On the third and final day of the National Conservatism conference, Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) gave an uncompromising speech on the dangers of AI-fueled transhumanism. From 1950s eugenicists to the tech overlords of Silicon Valley today, Hawley addressed many of the dark undercurrents seething below the surface of the AI revolution.

In a telling moment, Hawley emphasized that AI is continuously being curated to serve the powerful transhumanist leaders in Silicon Valley and the government: "AI is fulfilling transhumanist goals, whatever its boosters may personally believe, and if it proceeds in this way undirected, if it proceeds in this manner unchecked, the tech barons, already the most powerful people on the planet, will be more powerful than ever."

'Large language models have already trained on enough copyrighted works to fill the Library of Congress 22 times over.'

Hawley revealed a shocking statistic about large language models and the amount of data that they have accrued: "Large language models have already trained on enough copyrighted works to fill the Library of Congress 22 times over. Let me just put a finer point on that. AI's LLMs have ingested every published word in every language known to man already."

Photo by Ying Tang/NurPhoto via Getty Images

For reference, the Library of Congress had roughly 178 million items in its collection as of 2023.

Companies and individuals have begun to raise privacy and copyright concerns around AI companies scraping the internet to train the LLMs. For instance, Reddit cracked down on the Internet Archive last month over this very issue.

Hawley has been dogged in bringing congressional pressure to bear on Big Tech companies. Most recently, last month, he launched a probe into questions surrounding how Meta's chatbot may allow minors to engage with "romantic" and "sensual" content. In July, he reached across the aisle to co-sponsor a bipartisan bill to block AIs from training on copyrighted works without authors' permission.

Addressing the audience, Hawley said, "As I look out across the room and see many authors, all of your works have already been taken. Did they consult you? Doubt it. Do they compensate you? Of course not. This is wrong. This is dangerous. I say we should empower human beings to create, to protect the very human data that they create."

While the pathways toward protecting Americanism, as he called the defense of liberty in his speech, are narrowing, they are not yet closed. "How do we do it? Assign property rights to specific forms of data. Create legal liability for the companies who use that data. And let's fully repeal Section 230. Open the courtroom doors, allow people to sue for their rights being taken away, including suing companies and actors and individuals who use AI. We must add sensible guardrails to the emergent AI economy and hold concentrated economic power to account."

Drawing from the lessons of humility and humanity reaching back as far as the "Epic of Gilgamesh," Hawley warned of the dangers of the transcendence that transhumanism is seeking. "Our limits make us something better and powerful that make us good, and they keep us free, because there's only one God. We allow no man or class of men to rule over us. We rule ourselves together as equals. That is the American way. It always has been. Let's keep it so for this age and beyond. God bless you."

'Sabotage': Trump attacks Hawley for pushing bill that would ban congressional and presidential stock trading

Numerous members of Congress have gotten fabulously rich making well-timed investments.

Multiple bills have been introduced in recent years that would ban congressional stock trading, including Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley's Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments Act — the PELOSI Act.

Despite the opposition from his Republican peers — Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), for instance, warned of possible "unintended consequences" — Hawley successfully got the bill through through the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

President Trump was none too pleased with his longtime Republican ally in the Senate, suggesting in a strongly worded Truth Social post that Hawley was a "second-tier Senator" being used by Democrats to undermine him in an apparent act of "sabotage."

Hawley reintroduced the PELOSI Act in April, noting, "Americans have seen politician after politician turn a profit using information not available to the general public. It’s time we ban all members of Congress from trading and holding stocks and restore Americans’ trust in our nation’s legislative body."

The name of the bill is a not-so-subtle jab at one of the most brazen alleged insider traders in Congress, California Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D), whose annual salary is now around $174,000 but who has a net worth of $263.39 million, according to Quiver Quantitative.

Photographer: Yuri Gripas/Abaca/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Last year, President Donald Trump demanded that Pelosi be prosecuted for alleged insider trading after her husband dumped 2,000 of his shares in Visa — valued at roughly $500,000 — two months before the company was sued by the Department of Justice for allegedly monopolizing the debit markets. Visa stock dropped by 5% following the announcement of the DOJ's civil antitrust suit.

Pelosi is certainly not alone.

In his Blaze Originals documentary, "Bought and Paid For: How Politicians Get Filthy Rich," James Poulos, the host of BlazeTV's "Zero Hour" and the editor at large of Blaze Media, highlighted some of the "most egregious transactions" members of Congress have directly or indirectly pulled off in recent years — like making big investments in defense contractors on the eve of the war in Ukraine — without remorse or consequence.

Around the time of its reintroduction, Trump indicated that he would support such a ban.

However, the bill debated in committee on Wednesday would not just bar lawmakers in Congress and their spouses from buying, selling, or holding individual stocks while in office — it would apply to the American president and vice president as well.

'Members of Congress should be focused on delivering results for their constituents, not returns on investments.'

Trump told reporters on Wednesday that he likes the legislation "conceptually," adding that "Nancy Pelosi became rich by having inside information. She made a fortune with her husband, and I think that's disgraceful. So in that sense, I'd like it, but I'd have to really see — you know I study these things very carefully, and this just happened, so I'll take a look at it."

A White House official speaking to the New York Times on the condition of anonymity claimed that Hawley blindsided the president's team with the bill, the original version of which would have reportedly required Trump and Vance to sell off their investments starting in 2027.

