Aim true: Anna Thomasson sets her sights on empowering women through firearms training



There’s something about firing an AR-15 on full auto that puts a big smile on your face.

At least it does for my colleague, Helen Roy. It’s also addictive, apparently; no sooner has she emptied the entire magazine into the target than she asks, “Is that all?”

'A lot of the ladies that do come on a regular basis call it "lead therapy," because while you're out there, you're going to feel all this energy hitting you, and then you just want more of it.'

Behind her, David Prince laughs knowingly. A tall, grandfatherly former CPA, Mr. Prince (as everybody calls him) owns the spacious and immaculate Eagle Gun Range, where we’ve just spent the last few hours getting a crash course in how to shoot.

Beaming next to him with almost maternal pride is Helen's instructor, Anna Thomasson. She — along with her husband, Bryan Wertz — has been kind enough to spend the afternoon giving us a highly condensed version of the extensive firearms training she offers women through her company, Dallas-based Aim True.

Matt Himes

Although Thomasson grew up around firearms, she was always more observer than participant. "My family is very traditional,” the petite Texan explains. “My dad is ‘boys shoot guns and girls stay in the kitchen.'”

That changed in 2015, when Thomasson was diagnosed with breast cancer. Her husband, Bryan Wertz, was a lifelong avid shooter; during her recovery he suggested she join him at the range as a way to spend time together while getting outside and getting some sun.

Thomasson found she enjoyed it. And not only that — learning to handle a firearm seemed to restore some of the inner strength sapped by her medical ordeal. “I got the feeling I could be confident in the world again,” she says.

She never looked back, taking course after course and honing her skills. She formed Aim True in 2017 as way to teach firearm self-defense to other women. She also organized the “ladies-only” training group Diamonds and Derringers.

Like Thomasson, Helen has always been comfortable around guns. Her father and her older brother (military veteran and active military, respectively) both enjoy shooting, as does her husband. While she's often joined them at the range and has fired off a few shots of her own on occasion, she's never gotten much, if any, formal training. She's here to rectify that. Helen tells Thomasson she should consider her a beginner.

Gun-shy

We start in a tidy, well-lit classroom tucked away near Eagle Gun Range’s front desk. When I ask how they met, Wertz and Thomasson smile as they describe their courtship, more or less finishing each other’s sentences.

There’s an ease between them that automatically puts us at ease, and it sets the tone for the hours to come. As Thomasson runs the training, Wertz sits to the side, doing work on a computer, every so often interjecting to expand or emphasize a point Anna makes.

Thomasson begins by explaining what’s different about firearms training for women.

To begin with, says Thomasson, many of her students are motivated by a newfound sense of vulnerability.

“I have a lot of clients coming to me when they’ve had a divorce, or they’ve lost their spouse, or they’ve had a break-in at their home,” she says. “They’ve never wanted to hold a gun before, they've never had any interest in it, and now a situation has dictated that this is something [they] have to do.”

Matt Himes

According to Wertz, this reluctance tends to make women who do show up for the course very diligent students.

“We always say that a man feels like he was born to stick a gun in his pants and walk around with it,” says Wertz. A woman, on the other hand, “says I really want to know about this gun and I want to make sure that I don't hurt someone with it, that someone doesn't hurt me with it, that I really understand all aspects of it and how to use it and be confident.”

When that confidence finally comes, it’s often a revelation, says Thomasson. “Sometimes they have an emotional reaction to shooting the first time. And sometimes it just goes straight into, oh my gosh, I am going to be able to take care of myself and I don't have to rely on anybody else.”

Pick a holster

When it comes to buying a gun, Thomasson likes to start with an often overlooked question: Can you find a holster for it? “My clients go to Highland Park Village, get a really pretty gun, and I say, ‘And you can leave it on your bedside table because there's no holster to fit it,’” says Thomasson.

Unless you’re planning to use your gun exclusively out in the country, Thomasson recommends a concealed-carry holster, typically worn inside the waistband.

Choosing the right gun

“Our hands are different from men's,” notes Thomasson. “They're usually a little bit smaller.”

That doesn’t necessarily mean you want a smaller gun, but rather a “grip size that we can actually reach the trigger on.”

Ultimately, says Thomasson, how a gun fits your hand can come down to personal preference. She likens choosing a gun to buying shoes. “I can't buy you a pair of shoes and say, ‘Love these shoes. You should wear them.’ But [I can] teach you the aspects of the gun and what you should be looking for.”

Sometimes bigger is easier

One common misconception Thomasson encounters is the assumption that a smaller gun will always be easier to shoot.

“This is our mindset as women. We think the bigger the gun, the harder it is to control, and the smaller the gun, the easier it is to control.”

Thomasson recalls a recent exchange with a client.

“[A woman] in her 70s called and she said, ‘I'm about five foot tall and I don't have much strength. I have a really big gun, a 9mm, and I think I want to sell it and have you teach me how to use a smaller gun.’”

Thomasson quickly got her to reconsider. “I talked to her about the recoil … and the weight of that bigger gun taking some of that recoil away from your hands and your shoulders. Whereas a smaller gun doesn't have the weight to [absorb] that recoil … and it ends up hitting you harder.”

For Thomasson, this is an essential part of the training she offers: “learn[ing] how to figure out what kind of gun is going to suit you best for your hand strength … [and] your situation.”

Loading the magazine

Thomasson leads us over to a table on which she’s placed a Glock semiautomatic pistol with a special slide for training as well as a pile of inert dummy rounds — in this case, spent Simunition blank cartridges. She begins by teaching Helen to load the magazine, which she recommends bracing against the tabletop.

Laughing at how surprisingly difficult she finds it, Helen says, “You know what, this is very important. How do you do gun stuff and maintain a manicure?”

Thomasson has anticipated the question. “You know there's always a girl way and a boy way,” she says, fetching a small device from a nearby shelf and handing it to Helen. It’s called an UpLULA, and before long it significantly increases Helen’s efficiency.

Trigger warning

Matt Himes

Now that the gun is loaded, it’s time to pick it up. But first Thomasson imparts a basic principle of gun safety: “[You] don't ever want to touch the trigger until [you’re] ready to touch the trigger.”

“This gun is developed to be comfortable in your hand when your finger is on the trigger,” explains Thomasson. “So that's the way that your hand is going to want to pick this up.”

To avoid this, says Thomasson, we have to force ourselves to rest our finger on the frame as we grab the rest of the gun with our hand.

