This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Nearly two million dollars spent by one of the nation's Army recruiting brigades could not overcome the alienation of potential service members caused by the military's embrace of radical "diversity, equity and inclusion" policies under the Biden-Harris administration.

After more than two decades of service, Col. Nicholas Braun (a pseudonym) recently retired from the U.S. Army. He spoke to WorldNetDaily on the condition of anonymity, concerned over likely reprisals he would face from the U.S. government for the information he shared with WND.

In 2023, said Braun, as recruiting numbers continued to dwindle through the Biden administration, every corps in the Army was tasked to support Recruiting Command. For example, operations and maintenance funds were diverted to recruiting, he told WND, revealing that over $1 million was so redirected in just the first quarter of last year.

"Do you know how many contracts we got signed?" he asked. "One. After four months, we spent a million dollars to get one kid in the Army."

In the following quarter, Braun said, six individuals signed contracts after $800,000 of the operations and maintenance budget was redirected toward recruiting. "We used nearly $1.8 million to get seven people in the Army," he told WND.

Yet, throwing money at recruiting did not solve the problem. Plans to "shrink excess" and reduce its number of personnel from 494,000 to 470,000 by 2029 followed. "In the Pentagon's infinite wisdom to fix the recruiting problem," Braun said, in February 2024, "they began another round of restructuring to make the on-hand quantity [of Army personnel] the authorized quantity to be able to say they're at 100 percent or at least above 90 percent," he said.

In the restructuring, Braun revealed, "they removed reconnaissance formations from infantry and Stryker brigade combat teams to get the numbers down." Out of 31 armored brigades, he said, only 13 brigades in the Army with a reconnaissance formation remained.

"When these brigades need reconnaissance, they're going to pull from formation that don't have nearly enough training to do the mission," he told WND, warning that "any real war is going to look like a meat grinder with a whole bunch of under-resourced and undertrained soldiers getting completely chewed up."

"Why? Because political decisions have been made on force structure instead of capability decisions based on force structure – and it all ties back to the diversity, equity and inclusion stuff," Braun argued.

"The level of politics in the Army's general officer corps has elevated to a really unhealthy level," he added. "Most three-star and four-star generals circle the wagons and throw whoever they need to under the bus to save their own skin."

"Likeminded one-stars and two-stars get in the club by embracing uniformity of thought at the most senior levels," he said. "And at this level, they want DEI at the forefront. They want skin color and sexual orientation to be the top priority."

"If you're a white male, you're not really a welcome person in the Army right now," Braun said, recounting the mandatory Department of Defense stand down and subsequent briefings on the topic in 2021. In one of the briefings, he was told about "the problem of extremism in the ranks." The focus was primarily on "white domestic terrorists," he told WND.

Braun said he could not sit quiet at the time, interrupting the briefing to inquire: "How many people have been charged under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for white extremism in the Army?" To that, the presenter said he did not know. However, he told WND, the answer was "five."

"Out of 525,000 people, there were five, and they were trying to teach me that white extremism is our biggest problem."

He pinpointed this moment in history as "the time you begin to see a precipitous drop in Army recruiting numbers." Which begs the question: "With 70 percent of recruits being white kids from the south and southeast, why would you want to join an organization that's preaching you're an extremist or terrorist because you're white and conservative?"

"The problem is that nobody will acknowledge this is a problem or that we've screwed up putting this kind of rhetoric in place," Braun said. "If Lloyd Austin would come out today, take an in-depth look at the impact [DEI ideology is having] on recruiting and retention, and do something about it, numbers would start looking better almost overnight."

In the same vein, Braun said, today's selection of senior military leaders would also need to be addressed. While the Army might be selecting some qualified leaders, they are not selecting the most qualified, he explained: "The overarching feeling in the Army is that DEI is way more important than lethality. Formations are going to have to deploy somewhere, and when they do, many are going to be bringing a lot of kids home in body bags because we're more focused on this garbage [DEI] than we are actually being able to perform a job at the highest level possible."

