THIS is why CNN cut off Trump press secretary’s mic?



CNN host Jake Tapper is one of two chosen to moderate the first presidential debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden — and when one Trump campaign spokeswoman pointed out that he may be biased, she was cut off by another CNN anchor, Kasie Hunt.

Trump 2024 national press secretary Karoline Leavitt noted in the interview that it “would take someone five minutes” to google Jake Tapper’s name with Donald Trump’s to find that Tapper has “consistently likened Trump to Adolf Hitler.”

As she was trying to finish her sentence, Hunt interrupted, threatening to end the interview.

“I’m going to stop this interview if you continue to attack my colleagues,” Hunt said angrily.

“I am stating facts that your colleagues have stated in the past,” Leavitt fired back, before she was cut from the screen.

“She is welcome to come back and speak about Donald Trump, and Donald Trump will have equal time to Joe Biden when they both join us now, at next, early, later this week in Atlanta for this debate,” Hunt said, clearly flustered.

The issue began when Hunt had asked what Trump’s strategy for the debate was, and Leavitt initially said that Trump’s plan is just to point out what a horrible job Biden has done.

“She did give a very clear answer,” Sara Gonzales explains. “But then she did, I mean I think that very rightfully so, pointed out, ‘Your moderator has a history of anti-Trump sentiments, so obviously this is not right, it’s not going to be fair.’”

Hunt later wrote in a post on X, “You come on my show, you respect my colleagues. Period. I don’t care what side of the aisle you stand on, as my track record clearly shows.”

Gonzales is shocked that “pointing out a fact” is labeled as “disrespect” in this case.

“Don’t have someone on your show if you want to curate the opinion,” Jaco Booyens agrees.


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.

How will SCOTUS rule on controversial ‘gender care’ for minors?



The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge to Tennessee’s ban on transgender medical treatments for minors, which will set a major precedent for the rest of the country.

While the Supreme Court can be unpredictable considering the mixed bag of justices, Sara Gonzales believes the odds are in the conservatives' — and thus the children's — favor.

“I mean, SCOTUS now has an opportunity to set the precedent here on irrevocably sterilizing an entire generation,” Gonzales says. “I’m never fully confident on anything Supreme Court-related, there are too many wishy-washy conservatives on that court.”

“But I like our odds here,” she adds, noting that the plaintiffs were denied their appeal to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The plaintiffs in the case claim that the state’s ban on transgender medical treatments for minors violates the 14th Amendment.

“They say that the ban on gender procedures for minors violates the equal protection clause by preventing them from accessing medical treatments that are available to others,” Gonzales explains.

“This is their main argument: ‘We are an oppressed minority being discriminated against because we are transgender,’” she adds.

However, transgender adults are capable of getting the procedure.

“They can still go set an appointment, chop off their balls, chop off their breasts, chop off apparently whatever body part you like as long as you get the right doctor. Now, if you did it yourself, you’d be in an insane asylum. But you can chop off whatever you’d like once you’re an adult,” Gonzales says, adding, “It’s just the kids that are protected.”

Not only are transgender adults capable of making irreversible surgical alterations to their body, transgender adults are supported by nearly every large institution.

“So, the ban was upheld by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals as I mentioned,” Gonzales explains, “which said that the plaintiffs were in fact very much not an oppressed minority.”


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.

AG Bill Barr berates Wolf Blitzer for using 'cheap talk' in heated CNN debate on vote by mail



U.S. Attorney General William Barr berated CNN's Wolf Blitzer for his line of questioning about mail-in voting in a heated interview on CNN Wednesday.

Blitzer began his interview with a quote from President Donald Trump telling his supporters in North Carolina to vote twice in order to test whether the absentee voter system is actually trustworthy.

"That sounds like he's actually encouraging people to commit a crime, to vote twice," said Blitzer.

Barr asked Blitzer to read the quote from the president again.

"'So let them send it in, the voting by mail,'" quoted Blitzer. "'And let them go vote, the ballot, let them send the ballot, and if the system is as good as they say it is, then obviously, they won't be able to vote.'" It sounds like he's encouraging people to break the law and try to vote twice."

"Well I don't know exactly what he's saying," responded Barr," but it seems to me what he's saying is, he's trying to make the point that the ability to monitor this system is not good, and if it was so good, if you tried to vote a second time, you would be caught, if you voted in person..."

"That would be illegal, if they did that," interrupted Blitzer, "if they mailed in a ballot and then actually showed up to vote in person, that would be illegal."

"I don't know what the law in the particular state says," said Barr.

"You can't vote twice," said Blitzer.

"Well I don't know what the particular state says, and when that vote becomes final," said Barr.

"Is there any state that says you can vote twice?" asked Blitzer.

Blitzer pressed Barr on the issue.

"If you know what he's saying then why are you asking me what he's saying?" joked Barr while laughing.

"This is, you know, Wolf," Barr interjected. "This is a, you know, sort of, cheap talk, to get around the fundamental problem, which is a bipartisan commission chaired by Jimmy Carter and James Baker said back in 2009 that mail-in-voting is fraught with the risk of fraud and coercion..."

Blitzer tried to interrupt but Barr talked over him.

"Let me talk," said Barr.

"Please," replied Blitzer.

"And since that time there have been in the newspapers, in networks, academic studies saying it is open to fraud and coercion," said Barr. "The only time the narrative changed is after this administration came in. But elections that have been held with mail have found substantial fraud and coercion."

Blitzer argued that Barr had no evidence that mass voting fraud had ever been committed, but Barr responded that there was greater threat of massive fraud if Democrats succeeded with implementing massive vote-by-mail.

Here's the full CNN interview with Barr:

Barr interview gets tense when pressed on mail-in votingwww.youtube.com