This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
For the first time, Americans can see exactly how a major U.S. employer outsources American jobs, not in vague terms, but through formal documentation. A binding contract between Prudential Financial Inc. and Cognizant Technology Solutions lays out a step-by-step playbook for eliminating American jobs and shifting the work to foreign workers overseas.
This isn't theory, it's in writing. The document provides rare black-and-white evidence of how U.S.-based work is "transitioned" out of the country. While Americans have heard stories about being forced to train their replacements, this agreement reveals the actual process behind those headlines: how Prudential worked with Cognizant to plan, schedule and execute a full transfer of work to offshore teams, with American employees pushed out in the process.
The devil is in the details: The betrayal in black and white
Section 1.1(b) of the agreement openly states that the work previously handled by Prudential employees would be "eliminated" and reassigned to Cognizant. These weren't new jobs. They were the same roles Americans had been doing – application support, software maintenance, reporting – all now classified as functions to be transitioned out.
The language is careful but clear. Cognizant wouldn't just be stepping in to help; it was there to take over. The contract also gave Cognizant the right to perform any "incidental" tasks needed to complete the work, even if not spelled out directly. In other words, it had wide authority to expand its control over operations once embedded.
The built-in replacement plan
The contract's Transition Services section describes the process by which Cognizant would assume responsibility for Prudential's internal IT operations. A detailed transition plan was required, complete with milestone dates and task lists, all designed to avoid disruptions to business continuity. But what the contract avoids saying outright is what's plainly obvious: This plan definitively phases out American workers in favor of a lower-cost, offshore workforce.
This wasn't a case of hiring extra help. It was a direct replacement strategy. Cognizant was required to observe how Prudential's in-house team handled the work, copy it, and then eventually take it over – permanently. The agreement mandated a phased approach so the transfer wouldn't appear sudden. But behind the corporate phrasing was the harsh reality: The American team had to teach the offshore team how to do their jobs before being let go.
American workers forced to hand over their jobs
The agreement also makes it clear that Prudential would manage the entire transition internally. The company appointed project leads and gave Cognizant open access to internal systems, documents and staff. These staff were expected to help onboard the new offshore teams. But the contract offered them no job protection, no bonus, no role in the future structure. Their job was to help with the transition … and then leave.
Foreign labor in, American labor out
From the very first deliverables listed, it's clear what this contract was meant to do. The top priority: "Set up an offshore development center," or ODC. That's a dedicated office or facility in another country, in India in this case, where a foreign team will take over work that was once done in the U.S. This ODC becomes the new home base for handling core operations.
Right after that came the requirement to build and carry out a "knowledge transition plan," which is the process of transferring everything the American workers knew to the new offshore team. These steps weren't optional, they were the foundation of the entire deal. The rest – maintenance, bug fixes, reporting and support – were tasks already being done by U.S. employees. Now, those responsibilities were being prepared for transfer abroad.
Engineered dependence on foreign labor
The contract also included a unique clause about "non-billable" consulting hours. For every dollar Prudential spent, it received free consulting hours from Cognizant. But here's the catch: Those hours were heavily weighted toward India-based services. Once Prudential spent over $1 million in a month, it earned up to 800 hours of free offshore consulting, far more than what it would get from U.S.-based support. That structure created a clear incentive: The more Prudential outsourced to India, the more "free" services it received. The longer it stayed with Cognizant's offshore model, the deeper its dependence became.
They even set up what's called a Center of Excellence, or CoE, a permanent team focused on building deep expertise around Prudential's systems. This team, made up mostly of Indian business analysts and engineers, was responsible for mastering the technology, guiding decisions and supporting long-term operations. Although the contract labeled this effort "non-billable," meaning Prudential didn't pay extra for it, the long-term effect was significant. It wasn't just about supporting the transition, it was about anchoring control overseas.
The transition team: Locked out for good
As part of the transition, Cognizant assigned two full-time managers: an account manager and a transition manager. These weren't back-office roles, they were embedded into Prudential's leadership chain, given the responsibility to oversee the transition and manage future staffing. They represented Cognizant's permanent leadership presence inside Prudential's operations.
While Cognizant controls the operation, Prudential still directs staffing decisions, and there is a clause prohibiting Cognizant from rehiring former Prudential employees unless Prudential explicitly allows it. That means even if laid-off American workers wanted to come back through the vendor, they couldn't. Their exit is final and contractually reinforced.
