'GOOD RIDDANCE': Trump dunks on climate alarmists over ridiculous doomsday scenario



President Donald Trump mocked climate alarmists on Saturday after another one of their doomsday scenarios was shown to be utter nonsense.

The admission by scientists that prompted Trump's derision is but the latest in a long series of embarrassments for those activists keen to use climate prophecies as an excuse to socially engineer human beings and regulate society.

Narrative collapse

The imagined threat of anthropogenic climate change has driven numerous public officials, scientists, and impressionable people bonkers in recent decades.

While Western politicians sacrificed energy security and hobbled industry in hopes of slowing natural phenomena and defeating the arch-villain carbon dioxide (plant food), similarly minded scientists proposed blotting out the sun; "culling" the emission-generating human population with a deadly pandemic; reducing or eliminating meat consumption; putting the population on a diet of bugs, weeds, and micro-algae; and having fewer children.

'Climate Activism has been used by Dumocrats to scare Americans, push horrible Energy Polices, and fund BILLIONS into their bogus research programs.'

This madness has been driven and exacerbated in large part by bogus claims and laughably wrong predictions. In most cases, all that's required to debunk such claims is time and a functional set of eyes.

Failed Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, for instance, said at the Copenhagen Climate Conference in 2009 that new research indicated there was "a 75% chance that the entire North Polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years."

Just as Gore was wrong about a 20-foot rise in the global sea level "in the near future," polar bear drownings, and the snows of Kilimanjaro, he was wrong about the future of Arctic ice.

A paper published late last year in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Geophysical Research Letters concluded that over the past 20 years, "Arctic sea ice loss has slowed considerably, with no statistically significant decline in September sea ice area since 2005."

RELATED: Bizarre academic paper about releasing ticks resurfaces amid surging bites

Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis/Getty Images

If, perhaps, Gore confused the Arctic with the Antarctic, he'd still be wrong. Antarctica has enjoyed a massive gain in ice mass — at a rate of 119 billion tons per year from 2021 to 2023.

Polar ice is hardly the only planetary feature alarmists mistakenly suggested would fall victim to climate change.

Alarmists suggested in a 2017 study and elsewhere that climate change posed an existential threat to the world's coral reefs and that "immediate global action to curb future warming is essential to secure a future for coral reefs."

While dutifully claiming that "climate change mitigation" was still essential, researchers admitted in 2024 that "widespread and diverse coral species all exhibit the potential to adapt to the changing climate."

Former Jeffrey Epstein associate Bill Gates is one of the few alarmists to admit to having pie on his face.

Gates alleged in a 2021 work of climate alarmist agitprop that if humanity failed to eliminate so-called greenhouse gas emissions, "climate change will keep getting worse, and the impact on humans will in all likelihood be catastrophic."

After years of fear-mongering, he apparently felt compelled to admit that he too had gotten it wrong.

Gates noted in October that the "doomsday view of climate change" that says "cataclysmic climate change will decimate civilization" and that "nothing matters more than limiting the rise in temperature" is wrong.

UN wrong, again

The United Nations, like Gates a longtime proponent of climate hysteria, was recently confronted with evidence that it too is wrong.

The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project, an outfit led by a committee of top climate scientists, admitted in a study published last month in the journal Geoscientific Model Development that the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's worst-case future emissions scenarios are "implausible based on trends in the costs of renewables, the emergence of climate policy and recent emission trends."

Taking into account the world's future population, emission trends, energy sources, climate policies, and other factors, researchers have cooked up various climate scenarios for use in scientific modeling and activist propaganda.

In the early 2010s, such researchers developed a set of four scenarios for climate modeling, called "representative concentration pathways" or RCPs. The most extreme of these was RCP8.5.

The number 8.5 here signals the level of radiative forcing — the extra heat supposedly trapped in the Earth's system, expressed in watts per square meter — projected by the year 2100.

The IPCC projected in 2013 that under this scenario, there would be a temperature rise of 4.3°C by 2081-2100 when compared to the pre-industrial period.

Government of Canada

RCP8.5's successor, "shared socioeconomic pathway"-8.5, projected warming of 4.4°C by 2081-2100, with a "very likely" range of 3.3°C to 5.7°C, the Carbon Brief reported.

