Congress quietly pulls bill criminalizing anti-Israeli boycotts following GOP backlash



The House pulled a controversial bill that would criminalize anti-Israel boycotts from the votes schedule this week after several Republicans publicly criticized the bill for violating the First Amendment.

The bill, known as the IGO Anti-Boycott Act, would penalize Americans who participate in anti-Israeli boycotts if they are "imposed by" international organizations or governments like the United Nations or the European Union. The resolution, which was spearheaded by Republican Rep. Mike Lawler of New York, would fine Americans who violated the bill up to $1 million and could impose prison time of up to 20 years.

'It was a ridiculous bill that our leadership should have never scheduled for a vote.'

The bill was originally set for a vote on Monday but was quietly removed from the votes schedule after Republican lawmakers and conservative voices spoke out against it, arguing that it was a slippery slope.

"H.R. 867, up for a vote tomorrow, aims to curb antisemitism but threatens First Amendment rights," Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida said Sunday before the bill was removed from the schedule. "Americans have the right to boycott, and penalizing this risks free speech. I reject and vehemently condemn antisemitism but I cannot violate the first amendment."

"It is my job to defend American’s rights to buy or boycott whomever they choose without the government harshly fining them or imprisoning them," Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia said Sunday. "But what I don’t understand is why we are voting on a bill on behalf of other countries and not the President’s executive orders that are FOR OUR COUNTRY???"

Prominent conservatives like Charlie Kirk also came out against the bill, arguing that the legislation would foster more prejudice rather than reduce it.

"Bills like this only create more antisemitism, and play into growing narratives that Israel is running the US government," Kirk said in a post Sunday. "In America you are allowed to hold differing views. You are allowed to disagree and protest. We've allowed far too many people who hate America move here from abroad, but the right to speak freely is the birthright of all Americans. This bill should not pass. Any Republican that votes for this bill will expose themselves. We will be watching very closely."

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who has previously criticized and voted against similar resolutions, cheered the decision to remove the bill from the schedule Sunday night.

"Thank you for your vocal opposition on this platform," Massie said. "It was a ridiculous bill that our leadership should have never scheduled for a vote."

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

Trump DOJ Strips Terrorist-Tied UNRWA of Immunity in US Courts in Reversal of Biden-Era Policy

The Trump administration has stripped the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) of its immunity in U.S. courts, overturning a Biden-era policy and opening the door to a lawsuit from families of Hamas victims.

The post Trump DOJ Strips Terrorist-Tied UNRWA of Immunity in US Courts in Reversal of Biden-Era Policy appeared first on .

The only way to Mideast peace? Crush Iran’s terror regime



Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, recently warned, “Any mischief the U.S. does will surely receive a strong reciprocal blow.” It may be the most unintentionally absurd April Fools' joke of the year.

President Trump, who has long sounded the alarm over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, didn’t mince words in response. “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing — the likes of which they have never seen before,” he said. Days earlier, the president warned that if Tehran refused to negotiate a new nuclear agreement, “bad, bad things are going to happen to Iran.”

Anyone with a basic grasp of military power knows the Iranian regime would be hopelessly outmatched in a direct conflict with the United States. A well-executed U.S. strike could dismantle Iran’s nuclear facilities and cripple the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, its command-and-control networks, air defenses, and naval forces.

The recent deployment of U.S. B-2 Spirit stealth bombers to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean wasn’t just a routine maneuver. It was a clear and unmistakable signal to Tehran: Test America’s resolve, and the consequences will be swift and overwhelming.

Target the head of the snake

Since October 7, 2023, the Middle East has descended into chaos. The lesson is now unmistakable: Real peace and security in the region require confronting the source of the violence — the Iranian regime.

The Biden administration’s policy of appeasement gave Tehran room to maneuver. It exploited Western concessions, ramped up its nuclear program, and expanded its influence across the region. Intelligence from the National Council of Resistance of Iran — the same group that first revealed Iran’s covert nuclear sites at Natanz and Arak in 2002 — reported in February that Tehran is now actively developing nuclear warheads for ballistic missiles.

