This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Department of Defense is torpedoing the career plans of a Navy admiral who was caught facilitating drag shows on the USS Ronald Reagan.
The department confirmed it is withdrawing the nomination of Rear Adm. Michael "Buzz" Donnelly over the drag performances on the vessel while under his command.
The Daily Wire reported that Donnelly was commander of the aircraft carrier from April 2016 to September 2018.
During that time, the report said, "Yeoman 2nd Class Joshua Kelley performed as a drag queen under the name 'Harpy Daniels' at a department-sanctioned 'Morale, Welfare, and Recreation' event."
When President Donald Trump nominated Donnelly for promotion to vice-admiral and an appointment to command the 7th Fleet, the Daily Wire inquired about the drag shows.
The report said the result is that "a source at the Defense Department said that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is withdrawing Donnelly's nomination to lead the 7th Fleet. Hegseth is looking for a new 7th Fleet commander, the source shared."
The Daily Wire noted Donnelly drew national attention in 2023 when Sen. Tommy Tuberville held up his promotion as part of his blockade on Defense Department promotions. The Alabama Republican was challenging one part of Joe Biden's agenda to promote abortion and transgenderism.
In this fight, Tuberville opposed Biden's demand that taxpayers pay for three weeks of leave and travel expenses for military members and their dependents who demanded abortions.
The senator pointed out that the spending was completely unrelated to the department's mission of protecting the nation.
A number of legacy media outlets had highlighted the drag shows that occurred during Donnelly's tour, the report said.
Back at the time the performances were being scheduled, William Thibeau of The American Military Project at The Claremont Institute, told the Daily Signal, "Every military officer takes command of units large and small with the understanding they are responsible for everything that does and does not happen under their command. It's the basic truth of military leadership, whether you command an infantry company or an aircraft carrier."
He noted the drag shows are not "random acts of entertainment," they were "sanctioned Navy programs."
Donnelly's immediate future was unspecified in the report, but often when military commanders fail in one command, their next one is not considered a promotion.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Another legal victory for the administration of President Donald Trump was documented in the decision of a federal judge to allow the Department of Justice to rescind about $800 million in grants.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington rejected a demand for a preliminary injunction from five groups that benefited from the cash handouts.
They were objecting to the DOJ's cancellation of more than 360 grant awards, according to a report from Fox News.
The judge condemned the decision as "shameful" in his ruling, but said the court lacks jurisdiction and the plaintiffs failed to document a constitutional violation or protection.
"Defendants' rescinding of these awards is shameful. It is likely to harm communities and individuals vulnerable to crime and violence," the judge said. "But displeasure and sympathy are not enough in a court of law."
It was the DOJ's Office of Justice Programs that decided in April to cancel the hundreds of millions of dollars in grant handouts, describing the move as a change in priorities to include more direct support to some law enforcement groups, fight violent crime, and help American victims of trafficking and sexual assault, the report explained.
The complaint, from Democracy Forward Foundation and the Perry Law firm, claimed they were deprived of due process and the decision lacked clarity. They also said the move violated the constitutional separation of powers.
The cancellation of the handout of taxpayer money triggered layoffs and closures in various programs, the plaintiffs claimed.
But the DOJ said that no legal basis existed for the court to order the restoration of "lawfully terminated grants."
In fact, some plaintiffs in other disputes over the Trump administration's decision to cancel cash handouts have claimed that they have a constitutional right to be funded by the taxpayers.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Australian government had cited it's "Online Safety Act" in demanding that X censor the criticism of the transgender agenda by Canadian campaigner Chris "Billboard Chris" Elston.
But that censorship scheme now has been struck down by a tribunal.
It was an Administrative Review Tribunal that ruled in favor of Elston, who in February 2024 had gone online to criticize the appointment of Teddy Cook to a United Nations post.
Cook has been described by the Daily Mail as a transgender member of a new United Nations panel that's drafting global health rules who has "a kinky track record in everything from bestiality to bondage, drugs and nudism."
"Teddy Cook, a female-to-male trans Australian activist, started work this month on the World Health Organization's 20-expert body, drafting care guidelines for trans and non-binary people," the report said. It explained Cook calls herself a "professional queer…"
ADF International, which worked on Elston's case, said the tribunal decision strikes the government order attempting to censor him.