It was all nonsense.

Roger Pielke Jr., a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, noted, "The four scenarios were never apples-to-apples. They were four different fruits from four different trees. Yet, over more than a decade and in tens of thousands of papers, RCP8.5 was treated as where the world was headed and the other three scenarios — but especially RCP4.5 and 2.6 — as a world with climate policy interventions."

Despite numerous scientists stressing that the alarmist scenario was not only unlikely but misleading, the RCP8.5 scenario "came to dominate the literature to a degree that is impossible to overstate," Pielke said.

"RCP8.5 accounted for more than half of all RCP references in the 2018 U.S. Fourth National Climate Assessment, nearly 60 percent in the IPCC’s Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere, and about a third of all RCP references in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report," Pielke wrote. "By early 2020, researchers were publishing studies invoking RCP8.5 at a rate of roughly 20 per day. So far in 2026, studies using RCP8.5 (or its even more extreme successor, SSP5-8.5) are being published at a rate of ~30 new studies per day."

Now, the scientific community must contend with the acknowledgment that this scenario is bogus.

Science journalist Maarten Keulemans noted in a post that has been translated from its original Dutch, "The IPCC acknowledges what has been circulating for a long time: The highest disaster scenario, 8.5, no longer aligns with reality. WHAT CONSEQUENCES this has. ALMOST EVERYTHING YOU READ ABOUT CLIMATE FUTURE IS WRONG."

Keuleman suggested further that this admission effectively torpedoes claims that global surface temperature will increase 4-5°C by 2100; summers will all hit 104°F and agriculture in Western Europe will be unsustainable by century's end; tuna, swordfish, and other marine creatures will go extinct; there will be millions of climate refugees every year; and that there will be no more Winter Olympics by 2040.

Trump similarly weighed in, stating, "GOOD RIDDANCE! After 15 years of Dumocrats promising that 'Climate Change' is going to destroy the Planet, the United Nations TOP Climate Committee just admitted that its own projections (RCP8.5) were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!"

"For far too long Climate Activism has been used by Dumocrats to scare Americans, push horrible Energy Polices, and fund BILLIONS into their bogus research programs," the president continued. "Unlike the Dumocrats, who use Climate Alarmism nonsense to push their GREEN NEW SCAM, my Administration will always be based on TRUTH, SCIENCE, and FACT!"

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

23 State AGs Probe Federal Judicial Center’s Distribution Of ‘Biased’ Climate Guide To Judges

'Rather than offering the federal judiciary an objective guide to scientific principles, the chapter functions as an ex parte brief for one side of ongoing litigation.'

Marty Makary left behind an FDA families learned not to trust



With so much bad news in the world, it is worth pausing for one encouraging development: Marty Makary finally resigned as commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration last week.

Makary’s tenure at the FDA was marred by internal scandals, forced resignations, dreadful morale, and record staff turnover. More important, he actively sandbagged President Trump’s push to expand clinical trials for rare diseases through the aptly named “right-to-try” framework.

Trump’s next appointee should restore the spirit of right to try and make safe, effective treatments available to children as quickly as possible.

The idea behind right to try is straightforward. Patients with rare conditions, especially those for whom conventional medicine has failed, should have the freedom to pursue experimental treatments that have not yet received full FDA approval. Families fighting the clock have little left to lose. Government should not stand between them and a potentially lifesaving breakthrough.

Makary did.

Members of the MPS community sent more than 10 letters asking Makary for a meeting. They got a form letter in return. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) later announced an investigation into the FDA’s denials. Makary’s agency responded by claiming approvals were already “at their peak.” The Wall Street Journal took notice of the FDA’s foot-dragging last year, yet the agency kept rejecting relevant rare-disease treatments in early 2026, including RGX-121 and drugs from Biohaven and Saol Therapeutics.

That stonewalling forced families to escalate.

In March, more than 100 mothers and other advocates staged a mock funeral outside FDA offices. Dressed in black and carrying a real coffin, they sought to draw attention to a group of rare metabolic disorders known as mucopolysaccharidoses. These disorders can show up as mild symptoms such as depression or hyperactivity, or as devastating conditions such as heart disease and skeletal abnormalities.

