Month: April 2024

The Biden administration just released its 1500-page revision of the Title IX Rule. This new Rule makes this administration’s primary goal glaringly obvious: to cram Neo-Marxist gender ideology down the throats of every American and punish any resistance. That’s why they are weaponizing Title IX to compel speech. 

Despite the fact that expressing and debating views and ideas is fundamental to the American system, my organization, Speech First, has found that many universities prefer to shut down speech, punish students for merely asking questions or stating basic facts, and enforce a dogmatic approach towards all political speech. At the same time, they embed their preferred political speech in all aspects of student life.

Similarly, the Biden administration does not want to wait for the end result of the traditional American way—debate and discourse that seeks truth through reason, and ultimately settles on a conclusion based on core constitutional principles. Instead, the administration is attempting to bend the country to its will by turning Title IX against the Constitution.

Title IX was passed by Congress in 1972 to close gaps in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which did not provide protections for discrimination on the basis of sex in education. Since then, various lawsuits expanded or reworked definitions of “sex” and “discrimination.” Sexual harassment and sexual assault were eventually included to be forms of sex-discrimination. As the years went on, many presidential administrations sought to further define these terms.

The Obama administration issued a series of “Dear Colleague Letters,” policy directives from the Department of Education to colleges and universities. These circumvented the rule-making process to prioritize political goals over the rights of American citizens. Instead of going through the multi-year slog of hearing what legal experts and citizens of the country might think about a new Title IX Rule, the Obama administration just short-circuited the system.

The Trump administration, on the other hand, went through the formal rule-making process with the intentions of thoroughly auditing Title IX and building in important protections for constitutional rights. Under Trump, a very important speech protection was added to Title IX: the Davis standard. 

This speech protection was not written by the administration; it came from a U.S. Supreme Court decision, Davis v. The Monroe County Board of Education. This Supreme Court precedent specifically stated that for speech to be considered harassing conduct, it has to be so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively denies students equal access to education. 

What this means is that if a student wanted to report another student or a professor for a Title IX sexual harassment violation, it couldn’t be for a “microaggression,” nor could it be for any of the numerous and often ridiculous speech code limitations that universities have embedded in their own non-Title IX harassment policies. 

These days, universities punish students for committing “microaggressions,” not using “preferred pronouns,” using “offensive language,” “stereotyping,” or mean jokes. You may or may not believe these rise to the level of Title IX sexual harassment or sex discrimination, but they are all forms of constitutionally protected speech. 

But that didn’t stop universities from attempting to discipline students for their protected speech. In Speech First v. Cartwright, the Eleventh Circuit Court recognized how the University of Central Florida was abusing its discriminatory-harassment policy to target students’ constitutionally protected speech. 

The Davis standard is a possible solution for a harassment policy that protects students’ First Amendment speech rights while simultaneously protecting students from actual sex-based discrimination. This would also ensure that Title IX offices don’t get bogged down by frivolous or malicious reports that would inevitably bury and delay action on more serious cases.

When the Biden administration came in, its members sought to take much of what Obama listed in his “Dear Colleague” letters and march it through the formal rule-making process. This includes brazen expansions of the definition of sex. The new Rule broadens the definition of “sex” and states that discrimination on the basis of sex will also include discrimination based on “sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity.” In other words, you can no longer express your opinions on transgender ideology, the LGBTQ+ community, or abortion without getting reported for a Title IX violation. 

Section 106.2 redefines “sex-based harassment,” throwing out the aforementioned Davis standard that placed a high bar as to what kind of speech can be considered harassing conduct, and replaced it with language that is vague, overbroad, and actually uses the word “subjective” in the definition itself. A law cannot be subjective and applied fairly at the same time. 

The Biden Title IX Rule states that sex-based harassment must be “based on the totality of the circumstances, is subjectively and objectively offensive and is so severe or pervasive that it limits or denies a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from the recipient’s education program or activity.”

Here, the Biden administration changes “severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive” to “severe or pervasive.” Along with the inclusion of gender identity as a protected class, this means not using someone’s preferred pronoun is a reportable Title IX offense. This is compelled speech, and it is unconstitutional.

