On Monday afternoon‚ the New York Post dropped an exclusive that‚ after a few days of public wrangling and possible legal action‚ CBS News returned to Catherine Herridge her confidential files — including sensitive material‚ potentially containing sourcing — after having been seized when she was unceremoniously fired as part of layoffs by parent company Paramount Global. Reporter Alexandra Steigrad had the story: “CBS News on Monday finally returned confidential files belonging to fired investigative reporter Catherine Herridge amid mounting pressure from the House Judiciary Committee and the union representing the journalist‚ The Post has learned.” Steigrad explained that the reason for the whole hubbub stemmed from the fact that‚ upon being laid off‚ Herridge’s “personal files — along with her work laptop‚ which may have contained other confidential info — were immediately confiscated and locked away at” CBS News’s Washington bureau. In a statement to the Post‚ CBS said “Herridge’s union representative picked up her materials this morning.” The paper said Herridge herself would be “reviewing the materials‚” which would mean she’s combing through everything to ensure nothing was taken. For their part‚ Herridge’s union‚ SAG-AFTRA said they’re “pleased” CBS made this decision following “SAG-AFTRA's intervention and widespread media coverage that underscored shared concerns about press freedom and the First Amendment.” The Post cited a source as having heard CBS cry uncle and “was particularly rattled when SAG-AFTRA came out strongly in favor of Herridge.” In other words‚ CBS messed with the wrong reporter when trying to pull off something unprecedented when it came to a reporter's files that include sensitive details like sources‚ who risk their lives and livelihoods to share information with journalists. If CBS wasn’t going to comply‚ they would have faced more pressure beyond the union taking them to court as‚ according to the Post‚ the House Judiciary Committee launched a probe Friday into this chicanery. Nonetheless‚ CBS News President Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews and fellow CBS head honchos “have until March 1 to provide information on who handled Herridge’s files and who ordered them to be retained‚ among other things.” Media Research Center Founder and President Brent Bozell had his own thoughts on this story‚ posting on X: CBS shouldn't have had to be publicly shamed into doing what they should have done in the first place. They still owe @CBS_Herridge a very full and public apology. — Brent Bozell (@BrentBozell) February 27‚ 2024 Steigrad also outlined how Herridge reportedly clashed with Ciprian-Matthews over covering claims of Biden family corruption and this isn’t Herridge’s only problem as she still faces legal peril over a story from her Fox News days (click “expand”): During her time at CBS‚ Herridge had encountered roadblocks from higher-ups over her         Hunter Biden coverage and had also clashed with Ciprian-Matthews‚ a sharp-elbowed executive who was investigated — and cleared — in 2021 over favoritism and discriminatory hiring and management practices‚ as The Post previously reported. Some sources speculated that the network may believe Herridge has information in her files that could lead to a lawsuit for wrongful termination. Others mused that she may have sensitive information — including sources — that are central to her investigation into Hunter Biden. Currently‚ Herridge is under fire for not complying with US District Judge Christopher Cooper’s order to reveal how she learned about a federal probe into a Chinese American scientist who operated a graduate program in Virginia. The journalist may soon be held in contempt of court for not divulging her source for an investigative piece she penned in 2017 when she worked for Fox News. She could be ordered to personally pay fines that could total as much as $5‚000 a day. As an example of how her work at CBS expanded far beyond Biden family corruption to traditional‚ shoe-string‚ traditional investigative reporting that’s all too rare in today’s media ecosystem‚ the Post cited the US Justice and Advocacy Group as having voiced concern Monday about her firing after having worked with her “last November on an investigation that revealed the National Guard denied 30% of injury claims that are recommended by local commanders.”