Many MPS disorders still have no approved treatments, even though they can severely diminish children’s quality of life or kill them outright. The FDA’s regulatory process serves a legitimate purpose. But when a bureaucracy grows so rigid, self-protective, and arrogant that it blocks desperately ill children from access to promising therapies, it stops functioning as a safeguard and starts functioning as a death sentence.

Mark Dant of the Ryan Foundation told Newsweek that some of these drugs were denied because of the FDA’s institutional “dislike” of the accelerated-approval pathway. “For decades we waited for science to find our tomorrows,” he said. “Now it has, and bureaucrats within the agency we pay for are keeping those treatments from our children. We know they are there. … We just cannot reach them.”

RELATED: The FDA seems to care more about celebrities than sick Americans

Valerie Plesch/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Makary’s resignation will not undo the damage. But it does create an opening. We may not yet know what the FDA’s next leadership will look like, but Trump’s appointee should restore the spirit of right to try and make safe, effective treatments available to children as quickly as possible.

Across the world, in the nation of Georgia, parents have staged a protest lasting more than 500 consecutive days, maintaining a round-the-clock presence outside the main government building in Tbilisi. They are willing to risk everything to give their children the best chance at life. Americans should not have to camp outside federal offices for 500 days to get their government to listen.

The new FDA leadership must explain denials of right-to-try clinical trials with enough specificity that sponsors and families understand what evidence could change the decision. Patient and caregiver testimony should shape decisions early, not get folded in at the end as a token gesture. And Congress must demand transparency without turning each drug review into a partisan circus.

Children’s lives are not bargaining chips. The FDA exists to serve the public, not to protect its own bureaucracy from embarrassment. If Makary’s departure opens the door to that truth, families battling ultra-rare diseases may finally have reason to hope.

Gain-of-function experiments on hantaviruses? Yes, but virus threat is still MASSIVELY overblown.



The legacy media feverishly concern-mongered about COVID-19 and then tried unsuccessfully to generate similar hysteria over the gay-spread monkeypox virus.

Clearly desperate for a new health scare — especially after America formally rejected the World Health Organization — outlets seized upon reports of a deadly outbreak of hantavirus last month among passengers and crew of the MV Hondius, a Dutch cruise ship carrying 147 souls embarking from the southern tip of the Andes mountains in South America to the Canary Islands off the coast of Morocco.

'We should shy away from making bold pronouncements that may prove dangerously misleading weeks or months later.'

While some publications rushed to attack emerging theories about the nature of the virus, including the notion that it was cooked up in a lab — narrative attacks that neglected to mention a recent gain-of function experiment involving hantaviruses — others pushed alarmist headlines such as:

  • “Is hantavirus the next COVID? Is the U.S. response on point? An outbreak update” — NPR
  • “Why hantavirus is giving us a 'sinking feeling,' despite experts' reassurance” — Canadian state media
  • “Fears rat virus has spread to seven countries” — The Telegraph
  • “Could human-transmitted hantavirus be the next pandemic threat?” — The Week
  • “Hantavirus: Many unknowns surround an 'unprecedented and worrying' outbreak” — Le Monde

Despite provocative headlines and framing, many media outfits and experts have acknowledged that it is extremely unlikely that there will be a hantavirus epidemic, let alone a pandemic — though a news article at CNN cautioned against “calm-mongering” over hantavirus lest “post-COVID anxiety” be triggered.

A new article in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, for instance, emphasized that while the suspected variety of hantavirus on the MV Hondius “can cause severe disease, high case fatality, and intense public anxiety when they emerge in mobile or closed settings,” such “outbreaks are not frequent” and are “unlikely to become a global outbreak.”

Hantavirus is a family of potentially deadly single-stranded RNA viruses that are naturally found in rodents. Only 890 cases of hantavirus were reported in the U.S. between 1993 and 2023, 35% of them fatal.

RELATED: Bizarre academic paper about releasing ticks resurfaces amid surging bites

The MV Hondius. Omar Havana/Getty Images

When spread to humans, hantaviruses can cause two diseases: hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome — a condition affecting the kidneys — and hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, which affects the lungs.

The hantavirus affecting people on the MV Hondius, the HPS-associated Andes strain, is unique.

