Trump won decisively

This week President Joe Biden invoked the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to prohibit oil and gas drilling in most of America’s offshore areas, in perpetuity—or so he thinks. President-elect Donald Trump called the order “ridiculous” and pledged to reverse it immediately. That’s precisely what Trump should do, but it won’t be easy. In 2019, a federal judge in Alaska tossed out Trump’s revocation of a similar (though far more modest) Obama-era withdrawal, holding that Trump had exceeded his authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. While that decision lost most of its relevance when Biden’s election mooted the appeal, any similar effort by Trump will be challenged on the same legal theory. Section 12(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act provides: “The President of the United States may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the outer Continental Shelf.” The district court reasoned that because the provision doesn’t mention revocation, a withdrawal “without specific time limit” can’t be revoked except by an act of Congress. In other words, Biden would have no power to modify a withdrawal he announced this week, even though no private rights or obligations were impacted. That defies common sense. The evident purpose of Section 12(a) was to make clear that the president has discretion to not lease any particular area, a natural incident of executive authority. The notion that the power to do something doesn’t imply the power to undo it sounds like it could be a canon handed down from ancient Rome, but there is no such canon. If there were, the president’s power to appoint officials wouldn’t include the power to remove them. Congress’ power to establish lower federal courts wouldn’t include the power to dissolve them. The power of agencies to modify or rescind prior rules and regulations could be called into question in thousands of instances. But the Supreme Court has consistently recognized the power to undo or modify prior actions as implied in all of those instances, suggesting if anything the opposite canon: The power to do something necessarily implies the power to undo it. And even in the context of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, where withdrawals have been rare, President George W. Bush modified several prior withdrawals with no objection from Congress or the courts. Indeed the district court’s interpretation would plunge the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act into major constitutional problems. If the president can withdraw all the areas under the act from disposition for all time until Congress passes a new law, that would mean that the president in effect has authority to repeal the law altogether. But repealing a law requires the power to make law, and the president has no such power. The president can only exercise legislative powers under delegation of legislative authority from Congress, and the Supreme Court has said that such delegations must have “intelligible principles” to guide the president’s action.  If the president could permanently withdraw any and all the areas subject to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act in his unfettered discretion, the law would fail that basic test. This is all the more true given the intelligible principle enshrined in the law’s explicit purpose: the “expedited exploration and development” of those areas. The Supreme Court also requires Congress to have spoken clearly in statute before the president claims an unheralded power to transform a major part of the American economy. Its “major questions doctrine” prohibits courts from finding such sweeping powers in ambiguous statutes. All the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act says is that the president may withdraw offshore from development “from time to time,” which implies flexibility, not permanence, and which, as even the district court conceded, renders the statute ambiguous. Legal issues aside, one marvels at how short-sighted and self-defeating Biden’s withdrawal would be. In the long run the move would have no measurable impact on climate; its main impact would be to preserve vast fossil resources for future generations. In the short term it merely helps oil companies to maximize profits by limiting production, which they would readily agree to do on their own if it weren’t a criminal violation of the antitrust laws. The climate lobby still has not grasped that curtailing the supply of an essential commodity for which demand is overwhelming only makes people pay more for it. That’s why Biden spent much of his presidency denying responsibility for rising gas prices. But as the 2024 election showed, people weren’t fooled. His actions this week prove that higher prices were always part of his plan. ©2025 Tribune Content Agency, LLC. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. Originally published by ArcaMax The post Trump Should Reverse Biden’s Offshore Drilling Ban appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Saving the Best For Last: Sunday Reflection

