For the first time on CNN since the ruling came out in January, CNN viewers finally got an inkling of the fact that the network was found liable for malicious defamation of Navy veteran Zachary Young. No, it wasn’t because the network finally decided to be open an honest with their viewers; it was because Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins demanded answers on behalf of “one of my veterans” on Wednesday night. His insistence on getting answers left The Source host, Kaitlan Collins bewildered. Despite Doug Collins not being involved with the controversial group chat on Signal between other cabinet members and him already answering her questions about it, Kaitlan decided to pester him about it some more instead of talking about veterans. “Yes, and I do have questions about the veterans. But given what we saw with the group chat…Is this typical for the Cabinet to have conversations over Signal? Is this something that you use?” she wanted to know. Noting that his host “undoubtedly [did] not want to talk about the V.A.” and “my job is to take care of veterans,” Doug spun the tables around on Kaitlan. Eyes going wide, Kaitlan squirmed in her seat as he mentioned the network’s great taboo: And I would like to know why CNN is hostile to veterans, especially one in Florida, where you just had a $5 million defamation suit, taking offense at a veteran who was trying to help people. In fact, one of your employees actually said, ‘We're going to nail him.’ I have a question for you, Kaitlan. Is that employee still employed? Are you really concerned about veterans? So, if we don't want to talk about veterans now, and you want to talk about everything else, I'd like to hear from CNN, as the Veteran Cabinet Secretary, why CNN seems to have a problem with veterans?     What Kaitlan refused to answers was, yes, the reporters responsible for defaming Young (chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt, intelligence and national security reporter Katie Bo Lillis, and host Jake Tapper) were all still employed by CNN. In fact, CNN gave Marquardt a promotion amid the case proceedings. Kaitlan desperately tried to deflect away from the truth that Doug spoke. “Well, Mr. Secretary, respectfully, my question was about whether or not you, as a member of the Cabinet use this,” she tried to say, but Doug kept pressing. Possibly a Freudian slip for how CNN thinks themselves authority figures, Kaitlan bizarrely described their conversation as her “investigation.” “And respectfully, I'm conducting the investigation. And I do have a lot of questions for you, on Veterans Affairs. But I don't think it would be unwarranted to ask if you as a member of the Cabinet [use Signal],” she huffed. That holier-than-thou attitude was part of what got CNN in trouble with the Bay County, Florida jury. “What you want to do is talk about a subject that I have already answered,” he said. “And it does mean no good to speculate on something that I've already asked and answered. So I've asked and answered your question.” The Secretary continued to try to get answers: “Why don't you answer mine? Are you still in -- is this person still employed, who said they were going to nail one of my veterans, who you had to do a $5 million award from a jury because of defamation, and then you settled the case? Answer my question.” “Respectfully, sir, I'm asking the questions here,” Kaitlan shot back before trying to tone thing down a bit by noting: “I have no involvement in what you're referencing there.” The conversation then quickly pivoted to actually talking about veteran affairs. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN’s The Source March 26, 2025 9:23:28 p.m. Eastern (…) KAITLAN COLLINS: Yes, and I do have questions about the veterans. But given what we saw with the group chat, and how this was used. You are a member of the Cabinet. You obviously know these other members, several of them who were in there. Is this typical for the Cabinet to have conversations over Signal? Is this something that you use? V.A. SECRETARY DOUG COLLINS: Well, Kaitlan, since you undoubtedly do not want to talk about the V.A. I have a question, as V.A. Secretary, as Cabinet, I want to ask you, because I've been curious about this, because my job is to take care of veterans. And I would like to know why CNN is hostile to veterans, especially one in Florida, where you just had a $5 million defamation suit, taking offense at a veteran who was trying to help people. In fact, one of your employees actually said, ‘We're going to nail him.’ I have a question for you, Kaitlan. Is that employee still employed? Are you really concerned about veterans? So, if we don't want to talk about veterans now, and you want to talk about everything else, I'd like to hear from CNN, as the Veteran Cabinet Secretary, why CNN seems to have a problem with veterans? K. COLLINS: Well, Mr. Secretary, respectfully, my question was about-- D. COLLINS: No, answer my question, Kaitlan. K. COLLINS: --whether or not you, as a member of the Cabinet use this. D. COLLINS: Answer my question, Kaitlan. K. COLLINS: And respectfully, I'm conducting the investigation. And I do have a lot of questions for you, on Veterans Affairs. But I don't think it would be unwarranted to ask-- D. COLLINS: No, Kaitlan, what you want to do is you want to talk about a subject-- K. COLLINS: --if you as a member of the Cabinet-- D. COLLINS: What you want to do is talk about a subject that I have already answered. And if you want to continue this, like this, that's fine. But there are V.A. employees, who are working very hard. There are veterans who get their care from the V.A., and they get their benefits from the V.A. And it does mean no good to speculate on something that I've already asked and answered. So I've asked and answered your question. Why don't you answer mine? Are you still in -- is this person still employed, who said they were going to nail one of my veterans, who you had to do a $5 million award from a jury-- K. COLLINS: Sir-- D. COLLINS: --because of defamation, and then you settled the case? Answer my question. K. COLLINS: Respectfully, sir, I'm asking the questions here – D. COLLINS: No, I am right now. K.COLLINS: -- and I have no involvement in what you're referencing there. (…)

The trailer for the sixth and final season of the left’s favorite show, “The Handmaid’s Tale,” has hit the mainstream — and of course it’s not hiding its true agenda in the slightest. The show is based on “The Handmaid’s Tale,” a novel by Margaret Atwood, but the novel, which was written in the 1980s, doesn’t blame Christian conservatives for the dystopian setting. Rather, the plot simply involves women who are being forced into being surrogates for wealthier, infertile women. Atwood herself has said that she was influenced by many different religions, including Islam, for her best-seller. “Their argument, from what I understand,” Allie Beth Stuckey of “Relatable” says of the left, “is that the religious right, and really all Republicans, because Donald Trump is not the religious right, but they say that he’s co-opted Christianity to try to turn America into this Christian nationalist religious extremist dystopia where we are forced to give birth.” The reason they believe this is because many Christians on the right are against killing babies in the womb. However, Stuckey is well aware that their interpretation is delusional, to say the least. “Something that is really happening in the United States right now is a widespread billion-dollar surrogacy industry that thrives in the United States, which is the Wild West of reproductive technology when it comes to the creation and cryopreservation of embryos, the farming of eggs, the procurement of sperm,” she explains. “One of the most disturbing aspects of the reproductive industry in the United States is surrogacy,” she continues. “When we’re talking about a surrogate, it is typically the creation of a child using the DNA of two individuals which are complete strangers creating these embryos and then transferring these embryos into a surrogate who is not the biological mother, is not related to the child at all, and this carrier, this surrogate, carries the child until birth.” “Very often these are premature births because they are high-risk pregnancies. They were not naturally conceived; this baby doesn’t share DNA with the carrier,” she adds. In many births of babies carried by a surrogate, they take the baby away immediately to ensure that the baby doesn’t bond with the mother, who was the only home the baby has known for the first nine months. “They’ve just gone through something really big, really dramatic, really traumatic, and they need that bond. But in surrogacy situations, that skin-to-skin opportunity is taken away, that bonding experience necessary for the health of the child is taken away to prevent that bond,” Stuckey explains. And it gets worse. In a 2023 study from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System, it was found that between 2014 and 2020, 32% of surrogacy pregnancies by American women were for buyers outside the United States. 42% of those buyers were men of Asian descent. “We already know there’s an organ-harvesting black market that exists. We know that child sex trafficking exists. And surrogacy plays a part in all of that. Yet most people won’t say anything about this because they are scared of being called homophobic, because they know it is very often men using these services,” Stuckey says. “This is ‘The Handmaid’s Tale,’” she adds. Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The prime minister of the United Kingdom was brutally ridiculed on social media after he proudly announced that the government would be banning ninja swords. Prime Minister Keir Starmer posted on social media that the restrictions on owning the Japanese swords would be put in place by summer. The campaign to ban ninja swords began after 16-year-old Ronan Kanda was killed by a sword just outside of his home in 2022 in a case of mistaken identity. 'The only thing that stops a bad guy with a ninja sword is a good guy with a ninja sword.' "Confirmed: Ninja swords will be banned by this summer. When we promise action we take it," wrote Starmer. Critics pounced on the announcement to mock Starmer and the European instinct to ban weapons rather than allow citizens to defend themselves. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a ninja sword is a good guy with a ninja sword," responded Jim Geraghty of National Review. "Ninja swords don't kill people; ninjas do," replied Rob Henderson of the Manhattan Institute. "Despite making up only 13% of the population, Yellow Power Rangers are responsible for 94% of Ninja sword attacks," said one amateur statistician. "This is hilarious. How much more can they disarm you in the UK until you do something? Next Ginsu knives. Then butter knives. Then rolling pins. Have you looked into squirt guns? No one needs a high powered Super Soaker," said Carmine Sabia. "There's a reason why the old saying, 'Don't bring a knife to a gun fight' is still a thing. He's banning swords, next will be hammers, then screwdrivers, then pencils," responded John Rich. Under the new law, anyone caught with a ninja sword in the U.K. can face up to six months in prison, but that could be increased to two years under plans in a crime bill. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The NFL updated its list of banned gestures in a report sent to every team that has many fans confused over the included "nose wipe" celebration.The league sent the new rules to all 32 teams and, as ESPN analyst Benjamin Solak reported, included the "prohibited acts" list under the unsportsmanlike conduct section."According to the full rules report sent to NFL teams this week, the 'nose wipe' celebration is now a 15 yard penalty for being a 'violent gesture,'" Solak wrote on X, with a screenshot from the rulebook.In addition to stating that players are to follow the "generally understood principles of sportsmanship," the league included other specific acts that are considered "violent" gestures."Throat slash, simulating firing or brandishing a gun, or using the 'nose wipe' gesture, or an act that is sexually suggestive or offensive" are all fineable offenses, the league wrote.The NFL has famously fined players for celebrations like the "crotch grab," an ode to former player Marshawn Lynch, as well as for using finger guns, a harmless act performed even by top stars like Patrick Mahomes, who received a fine for the gesture last season.The inclusion of the "nose wipe" gesture had fans scratching their heads, especially considering it has become somewhat of a signature celebration for Dallas Cowboys wide receiver CeeDee Lamb.Lamb even shared Solak's report and added that he certainly had "plenty" other celebrations in mind for what could be considered a violent gesture. The Cowboy then shared a clip of him doing the celebration after a catch. — (@) What does it mean?Several reports indicate the gesture does not have the harmless origins that finger guns, or perhaps wearing different colored shoes (another fineable offense), may have.According to NBC Sports' Pro Football Talk, the nose wipe is a gang sign associated with the Bloods, which indicates someone is untrustworthy.The Baltimore Sun reported similarly in 2019 and said someone who wipes the tip of his nose with his index finger could mean "I don't trust him" if a member of the Bloods.As well, a Virginia State Police intelligence report on the Bloods from 2008 listed the rubbing of one's nose as a sign that he doesn't have a weapon and wiping the face to identify police, but there is nothing specifically about a nose wipe.The term has been used by rappers for at least a decade, several of whom have alleged gang affiliations. However, it is impossible to tell Lamb's specific meaning behind the celebration, which he has reportedly used since he entered the NFL in 2020. This wouldn't be the first time the league handed out fines for seemingly inexplicable reasons; the NFL has flip-flopped numerous times on what it deems to be inappropriate.Specifically, giant red kettles, which are novelty Christmas decorations from charity organization the Salvation Army, have spawned occasional fines when players have jumped into them. Other times, no fines were handed out to players who did the same celebratory jump.The mixed messaging confused Cincinnati Bengals running back Chase Brown, who accused the league of baiting players into fine-worthy acts.In total, the NFL fined players nearly $12.5 million in 2024, a sum significantly more than in 2021 ($7.1 million) but significantly less than in 2019 ($27.8 million).Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Colorado Democrats are more than willing to blow taxpayer money on programs for illegal aliens; however, when it comes to coverage for American mothers and their unborn babies, they will apparently appeal to lethal ways to reduce spending. State Democrats are advancing legislation that would enshrine the right to abortion in the state constitution; require the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing to fund abortions for Medicaid and Child Health Plan Plus program participants using taxpayer dollars; and force public employee insurance plans to fund abortions for plan members — something they are not presently required to do. Senate Bill 183 — a consequence of Colorado voters' overwhelming support last year for Colorado Amendment 79, which set the stage for the use of public funds for abortion — passed the state Senate in a 22-12 party-line vote on March 12. Prior to the bill passing the committee on health and human services on Tuesday, Colorado House Speaker Julie McCluskie (D), a prime sponsor of the legislation, indicated that the use of taxpayer funds to kill babies could save the state a little bit of money. "That savings comes from the averted births that will not occur because abortions happened instead," McCluskie said in a video shared to social media. "So a birth is more expensive than an abortion — so the saving comes in Medicaid births that will not occur." "This bill will actually decrease costs for our health care policy and financing department, our Medicaid expenditures, in both this year and out years as the savings from averted births outweigh the costs of covering reproductive health care for all Coloradans," continued McCluskie, who was endorsed last year by Planned Parenthood. 'Abortion care services represent a one-time expenditure.' While the Colorado House speaker indicated the state will initially see an "increase to general fund of $1.5 million," over time, the taxpayer-subsidized elimination of human life will ultimately lead to "cost savings." McCluskie was referencing a state fiscal analysis that made the following assumptions and assertions: 333,330 women ages 15 to 44 will be enrolled in Medicaid or the Child Health Plan Plus program in fiscal year 2025-2026; 1.67% of members from this cohort will seek abortions each year; 50.4% of abortions will be performed "procedurally" and 49.6% will be chemical abortions; "abortion procedures are assumed to be reimbursed at a rate of $1,300, and medication abortions are assumed to be reimbursed at a rate of $800"; taxpayer-funded abortions through Medicaid/CHP+ will increase the number of unborn babies killed by 30%; and the average reimbursement cost for child birth is $3,850, which is funded by state and federal programs. According to Democrats' calculus, abortions will not only save the state on total reimbursement costs for the delivery of children but will likely also spare the state from having to deal with additional costs that might arise in relation to human beings whose lives they failed to "avert." "Medicaid-covered births typically involve additional social safety net impacts for the child, whereas abortion care services represent a one-time expenditure. These impacts have not been addressed in this fiscal note," said the fiscal note on SB 183. "On net, the bill will decrease costs for HCPF by about $286,000 in FY 2025-26 and $573,000 in FY 2026-27 and ongoing," continued the fiscal note. "These impacts are the net result of increased costs for abortion services and decreased costs from averted births." State Rep. Kenneth G. DeGraaf (R) tweeted, "Holy Human-Haters, Batman! 'Killing people is less expensive than caring for them' coming soon from a eugenicist near you." "Paying for abortions for low income women will save our state millions of dollars on 'averted births,'" wrote Republican state Rep. Brandi Bradley. "Margaret Sanger would be so proud." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

While the launch of Assassin’s Creed Shadows has gone swimmingly for Ubisoft, with millions of sales and generally positive sentiments about its latest open-world RPG, it’s felt like a company in deep trouble recently. Prior to Shadows, it experienced a string of flops like XDefiant and Skull and Bones, its stock price tanked, and it conducted a critical review into how its business was being run and how it can change its fortunes. Now, Ubisoft has revealed that it’s creating a new subsidiary company that’ll house three of its biggest series, and even though the French company will remain in control, it’ll be getting a huge injection of over a billion dollars from Chinese mega corporation Tencent. Continue reading Ubisoft separates biggest franchises like Far Cry and AC into new subsidiary MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best sandbox games, Best RPG games, Best multiplayer games

It’s time to return to Path of Exile 2, as developer Grinding Gear Games unveils everything coming with PoE 2 patch 0.2.0 and the Dawn of the Hunt update. Game directors Jonathan Rogers and Mark Roberts run us through all of the changes, which start with the addition of a new class and more ascendancies, but extend to a wealth of extra skills, support gems, unique items, and crafting tools, along with a massive expansion to the endgame. Continue reading Path of Exile 2 Dawn of the Hunt is far bigger than just its new class MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Path of Exile 2 builds, Path of Exile 2 classes, Path of Exile 2 quests

The union doesn’t represent most autoworkers.

Harry Sisson Breaks Silence on Allegations of His Predatory Behavior and Just GUESS Who He Blames (Watch)

Self-Awarness Level: ZERO! Chris Murphy Asks MSNBC Why Trump Admin Officials Are Above the Law (WATCH)