Elston's offense apparently was to not just criticize Cook, but refer to her with biologically accurate pronouns.
His post then was claimed by Australia's eSafety commissioner to be "cyber abuse."
"Both X and Elston challenged the order, arguing that the censorship was a violation of the fundamental right to free speech. Elston's legal challenge was coordinated by ADF International, in conjunction with the Human Rights Law Alliance in Australia. The Administrative Review Tribunal in Melbourne held a week-long hearing on the case commencing March 31, 2025," ADF International reported.
The commissioner made the wrong decision, the ruling found.
"This is a decisive win for free speech and sets an important precedent in the growing global debate over online censorship. In this case, the Australian government alarmingly censored the peaceful expression of a Canadian citizen on an American-owned platform, evidence of the expansive reach of censorial forces, even beyond national borders. Today, free speech has prevailed," Paule Coleman, of the ADF International, said.
"This is a victory not just for Billboard Chris, but for every Australian—and indeed every citizen who values the fundamental right to free speech."
Elston said, "I'm grateful that truth and common sense have prevailed. This decision sends a clear message that the government does not have authority to silence peaceful expression. My mission is to speak the truth about gender ideology, protecting children across the world from its dangers. With this ruling, the court has upheld my right to voice my convictions—a right that belongs to every one of us. My post should never have been censored in Australia, but my hope is that authorities will now think twice before resorting to censorship."
The Christian Institute said the decision was by Damien O'Donovan, deputy president of the tribunal.
Elston had said, online, "This woman (yes, she's female) is part of a panel of 20 'experts' hired by the @WHO to draft their policy on caring for 'transpeople.' People who belong in psychiatric wards are writing the guidelines for people who belong in psychiatric wards."
Cook, of Australia, complained.
O'Donovan noted Elston "classifies a person as either a man or a woman" by referencing their biological sex at birth.
"I am satisfied that he believes doing otherwise has implications for the rights and safety of women and children. I am satisfied that he knows that his practice in this regard is offensive to people who identify as transgender," the ruling said.
But he said Australian Parliament was not trying to control debate on issues with its "cyber-abuse" law and that there was no evidence an ordinary person would think Elston "intended the post to have an effect of causing serious harm."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A federal appeals court has yanked the reins on a public schoolteacher who wanted to use his captive students to promote his own gender ideology.
It is the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that said the teacher is not entitled to a preliminary injunction that would allow him to promote his feminine pronouns to students, an agenda in violation of state law, while the fight continues.
Mat Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, which has handled multiple cases involving demands from the transgender community, said, "Florida law is clear that employees, contractors, or students of a public K-12 educational institution may not be required to refer to other people using their preferred personal titles or pronouns if it does not correspond to their biological sex. In this case, the teacher's speech was government speech, not private speech, and there is no First Amendment claim against the law."
The appeals court vacated a lower court's preliminary injunction and sent the case back.
The case, Wood v. Florida Department of Education, involves a teacher at a public high school in Hillsborough County, Florida. He challenged the state law that prohibits him from using pronouns not consistent with his biological sex in the classroom.
"Wood was born a biological male but now identifies as a woman. Wood argued the law violated his First Amendment right to free speech and sought a preliminary injunction to prevent its enforcement," Liberty Counsel explained
A judge in an entry level court to the federal judicial system granted him that injunction, but that was reversed.
The appeals court "held that Wood had not demonstrated a substantial likelihood that the law infringed free speech rights. The court concluded that when Wood used preferred pronouns in the classroom, it was as a government employee, not as a private citizen. Therefore, Wood's speech was not protected under the First Amendment in this context," the report said.
"The First Amendment's protections extend to public school teachers and students, 'neither of whom shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.' But a teacher's right to speak is not without limits. One reason is that 'in addition to being a private citizen,' a teacher is 'also a government employee paid in part to speak on the government's behalf and convey its intended messages,'" according to Judge Kevin Newsom's majority opinion.
In 2020, Wood began insisting on pronouns including, "she" and "her," and included that in communications with students. But then in 2023, Florida adopted a law regarding that issue.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Department of Justice, under President Donald Trump, is serious about election integrity in the U.S.
It has confirmed that local elections officials who refuse to meet required security standards could face charges.
Trump determined in an order weeks ago the U.S. lacks election security and called for enforcement of an existing ban on foreign nationals voting in federal elections.
