There was a time not long ago when Tucker Carlson commanded one of the most loyal audiences in conservative media. His nightly monologues on Fox News were must-see TV for millions. That version of Carlson felt grounded in the concerns of the everyday Americans who helped his show ascend to...

Former First Lady Michelle Obama sparked outrage among patriots by dismissing America as a “janky version” of itself during a podcast appearance, raising serious questions about respect for the nation that gave her family unprecedented opportunities. Obama’s Inflammatory Rhetoric Targets Nation Michelle Obama delivered controversial remarks on her podcast “IMO with Michelle Obama and Craig Robinson” during an April 2026 episode that quickly went viral. The former first lady stated, “We haven’t been this janky for a while, and I think our muscle of understanding our truth just got a little lax.” The colloquial term “janky,” meaning broken or substandard, represents a stark departure from the diplomatic language typically expected from former first ladies. Conservative commentators immediately challenged the appropriateness of such dismissive language from someone who lived in the White House for eight years. The timing of Obama’s comments proved particularly notable, coming during President Trump’s second term as his administration addresses serious public safety concerns. Federal immigration enforcement operations in Minnesota followed the January murders of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis. Former President Barack Obama had previously called Pretti’s killing a “wake-up call” regarding threats to American values. Michelle Obama’s characterization of the nation as “janky” appeared to critics as thinly veiled criticism of enforcement actions designed to protect American citizens from preventable violence. Washington Insider Questions America’s Direction Conservative critics quickly highlighted what they viewed as Obama’s lack of credibility to assess ordinary Americans’ experiences. One commentator directly addressed this disconnect, stating: “I don’t care what Michelle Obama has to say, but that’s someone who has lived in DC for more than 30 years.” This criticism underscores a fundamental frustration among conservatives with elite figures who spent decades benefiting from American opportunities while now characterizing the nation in negative terms. The Obama family’s rise from relative obscurity to the pinnacle of political power represents the American dream, making dismissive rhetoric about the country particularly galling to patriots. Obama attempted to frame her assessment as part of a broader discussion about national growth, suggesting the “janky” period represents a temporary phase. She acknowledged positive community responses, citing Minnesota as an example of communities protecting one another. However, this qualifier did little to soften the impact of her primary characterization. The podcast conversation, which included comedian guests discussing minority experiences and immigration, provided a platform for what critics viewed as one-sided grievance politics rather than balanced assessment of America’s strengths and challenges. Media Amplifies Partisan Divide CNN coverage characterized the controversy as a “fiery debate about politics, race, and double standards in public discourse.” The network’s framing suggested concerns about whether similar criticism from white public figures would generate equivalent backlash, shifting focus from the substance of Obama’s remarks to racial grievance narratives. This approach reflects the media’s tendency to deflect legitimate criticism of progressive figures by invoking accusations of bias. Fox News provided alternative coverage highlighting conservative objections, demonstrating the stark partisan divide in how Americans receive criticism of their country from prominent political figures. The viral spread of Obama’s comments led supporters to coin the term “Janky Era” to describe Trump’s second term, transforming her criticism into a rallying cry for administration opponents. This demonstrates how inflammatory rhetoric from influential figures can shape political discourse and deepen national divisions. For conservatives who spent years defending America against accusations of systemic racism and oppression, Obama’s characterization represents another attack on the exceptional nation that has provided unprecedented freedom and opportunity to people of all backgrounds. The controversy highlights ongoing tensions about acceptable criticism of America and whether prominent figures should prioritize national unity over partisan grievance. Sources: BET: Michelle Obama Says America Is in a ‘Janky Version’ of Itself Fox News: Michelle Obama Comment Video Coverage

