Sarah Varney, special health care correspondent for the PBS News Hour, has been providing pro-abortion reporting ever since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, focusing predominantly on lost opportunities to abort nationwide. In Monday’s program she once again went after the pro-life movement under the online headline “Rise of crisis pregnancy centers highlights shift in anti-abortion movement.” Geoff Bennett: Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case involving a group of faith-based pregnancy centers in New Jersey. The organization is hoping to block the state's attorney general from investigating whether they misled women into believing the centers offered abortions. The case highlights an effort to crack down on these so-called crisis pregnancy centers. For our series The Next Frontier, special correspondent Sarah Varney reports, these organizations are a growing part of the anti-abortion movement in a post-Roe America. “So-called pregnancy centers”? Varney found a sympathetic young victim of one such center. Hana Miller, Minnesota Native: And I was terrified. I mean, like, no 18-year-old wants to find themselves in that position. Sarah Varney: Four years ago, Hana Miller, then a freshman at Brandeis University outside of Boston, became pregnant. After searching for abortion care on the Internet, the Minnesota native called one of the first clinics to pop up….But partway through the appointment, Hana realized she had come to the wrong place. Instead of an abortion clinic, Hana was sitting in a crisis pregnancy center. Known as CPCs, these mostly faith-based nonprofits offer resources to pregnant women to steer them away from abortion. But reproductive rights advocates in the medical community have criticized CPCs for using deceptive and at times unsafe practices.   Are abortion mills “safe” for every human who enters them? Varney: These centers are part of a larger strategy, says Carrie Baker, in the next frontier of the anti-abortion movement. Carrie Baker, Smith College: When people think of the anti-abortion movement, they think of the push to try to make abortion illegal. And they haven't focused as much on the ground game, which is what CPCs are. Varney spoke of the narrowing chances to abort a baby as a tragedy, even though the crisis pregnancy centers she describes don’t sound very awful. Varney: As of last year, there were more than 2,600 crisis pregnancy centers and only 765 abortion clinics in communities across the U.S. Many of these centers, which typically provide free diapers, pregnancy tests and anti-abortion counseling, offer health care services and medical advice without a license. Carrie Baker: As these clinics get more and more things like ultrasounds and appear more and more medical and encourage people to rely on what they're saying, they're more of a danger. I wouldn't call them medical providers. I would call them political organizations who are often not revealing their political agenda, at least initially. Not revealing an agenda? None of Varney's experts are identified as liberal, leftist, radical, feminist, or progressive. There was only "reproductive rights advocates." Not "abortion advocates." There were ten uses of "anti-abortion" in the story by reporters and experts. No "pro-abortion." Baker's so radical a feminist that she co-chairs the Ms. magazine "Committee of Scholars." Varney made no pushback against the professor's paranoia. Varney: Baker points to cases where patients were misdiagnosed, delaying needed medical care, or were misled about the safety of abortion…. The irony of the phrase “safety of abortion” apparently didn’t raise an eyebrow during News Hour production meetings. At least Varney spoke with a pro-life person. Brian Westbrook, Executive Director and Founder, Coalition Life: We stand here today because Planned Parenthood and their allies want to destroy life and not protect it. …. Varney: Brian Westbrook is executive director of Coalition Life. The anti-abortion group runs a crisis pregnancy center in the St. Louis suburbs. They send out protesters for so-called sidewalk counseling to abortion clinics in and out of the state. Yes, another “so-called” descriptor, casting doubt on the sincerity of the pro-lifers.  The story didn’t even mention the word “baby,” but Varney did bring up the dubious phrase “abortion care” twice. Two weeks ago, Varney glamorized an "underground network" of abortion pill distributors in pro-life states on the News Hour, and in 2023 provided some free publicity (on then-publicly funded television) for abortion pill-makers. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS News Hour 12/1/25 7:35:28 p.m. (ET) Geoff Bennett: Tomorrow, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case involving a group of faith-based pregnancy centers in New Jersey. The organization is hoping to block the state's attorney general from investigating whether they misled women into believing the centers offered abortions. The case highlights an effort to crack down on these so-called crisis pregnancy centers. For our series The Next Frontier, special correspondent Sarah Varney reports, these organizations are a growing part of the anti-abortion movement in a post-Roe America. Hana Miller, Minnesota Native: And I was terrified. I mean, like, no 18-year-old wants to find themselves in that position. Sarah Varney: Four years ago, Hana Miller, then a freshman at Brandeis University