This is the kind of keen political insight that makes MSNBC our go-to network -- for laughs. On today's Morning Joe‚ Scarborough was dragging out the old DNC talking point that hey‚ the Republicans have lost the nationwide popular vote in seven of the last eight elections. This is how Electoral College Deniers argue. Eugene Robinson‚ MSNBC's chief political analyst‚ who is also an associate editor of the Washington Post‚ was responding to Joe Scarborough's question as to what Republicans should do‚ given their popular vote record.  Here was Robinson's description of the Republican strategy to win the White House despite losing the popular vote: "Well‚ the first thing you do‚ is you gerrymander the hell out of everything‚ right? To‚ to try to build in an advantage. " Not "right‚" Gene. Wrong! In 48 of the 50 states‚ the winner of the state's popular vote receives ALL of the state's Electoral College votes. [Maine and Nebraska have different ways of allocating their Electoral College votes.] Given that Maine and Nebraska have only a combined nine Electoral College votes‚ that means that 98.3% of all Electoral College votes are awarded in‚ 48 of 50 states‚ on a winner-take-all popular vote basis. You can't gerrymander your way around that‚ Gene! Yes‚ both parties do their share of gerrymandering of congressional districts. The latest example is New York‚ where Democrat state legislators rejected a bipartisan congressional district map in order to gerrymander things to their maximum advantage. But you can't gerrymander presidential electoral districts when—in almost all the states!—there's only one presidential district: the entire state! Joe Scarborough made his own contribution to today's absurdity. Scarborough claimed that Republicans have not won one presidential election this century—but then had to concede‚ if only‚ that is‚ if Ralph Nader hadn't run in 2000‚ Jill Stein hadn't run in 2016‚ and George W. Bush hadn't run for re-election in 2004 and won! That's a lot of ifs‚ Joe‚ amounting to three GOP presidential wins this century! We may be headed for another cycle where "If RFK Jr. and Jill Stein and Cornel West hadn't run‚" Republicans are losers. By Scarborough's logic‚ he's the most fair-minded‚ objective‚ talking head in liberal-media land -- if it weren't for the fact that he's totally in the tank for Joe Biden! Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 2/27/24 6:05 am ET JOE SCARBOROUGH: I think‚ I think sometimes you need to stepback‚ right?Sometimes you need to step back and you go‚ why are things happening the way they are? And I know we've all seen op-eds talking about this through the years. But the Republicans have lost seven of the last eight presidential elections when it comes to popular vote. They've been able‚ they figured out in '16 how to win‚ and just barely‚ and they did it through the Electoral College.  But you know‚ Gene‚ not to get too deep into it here‚ but I'm going to get deep in it here‚ because it's just kinda what I do. If you take away Ralph Nader in 2000‚ you take away Jill Stein in 2016‚ get this‚ a Republican‚ a Republican would not have been elected president this century. And that's‚ of course‚ assuming Bush doesn't run in 2004‚ win re-election. But‚ but the Republicans have lost the country. They've lost -- they've won one. This is amazing. Since 1992‚ Republicans have won the popular vote one time.  So‚ what do you do if you know you're going to lose? You've lost the country. You're not going to change anything‚. You're just going to keep denying elections! And they're trying to perfect it now. EUGENE ROBINSON: I know‚ yeah. Well‚ the first thing you do‚ is you gerrymander the hell out of everything‚ right? To‚ to try to build in an advantage.  You put your thumb on the scale in every way you can‚ which the Republican party did. And‚ and then you still lose. So the only recourse after that is just to say‚ no‚ it didn't happen. I didn't lose. I actually won‚ even though‚ even though you lost.

