Single military-age men are still pouring into the country as our enemies are joining forces against us throughout the world. We have no idea who these people are or why they are here. This is madness. US military just caught two illegal alien Jordanians trying to launch a terror attack at Quantico. One overstayed a […] The post Single Military-Age Men Pouring Across the Border Unfettered appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Sara Milliken is Miss Alabama 2024 in the National Miss contest. It’s a minor contest; it has nothing to do with the Miss America contest. I noticed that men online are complaining about the winner. Look at the photo. This is a woke decision glorifying overeating. For some reason, the left is promoting people who […] The post Miss Alabama in National Miss Contest Is Massively Obese appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Investigative journalist Michael Shellenberger has investigated the counter-terrorism tactics being used in the West. Free speech is the number one target. Currently, he’s concentrating on Ireland. Ireland could be one of the first to go down. Ireland’s horrific Prime Minister resigned, but the problems in Ireland are far from over. The totalitarians in power in […] The post Look at What Globalists Have in Mind for Ireland, You’re Next appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) appears to be rising in former President Donald Trump’s search for who will be his vice presidential running mate during this fall’s election. Cotton was not included in an ABC News report earlier this week that listed those who the Trump campaign reached out to for information. A subsequent report from The Washington Post said that Cotton was among that top candidates who have been asked to submit paperwork. “Senator Cotton stands out among the other candidates as a battle tested, serious minded lawmaker with exceptional fundraising skills,” a source close to Trump told The Daily Wire. “He’s a fighter that would round out the ticket in a way that is most likely to secure a victory in November.” The New York Times said in a recent report that Cotton has “unexpectedly emerged as a top contender” in Trump’s search, a signal that Trump believes that experience and discipline will be key factors to regaining the White House. The news comes as Cotton has taken his defense of the former president in interviews to new heights, including during a Sunday NBC News interview where he aggressively defended Trump against the prosecutions that he faces, his record as president, many of the claims that Trump has made, and Trump’s supporters who have faced what many have said are unfair prosecutions in cases related to the January 6 riot. The Times said that Trump has privately praised Cotton as “a reliable and effective communicator in cable news interviews,” something that is a top tier quality that Trump seeks in people he surrounds himself with. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP He also admires Cotton’s military service and Ivy League education, the report said. Trump has liked the senator for years and had considered giving Cotton a top administration position in the past. “The two men fostered a close relationship during their time in Washington. They worked closely on immigration issues and shared an affinity for the conservative populism fueling the Republican Party,” the report said. “Cotton’s presence on a presidential ticket could help reassure Republicans in the party’s dwindling traditional wing, particularly fellow foreign-policy hawks. Many of these Republicans remain undecided about a second term for Mr. Trump and might be put off by the selection of an inexperienced MAGA loyalist.” Throughout his time in Washington, Cotton has made all the right enemies that could make him an appealing candidate for Trump. In 2020, Cotton led the charge in raising awareness at the start of the coronavirus pandemic about a Chinese laboratory in Wuhan that had been conducting experiments on bats and that it was the likely source of the pandemic. Cotton was subsequently castigated by the media as it sought to cast his remarks as “fringe” conspiracy theories — even though many of the world’s leading scientists now believe that the pandemic originated from the Chinese lab. Months later, as far-left extremists burned down cities and rioted across the U.S. following the death of George Floyd, Cotton penned a piece in The New York Times urging Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act to deploy the military to stop the billions of dollars in damage that the Black Lives Matter and Antifa extremists caused and the thousands of law enforcement officers whom they attacked.

He has been suspended without pay

'...I don’t know how you could do anything other than vote for Donald Trump...'

