'Shocked and very sad'

An unverified tip claimed bodies may be buried at the property

A rare, pale pink, fairy club fungus native to Italy was found during a mushroom survey in England last autumn, the first recording sighting anywhere in Great Britain. The tennis ball-sized fungus has now been confirmed through DNA testing, as there are other species that look similar to it. The “exceptional” discovery was made by […] The post Rare Species of Pink ‘Fairy Club’ Fungus Discovered in UK for First Time appeared first on Good News Network.

News Tangled Live-Action Tangled: It Was Kathryn Hahn All Along for Mother Gothel It was previously rumored that Scarlett Johansson was attached to the role… By Vanessa Armstrong | Published on March 10, 2026 Screenshot: Disney Comment 0 Share New Share Screenshot: Disney We have confirmation that Kathryn Hahn (Agatha All Along) will play Mother Gothel in Disney’s live-action rendition of Tangled. Hahn herself confirmed (kinda) the news on social media by revealing on an official Walt Disney Studios account that she was wearing a Mother Gothel T-shirt. The comment from the official Disney account said, “You want her to be the bad guy? FINE. Kathryn Hahn is Mother Gothel in Disney’s live-action Tangled.” That’s what I’d call a confirmation that Hahn will be Rapunzel’s toxic “mother” in the film. Hahn isn’t the only official casting news we have for the live-action Tangled, which was taken off the shelf after being put on hold after the poor box office performance of Snow White. We also know that Teagan Croft (Titans) will be playing Rapunzel and Milo Manheim (School Spirits) will be Flynn Rider. Hahn also isn’t the only A-list actor rumored to take on the role of Mother Gothel. Back in October, reports suggested that Scarlett Johansson was taking on the role before speculation about Hahn also started circulating. Today’s message, however, confirms that it will be Hahn playing the bad guy in the film, including singing a rendition of the catchy song, “Mother Knows Best.” No news yet on when the live-action Tangled will go into production or make its way to theaters. [end-mark] The post Live-Action <i>Tangled</i>: It Was Kathryn Hahn All Along for Mother Gothel appeared first on Reactor.

The rate of adverse events from the abortion pill grew significantly higher after the Biden administration removed the in-person dispensing requirement for the drug. The rate of serious adverse events was 10.15% when a requirement was in effect that women visit health clinics in person to obtain the pill. However, it jumped to 11.50% when that requirement was removed, according to the new report from Ethics and Public Policy Center. This marks a statistically significant difference of 1.35 percentage points and an increase of 13%. The Biden Administration eliminated abortion pill safeguards that protected women.Now, our new research shows this caused a tragic spike in the rate of serious adverse events for women across the country. pic.twitter.com/Vrb19L3zwh— Ethics and Public Policy Center (@EPPCdc) March 10, 2026 “A year ago we reported that the data show chemical abortion is 22 times more dangerous for women than the FDA previously admitted,” EPPC President Ryan T. Anderson told The Daily Signal. “Now the data show that chemical abortion became significantly more dangerous after the Biden admin removed the in-person doctor requirement.” “So not only is it dangerous, but allowing online, mail-order abortion pills made it even worse,” he continued. “That’s all the more reason for the Trump FDA to at minimum restore the in-person doctor visit.” In April 2021, the Biden administration’s FDA stopped requiring that abortion drugs be dispensed to women in person, which allowed them to receive abortion pills through the mail with telehealth appointments. The FDA has not enforced the in-person dispensing requirement ever since. Pro-life advocates have repeatedly called on President Donald Trump and Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary to restore the in-person dispensing requirement for the abortion pill, but the administration has not acted. “Do not play politics with women’s lives,” Anderson said. “Every day you delay the return of the in-person doctor visit requirement, is a day when more women are placed at risk. Women deserve better.” A previous study from the Ethics and Public Policy Center found that 11% of women experience adverse health effects, such as sepsis, infection, and hemorrhaging, within 45 days of a chemical abortion. The FDA is performing a safety review of mifepristone, but no findings have been released. On March 6, Department of Justice lawyers asked a court to pause a Louisiana state lawsuit seeking to restore the in-person dispensing requirement on mifepristone. The judge “should either stay this case until after FDA completes its [safety] review or dismiss it,” the lawyers wrote. The EPPC report found that