This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
There are a lot of people in America who are opposed to, critical of, and even resentful toward, the nation's H-1B visa program, which is a scheme that corporations can use to fire American tech workers and replace them with much cheaper employees, either located overseas or brought to America from their home countries for the work.
Those already critical of the visa manipulations include those hundreds of thousands put out of work by the operations, their families, likely their friends, those business leaders interested in making America's business climate stable and prosperous and many more.
But now the fight has escalated to the point a church in Texas is attacking one of its members, actually an ex-member now that the elders of the reportedly Baptist-affiliated church have tossed him out over those very sentiments.
It is a report at the Blaze that details of the fight involving Daniel Keene, a small-business owner in a suburb of Dallas, Texas.
He noted that community members from India, which plays a massive role in the agenda to replace American workers with overseas hires, took over an entire street in his suburb for a block party.
He posted video online, and he commented, "We have to cancel the H-1Bs. I want my kids to grow up in America. Not India."
He later deleted that when he came under attack at his business, at his home, at his health club, and at his church, identified as Trails Church.
He more or less expected some backlash online, but it got "worse" when church officials "decided to interrogate him on his immigration stance," the report said.
"The elders at the Trails Church called him about his initial post, telling him to repent and that the post was 'uncharitable,'" the report said.
Church officials demanded he and his wife come in for a meeting, with "all the elders and staff who could be there."
"They hammered me for … hours," he explained.
The Blaze said, "The elders had apparently gone through the last three years of Keene's X account, looking for problematic posts. Keene said they brought up two posts that they found 'concerning.'"
But Keene said they kept shifting the goalposts, so he was left confused by their demands.
"On one hand, they are saying that the issue is not the position itself; it's how I expressed it. … but then we've had three hours of phone calls, and they're just hammering me on the position itself."
He asked for the elders' position in writing; they refused.
He explained, in the report, the elders "wanted him to apologize for his original post showing the Indian block party on his street and abandon his position on Indian immigration. While he respected their right to disagree with him, Keene told Blaze News he did not think apologizing for the post was appropriate."
Then, he said, elders threatened him with a "path to discipline."
Keene noted his detractors claimed, "We don't think you're a Christian any more because you haven't repented of a sin."
Later, he followed up his deleted post with a podcast talking about immigration, and questioned, "What would get you in more trouble at your church? Significant doctrinal error on the Trinity? Or opposing immigration to the harm of your neighbor?"
The elders, whose online store sells mugs, hats and $50 shirts, then "formally asked Keene to leave the church," he confirmed.
Church officials did not respond to a Blaze request for comment.
But other hits he has taken: Doxxing and threats, his business was review-bombed, someone claiming to have access to millions of Indian-American contacts apparently tried to extort him for $20,000. And his gym membership was canceled.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump's Sept. 19 proclamation imposing a $100,000 fee on all new H-1B petitions while acknowledging that the program has unjustly displaced many American workers has put the whole H-1B visa program under sharp scrutiny. It is the first time a presidential administration has admitted publicly that the program has inflicted measurable harm on Americans.
The H-1B promise vs. reality
The H-1B visa was created in 1990 under the Immigration and Nationality Act. It was meant to let companies bring in foreign workers for "specialty occupations" when no American worker could be found. Congress set the cap at 65,000 visas per year, later raising it to 85,000.
On paper, it looked like a narrow tool for filling rare shortages. In practice, the safeguards never existed and abuse has exploded.
Employers don't have to prove there's truly a shortage. They only need to claim they'll pay a "prevailing wage." Yet in reality, those wages are often well below market pay. On top of that, spouses and dependents arrive on H-4 visas, many of them also thus eligible to work. What was sold as a limited program has ballooned into a pipeline far larger than the statutory cap suggests.
U.S. Department of Labor – Office of Inspector
A 'cap' that isn't a cap
What most people don't know is that there are entire categories of employers, universities, research institutions and qualifying nonprofits that are legally exempt from the annual cap. Which means they can sponsor unlimited numbers of foreign workers year-round.
An even lesser-known loophole makes the system even more porous: Once a worker is hired by a cap-exempt employer, that same worker can hold a second job at a private company that normally would be subject to the cap. This effectively allows corporations to skip the H-1B lottery and gain unlimited access to foreign workers under the protection of nonprofit sponsorship.
