This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth launched fiercely into the Atlantic on Wednesday for continuing to claim war plans were mistakenly shared on Signal with the magazine's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg.

"So, let's me get this straight," Hegseth posted on X.

"The Atlantic released the so-called 'war plans' and those 'plans' include: No names. No targets. No locations. No units. No routes. No sources. No methods. And no classified information.

"Those are some really sh*tty war plans.

"This only proves one thing: Jeff Goldberg has never seen a war plan or an 'attack plan' (as he now calls it). Not even close.

"As I type this, my team and I are traveling the INDOPACOM region, meeting with Commanders (the guys who make REAL 'war plans') and talking to troops.

"We will continue to do our job, while the media does what it does best: peddle hoaxes."

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt also jumped into the fray Wednesday, saying: "The Atlantic has conceded: these were NOT 'war plans.'

"This entire story was another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well-known for his sensationalist spin."

Anna Bross, senior vice president for communications at the Atlantic, released a statement from the publication Wednesday, indicating:

"Attempts to disparage and discredit The Atlantic, our editor, and our reporting follow an obvious playbook by elected officials and others in power who are hostile to journalists and the First Amendment rights of all Americans. Our journalists are continuing to fearlessly and independently report the truth in the public interest."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

As cases of Tesla vandalism continue to rise across America, one case in New Hampshire was caught on video, with the suspected assailant in orange pants denying to police any involvement, while apparently still wearing the unmistakable orange pants.

"Our Tesla cyber truck was vandalized this weekend in NH," said @KerriLPouliot.

"While staying at our hotel, our vehicle was keyed within an hour of arriving.

"James 'Jim' Pelis & Chuck Smith either didn't know or didn't care that they would be recorded. Charges pending! Class A felony in NH."

Online journalist Collin Rugg gave his opinion of the suspect: "Total moron."

Meanwhile, in Wichita, Kansas, a wheelchair-bound Tesla owner is speaking out after her vehicle was keyed in the parking lot of an Olive Garden restaurant.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) was established with noble intentions, to regulate immigration in a way that benefits both American workers and foreign talent.

However, over time, this system has been exploited to prioritize profits over people, undermining the American workforce and perpetuating inequities. While the INA is supposed to protect U.S. workers, its enforcement, or lack thereof, has created a dysfunctional ecosystem where key players manipulate the rules with impunity.

To understand this, we need to examine the roles of the Department of Labor (DOL), the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA), and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) the primary agencies tasked with regulating employment-based immigration.

The Department of Labor (DOL): The Overworked Referee

The DOL's job is to ensure that employment-based immigration programs don't harm U.S. workers by displacing them or suppressing wages. Unfortunately, the DOL often acts more like a rubber stamp than a watchdog.

What the DOL is Supposed to Do

1. PERM Labor Certification: Certify that no qualified U.S. worker is available for a job before allowing a foreign worker to be hired.
2. Prevailing Wage Determinations: Ensure employers pay foreign workers wages comparable to those paid to American workers for similar jobs.

\What Happens in Practice

The DOL's oversight has glaring weaknesses. Employers exploit loopholes to sideline qualified Americans:

• Sham Recruitment: Employers claim they advertised positions, but these ads often appear in obscure publications or have unreasonable requirements. For example, an ad might run in a small-town newspaper when the job is located in a major city, effectively ensuring no one applies.
• Manipulated Job Descriptions: Employers craft job postings to exclude American candidates by adding impossible qualifications, like requiring ten years of experience in a technology that's only existed for five.
• Ignoring Layoff Data: Employers filing for PERM certifications during layoffs are required to disclose this information. But many simply lie, and the DOL rarely checks.

The Consequences

Qualified Americans are routinely overlooked, and wages for both foreign and domestic workers are suppressed. The DOL's lack of enforcement allows bad actors to continue gaming the system.

BALCA: The Appellate Body That Reflects Systemic Issues

The Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) is an administrative body that reviews denials of labor certifications. BALCA serves as a critical checkpoint, but its rulings often highlight how employers manipulate the system and how weak DOL enforcement really is.