Tomorrow, when you listen to the establishment media’s Inauguration Day coverage, you likely won’t hear journalists celebrate the incoming Republican President Donald Trump. And it’s not just their unique hostility to Trump — a deep dive into the MRC’s archives shows liberal reporters and anchors have been ardent participants in the so-called “honeymoon” for new Democratic Presidents, but provide a much chillier reception when it’s a Republican President being sworn into office. Back in 1993, for example, the weekly newsmagazines cheered the arrival of incoming Democratic President Bill Clinton. Newsweek’s Howard Fineman enthused: “There’s no doubting that the nation is about to be led by its first sensitive male chief executive.” Time’s Richard Corliss hit the same note: “Clinton is a prime communicator, a beacon of middle-class charisma, a lover of being loved, a believer in the importance — perhaps the primacy — of image, metaphor, style....This huggy-bear President needs to feel the electromagnetism of approval — but in a New Age way.” Four years later, Los Angeles Times television writer Howard Rosenberg was still smitten. “His sturdy jaw precedes him. He smiles from sea to shining sea. Is this President a candidate for Mt. Rushmore or what?” Rosenberg wrote in a review of Clinton’s second inaugural address in 1997. In 2001, the media weren’t nearly as thrilled at incoming Republican President George W. Bush. During her network’s live inauguration coverage, NBC’s Maria Shriver lectured incoming National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice that Bush would have “to reach out to the millions of people who felt disenfranchised by this election, who don’t feel that he’s their President yet?” And in 2005, journalists huffed that Bush’s inauguration was a waste of money. “On World News Tonight/Sunday, President Bush prepares for his second inauguration. In a time of war and natural disaster, is it time for a lavish celebration?” ABC’s Terry Moran griped four days before the swearing-in. Then came Obama, Trump and Biden. If the media’s partisan tilt had been easy to spot during the earlier Clinton/Bush era, it became an in-your-face assault starting in 2009. An effervescent media giddily celebrated Barack Obama’s arrival that year: “Never have so many people shivered so long with such joy,” correspondent Bill Weir gushed during ABC’s live “news” coverage. Trump’s inauguration eight years later was met with contempt. “I thought it was shockingly divisive for an inaugural,” NBC’s Chuck Todd whined. And journalists openly celebrated Joe Biden’s takeover in 2021. “We’ve gone from indecency to decency,” MSNBC’s Joy Reid declared during her network’s live coverage four years ago. The media’s partisan pattern is so firmly established, it would be a shock if any journalist has kind words to say for the President affirmed by more than 77 million voters. In anticipation of Monday’s second inauguration of Donald J. Trump, here’s a look back at the most outrageous media quotes from the previous four presidential inaugurals, all from the archives of the Media Research Center:   2009 ■ “A new day is dawning here in the nation’s capital on the eve of the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States...Does it get any better, or more beautiful, or more spectacular, than this?”— Co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez opening CBS’s Early Show, January 19, 2009. ■ “This is one of the great opportunities in journalism to cover history in the face. We’re going to see history in the face and when you get up tomorrow morning I recommend you stay tuned all day because I don’t think you’re going to stop seeing history being made....It’s going to be the honor of our lifetimes to be here on the Washington Mall.”— MSNBC’s Chris Matthews previewing his network’s inauguration coverage, January 19, 2009 Hardball. ■ “We know that wind can make a cold day feel colder, but can national pride make a freezing day feel warmer? It seems to be the case because regardless of the final crowd number estimates, never have so many people shivered so long with such joy. From above, even the seagulls must have been awed by the blanket of humanity.”— ABC’s Bill Weir on World News, January 20, 2009. ■ “What a day it was. It may take days or years to really absorb the significance of what happened to America today....When he [Barack Obama] finally emerged, he seemed, even in this throng, so solitary, somber, perhaps already feeling the weight of the world, even before he was transformed into the leader of the free world....The mass flickering of cell phone cameras on the mall seemed like stars shining back at him.”— Correspondent Andrea Mitchell on the January 20, 2009 NBC Nightly News. 2013 ■ “The Second Coming. America Expects. Can He Deliver?”— Headline for Newsweek’s “Inauguration 2013" cover, January 18, 2013. ■ “Here in Washington the excitement is already beginning. Those marching bands getting ready for their parade, the caterers, 10,000 eggs for one hotel. And the whole city has a smile on its face.”— Anchor Diane Sawyer talking about Obama’s inauguration during a live special report, January 20, 2013. ■ “I thought it was a marvelous speech and it’s brave and it’s bold and I think it’s going to play well in history.”