This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

For years already, American corporations have been pressured by pro-LGBT activists to join in their ideology.

The promise is good publicity in that community if they do, negative publicity if they don't.

And that word often has come through the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Quality Index, which rates companies by their submission to that agenda.

The agenda was stepped in up the last few years with the "diversity, equity, inclusion" agenda with which many companies were confronted, a move that in recent weeks and months has been fading as companies back away from the extremism it entails.

Among the companies that have been turning away are Tractor Supply, John Deer, Harley Davidson and Lowes.

Now Ford has not only joined that group, it has dropped a bombshell on DEI promoters and LGBT activists: It no longer will participate in HRC's annual index.

According to a report from Fox Business, "anti-woke activist and filmmaker Robby Starbuck, who has been leading a campaign exposing major corporations' woke policies, reported on X on Wednesday that he was in the middle of an investigation of Ford when the company sent him documentation indicating that it had made some changes."

The letter Starbucks posted, from Ford CEO Jim Farley, included Farley's comments to employees that "the external and legal environment related to political and social issues continues to evolve."

That's required "a fresh look at our policies and practices," Farley said.

The bottom line, Farley said, is that the company will not use quotas in hiring, will prioritize its resources for business goals "versus publicly commenting on the many polarizing issues of the day," and that its Employee Resource Groups are all open to all employees.

Further, he said, the company no longer will be part of the Equality Index.

The report said Ford confirmed the authenticity of the letter to Fox Business, explaining, "The communication to our global employees speaks for itself. We have nothing further to add."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Texas just days ago confirmed that it has removed more than a million ineligible voters from its voter registration rolls.

And an election integrity watchdog now is pushing other states to address problems with their records as well.

The Washington Stand reports that Texas Gov. Greg Abbott confirmed "noncitizens, deceased voter and people who moved to another state" have been deleted.

That means they no longer can vote in Texas, short of a move back.

But with the November election not even three months away, J. Christian Adams of the Public Interest Legal Foundation wants other states to make at least the same effort.

Or else they could end up in court.

"[W]hat if these one million ineligible voters were not removed from the voter rolls in Texas?" he commented during an interview on Washington Watch. "I will tell you that that would be called Michigan. … [W]e've been in litigation against Michigan because Secretary [of State] Jocelyn Benson won't remove at least 2[7],000 dead voters from the voter rolls. … We're now in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals against her. … [That] 27,000 [number] was only looking at people over the age of 70. So if you died at the age of 40 or 50 or 55 or 60, even in Michigan, we wouldn't have necessarily made that part of our lawsuit. So it's clearly more than 27,000."

Adams explained Texas is among the leaders in "making sure that the elections are clean."

"For example, they have a law there that if you just go out and register voters, you have to get training, you have to get deputized, and you can't engage in bad conduct. And of course, the Left challenged this law in court, and it was upheld," he said.

Nor, he said during the interview, are there grounds for leftist talking points that pursuing election integrity is "voter suppression."

"I always like to point out that 'suppression' is a fake word — it's not in any federal law. It's a made-up word by the Left … to attempt to blend the legal with the illegal. So if you have voter ID [laws], it's 'voter suppression.' If you clean voter rolls, it's 'voter suppression.' And it sounds very nefarious, [but] it doesn't exist in the law. What does exist is intimidation, coercion, and threats. There's no such thing as voter suppression."

He continued, "[S]tates that are cleaning their voter rolls are following federal law. States have an obligation to follow federal law and have a reasonable maintenance program that removes the dead and people who moved away. And kudos to [states like] Texas, Florida, [and] Ohio that have good laws in place and good practices to make our elections secure."

The report explained Adams highlighted Nevada as a problem that remains.

"It breaks my heart to see how bad things have gotten in Nevada, because you have automatic mail voting … where everybody on the voter rolls, even if they don't ask, gets a ballot mailed to them at their last known address, and those ballots are going out by the hundreds of thousands without request. And what we have found is that Nevada has lots of commercial addresses where those ballots are going improperly — strip clubs, casinos, bars, vacant lots, liquor stores. A Sonic drive-in in Las Vegas had a purported registered voter. We visited these places. … And what we did is we sued Clark County and also Washoe County, which is Reno. But Clark thankfully took steps to fix this problem."

