There's a new liberal sheriff in town‚ and his name is Joe Scarborough. Sheriff Joe is on the lookout for any media varmints billed as liberal‚ but who ain't liberal enough to suit Scarborough's standards. We saw Sheriff Scarborough in action on today's Morning Joe. When Mika Brzezinski referred to Harold Ford‚ Jr. as "the lone liberal co-host of Fox News show The Five‚ Scarborough cut Mika off: "Wait. Wait a second. Now‚ Harold. Willie‚ if you agree with both sides‚ you're not liberal‚ right? Harold's like -- he's just an agreer‚ right? [Imitating Ford] Here I agree with your side‚ I agree--" Mika stood up for Ford‚ a former Morning Joe regular. "No. He very smartly brings in his side by being kind to both sides. Do not mistake that." Sneered Scarborough: "I'm not mistaking anything." The agreeable Willie Geist -- not known for stirring up controversy himself -- did a Ford imitation‚ saying: "I agree with everything Harold said. I agree with everything you said. And I agree with everything Mika said." Willie added that he had seen Ford last night‚ and "I love that man." Scarborough certainly can't be accused of not being liberal enough. Joe's such a Biden toady that he devotes virtually every show to defending his boy and tearing down Trump. So much so that it was recently revealed that Biden is "obsessed" with Scarborough's show‚ that the two Joes‚ Biden and Scarborough‚ have become frequent phone buddies‚ and that Scarborough has become an informal Biden adviser. Note: During his days as a Congressman from Tennessee‚ Ford had a solidly liberal record. For example‚ he received a 94% rating from the hyper-liberal teachers' union‚ the NEA; a 78% rating from Planned Parenthood; and 80% from the radical-left Americans for Democratic Action. As for Scarborough‚ back before he quit Congress five months into his fourth term as a Republican congressman representing a district in Florida's conservative panhandle‚ Joe had a strongly conservative record. But that was before he hitched his star to MSNBC‚ and transmogrified into Joe Biden's biggest media booster--and enforcer against any supposedly liberal media types who aren't liberal enough for Scarborough's liking. And whereas Mika described Ford as the "lone liberal" on The Five‚ after Scarborough finished swiping at Harold‚ Mika played a clip of a second liberal co-host on The Five's panel--Jessic Tarlov. She cheered Dem Rep. Jamie Raskin as "spot on" in claimig that the Biden impeachment inquiry is toast.  And for good measure‚ Scarborough again aimed his insult machine at House Investigations Committee chairman James Comer. Back in October‚ we caught Scarborough claiming that Arnold The Pig from the 60s sitcom Green Acres "would do a better a better job than James Comer." Today‚ Scarborough fantasized about Arnold The Pig as Comer's chief counsel‚ whispering in his ear.  Note that the Democrats on The Five are actual Democrats. Ford might not be the most partisan guy‚ but Tarlov definitely has a hard Dem edge. And neither are known to take shots at their fellow Dems. Contrast Ford and Tarlov with what we like to call "MSNBC Republicans" -- the likes of Michael Steele and Charlie Sykes‚ who can be counted on to trash Republicans in general—and Trump in particular. Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 2/22/24 6:26 am ET KEN DILANIAN: What's really at issue here is‚ when did the FBI‚ when did the Justice Department‚ when did Congress start to understand that this informant not only was maybe unreliable‚ but was actually‚ you know‚ a fabulist who made up all kinds of things‚ and was also talking to Russian intelligence? That is a big deal‚ that's a momentous development.  MIKA BRZEZINSKIl: So‚ a lot of this constant twisting and turning‚ wherever the disinformation leads you‚ lands on Fox News. The lone liberal co-host of Fox News‚ the show 'The Five' --  JOE SCARBOROUGH: Wait. Wait a second. Harold‚ I don't know -- Willie‚ if you agree with both sides‚ you're not liberal‚ right? Harold's‚ like‚ he's just an agreerer‚ right?  MIKA: No-o-o-o.  SCARBOROUGH: Well‚ no. [Supposedly imitating Ford] Here I agree with your side. I agree with you guys. MIKA: He very smartly brings in his side by being kind to both sides. Do not mistake that.  SCARBOROUGH: I'm not mistaking anything. What do you think about our friend Harold? What is he? He's an agreer. WILLIE GEIST: [Facetiously imitating Ford] I would just say‚ I agree with everything Harold said. I agree with everything you said. And I agree with everything Mika said right there.  By the way‚ I saw Harold last night. I love hat guy. MIKA: What Harold does‚ he goes‚ I respect what you say. I respect what you say. But here's what I think. 