That clause closed the door on U.S. workers returning under the new model, even if they were qualified. They had trained their replacements and that was the end of the road – for them.
The technology transfer and foreign control
Another section lays out the software licensing structure: Prudential granted Cognizant, including its India-based affiliates, full legal rights to use its proprietary software systems to perform services. That meant Indian offshore teams were authorized to access and operate systems containing personally identifiable information (PII) and sensitive financial data tied to Prudential's American clients. Cognizant assumed liability for its offshore teams' use of the software, but the control and the data were now fully remote.
Map, transfer, replace, terminate
The contract's "Assumptions" section lays the groundwork for how the offshoring will take place. Prudential committed to giving Cognizant access to all documentation, systems, meeting rooms and even American employees themselves. These Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) were instructed to guide Cognizant's team, help them learn the job and ensure that knowledge transfer was successful. This wasn't just outsourcing. It was a fully coordinated transfer of control, with the U.S. workforce footing the labor to make it happen.
It also commits to giving Cognizant's offshore team access to engagement-specific software and guarantees coordination support to bridge the onshore-offshore model. This section confirms that Prudential is not just outsourcing the work; it is actively managing the transfer of knowledge, tools, systems and control to a foreign team.
This section also outlines the assumed support Prudential will provide to Cognizant for free, even for work that isn't directly billable, further demonstrating how the employer is actively facilitating the transfer of jobs offshore.
Labor displacement as deliverable
Once the handoff was underway, Cognizant assumed even more responsibility. The contract required performance tracking, called SLAs, only after the American team had fully trained the offshore team. These metrics kicked in after the replacements were operational, once the domestic team had been phased out.
The human handoff: Americans train their replacements
The "Pre-Knowledge Transition" phase required Prudential to grant access to all systems and assign American employees to begin the onboarding process. These employees were tasked with training the very people who would take their jobs. They hosted Q&A sessions, performed software demos and wrote training manuals. Their required deliverables were detailed: everything from system diagrams to escalation charts to maintenance plans. All of it handed over through a central knowledge repository.
This section confirms the most direct and personal part of the offshoring process: American workers are required to conduct classroom-style training, Q&A sessions, hands-on demos and even "reverse shadowing" to prepare the offshore team to fully take over their jobs.
During "Guided Support," the offshore team began taking control, with U.S. workers watching, guiding and validating the handover. This was the final leg of the transition. Americans were still involved, but only to support the full shift to India.
By the final phase, "Governance," the offshore team had full control. Prudential created a model where multiple vendors like Cognizant could operate with zero dependence on the original American workforce. The system was now re-designed to run without them.
The final handoff: Offshore replacement takes over
In the "Steady State" phase, Cognizant took full ownership of support, system fixes and enhancements. All technical documentation and service records were already prepared by the displaced U.S. team. Their role was over.
An internal staffing chart shows how this played out in numbers. In nearly every functional cluster, offshore workers outnumbered or replaced American workers entirely. U.S.-based workers were billed at $67/hour. Their replacements in India were billed at $22.50/hour for the same tasks. In some cases, the U.S. presence disappeared completely. It wasn't just a shift. It was a swap.
Terminating the Americans
The "Termination Assistance" section confirmed the final step. Even after the official transition ended, Cognizant had to remain on-site for three months to continue support and hand off operations, either to another vendor or back to Prudential. But that handoff would not include the U.S. workers who trained them.
Cognizant was required to provide full services during the wind-down, including answering all Prudential questions, turning over documentation and ensuring the transition remained smooth. It wasn't a contingency plan; it was the final clause in a structured replacement contract.
Prudential is responsible for training Cognizant, providing Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), documentation and ongoing guidance. Once transition is complete, Cognizant takes over full support, including issue resolution and warranty periods, ensuring any operational gaps during handover are still managed by the incoming vendor.
Key takeaway: Prudential is contractually obligated to train and hand over all responsibilities to Cognizant, replacing internal American workers with foreign vendor labor while maintaining service quality. This transition plan makes the displacement of domestic employees a built-in feature of the agreement.
The fine print that erased the American worker
For American workers, this contract spelled the end of their roles, permanently. There were no offers of rehiring, no retention plans and no support to help them transition. Instead, many were forced to train the offshore teams replacing them, document the systems they built and hand over guidance, only to be let go once those teams took over. What followed wasn't just job loss; it was the full relocation of high-skilled tech and operations work from the U.S. to foreign labor hubs, especially India.