outside of Boston, became pregnant. After searching for abortion care on the Internet, the Minnesota native called one of the first clinics to pop up. Hana Miller:They were really trying to, like, beat around the bush, really trying to just get me there. Sarah Varney: What happens when you went inside? Hana Miller: It looked exactly like any doctor's office, down to a woman in scrubs. Woman: Hello. Sarah Varney: But partway through the appointment, Hana realized she had come to the wrong place. Instead of an abortion clinic, Hana was sitting in a crisis pregnancy center. Known as CPCs, these mostly faith-based nonprofits offer resources to pregnant women to steer them away from abortion. But reproductive rights advocates in the medical community have criticized CPCs for using deceptive and at times unsafe practices. Hana Miller: They told me that I was eight weeks pregnant at a time when I was six weeks pregnant. Sarah Varney: Did anything she said change your mind? Hana Miller: No. It made me kind of more resolved in my decision. But it changed fundamentally the way that I felt about it. It felt like something I needed to be ashamed of. Sarah Varney: These centers are part of a larger strategy, says Carrie Baker, in the next frontier of the anti-abortion movement. Carrie Baker, Smith College: When people think of the anti-abortion movement, they think of the push to try to make abortion illegal. And they haven't focused as much on the ground game, which is what CPCs are. Sarah Varney: Baker teaches gender, law and public policy at Smith College. She says after many abortion clinics were forced to close post-Roe, the conservative Christian movement has prioritized replacing them. Man: Don't murder an innocent child. Sarah Varney: As of last year, there were more than 2,600 crisis pregnancy centers and only 765 abortion clinics in communities across the U.S. Many of these centers, which typically provide free diapers, pregnancy tests and anti-abortion counseling, offer health care services and medical advice without a license. Carrie Baker: As these clinics get more and more things like ultrasounds and appear more and more medical and encourage people to rely on what they're saying, they're more of a danger. I wouldn't call them medical providers. I would call them political organizations who are often not revealing their political agenda, at least initially. Sarah Varney: Baker points to cases where patients were misdiagnosed, delaying needed medical care, or were misled about the safety of abortion. And because nearly all of the centers are not licensed medical clinics, and, because of that, not subject to federal health care privacy laws, critics worry about what they are doing with patient information. Carrie Baker: There's a fair amount of evidence that anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers are collecting information about people, and they're creating a mass database of young pregnant women or people that may not yet be pregnant, but might become pregnant. My concern about CPCs is that they are actually surveilling women for criminal prosecution. Sarah Varney: This year, the crisis pregnancy center industry is expected to bring in more than $2.5 billion. From 2017 to 2023, nearly $430 million in federal dollars were awarded to more than 650 CPCs across the country through teen pregnancy prevention, welfare, and other federal programs. And though a majority of funding for CPCs is from churches and private donors, an increasing amount is coming from state taxpayer dollars. Brian Westbrook, Executive Director and Founder, Coalition Life: We stand here today because Planned Parenthood and their allies want to destroy life and not protect it. Sarah Varney: At the center of the abortion fight today, Missouri is home to more than 90 CPCs. Brian Westbrook: We want them to be the best darn mom they possibly can be, and that's where we come in. Sarah Varney: Brian Westbrook is executive director of Coalition Life. The anti-abortion group runs a crisis pregnancy center in the St. Louis suburbs. They send out protesters for so-called sidewalk counseling to abortion clinics in and out of the state. Brian Westbrook: We never believed that any mother wakes up in the morning saying, yes, I really want an abortion. I don't think anyone ever wakes up thinking they're excited to do that. And so what we want to do is we want to coach them. Then they can kind of pause, think about it, make a logical decision of, yes, maybe I shouldn't go through with this abortion. Sarah Varney: Westbrook says they served around 1,100 women last year and on average helped four to five people per day. Brian Westbrook: Our goal is to create a family unit that the child would be in a good spot to go into, to be born into. Sarah Varney: The center offers pregnancy and STI testing, ultrasounds and pregnancy coaching. Westbrook says that work is made possible because of private donors. In Missouri, residents receive a 70 percent tax credit when they donate to groups like Coalition Life. Last year, the state approved $11 million in these tax credits. That's on top of the state's long-running Alternatives to Abortion program, which received more than $8 million in 2024. Brian Westbrook: It certainly does help. It helps our donors for sure. They become a little bit more generous. But I try to stay away from government funding as much as we possibly can. For some pregnancy centers, that's fantastic for