In U.S. Senate Debate, Seth Moulton Apologizes to ‘Trans Community’

Rep. Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat who is running for U.S. Senate against incumbent Democrat Ed Markey, is apologizing for his post-2024-election comments suggesting the Democrats should shift their approach on transgender issues. The apology came Monday night in a televised debate, more than a year and a half after the original comments and less than a month before the Senate primary.

The post In U.S. Senate Debate, Seth Moulton Apologizes to ‘Trans Community’ appeared first on .

VIDEO: Democrat CAVES to trans lobby after previously warning party about alienating voters



A Democrat who had warned his party against alienating voters with the transgender agenda appears to have completely turned his back on that previous sage advice.

During a debate with incumbent Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) for the Senate nomination of his party on Monday, Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) apologized to the transgender community for his previous comments.

Markey fired back by characterizing Moulton's comments as tossing transgender kids under the bus and using the MAGA 'playbook' against them.

"I have two little girls, I don't want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete, but as a Democrat I'm supposed to be afraid to say that," said Moulton after the 2024 election.

On Monday, Moulton was challenged about his comments during a debate with Markey.

"To the trans community feeling the weight and the pain of the Trump administration policies, I deeply recognize your trauma. And I’m sorry if my comments hurt you. That was not my intention," said Moulton.

"I am a proud co-sponsor of the Transgender Bill of Rights, a proud repeat co-sponsor of the Equality Act, and I have a 100% voting record with the Human Rights Campaign," he added. "If you're in the trans community or you're a trans kid feeling the weight of the Trump administration and the Supreme Court, you matter, you're valued, and I will always have your back."

He then went on to attack Markey for voting 61 times for Trump administration nominees whom Moulton described as anti-transgender.

Markey fired back by characterizing Moulton's comments as tossing trans-identifying kids under the bus and using the MAGA "playbook" against them.

"We should have been loving those kids," Markey said.

"We should have been embracing them."

Video of the comments was widely circulated on social media.

RELATED: Trans-identifying reality TV star arrested for heinous acts with a child, police say

Moulton faced immediate backlash over his transgender comments in 2024, including some protests outside of his office and the resignation of a top aide.

He later reiterated his point while allowing that he may have been unartful about his choice of wording.

"Look, I was just speaking authentically as a parent about one of many issues where Democrats are just out of touch with the majority of Americans," said Moulton at the time. "And I stand by my position, even though I may not have used exactly the right words."

The entire debate on Monday between the two Massachusetts Democrats can be viewed on the WFXT-TV YouTube channel. The Massachusetts primary election is September 1.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Democrats can’t outrun their socialist wing



“In New York, they don’t say ‘I love you,’ they say ‘NYPD suck my d**k’ and I think that’s beautiful.”

“A world without borders — just like a world without prisons or police — is possible, necessary, and the only moral way forward.”

Voters judge political parties by what they do, not by what they call themselves.

“Trick question — Israel doesn’t exist.”

Those are social media posts or reposts from Darializa Avila Chevalier, the Democratic Socialists of America-backed candidate who won the 2026 Democratic primary for New York’s 13th Congressional District.

Many Democrats still insist the Democratic Socialists of America remain a fringe movement with little influence over the party. Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), for example, recently promised that “common-sense Democrats will fight back” against the socialist agenda.

The evidence suggests otherwise.

The DSA’s influence no longer depends on how many members it elects to Congress. Its influence comes from how many of its priorities have become mainstream Democrat positions.

Approximately 250 DSA members held public office in 2025, with roughly 90% elected after 2019. Only two currently serve in Congress, but the movement’s real strength lies elsewhere: dozens of state legislators and nearly 150 local officials, including mayors, city council members, county commissioners, and school board members. Another 35 DSA-backed candidates advanced through this year's primaries and appear positioned to win office.

Increasingly, the DSA shapes the Democratic Party from the ground up.

Consider the issues. The DSA openly advocates sweeping changes on immigration, policing, transgender policy, censorship, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The DSA has long called for expanding the Supreme Court to reduce conservative influence. Democrat leaders have moved in the same direction. Former Vice President Kamala Harris endorsed Supreme Court reform, while Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) introduced legislation in 2024 to expand the court to 13 justices, joined by Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

On gender policy, the DSA advocates taxpayer-funded transgender procedures, including for minors, and has threatened hospitals that refuse to provide them.

Former New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin (D) argued that schools should be permitted to withhold information from parents when a child socially transitions at school. Whatever differences may exist around the edges, the underlying assumption is similar: Parents should not always have the final say.

RELATED: Yet another establishment Democrat taken out by a Mamdani-like socialist from a foreign land

Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images

Immigration presents another point of convergence.

The DSA opposes meaningful immigration enforcement and has labeled Immigration and Customs Enforcement itself an instrument of “state violence.” Democrat officials have likewise resisted federal immigration enforcement in a variety of ways.

Sen. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) publicly aligned himself with anti-ICE activists, while New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill (D) has limited state cooperation with federal immigration authorities and expanded state funding for immigrant legal defense.