Whereas other strains leap from rodents to humans, the Andes virus — symptoms of which appear anywhere from four to 42 days after exposure — has been reported to transmit from person to person via saliva droplets and other oral fluids, although this transmission theory has not been definitively proven.

The breakout on the cruise ship, which has so far claimed the lives of three people, is hardly unprecedented in terms of alleged mass human transmissions of the disease — at least where South America is concerned.

From November 2018 through February 2019 in Chubut Province, Argentina, there was, for instance, a person-to-person outbreak that resulted in 34 confirmed infections and 11 deaths.

Amid continued uncertainty over the genesis of the latest outbreak and media fearmongering, a wide range of theories have emerged about the rodent-borne virus.

Having heard for years about the various efforts to enhance the transmissibility, virulence, or host range of certain viruses, some have speculated that human-to-human transmission of hantavirus points to gain-of-function experimentation.

While there’s been nothing yet to suggest that the virus responsible for the breakout on the Hondius was the result of intentional genetic meddling, scientists have previously modified viruses incorporating hantavirus components and increased their viral fitness in a lab setting. This is similar to the controversial work done on bat coronaviruses at the lab in Wuhan, China.

Hantaviruses are considered a bioagent requiring Biosafety Level 3 containment for research and viral propagation. Consequently, BSL-2 laboratories won’t cut it.

However, a peer-reviewed study funded by the National Institutes of Health and published in 2019 by the American Society for Microbiology describes how researchers developed a work-around for conducting hantavirus research in a lower biocontainment-security BSL-2 laboratory.

Researchers tried to make a safer chimeric virus — which is a hybrid virus created by piecing together parts of two different viruses. They used a relatively weaker virus, vesicular stomatis virus, as the main body, and then attached the entry proteins from the more dangerous hantavirus to the outside so that it could infiltrate and infect cells.

This new recombinant virus — the result of an artificial mash-up of genetic material — apparently started acting just like a real hantavirus and underwent a series of mutations to become more infective:

Serial passage of the rescued rVSV-HTNV Gn/Gc virus markedly increased its infectivity and capacity for cell-to-cell spread. This gain in viral fitness was associated with the acquisition of two point mutations: I532K in the cytoplasmic tail of Gn and S1094L in the membrane-proximal stem of Gc. Follow-up experiments with rVSVs and single-cycle VSV pseudotypes confirmed these results. Mechanistic studies revealed that both mutations were determinative and contributed to viral infectivity in a synergistic manner.

The lead researcher on the 2019 study declined Blaze News' request for comment.

This study is anything but a smoking gun. Whereas the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have originated in the neighborhood of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where dangerous gain-of-function experiments were being conducted on coronaviruses, the Hondius outbreak seemingly took place a world away from this ostensibly low-danger hantavirus study.

Still, researchers have yet to provide a comprehensive and satisfying explanation for how the Andes virus spreads, prompting speculation that members of the scientific community that possibly manufactured the SARS-COV-2 virus are again not being entirely forthright about what they know and don’t know regarding the Hondius outbreak.

“Public health officials have to be more honest and more humble about how this virus actually spreads,” noted Joseph Allen, professor of exposure assessment science at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “An essential lesson from COVID is that officials should be candid about communicating that we are often learning in real time, and we should shy away from making bold pronouncements that may prove dangerously misleading weeks or months later.”

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

Bizarre academic paper about releasing ticks resurfaces amid surging bites



An estimated 31 million people living in the U.S. are bitten by ticks annually, but this year, the number may hit a record. If a pair of radical professors had their way, then the surging bites would go unchecked, leaving multitudes of Americans sick — and unable to eat meat.

Citing its Tick Bite Tracker dashboard, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced late last month that visits to emergency rooms for tick bites were higher than normal in many parts of the country and that in all but the South Central U.S., "weekly rates of ER visits for tick bites are the highest for this time of year since 2017." The Midwest is the most affected region.

This is especially concerning because tick bites can lead to various serious and potentially debilitating diseases including Lyme disease, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, and every carnivore's nightmare: alpha-gal syndrome.

'This is the kind of philosophical argument that gives philosophy and the study of ethics a bad name.'

