This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

President Trump wants to abolish the Department of Education. Sounds outrageous to some.

Writing for The Hill, Justin Hawkins notes, "The Trump administration is reportedly preparing an executive order that could eliminate or roll back significant parts of the Department of Education, a move that has already received significant criticism from Trump's political opponents."

Hawkins also says, "Regardless of whether you support such programs, the Constitution does not allow for the vast majority of what the Education Department does today."

The White House declares: "President Trump's Department of Education canceled $881 million in unnecessary contracts that were not benefiting students, including a $4.6 million contract just to coordinate Zoom and in-person meetings."

I interviewed Dr. Paul Kengor on a radio segment and asked him about the president's plan to abolish the Department of Education. Kengor is a bestselling author on American politics and history, as well as a professor of history and political science at Grove City College in Pennsylvania.

Kengor reminded our listeners that the Department of Education is a relative Johnny Come Lately. It was only established by President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s: "Americans think it was created not in 1978, but 1778 – as if the founders were talking about it in the Federalist Papers."

Kengor, added, "When Ronald Reagan, just months after that, talked about eliminating it, they treated Reagan as if he were some sort of domestic terrorist. Somebody who was out of his mind. 'Eliminate the Department of Education? That's the craziest thing I've ever heard.'" Kengor has called the department "a menace" and "a force of destruction."

Kengor answers the common question, "What will happen if this federal agency were to be abolished?" He observes, "People will fund education the way they've always done – at the local level, at the state level."

The Constitution does not mention education per se. In my "Foundation of American Liberty" series of documentaries on our nation's Judeo-Christian roots, the late Dr. Walter Williams of George Mason University made an interesting observation.

Williams, a syndicated columnist, stated, "The founders thought that education was very, very important, but they gave the federal government no authority to deal with education – that is, education was mostly a state function. And if you look at James Madison and others who wrote in the Federalist Papers, trying to get the colonies to ratify the United States Constitution, James Madison and other founders had a very limited view of the federal government. In fact, in Federalist Paper 45, James Madison, who was trying to explain what's in the Constitution, said that the powers that we left to the federal government are few and defined, and mostly restricted to external affairs."

In 1789, America's founders passed the Northwest Ordinance, so that as new territories became new states, they would follow a common template.

In Article III, they mentioned education. America's Founding Fathers wrote, "Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged." They didn't intend to banish Christianity in the schools but to encourage it. And these schools were voluntary.

In fact, most of the education at that time was conducted by churches or in home settings. The Bible was the chief textbook in one way or another. And back then, society was much more literate than we are today.

Reagan warned about education that removed God. Dr. Kengor wrote an article about the 40th president and some remarks he made about education at Georgetown in 1988 at its 200th anniversary. Said Reagan, "At its full flowering, freedom is the first principle of … Western society. … And yet freedom cannot exist alone. And that's why the theme for your bicentennial is so very apt: learning, faith, and freedom. Each reinforces the others, each makes the others possible. For what are they without each other?"

Reagan went on to say, "Learning is a good thing, but unless it's tempered by faith and a love of freedom, it can be very dangerous indeed. The names of many intellectuals are recorded on the rolls of infamy, from Robespierre to Lenin to Ho Chi Minh to Pol Pot."

Why is modern education so vacuous for so many? I believe for too long we have forgotten the biblical counsel that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."

President Trump points out that we pay more for education for each pupil than do other industrialized nations. We are first in spending, but far down the list in results. No wonder people could well ask: Is the Department of Education a part of the solution or a part of the problem?

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

There long have been legitimate concerns when Americans travel to restrictive nations – those that don't accept the multitude of rights Americans enjoy – such as North Korea. Or China. Or even Islamic regimes like Iran, or Saudi Arabia.

Now, the American Center for Law and Justice is warning about travel to the United Kingdom.

The legal organization has posted online an analysis of the threat the UK's ideological leftism now poses.

"The UK has declared that it will charge and prosecute Americans for their social media posts, written while still in America, if they travel to its borders. The ACLJ has prepared a legal memo detailing the specific laws at play and the danger for Americans. Specifically, it details how your speech on the internet could violate the UK's broad 'hate speech' laws and how you could be arrested as soon as you step foot in the UK for your posts back home," the ACLJ reports.