The government and private companies spy on us. My former employee‚ Naomi Brockwell‚ has become a privacy specialist. She advises people on how to protect their privacy. In my new video‚ she tells me I should delete most of my apps on my phone. I push back. I like that Google knows where I am and can recommend a “restaurant near me. I like that my Shell app lets me buy gas (almost) without getting out of the car.” I don’t like that government gathers information about me via my phone‚ but so far‚ so what? Brockwell tells me I’m being dumb because I don’t know which government will get that data in the future. Looking at my phone‚ she tells me‚ “You’ve given location permission‚ microphone permission. You have so many apps!” She says I should delete most of them‚ starting with Google Chrome. “This is a terrible app for privacy. Google Chrome is notorious for collecting every single thing that they can about you ... (and) broadcasting that to thousands of people ... auctioning off your eyeballs. It’s not just advertisers collecting this information. Thousands of shell companies‚ shady companies of data brokers also collect it and in turn sell it.” Instead of Google‚ she recommends using a browser called Brave. It’s just as good‚ she says‚ but it doesn’t collect all the information that Chrome does. It’s slightly faster‚ too‚ because it doesn’t slow down to load ads. Then she says‚ “Delete Google Maps.” “But I need Google Maps!” “You don’t.” She replies‚ “You have an iPhone. You have Apple Maps ... Apple is better when it comes to privacy ... Apple at least tries to anonymize your data.” Instead of Gmail‚ she recommends more private alternatives‚ like Proton Mail or Tuta. “There are many others.” She points out‚ “The difference between them is that every email going into your inbox for Gmail is being analyzed‚ scanned‚ it’s being added to a profile about you.” But I don’t care. Nothing beats Google’s convenience. It remembers my credit cards and passwords. It fills things in automatically. I tried Brave browser but‚ after a week‚ switched back to Google. I like that Google knows me. Brockwell says that I could import my credit cards and passwords to Brave and autofill there‚ too. “I do understand the trade-off‚” she adds. “But email is so personal. It’s private correspondence about everything in your life. I think we should use companies that don’t read our emails. Using those services is also a vote for privacy‚ giving a market signal that we think privacy is important. That’s the only way we’re going to get more privacy.” She also warns that even apps like WhatsApp‚ which I thought were private‚ aren’t as private as we think. “WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted and better than standard SMS. But it collects a lot of data about you and shares it with its parent company‚ Facebook. It’s nowhere near as private as an app like Signal.” She notices my Shell app and suggests I delete it. Opening the app’s “privacy nutrition label‚” something I never bother reading‚ she points out that I give Shell “your purchase history‚ your contact information‚ physical address‚ email address‚ your name‚ phone number‚ your product interaction‚ purchase history‚ search history‚ user id‚ product interaction‚ crash data‚ performance data‚ precise location‚ course location ... “ The list goes on. No wonder I don’t read it. She says‚ “The first step before downloading an app‚ take a look at their permissions‚ see what information they’re collecting.” I’m just not going to bother. But she did convince me to delete some apps‚ pointing out that if I want the app later‚ I can always reinstall it. “We think that we need an app for every interaction we do with a business. We don’t realize what we give up as a result.” “They already have all my data. What’s the point of going private now?” I ask. “Privacy comes down to choice‚” She replies. “It’s not that I want everything that I do to remain private. It’s that I deserve to have the right to selectively reveal to the world what I want them to see. Currently‚ that’s not the world.”