Thomasson points to the fleshy webbing between Helen’s index finger and thumb. “When you pick this gun up … I want you to see how high you can get this part of your hand up here,” she says, indicating the curved little overhang separating the top of the grip from the rest of the pistol.

Helen does, which gives Thomasson the chance to point out an important physiological difference between men and women. “Now if I had one of the boys pick this up, then all of the meat [between his thumb and index finger] would be squished up at the top. But females don't have that kind of muscular development in that part of our hand.”

It’s a difference that can often be overlooked, says Thomasson. “A male instructor will tell the female you need a higher grip, you need a stronger grip. And the lady says, ‘This is all the grip I've got. I don't have any more hand.’”

It's something neither of us have ever thought about, apparently. "It's almost as if men and women are different," marvels Helen with mock incredulity. She examines my hand and compares it to hers.

"I do have that space," she says, smiling brightly. "Confirmed woman!"

"Confirmed woman!"Matt Himes

When it comes to finding a properly fitting gun, Thomasson says it’s all about how your finger reaches the trigger. You want to have it close enough that you comfortably pull it back, without it being so close that your finger wraps around to the other side.

Proper stance

After teaching Helen how to complete the grip with the placement of her non-shooting hand, as well as how to use the pistol’s metal sight, Thomasson talks proper stance.

“Did you notice that you leaned back?” she asks Helen. “The minute you picked up that gun, you got away from it.”

Thomasson says this is an unconscious expression of fear — “we think the gun is going to go off and cause a big bang and we’re already scared of it.” This is precisely what her training seeks to overcome.

Lead therapy

After Thomasson advises Helen on the proper stance, it’s time to dry fire — that is, “shoot” the gun without any live ammunition. We all know it’s loaded with inert rounds, but as Helen aims, the tension in the room builds, and when the hammer makes its quiet little “click,” there’s a tangible sense of release.

Helen lets out a deep exhale and smiles. She looks a little flushed.

“What went through your mind?” asks Thomasson gently.

“Something about having bullets in the gun made me a little nervous,” says Helen. “It's weird, there's so much psychological stuff built up around guns. And I have shot guns before, but ...”

“Because you loaded this and you made that action happen,” says Thomasson. She puts her hand on Helen’s shoulder. “How are you doing?”

“I'm good. It's kind of powerful, though. Do women often have an emotional reaction when they shoot?”

“I would say 75% of the females that I have, the first shot they go into tears. We put the gun down and we step back and we hug and we talk about it for five or ten minutes. A lot of the ladies that do come on a regular basis call it ‘lead therapy,’ because while you're out there, you're going to feel all this energy hitting you, and then you just want more of it.”

Get a grip

At this point Bryan chimes in to emphasize the power of a good grip.

“So a lot of times, ladies will ask Anna, you know, should I have a gun because I'm tiny and a man will take it from me?”

He demonstrates by trying to pull the gun out of Helen’s hands. He can’t. “I'm just not going to get it from you before you could use your blaster.”

He then addresses how to hold the gun before you’re ready to point and shoot; for example, if you’re preparing to defend yourself against what could be an intruder in your house. In this case, says Wertz, its best to hold the gun pointed down toward the floor.

He demonstrates on Helen. If she holds her gun above her head, pointed toward the ceiling, it’s easy for him to keep her from bringing the gun level.

Wertz then shows what happens if he grabs Helen’s gun when it's pointed to the floor. “If you kneel, then what am I giving you? I’m giving you the perfect first shot.”

Home on the range

David Prince is old enough to have had an entire career before this one, but he radiates boyish enthusiasm when he talks about Eagle Gun Range.

He opened it in 2012, after noticing that there hadn’t been a range built in the Dallas area for 30 years.

“My wife's inspiration is my perspiration,” he jokes. After building a fence and a rock garden, among other projects, they decided to think bigger. “Let us build a gun range. … I can do that.”

“We wanted someplace [that was] really family-friendly,” Prince says. “Especially friendly to the mothers and the women, because stereotypically, women and guns don't mix. … We wanted a place for them to come and feel safe.”

A big component of Eagle Gun Range’s family-friendly atmosphere is its state-of-the-art air filtration system, which removes the contaminants produced by firearm discharge. “It’s cleaner in the range than it is outside,” says Prince.

It’s clear that he’s proud of what he’s created. “Our mission statement says it all: to have a place that's safe and fun to shoot.”

And it’s not that he’s pandering to the ladies, either.

“Indoor shooting is a great co-ed sport,” he says. “Women outshoot guys all the time. Women are great shooters. It’s a fun sport. It doesn't take massive muscles. You can do it and compete against each other, and it's a fun thing, especially for families. Kids get to shoot against the parents. It’s something the whole family can enjoy.”

Shots fired

Now it's time for Helen to put her classroom training into practice.

We head to the private bay Prince has graciously arranged for us, and Thomasson introduces Helen to the first gun she'll be shooting. It's a Glock 9mm, the same as the practice gun she used. Only this one, of course, shoots real bullets.

Matt Himes

Helen loads the magazine, sorts out her grip, and gets into her stance. She aligns her sights at the paper target, then finds the trigger. She takes a deep breath and very slowly pulls it back.

Bang. We all exhale. Helen smiles. "There we go. That was fun."

It was a decent shot, hitting the human silhouette just above the bull's-eye over the chest. Helen fires off another. This one still hits the target, but a little wide. Thomasson reminds her to take it slow.

"When you pull it really fast, you kind of jerk the gun down, and then that's when you end up with shots that are not in the target. Not that, if you were defending yourself, it still wouldn't hurt the person. But if we want to get that perfect shot, [we need] control of the trigger."

Thomasson then has Helen shoot the same cartridge in a smaller gun: a subcompact Glock in turquoise. This gun's grip is significantly thinner and shorter than the previous one; Helen's pinky just barely wraps around the bottom.

When she shoots, the kick is powerful enough that her left hand slips off a little. Helen also notices that because the gun's size allows her finger to wrap all the way around the trigger, it has a tendency to pull to the right when shooting.

It's all a vivid demonstration of Thomasson's earlier point about women and gun size. "[They] say shrink it and pink it and that's how you sell it to a woman," says Wertz. "Well, that's no good because then it's just a pink gun and it's tiny."

As an alternative, Thomasson shows us the Walther PDP F-Series, a full-size 9mm pistol designed for shooters with smaller hands. To get the gun's ergonomics and fit just right, Walther consulted with expert female shooters, including Olympian Gabby Franco.

'Smith and Wesson ... and me'

Noting that the training so far has used Austrian and German pistols, I ask Wertz about the American gun industry.