At the same time, the regime continues to export terror. Iran arms, trains, and funds the Houthis, who have repeatedly attacked commercial shipping and disrupted trade in the Red Sea.

President Trump pursued a different path: maximum pressure. His administration imposed crippling sanctions and eliminated waivers that helped drive Iran’s oil exports toward zero. More recently, Trump warned that if Iran refuses to negotiate, “There’s a chance that I will do secondary tariffs on them like I did four years ago.”

This kind of pressure works. But economic force alone isn’t enough. It must be matched with steadfast support for the Iranian people and their resistance movement — those willing to fight for freedom from within.

Ready resistance

Internal dissent remains the most viable path to ending Iran’s theocratic government. Since December 2017, Iran has witnessed at least four major uprisings — each one larger, more diverse, and more threatening to the regime’s grip on power. The most significant was the 2022 revolt, when protesters chanted, “Down with the oppressor, whether the Shah or the Supreme Leader.”

That message couldn’t have been clearer: The Iranian people reject dictatorship in all its forms. They want a secular, democratic republic.

The Resistance Units — a national network affiliated with the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran — carried out more than 3,000 anti-regime operations in the past year alone. These efforts persisted despite mass arrests, torture, and executions. The network is growing, not shrinking. It is the only organized force inside Iran capable of challenging the regime from within.

At the same time, Maryam Rajavi, president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, has offered a clear plan for a free Iran. Her 10-point platform calls for secular governance, universal suffrage, gender equality, individual freedoms, and a non-nuclear state. That vision has earned the public backing of more than 4,000 lawmakers worldwide — including a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives and the British House of Commons.

Speaking before Congress in February, Rajavi made NCRI’s position clear. It doesn’t want foreign troops, weapons, or money. It wants recognition of the Iranian people’s right to resist tyranny and of the Resistance Units’ fight to dismantle the IRGC’s machinery of repression.

What the West can do

Military options must remain on the table. But the most effective way to defeat Iran’s regime is to cut off its financial lifelines and escalate pressure across all fronts.

A serious strategy should include the following:

  • Strangle the regime’s economy. Block Iran’s oil and gas exports to starve its terrorist proxies, missile programs, and nuclear ambitions of funding.
  • Activate the U.N. snapback mechanism. Reimpose all prior U.N. Security Council resolutions, shutting down the regime’s nuclear program in full.
  • Place the regime under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. Its repeated threats and destabilizing activities clearly qualify as threats to international peace and security.
  • Recognize the Iranian people’s right to resist. Publicly support the organized resistance movement and the Resistance Units battling the IRGC inside Iran.

The time for action is now

The Iranian regime is at its weakest point in decades. Its economy is collapsing, regional allies are facing setbacks, and internal dissent is growing. The international community has a unique opportunity to push the regime to the brink. The Iranian New Year, which began on March 20, could mark the start of historic change in the Middle East.

An Iran free from the mullahs is no longer a distant dream — it is within reach. But to make it a reality, the West must act decisively and stand with the Iranian people, not their oppressors.

John Oliver goes full ‘biology denier’ in defense of trans athletes



The star of HBO’s “Last Week Tonight,” comedian John Oliver, has made his stance on men competing in women’s sports clear. That is, he loves it and would like to see more of it.

The comedian played a Fox News clip where the hosts were discussing a United Nations report that revealed the amount of medals women have lost to transgender athletes — 600 female athletes have lost close to 900 medals because of their transgender opponents.

“Yeah, 900 medals. That is a go-to statistic. It was even cited on the floor of the Senate during their debate over a trans sports ban and featured prominently in J.K. Rowling’s latest tome,” Oliver said to a laughing audience. “But we got curious about that number, so we looked at that report, and it turns out, first, it wasn’t produced by the U.N.”