Recently‚ I appeared on “The Culture War” with Tim Pool‚ discussing the possibility of national divorce with Louis Marinelli‚ founder of the CalExit campaign‚ a movement to establish “the country of Pacifica in the San Francisco Bay area.” Three weeks ago‚ Daniel Miller‚ leader of the Texit movement‚ was on the show discussing the possibility of Texas leaving the Union. At LibertyCon earlier this month‚ Mises Institute editor Ryan McMaken and Project Liberal founder Jonathan Casey debated whether a national divorce would lead to more liberty. Why is national divorce such a hot topic these days? Could it be because 65% of Americans believe candidates for office serve “their own interests” and 61% percent believe those interests are for the wealthy? We must give power to the powerless and representation to the unrepresented. The reason so many Americans want a national divorce is that they feel unrepresented and powerless. But we tried a national divorce before. It didn’t work out. The three-fifths compromise determined representatives and direct taxes apportioned by the whole number of free persons and three-fifths of all other persons‚ meaning slaves. This meant that Southern slaveholding states would have unequal representation in the House. They could purchase representation and increase their power in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College. The founding generation set forth a path to abolish slavery with the Northwest Ordinance of 1787‚ the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807‚ and the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Unfortunately‚ the founders’ heirs failed to follow through with the plan. Slaveholders consolidated the power of the executive‚ Senate‚ and House into the well-funded and organized Democratic Party to preserve and extend slavery. The power shift began with the annexation of Texas and continued with the Mexican-American War and the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The Democratic Party maneuvered and consolidated power to advance the cause of slavery‚ undoing the founding generations’ work. Consolidating power also caused a divide in the Union that went deeper than slavery. Fighting for voting rights In the period leading up to the Civil War‚ a majority of Americans did not support the abolition of slavery. What they did agree on was that Southern slaveholders had manipulated power that created economic instability and sent the nation to war with Mexico. Innocent Americans were dying‚ and it was all in pursuit of the preservation of slavery. To defeat the power of the slaveholders who controlled the Democratic Party‚ the other factions of power consolidated into the new Republican Party. The slaveholders were in the majority power position for a long time‚ and they didn’t want to give it up. When they became the minority‚ they left the Union‚ leading to the Civil War. Over time‚ the Northerners understood that the real fight was over representation. Americans were reminded of the declaration that “all men are created equal.” And to be equal‚ each man must be given a vote. To be free‚ a person must have a voice in his government — a right to representation. The Civil War led to the 13th‚ 14th‚ and 15th Amendments‚ which freed the slaves‚ extended the federal government’s protection over the people of the states‚ and balanced representation in the House by expanding the right to vote. Red vs. Blue What does our past national divorce have to do with the current discussion about national divorce? During the Gilded Age and Progressive Era‚ immigration grew substantially in America. This led to a new fight over representation in the House. Representatives of cities supported counting all persons for purposes of apportionment in the House. Representatives of rural America wanted to count only American citizens. By 1911‚ this caused a stalemate in Congress over apportionment that lasted until 1929 with the Permanent Apportionment Act‚ which capped the number of representatives at 435 and determined that apportionment would count all persons regardless of citizenship or legal status. Since 1929‚ the representative-to-citizen ratio has grown from 1 to 220‚000 to around 1 to 756‚000. Power has concentrated in cities‚ leading to an imbalance of power in the House between rural and urban America. Americans can’t divorce because they are not divided by states’ interests. The lines are blurred. It’s not North versus South or this state versus that state. It’s the interests of red versus blue. The capping of the House has concentrated power in those with connections and money to donate. The representative speaks with donors and insiders instead of the American people. The rest of America‚ people with busy family schedules and bills to pay‚ are left powerless and unrepresented. The idea of popular sovereignty led to the violence of Bleeding Kansas. If we were to adopt that idea again‚ like allowing a state to leave the Union‚ there is a likelihood of violence that could escalate into another civil war. In the event of a state leaving the Union‚ what would happen if the blue part of California began oppressing the red part or‚ in Texas‚ the red part began oppressing the blue part? What if it led to violence like in Bleeding Kansas? Would the federal government step in if innocent Americans caught in the middle were dying? Uncap the House A national divorce carries the possibility of violence‚ and it’s powerless‚ unrepresented American citizens who would suffer the most. In Federalist 10‚ James Madison argued that factions are natural in society‚ and to control the effects of factions‚ we must create a system that recognizes and harnesses its power. In Federalist 55‚ Madison argued the virtues and flaws of the small and large legislative bodies. A large body can be confusing and inefficient‚ and a small body is more efficient but is at a higher risk of corruption. National divorce is not the answer – but representation is. We need a larger legislative body to limit government corruption while allowing more factions to balance our diverse society. We must give power to the powerless and representation to the unrepresented. We must uncap the House of Representatives.