The Build Fellowship: A nonprofit mask for corporate labor
The Open Avenues Foundation/Build Fellowship shows how these exemptions are being commercialized. Marketed as an educational fellowship, it advertises itself as a way to connect foreign professionals with U.S. universities. But the program's own documents reveal its business model is actually a visa pipeline.
Fellows are placed in nominal nonprofit roles for just five hours per week. That's enough to qualify them for a cap-exempt H-1B visa. Once they've cleared that hurdle, they move into full-time jobs at private companies through concurrent H-1B filings.
Universities like George Washington University lend the program legitimacy. Through GW's Market Discovery Program, international startups gain access to American markets under the guise of academic collaboration, with subsidized office space in Washington, D.C.'s Penn West "innovation district."
Other nonprofit partners, like DREAM Venture Labs repeat the same pattern. They openly pitch the fellowship as a way for immigrant entrepreneurs to obtain nonprofit roles that open the door to cap-exempt visas.
Universities from Boston University to Ohio State, Vanderbilt and Illinois Tech provide the legal foundation, giving the program an aura of academic respectability. In reality, these partnerships act as visa gateways, enabling a parallel immigration system outside the federal cap.
By layering nonprofit sponsorship over private-sector jobs, Build allows companies to bypass the federal H-1B lottery, avoid stronger wage requirements and slip foreign workers into U.S. jobs with minimal oversight. In its 2023 annual report, Open Avenues proudly describes itself as a "cap-exempt H-1B provider" with a "solid track record."
The report reveals its goals:
* Market the cap-exempt model nationwide, licensing it to other nonprofits.
* "Open source" the approach to scale it across the country.
* Promote it as a repeatable pathway for global workers to secure careers in the U.S.
In practice, this means nonprofits and universities are converted into labor sponsors, their nonprofit status used as cover while corporations gain steady streams of foreign hires. It's a structure that looks academic on the outside, but functions as a staffing pipeline.
When Build claims that immigrant workers participate in the labor force at higher rates than native-born Americans, it is not evidence of a high-skilled labor shortage. It reflects a stacked system of visa programs like the H-1B, F-1/OPT, L-1, H-4 EAD and others that enable employers to sideline qualified Americans in favor of cheaper foreign labor.
Discrimination hidden under 'diversity' branding
The Build Fellowship markets itself as a champion of "diverse teams," claiming diversity as a central benefit of its model. But its own documents reveal that the program brings real problems, from communication barriers to outright discrimination. Instead of treating these as failures to fix, the fellowship brushes them off as acceptable trade-offs, arguing that the program's benefits outweigh the harms.
What's left unsaid is crucial: Diversity is not a legal basis for an H-1B visa. By law, the H-1B can be used only for specialty occupations and then only when no qualified American is available. It doesn't matter whether that American worker is "diverse" or not; the law is about protecting U.S. jobs, not advancing corporate diversity campaigns.
The reliance on diversity as justification is not unique. Recent congressional oversight has raised alarms that H-1B visas are being used to staff Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) roles at universities, hospitals and public institutions, positions that do not meet the statutory definition of a specialty occupation under federal law.
The core issue is not only statutory compliance, however, but the real impact on American workers. By importing foreign nationals to fill positions labeled as "diversity" roles, employers bypass U.S. talent, including members of America's own minority populations. Instead of opening pathways for underrepresented Americans, these roles are diverted to foreign nationals whose continued presence in the United States depends on maintaining employment. This creates a system where the goal of increasing diversity within American institutions is achieved not by advancing opportunities for historically disadvantaged U.S. groups, but by expanding visa pipelines that place foreign workers into these roles.
Control, not talent
Build Fellowship materials highlight that visa sponsorship makes workers "much less likely to leave." In this model, retention is not driven by performance, merit or opportunity; it is secured through immigration status. A fellow's ability to remain in the United States depends entirely on a sponsoring employer. Federal anti-trafficking guidance identifies this dependency as a potential indicator of labor exploitation, since a worker's legal right to stay is contingent on keeping the job, regardless of working conditions.