— Historian Douglas Brinkley on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360, January 21, 2013, reviewing Obama’s inauguration speech. ■ “He is a president renewed in office by the votes of 65 million Americans. He is a president with a purpose....Change — this time around that word means something else to Barack Obama. He used his second inauguration to make an audacious claim that the coalition that reelected him — younger, more diverse, non-native, more socially liberal — is the next America, the rising generation, and he spoke directly to and for them....A man, a president with a purpose and an agenda, a progressive agenda, no question about it.”— Co-anchor Terry Moran on ABC’s Nightline, January 21. 2017 ■ “If, as I fear, we see the White House transformed into a bog of scandals flowing from an unprincipled narcissist, we as a nation will be more appreciative of a first family that set an impeccable example for all the world.”— New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof in January 19, 2017 article “Missing Barack Obama Already.” ■ “I have to say, I think it will go down in history as one of the most radical speeches ever given by a president.”— Host Jake Tapper on CNN’s live coverage of Trump’s inauguration, January 20, 2017. ■ “I thought it was shockingly divisive for an inaugural....He insulted — at points, insulted almost every living president that was there to witness his inaugural, which, to me, was so stunning.”—  NBC Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd on the January 20, 2017 Nightly News. ■ “The new President also repeating that our guiding principle will be ‘America First,’ ‘America First.’ We know how he has used that as a campaign slogan, that does also have very dark echoes in American history. There was an America First Committee that formed in this country, hundreds of thousands of people in this country, some of the richest businessmen in the country who were part of it, they were formed to keep us out of World War II. They were infiltrated by the Nazis, many of them are anti-Semitic, part of why they weren’t alarmed by Hitler’s rise in Germany. The America First Committee is something that means a specific thing in this country, to re-purpose it now, not that far down the historical path. It’s hard. It’s hard to hear.”— Host Rachel Maddow during MSNBC’s live coverage of Trump’s inauguration, January 20, 2017. ■ “But I’m thinking when he said today ‘America First’ it was not just the racial, I mean the, um, I shouldn’t say racial, the Hitlerian background to it. But it was the message I kept thinking, what is [British Prime Minister] Theresa May thinking this morning, when she picks up the papers and goes ‘My God, what did he just say, he said America first, what happened to the special relationship?’”— MSNBC’s Chris Matthews during live coverage of Trump’s inauguration, January 20, 2017. 2021 ■ “He [Joe Biden] gave kind of inaugural address our Presidents used to give, as hopeful as the man delivering it, yet an honest reflection of a great country at its modern-day low point: Beset by two viruses, one a pandemic, the other a sickness that has flowed into our politics....The message has gone out that the United States is back and under new management.”— MSNBC’s 11th Hour host Brian Williams during MSNBC’s live coverage of Joe Biden’s Inauguration, January 20, 2021. ■ “Joe Biden had to deliver the speech of his life, and he did. In my lifetime, I have never seen a more challenging inaugural address....What he did in about 21 minutes was absolutely astonishing under these incredibly challenging circumstances.”— MSNBC’s The Last Word host Lawrence O’Donnell on MSNBC’s live coverage of Joe Biden’s Inauguration, January 20, 2021. ■ Co-anchor George Stephanopoulos: “Most of us will remember where we were when we heard Joe Biden take the oath of office, give his inaugural address....Echoes of Abe Lincoln.”...Correspondent Byron Pitts: “Watching this moment, today’s inauguration felt more like a church service, right? And we see there, right after the sermon, the congregation doesn’t want to go home. People are hugging, shaking hands. I thought from Joe Biden today, certainly he was commander-in-chief, but he was also papa-in-chief. He gave a speech to comfort the nation.”— ABC News’s live coverage of Joe Biden Inauguration, January 20, 2021. ■ “We’ve gone from indecency to decency….We’ve gone from what can only be called idolatry and false religion under Trump, this worship of greed and this lust for conquest, one American over another, to really what the religion, the true religion is supposed to be, at least when I grew up in church….We try to love our fellow man, we try to be brothers and sisters, we try to care about the poor, the immigrant, we try to care about those in need. That’s the creed. That is the Christian creed. It’s what it was supposed to be before it was about stealing the children of migrants.”— MSNBC’s The ReidOut host Joy Reid on MSNBC’s live coverage of Joe Biden’s Inauguration, January 20, 2021. For more examples from our flashback series, which we call the NewsBusters Time Machine, go here.  