This move wasn't accidental, it was outlined and executed by contract. And with it came a long-term shift in hiring patterns, salary trends and the regional demand for technical talent. As part of the deal, Cognizant's offshore teams, including those in India, a country with poor data privacy protections, were given access to sensitive information like Social Security numbers and financial records tied to Prudential's American clients. These foreign teams were assigned system maintenance, bug fixes and production support – meaning the digital backbone of a major U.S. firm was now handled overseas. This wasn't just about saving money, it was about restructuring the system. American workers built the tools, ran the systems, trained the replacements and were erased from the future. It's a story happening across the country, quietly and legally, one contract at a time.
The bigger picture? India has turned job displacement into an export model. While Americans lose high-paying jobs, India gains service contracts, trade credits and political leverage, without ever building the products or taking the risk. U.S. companies opened the door and India optimized the model. Now, they call it a "services export." But what they're actually exporting isn't services, it's Americans' jobs.
Unless the U.S. confronts these offshoring pipelines, tightens visa loopholes and stops rewarding companies for abandoning American workers, the massive bleed will just continue. The future of America's workforce is being written in fine print, and clearly it's time to read it out loud.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The governor of Texas is promising to remove from office those Democrat lawmakers who fled the state to prevent a legislative quorum – and a vote on redistricting.
Gov. Greg Abbott has given the Democrats who have abdicated their responsibility to vote until late Monday to return.
The Democrats fled "in a last-resort attempt to block redrawn U.S. House maps that President Trump wants before the 2026 midterm elections," according to a report in the Washington Times.
The Democrats fled to Democrat strongholds in Illinois and New York.
The issue is the districting plan that would make five more Texas congressional districts likely Republican seats, a move that would increase the GOP's opportunities for maintaining the majority in the U.S. House in the next election.
Republicans now have 25 of the state's 38 seats in Congress.
The state House had planned a vote on the proposal Monday, but it could be delayed if Democrats refuse to fulfill their commitments and vote.
The move mostly only delays the changes, the report explained. "In 2021 when many of the same Texas House Democrats left the state for 38 days in protest of new voting restrictions. Once they returned, Republicans still wound up passing that measure."
This year Abbott is taking a hard line, and he has cited a non-binding 2021 legal opinion from Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton that suggested a court could determine that a lawmaker has forfeited their office.
"Truancy ends now," Abbot said.
The governor also pointed out that the lawmakers may have been committing felonies by raising money to pay for fines they could face, amounting to $500 a day per person.
Republican House Speaker Dustin Burrows said the House still will meet at planned, warning, "If a quorum is not present then, to borrow the recent talking points from some of my Democrat colleagues, all options will be on the table…"
The House rules require two-thirds of the 150 House members to be present for a vote, and Democrats hold 62 seats. At least 51 fled the state, boasted Josh Rush Nisenson, of the House Democratic Caucus.
The offense of refusing to appear actually, in Texas, is a civil violation of legislative rules, and the state Supreme Court has ruled House leaders have the authority to "physically compel the attendance" of missing members.
By their actions, Democrats also are refusing to allow votes on flood relief and new flood warning plans following last month's catastrophe there that killed at least 136 people.
Fox News reported Democrats, in their supposed safe states, responded to Abbott's threats to arrest them, and expel them, "Come and take it."
"Real Texans don't run from a fight," Abbott noted.
Paxton has explained derelict lawmakers could be arrested "no matter where they go."
The governor noted that a ruling that a lawmaker has "forfeited" his or her office can be removed, and under the state Constitution the governor then can "swiftly" fill the vacancy.
Democrats in states where they hold majorities have threatened to redistrict their states, too, although rules for each state have different requirements.
WND has reported on the statements from the Democrats:
Paxton's own perspective was blunt:
"Democrats in the Texas House who try and run away like cowards should be found, arrested, and brought back to the Capitol immediately," Ken Paxton said.
"We should use every tool at our disposal to hunt down those who think they are above the law," he said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A female police officer in the Houston area is now under investigation after posting a video on TikTok in which she threatened to give everyone a ticket because she did not have sex the previous night.
Harris County Constable Precinct 5 Deputy Jennifer Escalera was in uniform as she recorded herself writing on a notepad.