This arrangement departs from the original purpose of the H-1B program. Congress designed the visa to address narrow shortages in specialty occupations, with wage and worksite safeguards in place. Under models like Build, however, the visa operates as a tool to control labor supply. It becomes less about meeting genuine skill needs, and more about leverage, binding the worker to the employer through paperwork and legal dependency.
Federal oversight bodies have repeatedly warned that this structure is vulnerable to abuse. The Department of Labor's Office of Inspector General has reported criminal investigations exposing employers who misused temporary visa programs to commit labor trafficking. In one case, defendants tied to a transnational criminal organization allegedly exploited visa workers by charging unlawful fees, confiscating immigration documents, forcing them into physically demanding labor for little or no pay, housing them in degrading and unsanitary conditions and threatening deportation or violence.
The Office of Inspector General has also concluded that the H-1B program is "susceptible to significant fraud and abuse" by certain immigration agents, attorneys, labor brokers, employers and organized criminal groups.
The result is not a pipeline of specialized talent, but a system of dependency. Sponsorship functions less as a means of skills exchange and more as leverage, keeping workers tied to the employer who controls their legal status. For employers, this dependency brings clear financial advantages: Sponsored workers are less likely to leave for higher pay, less likely to demand competitive wages and less able to challenge conditions. Turnover costs are reduced, labor expenses are contained and the balance of power remains firmly with the sponsoring organization.
Build's fellowship structure capitalizes on this dependency, packaging visa sponsorship as a retention tool that guarantees employer control.
The benefactors' loophole
Build's benefactor guide reveals how the finances work. Every applicant must secure a "benefactor" to cover the cost of his or her visa. That benefactor can be an employer, a foreign company or even a shell LLC formed by the worker or a relative.
To qualify, applicants are required to make payments from a business account and demonstrate at least $250,000 in available funds or, alternatively, bypass the proof of funds by prepaying six months of fees in advance.
Build boasts a "99% acceptance rate," essentially turning immigration benefits into a purchasable commodity.
No employment commitment is required of the benefactor and payments can originate from entities outside the United States. Together, these elements create a system vulnerable to displacement of U.S. workers, manipulation of immigration rules and potential misuse of funds. For American professionals already navigating a competitive labor market, the effect is a system in which visa access can be financed and traded, while statutory protections for U.S. jobs are bypassed.
The pay-to-play pipeline
According to Build's pricing model, companies pay $4,000 per month for each participant. For that fee, Build places the worker in a token nonprofit role and secures cap-exempt status. From there, spouses and dependents also gain work authorization, multiplying the labor supply.
Nonprofits profit, too: They earn upfront fees, monthly "salary shares" and profits of $100 to $225 per fellow per month. A nonprofit hosting 50 fellows could generate more than $600,000 per year.
Build even offers to act directly as the visa sponsor, charging companies over $75 per hour for workers it places. At that point, it functions as both staffing agency and visa broker.
The numbers don't lie
Open Avenues has published extensive materials promoting its cap-exempt H-1B framework as a nonprofit innovation. The numbers, however, provide the clearest picture of how the model has been put into practice.
Between 2019 and 2025, Open Avenues filed 351 H-1B applications. In 2025 alone, it submitted 128 with most at the two lowest wage levels recognized by the Department of Labor. Many listed salaries under $60,000, well below industry standards.
The roles weren't limited to high-tech shortages. Petitions covered jobs in real estate, human resources, market research, finance and even graphic design, far outside the program's original purpose.
Nationwide, nonprofit and university-affiliated organizations secured 16,536 H-1B approvals in 2021, 23,079 in 2022, 25,019 in 2023 and 25,585 in 2024. By 2025, more than 3,200 nonprofit employers were listed as cap-exempt petitioners.
Taken together, the filings, federal statistics and Open Avenue's impressive list of "Company Partners" show how the nonprofit exemption has been operationalized into a very successful business model.
The bigger picture
Co-founder Danielle Goldman has been clear that her perspective is rooted in immigration law, citing her father's career as an immigration attorney and stating publicly, "We've always known the value of foreign talent in the United States." Michael Cruse, the fellowship's Immigration Program Co-Director, spent more than 15 years as an immigration lawyer for corporate and nonprofit clients before taking on the role of designing and managing its visa processes. Together, these backgrounds illustrate how the program has been constructed with insider legal expertise, ensuring that cap-exempt provisions are not incidental advantages, but central to its operating model.