"When we get into rifles, bolt-action rifles, semiautomatic rifles, carbines, we win," says Wertz, "but the Europeans kind of have a hold on the striker-fired market. The polymer lower, steel upper type gun like Glock, Sig, H&K, Walther, all really great handgun manufacturing companies."

Wertz is quick to add that Smith & Wesson does make an excellent striker-fired pistol that many competitors use.

Of course, the iconic American brand has other claims to fame. "Smith & Wesson makes a better revolver than anybody in the world," says Wertz. "And then if you want a 1911-style, old kind of World War II Heritage American pistol, nobody makes them better than we do."

In this latter category, Wertz singles out Florence, Texas-based Staccato. "Anna's got a Staccato that she carries a lot, and they make a better gun than than just about anybody else."

'It's gonna get sporty'

Matt Himes

According to Prince, Helen is something of a natural. He pulls her target and examines it with admiration. "This is extremely good shooting. She's at five yards, but she shot with several firearms, not having any practice rounds."

Helen does equally well on the AR-15 rifle Prince offers her; in fact, she finds it to be her favorite firearm of the day. "I feel so much more confident with [the AR-15] than the smaller ones," she says, when asked if she'd rather have it or a pistol for self-defense.

Wertz says that despite the media's relentless propaganda about "assault rifles," this is a common reaction from women after they shoot an AR-15. "You can see how accurate you were with very little effort and without having any training."

Then it's time to try the rife on full auto. Prince is thorough and professional as he coaches Helen on what to expect; at the same time, you can tell he can't wait for her to let it rip. "It's just natural — when you first squeeze the trigger, you're going to let it rattle off about five rounds. You're going to let go. We're going to reload. Squeeze. Turn around and smile."

Just before Helen pulls the trigger, Wertz smiles. "It's gonna get sporty."

Matt Himes

To watch some of Helen's training with Aim True at Eagle Gun Range, check out the video below.

For more information about Aim True and the wide variety of firearms and emergency preparedness training it offers, see here.

To learn more about Eagle Gun Range or to explore its online store, go here.

'Reagan' actor Robert Davi on Hollywood left: 'They want DEI except for thought'



Robert Davi didn’t just bring Leonid Brezhnev to life in “Reagan,” this year’s eagerly awaited biopic of the 40th U.S. president. The veteran actor brought volumes of research to both the role and the set.

Davi, beloved for work in classics like “Die Hard,” “The Goonies,” and “Licence to Kill,” spent time in Russia speaking to citizens about the late Soviet Union leader.

In a business that routinely punishes conservative stars, the film's producers bucked groupthink, casting not only Davi but talented actors such as Nick Searcy, Pat Boone, and Kevin Sorbo.

He dug deep into Brezhnev’s complicated legacy, learning of his bond with President Richard Nixon and affinity for fast cars.

Command performance

For Davi, “Reagan” deserved nothing less than his full commitment. It explains why he has endured as an actor whose career stretches back to 1977’s “Contract on Cherry Street” with Frank Sinatra.

“Reagan,” now available via digital on demand, finds Davi and co-stars fleshing out “The Gipper’s” remarkable life and political career. Some viewers, familiar with iconic Reagan moments like his “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” speech, may not know how Reagan battled communism behind the scenes in Hollywood.

For Davi, the biggest takeaway may be how little has changed in America since the Reagan Revolution.

Back to the future

He said pop culture and the press loathed Reagan, much as they do President Donald Trump. In fact, the moment Trump descended the Trump Tower escalator to announce his candidacy, the actor connected the mogul’s populist message to that of vintage Reagan.

Davi also notes that both Reagan and Trump were badly underestimated by their opponents — until it was too late.

The actor wishes the film could have included even more of Reagan’s life and legacy. Notably, he would have loved to see Nancy Reagan (Penelope Ann Miller in the film) reacting to new President George H.W. Bush’s vow to build a “kinder, gentler nation” — a not-so-subtle dig at his former boss of eight years.

An 'eye-opening' biopic

Still, the movie packs plenty into the running time, including how Reagan reached across the aisle to get legislation done. His scenes with Congressmen Tip O’Neill (Dan Lauria) epitomize that attitude. It also explains the dawn of the Reagan Democrat.

That, and so much more featured in the film, will prove “eye-opening” to younger viewers, Davi predicted.

“The new generation needs to watch that to understand the difference between the extreme left and the conservative movement,” he said.

Davi’s “Reagan” contributions didn’t end with his Brezhnev performance. The versatile star also sings two tracks on the film: “This Town” and “Nancy (with the Laughing Face).” He studied music extensively earlier in his career and, in recent years, has brought the Sinatra catalog to vibrant life via “Davi Sings Sinatra.”

He also directed the charming 2007 film “The Dukes” along with the 2022 biopic “My Son Hunter,” which cast Laurence Fox as the embattled first son. The film stands in sharp contrast to how Hollywood either ignored or lionized Hunter Biden throughout his various scandals.

Davi’s conservative bona fides are no Hollywood secret. He continues to work, although often in independent features like this year’s “Bardejov.” That film recalled the true-life heroism of Rafuel Lowy, who saved hundreds of Jewish lives during the Holocaust.

Hollywood rebels

It’s no accident that Davi is not the only openly right-of-center actor in the “Reagan” cast. In a business that routinely punishes conservative stars, the film's producers bucked groupthink, casting not only Davi but talented actors such as Nick Searcy, Pat Boone, and Kevin Sorbo.

Sorbo has said his unofficial Hollywood blacklisting began roughly a decade ago when his agent left him over his conservative beliefs. Oscar nominee James Woods hasn’t had a sizeable film role since his supporting turn in 2014’s “Jamesy Boy.”

Davi confirms the new blacklist is “worse than it was during the McCarthy era,” adding that communists did infiltrate the Hollywood community during the 1950s.

For his part, Davi won't be cowed. He contributes thoughtful op-eds to Breitbart News and keeps creating art on his terms. He promises a new album to drop in 2025 in addition to a European tour. He’s close to starting work on a new film called “The Ministry” about a group tied to vigilante justice.

The ultimate irony? Hollywood continues to make movies about the blacklist era while stars are penalized for their political beliefs in 2024, he said. George Clooney will bring his “Goodnight, and Good Luck” film, recalling journalist Edward R. Murrow’s scraps with Sen. Joseph McCarthy, to Broadway starting in March.

