Dear Mr. President, Please Stop Giving Special Access to the Left-Wing Press

Townhall 

Remember when the leftist media was upset about Benjamin Netanyahu being in the Situation Room with President Trump? “How dare he?” they cried as they clutched their pearls. Well, at least Israel is an ally of the United States, whereas the media is not, and the media, as horrifying as it is, is only made worse by the President talking to them. Please, Mr. President, stop giving access to these people.

During the first Trump administration, the New York Times got scoop after scoop on the Trump administration from Donald Trump himself. He had Maggie Haberman on speed dial. He complained about her a lot in public, as he should have, but in private he not only took her calls, he called her too. 

I remember thinking he’d be in a much better position if he’d reach out to conservative news organizations, even only every once in a while. Not to give interviews, he did that, but he’d give exclusive information to the Times over anyone else.

I understood it – he grew up in New York City and the Times was THE PAPER of the world. Trump in the 80s and 90s made his fame by appearing in the pages of the New York Post and Daily News, but that was for gossip. Getting in the pages of the Times was the passport to being taken seriously. 

The Times mattered, and you mattered if you appeared in the Times. I remember the first time my name appeared in the Times – I have a copy of it somewhere – I was quoted as a health policy expert about Medicare Prescription Drug Discount Cards (try to remain calm, ladies, I’m married). It was very cool because it was tangible and the Times. It was also the early 2000s and I was not that far removed from college. The paper has crashed completely since then.

But the President seems to still revere the memory of what it used to be. He still seems to want to win over those same Manhattanites who hated him even when he was one of them and a Democrat. But they will never like him, ever. 

Two “reporters” from the Times, including Haberman, have a book coming out called “Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump.” I’m not going to link to it, you can look it up on your own. 

The description reads, in part, “Based on hundreds of interviews and unprecedented reporting from deep within the administration’s most closely guarded rooms, Regime Change takes the reader inside the Situation Room and into the secret Oval Office deliberations that have launched a new war in the Middle East and seen Trump seal the border, surge National Guard troops into cities, and send immigration agents into deadly clashes with protestors. Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan bring us behind the scenes of a presidency that has transformed the culture, turned the Justice Department into an agent of retribution against the President’s enemies and the office itself into a brazen vehicle for profit. They reveal a second term propelled by a historical irony that Trump himself has come to understand: that the indictments, the convictions, the assassination attempts, and four years of exile made him not weaker but far more powerful, more vengeful, and more willing to gamble than any President in modern history.”

A couple of things pop out: 1, this will not be a fair or friendly look at the second Trump administration, and 2, they talked to a lot of people, likely including the President himself.

It would be better for the President and his legacy if he’d stop giving special access to reporters and news outlets that hope to obstruct anything he tries to go, don’t you think?

I’m not saying he shouldn’t take their questions at press conferences, like he does. Sparring with these people in public is one of the best things the President does to expose their bias and get out his message. But private conversations and special interviews, especially for their books, will never work out well. These people aren’t writing to truth, they’re crafting the first draft of a liberal narrative as history for a profit – and they need something “juicy” to sell that book and increase that royalty check. Direct access to the President helps get that because it gives credibility to the other lies they hammer in there.

There are plenty of conservative news outlets that would absolutely love to break stories and get the clicks that come along with it. Even if the President shifted half his efforts away from the enemy press it would go a long way toward cementing some positivity in his legacy and help the conservative press shore up its existence and bottom line to extend itself into the future. It won’t help when the snobs in Manhattan, but anything bad for them is good for the rest of America. 

Podcast thread for April 21

 

busy night ahead.

Gabbard’s Declassified Documents Are Just The Tip Of The Iceberg

From fake impeachments to battles with a KGB-created religious movement, Trump is engaged in a “to the political death” battle with the left.

American Thinker 

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard just released another batch of declassified documents that lay bare how the 2019 Trump impeachment was built on second-hand hearsay, anonymous tips, and a coordinated narrative pushed by intelligence officials and Democrat operatives. At the same time, we’ve witnessed the Democrats’ sudden, open allegiance with a Chicago Pope.

