LGBT activists find devious way to hoist their colors despite flag bans in Salt Lake City, Boise



Months after the Trump administration announced that "only the United States of America flag is authorized to be flown or displayed at U.S. facilities, both domestic and abroad," Republican lawmakers in Idaho and Utah passed restrictions on which flags could be flown at state government buildings and at schools.

While the laws prohibit virtually all nonofficial flags, irrespective of political persuasion and significance, leftists raged over their potential inability to continue hoisting sex- and race-themed flags over American soil, flaunting the success of their cultural imperialism.

Democratic mayors in Boise and Salt Lake City have apparently found a way to continue flying non-straight activists' colors without having to continue directly violating the law: adopt the LGBT flags as official city emblems or incorporate their elements into official flags.

'Clear waste of time and taxpayer resources.'

Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall proposed adopting three new city flags "in addition to the traditional Sego Lily Flag, on Tuesday to most accurately reflect the values of the City and its residents."

Salt Lake City Mayor's Office

According to Mendenhall's office, the first flag would represent the city's transvestite population "and a commitment to seeing and celebrating their lives"; the second would represent the city's non-straight residents "and broader acceptance of this community"; and the third would represent the "history of Juneteenth and the City’s Black and African American residents."

"Our City flags are powerful symbols representing Salt Lake City's values," said Mendenhall. "I want all Salt Lakers to look up at these flags and be reminded that we value diversity, equity and inclusion — leaving no doubt that we are united as a city and people, moving forward together."

Salt Lake City council unanimously approved the designs on Tuesday evening, reported the Associated Press.

Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz (R) characterized the devious workaround as a "clear waste of time and taxpayer resources."

'You're a bunch of fricking commies breaking the law.'

"This law is about keeping government spaces neutral and welcoming to all," said Schultz. "Salt Lake City should focus on real issues, not political theatrics."

Blaze News previously reported that the Boise City Council put making the Progress Pride flag an official city flag to a vote Tuesday evening, one week after Boise Mayor Lauren McLean suggested to state Attorney General Raul Labrador that the flag ban was "legally defective and unenforceable as written."

The council ultimately voted 5 to 1.

According to Boise State Public Radio, one opponent of the measure yelled, "You're a bunch of fricking commies breaking the law," adding, "You think gay people are the only people who are entitled to anything?"

The lone vote against the resolution came from Council Member Luci Willits, who emphasized that her role as an elected official was to follow the law and suggested that the "legislature will come in, and it will slap a huge fine on the city of Boise, and Boise will have to pay it."

"That will limit what we can spend on things that we have control over, like police and fire and libraries and parks and all the things that make Boise what it is today," added Willits.

"Removing the flag now after years of flying it proudly would not be a neutral act," said Council Member Meredith Stead. "It would signal a retreat from values we've long upheld and send a disheartening message to those who have found affirmation and belonging through its presence at city hall."

Mendenhall and McLean apparently spoke Tuesday morning to discuss their respective plots to undermine their states' legislatures and fly the activist colors.

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

'Genocidal language': JD Vance, Democrat strategist James Carville blast Ilhan Omar over anti-white comments



Vice President JD Vance and Democratic strategist James Carville both blasted Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar (Minn.) this week over her apparent racial animus. Whereas Vance characterized the Minnesota congresswoman as a "disgrace," Carville suggested she was a political liability whose supporters "are more trouble than they're worth."

Omar was asked in a February 2018 interview about President Donald Trump's Executive Order 13780 — the so-called "Muslim travel ban" that placed restrictions on entry to the U.S. by nationals from terrorist hotbeds such as Syria and Omar's native country of Somalia.

"Do you think President Trump doesn't want people like you in the country? Because he says it's not personal; it's national security," Mehdi Hasan, a liberal talking head known for his "anti-Israel agitprop," asked Omar in the interview.

'Our country should be more fearful of white men.'

"If we were really being honest about what could be masqueraded as a national security issue, we know that no one from any of these countries has ever posed a threat within this country," said Omar.

Hasan noted later in a portion of the interview that has repeatedly gone viral that "a lot of conservatives in particular would say that the rise of Islamophobia is the result not of hate but of fear — a legitimate fear, they say, of 'jihadist terrorism,' whether it's Fort Hood or San Bernardino or the recent truck attack in New York. What do you say to them?"

Omar — who previously summarized the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks as "some people did something" and whose community saw dozens of young men, including the first known American Islamist suicide bomber, return to Somalia to fight for Islamic terrorist groups — appeared keen to downplay the relative threat of Islamic terrorism.

"I would say our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country," said the Democratic congresswoman. "And so if fear was the driving force of policies to keep America safe, Americans safe inside of this country, we should be profiling, monitoring, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men."

'This is blatant racism.'