Colorado is another state where leftists have set up a system for mail voting, where ballots are dispatched en masse.

He said sending ballots to all, including those "not alive anymore" can push the voting outcome.

"You had a U.S. Senate race with Adam Laxalt [that] was decided by only 7,000 votes. In that same race, we knew that 95,000 ballots went unaccounted for. We don't know what happened to them. Garbage cans, dumpsters, whatever. And so it's just the wrong way to be picking leaders by automatically mailing ballots to every single person on the list," he said.

He pointed out that his organization has 19 active lawsuits over election integrity.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A watchdog is warning Americans that "Deep State CIA agency trolls" are snooping on them – for nothing more than sharing First Amendment-protected content.

That's the verdict from Judicial Watch chief Tom Fitton, whose organization reported getting five pages of documentation from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security.

And they reveal CISA is "trolling on social media and reporting on alleged 'domestic violent extremism.'"

He said, "These documents show how the Deep State CIA agency trolls social media to snoop on Americans. The woke protocol sweeping the federal bureaucracies allows CISA snoopers to target individuals who are supposedly sharing First Amendment-protected content."

The organization said it got documents as part of a Freedom of Information Act fight that revealed "heavily redacted records" confirming elected officials just before and after the 2020 election flagged online comments deemed "misinformation" and sent it to the Center for Internet Security, CISA, and more.

What was confirmed was a federal-state censorship coordination during the 2020 election.

Other documentation previously obtained by Judicial Watch showed a CISA partnership with the Election Integrity Partnership and others, as well as details of a "close collaboration between CISA and EIP for "real-time narrative tracking."

The details sought in the FOIA process included CISA communications regarding threats to the nation's electrical supplies.

CISA sent multiple emails on the subject.

The emerging documents show that a "threat" identified as "Sadako Poker" was identified as "an 'armchair revolutionary'" and "a scan of their Twitter page found the following two threads which contained threatening information. I was not able to determine Sadako Poker's exact philosophy or affiliation, they referenced arguing with racists, but also shared potentially racist memes."

Those discussions referenced comments that bringing down nine substations would cause society to collapse take down the power grid and blame Antifa.

A report on a second individual's comments also revealed, "Not sure exactly individuals' philosophical affiliation, perhaps acerbic skeptic, seems to dislike left and right. Seems to spend a fair amount of time on race."

That individual commented on a fragile, aging infrastructure and damage to substations.

"These documents show how the Deep State CIA agency trolls social media to snoop on Americans," said Fitton. "The woke protocol sweeping the federal bureaucracies allows CISA snoopers to target individuals who are supposedly sharing First Amendment-protected content."

Judicial Watch has its own experience with government message controls.

"In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden's corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled 'Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,' was falsely determined to be "election misinformation' and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch's YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton," the organization reported.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Cleveland Clinic, named in a civil rights complaint for alleged racial discrimination, now has removed all traces of its "Minority Men's Health Center" from its web pages, according to a report from the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty.

WILL was representing an organization called Do No Harm when it filed a recent complaint.

Now, however, there appear to be changes in the circumstances.

"We believe this move signals that Cleveland Clinic is taking seriously our challenge against its racially discriminatory patient programming," WILL confirmed.

WILL lawyer Cara Tolliver explained, "We are glad to see that Cleveland Clinic is taking steps to remove racial discrimination from its patient programming. While racial identity politics are often problematic wherever they occur, in healthcare, the problem can engender serious stakes, including life and death matters. When it comes to healthcare, providers should be simply extending care efforts to all patients who need it, regardless of their race and under the law —not relying on racial stereotypes as a proxy for legitimate health risks."