I learned I was an adopted kid in 1978, the year I turned 5. Mom read "The Chosen Baby" by Valentina Wasson to my older sister and me (she is also adopted) every night until we outgrew bedtime stories. Our young minds were encoded with the message: You’re the chosen ones; you’re the cool kids. Being adopted was never a source of shame. Our older brothers, our parents’ biological sons, were as much our brothers and we their sisters as if we’d all come out of the same oven. Everyone in the family knew the refrain: We didn’t grow under mom’s heart; we grew in it. We were special and never doubted it. Too much Being adopted made me special, but it did not immunize me from life. I was a precocious and insatiably curious kid who never stopped asking “Why?” My inquiring mind always wanted to know. I wore my parents out, overwhelmed my teachers, and irritated my friends. I was simply “too much” and needed to be contained, for everyone’s sanity. My kindergarten teacher labeled me a show-off and attention-seeker, giving me an unsavory reputation as a challenging child to have in class. That rep followed me like a bad penny all the way through high school. Lord’s Day We were faithful churchgoers, always dressed in our Sunday best. Sunday mornings were for Sunday school and “big church” in the sanctuary, and Sunday evenings were for Bible study; Wednesday worship focused on family, food, and fellowship. This was the weekly routine of good Baptists. I accepted Jesus into my heart the same year I learned I was a chosen child. Now, I was chosen not just by my birth mother and my parents, but by God as well. Full-immersion baptism soon followed, and the deal was done. Except it wasn’t. We stopped attending church the year I turned 12. Differences with church elders on how to steward church funds for a new building created friction with my mom and dad. Combined with leadership’s increasing disapproval of my parents’ popular in-home Bible study, rupture was inevitable. I don’t remember the details, but suffice it to say our family was uninvited from continuing membership with the church. Having been shown the door by the swanky church attended by the “who’s who,” we quickly became personae non gratae in accompanying social circles. It was snobbery at its finest. Make no mistake, Christians have turned intra-group snobbery into an art form. We tried different churches here and there, but nothing ever stuck. Church ceased being a part of my daily life for nearly 30 years. Unsurprisingly, God or, more specifically, the truth in Scripture ceased being a part of my life as well. While my family did not move into unbelief, we did become Chreasters (those who only attend services on Christmas and Easter). By the time I was in college, I slid into religious apathy and ultimately developed a disinterest in all things JC (Jesus Christ). I remained unregenerate. Weighty matters I was a straight-A student, power tumbler, and star cheerleader in high school. I kept the stats for the baseball team, tutored the shortstop, and worked the concession stand. To the outside world, I was an all-American girl. But my reality was a little different. Some years earlier, I learned I was a biologically fat kid (a propensity for obesity was noted in my adoption file) trying to live in a skinny person’s body (the kind all-American girls have). And I was succeeding, until I crested 110 pounds in the ninth grade. Over time, my sense of self-worth was tied not only to how well I contained my “too much” personality but how well I maintained the package in which the “too much” was contained. Cue the shame cycle. Body image issues are brutal, gruesome, and insidious, especially for young girls. They lead us into dark places without resources for coping or escaping. To supplement our self-loathing and self-hatred, we engage in all manner of masochistic behavior, including cutting, disordered eating, drunkenness, and hyper-sexualization. This destructive behavior is a misguided, dangerous, and undisciplined form of self-mortification whose sole purpose is a self-imposed penance for being “less than.” Unlike many monastic orders of old, this process was not for imitating the suffering of Christ in pursuit of spiritual things; it was for accepting the unworthiness of the body in which we were born, even if subconsciously. The dissonance caused by the