An excerpt from the seven-year-old interview recently resurfaced and, with the amplification of influencer accounts like Libs of TikTok, quickly went viral.

Vice President JD Vance commented on the excerpt, which had over 17.5 million views at the time of publication, writing, "This isn't just sick; it's actually genocidal language."

"What a disgrace this person is," added Vance, who previously suggested that Ilhan Omar would be "living in a craphole" if the U.S. hadn't welcomed her.

Omar punched back, claiming she was "referring to the rise of white nationalism in an annual report issued by the Anti-Defamation League that said white supremacists were responsible for 78 percent of 'extremist-related murders.'"

"PS you should look up what 'genocidal' actually means when you're actively supporting a genocide taking place in Gaza," added Omar.

Other critics piled on, with some X users issuing reminders about Omar's past difficulty filing accurate tax returns and others calling for her deportation.

Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R) said of Omar's comments, "This is blatant racism. Who condemns it?"

'There are people that actually agree with her.'

Republican Majority Whip Tom Emmer (Minn.) said Omar "never ceases to be an embarrassment for Minnesota."

Carville similarly took aim at Omar over her comments days later at the Sir Harry Evans Investigative Journalism Summit when discussing how Democrats might "regain their mojo," emphasizing that they aren't doing her party any favors.

"Ilhan Omar says that white men are responsible for most of the deaths in the United States," Carville said Wednesday. "So let me get this straight: 69% of the people — I'm stuck on that number; I don't know — but 69% of people who're going to vote are white. Of that, [48.5%] are males. So I don't know, my rough math is 33%. Let's go out and piss off 33% of the people that vote."

"That's a smart strategy," added Carville sarcastically. "There are people that actually agree with her, and I think these — honestly — I think these people are more trouble than they're worth."

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

FBI pushed 'false narrative' about leftist terrorist's shooting of Scalise, GOP baseball practice: House report



Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and several other Republican lawmakers were practicing for a charity baseball game on June 14, 2017, when a leftist terrorist took aim at them and opened fire. Alexandria police officers and U.S. Capitol police officers were able to permanently neutralize the shooter, a supporter of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — but not before he hit Scalise and three others.

Days after the shooting, the FBI acknowledged that the shooter, James Hodgkinson, had repeatedly espoused "anti-Republican views"; identified six members of Congress as targets; prepared for months; and ensured that the individuals on the field were Republicans before his attack. However, the FBI concluded there was "no nexus to terrorism" and ultimately spun the attack as suicide by cop.

A newly released congressional report claims that the bureau "used false statements, manipulation of known facts, and biased and butchered analysis to support a narrative that Hodgkinson committed suicide by cop without any nexus to domestic terrorism."

The majority staff report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released Tuesday noted that years after this mischaracterization, "based upon no new information or evidence gathering, the FBI changed its previous decision that this case was a purely criminal matter involving suicide by cop," and recognized the attack as a "domestic terrorism event."

'This report definitively shows the FBI completely mishandled the investigation.'

"The FBI arrived at the obvious conclusion four years too late," continued the report. "Unfortunately, the timing of the changed position indicates politics rather than Fidelity, Bravery and Integrity by an agency that should be guided by an apolitical commitment to uphold the Constitution."

Scalise, who took a bullet to the hip and suffered fractured bones, damaged organs, and severe bleeding, said in a statement, "This report definitively shows the FBI completely mishandled the investigation into the Congressional baseball shooting of 2017 — ignoring crucial and obvious facts in order to sell a false narrative that the shooting was not politically motivated."

Scalise thanked FBI Director Kash Patel and the committee "for finally getting to the truth of the matter: this was a deliberate and planned act of domestic terrorism toward Republican Members of Congress."

Patel enabled the committee to review the FBI case file, which congressional investigators received in two tranches, altogether amounting to roughly 4,400 pages.

Congressional investigators determined on the basis of the case file that the FBI investigation failed to substantively interview eyewitnesses to the shooting, failed to develop a comprehensive timeline of events, and improperly classified the file at the Secret level, "which may have assisted the FBI in obfuscating its substandard investigative efforts and analysis."

'Based upon one erroneous factual conclusion and two false premises.'