The impeachment wasn’t real, and Trump’s not engaged in a religious war. Instead, both fights—the attacks at home and in the Vatican—are the visible handiwork of a coordinated Deep State and globalist Cabal—the same network of intelligence operatives, bureaucrats, foreign actors, and ideological allies that has operated as a mutual protection racket existing since Benghazi.

Domestically, Just The News recently reported that the 2019 Ukraine impeachment effort was a direct continuation of the failed Mueller investigation—the same players, the same goal: get Trump by any means necessary.

This is explosive, not because it reveals anything entirely new, but because it confirms, with actual documents, what many of us have been saying for years: The pattern goes all the way back to Benghazi (here)(here), when Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration went rogue, and everyone began covering for each other. From that point forward, it became a mutual protection racket: lie, leak, lawfare, and media spin to shield the collective criminal acts.

The Russia collusion hoax, the two sham impeachments, the relentless lawfare, and now the coordinated street protests are not isolated events. They are overt acts in the same ongoing criminal enterprise.

Hillary Clinton’s infamous email server and pay-to-play operation were never fully prosecuted because she had to win in 2016 to keep the entire conspiracy concealed. The Biden family’s foreign dealings fit the same mold—Hunter Biden acting as the princeling, raking in millions from Chinese and other foreign interests in exchange for favorable policy decisions. They sold out the country to protect the larger protection racket, where everyone involved had a stake in the cover-up.

Gabbard’s releases—including material pulled from “burn bags” and previously hidden files—make it increasingly difficult for legacy media to dismiss these connections as conspiracy theory. The documents show how second-hand claims were elevated to impeachment-level accusations while exculpatory evidence was buried or ignored. At some point, the game of whack-a-mole becomes too large even for the legacy media—which has grown lazy and complicit—to keep spinning disinformation to cover up their criminal acts.

This is the very definition of an ongoing criminal enterprise, the core of a RICO case. On March 26, I described the Southern District of Florida grand jury subpoenas to Comey and Brennan as the potential RICO hammer finally dropping on a decade-long conspiracy, even as the DOJ is continuing to purgeholdovers who have been dragging their feet. Because the enterprise is treated as ongoing, statutes of limitations do not shield the participants. Moving the case to Florida avoids the deeply conflicted D.C. venue and gives accountability a real chance to stick.

President Trump is a master of multitasking. While the radical left spreads disinformation to discourage Republican turnout and hammer him daily, he is methodically dismantling the machinery that tried to destroy him. The base should take heart: real accountability is on the way. The RICO case in the Southern District of Florida is building, and public evidence could emerge this summer ahead of the midterms—a politically significant step toward restoring trust in our institutions.

The American people have watched this machinery operate for nearly two decades. The truth seeks to be free. With new leadership at the DOJ and the FBI, and Gabbard’s continued declassifications shining a light on the hidden records, the walls are closing in.

This decades-long enterprise is not limited to the intelligence agencies, lawfare, and street-level protests. It extends into the cultural and ideological realm, where globalist and Marxist influences continue to undermine American institutions and leaders. While President Trump methodically dismantles the legal and intelligence machinery arrayed against him, he must also contend with coordinated attacks from multiple fronts—including recent attempts to discredit key appointees like Patel and Hegseth.

Nor is this battle purely domestic. The Pope’s recent comments, whether driven by ideological alignment or simple naivety, serve as another front in this larger battle. Thus, the spat between Trump and Pope Leo highlights how KGB-created Liberation Theology is one front in this ideological war.

As Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa detailed in his book Disinformation, the KGB ran long-term operations to infiltrate religious institutions and turn them into vehicles for political subversion. In 2015, Pacepa had this to say about liberation theology in 2015:

It was not invented by Latin American Catholics. It was developed by the KGB. The man who is now the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, secretly worked for the KGB under the code name “Mikhailov” and spent four decades promoting liberation theology, which we at the top of the Eastern European intelligence community nicknamed Christianized Marxism.

Liberation theology has been generally understood to be a marriage of Marxism and Christianity. What has not been understood is that it was not the product of Christians who pursued Communism, but of Communists who pursued Christians.

The Pope’s recent comments appear either woefully uninformed about the evil the Mullahs are inflicting on their own people—including using children as human mine clearers and now as shields around power plants—or he is looking the other way, turning a blind eye. Either way, calling a spade a spade is necessary: the Iranian regime is evil incarnate.

