A senior vice president at the Walt Disney Company reportedly said in an undercover video captured by the O’Keefe Media Group that he was told by co-workers in the human resources department the corporation discriminates against white men. Michael Giordano, a senior vice president and team lead at the Walt Disney Company, reportedly said the corporation discriminates against white men on account of their race and sex in O’Keefe’s video. The report comes as the company has embraced far-left policies on gender and race, going so far as to embed them in their movies and television shows. “I have friends in HR and I have friends in other divisions. And they’re like, ‘Look, nobody else is going to tell you this, Mike, but they’re not considering any white males for the job,'” Giordano reportedly divulged to an undercover journalist with O’Keefe Media Group. He also went on to say that being a white male limits his upward mobility within the company. “As far as Disney is concerned, I am a white male and that’s not who they’re looking to promote at the moment,” he reportedly said. Giordano went on to allege that one biracial person was passed over for a promotion because he didn’t look African American. “We wanted to hire somebody in the department … who was half black but didn’t like, appear half black and there was a creative executive who was like ‘We’re not, like, that’s not, that’s not what’s wanted,’” he claimed. “They wanted somebody in meetings who would appear a certain way and he wasn’t gonna bring that to the meeting.” BREAKING: Senior Vice President at The Walt Disney Company details discriminatory hiring practices: “Nobody else is going to tell you this, but they’re not considering any white males for the job,” says Michael Giordano, a Vice President of Business affairs, “there’s no way we’re… pic.twitter.com/IMOsFOLKro — James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) June 20, 2024 In the video, Giordano alleges that Disney attempts to prevent lawsuits by using euphemistic terminology. The company allegedly uses “code words and buzzwords that are used to explain what they’re looking for… so it’s not like a legally actionable thing,” the senior vice president explained. He did, however, say that Disney’s practices would likely eventually lead to a lawsuit. O’Keefe reported that Disney also awards bonuses to executives based on whether they recruited enough employees from non-white backgrounds. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP The allegations against Disney come as a wide array of companies have been caught discriminating against white and often Asian job applicants. Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey announced a lawsuit on Thursday against tech giant International Business Machines (IBM) over a policy of financially penalizing executives who did not recruit enough people from “underrepresented groups,” accusing the company of discriminating against whites, Asians, and men. One Daily Wire investigation revealed that NASCAR hosted two different internships that explicitly listed certain racial backgrounds as program requirements, only omitting white people. A law professor told The Daily Wire that the program requirements were “blatantly illegal.” Oracle hosted internship and scholarship opportunities that barred both whites and Asians, with approved racial groups being listed under the program’s “eligibility requirements,” another Daily Wire investigation found. Another probe found that corporations from across different sectors, including Bayer Pharmaceuticals, US Bank, Best Buy, and Liberty Mutual, all participated in a training program from McKinsey and Company that barred white people based on their race.

The theme from legacy media in recent weeks has been simple: when it comes to President Joe Biden and his mental acuity and fitness for office, believe what we tell you, not your lying eyes. But a damning supercut — showing Biden’s current state alongside the media’s constant defense of it paints a very different picture. That message has been even more clear since the White House debuted — and media outlets happily ran with — the label “cheap fakes” to describe any video that shows Biden in a less-than-flattering light, often claiming without evidence that those clips are either deceptively edited or intentionally presented without context. Grabien media founder Tom S. Elliott shared a supercut over the weekend that put the two narratives side by side — video of President Biden alongside audio of his most ardent media defenders — and the contrast was striking. WATCH: SUPERCUT! Corporate media: Don’t believe your lying eyes, Biden’s never been sharper! pic.twitter.com/FW6e2ZPT5i — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) June 15, 2024 The video began with MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough: “Start your tape right now, because I’m about to tell you the truth, and f-you if you can’t handle the truth.” Video of Biden looking lost at several different points during the D-Day 80th anniversary followed, with Scarborough’s voiceover declaring, “This version of Biden is the best Biden ever. In fact, I think he’s better than he’s ever been.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP The next clip showed the president wandering away from other world leaders at the G-7 meetings, only returning to the fold after Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni takes him by the elbow and guides him back. Meanwhile, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) says, “President Biden has a photographic memory. His understanding and mastery of a complicated geopolitical situation. Remarkable.” As the clips played on, CNN’s Anderson Cooper referred to Biden as “intense,” and David Axelrod said he was “sharp in meetings.” Several people claimed that “ageism” was to blame for any criticism of Biden’s apparent frailty. “He’s showed exactly how with it he is,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) insisted as the clips continued to play.