Further, the speech only has to “limit a person’s ability to benefit from….” Unlike the previous Rule’s “effectively denies a person equal access…” phrasing, this means anyone can file a Title IX claim, even when they have equal access to education, if they merely feel they cannot enjoy their class because, for example, a fellow student asked about Title IX compelling the use of gender affirmation language. 

Other countries like Canada already have similar laws regarding the use of pronouns. They now send their citizens to jail if they do not use the language the government demands of them. Biden’s Title IX Rule is the first step in that direction—the beginning of the end of free speech in America.

The post Biden’s New Title IX Rule is the Beginning of the End for Free Speech appeared first on The American Conservative.

National Conservatives saw an unlikely party leap to their defense amidst a buffoonish and unacceptable crackdown in Brussels. None other than their arch-rivals, the “Freedom Conservatives,” stepped up.

The Freedom Conservatives, an umbrella group who are broadly old fusionists in their outlook, opposed the cancellation of NatCons, while reminding them about their appeal to the principles of liberalism, open debate, freedom of speech, and reduced governmental powers. 

“Although Freedom Conservatives have many and profound disagreements with National Conservatives, we condemn any attempts by the government to hamper or extinguish the peaceable exercise of anyone’s fundamental rights to free speech, assembly, and association,” their statement noted. 

John Hood, a signatory to the statement and the President of the Pope Foundation, reminded me that NatCons also have an obligation towards bridge-building if they seek a genuine movement:

Any political movement broad enough to win elections and govern effectively will encompass individuals and institutions who disagree on some matters of principle or priority. Robust debate about such disagreements can be healthy, as long as it’s substantive and folks still share enough in common to work together. Over the past decade, however, I’ve seen these debates turn increasingly toxic. And what we share can’t just be progressivism as a common foe. That’s not enough. 

And that’s precisely why the FreeCons are reaching out in support of the NatCons: “Although FreeCons and NatCons differ on many issues, we ought to be able to agree on freedom of speech and the other foundational principles of a free society,” Hood said.

The European venue this year was in Brussels, capital of the European Union and seat of NATO. What transpired was downright absurd. Two venues were forced to cancel the conference under pressure from mobs, antifa, and the Socialist-party mayor of the precinct, Emir Kir. The third venue witnessed a massive police buildup—ironic in a city known for its inability to ever stop a terror attack or museum vandalism—but when they refused to shut down the conference, the police laid siege, refusing entry of people, food, and water. A British Member of Parliament, Miriam Cates, had to be escorted wearing a head-cover through a backdoor. 

That’s just one of the several examples of speech rights violation at the center of the European Union. Ultimately, after it spiraled into an international diplomatic incident, the Belgian supreme court reversed the order for the police siege and the conference was allowed to continue, with the Belgian prime minister tweeting why free speech should never have been violated. But by then, as the Economist noted, the damage to the reputation of the EU was already done. 

“It is the sad reality that an emergency legal challenge had to be mounted in order to peacefully assemble in the political center of Europe. How can Brussels claim to be the heart of Europe if its officials only allow one side of the European conversation to be heard?” Paul Coleman, International Executive Director of the Alliance Defending Freedom, told The American Conservative in an email. “What we have seen in Brussels is an overt attempt from authorities to censor and suppress free speech and ideas that they disagree with—tyranny at its finest.” 

He cited multiple speech right violations within the EU, including the high-profile cases of the Finnish Christian MP Päivi Räsänen and of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, a Catholic activist in the UK. “In this instance with NatCon, common sense and justice have prevailed,” he said. “But the battle to protect free speech throughout Europe is far from over.”

But the theoretical contradictions were visible this time, and are becoming increasingly hard to ignore. The left-wing mayor who tried to cancel the NatCon event tried to do so in the name of liberty and authority, and the NatCons appealed with card-carrying liberal principles of free speech.  