Do No Harm official Jared Ross said, "This takedown is an initial win but Do No Harm would like to receive confirmation that patients of all races and ethnicities are now welcomed for treatment at the two Cleveland Clinic programs we highlighted in our complaint.

"Do No Harm will continue working to eliminate racial bias and political ideology from all aspects of medicine."

WILL and DNH earlier this month filed a federal civil rights complaint with the Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Health and Human Services.

It challenged two discriminatory patient programs at the Ohio-based health facility, its "Minority Stroke Program" and the "Minority Men's Health Center."

Both programs aim to address stroke, diabetes, men's health conditions, mental health issues, and other medical conditions, the WILL report on the dispute said.

They tout "a range of benefits from disease prevention and treatment to specialized providers, transportation assistance, prescription assistance, support groups, and education events."

However, the special programs "discriminate against patients based on race and are racially motivated to provide services to some in a different manner from those provided to others," meaning that "Cleveland Clinic's programs violate the anti-discrimination provisions of Title VI and the Affordable Care Act."

WILL reported the men's center pages were completely removed from the clinic, and no mention of the program now is found there.

WND reported when the fight developed that the complaint charged, "Cleveland Clinic may not implement racial preferences, or programs that are racially motivated, to provide services or benefits differently from those provided to others."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

There's an organization called the World Professional Association for Transgender Health that promotes that particular ideology, the scientific impossibility that men can become women or vice versa.

It even offers "guidelines" for imposing such chemical alterations and body mutilations on children.

Now members of Congress are investigating whether the Biden-Harris administration tried to influence that group to remove age minimums for those surgical body invasions.

The Washington Stand reports it is the House Oversight Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services whose members are reviewing the Biden-Harris role in "shaping guidelines for the provision of gender transition procedures to both adults and minors."

The New York Times previously confirmed federal Health and Human Services officials two years ago "lobbied" WPATH to take away age minimums.

Rep. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., chief of the committee, said in a letter to HHS, "We are concerned that HHS officials, acting in their official capacity, inappropriately applied pressure for change to international pediatric medical standards."

Cited were Rachel Levine, an official at HHS, a man who identifies as a woman, and his aide, Sarah Boateng, as "key actors involved in pressuring WPATH, according to email records disclosed in a court filing."

The leftist organization had proposed in 2021 "Standards of Care" for such procedures, and had recommended giving cross-sex hormones to children as young as 14, mastectomies to those as young as 16, and genital surgeries or hysterectomies at 17.

The Stand reported then Levine and Boateng asked that age minimums be removed, over political issues, not medical, the report said WPATH emails confirmed.

"According to one email, Boateng 'is confident, based on the rhetoric she is hearing in D.C., and from what we have already seen, that these specific listings of ages, under 18, will result in devastating legislation for trans care. She wonders if the specific ages can be taken out,'" the report said.

Another charged that Levine was "very concerned" that specifying ages "will affect access to care for trans youth and maybe adults."

"Health care" is what pro-transgender radicals use to described the chemicals given, and surgeries done to patients.

Ultimately, WPATH released its document without those age recommendations.

Transgender promoters in the U.S. often have used WPATH citations to promote their ideology, arguing that gender "procedures" are in accordance with WPATH "standards" for care.

The report noted, "The publication of these emails provoked criticism at the Biden-Harris administration's apparent political interference in medical recommendations. According to a nationwide study, in 2022 nearly 80% of Americans opposed gender transition procedures for minors."

McClain wrote, "The Biden administration's advocacy for expanding the pool of vulnerable children subjected to life-altering procedures they may later regret is reprehensible. Emails indicating that this advocacy was done for political advantage — possible to satisfy extremist elements of its base — is [sic] even more outrageous."

The House subcommittee also wants to look at HHS records on the issue, and is requiring the agency to turn over relevant documents and communications involving WPATH.

A congressional letter to HHS said, "The committee expects your full cooperation with these requests. Under your purview, HHS has not cooperated in good faith with the committee's oversight of HHS and its subagencies. … HHS and its subagencies have been recalcitrant in responding and producing documents …. It is unacceptable for HHS to interfere with congressional investigations by refusing and delaying cooperation with the committee's oversight."

