'All you have to do is say you're a woman': Female inmates say women's prison caters to trans community



Female inmates from the Washington State Corrections Center for Women said that male inmates allegedly abuse the system by pretending to be transgender, forcing women to go to extraordinary measures to avoid being jailed in a room with them.

According to the Daily Wire, investigative reporter James O'Keefe released a video on Thursday April 13, 2023, purporting to show interviews with two female inmates from the WCCW. The women said that there are male rapists and murderers pretending to be transgender to get admitted into the female institution.

“So, we have men rapists, men murderers, child rapists, men who have killed women and are in prison for raping and killing women who get put in our rooms,” the first woman claimed.

“Imagine coming into your room one day and you’re in closed custody and you turn around and there is a man standing there peeing in the toilet because you have the bathroom in your [closed custody unity]. There is nothing you can do," she added.

“Some of these men are not confused; they’re just manipulating the system. It’s not equal, because we don’t get the same care and treatment that the trans get in here," she continued.

The women's prison has been called “the tip of the spear with inclusivity in the prison system," by O'Keefe, as it has been previously at the center of controversies involving transgender inmates.

In December 2022, a man who sexually assaulted a 13-year-old girl was reportedly transferred to the same women's prison facility after "sometimes" identifying as transgender. The man claimed he feared "male aggression" at another prison and therefore was moved into the WCCW.

“They cater to the trans community," the unidentified inmate said. "All you have to do is say that you are a woman, that you now, when you’re in county, say that you identify as a woman, and you can come straight to here from county. The guys don’t even have to go to the men’s prison first," she explained.

\u201cJAILHOUSE FOOTAGE: Male Inmates in Womens' Prison Claiming to be Transgender.\n\n"Rapists, Murderers, Child Rapists, and Men Who Have Killed Women in Our Rooms"\n\n#MillionDollarBaby\u201d
— James O'Keefe (@James O'Keefe) 1681430577

The female added that the women are reprimanded if they refuse to be housed with a man, and the only way to leave the confinement is to be placed on suicide watch.

“There’s nothing you can do but say you’re going to kill yourself and then go down to the crazy unit to get out of that room,” she said. "If you refuse to go back in there, you get a major, you get in trouble.”

A second female inmate told reporters that she has allegedly heard men in the prison discuss intentionally getting a woman pregnant in order to file a lawsuit.

“I’ve heard some of these men talk about how they would want to get a girl pregnant so that the girl could form a lawsuit against WCCW and say that he raped her and he’s willing to go along with it. He’s pretty much the mastermind behind his own scandal.”

The inmate said that they refer to it as a "‘million dollar baby’ play.”

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

Elon Musk leaves BBC reporter stunned after he turns the tables, puts reporter on hot seat in wild interview: 'You just lied!'



Elon Musk has gone viral after he sat down for an interview with BBC reporter James Clayton and pressed Clayton on a couple of controversial topics. Musk was so direct and unrelenting in his responses that Clayton later admitted, "Several times it felt like he was trying to interview me."

On Tuesday evening, Musk and Clayton sat down for an in-person conversation, which Clayton claims had been spontaneously arranged earlier that day. The two touched on various topics, including the massive layoffs that have occurred at Twitter since Musk took over last year as well the "government-funded" media label that was recently added to the BBC's Twitter account.

However, two aspects of the conversation have drawn particular interest on social media since the interview aired live on Twitter Spaces and the BBC: the supposed rise in hateful content on Twitter and COVID misinformation. During these discussions, Clayton appeared so surprised and uncomfortable that he repeatedly attempted to steer the discussions in another direction.

First, Clayton asserted that he had "personally" noticed a rise in hateful content on Twitter since Musk's takeover. When Musk pressed him for an example of such "hateful" content, Clayton demurred and spoke generally about comments that could be considered "slightly racist or slightly sexist." When Musk then asked for a specific example of hate speech that should be censored on Twitter, Clayton came up empty.

"I don't actually use that feed any more because I don't particularly like it," Clayton stammered.

"You said you've seen more hateful content, but you can't name a single example, not even one," Musk countered.

Clayton continued to avoid giving an example, but Musk would not let him off the hook. "Then I say, sir, that you don't know what you're talking about," Musk stated, adding that the premise of a rise in hate speech was "false."

"You just lied!" Musk claimed.

Clayton denied the allegation and insisted that other "organizations" had reported a rise in hateful tweets in recent months. When Musk continued to demand an example, a seemingly exasperated Clayton claimed that they weren't "getting anywhere" and suggested they just "move on."

