This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
For the third time in just months, a prominent Democrat has been accused of lying to federal officials about housing in order to get preferential mortgage terms.
First it was Letitia James, the attorney general for New York who flamboyantly claimed in a court case that is on appeal that President Donald Trump's companies committed fraud in loan deals the banks were happy to make, profited from, and would like to do again.
She was accused of wrongly claiming the location of her "primary residence."
Then it was Adam Schiff, the Democrat senator from California who pushed hard at the false claims of the Russiagate conspiracy theory over which Trump was impeached – and acquitted.
He apparently claimed two residences as his "primary" at the same time.
Now Trump is calling for Lisa D. Cook, a governor of the Federal Reserve who was appointed by Joe Biden, to leave her post because she faces the same accusations.
It was the U.S. Federal Housing FHFA that alleged, in a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, that Cook committed mortgage fraud by designating both an out of state condominium as well as a Michigan residence as her primary "home," at the same time.
Shortly later, the condo allegedly was offered for rent.
The government statement said, "When someone commits mortgage fraud, they undermine the faith and integrity of our System. It does not matter who you are – no one is above the law. We have sent a Criminal Referral to the Department of Justice with regard to the allegations against Ms. Cook, and the DOJ should go wherever the facts may lead them."
The Gateway Pundit said federal housing chief Bill Pulte also has called for Cook to resign, and asked if Fed chief Jerome Powell "was aware of her mortgage fraud."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Dear Netflix producers and creative team,
As someone who speaks daily to millions of Christians across America – through sermons, social media and broadcast platforms – I want to extend both a challenge and an invitation.
The Christian community is not a niche. It is a vast, values-driven audience that is hungry for stories that reflect their worldview, honor their convictions and stir their souls. With over 62% of American adults identifying as Christian in 2025 and 33% attending religious services monthly, this is not just a spiritual demographic – it's a formidable market segment. Faith-based movies designed for a broad audience like "THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING" ($382 million), "THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST" ($370 million), "HOME ALONE" ($286 million), "THE GRINCH" ($272 million) and "THE BLIND SIDE" ($256 million) have proven that when Christians see a Christian worldview represented with reverence and authenticity, they show up in droves and become a key element in the marketing campaign of such movies. Even secular titles, such as "TOP GUN: MAVERICK" or "AVENGERS: ENDGAME," that are careful not to include content antagonistic to Christian sensitivities tend to do far better than those that ignore this word-of-mouth promotion in favor of praise from peers.
Too often, adaptations of spiritually rich works, such as "THE MAGICIAN'S NEPHEW," veer into tones that feel ironic, irreverent or campy. These choices may appeal to critics, but they alienate the very audience that would champion the movie, and prevent it from becoming an unprecedented success if it honors the sacred themes embedded in the story.
If your adaptation of "THE MAGICIAN'S NEPHEW" broadly meets the following criteria, ensuring that Christians can find only content that supports their worldview, I will personally promote it to my subscriber base of over 69 million followers across our platforms. This includes email campaigns, livestream interviews and coordinated screenings through churches and Christian schools nationwide.
Here are the key criteria we believe are essential to resonate with the faith-based audience:
1. Faithful representation of Lewis's lore, story chronology and Christian themes:
– Emphasis on creation, fall and redemption motifs (e.g. Aslan's song creating Narnia)
– Clear allegorical parallels to biblical truths without distortion
– Respect for Lewis's theological intent, especially regarding good vs. evil
2. Moral integrity in storytelling
– Avoidance of gratuitous violence, sexual content or profanity
– Promotion of virtues like courage, sacrifice, obedience and humility
– Clear moral consequences for choices made by characters
3. Respectful portrayal of Aslan
– Aslan depicted with reverence, majesty and divine authority
– Avoid trivializing or reinterpreting Aslan's role as a Christ figure
– Voice and visual design that evoke awe and spiritual depth that maintain the key Christlike attributes of an awe-inspiring Aslan as an authentic allegory of Jesus Christ
4. Biblically resonant themes
– Creation of Narnia echoing Genesis 1
– The temptation of Digory's mother and the forbidden fruit paralleling Eden
– Redemption and healing as reflections of divine grace
5. High artistic and production quality
– Cinematography, score and acting that elevate the story's spiritual tone
– Avoidance of campiness, over-stylized, cheesy or over-commercialization
– Aesthetic beauty that reflects the wonder and sacredness of Narnia
6. Family-friendly and edifying
– Suitable for children and adults alike
– Encourages meaningful family discussions about faith and morality
– Offers spiritual nourishment, not just entertainment
7. Avoidance of secular reinterpretation
– No attempt to "modernize" or secularize the allegory
– Refraining from turning Lewis' work into generic fantasy
– No ideological overlays that conflict with Lewis' or biblical values
– No reinterpretation of gender-based personalities, i.e. the two children
In addition to these suggestions, adherence to these criteria can lead to enthusiastic endorsements from other respected pastors, theologians or Christian reviewers, as well as screenings hosted by other churches or faith-based organizations, inclusion in the broader Christian media outlets, and could be co-promoted with Lewis' apologetic works like "Mere Christianity."