"If an American speaks in the United States in a way that UK officials construe as affecting their national interest or even producing substantial effects within the country, even if it's just a statement about your Christian faith or your political stance, then you could be arrested upon entry to the UK," it warned.

This of course, would be entry to the nation famed worldwide for the Constitution-inspiring Magna Carta.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A hospital is being informed that requiring ultrasound technicians to take part in the facility's abortion business violates their rights.

It is the American Center for Law and Justice that has dispatched a letter to Presbyterian Hospital in Albuquerque, N.M.

The business, which no longer has a religious affiliation, a few months ago changed its policy to demand that ultrasound techs help in abortions – a reversal of the previous practice.

"This shift has put employees in the impossible position of choosing between their livelihoods or their religious convictions," explained the legal experts at ACLJ.

The hospital is demanding in its new policy that techs participate, and exemptions are not assured.

"If an employee is unwilling to participate and an accommodation cannot be ensured, they risk job reassignment or termination. Moreover, even if an alternative position is available, the employee must endure a four-week unpaid leave until a transfer is finalized," the ACLJ explained.

When the techs submitted a conflict of conscience form, there wasn't an answer.

So the ACLJ dispatched a formal demand letter to Presbyterian Hospital explaining what the hospital is required to do under federal law, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Church Amendment.

Those "explicitly protect healthcare workers from being compelled to participate in procedures that violate their religious beliefs," the ACLJ said.

The organization said, "We have demanded that Presbyterian Hospital provide written assurances confirming that our clients will be fully exempt from assisting in any abortion-related procedures without penalty or adverse action. Should the hospital fail to comply, we are prepared to take all necessary legal and administrative actions to defend the conscience rights of these dedicated medical professionals."

The ACLJ explained the law is clear: "Employers must provide reasonable accommodations for sincerely held religious beliefs unless doing so imposes an undue hardship – a standard that the U.S. Supreme Court has reinforced in recent rulings."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

It's not just a "gravy train" that is dumping millions of taxpayer dollars into a broadcast scheme that delivers leftist propaganda, it's a "gravy train with biscuit wheels."

That's from Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., who recently took to the floor of the Senate to blast the continued funding of National Public Radio, the Corporation Public Broadcasting, and the Public Broadcasting System.

Those organizations often have been criticized for having a leftist ideology and inserting that regularly into the news reporting.

Kennedy brought with him examples of that activity, through headlines that actually were created by the organizations.

Such as, "Eating less beef is a climate solution," "There is no neutral. Nice white people can still be complicit in a racist society" and "Scientists debunk lab accident theory of pandemic emergence."

"No fair-minded person with an IQ above a single cell organism would conclude that this is anything but biased to certain points of view," he said.

A report at RedState explained that Kennedy was calling on Congress "to stop funding all public broadcasting."

Kennedy said the taxpayer-funded organizations are "the perfect example of a project the American people no longer need and should not fund."

He said the outlets can broadcast what they want.

"But, I'm not for taking $500 million every single year and giving it to these stations (CPB) to the exclusion of everybody else. That's immoral. We are running $36 trillion in debt. This is disgraceful in 2025. It is disgraceful whether it is left-of-center opinion journalism or right-of-center opinion journalism. It is disgraceful to the American people to have to fund this rot. It doesn't mean the rot doesn't have a right to exist, but they don't have a right to taxpayer money," he warned.

The report also noted that NewsBusters' Executive Editor Tim Graham wrote about the same time, "NPR Is National Public Relations for the War on Trump."

He explained, "At the top of every hour, hundreds of taxpayer-subsidized National Public Radio stations in 50 states transmit leftist public relations, badly disguised as news. You can get talking points jammed in your ear on your rush-hour commute. Nobody is allowed to question the concept of 'systemic racism' on NPR. They're deeply invested in that ideology. It's why NPR favors describing race riots against cops as 'rebellions.'"

He explained, "The half of the country that voted for Trump shouldn't have to support this clearly hostile radio network with our tax dollars. Lambda Legal and all the other leftists should pony up for NPR's supine press releases since NPR's 'newscasts' aren't diverse or inclusive enough for conservatives."