The House report also picked apart the FBI's preferred narrative as well as some of the bureau's public statements, noting for instance that:

  • whereas the FBI publicly stated Hodgkinson told a family member he was traveling to Washington, D.C., but had not provided "any additional information on his travel," the case file indicates the bureau had by that time interviewed five of the terrorist's family members, "all of whom provided considerable additional information";
  • the FBI gave undue weight to the suggestion by Hodgkinson's brother that the terrorist wanted to commit suicide by cop, which was apparently based not on a discussion with his brother but on a post-action opinion on his brother's "poor markmanship during the attack";
  • "since there were no uniformed officers present at the time of the attack and Hodgkinson had no reason to believe there were police present, the suicide by cop determination does not make sense" especially since he took "several actions that may indicate he hoped to survive the firefight";
  • a desire to die is not mutually exclusive with domestic terrorism — after all, "suicide bombs are a routine tactic of terrorism";
  • whereas the FBI claimed "no context was included" on Hodgkinson's kill list, the list included physical descriptions of Republican lawmakers as well as the names of two Republicans on the congressional baseball team present for the fateful practice;
  • the FBI's assertion that "Hodgkinson's list of six congressmen found in his vehicle does not appear to be a 'hit list'" is "based upon one erroneous factual conclusion and two false premises";
  • the FBI intimated there were only two documents in the terrorist's possession when in fact there were pages of notes "demonstrating his political thoughts and motivations";
  • the FBI claimed the terrorist "was not a member of any extremist organization and did not have contact with individuals who were affiliated with extremist organizations" but glossed over his membership in a Facebook group called "Terminate The Republican Party"; and
  • the FBI claimed it "found no information to indicate Hodgkinson chose to act to impact government policy or the political system" despite the terrorist claiming before leaving Illinois with his weapons that he was going to D.C. to protest government policy.

The committee recommended that Patel figure out how the FBI arrived at its 2017 decision to frame the attack as suicide by cop — as well as whether then-acting Director Andrew McCabe or another senior leader pushed for that conclusion.

The committee also suggested the possibility of pursuing legislation that "establishes criminal liability for the politicization of intelligence analysis."

Democrats on the committee agreed with the majority's finding that the shooting was a "domestic terror attack motivated at least in part by political animus" and suggested the FBI should have made that determination sooner. However, the Democratic members cast doubt on whether political considerations factored into the FBI's failure to immediately recognize the attack as domestic terrorism and advocated against considering criminal charges against intelligence analysts.

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

Woke Virginia school district investigates boys uncomfortable with girl in their locker room: Report



The woke public school district in Loudoun County, Virginia, has for years been a key battleground in the war over gender ideology, the primary victims of which have been children. For instance, a skirt-wearing male who identified as "non-binary" took advantage of Loudoun County Public Schools' ideological capture in 2021, entered the girls' restroom, and raped a 15-year-old female student.

While students and parents have spoken out against the invasion of female spaces by opportunistic boys, gender-bending incursions in the district are not unidirectional.

A female transvestite has reportedly been using the boys' locker room at Stone Bridge High. Following a gym class in March, she allegedly videotaped three boys in the locker room who were discussing their discomfort over her presence.

In a bizarre twist, LCPS has launched a Title IX investigation into the boys for supposed sexual harassment, reported WJLA-TV.

'They're expressing their opinions, and now they're being targeted for expressing those opinions.'

"We're concerned," a father of one of the boys under investigation for supposed sexual harassment told WJLA. "He was questioning why there was a female in the males' locker room."

"And other boys were uncomfortable [with a female in the boys' locker room]," continued the father. "There were other boys asking the same question. They [LCPS] created a very uncomfortable situation. They're young; they're 15 years old. They're expressing their opinions, and now they're being targeted for expressing those opinions."

According to the father, the boys weren't directly interacting with the female student but were rather "having a conversation with their peer group."

"I don't think my son should be punished for expressing his First Amendment right and being able to ask questions," said the father. "If you were to get a sexual harassment charge on your record, even at a young age, I'm sure that's going to follow you around."

The father also questioned why the transvestic student isn't facing serious consequences for allegedly filming minors in a locker room, especially when LCPS policy explicitly prohibits photography, audio, or video recording in bathrooms, locker rooms, changing areas, and clinics.

"I have a daughter that's in high school as well, and if there was a male in there videotaping her in the locker room, I would have issues," the father told WJLA. "If it's my son and there's a female in the locker room videotaping, I have issues. Even if it was somebody of the same sex, I believe that this is an invasion of their privacy."

The father wants the woke district to drop its Title IX complaint against the boys and suggested it should also axe "Policy 8040: Rights of Transgender and Gender-Expansive Students," which the Loudoun County School Board approved on Aug. 11, 2021.

'Their policies run afoul of President Trump's January 29, 2025, executive order.'

"I think the policy itself creates an unsafe environment for all kids at all levels, from the elementary schools and middle school to the high school," said the father. "I think it creates an unsafe and unclear message for them. I think by not having clear policies in line with the presidential mandates that it has actually created these hostile environments and environments that these young boys and young girls do not feel comfortable in."

The district's policy not only requires schools to allow "gender-expansive or transgender students to use their chosen name and gender pronouns that reflect their consistently asserted gender identity without any substantiating evidence," but to also allow students to "use the facility that corresponds to their consistently asserted gender identity."

