This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A federal court ruling has allowed a school to censor "Let's Go Brandon," preventing students from wearing the popular social media meme on shirts.

But a constitutional expert warns that it's a "dangerous precedent" that will move the nation established on the basis of free speech the wrong direction.

Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, has testified before Congress on constitutional issues, and even represented members in court.

He cited the case of "D.A." in Michigan, a student ordered to remove his sweater with the phrase on it.

That decision was from Judge Paul Maloney.

"Maloney rejects the free speech claim and rules that school officials can punish a student for wearing a 'Let's Go Brandon' T-shirt. I believe that he is wrong and that the case sets a dangerous precedent," Turley wrote.

The slogan is "a familiar political battle cry not just against Biden but also against the bias of the media. It derives from an Oct. 2021 interview with race-car driver Brandon Brown after he won his first NASCAR Xfinity Series race. During the interview, NBC reporter Kelli Stavast's questions were drowned out by loud-and-clear chants of 'F*** Joe Biden.' Stavast quickly and inexplicably declared, 'You can hear the chants from the crowd, 'Let's go, Brandon!'"

In the case at hand school officials Andrew Buikema and Wendy Bradford ordered several boys to remove the slogan.

"The school ordered the removal of the clothing as obscene and in violation of the school code. However, other students are allowed to don political apparel supporting other political causes including 'gay-pride-themed hoodies,'" he noted

While the school claims its authority to banish the message was because it was "profane," Turley explained, "The funny thing about this action is that the slogan is not profane. To the contrary, it substitutes non-profane words for profane words."

Maloney claimed, "Removing a few letters from the profane word or replacing letters with symbols would not render the message acceptable in a school setting."

Turley said the ruling is "jarring and chilling."

"The 'Let's Go Brandon' slogan is more than just a substitute for profanity directed at the president (which itself has political content). It is using satire to denounce the press that often acts like a state media. It is commentary on the alliance between the government and the media in shaping what the public sees and hears."

He warned the decision moves to far "into the regulation of political speech. Notably, politicians have used the phrase, including members of the House of Representatives despite a rule barring profanity on the floor. On October 21, 2021, Republican congressman Bill Posey concluded his remarks with 'Let's go, Brandon.' It was not declared a violation of the House rules."

The judge's "default," he said, is "to limit speech even when it is not overtly profane and concerns a major political controversy."

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.

Pressure is mounting in the East as the People's Republic of China continues aggressively to engage with surrounding nations. Attempts by the U.S. to calm the situation have been met with several stern warnings of war.

U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan is in Beijing this week in an effort to stabilize relations between the U.S. and China. Sullivan met with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, to discuss various issues, including Taiwan.

"President Biden has been very clear in his conversations with President Xi that he is committed to managing this important relationship responsibly," Sullivan said.

In a statement from the White House released Wednesday, it details Sullivan's meeting, and reiterated Sullivan's comments about the Biden administration being committed to maintaining channels of communication between the two nations.

"The two sides held candid, substantive, and constructive discussions on a range of bilateral, regional, and global issues. They discussed progress and next steps on implementation of the Woodside Summit commitments, including counternarcotics, military-to-military communications, and AI safety and risk," the White House said.

The U.S. is taking steps to prevent U.S. technologies from being used to undermine national security, and Sullivan raised concerns with Wang over China's unfair trade policies and practices, according to White House officials.

Sullivan further voiced concerns to Wang over China's growing aggression towards Taiwan and the maritime attacks on Philippine vessels in the South China Sea.

"Mr. Sullivan reaffirmed the United States' commitment to defending its Indo–Pacific allies and expressed concern about the PRC's destabilizing actions against lawful Philippine maritime operations in the South China Sea," the White House said.

According to Chinese state broadcaster CCTV, Wang reportedly issued a warning to Sullivan about the U.S. being involved in disputes between China and U.S. allies.

"The United States must not use bilateral treaties as an excuse to undermine China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, nor should it support or condone the Philippines's actions of infringement," Wang said.

Over the past week, China has repeatedly used force against Philippine vessels near the Spratly Islands, a rich fishing ground within the Philippine Economic Exclusion Zone.

Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson Jay Tarriela said in a post on X China used 40 vessels to block supplies being delivered to soldiers who are stationed in Sabina Shoal, an atoll within the island chain.

Collin Koh, a senior fellow at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies at the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, told CNN the Philippines is trying to avoid confrontation with China.

"China is deliberately escalating the situation, with a likely intention to test how far Washington would support Manila…It's a high-stakes game for Manila. The domestic circumstances all point to the very fact that now Sabina Shoal is where you could not yield an inch to the Chinese," Koh said.

Koh pointed out on X the Chinese are attempting to blame the U.S. for their recent actions against the Philippines.

China Daily recently published an editorial on how the U.S. should respect China's sovereignty, because the U.S. expects the same.

However, China has been caught on more than one occasion stealing intellectual property from the U.S., as well as using Chinese nationals to position themselves within American companies, to steal information and spy on Chinese dissidents in the U.S.

