I’ll take ‘Things I never thought I’d hear for $1000.' A transgender identifying female (so...a male) sued his ex-boyfriend after the boyfriend threw out the tranny's “preserved testicles.” Reduxx Magazine posted video testimony from Brianna Kingsley‚ who sought the return of the testicles and $6‚500 for damages over the loss of “deez nuts.” What the heck has our society come to!? Kingsley‚ a biological man‚ identifies as a Muslim woman and lives in the Detroit‚ Michigan area. Apparently Kinglsey had his testicles removed as part of his gender-affirming “care”‚ and now wants them back.  Though the story broke back in August‚ Reduxx’s post of the court hearing has re-upped concern - and mockery - over how delusional our society has gotten. “She had had her testicles removed‚” William Wojciechowsk‚ the ex‚ said in the hearing. “I believe if I recalled correctly‚ it was March 23 and they were left in the fridge. I wanted nothing to do with it. I thought it was odd but I try not to judge because everybody’s a little different.” Yeah‚ no kidding. It’s weird enough that Kingsley wanted to get his testicles removed to further convince himself that he’s a girl - but to keep them in the fridge? “Odd” is putting it nicely. “They were there from April of 2022 until July of 2023‚ when I disposed of them‚” Wojciechowsk told the judge.  The video cut to Kingsley talking again. He stood there in a turban‚ holding a fluffy dog and said‚ “that physical anomaly [the balls] has been a point of stress in my life since I can remember and my middle name that I chose is Dee because my whole life I’ve been called Big D. I’m Dee from the D and I thank God that these ‘deez nuts’ were extracted and they were put into a biohazard bag.”  “For s**ts and giggles‚ I put them in a mason jar and I put them in the fridge next to the eggs‚” Kingsley confessed. A trans-identified male in Michigan is suing his ex-partner for the return of his preserved testicles‚ which he had kept in their shared fridge following his genital surgery. Brianna Kingsley‚ who identifies as a Muslim woman‚ is demanding $6‚500 for the loss of "deez nuts." pic.twitter.com/0JRVQiqRb4 — REDUXX (@ReduxxMag) February 8‚ 2024 Firstly‚ it always baffles me when transgender people‚ who clearly don’t listen to anything the Bible or God says‚ thank God for His assistance in their transgender “care.” Secondly‚ imagine opening up the fridge to make an omelet. You reach to grab a carton of eggs and your hand grazes a jar with year-old surgically extracted human testicles inside. Related: ‘Dragging’ Kids Away from Normalcy: Groomers on the Go That takes cringe‚ and honestly the idea of a gag reflex‚ to a whole new level. But still‚ Kingsley's suing over the supposed loss. “The amount that I’m claiming is for the damages of not having these nuts with me‚” Kingsley added confidently.  What‚ was he going to snuggle them when going to sleep or something?  In response to the video posted by Reduxx‚ many individuals were in disbelief. “HOW IS THIS REAL‚” one commentedwhile another asked‚ “Is this satire?”  Others said things like‚ “Gender Ideology exacerbates existing mental disorders  and creates them where they didn't exist before‚” while another said‚ “What a time to be alive!” It really is unfortunate that this story isn’t satire. I hope Mr. Brianna gets his nuts back safe and sound and then checks himself into the psych ward. Follow us on Twitter/X: Woke of The Weak: They're here‚ they're queer‚ they're coming for your children. pic.twitter.com/LFIaGkr3pM — MRCTV (@mrctv) February 6‚ 2024  

We know about CNN Republicans and MSNBC Republicans‚ but there are also NPR Republicans. Brendan Buck‚ a former aide to Speakers John Boehner and Paul Ryan‚ is a semi-regular pundit on Meet the Press. On Thursday‚ Morning Edition anchor Steve Inskeep kept asking Buck to describe Republicans as insincere extremists who don't want to govern. Buck played right along‚ calling conservatives "post-policy."  Buck lamented that old-guard leaders like Mitch McConnell don't get enough respect: BUCK: The Senate is starting to feel a lot more like the House‚ where you have a bunch of more conservative senators who are‚ frankly‚ undermining their leadership at every turn and then turning around and saying‚ gosh‚ isn't our leadership bad? So it just feels like there isn't enough respect and trust in leadership right now to assert their will in the way that Mitch McConnell has been able to do for many‚ many years. INSKEEP: I'm wanting to argue with the labeling of conservative for some of the more conservative lawmakers. This bill that was rejected would seem from the outside to have a lot that you'd want if you're worried about border security - 1‚500 more border agents‚ more courts so that people get asylum hearings a lot faster and get kicked out a lot faster if they shouldn't be here‚ a lot of things like that - maybe things you don't like as much as well‚ but a lot. Did none of this interest Republican lawmakers at all? BUCK: So I think what we're running into is the party being somewhat post-policy‚ if you will‚ where the policy almost doesn't matter - at least it comes in second to the politics. NPR won't bring someone on to argue that the Biden policy has been a disaster‚ and that this bill would make it worse. That doesn't make Steve Inskeep feel morally superior.  