What BALCA Does

• Reviews Recruitment Efforts: Determines whether employers made genuine attempts to hire U.S. workers.
• Evaluates Prevailing Wage Compliance: Ensures that employers aren't underpaying foreign workers to save costs.
• Interprets Regulations: Sets precedents on how rules should be applied.

Common Issues BALCA Encounters

• Job Descriptions Designed to Exclude Americans: Employers claim no American workers meet qualifications that are excessively narrow or arbitrary.
• Failure to Consider U.S. Applicants: Employers reject Americans for vague or unjustified reasons, such as being "overqualified."
• Inadequate Recruitment: Some employers post job ads for the bare minimum time or on platforms unlikely to attract applicants.

The Problem with BALCA's Role

While BALCA can reject fraudulent certifications, it lacks the authority to impose penalties. This means employers who violate rules face no real consequences. Worse, BALCA decisions often expose systemic flaws but don't fix them, leaving the door open for continued abuse.

USCIS: The Administrator with Too Much on Its Plate

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) oversees visa programs like H-1B, adjudicates green card applications, and monitors compliance with immigration laws. Despite its critical role, USCIS is hampered by inefficiencies, lack of transparency, and weak anti-fraud measures.

The H-1B Lottery
USCIS runs an annual lottery to allocate 85,000 H-1B visas. Employers are supposed to prove they genuinely need foreign workers to fill these positions. However:

• Duplicate Registrations: Some employers submit hundreds of applications for the same worker using shell companies to increase their chances of winning the lottery.
• Hiring During Layoffs: Even companies laying off thousands of American workers are allowed to file for H-1B visas, claiming labor shortages.

Fraud and Abuse

USCIS has acknowledged rampant fraud in visa programs but lacks the resources to address it effectively:

• Shell Companies: Employers create fake entities to manipulate the lottery or transfer workers to other companies after approval.
• Underpaying Workers: Foreign workers are often paid less than the prevailing wage, which lowers wages across the industry.

Operational Inefficiencies

The agency's backlogs in processing applications lead to delays that harm both employers and workers. Meanwhile, employers exploit temporary work authorizations to sidestep regulations, exacerbating displacement of U.S. workers.

The exploitation of immigration programs doesn't just harm American workers, it distorts the entire labor market. Here's how:

1. Displacement of U.S. Workers: Qualified Americans lose out on jobs to foreign workers, often because employers manipulate the system to hire cheaper labor.
2. 2. Wage Suppression: When foreign workers are underpaid, wages for everyone, foreign and domestic, are dragged down.
3. Erosion of Worker Protections: Visa-dependent workers have limited bargaining power, weakening collective protections for all employees.
4. Economic Instability: Over-reliance on foreign labor makes industries vulnerable to global disruptions while neglecting domestic talent development.

Why Should Americans Care?

If you're not in tech or STEM fields, you might think this doesn't affect you. But the systemic issues in immigration programs have far-reaching consequences:

1. Reduced Job Opportunities: Displacement and wage suppression ripple through the economy, affecting industries beyond tech.
2. Weakened Economic Growth: Failing to invest in domestic talent undermines long-term innovation and competitiveness.
3. Eroded Trust in Institutions: When agencies fail to enforce rules, public confidence in the system erodes, leading to resentment and division.

What Needs to Change

1. Stronger Enforcement by the DOL: Require thorough audits of recruitment efforts and layoff disclosures. Penalize employers who lie or manipulate the system.
2. Reform the H-1B Lottery: Limit duplicate registrations and prioritize employers with a proven need for foreign talent.
3. Increased Transparency from USCIS: Publish real-time data on visa applications and employer practices to hold bad actors accountable.
4. Empower BALCA: Give BALCA the authority to impose penalties on employers who violate regulations.