U.S. Army Recruiting Command did not respond to WorldNetDaily's requests for comment.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The U.S. House of Representatives has begun an investigation into the Democrat-aligned daughter of a judge who heard one of the lawfare cases that party has assembled against President Donald Trump.

Rep. Jim Jordan, the head of the House Judiciary Committee, has launched the review of Loren Merchan, the daughter of Juan Merchan, who heard prosecutor Alvin Bragg's business records case against Trump.

A jury in the leftist enclave of Manhattan found against Trump on 34 counts after Merchan, the judge, repeatedly ruled against Trump, allowed salacious and irrelevant testimony in the case, and refused to allow a true expert on the topic to provide evidence.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

They are admitting the responsibility for the murders of nearly 3,000 people in America, but they are being let off with life sentences.

That's the substance of a deal the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris administration is reaching with several of the 9/11 terror attack terrorists, including alleged mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad.

And it's not getting a good reaction from multitudes of the victims, from family members of those murdered to members of the New York Fire Department, which lost dozens of its brothers and sisters in the attack.

Fox News reports a union representing New York firefighters reports its members are "disgusted and disappointed" with the deal sparing Mohammad, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak Bin 'Attach and Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hawsasi.

They have been held at Guantanamo Bay for years already, since their capture for the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington.

A letter sent to families of victims bluntly informed them, "In exchange for removal of the death penalty as a possible punishment, these three accused have agreed to plead guilty to all of the charged offenses, including the murder of the 2,976 people listed in the charge sheet."

That was from Rear Adm. Aaron Rugh, the chief prosecutor for the Office of Military Commissions, and was documented by the New York Post.

"On behalf of New York City firefighters, especially the survivors of the September 11th terrorist attack who are living with the illnesses and injuries that were inflicted upon us that day, we are disgusted and disappointed that these three terrorists were given a plea deal and allowed to escape the ultimate justice while each month three more heroes from the FDNY are dying from World Trade Center illnesses," stated Andrew Ansbro, the chief of the FDNY Uniformed Firefighters Association.

9/11 Justice President Brett Eagleson added, "While we acknowledge the decision to avoid the death penalty, our primary concern remains access to these individuals for information. These plea deals should not perpetuate a system of closed-door agreements, where crucial information is hidden without giving the families of the victims the chance to learn the full truth."

The three are accused of providing training, money and other help to the 19 terrorists who hijacked four passenger jets that day and crashed them into the World Trade Center buildings, the Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania.

The Washington Examiner reported families of those killed were not happy either.

And Newsweek said the announcement "sparked fury."

"For me personally, I wanted to see a trial," said Terry Strada, head of a group of families of victims, 9/11 Families United.

"And they just took away the justice I was expecting, a trial and the punishment."

Michael Burke, who lost family, told legacy wire service AP it "always been disgraceful that these guys, 23 years later, have not been convicted and punished for their attacks, or the crime."

He continued, "I think people would be shocked if you could go back in time and tell the people who just watched the towers go down, 'Oh, hey, in 23 years, these guys who are responsible for this crime we just witnessed are going to be getting plea deals so they can avoid death and serve life in prison.'"

Sen. Mitch McConnell said the deals were a "revolting abdication of the government's responsibility to defend America and provide justice."

House Speaker Mike Johnson added, "For more than two decades, the families of those murdered by these terrorists have waited for justice. This plea deal is a slap in the face of those families. They deserved better from the Biden-Harris Administration."

National Security Council officials said Biden, who recently "dropped out" of the 2024 presidential race after he exhibited multiple episodes of a declining mental ability, played no role in the decision.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, of New York, said, "Any plea deal with the terrorists responsible for killing thousands of Americans including so many of my constituents is unacceptable. We owe it to the victims, their families and those 9/11 heroes who continue dying today from related illnesses to pursue the death penalty."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

WASHINGTON – Why does the government appear to want to kill January 6 political prisoner Ryan Samsel?