them. For us, we want to be able to operate as independently as humanly possible. And we know that a lot of government funding comes with a lot of strings. Sarah Varney: Missouri is not alone. From 2021 to 2024, anti-abortion centers in at least 21 states received funding through grants, state programs, budget allocations or tax credits. Carrie Baker says, even in states where abortion is legal, crisis pregnancy centers are hard to hold accountable. Carrie Baker: Just like a church can say whatever it wants on a Sunday morning, they're like, we're like a church. We can say whatever we want. We don't charge for our services, so we can't be regulated. We don't have to reveal any information. Sarah Varney: But that may be changing in Massachusetts. Last year, a CPC in Worcester settled a lawsuit that alleged a nurse failed to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy. That's when a fertilized egg implants outside of the uterus, a condition that is dangerous if left untreated. The woman survived, but needed emergency surgery for massive internal bleeding. Narrator: Whether you need pregnancy care or abortion care, avoid anti-abortion centers. Sarah Varney: That summer, Governor Maura Healey, a Democrat, launched a $1 million education campaign to discourage residents from going to CPCs. State Sen. Becca Rausch (D-MA): In order to get at anti-abortion centers, at this very real problem and threat to the health and safety of a lot of people, we have to do it in a way that does not run afoul of the First Amendment. That's hard to do. Sarah Varney: Democratic State Senator Becca Rausch authored a bill requiring a licensed health care professional to supervise any ultrasound related to a pregnancy. It was signed into law last year. State Sen. Becca Rausch: Because of search engines and algorithms and money, a lot of times, the first places that pop up are these anti-abortion centers. But if they can't provide any ultrasound services because it's illegal in Massachusetts for them to do so because they lack a license and the appropriate training to do so safely and accurately, then that doesn't happen at the get-go. Sarah Varney: But some groups are pushing back. Your Options Medical, which runs centers in Eastern Massachusetts, is suing the state, saying its education campaign violates the group's free speech and equal protection rights. Hana Miller: This experience, for all intents and purposes, it did not have the effect that they wanted it to in so many ways. Sarah Varney: Weeks after her CPC appointment, Hana was able to get abortion care at a licensed clinic near Boston. She says the ordeal inspired her to study reproductive health and policy. Hana Miller: Class of 2025, we made it. Sarah Varney: This may, she graduated with a degree in public health. Hana Miller: I felt incredible shame, incredible guilt. I was so embarrassed. And I felt stupid. Like, how could I not have seen this sooner? And I have thought about this for a long time, and I have kind of come out saying, you should not feel that. They should feel that. Sarah Varney: Hana hopes talking about her experience will help others avoid the same pain in the future. For "PBS News Hour," I'm Sarah Varney in Massachusetts.

On Thursday, radio host Derek Hunter of Washington, D.C.'s powerhouse news/talk station WMAL broadcasted live from the Media Research Center studios and welcomed MRC President David Bozell to drop an exclusive bombshell poll that should terrify every conservative in America. The question was simple: What was the political ideology of Tyler Robinson, the man accused of gunning down Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk? According to a November 25 McLaughlin & Associates national poll of 1,000 likely voters conducted for the Media Research Center, less than a quarter of respondents correctly described Tyler Robinson, the man accused of murdering TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk, as left-wing.  Just 24% of likely voters correctly identified the suspect as left-wing. A staggering 22% of likely voters wrongly believed Robinson was right-wing. But the real gut-punch came from college-aged respondents – the very demographic Charlie Kirk spent his career trying to reach: 33% thought the shooter was a right-winger. A pathetic 4% got it right and pegged him as left-wing. Bozell didn’t mince words, pointing the finger squarely at late-night propagandists and Big Tech gatekeepers. “I’d still put this largely at the feet of folks like Jimmy Kimmel,” Bozell told Hunter. He also called out the “big-time aggregators that enjoy relative anonymity” – Google, Apple News, and Yahoo – for funneling hundreds of millions of eyeballs to far-left outlets disguised as neutral. Case in point: Newsweek, which famously sold for one dollar, now ranks as America’s 16th-most-trafficked news site with 68 million monthly visitors – almost entirely because it’s algorithmically embedded in Google News, Apple News, and Yahoo. And what did those outlets do in the critical hours and days after the assassination? They played dumb. As Bozell put it, CNN, The New York Times, and their ilk spent the aftermath shrugging: “We just don’t know enough about Tyler Robinson yet… let’s wait for the courts.”  The result? A plurality of young Americans now believe a left-wing extremist who targeted Charlie Kirk was actually a “right-wing” killer – the exact opposite of reality. Listen to full interview here.  

