People have been anxiously awaiting Donald Trump’s VP candidate list‚ and now they finally have their wish. “Donald Trump discussed a short list of potential VP candidates during [a recent] town hall meeting‚” says Sara Gonzales. “So it's‚ of course‚ Governor Ron DeSantis from Florida‚ Vivek Ramaswamy‚ South Carolina Senator Tim Scott‚ South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem‚ Florida Republican Byron Donalds … and Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard.” To gauge her followers’ feelings regarding the list of potential candidates‚ Sara posted the following poll on her Twitter page: Unfortunately‚ “they only allow you to pick four choices‚ so I couldn't include all of them‚” she says. “Vivek’s running away with it at 50%‚ but Tulsi Gabbard at 20%‚ more than DeSantis?” she asks in disbelief. “We are in such a cult-of-personality era in politics‚ where policy doesn't really matter‚” says Glenn Beck chief researcher Jason Buttrill‚ adding that “Tulsi Gabbard [getting] 20% over an actual conservative with a proven track record like Ron DeSantis is terrifying.” If you’re voting based on “the ability to destroy the left and track record‚ you vote 100% for Ron DeSantis; if you're voting for the smartest man in the room who’s got amazing ideas … you would vote for Vivek‚” he continues‚ noting that Tulsi Gabbard may work well in a Trump administration as a member of the “State Department” or the “[Department of Defense]” but as far as policy goes‚ she’d be a terrible choice. “She was a Bernie bro‚” says Sara in agreement. To hear more of the conversation‚ watch the video below. Want more from Sara Gonzales?To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

The Supreme Court is not supreme over other branches of government‚ but it most certainly is superior to the inferior federal courts. We’ve been observing a pattern of the three Trump appointees refusing to join Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito in enforcing what is clearly the majority opinion against bad lower court rulings. Shockingly‚ we are now seeing this happen with race-based admissions despite the court’s categorical landmark ruling in the Harvard and University of North Carolina cases. Lower courts continue to play a legal game of “catch me if you can” by trying to defy the jurisprudence of the high court. The Supreme Court last year ruled 6-2 that race-based preferences violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clause. As Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority in the Harvard admissions case‚ “an individual’s race may never be used against him in the admissions process.” And he noted that any preference for one race necessarily harms others. “College admissions are zero-sum‚” Roberts wrote. “A benefit provided to some applicants but not to others necessarily advantages the former group at the expense of the latter.” The court ruling was as unambiguous as we ever get from this panel of justices. We thought all discrimination in admissions‚ especially in public schools‚ would be relegated to the ash heap of history. Yet the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology‚ a highly regarded public magnet school in Virginia‚ to discriminate based on “socioeconomic” factors. The policy‚ adopted by the Fairfax County School Board‚ was transparently designed with the same outcome in mind as the Harvard case — namely‚ to reduce the numbers of Asian students and increase the numbers of black and Hispanic students. The school succeeded. In the first year after the new admission policy was put in place‚ the number of Asian students dropped by 19% and the number of black and Hispanic students quadrupled. This is why the district court sided with the students and found direct evidence that the admission process was racially motivated. If the Fourth Circuit’s reversal stands‚ however‚ it would provide a clear workaround for the Harvard decision‚ thereby neutralizing the entire prohibition on race-based considerations. Sadly‚ the Supreme Court turned down the Asian parents appealing the Fourth Circuit’s decision. Only Alito and Thomas publicly lodged their dissent. This is shocking given that Roberts himself warned schools last year against indirectly achieving affirmative action goals “through application essays or other means.” He also cautioned that “what cannot be done directly” — the consideration of an applicant’s race — “cannot be done indirectly.” In a sharply written dissent‚ Alito chastised his colleagues’ “willingness to swallow the aberrant decision below” as “hard to understand.” He therefore warned that this stratagem from the Fourth Circuit is “a virus that may spread if not promptly eliminated‚” and consequently‚ “We should wipe the decision off the books.” Alito went a step farther and shamed his politically correct colleagues with a hypothetical scenario in which the races would be reversed.Suppose that white parents in a school district where 85 percent of the students are white and 15 percent are black complain because 10 of the 12 players (83 percent) on the public high school basketball team are black. Suppose that the principal emails the coach and says: “You have too many black players. You need to replace some of them with white players.” And suppose the coach emails back: “Ok. That will hurt the team‚ but if you insist‚ I’ll do it.” The coach then takes five of his black players aside and kicks them off the team for some contrived — but facially neutral — reason. Alito correctly observes‚ “I cannot imagine this Court’s sustaining such discrimination‚” but that is what would be compelled by the Fourth Circuit’s logic. “According to the reasoning of the Fourth Circuit majority‚” Alito writes‚ “this action would not violate equal protection because the percentage of black players left on the team (approximately 42 percent) would exceed the percentage of black students in the school.” Although it’s hard to know which of the remaining Republican appointees who did not sign on to the dissent would have agreed to take the case‚ clearly no more than one out of Roberts‚ Gorsuch‚ Kavanaugh‚ and Barrett wanted to take the case.GOP-appointed justices hesitate to oversee lower courts‚ highlighting a contrast in legal victories between right and left. After the high court redefined marriage for all of humanity‚ no red state tried to slow-walk implementation of the ruling. The red states collapsed into “the law of the land” mantra immediately. Contrast that with cases that we win on guns‚ religious liberty‚ or affirmative action‚ and lower courts continue to play a legal game of “catch me if you can” by trying to defy the jurisprudence of the high court in a slightly different case. Democratic judges police their rulings with vigor‚ while Republican judges don’t want too many policy changes to flow to conservatives as a windfall of their decisions. As such‚ they let negative rulings they know are unconstitutional fester unchallenged at the lower court level for years. Which is why the left has a perpetual first-and-goal at our one-yard line. We must win every time while they need only one pass into the judicial end zone.