Throughout his nearly four years of pretrial detention, Samsel has pleaded – to no avail – with judges and jail staff to allow him the critical, life-saving vascular surgery he was prescribed before his arrest to stop his blood from clotting.

Instead, he developed 17 blood clots throughout his body while being systemically denied medical treatment during his incarceration. Left untreated, the clots morph into blood-flow-obstructing fibroids.

Thus, each day Samsel is refused surgery his life is literally at risk.

But the Biden Justice Department has essentially played political football with the lives of Samsel and all the other so-called "insurrectionists" who were unprecedentedly assaulted, gassed, bombed and shot at with less-than-lethal munitions by police, terrorized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, denied bail while held in pretrial custody for years for nonviolent crimes, and handed shockingly lengthy prison sentences for trumped-up or trivial charges that are normally treated as misdemeanors punishable by fines or a maximum one-year prison term.

In addition to being denied the lifesaving procedure, Samsel has essentially been tortured while detained in pretrial detention for "his role in the Capitol riot," repeatedly assaulted by jail guards, from which he has sustained irreversible injuries including loss of eyesight and a broken orbital floor. He has sometimes been detained in solitary confinement for weeks and months at a time.

While caged in a filthy cell in Metropolitan Detention Center Brooklyn, with the assistance of this reporter and a legal expert, Samsel determined to fight for his medical and civil rights pro se in two groundbreaking lawsuits.

In both a Petition of Writ of Mandamus and a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed in the Eastern District of New York on July 19, Ryan Samsel – the political prisoner, Pennsylvania barber and former MMA fighter – lays out how he has been routinely trafficked across the country between different correctional facilities as the respondents systemically circumvent the law and doctors' orders to deny him critical care and emergency surgery in what he suspects is a calculated attempt to take his life.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Kamala Harris, installed on the top line of the Democrats' ballot this fall in replacement of a mentally faltering Joe Biden, needs to produce.

Something. Just about anything.

Or she'll end up the "latest useful idiot" for the Democrat party's power brokers.

That's according to columnist Maureen Callahan in the Daily Mail.

Harris right now is proclaiming to audiences that, "We won't go back."?

"It allows the voter to project whatever meaning they like, and for women, many will surely interpret this as a call to restore reproductive rights in full. Such is the minefield the Trump-Vance ticket must navigate," Callahan explained.

"That said, Harris has no existential reason for running. She has no record, no real cause to show after four years as VP. Right now, she's running on the fumes of relief and emotion, the attempt to turn her into your 'cool wine aunt,' a Gen Z 'brat' who is messy and relatable – but this all has a very short shelf life.

"If Kamala Harris can't project confidence, purpose, and a real, actionable agenda, she will remain nothing but a figurehead — another empty suit that the true Dem powerbrokers put forward as their latest useful idiot."

Right now, she explained, "Just because Joe Biden isn't capable of being president doesn't mean Kamala Harris is. Yet we are now suffering through another unthinking coronation by the liberal media, their emotional incontinence soiling any iota of critical thought."

While Harri's popularity seemingly surged, especially among Democrats, with the fact that Biden now is out, such a bump will end.

"Simply put, Kamala Harris is not the best candidate. She is not the brightest. She is a political hack, a mediocrity who — like her current boss — found herself the beneficiary of luck and timing rather than grit and intellect."

Callahan's column outlined the six "fatal secrets" about Harris that "she'll wish you didn't know."

First, she said, "Harris owns the border." That means the catastrophic crisis that has been created by Biden's decision to open the southern border and essentially invite millions of illegal aliens to move onto U.S. soil.

She was, after all, the "border czar" for Biden, then allowed an estimated 10 million illegals into the country, including, undoubtedly, known terrorists.

Then, too, she repeatedly vouched for Biden's mental ability, claiming just weeks ago "We have a very bold and vibrant president in Joe Biden," when the facts now show he's not reliably able to string words into a sentence.

The two explanations for that are that she was "so far out of the president's loop" she didn't know anything, or "she lied."

Third, citing a staff turnover rate of about 92% in her office, Callahan described Harris as an alleged bully.