mixed messages coming at me was impossible to process. On the one hand, I was a special chosen child created in the image of a holy God with an essence and a purpose; on the other hand, I was one brownie away from having an overweight, chubby, or even fat body the mean girls would ridicule and the teenage boys would reject. Which was right? Which mattered most? Me, myself, and I After high school, I bumped around a bit, ultimately landing in Erie, Pennsylvania, with my parents, who’d relocated from my hometown in Florida. Penn State Erie was local, so I began classes in the spring of 1993, a decision that changed my life forever. Just two semesters in, I had been radicalized in the critical theories and loved every minute of it — until I didn’t. Marxism had been mainstreamed on university campuses just a few years before I enrolled. Critical theory had replaced traditional theory, the gender sameness/difference debate was in full swing, and the newly organized LGBT movement had secured political power. The gospel of Freud, Marx, Hegel, and Darwin replaced Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The salvation message of Jesus Christ was mere mythology invented by men to subordinate women. Christianity was a patriarchal discourse keeping women from escaping the evil prisons of the Gnostic demiurge who was blocking their access to the divine within. Radical feminist Mary Daly wrote: “‘God's plan' is often a front for men's plans and a cover for inadequacy, ignorance, and evil.” Her claim seemed far-fetched, but maybe it had a kernel of truth? I started to believe her. I had no clue how to defend my anemic Christianity against these critics or their claims, so I was a sitting duck, a ripe recruit for the consciousness-raising cadres on campus. Waking up to my own oppression as a woman whose body had been ill considered and whose sexuality had been condemned to monogamy felt like the most honest thing I’d done in all of my life. I was laying bare the contradictions of my soul and asking anyone and everyone to help me make sense of them. The church was ineffective; the feminists took me in. Their position was well articulated by Susie Bright: “When a young woman discovers her power, both sexual and intellectual, she unleashes her own voice, her righteousness.” I woke up to my voice and my victimhood, and things were beginning to make sense. I became “woke.” The next several years saw the exploration of intellectually seductive, albeit highly manipulative, thought forms that challenged me to examine the belief systems on which I was raised and that I’d trusted without question. I needed to test my newly acquired knowledge before self-amputating from everything, and possibly everyone, I knew. Slowly, I began to resist Christianity, or at least what I understood Christianity to be, primarily on the grounds that the moral straitjacket it required cramped my ability to break free from years of abusive oppression. I was finally on a path to self-righteousness. My liberation would come from leveraging my sexual and intellectual power in spite of the dominant ideologies (aka Christianity) that say women should stay home and make babies (even though they don’t say that at all). Freedom for women comes not from Christ’s atoning work on the cross, but through the grandiose release of collective libidinal energy from all of the whores next door. The long walk home Marxian feminism ensnared my mind and emotions in a nihilistic trap for many years. Condemnation, doubt, fear, and depression were the bitter fruits of my choices. Feminist activism through promiscuity ultimately gave way to addiction and demoralization. Make no mistake, feminism fans no flames of freedom — it just delivers a broken heart and low self-esteem. For the next two decades, I wandered through an ideological wilderness, always looking for the truth, but preferably not in “being a Baptist.” During my journey, I found my birth mother, married two husbands (not at the same time), traveled the world, and graduated from law school. I started a business, and 13 years later, I lost that business. I built idols of identity, stature, and fancy things, only to have them smashed in my face. I became a pile of shrapnel, the collateral damage of a hedonistic life. Fallopians 19:73 When Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022, I woke