The rhetoric differs. The practical effect often does not.

The same pattern appears on free speech.

After Elon Musk purchased Twitter and restored numerous previously restricted conservative accounts, the New York City DSA launched a dedicated “Stop Musk” campaign.

Democrat officials have repeatedly criticized Musk’s moderation policies and supported efforts, both here and abroad, to pressure X over the speech it permits.

Again, the methods differ. The destinations look remarkably similar.

The DSA also embraced the “Free Palestine” movement immediately after Hamas’ October 7, 2023, terrorist attack, issuing a statement calling for an end to the Israeli regime.

Many of the Democratic Party’s most prominent progressive members have likewise become leading voices in the pro-Palestinian movement. Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) have all championed that cause, while several have also supported reducing police funding or sharply limiting law enforcement.

No, today's Democratic Party is not formally controlled by the DSA. But it increasingly advances many of the same priorities. That is why Democrat leaders spend so much energy insisting they are not socialists. They understand the label remains politically damaging.

The problem is that voters judge political parties by what they do, not by what they call themselves. When the Democratic Party repeatedly adopts positions first championed by the Democratic Socialists of America, the distinction becomes more difficult to see.

Democrats may not like the comparison. Their policies increasingly invite it.

In 2026, voters should recognize an uncomfortable political reality: A vote for today’s Democratic Party increasingly advances the agenda of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Dems Call For Court Packing After SCOTUS Rules ‘Temporary’ Really Means Temporary

Democrats are once again calling for the Supreme Court to be “expanded” and “reformed” after the high court affirmed Thursday in a 6-3 decision that “temporary” means “temporary.” The Supreme Court upheld President Donald Trump’s efforts to revoke temporary protected status for foreigners in the country. The ruling came in Mullin v. Doe and Trump […]

Democrats Suddenly Agree With Trump: Haiti Is An ‘S-hole Country’

Every Democrat who insists it’s a deeply inhumane offense to send Haitians temporarily in the U.S. back to their country should be required to admit what they previously denied: that Haiti and so many others like it really are, as President Trump so eloquently put it, “sh-thole countries.”  The Supreme Court ruled this week that […]

Karoline Leavitt names and shames Democrats who inspired WHCD assassination attempt



In the aftermath of the third assassination attempt against President Donald Trump, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt took to the podium on Monday to call out specific Democrats for heightening tensions and calling for violence.

Just days after 31-year-old Cole Allen allegedly sprinted through a security checkpoint and opened fire in the lobby at the Washington Hilton, wounding a Secret Service agent, Leavitt is pointing the finger at Democrats who have inspired deranged leftists to take up arms.

'These are Democrat-elected officials calling for war.'

"It's not just the media. ... The entire Democrat Party has made their pitch to voters across the country that Donald Trump poses an existential threat to democracy, that he is a fascist, and that they compare him to Hitler," Leavitt said Monday.

"I mean, these are despicable statements that the American people have been consuming for years, and so many mentally perturbed individuals are led to believe these words are truth and then are inspired to act on it."

RELATED: Stunning new details reveal the 'depraved' motivation of the suspected WHCD shooter

Truth Social/Anadolu/Getty Images

Leavitt said those incessantly likening Trump to dictators who deserve to be met with violence inspired the three assassination attempts and countless threats waged against the president and his allies.

"Rep. Hakeem Jeffries just this April, this month, said, 'We are in an era of maximum warfare everywhere all the time,'" Leavitt said. "Governor Josh Shapiro said, 'Heads need to roll' within the administration. Senator Alex Padilla said people are 'dying because of fear and terror' caused by the Trump administration."

Leavitt went on to list several more prominent Democrats like Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Adam Schiff (Calif.), and Ed Markey (Mass.), Gov. JB Pritzker (Ill.), Rep. Ayanna Presley (Mass.), and Rep. LaMonica McIver (N.J.), who have made similar appeals likening Trump to a fascist, dictator, or authoritarian and calling for ambiguous escalations.

"These are Democrat-elected officials calling for war against the president of the United States and his supporters," Leavitt said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Every sidewalk a surveillance grid: How Meta’s glasses will kill anonymity



When I find myself agreeing with Democrats more than Republicans on a core liberty issue, I know something has gone badly wrong on the right.

That is where we are.

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has shown more urgency about protecting privacy from Big Tech than most Republicans. Republicans, meanwhile, keep covering for companies like Meta in the name of innovation or “anti-regulation.”

Privacy is not a boutique concern for cranks. It protects freedom of movement, assembly, association, and speech. A country that abandons privacy invites tyranny.

If the biomedical security state pushed during COVID looked sinister, wait until Big Tech deploys smart glasses with AI facial recognition.

In February, the New York Times reported, based on internal Meta documents, that the company had revived a 2021 plan to add facial recognition to its Ray-Ban smart glasses. The feature, internally code-named “Name Tag,” would let wearers identify people in real time without their knowledge and pull up information through Meta’s built-in AI assistant. “Dystopian” hardly covers it.