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi admitted she "totally failed" in her responsibilities for securing the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot, the New York Post reported. The newly released footage was taken in the aftermath of the unrest.

House Republicans made the videos public Wednesday after HBO turned over the footage to the Committee on Administration which continues an informal examination of the event. The California Democrat's daughter, Alexandra Pelosi, captured the footage while filming a documentary about her mother.

Failures leading up to that day led supporters of former President Donald Trump to breach the Capitol. Nancy Pelosi scoffed at the notion that they assumed Trump's supporters would "act civilized" when planning security for the day.

"We have totally failed. We have to take some responsibility for not holding the security accountable for what could have happened," Pelosi admitted during the footage.

Startling Admission

Pelosi has spent the last three years hammering Trump about his alleged involvement in the so-called insurrection. Although her ire is reserved for the former president in many of the clips, Pelosi is often seen pointing out the glaring failures of her own office.

"How many times did the members ask, ‘Are we prepared? Are we prepared?'" Pelosi said in one of the clips as she was being driven away from the area.

"We’re not prepared for the worst. We’re calling the National Guard. Now? They should have been here to start out," Pelosi said to then-chief of staff Terri McCollough. "We have responsibility, Terri. We did not have any accountability for what was going on there, and we should have. This is ridiculous," she added.

Pelosi lamented that the National Guard wasn't activated. "You’re gonna ask me in the middle of the thing, when they’ve already breached the inaugural stuff, ‘Should we call the Capitol Police?’ I mean the National Guard. Why weren’t the National Guard there to begin with?" she said

"It’s not a question of how they had … they don’t know! They clearly didn’t know, and I take responsibility for not having them just prepare for more," Pelosi claimed in the clip. Other reports show that Trump ordered thousands of guardsmen to be deployed, but his request was denied.

Attacks on Trump Supporters

Pelosi didn't take too long before she turned her rage to Trump and his supporters. "It’s stupid. They thought they had what? They thought these people would act civilized? They thought these people gave a damn? What is that is missing here in terms of anticipation," she continued.

One of the most telling aspects of the new footage is how Pelosi began crafting her attack on Trump using the day's events almost immediately. "I just feel sick for what he did to the Capitol and to the country today," Pelosi said of Trump night progressed into day.

"He’s gotta pay a price for that," Pelosi added. She would go on to admonish an official calling for Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund to resign, saying that the "focus has to be on the president," whom she'd later say was "a domestic enemy in the White House."

"I just feel sick."

Never-before-seen documentary footage shows then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Jan. 6 and reacting to the aftermath of the U.S. Capitol riot.

In these excerpts of the footage, which was turned over to Congress by HBO and obtained by CBS News, Pelosi is seen… pic.twitter.com/hQzXXU57u8

— CBS News (@CBSNews) August 29, 2024

Before much information was available, Pelosi was already crafting her narrative about Trump. She has spearheaded the effort to smear him as an insurrectionist in the years since, and this video footage shows that she intended to do so all along.

President Biden vowed to keep "fighting" for illegal immigrants Tuesday after a federal judge blocked his sweeping amnesty plan. 

The program, called "Keeping Families Together," would have granted deportation protection, work permits, green cards, and a path to citizenship to half a million illegal migrants married to U.S. citizens.

Biden's amnesty blocked

Biden announced the program in June, on the 12th anniversary of President Obama's unlawful DACA program. Like DACA, Biden's amnesty program shields illegal immigrants from deportation without any action from Congress.

The program was challenged by 16 Republican states who said it would encourage more illegal immigration, to their detriment. Texas attorney general Ken Paxton (R) hailed the temporary block from judge J. Campbell Barker as a victory for the rule of law.

"This is just the first step. We are going to keep fighting for Texas, our country, and the rule of law," Paxton said.

Former Donald Trump adviser Stephen Miller, of America First Legal, led the Republicans' challenge. Miller said the actual number of migrants who stand to benefit from the program is closer to 1 million.