The Build Fellowship by Open Avenues "law Firm Networks"
Closing the gap with cap
The Build Fellowship demonstrates how the system has drifted away from serving American interests. What was originally intended to address rare labor shortages has instead become a marketplace where visas are bought, sold and scaled, leaving American workers excluded.
Each loophole erodes fairness in the labor market. Every carve-out forces U.S. workers to compete not against genuine shortages, but against a system deliberately structured to undercut them. For American families, this translates into lost jobs, lower wages and diminished opportunities for future generations. For the nation, it represents a loss of sovereignty over who works and who benefits from the economy.
The H-1B cap was designed as a safeguard for American workers. Programs like Build reveal that, in practice, the cap no longer functions and unless the system is corrected, American workers will continue to bear the cost.
WND contacted the Build Fellowship with questions regarding its role in the H-1B cap-exempt process. In particular, Build was asked to address the contrast between its public branding as an educational fellowship and its own reports marketing the program as a cap-exempt H-1B model designed to scale nationally and provide corporations with steady access to foreign workers.
As of publication, Build has not responded. This article will be updated as the story develops.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem is revealing bounties of up to $10,000 have been put on the heads of federal agents, encouraging Americans to murder officers enforcing U.S. immigration laws.
"Gangs, cartel members, and known terrorist organizations have placed bounties on the heads of several of our law enforcement officers," Noem posted Sunday on X.
"These violent riots are not about free speech. This is the rule of law vs. anarchy. We will win."
U.S. cities including Portland, Oregon, and Chicago have been the scene of increasing attacks against ICE officers in recent days, and during an appearance on "Fox & Friends" Sunday morning, Noem detailed the bounties that urge Americans to kidnap or kill the federal officers.
"Our intelligence indicates that these people are organized," Noem said.
"They're getting more and more people on their team as far as attacking officers and they're making plans to ambush them and to kill them."
"We have specific officers and agents that have bounties that have been put out on their heads. It's been $2,000 to kidnap them, $10,000 to kill them. They've released their pictures. They've sent them between their networks and it's an extremely dangerous situation and unprecedented."
Noem said "protective detail" has been placed around the targeted officers, and DHS has "changed some of our operations to keep our officers safe."
"But make no mistake," she added. "This isn't just about protesting free speech or that they don't like that people out here are upholding the law of our country.
"They're actually going out there and saying, 'Kill these people, and we'll give you this much money to do it.'"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
They call you a neocon to silence you. They smear you as a warmonger, a globalist, or worse, just for believing America must stand strong. Clifford May, founder of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, destroys that lie. He shows why weakness provokes war, how China is building an empire through supply chains and TikTok, why Iran still chants "Death to America," and what happens if we stop leading the free world. This is about truth, survival, and the future of your children. If America retreats, communists and Islamists will fill the void. Watch this and understand what is at stake.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The federal government went into a partial shutdown mode on Wednesday after Democrats demanded an extraordinary $1.5 trillion in spending for a wide range of their constituencies, including Obamacare subsidies, illegal aliens and leftist propaganda.
And one of the first consequences was an $18 billion hit to the state represented by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who led the battle for the shutdown.
The New York City projects affected by the White House punching the pause button also hit in the district represented by Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., another advocate for the massive spending agenda.
A report at the Daily Mail noted that those who are "leading the obstruction against Trump's agenda."
The "hardball" announcement came from Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, who said the projects were blocked immediately to prevent funds "flowing based on unconstitutional DEI principles."
President Trump, meanwhile, has discussed his opportunity for a renewal of the cuts made to the federal workforce early in his term by the Department of Government Efficiency.
Tens of thousands of jobs were eliminated as unnecessary.
Vought was scheduled to meet with House Republicans about those plans.
He is responsible for about 3 million workers, and his agency decides which government jobs are essential, and continue to get funding during a shutdown, and which do not.
The publication reported, "Vought previously warned agencies to get ready for a 'reduction in force notices for all employees,' specifically highlighting departments and programs that he referred to as 'not consistent with the president's priorities.'"
The OMB memo just days ago said agencies needed to have a list of layoff options for workers "whose salaries aren't paid using the Big Beautiful Bill, obligatory funds. This also included 'programs and projects' that are not consistent with 'the president's priorities.'"
