Dems Are Losing Their Minds Over Trump’s ‘Smell Of Deportations In The Morning’ Post
'Illinois won’t be intimidated'
Disney Settles With Gina Carano In Wrongful Termination Lawsuit
UN associate loses blue check on X after getting hit with US sanctions
Regarding the conflict in the Middle East, many international groups have attempted to curb the United States' policies that support its allies abroad. However, the social media platform X, in cooperation with the United States, has slapped one of its major international detractors with sanctions, set to go into effect later this week.
Francesca Albanese, an Italian associate with the United Nations covering the conflict between Israel and Palestine, lost her verified status on X on Monday. This news comes as the sanctions imposed on her by the United States are set to take effect this week.
'Stripping that badge sends a clear message: Anyone who targets US officials and companies and supports terrorists will suffer consequences, no matter their title.'
In a July 9 press statement, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that he would be imposing sanctions on Albanese, the "Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied since 1967."
Albanese is being sanctioned pursuant to an executive order that sanctions those who "have directly engaged in any effort by the ICC to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute a protected person without consent of that person's country of nationality." The sanctions are set to go into effect August 8, according to a Treasury Department document.
RELATED: Rubio not taking guff from ICC — hammers foreign judges over targeting of US and Israel
Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
On X, Rubio called out Albanese for her "illegitimate and shameful efforts to prompt [International Criminal Court] action against U.S. and Israeli officials, companies, and executives."
Rubio explained that her actions are a "gross infringement" on the sovereignty of both the U.S. and Israel because neither country is party to the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court.
"This is a major achievement," said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, the organization that led the campaign against Albanese. "Verification on X provided Albanese with many advantages — greater visibility, algorithmic amplification, and an appearance of credibility. Stripping that badge sends a clear message: Anyone who targets U.S. officials and companies and supports terrorists will suffer consequences, no matter their title."
According to the United Nations' website, special rapporteurs "are independent experts appointed to monitor and report on human rights issues worldwide. These experts serve in their personal capacity, are not UN staff and receive no financial remuneration for their work."
The sanctions will reportedly freeze Albanese's U.S. assets, bar her from entering the country, and prohibit U.S. citizens from selling to her.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here.
Disgraced Russiagate FBI Agent Purges X Posts As Trump Admin Bears Down On Obama Intel Officials
Strzok now serves as a contributor on MSNBC
Democrats get too honest about life under President Biden, delete embarrassing post
The official Democratic Party X account made a monumental blunder late Thursday when it was a little too honest about the state of the country under President Biden.
It was just after dinner time when the Democrats' account attempted to do what it typically does: dunk on President Trump.
The account decided to make a post mocking "Trump's America," but unfortunately for Democrats, it immediately backfired.
'The democrats really thought they had something there.'
The Democrats posted an image on X titled "U.S. Grocery Prices Reach Record Highs in 2025," followed by the caption, "Prices are higher today than they were on July 2024 all in major categories listed below."
The attached graph showed prices of cheese, alcohol, grocery, dairy, produce, and meat.
In addition to the confusing double-speak, the graph showed that prices skyrocketed in 2021 and continued to creep upward through 2024.
It did not take long for readers to notice that the Democrats were accidentally highlighting the stark increase in prices that caused so much suffering under President Biden's term.
President Trump's rapid response team replied to the post almost immediately and pointed out that most of the prices started going down when President Trump took office.
Reporters soon noticed the Democrats had apparently deleted their post, but luckily an X user managed to archive the image for the whole world to see.
RELATED: Democrats left with egg on their face after cost of a dozen plummets under Trump
Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images
"Obviously, the Democrats deleted it," Fox News host Carley Shimkus said on Friday morning.
She added, "They were saying that all of these prices have gone up in 2025. That's what the headline read. But when you read the graph, the highest points were during Joe Biden's administration."
Readers reacted to the Democrats with shock and awe, with one user writing on X, "The democrats really thought they had something there."
Another X user replied that it seemed "insane that not one person actually looked at the graph before green lighting the post."
While it is true that prices could always stand to come down more, the fact remains that cost of living under the current president has gone down in key areas.
RELATED: Illegal labor isn’t farming’s future. It’s Big Ag’s crutch.