INSKEEP: Democrats now will say - in fact‚ are saying - this shows Republicans don't actually care about border security policies. I feel that you're telling me that is functionally true. There may be Republicans who care‚ but politically they can't afford to care. BUCK: I think they care. They're just not willing to do anything that would potentially trigger a primary challenge or get them cross with their activists in their districts. This is why this issue never gets resolved‚ is‚ frankly‚ there is no space for Republicans to do anything that would include Democrat support as well.  Inskeep asked about Ukraine: "Do Republicans feel so strongly now against funding for Ukraine that there's really no deal they would ever accept to do that?" Buck said there's still a possibility for Ukraine aid‚ that McConnell if most interested in that (more than the border). Then Inskeep suggested conservatives are pro-Putin:  INSKEEP: I'm trying to figure out the heart of the Republican resistance to funding for Ukraine‚ and I know there's a lot of reasons‚ but if you tried to find a basic reasons‚ is it just that Biden is for it‚ so they need to be against it? Is it that they think that Vladimir Putin is a great guy? Do they really think it's all being misspent? I mean‚ what is the bottom line here? BUCK: There is a - has been and is a growing strain of isolationism in the Republican Party. And Donald Trump‚ I think‚ seized on that -- you know‚ his commentary on Iraq‚ however inconsistent it may be. There are a lot of people in the Republican Party and base Republican voters who don't like the idea of sending us taxpayer money abroad‚ period.  It's quite a contrast with the Steve Inskeep that rolls over for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.   

Colorado had such a bad day before the Supreme Court as it tried to defend its decision to kick Donald Trump off its primary ballot that not even MSNBC and CNN could pretend otherwise. However‚ for MSNBC legal analyst‚ former Obama Solicitor General‚ and self-described “extremist centrist” on Twitter‚ Neal Katyal‚ it wasn’t because their arguments were so bad even the liberals appeared highly skeptical‚ but incompetence on the part of their lawyer. Ana Cabrera wondered if the lawyer’s lack of experience had anything to do with it‚ “Neil‚ you are somebody who's argued before the Supreme Court. We know the challengers here‚ their lawyer Jason Murray‚ this is his first time going before the Supreme Court whereas Trump's lawyers argued five times before. Did you recognize the disparity in terms of their experience there? Or did you feel like both lawyers gave their strongest case and strongest arguments here?”     Katyal didn’t think so‚ arguing even experienced lawyers “mess up arguments.” At the same time‚ he declared that Murray should’ve been more combative with the Court‚ “in a case of this gravity‚ you need to basically call out the other side and you need to call out the Court even and so‚ you need to say about the other side‚ you are gutting the Constitution‚ Donald Trump. What you need to say to the Court is‚ look‚ for years‚ you have staked yourself on strict construction of the document‚ on the original intent of the document.” Trying to insist that the states can add to Article II’s presidential eligibility requirements or that the Fourteenth Amendment gives states the right to determine if somebody engaged in a federal insurrection is quite literally the opposite of the original intent of the document when the latter says in plain English “The Congress shall have power to enforce‚ by appropriate legislation‚ the provisions of this article.”  