I’m one of those people who likes to write in cafés. I like the atmosphere. And the people. And the smell of espresso machines.Recently I was walking in a newly developed area of my hometown (Portland) and discovered a new coffee place.I ordered the house-blend coffee. I took it to the cream-and-sugar counter and poured a little milk into it. Much to my horror, the milk curdled instantly.It looked like an excellent writing spot. There were solid tables and comfortable chairs and a window you could look out when you weren’t typing.That smellBut then I went to the counter, where I recognized the distinct smell of a certain kind of Pacific Northwest coffee. It’s the smell of artisanal roasting, done on the premises. Or in some cases, a small roaster nearby who provides the café with elaborately packaged organic, roaster-to-retail, artisanal coffee beans. In other words: left-wing coffee.That’s right: left-wing coffee. In case you haven’t noticed, there’s now left-wing and right-wing coffee. And as you’d expect, left-wing coffee is terrible.*******StumptownThe best example of left-wing coffee is Portland’s own Stumptown brand. Stumptown has spread all across the world and at one point was widely advertised as Alaska Airline’s exclusive in-flight brand.And what does Stumptown taste like? It tastes like someone poured a little orange juice into your coffee. Or some other acidic, citrusy liquid. This gives it a weird, tangy taste initially. And then a bitter, sour aftertaste.The important thing is: It's bad. It tastes bad. But that isn’t surprising. That’s what the left does. It takes good things and makes them bad. Movies? Architecture? Your local library? The left can ruin almost anything.Now you might say: But all artisanal coffee doesn’t taste the same! Ah, but it does! Even though each individual coffee roaster handcrafts his coffee in his own unique fashion, somehow, by some strange process, all the artisanal coffee tastes remarkably similar and equally awful.Coffee curdleMy favorite experience to relate about left-wing coffee came when I visited a popular Portland café with a friend. I’d been there many times, so I knew the coffee there was artisanally roasted and therefore barely drinkable. But the café was buzzing with people, and my friend liked it, and there were good seats available for people-watching. So here we were.I ordered the house-blend coffee. I took it to the cream-and-sugar counter and poured a little milk into it. Much to my horror, the milk curdled instantly. Alarmed, I took my cup back to the counter and explained to the barista guy (with a man bun) what had happened. He shrugged. “Yeah, it does that sometimes; it’s the acid in the coffee.”I said, “Why is there acid in the coffee?”“It’s just the type of bean,” he said. “Sorry about that. Maybe don’t put milk in it?”*******The reason these artisanal-roasted coffees are left-wing is because left-wing people drink it. And serve it. And roast it. And brag about it.It is a trend that began in coastal cities during the “locally sourced,” “farm-to-table” craze. It continues to exist to this day in college towns and other progressive strongholds in the rest of the country.Leftists always want to change things. Especially things that people already like. They changed sports (they added gambling). They changed sex (they added pornography). They changed marriage (they added no-fault divorce).So now they changed coffee by adding citrusy, floral, nutmeg-flavored, acidic, rainforest-protecting coffee beans that taste bad. But that’s what they do. Bad is good to leftists.RELATED: Corporate America turned coffee shops into cubicles. A more human cafe culture is fighting back. Hertiage Images/Getty ImagesWhere the girls areA couple years ago, I met a young Texan living in Warsaw, Poland, who agreed with my assessment of the leftist coffee problem but insisted it was still worth it to patronize “artisanal roaster” cafés because those were the best places to meet trendy girls. He said this was the case all over Europe.And he was right. Everywhere I went on that trip, I googled “artisanal roasters” to find cafés. And sure enough, that’s where the hipsters were, the trendoids, the pretentious expats, the people wearing “statement glasses.”This is also the case in L.A., San Francisco, New York, Seattle, and all the other leftist strongholds. Which reveals an obvious truth: that most hipsters, most trendsetters, most influencers are, at heart, brainless conformists. If everyone else is drinking the terrible coffee, they’ll drink it too.Take the 'hints' — pleaseSo if Stumptown is left-wing, what coffee is right-wing? I would say that any coffee that tastes like coffee is right-wing. Especially if it’s good. Like McDonald’s, Dunkin' Donuts, Tim