This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A member of Parliament from East Wiltshire, Danny Kruger, has delivered a stunning call, to an empty chamber, for the nation to return to Jesus Christ:

A report at Not The Bee said, "It's 10 minutes long, but perhaps the best thing you will listen to today."

Kruger said, "Last month, in the space of three days, in one infamous week, this house authorized the killing of unborn children, 9 month old babies, and it passed a bill to allow the killing of the elderly and disabled. And I describe those laws in these stark terms not to provoke further controversy but because those are the facts. We gave our consent to the greatest crime – the killing of the weak, the murder of defenseless human beings – it was a great sin."

He explained, "This nation … was founded, created consciously on the basis of the Bible and has story of the Hebrew people. And in that sense, England is the oldest Christian country and the prototype of nations across the West. The story of England is the story of Christianity operating on a people to make the institutions and a culture that has been uniquely stable, uniquely successful. The Western model was forged and refined in England over a thousand years …"

He said, "So through all these long years, from the time of Alfred to the time of Victoria it was assumed that a nation was a community of common worship and that our community – this country – worshiped the Christian God. Then in the 20th Century another idea arose. That it is possible for a country to be neutral about God. That the public space, the public square was empty of any metaphysics. That the route to freedom lay through the desert of materialism, individual reason. 'No hell below us, above us only sky."

That ideology gave the world "the horrors of the 20th Century," he said.

"And now new threats, ugly and aggressive are arising because we have found that in the absence of the Christian God we do not have pluralism and tolerance, everyone being nice to each other in a godless world. Because all politics is religious, and in abandoning one religion we simply created space for others to move into as dominant faiths," he said, identifying Islam and "wokeness."

He said either society owns Christianity, or repudiates it.

One on social media said, "More and more, I'm wondering if Christianity is the reason for the success of Europe and America. Should we be leaning back into religion to bring us back to our roots. Put more focus on building families and less on multiculturalism. Christian values and ethics built the West!!"

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

If nothing else, Colorado officials have proven their persistence in their agenda to control everyone's speech.

First, following the demands of a homosexual Gov. Jared Polis and a Democrat-majority state House and Senate, they tried to force a Christian baker to endorse same-sex marriage. Millions of tax dollars later they not only lost, but were scolded by the U.S. Supreme Court for their "hostility" to Christianity.

They tried the same stunt, under the guise of "non-discrimination," with a web designer. Again the Supreme Court knocked the state down.

They're also arguing for their right to control others' speech in another case now before the Supreme Court, involving state-mandated censorship of counselors.

Now state officials have adopted a scheme that would require a bookstore to express ideas its owners don't believe, and it's already in the courts.

Again.

It is a report in Complete Colorado that describes the dilemma facing Born Again Used Books, a Christian bookstore in Colorado Springs.

Its owners had to file a lawsuit against the state because of a leftist "gender expression" law new from Democrats in the statehouse.

It controls speech in that it requires businesses to address customers according to their "preferred pronouns," meaning that bookstore workers have to call a woman "he" and a man "she" if that's what they want.

The store, with help from the ADF, has sued over the state scheme to censor speech and punish individuals who are guilty of "misgendering" someone, that is, calling them by an accurate pronoun they don't like.

It's all under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which has been used in those other schemes that already have been torpedoed repeatedly by the Supreme Court.

The lawsuit, in federal court, names as defendants state officials Aubrey Sullivan, Sergio Raudel Cordova, Geta Asfar, Mayuko Fieweger, Daniel S. Ward, Jade Rose Kelly, Eric Artis and Phil Weiser.

"The government has no need or right to force Americans to profess ideological views they oppose," the court filing charges. "Our pluralistic country is big enough and sturdy enough to allow people of good faith to express different views, even when the government disagrees. The Constitution demands it. And Colorado is better for it."

Store owners Eric and Sara Smith told Complete Colorado of their concern about compromising their values, or facing steep legal punishments for exercising their First Amendment rights.

"When the truth gets lost in the discussion, it's hard to have a discussion," Sara Smith told the publication.

The state also tried recently to force a Christian summer camp for children to allow boys in the facilities for girls, but abruptly reversed course when confronted with concerns about the state's violation of religious rights.