CBS News is facing accusations that it seized computers‚ files‚ and records — "including information on privileged sources" — that belong to reporter Catherine Herridge.Last week‚ CBS News terminated Herridge's employment as part of a layoff impacting fewer than two dozen employees at CBS News. Her surprise termination sent shockwaves through Washington because Herridge is a respected‚ award-winning journalist with a storied career. She is seen as a bastion of "old school" journalism‚ covering major topics the legacy media often ignores. So how could she end up on the chopping block?But the story doesn't end there. According to law professor Jonathan Turley‚ who spoke with sources at CBS News‚ executives did something "unusual" after handing Herridge her pink slip."CBS officials took the unusual step of seizing her files‚ computers and records‚ including information on privileged sources‚" Turley wrote in a new essay."The network grabbed Herridge's notes and files and informed her that it would decide what‚ if anything‚ would be turned over to her‚" he explained. "The files likely contain confidential material from both her stints at Fox and CBS. Those records‚ it suggests‚ are presumptively the property of CBS News."If true‚ it's a strange departure from routine practices for laid off employees — and "nothing short of shocking‚" Turley added."Journalists are generally allowed to leave with their files. Under the standard contract‚ including the one at CBS‚ journalists agree that they will make files available to the network if needed in future litigation‚" he explained. "That presupposes that they will retain control of their files. Such files are crucial for reporters‚ who use past contacts and work in pursuing new stories with other outlets or who cap their careers with personal memoirs."Not only do Herridge's files contain information she accumulated while working at CBS News‚ but they also contained records from her 23-year tenure at Fox News.The problem at the center of the allegation is obvious: journalists abide by a strict ethical obligation to maintain confidentiality with sources. These agreements are made between a reporter and their source — not a reporter‚ their source‚ and the reporter's employer. Confidentiality ethics are important to Herridge — and she even appears willing to go to jail to protect her sources.Turley even spoke with Herridge's union representative‚ who confirmed the union has approached CBS officials over this "very unusual" situation."We are considering all of our options‚" a spokesperson from SAG-AFTRA told him.In the end‚ the alleged decision to seize Herridge's records has sent a "chilling signal" through the newsroom‚ a former CBS News journalist familiar with the situation told Turley.Blaze Media reached out to CBS News for comment‚ but a representative for the network did not respond. Herridge‚ on the other hand‚ declined to speak about the allegations. She has also not spoken publicly about her termination‚ other than to clarify that she has not‚ in fact‚ released a statement.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

This just in: Travis and Taylor are still going strong! In fact‚ the world's most famous tight end flew all the way to Australia to support his sweetheart on tour. They hand-fed kangaroos together at the Sidney Zoo! Awwww. I can't be the only one who doesn't buy this all-too-perfect American rom-com. Oh‚ you don't care about Taylor Swift? What does matter is the media's complicity in promoting this false narrative. If they're lying about this‚ what else are they lying about? The devil's in the details. Then consider the Kelce-Swift psyop a prime example of how our media distracts and deceives us. And maybe check out "Our Song" from Taylor's 2006 self-titled debut. This little gem of pop-country bliss has lured many a skeptic down the road to Swiftydom. Buss Let's start with that kiss. The perfectly miced-up‚ totally spontaneous