The privacy threat gets worse. According to the Times, an internal Reality Labs memo from May 2025 discussed launching the feature during a “dynamic political environment” to reduce scrutiny from privacy groups. In other words, Meta appears to know exactly how toxic this is and hopes to slip it into public life while the country is distracted by a war.

A new boundary breached

Meta already has access to billions of personal profiles and a long record of treating privacy as a nuisance. Facial recognition in covert wearable cameras would not be a harmless upgrade. It would breach a boundary that should never be breached.

For most of modern life, stepping into public did not mean surrendering your identity to every stranger around you. A person outside his home still retained some anonymity. He could walk, speak, assemble, worship, or attend an event without assuming that every passerby could identify him and connect him to a digital dossier.

Meta’s glasses would end that.

This is how the surveillance state grows: one device, one platform, one “convenience” at a time. The goal is obvious enough — surveil Americans continuously, gather every available scrap of data, and make it available for private exploitation or government abuse.

Republicans should lead the fight against that future. Instead, Democrats have taken the lead. Markey, joined by Oregon Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, sent Mark Zuckerberg a letter laying out the civil-liberties threat.

“Embedding facial recognition into consumer wearables would vastly expand this surveillance infrastructure, enabling continuous, decentralized identification of members of the public without their knowledge or consent,” the senators wrote. “The deployment of facial recognition technology in smart glasses risks entrenching a system in which Americans are routinely scanned, catalogued, and analyzed as they move through daily life — an outcome fundamentally incompatible with a democracy.”

For once, the Democrats are right.

A doxxing machine

A wearer could blend into a crowd and scan thousands of faces in a single afternoon. The people being scanned would never know. No practical mechanism for consent exists. No opt-out exists. Your privacy would depend on strangers’ self-restraint and Meta’s internal rules.

That is no protection at all.

Now add politics. America is already divided along political, social, cultural, and religious lines. These glasses would function as a doxxing machine — a gift to activists, harassers, and anyone who wants to expose, blacklist, or intimidate another person.

Imagine someone wearing them at a protest, church, synagogue, school-board meeting, rally, or conference. A passing glance could tie a face to a name, employer, relationship status, online history, and web of personal associations. The line between public presence and forced disclosure would disappear.

Markey asked whether Meta had evaluated “the potential for stalking, harassment, doxxing, or government misuse.”

That question answers itself. Those are not side effects. They are among the most obvious uses.

‘We see everything’

The data pipeline should alarm people just as much. Anyone who wants to use the AI functions on these glasses will likely have to run them through Meta’s app. That means Meta and its contractors will receive the footage and other user data and can use the data to train models and refine the system.

A Swedish newspaper already found that workers for Meta contractors had access to shockingly intimate moments from users’ lives. One Kenyan subcontractor put it this way: “We see everything — from living rooms to naked bodies. Meta has that type of content in its databases. People can record themselves in the wrong way and not even know what they are recording. They are real people like you and me.”

Defenders will say smartphones already allow people to spy on one another. That misses the point. Phones are conspicuous. They require effort. Smart glasses make surveillance ambient, easy, and nearly invisible.

RELATED: Your smart thermostat is watching you — it knows your routine and when your house is empty

Photo by Gado/Getty Images

Political malpractice

Republicans should grasp the politics as well as the principle. Getting outflanked by Democrats on privacy, Big Tech, and the surveillance state is malpractice. Young voters already distrust AI. Fighting biometric surveillance and warrantless data abuse should be easy territory for a party that claims to care about liberty.

Instead, Trump has called on House Republicans to pass a clean reauthorization of FISA Section 702 without requiring warrants when federal agencies query Americans’ communications swept up in foreign surveillance. He has also pushed legislation to preempt many state regulations on data centers and AI deployment.

That is the wrong instinct at the wrong moment.

Privacy is not a boutique concern for cranks. It protects freedom of movement, assembly, association, and speech. A country that abandons privacy invites tyranny.

Americans do not want data centers imposed on their communities, fentanyl zombies defecating in the street, chemicals in their food, and camera networks tracking their movements. They certainly do not want strangers stripping away their anonymity with a glance through AI-powered glasses.

If Republicans cannot draw the line here, on a bedrock question of liberty and human dignity, they deserve to lose.

Democrat Fanatics Embrace Trans Madness Like Ahab Chasing That Whale

Trans people, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., declared this week, 'hurt absolutely no one.'

Seven Primaries That Could Tear Democrats Apart In 2026

Progressives facing off against moderates in high-profile contests

For Dem Senators, the First Rule of 'Fight Club' Is Fighting Chuck Schumer

A rogue group of left-wing senators is rebelling against Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer's (D., N.Y.) midterm strategy, another sign of deep fractures within the party.

The post For Dem Senators, the First Rule of 'Fight Club' Is Fighting Chuck Schumer appeared first on .