The National Conservatism movement is predicated on two fundamental pillars: first, that nation-states are the fundamental units of international relations, and they chart their courses independently; and, second, a broad opposition to the fusionist conservatism that has run the Anglo-American right since roughly the late 1960s to the present day. With the increased secularization of society and the lack of an overwhelming external secular-authoritarian threat in the USSR, the bonds of a 50-year period of social cohesion disintegrated. The NatCons therefore believe in a return to a more communitarian economy, a program of social cohesion and assimilation, and a return to more religious overtones in the social contract. 

So far, so good. The problem, of course, occasionally arises from the definitions of these terms. As Max Weber wrote in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, freedom of speech, for example, stems from a broadly Anglo-Protestant theological impulse, which also opposes increased economic communitarianism—increasingly an orthodoxy in the NatCon section of the right.

There are also other philosophical conflicts. NatCons in the last four years have opposed “foreign interventions,” “Covid tyranny” and lockdowns, and state-mandated vaccinations backed by penalties, but they supported school choice and defunding higher ed; at the same time, they rhetorically denigrate libertarians and fusionists. 

In foreign policy, that gets even more problematic. The Hungarians and the Poles, for example, are on the opposite side of the Ukrainian question, with the American NatCons falling firmly on the Hungarian side, and the British NatCons closer to the Poles. Outside Europe, Modi’s India, a potential ally and example for NatCons across the world, is comically opposed to the very Anglo foundation of the modern Indian state formed in the aftermath of British withdrawal. No one really knows where the NatCons fall on the question of free speech. 

These are not criticisms. Every movement has different subsets within it; part of the job of growing a movement is to seek common ground.

These questions will be increasingly important in an election year, as besieged left-wing forces in the government facing public opposition and hostility turn to the authoritarian use of state power to crush dissent in Europe, America, and potentially in a Labour-governed UK. (Note the Labour front bench cackling at the news of the attempted cancellation of the conference.)

“It is laughable that the Brussels thought police were sent out to shut down a conference of democratically elected politicians representing the views of millions of people. They clearly didn’t want to hear about how we can secure our borders and protect our citizens,” the current Member of Parliament and former British Conservative Home Secretary Suella Braverman told TAC, adding that “the more ridiculous their attempts to shut us down, the more cheered I am that we are winning the arguments.”

But, while Braverman is the last best Tory hope against a second Blairist assault on the UK, and at least somewhat identifies and understands the main cause of all Anglo-American social dysfunction, the Brussels episode highlights that arguments and debates in and of themselves are clearly not enough; political power and willingness to use that power towards democratic ends are also urgent and necessary. And that is perhaps the question that needs a better answer from any future conservative thought summits, whether organized by FreeCons, libertarians, fusionists, or NatCons. 

The reality is that Johnny Public doesn’t really care about theories of governance. He sees a practically open border and unlimited foreign aid to secure foreign borders. He also sees his voice being drowned in their local school boards, mind-numbing breakdown of inner cities, crime on the streets due to lax governance and a flawed punitive philosophy, massive inflation and deficit due to a bloated government, a particularly self-loathing and destructive education sector, and a political class that is indifferent to his cultural patrimony at best and antagonistic at worst. He sees increased taxes, but also decreased policing and broken roads and other primary services for which they pay tax.

Ultimately, however, the common enemy of the FreeCons and the NatCons is the same: an unelected political and bureaucratic class, ever-growing and self-sustaining—an edifice, a superstructure, a governance by swarm, as Michael Brendan Dougherty once noted. Democracy, in any form, whether populist, statist, nationalist, or localist, loses all meaning against that, as the swarm has no accountability and no hierarchy. 

Perhaps conservatives should stop bickering among themselves and recognize that reality. 

The post ‘Freedom Conservatives’ Defend Free Speech—Even for National Conservatives appeared first on The American Conservative.

Michelle Herczeg

Major DEI fail.

Who vetted this agent?

As previously reported, an armed Secret Service agent assigned to Kamala Harris got into a physical fight with other agents at Joint Base Andrews on Monday morning.

According to reports, the problem agent, identified as Michelle Herczeg, began acting aggressively, speaking gibberish and shouting incoherently at other agents while they were near the lounge at JBA.