An expert review panel observed "gaps" in Boeing's safety culture‚ according to a report released Monday by the Federal Aviation Administration.The FAA's expert panel members recently completed an extensive review of the design and production of Boeing's airplanes after a door panel blew out during an Alaska Airlines flight last month. The report found "a disconnection between Boeing's senior management and other members of the organization on safety culture." Panel experts expressed concerns that the company's reporting systems failed to encourage "open communication‚" potentially causing retaliation fears."The Expert Panel also observed inadequate and confusing implementation of the five components of a positive safety culture‚" the report stated. Boeing's five safety-culture components include: "Reporting Culture‚ Just Culture‚ Flexible Culture‚ Learning Culture‚ and Informed Culture."The report revealed "gaps" in Boeing's safety‚ including "a lack of awareness of safety-related metrics at all levels of the organization."The company was advised to review the panel's recommendations "and develop an action plan" within six months.Boeing responded to the report's release by thanking the panel."We've taken important steps to foster a safety culture that empowers and encourages all employees to share their voice. But there is more work to do‚" the company stated. "We will carefully review the panel's assessment and learn from their findings‚ as we continue our comprehensive efforts to improve our safety and quality programs."The FAA appointed the expert panel early last year. The agency noted that it "will immediately begin a thorough review of the report and determine next steps regarding the recommendations as appropriate.""We will continue to hold Boeing to the highest standard of safety and will work to ensure the company comprehensively addresses these recommendations‚" the FAA added.Last month's mid-air blowout prompted Boeing to reshuffle its management team. Blaze News previously reported that as a result of the shake-up‚ Ed Clark‚ the head of the company's 737 Max program‚ was replaced.A United States National Transportation Safety Board preliminary report found that the plane involved in the incident may have left the Boeing factory‚ overseen by Clark‚ without key bolts to secure the emergency door panel.Boeing's investors have since lodged a lawsuit against the company‚ claiming that its "serious safety lapses" and "poor quality control" measures caused a dip in stock prices.Reuters reported that Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun is scheduled to meet with FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker on Tuesday to review his recent visit to the company's 737 factory.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The authorities in Ohio reported that an amputated human finger was discovered in a Walmart parking lot. Now‚ the police are asking for help and information on how it got there in the first place‚ according to the Kansas City Star.The authorities in Sidney‚ Ohio‚ were alerted to the horrific sight of an amputated human finger at a Walmart off West Michigan Street on Sunday. However‚ it is still not clear how it got there.The city government of Sidney‚ Ohio‚ took to Facebook after the alarming discovery‚ writing: "The Sidney Police Department approaches all investigations with a high level of seriousness. As such‚ a request for community assistance has been made in an effort to support the investigation. During the preliminary investigation phase‚ the department exhausted all possibilities within nearby hospitals and is working with other law enforcement agencies in conjunction with the Montgomery County Coroner’s office."The coroner's office was able to confirm that the finger did indeed belong to a human‚ likely female. However‚ no medical providers who have been alerted to the situation have been able to link the finger to any recent patients‚ per CBS News.The authorities have asked the surrounding community for help with the investigation."The Sidney Police Department is committed to examining all potential criminal and non-criminal scenarios. Anyone with information regarding this is asked to call the Sidney Police Department at 937-498-2351 or Crime Stoppers at 937-492-8477 (TIPS)‚" the Facebook post continued.Facebook users chimed in on the development‚ with one user suggesting that cartels are known for "dismembering body parts when a Drug deal goes bad." Another user said that "who ever left it there didn't leave it voluntarily. A finger is not something you just drop without noticing."While the investigation is still in the early stages‚ the police have been unable to find a match for the lost digit. Nate Robinson‚ who frequently shops at the Walmart‚ said: “That’s pretty crazy to think about."“How do you not know whose finger is missing? There should be a body connected to that‚ right?” "I thought it was the strangest thing I ever heard‚" Robinson continued.Briaunna Gregory said that she would have freaked out if she had been the one to find the lost finger.“I’d freak out [and] probably turn around and go home. [I’d] never come to this Walmart again‚” she said‚ according to WHIO.