LCPS may not ultimately have a choice in whether it drops the policy.

On Feb. 3, America First Legal submitted a Title IX complaint to the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights alleging that the "transgender" policies embraced by LCPS and other districts in Virginia "provide greater rights to students whose 'gender identity' does not match their biological sex than it does to students whose 'gender identity' matches their biological sex.'"

Ian Prior, senior adviser at AFL, added, "The policies of the five Northern Virginia public school systems have eliminated the protections that Title IX requires of K-12 institutions that accept federal funding, and their policies run afoul of President Trump's January 29, 2025, executive order."

The OCR responded a week later, indicating it would investigate the schools for possible Title IX violations.

This is not the only fight with the federal government the district has on its hands.

Loudoun County Superintendent Aaron Spence notified the Trump administration last month that LCPS would not submit a certification affirming that the district follows federal anti-discrimination law and regulations prohibiting discrimination based on race.

WJLA indicated that neither Spence nor any of the school board members have responded to its requests for comment regarding the investigation into the boys' apparent discomfort over the transvestite in their locker room.

'So open-minded their brain falls out.'

Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares (R) said in response to the woke district's investigation, "This is exactly why these schools should be adopting Governor Youngkin's model policies."

In July 2023, the Virginia Department of Education released its final Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia's Public Schools, which not only emphasize parents' rights "to make decisions with respect to their children," but require schools to use students' real names; refer to students with the pronouns in accordance with the sex indicated on their official record unless given a formal written request by parents; and require that students use sex-segregated school facilities that correspond with their biological sex.

"What you reported I find to be outrageous — that these young boys presumably felt uncomfortable," Miyares told WJLA. "They're 15 years old. We all were teenagers at one point. I can't imagine how uncomfortable it would be to have a member of the opposite sex in the locker room where people were obviously changing clothes and then later, on top of that, recording it."

"Even though they're the victims in this, somehow, they're being treated as perpetrators. I think this is an example, yet again, [of] a school district that tries to be so open-minded their brain falls out," added the state AG, borrowing a quote from the English author G.K. Chesterton.

"If this was 20 years ago, nobody in their right mind would think this was a smart policy. Yet here we are today," added Miyares.

The Virginia AG hinted there was little that either his or Governor Glenn Youngkin's offices presently could do about the matter — especially given the Virginia Human Rights Act's carve-out for educational institutions — and stressed that the Trump administration's investigation will be "critically important."

Miyares noted further that the new Loudoun County School Board should take a vote on Policy 8040 so that parents know where members stand when it comes to letting transvestites slip into the opposite sex's locker rooms and bathrooms.

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

Bishops vow defiance, DOJ launches probe over Washington state's new 'anti-Catholic' law



Washington state Gov. Bob Ferguson (D) ratified a bill on Friday requiring priests to break the seal of confession if informed of abuse.

As this law invites the government into the confessional, likely violates the Constitution's Establishment Clause, and puts priests at risk of automatic excommunication, Catholic bishops in Washington state have vowed defiance and the Department of Justice has launched a civil rights investigation.

Senate Bill 5375, which passed the state Senate in a 28-20 vote and the state House in a 64-31 vote, requires any person operating in an official supervisory capacity with a nonprofit or a for-profit organization — including priests, ordained ministers, and rabbis — who has "reasonable cause to believe that a child has suffered abuse or neglect" to notify law enforcement or the Department of Children, Youth and Families.

Unlike a previous version of the legislation, SB 5375 offers no carve-out for allegations learned as a result of a confession.

The final bill report actually clarifies that the Democratic law mandates no one except for members of the clergy to report abuse when that information is obtained solely as a result of a privileged communication.

'He can make no use of knowledge that confession gives him about penitents' lives.'

By mandating priests to divulge information gleaned in the confessional, the Democratic law puts priests at risk of excommunication.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

Given the delicacy and greatness of this ministry and the respect due to persons, the Church declares that every priest who hears confessions is bound under very severe penalties to keep absolute secrecy regarding the sins that his penitents have confessed to him. He can make no use of knowledge that confession gives him about penitents' lives. This secret, which admits of no exceptions, is called the "sacramental seal," because what the penitent has made known to the priest remains "sealed" by the sacrament.

The Code of Canon Law cited by the Washington State Catholic Conference in its oppositional statements is similarly clear on the issue: "The sacramental seal is inviolable; therefore it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray in any way a penitent in words or in any manner and for any reason."

Canon Law notes further that a "confessor who directly violates the sacramental seal incurs a latae sententiae — automatic — excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See."

Democratic state Sen. Noel Frame, a prime sponsor of the bill, did not appear to be concerned about such consequences, stating, "There are some things that it doesn't matter what religion you are in; you never put somebody's conscience over the protection of a child," reported KXLY-TV.