Religious leaders, of all people, should have the moral clarity to name it as such instead of engaging in political theater. But of course, popes have often played politics. In the early 14th century, Pope Clement V, under pressure from King Philip IV of France (who owed massive debts to the Knights Templar), betrayed and suppressed the order, leading to the arrest, torture, and execution of many Templars on trumped-up charges. The pattern of political expediency over moral courage is not new.

Progressivism—a polite term for Marxism—has crept into our government and society since the 1920s. As Justice Clarence Thomas blasted in a recent speech:

I think if we don’t stand up and take ownership of our country and take responsibility for it, we are slowly letting others control how we think and what we think.

If you think it’s losing confidence, then you get up, and you participate. You don’t sit on the sidelines.

In my view, we must find in ourselves that same level of courage that the signers of the Declaration have so that we can do for our future what they did for theirs.

Thus, what we are witnessing is not a series of isolated scandals, but a comprehensive effort by the same forces to retain power and reshape society. The second part of this struggle—the ideological and religious dimension—is equally important and deserves closer examination.

With Trump in the White House, the temple is finally being cleansed, one document at a time. Trump is not a religious savior, but his efforts to restore American government echo Jesus driving the money changers out of the temple with righteous anger when He found corruption and exploitation in His Father’s house. Jesus later denounced the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23 as hypocrites and “whitewashed tombs”—beautiful on the outside but full of dead men’s bones inside. Today, we see the same spirit: leaders who appear righteous while concealing evil and protecting their power.

For more on this ongoing criminal enterprise and the broader pattern, readers can explore my full archive at American Thinker. The truth is finally breaking through, and real accountability appears to be on the horizon.

The American people deserve to see the full picture—and justice delivered.

How Feminism Created An Insufferable Class Of 'Infallible Females'

How Feminism Created An Insufferable Class Of 'Infallible Females'

Carrie Grees for The Federalist 

Intellectual nonsense from elite women is surprisingly commonplace and continues unabated. One need look no further than Meryl Streep’s recent rant that the SAVE Act will disenfranchise married women, Jennifer Siebel Newsom’s practice of changing the pronouns in books when reading to her children, or most anything said by the ladies on The View. Long left unchecked, the West has been living for decades under the tyranny of “infallible females” — women who never get fact-checked, receive push-back, or hear moral correction.

The road to female infallibility started innocently enough, with most believing that feminism was only trying to level the playing field. Things then accelerated quickly. Feminism had a secret weapon: It was kryptonite for men. Given men’s natural disinclination to fight with women, good men simply went silent about women’s lib, while the bad ones “benefitted” from and promoted it. Without any societal restraint, feminists ran amok, eventually saturating the culture with female dominance, entitlement, and self-righteous confidence.

Anyone who grew up watching TV remembers the endless stream of female-targeted sitcoms and commercials emphasizing women’s competence over men: Men couldn’t buy a car, diaper a baby, or clean a kitchen without a woman’s sage supervision. Advertisers knew that portraying women’s faux superiority over men sold cars, toilet paper, and processed foods. The mirage didn’t stop there. Hiring quotas and lowered physical fitness requirements gave the impression that male/female interchangeability could be achieved, paired with flawed and persistent rhetoric about unequal pay and the glass ceiling. #BelieveAllWomen also fortified the notion that women never lie, especially about sexual assault.

Infallible females also significantly affect work environments, particularly through quotas and DEI hiring. Mediocre female employees have been flattered, platformed, and promoted, and the workplace “feminized” — as Helen Andrews has made plain — while femininity was eradicated. The most toxic of women are tolerated for fear that they will take their tale of woe to a deeply sympathetic press or courtroom. The result is that conscientious male and female employees are demoralized, turning the pursuit of excellence into a farce.

Then came the psychological changes. Reason was out; emotions were in. Anything a woman felt gained her access to the prized status of “victim,” easily opened by claims of feeling triggered, offended, or imposed upon. The victim card had the added benefit of dissolving any societal or familial responsibilities. Duties and roles evaporated; emotional whim and self-absorption settled in comfortably.

Zero Resistance

Feminism also hermetically sealed leftist women — and the nominally conservative women who breathe the same fumes — into believing the nobility of their cause. It is a safe space. No one questions your arguments or challenges your convictions. Agreeing with the movement offers an aura of strength, conviction, righteousness, and unassailability. Who could question the movement’s purity? 