moment of PDA between Travis and Taylor in the immediate afterglow of Kelce's Super Bowl triumph. And what a triumph it was. Scoff all you want at the Black National Anthem‚ but this Super Bowl was the most watched telecast in all of television history‚ grossing 7% higher than the moon landing. The superstar couple played a large role getting people to tune in. Whatever happened to "go woke‚ go broke"? With CBS and the NFL's big win‚ we can expect the struggle sessions to continue. As for Travis‚ he's had aspirations to be a household name for a long time. He told his managers that he wanted to be “as famous as the Rock.” That campaign started in earnest with the debut of Kelce’s first Pfizer commercial on September 22. Two days later‚ Taylor made her first appearance at one of his games. Call it a booster shot. But what does Taylor get out of all this? Box To answer that‚ we must go to legendary NYC gay hot spot the Box‚ where Taylor celebrated her 34th birthday just weeks before the lip lock seen 'round the world. No football players in sight — just Taylor and a bunch of her closest gal pals. Yes‚ we're about to speculate about Taylor's sexuality. Is it worth caring about? No. Taylor's smart enough to know how to play to her audience. Does it matter if she puts on a little show to give the fans the love story they want? No. What does matter is the media's complicity in promoting this false narrative. If they're lying about this‚ what else are they lying about? The devil's in the details. The cover-up goes back to late 2014‚ when video emerged of Taylor making out with model Karlie Kloss at concert by the 1975. In the glare of "Kissgate‚" all those lyrics about boy drama hit a little different. In fact‚ some of them seemed to say it loud and clear: Karlie was no mere BFF. (Dedicated "Gaylor" theorists will no doubt be familiar with the video of Taylor serenading Karlie with “Dress.”) Beard Taylor needed a getaway car back to Heteroville. And who should pull up at just the right moment but Calvin Harris. (1975 lead singer Matty Healy would have to wait until spring 2023.) Their 14-month fling was long enough to quiet any rumors about Taylor and Karlie's Sapphic spit-swapping sesh. The break-up was "amicable‚" as they say‚ even if Taylor's rebound romance with Tom Hiddleston made some tongues wag. Harris tried to put a stop to the gossip with a gentlemanly tweet: "The only truth here is that a relationship came to an end &; what remains is a huge amount of love and respect." Tweets he posted a year and a half later seemed to hint there was something a little more transactional going on. Twitter/@CalvinHarris By “beard‚” he's not talking about the fetching face fuzz sported by his touchdown-scoring successor. Could this have been a case of mutually beneficial couple cosplay? Bamboozle? I'm not going to hold your hand through the rest. Suffice it to say Taylor has dropped plenty of clues about her rumored preferences. The "bisexual flag" color scheme of the wig she wears in the “You Need to Calm Down” music video. Her similarly hued “PROUD” bracelet. This behind-the-scenes explication of the "ME!" video. The butch leather jacket she changed into for her 2023 Grammys afterparty. It's not hard to understand why some consider "Blank Space" to be the confession of a master media manipulator. “Love’s a game‚ wanna play?” goes the lyric. Maybe Travis Kelce is nothing more than the latest seat-filler to get this invitation. And so what if he is? Taylor gets her privacy‚ Travis gets his fame‚ and the fans get their romance. It's all harmless fun. So enjoy for what it is. Or better yet‚ ignore it. But five or ten years from now‚ we may well see Taylor entering her most lucrative and attention-consuming era yet: her LGBT-hero-finally-free-to-live-her-truth era. By then we may know all too well why propping up this charade was so useful to the powers that be. When that day comes‚ don't say I didn't warn you.