taking mifepristone without an in-person doctor’s visit is particularly dangerous for women with an ectopic pregnancy, which can only be diagnosed by a physician in-person. The data also shows that the rate of chemical abortion prescriptions during an ectopic pregnancy was 0.27% before Biden relaxed regulations, and 0.41% after, a 52% increase. Mifepristone has become the most common abortion method, accounting for about 63% of all abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood’s research arm. However, this is likely an undercount, according to the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute, because it does not include abortions outside the formal health care system or under shield laws. Shield laws allow abortionists to mail abortion drugs to women in states that prohibit most abortions or impose gestational limits on abortions, promising them immunity from lawsuits or state penalties. The post Adverse Events Skyrocketed After Biden Loosened Abortion Guardrails, New Report Shows appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A tech group that has received funding from left-leaning nonprofits is suing the Trump administration over the threatened deportation or revocation of visas for noncitizens the State Department identified as trying to censor Americans. While the administration says the policy targets foreigners seeking to censor Americans, the plaintiffs, the Coalition for Independent Technology Research, allege in the complaint that the government is “excluding and deporting noncitizens whose work involves combatting misinformation and disinformation.” The litigation in the D.C. District Court is a battleground in which both sides claim to be defending free speech. Plaintiffs assert that the administration’s policy violates the First and Fifth Amendment rights of noncitizens who are in the country legally, including researchers, scientists, nonprofit staff, and educators. They also allege it violates the Administrative Procedure Act, a law that governs how executive branch regulations are created and implemented.  “Researchers who help everyday people understand the impacts of Big Tech are scared that they and their families will be targeted for detention and deportation under this policy,” said Brandi Geurkink, executive director of the Coalition for Independent Technology Research, in a public statement.  The group says that several coalition members were blocked from the United States under the policy because they researched “online hate speech and platform advertising policies.” “At a time when AI is rapidly changing our lives and economy and people are already worried about their freedom and safety online, we need independent researchers more than ever,” Geurkink added. “This policy is meant to censor researchers into silence and keep the public in the dark, and that’s exactly what it’s doing.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio is named as the lead defendant in the lawsuit. Last May, Rubio announced the State Department would implement a new visa restriction that applies to foreigners complicit in censoring Americans. “Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans,” Rubio posted on X last May. “Free speech is essential to the American way of life – a birthright over which foreign governments have no authority.” For too long, Americans have been fined, harassed, and even charged by foreign authorities for exercising their free speech rights.Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans.…— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) May 28, 2025 In December, Rubio announced that five people accused of trying to censor American viewpoints would be subject to visa restrictions. “Based on these determinations, the Department has taken steps to impose visa restrictions on agents of the global censorship-industrial complex who, as a result, will be generally barred from entering the United States,” Rubio said in a statement. “President Trump has been clear that his America First foreign policy rejects violations of American sovereignty. Extraterritorial overreach by foreign censors targeting American speech is no exception.” The lawsuit was filed in partnership with the Knight First Amendment Institute, a litigation organization based at Columbia University, and Protect Democracy, a left-of-center litigation group that has previously sued the Trump administration and has warned that democracy in the U.S. is in danger. The Coalition for Independent Technology Research is the only organization listed at the top of the complaint. It is fiscally sponsored by Aspiration, a nonprofit group that focuses on technology policy.  The Ford Foundation, a noted funder of left-leaning organizations, including immigration and environmental groups, announced that it contributed $400,000 in 2023 to Aspiration for the purpose of the Coalition for Independent Technology Research.  