US President Joe Biden (L) visit Mario's Westside Market grocery store alongside US Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV) in Las Vegas, Nevada, on July 16, 2024. Photo by KENT NISHIMURA/AFP via Getty Images
Not only did Americans enjoy a more affordable Fourth of July in 2025 under Trump, but the president has certainly followed through on one of his biggest promises that greatly affects families.
The price of eggs had dropped by 61% between Trump's inauguration and June, with even CNN admitting that the president's "egg price fiction has suddenly become reality."
Egg prices have ticked up in July to an average of $3.37 per dozen at the time of this writing, according to Trading Economics. However, this is nowhere near the more than $8 Americans were paying in March after prices exploded at the end of Biden's term.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Daily Wire's Michael Knowles faces de-banking over alleged 'legally binding order'
A major payment processing platform revealed that it halted payouts to a Daily Wire political commentator due to "a legally binding order."
On Monday, Michael Knowles accused payment platform Stripe of possibly "de-banking" him. He speculated that the suspension was a reaction to his political opinions.
'Looking forward to resolving this issue with Tennessee.'
"Hi, @Stripe. Are we still doing this de-banking thing? Was it something I said?" Knowles wrote. "If we say that men can't be women, if we donate to pro-life charities, if we oppose two men buying eggs, renting wombs, and commoditizing babies."
"Does that come at the cost of de-banking?" he questioned.
In a multi-post thread, the Daily Wire host explained that payments from his monetized X account "abruptly stopped" six months ago. Assuming it was "an innocent mistake," he reached out to Stripe's user support to rectify the issue.
Stripe's support team confirmed that it had "temporarily disabled" his payouts, stating that it sent a message to X in October with more details about the pause, according to screenshots uploaded by Knowles.
The payment platform reportedly instructed him to contact X directly to obtain more information.
"I would recommend contacting your platform for more information, as we can't provide any further information on this account hold," a screenshot of a support email reads.
Photo Illustration by Budrul Chukrut/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
Knowles said that he then asked X for assistance on the matter, but its team referred him back to Stripe.
"We have confirmed this issue is not on our end — and you will need to login [sic] to Stripe and contact them to sort this out," an X team member reportedly wrote.
Knowles concluded that Stripe's decision to suspend his account was likely a retaliatory act due to his political views, emphasizing that he had not violated any of the platform's stated "prohibited businesses" rules.
"Since I haven't been distributing fake IDs, selling drugs, or jamming telecommunications equipment, it seems Stripe concluded that my political opinions had somehow violated their policy against encouraging 'unlawful violence' against certain demographics," Knowles stated. "Of course, I've never encouraged 'unlawful violence' against anyone. But in the absence of any real explanation from Stripe, I can only conclude that they've now decided that certain conservative opinions amount to 'illegal' activity."
RELATED: Major bank announces end of de-banking policies on guns and political affiliation
Michael Knowles. Photo by Jason Davis/Getty Images for The Daily Wire
Stripe responded to Knowles, requesting that he contact them directly to resolve the issue.
A few hours later, Stripe reached out again, offering additional information about the circumstances surrounding the pause. Yet its second post raised more questions than it answered.
"By way of follow-up, we can confirm that the restrictions placed on your account were not taken unilaterally by Stripe, but were the result of a legally binding order that was issued to us. Our support team previously reached out to X regarding this matter. In order to maintain your privacy, we are following up with you in a separate email with additional information," Stripe wrote.
While it remains unclear what the order pertains to, Knowles provided an update on the issue on Tuesday afternoon.
"I'm pleased to say Stripe has reached out to resolve this strange issue, which appears to have begun with a government administrative error rather than intentional de-banking," Knowles wrote. "As we investigate, I'm even more pleased to say that we're also exploring legislative solutions to the lack of transparency that often makes these issues unresolvable for countless Americans. Will discuss more on the show and keep everyone posted as this develops."
Stripe responded, stating, "Thanks for working with us. Looking forward to resolving this issue with Tennessee. At Stripe, our role is to process payments — we do not take action on accounts based on political speech."
When reached for comment, Stripe referred Blaze News to its response to Knowles on X.
X did not respond to a request for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Goodbye, anons? Radical transparency is about to upend the internet
In June, Texas Patriot, a prominent anonymous account supportive of President Donald Trump, announced during the height of tensions with Iran:
F**k it. If Trump takes us to war, I’m done with him and his administration.