Herczeg reportedly threw menstrual pads at another agent before getting into a brawl a JBA.

RealClearPolitics reported that Herczeg grabbed a male agent’s personal cell phone and began deleting apps on it before she completely melted down.

Agent Herczeg had to be physically restrained and her firearm was taken away from her. She was handcuffed and taken to the hospital in an ambulance.

“Herczeg then chest-bumped and shoved her superior, then tackled him and punched him. The agents involved in restraining Herczeg were especially concerned because she still had her gun in the holster. They wrestled her to the ground, took the gun from her, cuffed her, and then removed her from the terminal,” RealClearPolitics reported.

One other agent was also hospitalized.

Kamala Harris was at the Naval Observatory at the time of the fight.

The New York Post reported that agent Herzceg previously filed a $ 1 million gender discrimination lawsuit against the city of Dallas while she was a police officer.

RealClearPolitics reported:

Several sources in the Secret Service community identified the agent who physically attacked her superior as Michelle Herczeg. The altercation occurred at approximately 9 a.m. at Joint Base Andrews, the home base for Air Force One and Air Force Two, the call signs of the Boeing aircraft used by the president and vice president. Harris was at the U.S. Naval Observatory at the time of the incident, and it did not delay her travel, said agency spokesman Anthony Guglielmi.

Herczeg showed up at the terminal and began acting erratically, grabbing another senior agent’s personal phone and deleting applications on it, according to two sources familiar with the matter. The other agent, a shift leader, was able to recover his phone and then acted as if nothing had happened.

But Herczeg’s bizarre behavior didn’t stop. She then began mumbling to herself, hid behind curtains, and started throwing items, including menstrual pads, at an agent, telling him that he would need them later to save another agent and telling her peers that they were “going to burn in hell and needed to listen to God,” a source told RealClearPolitics.

The post DEI FAIL: Secret Service Agent Assigned to Kamala Harris Threw Menstrual Pads at Other Agents Before Getting Into Brawl at Joint Base Andrews appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

FOX News went into a diner in Pennsylvania this morning and spoke to a group of veterans, including a man who served in WWII.

The vets were asked specifically about the anti-Israel and anti-American protests happening on college campuses. All of the men that they spoke to registered absolute disgust with what’s happening.

One vet wondered why law enforcement is being forced to allow it to happen in some places. Another vet suggests deportations.

FOX News reports:

Veterans disgusted by anti-Israel protests, flag-burning: ‘Disgrace’ to America

A group of U.S. military veterans shared their disgust over the wave of anti-Israel protests spreading across college campuses.

“They’re a disgrace to the United States of America. Burning flags, talking against the country. They’re not happy here? Deport them like anybody else if they’re not an American. It’s a shame and a disgrace,” a World War II veteran named George said on “Fox & Friends” Thursday.

“These veterans died and got injured and everything else, so they could protest against the United States of America and burn flags and everything else. Total disgrace.”

After protests rocked Columbia and Yale campuses, demonstrations broke out at the University of Texas-Austin and the University of Southern California Wednesday…

“They’re all nasty, nasty people. They’ve got nothing better to do with their lives than to say that. It’s so disgusting,” another veteran told Lawrence Jones at the Eagle Diner in Warminster, Pa., about 30 miles north of Philadelphia.

Watch the segment below:

Millions of people across the country feel the same way these men do. What we are seeing is a total disgrace, and it is disgusting that so many schools are allowing it to continue.

The post Veterans in Pennsylvania Disgusted by Anti-Israel and Anti-American Protests on College Campuses: ‘Total Disgrace’ (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Joe Biden and the Democrat party get special treatment from about 99 percent of the media but apparently, it still isn’t enough.

People at the Biden White House are angry at the New York Times for not being loyal enough. They actually think that the incredibly liberal newspaper is too biased against them and too nice to Trump.

This claim is positively delusional. The media bends over backwards to not report negative news about Biden while demonizing Trump constantly.

What this really shows is that people in the Biden camp are sensitive and scared.