Kennedy noted that since 1970, Congress has given NPR more than $14.5 billion and it has purchased a $200 million office building, pand ays its hosts as much as $532,000 a year.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

It seemed to take only seconds. And it probably was no more than minutes. But when the Senate on Thursday approved Kash Patel, President Donald Trump's nominee to head the FBI, one recurring message appeared on social media:

"Deep State is COOKED!"

Or another way, "Deep State's days are over."

Democrats long have expressed vigorous opposition to Patel's nomination to the point it bordered on what appeared to be fear.

After all, Patel already is on record criticizing the bureau. And he was a key investigator that uncovered the false claims of the Democrats' "Russiagate" scandal that involved the FBI during Trump's first term.

Ranking Member Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., claimed Patel's confirmation would be "inviting a political disaster," and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., issued a kind of threat, telling his GOP colleagues, "Mark my words, this Patel guy will come back to haunt you."

Durbin had claimed he had been told that Patel already was directing a "purge of career civil servants" at the FBI.

Patel's spokeswoman pointed out that was sourced by the media with "anonymous" informers and "second-hand gossip."

Durbin also had argued, unsuccessfully, that Patel didn't' have "the temperament" for the position.

But Patel also declined to explicitly promise he would not investigate possible criminal activity among former officials who have been critical of Trump.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The initial goals indeed were lofty: For the Department of Government Efficiency to cut $2 trillion from federal spending by cutting out fraud, waste and corruption.

Even $1 trillion, discussed by many as realistic, was huge.

In just a few weeks, reports say, DOGE, run by Elon Musk, has found $55 billion to eliminate.

And it looks like a bit of that could end up coming back to taxpayers.

The Washington Examiner reports, "The Trump administration could be sending out $5,000 checks to millions of people next summer if Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency have their way."

Musk said on social media he's checking with the president on the future of what proponents call a DOGE Dividend.

Early plans suggest 20% of what is saved could be sent back to taxpayers.

The report said, "If the idea moves forward, it is sure to face pushback, as have most of Trump and Musk's moves over the last month. Thousands of people have been laid off or fired throughout the federal government, and Democrats are staging protests almost daily outside various agencies or on the National Mall."

A report from Forbes said the idea was pitched by James Fishback of investment firm Azoria. He reportedly advises DOGE.

The report explained the plan is to return 20% of DOGE's targeted $2 trillion in savings to some 79 million tax-paying households.

Musk has confirmed that ultimately the decision would be up to President Trump.

Musk and his DOGE team have been working to cancel grants and contracts, reduce the federal workforce, and more. Multiple lawsuits have been filed, with some of the DOGE actions now on hold, while other judges have affirmed various moves, such as offering federal workers six months of paid leave in return for leaving government employment.

Fishback, in the report, was called "an outspoken supporter of Trump, Musk and DOGE" who considers DOGE "pro-taxpayer and anti-waste."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Maybe there are vampires after all.

And they're collecting Social Security.

That stunning conclusion comes from Elon Musk, chief of President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency, and is a result of DOGE's initial review of the nation's Social Security, its payouts, and more specifically, those getting the benefits.

Musk posted on social media the comment, "According to the Social Security database, these are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!"

He continued, "Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security."

The chart, for example, lists one person each in the age range 360-369 and 240-249.

That would make those beneficiaries older than the Civil War, older than the Revolutionary War, older than the Constitution, older than … the United States, which is coming up on its 250th next year.

Musk noted that, "This might be the biggest fraud in history."

Some 20 million are beyond the age 100, including about 2,700 who, purportedly, already have celebrated their 200th birthdays.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Is it a harmless celebrity book-reading for young children, or is there a darker side tied to child sex trafficking?

Actress Jennifer Garner is coming under fire online after posting a video clip of herself reading the book "Secret Pizza Party" to young children at a Save the Children-sponsored event in Yakima, Washington.

One commenter on X said of the actress noted for "Alias" and "Catch Me If You Can": "Hollywood actress elitist Jennifer Garner has left many of her fans disturbed after uploading a video of herself reading a book titled Secret Pizza Party to children at a Save the Children event, which is currently under investigation for child sex trafficking. The book Secret Pizza Party instructs children to keep secrets."

