This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A Florida teacher under fire for attacking a student with conservative values now needs to be fired, "and never allowed to teach again in Florida," according to state Attorney General James Uthmeier.
He sent a letter to the school board of Alachua County, demanding an investigation into a situation described by Crystal Marull at a state board of education meeting.
"If these facts bear out – and we have no reason to doubt Dr. Marull's veracity – then this teacher should be immediately terminated, and never allowed to teach again in Florida," the AG wrote in his letter.
He described: "Yesterday, Crystal Marull testified before the State Board of Education that a teacher from your county allowed students to label Dr. Marull's son a 'Naziphile' because of his interest in World War II history and participate in ROTC. That same teacher nominated her son 'Most Likely to Become a Dictator' due to his conservative values, had his classmates vote on the 'award,' and tried to force the student to the front of the class to receive a certificate, which he correctly refused."
That is a likely violation of state law, Uthmeier said.
"Florida law prohibits bullying and harassment. The Alachua County School Board's policy also prohibits bullying and harassment. Indeed, teachers must adhere to the Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession in Florida. Teachers must not 'harass or discrimination against any student on the basis of … political beliefs,' 'intentionally expose a student to unnecessary embarrassment or disparagement,' 'unreasonably deny a student access to diverse points of view,' 'unreasonably restrain a student from independent action in pursuit of learning,' 'intentionally suppress or distort subject matter relevant to a student's academic program,' or expose a student to 'conditions harmful to learning,'" the letter charged.
The teacher, he said, "violated Floria law, the school board's policy, and no less than six ethical principles."
A report in the Alachua Chronicle said the board's reaction was to put the teacher on administrative leave immediately.
And Uthmeier noted, "Despite this teacher's nasty immaturity, we commend this young man for his strength in the face of rank political discrimination. Remove this teacher from the classroom. Parents and students in Alachua deserve better."
The teacher had told Marull earlier, "I do apologize that [your son] was offended by the Class Superlative. Class Superlatives are an activity I have been doing with all my classes for the last four years. I give students the option to change or add superlatives to the list from previous years and then the class nominates students and votes on the winner. I was not aware that [your son] was upset that he was nominated for that superlative a few weeks ago. To my knowledge, he did not ask to be removed when he was nominated or when the class voted. When I passed them out today, I reiterated that they were just for fun. These were not meant to be offensive. I do apologize."
But Marull charged, "This is just one incident emblematic of the litany of abuses and offenses that conservative families face in this district. Not only was it wholly inappropriate, the apology was hollow, and although I reported this to a school board member at the time, the board failed to follow up with any consequences."
WND had reported Marull also noted another son was barred from sitting with a friend "because a parent objected to my perspectives on book challenges."
Marull has been fighting woke books in the school system for years, and on Tuesday, she said on X: "School libraries are not a safe space. There are so many dark forces afoot, parents need to wake up.
"The groomers and pedophiles have infiltrated the school libraries! The 'banned book' arguments are all just a cover for their dark purposes."
From social media comments came a description of the teacher's actions: "Satanic."
And, "Why are we allowing teachers to bully conservative students? @EDSecMcMahon @HarmeetKDhillon."
And, "Hell, JAIL the teacher, this is child abuse."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Euthanasia, the deliberate medical industry killing of victims, has become more and more common around the world in recent years. In Canada, it's routinely offered, instead of medical treatment, to people with nothing more than depression. In the United States, more and more state legislatures are adopting the "assisted suicide" schemes that kill residents.
But it is one scheme, in France, that has actually alarmed even the progressives at the United Nations.
There, the U.N. Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has told the French government to respond to serious concerns about its "radical" plan authorizing and promoting euthanasia and assisted suicide.
According to a report from the American Center for Law and Justice, whose affiliate, the European Centre for Law and Justice alerted the U.N. about problems, said the bill "seems to target persons with disabilities, and coerces religious clinics and retirement homes to comply or face punishment."