Conclusion:

The INA was meant to balance economic growth with labor protections, but it has become a tool for exploitation. Understanding the roles of the DOL, BALCA, and USCIS and their shortcomings is critical to demanding accountability and reform. Americans must engage with these issues, not just for the sake of fairness, but to ensure the future of a labor market that truly serves everyone.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Former U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr, who served during President Donald Trump's first administration, is calling out federal district judges for trying to "usurp" the president's authority and responsibility to deal with national security

A report at Fox News explained Barr said, "The president is absolutely right to be frustrated and concerned about the way the courts are handling this."

His comments came on the topic of deporting illegal alien criminals, which Trump has been pursuing. At least one judge, James Boasberg, has tried to halt those deportation's by claiming the illegal aliens must be given hearings, despite a federal law allowing Trump's actions.

Boasberg also has tried to demand secret national security information from the White House, which responded with a "no."

Barr explained to Fox that Boasberg's ruling goes beyond the judge's authority and interferes with the president's constitutional powers.

"The Constitution gives the president the power to make the judgments about how we deal with foreign nationals when we are animated by national security concerns. It's his call, not a district court judge's call."

Boasberg previously had established a record of leftist activism from the bench, including demanding more severe penalties than the law allowed for J6 protesters.

An appeals court heard arguments on a White House request to overturn Boasberg's demands on Monday, and the judges appeared divided with Patricia Millett taking the leftist approach, insisting that, "Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemy Act than has happened here."

Barr explained part of the issue is the nationwide injunctions coming like confetti from local judges.

"Even where it's appropriate for the court to play its traditional role of safeguarding the liberties of American citizens, we have this phenomena of nation-wide injunctions where the lowest level judge, district judges, try to bind the entire nation and bind the president in their initial decision. That is not what we have meant by the judicial power under our Constitution," he said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

An analysis of a ruling from Ana Reyes, a judge in Washington, that President Donald Trump's military must accept those with gender dysphoria, is taking her to task for singling out one political ideology – that could undermine America's national defense.

It is Charles "Cully" Stimson, of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, who wrote at the Daily Signal that there is a long list of physical and mental conditions that disqualify individuals from being in the military.

Gender dysphoria is just one.

The analysis notes Reyes has barred Trump from expelling "certain transgender servicemembers" from the military, in a legal case that already is on appeal.

"The U.S. military exists to defend the nation. As an all-volunteer force, the military relies on qualified men and women volunteering to serve in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, or Space Force. Enlisted men and women are typically high school graduates, young, meet or exceed certain physical and mental aptitude tests, and pass security background checks. Officers are college graduates and must pass the same or similar tests as enlisted personnel," he explained.

"Not everyone is cut out to serve in the military. Far from it. Some don't want to serve. Others want to serve but are not eligible because they are overweight, have asthma, musculoskeletal issues, vision or hearing impairments, dental issues, allergies, skin conditions, psychiatric disorders, eating disorders, learning disabilities, or one or more of hundreds of other disqualifying physical or mental conditions. Others are eligible to serve but don't pass the minimum physical or mental tests," he said.

Significantly, the military cannot afford to hire those who have disqualifying medical, emotional or psychological conditions.

"That lawful discrimination is rationally related to a legitimate, indeed compelling, government interest. Our military must only hire men and women who are ready, willing and able, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year, to deploy anywhere in the world at a moment's notice and who have the physical, mental, emotional, and psychological stability and toughness to fight and win," he explained.

In fact, such deployability requirements have a list of "30 broad categories" that can disqualify personnel.

Among those listed under "Learning, Psychiatric, and Behavioral Disorders," disqualified are those with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, a history of learning disorders such as dyslexia, autism, schizophrenic disorders, delusional disorders, a history of being bipolar, depression, conduct "disorders," eating disorders, self-harm disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, dissociative disorders and many more.

"The military lawfully discriminates against myriad people with mental health conditions. We do so not because we are callous, unfeeling, or don't wish the best for people (including family members and friends) with these conditions," he explained.