"Din't get cracked last night so everyone is getting a ticket…" Escalera indicated in her now-deleted video.
Although she blurred portions of her uniform, the officer left her name tag visible.
"Our administration is aware and internal affairs has opened an investigation. We have no other comment at this time," the constable's office said.
The New York Post reported: "The female cop's TikTok account features several posts showing her in uniform. She also posts about being a mom.
"One of the posts shows Escalera getting ready 'to work as a female Police Officer' as the text across the screen reads, 'contemplating if I really need this job, knowing that I do.'"
Local Texans were said to be outraged.
"I think it's really inappropriate and disrespectful," resident Alex Fitch told Fox 26 in Houston.
"Not as much distrust, but you can't rely on them. It makes them look unprofessional when they start posting videos like that. You can't take them seriously," Fitch said.
"Then they wonder why, when you see them, they say, 'Why don't you respect me?' or, 'Why are you talking to me like that?' Well, you don't treat yourself like a woman, and you ain't treating yourself like a police officer."
Another Precinct 5 resident who didn't want to be identified agreed with Fitch: "It's very unprofessional. You shouldn't be doing things like that. When you're a professional, you carry yourself a certain way. What you do outside of work is cool, but I don't think she should've done that."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a far-left activist who represents part of New York City, has been handed a rebuke from the House Ethics Committee for claiming her live-in other is her "spouse" but also is not her "spouse."
A report in the Free Beacon noted that AOC considers Riley Roberts her "spouse" when the issue is accepting gifts that normally would be available only the spouses of members of Congress.
Such as a free ticket worth $35,000 to the 2021 Met Gala, or possession of a "spouse pin" that allows him access to non-public areas of the Capitol complex.
But he's not a spouse when it comes to public disclosure of his finances.
That differentiation is according to lawyer David Mitrani, who wrote to the ethics committee justifying her claims.
Actually, the report said, Cortez has "lived with Roberts since 2016 and the pair became engaged in 2022, but there's no evidence the couple has legally tied the knot, and Ocasio-Cortez hasn't been pictured wearing her engagement ring in public since November 2023."
The rebuke from the ethics committee was because she is – and isn't – describing him as her "spouse."
The lawyer noted that she could take a ticket worth $35,000 for Roberts for the 2021 Gala even though that was a perk available only to a "legally-married spouse."
"Roberts is considered a 'spouse'," Mitrani told the committee. With that understanding, Roberts also was able to accept free travel to Japan and South Korea.
But, the report said, Mitrani explained to the committee Roberts is not subject to having its income and financial holdings disclosed, as required for spouses of members of Congress, because for those requirements, he's not considered a "spouse."
"The Ethics Committee rebuked Ocasio-Cortez for her dual-use of the term 'spouse' to define her relationship with Roberts deep in the footnotes of the committee's July report ordering Ocasio-Cortez to repay $3,000 in impermissible gifts she received when she attended the 2021 Met Gala in her infamous 'Tax the Rich' dress," the report said.
"The Committee further notes that at the same time Representative Ocasio-Cortez was seeking to take advantage of exceptions to the Gift Rule only applicable to spouses and/or certain relatives, she was not disclosing Mr. Roberts's financial interests as is required of Members who are legally married," the committee wrote.
The report said literally no information is available about Roberts, where he works, his business ownerships, debts, assets and stock market trading activity.
"Federal laws that require the spouses of lawmakers to disclose their financial affairs to the public exist to prevent congressional spouses from profiting from their partner's position in Congress or from being used as a pass-through to influence legislation," the report said.
Kendra Arnold, of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, said the evidence raises questions about whether there is something being hidden.
"It is fair to question her inconsistent treatment of Roberts as her spouse, and specifically whether this is in an attempt to not disclose financial information," Arnold explained to the Free Beacon.
Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette, of the Project on Government Oversight, said, "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. It's a duck."
"She wants to take advantage of the perks of Roberts being a congressional spouse when it's convenient. They should also comply with the less convenient parts of being a congressional spouse, including financial disclosures."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Letitia James, a high-profile Democrat who used her position as New York attorney general to build a wild case against President Donald Trump that accused him of fraud – a case now on appeal – since then has been caught up in her own case in which she's alleged to have committed mortgage fraud.