Potential pathways towards capitalizing on these opportunities and further fine tuning for greatest possible appeal to the largest target audience would include careful and thoughtful reflection by the director, screenwriter or producers for a better understanding of Lewis' Christian worldview, which could be achieved by consultation with theologians and/or Lewis scholars during development.
Feel free to reach out to me and/or my staff to start this journey toward unprecedented community stakeholder engagement, which could easily lead to a new standard for marketing these types of products across America and the world.
Yours sincerely,
Ted Baehr
Chairman of the Christian Film & Television Commission
Founder and publisher of MOVIEGUIDE
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Joe Scarborough, the left-leaning host of "Morning Joe," is now blasting California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, for "quite embarrassing" behavior in recent attempts to act like President Donald Trump.
"The Democrats are trying to find their footing and it's quite embarrassing, actually," Scarborough said Wednesday. "Gavin Newsom, I mean if you've seen what he's doing online."
"Don't try to turn the ship 180 degrees … They don't know what to do!"
"I have a good idea. Instead of trying to school Donald Trump, talk into the camera about affordability," Scarborough continued. "Talk about what you're going to do for housing."
"Donald Trump's not on the ballot in '26, he's not on the ballot in '28," he concluded. "You're not running against Donald Trump!"
The Hill reported Wednesday: "California Gov. Gavin Newsom has figured out the best way to get under President Trump's skin. Act like him.
"In an effort to egg Trump on – and rally his own troops in the Democratic Party – Newsom has taken a page from Trump's playbook, mirroring everything from the president's rants to his social media habits.
"In recent days, the California governor has touted his own 'beautiful' midterm redistricting proposal and his 'beautiful' rally to boot – needling Trump's braggadocious ways.
"Newsom has started to write his social media posts in ALL CAPS, just like the president."
"Wake the f*** up to what's going on in this country," Newsom said to author Brian Tyler Cohen on Sunday. "We're going to put everything on the damn line."
"And that's why I'm proud of the folks from Texas. And that's why I'm proud of folks showing up at the No Kings rally. People haven't given up yet. I'm telling you, we can win. We're going to do this. We can win this November. We can win next November, and then we can get this country back on track."
"Democrats are over being the nice guy party," Democrat strategist Jamal Simmons, who served as Kamala Harris' communications director in the vice president's office told the Hill. "Standing up for Dem values doesn't mean you have to play by the old rules and Newsom in particular is showing he'll go as low as he needs to to take on Trump."
Former White House Press Secretary Dana Perino, who served under President George W. Bush, advised Newsom on Monday: "You have to stop it with the Twitter thing."
"If I were his wife, I would say: You are making a fool of yourself! Stop it! Do not let your staff tweet, and if you're doing it yourself, put the phone away and start over. He's got a big job as governor of California, but if he wants an even bigger job, he has to be a little bit more serious."
Others comments online include:
"Newsom trying to cosplay as a conservative is peak cringe. Sorry, no one's buying it. Just own your record instead of pretending."
"Newsom's strategy may alienate his base and highlights the risks of political theatrics.
"If Morning Joe thinks you are embarrassing then you know things are bad."
"I've been wondering what the party is going to do without their 'orange man bad' policy. It's the only policy they have."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A legal analysis of the political agenda adopted by James Boasberg, the anti-Trump judge working in the courts system in Washington, D.C., reveals how he abandoned his role as a "judge" and made himself "like a foreign diplomat" by "attempting to influence how the Trump administration conducted foreign affairs."