Meanwhile, the ideological gatekeepers stand at the ready to correct anyone who gets out of line. “You can’t talk about this, you’re a man!” or, “How dare you question feminism? You have a degree!” or, “Feminism is only about helping women. You must hate women!” As regular as rain, these simple phrases keep everyone cozy and safe from dangerous dissenters. And for those who are not quickly silenced, isolation and cancellation are always available.

Entitlement

Things didn’t stop there. The new nexus of advertising, equality, and ideology bled into a new kind of entitlement that came from an unexpected place: consumerism. 

Decades ago, a story circulated that Nordstrom was so committed to customer service and a generous return policy that one store took “back” a set of tires even though Nordstrom doesn’t sell tires. This policy set the gold standard that every woman came to relish, and it quickly became the industry standard, not just for Nordstrom but for every mom-and-pop store too. Ask any merchant or store manager about their experience with customer demands, and hysterical and often galling stories abound. The “customer is always right” has turned into a nightmare for almost every merchant and restaurateur, thanks to supposed infallible women.

Social media reviews only made things worse. Imagine what happens to several generations of women who are told in most of their day-to-day interactions that they are always right? Hence the emergence of the Bridezilla and the AWFLs (affluent, white, female liberals) who head up the “No Kings” resistance rally and then head to Whole Foods, meeting with nary an ounce of real resistance but bathed in glorious acclaim for their conformist bravery.

Far from serving women, female infallibility has left women in a perpetual state of adolescence, tethered to the latest celebrity and influencer trends, unable to think properly, articulate beliefs, or get beyond emotions.

Battle of the Sexes

Women have been sold a lie about what men want, becoming model feminists, and then they can’t figure out why they can’t find good men. On the one hand, like attracts like. Shallow women attract shallow men. Shallow women raise shallow men. But on the other hand, men don’t want women who are like them as men; they want and were made for women who understand womanhood.

Feminists, meanwhile, point to passive or pornified men, unaware of their role in contributing to both. The values that feminism has curated in women — to be domineering, self-absorbed, entitled, and manipulative — are not the qualities that are going to attract or elicit the best from men. In the race for empowerment, women traded their tools of wisdom, presence, and life-giving for a shiny and selfish façade. Men and children need women who will offer themselves for the good of others, to live with responsibility, loyalty, and sacrifice.

Feminists despise the notorious Andrew Tate, but for the wrong reason. They don’t do it because he denigrates women. Plenty of leftist men do that without eliciting their condemnation, e.g., Bill Clinton or the newly accused Eric Swalwell. Rather, they loathe him because he doesn’t buy into their infallibility. This rationale is why they continually try to link nonfeminist women with him. (Nonfeminist women, of course, rightfully scoff at the ridiculous comparison.) The great irony is that, ultimately, what these women hate in Tate is the mirror image of themselves. He has for women the same contempt feminists have for men. He is fundamentally just the reverse of them: the “infallible male.” And they are both equally wrong in failing to realize that humility, love, sacrifice, and reverence are essential for human flourishing. 

Change

Decades of submission to infallible females have worn the West thin. The culture is quickly changing. An array of conservative sites, many of which previously steered clear of critiquing feminism, are now speaking against it, with articles written by both women and men.

Motherhood is making a comeback. Younger women are rejecting the tired allegiance their mothers and grandmothers gave to the ideology, and many young men are choosing nonfeminist wives. Even People Magazine published a puff piece about an author who prioritized her six children as a stay-at-home mom. The accelerated speed at which the narrative is shifting is likely because many have seen for years that the Empress Had No Clothes but felt powerless to call it out. Today, the groundswell is large enough that few live with fear of retribution and cancellation.

The feminists have overplayed their hand; men and women are finally rejecting their tyrannical, entitled, and condescending mien. They certainly won’t go down without a fight, but it’s a fight they’ve already lost. Despite their “infallibility,” or maybe because of it, they just haven’t realized it yet.