Trump repeatedly has spoken of options that the administration has during a shutdown that can create impacts that are "irreversible."
Trump said, "A lot of good can come down from shutdowns. We can get rid of a lot of things that we didn't want."
House Speaker Mike Johnson, whose body approved a resolution extending government spending only to see it defeated by Democrats in the Senate, said the shutdown will last until Democrats decide to end it.
Leftist labor unions already are threatening to sue over any job reductions.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The father of a crime victim has unleashed at a congressional hearing on those who tolerate career criminals on America's streets.
It's becoming more and more common, under agendas perpetrated on America by elected and appointed Democrats in recent years, for criminals to be allowed back on the streets after being charged, even multiple times.
One case involves career criminal Alexander Davante Dickey, "who was arrested 39 … times, 25 felonies," who allegedly executed a 22-year-old woman, Logan Federico, while she was visiting friends at the University of South Carolina, according to reports.
Hear her father describe his heartbreak at the violence suffered by his daughter, "[He] dragged her out of bed naked, forced on her knees with her hands over her head … BANG! Dead. Gone."
Editor's Note: Be aware of harsh language throughout:
It was the Senate Judiciary Committee that was hearing evidence about the costs inflicted by judges and prosecutors, often extreme leftists, who have become soft on crime in America.
The hearing was part of a broad examination of the toll of crime, and the efforts by the administration of President Donald Trump to reduce violent crime.
A report at Fox said Stephen Federico warned lawmakers, "I will fight until my last breath for my daughter. You need to fight for the rest of our children, the rest of the innocents, and stop protecting the people that keep taking them from us, please."
The father told lawmakers after killing his daughter, the suspect "went to a store and used her debit card," the report said.
"When they saw his face on the video, they didn't have to do a check. He was arrested so many times they knew who he was," Stephen Federico said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Some of the money given to officials in Pennsylvania as part of a settlement with opioid makers is being used to take children to LGBT indoctrination classes.
It is a report in the Free Beacon that explains how Democrat House candidate Bob Harvie, a county commissioner, manages a local fund distributing money from the drug makers settlement.
"While the money is supposed to go toward 'Prevention, Treatment and Recovery' services, Harvie used some of it to transport kids as young as 14 to an 'LGBTQ-youth' center that offers 'medical transition' seminars," the report said.
It was the Bucks County commissioners, a board headed by Harvie, that handed out $13,500 to Planned Parenthood Keystone for "Expanding Services and Transportation" to the Rainbow Room, a local center that caters to gay and trans youth, the report said.
The Delaware Journal said the cash handout was actually used to take students to Rainbow Room events.
The report noted that such facilities promote events about the "Fun facts, weird history, busting myths, breaking stigma" on topics like "SEX ED NIGHT MASTURBATION."
"The Rainbow Room hosted a 'Queer Prom,' where attendees as young as 13 were given goody bags with condoms, lubricant, and dental dams, used to prevent the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases during oral sex," the report explained.
Just recently it promoted a seminar "meant to teach kids as young as 14 'the basics of transgender identities, social transition, medical transition, and more!'"
Harvie currently is a Democrat candidate running against Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, who won his last race by 10 points.
Further complicating Harvie's legitimacy as a candidate is the fact he and other Democrat Bucks County officials voted last year to defy state law and count invalid mail-in ballots during an election recount.
"The Rainbow Room's sexually explicit programming has been a hot-button issue for years in Bucks County, a northern suburb of Philadelphia. In addition to local news coverage of its controversial activities, state senator Doug Mastriano (R.) proposed a bill in 2023 to classify drag shows as an 'adult oriented business' after learning the Rainbow Room hosted a drag show for children," the report said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Most Americans assume that when a company posts a job opening, it actually wants someone to apply. That's how the labor market is supposed to work.
But in the world of immigration sponsorship, job postings sometimes serve a very different purpose: checking a box for the government, while keeping American workers in the dark.
Under the Department of Labor's PERM process (Program Electronic Review Management), employers seeking to sponsor foreign workers for green cards must first prove they tried to hire Americans. The law requires them to place ads, review resumes and certify that no qualified U.S. worker was available before moving forward with sponsorship.