“They want DEI except for thought. … People wanna talk about the ‘fascists’ in the MAGA movement,” Davi said with a laugh. “The fascists in the liberal left will denigrate you, dispel you.”

Is CBS Refusing To Release Its Full Kamala ‘60 Minutes’ Interview Because It Let Her Redo Answers?

There are only two possibilities pertaining to that “60 Minutes” interview in which at least one of Vice President Kamala Harris’ answers to a critical question was edited in her political favor: Either Kamala’s handlers insisted upon redoing some of her comments, or the program unilaterally assisted in cleaning them up on its own. Whichever […]

'F*** them forever': Andrew Schulz's show canceled hours after Trump interview goes live



Ahead of the 2016 election, comedian Jimmy Fallon traded laughs with then-candidate Donald Trump on "The Tonight Show." Democratic boosters and other leftists condemned the host for "humanizing" the Republican.

Future "Jeopardy!" host Ken Jennings joined other middling media personalities in further insinuating that Fallon was racist-adjacent and courting white supremacists, while others called for the comedian's cancellation.

Unfortunately for comedian Andrew Schulz, it appears that intolerance has not dissipated over the past eight years.

Schulz revealed on the Wednesday episode of the "Flagrant" podcast that a New York venue canceled what would have been his special just hours after he hosted the once and possibly future Republican president.

'It's booked. It's ready to go. We're going on sale this week.'

According to Schulz, he was set to shoot his next comedy special at the Brooklyn Academy of Music. However, shortly after his massively popular interview with Trump went live, the venue notified him that it was canceling the gig.

"It was an awesome interview and everybody loved it, and then a day later, [producer] Dov [Mamann] was like, 'Oh by the way, the venue you're going to shoot your special in canceled your shows,'" said Schulz. "Within three hours."

"Flagrant" co-host Akaash Singh said, "After we interviewed him, before the episode comes out, he goes to the venue. Everybody leaves on Schulz's special team. All of them have to go to the venue to check it out. I assume everything is good."

"Yeah, so we've had these venues locked in for months now," replied Schulz. "It's not like, 'We might do it here.' It's booked. It's ready to go. We're going on sale this week. We had the entire production team come out for the — this is for the third time many of us are spotting the venue and looking and everything. We have the set design already curated. We're moving around seating plots, camera — it's ready to go."

"I don't know if it's the Trump interview," said Schulz. "But the day before it came out, we were ready to go and were going on sale this week. And three and a half hours afterwards, we get this email."

The podcast shared an image of an Oct. 9 email from the venue, which read:

First off, I want to thank you for thinking of BAM for Andrew Schulz's upcoming comedy show. We are always excited when promoters consider our space for their events. After some internal discussion with leadership, it was decided that BAM is not the right fit for this show at this time. That said, we really do appreciate you reaching out and we'd love to work with you on future events that might be a better match for BAM. Our door is always open for a chat about other shows you think might work well in our space. Thanks for considering us. Looking forward to potentially collaborating down the line!

Diane Max, former board chair for Planned Parenthood NYC and current Planned Parenthood Federation of America board member, is the chair of the venue's board of trustees. Planned Parenthood endorsed Kamala Harris once again in July.

"F*** them and f*** them forever," added Schulz.

Mamann, who emphasized the venue had previously been receptive to the content planned for Schulz's special, suggested this "felt personal."

After yelling "MAGA," Schulz joked that while his "vote was up for grabs," the board of the venue has pushed him in a particular direction.

Blaze News reached out to the Brooklyn Academy of Music but did not receive an immediate response.

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

Flailing aides prove unable to save Kamala Harris from absolute 'TRAIN WRECK' Bret Baier interview



Kamala Harris has historically kept her unscripted engagements with the fourth estate to a bare minimum. In the handful of instances in which Harris has actually sat down for interviews as a presidential candidate, they have nearly all been with friendly talking heads from sympathetic networks — such as CBS News, which apparently radically edited footage to make her seem more coherent.

Harris sat down Wednesday with Fox News' Bret Baier for a nearly 30-minute interview in an attempt to broaden her reach and offset the loss of voters Democrats have long alienated.

It did not go well.

It went so poorly, in fact, that Harris' staffers apparently pulled the plug and the Trump team later posted the interview in its entirety as a campaign ad.

Speaking to a panel of his peers after the sit-down, Baier revealed that Harris arrived nearly 20 minutes late and that her team frantically tried to cut the interview short, sparing the Democratic candidate from having to dodge additional questions.

"I'm talking, like, four people waving their hands like, 'It's gotta stop!'" said Baier. "I had to dismount there at the end."

Baier can be seen roughly 26 minutes into the interview referring to Harris' flailing aides, telling Harris, "Madam Vice President, they're wrapping me very hard here. I hope you got to say what you wanted to say about Donald Trump. ... There are a lot of things that people want to know about you and your policies. That's why we invited you here."

While Harris appeared frazzled throughout the interview, there were several moments in particular that may have prompted her aides to seek a quick exit.

'What are you talking about?'

"More than 70% of people tell [pollsters] the country is on the wrong track," Baier managed to say during one of Harris' filibusters, referring to a new Marquette Law School national survey. "If it's on the wrong track, that track follows three and a half years of you being vice president and President Biden being president. That is what they're saying — 79% of them. Why are they saying that if you're turning the page? You've been in office for three and a half years."

"And Donald Trump has been running for office," said Harris.

"But you've been the person holding the office, Madam Vice President," responded Baier.

"Come on," said Harris, smiling. "Come on. You and I both know what I am talking about. You and I both know what I am talking about."

Baier, genuinely confused as to Harris' meaning, responded, "I actually don't. What are you talking about?"

Harris, ostensibly unsure herself, pivoted into another attack on President Donald Trump, saying, "Over the last decade, people have become — but listen, over the last decade, it is clear to me and certainly the Republicans who are on stage with me, the former chief of staff to the president, Donald Trump, the former defense secretaries, national security adviser, and his vice president, one, that he is unfit to serve, that he is unstable, that he is dangerous, and that people are exhausted with someone who professes to be a leader who spends full time demeaning and engaging in personal grievances."

When asked to estimate how many illegal aliens have stolen into the country during her time as America's border czar, Harris proved unable or at the very least unwilling to answer. Instead she tossed another word salad.

"I'm glad you raised the issue of immigration, because I agree with you, it is a topic of discussion that people want to rightly have," said Harris. "And you know what I'm going to talk about."

"Do you think it's 1 million, 3 million?" said Baier.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection data indicates that over 2 million illegal aliens have so far entered the country in fiscal year 2024.