In his defiant response to the court' ruling, Biden fretted that deporting illegal migrants married to Americans would cause "needless" suffering.

"That ruling is wrong," Biden said. "These families should not be needlessly separated. They should be able to stay together, and my Administration will not stop fighting for them."

Biden steps on the message

Biden's pledge to "fight" for illegal immigrants contradicts his party's recent adoption of tough-on-the-border rhetoric ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

Vice president Kamala Harris, the Democrats' presidential candidate, is attempting to coopt Donald Trump's signature policy of building a border wall - after roughly 10 million illegal crossings under Biden and Harris.

In his response to the court's ruling, Biden - who blocked Trump's wall on the first day of the Biden-Harris presidency - pledged to "fight to secure our border and fix our broken immigration system."

Still, Biden lamented that illegal immigrants would be living "in fear" after the court's ruling.

"They’ll be forced to either leave their families in America, or live in the shadows in constant fear of deportation,” he said.

Biden's angry reaction to this commonsense court ruling shows where his party's priorities actually are, despite their recent "border security" messaging.

For Biden, these migrants are future Democratic voters, and it grieves him to see their "path to citizenship" disrupted.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

In today's "depraved" America there are "corrupt politicians, dishonest journalists and media outlets, broken social institutions, immoral religious leaders, unconstitutional government programs and policies," and more, according to a new report on the nation's beliefs.

"The depth of the depravity is shocking," explains the American Worldview Inventory No. 4 from the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University.

"The deterioration of this once-great nation begs the fundamental question: How did we get here? What happened to so quickly introduce new philosophies of life and ways of living that radically depart from the historical Judeo-Christian moorings and consensus of America?" it notes.

And, according to veteran researcher George Barna, "The indisputable cultural decline is a direct result of the spiritual collapse of Christianity in the nation."

He's chief of research at the CRC, and his conclusions align with the oft-cited sermon illustration that when darkness is overtaking a society, the darkness is not to blame; it's only acting in its nature. The problem is with the absence of light.

The center's report said research now shows that "much of this steep cultural decline flows from the dramatic transformation in the evangelical community of the United States in the past 30 years. In reality, evangelicals are far fewer in number than typically reported, often are far less biblical in their thinking than one might think, and tend to vote in far fewer numbers than expected."

In fact, evangelicals choose lifestyles that are largely similar to that of their neighbors, who are not.

"Surprisingly, most evangelicals do not possess a biblical worldview—only about one-third do. In fact, the data strongly suggests that evangelicals are more likely to be shaped by the culture around them than they are to influence or 'evangelize' it," the report confirms.

Defined by the National Association of Evangelicals, such people are those "who recognize their sinful life, rely upon Jesus Christ for their redemption, and receive practical life guidance and wisdom from the Bible in their quest to live under the lordship of Jesus."

While media reports claim that anywhere from 25% to 40% of American adults are evangelicals, the CRC report said those figures are suspect, because they are based on self-reporting.

The report said the American Worldview Inventory 2024 suggests only 10% of adults qualify as evangelicals, using survey data consistent with the NAE description of evangelicals.

Members of that group actually are making lifestyle choices that are "significantly different than those of the non-evangelical population," as only 3% identify as LGBTQ, they are less likely to be recovering addicts, they are much less likely to have been part of an abortion, and more likely to be located in southern states.

Nine of 10 believe "God is the all-knowing, all-powerful, just, and perfect Creator of the universe who still rules the world today; God is the basis of all truth, and those truths are conveyed to us through the Bible; the purpose of life is to fully know, love, and serve God with all your heart and soul, mind and strength; the universe was created by God; Jesus Christ is an important guide for their life; that Satan exists—he is real and influential; all humans are born into sin and can only escape the consequences of sin through Jesus Christ," the report said.