"She is reportedly well-known for cursing out her staff, for chasing her most talented hires out the door, and refusing to read her briefing books, then exploding at her staff for being unprepared," the column said.

And how does "particularly craven" sound for a description?

"After accusing Biden of backing historically racist policies during a televised June 2019 presidential debate — causing Biden to reportedly say during a commercial break, 'Well, that was some f***ing bull****', and forever earning the enmity of Jill Biden — Harris, who dropped out of that race with a 3 percent approval rating, accepted his VP slot."

Still more is that she has zero foreign policy experience. And "zero backbone."

"Harris' husband, Doug Emhoff, is Jewish, yet Harris caves to the radicals in her party, refusing to attend Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's wartime address to Congress last week," Callahan wrote.

Lastly, there's that total absence of "stated premise or philosophy," evidenced by that "no record, no real cause."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

JERUSALEM – Three hundred days have passed since Oct. 7, the day when hordes of well-trained Hamas commandos and ordinary Gazans breached Israel's southern border fence and indulged in an orgy of blood-letting, pillage, rape, murder and kidnapping, the likes of which hadn't been perpetrated against Jews for 80 years. Some 1,200 Israelis died.

Then on Oct. 8, Iran's powerful proxy Hezbollah, started firing ordnance into Israel's north, creating the environment for a potential regional war.

Now have recent events brought that possibility even closer?

Following Hamas' invasion, the Israeli military focused initially on eliminating or capturing Gazan Palestinians roaming Israel's southern territory, and then turned its focus on dealing with the locus from which the threat emanated. Three hundred days is by far Israel's longest war, and at least in part would be anathema to the doctrine one of the country's founding fathers – David Ben-Gurion – initiated: Israel's wars should be short and fought on the enemy's territory.

This particular enemy, however, having wasted the treasure bestowed upon it to create a subterranean terrorist state is unlike anything that could have been imagined in the 1940s. And so, the IDF has painstakingly – and at great human cost on both its and the Palestinian side – determined to prevent the possibility of a repeat of the slaughter on that Black Sabbath in October.

After 300 hundred days we must also pause to remember the approximately 115 Israeli hostages – several of whom are known to no longer be alive – still held in Hamas captivity. Recent events have overshadowed the pressing need to arrive at a hostage deal – and both the Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Hamas rulers in Gaza and elsewhere, have played their ignominious part in prolonging this all-too-human tragedy.

We should not lose sight, however, of what might seem an obvious statement; a ceasefire was in place on October 6, and Hamas obliterated it in such a dramatic way to ensure overwhelming reprisals against the very people it claims to represent, but whose blood it holds cheaply.

While we mark the 300th day since Hamas' brutal attack, it has been 299 days since Hezbollah – a highly trained and massively armed wing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – began its so-called "act of resistance" in solidarity with the Palestinians, and began firing missiles, rockets, and UAVs into Israel's north.

It has succeeded in emptying large swaths of northern Israel, attempting to redraw the contours of the border, by forcing the evacuation and internal displacement of up to 100,000 people. Some of Israel's border towns like Kiryat Shmona or Metulla are ghostly quiet, emptied of their people; and in some cases with up to a third of residential dwellings destroyed – used as target practice for Hezbollah operatives across the Lebanese border.

These towns and kibbutzim are also symbolic of Zionism itself, holding historical and cultural power. Some of them predate the official declaration of the State of Israel in May 1948, and they represent an unquenchably adventurous and pioneering Jewish spirit. Indeed, during the Arab Revolt of 1936-39, the Jewish leaders in British Mandate Palestine encouraged Jews to settle the land to the outermost reaches of its borders, both in the south around Gaza, and abutting Lebanon in the north.

Prior even to that, heroic Zionist figures such as Joseph Trumpeldor, a one-armed, one-eyed former soldier in the Tsarist army who fought and was wounded in the Russo-Japanese War, came to pre-Mandate Palestine to defend Jewish settlement. He fought Arab bandits in Tel Hai in the northern Galilee – exactly the area upon which Hezbollah has designs. It was Trumpeldor who reportedly said while he lay dying following the battle, "No matter, it is good to die for our country."