The original case in Colorado was heard by seven Democratic appointees and even there the ruling was only 4-3. Nevertheless‚ Katyal continued to lament‚ “The original intent of the document is so clear against Donald Trump. You need to be using their methodology that they've used to say‚ look‚ you have to be consistent with what you have said before. We heard none of that today. I'm not sure why. That makes it‚ frankly‚ a really easy case for the U.S. Supreme Court to decide in favor of Donald Trump.” Maybe because MSNBC's legal fantasies are not real. Ultimately‚ the problem for Murray is that his client is taking a position that is so preposterous that you almost feel bad for him… Almost. Here is a transcript for the February 8 show: MSNBC Trump Ballot Battle 2/8/2024 12:25 PM ET ANA CABRERA: Neil‚ you are somebody who's argued before the Supreme Court. We know the challengers here‚ their lawyer‚ Jason Murray‚ this is his first time going before the Supreme Court‚ whereas Trump's lawyers argued five times before. Did you recognize the disparity in terms of their experience there? Or did you feel like both lawyers gave their strongest case and strongest arguments here? NEAL KATYAL: Yeah‚ I don't want to chalk it up to experience. Like‚ you know‚ as you say‚ I have had a lot of experience‚ but I’ll certainly mess up arguments‚ so experience is no‚ you know‚ guarantee of anything.  So‚ I don't want to say that‚ but I do want to say in a case of this gravity‚ you need to basically call out the other side and you need to call out the Court even and so‚ you need to say about the other side‚ you are gutting the Constitution‚ Donald Trump. What you need to say to the Court is‚ look‚ for years‚ you have staked yourself on strict construction of the document‚ on the original intent of the document.  The original intent of the document is so clear against Donald Trump. You need to be using their methodology that they've used to say‚ look‚ you have to be consistent with what you have said before. We heard none of that today. I'm not sure why. That makes it‚ frankly‚ a really easy case for the U.S. Supreme Court to decide in favor of Donald Trump. 

The world’s second richest man‚ X owner Elon Musk‚ is exposing and avenging diversity‚ equity and inclusion (DEI) discrimination in a series of damning posts on X.  Musk revealed on Tuesday alleged internal documents from Disney‚ showing what he characterized as the “mandatory‚ institutionalized racism and sexism” in Disney’s inclusion standards. Stunningly‚ Musk followed up with a major promise: the individuals whom Disney discriminated against will receive legal support. “Here is the full racist‚ sexist‚ etc discriminatory set of laws enforced by Disney’s DEI Gestapo‚” Musk said‚ also sharing a screenshot of the alleged Disney document. The purported document showed Disney offered preferential treatment to “underrepresented groups” and other victims of DEI. The alleged documents require that “50% or more” of actors‚ writers‚ and other employees of Disney productions “come from underrepresented groups‚” while placing other discriminatory burdens on potential productions.  Despite these requirements‚ which Musk called “laboriously vile” and “illegal” the other documents strenuously deny that this decision will harm people who do not belong to an underrepresented group. The documents gaslight employees by arguing that removing “systemic barriers” will achieve these mandatory goals.  The same documents claimed that productions are “encouraged” to hire job candidates who lack the needed experience.”  In other words‚ move out of the way‚ we’ve got to reach our 50 percent quota.  Musk has already offered his support to former The Mandalorian actress Gina Carano‚ who sued Disney for firing her with a statement criticizing her social media use. In early 2021‚ Disney fired Carano and denounced “her social media posts denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities” in the statement on her dismissal. Carano thanked Musk for providing her a lawyer to investigate her firing and blasted Disney in a Feb. 6 post on X.  “It has been difficult to move forward with the lies &; labels stuck on me‚ backed &; encouraged by the most powerful entertainment company in the world‚” Carano wrote. “I am grateful someone has come to my defense in such a powerful way &; look forward to clearing my name.” Musk went on to tie Disney’s obsessive focus on DEI and the onerous requirements from these documents to recent Disney box office failures: “No wonder most of their content produced over the past several years has sucked. Just trying to navigate the DEI minefield is going to crush the creative process!” Musk said that this ideology “crushes the spirit” of those who seek to “make great art.”  Conservatives are under attack! Contact The Walt Disney Company at TWDC.corp.communications@disney.com and demand the company stop shoving woke propaganda down the American people’s throat