\u201cPerfect illustration of how scumbag reporters lie:\n\nThis BBC hack claimed he's seen more hate on Twitter. When asked, he can't name a single example because he hasn't look. Then claims @ISDglobal -- funded by US, EU and neoliberal billionaires - said it:\n\nhttps://t.co/Z0F8eGm1wp\u201d
— Glenn Greenwald (@Glenn Greenwald) 1681306786

Clayton then wanted to talk about Twitter removing warnings about possible misinformation about COVID, but Musk fired back immediately: "Has BBC changed its COVID misinformation?"

After a brief silence, Clayton retorted that the "BBC does not set the rules upon Twitter, so I'm asking you," but Musk refused to restrict his answers to fit Clayton's framing.

"COVID is no longer an issue," Musk noted before accusing the BBC of peddling misinformation about the COVID policies related to masking and the vaccines.

"Does the BBC hold itself at all responsible for misinformation regarding masking and side effects of vaccinations and not reporting on that at all?" Musk asked.

When Clayton made no reply, Musk pressed on: "And what about the fact that the BBC was put under pressure by the British government to change [its] editorial policy?"

Clayton then responded hesitatingly, "This isn't an interview about the BBC," to which Musk immediately quipped, "Oh, you thought it wasn't?" Clayton then reacted with a nervous chuckle and a disclaimer that he was not an official "representative of the BBC's editorial policy."

"Let's talk about something else," Clayton once again pivoted, while Musk remarked slyly, "You weren't expecting that."

That four-minute exchange from their larger, 90-minute interview can be heard in the tweet below.

\u201cBREAKING: @ElonMusk shut down this pro-censorship BBC reporter and left him scrambling on how to justify his own questions on misinformation and the supposed rise in hate speech. \n\nListen till the end.\u201d
— TexasLindsay\u2122 (@TexasLindsay\u2122) 1681273441

Clayton later called it "a whirlwind of an interview," and the BBC seemed pleased that Musk agreed to label the outlet "publicly funded," rather than "government-funded." Clayton also seemed surprised that, after their conversation ended, Musk continued to chat with some of those who had joined them on Twitter Spaces.

"Ok so usually the interviewee leaves the interview. Elon musk now taking questions on Spaces," Clayton tweeted.

\u201cOk so usually the interviewee leaves the interview. Elon musk now taking questions on Spaces\u201d
— James Clayton (@James Clayton) 1681274745

Musk appears to be a night owl. He told Clayton that he often does not retire for bed until sometime between 3 and 6 a.m.

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

Protesters storm BlackRock headquarters in Paris



Massive protests condemning the Macron government's pension reforms have swept the nation in recent weeks. Macron is increasing the retirement age from 62 to 64.

Demonstrators seeking to strike a nerve went beyond the streets Thursday and stormed the Paris headquarters of BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, with over $10 trillion under management.

Protesters marched into Le Centorial block carrying flares and firing smoke bombs, reported CNN.

The Telegraph reported that members of the railway workers' union set off incendiary devices in the atrium of the Centorial building, filling it with smoke.

\u201cHappening in France this morning. \n\nRailway workers have taken over BlackRock\u2019s headquarters in Paris.\n\nhttps://t.co/unwYeH1YS3\u201d
— Zineb Riboua (@Zineb Riboua) 1680781368

Below BlackRock's office on the third floor, roughly 100 people, including some trade unionists, chanted and hollered. Some regurgitated anti-capitalist slogans while others sang labor songs.

"The meaning of this action is quite simple. We went to the headquarters of BlackRock to tell them: the money of workers, for our pensions, they are taking it," Jerome Schmitt, spokesman for French union SUD, told BFM-TV.

While Schmitt indicated the meaning was simple, different protesters derived other meanings from the incident.

One protester cited BlackRock's links to companies that allegedly harm the environment as cause for the fiery ingress, reported the Telegraph.

The accusation that BlackRock's chairman lobbied to break the French pension model was another rationale provided.

\u201cJUST IN: \ud83c\uddeb\ud83c\uddf7 $10 trillion asset manager BlackRock Paris headquarters taken over by protestors.\u201d
— Watcher.Guru (@Watcher.Guru) 1680782383

The Guardian reported that hundreds of thousands of Frenchmen took to the streets after talks between trade unions and French President Emmanuel Macron failed.

During the talks, Cyril Chabanier, representing the country's eight main unions, said, "We again told the prime minister that the only democratic outcome would be the text’s withdrawal. The prime minister replied that she wished to maintain the text, a serious decision."

Macron, a former World Economic Forum Young Global Leader, took unilateral action in March, bypassing a parliamentary vote and forcing through his unpopular pension plan.