That's according to an appeals court judge whose comments were cited by Thomas Jipping, senior legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation, and John Osorio, a research associate, online.
The fight is over President Donald Trump's agenda to secure American borders and remove illegal alien criminals invited in by the open borders policies of Joe Biden during his years in the White House.
Boasberg has fought Trump's agenda, even to the point of trying to enforce his own order that the U.S. Supreme Court overturned.
He was the judge who even tried to order Trump to tell airplanes carrying illegal alien criminals, that already had left American airspace, to return to the U.S. with the criminals.
The analysis notes Trump is backed by the Constitution, which gives him authority over matters involving international relations, the Alien Enemies Act that allows the president to apprehend and remove the natives, citizens, or subjects of a hostile foreign government if that government attempts or threatens an 'invasion or predatory incursion' against the U.S. and the Immigration and Nationality Act that lets the secretary of state designate as Foreign Terrorist Organizations groups that engage in terrorist activity and threaten the safety of Americans or the United States.
The drama developed over recent months as State designated eight transnational gangs and cartels FTOs, including Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan prison gang, Trump then cited the AEA and TdA's links to the "narco-terrorism" of regime chief Nicolas Maduro.
The administration took into custody dozens of TdA agents, with deportation plans to El Salvador.
Their lawyers went to Boasberg and called for him to protect their criminal clients.
On that day, "between 5:25 and 5:45 p.m., two flights with a total of 137 suspected TdA members left Texas, bound first for Honduras and then El Salvador. At 7:25 p.m., Boasberg certified a class of all individuals covered by the proclamation and issued a TRO prohibiting the government from 'removing' them for 14 days. On Mar. 28, he extended that order for another 14 days," the analysis said.
The Supreme Court then vacated both of his orders, prompting Boasberg to launch contempt proceedings against the government because he claimed "removing" meant turning over custody to another government, which actually happened after his order and the planes landed.
"Boasberg's shocking ultimatum to the executive branch was this: Return the deportees to U.S. soil or identify the officials who ordered the deportation so they could be prosecuted. He set a hard deadline of Apr. 23," the analysis confirmed.
"But wait—hadn't the Supreme Court already vacate Boasberg's TRO? How can someone disobey an order that, in effect, Boasberg had no authority to issue?"
Soon the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was ruling.
Judges Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao sided with the government.
Rao took the high road, to Boasberg's low, warning he was intruding "upon the powers committed to the Executive Branch."
"This case is highly unusual, and I have found no other like it, perhaps because no district court has threatened criminal contempt against Executive Branch officials as a backdoor to coercing compliance with an order that has been vacated by the Supreme Court," she said.
Boasberg's politics, she wrote, were "untenable" and described his order "coercive."
WorldNetDaily has reported on Trump's criticism of Boasberg.
On social media, he said, "People are shocked by what is going on with the Court System."
"I was elected for many reasons, but a principal one was LAW AND ORDER, a big part of which is QUICKLY removing a vast Criminal Network of individuals, who came into our Country through the Crooked Joe Biden Open Borders Policy!
"These are dangerous and violent people, who kill, maim and, in many other ways, harm the people of our Country. The Voters want them OUT, and said so in Record Numbers.
"If it was up to District Judge Boasberg and other Radical Left Judges, nobody would be removed, the President wouldn't be allowed to do his job, and people's lives would be devastated all throughout our Country. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"
He's also called for Boasberg's impeachment.
Trump also reposted a message by Mike Davis, the former chief counsel for nominations to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley and founder and president of the Article III Project, which defends constitutionalist judges and the rule of law.
Davis urged Trump: "Please revoke Judge Boasberg's security clearance. He has demonstrated he cannot be trusted with keeping secrets."
Davis also noted:
Here is the fatal flaw with DC Obama Judge Jeb Boasberg's order:
Even if these designated foreign terrorists are entitled to individual court review before their deportation, which is disputed, the DC court is not the proper court.
Judge Boasberg did not, and does not, have the power to do what he is purporting to do. For this reason alone, everything he is doing is lawless. But it is much worse; it is also dangerous.
Judge Boasberg ran to his courtroom to hold a Saturday hearing, even though he was not even serving as the emergency judge that weekend. (How did he get this case?) He publicly exposed an ongoing U.S. military, intelligence, and law-enforcement operation with an American ally dealing with the most vicious terrorists (Tren de Aragua) and international gang member (MS13) in the Western Hemisphere.