NewsBusters has details:

The comical tale of liberal eating themselves began with a seemingly innocuous mix-up between a Times reporter not on the White House beat being unaware with how to attribute quotes from a junior White House press aide becoming a hissy fit that resulted in the Times temporarily being kicked off the administration’s “‘tier one’ email list for background information about various briefings and other materials”.

“Biden’s closest aides had come to see the Times as arrogant, intent on setting its own rules and unwilling to give Biden his due. Inside the paper’s D.C. bureau, the punitive response seemed to typify a press operation that was overly sensitive and determined to control coverage of the president,” Stokols explained.

Stokols further summarized his tome as based on “interviews with two dozen people on both sides” about “the relationship between the Democratic president and the country’s newspaper of record — for years the epitome of a liberal press in the eyes of conservatives” that’s become “remarkably tense, beset by misunderstandings, grudges and a general lack of trust.”

Not surprisingly, Team Biden must think they’re owed Obama-like snuff pieces seeing as how, in their mind, The Times has “fall[en] short in a make-or-break moment for American democracy, stubbornly refusing to adjust its coverage” away from “impartial neutrality, often blurring the asymmetries between former President Donald Trump and Biden when it comes to their perceived flaws” when America itself is at stake.

Again, this is delusional thinking. If we had an honest media, Biden would be ten points lower in the polls.

The post REPORT: The Biden White House is Angry at the Liberal New York Times for Not Being Loyal Enough appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Joe Biden and Obama are going to hold a fundraising event in June with liberal Hollywood celebrities, their most loyal constituency.

George Clooney and Julia Roberts are reportedly in talks to appear at the event.

Democrats are trying to repeat the success they had with a fundraiser in New York City featuring Stephen Colbert and other celebs.

Axios reports:

Scoop: Biden, Obama aiming for glitzy fundraiser in L.A.

The Biden campaign is in talks with former President Obama about appearing with President Biden at a star-studded Los Angeles fundraiser in mid-June, according to people familiar with the plan.

George Clooney and Jeffrey Katzenberg are being lined up as hosts, the sources said.

Why it matters: It’s set to be the Hollywood sequel — currently with just two presidents — of the “three presidents” show in New York City that featured Biden, Obama and former President Clinton last month.

That event brought in $26 million for Biden’s re-election effort, setting a fundraising record for Democrats in a single evening, according to Biden aides.
Given Katzenberg’s role as a co-chair of Biden’s campaign — and his deep connections in the movie industry — Democrats are optimistic that the Biden-Obama appearance, plus a smattering of stars, will lead another historic fundraising haul.
Other big names, including Julia Roberts, also might attend, according to people familiar with the matter.

This is so predictable.

Alternate Headline

Biden campaign double downs on leftists hollywood types for campaign funds

Scoop: Biden, Obama aiming for glitzy fundraiser in L.A. https://t.co/pb3eSjq6bt

— Sean Spicer (@seanspicer) April 25, 2024

These Hollywood Elites have to fundraise because nobody else will donate to Biden!#Trump2024

George Clooney Teaming Up with Obama for Biden Hollywood Fundraiser, Julia Roberts Might Attend https://t.co/B45h32Sc55

— Frank (@MegaMAGA7631) April 26, 2024

And they wonder why Americans don’t like Hollywood anymore:
“The last time Biden stopped by the Hollywood ATM was in February when he attended a swanky Los Angeles fundraiser thrown by Democrat megadonors Haim Saban and Casey Wasserman. …”https://t.co/lWD8DeozJ1

— Farm Lady (@farm_lady22) April 25, 2024

Hollywood wasn’t able to save Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016. Do they really think they’ll do any better with Biden?

The post OF COURSE: Biden and Obama to Hold June Fundraising Event With George Clooney and Other Hollywood Liberals appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Supreme Court on Thursday heard oral arguments on Trump’s presidential immunity claim in Jack Smith’s January 6 case in DC after a federal appeals court ruled Trump was not immune from prosecution.

Trump’s lawyers previously argued that Trump is immune from federal prosecution for alleged ‘crimes’ committed while he served as US President.