“It was submitted to it by a special rapporteur, who herself said its findings do not necessarily represent those of the U.N. And if you go online to the footnote that it cites and click on it, you get sent to this website She Won, where anyone could submit an instance of a cis woman losing to a trans woman anywhere in the world, in any competition, big or small,” he added.

Oliver went on to claim that the content on the She Won website is published by random people on the internet and that there are women in sports, like disc golf, who are “happy” to see trans people join them on the field.

Stu Burguiere of “Stu Does America” isn’t as amused as Oliver’s audience, as he knows that what Oliver is saying isn’t funny, true, or helpful.

Burguiere points out that the organization She Won also saw Oliver’s monologue and wrote in a post on X, “First, John Oliver leads viewers to believe that the content on SheWon.org is directly published by random people on the internet. This is totally false. We encourage people to submit tips, and our team of volunteers reviews each entry before we publish anything.”

“We only publish what we can verify from primary and secondary sources. We state this methodology clearly on our website, so check one off for deliberately misleading viewers,” the post continued.

But that’s not all Oliver got wrong.

“Second, John Oliver also suggests that our data is stale, mentioning that it dates back to the year 2001. This is extraordinarily misleading. 97% of our data is dated no earlier than 2014. 86% is from 2019 and onward. Check another off,” the X post revealed.

“Third, John Oliver attacks our org to discredit the idea that a significant number of women are displaced by male athletes in women’s competitions. This is absurd because She Won does not purport to provide a comprehensive list of every woman denied a medal to male athletes,” they added.

“This is one of the typical go-to arguments of people saying that conservatives or sane people are wrong when it comes to this issue. ‘Come on, barely ever happens,’” Burguiere mocks. “Something they will never admit, but at the end of the day, I don’t know, you probably have one, maybe two daughters.”

“It’s happening to them. It kind of makes a big difference in your life, doesn’t it? It might not be as big of an issue as some nationwide pandemic, but it’s a pretty big issue, especially when it hits your family,” he adds.

Want more from Stu?

To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

From UN hopeful to House lifeline: Trump’s last-minute Stefanik switch explained



Shortly following his historic election victory last November, President Trump nominated loyal ally Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Of all his nominations, Stefanik faced the least opposition in her Senate confirmation hearing — even walking away with some Democrat support.

Last week, however, Trump pulled her nomination, citing fear that Stefanik’s House seat would be replaced by a Democrat in a special election. Granted the GOP holds a razor-thin House majority (218-213) after January 2025 vacancies, losing her vote could very well jeopardize his legislative agenda.

“Is this the right move from the Trump administration?” Jill Savage, host of “Blaze News Tonight,” asks Blaze Media senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford.

Bedford’s answer is a resounding yes.

Ambassador for the United Nations is “kind of a pointless job,” he says. “The whole point of the United Nations in New York is just so we can get foreign diplomats and leaders liquored up, hookered up, and on tape and video, and then go back to them later and say, 'Hey, we need a favor because we saw you with six prostitutes in your hotel room and a pile of coke, and your wife wouldn't want to see that.’"

Even still, he feels bad for Stefanik. The position is certainly “a stepping stone” and “a cool thing on your resume.”

However, what’s far more important is the GOP’s House majority, and where the numbers currently stand, Trump can’t afford to lose Stefanik’s vote — especially with wild cards like Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas) in the House.

“It just comes down to the reality of giving the Republicans more breathing room particularly for this upcoming budget battle, which is expected in the next few weeks,” says Bedford.

“So who gets [the position] now?” asks Blaze News editor in chief Matthew Peterson.

“Maybe Ron DeSantis — you know someone who is not necessarily a Trump ally, but it'd be good to get them on the team but at the same time kind of sideline them a little bit,” says Bedford.

To hear more of the conversation, including Bedford’s predictions on the upcoming budget bill, watch the clip above.