But the report explained some differences:

A large share of the theologically-defined evangelical segment rejects a number of perspectives popular within other worldviews. One example is the view held by Secular Humanists, Wiccans, and Satanists, among others, that "as long as you do no harm to others, you can do whatever you want." While half of non-evangelicals have adopted such thinking, it is common to just one out of five evangelicals. In like manner, three-fourths of evangelicals dismiss the popular idea that animals, plants, water, and the wind all have a unique spirit.

That notion is embraced by almost six out of 10 adults who attend an evangelical church. Seven out of 10 adults who are not theologically-defined evangelicals—a group that is a full 90% of the nation's adult population—adopts this view. Beliefs about absolute moral truth are pivotal for any society. While evangelicals are far from monolithic on this point—and the disagreement on this matter within the evangelical camp is a matter of grave concern—about seven out of 10 evangelicals reject the idea that truth is subjective and individual.

However, almost half of the adults attending evangelical churches (44%) believe that there is no absolute moral truth that is pertinent to everyone in all situations. It is even more dire among the non-evangelical public: Just one out of every four people (24%) in that vast population reject the idea that moral truth is always subjective and conditional.

The report noted the troubling contradiction involves the part of the Christian community that embraces core biblical teachings but still fails to have a Christ-like philosophy.

"Part of the explanation lies in the fact that a biblical worldview demands a coherent spiritual perspective that results in a lifestyle robustly aligned with those beliefs. It is one thing to say you believe the Bible is God's word, and that it is true and relevant, but something else altogether to possess a comprehensive understanding of what the Bible says and consistently put those beliefs into practice."

It explained, "The study instead reveals that while evangelicals often get the 'big picture' of Christianity, they struggle to apply core principles to everyday situations, and are too often victims of catchy slogans and feel-good behaviors promoted by a culture propelled by competing worldviews."

But the failings are evident, it said, as "millions of evangelicals, do not vote (a practice of every good citizen and those seeking to serve their community); believe the animist and Eastern mystical perspective that that animals, plants, the wind, and water have unique spirits; do not pay much, if any, attention to news about politics and government that affects our lives; and who read the Bible on occasion, but not on a daily basis, even though the Bible encourages us to immerse ourselves in God's words to us."

It further warned about the responsibility held by Christians.

"Contrary to the media's depiction of the politics represented by people in evangelical churches, just one-third are very likely to vote in the 2024 general election, only half are consistently conservative in their socio-political views, and one out of every five prefers socialism to capitalism. "

Interesting in the study were the SAGE Cons—the Spiritually Active, Governance Engaged Conservative Christians.

"That segment represents 8% of all voters, but emerged as the biggest concentration of Trump voters in both the 2016 and 2020 elections. Nearly half of evangelicals (44%) qualify as SAGE Cons. Put differently, most SAGE Cons (55%) are theologically-defined evangelicals. The conservative political impulse of evangelicals was evident in the January study, when the Cultural Research Center asked which presidential candidate people would vote for. Nationally, Donald Trump led Joe Biden 36% to 31%, with 11% opting for Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The picture was significantly different among evangelicals: 61% were backing Trump, 8% sided with Biden, and 10% backed Kennedy."

Barna said, "Identifying evangelicals and then developing an understanding of the mind and heart of the group is not a simple task. There is little uniformity to the belief patterns and lifestyle choices of evangelicals. The entire faith matrix of America is frighteningly complex. Other studies I have conducted underscore how unique each person's faith journey is, and that journey both shapes and is shaped by a person's belief structure and religious practices."

He noted journalists, the more influential ones, "do not have positive views of the Christian faith and Christians. They are therefore comfortable seeing evangelicals as a group to be feared, a group that seeks theocratic rule in America, and thus a group to be thwarted by all means for the sake of democracy."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Back in the day when television still was relatively new and the space program was developing, there was concern about a new "ice age," as earth's temperatures were dropping.

Then there was global warming when those data points reversed themselves, and for years it held.

But those trends also stopped, and activists who had been using "global warming" for their political benefit changed to "climate change," which presumable was a good talking point no matter the evidence.