The French plan already has been endorsed by Emmanuel Macron and been adopted in the National Assembly. He awaits confirmation in the French Senate.
"First, as a matter of principle, it violates the prohibition on killing and describes euthanasia and assisted suicide as forms of so-called 'medical care,' deceptively framed as merely offering 'aid in dying.' Even more alarming, it uses a subjective criteria of suffering, including individuals with mental illness and disabilities," the ACLJ warned.
"The proposed euthanasia procedure could occur in a shockingly quick turnaround – carried out within a week – based solely on the decision of a single physician without any judicial oversight. Families would not be allowed to oppose the killing of their loved one, and compliance with the policy would only be reviewed a posteriori, or after the patient's death," the pro-life organization said.
"Extremely disturbing is that medical and social institutions — including religious clinics and retirement homes — would be forced to permit euthanasia on their premises, while pharmacists would be legally required to supply the lethal drugs used. The bill even creates a new crime of obstruction, punishable with up to two years in prison and fines of €30,000, effectively criminalizing any attempt to prevent or question an assisted suicide."
The ECLJ now is challenging the plan under international law, specifically the U.N. Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
That 2006 treaty sets out the rights of the disabled, and countries are legal bound to follow, if they've adopted it.
The ECLJ has informed the U.N. of the human rights violations embedded in France's agenda, and as a result, the U.N. told France of the "credible information indicating that if the above-mentioned piece of legislation is approved, it would result in an infringement of the duty of the state party to respect, protect and guarantee the right to life of persons with disabilities."
Among the concerns is the U.N.'s perception that "proposed eligibility criteria . . . appear to be based in ableist perceptions of the quality and value of the life of persons with disabilities.":
The ACLJ explained, "In fact, under the proposed law, a disability alone could be sufficient grounds for euthanasia or assisted suicide, if the person suffers physically or psychologically. This refers to what the U.N. CRPD calls 'ableist.' It also raised concerns about the lack of 'alternatives to assisted dying,' the creation of a new felony of obstructing assisted suicide, and the very short mandatory cooling-off period of only two days before euthanasia or assisted suicide can be performed.":
France has been trying to delay a response, which now isn't expected until the end of the month.
"It is extremely unusual for a U.N. Committee to intervene during a national legislative process, but in this case, it is fully justified given the dangerous nature of the bill. We must never forget that the U.N. was founded in response to the horrific crimes of Nazi Germany, including the state-sanctioned euthanasia of the innocent," the ACLJ warned.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states euthanasia is always a crime and can never be justified.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Officials in Cincinnati have charged the white man beaten by multiple blacks with a crime related to the July 26 late-night racial street brawl.
As Fox News reported, on Wednesday, authorities charged the unidentified 45-year-old white man with disorderly conduct for his part in the fight.
Police are not legally allowed to identify the man at this time. Under Marsy's law, victims of crimes are allowed to have their names withheld from the public.
According to the Fox report, authorities did not indicate what the man specifically did to warrant a disorderly conduct charge.
The charge comes after black community leaders in Cincinnati last week demanded the white man's prosecution, citing a video appearing to show him slapping one of the black individuals before the all-out assault.
As the Gateway Pundit reported, those leaders said the footage proved the white man should be facing at least the same charges as the six black Cincinnatians who brutally beat him and a white woman, Holly, who had tried to intervene to stop the melee, which left six people injured altogether.
At a press conference Aug. 11, Senior Pastor Tracie Hunter of the Western Hills Brethren In Christ Church demanded that the bald white man face criminal charges after citing the charges that had been filed against the black participants.
"Because those six individuals were charged with aggravated assault, which is a felony, the white guy incited or urged six other people to commit a felony, which means based on part B of the statute, he should be charged with inciting to violence, a felony of the third degree," Hunter claimed.
"If the riot is because of a slap, who incited the riot?" asked Rev. Damon Lynch. "Why are the only people being charged are the ones who look like me?"