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.

The Paris climate agreement is dead — time to bury it for good



The Paris climate agreement was doomed to fail from its inception. It is long past time for all parties involved, as well as the media, to acknowledge this fact.

The mainstream media has lamented the Paris agreement’s fate since President Donald Trump’s re-election. Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement during his first term and vowed to do so again after Joe Biden rejoined it. While Trump’s withdrawal was a public rebuke that undermined the pact’s “effectiveness,” the agreement was effectively dead before the ink on the last signature was dry.

China’s rising emissions since 2015 all but guarantee that global CO2 levels will continue climbing through 2030 and beyond, no matter what other nations do.

The structure of the agreement itself ensured that it would be ineffective in preventing greenhouse gas emissions from rising.

As I noted shortly after its completion in 2015, even the architects of the Paris agreement quietly admitted that the emissions pledges made by signatory countries would fall short of limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius. At the time, their own estimates showed that if every nation fulfilled its commitment, the combined result would still account for less than half the greenhouse gas reductions needed to meet the 2-degree goal.

By 2017, the United Nations confirmed this shortfall. Its report projected that even if every country fully complied with its Paris agreement targets — an optimistic scenario — global temperatures would still rise by 3 degrees Celsius by 2100.

The agreement’s prospects have only worsened since. As the BBC has reported, several countries openly acknowledge that they will not meet their commitments. Nations such as Argentina, Indonesia, South Africa, and South Korea — all signatories that previously pledged to curb fossil fuel use — now plan to increase the production of coal, natural gas, and oil. Many also hope to import additional fuel from the United States.

These nations are now blaming Trump for their decision, but the data shows that every single country now seeking more fossil fuels had already increased its use long before Trump was re-elected and withdrew from the Paris agreement. In fact, no country that set specific emissions reduction targets in the first Paris commitment period has made significant progress toward meeting its goals.

What’s more, of the nearly 200 countries that signed the agreement, only 10 submitted their updated carbon reduction commitments by the deadline — meaning 190 nations failed to comply. Even the 10 countries that submitted their updated commitments failed to meet their previous targets.

Two of the world’s three largest carbon dioxide emitters — China and India — have made no firm commitments under the Paris agreement. Instead of pledging to reduce emissions, both countries offered vague assurances that they expect emissions to peak eventually. If carbon dioxide truly drives climate change, China’s rising emissions since 2015 all but guarantee that global CO2 levels will continue climbing through 2030 and the 2050, no matter what other nations do.

As Thomas Hobbes wrote, “Covenants, without the sword, are but words, and of no strength to secure a man at all.” Every climate agreement to date has embodied that idea — unenforceable promises with no mechanism to guarantee compliance.

The fact is that the Paris agreement was never a binding treaty. Countries set their own emissions targets, but the agreement included no international enforcement. Unless countries pass laws domestically to formalize their pledges, those goals remain legally meaningless — even within their own borders.

Ultimately, the Paris agreement demands long-term sacrifice without any clear or measurable benefit. Politicians focused on re-election hesitate to adopt policies that visibly harm their constituents today in exchange for hypothetical rewards decades after they’ve left office. That political reality is why the Paris climate agreement was doomed from the start. Now is the time to acknowledge its failure — without regret. The trillions already spent are sunk costs, but at the very least, we can stop wasting more.

Trump’s climate policy shift could save American farmers from disaster



While news about President Trump’s tariffs and crackdowns on the questionable financial management of federal agencies has dominated media reports in recent weeks, a quiet transformation has been under way in agricultural policy.

An order to remove climate change references from U.S. Department of Agriculture websites signals a departure from the red tape of climate regulations on domestic farming practices and strings attached to U.S. support of agriculture abroad.

Programs that seek to lower carbon dioxide levels are destructive — period.

Through the U.S. Agency for International Development, the federal government poured millions of dollars into climate-focused programs that could have no positive effect on the climate — promoting “green” orthodoxy over agricultural productivity.