A January Elabe poll revealed that nearly three-fifths of Frenchmen opposed the pension reform, reported Bloomberg. The same poll revealed that the majority sympathized with the planned protests, and 46% indicated they were willing to take part.

His government reasoned that doing so would prevent the pensions system from falling into deficit. France has the lowest qualifying age for a state pension among the major European nations.

Reuters reported that a source close to Macron claimed, "If the role of a president of the republic is to make decisions according to public opinion, there is no need to have elections. ... Being president is to assume choices that may be unpopular at a given time."

While protests were relatively peaceful through January and early March — including the nationwide demonstration on March 7 that saw 1.28 million people turn out — Macron's parliamentary bypass on March 16 triggered significant clashes between demonstrators and law enforcement officials.

There were 80 arrests and 123 police officers injured on March 23 alone. Property damage, fires, barricades, and smoke bombs have also been common in recent days.

\u201cFrance \ud83c\uddeb\ud83c\uddf7 \n\nProtests continue to take place across France against Macron's pension reform (and many other issues). Just look at the scale of the protests in Toulouse.\n\nhttps://t.co/4j368gEe0D\u201d
— James Melville (@James Melville) 1680764792
Sophie Binet, general secretary of the CGT union, told BFM-TV, "The government will not be able to run the country if they do not take back the reform."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Project Veritas' board of directors lobs accusations of 'financial malfeasance' at James O'Keefe while hemorrhaging support online. O'Keefe corrects the record.



Following James O'Keefe's reported resignation from Project Veritas, the company's board of directors issued a statement accusing its outgoing founder and chairman of buying himself luxury gifts with donor money and mistreating employees.

While the board of the investigative journalism outfit aired its allegedly dirty laundry, Project Veritas hemorrhaged supporters online. O'Keefe, who intimated in a Monday address that Project Veritas' explosive Pfizer exposé may have something to do with this internal conflict, has alternatively seen a significant spike in followers.

What are the details?

TheBlaze reported earlier this month that O'Keefe had been placed on paid leave, with the organization contemplating ousting him from his role of chairman.

Project Veritas' board of directors appeared to confirm these suspicions in its Monday statement, noting that O'Keefe had been "suspended indefinitely pending the resolution of a fulsome investigation and clarity which will need to be provided by a third party investigative audit report."

In a Monday address, O'Keefe confirmed that he had been suspended on Feb. 10 without compensation as the result of a 3-2 board vote. The board reportedly also stripped him of his authority and limited his access to proprietary information.

The board claimed that despite multiple attempts to "have a conversation with James ... he ignored our outreach and decided to instead leak private information to others," then ultimately removed his belongings from the company's headquarters on Monday.

"There were two subjects that the Board wished to come to terms with James on: the company’s long-term sustainability based on staff retention and morale, and the company’s financial health — which has been a serious concern for several months now," said the statement.

The board indicated that the company's founder and chairman had spent "an excessive amount of donor funds in the last three years on personal luxuries."

Among the alleged expenditures:

  • "$14,000 on a charter flight to meet someone to fix his boat under the guise of meeting with a donor";
  • "$60,000 in losses by putting together dance events such as Project Veritas Experience";
  • "Over $150,000 in Black Cars in the last 18 months"; and
  • "Thousands of dollars spent on DJ and other equipment for personal use."

The board suggested that O'Keefe was not explicitly suspended for the alleged financial malfeasance, but rather for "unilaterally" firing the CFO and indicating that a board member had approved the firing.

In their statement, the board underscored that they wanted to keep donors' money coming, writing that "more than anything, the Board cares about the donors of this organization, who decided to donate their hard-earned money to us because they believe in the mission. We could not allow for our donors to send us money and have it be misappropriated in such a way."

The board finally claimed, "We did not fire him, nor do we want him to resign."

O'Keefe's farewell address

After 13 years with the company, O'Keefe said his farewells to the Project Veritas staff in a Presidents' Day address, in which he drew a parallel to the termination of Steve Jobs from Apple, a company the late tech magnate had similarly founded.

O'Keefe recalled a statement from a former board member, who said, "Project Veritas will never be stopped from the outside. It will only be because we stopped ourselves" and amended it to say that Project Veritas will only be defeated "if they take our spirit."

He admitted that he hasn't been a particularly compassionate leader, but said he has made a difference where it counts, highlighting that the nonprofit's yearly revenue has grown from $738,210 in 2012 to over $22 million in 2020.