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Democrats are notoriously lazier than conservatives‚ but not when it comes to keeping Donald Trump from becoming president again. In a report from the Atlantic‚ Democrats are apparently weighing the option of “coming back with a vengeance” and refusing to certify a Trump win — ironically‚ on January 6‚ 2025. “Isn’t that an insurrection?” Pat Gray asks. "Isn’t that what we’ve decided?” “If there’s no law in Georgia‚ there’s no law in New York‚ no law in D.C.‚ and they decide on January 6 to ‘come back with a vengeance’ — you know there will be demonstrations all over‚ and then they overturn the election‚” Glenn Beck says‚ disturbed. However‚ while the legal attacks on Trump have been relentless and from every angle‚ Stu Burguiere thinks it can actually affect the former president positively. “I think it’s going to be cemented that a lot of this was just crazy political attacks‚ and that’s what Trump politically needs to convince people of‚ he needs to be able to get people over that line and think‚ ‘This actually was unfair‚’” he explains. Glenn agrees‚ especially considering the result lawsuits have had on other politicians. “I’ve heard since Bill Clinton‚ that when you persecute somebody like this‚ and you’re unfair‚ and you use the court system to go after them‚ what happens with the black population‚ Pat?” he says. “They’re sensitive to it‚” Pat says‚ before Glenn agrees‚ “And they will rally around that person.” To hear more‚ watch the clip below. Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling‚ thought-provoking analysis‚ and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

The White House was slammed on Monday for releasing a woefully inadequate statement about the shocking murder of Laken Riley. Police have charged Jose Ibarra‚ a 26-year-old Venezuelan immigrant living in the U.S. illegally‚ for murdering Riley‚ a 22-year-old Georgia college student‚ on the University of Georgia campus last week. Court documents allege that Ibarra didn't simply kill Riley. Rather‚ police accuse him of "disfiguring her skull." The heinous crime has brought increased attention to the border crisis and President Joe Biden's immigration policies‚ and the administration's response to Riley's murder isn't helping. On Monday‚ a White House spokesperson released the following statement: We would like to extend our deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of Laken Hope Riley. People should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law if they are found to be guilty. Given this is an active case‚ we would have to refer you to state law enforcement and ICE. The lackluster statement — which doesn't‚ in fact‚ include any word from President Biden himself — was quickly slammed. "No statement from Biden? Just a few cold words from a press aide. Pathetic‚" Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) said. '"People should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law if they are found to be guilty.' Really? The White House refused to hold this illegal alien accountable for crossing our border illegally in 2022‚" Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) said. "I've heard NO APOLOGIES or remorse from @TheDemocrats about their open border policies leading to another murdered American‚" Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) said in response. "Tragic and preventable. Joe Biden took 94 executive actions in his first 100 days to expose our southern border. 3 years later‚ Biden still refuses to take accountability for creating the worst border catastrophe in American history. His failure is having deadly consequences‚" Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) responded. "Once again‚ Biden refuses to take accountability for creating the worst border disaster in American history. What a sad and pathetic statement given his administration's actions have allowed this to take place. @POTUS stop the invasion‚ shut down the border‚" Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) said. "Mr. President‚ instead of making excuses for her murder‚ and defending policies that weaken our immigration laws‚ we must ensure justice for Laken by first securing our border‚" Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) said. "I see they left out the part that her murder was a result of leftist sanctuary city policies and the open border‚" Jeremy Redfern‚ press secretary for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R)‚ pointed out. "If only the White House showed similar deference to ICE on actually enforcing our laws‚ then Laken Riley may still be alive. There were thousands of detention beds available to detain and remove Laken’s killer when he entered illegally‚" the National Immigration Center for Enforcement said. As Blaze News reported‚ Immigration and Customs Enforcement confirmed that Ibarra entered the U.S. illegally in September 2022.About a year later‚ Ibarra was arrested in New York City for "acting in a manner to injure a child less than 17 and a motor vehicle license violation." But he was "released by the NYPD before a detainer could be issued‚" ICE said. Ibarra then moved to Georgia sometime last fall. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