According to a report at the Washington Examiner, he also ordered the attorney general and Homeland Security secretary to "prevent all noncitizens from being involved in the administration of any federal election."
Now, DOJ spokesman Gates McGavick confirmed that, "The president's executive order speaks for itself, and the Department of Justice will leave no option off the table when it comes to promoting free, fair, and secure elections."
Charges against elections officials are rare, but analysts confirmed they could happen.
There was immediate pushback.
"The tactics we're seeing out of DOJ right now are building on what we've seen from anti-democracy groups for years," claimed Dax Goldstein, of the States United Democracy Center "They're rooted in the same lies about elections, and they're all meant to create noise and fear and concerns about issues with our elections that just don't exist. Our elections are safe and secure, and election officials are working to keep them that way."
All states claim their elections systems are secure, including Colorado. But that state was revealed to have posted pages of election system passwords online just ahead of the 2024 vote. Investigators gave Democrat Secretary of State Jena Griswold, under whose watch the passwords were posted, a pass.
Trump has claimed the 2020 vote was "rigged" and while exactly what "rigging" went on isn't certain, there were several undue influences that are believed to have changed the results.
One was that Mark Zuckerberg handed out, through foundations, hundreds of millions of dollars to local elections officials who often used it to recruit voters in Democrat districts.
But probably larger was the impact from the FBI's decision to interfere in the results by telling media corporations to ignore the stories about Biden family scandals detailed in the laptop computer abandoned by Hunter Biden at a repair shop, despite the fact the bureau knew the scandals were true.
Subsequent polling showed had that information been distributed generally to the voting public, enough voters would have withheld their support from Biden for him to lose.
"The New York Times reported that senior officials have directed DOJ lawyers to examine how a failure by state or local officials to follow security standards for electronic voting could be charged as a crime," the report said.
The DOJ already has been contacting elections officials around the nation for details about their systems.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Religious chieftains in Iran, those purportedly directing the faith lives of millions of Iranians oppressed by the nation's Islamic regime, have issued a "fatwa" against President Donald Trump, calling him an "enemy of god," and insisting that the punishment for such an offense is "usually death."
They are insisting that Muslims worldwide rise up to enforce their ideological wishes.
They cite Trump's "threat" to assassinate Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, which actually never happened. In fact, Trump has stated he deterred a plan to assassinate Khamenei.
It is the Middle East Media Research Institute that described the threats to Trump from Nasser Makarem Shirazi, a "grand ayatollah," and Hossein Nouri Hamedani, another "grand ayatollah" operating in the Islamic regime.
Shirazi "issued a fatwa stating that the punishment for U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who threatened Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei with assassination, is the same as the punishment for muhareb – that is, a person defined as an enemy of God and Islam who is gravely threatening or conducting an armed rebellion against the Islamic public order."
The institute reported, "In Shi'ite Islam, and particularly under Iranian religious law, the punishment for this is particularly severe and is usually death; less often, it could be exile, amputation of the transgressor's right arm and left leg, or crucifixion. … It should be noted that President Trump never threatened to assassinate Khamenei and it was even reported that he had prevented such an assassination."
The demands by Shirazi, 98, an authority whose demands "obligates his followers to obey him," were echoed shortly later by Hamedani is a similar statement.
He stated, "that any harm or insult to Khamenei was fundamentally harm or insult to Islam, and that the punishment for anyone harming or threatening him was like that for a muhareb. He added that protecting Khamenei was a religious obligation for all Muslims, and that any assistance to those harming him is also considered punishable by death according to the religion."
And he actually pursued a threat against Trump, demanding his followers "are obligated to make these enemies regret their words and actions…"
Shirazi's statement was, "In the name of Allah the Merciful and Beneficent, any person or regime that threatens the leader of the Islamic ummah [Khamenei] or its religious authorities, with the aim of harming the ummah and its rule, or who actually attacks it, is considered a muhareb. Any cooperation with him [the attacker] or reinforcement of him by Muslims or Islamic governments is strictly forbidden. All Muslims around the world are obligated to make these enemies regret their words and actions, and if they must endure hardship or damage for doing so, their reward will be the same as that of a jihad fighter for Allah. May it be God's will to protect Islamic society from its enemies and to hasten the appearance of Imam Mahdi."