'Continuous neglect and poor conditions'

It seems that many gun control activists want to take your guns so badly that they’re willing to take your voice, too. And increasingly, the war for the Second Amendment involves battles waged on a First Amendment front. Just ask the National Rifle Association, which last week needed the Supreme Court to vindicate its right to free speech against New York’s attempts to suppress the gun rights organization’s pro-Second Amendment views. New York’s unconstitutional assault on a Second Amendment advocacy group was, unfortunately, far from the first time that gun control activists have attacked the lawful gun industry and lawful gun owners by threatening their right to speak freely. Particularly when it comes to the importance of armed self-defense, gun control activists know that the closest thing they have to a winning argument is a silent (or silenced) opposition. The numbers simply don’t work in their favor. Almost every major study has found that Americans use their firearms in self-defense between 500,000 and 3 million times annually, according to a 2013 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2021, the most comprehensive study ever conducted on the issue concluded that roughly 1.6 million defensive gun uses occur in the United States every year. No wonder gun control activists pressured the CDC two years ago into quietly removing those numbers from the agency’s website. But defenders of the Second Amendment should keep shouting the facts from the rooftops, despite efforts to silence us. For this reason, The Daily Signal publishes a monthly article highlighting some of the previous month’s many news stories on defensive gun use that you may have missed—or that might not have made it to the national spotlight in the first place. (Read other accounts here from past years.) The examples below represent only a small portion of the news stories on defensive gun use that we found in May. You may explore more using The Heritage Foundation’s interactive Defensive Gun Use Database.  May 1, Jackson, Mississippi: A woman returned home to find herself face-to-face with three burglars who’d broken in, police said. At least one burglar was armed and shot at the woman, who drew her own gun and returned fire until all three fled. Police later arrested one suspect. May 4, Omaha, Nebraska: Security cameras captured the moment an armed Air Force veteran defended his jewelry store from a would-be robber who used a rock to smash his way inside after the store closed, police said. Footage shows the veteran store owner jogging out of a back room and pointing his gun at the robber, who stands over a display case with burglary tools in his hands. After seeing the armed owner, the robber puts his hands in the air and scrambles back out of the store, the video shows. Police didn’t have a suspect. May 7, Cheltenham Township, Pennsylvania: A DoorDash driver with a concealed carry permit exchanged gunfire with two carjackers who accosted him while he made a late-night delivery, police said. The driver escaped unharmed and his assailants fled, though police later arrested a suspect after tracking him down with a K-9 unit. May 9, Portland, Oregon: Two private security officers confronted a man who was “aggressively banging on apartment windows” and tried to get him to leave the premises. For unclear reasons, the man then charged at a bystander and continued coming after him, even as the bystander tried to get away. Eventually, the bystander drew his lawfully concealed firearm and shot the man, wounding him. May 11, Yakima, Washington: A homeowner who fatally shot an elderly man did so in self-defense after the man came onto the homeowner’s property and threatened his family with a gun, police said. The homeowner’s version of events was confirmed by video evidence and witness statements. May 14, Vermillion, South Dakota: Police said a man with a history of domestic violence violated a protection order, forced his way into a woman’s home, threatened those inside with a handgun, and shot at a guest. The guest retrieved his own firearm and fatally shot the assailant before he could harm anyone. Records indicate this wasn’t the first time the woman was granted a protection order against the man—or the first time that he violated one. May 15, Willow Springs, Illinois:  An armed homeowner helped end a police manhunt, detaining a wanted burglary suspect at gunpoint after catching him hiding in his backyard, where his young child was playing, police said. The suspect was one of two men accused of stealing chainsaws and leading police on a high-speed chase that at times reached 120 mph. Police arrested a second suspect outside a nearby school.   May 17, Monrovia, California: Police said a man armed with knives showed up at a woman’s home in violation of a restraining order, then tried to stab her and another man inside the residence. The woman retrieved her firearm and fatally shot him. Neither victim appeared to be injured. May 21, Vernon Parish, Louisiana: A woman’s ex-boyfriend broke into the home where she and her children were staying as a way to avoid him, police said. He stabbed the woman in front of the children, then stabbed the homeowner when he tried to intervene. Despite life-threatening wounds, the homeowner retreated to another room, grabbed his gun, and fatally shot the ex-boyfriend. May 24, Farrell, Pennsylvania: When a police officer approached a man outside a convenience store, suspecting he carried a weapon, the man refused to cooperate and started shooting at the officer, police said. A bystander with a concealed carry permit helped return fire at the gunman, who was wounded and arrested. May 27, Taylor, Texas: A homeowner shot and wounded a man who, while wielding a large knife inscribed with the words “hail Satan,” tried to break into his house in the middle of the night. The suspect faces felony charges, police said.  May 29, Lehigh Acres, Florida: A county sheriff lauded an armed homeowner as a hero for fatally shooting a man who, in the midst of an hourslong violent crime spree, drove a stolen car to a relative’s home and opened fire at those inside. It wasn’t clear what prompted the man, who had no criminal history, to commit four carjackings before targeting the homeowner. Examples like the ones above make it easy to see why proponents of gun control are often more eager to use the government’s coercive power to silence pro-Second Amendment views than they are to engage in open and honest gun policy debates. They rely on a narrative that “good guys with guns” really don’t exist and that armed self-defense is rarely an effective solution for crime victims. But that narrative is only persuasive if stories about defensive gun use are swept under the rug. Because these stories of armed self-defense speak volumes. We won’t let them be silenced. The post These Accounts of Defensive Gun Use Speak Volumes appeared first on The Daily Signal.