Former President Donald Trump claims to be politically persecuted more than any other former president in America — and after the $354 million fraud verdict against him‚ it seems he’s probably right. The penalty will exceed $450 million‚ and the New York attorney general keeps claiming she may seize Trump’s assets if he can’t pay the $354 million fine. The mainstream media is having a field day with the verdict‚ even though there was no victim in the case levied against him. “Now we know that there was no victim here‚ and that’s a key part of this story‚” Stu Burguiere explains. “It’s not like a situation where he lied to the bank.” Trump didn’t lie to the bank‚ and the bank wasn’t hurt in the process. Trump allegedly did‚ however‚ lie about how much his properties were valued at. “Now‚ the banks themselves say‚ ‘Well‚ actually we do our own checking on that. We check to see if these values are right‚ we look at them ourselves. Everybody makes up values that‚ you know‚ we’re not comfortable with. But we gave him the loan because we thought he was a good risk‚’” Stu says‚ breaking it down to the simplest terms. Which is why Stu knows that New York AG Letitia James isn’t going after Donald Trump because it legally makes sense to go after Donald Trump but rather because she hates him. “This was her campaign promise‚ to go after Donald Trump really with any means necessary. So that’s what she’s doing‚” he says. To learn more‚ watch the video below. Want more from the Robertsons?To enjoy more on God‚ guns‚ ducks‚ and inspiring stories of faith and family‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

In Episode 337 Jeff Belanger and Ray Auger take a drive to the intersection of Routes 35 and 5 in Lynchville‚ Maine‚ to see a unique road sign giving directions to places like: Norway‚ Paris‚ Denmark‚ Naples‚ Sweden‚ Poland‚ Mexico‚ Peru‚ and China – all of them just a few miles away – in Maine. How did that happen? BECOME A LEGENDARY PATRON: https://www.patreon.com/NewEnglandLegends CREDITS: Produced and hosted by: Jeff Belanger and Ray Auger Edited by: Ray Auger Guest Voice Talent: Marv Anderson Theme Music by: John Judd SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST FOR FREE: Apple Podcasts/iTunes | Google Podcasts | Spotify | Pandora | Amazon Podcasts | TuneIn | iHeartRadio JOIN OUR SUPER-SECRET: New England Legends Facebook Group

If congressional Republicans won’t push back on the president’s ‘loan forgiveness’ schemes‚ what purpose do they serve?

Policy-makers should ignore it and roll back the pandemic-era expansion.

Catholic Vote says that trans activists ‘used deception’ to access St. Patrick’s Cathedral‚ desecrated it‚ and mocked Catholicism during a funeral.

Elon Musk Mocks Trudeau‚ Google Gemini‚ and the Woke Movement as a Whole in One PERFECT (Hilarious) Tweet

Here's a GREAT Way to Get Around the Big Gov't/Social Media Censors to Spread the 'Right' Message

Google Trying to Erase History in REAL-TIME? Gemini AI Just Gets Worse - Look at How It Describes Israel