"Bret, let's just get to the point, okay? The point is that we have a broken immigration system that needs to be repaired," said Harris.

Baier noted between interruptions that the Biden-Harris administration dismantled Trump-era policies that helped secure the border and prevent the release of illegal aliens into the U.S.

Harris responded by listing several unrelated initiatives she and Biden pushed upon taking office, then suggested she had also advanced "a bill to fix our immigration system."

Baier, who wasn't buying what Harris was selling, noted that the vice president was referring to the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021. The bill, which failed despite a federal Democratic trifecta, would have both provided a path to citizenship for tens of millions of illegal aliens and weakened various immigration policies.

When the interviewer began to highlight the nature of the bill, Harris cut him off and resumed talking around the question.

'She couldn't give a straight answer to a single question because she has no answers.'

In another instance that might have worried Harris' aides, the vice president demonstrated difficulty reconciling her newfound ability to diagnose Trump's supposed instability from afar with her years-long failure to recognize Biden's decrepitude up close.

After noting that Harris previously called Trump "misguided," "unstable," "not well," and "mentally not stable," Baier said, "You told many interviewers that 'Joe Biden was on his game,' that [he] 'ran around circles on his staff.' When did you first notice that President Biden's mental faculties appeared diminished?"

Even though Harris replaced Biden as the Democratic candidate because of the widespread recognition of the president's decrepitude, Harris suggested to Baier that there actually was no problem, stating, "Joe Biden I have watched in from the Oval Office to the Situation Room, and he has the judgment and the experiment — and experience — to do exactly what he has done in making very important decisions on behalf of the American people."

"You met with him at least once a week for three and a half years. You didn't have any concerns?" asked Baier.

Harris refused to answer and instead attacked Trump.

Trump responded to the interview on Truth Social, writing, "She has a massive and irredeemable case of TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME - So bad, in fact, that she is barely able to talk about any subject other than the man who had the best economy ever, the strongest border in history, and who just got the UNANIMOUS ENDORSEMENT OF THE U.S. Border Patrol, ME!"

Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) tweeted, "To my Democratic friends: maybe you should consider swapping Kamala Harris for Joe Biden."

"Kamala Harris' interview with Bret Baier was a TRAIN WRECK," wrote Karoline Leavitt, press secretary for the Trump campaign. "Kamala was angry, defensive, and once again abdicated any responsibility for the problems Americans are facing. She couldn't give a straight answer to a single question because she has no answers."

Brian Fallon, a top Harris campaign aide, told NPR, "We feel like we definitely achieved what we set out to achieve in the sense that she was able to reach an audience that's probably been not exposed to the arguments she's been making on the trail."

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

Harris Won’t Say When She First Noticed Biden’s Cognitive Decline After She Helped Cover It Up

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Screenshot-2024-10-16-at-8.22.06 PM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Screenshot-2024-10-16-at-8.22.06%5Cu202fPM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]While Biden is not on the ballot, he is the sitting president. His mental status is of clear and present interest to the American people.

Bloomberg interviewer's attempts to needle Trump backfire — and the crowd loves it



Leftist publications and the Harris campaign have tried desperately to spin President Donald Trump's Tuesday interview with the editor in chief of Bloomberg News as a botch job on the part of the Republican — calling it "disastrously bad," "rambling," "angry and unfocused," and "a total mess."

The audience members present for the exchange at the Economic Club of Chicago were evidently of a different mind, both cheering on Trump's ripostes to Bloomberg's John Micklethwait, booing the interviewer's loaded questions, and giving the president a standing ovation.

Micklethwait, who reportedly ordered his staff not to investigate Michael Bloomberg or his Democratic rivals prior to the 2020 election, attempted on several occasions to kneecap the Republican candidate but proved unsuited to the task.

In one instance, the British Bloomberg EIC tried characterizing Trump's plan to impose significant tariffs on imports and on American companies that outsource manufacturing as potentially ruinous, suggesting that it might adversely impact the economy as well as foreign powers.

Trump indicated that his tariff strategy during his first term was ramping up to major success prior to the pandemic, not only incentivizing companies to build factories in the homeland but bringing in "hundreds of billions of dollars just from China alone, and I hadn't even started yet."

'They've been wrong about everything.'

Shortly after the Republican president reiterated that tariffs serve to protect American companies and those companies that will ultimately flood into the country, Micklethwait said:

A lot of places like this, they rely — there are a lot of jobs that rely on foreigners coming here. You're going to basically stop trade with China. You're talking about 60% tariffs on that. You're talking, as you said, 100%, 200% on things you don't really like. You're also talking about 10, 20% tariffs on the rest of the world. That is going to have a serious effect on the overall economy. And yes you're going to find some people who would gain from individual tariffs. The overall effect could be massive.

Trump rejected the Bloomberg editor's premise, saying, "I agree. It's going to have a massive effect. Positive effect. It's going to be a positive, not a negative."

"I know how committed you are to this," continued Trump. "It must be hard for you to spend 25 years talking about tariffs as being negative and then have somebody explain to you that you're totally wrong."

As the audience broke into laughter, Micklethwait tried in vain to reassert himself, insinuating that 40 million jobs dependent on trade might be lost on account of the tariffs.

"You ready? John Deere. Great company. They announced about a year ago they're going to build big plants outside of the United States," said Trump. "They're going to build them in Mexico."

"That's right. I said, 'If John Deere builds those plants, they're not selling anything into the United States,'" added Trump.

Following the Bloomberg interview, the Wall Street Journal indicated John Deere has not yet axed its Mexican ambitions; however, Trump's potential re-election might prompt a rethinking of the company's extra-national focus.

Micklethwait suggested further that Trump's proposed tariffs could undermine American foreign policy, in part by upsetting allies and "dividing" the West.

"How does it help you take on China turning all of your allies against you?" asked the editor.

"Tremendously because China thinks we're a stupid country, a very stupid country. They can't believe that somebody finally got wise to them," said Trump. "Not one president charged China anything. They said, 'Oh, they are a third-world nation. They are developing.' Well, we're a developing nation, too. Take a look at Detroit. Take a look at our cities. ... We have to develop more than they do."

"Our allies have taken advantage of us more so than our enemies," continued the president, citing the European Union nations, Japan, and South Korea as countries that have benefited from other presidents' reluctance to impose tariffs.

After several unsuccessful attempts to extract concessions from Trump on the topic of tariffs, Micklethwait suggested the Republicans' promises to drop taxes will cost trillions of dollars.