In what has been coined the “New Great Depression,” the number of high schoolers who agree with the phrases “I can’t do anything right,” “I do not enjoy life,” and “My life is not useful” has doubled since 2010. That’s an unprecedented spike. Constant cellphone use has exacerbated a mental health crisis among our youth, who have been relentlessly exposed to online content during critical years of formation and growth, including during school hours. Jonathan Haidt sounds the alarm about this in his new book, “The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness.” He also lays out solutions, including allowing no smartphones before age 14, no social media until age 16, phone-free classrooms, and more free play time. With mounting evidence of the toxicity of smartphone overuse in our children, the time has come to ask ourselves a difficult but necessary question: Are we willing to do something about it? While we have bemoaned the consequences, we have neglected to take effective action to truly stem the tide of destruction. Maybe we don’t want to anger or isolate our kids. We ourselves are used to always being “on.” We fear we don’t have the resources to fight powerful Big Tech, and we don’t want to admit to ourselves that we allowed it to get this far.  This is what students on the phone at school looked like in 1938, at least according to this scene from the Columbia Pictures film “Girls’ School.” (Photo: Irving Lippman/Vintage Images/Getty Images) As a parent, I am more committed than ever to keeping my young children away from smartphones and social media apps in order to allow them to develop and connect in the real world. As a lawmaker, I know that I have a responsibility to our teachers, administrators, and parents alike to stop the ubiquitous presence of phones in classrooms, and set our students up for success by minimizing distractions. It will come as no surprise that 97% of students are on their phones during typical school hours—texting, posting, filming, scrolling, watching, rinsing and repeating. Despite many school districts having policies against phone use in class, the reality is that enforcement is a challenge when the endlessly compelling internet portal can be easily hidden behind a book or under a desk. We’ve sent our kids to school with a television, boom box, and walkie-talkies, and expected them to pay attention during class.  States must take firm action now to get smartphones out of classrooms and give our students and teachers uninterrupted time to focus on math, science, reading, writing, and in-person socialization. Public education is one of the largest funding priorities in any state budget, and lawmakers have a responsibility to the families they serve and the taxpayers who are footing the bill to provide an educational environment that is conducive to learning and free of inappropriate influence.   Removing the temptation during school hours will unchain our students from the technocratic overlords who are monetizing the destruction of their brains. Phones can be slipped in locking neoprene pouches at the beginning of the school day and kept out of sight in backpacks until school is dismissed. Or they can be left in lockers with immediate consequences for visible phones in classrooms, hallways, and cafeterias. Nothing worth doing is ever easy or without some opposition, and this will be no exception. Parents will need to be confident that their children will still be reachable in an emergency, and Big Tech will no doubt launch a defense in an effort to keep their underage customers online all day. However, the results will be well worth it, as proven in the schools that have already adopted this approach across the nation. There’s no need to imagine a world where children exist free of the constant threat of online hazards. It’s possible for the children you know to be free today.  Teachers and parents alike will be grateful for this “new normal,” reaping the benefits of more engaged children and focused time in the classroom. Students will finally feel what it is like to be unleashed and free from a prison of our creation. Who knows, they may even start making eye contact again. Every state should rise to this challenge and give school districts the tools and support they need to make this a reality. I will be filing a bill in the Texas Legislature to do just that. Our children have become servants to the creeping compulsions of Big Tech under our watch, and it’s time we step up to save them from what we know is slowly killing them—and do it sooner, rather than later. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Parents, Teachers, Lawmakers Must Unite to Untether Kids From Smartphones in Classrooms appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Another Friday afternoon, another potential bombshell in the Trump “hush money” trial in New York City. The judge who presided over former President Donald Trump’s trial notified the parties that on May 29, a user named “Michael Anderson” (if that is his real name) posted on the New York Unified Court System’s public Facebook page that “My cousin is a juror and says Trump is getting convicted . . . Thank you folks for all of your hard work!!!!!”  (Emojis omitted). ?Buckle Up! Breaking news in @realDonaldTrump's Hush Money Trial.The judge notified the parties that someone posted on the NY Court System's social media page BEFORE the verdict that "My cousin is a juror and says Trump is getting convicted."What does this mean? ?? pic.twitter.com/vnw3X2Yfah— Zack Smith (@tzsmith) June 7, 2024 Of course, if true (and that’s a BIG if), this comment raises immediate concerns and should raise alarm bells for all involved in the trial.  That’s because jurors are not supposed to discuss the case with anyone—even other jurors—until the judge submits the case to them and their formal deliberations begin. This requirement is crucial to maintain any semblance of integrity in the jury trial process (setting aside the other issues related to this specific prosecution). As part of his instructions to the jurors right before they began their deliberations, Judge Juan Merchan admonished that “During your deliberations, you must discuss the case only among yourselves; you must not discuss the case with anyone else, including a court officer, or permit anyone other than a fellow juror to discuss the case in your presence.” Jurors typically receive a similar admonishment at the beginning of the trial whenever the judge swears them in to begin their service.  A handbook for jurors provided by the New York court system explains that the judge explains to jurors at the beginning of a trial that each “juror pledges to act fairly and impartially and follow the law . . . . [including the instruction to] not discuss the case with anyone (including other members of the jury) until all evidence has been presented and the jury retires to deliberate.” If Anderson’s comment turns out to be true, at least one juror clearly did not follow those instructions with a potential consequence that the jury’s verdict against Trump could be tossed out. So what happens now? First, an investigation into the comment is likely to take place to find out who made it and if that person is, in fact, related to a juror. The judge will likely hold a hearing allowing the defense and the prosecution to present arguments about how this investigation should proceed. Given the unprecedented nature of this prosecution and the serious consequences that will follow from it, everyone should want an expeditious resolution. Second, if the comment is found to have been made by a real person, who is really related to a juror, that’s where things get interesting. The judge would likely hold further hearings and question the juror, under oath, about his or her conduct. Depending on what the conduct consisted of, that juror could find himself or herself subjected to criminal liability—though even that could be very difficult to prove given New York’s juror misconduct statutes. And regardless, if the juror shared information, he or she clearly violated his or her oath. Third, in terms of what this means for the verdict, there is recent precedent from New York’s highest court that could call for the verdict against Trump to be set aside. In a 2019 case, People v. Neulander, a unanimous New York Court of Appeals (New York’s highest state court), upheld the setting aside of a murder conviction where a particular juror had texted extensively about the case during the trial and then lied about it. Finally, it is notable that the judge in this case did not sequester the jury, which would have prevented them from having communication with others outside the trial. Juries in other high-profile cases—such as the O.J. Simpson case—have been sequestered to keep outside pressures from influencing their decisions and avoiding potential issues like the one the parties in the Trump trial now face. Of course, sequestration itself is controversial and its benefits and drawbacks are hotly contested. Still, if ever there was a case where sequestration might have been appropriate, this seems to be the one. We’re still early in this process. The Facebook comment could be nothing—a random comment from a random person designed to wreak havoc. As some have reported, the poster’s profile says that the is “transabled & a professional sh– poster.” But if it’s not—if it was made by a person related to a juror—buckle up. Things are going to get wild. And it would be another black mark against this already-besmirched prosecution. The post Social Media Message Could Doom Trump NYC Verdict—If It’s True (And That’s a BIG IF) appeared first on The Daily Signal.