Lunden Roberts: Biden has not Reached Out to Navy, Hopes Hunter Receives a Pardon

The European Space Agency’s Mars Express has been around the Red Planet for two decades and has delivered incredible images of the Martian surface. Those images have often been turned into three-dimensional visualizations and videos, and the latest one is of a fascinating series of trenches known as Nili Fossae.The series of concentric trenches might not be as well known as other Martian sites such as Valles Marineris or Olympus Mons, but for planetary scientists this is a region of major interest. From this location, NASA discovered plumes of methane. The source is unknown, but obviously some have speculated that it could be from living organisms. It is also considered an interesting site for future human exploration.We are not very close to actually getting to Mars, so this visualization is the best we have for now. The ground here formed 4 billion years ago with the impact of an asteroid that formed the crater known as Isidis Planitia. Around the crater, parallel faults formed in the crust, stretching for hundreds of kilometers. They are several hundred meters deep, thin and very long, described by the team as cat scratches.     On the other side of Isidis Planitia there is a different series of trenches known as the Amenthes Fossae. Nili Fossae is known for a wide diversity of minerals, some of which could have only formed in the presence of water. The richness of this region had it as a potential contender for the landing location of NASA’s Perseverance. The rover was eventually sent to Jezero Crater, which is visible at the end of the video.Twenty years on, Mars Express continues its stunning work around the Red Planet, providing new insights about Mars. 

Anthrax is a serious disease that’s rare in humans, but earlier this year an unexpected outbreak occurred when a Texas rancher picked up the bug. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have now detailed the circumstances behind the event that made it what they describe as “unusual”.It began when a male in his 50s presented to his GP with a soft tissue infection and was sent home with a course of antibiotics. The infection, however, didn’t go away; three days later, he was sent to hospital after developing a fever, blisters, and a black piece of dead tissue characteristic of an anthrax infection.After being sent to a larger hospital, swabs of the wound then tested positive for the DNA of Bacillus anthracis, the bacterium that causes anthrax. Though the skin form of the disease can be fatal if left untreated, the rancher was successfully treated and discharged from hospital a week after being admitted.So what was the source of his infection? The clue is in his job.Anthrax is zoonotic, meaning it can be passed from animals to humans. While such cases are rare on the whole, there’s a region of Texas known as the “Anthrax Triangle” where it’s considered to be enzootic, a disease that’s constantly present in animals – essentially their equivalent of endemic. The case in question occurred on a ranch in a county adjacent to the triangle.Outbreaks in this region usually occur sporadically in the summer months when there’s hot, dry weather, followed by human cases. What made this case particularly “unusual”, as the CDC described it, was that the rancher turned up in hospital in January.Upon investigation, it was suspected that the source of the infection had been a lamb on the ranch that had died suddenly, 11 days prior to the rancher winding up in hospital. After the rancher butchered the lamb, its meat was then cooked and eaten by himself and four others.With only the rancher becoming ill, it’s likely that the man picked up the skin infection handling the lamb, as he’d reported not using any personal protective equipment to do so. Although no one else got sick, the CDC reported that cooked meat from the lamb that had been frozen did test positive for B. anthracis and cautioned that “there is no safe way to prepare meat for human consumption from an animal that has died of anthrax.”“Processing animals that die suddenly from unknown causes should be avoided, irrespective of the season.”

The New York Times’s latest attempt at a manufactured scandal — that that a few years ago, a Supreme Court Justice’s wife flew a flag upside down — is among the most desperate election-year media ploys ever seen. Everyone knows what this non-story is about: the corporate journalists are attempting to conjure up a pretense for the Supreme Court to be “reformed,” which, in this case, usually involves adding five or more new seats and immediately filling them with far-left ideologues. Nobody’s buying it, because we know the media’s thoughts on the Supreme Court. As soon as Trump started nominating judges, they began questioning the court’s legitimacy and arguing that perhaps something needed to change. Here’s how they’ve talked about it over the past year:     Journalism during an election year is like playoff hockey. Convinced that democracy itself its on the line, the news creatures have grown bolder and more shameless with their political hackery. At this point sheer volume of nonsense has reached a point where one struggles to keep track of all their shenanigans. Does anyone even remember how last week, during the final day of jury deliberation in Trump’s New York trial, a slew of mainstream news publications suddenly started blasting our phones with alerts proclaiming that a tape existed of the former President using a racial slur? It was only a week ago. What was that about? Why is literally nobody talking about it anymore? Where did all the media interest go? Kind of weird how it all completely evaporated the second Trump was found guilty. It’s almost like these outlets knew they were publishing fake news. That brings us to the Times’s latest non-story. Does anyone really believe the American news media, with all their criticism of America, flouting of norms, and scorn for tradition, are actually upset at the supposed mishandling of an American flag? It’s not like it was a pride flag. Just how stupid do they think we are? Perhaps aware of their weak pretense, they tried to punch up their story with a new scandalous detail: the Alitos were also seen flying the “Appeal to Heaven” flag on one of their properties. You know, that flag commissioned centuries ago by George Washington. Apparently we’re meant to pretend it’s a symbol of January 6 or racism or something now. Of course, the facts didn’t line up for that one either, and it became clear that history would have to be revised in order for democracy to be saved. Wikipedia made some stealth edits to its page about the flag, but then it came out that the deepest blue cesspit of a city in all of America, San Francisco, had been flying the flag outside its city hall for years. The local government tried to keep the narrative alive by quietly taking down the flag, but at that point everyone with an IQ above room temperature already had stopped paying attention to this fake scandal. The journalists officially are out of control. Look forward to the next insane ploy as election day approaches. We’ll be here to cover it.