The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, known for mostly donating to left-leaning causes such as abortion and climate issues, made a $1 million donation to Aspiration in 2024, with $300,000 earmarked for the Coalition for Independent Technology Research. The Soros family-backed Open Society Foundation contributed $500,000 to Aspiration in 2024, according to Cause IQ, a website that monitors nonprofits.  The post Free Speech Clash: Tech Coalition Challenges Trump Anti-Censorship Visa Policy appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A medical watchdog is calling on the Food and Drug Administration to investigate companies that allow Americans to purchase sex-rejecting drugs without a prescription, in pursuit of transgender identity. Do No Harm released a report titled “The Lack of Barriers to Minors Ordering Cross-Sex Hormones Online” Tuesday. It highlights certain websites that may enable minors to obtain estrogen and testosterone from online pharmacies and other sources that do not appear to require prescriptions or age verification. Dr. Kurt Miceli, a psychiatrist and chief medical officer at Do No Harm, blamed the transgender movement—specifically the Human Rights Campaign and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health—for creating the conditions behind this phenomenon. “The unfortunate reality is that these online vendors have gained a market due to the normalization of dangerous hormonal interventions as ‘gender-affirming care’ and the resulting growth of the child transgender industry more broadly,” he told The Daily Signal. “Activist organizations like the Human Rights Campaign and ideologically motivated groups like WPATH have succeeded in selling experimental, irreversible procedures as medically necessary treatments for children,” Miceli noted. “Is it any wonder that minors believe this to be true, and may be turning to alternative sources that don’t require prescriptions?” “Our report reveals how online pharmacies may enable minors to obtain cross-sex hormones with alarming ease,” Miceli said in a separate statement on the report. “From websites listing online vendors across the globe to marketplaces for ‘homebrewed’ hormones, we found a multitude of troubling pathways that appear to bypass basic safeguards and regulatory oversight.” “Gender-confused kids should not be able to purchase potent, experimental medications with just a few simple clicks,” he added. “These hormones carry significant risks, including effects that can be irreversible. We urge the FDA and other federal agencies to investigate any potential unlawful sellers and, where appropriate, for states to do the same when their laws are being violated.” Transgender ‘Medicine’ Under Fire While activists claim that teens who suffer from gender dysphoria—the painful and persistent condition of identifying with the gender opposite one’s sex—need experimental medical interventions to prevent suicide, the Department of Health and Human Services concluded there is little evidence for positive impacts from such “treatments” for minors. Studies have shown concrete harms from these drugs, however. One study found that males who identify as transgender and take estrogen in order to appear female face higher risks of infertility, diabetes, testicular and breast cancer, and early death. An FDA study found that suicidal thoughts actually increase among kids who take so-called puberty blockers. A jury concluded that medical professionals had engaged in malpractice when cutting off the breasts of a young woman who later rejected her transgender identity. The jury ordered them to pay her $2 million. The American Society of Plastic Surgeons released a statement recommending against transgender surgery for minors under 19, leading other medical associations to follow suit. Many states passed laws protecting minors from sex-rejecting procedures, and that helps explain why companies may offer minors a way to obtain these drugs without a prescription. ‘Homebrewed’ Transgender Drugs The Do No Harm report reveals major hubs from which users can obtain drugs for “hormone replacement therapy” or HRT. “A cursory internet search for information related to pediatric medical transition reveals a host of resources directing users to online pharmacies, distribution networks for ‘homebrewed’ hormones, and guides on self-administering cross-sex hormones,” the report states. The website Transgender Map, for example, says it aims to inform readers about “how to make a gender transition,” and lists several online pharmacies located on multiple continents. The website includes this disclaimer: “getting hormones without a prescription is against the law.” HRT.Coffee and HRT Cafe provide information on pharmacies and hormone vendors, including accepted payment methods, country of origin, and product details. HRT Cafe includes a list of “unregulated” online pharmacies where users can