Other black elected officials have made inflammatory statements about the incident, with Councilwoman Victoria Parks of Cincinnati saying the victims in the brawl "begged for that beat down," drawing calls for her resignation.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Two internet content creators, Nina Unrated (real name Nina Santiago) and Patrick Blackwood, were testing food in a Houston restaurant Sunday when an SUV crashed through the plate-glass window – and it's all caught on video.
Santiago and Blackwood were sitting down for brunch at Cuvee Culinary Creations when the vehicle, traveling at an estimated 35 mph, hit their table. The two went to the hospital for glass cuts but otherwise are unhurt.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
People who are in the United States on student visas have participated in events that left assault cases on their records.
Or burglaries cases, and DUIs, even records of support for terrorism.
And now 6,000 times, those visas have been pulled.
"Every single student visa revoked under the Trump administration has happened because the individual has either broken the law or expressed support for terrorism while in the United States," a senior State Department official said in a statement to Fox News.
"About 4,000 visas alone have been revoked because these visitors broke the law while visiting our country, including records of assault and DUIs."
Those whose records now includes assault – about 800 – either faced arrest or charges stemming from an assault.
Between 200 and 300 cases involved "support for terrorism," and they engaged "in behavior such as raising funds for the militant group Hamas, which the U.S. State Department has designated as a terrorist organization," the official told Fox.
Some of the cases that have developed so far in 2025 also are for overstays.
"The Trump administration has launched multiple initiatives aimed at cracking down on immigration and revoking visas of those attending academic institutions in the U.S.," the Fox report explained. "Those who've publicly protested supporting Palestine have faced heightened scrutiny, as one example, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in May that the administration was reviewing the visa status of students."
The Department of State said overall, about 40,000 visas have been canceled in 2025, up from 16,000 during the same time period under Joe Biden's Washington regime.
The State Department official said the revocation of visas isn't new.
But Secretary of State Marco Rubio has explained, "We're going to continue to revoke the visas of people who are here as guests and are disrupting our higher education facilities."
According to the report, Democrats complained the Trump administration, by enforcing the law, is violating due process.
The Trump administration already has taken several steps to other accountable those who violate U.S. law, including "unlawful anti-Semitic harassment and violence."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In the aftermath of the COVID-19 mandate era, tens of thousands of service members who were forced to leave the U.S. military, or who left on their own over the issue, are now being invited back. However, relatively few have expressed a desire to return to a military that, not long ago, trampled on their freedoms.
On July 26, Stuart Scheller, senior adviser to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, turned his focus to the reinstatement process. While many commended him for his effort, he also made a statement that heightened the concerns of those who were negatively impacted by the 2021 mandate and who continue to demand that some senior military leaders be held accountable for illegally enforcing the experimental shot.
"… [M]any who exited the service because of poor treatment over the shot refusal want retribution. I get tagged every day with posts questioning when commanders at every level of the military will be thrown in jail for 'illegally enforcing the COVID vaccine.' That's not going to happen. Time to move forward."
Two days after Scheller's statement, this reporter emailed him requesting clarification of what could be interpreted as saying military leadership will not be held accountable for enforcing the "unlawful as implemented" mandate. To date, no response has been received from Scheller.
WorldNetDaily spoke to retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Darin Gaub, a former UH-60 Black Hawk pilot and battalion commander.
"Quite disappointed" by Scheller's lack of response, Gaub said, "Those who have risked a lot and lost a lot in the fight for liberty are begging and asking for transparency from every agency." Service members and veterans, as well as the American people, want "absolute truth and honesty from everybody involved," he added.
Failure to demand accountability on behalf of the tens of thousands of service members adversely affected by the COVID-19 mandate is "a break in trust with the very people who make the military what it is," said Gaub. "It doesn't matter what else you do, because if you break trust and refuse to restore it to the people who make up the military, your military will never be as strong and as sound as you want it to be."