So much for history, though. We are now at a point – following the targeted assassinations of senior Hezbollah leader Fuad Shukr in Lebanon, and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, of a possibility of all-out war. Israel immediately took responsibility for Shukr's killing – a man it should be remembered was not only responsible for the last 10 months of incessant Hezbollah attacks against Israel – including one on Saturday, which killed 12 children playing soccer on a Majdal Shams field – but also was instrumental in the 1983 truck bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut.

He along with others introduced the world to the notion of suicide bombing in that attack, and for which the U.S. State Department placed a $5 million bounty on his head.

The man behind the massacre

Meanwhile, Israel has officially kept quiet about the Haniyeh hit – to the point Netanyahu has issued a directive for ministers to not speak about it. In a way, it is irrelevant whether it was the IDF or not, the assumption is that it was, and taking credit for it is neither here nor there.

Israel publicly vowed in October to eliminate Hamas' leaders, and it has systematically gone after the organization's most senior figures, following a policy, colloquially known in intelligence circles as the "Munich Doctrine." This was the program of revenge Israel's then prime minister Golda Meir set out to hunt down and kill the orchestrators of the Munich Olympics massacre in 1972, in which 11 Israeli athletes were murdered.

It took at least a decade, but Israel successfully eliminated all who were connected. The IDF and Israel's security forces have removed four of Hamas' top six leaders – Saleh al-Arouri, killed like Shukr in Hezbollah's Beirut stronghold of Dahiyeh on Jan. 1; Marwan Issa in the Nuseirat Camp on March 10; Mohammed Deif, whose death was unconfirmed until Thursday, but who was killed in Rafah on July 13; and Haniyeh. Only Yahya Sinwar, thought to be deep underground somewhere in Gaza – likely Rafah – and assumed to be surrounded by Israeli hostages, and Khaled Mashal, who was exiled in Doha along with Haniyeh – and who is touted to become Hamas' new leader – remain.

On Thursday, Hezbollah and Iran vowed "vengeance" on Israel, saying, "Israel's acts of aggression would not go unpunished." Hezbollah has consistently said an attack on Beirut would be met with an attack on Tel Aviv. And while the IDF's attack on the apartment block where Shukr was known to be was exceptionally accurate, relying on pinpoint intelligence, several civilians were killed.

It is unclear if Hezbollah would use precision-guided munitions to attack Tel Aviv or attempt to overwhelm Israel's defensive missile umbrella. Hezbollah's leader Hassan Nasrallah – who is thought to live largely underground and frequently changes location for fear of assassination attempts on him – spoke later Thursday.

In his address, Nasrallah mentioned the war had entered a "new phase" three times, saying Israel had crossed a red line and "must expect rage and revenge." He said international pressure won't work and the war in Gaza must stop if people want the attacks on Israel to stop. He threatened both "Israel and whoever backs them." He hinted at other forces joining – looking for a "precise and painful" attack. Iran would respond, he added, and it would be more significant than the previous one.

Nasrallah also mentioned "civilian casualties," giving the impression of deliberately targeting Israeli civilians in retaliation, while denying Hezbollah had anything to do with the deadly attack on Majdal Shams. He highlighted the notion of honor for the region, a nod to the shame Iran feels for the attack carried out on its territory.

At Haniyeh's Tehran funeral, Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamanei spoke about it being his country's "duty to respond" to the Hamas leader's killing. It should be noted, Haniyeh's assassination is a source of great embarrassment to the Iranian regime. He was an honored guest of the mullahs, invited to attend the inauguration of Iran's new president Masoud Pezeshkian at the country's parliament Tuesday.

Crucially, he was also staying at an IRGC-owned property in Tehran. He was ostensibly under its protection, and it failed to do so in the most spectacular way. In a region where saving face is a key component of social and cultural mores, it cannot be overstated how much of a rank humiliation this is.