When active-duty U.S. Air Force member Aaron Bushnell‚ 25‚ died after setting himself on fire outside the Israeli Embassy in Washington‚ D.C.‚ while hollering "free Palestine!" woke social media users flooded the X platform with tributes to Bushnell punctuated with the phrase "rest in power" as opposed to the traditional "rest in peace." For example‚ Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein posted the following message‚ which has received well over 1 million views since Monday: "Rest in power Aaron Bushnell. 'I will no longer be complicit in genocide. Free Palestine!' May his sacrifice deepen our commitment to stop genocide now." Uh-oh Well‚ it appear that leftists of a more rabid nature aren't too happy with the likes of Stein‚ and they're demanding that the phrase "rest in power" be reserved for black people only. The following X user created a video showing a whole bunch of social media posts from annoyed wokesters explaining the unwritten rules surrounding the proper usage of "rest in power." Content warning: Language‚ potentially disturbing images: — (@) Here comes the backlash In the wake of the pointed "rest in power" corrections from the militant left‚ let's just say not everyone is down with being ordered around over their speech. To wit: — (@) — (@) — (@) — (@) Some others: "I will now say #RestInPower every time a white person of notoriety dies‚" one X user wrote. "Not because it’s important to do so‚ but because we’ve been told we’re not supposed to by those who attempt to demean us with controlled-speech. I reject their hollow dictates." "Put the kids to bed. Told them all to rest in power‚" another commenter quipped. "What if someone was electrocuted? Technically wouldn’t they Rest in Power?" another user wondered with tongue fully in cheek. 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. birth rate currently languishes at its lowest level in history‚ and a recent Pew Research Center report indicates that young women are less interested than ever in having children. For all the inquiry on the subject‚ sociologists and pundits across the political spectrum recognize that this fact exposes something broken at the heart of American society. In the era of “family planning‚” babies are an implicit signal of hope‚ an expression of confidence. What is it about American culture — and the global homogenized culture downstream from it — that has caused young people to lose their faith in the future? Boomers made marriage as frivolous as they made divorce and expected their children to emerge unscathed. Frequently‚ and fairly‚ young people’s reproductive fruitlessness is chalked up to downward mobility. Many Millennials entered the job market during the Great Recession‚ and that was only their first setback. Factoring in student debt‚ skyrocketing health care costs‚ the diminishing worth of wages‚ precarious gig employment‚ and the worst housing market in recent history‚ Millennials probably faced more economic headwinds in their childbearing years than any other generation. This is especially true for men‚ whose financial viability directly affects their eligibility as potential husbands and for whom automation and outsourcing have devastated several traditional modes of work. Conservatives are more likely to bring up cultural factors — casual sex‚ antinatalism‚ secularism‚ and the diversionary urban lifestyle‚ for example — as major contributors to the malaise. We have become lotus eaters‚ it is said‚ worshippers at the altar of the eternal present and the almighty dollar. Gone are the days when the word luxury held a negative connotation. Long gone are the days of public Christian culture and the “family values” it once entailed. What‚ lacking a common sense of the dignity in sacrifice‚ could compel a young woman to give up her unencumbered pleasure-seeking‚ looks-maxing‚ and sleep to give life to another person? It’s a hard sell. Pushing back marriage Even for those conservatively disposed young people who claim interest in domestic life‚ the cultural narrative around marriage suggests that it is a capstone event. In other words‚ several other benchmarks must be achieved first to pursue marriage legitimately. Having first faced economic setbacks‚ then having lost several critical years of potential achievement to pandemic restrictions means the leading indicator of fertility — marriage — is pushed ever farther into midlife for Millennials and Gen Z. Many things can be true at once. Though right and left may contest whose reasons are more legitimate or more primary‚ the fertility crisis is‚ above all‚ a conflagration. Rarely articulated in these debates‚ because it is essentially unquantifiable (though readily observable on social media)‚ is Millennials’ sense of being betrayed and abandoned by their own parents. Whether “child-free by choice” or “cycle-breaking‚” Millennial resentment of Boomers is a veritable theme online. Last week’s viral discourse on X was prompted by a woman in her early 20s who posted a TikTok asking her followers‚ “What childhood trauma do you have that’s actually kind of funny?” She then proceeded to share about her father‚ who abandoned his family to pursue competitive breakdancing in middle age and became a “D-list celebrity” through his pursuit. While the conditions of the man’s departure may be unique‚ and uniquely ridiculous‚ the departure itself‚ and its more fundamental impetus (what Inez Stepman called the “exhaustive spelunking into the abyss of [his] own psyche”) is all