"You have to have accountability to restore trust," he added, "and those who willingly and knowingly violated laws and ethical standards to push the jabs need to be held accountable regardless of rank or position." Whatever "the smoke and mirrors or the cover story" military leaders who enforced the mandate try to create, he said, "they need to be held 100 percent accountable."
"If that doesn't happen, especially in the four years of this [Trump] administration, you will never see trust restored," Gaub stressed, because without real accountability, "they'll miss any chance of rebuilding the backbone of what makes the military strong and what makes it lethal."
What would accountability look like? For Gaub, it would mean some senior military leaders considered for courts-martial. He would even advocate that such proceedings be televised, to show the American people that law breakers, even in the military, will not be tolerated. In addition, he said, "their retirement grade should be based on their last known honorable conduct," which would have occurred before the now-rescinded 2021 vax mandate.
Bottom line, said the former Army chopper pilot and battalion commander: "If you can't promise the people sitting at home that their children will not be put in the same position and not have to suffer the consequences" of upholding their moral and religious convictions to object to an unproven and experimental shot, "you'll never have the best and brightest of America go into a system that's going to chew them up and spit them out."
On the other hand, WND also spoke to an Air Force officer who agreed with Scheller. A fighter pilot affected by the mandates, and who asked to have his name withheld for this story, he considers it "impractical to fire people or anything else of the sort, [arguing that] just because they violated 10 U.S.C. § 1107a does not mean they have criminal liability." The U.S. Code should have required informed consent for the "emergency use" of the COVID-19 shot. However, this was not provided to service members.
Despite the law, he suggested, "the Defense Department's best policy for righting wrongs is in a large-scale policy change for vaccines."
According to the Air Force officer, "We are not in a place to fire tons of people, nor do we need to." He agreed that investigations need to be done, but said, "our [military] community is asking way too much, taking a major win [with the Trump administration only to] squander it with a lot of unreasonable requests that will only alienate the administration."
Having survived the COVID era with the ability to continue serving his country, the Air Force officer said, "It can't always be perfect, and if I've learned anything from this fight, you have to take small wins by baby steps and make influential friends in the process, even if they don't agree on your end state."
The Air Force officer stressed his views do not represent those of the Department of Defense or Department of the Air Force.
Regarding the series of questions submitted to Scheller by this reporter, the Air Force officer said he is particularly interested in knowing how service members can be assured that a similar illegal and harmful mandate will not happen again, as it did in both the anthrax and COVID-19 eras.
"While I share the Department of Defense's desire to move forward," he acknowledged, "I would like to see some significant increases in medical freedom in the DoD." For example, he noted, "There's no reason to lose service members over a flu shot or a Japanese encephalitis vaccine."
Finally, Gen. Mike Flynn, former national security adviser at the start of Donald Trump's first term as president, just posted on X about an open letter, titled "Declaration of Military Accountability," having been officially entered into the Congressional Record. Signed by 231 active service members and veterans, the letter demands accountability over the Defense Department's highly controversial enforcement of the now-rescinded COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
The signatories state, "In the coming years, thousands within our network will run for Congress and seek appointments to executive branch offices, while those of us still serving on active duty will continue to put fulfilling our oaths ahead of striving for rank or position.
"For those who achieve the lawful authority to do so, we pledge to recall from retirement the military leaders who broke the law and will convene courts-martial for the crimes they committed."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The starting quarterback for the New York Jets, Justin Fields, recently explained to the media what has helped renew his outlook on life and his career: his "low-key addiction" to reading the Bible.
The 26-year-old was asked about what has helped him in making a fresh start with the Jets, taking over this year for veteran quarterback Aaron Rodgers.
"Really getting closer to God, like I said, my relationship, me reading the Bible every day, and if I'm being real, there are some great lines and great wisdom that I didn't even know of. So I'm low-key addicted to getting in my Bible every day just because I learn something new and I'm able to apply it in my everyday life," said Fields.
"I wish I would have started earlier. So I encourage you all to go read a little bit. Start in Proverbs and move on from there," Fields added.