Amid this surge in tick bites and hospitalizations, a July 2025 academic paper defending the intentional spread of AGS via genetically modified ticks is once again in the spotlight.

AGS is a serious, potentially deadly allergy to alpha-gal, a molecule found in most mammals including cows and pigs. According to the CDC, the body of an afflicted individual registers alpha-gal in red meat and other mammal products as a threat and triggers an allergic reaction. This allergy can develop after a bite from a tick, most commonly the lone star tick.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans are believed to presently be affected by AGS.

A pair of professors at Western Michigan University School of Medicine said in an article titled "Beneficial Bloodsucking," which was published in the journal Bioethics, that tick-borne AGS should be regarded as a "moral bioenhancer if and when it motivates people to stop eating meat."

RELATED: The FDA seems to care more about celebrities than sick Americans

Ben McCanna/Portland Portland Press Herald/Getty Images

Eating meat, as humans have done for millions of years, is — according to Professors Parker Crutchfield and Blake Hereth — supposedly bad for the world because it contributes to "climate change" and harms animals.

"AGS promotes in the people who have it a resistance to eating mammalian meat," wrote the professors. "Thus, they eat less mammalian meat, which is an improvement in their capacity for moral behavior."

Crutchfield and Hereth not only argued that efforts to prevent the spread of tick-borne AGS are impermissible but that "promoting tickborne AGS is strongly pro tanto obligatory" and that promoting the proliferation of tick-borne AGS by genetically optimizing the disease-carrying capacity and adaptability of ticks is "morally obligatory."

"Today we have the obligation to research and develop the capacity to proliferate tickborne AGS and, tomorrow, carry out that proliferation," added the radicals.

The professors claimed — in the paper that Crutchfield subsequently said was a hypothetical ethical framework for discussion — that intentionally infecting people with a syndrome that prevents them from eating meat does not violate their rights but is rather analogous to mass "vaccinations."

Crutchfield argued in a 2019 paper that such "moral bioenhancement" interventions in pursuit of imagined moral improvements, not health gains, ought to be not only compulsory but covert.

"This is to say that it is morally preferable for compulsory moral bioenhancement to be administered without the recipients knowing that they are receiving the enhancement," he noted in the abstract for the 2019 paper.

Crutchfield and Hereth are hardly the first on the scene to discuss possibly using bioengineering to render the population incapable of eating meat.

For instance, Taiwanese-American "bioethicist" S. Matthew Liao discussed over a decade ago not only reducing humans' average height to reduce their "footprint" but artificially inducing "intolerance to red meat by stimulating the immune system against common bovine proteins" by way of a medical device resembling a nicotine patch or other means.

H. Sterling Burnett, director of the Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy, told the College Fix in response to the 2025 paper, "It is never morally right to promote a disease which harms people, robs them of choice, literally makes them sick, and, in extreme instances, kills them."

"Whether to fight climate change or promote animal welfare, preventing the eradication of a disease that causes human harm — indeed, promoting increased infection — is morally abhorrent," continued Burnett. "This is the kind of philosophical argument that gives philosophy and the study of ethics a bad name."

Bioethics published a critical response in March to Crutchfield and Hereth's paper that challenged the professors' assumptions that introducing AGS would reduce overall animal suffering, that intentionally infecting humans would not violate fundamental moral rights, and that intentionally infecting people with AGS is comparable to vaccination.

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

Far-Left Academics Wrote Scientific Advisory Guide Used To Influence Judges

A Federalist investigation found that a key section of a manual advising federal judges on science-related matters was authored by Democrat donors.

Vindicated? Gabbard probes the biolabs Romney called her a 'traitor' for mentioning.



The Trump administration is investigating the U.S.-funded Ukrainian biolabs that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was previously smeared as "treasonous" and "traitorous" for bringing to the public's attention.

Then

Gabbard issued a video statement while a private citizen in 2022 where she claimed that "there are 25-30 U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine. According to the U.S. government, these biolabs are conducting research on dangerous pathogens."

In order to mitigate the risk of breaches at the facilities, Gabbard said that "these labs need to be shut down immediately, and the pathogens that they hold need to be destroyed."

'The era of lies and betrayal is over.'