During debate in February, Republican state Sen. Leonard Christian noted that the legislation would force "somebody who's given their entire life — raised their hand, made an oath with God almighty — to choose between God's law and man's law."

'After the apostles were arrested and thrown into jail for preaching the name of Jesus Christ, St. Peter responds to the Sanhedrin: "We must obey God rather than men."'

Catholic bishops in the state have made clear which law takes precedence.

The Most Rev. Thomas Daly, Bishop of Spokane, reassured Catholics in his diocese Friday that their priests and bishop "are committed to keeping the seal of the confession — even to the point of going to jail.

"For those legislators who question our commitment to the safety of your children, simply speak with any mom who volunteers with a parish youth group, any Catholic school teacher, any dad who coaches a parochial school basketball team or any priest, deacon, or seminarian, and you will learn firsthand about our solid protocols and procedures," said Bishop Daly. "The Diocese of Spokane maintains an entire department at the Chancery, the Office of Child and Youth protection, staffed by professional laypeople. We have a zero-tolerance policy regarding child sexual abuse."

Seattle Archbishop Paul Etienne underscored in a statement Sunday that while the Church "agrees with the goal of protecting children and preventing child abuse" and already has policies requiring priests to be mandatory reporters, the seal of confession will not be broken.

"This weekend at Mass, the first reading was from the Acts of the Apostles. After the apostles were arrested and thrown into jail for preaching the name of Jesus Christ, St. Peter responds to the Sanhedrin: 'We must obey God rather than men' (Acts 5:29)," wrote the archbishop. "This is our stance now in the face of this new law. Catholic clergy may not violate the seal of confession — or they will be excommunicated from the Church."

'The law appears to single out clergy as not entitled to assert applicable privileges.'

"All Catholics must know and be assured that their confessions remain sacred, secure, confidential, and protected by the law of the Church," added Archbishop Etienne.

The archbishop also raised the question of why privileged communications between priest and penitent were singled out but not the communications between attorney and client, doctor and patient, and spouses.

"This new law singles out religion and is clearly both government overreach and a double standard," wrote Archbishop Etienne.

The Justice Department announced a First Amendment investigation into the Washington state law on Monday, calling SB 5375 an "anti-Catholic law."

Like Archbishop Etienne, the DOJ also expressed interest in why Washington Democrats singled out members of the clergy as the only "supervisors" who may not rely on applicable legal privileges as a defense to mandatory reporting.

"SB 5375 demands that Catholic priests violate their deeply held faith in order to obey the law, a violation of the Constitution and a breach of the free exercise of religion cannot [sic] stand under our constitutional system of government," Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon of the DOJ's Civil Rights Division said in a statement.

"Worse, the law appears to single out clergy as not entitled to assert applicable privileges, as compared to other reporting professionals," continued Dhillon. "We take this matter very seriously and look forward to Washington State's cooperation with our investigation."

Gov. Ferguson, who identifies as a Catholic, said in a statement obtained by the Seattle Times, "We look forward to protecting Washington kids from sexual abuse in the face of this 'investigation' from the Trump administration."

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

‘Maryland Man’ bodycam footage reveals potential criminal activity



Tennessee state law enforcement has released bodycam footage from a November 2022 traffic stop involving the left’s darling, illegal immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

While the traffic stop report doesn’t mention anything about human trafficking, Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Trisha McLaughlin believes otherwise.

“This is textbook human trafficking,” McLaughlin said in a segment on Fox News. “I’ll remind viewers that there were eight other individuals in this car that Kilmar Abrego Garcia was driving. They were driving allegedly from Texas to Maryland. That’s a three-day journey, not a single piece of luggage in that vehicle.”


“That screams of human trafficking,” she continued. “I also want to remind viewers that in 2019, Kilmar Abrego Garcia was arrested. He was arrested with multiple other members of MS-13. He was decked out in MS-13 symbols — ‘See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil,’ which is MS-13’s logo and slogan.”

But that’s not all. According to McLaughlin, Abrego Garcia allegedly had “drugs and rolls of cash on him” and in the past was accused by his wife of detaining and abusing her, as well as psychologically abusing her and her children.

“How is this the story that Democrats are willing to fight for? How is this the one thing that has captivated all of their attention in all of these media headlines right now?” Jill Savage asks independent journalist Breanna Morello.

“It’s pretty strange because one would think this would not be the person they’re putting on a pedestal when it comes to this immigration topic. Obviously, they’re trying to win over their voter base so that they feel a little bit more passionate about this argument because many people are on the fence, or they’re swinging with President Trump these days,” Morello tells Savage and Matthew Peterson.