YouTube CEO Neal Mohan is being openly brazen about his platform’s intentions to interfere in the 2024 presidential election.  In a letter published Feb. 6‚ titled “4 Big bets for 2024‚” Mohan assured the world that Google-owned YouTube would be manipulating and controlling what people see. YouTube ensures alleged “authoritative sources are prominent in [users’] searches and recommendations” when they search election news. Not only that‚ Mohan wrote that YouTube has “rigorously enforced” policies to suppress free exchange of ideas that offend the leftist YouTube overlords‚ like the nebulous concept of “hate speech.” The irony was that Mohan had the audacity to praise YouTube’s efforts against “election interference‚” despite being one of a slew of Big Tech platforms that repeatedly censored President Joe Biden’s political opponents in the lead-up to the 2024 election‚ as MRC Free Speech America research has shown.  As “more than 50 countries will hold elections this year‚” Mohan wrote‚ YouTube is committed to restricting a free information flow. Instead of allowing citizens to analyze information themselves‚ Mohan boasted how YouTube would be actively promoting news sources it considers “authoritative.” Specifically‚ wrote Mohan‚ “We’re ensuring that when people look for election news on YouTube‚ authoritative sources are prominent in their searches and recommendations. We spent years investing in a playbook to responsibly manage content” on YouTube‚ including alleged “hate speech.” This is the same platform that had to update its COVID-19 censorship policy quietly after some of its axiomatic positions on masking‚ vaccination‚ and social distancing turned out to be erroneous. But Mohan wasn’t finished. “We quickly evolve and adapt when new challenges emerge‚ and we’ll do so again as generative AI makes more sophisticated deepfakes possible and raises new questions‚” he pledged. Ultimately‚ Mohan’s letter certainly raises a few questions of its own. His boasts about election manipulation and censorship are particularly concerning given a Media Research Center poll that found in November 2020 that 17 percent of then-presidential candidate Joe Biden’s voters in seven swing states would not have voted for him had they known the scandals purposefully censored by Big Tech and the legacy media. YouTube is apparently looking for a repeat of 2020 in 2024.  Conservatives are under attack. Contact YouTube here and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

The biker accused of stomping and smashing a car's rear window on a Philadelphia street last fall when children‚ ages 2 and 5‚ were in the back seat and then pointing a gun at their mother and head-butting her after she confronted him pleaded guilty Wednesday‚ the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office said.Cody Heron‚ 27‚ during a pre-trial status hearing pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated assault and one count of possession of an instrument of crime‚ officials said‚ adding that the DA's office announced Heron's conviction Thursday.What's the background?Authorities said Heron and fellow bikers and drivers jammed traffic outside City Hall on Oct. 1 during an unauthorized "meet-up."Nikki Bullock‚ the mother in question‚ told WCAU-TV shortly after the ordeal that she was delivering food with her girlfriend and their two children when the assailant hit her car."They’re not paying attention to lanes. They’re just doing whatever. So I’m turning in the lane‚ and he just hits the side of the car‚" Bullock told WCAU‚ adding that she argued with the biker afterward. Image source: YouTube screenshotShe noted to the station the biker at that point took things to another level‚ hopping up on her car's back bumper and stomping on the rear window before jumping high and smashing through the window with both feet. After Bullock exited the car to confront the biker‚ the biker pointed a gun at her. Bullock told the station‚ "It was just‚ like‚ it was a little gun‚ and at that point‚ my windshield was already broken — so‚ what was he really going to do to me‚ for real?" She continued trying to get in the biker's face‚ and the biker — who was wearing a helmet — head-butted her and shoved her. The DA's office confirmed that Heron smashed the car's window‚ head-butted the victim‚ and brandished a firearm at her.Bullock still didn't back down‚ and video shows her shoving the biker back — and he falls sideways along with his two-wheeled ride. Image source: YouTube screenshotAnything else?The DA's office said Heron tried to evade authorities by destroying evidence and "even using another person’s online profile to deflect attention from investigators." Heron's sentencing is scheduled for June 5‚ authorities said.Here's a report about the incident that aired after Heron's arrest: Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A Massachusetts dad asked "where's the parents" as a WFXT-TV camera rolled for its Wednesday story about a supermarket that contacted Medway Middle School to complain about students — around 100 of them — repeatedly wreaking havoc in the store on days when students are dismissed early."Where's the parents?" Eddie Enos asked the station. "That's what I say. Where's the parents?" He added to WFXT hypothetically that if he found out his son was taking part in that kind of behavior‚ it would stop immediately. Image source: YouTube screenshotWhat's the background?