The bookstore is seeking a court ruling to stop the state's enforcement of its CADA against the store, an order declaring the state is violating the Constitution, a monetary award to cover the expenses of the fight, and that the court retain jurisdiction to see that the state follows the law.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Remember all the "Russia collusion" claims just before President Trump took office in 2017? And after? The years of special investigations. Government officials making wild claims? Media sycophants echoing the claims? All of those claims about Trump's campaign colluding with Russia.

Evidence now shows that that conspiracy was triggered by Hillary Clinton's desire to distract American voters' attention away from her scandalous behavior in which she posted government secrets on an unsecure private computer server she set up, and worked with an "opposition research" team, some lawyers, and some foreigners on the plan.

But whatever "colluding" they had been trying to persuade the American public was going on, the top level of Democrats in America, from Barack Obama and Joe Biden on down, knew that the Russians did not impact Trump's victory.

It comes from a report marked "For the President" and dated Dec. 8, 2016, shortly after Trump's victory but before he took office.

That document, a Presidential Daily Brief, was declassified by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and had top intel agencies confirming, "We assess that Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent U.S. election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure."

The report said at most the offenders "compromised an Illinois voter registration database and unsuccessfully attempted the same in other states."

A report at Fox News charged, "Obama admin 'manufactured' intelligence to create 2016 Russian election interference narrative, documents show."

Gabbard's comment? "There was a treasonous conspiracy in 2016 committed by officials at the highest level of our government."

The report said the Obama administration "manufactured and politicized intelligence" to "create the narrative that Russia was attempting to influence the 2016 presidential election, despite information from the intelligence community stating otherwise."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

President Donald Trump has ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to work on unsealing and releasing grand jury testimony in the Jeffrey Epstein case.

Epstein was a convicted sex offender billionaire who died in a New York jail in 2019 awaiting more charges against him. With his privately owned island and "Lolita Express" jet he's long been suspected of trafficking underage girls to celebrities and others.

Bill Clinton and Bill Gates are known to have associated with him, and President Trump appears in photographs with him, images that mostly date to before Epstein's first conviction in Florida.

Fox News confirmed the order, but said it wasn't certain when any testimony may be public.

Democrats who now are demanding the release of all of the Epstein information, suspecting it include references to Trump, were silent on the issue for years while Joe Biden was in the Oval Office.

A report in the Hill pointed out that such testimony is confidential by law and could take months of legal work to release.

"Trump's announcement about the grand jury testimony came hours after the publication of a Wall Street Journal report about a birthday card he apparently wrote the disgraced financier," the report claimed. Trump has described that report as completely false.

The Hill said grand jury testimony could include details from the legal work against Epstein in the early 2000s, for which he was given a slap on the hand, meaning he served time in jail but was freed many days of his sentence.

His 2019 case just was developing when his death was reported in that New York jail.

Leftists, including Rep. Dan Goldman, said it would be other evidence that more likely would mention Trump.

A memo released by the FBI and the Department of Justice that has provoked "the latest firestorm over Epstein said it uncovered a 'significant amount of material,' including more than 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence," the Hill said.

"That included large volumes of child pornography and images of Epstein and people who appear to be minors, the memo said. Most of it has been ordered sealed," the report said.

The report noted there's also evidence from a defamation case filed by the late Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein's accusers, as well as documents about how Epstein amassed his wealth.

"There's also the question of whether Epstein kept a 'client list,' which the DOJ and FBI memo said he did not," the Hill said.

Investigative reporter Julie Brown for the Miami Herald said that probably didn't exist, and is used now as a "red herring."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Still representing themselves as board members, taking votes, adopting resolutions

The U.S. Department of Justice is going after workers fired by President Donald Trump who have refused to leave.

The details are documented in a column posted on the website for constitutional expert Jonathan Turley.

It explains that the DOJ has petitioned for a writ of Quo Warranto against three people who had served as board members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, fired by Trump, because they "continued to hold and exercise their office."

The CPB, which funds NPR and PBS, was hit this week with the loss of more than a billion dollars when Congress adopted a rescissions package that pulls that money back from what was allocated for the organization.

Named are Laura G. Ross, Thomas E. Rothman and Diane Kaplan, who are accused of "usurping and purporting to exercise unlawfully the office of board member of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting."