---

Carrie Gress is a scholar at the Institute of Human Ecology at Catholic University of America.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Air Force Now Extending A-10 Warthog Service to 2030

RedState 

Every grunt's favorite Cold War leftover piece of close air support, it seems, is getting a few more years of active service. On Monday, the Secretary of the Air Force announced, with a nod to the Secretary of War, that the great A-10 Thunderbolt II, better known as the Warthog, will have its service life extended until at least 2030.

The post states:

In consultation with @SecWar, we will EXTEND the A-10 “Warthog” platform to 2030. This preserves combat power as the Defense Industrial Base works to increase combat aircraft production. Thank you to @POTUS for your unwavering support of our warfighters and quick, decisive leadership as we equip our force. More to come.

The A-10 is operating with impunity in Iranian airspace right now, and the 'Hog drivers have had great success in hunting down and disassembling the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' annoying little speedboats.

2030, granted, isn't all that far away. And who knows what the geopolitical situation will be then? But in any war, there may well still be a use for a flying 30mm rotary cannon that keeps its pilot in a titanium bathtub. 

Only recently, in a move that had the USAF's elite combat search and rescue (CSAR) community concerned, the U.S. Air Force was still planning the A-10's phase-out.

As the Air Force accelerates plans to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt II by fiscal year 2029, the service faces a growing set of unanswered questions about what replaces it in combat search and rescue, one of the military’s most specialized mission sets.

More than an analysis of replacement aircraft and their capabilities, the transition raises concerns about the pilots in the cockpit, who for nearly five decades have received specialized training in the combat search-and -rescue mission and built trust within the CSAR community. With congressional oversight and legislation underscoring concerns about CSAR operational readiness, and on the heels of a CSAR mission over Iran that brought two F-15E airmen home, the stakes of those unanswered questions have taken on a new sense of urgency.

It seems the F-35 may be taking on the A-10's role in CSAR, but that apparently hasn't been completely worked out yet, and the extension of the A-10s lifespan is short; very short indeed. We have B-52s being flown by the grandchildren of the original pilots, so why not keep the A-10 around another decade or two, to do what it does so well — serve as a flying tank?

I question whether the F-35 has the endurance and ability to fly low-and-slow while maneuvering effectively, as the A-10 does. But there is another alternative in the works; it may not be as tough as the A-10, but it may serve very well in the CSAR role, as well as finding and un-aliving individual bad guys.

Like the A-10, the new Skyraider II would require complete air dominance and serious repression of an enemy's air-defense network. But if we had that, this is about as low and slow as you get.

Sometimes there's a place for low tech. In World War 2, the Soviet 588th Night Bomber Aviation Regiment, flying old Polikarpov Po-2 biplanes, caused the Wehrmacht a lot of headaches, to the point where the Germans dubbed them the Nachthexen — the Night Witches — because of the swishing sound the wind made in the wings of the old Po-2, and because the pilots were women. They flew at night, in the old biplanes that came to be called the Kukuruznik (wheat-cutter) with machine guns strapped to the wings, and grenades to toss out the window.

High tech is a great force multiplier, and we're awfully good at that. But the A-10 drivers in the Strait of Hormuz are proving that there's still a place for low tech, and what's more, low tech is cheaper. Missiles are expensive, but 30mm cannon shells are cheap.

We should keep the A-10 around for a few more years.

Broken Journos Demand DC Hacks Protest Trump's Appearance at WH Correspondents' Dinner

RedState 

As RedState reported, President Donald Trump has lifted his moratorium on attending the annual White House Correspondents' Dinner. Saturday will mark his first-ever attendance at what has been dubbed "the nerd prom," with journalists glad-handing and congratulating one another for being their not-so-fabulous selves. Think, the Academy Awards, with less attractive people.

Weijia Jiang, President of the White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA), said on X, "We're happy the president has accepted our invitation and look forward to hosting him." Trump graciously agreed to attend in light of this year marking the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, and First Lady Melania Trump will be coming along with him. 

But for certain journalists, this is all too cozy and Kum-bah-yah. They don't want President Trump to come to the dinner and have a good time. They want their fellow D.C. journalists to rise up to "force protest!" What does that mean? Will the journos break out into chants of "This is what democracy looks like?!" or sing, "Which side are you on?" Or will they do a synchronized dance in their tuxes and come-jump-me heels? 