“Over the weekend‚ I was contacted by the director of Shaw’s Market‚ who shared alarming information regarding a troubling trend involving our middle school students who visit Shaw’s on half days‚” Principal Amanda Luizzi wrote in an email to parents‚ WFXT said.The station said the email added that "a growing number of students are engaging in disruptive behavior while visiting the store. This includes building ‘forts’ out of paper towels‚ riding in carriages and electric carts‚ knocking over displays‚ and even stealing merchandise. These actions pose a risk to the students involved and customers of Shaw’s. They also reflect poorly on our school community."Luizzi also asked parents to speak with their children‚ WFXT reported: “I am asking all families to partner with the school and have a conversation with their children about the importance of respectful behavior — in Shaw’s‚ in any business in the Plaza‚ and school. Please also speak with students about the potential consequences of their actions should this behavior continue.”A spokesperson for the grocery chain told the station the students' behaviors have been “negatively impacting” shoppers as well. But WFXT added that as of Tuesday‚ the Medford store hadn't implemented a ban on students entering the premises. ‘Alarming’: Mass. middle school asks parents for help as students terrorize Shaw’s grocery store youtu.be How are folks reacting?Over 400 comments have appeared under the WFXT story published on Yahoo! News‚ and the reactions are varied. Here's a sampling:"How is this a school issue?" one commenter wondered. "If the same kids did the same thing on Sunday‚ would their church be responsible? School is dismissed...the school's responsibility for what the kids do should be over. Parents demand full authority over everything that schools do but accept zero responsibility. Call the cops. That is their job.""The school is asking parents to control their kids. The parents are the ones who didn't teach their kids how to behave in the first place‚" another commenter noted. "I wonder how that is going to work?""Walking to and from school is a privilege (unsupervised free time). The school needs to tell the parents that children will stay on campus until picked up by an adult on half days — including unexpected closures‚" another commenter suggested. "Inconvenience the parents for the rest of the school year and see how quick those kids straighten up.""I think it might be worthwhile on half days if an army of parents descended on the store to surprise their little angels‚" another commenter offered."Where are police in this town‚ at the local donut shop?" another commenter asked. "On half days the police should have a presence at this store and take into custody any students [who misbehave] and fine the parents for their child's misbehavior. Perhaps the parents should have to go to the store and clean up the damages their kids have done also. Oh that is right‚ no one is responsible for what their kids do anymore‚ my bad."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Squatters in Atlanta‚ Georgia‚ have taken over more than 1‚200 vacant rental homes‚ according to an estimate from the National Rental Home Council‚ Bloomberg recently reported. The trade group found that squatting appears to be much more prevalent in Atlanta than in other metro area cities in the United States.Many are concerned that the squatting crisis in the city is completely out of control‚ with some homeowners offering the freeloaders money to leave their property. Landlords are being forced to wait six months or more to remove illegal tenants due to overwhelmed sheriff's offices and backlogged court systems‚ according to Bloomberg. Local police currently have their hands tied‚ unable to help homeowners because it is considered a civil matter.Simon Frost‚ the chief executive for Tiber Capital Group‚ which manages homes for a rental business‚ wrote a letter to local authorities urging them to help combat the ongoing illegal tenant crisis‚ the news outlet reported."Unlawful occupants often brandish weapons and threaten neighbors‚ including children‚" Frost wrote. "This problem is rapidly growing. We are concerned about the impact that this is having on safety and livability of our local neighborhoods."In October‚ a home in a South Fulton neighborhood was converted into an illegal strip club. The illegal occupants took over the residence‚ held parties‚ and kept horses on the property. A SWAT team was eventually deployed to remove the freeloaders. During