"You're flooding the thing with giveaways. I was actually quite kind to you. I used $7 trillion. The upper estimate [for the cost of the promises] is $15 trillion. People like the Wall Street Journal, who's hardly a communist organization, they have criticized you on this as well," said the editor.

"What does the Wall Street Journal know?" responded Trump. "They've been wrong about everything. So have you, by the way."

Once again, the audience — apparently out of touch with the thinking of liberal bloggers — broke into laughter.

"You're trying to turn this — you're trying to turn this into debate," said Micklethwait, growing visibly flustered.

"You're wrong," replied Trump. "You've been wrong all your life on this stuff."

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

Trump tells Glenn Beck who's really running the country — and it isn't Biden



President Donald Trump spoke this week with Blaze Media co-founder and nationally syndicated radio host Glenn Beck, diagnosing various systems and personnel problems he reckons must ultimately be rectified in order for America to be restored to greatness.

In the over-40 minute interview, Trump addressed numerous issues including voter fraud, the fallout of the Biden-Harris administration's botched Afghanistan withdrawal, and the threat of nuclear holocaust.

His remarks about America's covertly transmogrified political hierarchy were, however, among the most troubling.

Trump suggested that even prior to President Joe Biden's unceremonious ouster as a candidate, the 81-year-old Democrat was effectively little more than a figurehead for a "committee" of unnamed kakistocrats.

Echoing Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s recent suggestion to Tucker Carlson that Democrats are poised to once again vote for an "apparatus" regardless of whose name is on the ballot, Trump told Beck that the same cabal operating around Biden now seeks to hold onto power via Kamala Harris who has distinguished herself as a "believer."

'It's a nasty group of people.'

"It's a nasty government. It's a mean government. They weaponize government," said Trump. "It's interesting because the people aren't very smart — you know, the people on top."

While these figureheads are cognitively lackluster, Trump said that the people who surround them are alternatively "smart and they're vicious, and they're fascists, and everything else you can be. It's a nasty group of people."

'She's worse than he is, and the difference is she was a believer.'

After expressing certitude that somebody capable must be running the show, Beck — fresh off condemning Democrats' moral inversion in a speech at Trump's Sunday rally in Arizona — asked Trump, "Who's actually the president?"

"I think it's actually a committee of people, and they might not even know who the committee is. They may not even know themselves," Trump said, intimating a siloed and stratified shadow governance structure. "It's a group of people that are in different levels of [Washington,] D.C., and they surround a man that was not the most capable person. By the way, never was but certainly not anymore."

Trump, who repeatedly emphasized Harris' incompetence and hostility toward Christians, suggested that she might be an even more malleable figurehead for the "committee," noting that "she's worse than he is, and the difference is she was a believer. You know, she was a believer for a long time. She was a Marxist, right, for a long time. She's further left than Bernie."

Referencing Voteview data pertaining to past roll-call votes cast in Congress, Rice University political science professor Mark P. Jones noted in The Hill that Harris was "the second-most liberal Democratic senator to serve in the Senate in the 21st century."

That analysis neither factors in her pre-Senate radicalism, including her endorsement of a handgun ban or her threat to storm the homes of law-abiding Americans for surprise gun inspections, nor her recent proposal for price controls.

Whereas Harris is an extremist even by Democratic standards, Jones noted that Biden was closer to the ideological center when compared to the 109 Democrat senators analyzed in the 107th-118th Congresses.

Kennedy Jr., who at one point attempted to stake out common ground with the Harris campaign, indicated in late August that "there's a lot of handlers involved."

"Even when you talk to Democrats about, you know, 'Do you really think it's a good idea to be electing somebody who cannot give an interview?' they say, 'Well ... you're electing the people around her, you're electing the apparatus,'" said Kennedy. "The apparatus, I don't have any faith in it. It's an apparatus that are neocons like Antony Blinken who are running us right up into World War III, and they are people who masterminded the censorship from inside the White House."

House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) raised the possibilities in July that Annie Tomasini, White House deputy chief of staff, and/or Ashley Williams, special assistant to the president, may be among those "doing some of the President's job for him."

There appears, however, to be a great deal of friction presently between Biden's confidants and elements of the Harris campaign, so it is unclear just how transferable the "apparatus" or "committee" would be.

Nevertheless, unnamed sources suggested to NBC News last month that Harris was contemplating bringing over Biden officials, such as U.S Agency for International Development Samantha Power. Such holdovers might constitute committee members even if, according to Trump, they are unaware.

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

M.I.A.: From 'Paper Planes' to 'full tinfoil hat'



M.I.A. — full name Mathangi "Maya" Arulpragasam — has always been wild. Rapper, artist, fashion icon, activist, she navigates the world with the same energy that bursts from “Paper Planes” and “Galang.” She’s even irked the NFL — surely you remember her middle finger during the Super Bowl XLVI halftime show.

On a recent "Zero Hour," James Poulos sat down with Arulpragasam for a conversation that tackles the complexities of life under COVID restrictions, the transformative power of music and technology, and the ongoing spiritual quest amid a tech-dominated era.

'Merging Only Fans with the music industry is where we're at in tech.'

Arulpragasam and Poulos examine many of the pitfalls of modern life, particularly those at the intersection of technology with health.

'Not an analog situation'

She scrutinizes the mental health industry, offering music as a sanctuary for healing. This deep dive into the ramifications of AI and tech culture leads to a poignant reminder to keep humanity and spirituality at the forefront of our rapidly evolving world.

She bemoans the proliferation of powerful devices, recalling that, when she was a teenager, she didn’t even have the internet in her home. “Slowly, slowly,” she tells James, “gadgets got added, but now my own lifestyle as a musician, I'm constantly surrounded by machines and everything is on and all the WiFi is on and everything needs WiFi."

She adds: “So you can't even make music anymore unless you're logged into the programming app, into the microphone app. It's not an analog situation.”

Techie taste

While tech increasingly dominates music, Arulpragasam notes that its leaders are woefully out of touch, content to stick with pornified artists like Cardi B, Ice Spice, and their various clones.

"Merging Only Fans with the music industry is where we're at in tech," she says.

"These techies advising governments [on how] to program AI and to program the technological future ... even they think the avant-garde is exactly the same as the mainstream, and all they want is a sexy female every time," she says.

Faraday fashion

These days, Arulpragasam has shifted her focus to fashion. The “Queen of anti-brand” brings a unique twist to the streetwear with Ohmni, her line of EMF-protective clothing.