That public exposure put American and allied lives in grave danger.
Stunningly, Judge Boasberg even ordered the President to turn around planes full of terrorists over the Gulf of America, without knowing the fuel levels, the security footprint back in America, or other crucial operational details.
Attorney General Pam Bondi explained the complaint over "misconduct" by Boasberg involved his "making improper public comments about President Trump and his administration."
These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, she confirmed.
A DOJ official confirmed, "Judge Boasberg first tried to persuade Chief Justice Roberts and other federal judges that the Trump administration would not follow court orders, despite having no basis for his belief. Then he acted on his baseless belief again and again in litigation over which he was presiding. Judge Boasberg violated the Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, including the requirement that he 'promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.'"
The Washington Examiner said the official complaint, for "misconduct," against Boasberg charged him with those "improper public comments" about the administration.
Boasberg has fought the administration's agendas, including that for securing the borders and deporting illegal aliens, especially criminals, for months.
WND has reported it was the Federalist that obtained access to comments Boasberg made at a recent judicial conference undermining the president.
He disparaged the president, even though he's required to be neutral on issues and people in his court, where Trump is a defendant in a number of cases brought by activists trying to undermine his agenda for America.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche later described Boasberg as a "threat to the rule of law" for using his own agendas in his court rulings to try to control the decisions of the Executive Branch.
Boasberg also was part and parcel of the Russiagate conspiracy theory, advancing permissions for the Barack Obama regime to spy on political opponents.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A law firm in Des Moines, Iowa, is being accused of trying, on behalf of teacher Erin Slifer, to intimidate a student's mother who objected to "controversial curricula and instructional materials" introduced by the teacher at Belmond-Klemme Community School.
The legal team at BolesWitoskyStewart Law had written to parent Elayne Casalins threatening her for her comments to the school board about "a matter of public concern namely controversial curricula and instructional materials" at the school attended by her 12-year-old son.
The threats came in a "cease-and-desist" letter in which Slifer's lawyers refused even it identify what they claimed was defamatory about their client.
"On behalf of Mrs. Casalins, we reject the legal arguments and demands in your letter, and we see it as little more than an attempt to intimidate Mrs. Casalins into giving up her First Amendment rights to speak and to petition her local school board regarding a matter of public concern," explained a letter from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty.
Further, "By choosing controversial curricula and instructional materials for public school students and not giving notice to parents so that they might opt their children out of the controversial curricula, Ms. Slifer injected herself into a public controversy. As pointed out above, both the Iowa Legislature and the Belmond-Klemme School Board have acknowledged that this is a controversial topic and the school board held a public meeting under a published school board policy to discuss it. By choosing controversial curricula and instructional materials in a system that makes such a decision a matter of public concern, Ms. Slifer became a limited purpose public figure. Thus, the doctrine of defamation per se does not apply as a matter of law."
WILL explained Casalins first addressed her concerns about offending material with the teacher, then the school principal, then the superintendent.
"She went to the school board because no action was taken after she explained her concerns to the teacher, principal, and superintendent. She then spoke at a June 19, 2025, Belmond-Klemme Community School Board meeting to make objections to the instructional materials used in her son's classroom and the lack of notice she was given as a parent," WILL reported.
She documented a teacher made the students watch the PG-13 movie "Till" without any parental notice or consent — even though many students, including her son, were only 12 years old. She further reported that there was a discussion of Black Lives Matter, racism, and police brutality all without parental notification or consent, WILL reported.
Her concerns were the possible violations of state law in the use of the curricula, that she was denied her right, protected by state law, to object, and more.
The teacher then contacted the law firm and it sent the mom a letter with the threats, demanding she not participate in any "public discussion regarding this matter of public concern."
"Mrs. Casalins had and continues to have a First Amendment right, and the right under Iowa law, to speak on this critical subject and to petition her government (the school board) for relief. We think it is crucial for parents to be free to direct their children's upbringing and education and not be prevented from doing so by threats of a claim for defamation," said Cory Brewer, WILL lawyer.