purchase hormones online, and the website states that the pharmacies do not require prescriptions. As of Tuesday morning, HRT Cafe appears to be offline. Do No Harm visited several of the listed pharmacies’ websites, and says many of them “do not appear to require a prescription or verification of a customer’s age at any point before prompting the customer to submit payment information.” The Mexican pharmacy MedsMex ships to the U.S. and explicitly states on the website that it requires “No prescription to purchase any medicines in our pharmacy.” Inhouse Pharmacy, based in the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu, states that it is “permitted to process your order without a prescription.” The Daily Signal reached out to Andrea James (who runs Transgender Map), HRT.Coffee, HRT Cafe, MedsMex, and Inhouse Pharmacy for comment, and none responded by publication time. Neither the Human Rights Campaign nor WPATH responded to requests for comment. The Food and Drug Administration also did not respond by publication time. Do No Harm Pharmacies No PrescriptionDownload The post FDA Must Investigate ‘Homebrewed’ Transgender Hormones, Watchdog Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The UK Lords spent March 9 dismantling what little legal cover existed for anonymous protest and privacy, and building new tools to suppress it entirely. Start with what they refused to protect. Peers voted down an amendment that would have kept the DVLA database (the equivalent of the DMV in the US) out of live facial recognition searches. That database isn’t a surveillance archive. It was built to verify driving licenses. It contains photographs linked to the confirmed real-world identities of most UK drivers, and the Lords just cleared the path for police to run it against faces captured in real time at public gatherings. A licensing bureaucracy would become an identification engine. The repurposing happened quietly, through a vote most people won’t read about. The Lords also voted down a proposed “defence of reasonable excuse” for concealing identity at protests. The amendment would have shifted the burden of proof onto police officers to justify why a face covering made someone arrestable. It failed 172 to 88. That means wearing a mask at a protest carries no legal defense, even if your reason is documented, principled, and directly tied to avoiding government surveillance. Then, on the same day, peers approved new Home Secretary powers to designate organizations as “Extreme Criminal Protest Groups,” passing 200 to 162. The designation criminalizes membership, promotion, fundraising, and providing any form of support to a designated group. No court makes that call. The Home Secretary does. Read the three votes together, and the shape becomes clear. The Lords rejected a right to shield your face from surveillance, rejected a legal defense for trying, and handed ministers a new tool to criminalize the groups most likely to show up at protests in the first place. Each vote was taken separately, but the combined effect is a surveillance and suppression framework that will outlast every minister who voted for it. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post UK Lords Back Facial Recognition Overreach, Protest Crackdown Powers appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

CNN Spinning Like Mad Over Its Terrorism Apologia

As his time as host of The Late Show winds down, CBS’s Stephen Colbert was awarded the Writers Guild of America’s Walter Bernstein Award on Sunday in another example of liberal celebrities giving other liberal celebrities awards for their liberalism. Introducing Colbert, Robert Smigel hailed Colbert as someone who speaks “truth to power,” by which he just meant that Colbert mocks Republican presidents. Smigel, best known for his work on Saturday Night Live and as the voice of Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, recalled Colbert’s appearance at the 2006 White House Correspondents Dinner, “And as I watched Stephen bomb and bomb and bomb, it occurred to me: Anyone else I'd ever seen do this gig would have ‘read the room,’ would have done something to break the tension, a self-effacing, improv quip, or an exaggerated wipe of the brow, anything to get the crowd on their side. But Stephen just kept going. And I know at some point, he clearly read the room. And he just said to himself, "Fuck the room.’”   At Sunday's Writers Guild Awards, Robert Smigle introduced Stephen Colbert winning the Walter Bernstein Award hypes his 2006 WHCD performance "he just said to himself, 'fuck the room.' And he just kept tearing into the president three feet to his right, never breaking characters.