too common. Baby Boomers have the highest divorce rate in recorded U.S. history. Not only that‚ but Boomers are the only generation to increase their divorce rate as they age. The divorce rate has doubled for adults 50 and over and tripled for adults 65 and older since the 1990s. Some scholars all but guarantee that the divorce rate will decline as Boomers pass away. On the other hand‚ Millennials‚ despite their failure to launch‚ are far less likely to divorce when they do get married. Boomers made marriage as frivolous as they made divorce and expected their children to emerge unscathed. Reality bats last. Their children’s deepest wounds‚ inflicted by those entrusted with their care‚ have rendered those children fearful‚ suspicious‚ anxious‚ and avoidant. Anecdotal evidence from the trenches of the dating apps confirms it. The proliferation of explicitly misogynistic and misandrist content on the internet does‚ too. What if the behaviors that appear cynical‚ especially from the perspective of the religiously minded social conservative — including delaying marriage‚ avoiding exclusivity‚ and even promiscuity — are at least partially a matter of shielding oneself from a familiar heartache? What if Millennial malaise is as much a defense mechanism as it is a conscious rejection of traditional life scripts? The reverse grandmother effect For people who care about monogamous marriage as an effective‚ civilization-enhancing social technology‚ recognizing the vulnerability — and the fear — behind Millennials’ revealed preferences may highlight a new path for addressing the problem. Divorce wasn’t the only way Boomers abandoned their kids. For many‚ the abandonment has come later. Statistician “Postliberal Pete” consistently offers analysis on the low fertility problem. Recently‚ he identified the “grandmother effect" as a boon to fertility: Research has demonstrated that having a living maternal grandmother increases the number of offspring born by their daughters by about 20% whilst another study found that a grandparental death leads to a reduction of approximately 5 percentage points in the five-year probability of childbirth amongst their offspring. The grandmother effect gives us an insight into some of the cultural factors which underpin higher fertility rates in predominantly rural societies‚ given that in rural areas people are more likely‚ on average‚ to live near extended family and given that there is a positive and statistically significant association of parental support with adult daughters' entry into parenthood. For the Millennials who do have children‚ a troubling realization awaits: Their own mothers are not interested in helping. I call this the reverse grandmother effect. Mary Harrington has identified the phenomenon through “glammies‚” the Baby Boomers who seek to embrace “their ‘hot kooky unhinged grandma era.’” In this view‚ Harrington says‚ “the role of grandma is to be ‘unconventional’: challenging authority‚ flouting routines‚ giving your grandkids inappropriate things for breakfast‚ and doing ‘crazy things’ with them.” The glammies want to travel. They don’t want to change diapers. Harrington continues: Clare‚ 30‚ from South Carolina‚ tells me that her own mother has little interest in helping with Clare’s baby and young toddler‚ often “because she has a hair/Botox/facial appt‚ which she must travel cross-state to attend”. Ellie‚ 30‚ a New England mother of two under two‚ tells me “Our parents are just not interested in cultivating a deep relationship with us or our daughters.” Instead‚ her mother live-posts her “brief‚ rare” granny visits to social media for her friends — and never offers to wash up. And she scornfully rejected an offer to live rent-free closer by‚ in exchange for helping with childcare‚ as a hostile attempt to reduce her to “just a grandma.” For a young‚ conservative-leaning mum‚ with visions of an interconnected‚ resilient extended family‚ her own parents’ determinedly atomistic approach to grandparenthood has been profoundly disappointing‚ Ellie tells me. As she puts it: “Spiritually and emotionally‚ we feel robbed.” Adding insult to injury‚ the public institutions that Boomers once relied on to help raise their children have been ideologically and socially hollowed out in the meantime. Public transportation‚ the public library‚ and public school have become downright dangerous for young families in certain cases. What remains instead of a robust civic life are two options: extremely expensive‚ high-demand private education and extracurriculars or‚ as many have it‚ isolation. If Millennials want a village‚ they must build it themselves. The village into which they were born dissolved beneath their feet‚ at the behest of their elders. All that remains is a terribly thin and tattered social fabric. Rebuilding everything from scratch is a pretty overwhelming prospect for an unprecedentedly mentally ill and lonely generation. Ultimately‚ the generation must exercise radical acceptance and responsibility to move forward. But perhaps confronting their legitimate injuries — the first cause of their loneliness — would help things along.