the raid‚ law enforcement recovered several stolen items‚ including two vehicles‚ a weapon‚ and credit cards. Online rental listings make it easy for squatters to identify vacant homes. WSB-TV reported that some crooks are using the squatting crisis to turn a profit by advertising on social media that they can help freeloading tenants find homes to take over. An Instagram account that Meta has since removed featured a story post explaining how to illegally take up residence in someone's property‚ the news outlet claimed."The company's owners will come out‚ so will the police. The police will tell you there's nothing they can do about it -- squatters rights‚" the story reportedly stated.The social media account advertised a New Year's special‚ including a one-time $1‚400 payment for keys and a bogus lease agreement so squatters could "stack money and turn ya life around."Homeowner Michael Holmes‚ who is a victim of squatting‚ told WSB that the intruder problem in Atlanta has been "a nightmare.""It's like I gave away $200‚000‚ I feel‚" he stated. "If I can't bring this to some type of resolution‚ I'll be in jeopardy of filing bankruptcy.""It makes you feel like‚ 'Why do you play by the rules if everyone doesn't have to?'" Holmes added.State lawmakers recently introduced new legislation‚ House Bill 1017‚ which would empower local police officers to remove trespassers‚ WSB reported. The Georgia Squatter Reform Act would "make it criminal trespassing so the police can come and take them out of the house‚" state Republican Representative Devan Seabaugh stated."House Bill 1017 says to squatters‚ 'No more freeloading‚ no more free rides‚'" said state Republican Representative Matt Reeves. "No more fraud on the paperwork. If you falsify documents and you get caught‚ you're going to serve jail time on that. That's wrong.""These squatters are stealing the American dream‚" he added.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The U.S. Supreme Court heard roughly two hours of arguments Thursday concerning the effort by six Colorado voters to deny their fellow countrymen the opportunity to vote for the Republican front-runner in the 2024 election. Jason Murray‚ a Denver lawyer representing the six voters‚ struggled to make a case for former President Donald Trump's disqualification‚ ostensibly tripping over simple questions and facts. While conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh predictably exposed the various faults in Murray's arguments‚ even left-leaning Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson seemed unimpressed‚ casting doubt over whether Section 3 of the 14th Amendment applies and over whether the Centennial State should determine the fate of the nation. Quick background Six voters backed by a Democrat-aligned group‚ which is helmed by a former Biden official‚ sued in September 2023 to have Trump removed from Colorado ballots in the 2024 election‚ claiming both that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment concerning insurrection applies to Trump and that the former president's actions on Jan. 6‚ 2021‚ qualified. The case was kicked up to the Democratic appointees on the Colorado Supreme Court‚ who ruled in a 4-3 December decision that Trump engaged in an insurrection on Jan. 6‚ is ineligible to be president‚ and cannot therefore appear on the ballot. Trump's legal team appealed the verdict‚ maintaining that the former president did not engage in an insurrection; Section 3 does not apply to the president; the Colorado Supreme Court violated the Electors Clause; and Congress is the proper body to resolve such matters. Murray swings and misses — repeatedly Murray‚ who previously convinced Democratic appointees on the Colorado Supreme Court to declare Trump ineligible to appear on ballots in the state‚ attempted to repeat his success Thursday but soon discovered the road forward had not similarly been ideologically greased. Justice Kagan‚ for instance‚ said to Murray‚ "The question you have to confront is why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States. In other words‚ you know‚ this question of whether a former president is disqualified for insurrection to be president again is — just say it — it sounds awfully national to me." "So whatever means there are to enforce it would suggest that they have to be federal‚ national means‚" continued Kagan. "If you weren't from Colorado and you were from Wisconsin or you were from Michigan and ... what the Michigan secretary of state did is going to make the difference between‚ you know‚ whether candidate A is elected or candidate B is elected. That seems quite extraordinary‚ doesn't it?" "Why should a single state have the ability to make this determination‚ not only for their own citizens‚ but for the rest of