On Friday, the flagship morning news shows of ABC, CBS, and NBC were shamelessly ebullient at President Biden’s speech hours later that would use the heroes who fought and died at Pointe du Hoc as part of the D-Day invasion as implicit but a “clear” “contrast” against President Trump, cloaking his daggers as “a forceful defense of democracy” and “echoing the lessons of the past” to speak to “audiences back home”. Unsurprisingly, ABC’s Good Morning America was on its own planet with its out-of-control quackery. Leading the way? Biden tools in co-host George Stephanopoulos and its chief White House correspondent (aka chief Biden apple polisher), Mary Bruce.     “President Biden’s major address as the world remembers D-Day. President’s warning to the world,” Stephanopoulos boomed in a tease, adding prior to Bruce the official White House spin that Biden’s speech would be about the “timeless principles that have safe guarded American security and democracy.” Smiling from ear-to-ear, Bruce gushed about how from “here on the edge of these 100 foot cliffs that American forces scaled on D-Day, President Biden today will offer a forceful defense of democracy.” “And, while he is not expected to call out Donald Trump by name, the contrast will be clear. This morning, 80 years after the invasion that turned the tide of World War II, President Biden arguing the lessons of the past cannot be forgotten as he rallies the next generation to protect democracy,” she giddily proclaimed. Unfortunately, Bruce had more rhetorical valentines, like this one: “Biden, feeling the weight of history as he toured the Normandy American cemetery.” Bruce even fretted pesky voters have other priorities that are getting in Biden’s way: “While the President is echoing the lessons of the past to make clear what’s at stake in this election, back home issues like the economy and immigration continue to dominate.” She closed with another clip for her hypothetical press secretary audition tape: “Now, this is the site of one of President Reagan’s most iconic speeches. And, today, President Biden will try to echo that moment as he argues the dangers of isolationism and it underscores the need to come together and fight again tyranny, making what he thinks is on the line in this election.” Over on NBC’s Today, chief White House correspondent Peter Alexander had his moments of shilling, saying Biden would “deliver a forceful defense of democracy, sharing, harnessing the stories of the inspiring courage and commitment to those rangers here”. “The speech coming 40 years after Ronald Reagan gave what’s considered the greatest tribute to those brave American warriors who endured withering gunfire...President Biden hoping to summon those same patriotic sentiments that helped propelled President Reagan to reelection that year,” he gushed. Alexander later smeared Republicans by arguing Biden was more aligned with “Reagan’s legacy of leadership against tyranny” since the GOP is led by someone “warmed up to Russia’s Vladimir Putin” (click “expand”): Well, Savannah, notably, the President is looking to align himself with President Reagan’s legacy of leadership against tyranny. The irony here, of course, Biden a Democrat, Reagan, a conservative Republican, but the Republican Party has gone in a very different direction since Trump’s time in office here.  And the President is hoping to draw a contrast between his unifying that western alliance and former President Trump is trying to pull the U.S. out of the NATO alliance and also warmed up to Russia’s Vladimir Putin. One other note we should share today among those expected to be in attendance, private first class John Wardell. 19 years old when he came here on that mission. Now 99 years old. He’ll be there listening to the President[.] CBS Mornings wasn’t going to be left out. Co-host and Democratic donor Gayle King also led the show with state-run media, saying there was “a major new effort by President Biden to warn about the forces threatening democracy around the world.” White House correspondent Ed O’Keefe kept his segment more geared toward Biden’s support for Ukraine, but nonetheless said Biden would use “one of the most breathtaking backdrops a president can visit....to talk about his concerns about the future of democracy” and invoked the Reagan comparison as a reelection ploy (click “expand”): O’KEEFE: Biden isn’t the first American president to speak from the shell-scarred site. 40 years ago, Ronald Reagan touched on similar themes when he honored the boys of Pointe du Hoc. RONALD REAGAN [on 06/06/84]: And democracy is worth dying for because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. O’KEEFE: Now, here at Pointe du Hoc, the White House tells us, again, the president’s going to focus on his once about the future of democracy. It’s a message that will be heard by the world, but that aides say is especially designed to reach audiences back home as he continues his re-election fight. And the trip here to France continues through the weekend. Saturday, it’s a state visit with a full military parade in the streets of Paris and a state dinner, and big meetings with French President Emmanuel Macron before flying home on Sunday[.] To see the relevant transcripts from June 7, click here (for ABC), here (for CBS), and here (for NBC).

WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and other globalists have campaigned feverishly in recent months to promote an international pandemic agreement, lashing out at those who dared to suggest the legally binding pact would undermine American sovereignty and burden U.S. taxpayers with yet more financial obligations, as well as at those who noted that the WHO is an untrustworthy, corruption-prone, and Chinese communist-compromised organization. Ghebreyesus, who leaned on concern-mongering about "Disease X" to move the needle, sought a successful vote on the globalist pact at the 77th meeting of World Health Assembly from May 27 to June 1 in Geneva, Switzerland. His hopes were dashed as the Assembly couldn't agree on the wording or passage of the pact. Blaze News previously reported that the WHA did, however, manage to adopt a package of amendments to the International Health Regulations allegedly aimed at strengthening "global preparedness, surveillance and responses to public health emergencies, including pandemics." Critics have expressed concern that the amendments, adopted by "consensus" contra an actual vote, might not be as advertised or even be legal under the WHO's own rules. American biochemist Dr. Robert Malone claimed Monday that the "hastily approved IHR [amendments] consolidate virtually unchecked authority and power of the Director-General to declare public health emergencies and pandemics as he/she may choose to define them, and thereby to trigger and guide allocation of global resources as well as a wide range of public health actions and guidances." 'The WHO's failure during the COVID-19 pandemic was as total as it was predictable and did lasting harm to our country.' The IHR make up a legally binding international instrument authorized under Article 21 of the WHO Constitution to which all 194 member states of the WHO, including the U.S., are parties. While amendments submitted to the WHA can be advanced by consensus, decision-making by vote "is a legally available option." WHO member states agreed in January 2022 to consider potential amendments to the IHR. This decision was prompted, in part, by concerns over "the negative effects of discrimination, misinformation and stigmatization on public health emergency prevention, preparedness and response as well as unnecessary interference with international traffic and trade, and recognizing the need for strengthened coordination." The amendments were negotiated parallel to the so-far unsuccessful pandemic pact but crafted in the same spirit. According to Liberty Council, the proposed amendments took "major steps in the wake of COVID-19 to conform and integrate each nation's pandemic responses by directing them to develop 'core' capabilities in areas of Surveillance (vaccine passports/digital health certificates), Risk Communication (censoring misinformation and disinformation), Implementation of Control Measures (social distancing/lockdowns), Access to Health Services and Products (greater sharing of resources and technologies between countries), and more." The Kaiser Family Foundation reported that the Biden administration was actively engaged in the negotiations despite the urging of Republican lawmakers, such as Sens. Dr. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), to spike the amendments, noting they would "substantially increase the WHO's health emergency powers and constitute intolerable infringements upon U.S. sovereignty." Cassidy, Johnson, and the entire Senate Republican Conference told President Joe Biden in a May 1 letter, "The WHO's failure during the COVID-19 pandemic was as total as it was predictable and did lasting harm to our country. The United States cannot afford to ignore this latest WHO inability to perform its most basic function and must insist on comprehensive WHO reforms before even considering amendments to the International Health Regulations." 'We consider any such agreement to be a treaty requiring the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate under Article II Section 2 of the Constitution.' Like Dr. Malone and the Heritage Foundation, the Republicans indicated that the adoption of new IHR amendments at the 77th WHA would be in violation of the WHO International Health Regulations, specifically Article 55, which states, "The text of any proposed amendment shall be communicated to all States Parties by the Director-General at least four months before the Health Assembly at which it is proposed for consideration." "As the WHO has still not provided final amendment text to member states, we submit that IHR amendments may not be considered at next month's WHA," wrote the Republican lawmakers. "Should you ignore this advice, we state in the strongest possible terms that we consider any such agreement to be a treaty requiring the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate under Article II Section 2 of the Constitution." Extra to facing potential congressional pushback, the Biden administration negotiated the amendments with the foreknowledge that the U.S. might not be bound by them depending on the results of the 2024 election. After all, President Donald Trump is expected to once again move to withdraw America from the WHO. 