“We’ve seen it based on the polls when it comes to immigration,” she continues, “And I just think it’s so crazy that they’re picking this person to go out there and throw their whole support behind. It makes me wonder, did they actually understand what he was doing or what he was accused of in the past? Or did they just find one person, think that they could win over the American people with him, and didn’t do any research?”

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

DOJ investigating after woke Minneapolis prosecutor ordered team to factor race into plea deals



The Department of Justice announced Saturday that it was opening a racial discrimination investigation into the Minneapolis-area Hennepin County Attorney's Office following its embrace of a policy that requires prosecutors to factor a criminal defendant's race into plea deal negotiations.

Hennepin County attorney Mary Moriarty, a leftist who has long enjoyed the support of George Soros-backed organizations including TakeAction Minnesota, recently sent a memo to prosecutors in her office titled "Negotiations Policy for Cases Involving Adult Defendants."

The memo, first reported by Lou Raguse of KARE-TV, states that "while racial identity and age are not appropriate grounds for departures [from the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines], proposed resolutions should consider the person charged as a whole person, including their racial identity and age."

"While these factors should not be controlling, they should be part of the overall analysis," continued Moriarty. "Racial disparities harm our community, lead to distrust, and have a negative impact on community safety."

Moriarty, who recently refused to charge a worker in Democratic Gov. Tim Walz's administration who allegedly vandalized multiple Teslas, added that "prosecutors should be identifying and addressing racial disparities at decision points, as appropriate."

'Lady Justice is blindfolded for a reason.'

Jill Hasday, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, told KARE that the policy "both says, 'Don't take race into account,' presumably because of the constitutional problems with taking race into account in addition to potentially political objections, but it simultaneously says this is something you should consider."

"The problem for the drafters of this policy is, once you take race into account, it doesn't really matter what else you say," continued Hasday. "The policy is going to be struck down."

The DOJ evidently took interest after the policy was brought to light and critics noted that Moriarty may be in violation of federal law 18 U.S.C. § 242, which makes it a crime for anyone — "under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom" — to willfully subject any person "to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens."

"The investigation will focus on whether the HCAO engages in the illegal consideration of race in its prosecutorial decision-making," said a May 2 letter signed by Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division.

While the DOJ will focus on the "discriminatory" policy outlined in Moriarty's memo, investigators will also review all of the HCAO's policies and practices "that may involve the illegal consideration of race in prosecutorial decision-making."

The DOJ may, for instance, take a look at Moriarty's related "collateral consequences policy," which requires prosecutors to notify a supervisor if a defendant might face "major collateral consequences" from prosecution, such as "immigration consequences" or "loss of or inability to obtain public benefits."

Dhillon noted Sunday evening, "Lady Justice is blindfolded for a reason," adding that the DOJ will "investigate and take action wherever necessary to identify government practices that may run afoul of our civil rights norms."

Daniel Borgertpoepping, a spokesman for the HCAO, told WCCO-TV in a statement Sunday, "We are aware of the letter from the Department of Justice posted to social media but have not received it. Our office will cooperate with any resulting investigation and we're fully confident our policy complies with the law."

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

Katherine Maher gaslights about NPR's bias, claims cutting off federal funds undermines free speech



President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday directing the board of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and relevant agencies to terminate federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service.

While Trump's top reason for cutting off NPR and PBS was their unmistakable political bias, he also noted that government's funding of news media is "not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence."

NPR chief executive Katherine Maher apparently decided that the best way to respond to the threat of losing federal funding was to continue gaslighting the American people, characterizing Trump's executive order as an "affront to the First Amendment rights of NPR" and suggesting that her newsroom is politically neutral.

Maher — who wrote in a December 2010 NDI blog post, "Control over the flow of information in a closed society can be tantamount to control over the state" — vowed in a statement Friday to "challenge this executive order using all means available."

Less than 1% of NPR's annual operating budget comes in the form of grants directly from the CPB and other federal sources; however, numerous CPB-funded public radio stations in NPR's syndication network pay for its programming. Consolidated financial statements show that the organization secured over $96.1 million in "core and other programming fees" in 2023, $93.2 million in 2022, $90.4 million in 2021, and $92.5 million in 2020.

Despite acknowledging that "significant financial support" comes from private sources, Maher suggested the loss of federal funding would be calamitous, equating it with an attack on constitutionally protected speech rights.

'An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR.'

"This is not about balancing the federal budget. The appropriation for public broadcasting, including NPR and PBS, represents less than 0.0001% of the federal budget," wrote Maher. "The president's order is an affront to the First Amendment rights of NPR and locally owned and operated stations throughout America to produce and air programming that meets the needs of their communities. It is also an affront to the First Amendment rights of station listeners and donors who support independent news and information."

Maher noted further that Trump's "action jeopardizes the national airing of beloved programming and essential news such as NPR's iconic hourly 'Newscast,' 'Morning Edition,' and 'Tiny Desk Radio.'"

