox legend Ted Williams’s unique afterlife. Though Williams died back in 2002, some members of his family believe that’s just a technicality. Ted’s head and body were separately cryogenically frozen in the hopes of being revived one day when there’s a cure for… death. BECOME A LEGENDARY PATRON: https://www.patreon.com/NewEnglandLegends CREDITS: Produced and hosted by: Jeff Belanger and Ray Auger Edited by: Ray Auger Theme Music by: John Judd SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST FOR FREE: Apple Podcasts/iTunes | Spotify | Pandora | Amazon Podcasts | TuneIn | iHeartRadio JOIN OUR SUPER-SECRET: New England Legends Facebook Group

Never Trumper Heath Mayo Served Up BRUTAL Reality-Check About Who Kamala REALLY Is and LOL It's GLORIOUS