According to the letter being shared by all the left-wing hacks, a group of 250 journalists signed a letter demanding the WHCA bow to their wishes. The signatories include Sam Donaldson (who?), Dan Rather (he's still alive?!), and Jackie Judd (huh?), among others.

The letter reads, in part:  

To the Officers, Board of Directors, and Members of the White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA):

We, the undersigned, call upon the White House Correspondents' Association to use the occasion of the White House Correspondents' Dinner, to forcefully demonstrate opposition to President Trump's efforts to trample freedom of the press.

The dinner has long served as a symbol of the vital and irreplaceable role of a free press in American democracy and a celebration of the First Amendment and the journalists who uphold it. President Trump's systematic, sustained, and unprecedented attacks on the free press (detailed below) render his presence at such an event a profound contradiction of its purpose.

The collective weight of the administration's actions — retaliatory access bands, coercive regulatory investigations, frivolous lawsuits against the press, defunding of public broadcasting, dismantling of international broadcasting, physical restrictions on journalists, personal verbal attacks on reporters, assaults on the media in official White House press releases and social media posts, the arrests of journalists, and the pardoning of those who committed violence against the press — represent the most systematic and comprehensive assault on freedom of the press by a sitting American president.

So, President Joe Biden called lids at 11 a.m., rescinded press access to 440 media outlets, and limited press to selected outlets and pre-programmed questions. But President Donald Trump holds press scrums on the tarmac of Joint Base Andrews on the regular, and answers questions unscripted and off-the-cuff, wherever he goes. Trump also responds to journalists' calls to his cell phone at all hours. 

So, who, exactly, is a threat to the First Amendment? 

Take all the seats, whiners.

There is a long tradition of presidents attending the White House Correspondents Association Dinner. But these are not normal times, and this cannot be business as usual with the press standing up to applaud the man who attacks them on a daily basis.

We understand that some journalists plan to wear pocket handkerchiefs or lapel pins with the words the First Amendment. And continuing in that spirit, we believe the White House Correspondents Association should take stronger action by issuing — from the podium — a forceful defense of freedom of the press and condemnation of those who threaten that freedom, followed by a standing toast to the First Amendment and a pledge to continue upholding such a critical cornerstone of our democracy. Speak forcefully, in front of the man who seeks to undermine our country's long tradition of an independent, strong, and free press.

Yeah, this is gonna be brutal. Trump takes down these folks' gotcha questions and poorly framed logic with precision. Trust me, whatever they have planned, he'll be loaded for bear.

We also urge the WHCA to reaffirm, without equivocation, that freedom of the press is not a partisan issue and that the Association will not normalize this behavior but instead fight back against any officeholder who has waged systemic war against the journalists whose work the dinner celebrates.

The letter ends with a two-and-a-half-page laundry list of "Trump Administration's Attack on the Free Press," along with the 250 signatories listed alphabetically. 

Here is where these fauxnalists tank their entire argument. This screed is nothing BUT partisan. Where were their protests when President Barack Obama spied on then-Fox News correspondent James Rosen and then-CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson? Non-existent. They gladly toasted and took photos with the "first Black President" because he represented their values and the correct political leanings.  

The fact that the people who signed on to this letter, and those who will attend the dinner, are still publishing under their bylines or trotting on to whatever news outlet finds them interesting to spout about how terrible Trump is, is proof that the First Amendment is alive and well, and their protests are merely performative theater. The legacy media loses credibility by the day, especially when they cannot even distinguish NAFTA from NATO. 

There is real suppression of the First Amendment happening, though: look no further than California and the so-called "Stop Nick Shirley" Act that is designed to suppress independent journalism and free speech. That same Nick Shirley has done the work of helping to expose corruption and further the First Amendment, yet he has to hire personal security because he's getting death threats. This bunch thinks they're being targeted if their Starbucks order is wrong. 

This dinner is the most vain-glorious event ever put on in DC  - and that’s saying a lot. 

I don’t know why any Republican would go. The press will toast itself, brag about how they are saving the republic, and only Democrats will agree. 

The biggest threat to the press is the press. They’re the ones who lost their customers trust long ago.

DEI’s New Frontier: AI in Schools

DEI’s New Frontier: 

AI in Schools

Casey Ryan for Daily Signal

Sam Altman on April 18, 2026, in Santa Monica, California. (Taylor Hill/FilmMagic)

The world is currently in the midst of a new digital revolution. Artificial intelligence is being implemented into every part of our lives. There is no escaping it—not even for America’s public schools.