up from a long, slovenly sleep in the land of ideological compromise. I was a prolific writer on social media and was gobsmacked by the shocking display of bravado by women who claimed a special privilege for terminating their pregnancies. But for these abortions, their access to economic independence and bodily autonomy would have been denied. It wasn’t their merit or competence that sourced their social power; it was their empty uteruses. I found my birth mother when I was 21; she was 35. She delivered me at age 14 on November 22, 1973. Initially, I was due on October 22, 1973. This meant that by the time she saw the doctor, my birth mother was a month too far along to have an abortion, even though a brand-new case called Roe v. Wade, decided January 22, 1973, legalized abortion in the first trimester nationwide. October 22 came and went; no baby. Exactly one month later, a baby. The doctor’s mistake saved my life. Naturally, this complicated my feminist views of sex and the body in unsettling ways. After a season of vacillating, I became a fence-sitter on abortion, ultimately taking the coward’s way out of the discussion because “I’d never been pregnant.” Who was I to judge? Plus, I wasn’t violating the sardonic command of Fallopians 19:73: “He who hath nay uterus shall shutteth … up.” I was a woman, but I was shuttething up nonetheless. I was a fool. As late as the spring of 2022, I still hadn’t taken a public stand on the life issue outside a very tight circle, since I was still struggling with the “tough” cases of rape and incest. I needed to learn more, so I started to study. What lies beneath I was no longer interested in the litany of arguments supporting women’s liberation from unwanted pregnancies. I knew those better than most who espouse them. What I did want was to understand the path one must travel to arrive, and remain, at a place that demands adherence to an inconsistent, incoherent, and indecipherable position on the vesting of value in a human life: on deciding when a human fetus becomes a person who merits protection under the law. While studying, I learned the concept of worldview and its epic usefulness in understanding why we think the way we do. It was exactly what I needed to comprehend the hive mind infiltrating my inbox. It was also what I needed to finally understand the full story of Christianity, that is, historical, biblical Christianity, not the littered mess of modern-day Christendom promoting a counterfeit Christ throughout the culture. By reverse-engineering the range of worldviews underlying our modern ideas, I was able to work meticulously through the logical consequences that flow from their systematic implementation, from the beginning of time to the end of time. It wasn’t long before I realized that the biblical worldview — not a Marxist, postmodernist, New Age, or other worldview — was the only internally consistent, sufficient, coherent, and complete one on the menu. Nothing else even came close, at least not without borrowing from the biblical worldview to fill in the missing parts, such as an inalienable pre-political right to life. I was utterly dumbfounded. Not only was biblical Christianity true, it provided a comprehensive explanation for the world and everything in it. It provided rational answers to every question I could find about the nature and purpose of life. All I had to do was believe it. I’d never heard Christianity described this way, and I’m a little bummed that it took so many years for me to hear it. A full-orbed faith The evidence was in, and I had two choices. Believe God, take Him at His word, and abide in His promises, or Reject God and go it alone. I immediately recalled Joshua’s challenge to the unbelieving Israelites: … choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. (Joshua 24:15, KJV) I imagined Joshua standing at my door admonishing me to get off of the coward’s fence and choose, once and for all, whom I will serve: the God who made you and saved you or the idols of man who neither made you nor saved you, but always seek to devour you. I chose God, and I still choose God, all day, every day. The deal, at last, was done. And He did it all. I just had to say yes. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20, KJV) This article is adapted from a post that originally appeared on the "Worldview Bulletin" Substack.