Designed to shield against electromagnetic fields, her collection integrates faraday-lining and materials like silver, copper, and nickel to guard against potentially harmful radiation.

While the debate over EMF safety continues, M.I.A. advocates for proactive protection rather than waiting for definitive evidence of harm.

Her line includes everyday garments such as hats and track pants, fashioned from silver-infused fabric that merges functionality with style. M.I.A. emphasizes that her jersey fabric offers the comfort of a regular T-shirt while providing essential protection. Key items, like boxer shorts and track pants, are engineered to safeguard critical areas such as the heart and reproductive organs.

M.I.A. also links the concept of protective clothing to broader themes of privacy and creativity, stressing the necessity of maintaining a personal haven in a tech-saturated world. Inspired by the technology surrounding Julian Assange, particularly a faraday phone case, M.I.A. was motivated to explore protective fashion.

Et tu, Hypebeast?

She also realizes, however, that the production of this specialized fabric poses its own challenges. Currently sourced from China — ironic given its reputation for surveillance — the fabric highlights a paradox: Protective technology is manufactured in a country known for its watchful eye, while it remains elusive in the "land of freedom."

Looking ahead, M.I.A. envisions expanding her brand as awareness of EMF exposure grows. She believes that, with increasing concerns over advanced technologies like 5G and 6G, the demand for protective clothing is expected to rise, marking a new frontier in the intersection of fashion, health, and technology.

On top of it all, she fights the resistance caused by a media that once worshiped her. Hypebeast, who once adored her boldness, accused her of going “full tinfoil hat.” These days, that’s quite the compliment.

Blaze News original: One company's pet project: Build a future for lab-grown meat



The “cultivated meat” industry appears to be experiencing serious growing pains.

The sector that once had investors salivating now faces significant technological, financial, and legal challenges — as well as the ever-present fear that consumers just won't bite.

'The same people who are doomsaying it now were hyping it five years ago.'

While American players in the lab-grown meat market apparently prefer to suffer in silence — of the 20 startups Align contacted, none responded — we did find one British company forging ahead by targeting a considerably less picky demographic: dogs and cats.

And once their pets are on board, can people be far behind?

Where's the beef?

Things were a lot different just five years ago, when investors' appetites for this new, cruelty-free way to get hamburgers seemed insatiable. Why raise a calf into a fulsome cow, then brain it for chuck when you can simply:

  1. Secure a sample of cells from that cow;
  2. Take a sub-selection of those cells to grow a “bank” of cells for later use;
  3. Deposit some of the banked cells into a tightly controlled tank called a bioreactor, not wholly unlike those you might find in a brewery;
  4. Supply the cells with nutrients and other factors (including inorganic salts, vitamins, oxygen, amino acids, glucose, and in some cases fetal bovine serum);
  5. Introduce other factors after the cells have multiplied many billions of times over, further modifying the clumping mass of monstrous potential;
  6. And harvest the resulting cellular material for processing and preparation?

Six simple steps to getting a product genetically indistinguishable from the real thing.

A recipe for success

Deep-pocketed juggernauts and wide-eyed hopefuls alike were keen to try their hand at this novel and supposedly ethical way of growing money-makers in bioreactors. The idea practically sold itself. Near-universal was the emphasis on sparing livestock from slaughter.

A number of companies — including a few that now live on only in disgruntled investors’ memories — also laid it on thick with green appeals, noting that with fewer cows and chickens, less farmland and water will be needed. While there are indications that lab-grown meat will still have a significant carbon footprint, fewer cows might also mean less methane emissions.

Others noted that their products are hormone-, steroid-, and antibiotic-free.

Still other companies argued that lab-grown meat can help out with food security — reinforcing the supply chain and helping to meet the increasing global demand for meat.

Venture capital liked what they were cooking — especially with the market beginning to lose its appetite for plant-based meat.

It helped that there had been incredible technological progress over a short period of time, driving down the cost to lab-grow a hamburger from $300,000 to less than $10. Regulators were keen to clear the way — at least stateside, where both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture approved select prospects for retail.

So bullish was Israel-based Believer Meats that the company broke ground on the largest cultivated meat production facility in the world, set to open its doors next year North Carolina, signaling to those still in trials that it might actually be possible to fire off imitation chicken for something other than pop-up food demos.

Trimming the fat

That was then. Turns out making lab-grown meat into a viable business is harder than many thought. Investment has dropped off, and reality has set in. Those players still remaining are trimming the fat. A winnowing is under way.

SCiFi Foods and New Age Eats are two among numerous companies that won’t see the bloodless promised land.

Not even Upside Foods, the company that first received FDA approval for its “cultured chicken cell material” in November 2022, made it into 2024 unscathed.

Months after Upside rebuked Bloomberg for suggesting it lacked a path to scale its product and spiked plans for an Illinois-based factory, Wired indicated in July that Upside CEO Uma Valeti notified employees that he was canning 26 people; that leadership teams were going to be restructured to “reduce top-heavy structures”; and that he was pausing the “large-scale tissue program.”

The Good Food Institute recently noted in its annual state of the industry report that cultivated meat and seafood companies raised $225.9 million global in 2023. The previous year, the industry raised $922.3 million.

When accounting for the delta, the GFI — a cellular agriculture advocacy group founded by PETA veteran Bruce Friedrich — noted that last year, “companies and investors alike faced elevated inflation, rising interest rates, and a mixed economic outlook.”

Although keen to put a positive spin on a mixed year, the GFI acknowledged that Good Meat, Upside Foods, and other companies “continued to wrestle with the difficulties of scaling production beyond limited quantities, and sectors of the media took a more skeptical view of cultivated meat’s market viability.”

Bugging out

Amid such technological and financial problems, there are also legislative and narrative setbacks. Italy banned cultivated meat November 2023. Florida led the way in the U.S., and Alabama followed.

Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis noted after ratifying legislation in May to ban lab-grown meat in Florida, “Today, Florida is fighting back against the global elite’s plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals.”

The support cultivated meat has received from outfits like the World Economic Forum and personalities like Bill Gates has bolstered such suspicions. Bill Gates — a big investor in some of the early companies — told the MIT Technology Review in 2021 that "all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef. You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they're going to make it taste even better over time. Eventually, that green premium is modest enough that you can sort of change the [behavior of] people or use regulation to totally shift the demand."

Pleased to Meatly

But to CEO Owen Ensor of the U.K.-based Meatly, this recent downturn is just business as usual.