'The final version of the IHRs significantly enhances the WHO’s authority.' The WHO said in a statement Saturday that the WHA and its 194 member countries "agreed [on] a package of critical amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR), and made concrete commitments to completing negotiations on a global pandemic agreement within a year, at the latest." "The amendments to the International Health Regulations will bolster countries' ability to detect and respond to future outbreaks and pandemics by strengthening their own national capacities, and coordination between fellow States, on disease surveillance, information sharing and response," said Ghebreyesus. "This is built on commitment to equity, an understanding that health threats do not recognize national borders, and that preparedness is a collective endeavor." Despite the insinuation of consent among member nations, the Sovereignty Coalition suggested that roughly 30% of member states were present and Ghebreyesus declined to conduct a roll-call vote. The amendments ultimately adopted by 77th WHA include a new definition for "pandemic emergency"; another "equity"-driven international wealth redistribution mechanism; the creation of a new bureaucracy to oversee the implementation of the other half-measures; and the creation of IHR authorities for member countries to "improve coordination of implementation of the Regulations within and among countries." While acknowledging that the language of the amendments was weakened during the negotiations, Liberty Counsel indicated that "the final version of the IHRs significantly enhances the WHO's authority." The U.S. State Department claimed the amendments will "make the global health security architecture stronger overall while maintaining full respect for sovereignty of individual states." The Kaiser Family Foundation indicated that if "approved at the WHA, the [IHR] revision does not require further Congressional approval or ratification in the U.S." The British government indicated that each member state has the right to evaluate "each and every amendment before making a sovereign choice of whether to accept or opt out of each — or all of — the amendments." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Abortion has been a major point of contention here in America, but it’s stayed under the radar as it’s slipped into poorer, non-Western countries. Medical doctor and researcher Dr. Calum Miller calls it “abortion colonialism.” “It’s the idea that this is a new form of ideological colonialism, the way that Western countries go to non-Western countries, and they say, ‘You have to promote abortion, you have to legalize abortion, you have to put it in your schools,’” Miller tells Allie Beth Stuckey of "Relatable." If they refuse, they’re threatened with the withholding of something — like aid money. “They’re basically going into these countries and saying, ‘Your culture, your values, don’t matter. We know better, and you have to change them, or we’re not going to support you,’” Miller explains. One of the “most sinister” examples of abortion colonialism occurs in places like the Pacific Islands, where the people generally are afraid of climate change, fearing if sea levels rise that their countries will disappear. “It’s a genuine existential threat to these countries,” Miller says. Rich countries then go to these countries and tell them they “are going to vote for these pro-environmental policies that will save your countries, but only if you support abortion.” “So, you get these sort of green people and pro-environment people who are so cynical, that care so little about the actual environment and climate change, that they’re willing to base their support for climate change policies or not based on whether the Pacific Islands want to kill their babies,” Miller explains. “They’re basically threatening these countries with extinction unless they support abortion,” he adds. Stuckey notes that they’ve done the same thing with the LGBTQ agenda. “Democratic administrations have said to countries like Uganda, if you don’t repeal your laws against homosexuality,” she says, “we’re going to withhold our aid or XYZ unless you conform to our ideological positions.” In order to stop this, “It’s not enough to cut Planned Parenthood International’s budget from $100 million to $50 million,” Miller says. “If we want to preserve these countries and protect their cultural values and give them the tools and resources to do that, we have to be proactive in reaching out to these countries, providing them support, sending pro-life missionaries, giving them resources, giving them political support, giving them education.” “Because the reality is that even if the U.S. government money stopped going to all of these countries around the world, you would still have millions from the Gates Foundation, from Soros, from Packard, and a bunch of others, and it would still massively outweigh anything that pro-lifers have.” Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Col. Rob Maness ret. Serves Adam Kinzinger a Nice Glass of STFU Juice for Whining About Upside Down Flag

Conservatives Need to Watch How Pierre Poilevre Calmly Yet COMPLETELY Dismantles Leftist Media (Video)

WATCH: Justice Alito Neighbor at Center of Upside Down Flag Dispute Tells on Herself in CNN Interview