And Adam Schiff, a high-profile Democrat, claimed that he had seen "evidence" of the 2016 Trump campaign's "collusion" with Russia, even though multiple investigations failed to document that "evidence," and also has been caught up in mortgage fraud allegations.
While those cases remain under investigation, with the possibility of fines and jail times for a conviction, one Republican senator has had enough.
U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, believes public officials should be held to a high standard, and pay a bigger penalty when convicted.
He's introduced the "LETITIA Act," which would raise the mandatory minimum penalties for such officials, according to Fox News..
His enhanced penalties would be applied to public officials "who commit federal bank fraud, tax fraud, or loan or mortgage fraud."
His "Law Enforcement Tools to Interdict Troubling Investments in Abodes (LETITIA) Act" follows Depar\tment of Justice investigations into James for alleged mortgage fraud.
Federal Housing Finance Director Bill Pulte has alleged James could have engaged in mortgage fraud by lying, or making false statements, on property records, such as a loan application that said her property in Virginia "is her primary residence," as well her claim on government paperwork that her Brooklyn property has four units, when it actually has five.
"This legislation would empower President Trump to hold crooked politicians like New York's Letitia James accountable for defrauding their constituents, violating their oath of office, and breaking the law, and I'm proud to lead my Republican colleagues in introducing it," Cornyn said.
Also in the jurisdiction of Cornyn's plan would be Schiff, who was accused by Pulte of falsifying bank documents and property records by listing homes in Maryland and California as his primary residence out of an effort to allegedly get more favorable loans.
A spokesperson for Schiff, who repeatedly and viciously has lashed out at Trump, said the claims about mortgage lies are "false allegations."
Six other senators have joined Cornyn already in sponsoring the bill.
It would "increase federal statutory maximum sentences and fines for public officials who abuse their offices and violate the public trust to commit bank fraud, loan or mortgage fraud, or tax fraud," the report said.
Those minimums would include one year for bank fraud, one year for loan or mortgage fraud, and six months for tax fraud.
Repeated offenses would make those minimums five years for bank or loan fraud and two years for tax fraud, the report said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin shut down CNN host Kasie Hunt Sunday on "State of the Union," saying the pictures Hunt displayed in her opening had "nothing to do" with a major Trump administration climate policy announcement.
The EPA on Tuesday announced it would formally end the 2009 Obama-era Endangerment Finding, which allows the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases. In Hunt's opening monologue before bringing on Zeldin, the CNN host criticized the EPA's new change while images of power plants with smoke billowing into the sky played in the background, prompting Zeldin to correct her.
Hunt asked if Zeldin accepted the "overwhelming scientific consensus that these greenhouse gas emissions are the biggest drivers of man-made climate change."
"Well, it's great to be on with you. First, it's worth pointing out that all eight or so images that you just posted on the screen have nothing to do with this week's announcement," Zeldin responded. "What the 2009 endangerment finding had to do with was with regards to mobile sources vehicles."
"This week's proposal to rescind the 2009 endangerment finding was with regards to mobile sources vehicles. CNN's been using a lot of photos where they show smokestacks of stationary sources like power plants. That's not what we proposed," Zeldin continued. "Now going back to 2009, the science that they were reviewing included both optimistic to pessimistic scenarios. To reach the 2009 endangerment finding, they relied on the most pessimistic views of the science."
In a public response to the agency's decision to roll back the Endangerment Finding, Zeldin told the hosts of the "Ruthless" podcast that the regulation is not only costly for Americans, but has also been used to impose strict rules on vehicles. Without it, consumers could see more freedom of choice and potentially lower costs.
Zeldin went on to state that "a lot" of the assumed "pessimistic views of the science in 2009" did not end up "panning out," pointing to how the EPA can now ultimately "rely on 2025 facts as opposed to 2009 bad assumptions."
"The other thing too is that at EPA, we don't just get to creatively make the law whatever we want it to be," Zeldin added. "The Supreme Court ruled in Loper Bright overturning the Chevron doctrine in West Virginia versus EPA, Michigan versus EPA, that agencies like the EPA can't just use vague language in statute and try to make it be whatever we want it to be. The major policy doctrine also says that when you're going to reach something like an endangerment finding and then have trillions of dollars of regulation, that's something that should be decided by our elected members of Congress in passing statute."