Out of Ohio State, Fields signed a two-year, $40 million contract with the Jets after playing on the Pittsburgh Steelers last year.
A seemingly large percentage of NFL quarterbacks are professing Christians. WND columnist Jack Cashill delved into the issue in 2020.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A major U.S. newspaper with insider financial ties to local politicians now is doxxing critics of the city's crime agenda – or lack thereof.
It is the Federalist that has published a report exposing the suspect activities of the Denver Post.
It has targeted – and exposed the names, home addresses and more – of those participating in an organization that sought to review public records about crime in the infested city.
The report charged that the Post even published employment information about "three private citizens who legally obtained public information" that later appeared in the social media account called Do Better Denver.
"The Post identified the three people it doxxed by doing a public records request for those women's public records requests," the report explained.
It was "crime reporter Shelly Bradbury" who named names in her recent article.
From Do Better Denver was the comment, "I have been informed that the Mayor's office were the ones that looked at all the CORA requests over the last two years and tried to figure out who I am based on CORA requests and my posts (based on who was requesting them). The Mayor's office narrowed it down to three names and FED the story to the @denverpost and told their contact at the Post to CORA the CORA requests in hopes of outing me and getting the media and my followers to turn on me. The Mayor's office said that @mikejohnstonco wants DoBetterDNVR gone because 'I am ruining his narrative'. Is it legal for government officials to try and silence me via doxxing? Or engaging the Denver Post to do so? #Yikes #IsThisLegal #DoBetterDNVR."
The Federalist's Mollie Hemingway said:
And Do Better Denver responded:
It also noted Denver's "body count" is on the rise, again:
Jill Osa, one of those named, said Bradbury "doxxed me and two others" but "indefensibly" failed to tell the real story:
Further, Bradbury engaged in "bad, unethical journalism," the social media statement charges.
Interestingly, the city, with hundreds of millions of dollars in budget deficits, is laying off staff that grew by 4,000 individuals receiving paychecks over recent years under Democrat administration.
Colorado also is a Democrat stronghold, with a Democrat governor, majority-Democrat Senate and House, and an all-Democrat state Supreme Court that wildly assumed it could order President Donald Trump off the 2024 election ballot before being scolded by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The report noted the city "has a $44 million rental contract from 2024 through 2029 with the Denver Post's parent company … and in 2024 approved an $89 million contract to go into debt to purchase the same former Denver Post building."
Do Better Denver charges the city sought the newspaper's participation in the doxxing because officials were "angry about public disclosures of their activities."
"One public record one of the women discovered, for example, showed the city paid $2.1 million for vacant rooms for illegal immigrants," the report said.
No comment from a spokesman for Mayor Mike Johnston.
The Post claimed the government "played no role" in the newspaper's agenda against the Do Better Denver individuals.
An administrator for Do Better Denver confirmed in the report it gets death threats "for posting public records about people with criminal records that include kidnapping, battery, and work for terrorist gangs such as Tren de Aragua."
The Post confirmed the mayor's office ordered police to stop r0esponding to public records requests from Do Better Denver, and the staff in the mayor's office switched in an app that automatically deletes messages.
The DBD's accounts on social media have addressed problems in the city with indecency, vagrancy, crime, and its accounts are followed by 150,000 people.
"The accounts criticize public officials for sanctuary city policies inviting gang activity, releasing violent criminals on low bonds, and otherwise enabling public disorder. Denver has sued the Trump administration for opposing such policies," the report said.
It was the Post's recent doxxing that said it knew the names of some of those who supply DBD with information: "Arizona resident Jill Osa, Denver resident Megan Anderson and New Mexico resident Alexandra Pacheco."
Osa explained, "I'm just an average citizen who wanted answers and wasn't getting them when she went to her elected officials."
On the website has been criticism of the city's pro-illegal alien agenda, and voters are soon going to be asked to raise their own taxes by $1 billion for "affordable housing."