Many Americans across the country woke up on Thursday morning without cell service — but there’s still no explanation for what caused the outage. The most affected were AT&;T customers with 50‚000 outages officially reported at 7 a.m. EST‚ but some Verizon and T-Mobile customers were affected as well. Now‚ Americans are left wondering whether or not it was a solar flare or a massive cyberattack — especially considering just yesterday there was a cyber attack on the cellular systems in Israel. This was a small taste of what life would be like after such an attack‚ but a bigger attack could have devastating effects. “One Second After” author William Forstchen has been warning about this for years. “If you saw the number of attacks‚ incoming attacks on our infrastructure‚ on our military‚ it’s unrelenting‚” Forstchen tells Glenn Beck. “This is just a foretaste of the future‚” adding that we should be prepared for a cyber attack. “Cyber attacks could include our water system‚ our electrical grid‚” Glenn says‚ asking Forstchen how widespread this could be. “It could be targeted to a specific or in a general offensive‚ like what I would call a first strike scenario‚” Forstchen says. “For example‚ take where you are‚ suppose water all across the board was shut down for 48 hours because that’s all electronically controlled.” “Would be very bad within 24 to 48 hours‚” he adds. “If you lose electricity‚ that’s the fundamental building block‚” he continues. “Then everything goes. Water‚ food‚ medical‚ all of it.” 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 National Multiple Sclerosis Society recently canned a 90-year-old volunteer who worked for the organization for several decades all because she dared to question its conformity to radical social constructivist conventions. The backlash online was swift and severe. Various critics expressed doubts about making future donations to the organization. Others accused the organization — which locked comments on X and saw at least one employee deep-six her social media accounts — of ideological capture or ageism. After doubling then tripling down on the ouster‚ the DEI-gripped organization finally came around to apologizing; however‚ that too has drawn the ire of critics who feel it was a similar "fail." What's the background? Fran Itkoff‚ 90‚ volunteered for the National Multiple Sclerosis Society for roughly six decades‚ running the Long Beach Lakewood MS support group in California and aiding countless people who were afflicted with the same condition as her late husband. Blaze News previously noted that Itkoff received the Volunteer Lifetime Achievement Award in 2008 for her committed service to others. Chaya Raichik of Libs of TikTok raised the alarm that Itkoff was fired in January for apparently questioning the organization's practice of stating gender pronouns in its communications. In the Jan. 19 termination letter obtained by Raichik‚ Kali Kumor‚ a pronoun-providing MS Society community engagement manager who recently deleted her LinkedIn profile‚ told Itkoff: "After a thorough review of our guidelines and standards‚ it has come to our attention that there has been a failure to abide by our Diversity‚ Equity‚ and Inclusion guidelines during your time as a volunteer." "Unfortunately‚ based on the situation‚ we have made the difficult decision to have you step down from your volunteer position‚ effective immediately‚" wrote Kumor. "I was completely shocked as I read that‚" Itkoff told Libs of TikTok. "I couldn't believe that. I had to read it a couple of times to see if I'm getting what she said." — (@) Itkoff's daughter Elle Hamilton said it was disappointing the MS Society would discriminate against her mother‚ particularly when the disease she has devoted her life to helping others fight does not similarly discriminate. "Can happen to anybody‚" said Hamilton. "Anybody can get the disease and yet they're discriminating against her ... trying to help‚ just because she asked a question to explain what the pronouns were." Raichik summarized the situation thusly: "So you're volunteering for 60 years. You gave your life to this organization. You honored your late husband. And ... they just take it away from you in a split second and throw you under the bus just because you did not understand why someone who is a woman needs to have the words she/her in their email signature." Doubling then tripling down Libs of TikTok obtained an internal Feb. 9 email from a pronoun-providing "Executive Vice President‚ General Counsel" concerning Itkoff's ouster. The letter suggested the decision to fire the nonagenarian was made with "thought and care"; that the organization wouldn't fire someone for asking questions about its inclusive practices; and that the MS Society expects that volunteers "uphold the values outlined in our Inclusion Policy." In the face of significant backlash‚ the MS Society released a public statement on Feb. 15 saying‚ "We firmly believe that we best serve and support those living with MS by creating a space that welcomes all. This is especially true for self-help group leaders‚ who are responsible for leading meetings for people affected by MS to confide in and support one another." The MS Society further claimed in the statement that its "staff acted with the best intentions" when canning Itkoff. — (@) This statement was ratioed on X and prompted even more furor. All-American‚ all-female swim star Riley Gaines‚ one among many critics