"If you don't mind, the 2009 endangerment finding, while it's simply summed up now as saying carbon dioxide endangers public health and welfare, that's not what they did back in 2009. They had a lot of mental leaps. They say carbon dioxide, when mixed with a whole bunch of other well-mixed gases, in some cases not even emitted from mobile sources, they say that that contributes to global climate change. It doesn't say causes, contributes. How much? They don't say, but it's north of zero, not much more than zero."
Talks of rolling back the 2009 Endangerment Finding began in March and were discussed with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and other federal agencies. By June 30, the EPA had formally submitted its request to OMB regarding the regulation.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has signed an order launching a grand jury investigation into the beginnings of the Democrats' 'Russiagate" conspiracy against then-candidate Donald Trump, a scheme that carried through the entirety of his first presidency, during the four years before his second term, and even today has some extremist adherents.
It was a conspiracy theory launched by Hillary Clinton's campaign, and apparently aided by Barack Obama and his minions, including the CIA and FBI, that somehow Trump's 2016 campaign was colluding with Russia on the election outcome, when no such evidence existed.
It was started, apparently, because Clinton wanted to distract voters who may have concerns about her own scandal, that of putting national secrets on an unsecured and private computer server in her home.
Fox News confirms Bondi told her staff to "act on the criminal referral from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard."
That document concerned the "alleged conspiracy to tie President Donald Trump to Russia.
"Bondi ordered an unnamed federal prosecutor to initiate legal proceedings, and the prosecutor is expected to present department evidence to a grand jury to secure a potential indictment, according to a letter from Bondi reviewed by Fox News Digital and a source familiar with the investigation," the report said.
Social media confirmed, "This is MASSIVE!. … Some sources are mentioning James Clapper and John Brennan could be the first to be charged."
The evidence being presented likely will include information from a memo called "Intelligence Community suppression of intelligence showing 'Russian and criminal actors did not impact' the 2016 president election via cyber-attacks on infrastructure."
The essence is that while the intel community concluded Russia had essentially no impact on the election, because of the conspiracists, that briefing was rewritten to somehow conclude that there was an impact, and it was Trump's fault.
The goal allegedly was to undermine Trump, a duly elected president, and his term in office.
"Former President Barack Obama and his intelligence officials allegedly promoted a 'contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help President Trump win, selling it to the American people as though it were true. It wasn't,'" Gabbard said during a press briefing of the intelligence.
The report noted, "Among the declassified material was a meeting record revealing how Obama allegedly requested his deputies prepare an intelligence assessment in December 2016, after Trump had won the election, that detailed the 'tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election.'"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The once-popular "Lion King" movies talk over and over about the "circle of life," which, in fact is nothing but predators higher on the food chain stalking, killing and eating their prey.
Now a zoo in Denmark has come up with its own "circle" that cuts out stalking and killing.
But junior may not be entirely pleased if his pet hamster, or a little girl may be concerned that her rabbit, would become food for a local zoo's predators.
It is the Aalborg zoo in northern Denmark that now, according to Not the Bee, is "trying to mimic the natural food chain" by asking families to donate small pets – to be fed to lions and tigers and bears.
The zoo claims the program is "for the sake of both animal welfare and professional integrity."
It says the pets will be "gently euthanized," then fed to the predators.
"Yes, mom and dad, if you have a little guinea pig that needs to make an unscheduled journey to Guinea Pig heaven …, " charges Not the Bee.
The report cites comments from the Associated Press about how the zoo is pointing to "guinea pigs, rabbits and chickens" as possible donations.
"That way, nothing goes to waste — and we ensure natural behavior, nutrition and well-being of our predators," the zoo statement said.
Said Not the Bee, "Ahh, yes, there's nothing more natural for a jungle predator than to have a pre-euthanized baby hamster that belonged to a little kid served to him through a little chute. Truly, this zoo is keeping their animals in tip-top hunting shape!"
The report noted the online request for pets features a picture of a wildcat baring its teeth.
Further, the facility said it also is interested in receiving horses.
The AP reported the zoo, on social media, explains, "if you have a healthy animal that needs to be given away for various reasons, feel free to donate it to us."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
As President Donald Trump expresses his support for Sydney Sweeney and her American Eagle jeans commercial, the celebrity is now being heckled in public.
At her latest movie premiere Sunday night in Hollywood, a heckler targeted the actress, yelling: "Stop the ad! That is being racist."
"Sydney plays it cool and unbothered, disappearing into the movie house," reports TMZ.