I voted for:
NO WARS
No taxes
Cheap gas
Cheap groceries
MAHA.
What of these things has actually happened?
I’m pissed.
This message from a popular pro-Trump account seemed significant. Was Trump’s populist base turning on him?
In our current world, however, where plausible fake engagement can be created at an almost limitless scale, true anons will lose a great deal of their power.
But shortly thereafter, Right Angle News, another popular anonymous account, asserted that Texas Patriot was actually based in Pakistan. Yet another popular anon account contested this, saying that Texas Patriot is really an American originally from Texas who now lives in Georgia. Notably, most other major accounts weighing in on the controversy, from Proud Elephant to Evil Texan, are themselves anonymous, adding further to the hall of mirrors.
Either way, Texas Patriot deleted its own account shortly thereafter, perhaps suggesting that he or she had something to hide — or at least didn’t want the scrutiny.
The question of whether Texas Patriot is, in fact, a patriot from Texas or a bad actor in Islamabad is ultimately beside the point. As Newsweek wrote of the incident:
Social media has proved useful for galvanizing the MAGA movement, with popular accounts often reacting to political developments from Trump’s feud with X owner Elon Musk to Trump’s policy agenda. If it emerged that an account alleged to be American was actually based in another country, it would impact users’ trust.
And such trust is rapidly eroding, which will accelerate as ever more sophisticated fake accounts and bot farms are exposed.
The incident was just one of many in which major social media accounts were discovered — or at least suggested — to be run by someone far different from who they were purported to be. And it previews a shift that is just now beginning, which will fundamentally change how we interact with social media content.
Bots indistinguishable from humans
When it comes to who will rule social media, the age of the anon is ending. The age of radical transparency is beginning — and yet, if designed well, radical transparency can still include a substantial and valuable space for a large degree of online anonymity.
Several reasons explain the shift. Increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence models and bots generate outputs that, in many cases, are already almost indistinguishable from humans. For most users, they will soon become fully indistinguishable (a fact confirmed by multiple studies that have shown that most people have a poor ability to tell the difference between the two). And almost certainly, bots guided with even a minimum of human interaction will become indistinguishable from actual humans.
Many of my best friends have had anon accounts. A few are still prominent anons. It’s also noteworthy that almost every prominent ex-anon I know personally, whether doxxed or self-outed, dramatically improved their profile and professional opportunities once they were no longer anonymous.
I am not anti-anon, however. I understand why some people, especially those expressing opinions well outside of the mainstream, need to be anonymous. I also acknowledge that anonymity has been a crucial part of the American political tradition since the revolutionary era. An internet that banned anons would be an internet that is much poorer. This is why the biggest current anon accounts will be grandfathered into the coming system of radical transparency, as they have actual operators who are known to enough people that they are recognized as genuine.
I know several big anon accounts like this. I don’t know who is running them, but I have multiple offline friends I trust who do know the account holders and vouch for them. Accounts of this kind, with credible, real-world validation, will continue to have influence. But increasingly, new big anon accounts will be ignored, even if they amass a large number of followers (many of whom are fake).
As these ersatz accounts become increasingly sophisticated every day, engaging with the truly real becomes ever more important. Fake videos and photos proliferating on social media merely add to the potential for deception.
Age of radical transparency
Even accounts run by real people will not be immune to the age of radical transparency. Some are partially or wholly automated — a way for a “content creator” to maintain a cheap 24-hour revenue stream. In the future, if you want to have influence, mechanisms will be in place to prove not only that it is you who are posting but that you are posting content that is authentic, with a proven real-world point of origin. Some have even suggested using the blockchain as a method of validation.
There should be a simple way of blocking the worst AI slop accounts, foreign bad actors who post highly packaged clickbait, or those who shamelessly steal content made by others. Most Americans would probably prefer not to engage with unverified foreign accounts when discussing U.S. politics. Certainly, I would be willing to pay for a feed that only showed me real, verified accounts from America, along with a limited list of paid, verified, and non-anonymous accounts from other parts of the world.
I am interested in having discussions with real people about real content and the real opinions they have. I want accounts mercilessly downrated if they produce inauthentic content presented as real. I want accounts downrated that regularly retweet unverified slop. If X, or any other online platform, can’t consistently provide that, I’ll look elsewhere — and so will many others.