… pic.twitter.com/F8LJCiNvYH — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) March 10, 2026   Colbert’s attacks on President Bush led Smigel to add, “And he just kept tearing into the president three feet to his right, never breaking character. Stephen Colbert was not going to sell out Stephen Colbert. And that's the night Stephen went from being my comedy crush to my comedy hero.” As if Presidents Obama and Biden never happened, Smigel fast-forwarded to the present day, “And we all know what's going on now. Things are so messed up that now they're clearly our tangible consequences to speaking truth to power. But Stephen, you've always led with integrity.” Smigel added, “And recently, of course, Stephen, you called out your new bosses for bowing to Trump ‘like dogs’ to get their merger done. Stephen, I know you love your staff and your writers. I know how badly you feel for them. And I also hope—I hope you also know that they wouldn't want you to be anything less than the decent and brave soul that you are.”   Later, Colbert quips, "As we know, the revolution will not be televised. It was going to be televised, but then Paramount bought it. And evidently the revolution was losing like $40 million a year. It had to go. I hear the revolution is thinking about starting a Substack" pic.twitter.com/SHLDJeYiRy — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) March 10, 2026   During his acceptance speech, Colbert took a dig at his Paramount bosses, “This is not the 1950s. This is not the Red Scare. And as far as I can tell, no one in late night is fomenting a revolution. As we know, the revolution will not be televised. It was going to be televised, but then Paramount bought it. And evidently the revolution was losing like $40 million a year. It had to go. I hear the revolution is thinking about starting a Substack.” Sunday’s WGA ceremony illustrated one thing perfectly: whether it is Smigel, Colbert, or the WHCD, the idea of speaking truth to power means attacking Republicans. The WGA was not going to give anyone an award for their biting satirical critiques of Obama or Biden, but there are millions of dollars to be made and awards to be earned if you attack Bush, Trump, and presumably whoever the next Republican president will be. Here is a transcript for the March 8 ceremony: Writers Guild Awards 3/8/2026 ROBERT SMIGEL: And as I watched Stephen bomb and bomb and bomb, it occurred to me: Anyone else I'd ever seen do this gig would have “read the room,” would have done something to break the tension, a self-effacing, improv quip or an exaggerated wipe of the brow, anything to get the crowd on their side. But Stephen just kept going. And I know at some point, he clearly read the room. And he just said to himself, “Fuck the room.” And he just kept tearing into the president three feet to his right, never breaking character. Stephen Colbert was not going to sell out Stephen Colbert. And that's the night Stephen went from being my comedy crush to my comedy hero. And we all know what's going on now. Things are so messed up that now they're clearly our tangible consequences to speaking truth to power. But Stephen, you've always led with integrity. When so many comedians take the easy route of mocking religion, Stephen, you never shy from speaking up for your faith. And that means a lot to the many of us who are afraid to speak up for our faith. And you were also willing—I don't know if people remember this. He was—Stephen was willing to address the allegations about your boss, Les Moonves, before anyone in the industry, any other late night show wanted to touch that story. And recently, of course, Stephen, you called out your new bosses for bowing to Trump [Trump voice] “like dogs” to get their merger done. Stephen, I know you love your staff and your writers. I know how badly you feel for them. And I also hope—I hope you also know that they wouldn't want you to be anything less than the decent and brave soul that you are. … STEPHEN COLBERT: Bernstein, as you saw, was a brilliant writer, and as you know, was blacklisted. And I did a little research, and as I was doing the research on Walter Bernstein for this award, I discovered—I don't know why I didn't know this. It dawned on me. The blacklist was not a government policy. The blacklist wasn't a law or a regulation or an executive order. It was a voluntary, industry-wide agreement to deny work to left-leaning artists out of fear that certain members of the government might publicly attack the parent corporation of these artists or the union they belong to. It was that threat, only the threat of trouble that ended so many careers. And now, while I'd be associated with Mr. Bernstein in any way is a great honor. I want to be clear that I do not deserve the implied parallel here. This is not the 1950s. This is not the Red Scare. And as far as I can tell, no one in late night is fomenting a revolution. As we know, the revolution will not be televised. It was going to be televised, but then Paramount bought it. And evidently the revolution was losing like $40 million a year. It had to go. I hear the revolution is thinking about starting a Substack.