Within the next few years, many of the nation’s K-12 schools will be integrating AI into their daily operations. This will likely include everything from assisting teachers in creating lesson plans to helping students with research assignments.

We must prepare for and counter the coalition of left-wing activists who intend to use AI as another vehicle to push diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives onto the nation’s youth.

As schools throughout the country have begun to invest in these tools, bad actors are plotting how to maximize this new technology as a superhighway into the minds of children. To no one’s surprise, the National Education Association is leading the charge by providing the nation’s school districts with a policy that places DEI at the forefront of AI in classrooms.

The NEA is notorious for using membership dues from teachers to promote political advocacy, including accusing President Donald Trump of “fascism” and hosting training for teachers on “Advancing LGBTQ+ Justice and Transgender Advocacy.” Now the NEA has introduced a sample school board policy for school districts throughout the country to use as a template that explicitly centers equity and “algorithmic bias.”

The teachers union describes algorithmic bias as “unwanted unfairness in how a computer detects patterns or automates decisions” that is based on “characteristics and identities such as age, class, culture, disability status, ethnicity, gender, location, nationality, political affiliation, race, religious background and practices, and/or sexuality.” The sample policy states that AI tools should “undergo regular audits to identify and mitigate biases.”

In other words, the NEA wants AI tools to be tweaked.

Rather than reaching the most accurate conclusion for a problem, the NEA is calling for AI to come to the most politically correct answer, one imbued with new biases inspired by DEI advocacy. Providing students with anything other than the factually correct answer for any problem is a disservice to them, but the NEA does not care.

Unfortunately, the largest school district in the nation is promoting problematic AI policy as well. New York City Public Schools has guidance on how the district will use AI going forward. In this guidance, the district explains that it is “actively building the capacity to also review for algorithmic bias, equity impact, and instructional effectiveness.”

Left-wing activists are now even creating new groups to assist schools in implementing DEI initiatives into their AI tools for students and teachers.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has launched a new initiative called the “Responsible AI for Social Empowerment and Education” (RAISE) to do exactly this. MIT claims that this initiative’s mission is to “rethink and invent a more positive and inclusive future of education and learning in the era of AI.” In an “AI and Ethics” curriculum for K-12 students that is part of RAISE, MIT explains that students will develop “critical thinking around topics like algorithmic bias, optimization, and socio-technical systems.” Lenox Public Schools in Massachusetts is already using this program.

This is not a warning that bad actors may someday attempt to use AI in schools to spread terrible ideologies to students. The fact of the matter is that they already are.

Parents who care about their children’s future and Americans who simply want our nation’s schools to prioritize education now have another reason to be worried.

Last year, President Donald Trump issued an executive order for the federal government to explore and support using AI to further the education of students and supplement training provided to educators. While the president issued the directive with good intentions, bad actors like the NEA and MIT will use the opportunity to embed their corrupt ideology into a greater number of classrooms.

If left-wing activists already have their grip on AI tools before schools implement them, the problem will become institutional and much harder to fix. Concerned Americans must step up now and reach out to their local school leadership and school boards before it is too late.

If your school is in the process of adopting AI, make sure there are no DEI strings attached.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.

Trump Says He Feels 'No Pressure' to Make Deal With Iran, Won't Make the Mistakes Obama Did

RedState 

President Donald Trump has been active on social media on Monday, posting several missives about the fake news, traitorous Democrats, and Obama’s terrible 2015 deal with Iran (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action [(JCPOA)]. He also said he felt “no pressure” to come to a new agreement with the Islamic Republic, because no deal is better than a bad one.

Don’t believe the lying media, he wrote:

His post in full:

The Democrats are doing everything possible to hurt the very strong position we are in with respect to Iran. Despite World War I lasting 4 years, 3 months, and 14 days, World War II lasting 6 years and 1 day, the Korean War lasting 3 years, 1 month, and 2 days, the Vietnam War lasting 19 years, 5 months, and 29 days, and Iraq lasting 8 years, 8 months, and 28 days, they like to say that I promised 6 weeks to defeat Iran, and actually, from the Military standpoint, it was far faster than that, but I’m not going to let them rush the United States into making a Deal that is not as good as it could have been. I read the Fake News saying that I am under “pressure” to make a Deal. THIS IS NOT TRUE! I am under no pressure whatsoever, although, it will all happen, relatively quickly!