Wasted climate dollars

Some of these programs have been intertwined with other activities in rural agrarian communities. USAID and the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, for example, joined in a “$55 million credit guarantee to address the economic impact of COVID-19 by supporting loans to farmer producer organizations, ag-tech companies, and companies engaged in clean energy solutions for the agriculture sector.” A $1.5 million program aimed at "empowering" female climate activists in northern Kenya.

USAID also partnered with organizations like the Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, which operates in developing countries and focuses on so-called research themes that include “low-emissions” development, climate services and safety nets, scaling “climate-smart” agriculture, and gender and social inclusion.

All these expenditures came under the umbrella of USAID’s 2022-2030 climate strategy, a $150 billion "whole-of-agency approach" to establish an “equitable world with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions.’

Climate mandates stifle farming

USAID's financial support for farmers and businesses has been contingent on adherence to an absurd climate agenda and perverse views of human nature that have nothing to do with feeding hungry people.

The administration’s freeze on this funding cuts off money to hundreds of such programs that interfered with the employment of sensible farming practices in places like Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

It’s not just farmers abroad who will benefit from the dismantlement of USAID’s climate initiatives. Among the first casualties of the current policy shift will be the unscientific $3.1 billion program to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions on farms across 55 U.S. states and territories through 135 projects.

Imagine a program intended to help crops grow but that robs them of the carbon dioxide that enables photosynthesis. CO2 is necessary for plant life — and ultimately all life.

NASA credits the greening of much of the planet over the past 100 years to the increase in atmospheric CO2. Programs that seek to lower carbon dioxide levels are destructive — period.

Worldwide impact

Without President Trump’s bold moves, U.S. farmers likely would have fallen under the constraints of externally imposed climate frameworks that have, in many cases, stifled innovation and reduced U.S. farmers' competitiveness on the world stage.

The USDA targets greenhouse gas emissions under the Climate Smart Agriculture and Forestry program. These initiatives include forcing U.S. farmers to employ lower-pressure irrigation systems to decrease fossil fuel energy use. Other measures are aimed at manipulating the quantity and quality of dietary nutrients to reduce methane emissions from animal digestive tracts. It was probably just a matter of time before critically important nitrogen fertilizers were targeted as a source of greenhouse gas emissions — as they have been in some other countries.

By contrast, countries such as China and India have prioritized productivity and food security over such practices. They have invested heavily in fossil fuel-based agricultural technologies and products, achieving record crop yields for their massive populations.

Adding insult to injury, the climate money these nations received purportedly for “climate justice” may have financed fossil fuel projects. Too often, American taxpayers have paid the bill for overseas projects that do little if any good.

The highly politicized, fabricated climate crisis, which is based on erroneous climate models and exaggerations of a so-called greenhouse effect, should not overshadow the immediate economic and operational concerns of farmers in the U.S. and elsewhere.

Trump’s withdrawal from international climate initiatives, including the U.N.’s Paris Climate Accords, marked a win for American farmers and taxpayers. His decision ended U.S. participation in costly and unrealistic mandates — such as the Net Zero agenda — that have strained global economies and fueled unrest among farmers and the broader public.

Why School Choice Is Not A Leftist Plot To Take Over Private Education

Since before the founding of our country, Americans have taxed ourselves to pay for public K-12 education.

Kamala Harris, size queen?

The federal government might shut down at the end of the day if Congress does nothing, which it excels at doing. Not the entire government, just the "non-essential" parts, which means hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats would get a paid vacation. Honestly, who cares? Nothing really matters when…

The post Kamala Harris, size queen? appeared first on .

UN Judge Found Guilty of Slavery

A United Nations judge was convicted on Thursday of trafficking a young woman to the United Kingdom and forcing her to work as a slave.

The post UN Judge Found Guilty of Slavery appeared first on .