the nation?" added Kagan. — (@) Chief Justice John Roberts echoed Kagan's concern‚ suggesting states would likely weaponize such a precedent and proceed to knock other candidates off the ballot‚ reported CNN. "It'll come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election‚" said Roberts. "That's a pretty daunting consequence." Justice Thomas was even less forgiving when questioning Murray. Thomas pressed Murray to cite examples of national candidates who have similarly been disqualified — possibly Confederates running for high office "after Reconstruction and after the compromise of 1877 and during the period of Redeemers." "There were certainly national candidates who were disqualified by Congress refusing to seat them‚" replied Murray. "I understand that‚ but that's not this case‚" Thomas fired back. "States disqualified them; that's what we're talking about here. I understand Congress would not seat them." "Again‚ your honor‚ [the absence of examples] is not surprising because there wouldn't have been — states certainly wouldn't have the authority to remove a sitting—‚" Murray said before being cut off by Thomas. "So what was the purpose of the Section 3? States were sending people. The concern was that the former Confederate states would continue being bad actors‚ and the effort was to prevent them from doing this‚" said Thomas. "And you're saying that ... this also authorized states to disqualify candidates. So what I'm asking you for‚ if you are right‚ [is] what are the examples?" Murray alluded to examples of states excluding candidates from holding state offices‚ but was cut off again by Thomas‚ who said‚ "I understand the states controlling state elections and state positions. What we are talking about are national candidates. ... Do you have any examples of this?" Murray apparently did not. — (@) Justice Kavanaugh indicated there were already mechanisms in place to prevent insurrectionists from holding office‚ intimating Colorado was overreaching. "Some of the rhetoric of your position — I don't think it is your position — but some of the rhetoric of your position seems to suggest unless the states can do this‚ no one can prevent insurrectionists from holding federal office‚" said Kavanaugh. "But obviously Congress has enacted statutes‚ including one still in effect‚ Section 2383 of Title 18 prohibits insurrection; it's a federal criminal statute. And if you're convicted of that‚ you are‚ it says 'shall be disqualified from holding any office.' And so there is a federal statute on the books‚ but President Trump has not been charged with that. So what are we to make of that?" — (@) Kavanaugh also suggested that the effort to remove Trump from the ballot "has the effect of disenfranchising voters to a significant degree." Justice Brown cast doubt on whether the Framers intended Section 3 to be used as Murray argued it should be. "I'm wondering really whether presidential elections were such a circumstance‚ that the Framers actually envisioned states enforcing Section 3 with respect to presidential elections as opposed to senatorial elections‚ representatives‚ the sort of more local concerns‚" said Brown. "The more broad point I want to make is that what is very clear from the history is that the Framers were concerned about charismatic rebels who might rise through the ranks up to and including the presidency of the United States‚" said Murray. "But then why didn't they put the word 'president' in the very enumerated list in Section 3?" asked Brown. "The thing that really is troubling to me is — I totally understand your argument — but they were listing people that were barred‚ and president is not there. So I guess that just makes me worried that maybe they weren't focusing on the president." Brown added‚ "The fact that electors of vice president and president are there suggests that really what [the Framers] thought was‚ 'If we're worried about the charismatic person‚ we're going to bar insurrectionist electors and therefore that person is never going to rise." — (@) Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