He continued, noting that even the Democrats have for years warned that the Iran problem must be solved, and the only reason they’re opposed to Operation Epic Fury is that they suffer from a bad case of Trump Derangement Syndrome:

Time is not my adversary, the only thing that matters is that we finally, after 47 years, straighten out the MESS that other Presidents let happen because they didn’t have the Courage or Foresight to do what had to be done with respect to Iran. We’re in it, and it will be done RIGHT, and we won’t let the Weak and Pathetic Democrats, TRAITORS ALL, who for years have been talking about the Dangers of Iran, and that something has to be done, but now, since I’m the one doing it, belittle the accomplishments of our Military and the Trump Administration. This is being perfectly executed, on the scale of Venezuela, just a bigger, more complex operation. The result will be the same. In my First Term, I built the Greatest Military our Country has ever seen, including adding Space Force. In my Second Term, I am properly and judiciously using our Military to solve problems left to us by others of far less understanding or competence. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP

In another post, the president said the U.S. is winning the war “by a lot,” and that outlets like The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post are doing everything in their power to gaslight the American public and depict a losing effort.

Due to the blockade, Trump asserted, Iran is losing $500 million a day, and their military is shattered:

I’m winning a War, BY A LOT, things are going very well, our Military has been amazing and, if you read the Fake News, like The Failing New York Times, the absolutely horrendous and disgusting Wall Street Journal, or the now almost defunct, fortunately, Washington Post, you would actually think we are losing the War. The enemy is confused, because they get these same Media “reports,” and yet they realize their Navy has been completely wiped out, their Air Force has gone onto darker runways, they have no Anti Missile or Anti Airplane Equipment, their former leaders are mostly gone (This has been, in addition to everything else, Regime Change!), and perhaps, most important of all, THE BLOCKADE, which we will not take off until there is a “DEAL,” is absolutely destroying Iran. They are losing $500 Million Dollars a day, an unsustainable number, even in the short run. The Anti-America Fake News Media is rooting for Iran to win, but it’s not going to happen, because I’m in charge! Just like these unpatriotic people used every ounce of their limited strength to fight me in the Election, they continue to do so with Iran. The result will be the same — It already is! President DONALD J. TRUMP

He also mocked former President Barack Obama, who negotiated the deal with Iran that ended up with the U.S. sending them pallets of cash and not even ending their nuclear weapons efforts. The ridiculous deal, which Trump killed in 2018 during his first term, symbolizes the Obama legacy:

The DEAL that we are making with Iran will be FAR BETTER than the JCPOA, commonly referred to as “The Iran Nuclear Deal,” penned by Barack Hussein Obama and Sleepy Joe Biden, one of the Worst Deals ever made having to do with the Security of our Country. It was a guaranteed Road to a Nuclear Weapon, which will not, and cannot, happen with the Deal we’re working on. They actually gave $1.7 Billion Dollars in “GREEN” Cash, loaded into a Boeing 757, and flown to Iran for Iranian leadership to spend anyway they saw fit. He emptied out all of the Cash from Banks in D.C., Virginia, and Maryland. Those Bankers said they’ve never seen anything like it before. In addition, Hundreds of Billions of Dollars was paid to Iran. If I did not terminate that “Deal,” Nuclear Weapons would have been used on Israel, and all over the Middle East, including our cherished U.S. Military Bases. The Fake News, like Lightweight Washington Post “Journalist” David Ignatius, loves to talk about the JCPOA, knowing that it was DANGEROUS, and a Complete Embarrassment to our Country. If a Deal happens under “TRUMP,” it will guarantee Peace, Security, and Safety, not only for Israel and the Middle East, but for Europe, America, and everywhere else. It will be something that the entire World will be proud of, instead of the years of Embarrassment and Humiliation that we have been forced to suffer due to incompetent and cowardly leadership! President DONALD J. TRUMP

Phew! I warned you he’d been busy. One thing about Donald Trump: you don't have to worry about what he really thinks, because he'll tell you.