Responding to the accusations leveled by some of the board, O'Keefe indicated that his conduct and expenditures had proved satisfactory to external auditors, adding that "nothing about how I've conducted myself over the past 13 years has really fundamentally changed until now. So what has changed in the last three weeks? ... The only thing that has changed is that we broke the biggest story in our organization's history ... Pfizer."

"Our video [on Pfizer] became a global phenomenon. It was about Pfizer and one of the directors discussing mutating the virus," said O'Keefe.

Consequently, suggested O'Keefe, Project Veritas' "employees' and board members' Twitter accounts also exploded like never before," and Pfizer was forced to respond with a "non-denial denial."

"And then suddenly, an unusual emergency happened just a few days after that. ... On Thursday, February 2, a few days after the Pfizer story, I was informed by an officer of Project Veritas ... that he would resign unless I stepped down as CEO" over differences of opinion about fundraising strategies, said O'Keefe.

The disagreement ultimately boiled over, and when the officer allegedly refused to resign, O'Keefe said he fired him.

Following this action, another officer allegedly cautioned O'Keefe that he would go to the board to call an emergency vote to restructure the company. This internal turmoil reportedly continue to snowball, culminating in O'Keefe's suspension.

In his address, O'Keefe remarked about some of the board's accusations.

Concerning his use of black cars to travel for work, he said, "I don't know the significance of the color of the vehicle."

O'Keefe said that his use of charter jets "over the years to pack multiple PV meetings in a day" proved fortuitous, in one instance enabling him to raise $2 million in a single day, but that the "revenue part was omitted" in the board's accusation.

Reflecting on his history with Project Veritas, O'Keefe noted, "The external threats and pressure inflicted against myself and some of us has been unimaginable."

He cited numerous instances in which his investigative reporting got him into hot water, including getting "handcuffed by the FBI in two separate occasions, 12 years apart. Having my phones confiscated and private information leaked to the New York Times. Being placed on effective house arrest for three years between May of 2010 and May of 2013. Being sued dozens of times. Being served two separate criminal grand jury subpoenas in New Hampshire in the last ten years. Getting pursued in a high-speed chase by a New Jersey education union official. ... Getting my home raided by the FBI. Having my loved ones put in handcuffs in the hallway."

O'Keefe concluded by indicating he would continue his work, possibly at an organization with another name, and emphasized to his staff that he would need a few good men and women at his side.

\u201cSince it\u2019s already out there, here are my heartfelt remarks to my staff this morning.\n\nI need to make clear I have not resigned from the company, Project Veritas, I founded 13 years ago. I was stripped of my position as CEO and Chairman.\n\nI came to the PV\u2026\u201d
— James O'Keefe (@James O'Keefe) 1676942823

According to Social Blade, Project Veritas lost nearly 200,000 followers on Twitter on Monday, and continues to bleed followers on Tuesday, having lost approximately 49,000 as of the time of publication.

O'Keefe, on the other hand, secured 79,944 new followers on Monday and is set to far exceed that figure on Feb. 21. He now has over 1.3 million Twitter followers, nearly 80,000 more than his former company.

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

Bank of Canada admits Trudeau's climate-alarmist policies are worsening inflation



Americans have long understood that President Joe Biden's so-called green agenda has exacerbated inflation, making it harder for families to fill their gas tanks and grocery baskets.

Now, central Canadian institutions are coming around to the fact that the Trudeau government's climate-alarmist policies have similarly dealt their nation and its citizens an inflationary blow.

A troubling solution

Although somewhat buried in its Jan. 26 report entitled "The 2021-22 Surge in Inflation," the Bank of Canada, the country's central bank, admitted that the "ongoing transition from fossil fuels to green energy ... requires an immense reallocation of investments, which raises costs due to higher demand for new investments and lack of investment supply into fossil fuel production."

"These cost pressures are exacerbated by the long time required to build green energy infrastructure, further boosting prices for fossil fuels," continues the report. "This shift to relatively higher energy prices will also contribute to challenges for monetary policy to keep inflation on target over the long term."

According to the report's authors, this transition — largely away from stable and ethical North American oil to purported alternatives frequently reliant on instable foreign supplies of rare minerals — is "perhaps the most persistent trend" adding to inflationary pressures in Canada.

The report references a March 2022 speech by Isabel Schnabel, a member of the executive board of the European Central Bank, in which the Greek economist underscored that "there is a price to be paid for going green at a pace that reflects the dual objective of safeguarding both our planet and our right to self-determination."

Schnabel reckons it's a price worth other people paying.

She further suggested that the "fight against climate change is one factor that is contributing to making fossil fuels more expensive."

Oil and its byproducts do not just fuel transportation and keep the economy moving but are used in plastics, protective equipment, chemicals, fertilizers, drugs, clothing, and even in the construction of the materials needed for the means of their planned substitution, such as solar panels and wind turbines.