One passage from the book about a thieving raccoon states: "I know what you're thinking. Why would we keep such a delicious, delicious party a secret? Okay, sure. It's so folks don't show up to bonk you with brooms, but that's not the only reason. When you make something secret, you make it special."

In October, Save the Children had five of its regional offices in Guatelemala raided by police as part of an investigation into alleged child abuse.

BBC News reported: "Save the Children said it was 'aware of the activity' at their offices, and denied the prosecutors' allegations.

"The prosecutor in charge of the case, Rafael Curruchiche, and the country's attorney general, Consuelo Porras, have previously been sanctioned by the United States and the European Union for attacks on democracy. …

"In a statement to the BBC, Save the Children said it was collaborating with authorities but that it has 'never facilitated any transfer of children or adolescents out of Guatemala.'"

Former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio also came under fire for reading the book to children in 2016.

"The book was neither fun nor cute," mom Jen Bee wrote on Amazon, reported the New York Daily News. "Yeah, that's not what I want to teach my child. It sounds like something a pedophile would say to their victim."

Other commenters reacting to Jennifer Garner's reading to children stated:

"A book teaching kids to keep secrets at an event tied to an investigation? Hollywood always tells on itself … people just need to pay attention."

"This raises serious concerns. Organizations tied to such allegations must be fully investigated, no exceptions. Children's safety comes first – no elite status should shield anyone from accountability.

"Hollywood needs to be leveled never to be rebuilt. Disgusting demons."

"She is a good person, they probably said here is the book you will read. I'm betting she knew nothing about what they were under investigation for. It's a shame because she does a lot of good for people. Hate to see her name get smeared."

"Jennifer Garner reading a book about 'keeping secrets' at a Save the Children event tied to a child trafficking investigation is beyond disturbing. The fact that she's still pushing this while the organization is under scrutiny is all you need to know about Hollywood's priorities."

"Either that or she is a dim bulb in the chandelier of intellect."

"She has trans children who have trans friends- that's all you need to know about how fit she is to be in a position of influence over children."

Wut? Taxpayer funded Save the Children? https://t.co/n9NMCFjmSd

— KK Berd (@keny_berd) February 16, 2025

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency, run by Elon Musk, has uncovered stunningly wasteful and offensive spending by the federal government, and has been trying to cut that off, even clawing back funding at times.

But a new statement from Musk, on social media, is pushing the outrage to a whole new level, pointing out that the government paid $9 million in a contract for "Active Social Engineering Defense (ASED) Large Scale Social Deception (LSD)."

It is the Liberty Daily that promptly raised questions about the massive expenditure, and its reason:

"Many of the proposed Community Notes cite references to programs coordinated by Reuters that focus on fighting 'disinformation' and inappropriate social engineering. But just because they claim their motives are positive doesn't change the fact that they've participated in spreading disinformation in the name of 'stopping' disinformation. This has been demonstrated clearly by the push to promote ineffective and dangerous COVID jabs. Conspicuously, the contract was for 2018 (before COVID) through 2022 (peak injection time). Why did they have a program set up to fight COVID disinformation before COVID was known to exist? Why were they tasked with social engineering and 'large scale social deception' by DARPA? What will DOGE and the Trump administration do about this?"

Musk had referenced a posting from Mario Nawful, who said, "DOGE investigations reveal mysterious Defense Department payments to Reuters for 'large scale social deception' project between 2018-2022. While DARPA claims it was for cyber defense, questions swirl about why a news agency received millions for 'social engineering.' The revelation comes as other media outlets face scrutiny over federal funding. Source: USASpendingGov,"

The Reuters referenced is the parent company of the Reuters news agency.

The Daily Mail reported DOGE found the Department of Defense awarded Thomson Reuters Special Services the $9.15 million contract in September 2018.

"The contract was filed under the Pentagon's 'Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' and 'Research and Development' programs. And a pro-Trump incubator and investing consultant claims the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) says the contract to TRSS was for cyber defense," the report explained.