Not that it needs saying, but the economy is still a mess. Inflation is high, the value of a dollar continues to increase, and interest rates are insane. At the same time, most salaries are not increasing, the job market is terrible, and people are struggling to find work. This combination makes it seem as though it’s not at all possible to buy a home. But is it actually impossible? Boomers often look at young people and say, “Well, interest rates were even higher in my day, and I still managed to buy a home.” The difference is, salaries increased along with the prices of homes. In 2024, that has not happened. As a result, young people are priced out of the market, especially if they are living in metropolitan areas. However, I believe there is a solution to this bad combination of economic woes. Conversations about starter homes go viral on X all the time. All it takes is one person tweeting something like this, judging people for “skipping over starter homes” and buying houses that are too expensive, contributing to their own financial demise. Screenshot: X To be fair, he’s correct. Expectations should be in check – based on where you live and what your salary is. But I do not think this is why people are failing financially, nor do I think he has any idea how much a starter home in 2024 actually is. In most relatively metropolitan areas where people are working and commuting to and from, starter homes start at around $300,000. The replies argued as much: Screenshot: X Screenshot: X Screenshot: X Now, we have probably all heard the “stop buying avocado toast” argument. When I was in college, my mom would tell me that if I wanted to buy a house someday, I couldn’t spend all my money on Starbucks. I have a love-hate relationship with this statement. On the “love” side, it is true smaller purchases add up. Spending $50 a day on random things here and there ends up being $18,000 at the end of the year. However, on the “hate” side, I think these types of statements trivialize the actual problem at stake, which is that low salaries, high interest rates, and high prices all around make it near impossible to save for a down payment or be able to make a mortgage payment. Another solution people commonly pose is to live in the middle of nowhere, so you can buy a five-bedroom house for $200,000. While this is true in some parts of the country, many people cannot make this proposed solution work logistically. Although they might be able to afford the house, they might not be able to pull off living in the middle of nowhere because there are no job opportunities, plus schools and grocery stores are 45 minutes away. So, this suggestion just ends up being counterproductive and unhelpful, which some tweets, like this one, are quick to point out: Screenshot: X The issue of not being able to afford a house is not just relegated to Gen Z. Wall Street Silver went so far as to question if we even have a middle class, tweeting that “homeownership is no longer a staple of the middle-class American Dream.” Screenshot: X This should not be the case. People should not just shrug it off, saying, “Oh, well, that’s just life in 2024.” And people should not be stuck in this cycle. So, what is the solution? First, we need to vote accordingly. But until we can do that and until circumstances hopefully change, there are steps you can take. This is not a hopeless situation if you truly want to buy a home. In Nashville, for example, there are very few homes for sale at or around $300,000, and the ones that are at that price point are not in the safest of areas and they would require a fair amount of renovating. So while you might save money on a down payment, you would spend a pretty penny renovating the entire house. Plus, these homes aren’t even in Nashville proper. You would still be looking at a 20- to 30-minute commute. That means, if you want a house in Nashville, you have to change your expectations. Since you would already be driving at least 20 minutes from an unsafe, not move-in ready home if you bought at $300,000, could you, instead, add an extra 10 minutes to that drive? If you want to own a home, are you willing to sacrifice a shorter drive for a longer one? If so, you could afford a starter home that is clean, move-in ready, and in a safe area. WATCH: The Comments Section with Brett Cooper I know this is possible because I know people who have done it — and I am one of them. The farm my husband and I just bought would have never been in our budget had we lived within 20 minutes of work. So, I spend two hours in the car every single day because that is the house I want to go home to, it is the lifestyle I want to have, and it is the place I want to raise our future children. My producer and her husband similarly worked through this decision a couple months ago, and they bought the cutest historical home outside Nashville where they are actually saving on their mortgage, compared to the rent they had been paying. Which is rare in 2024. All of this to say, buying an affordable home is possible. All the posts and articles that claim the American Dream of owning a home is completely dead just aren’t true. It might be harder, but it is still possible. You can buy a house, but you must figure out what your priorities are. If you are willing to make some sacrifices, like driving longer to work, it’s entirely possible. If, however, you don’t want to commute, that is ok, and while the market is truly terrible, renting can still be a mostly affordable option. The point is, you have to decide what you value and what is most important to you. You must choose where you are going to put your money. That may be different than everyone else around you — and that is ok. For plenty of people, buying a home isn’t the most important next move and they choose to prioritize other things. For example, after college, my husband moved to New York City for five years where he made incredible connections and created an invaluable network for his career. Instead of buying a house at 23 with a stupidly low interest rate, he chose to move and the return on his career investment was significant. But still, he knew NYC was not where he wanted to be long term, so when those five years lapsed, he reprioritized, moved to Nashville, bought a starter home, met me, and the rest is history. Now, I do not give these examples to trivialize this problem because there is no getting around the fact the American middle class is disappearing, which has never been the case before. I share these anecdotes to hopefully provide a feeling of empowerment and a reality that there are other options. Life is not as black and white as it may seem on X. I wish everyone could just buy whatever house they want, but that’s not how the world works. It’s true that life isn’t fair and it never has been. But if you are honest with yourself about what you really value, you’ll be able to prioritize to make life more of what you want. Then, all it takes is some creative, unconventional thinking in determining and realizing there is a way to your goals.