According to a report from Lumen's Black Lotus Labs, a Chinese state–sponsored hacking group was observed infiltrating internet service providers, managed service providers, and IT sectors, exploiting a zero-day vulnerability in Versa Director servers since at least June 2024.

"Given the severity of the vulnerability, the implications of compromised Versa Director systems, and the time that has now elapsed to allow Versa customers to patch the vulnerability, Black Lotus Labs felt it was appropriate to release this information at this time. Lumen Technologies shared threat intelligence to warn appropriate U.S. Government agencies of the emerging risks that could impact our nation's strategic assets," the report states.

FBI Director Richard Wray said during a congressional hearing six months ago, that Chinese hackers pose a very real threat to the American people.

"PRC hackers are targeting our critical infrastructure; our water treatment plants, our electrical grid, our oil and natural gas pipelines, our transportation systems, and the risk that poses to every American requires our attention now. China's hackers are positioning on American infrastructure in preparation to wreak havoc and cause real world harm to American citizens and communities," Wray said.

Russia, one of China's closest allies, issued a World War III warning over U.S. involvement in its war with Ukraine, when Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated the U.S. is overly confident the war would only stay in Europe.

"Americans have this direct association, these conversations, talk of a world war. They think if this happens, it would only concern countries in Europe, which is a very showing thing that reflects the mentality of those duo–political strategists in the U.S., because they are confident they will just be safe across the ocean,": Lavrov said.

Lavrov hinted at the possible use of nuclear weapons by Russia in the event World War III does indeed happen.

"One has to understand that we have our own doctrine, a doctrine of using nuclear weapons amongst other things, and we are making adjustments to this doctrine, and the Americans are well aware of these doctrines," Lavrov said.

Lavrov stated Americans expect other nations to "do their dirty job" for them, and warned against the U.S. "playing with fire."

"The West does not want to avoid escalation. The West, as they say, is "asking for it," Lavrov said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

One of the overseas chiefs of the Hamas terror organization of Gaza, which last October 7 slaughtered some 1,200 Israelis in an open act of war against the Middle East democracy, now wants suicide attacks on Israel.

Confirmation comes in a report in Israel365News, which reported Hamas "leader abroad" Khaled Mashaal said, "We want to return to martyrdom operations."

It was during an address in Istanbul, Turkey, that Mashaal said, "Resistance operations in the West Bank are escalating despite the harsh conditions. … This is a situation that can only be addressed by open conflict. They are fighting us with open conflict, and we are confronting them with open conflict.'

Decades have passed without enforceable peace among the Muslims and Palestinians who often have insisted on the complete obliteration of Israel to satisfy their demands.

The closest in recent years has been the development of the Abraham Accords, which under then-President Donald Trump produced actual peace agreements involving Israel and several of its Arab neighbors.

Hamas, while being the elected government in Gaza, also has been designated as a terror organization by various groups.

It proved its terror basis last October when its soldiers infiltrated Israel and killed some 1,200 citizens, often in horrific fashion such as burning entire families alive. Since then, Israel's military has been on the march to remove that threat of terror from being repeated.

He claimed, in his recent address, "The enemy has opened the conflict on all fronts, seeking us all, whether we fight or not. The enemy says, 'I am crazy,' and it is up to the nation to assume its responsibilities. I reiterate my call for everyone to participate on multiple fronts in the actual resistance against the Zionist entity."

The reported noted, "The 'military wings' of the Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist groups took responsibility for a failed suicide bombing attack in south Tel Aviv earlier this month."

And in a statement, Hamas promised to promote suicide attacks "as long as Israel continues its massacre and policy of assassinations in Gaza."

In fact, in Gaza, Hamas often has set up its terror operations and bases in schools, in residential subdivisions, and other highly populate locations so that innocent civilians actually are in place as shields against an attack on its military resources.

Mashaal also condemned U.S.-led diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire in Gaza, and claimed that Americans are giving Israel weapons of "destruction."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A new report from a watchdog says the FBI must improve its performance when it handles child sexual abuse investigations.

A report at Just the News said the warning comes some three years after it was learned the FBI knew that U.S. gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar was molesting female athletes, but "did not act quick enough."

The new report is from the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Justice.

A summary explains, "The DOJ OIG found that further improvements are needed to build upon the FBI's recent changes to its crimes against children and human trafficking (CAC/HT) program to ensure it appropriately addresses child sexual abuse allegations."

The watchdog found that there were suspected child abuse cases for which the FBI "lacked any recent investigative activity or case updates, logical investigative steps, or referrals to appropriate agencies."

The report said not only did agents not appropriately review leads about cases, but there were "instances of substantial non-compliance with FBI policy."

According to Courthouse News, while the FBI tried to correct its operations after the Nassar case, "some agency staff have been slow to respond to active child sexual abuse allegations."

The report noted that lawmakers will put the agency "back under the microscope this fall" because of the report.