On Thursday, the White House highlighted past reports that cast doubt on whether at least one of the shows Maher singled out as "essential news" deserves that label or federal funding.

"Morning Edition" noted in a piece ahead of Independence Day in 2021 that the Declaration of Independence "is a document with flaws and deeply ingrained hypocrisies." Two years earlier, the same show issued an editor's note warning that the Declaration of Independence "contains offensive language."

Maher concluded her statement by asserting that NPR has "high standards," that her colleagues seek to "present issues fairly and without bias," and that NPR "will continue to tell the stories of our country and the world with accuracy, objectivity, and fairness."

Maher continued pushing the neutrality claim Sunday on CBS News' "Face the Nation," telling talking head Margaret Brennan that the NPR newsroom "would really take issue" with its characterization by Trump as politically biased.

Trump is far from the only person to call out NPR's heavy political skew.

After working for 25 years at NPR, Peabody Award-winning business editor Uri Berliner noted last year that "an open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR."

'Our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that is getting in the way of finding common ground.'

"That wouldn't be a problem for an openly polemical news outlet serving a niche audience," continued Berliner. "But for NPR, which purports to consider all things, it's devastating both for its journalism and its business model."

Maher stressed to Brennan that she doesn't make editorial decisions at NPR and added, "We have an extraordinary Washington desk. And our people report straight down the line."

Berliner revealed that 87% of the Washington, D.C., editors and reporters at NPR were registered Democrats and none were registered Republicans.

While Maher appears to be strategically downplaying her team's bias, she might be unable to recognize their bias on account of her own. The NPR CEO revealed her remoteness from the political center when she previously:

  • rejected the idea of "radical openness," which she associated with a "white male Westernized construct";
  • stated "our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that is getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done";
  • claimed "America is addicted to white supremacy";
  • tweeted during the Black Lives Matter riots, "I mean, sure, looting is counterproductive. But it's hard to be mad about protests not prioritizing the private property of a system of oppression founded on treating people's ancestors as private property"; and
  • writing in September 2020, "Let's be clear here too: I am a white woman. I already got the leg up. ... My race is consistently an advantage."

'No media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies.'

"If we were to see a claw-back of these funds, which we know is part of the conversation from a rescission standpoint, or if we were to see that the stations were no longer able to participate in their membership dues, that would be damaging," Maher told Brennan.

In his executive order, Trump emphasized that "Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage. No media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize."

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

Trump orders Corporation for Public Broadcasting to end funding for NPR and PBS: 'Outdated and unnecessary'



President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday directing the board of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and relevant agencies to terminate federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service — not exactly the news that socialists may have wanted to hear on May Day.

"The CPB Board shall cease direct funding to NPR and PBS, consistent with my Administration's policy to ensure that Federal funding does not support biased and partisan news coverage," wrote Trump. "The CPB Board shall cancel existing direct funding to the maximum extent allowed by law and shall decline to provide future funding."

Trump also targeted the liberal outfits' indirect federal funding, directing the CPB — which has an operating budget of over $535 million for fiscal year 2025 — to ensure that "licensees and permittees of public radio and television stations, as well as any other recipients of CPB funds, do not use Federal funds for NPR and PBS."

The loss of this indirect funding will be the more devastating.

While NPR claims that less than 1% of its annual operating budget comes in the form of grants directly from the CPB and other federal sources, multitudes of CPB-funded public radio stations in NPR's massive syndication network pay for its programming.

Blaze News previously reported that consolidated financial statements show that the organization secured over $96.1 million in "core and other programming fees" in 2023, $93.2 million in 2022, $90.4 million in 2021, and $92.5 million in 2020.

"These station programming fees are one of NPR's primary sources of revenue," noted the media outfit. "The loss of federal funding would undermine the stations' ability to pay NPR for programming, thereby weakening the institution."

PBS similarly receives taxpayer dollars indirectly from CPB-funded public TV stations that pay for its programming.

According to PBS, its flagship "News Hour" program, for instance, receives roughly 35% of its "annual funding/budget from CPB and PBS via national programming funds — a combination of CPB appropriation funds and annual programming dues paid to PBS by stations re-allocated to programs like ours."

A spokesman for PBS, which has over 330 member television stations, indicated earlier this year that the organization receives 16% of its funding directly from the federal government each year.

"Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage," Trump noted in his order, titled "Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media."

That is certainly not the case with NPR and PBS.

The Media Research Center conducted a study from June 1, 2023, to Nov. 30, 2024, analyzing political labels used by anchors, reporters, and contributors on PBS' "News Hour." PBS staff threw around the term "far right" or some variation thereof 162 times but used the term "far left" only six times.