House Republicans this week demanded documents from YouTube as part of an investigation into who pressured it to change its policies to prohibit certain videos involving guns. The House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government wrote to lawyers for Alphabet, the parent company of Google and Youtube, saying that information suggests that “YouTube’s decision to change its firearms policy may have been influenced by government officials and third parties interested in suppressing certain Second Amendment-related content.” On Tuesday, new YouTube policies went into effect pertaining to videos about firearms, saying that “certain content showing how to remove safety devices will be prohibited. Content showing the use of homemade firearms, automatic firearms, and certain firearm accessories will be age restricted.” Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, the far-left prosecutor who targeted former President Donald Trump, said the change was “in response to advocacy” from his office. The line of questioning highlights a pattern in which the government seemingly circumvents the First Amendment by manipulating private companies, who are not required to respect free speech in the same way the government is.  Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said that documents obtained by the committee showed that “the federal government has pressured Alphabet to censor certain content, including content that did not violate YouTube’s content moderation policies.” His letter says a subpoena issued in February 2023 compelled “Alphabet to produce communications between Alphabet and the Executive Branch, internal Alphabet communications discussing communications from the Executive Branch, and Alphabet communications with third parties that may have been working with the Executive Branch,” and that the subpoena was “continuing in nature.” “To develop effective legislation, such as the possible enactment of new statutory limits on the Executive Branch’s ability to work with Big Tech to restrict the circulation of content and deplatform users, the Committee and the Select Subcommittee must first understand how and to what extent the Executive Branch coerced and colluded with companies and other intermediaries to censor speech,” it said. YouTube did not immediately return a request for comment. The Daily Wire and The Federalist are suing the State Department for a similar move, arguing that when the government uses private companies as its proxies, it is still violating the Constitution. U.S. District Judge Jeremy D. Kernodle rejected early motions by the government, recalling that “if there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.” The House Small Business Committee says the State Department is hiding records showing the extent of its ties to firms like NewsGuard and the Global Disinformation Index, which make lists of news outlets that are used as blacklists by advertisers. The House Oversight Committee is also focused on NewsGuard, which has received federal money. Jordan’s committee is also honed in on the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), part of a trade group consisting of major companies that run advertisements, and which he says may have violated antitrust laws by having the companies coordinate to blacklist conservative news outlets.