My health fell apart in 2020. It was a challenging year for all the familiar reasons; it was also the year I had my first baby. Certainly the shrill political climate‚ state-mandated isolation‚ and media-fueled race riots didn’t make pregnancy any easier. Add to that a difficult birth and the prolonged sleeplessness of having a colicky kid‚ and I was in for a grim postpartum fall. Where had my spark of life gone? How could I recapture it? It struck me that if I was going to thrive in this new vocation‚ I needed to view motherhood‚ in some part‚ as a skill set. I was so overwhelmed and exhausted that I felt as if I were drowning‚ swept away by a current I had no will to fight. Or better yet‚ I was like that cartoon dog in the popular meme‚ sipping coffee in a haze as the flames rose around me: “This is fine.” This was also motherhood‚ apparently. I knew some women found it grueling enough to stop at one or two‚ but I had more ambitious plans for my fertility‚ plans that clearly required more mential and physical resources than I currently possessed. So to the mirror I slouched for that proverbial long look. There I saw a troublingly complacent mediocrity. My days lacked structure. My choices lacked discipline. Less than a decade before‚ I had been an elite athlete‚ taking pride in my abiility to perform at a consistently high level. How had I let myself get so soft? I loved my child and my family‚ but I’d forgotten what it meant to be excellent. Where had my spark of life gone? How could I recapture it? It struck me that if I was going to thrive in this new vocation‚ I needed to view motherhood‚ in some part‚ as a skill set. It is of course more than that‚ but on the practical level‚ home economics comes down to habit. I realized that I needed to cultivate the same level of discipline and dedication that I once did for the sake of athletic pursuit. So I racked my brain to remember the principles that had served me so well in the past. Retraining my brain to operate like an athlete’s made me a better mom. Here’s what worked for me.Begin at your level The first principle of learning a new skill is to accept failing at it. Practice means doing something badly‚ then less badly‚ then less badly still‚ over and over again. Having the humility to suffer through these first repetitions is what leads to competence and‚ ultimately‚ mastery. Like many of us‚ I'd learned disdain for homemaking‚ seeing it as a collection of mindless chores. In reality‚ running a household requires scrupulous time management and organization‚ among other acquirable skills. Understanding this allowed me to take responsibility for — and satisfaction from — learning to do it well. Find a coach There would be no Mikhail Baryshnikov without Alexander Pushkin. Every true master of a craft is the product of tradition. As a mom‚ this means seeking wisdom from friends‚ elders‚ and yes‚ the occasional YouTube mommy vlogger. Leila Lawler‚ mother and grandmother of many‚ took years to compile a series of advice on keeping an orderly and spiritually well-centered home in her "Summa Domestica." I also recommend Fly Lady Method for cleaning and Ina Garten for cooking and entertaining. Accept sacrifice Athletes have to train. This means missing out on the some of the fun enjoyed by your non-athlete peers. Did skipping all of those pool parties give me FOMO? Sure‚ but it also taught me to accept early on that a life lived in pursuit of a particular excellence will necessarily set you apart. I also discovered how rewarding friendships with travelers on the same narrow path can be. Too often our culture trains us to think of motherhood as deprivation — of freedom‚ of identity‚ of time. Far better to understand it as a vocation‚ requiring sacrifice but also offering rich rewards. We shouldn't confuse healthy skepticism with resentment of excellence. Some moms may indeed have leveled up. Cross-train It isn’t uncommon for wide receivers to practice ballet in order to perfect their jumping skills. Implementing the right kind of exercise can complement an athlete’s main focus‚ as well as prevent injury and increase neuroplasticity. As a mom‚ I believe it is important 1) to get regular exercise and 2) to maintain outside hobbies or interests. These may seem unwelcome additions to an already overstuffed life‚ but time and energy tend to compound when you invest a little in yourself. Find something that strengthens your body and feeds your spirit. For me it's lifting weights and reading Jane Austen. Strive for continuous improvement Something I've noticed in every high-level athlete I’ve ever known: They never rest on their laurels. The best people in the room always believe they could be a little bit better. Should we think of motherhood as a competition? No‚ not if that means obsessively comparing ourselves to every well-staffed‚ trust-funded homesteading influencer. But we shouldn't confuse healthy skepticism with resentment of excellence. Some moms may indeed have leveled up. While the reflex to dismiss their posts as showing off is understandable‚ we shouldn't be too quick to throw out the baby with the bathwater (we can all agree that would be lackluster parenting). There could be something worth attaining amidst all the performative unattainability. Perfection is a moving goalpost‚ but that’s a good thing. Stay the course. Trust the plan. Motherhood‚ like anything else worth doing‚ will never stop surprising you with how much more there is to know.