It explains Trump "lawfully removed each defendant from office on April 28, 2025."

And it explains, "As recent Supreme Court orders have recognized, the President cannot meaningfully exercise his executive power under Article II of the Constitution without the power to select—and, when necessary, remove—those who hold federal office. Personnel is policy, after all."

The three, told they were dismissed, "immediately sought a preliminary injunction against the president and other officials, seeking to enjoin the government from completing their firing," court filings noted.

The commentary said, "Their effort was unsuccessful as the court held that their claim the president lacked authority to remove them from office was unlikely to succeed."

The DOJ's complaint now accuses the three of "continuing to usurp the office of Board Member of the CPB by 'participating in board meetings, voting on resolutions and other business that comes before the board, and presenting themselves to the public as board members. All of this [was] manifestly unlawful.'"

The former board members charged that CPB was created by Congress as a "private corporation," and they are not subject to the president's authority to dismiss them.

They claimed the president's actions violated the Administrative Procedure Act and violated the separation of powers.

The DOJ pointed out that CPB board members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, like other federal officials, Congress restricts the makeup of the board, limits their compensation, and has charged the organization with taking actions "to achieve the objectives and to carry out the purposes" of the law.

Further, it is a "designated federal entity," is subject to inspections by an inspector general, and is subject to congressional oversight hearings.

But, court filings charge, the three held board meetings in May and June where they voted "in their official capacity," adopted resolutions and acted "as if the preliminary injunction they sought had been held in their favor."

Actually, the court filings confirm the president, under his Article II powers, with his "power to appoint someone … presumptively carries with it the incident power of removal."

It cites a Supreme Court ruling regarding Amtrak, which was set up as a corporation and not a government agency.

"The Supreme Court held 'that where, as here, the Government creates a corporation by special law, for the furtherance of governmental objectives, and retains for itself permanent authority to appoint a majority of the directors of that corporation, the corporation is part of the Government for purposes of the First Amendment. … The Supreme Court later applied similar analysis to hold that Amtrak is also 'a governmental entity for purposes of the Constitution's separation of powers provisions.""

The DOJ is asking that the court enter a judgment for the defendants to "be ousted and excluded."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

'BILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR WERE WASTED. REPUBLICANS HAVE TRIED DOING THIS FOR 40 YEARS, AND FAILED….BUT NO MORE. THIS IS BIG!!!'

The U.S. House has passed President Donald Trump's $9 billion rescissions bill, sending it to his desk, and he immediately praised the action

"HOUSE APPROVES NINE BILLION DOLLAR CUTS PACKAGE, INCLUDING ATROCIOUS NPR AND PUBLIC BROADCASTING, WHERE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR WERE WASTED. REPUBLICANS HAVE TRIED DOING THIS FOR 40 YEARS, AND FAILED….BUT NO MORE. THIS IS BIG!!!" he posted on Truth Social.

The plan pulls back money, about $8 billion, from previously approved handouts to foreign interests, and another $1 billion or so from Public Broadcasting System and National Public Radio, which he has condemned often as tax-funded mouthpieces for leftist agendas.

The $8 billion had been for foreign disaster relief, health projects and agriculture, while the $1 billion was to be used for 1,500 NPR and PBS stations.

Commentaries said the plan "reverses years of wasteful globalist spending that has funneled billions overseas while neglecting American families at home."

The final vote was 216-213 on the plan that earlier was adopted by the House, then sent to the Senate where there were minor revisions before it was adopted there.

The bill now heads to the president's desk for his signature.

The Daily Caller News Foundation described the move as "a significant victory for Trump who was the first commander-in-chief to have a clawback funding request approved by Congress in more than 25 years."

The vote delivers on the president's promise to close down the United States Agency for International Development and defund NPR and PBS, which Republicans have long accused of being biased against conservative viewpoints.

USAID now essentially is closed, with a handful of selected responsibilities being assigned to the State Department. Its employees largely are gone from the government.

The $1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which partially finances NPR and PBS, was for the next two years.

"I'm not sure how NPR helps the public safety of our country, but I do know that NPR unfortunately has become, really just a propaganda voice for the left," White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said Thursday.