Schnabel suggests that in this transition, countries like Canada will also have to contend with "greenflation."

"Many companies are adapting their production processes in an effort to reduce carbon emissions," she said. "But most green technologies require significant amounts of metals and minerals, such as copper, lithium and cobalt, especially during the transition period."

Here is a cobalt mine in the Congo where the mineral is extracted to help achieve the vision of climate alarmists like Trudeau and Biden:

\u201cCongo supplies\u00a070% of the world\u2019s cobalt via industrial mining (mostly Chinese-owned). Cobalt is used in lithium-ion rechargeable batteries used in smartphones, tablets & electric cars. Children in Congo are among those risking their lives to mine cobalt.\n\nhttps://t.co/lL6E0ZAAhs\u201d
— James Melville (@James Melville) 1674810960

"Electric vehicles, for example, use over six times more minerals than their conventional counterparts. An offshore wind plant requires over seven times the amount of copper compared with a gas-fired plant," added the Greek economist.

The heightened demand for these minerals and the constrained supply accounts for the spike in prices, contributing to the problem of the so-called green solution.

Mark Mills of the Manhattan Institute wrote in apparent concurrence in the Wall Street Journal last April, stating, "Just as inflated prices for oil and natural gas rip through the economy, so do the costs of basic minerals, which are needed to build every class of product from appliances and houses to computers and cars. And while materials have for most of recent history constituted a minor share of the final cost of products, that share becomes major if mineral prices balloon."

Schnabel of the European Central Bank distilled the trouble in the climate alarmists' remedies down to: "The faster and more urgent the shift to a greener economy becomes, the more expensive it may get in the short run."

Acceptable pain

Trudeau's liberal government is keenly aware of the impact this will and has had on citizens.

Liberal member of parliament Ryan Turnbull stated on June 6, "Achieving net-zero is not going to be easy, that's for sure. ... We are going to have to switch our lifestyles and that is going to be painful at times."

Liberal millionaire Chrystia Freeland, Trudeau's deputy prime minister, confronted that pain, telling working- and middle-class Canadian families overwhelmed by inflation that they could improve the situation her government's policies worsened by dropping their Disney+ subscriptions.

Under the Trudeau government, federal carbon taxes imposed on Canadians have gone up drastically and are set to rise even more.

Global News reported that the price of the carbon tax hit $50 per ton of emissions on April 1, 2022, working out to approximately 11 cents CDN per 0.2 gallons, which is in addition to various municipal and provincial climate taxes.

The Trudeau liberals announced that by 2030, the price would be $170 CDN a ton, or nearly 40 cents a liter.

Adding insult to injury, Liberal natural resources minister Jonathan Wilkinson recently announced that he will introduce green-transition legislation to move the oil and gas workers Ottawa has or soon will put out of work into so-called green energy jobs.

CTV News reported that to meet the Liberal government's emissions targets, millions of Canadians would be put out of work, including 300,000 agriculture workers; 35,000 forestry workers; 202,000 energy workers; 193,000 manufacturing workers; 1.4 million buildings workers; and 642,000 transportation workers.

Danielle Smith, the conservative premier of Alberta, noted that her province, which boasts the world's fourth-largest oil reserves, would be severely impacted by the liberals' fanciful vision.

"He has no business dictating to us," said Smith. "'Just Transition' is extreme environmental language."

Smith added, "It was coined by extreme environmental groups who want to completely phase out the oil and gas and fossil fuel sector. They [Ottawa] use that knowing that was going to be the way it was interpreted."

If liberal politicians' efforts to decarbonize will not be held up by the will of carbon-based workers, scientist and policy analyst Vaclav Smil suggested reality will do the trick.

"Annual global demand for fossil carbon is now just above 10 billion tons a year — a mass nearly five times more than the recent annual harvest of all staple grains feeding humanity, and more than twice the total mass of water drunk annually by the world's nearly 8 billion inhabitants — and it should be obvious that displacing and replacing such a mass is not something best handled by government targets for years ending in zero or five," he wrote in "How the World Really Works."

Smil emphasized that "both the high relative share and the scale of our dependence on fossil carbon make any rapid substitutions impossible: this is not a biased personal impression stemming from a poor understanding of the global energy system — but a realistic conclusion based on engineering and economic realities."

Until the time the transition supposedly under way meets with reality or significant opposition, inflation and joblessness will likely continue to be problems. However, per Freeland's suggestion, it may not be so intolerable for the financially overwhelmed and the unemployed who drop a streaming subscription.

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