"The profession of arms is different from all other professions. The demands, operational tempo, physical and mental stressors, and lifestyle are distinct from all (except for a small handful of) civilian jobs. That requires the military to make sensible, reasoned choices about who can and who cannot be allowed to serve in the armed forces of the United States."

Trump's order specifically noted that longstanding policy is that military members are "free of medical conditions or physical defects that may reasonably be expected to require excessive time lost from duty for necessary treatment or hospitalization."

He called for those with "gender dysphoria" to be moved out of the armed forces.

The analysis pointed that out Reyes "tips her hand" by using loaded language in her decision, calling people "marginalized persons.'

It explains Reyes falsely conflates "skin color, sex, and sexual orientation with people who suffer from a cognizable mental disorder, gender dysphoria," that that "infects" her opinion.

And her citation of the Constitution's reference to all being "equal" is a reach too far.

"When it comes to whether someone is physically, emotionally, or psychologically qualified to serve in the armed forces, everyone is not equal. True, everyone has equal value and dignity as a human being. But that's not the point. Equal value and dignity as a human being does not translate to equality of suitability to serve in the armed forces, a fact that Judge Reyes blatantly ignores."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'If convicted, the grandfather of 7, who has never been in trouble with the police, faces a criminal record and maximum fines totaling thousands'

It's considered the most famous line in the Holy Bible.

John 3:16 states: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Now, a retired pastor in Northern Ireland is facing prosecution for voicing the inspirational passage during an open-air sermon.

The charge is that Clive Johnston, 76, allegedly violated "abortion buffer zones laws," even though abortion was never mentioned in his message.

Johnston, former president of the Association of Baptist Churches in Ireland, is facing two charges under the Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) Act for holding an open-air Sunday service on the fringes of a buffer zone on the other side of a dual carriageway from Coleraine's Causeway Hospital on July 7, 2024.

He's accused of seeking to "influence" people accessing the hospital's abortion services and for not immediately leaving the area when asked to do so by police.

If convicted, the grandfather of seven, who has never been in trouble with the police, faces a criminal record and maximum fines totaling thousands of dollars.

Johnston told reporters: "I'd like to thank the media for the interest that they've taken in the case. And we have been overwhelmed by the amount of support that we've received."
Simon Calvert, deputy director of The Christian Institute which is representing Johnston, said: "Should a law designed to stop abortion protests be used to criminalize Gospel preaching?
"We have amazing gospel freedom in this country and we encourage Christians to use those freedoms so that more people will hear about the love of God. That's why we've taken on this case. Prosecuting someone for preaching John 3:16 near a hospital on a quiet Sunday is an outrageous restriction on freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
"It's just not reasonable or rational to suggest that preaching the Gospel, with no reference to abortion, is a protest against abortion. The police and the Public Prosecution Service are over-stepping the mark. This is not what buffer zones were designed to do.

"As far as I can tell, the politicians who backed buffer zones never suggested they should be used to outlaw the Gospel. I hope some of them will come forward to confirm this. They could help to persuade prosecutors to drop this ridiculous case.

"Clive has campaigned in the past on abortion. If there had been anti-abortion placards on display, or if Clive had made side-swipes at abortion, I could understand why the police would take an interest. But abortion was not mentioned, not once, not even tangentially.

"For the record, this was an open-air service held on a Sunday, with about a dozen people in attendance, on a patch of grass, separated from Causeway Hospital by a dual carriageway. There was a wooden cross, and Clive leading the singing of well-known hymns on a ukelele. Yet the police summons says he 'conducted a protest' to try to 'influence' patients or staff attending the abortion clinic. This is religiously illiterate."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

President Donald Trump on Tuesday issued an order that all of the government's files on the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation nine years ago be made public.

That was the FBI's attempt to undermine Trump's first, successful, campaign for president.

Commentator Charlie Kirk explained its significance:

BREAKING: President Trump has just signed a Presidential Memorandum ordering the immediate declassification of all FBI files relating to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation which kicked off the Russia hoax 9 years ago. This is a big deal. Our own FBI tried to sabotage a presidential candidate based on an absurd conspiracy theory, then sabotaged that same candidate after he was elected, then coordinated a Deep State-directed censorship campaign to throw him out of office. The only way we can hope to fix this is with total transparency. All the FBI's dirty laundry MUST be made public."