Indeed, reports surfaced Thursday saying Khamanei had ordered a direct Iranian attack on Israel in retribution for the Haniyeh strike. On April 13 Iran responded to the killing of Mohammad Reza Zahedi, a senior commander in the Quds Force – the operational arm of the IRGC in Damascus on April 1, by launching some 330 ballistic missiles, drones and rockets.

Miraculously, almost all of these either fell short or were shot out of the sky due to a combined effort of multiple countries, which included other than Israel itself, France, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom and the United States. A similarly disproportionate response could be forthcoming. Although it is not at all clear on this occasion whether Iran will telegraph its intentions and give the defensive shield the time to array in the way in which it did previously. Or, if the countries involved would be able to respond similarly again.

Another scenario is the possibility of a coordinated attack; where Iran – emboldened by the lack of tighter U.S. administration oversight – could well take the lead in any strike, but it would be joined – in a multi-front pincer movement – by Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, other Iranian Shiite proxies in Iraq and Syria, and perhaps even stoking unrest in Judea and Samaria. As well as a coordinated projectile attack, Iran's vast army of cyber terrorists might also be activated to try and hack sensitive military sites or cause chaos for ordinary Israelis.

Middle Eastern analysts speaking in a Spaces forum on X suggested there was unlikely to be just a single attack, pointing out that multiple targets, potentially including Israeli embassies or diplomatic missions across the globe, could be forthcoming. Hezbollah has a very strong presence in South America for example. Another potential option could be the targeted assassination of a high-ranking or highly visible Israeli, whether in Israel itself or another part of the world.

Despite appearances, the regime in Tehran is generally a rational actor and views its own survival as key. However, the path of retribution which Khamanei, the Supreme National Security Council, and the IRGC have vowed to travel down is filled with jeopardy. A massive – even overwhelming response – which causes significant casualties in Israel, will almost inevitably lead to a wider regional war, which will likely also require the U.S. administration to stop sitting on the fence, and which may in turn kindle the flames of World War 3, about which President Donald Trump has recently sounded the alarm.

Netanyahu warned in an address to the nation on Wednesday evening "challenging days are ahead," but vowed the country was "ready for every scenario" and "will exact a very heavy price for any aggression against us."

While our immediate concern must be on what the Iranian response will be – which includes the various proxies it has activated and funded to serve the very purpose of destroying the world's only Jewish state, it's important to put some things into perspective.

The response of the world's media has been shameful, and while it paints Trump as a menace to the global order and calls vice-presidential candidate JD Vance a "weirdo" for believing and living his natalist ideals, it labels Haniyeh, a mass-murderer and embezzler of billions of dollars a "tough, but moderate" ceasefire negotiator. This is reminiscent of the Washington Post's bizarre and self-owning take on the demise of ISIS leader Abu-Bakr al-Baghdadi, completely ignoring his bloody reign of terror merely calling him an "austere religious scholar."

There are also bizarre claims Israel "escalated" the situation by taking out Shukr and Haniyeh. Shukr has been responsible for the last 299 days of in all-but-name war in Israel's north, and Haniyeh was indivisible from the organization that carried out the worst pogrom against Jews since the darkest days of the Holocaust.

And now, we come to the U.S. administration. One is hesitant to label it the "Biden administration," because it seems evident the man himself is to play no further part in American politics – having been peremptorily dismissed in subservience to the greater needs of the Democratic Party. On Wednesday, following Haniyeh's assassination, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken was quick to deny any U.S. involvement, distancing the administration – whoever is in charge of it – and bleating an increasingly forlorn plea for "deescalation."

To his credit, Biden instinctively backed Israel in the days and early weeks following the Hamas attack, but as he has grown increasingly enfeebled and distanced from the central levers of power, functionaries in the State Department among others, has successfully put daylight between Washington and Jerusalem – highlighted by the slow-walking of the much-needed rearmament shipments.