Ya' Don't SAY! Leaked Confidential Doc Shows Anti-Trump People's March Is NOT a Grassroots Effort -Thread

IT'S ALL A PLOT! Chris Murphy Goes Full BLUE-ANON in Freak-Out Post About Trump, GenZ, and Big Tech

Free at Last: Three More Hostages Are Now Home, Safe in Israel

With the iPhone 16, Apple introduced the new Camera Control feature. The cutout below the side button is the perfect tool for quickly opening the camera (or other third-party camera app). However, with iOS 18.2, Apple upgraded it with Visual Intelligence, a feature powered by Apple Intelligence. In this article, you'll learn what Visual Intelligence is and how to take full advantage of this exclusive iPhone 16 feature. What's Visual Intelligence? According to Apple, Visual Intelligence with Camera Control lets you quickly learn "more about the places and objects around you. " You can look up details about a restaurant or business, have text translated, summarized, or read aloud. This technology is powered by iPhone 16 devices running iOS 18.2 as long as they meet the Apple Intelligence requirements (like using the supported English regions). How to use Visual Intelligence To start using iPhone 16's Visual Intelligence feature, long-press the Camera Control until a new camera animation appears on your display. These are some of the benefits of using this technology: Get information about a place: You can use visual intelligence with Camera Control to get details about a business in front of you, such as hours of operation, available services, and contact information. Depending on the business, you can also view reviews and ratings, make a reservation, or place an order for delivery. (Available in the US only). Here's how to do that: Direct your iPhone camera at the business in front of you, then click and hold the Camera Control. Click the Camera Control again or tap the name of the business at the top of the screen, then depending on the business, do any of the following: View the hours of operation: Tap Schedule. Place an order for delivery: Tap Order. View the menu or services offered: Tap Menu. Make a reservation: Tap Reserve. Call the business, view its website, and more Using the Camera Control button to find out information about a restaurant with Visual Intelligence. Image source: Apple Inc. Interact with text: You can use visual intelligence with Camera Control to interact with text around you in various ways. For example, you can have visual intelligence to summarize and translate text or read it aloud. Visual intelligence can also identify contact information in text, such as phone numbers, email addresses, and websites, and take action depending on the type of text. Here's how to use it: Direct your iPhone camera at the text in front of you, then click and hold the Camera Control. Click the Camera Control again or tap the circle at the bottom of the screen to analyze the text. Depending on the text, do any of the following: Read a short summary of the text: Tap Summarize at the bottom of the screen. Translate text: Tap Translate at the bottom of the screen. Hear the text read aloud: Tap Read Aloud at the bottom of the screen. Call a phone number, start an email, create a calendar event, or go to a website: Tap the phone number, email address, date, or website at the bottom of the screen. Tap the three dots to see all of the available options. Ask ChatGPT for information: ChatGPT can expand the knowledge available with Apple Intelligence as long as you opt to use this AI tool. Here's how to use it: Direct your iPhone camera at an object in front of you, then click and hold the Camera Control. Tap the text bubble icon to ask ChatGPT about the object. After you tap, you can type or dictate a follow-up question in the text field at the bottom of the screen. Search Google for images: You can use visual intelligence with Camera Control to identify objects around you and then search Google for similar items. Direct your iPhone camera at an object in front of you, then click and hold the Camera Control. Tap the image icon to search Google for similar images. Tap the "X" icon to close Google results, then swipe up from the bottom of the screen to close visual intelligence with Camera Control. Wrap up BGR will update this article if Apple adds more features to Visual Intelligence. Don't Miss: 6 useful iPhone camera tricks you might have forgotten about The post How to use iPhone 16’s Visual Intelligence feature appeared first on BGR. Today's Top Deals Today’s deals: $50 off Meta Quest 3S, $250 Dyson Digital Slim vacuum, $50 Anker ANC headphones, more Best deals: Tech, laptops, TVs, and more sales Today’s deals: $294 Nintendo Switch OLED, $6 color LED smart bulbs, 26% off Energizer batteries, more Today’s deals: $185 iPhone SE, $99 Beats Pill, 30% off TurboTax Deluxe 2024, $500 off Peloton Bikes, more

Incoming border czar Tom Homan said plans for immigration raids beginning in Chicago on Tuesday are now being reviewed in the wake of a leak about the operations .Homan made the remarks in two different interviews on Saturday.