Another commenter was to the same point, only more succinct: "President Trump orders the immediate declassification of all FBI files on Crossfire Hurricane, the infamous 'Russian Collusion' investigation. These documents could finally expose Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for committing treason against a sitting president."

In fact, conspiracy rumors created by Democrats and their hired lawyers included a wild list of unrealistic claims in documents like the now-discredited Steele Dossier, which leftists quoted as if it were the truth.

Fox News reported that Trump cast doubt on the willingness of the media, which joined the Democrats wholeheartedly in the conspiracy against Trump, to review the facts.

"You probably won't bother because you're not going to like what you see. But this was total weaponization. It's a disgrace. It should have never happened in this country. But now you'll be able to see for yourselves. All declassified," he said.

The report noted the FBI opened the unsubstantiated investigation on July 31, 2016, a counterintelligence scheme that claimed to seek if Trump or his campaign members were colluding with Russia.

The report noted, "The opening of the investigation came just days after a July 28 meeting during which then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed then-President Barack Obama on a purported proposal from one of Hillary Clinton's campaign foreign policy advisors 'to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service.'"

Clinton was the Democrat nominee for president that year, and failed in her second attempt at the office. She later claimed, wildly, that the election was stolen from her.

Then-FBI Director James Comey subsequently pushed the Steele Dossier, a compilation of salacious lies about Trump. It was fabricated by Christopher Steele and was commissioned by Fusion GPS, in the pay of Hillary Clinton's campaign.

But what was found was that the weaponized government agency has pursued improper surveillance of Trump staff members.

A subsequent review confirmed that the FBI, under Obama, had zero evidence to even begin an investigation. It also found the FBI was the "target" of a Clinton conspiracy to "manipulate" law enforcement for political purposes.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

One of the White House X accounts, Rapid Response 47, which posts positive news and stories about President Trump and his policies, has highlighted a CNN segment reporting on how many Americans say the nation is "on the right track."

Watch the network's senior data reporter, Harry Enten:

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The U.S. Supreme Court has confirmed in a number of cases that the First Amendment protects even material that people find offensive.

Now a lower court judge in Colorado has expanded that ruling, further ordering that that requires a school district to provide offensive material to children.

Demanding that the Elizabeth School District use her judgment regarding materials board members and others determined should not be placed within ready access of children, Charlotte Sweeney, appointed by Joe Biden, "has sided with far-left activists over concerned parents, forcing the Elizabeth School District to return 19 books – including those pushing graphic sexual content and radical ideologies – to school library shelves," according to the Gateway Pundit.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Two federal appeals courts handed down decisions Tuesday on Trump-related lawsuits, and they both were favorable decisions for the president who faces more than 120 lawsuits challenging various executive decisions in his administration's first 60 days.

The first is from the typically liberal-leaning 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. A three-judge panel ruled there is no problem with Trump's executive order that put a stop to the federal government approving new refugees for entry into the U.S.

The suspension of new approvals had been challenged earlier, and Biden-appointed U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead in Seattle had found that Trump could not nullify the law passed by Congress establishing the program, and it must be restarted, the AP reported.

The 9th Circuit panel reversed Whitehead's ruling, though it said refugee applications in the pipeline must continue.

The refugee program is meant to help people in other countries who claim their lives are endangered in their homeland migrate to America.

The other decision comes from the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which temporarily paused a previous ruling claiming Trump's Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, acted unconstitutionally in attempting to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID.

As reported, by the Washington Examiner, the court's administrative stay counters U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang's order, which required USAID to restore access to email and systems for employees placed on leave by DOGE. USAID has been one of the primary targets of Elon Musk's work to cut federal spending, waste and abuse.

Chuang is an appointee of former President Barack Obama.