At issue before the Supreme Court is whether a US President is immune from criminal prosecution for official (not personal) acts.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked DOJ prosecutor Michael Dreeben (former Mueller goon) why Barack Obama was never charged for drone strikes against civilians.

“How about President Obama’s drone strikes?” Kavanaugh asked Michael Dreeben.

Dreeben defended Obama’s drone strikes that killed weddinggoers and innocent civilians.

“So the office of legal counsel looked at this very carefully and determined number one that the federal murder statute does apply to the Executive Branch, but the president wasn’t personally carrying out the strike, but the aiding and abetting laws are broad and determined that a public authority exception is built into statutes and that applied particularly to the murder statute that talks about unlawful killing did not apply to the drone strike,” Dreeben said.

Dreeben could have saved a lot of time and just said that Barack Obama has Democrat privilege.

AUDIO:

Justice Kavanaugh asks DOJ Lawyer if Barack Obama should be prosecuted over his use of drone strikes against civilians pic.twitter.com/7yBMmQMMZM

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) April 25, 2024

John Sauer, a Missouri-based attorney for Trump, gave an opening statement on Thursday and argued that Jack Smith’s indictment uses vague statutes to criminalize “core authority” of the presidency.

Sauer argued that immunity protects past presidents such as George W. Bush and Barack Obama from being prosecuted for crimes they committed while in federal office.

He also brought up Obama’s drone strikes against civilians.

AUDIO:

The post Justice Kavanaugh Asks Jack Smith’s Prosecutor Why Barack Obama Was Never Charged For Drone Strikes Against Civilians (AUDIO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

As our country is being invaded our government’s focus is on sending your hard earned money to foreign countries to secure every border in the world, besides ours.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported:

Joe Biden on Wednesday signed the foreign aid package which allocates billions of dollars to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.

The Senate late Tuesday approved a massive $95 billion emergency foreign aid package with no U.S. border security.

A group of RINOs joined Democrats to support the bill. The measure passed by a vote of 79 to 18.

The passing of the bill saw 48 Democrats joined by 31 Republicans in favor of the foreign aid efforts. However, 15 Republicans broke ranks to vote against the package, with three Democrats joining in opposition.

The finalized bill encompasses extensive provisions:

$47.7 billion through the Defense Department to support Ukraine’s military with training, equipment, weapons, and logistical aid.
$13.4 billion to restock U.S. military equipment sent to Ukraine.
$20.5 billion for U.S. Armed Forces support in Europe.
$9.5 billion in economic aid to Ukraine as a forgivable loan.
Added to this is 15 billion** in military aid designated for Israel and **9 billion in humanitarian assistance for Gaza and other conflict zones, a point of contention for conservative Republicans concerned about the funds being intercepted by Hamas.
The bill also allots $8 billion to counter Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific and introduces legislation that would force the divestment or ban of TikTok in the United States.

“It’s a good day for America,” Biden said after he signed the foreign aid package with no US border security.

Biden having the audacity to claim that sending nearly $100b in tax payer money to the rest of the world while our own citizens suffer is nothing short of a slap across the face. This has become something of a public humiliation ritual as we are extorted out of our money and then forced to watch as they give it to literally anyone else.

This is what America last looks like.

The post Victor Reacts: $95B to Foreign Countries- America Last (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

A massive fire consumed the Oceanside Pier in San Diego, California on Thursday afternoon.

The fire began around 3 pm local time.

The building at the end of the pier is vacant. It used to be a Ruby’s Diner, but it shut down three years ago after strict Covid pandemic lockdowns destroyed California thanks to Democrats.

According to NBC 7 San Diego, the city of Oceanside last year spent $5.5 million upgrading the pipes and electrical systems on the pier.

NBC 7 San Diego reported:

A massive plume of smoke quickly filled the sky, and two fire-fighting boats arrived on scene shooting water cannons at the structure at the end of the pier. A lone lifeguard vehicle posted up at the foot of pier, with a long fire hose, possibly two, running the length of the pier.