Casalins said, "As a new American citizen, I have constitutional rights that make this nation the envy of the world. There is no better place to live your life and raise a family, and we moved to Iowa to live in a state that upholds these fundamental American values. I was shocked to receive such a threatening letter from a law firm representing a public employee, my son's teacher. But I will continue to tell my story and speak out for my son and the rights of parents across the country."
WILL also pointed out that the teacher's lawyers declined to "set forth the words spoken by Mrs. Casalins at that meeting that you allege were false and constituted defamation per se."
"There was nothing in her presentation that was defamatory towards anyone, much less defamatory per se with respect to Ms. Slifer," WILL informed the lawyers.
Further, WILL pointed out that in one of the cases cited by the teacher's lawyers as precedent for their threats, the plaintiff who complained about someone else's statements actually lost the case.
"Mrs. Casalins had and has a First Amendment right to speak on this subject and to petition her government (the school board) for relief. Ms. Slifer may not lawfully interfere with those rights through your letter," WILL stated.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In a statement posted on X Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security criticized the media's use of the term "undocumented immigrant," emphasizing that the appropriate terminology is "illegal alien."
The post, which includes several media headlines using the wokier term, reads, "'Undocumented immigrant' is the immigration equivalent of 'they/them.' DHS has no interest in the left's open borders pronouns. 'Alien' is the technical legal term, and that is what DHS will use. 'Illegal' is the only way to correctly describe lawbreakers. Next thing you know you will be calling burglars 'undocumented houseguests.'"
Fox News reports that federal law includes multiple references to the term "illegal alien" or "alien" in describing persons who incur into the U.S. illegally or without proper documentation.
In 8 U.S.C (U.S. Code) 1182 and 1227 – provisions dealing with admission and removal of foreign nationals – the terms "inadmissible aliens" and "deportable aliens" are used.
In federal statute delineating employment and public benefits, 8 U.S.C. 1324(a) and 8 U.S.C. 1611 describe the "unlawful employment of aliens" and "aliens ineligible for federal public benefits.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Officials in Cincinnati have charged the white man beaten by multiple blacks with a crime related to the July 26 late-night racial street brawl.
As Fox News reported, on Wednesday, authorities charged the unidentified 45-year-old white man with disorderly conduct for his part in the fight.
Police are not legally allowed to identify the man at this time. Under Marsy's law, victims of crimes are allowed to have their names withheld from the public.
According to the Fox report, authorities did not indicate what the man specifically did to warrant a disorderly conduct charge.
The charge comes after black community leaders in Cincinnati last week demanded the white man's prosecution, citing a video appearing to show him slapping one of the black individuals before the all-out assault.
As the Gateway Pundit reported, those leaders said the footage proved the white man should be facing at least the same charges as the six black Cincinnatians who brutally beat him and a white woman, Holly, who had tried to intervene to stop the melee, which left six people injured altogether.
At a press conference Aug. 11, Senior Pastor Tracie Hunter of the Western Hills Brethren In Christ Church demanded that the bald white man face criminal charges after citing the charges that had been filed against the black participants.
"Because those six individuals were charged with aggravated assault, which is a felony, the white guy incited or urged six other people to commit a felony, which means based on part B of the statute, he should be charged with inciting to violence, a felony of the third degree," Hunter claimed.
"If the riot is because of a slap, who incited the riot?" asked Rev. Damon Lynch. "Why are the only people being charged are the ones who look like me?"
Other black elected officials have made inflammatory statements about the incident, with Councilwoman Victoria Parks of Cincinnati saying the victims in the brawl "begged for that beat down," drawing calls for her resignation.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The investigations already have begun, in Congress, in the Department of Justice, and more, over the Democrats' scheming during the 2016 election to falsely accuse then-candidate Donald Trump's campaign of colluding with Russia.
Evidence shows what now is known as Russiagate was triggered by then-Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton but was pushed by Democrats at the highest levels of the Barack Obama administration.
While adherents sometimes still regurgitate the lies, it's been debunked, and investigators in Congress are reviewing the evidence, as are the professionals in the Department of Justice.
But now Hillary Clinton herself might be facing one move that others might not: An investigation into were ability to practice law.
A complaint has been filed by government watchdog Democracy Restored about her ethics, asking the Arkansas state bar to review whether her involvement in the conspiracy theory should affect her ability to practice law in the state.