who responded‚ wrote‚ "You cannot tout that you are an 'inclusive' organization when you lay off a 90yr lady who gave 60 yrs of support and service because she didn't understand the concept of preferred pronouns. Despicable. She's got a heckuva lawsuit on her hands and I hope she sees it through." A DEI apology The MS Society finally caved this week‚ noting in a statement Wednesday‚ "The National Multiple Sclerosis Society apologizes to our longtime‚ dedicated volunteer Fran Itkoff. Recently‚ we asked Fran to step down from her role as a group leader because of statements made that we viewed as not aligning with our recently implemented diversity‚ equity and inclusion policy." Once again‚ the MS Society suggested that the ouster — apparently driven by Itkoff's failure to reflexively conform to the radical conventions of the day — was motivated by "the best intentions." "We realize now that we made a mistake‚" continued the statement‚ "and we should have had more conversations with Fran before making this decision." While acknowledging that "as an organization‚ we fell short‚" the MS Society continued painting Itkoff as an ignoramus in need of re-education. "We should have spent more time with Fran to help her understand why‚ as an organization‚ we are dedicated to building a diverse and inclusive movement where everyone has equitable access to the care‚ connections‚ and support they need to live their best lives‚" said the statement. Raichik responded‚ "Better late than never but this never should've happened to begin with! They put an old woman under unnecessary stress." The apology rang hollow for various critics‚ including conservative commentator Megyn Kelly‚ who tweeted‚ "Another FAIL from the MS Society - they finally apologize to the 90-yr-old volunteer they fired for not understanding why she was forced to say her pronouns but now say what they shld've done was work w/her to explain how wonderful DEI is. WRONG AGAIN." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

On the question of allowing abortions at any time‚ an adult voter generally takes a pro-life or pro-choice position. But from the standpoint of the unborn child‚ the choice will lead to either life or death. After the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization‚ which overturned Roe v. Wade and held that abortion is not a constitutional right‚ each state is grappling with the right policy. Americans by and large do not favor taking a life. The question‚ which can’t be answered definitively‚ is: When is the unborn child considered a life? At what point does the unborn child enjoy the right to “life‚ liberty‚ and the pursuit of happiness”? Since the country is sharply divided‚ we’re left in search of a compromise position. Many pro-life Americans argue that life begins at conception. Some argue that life begins when a heartbeat can be detected‚ roughly at six weeks. Others say the fetus should be considered a life when it can survive outside the womb‚ which is at roughly 23 weeks. Some argue that life does not begin until after the child leaves the womb. One proponent of allowing abortion up until birth said to me‚ “Life begins when the child takes their first breath and ends when they take their last.” The unborn fetus has no rights while still in the womb‚ according to this view. If that’s the case‚ then abortion should be allowed up until the time of birth. But few Americans support that position. Even those who favor late-term abortions believe very late-term abortions should not be allowed except under extraordinary conditions. Each state can now set its own abortion policy. States like California‚ Illinois‚ and New Jersey tend to set policies that favor the mother at the expense of the unborn child. States like Florida and Texas believe the fetus has rights at some point during pregnancy. The pro-choice supporters focus the debate not on the child but rather on the mother. The mother has the right to choose the fate of the unborn child well into the pregnancy. They say this ensures reproductive health for the mother‚ although it completely ignores the rights of the unborn child. Prior to the reversal of Roe v. Wade‚ the consensus view seemed to be that when the fetus can survive outside the womb‚ it has a right to life. Very religious people argue those rights begin much earlier‚ perhaps at conception‚ so they were never happy with the 23-week limit. Since the country is sharply divided‚ we’re left in search of a compromise position — although any compromise will vary greatly from state to state. Politically‚ the Democrats tend to win the debate by focusing on the rights of the mother and completely ignoring any rights the unborn child may have. Republicans try to focus on the rights of the unborn child. Unfortunately‚ unborn children don’t vote. Allowing abortion on demand up until the 15th week of pregnancy is a compromise position. While very religious Americans would not favor this‚ it is a compromise that most Americans would support. Perhaps the GOP should also focus the debate on the unborn child so that if Democrats support the “pro-choice” position‚ they are really saying they are pro-death. That could be a winning issue for the GOP. As recently as the 2022 elections‚ Democrats used the choice argument to win‚ noting that Republicans wanted to take away reproductive rights from women. In reality‚ the GOP just wants to combat the pro-death position by recognizing the rights of the unborn child.