Gabbard was viciously attacked over the video even though days earlier, then-Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland — a woman whose meddling in Ukrainian affairs helped pave the way for the ruinous overthrow of its previous government — admitted that such labs existed.

Nuland testified to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee both that "Ukraine has biological research facilities" and the U.S. government was worried that "Russian forces may be seeking to gain control" of "research materials" in the labs. Then-Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) then steered Nuland into prophesying that should there be a biological or chemical incident in Ukraine, the Russians would necessarily be to blame.

Following Nuland's admissions, then-Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines testified to the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee that Ukraine "operates a little over a dozen" biolabs for bio-defense; that the U.S. had "provided assistance" to the labs, at least "in the context of biosafety"; and there was room for misuse of "some of the material that's there that is not intended for weapon purposes but nevertheless could be used in dangerous ways."

RELATED: Chinese fraudster convicted for ripping off Americans with bogus COVID tests

Arun SANKAR/AFP/Getty Images

The Pentagon also noted in a fact sheet that month that the U.S., through the Biological Threat Reduction Program, had by that point dumped roughly $200 million in Ukraine since 2005 "supporting 46 Ukrainian laboratories, health facilities, and diagnostic sites."

The fact sheet noted further that BTRP sought to help the Ukrainians "consolidate and secure pathogens and to continue to ensure Ukraine can detect and report disease outbreaks before they pose security or stability threats."

Despite the Biden administration bolstering in advance the claims that Gabbard would make in her March 13, 2022, video, failed presidential candidate Mitt Romney accused Gabbard of "parroting false Russian propaganda" and spreading "treasonous lies" that "may well cost lives."

Then-Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), a Ukraine hawk who later stumped for Kamala Harris' doomed presidential campaign, shared Gabbard's video, writing, "Actual Russian propaganda. Traitorous."

Gabbard noted that such remarks were "slanderous" and stuck to her guns.

Now

Now in a position to do the work she took abuse recommending the government do in 2022, Gabbard is investigating over 120 biolabs outside the U.S. that have been funded by American taxpayers.

The spy chief told the New York Post on Monday that her team will "identify where these labs are, what pathogens they contain, and what 'research' is being conducted to end dangerous gain-of-function research that threatens the health and well-being of the American people and the world."

"The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the catastrophic global impact research on dangerous pathogens in biolabs can have," Gabbard said. "Yet despite these obvious dangers, politicians, so-called health professionals, like Dr. Fauci, and entities within the Biden administration's national security team lied to the American people about the existence of these US-funded and supported biolabs and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth."

ODNI officials confirmed that more than 40 of the biolabs under investigation are — as Gabbard indicated four years ago — in Ukraine and could "be at risk of compromise" due to the ongoing war.

Trump ODNI officials said that the Biden administration's mixed messaging about the Ukrainian biolabs were part of an "Information Resilience" strategy to "shape the public narrative" to simultaneously "mitigate and counter foreign malign influence" and downplay American ties to the war-zone research. In other words, they were pushing falsehoods domestically to neutralize foreign half-truths.

The State Department, for instance, noted in a carefully worded March 9, 2022, statement that "the United States does not own or operate any chemical or biological laboratories in Ukraine." The State Department proceeded to reject the claim, not that the U.S. and Ukraine were collaborating on biological and chemical research, but that they were "conducting chemical and biological weapons activities."

"The prior administration bankrolled dangerous gain-of-function research and foreign biolabs with American tax dollars, then deliberately hid it from the American people," Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said in a statement.

"Under President Trump's leadership, DNI Tulsi Gabbard and the entire Cabinet are righting these historic wrongs and delivering justice for our warfighters and the ones they protect," Hegseth continued. "The era of lies and betrayal is over."

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

Instead Of Reading And Math, Teachers Are Grading Kids On Personality And Emotions

In many classrooms today, students are no longer evaluated solely on what they know, but increasingly on how they think, how they react, and how they see themselves.

The Pro-Life Movement Has An IVF Problem

As Christians we are called to proclaim the truth that human life begins at conception, no matter how inconvenient or unpopular it may be.

The Story Of Everything Hits At Just The Right Time To Boost America’s Faith Resurgence

A new documentary pieces together the scientific case for creation with such clarity that even materialists may find themselves without a rebuttal.