When then-Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., announced his candidacy for governor of California, I was beyond surprised. Rumors of sexual misconduct, including allegations of blatant and serial infidelity, had been circulating for years. Having run for this very office, I experienced firsthand the intense level of local, state and national scrutiny one receives when seeking the top job in the biggest state in the country. The left-wing media treats liberal Democrat candidates different from how it treats conservative Republican candidates, but the media are not the problem if one’s candidacy starts to resonate. The heat comes from the same-party campaign rivals. When I decided to run for governor of California, I sought the advice of several experienced strategists, politicians, pundits and some professors. They all said the same thing, only worded differently: “Is there anything in your background that would be a problem?” These questions, they advised, include but are not limited to: Skeletons in your closet? What about your friends, associates, and family members? Taxes? Sexual harassment or misconduct or assaults? Any present or past behavior that could be deemed scandalous? Dating history, marriage, or divorce? Outstanding warrants? Traffic tickets? Unpaid traffic tickets? DUIs? Automobile accidents you caused or were involved in? Arrests? Misdemeanors? Felonies? Unpaid bills? Credit card debt? Lawsuits filed by or lawsuits against you? Drug use and drug abuse? Alcoholism? Abuse of prescription drugs? Sketchy business dealings? Bankruptcy? Inappropriate internet activity, including porn sites, other illicit sites or sending “compromising pictures”? Social media posts that could come back to haunt you? 911 calls from your home? Your work history? To what church do you belong? Who is your pastor? Ever been fired? If so, why? Is your campaign biography accurate, with no exaggerations or embellishments? Do your neighbors like you? And, for good measure, I was advised to hire a private detective to investigate myself. My experienced campaign manager took me on only after I addressed all those questions—and others—and obtained a report from a well-regarded private investigator. My campaign manager cautioned, “If you are accused of picking your feet in Poughkeepsie—especially if you DID pick your feet in Poughkeepsie—it will come out.” This brings us to Swalwell, who, according to a University of California, Berkeley poll conducted in March, was the leading Democrat in the primary. He was endorsed by Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who, like Swalwell, served as a prosecutor in an impeachment trial against President Donald Trump. According to Reuters, “ … a fifth woman came forward to accuse Swalwell of unwanted sexual contact, saying the Democratic lawmaker drugged and raped her during an encounter in 2018.” Swalwell first denied the accusations. He then dropped out of the race for governor, followed by his resignation from Congress. Former House Speaker and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., claimed she knew nothing about the rumors against Swalwell. But Willie Brown, once a mentor to former Vice President Kamala Harris and a former mayor of San Francisco, and who for 15 years served as speaker of the California Assembly, said: “No, I’m not surprised frankly because there have been rumors after rumors after rumors, his colleagues in Washington pretty much said that. That’s what Adam Schiff said, that’s what Nancy Pelosi said.” But Swalwell’s problems are just beginning. The sheriff of Los Angeles County has launched a criminal probe, as has the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. Civil lawsuits may follow. Then there are Swalwell’s financial issues. Despite a combined income with his wife of over $400,000, he is deeply in debt. He owes $100,000 in student loans, borrowed against his retirement account to help fund his campaign and deferred paying income taxes to conserve cash flow. This is not exactly a good look for someone vying to be the chief executive of a state with a budget deficit and massive unfunded pension liabilities. On top of everything, these scandals could cost the father of three children his marriage. After all, Swalwell set the standard. During the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Swalwell considered Kavanaugh unfit due to allegations of sexual misconduct. Swalwell tweeted: “Support survivors. Believe survivors. We are with you.” All of this raises a question. When Swalwell decided to run for governor, “What was he thinking?” COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post The Implosion of Eric Swalwell: What Was He Thinking? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Less than 100 days into his administration, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has been forced to slam the brakes on his signature campaign pledge. Instead of the citywide no-cost transit he promised, New Yorkers are being offered a scaled-back pilot covering three bus lines per borough. That is, if the state legislature can pass a budget, which is already a week past its deadline.Here's the part that really stings: Mamdani sabotaged his own policy. He and state Sen. Michael Gianaris (D) successfully launched a Queens free-bus pilot in 2023. It worked. But when Mamdani picked a fight with Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie (D) over a housing dispute, Heastie yanked the expansion from the budget.What does a socialist mayor do when his promises collapse? He makes bigger ones.Mamdani killed his own program, then ran for mayor promising to bring it back citywide. He campaigned on cleaning up a mess he made.Now he's calling a three-line pilot "a first step." Metropolitan Transportation Authority CEO Janno Lieber has been critical of the plan. Gov. Kathy Hochul (D), who has committed an additional $1.5 billion to bail out the city, is making it clear that buses rank below housing and auto insurance on her list.The reception in the state legislature has been, generously speaking, chilly.So what does a socialist mayor do when his promises collapse? He makes bigger ones.This week, Mamdani announced that La Marqueta in East Harlem will become New York City's first government-owned grocery store. The plan outlines one in each borough, where prices are "fair" and New Yorkers can "actually afford to shop." The man who couldn't deliver free buses now wants to compete with Costco. He even challenged the private sector directly: "I look forward to the competition."What he doesn’t seem to understand is that the competition has already won. Decades ago. And the proof is everywhere.It will cost $30 million just to open the East Harlem location, with a $70 million budget for all expected stores. That's $70 million in taxpayer money going into a business where even the best-run private grocery stores average margins under 2%. Every major retailer in America has spent decades perfecting supply chains and slashing spoilage, and yet they're still barely breaking even. Mamdani, fresh off failing to stop charging $2.90 for a bus ride, thinks he can do better.The real-world track record is telling. Baldwin, Florida, opened a city-run grocery in 2019, struggled to break even, and shut down in 2024. Erie, Kansas, ran its only grocery store at a loss for years before handing it to a private operator. Those towns had zero private competition, and they still couldn’t make it work. In New York City, the sequence is even more dangerous. The government store moves in, undercuts private competitors with taxpayer subsidies, and drives out the corner bodegas and family grocers who actually pay rent and taxes. RELATED: The liberal guide to committing national suicide Blaze Media IllustrationThen, as history guarantees, the government store collapses too. The Soviet Union, Venezuela, and Cuba all tried it. Every time: empty shelves, shortages, black markets. You don't end up with affordable groceries. You end up with a food desert and no private stores left to fill the gap.The reason is simple: Politicians are not personally responsible for the losses their policies create, so they have no incentive to operate efficiently. The losses get folded into next year's budget and repackaged as progress. Three out of four young voters put this man in office. Voters who had lived in New York City less than five years backed him 85% to 14%. They voted for the TikTok version of governance: big promises, great optics, someone else's problem. Free buses sounded great in a Trevor Noah interview.City-owned grocery stores sound great at a rally in East Harlem. Governing eight million people with real money and real consequences? That's where the fantasy ends.New York City doesn't have a bus problem or a grocery problem. It has a mayor with a socialism problem. And unlike his buses, the bill is running right on schedule.