Reaction online confirmed "there is a lesson here" when Trump prevents an assassination attempt, then is condemned by the regime anyway.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A woman has died of injuries she suffered in the terrorism in Boulder, Colorado, when an anti-Semite attacked a cadre of Jews walking for their Middle East cause with Molotov cocktails and a homemade flamethrower, and charges over that attack now have been upgraded.
A report at the Post-Millennial explained prosecutors in the leftist state now have added to the charges against suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45.
The additional charges followed the death of Karen Diamond, 82, who the Boulder County district attorney's office said, "died tragically as a result of the severe injuries that she suffered in the attack" that happened on June 1.
"Our office will fight for justice for all the victims, their loved ones, and the community," explained DA Michael Dougherty.
Soliman now faces two counts of first-degree murder, 52 counts of attempted first-degree murder, eight counts of first-degree assault, 18 counts of attempted first-degree assault, two counts of third-degree assault, two counts of using an incendiary device and 16 counts of attempted use of an incendiary.
He also faces one count of animal cruelty.
He could be, if convicted, sentenced to life in prison without parole.
Additionally, the federal government has delivered a 12-count indictment against him alleging federal hate law crimes and crimes of using fire in a felony.
Soliman reportedly targeted a "Run for Their Lives" demonstration over the group's advocacy for the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.
Court records allege he was carrying many Molotov cocktails and a backpack sprayer filled in flammable substance when he approached the marchers, then lobbed two of the explosives at them while yelling, "Free Palestine."
His manifesto, founder later, was where he called Israel a "cancer entity."
He was in the U.S. illegally at the time of the attack.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A U.S. Navy ship that previously was saddled with the "Harvey Milk" name in a move that promoted the LGBT lifestyle choices, as Milk was a homosexual activist who was shot and killed in San Francisco, has been renamed. As WND reported, the Pentagon announced earlier this month that the ship would be renamed.
The vessel, a fleet replenishment oiler, now honors Oscar V. Peterson, a Medal of Honor recipient who was injured while saving his ship in the Battle of the Coral Sea.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth confirmed the name change, and emphasized that the move was to take politics out of the process of naming vessels.
A Fox report said Peterson, a 20-year veteran of the Navy, was awarded the Medal of Honor after his death.
He was seriously injured in World War II "in an act of self-sacrifice that saved lives," the report said.
He was in charge of running the steam engine in the U.S.S. Neosho when it came under Japanese attack in the Philippines in 1942. He was seriously injured during the Battle of the Coral Sea when he was doing repairs, and was hurt while closing four bulkhead steam valves.
The move kept the ship afloat, the report said, but he was seriously burned, and although the ship kept afloat and 123 survivors aboard later were rescued, Peterson died of his injuries.
"People want to be proud of the ship they're sailing in," Hegseth explained. "We're not renaming the ship to anything political. This is not about political activists, unlike the previous administration."
He said the politics are being taken out of the process.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Democrats often work for huge election turnouts in the belief that will help their candidates and their party.
It's why so many Democrat jurisdictions also are home to massive populations of illegal aliens, who at this point still are counted in the national census. And sometimes, too often, actually vote.
It's likely why when Mark Zuckerberg was handing out those hundreds of millions of dollars in free cash to local elections officials in the 2020 race, they often used it to recruit voters in Democrat districts.
But now a report reveals that an increasing number of the voters who stayed home during the 2024 race would have picked President Donald Trump had they voted.
In fact, Trump won landslide proportion victories in the popular vote and in the Electoral College.
The report that undermines apparently Democrat "get-out-the-vote" schemes comes from Politico.
The report cited the work of Pew Research Center, which found that Trump, "benefited from high voter turnout in the 2024 presidential election more than former Vice President Kamala Harris did."
The report explained, "Trump won a larger percentage of voters who cast ballots last November after skipping the 2020 election, and the poll found roughly equal support between Trump and Harris among eligible voters who stayed home in 2024. That finding bucks a trend in the presidential electorate dating back decades. Historical analysis of presidential elections has indicated Democrats generally have been more popular among nonvoters."
Politico said during the 2020 race, "nonvoters preferred former President Joe Biden over Trump by 11 points."
Now, however, comes a new precedent, with Pew results suggesting if "all Americans eligible to vote in 2024 had cast ballots, the overall margin in the popular vote likely would not have been much different."