Bradbury claimed the site provides "misinformation" and she was backed up by the leftist Poynter Institute, which runs "one of the most notorious mass censorship organizations, the egregiously politicized Politifact," the Federalist confirmed.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Court of Appeals of Tennessee, located in Nashville, has struck down a municipal ordinance that limited the number of customers who could visit a home-based business.
It is invalid because it discriminated based on the type business it was.
According to a report from the Institute for Justice, which fought on behalf of record producer Lij Shaw and hairstylist Pat Raynor, Nashville's rule allowed the two only six client visits a day at their businesses.
And then the city came up with "invasive and burdensome requirements."
However, other businesses based in homes, such as short-term rentals, home daycares, historic homes and more, were allowed to have 12 or more clients daily, "free from additional requirements."
"This kind of arbitrary favoritism has no place under the Tennessee Constitution," explained Paul Avelar, a lawyer for the IJ. "Lij and Pat have a constitutional right to use their homes to earn an honest living. But Nashville treats their home-based businesses worse than other, privileged, home-based businesses for no real reason."
The lawsuit stems from the city's 2017 attacks on the two businesses, in which it shut them down.
Then came COVD, and the city allowed them to have six client visits daily.
Now a unanimous ruling from Judges Frank Clement, Andy Bennett, and Jeffrey Usman agreed with the claims that the city had not offered good reasons for favoring some home business over others.
The ruling said, "Metro has offered no rational reason for the difference in treatment that is relevant to the purpose of the law."
The case already has been to the state Supreme Court, which rejected a lower court's dismissal and reinstated it for further opinions at the lower court level.
At first, the lower court claimed the limits were "constitutional because they were rationally related to the city's interests in preserving the residential nature of neighborhoods."
The appeals ruling noted that the city changed its code during the time period that the lawsuit was pending. But throughout the proceedings the city exempted short-term rentals, home-based daycares, historic buildings and such.
The case ended up addressing the city's irrational decision to distinguish between different types of home-related businesses.
"Plaintiffs argued that there was no rational reason that was relevant to the purpose of the law for distinguishing between their businesses and the Exempt Businesses. In support, Plaintiffs produced evidence that their businesses had no more of an impact on the residential character of neighborhoods than the Exempt Businesses," the ruling said.
The opinion noted the city didn't even try to dispute that.
The city had responded to the unequal treatment concerns by stating that it did allow customer visits, but did "not explain what relevance this has to plaintiff's equal protection claim.'
"We conclude that Plaintiffs' businesses are similarly situated in all material respects to home-based daycares, historic-home event venues, owner-occupied STRPs, and home based businesses on property rezoned as SP districts with respect to the purpose of the law," the appeals court said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Vice President JD Vance is predicting "a lot of people" will get indicted in connection with the Trump-Russia collusion hoax that has come to be known as Russiagate.
Appearing on "Sunday Morning Futures" with Maria Bartiromo on the Fox News Channel, Vance said: "I absolutely want to see indictments."
He indicated U.S. intelligence agencies "defrauded the American people" on behalf of Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign against then-candidate Donald Trump.
"They actually laundered Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign talking points through the American intelligence services," Vance explained.
"That's a violation of the people's trust, that's a violation of what our intelligence services be doing, and I absolutely think they broke the law and you're gonna see a lot of people get indicted for that."
"Here's the thing that should really bother the American people," Vance continued. "What do you want our intelligence community to be doing? I want them to be catching bad guys. I want them to make sure terrorists aren't going to one killing innocent American civilians.
"I don't want them laundering Hillary Clinton's campaign talking points into the American media and giving them this air of legitimacy.
"It is sick and it's disgusting. It hurt the intelligence community, it hurt the American people and it hurts the first Trump administration. We've got to have consequences for it, or we're just gonna see the same play repeated again."
As WorldNetDaily reported last week, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi signed an order launching a grand jury investigation into the beginnings of the Democrats' Russiagate conspiracy against Trump, a scheme that carried through the entirety of his first presidency, during the four years before his second term, and even today has some extremist adherents.