Hortons, Peet's, or Starbucks.If it doesn’t have words like “ethical” or “fair trade” or “locally sourced” and doesn’t have “hints” of lavender blossoms or “notes” of Scandinavian pine cones, it is probably right-wing.If there are no drawings on the package of impoverished indigenous South American folks, suffering under the yoke of American capitalism, it is probably right-wing.If the most descriptive thing it says on the packaging is “100% Arabica coffee,” it is probably right-wing, and it probably won’t curdle your milk.Good to the last dropMy own favorite coffee shop in Portland is a quiet student café near Portland State University. It is an outlier in its coffee selection. It only serves ILLY brand coffee. The ILLY company started in 1933. The original founder also invented this little thing called the ESPRESSO MACHINE. So I would guess he knew what he was doing. Three generations later, ILLY is still one of the most loved and respected coffee companies in the world. And guess what? ILLY doesn’t taste like anything except coffee. And it is delicious.It is so good, I don’t even buy it to make at home. Because I don’t want to get used to it. I prefer to visit that one particular café once or twice a week to luxuriate in the perfect cup of coffee. *******The good news is, nobody is talking about Stumptown coffee anymore. Alaska Airlines has come to its senses and returned to ordinary coffee for in-flight customers. And I’m guessing that even the trendiest young people will eventually abandon bad coffee. They have taste buds too.But of course, leftists will continue to seek out new areas of Americana to mess with. Get ready for equitable corn flakes, nonbinary toothpaste, rainbow-infused gasoline for your car. At this point, I wouldn’t put anything past them.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) joined Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck to share his reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on Republicans' proposed redistricting map. He also talked about his recent actions against the Council on American-Islamic Relations.On Thursday, SCOTUS temporarily approved the GOP's redistricting efforts in Texas for use in the upcoming midterm election. As a result, Republicans are likely to gain five additional seats in the U.S. House.'The Supreme Court beat down the lower court for violating that precedent.'The Supreme Court's latest decision overturned a lower court's order, which would have required Texas to return to 2021 district lines.Abbott joined "The Glenn Beck Program" on Friday morning to share his thoughts on the recent Supreme Court decision, calling it "huge news" for Republicans across the U.S."This is total vindication for the state of Texas, for the legislature," Abbott told Beck. The Texas governor explained that the map was redrawn to "fully" comply with the U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court precedent as well as "truly represent the values of people of our state."Abbott accused the lower court of abandoning precedent previously established by SCOTUS. "The Supreme Court beat down the lower court for violating that precedent," he told Beck.RELATED: Supreme Court allows Texas redistricting map for midterm elections; liberals dissent Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty ImagesDuring Friday morning's interview, Abbott also discussed his effort to remove the Council on American-Islamic Relations' tax-exempt status, citing the organization's alleged ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Abbott sent a letter to Secretary Scott Bessent earlier this week requesting that the Treasury Department open an investigation into the group and suspend its tax-exempt status. "CAIR has historic connections to terrorism," Abbott stated. "Here's the bottom line: If CAIR doesn't want to be labeled as a terrorist organization, if it wants to shed its early ties to terrorism, it needs to stop supporting those who are identified by the federal government as supporters of terrorism.""Because they support terrorists to this day, that is exactly why they deserve, for one, to be labeled a foreign organization, and, for another, why they should not be receiving the benefits of a 501(c)(3) organization," he added.RELATED: Islamist groups in Texas rake in $13M in taxpayer-funded grants amid Abbott’s battle against Sharia law Greg Abbott. Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty ImagesCAIR sent its own letter to Bessent the following day, claiming to debunk the governor's accusations."Governor Abbott is afraid," CAIR stated. "He knows that his proclamation targeting CAIR-Texas is unconstitutional, so now he is desperately trying to find another way to target our organization.""Unfortunately for Mr. Abbott, his lies about us are easily disprovable and the truth about him is clearly evident: He's an Israel First politician who is obsessed with CAIR because our lawsuits have defeated his attempts to silence Texans critical of Israel three times in a row. We look forward to defeating him in court for a fourth time soon, God willing," CAIR's statement read.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