The complaint cites the Arkansas Rules of Professional Conduct involving "Dishonesty" and "Prejudice to the Administration of Justice" and seeks a "formal review of the conduct of Hillary Rodham Clinton, Esq., a licensed attorney in the State of Arkansas, in connection with her actions during the 2016 presidential campaign," according to a report at Fox News.
Evidence revealed recently by the Senate Judiciary Committee suggests Clinton herself approved a plan "to release false information" with the purpose of smearing Trump.
The goal also apparently included distracting voters from her own scandal, in which she was investigated for putting government secrets on a private and unsecure email server in her home.
Investigations suggestions show that Democrats in power protected her from any charges for that.
The complaint said, "Within this release, there is an annex, which suggests that Clinton approved a plan created by one of her advisors to release false information with the purpose 'to smear' her political opponent during a presidential campaign and distract from the news surrounding her own legal accusations. This revelation demands an already overdue inquiry into Clinton's fitness as a member of the Arkansas Bar."
The complaint details her links to anti-Trump "opposition research" and alleges her campaign pushed unverified information to "injure" Trump.
She also allegedly, "personally signed off on an effort to amplify this bad intelligence to the media and federal law enforcement."
"Former Secretary Clinton's utilization of a bunk dossier by a foreign ex-spy to harm a political opponent violates basic ethical norms as well as the Arkansas bar's own rules of conduct for attorneys. The Arkansas bar needs to take a serious look at former Secretary Clinton's involvement in this scandal and take appropriate action," a Democracy Restored official told Fox.
While the letter states no criminal charges have been filed, "Recently released records have again increased the prospect of a federal investigation into her conduct."
The Trump administration already has been canceling the security clearances held by those involved in the scheme.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President's Donald Trump's famed border wall, installed and effective at deterring illegal aliens from crossing into the U.S., is getting an enhancement: Black paint.
Which is supposed to help the wall heat up in the southern sun, and thereby make it harder to climb.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem made the announcement:
And showed what is happening:
At a news conference in Santa Teresa, N.M., she said, "Now, if you look at the structure that's behind me, it's tall, which makes it very, very difficult to climb, almost impossible. It also goes deep into the ground, which would make it very difficult, if not impossible, to dig under. And today, we are also going to be painting it black. That is specifically at the request of the president, who understands that in the hot temperatures down here, when something is painted black, it gets even warmer, and it will make it even harder for people to climb."
Democrats and other liberals were losing their cool over the plan:
Other critics warned it would not be as hot at night, when the sun isn't shining. And they also asked if there are no gloves in Mexico. And at the other end of the spectrum was the suggestion from many commenters simply to electrify the wall. Or install razor wire.
Actually, the flood of millions of illegal aliens drawn to the United States under Joe Biden's open borders policies has been cut to only a trickle under Trump's combined efforts to secure the border in recent months.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
GAINESVILLE, Florida – An anti-woke Florida mother says her son's history teacher nominated him "Most Likely to Become A Dictator" for his conservative views, while another son was precluded from sitting next to his friend on the bus because of her conservative views.
Crystal Marull of Alachua County voiced her concerns to local officials, captured on camera by the Florida Channel.
"My son, 6 years old, was prohibited from sitting next to his friend on the school bus because a parent objected to my perspectives on book challenges," Marull said.
"My older son's history teacher let students label him a 'Naziphile' simply for his interest in history and participation in ROTC.
"She later nominated my son as the 'Most Liked to Become a Dictator' and had his classmates vote on it and try to force him to the front of the class to receive the certificate, which he rightly refused, all because of his conservative values and our perspectives."
Marull has been fighting woke books in the school system for years, and on Tuesday, she said on X: "School libraries are not a safe space. There are so many dark forces afoot, parents need to wake up.
"The groomers and pedophiles have infiltrated the school libraries! The 'banned book' arguments are all just a cover for their dark purposes."
Marull is getting plenty of positive support online, with comments including:
"You're doing the right thing, Mom! Despicable behavior from the teacher, who should be fired and teaching license revoked."
"Really @AlachuaSchools you have some serious problems. How is that teacher allowed to treat children like that? Disgusting behavior on both the teacher for doing it, and you for allowing it."
"Satanic."
"Why are we allowing teachers to bully conservative students? @EDSecMcMahon @HarmeetKDhillon."
"Hell, JAIL the teacher, this is child abuse."
"Does she need any help running for school board? Fight fight fight!"