The irony of the situation – and it is certainly a bitter one because lessons remained unlearned by an administration that hubristically claimed in 2021 on its assumption of power "the adults were back in the room" – is that its entire foreign policy has been an unmitigated failure. Putting Ukraine to one side for the moment, it has strained every sinew – and also credulity – to prevent a war from happening, by seeming to advocate for the path of least resistance and appeasing the mullahs in Tehran. It was a policy the Obama administration spectacularly failed with, and Joe Biden telegraphed it was his desire to reanimate the JCPOA and roll back Trump'' harsh deservedly harsh treatment of the regime, before he had even officially assumed the reins of power.

Take for example, the administration's attitude after Iran fired those hundreds of missiles at Israel back in April. "Take the win" was the message, as if the killing of a senior IRGC general among others in Damascus, somehow warranted the indiscriminate firing of ballistic missiles, drones and rockets in Israel's direction – aimed no doubt to cause maximum fatalities and casualties by being targeted at large population centers.

The stakes right now could not be higher, and there is little room for error for both Iran and all of its proxies.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A new report in the Washington Times has documented Kamala Harris' view on databases listing the nation's guns – and their owners.

And just exactly why she supported that particular scheme in technology.

It was because she wanted to use those lists of gun owners to send police out to confiscate the weapons.

The report confirmed, "Harris once threatened to use databases of gun owners to send police to their homes to confiscate firearms."

There had recently been shootings in California and Texas when she attended a Democratic presidential primary forum in 2019.

That was shortly before she dumped her campaign that year over its underwhelming support, in which she did not win the support of a single convention delegate.

The report explains Harris announced she was "prepared to take executive action" to demand "comprehensive background checks," the report said.

Further, she planned to attack gun dealers and ban what she called "assault weapons."

She boasted of already having carried off those campaigns, in California.

The report said, "She said she knew how to enforce tough gun laws because as California attorney general she allowed police to 'knock on the doors of people' on a state list of prohibited gun owners and people deemed a danger to themselves and others."

She boasted, "We sent law enforcement out to take those guns because we have to deal with this on all levels."

Since then, Harris has worked on promoting those "red flag" laws, those schemes adopted by multiple states that allow an individual to go to court where a judge would, without evidence, decide whether someone else should be deprived of any weapons they may own.

She promoted the launch of a National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center, paid for by the Department of Justice.

That works to impose those gun confiscation laws on states.

It already has been facing backlash from state officials who have objected to its agenda to "suspend fundamental rights under the Second Amendment with no genuine due process."

Recently, Harris campaign consultants have claimed "she no longer supported a mandatory buyback of civilian-owned 'assault weapons,'" the report said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Georgia was one of the swing states in the 2020 presidential election where there were concerns about massive fraud: Tens of thousands of probably illegal ballots.

Those concerns never were fully investigated.

And now a report in the Federalist is warning that because of that failure, the 2024 vote in Georgia is setting up to be a catastrophe.

The report explains there were charges that some 35,000 possibly illegal votes were counted that election. That was the election when Joe Biden was declared the winner by only 11,779 votes.

The issue is being pushed by Mark Davis, the president of Data Productions Inc. "and an expert in voter data analytics and residency issues," according to the report. He filed documents with the Georgia secretary of state and the state election board seeking an investigation of some 25,794 possibly illegal votes subsequently cast in the 2022 midterms.

The issue is a state requirement that residents must vote in the county in which they reside unless they have changed their residence within 30 days of the election.

"And now, with just four months until the November 2024 general election, the state's refusal to address the problem ensures chaos will ensue unless there is a complete blowout by one of the candidates," the report explained.

The evidence includes that National Change of Address processing Davis performed showed nearly 25,800 Georgia residents filed such a notice with the U.S. Postal Service, documenting they were moving from one Georgia county to another.at the time of the 2022 midterms. The issue was the same as during 2020.

"Those notices of a permanent address change all fell outside the 30-day grace period that allows Georgia residents to cast a ballot in the county in which they previously lived. None of the 25,000-plus voters updated their address and instead all appear to have voted in the county in which they previously resided," the report charged.