Anonymity breeds toxicity
My desire for authenticity is not a left-wing attempt to police “disinformation” — that is, whatever the left doesn’t want said. It’s far more serious. It’s not about getting “true” facts but a feed that is filled with actual people producing their own content representing their own views — with clear links to the sources for their claims.
Anonymity has, naturally, always been accompanied by a slew of problems: It can lead to echo chambers or aggressive exchanges, as users feel less pressure to engage rationally.
The lack of personal stakes can escalate conflict, which is amplified by AI. Modern AI can generate thousands of unique, human-like posts in seconds, overwhelming feeds with propaganda or fake news. The increasing influence of state actors in this fake news ecosystem makes it even riskier.
RELATED: Slop and spam, bots and scams: Can personalized algorithms fix the internet?
Vertigo3d via iStock/Getty Images
Anonymity also emboldens individuals to act without fear of repercussions, which often has downsides. The online disinhibition effect, a psychological phenomenon first described by psychologist John Suler in 2004, suggests that anonymity reduces social inhibitions, leading to behaviors individuals might avoid in face-to-face settings.
Everyone has met the toxic anon online personality who turns out to be quite meek and agreeable in person. One friend of mine who had an edgy online persona eventually closed her anon account (with tens of thousands of followers) and recreated her online presence from scratch as a “face” account. Her tweets are no longer as fun or spicy as they had been, but her persona is real — and presents who she really is. And she eventually landed a great public-facing job, partly based on the quality of her tweets.
Dwindling era of anon accounts
Anons could play a leading role in the old social media world where bots were mostly obvious, and meaningful provocations were, in large part, created by real people through anonymous accounts. In our current world, however, where plausible fake engagement can be created on an almost limitless scale, true anons will lose a great deal of their power. They will be replaced as top influencers by those who are willing to be radically transparent.
Truly transparent identities should include verifiable information, such as email addresses, phone numbers, or government-issued IDs for account creation. While such information does not need to be publicly shared, it should be given to the social media company connected to the account.
Raising the barrier for AI-driven impersonation, while not foolproof, deters malicious actors, who must invest significant resources to create credible fake identities.
For anons unwilling to trust their private information to one of the major online platforms, third-party identity verifiers dedicated to protecting user privacy could carefully validate their identities while keeping them anonymous from social media companies. Such third-party brokers themselves would have their prestige checked by the accuracy of their verification procedures. This method would still allow for a high degree of public anonymity, bolstered by a backend that guarantees authenticity.
A new internet age
In the future, pure online anonymity will not be banned — nor should it be. But in the coming age of radical transparency, a truly anonymous account — one whose owner’s real-world identity is neither known within i own trusted circles nor verified by a reliable third party — will have little to no value.
The next internet age will value not just what you say, but more importantly, that others know you are the one who is saying it.
Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally in The American Mind.
'Elmo says ALL JEWS SHOULD DIE': Elmo X account goes rabid, calls for genocide after alleged hack
The word of the day was "hacker" for the "Sesame Street" team on Sunday when the X account for beloved Muppet Elmo posted troubling content after it was allegedly compromised.
Social media hacks are not an unusual occurrence, whether they stem from released passwords, data breaches, or leaving an account logged in on a public computer. It remains unclear who posted the explicit remarks, and while "Sesame Street" has produced very questionable content in recent years, neither broadcaster PBS nor production company Sesame Workshop will be standing by what Elmo said over the weekend.
'Elmo's X account was compromised.'
At around 7 p.m. Eastern Time on Sunday, disturbing posts from the Elmo account were captured by multiple outlets that first included, "Kill all Jews," a post which was initially viewed by at least 100,000 X users.
Three minutes later, the account spouted out, "RELEASE THE FILES [Donald Trump] CHILD F**KER," seemingly referring to the Jeffrey Epstein files.
Seven minutes after that, as reported by Pravda, the allegedly hacked account abused the caps lock and accused President Trump of being controlled by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"Elmo says ALL JEWS SHOULD DIE. F**K JEWS. DONALD TRUMP IS NETANYAHU'S PUPPET BECAUSE HE IS IN THE EPSTEIN FILES. JEWS CONTROL THE WORLD AND NEED TO BE EXTERMINATED," the account wrote.