A Minnesota man — with a lengthy and violent criminal record — has been arrested in connection with the brutal murder of a California model who was found tortured and stuffed inside the refrigerator at her Los Angeles apartment. Magnus Daniel Humphrey‚ 41‚ was arrested on Wednesday on an unrelated federal warrant at his home in Hopkins‚ Minnesota. Police said Humphrey is the "suspect responsible" for the grisly murder of 31-year-old Maleesa Mooney. At the time of his arrest‚ Humphrey was on federal probation for narcotics offenses after being released from prison on Feb. 7‚ according to Justice Department records.Humphrey has been convicted of multiple felonies in Minnesota and Illinois‚ including gun charges‚ assaults‚ sexual assaults‚ and false imprisonment‚ according to the New York Post.The Los Angeles Police Department said in a statement that Humphrey has agreed to be extradited to Los Angeles.Humphrey was charged with murder as well as a special allegation of murder during the commission of torture‚ according to KTTV.The suspect is being held without bail.Police did not reveal what led investigators to suspect the Minnesota felon to be involved in the murder of the Los Angeles model or a possible motive. As Blaze News previously reported‚ Mooney was found dead at her luxury apartment in Los Angeles around 4:00 p.m. on Sept. 12‚ 2023. LAPD officers conducting a welfare check found Mooney's mutilated body inside the refrigerator at her apartment. There was allegedly a pool of blood under the refrigerator. Mooney reportedly had her wrists and ankles bound with electrical cords‚ and her mouth was gagged with clothing. The Los Angeles County Medical Examiner's Office listed her cause of death as "homicidal violence."The coroner's office said the model suffered blunt force injuries‚ lacerations‚ abrasions‚ contusions‚ and a fractured rib. The coroner's report noted that the blunt force injuries by themselves were likely not severe enough to have caused her death‚ and that "she was likely involved in a violent physical altercation prior to her death."Mooney worked as a model and a real estate agent. She had only moved into her apartment a month before her death.Mooney's sister‚ Jourdin Pauline‚ previously said that the slain woman was two months pregnant when she was murdered. "She was super excited and I know she really wanted a kid‚ and it's something that she has always talked about‚" Pauline stated.LAPD is urging anyone with information regarding the case to contact Detective Pierce or Detective Marcinek at 213-486-8700. Arrest made in Los Angeles model’s gruesome slaying www.youtube.com Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A man chased down a suspected car thief last week in Maui and held her at gunpoint until police arrived‚ Hawaii News Now reported.The station's story also noted that the incident raises continuing "concerns over concealed carry laws."What are the details?Hawaii News Now said a video "appears to show a Maui police officer arresting a woman while a man in plain clothes points a gun at her."Hawaii Firearms Coalition Director Andrew Namiki Roberts told the station‚ “It’s a 45-second video. It is at the point of arrest. We don’t know what’s happened before that. But based on the video‚ and the way the person with the firearm is interacting with the police officer‚ it makes me believe that the person didn’t do anything wrong."Maui Police told Hawaii News Now that the man seen holding the gun in the video isn't with the department and that the incident is "under review/investigation."The station said sources indicated the man holding the gun chased down the woman who was driving a stolen vehicle in Wailuku on Feb. 11.Roberts added to Hawaii News Now that the main reason why those with concealed carry permits can legally draw their guns is if their lives are in danger.“In that situation‚ if the police officers arrived‚ maybe put your firearm away‚" Roberts told the station in regard to the video showing the man holding the gun. "The police officer has the situation under control‚ maybe there’s no need for you to have your firearm out at that point. That’s just a safety aspect for everybody involved.” Roberts added to Hawaii News Now that "of course‚ we’re not going to recommend vigilantism. Don’t go chasing down looking for criminals. Vigilantism isn’t something that we would like to see. If you see a stolen vehicle‚ you’re probably better off calling the police‚ letting them come in and handle it instead of trying to detain a person.”Anything else?The station said arrest records indicate the 31-year-old woman was arrested for driving a stolen vehicle and that police records show she later was released pending further investigation. Hawaii News Now said it's unclear whether the man with the gun faced any charges. Maui man uses gun to detain suspect‚ raising questions about concealed carry laws in Hawaii youtu.be Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!