Meatly CEO Owen EnsorMeatly

When asked to characterize the state of play in the cultivated food industry, Ensor says, “There’s wave-one companies who probably started five-plus years ago and raised pretty significant amounts of money — or some of them did — and tried to scale up without reducing costs. That burned a lot of capital and they weren’t necessarily able to find the most efficient ways of reducing costs.”

According to Ensor, wave-two companies that kicked off sometime in the last two or three years — including Meatly — have for the most part been far more streamlined — “very much focused on cost reduction and on finding ways to make this commercially viable as quickly as possible and with as little capital as needed.”

In May, Meatly revealed one of the ways it would cut costs, announcing the development of a protein-free culture medium that costs roughly $1.34 for 33.8 ounces — hundreds of dollars cheaper than typical alternatives.

“I do think there will be companies that won’t make it out of those cycles,” says Ensor. “And that’s very natural. There’re a lot of different people trying different approaches. Some of those work and some of those don’t. I think a limited number of companies is better. Then the capital can be more concentrated.”

David Kaplan, a director of the Tufts University Center for Cellular Agriculture who is keeping a close watch on the industry, apparently agrees. Kaplan recently told AgFunderNews, “What we’re seeing is a normal contraction and rebirth that has to happen in any new industry or technology.”

“I think consolidation from the early-stage companies is normal, and then things will start growing again. It’s going to be cyclical,” added Kaplan.

When pressed on whether “big-time consolidation” is coming down the pike, Ensor expresses uncertainty about the “big-time” modifier but indicates “there’ll be emerging winners out of this phase of cultivating.”

Hold the doom

Ensor sees a new phase on the horizon, one in which companies begin licensing their technologies and specializing.

With this in mind, says Ensor, it is “very premature to be making predictions on such an early-stage, fast-moving industry.”

The vegan CEO further notes that this disenchantment is most pronounced among those who rushed to hype cultivated meat early in its infancy.

“The same people who are doomsaying it now were hyping it five years ago,” says Ensor. “We need a bit more calm thinking.”

"Calm" is certainly one way to describe Meatly's strategy of not overpromising or growing too fast.

“We didn’t really do any PR for the first two and a half years until we had some rock-solid progress on media [cell culture medium] cost and regulatory approval,” says Ensor. “We’re just doing our job.”

Dogged determination

That keep-your-head-down approach is also apparent in Meatly's willingness to keep its ambition relatively modest, at least for now. The company recently won approval to sell cultivated meat for pet food in the United Kingdom — an apparent global first.

When asked whether there were fewer obstacles for pet food than for human food on his side of the Atlantic, Ensor notes that the regulatory pathways are faster and the consumers “are less fussy about what things look like.”

In his answer, however, Ensor appears to give away the plot: “Pet food is more straightforward and that’s why we’ve started with pet food.”

“You said, ‘started.’ Is there an ambition to go into human food?” this reporter asks the Meatly CEO. “And if so, then is that just into the U.K. and Europe, or, you think, in the States as well?”

“There’s definitely an opportunity,” Ensor responds.

“A lot of strategy and a lot of our success so far has been to be very fast and to be very focused, and so we are focused on pet food for now. But we see it on two sides. One is we’re creating the first cultivated meat products, and secondly, we’re creating the technology and processes need to scale it in a commercially viable manner.”

That technology could have applications in the bio-pharma industry as well, says Ensor.

Scaling up

In the near term, Meatly will be focused on cost reduction. In about six to nine months, the company plans to begin methodically scaling up.

“We’re going from the moment producing kilograms a month to hopefully, by the end of next year, hundreds of kilograms into tons per month, and then the 18 months after that, producing hundreds of tons per month,” says Ensor. “Then we’d be able to replicate that mode quite quickly.”

Ensor speculates that these products will be ready for retail sale “hopefully in the next five years."

Taking a bite out of tumor rumors

Skepticism about cultivated meat has been fueled in part by health concerns, particularly about the use of immortalized cells, as well as by concerns over some of the groups and personalities driving meat substitutes.

Bloomberg, for instance, insinuated in a February 2023 feature that lab-grown meat was effectively the stuff of tumorous masses, noting:

The big honking asterisk is that normal meat cells don’t just keep dividing forever. To get the cell cultures to grow at rates big enough to power a business, several companies, including the Big Three, are quietly using what are called immortalized cells, something most people have never eaten intentionally. Immortalized cells are a staple of medical research, but they are, technically speaking, precancerous and can be, in some cases, fully cancerous.

Joe Fassler, the author of the report, suggested that the meat industry might weaponize fears about immortalized cells, adding, "It's all too easy to imagine misleading Fox News chyrons about chicken tumors and cancer burgers."

Ensor echos what some of the companies contacted by Bloomberg said at the time: “Immortalized cells are safe, robust cells that have been used in bio-pharma for the last 40 years and are the most efficient way of growing cells.”

“There’s no risk with immortalized cells,” continues Ensor:

I know there have been some social media claims around cancer. The difference: Cancer cells are immortalized, but they’re also invasive and you have to have those two attributes. So you can have non-invasive immortalized cells and you can have invasive immortalized cells. No mainstream publication has ever talked about the cancer cells because it has no scientific basis whatsoever.

Ensor notes that the kind of immortalized cells used at Meatly have been used in vaccine production cellular therapies for the past three decades.

Nothing to hide

Ensor is eager to explain "how the sausage is made":

We take cells from a chicken egg. We do that one time, and from that we can grow an infinite amount of them forevermore. And we do that … by putting it in a bioreactor, which is a large steel vessel, so at scale this looks like a microbrewery. It’s a similar process to making beer or yogurt. And you feed it the nutrients that the cells need — so that is amino acids, minerals, vitamins.

After a series of cell duplications, Ensor’s team goes to harvest, which involves spinning the cells free from the leftover nutrients.

To Ensor, going into such detail is the best way to combat misinformation about lab-grown meat: “We need to make sure we’re articulating what we’re doing, sharing transparently and openly about why we’re so excited about it — why I’m excited to feed this to my pets and why I’m excited to one day eat it myself."

Room for more?

If there's one lesson to take from all the efforts to displace meat, it's this: Never underestimate the competition.

According to Statista Market Insights, U.S. sales of faux meat reached $1.4 billion last year, a drop in the bucket compared to the roughly $124 billion raked in by the real thing.

It hasn't been easy for plant-based meat substitutes to find their way into American kitchens, and it’s unclear whether cultivated meat will fare any better. By entering through the pet door, Meatly hopes to show that a viable path to the table begins on the floor.