Whoopi Goldberg lashed out on Thursday at Louisiana’s new law mandating that all public school classrooms — from kindergarten to state-funded universities — display the Ten Commandments. Goldberg made her comments on Thursday’s broadcast of ABC’s “The View,” and she argued that if people wanted their children to see the Ten Commandments on the wall, they should “send them to a religious school.” WATCH: Reacting to Louisiana’s law mandating the Ten Commandments in the classroom, Whoopi demands religious folks “get out of my school!” pic.twitter.com/lJkShI9ZoX — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 20, 2024 “You’re telling me you’re concerned about children learning things — one of the things that you don’t seem to understand is I have the same respect for my child that I have for yours,” Goldberg began. “I’m not asking you to believe what I believe. I’m not asking your kid to believe what I believe.” “Public schools public school,” she insisted. “That means everybody can go to public school. I don’t understand why — if you want your child to have a religious education, send them to a religious school! There’s nothing stopping you.” “Get out of my pocket, get out of my body, and get out of my school!” she shouted. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP Goldberg also pointed out the fact that the United States is made up of many religions, asking whether classrooms would also display parts of the Quran or Buddhist teachings. Co-host Sunny Hostin said that her main concern was that a similar law in Kentucky had already been struck down by the Supreme Court. “We’re talking about nearly identical laws, and half a century ago they said it wasn’t okay. What he’s banking on is this reactive, partisan Supreme Court will overturn precedent and say, now, that this is okay. We should be very afraid of that,” Hostin warned.

A group of more than two dozen House Republicans unveiled this week a resolution that aims to rescind January 6 Committee subpoenas against several associates of former President Donald Trump. The measure also seeks to withdraw recommendations that these individuals be held in contempt of Congress and require the House speaker to notify the Department of Justice (DOJ) of these actions. At focus are four ex-White House officials who refused to cooperate with subpoenas: Stephen Bannon, Peter Navarro, Dan Scavino, and Mark Meadows. The DOJ declined to prosecute Scavino and Meadows, but did open up cases and secure convictions against the others. Former White House trade adviser Navarro is serving a four-month prison sentence. Bannon, Trump’s former chief strategist who left the White House in 2017, is slated to report to prison on July 1. Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO) announced the resolution on Tuesday, noting that it had 24 co-sponsors, including Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY), Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), and Chip Roy (R-TX). “The subpoenas that were issued were legally insufficient and should be rescinded, and the contempt of Congress referrals based on those subpoenas should be withdrawn,” Burlison said in a statement. Democrats led the House when the now-defunct January 6 Committee ran its investigation. Two Republicans, now-former Reps. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), served on the panel. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), who served as chairman of the January 6 Committee, pushed back against the bid to revoke the subpoenas and withdraw the contempt of Congress recommendations. “Thankfully, this resolution will have no impact,” he told Fox News, adding that the subpoenas “were litigated exhaustively, with contempt of Congress charges going as high as the Supreme Court.” It remains to be seen whether the resolution will even be considered by the GOP-led House, but its co-sponsors would like to see a vote. “The Republican House should, by an official vote of the House, declare the subpoenas on Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro to be illegitimate and repealed,” Massie said. He added, “If Congress does so, it will be an effective and needed repudiation of the sham January 6th committee.”

‘He was genuine and truly wanted to know how our family was coping,’ Patty Morin said

'Biden's campaign chose to select the right podium position'

'Handout to major political donors'

'Is he ignoring them or having a fantasy?'