Trump, on social media, said, "Looks like Radical Left Reuters was paid $9,000,000 by the Department of Defense to study 'large scale social deception.' GIVE BACK THE MONEY, NOW!"

It noted, "On the government website that tracks and publishes contracts the federal agencies award to private companies, the $9 million contract for TRSS is listed on the purchase order as being for 'Active Social Engineering Defense (ASED) Large Scale Social Deception (LSD).'"

The reported noted on the contract was a statement that some funding provided in 2020 and beyond was related to COVID-19.

Government payments to other news organizations also have been identified, and criticized.

For example, Politico got $8 million in payments from the now-defunct U.S. Agency for International Development in return for access to premium services.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Democrats are lining up behind a new talking point to undermine President Donald Trump's agenda to clean up the federal government, eliminate waste and fraud, and focus on projects and costs that are in the nation's national interests.

Through his Department of Government Efficiency, led by billionaire Elon Musk, already has moved to cut thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in spending.

Which has triggered Democrats, whose favorite constituencies sometimes are losing their funding. They now are calling it a "constitutional crisis."

Trump mocked the claims, assuring listeners that he has not plans to ignore court orders regarding his executive decisions: That he'll make the decisions, then appeal adverse decisions by local judges and get those overturned on appeal.

After all, he said it is his practice to follow court orders. Unlike Joe Biden, who openly boasted of defying a Supreme Court ruling he could not transfer student loan debt from the borrowers to innocent taxpayers, and then doing so.

The Washington Examiner reported Trump said, on the topic of the court orders delaying his agenda, "I always abide by the courts, and then I'll have to appeal it."

The problem he cited, however, is that the lower court judges are slowing down the process and that "gives crooked people more time to cover up the books. You know if a person's crooked and they get caught other people see that, and all of a sudden, it becomes harder later on."

He cited Paul Engelmayer, a judge who has temporarily foiled DOGE's access to TRreasury Department information.

Vice President JD Vance has pointed out that it's illegal for a judge to interfere in the duties of the executive branch.

Trump explained, "I would hope that a judge, if you go to a judge and you show them, 'Here's a corrupt situation. We have a check to be sent, but we found it to be corrupt. Do you want us to send this corrupt check to a person, or do you want us not to give it and give it back to the taxpayer?' I would hope a judge would say, 'Don't send it. Give it back to the taxpayer.'"

Vance charged, ""If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal. Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power."

Democrats routinely accuse Trump of ignoring court decisions, a situation that has yet to develop.

The "constitutional crisis," Vance has explained, could actually be something not of Trump's making.

"If the elected president says, 'I get to control the staff of my own government,' and the Supreme Court steps in and says, 'You're not allowed to do that' — like, that is the constitutional crisis. It's not whatever Trump or whoever else does in response. When the Supreme Court tells the president he can't control the government anymore, we need to be honest about what's actually going on," Vance has said.

The real constitutional crisis is the evolution of a fourth branch of government — a massive power center insulated from accountability, immune from the results of elections, and yet eager to impose its will on We the People.

The real constitutional crisis lies in leftist… https://t.co/qkD8rbmYQY

— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) February 12, 2025

Fox News reported that contributor, and constitutional expert, Jonathan Turley "was left bewildered after a federal judge extended a temporary restraining order Monday blocking the Trump administration's buyout offer to federal employees.

He explained that as being "perfectly within the wheelhouse of the president."

"The report said, "The legal group Democracy Forward sued on behalf of labor unions representing thousands of employees, claiming the administration can't administer payments. In a letter to its members, the AFGE noted that the buyout offer doesn't guarantee that the employee's resignation will be accepted or that the benefits will be paid."

It also claimed the offer violates federal law.

Trump, in an Oval Office comment, said, "Any court that would say that the president or his representatives, like secretary of the treasury, secretary of state, whatever, doesn't have the right to go over their books and make sure everything's honest — I mean, how can you have a country? You can't have anything that way. You can't have a business that way. I hope that the court system is going to allow us to do what we have to do. We got elected to, among other things, find all of this fraud, abuse, all of this, this horrible stuff going on. And we've already found billions of dollars. … And when you get down to it, it's going to be probably close to a trillion dollars."