Hawley changed the bill so that officeholders would not have to divest until the beginning of their next terms, meaning Trump would be exempt.

— (@)

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) criticized the change, suggesting that the prohibition "should apply to everybody or nobody."

Nevertheless, the bill passed committee 8-7 — with all Republicans but Hawley voting in opposition.

After the vote, Hawley said in a statement, "Members of Congress should be focused on delivering results for their constituents, not returns on investments. It's time to find out where members stand. It’s time we restore trust in Congress and ban all members from trading and holding stocks."

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Trump subsequently attacked Hawley on Truth Social, writing, "The Democrats, because of our tremendous ACHIEVEMENTS and SUCCESS, have been trying to 'Target' me for a long period of time, and they're using Josh Hawley, who I got elected TWICE, as a pawn to help them. I wonder why Hawley would pass a Bill that Nancy Pelosi is in absolute love with."

Trump suggested further that Hawley "is playing right into the dirty hands of the Democrats. It’s a great Bill for [Pelosi], and her 'husband,' but so bad for our Country! I don't think real Republicans want to see their President, who has had unprecedented success, TARGETED, because of the 'whims' of a second-tier Senator named Josh Hawley!"

The president also took issue with Hawley for siding with Democrats against Florida Republican Sen. Rick Scott's attempt to add a report of controversial stock trading by Pelosi and her family to the bill — a possible deal-breaker for Democrats — and to add an exemption for the president and vice president.

When asked for comment on whether Trump's view changed in light of Hawley's alteration to the bill, the White House referred Blaze News back to the president's Truth Social post.

A poll conducted in 2023 by the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation found that 86% of Americans favored barring members of Congress and their family members from trading stocks. When broken down by political affiliation, 87% of Republican respondents, 88% of Democratic respondents, and 81% of independents supported the proposal.

The poll found that 87% of Americans also supported prohibiting the president, the vice president, and Supreme Court justices from trading stocks in individual companies.

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

Republican support wanes as Senate overhauls key provisions in 'big, beautiful bill'

The Senate Finance Committee put out its version of the "big, beautiful bill," and support from Republican lawmakers is already beginning to slip.

The House version of the bill narrowly passed in a 215-214 vote in May after weeks of tumultuous negotiations. The House then sent the bill over to the Senate, where the Finance Committee made key changes to several tax provisions in the bill, once again provoking various ideological factions within the GOP.

'Yeah, I will not vote for this.'

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

One of the most contested changes was lowering the SALT cap from the House's $40,000 cap back down to $10,000 in the Senate. The SALT caucus vigorously negotiated for weeks on the House side and quadrupled its original cap, which leaders have said is nonnegotiable.

As expected, SALT Republicans came out strongly against the $10,000 cap put forth by the Senate, calling the bill "insulting" and "dead on arrival." The Senate claims that the lower figure is simply a placeholder to negotiate with the House, but SALT Republicans have made clear that they won't accept anything less than $40,000.

Given their narrow House majority, Republicans can afford to lose only a handful of votes to pass the bill. Without the support from the SALT caucus, the bill would not pass the House.

"I have been clear since Day one: sufficiently lifting the SALT Cap to deliver tax fairness to New Yorkers has been my top priority in Congress," Republican Rep. Mike Lawler of New York said Monday. "After engaging in good faith negotiations, we were able to increase the cap on SALT from $10,000 to $40,000. That is the deal and I will not accept a penny less. If the Senate reduces the SALT number, I will vote NO and the bill will fail in the House."

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Senate has also taken a gentler approach to rolling back green-energy subsidies first implemented through former President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. Certain solar and wind subsidies are now going to be extended through at least 2030 and in some cases through 2040.

Fiscal hawks like Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas fought for more aggressive cuts in the House version of the bill. While the Senate softened up on green-energy subsidies, Roy is insisting on deeper cuts.

"Yeah, I will not vote for this," Roy said of the Senate's bill.

"The IRA subsidies need [to] end," Roy added. "Period."

Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

Most critics argue the Senate's bill doesn't go far enough, but with respect to Medicaid, Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri says it went too far.

The House version freezes new provider taxes, strengthens work requirements, and puts forth certain cuts to the program in order to ensure only eligible individuals are receiving Medicaid benefits. This was crucial in securing support from fiscal conservatives like Roy, who otherwise were inclined to vote against the bill in the House.

The Senate version takes these cuts one step further, capping the expansion states' charges at 3.5% by 2031. Hawley said he was "alarmed" by this provision, noting that many rural hospitals in low-income areas rely on support from the federal government.

"This is gonna defund rural hospitals effectively in order to, what, pay for solar panels in China?” Hawley said. “I’ll be really interested to see what the president thinks about this."

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

'Transhumanist goals': Sen. Josh Hawley reveals shocking statistic about LLM data scraping

'Sabotage': Trump attacks Hawley for pushing bill that would ban congressional and presidential stock trading

Republican support wanes as Senate overhauls key provisions in 'big, beautiful bill'

VIDEO: Erika Kirk makes first public remarks since the death of her husband, Charlie Kirk

He May Have Pulled The Trigger, But Charlie Kirk’s Suspected Killer Didn’t ‘Act Alone’

Liberals spew hatred against moment of silence for Charlie Kirk on Thursday Night Football

'Christ is king!' chants break out at large memorial for Charlie Kirk in London

All The Companies That Advertised On The MSNBC Segment Blaming Charlie Kirk For His Own Death

We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.