PBS reporters and guests routinely deemed social conservatives and Trump-adjacent Republicans as "extreme" or "extremists," and liberally applied the "fascist" label to Trump or his policies.

Meanwhile, the organization clamped down on unfavorable characterizations of failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris and other Democrats, writing the "Marxist" and "communist" labels off as "slurs."

Another MRC study published last year tallied every comment made by PBS journalists during the Republican and Democratic national conventions. Of the 191 minutes of PBS commentary on the Republican National Convention, 72% of opinionated comments were reportedly negative, and only 28% were positive. The PBS' DNC coverage was alternatively sycophantic.

NPR's bias is similarly so substantial that Peabody Award-winning business editor Uri Berliner was willing to throw away 25 years at the outfit just to call it out.

Berliner, a liberal who characterized himself as something akin to the stereotypical NPR listener — "an EV-driving, Wordle-playing, tote bag-carrying coastal elite" — noted in an April 2024 op-ed that NPR had effectively transformed into a Democratic propaganda machine, working strenuously to "damage or topple Trump's presidency," in part by "hitch[ing] our wagon to Trump's most visible antagonist, [then-]Representative Adam Schiff," and amplifying the Russia collusion hoax.

'Neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens.'

In addition to boosting "Russiagate" propaganda, Berliner noted that NPR — where 87% of the Washington, D.C., editors and reporters were registered Democrats and none were registered Republicans — evidenced its unmistakable bias with its coverage of the COVID-19 lab leak theory and the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, both of which the network downplayed.

The White House highlighted other examples indicating an ideological bent at NPR, noting for instance that it:

  • declared the Declaration of Independence to be a document with "flaws and deeply ingrained hypocrisies";
  • apologized for calling illegal immigrants "illegal";
  • concern-mongered about the choice of young men to abstain from masturbating to pornography;
  • "routinely promotes the chemical and surgical mutilation of children as so-called 'gender-affirming care' without mentioning the irreversible damage caused by these procedures"; and
  • "suggested doorway sizes are based on 'latent fatphobia.'"
The White House similarly blasted PBS for its bias, noting that it produced a documentary making the case for reparations and produced a movie celebrating a transvestic teen's "changing gender identity."
— (@)

Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation who has long written about the need to defund public broadcasting, previously told Blaze News that NPR and PBS "gave up any attempt at appearing impartial or objective in any way," adding that in the case of NPR, the choice of Katherine Maher as CEO was a crystal-clear message that things won't soon change for the better.

"Maher, on the record, is calling Trump racist. She was an enthusiastic supporter of Kamala Harris," said Gonzalez. "She's on the record as saying the First Amendment and our obsession with truth is getting in the way of consensus. Well, gee — that's the CEO of NPR. Anything else you need to know?"

Trump noted that "no media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize."

"The CPB's governing statute reflects principles of impartiality: the CPB may not 'contribute to or otherwise support any political party,'" continued the president. "The CPB fails to abide by these principles to the extent it subsidizes NPR and PBS. Which viewpoints NPR and PBS promote does not matter. What does matter is that neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens."

In addition to emphasizing the biased nature of NPR and PBS, Trump noted that the ubiquity of media alternatives precludes any need for taxpayers to continue the liberal outfits.

'Trump is working to ensure taxpayer dollars are no longer wasted on progressive pet projects.'

"Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence," added the president.

Trump further directed the heads of all federal agencies to "identify and terminate, to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, any direct or indirect funding of NPR and PBS," and tasked Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to investigate the liberal outfits for possible employment discrimination.

Trump gave the CPB board until June 30 to effectuate his order.

When NPR learned of a draft for the order, it stated earlier this month, "Eliminating funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would have a devastating impact on American communities across the nation that rely on public radio for trusted local and national news, culture, lifesaving emergency alerts, and public safety information."

"We serve the public interest. It's not just in our name — it's our mission. Across the country, locally owned public media stations represent a proud American tradition of public-private partnership for our shared common good," added the liberal outfit.

PBS CEO Paula Kerger reportedly said last month than an order to defund her organization would "disrupt the essential service PBS and local member stations provide to the American people."

The CPB, which is not a federal agency, has already filed suit against Trump because the White House attempted to fire three of its board members.

"Because CPB is not a federal agency subject to the President's authority, but rather a private corporation, we have filed a lawsuit to block these firings," the corporation said in a statement obtained by CNN.

The CPB is likely to seek to block this effort as well.

The White House noted that "President Trump is working to ensure taxpayer dollars are no longer wasted on progressive pet projects, but rather used to benefit hardworking Americans."

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

Advice For The Class Of 2025: Never Put Your Hope In Earthly Kingdoms

From newly minted college Marxists to MAGA social media, many of those who are investing their hearts and hopes in politics are looking for things that politics cannot give to them.