The criticism comes from FBI Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

"It was also partly a response to bipartisan oversight from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who grilled FBI Director Christopher Wray on the Nassar case in 2021 and demanded that the agency review its practices for responding to such reports," CN reported.

In fact, the IG found "dozens of instances" where FBI employees sat on allegations of child sexual abuse or failed to report those allegations properly.

Horowitz listed almost a dozen recommendations to better address the FBI's failings than the adjustments it already had made in procedures.

Lawmakers say they are ready to act.

"The FBI must answer for the inspector general's grave findings," charged Sen. Dick Durbin, a Democrat. "In 2021, Director Wray testified to the Committee that what happened with Nassar was 'inexcusable … and we're doing everything in our power to make sure it never happens again.' But it's still happening."

The report noted just months ago, the DOJ agreed to a settlement of some $139 million for more than 130 claims the FBI failed to properly investigate allegations of sexual abuse crimes by Hassar.

Nasser, convicted on charges several years ago, is serving three consecutive 20-year terms.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A defamation lawsuit by one-time GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, who sued the New York Times after it published an editorial suggesting she inspired or incited Jared Loughner's 2011 shooting of then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, an Arizona Democrat, is alive again.

The latest iteration comes out of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals where a three-judge panel threw out a 2022 jury verdict in favor of the publication due to the errors of Jed Rakoff, the district judge in the case.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, a popular commentator on legal issues who has testified multiple times before Congress, said the fight could end up before the U.S. Supreme Court where it could make changes to the New York Times v. Sullivan precedent that gives special protection to those who say bad things about "public figures."

That standard, he said, "is an obvious benefit to the media. However, without a compelling argument for a constitutional standard for public figures, it seems more like a judicially maintained subsidy or shield. The purpose of Times v. Sullivan was not to simply prop up the press. The Palin case and other cases could present a new opportunity for the court to review the doctrine."

The appeals panel said that Rakoff had dismissed the case earlier, using an improper process, and then when reversed held a trial and gave the case to the jury. But he again dismissed the case while the jury was deliberating.

"We conclude that the district court's Rule 50 ruling improperly intruded on the province of the jury by making credibility determinations, weighing evidence, and ignoring facts or inferences that a reasonable juror could plausibly have found to support Palin's case," the court said.

The decision noted that despite the dismissal, the jury was allowed to reach a decision, which was in favor of the Times.

"Unfortunately, several major issues at trial – specifically, the erroneous exclusion of evidence, an inaccurate jury instruction, a legally erroneous response to a mid-deliberation jury question, and jurors learning during deliberations of the district court's Rule 50 dismissal ruling – impugn the reliability of that verdict," the court said, listing multiple errors by Rakoff.

It sent the case back for another trial.

Turley explained the foundation of the case: "The case involves an editorial that suggested Palin inspired or incited Jared Loughner's 2011 shooting of then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.). It was outrageously and demonstrably untrue. The editorial was published in the wake of the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and other GOP members of Congress by James T. Hodgkinson, of Illinois, 66, a liberal activist and campaign supporter of Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). It appears The Times wanted to shift the narrative back to right-wing violence; it stated that SarahPAC, Palin's political action committee, had posted a graphic that put Giffords in crosshairs before she was shot, described it as direct incitement of violence and opined that while not as guilty as Palin, 'liberals should of course hold themselves to the same standard of decency that they ask of the right.'"

But, he said, the reality is that the map SarahPAC distributed put targets on various districts that were viewed as possible flip districts by Republicans, and the map was published long before the shooting.

Turley said the big concern now is that it appears Rakoff again will be allowed to make decisions in the new trial, even after he'd been publicly humiliated by being reversed twice for errors that harmed the plaintiff.

He said the "hit piece" on Palin was "all-too-familiar for conservatives and Republicans routinely targeted by the newspaper. In that sense, the Times has become the very thing that the original decision sought to combat: a threat to free speech. The Times, they argue, often uses this protection to shield false attacks on political opponents."

The standard calls for a knowledge that a damaging statement is false, or a "reckless disregard" regarding comments about public figures.

The Times was integral to that standard. "Decades ago, The Times was being targeted by segregationists who wanted to deter media from publishing accounts of segregationists opposing the civil rights movement. This effort was creating such a threat that media had to choose between a type of self-censorship or insolvency. In his concurrence in New York Times v. Sullivan, Justice Hugo Black said that 'state libel laws threaten the very existence of an American press virile enough to publish unpopular views on public affairs and bold enough to criticize the conduct of public officials,'" Turley documented.

He opined that Palin offered "sufficient evidence to allow a jury to render a verdict," but Rakoff claimed she had failed to offer evidence meeting the actual malice standard.

He noted Rakoff even insisted on ordering the jury not to speak to the media after the case, "an abusive demand that worked to protect his own errors," Turley noted.

And he revealed two current Supreme Court justices already have indicated "they might be open to the idea of revisiting" the standard.

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.

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."