President Donald Trump and members of his administration have worked doggedly over the past year to broker a lasting peace between Russia and Ukraine. While there have been multiple instances when an end to the bloodshed appeared within reach, Presidents Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Vladimir Putin have both repeatedly thrown up obstacles to sealing the deal — in most cases over proposals regarding territorial concessions and security guarantees for Kyiv.There are, however, others actors in the mix who appear content to stymie the U.S.-mediated peace negotiations.English-language notes allegedly detailing a conference call held on Monday between Zelenskyy, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, and numerous other EU leaders revealed the extent of the contempt and distrust some European leaders have for the United States as it relates to Washington's role in the peace talks.According to the notes that were leaked to the German publication Der Spiegel, Macron suggested that there was a chance that the U.S. — a nation that has kept Ukraine viable with the help of hundreds of billions of dollars and top-notch armaments as well as by sanctioning its foe — might "betray" Ukraine."There is a chance that the U.S. will betray Ukraine on territory without clarity on security guarantees," Macron reportedly said, adding that the territorial matter presents "a big danger" for Zelenskyy.Macron was among the EU leaders who rejected Trump's original 28-point peace plan last month and echoed an old complaint that certain proposals would require EU consent. His office has claimed that he "did not express himself in these words" as described in the notes but did not indicate how he had expressed himself.RELATED: Zelenskyy's hold on power uncertain as criminal charges reach his inner circle Photographer: Nathan Laine/Bloomberg via Getty ImagesMerz, whose nation is set to pass a new conscription scheme, reportedly said that Zelenskyy must be "very careful" in the talks ahead, noting that "they are playing games with both you and us." Der Spiegel indicated that the "they" Merz referred to was likely Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and the president's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who have been working on the peace negotiations.Alexander Stubb — the Finnish president who complained in a recent interview that "all the conditions for a just peace we’ve talked so much about over the past four years are unlikely to be fulfilled" — reportedly said on the conference call, "We must not leave Ukraine and Volodymyr alone with these guys," again apparently referring to the U.S. representatives. The notes for the call, which several participants confirmed to Der Spiegel had taken place, indicate that Rutte agreed, stating, "I agree with Alexander that we need to protect Volodymyr."While a spokesperson for Zelenskyy told Der Spiegel he did not want to comment on the content of the call, the Ukrainian president said in a statement on Thursday, "Ukraine is prepared for any possible developments, and of course we will work as constructively as possible with all partners to ensure that peace is achieved — and that it is, after all, a dignified peace. Only a dignified peace provides real security, and we fully understand that this requires — and will continue to require — the support of our partners."The White House did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment.On Tuesday, Putin suggested European leaders were undermining the peace process, stating, "They don’t have a peace agenda; they’re on the side of the war," reported the Associated Press.The Russian president further accused the Europeans of introducing "demands that are absolutely unacceptable to Russia," thereby "blocking the entire peace process."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Jon Favreau Quotes Jesus to Shame Tricia McLaughlin for Debunking Thanksgiving Illegal Sob Story (HOOBOY)

Boom: Tom Homan Brings Straight Fire As He Levels Heckler at TPUSA Event

Retired DEA Chief Now Accused in $12M Cartel Scheme

Drug Boat Bafflement and Drone Dysphoria - Media Trapped Themselves Trying to Implicate Pete Hegseth

Streaming devices, such as Amazon's Fire TV Stick and Roku Streaming Sticks, have long been the go-to TV streaming solution, but that looks to be changing.