Yet most Americans have never seen these ads – because employers often place them where no one is likely to look. They thus satisfy the letter of the law while ensuring the jobs are already earmarked for someone else. That's where Jobs.Now, a U.S. worker advocacy group, stepped in. By republishing these hidden ads online, Jobs.Now gave them the visibility the law intended, visibility that many employers have quietly worked to avoid.
Instacart's heavy hand
When Jobs.Now reposted one of Instacart's PERM ads to make it visible to the public, the publicly traded San Francisco-based company didn't thank the website for the free advertising. Instead, Instacart sent a trademark complaint letter.
The letter, transmitted by a third-party enforcement firm, accused Jobs.Now of "infringing Instacart's intellectual property rights" and even suggested the group suspend their web domain. The company reserved the right to pursue monetary damages, all because an advocacy group had posted a job listing that Instacart itself was legally required to advertise.
The real issue – and what Instacart's ads expose
Why such a heavy-handed response? The answer may lie in Instacart's job advertisements and recruitment practices tied to the PERM program. Federal rules, written decades ago, force employers to place notices in old-school newspapers and state workforce sites. But the intent of the law is clear and companies must make a "good faith" effort to recruit Americans before turning to foreign workers. That means actually trying to reach U.S. applicants, not burying ads where no one will look, or setting up recruitment processes designed to avoid finding U.S. candidates.
How Instacart blocked Americans
Jobs.Now's reposting exposed the truth: Instacart's job ads were nowhere to be found on the company's career page, LinkedIn, or any platform where real applicants look for work. Instead, the posting was buried in a classified newspaper, directing candidates to mail paper resumes to "Global Mobility," a department that does not hire Americans but oversees visa processing for foreign workers.
That distinction is critical. In 2025, almost no one applies for a tech job by mailing in a paper resume. And even if an American did, his or her application would never reach a hiring manager. It would be funneled straight to the immigration team whose role is not to recruit talent, but to record why no U.S. worker was deemed "qualified."
The two-track system
The Department of Justice has already gone after companies for similar practices. Facebook paid $14 million and Apple paid $25 million in settlements for requiring mailed resumes and reserving jobs for foreign workers through the PERM process.
Like Facebook, Apple forced applicants for PERM positions to submit paper resumes by mail instead of through its online portal, and it left those jobs off its public-facing career site. Investigators found that Apple's practices weren't consistent with the way it usually hired, which was overwhelmingly through digital systems designed to attract a wide pool of candidates.
In both cases, the DOJ made clear the issue wasn't that companies were using the PERM process; that's allowed by law. The issue was that they intentionally set up a two-track system: one for normal jobs where Americans could apply easily and another for PERM jobs where the process itself made it virtually impossible for Americans to compete.
Why Instacart's response matters
The key question now is why Instacart chose to file a trademark complaint when Jobs.Now was, in effect, providing free visibility for a job posting Instacart was already legally required to advertise?
If the postings are legitimate, wider visibility should mean more qualified Americans applying. But the company's legal maneuver suggests something else: that these ads may not truly be about recruiting U.S. workers at all, but about protecting a visa pipeline while keeping the door closed to the very people the law was designed to protect.
Turning the tables on corporate abuse
At its core, the PERM system was designed to test the U.S. labor market. Sharing those job ads publicly and encouraging qualified Americans to apply isn't just lawful, it's exactly what the process requires. When companies or their attorneys try to suppress that visibility with trademark claims or intimidation tactics, they may be crossing a legal line of their own.
Federal law, under INA §1324b, makes it an unfair immigration-related employment practice to intimidate, threaten, coerce or retaliate against anyone for exercising or helping others exercise their rights under the statute. That protection extends to advocates who assist U.S. workers in seeing or applying for jobs. Trying to prevent circulation of these ads could be interpreted as obstruction of compliance evidence. And suppressing access to recruitment ads could make the labor market test fraudulent, since U.S. workers cannot reasonably find and apply.
What began as a trademark threat could end up flipping the script on Instacart. By trying to muzzle the lawful sharing of job ads, it may have invited even sharper scrutiny, not only of how the company recruits, but of how it responds when Americans shine a light on the very system meant to protect them.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Television show entertainer Jimmy Kimmel returned to some of the stations that used to carry his show Tuesday might but offered no apology, only an "explanation" for his false claim that MAGA members were trying to "score political points" over the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
The co-founder of Turning Point USA was gunned down by a sniper during a free speech event at a Utah college. The suspect, Tyler Robinson, is known to have been radicalized by leftist ideologies in recent months. He was living with a roommate who was a male who claimed to be female, and the shooter had engraved radical slogans on the bullets he loaded into the rifle that was used.