CNN's chief international anchor, Christiane Amanpour, was ridiculed after she posted an unhinged response to criticism from Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.Hegseth compared some of the mainstream media to the Pharisees of the Bible during a media briefing Thursday morning.'You have *never* been in the United States military, and you should be absolutely drummed out of journalism for attempting to equivocate (sic) yourself to an [actual] member of the military.' Amanpour fired back in a lengthy rant on social media, where she appeared to claim that she had a similar rank as Hegseth when he left the military."Using the Pentagon podium to lash out at journalists in extreme biblical terms is unprecedented, misguided, and frankly wrong on the substance," she wrote."Ever since Sunday School Catholic classes, I have been well aware of the Scribes and the Pharisees. They were the bad guys against Jesus, the good guy ... in current U.S. good v evil war parlance. Bearing witness to the truth is what we journalists are commanded to do, without fear nor favor," she added.Hegseth pointed out that the Pharisees had ignored the miracles that Jesus Christ was performing and instead waited to catch him breaking the laws of the Old Testament. He compared that to the media ignoring the president's accomplishments to criticize him."I am also well aware of the Ten Commandments, and therefore urge any government radical anywhere, to follow the 9th ... against bearing false witness," Amanpour continued."And finally an observation: the current Secretary of War, f/k/a Defence, left the military with the rank of Major," she added. "I recall my dogtag in the first Gulf war had the rank of major ... the very same rank. Just sayin'!" she concluded.She was immediately mocked online for the bizarre statement."Read the last paragraph, folks. If @CNN had any editorial standards, Christiane Amanpour would be fired for her bizarre attack on @SecWar's military service," one response reads. "Why is a journalist mocking the rank of major, which @PeteHegseth earned while risking his life in Iraq & Afghanistan?"RELATED: Hegseth goes viral for 'Pulp Fiction' prayer at the Pentagon "A Major, really? Perhaps, a major pain in the ass, but definitely not Major," another user said."You have *never* been in the United States military, and you should be absolutely drummed out of journalism for attempting to equivocate (sic) yourself to an [actual] member of the military. Quite literally the definition of stolen valor," another detractor said.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

In the market for a new MacBook? Depending on how much you're willing to spend, we've curated a list of the best MacBook models you can buy for every budget.

In the market for a new MacBook? Depending on how much you're willing to spend, we've curated a list of the best MacBook models you can buy for every budget.

[View Article at Source]By Liberty Nation Authors Constructed by Liberty Nation News using PuzzleMe’s free crossword generator

President signals upcoming Pentagon document release on UAPs amid political debate over transparency and timing. By yourNEWS Media Newsroom President Donald Trump said new government documents related…