The Federalist reported it reviewed the data, and found "strong evidence that those Georgia residents had, in fact, permanently moved to a new county, as their NCOA notices suggested. If so, and they also moved at the date specified, they voted illegally in the 2022 midterm election."

Further, those voters would have violated another state statute by "providing false information about their name or address" when they voted, the report notes.

Violating the state law would be a felony, but there could be additional charges under the Voting Rights Act if they voted improperly in a federal election.

Davis notes that "no substantive action has been taken to address these issues" so the state undoubtedly will "see tens of thousands more of these residency issues in the upcoming 2024 General Election…"

The problem that reared up in 2020 was that under state law, "if there are more illegal votes cast than the margin of victory, or if a judge sees evidence of 'systemic irregularities,'" the election could be ordered held again.

Actually, at the time, President Donald Trump challenged the outcome in Georgia based on evidence, but a judge in Fulton County ordered his case delayed until after the state results were certified.

The Federalist noted, "If the closeness of the 2020 general election repeats itself this November, the problem of Georgians voting illegally in counties in which they don't reside could threaten the validity of the election results. That remains true no matter which candidate prevails because, for all their deriding of Trump for contesting the 2020 election, Democrats, when on the losing end, bring their own legal challenges."

It warns Georgia could "face a disaster in deciding whether and for whom to certify the vote," this November because of officials' own failure to investigate problems that were evident.

Davis actually filed his first complaint about the potentially illegal votes in 2021, but he now affirms that while Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger agreed to investigate, that never was done.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Biden-Harris administration is being asked to explain why it has delivered nearly $1 billion in U.S. taxpayer dollars to Hamas – in just the months since the terrorists in that Gaza-based organization invaded Israel and slaughtered some 1,200 civilians last Oct. 7.

It is researcher Robert Williams who has written at the Gatestone Institute that the subject is part of a lawsuit now pending in federal court, a lawsuit the administration has failed to get dismissed.

The case, from Rep. Ronny Jackson and victims of terror attacks in Israel, charges that Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken "knowingly and unlawfully" provided more than $1.5 billion in aid to Gaza and the West Bank since taking office.

The case explains Biden and Blinken have "known for years" that the U.S. aid is providing "material support" for Hamas' "tunnels, rockets, weapon procurement, and command and control infrastructure," among other terror structures.

A ruling from a federal court in Texas has rejected Biden's demands for it to be thrown out.

That ruling even noted there's evidence Biden continued to give tax money to UNRWA "even after Congress blocked funding to that group due to its support for Hamas' military infrastructure," the report said.

The case charges that Biden has delivered $896 million since the Oct. 7 massacre of innocents.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A crowd at the conference for the National Association of Black Journalists on Wednesday gasped, and there even were cheers, when President Donald Trump scolded a rude reporter who attacked him with list of loaded statements.

See it:

The reporter, on stage with Trump, called his old comments the "elephant in the room."

Why should, ABC's Rachel Scott demanded, blacks trust Trump after he allegedly made "false" claims about rivals, used negative descriptors for liberal prosecutors and said black journalists were asking stupid and racist questions.

Trump, who sat listening quietly during the attack, responded: "Well, first of all, I don't think I've ever been asked a question so … in such a horrible manner."

There was a collective gasp, interspersed with guffaws and laughter, from the crowd.

He continued, "You don't even say, 'Hello. How are you?' Are you with ABC? Because I think they are a fake news network. A terrible network."

More laughter.

"I think it's disgraceful that I came here in good spirit. I love the black population of this country. I've done so much for the black population of this country, including employment, including opportunity zones with Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, which is one of the greatest programs ever for black workers and black entrepreneurs … ."

He cited his work for black colleges. They were "out of money, stone cold broke. I saved them. Gave them long term financing," he said.

He cited the introduction as "very rude" and pointed out that he'd been told his opponent also would be there, and she wasn't.

"You invited me under false pretenses," he explained.

Then he noted that while he has too much respect for the conference to be late, the interviewer was half an hour late.

He said such "hostile" questioning was "a disgrace."