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's deeply unpopular regime rolled out new legislation Monday that threatens to radically transform the Canadian legal landscape and equip activists with new means of clamping down on speech they perceive to be hateful. On its face‚ Bill C-63‚ the so-called "Online Harms Act‚" contains various uncontroversial elements such as the promise to tackle child pornography online. While Justice Minister Arif Virani and other Liberal officials have emphasized these elements when promoting the bill‚ the child protections appear only to be the vehicle for the transformative substance of C-63. C-63 would enable Trudeau's leftist government to define "hate speech" online; create a stand-alone "hate crime"; set "strict penalties" for perceived offenses; and allow concern-mongers to file complaints without facing the accused. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre stressed the bill is an "attack on freedom of expression." 'Online Harms Act' According to the Trudeau government‚ the bill would "create stronger online protection for children and better safeguard everyone in Canada from online hate and other types of harmful content." To this end‚ C-63‚ would hold online platforms‚ including streaming sites and pornographic websites‚ "accountable for the design choices made that lead to the dissemination and amplification of harmful content on their platforms." Legislation has recently been enacted in the United Kingdom with a similar aim. Extra to holding organizations like Facebook‚ PornHub‚ and Twitch responsible for content on their platforms and threatening penalties of up to $25 million‚ C-63 would: establish an entirely new legislative and regulatory framework; create a brand-new "digital safety" czar; put a definition for "hatred" in the Criminal Code; provide increased penalties for existing "hate propaganda offenses"; and establish a "standalone hate crime offense and creating an additional set of remedies for online hate speech in the Canadian Human Rights Act." The legislation defines hatred thusly: "the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike." Content that foments hatred is defined as that which "expresses detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination ... and that‚ given the context in which it is communicated‚ is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of such a prohibited ground." Hate crime offenses‚ including those related to "sexual orientation or gender identity or expression‚" would carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. So-called "hate propaganda" offenses would land offenders anywhere from a few years in prison to life‚ the maximum sentence being reserved for those advocating for genocide against an identifiable group. C-63 would afford anybody including grievance groups the ability to file complaints with the Canadian Human Rights Commission against users who have supposedly posted hate speech online. According to the Trudeau government‚ the bill would also outline procedures to "protect the confidentiality of complainants and witnesses as appropriate." True North News indicated that those the CHRC finds guilty can be hit with fines up to $70‚000 — $20‚000 for so-called victims and $50‚000 for the government "if the member panel considers it appropriate" — as well as take-down orders for content. 'Woke authoritarian agenda' Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre‚ presently poised to defeat Trudeau in the next federal election‚ told Canadian state media ahead of the bill's reveal that he will not accept "Justin Trudeau's woke authoritarian agenda‚" adding that the Liberal regime should not be deciding what constitutes "hate speech." "Justin Trudeau said anyone who criticized him during the pandemic was engaging in hate speech‚" said Poilievre. Around the time in 2022 his Liberal cabinet members contemplated deploying tanks against peaceful protesters‚ Trudeau called the Freedom Convoy truckers a "small fringe minority of people who are on their way to Ottawa‚ who are holding unacceptable views that are expressing." "What does Justin Trudeau mean when he says the words 'hate speech'? He means the speech he hates‚" continued Poilievre. "You can assume he will ban all of that." The Conservative leader stressed that Trudeau is the last person in Canada who ought to be defining hatred. "I point out the irony that someone who spent the first half of his adult life as a practicing racist‚ who dressed up in hideous racist costumes so many times he says he can't remember them all‚ should then be the arbiter of what constitutes hate‚" said Poilievre. "What he should actually do is look into his own heart and ask himself why he was such a hateful racist." When asked about the bill last week‚ Trudeau suggested that criticism of C-63 and the notion that it is censorious amounted to more "misinformation" from the right. Liberal Justice Minister Virani maintains that C-63 is not another effort by the Liberal regime to clamp down on free speech. "I want to be crystal clear about what the Online Harms Act does not do‚" said Virani. "It does not undermine freedom of speech. It enhances free expression by empowering all people to safely participate in online debate." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A new adaptation offers a fresh take on James Clavell's 1975 novel‚ which fictionalizes the stories of English sailor William Adams‚ shogun Tokugawa Ieyasu and Japanese noblewoman Hosokawa Gracia