The plan becomes the first of what is expected to become a stream of legislative moves to codify cuts identified by Trump's Department of Government Efficiency.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reported, "There is still roughly $164 billion in federal spending pinpointed by Trump's cost-cutting department as wasteful that Congress has yet to claw back."

Speaker Mike Johnson noted taxpayers now no longer are being forced to pay for "politically biased media" and "outrageous" expenses overseas.

Russ Vought, White House Office of Management and Budget director, earlier said the administration will be sending Congress more plans to claw back more funds.

Democrats have been united in their opposition to cutting even 0.1% of the federal governments $7 trillion spending.

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., documented the bias found at NPR as only he can:

Just a day before the Senate adopted the recissions package on a 51-48 vote following a 13-hour vote-a-rama.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Army, caught describing pro-life members of the famed pro-life Operation Rescue organization and others as "terrorists," already had admitted it was wrong to do that.

Now it is apologizing.

OR announced, "The Secretary of the Army Dan Driscol has issued a formal apology to Operation Rescue for mischaracterizing the pro-life organization as a terror group during a counterterrorism and security training presentation that was used to teach 9,100 Army soldiers at Fort Bragg."

Driscol said, "This characterization was not only inaccurate but also deeply inappropriate."

His response came in a letter to the American Center for Law and Justice, which represented Operation Rescue and its president, Troy Newman.

"I am glad to accept the Army's apology, but the harm this has caused Operation Rescue has been incalculable," said Newman. "Being labeled a terrorist in these troubled times has carried with it a heavy burden on my staff and me."

Driscol continued, "While I cannot undo the harm that this training caused, I want to offer my sincerest apology to Operation Rescue, National Right to Life, and all pro-life groups negatively impacted by the false characterization of all pro-life organizations made by this training. Please be assured that I am firmly committed to rigorous oversight of all Army training materials to prevent such incidents from occurring in the future."

The ACLJ's Jordan Sekulow responded to Driscol's letter.

"Thank you for standing up against the Leftist ideology that had been infecting our military branches and bogging down our warfighters, often cloaked in the bureaucratic morass. We know you have a lot of work to do, and that you took time to address this — not just in response to an oversight function of Congress, but directly to our client who was among those harmed — confirms your commitment to the values for which you fight," said Sekulow.

Newsom confirmed the damage.

"For years Army trainers falsely told thousands of soldiers that Operation Rescue posed a terror threat to our country. The damage this has caused our nonviolent organization is something that cannot be undone with a simple apology, no matter how sincere.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Yet another prominent Democrat has been referred to authorities for investigation and possible prosecution for a crime.

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, a Florida Democrat, has become just the latest in a long list of Democrats suspected of outside-the-law behavior.

The Washington Examiner explains conservative watchdog Foundation for Accountability and Civil Trust has submitted a referral to the Department of Justice regarding her actions in allegedly retaining a $5.8 million overpayment from the state of Florida and using it for her congressional campaign.

She's already been the subject of "numerous ethics" investigations by the Office of Congressional Ethics and House Ethics Committee. Their conclusions were that she accepted campaign contributions "linked to an official action, accepted illegal in-kind campaign contributions, dispensed special favors to friends, misrepresented the source of campaign contributions, and requested community project funding to be directed to a for-profit entity," FACT charges.

Her actions like are "serious criminal violations," FACT charges.

The report said Trinity Health Care Services, which Cherfilus-McCormick led before joining Congress, was accused by the state of "knowingly processing an invoice more than 100 times its typical invoice size."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

An anti-Trump judge in the federal judiciary now has been described as a "threat to the rule of law," by an official in the Department of Justice.

The comments come from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and are about James Boasberg, who repeatedly has used his own agendas in his court rulings that have struck down the president's.

In one case, he demanded that the president order airplanes carrying illegal alien criminals on deportation flights be turned around mid-air and brought back to the U.S., without regarding to whether those jets had enough fuel to do that.

Those airplanes were outside of American airspace already, however, and the White House explained Boasberg's jurisdiction didn't extend to international locations and foreign countries.

It was revealed this week that Boasberg, at a recent judicial conference, had made disparaging remarks about Trump, even though he's supposed 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.

A report at the Washington Examiner said Blanche was responding to Boasberg's comments and said, the judge was in "serious breach of the judicial oath and a threat to the rule of law."