Kimmel's jokes about the Kirk murder included his statement, "The MAGA gang is desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it."
He was suspended by ABC and other station ownership organizations, only to be allowed back on the air on Tuesday by ABC. The other ownership groups, Sinclair and Nexstar, still have him banned.
A report at Washington Examiner revealed that after Kimmel's return, Andrew Kolvet, who worked as a producer for Kirk, said Kimmel's refusal to offer an apology, just a claim that "it was never my intention to blame any specific group," failed.
"Not good enough," Kolvet wrote on social media.
He explained, "Jimmy, it's simple. Here's what you need to say: 'I'm sorry for saying the shooter was MAGA. He was not. He was of the left. I apologize to the Kirk family for lying. Please accept my sincere apology. I will do better. I was wrong.'"
Kimmel's claim that it was "important to me as a human" that people believed his claim that it never was intention "to make light of the murder of a young man," was met with loads of skepticism.
From online social media commenters: "It was precisely his intention to make light of it, which explains his recklessly inaccurate depiction of the killer's ideology and then cutting away to that edited South Lawn clip, which was designed EXCLUSIVELY for comedic effect. And no apology, inflaming it all further."
And, "He didn't just make light of the murder of a young man he and his staff mulled it over first. Someone said 'hey, let's make a joke about Trumps response to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, while implying he was MAGA'. No one said it's too soon or disrespectful, they ran with it"
And, "Sounded to me like a lot of dancing around the subject. Half hearted, and weak at best. In the end, it doesn't really matter. 70 affiliates aren't airing his show, and his ratings will probably continue to tank. Good luck Jimmy. Maybe it's time to bring back the trampoline"
The Washington Examiner also cited other criticisms of Kimmel, whose show ratings have been plunging.
Piers Morgan said, of Kimmel's call for understanding of his lack of intent to "make light of the murder," "Yet that is exactly what he did."
Morgan added, "Hard to feel sympathy for Jimmy Kimmel and his crocodile tears given how gleefully he has always gorged on the career entrails of conservative stars who lost their jobs like Tucker, Roseanne etc. He's become a partisan political activist, not a comedic host."
Kimmel also, the Washington Examiner reported, brought in religion as his defense, citing a statement from Erika Kirk, Charlie's widow, who publicly forgave her husband's accused killer, recalling the example of Jesus.
Kimmel claimed, "That is an example we should follow. If you believe in the teachings of Jesus as I do, there it was. That's it. A selfless act of grace, forgiveness from a grieving widow. It touched me deeply, and I hope it touches many, and if there's anything we should take from this tragedy to carry forward, I hope it can be that and not this."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
After a bilateral meeting with Ukrainian President Zelensky in New York Tuesday, President Trump posted that the embattled nation "is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form" and "maybe even go further than that!"
Trump also endorsed the ongoing arrangement whereby the U.S. sells weaponry for the war to NATO, which then sells it Ukraine.
Posted Trump on Truth Social:
"After getting to know and fully understand the Ukraine/Russia Military and Economic situation and, after seeing the Economic trouble it is causing Russia, I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form.
"With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option. Why not? Russia has been fighting aimlessly for three and a half years a War that should have taken a Real Military Power less than a week to win. This is not distinguishing Russia. In fact, it is very much making them look like 'a paper tiger.'
"When the people living in Moscow, and all of the Great Cities, Towns, and Districts all throughout Russia, find out what is really going on with this War, the fact that it's almost impossible for them to get Gasoline through the long lines that are being formed, and all of the other things that are taking place in their War Economy, where most of their money is being spent on fighting Ukraine, which has Great Spirit, and only getting better, Ukraine would be able to take back their Country in its original form and, who knows, maybe even go further than that!
"Putin and Russia are in BIG Economic trouble, and this is the time for Ukraine to act. In any event, I wish both Countries well. We will continue to supply weapons to NATO for NATO to do what they want with them. Good luck to all!"