Among those who stayed home or weren't eligible to vote, Trump captured 52% of the support. Kamala Harris got 45%.
Sixty-four percent of the electorate voted in 2024, which was the second-highest figure since 1960, the report said.
Trump's campaign specifically reached out to young men, and ended up taking 55% of the voters who skipped both the 2020 presidential vote and the 2022 midterms.
Only 41% of that population chose Harris.
"The survey found that 44 percent of nonvoters said they would have voted for Trump had they voted, while 40 percent said they would have supported Harris," Politico reported.
Trump's supporters during 2024 also were more racially diverse that those who backed him in 2016 and 2020. He took 48% of the support of Hispanic voters and 15% of black voters, and that was up 7% from the election before.
The survey contacted nearly 9,000 people and ran from Nov. 12-17, 2024. There is a margin of error of 1.4 percentage points.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Leftists in Colorado apparently can learn, as they have agreed to settle quickly the latest lawsuit challenging their agenda to impose their LGBT faith on all groups in the state, including Christian camps for children.
The ADF has announced that a settlement has been reached with the state in which the extremists in power have agreed not to enforce their transgender demands on a Christian camp for children, IdRaHaJe, named after the traditional hymn "I'd Rather Have Jesus."
Earlier court fights over the anti-Christian policies and practices adopted by state officials already have cost taxpayers millions, and those continue to mount.
The newest case was filed just a month ago, and challenged a decision by the Colorado Department of Early Childhood to impose its transgender ideologies on all camps for children.
The settlement "allows the camp to operate without compromising its religious and commonsense beliefs about biological sex," the legal team explained.
The state agency had tried to force licensed resident camps to allow campers to use the private facilities of the opposite sex. That would mean letting boys into girls bedrooms and showers at the Christian camp, and vice versa.
"As part of the settlement, Colorado agreed not to take any enforcement action against Camp IdRaHaJe for violation of the gender identity requirements. The state is also clarifying in a memo on its website and in administrative guides that 'churches, synagogues, mosques, or any other place that is principally used for religious purposes' are exempt from the requirements," the ADF said.
"Government officials should never put a dangerous ideology ahead of kids," explained lawyer Andrea Dill. "State officials must respect religious ministries and their beliefs about human sexuality; they can't force a Christian summer camp to violate its convictions. We're pleased that Camp IdRaHaJe is again free to operate as it has for more than 75 years: as a Christian summer camp that accepts all campers without fear of being punished for its beliefs."
The camp has operated on acreage near Bailey, Colorado, since 1948, and has maintained a resident camp license in the state since 1995.
Leftists in Colorado's government recently pushed their radical transgender beliefs through the agency that issues camp licenses, demanding that campers be allowed "access bathing, dressing, and sleeping facilities designated for the opposite sex."
State officials then refused the camp's request for permission to operate consistent with its faith.
WND reported when the case was filed that it was just the latest in a long list of court disputes over the beliefs state officials insist on imposing on residents.
The state, run by leftist Democrat Gov. Jared Polis, Democrat-majority House and Senate bodies, and an all-Democrat state Supreme Court that in pursuit of its partisan agenda tried to bar President Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential election ballot, has taken actions dating back years already in its pro-LGBT, pro-abortion ideologies.
The problem is they conflict with the Constitution, as the Supreme Court already has ruled multiple times.
One of the latest fights is in court in a case brought by Defending Education, which sued Colorado over its new law that also punishes parents who don't support transgender beliefs adopted by their children.
That legislative plan created a standard that makes it "a discriminatory act to refuse to call trans-identifying individuals by their chosen name."
The state already has lost twice at the Supreme Court in its agenda to force Christian business operators in Colorado to spout the pro-LGBT agenda in their dealings, once with a cake baker and once with a web designer. A third similar case is pending before the Supreme Court now regarding the state's attempts to control the beliefs and speech of counselors. In the first case, the Supreme Court scolded the state for its "hostility" to Christianity.
Colorado taxpayers already have been stung for millions of dollars in legal expenses in the failed ideology imposed on them by leftist leaders.
The transgender ideologies promoted by state officials now exploded under the promotions adopted by Joe Biden when he was in the White House. For those who follow the science, such ideology in fact is a myth, as being male or female is embedded in the human body down to the DNA level.