It's what's behind that unseemly push for expensive and environment-impacting electric vehicles. And the attacks from Biden and Harris on fossil fuels. And much, much more.

But now there's trouble for the ideologues, as a new report from the Daily Sceptic is headlined, "Party over for alarmists as sea temperatures plunge around the world."

The report said scientists are "reported to be puzzled at the speed of the recent decline. Less puzzlement was to be found when the oceans were 'boiling' during the last two years. Plebs flying to Benidorm for an annual holiday and causing 'global heating' was a favorite explanation, although mainstream media put it in marginally more polite terms."

But, it said the current surface sea temperature graph documents that those readings now are 0.2 degrees Centigrade lower than before.

"In the Atlantic, the turnaround has been even more dramatic. Temperatures have cooled quickly since May and in the central equatorial region are up to 1°C colder than average for this time of year. The American Weather Service NOAA notes that the high SSTs at the start of the year were the strongest warm event since 1982. The rapid transition from warm to cold SST anomalies (current temperatures compared over a longer past trend) was said to be remarkable," the report said.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in fact, said, "Never before in the observed record has the eastern equatorial Atlantic swung so quickly from one to another extreme event."

The report explained, "It is not unusual for waters in these parts of the Atlantic to cool in the summer months as seasonal southern winds drag surface waters away from the equator and expose deeper colder water. The process is called 'upwelling', but this year it coincided with a weakening of the trade winds which should have led to warmer anomalies."

NOAA admits to conditions that are "perplexing."

According to the Daily Sceptic, "These days we must of course welcome any outbreak of scientific head-scratching in the usually 'settled' climate business. Temperatures suddenly go down and scientists are seemingly clueless as to why it happens. Yet temperatures go up and it is all due to global warming and humans must return, instanter, to a pre-industrial societal and economic hellhole."

It continued, "The fact that some scientists are perplexed when temperatures go down, but full of fear-mongering explanations when they go up, says it all."

According to the publication, it's not just in the Atlantic, either.

"In the Pacific, a strong El Niño natural variation that warms the ocean and affects weather across the planet has dissipated. The higher SST anomalies recorded over the last year have fallen sharply as the latest figures below from NOAA show. The blocks record the anomaly on a rolling three-month basis with the last figure of 0.2°C referring to May, June, and July 2024. As the latest figures along with records that go back much further show, recent changes in SSTs due to El Niño are nothing out of the ordinary."

The report found words for a logical explanation of recent upturns in temperatures: "As with most natural variation, that process is being reversed – what goes up, usually comes down."

In fact, it noted that three of four Pacific locations used to determine El Nino now are lower than the long-term trend, including water down to 300 meters before the surface.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Kamala Harris, the word-salad candidate in the 2024 presidential race, will be interviewed by CNN on Thursday.

The Democrat has been under harsh criticism for her decision, ever since her coronation with the title of nominee after Democrat party elite pushed the aging and mentally failing Joe Biden under the bus just weeks ago, to refuse to answer questions, for refusing to be interviewed, for essentially trying to hide what she thinks and believes from voters.

And now that she's agreed to be interviewed on CNN, there's criticism for her requirement to have her "Emotional Support Governor," VP candidate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, on screen to help her.

Scott Jennings, a former special assistant to President George W. Bush and now a columnist for multiple publications, said the decision is evidence of a lack of Democrat party confidence in her political ability, and voters need to wonder if Harris can't even do the simplest of political tasks, what would she not be able to do as president.

He said, "I have great confidence in Dana (Bash, the interviewer) and CNN to do this," he said. "I think it's incredibly weak, weak sauce, to show up with your running mate. The fact that they don't have enough confidence in her to let her sit herself, the actual top of the ticket, and do a single interview …

"In fact, I think the handwringing and the gyrations over this over the last month show a troubling lack of confidence in her political ability which also makes you wonder as a voter what kind of president would you be if this kind of a small time decision, can we do an interview or not, what does that look like your decision making process and so on."

He said, "I think Republicans are going to think it's pretty weak to show up with effectively someone to take up half the time."