Although smoke obscured the scene, the building at the end of the pier was burning furiously. The structure was once the site of the Ruby’s Restaurant, which has stood empty since the business closed three years ago. As SkyRanger 7 arrived overhead, smoke was blowing onshore the entire length of the structure.

“The Oceanside Fire Department is currently engaged in fighting a fire on the Oceanside Pier,” OFD tweeted out at 3:14 p.m. “We are asking all citizens to please stay away from the immediate area.”

At 4 o’clock, a third vessel had joined the fight as well as a U.S. Coast Guard cutter, but smoke continued to pour out all sides of the two-story building as well as beneath the pier, with only a few flames actually visible. Over at the coast, people had started to congregate to watch the conflagration, with some posing for selfies with the historic structure aflame behind them.

WATCH:

BREAKING.

Massive fire is DESTROYING the historic Oceanside Pier in California.

“The Oceanside Fire Department is currently engaged in fighting a fire on the Oceanside Pier,” OFD posted. “We are asking all citizens to please stay away from the immediate area.”

A third ship… pic.twitter.com/AHPjOtiQzZ

— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) April 25, 2024

Additional footage of the blaze:

#BREAKING: Firefighters are battling a massive fire at the Oceanside Pier with evacuations currently underway⁰⁰#Oceanside | #California

Currently, multiple firefighting units have been dispatched to respond to a second-alarm fire raging at Oceanside Harbor Beach Pier as… pic.twitter.com/EtEuBEF29y

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) April 25, 2024

More on this breaking story from NBC 7:

The post JUST IN: Massive Fire Consumes Oceanside Pier in San Diego (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said the quiet part out loud late last month before announcing that 18 individuals were indicted by an Arizona grand jury in the latest election interference witch hunt against President Trump and his allies.

While speaking about abortion with MSNBC three weeks ago and claiming that Republicans will enact a federal abortion ban, Kris Mayes declared, “We absolutely have to get President Biden reelected.”

It can be recalled that lawless Attorney General Kris Mayes previously vowed not to enforce any current Arizona abortion laws if she is elected. She later doubled down on this promise, saying, “We will never prosecute a doctor, a nurse, a pharmacist, a midwife, a woman, or a friend helping a woman for abortion care,” regardless of what law is on the books.

However, as The Gateway Pundit reported, Kris Mayes, who stole her election from Republican Abe Hamadeh by 280 votes, announced the charges on Wednesday afternoon for the non-crime of questioning an election. She defended her witch hunt and the curious timing of the indictment – just months before the 2024 general election.

The charges include nine counts of conspiracy, fraudulent schemes and artifices, fraudulent schemes and practices, and forgery. “Defendants and unindicted coconspirators schemed to prevent the lawful transfer of the presidency to keep Unindicted Coconspirator 1 in office against the will of Arizona’s voters,” the indictment alleges.

Make no mistake, the charges are a warning shot to anyone who may want to challenge the 2024 election.

See the full list of 18 defendants facing felony charges in Arizona here:

FULL LIST: Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, Christina Bobb, John Eastman Among Those Charged in Democrat Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes’ Witch Hunt Grand Jury Indictment

On March 30, Mayes told MSNBC, “We absolutely have to get President Biden reelected,” and yesterday, she showed how far she is willing to go.

Watch below:

Mayes: As my colleague from Massachusetts just mentioned, we absolutely have to get President Biden reelected because one of my fears is, despite the fact that Republicans said they wanted to send this back to the States, for states to decide, I think there’s a real movement in the sort of extreme elements

Kris Mayes, the Attorney General of Arizona, went on MSNBC on March 30 to say this:

“We absolutely have to get President Biden reelected.”

Three weeks later she weaponized her office by indicting seven Trump attorneys and 11 Republican electors.
pic.twitter.com/q3uklqspA4

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) April 25, 2024

The post WATCH: “We Absolutely Have to Get President Biden Reelected” – Leftist Arizona AG Kris Mayes Says The Quiet Part Out Loud Before Announcing Grand Jury Indictment Against Trump 2020 Alternate Electors appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.