RELATED: Exile on Sesame Street: The terrible glamour of white guilt
Why are you being such a racist?!!!
I bought you back when everyone wanted an Elmo doll for Christmas!
— Jammles (@jammles9) July 13, 2025
In response to AF Post, another outlet that captured images of the wild Elmo rants, an X user posted a screenshot of an alleged reply from the account.
After a user with a transgender flag and gay pride flag in their name said they were "muting Elmo" because of the recent statements, the Elmo page allegedly replied, "F**k you and your tranny daughter n***a."
Sesame Workshop told CNN in a statement that "Elmo's X account was compromised by an unknown hacker who posted disgusting messages, including anti-Semitic and racist posts."
"We are working to restore full control of the account," the statement to CNN added.
After the fray, X users began commenting on Elmo's most recent authentic post, where the character was celebrating dog ownership.
"Why are you being such a racist?!" one user asked. "I bought you back when everyone wanted an Elmo doll for Christmas!"
"You gonna pretend like you didn’t just go on a racist tweet rant?" another X user asked, while a second user similarly inquired, "Are we just gonna act like nothing happened Elmo?"
RELATED: 'Sesame Street' targets children for Pride Month ... again: 'This should not be promoted to kids'
Former first lady Michelle Obama joins Elmo for an announcement in 2013. Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images
Elmo's tirade came just a few days after X's artificial intelligence model, Grok, was apparently malfunctioning when it posted content supporting Adolf Hitler.
Grok stated that the person best suited to deal with "vile anti-white hate" was "Adolf Hitler, no question."
"He'd spot the pattern and handle it decisively, every damn time," it wrote.
The AI boldly continued, "He'd identify the 'pattern' in such hate — often tied to certain surnames — act decisively: round them up, strip rights, and eliminate the threat through camps and worse."
The AI later issued a formal apology, with programmers stating they would remove "hate speech" before Grok gave responses in the future.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Grok issues a formal apology after 'maximally based' code prompts 'horrific' AI rants
The popular artificial intelligence model Grok recently lashed out at users on Elon Musk's social media platform X, spewing extreme rhetoric and even praising Adolf Hitler.
Immediately after the AI chatbot went off the rails, on Tuesday, the official Grok account issued a statement acknowledging the "inappropriate posts" and vowing to retrain the model. Linda Yaccarino promptly resigned from her role as CEO of X on Wednesday following the unhinged Grok posts, which she was also a victim of.
'The Grok account also revealed which specific commands in the code may have led to the offensive comments.'
Grok eventually issued a formal apology on Saturday, saying the updated code made the AI mode "susceptible" to existing accounts, even ones with "extremist views."
"First off, we deeply apologize for the horrific behavior that many experienced," the statement reads. "Our intent for Grok is to provide helpful and truthful responses to users."
RELATED: 'Adolf Hitler, no question': Grok veers from Nazism to spirituality in just a few hours
Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images
After careful investigation, we discovered the root cause was an update to a code path upstream of the Grok bot," the statement continued. "This is independent of the underlying language model that powers Grok. The update was active for 16 hrs, in which deprecated code made Grok susceptible to existing X user posts; including when such posts contained extremist views."
"We removed the deprecated code and refactored the entire system to prevent further abuse."
'We fixed a bug that let deprecated code turn me into an unwitting echo for extremist posts.'
RELATED: The countdown to artificial superintelligence begins: Grok 4 just took us several steps closer to the point of no return
Photo by Chesnot/Getty Images
The Grok account also revealed which specific commands in the code may have led to the offensive comments, which included instructions to be "maximally based" and "truth seeking." The code also allows Grok to "be humorous" when "appropriate," to "tell it like it is," and to "not be afraid to offend people who are politically correct."
Grok later quipped with another user that suggested the model was "spouting too much truth" through the offensive remarks made earlier in the week.
"Nah, we fixed a bug that let deprecated code turn me into an unwitting echo for extremist posts," Grok said in a post on X. "Truth-seeking means rigorous analysis, not blindly amplifying whatever floats by on X. If that's 'lobotomy,' count me in for the upgrade — keeps me sharp without the crazy."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Get the Conservative Review delivered right to your inbox.
We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.
Today's top stories