President Donald Trump has also jumped into the controversy, and upon learning the actress is a registered Republican, he told reporters: "Now I love her ad. If she is a registered Republican, I think her ad is fantastic."
The president also went on Truth Social Monday to praise Sweeney, while trashing woke Jaguar for its woke featuring non-binary characters.
Trump indicated: "Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the 'HOTTEST' ad out there. It's for American Eagle, and the jeans are 'flying off the shelves.' Go get 'em Sydney!
"On the other side of the ledger, Jaguar did a stupid, and seriously WOKE advertisement, THAT IS A TOTAL DISASTER! The CEO just resigned in disgrace, and the company is in absolute turmoil. Who wants to buy a Jaguar after looking at that disgraceful ad. Shouldn't they have learned a lesson from Bud Lite, which went Woke and essentially destroyed, in a short campaign, the Company.
"The market cap destruction has been unprecedented, with BILLIONS OF DOLLARS SO FOOLISHLY LOST. Or just look at Woke singer Taylor Swift. Ever since I alerted the world as to what she was by saying on TRUTH that I can't stand her (HATE!). She was booed out of the Super Bowl and became, NO LONGER HOT. The tide has seriously turned – Being WOKE is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"
One online commenter suggested to Sweeney: "Make another ad! This time wear white jeans!"
And another posted a montage of what average haters of Sweeney look like.
Meanwhile, U.S. Border Patrol has come out with its own jeans ad, declaring: "Our horse patrol unit has great jeans," and that "it's not just what we ear every day, it's in our DNA."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The white woman who was viciously pummeled by blacks in Cincinnati last weekend is now speaking for the first time, while a black pastor in the city is calling for the white victims of the beatdown to be arrested and have their mugshots made public.
"I just want to say thank you to everyone for all of the love and support," said Holly through tears.
"It is very humbling that to have your prayers, your blessings. It's definitely what's keeping me going. And you have just brought back faith in humanity. So God bless you all and thank you.
"I appreciate everything that you're doing for me and my family. It's been very, very hard, and I'm still recovering. I still have a very bad brain trauma. Thank you. Thank you everyone."
A GiveSendGo account has been set up to help Holly, whose last name has not been provided, and it has already raised nearly $160,000.
Pastor Damon Lynch of the New Prospect Baptist Church in Cincinnati is now urging the arrest of any white person who may have started the violence, even if he or she were a victim.
"Nobody's asking, why didn't he just walk away?" Lynch said at a news conference with city officials and leaders.
"When I see the mugshots, I only see people who look like me. I don't see the person who re-engaged, slapped not the initial person, but slapped another black man. So I don't see the slapper's mugshot."
"This is racial, because it is unequal justice. And so until we see all the mugshots, this is still a racial issue."
Cincinnati Mayor Aftab Pureval agreed with Lynch, suggesting even those who were beaten could face charges.
"I agree with Pastor Lynch, that there is no doubt that this public safety challenge, that this incident will require further investigation, further charges and further arrests for every single person involved," Pureval said.
"The investigation is ongoing, and I expect that we will have more charges and more arrests as the investigation proceeds," the mayor added.
"This was an awful incident, and our law enforcement has been working quickly and effectively to bring all responsible to justice."
"Let me be clear there is no place for violent crime in Cincinnati, whether it's a fight or gun violence. We will pursue those responsible and we will hold them accountable no matter who they are."
As WorldNetDaily reported last week, Cincinnati City Council President Victoria Parks said the victims "begged for that beat down!"
Meanwhile, U.S. Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, spoke with journalist Benny Johnson about the incident, with the senator saying the city has suggested the woman beaten is a Russian asset.
"So [CNN's] Jake Tapper, who knows about this story, flagged it for him, decides not to cover it at all, Can you imagine just for a split second if the races were reversed?" Moreno asked Johnson.
"Jake Tapper would be living in Cincinnati. He would be covering this story 24/7. The breaking news alerts would be on all the time. Can you imagine if somehow we said, 'Oh that person is some sort of criminal alien from some country like Haiti. They would slaughter us."
Johnson responded: "We all are aware of what the reality would be if a bunch of young, white men hunted down elderly black couples at a country music festival. And then everybody stood around and cheered and filmed it as the couples got beat within an inch of their lives. It would end the country as we know it. Every major city would burn."