This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Dancing burning cyber trucks spotted at anti-Musk demonstration

Making the rounds on social media is video highlighting a new costume worn by some protests of Tesla and its founder, Elon Musk.

The footage shows people dancing in burning cyber truck costumes, made mostly of cardboard, apparently honoring the "virtue" of those who have set Tesla vehicles on fire across the nation in recent weeks.

Verbiage accompanying the video notes, "This Is The Reason Why Nobody Will Ever Take The Democrat Party Serious Again."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Gruesomely insists on promoting abortion because live births are 'more expensive'

A prominent lawmaker in the leftist state of Colorado has turned gruesome in her demands that the state promote abortion: She's insisting that the killing of unborn children is better for the state because births are "more expensive."

It is Julie McCluskie, a Colorado Democrat and extremist on abortion, who said, "Births will not occur because abortions happened instead. A birth is more expensive than an abortion. … The savings comes in Medicaid births that will not occur."

She is the speaker of the Colorado House, and continued, "Savings from averted births outweigh the cost of covering reproductive health care for all Coloradans."

A report at the Gateway Pundit took McCluskie to task, explaining the Democrat "has gone so far in supporting abortion, she's reducing the decision to murder babies to a cost-benefit analysis."

McCluskie was promoting her own bill, and agenda, in an attempt to demand that taxpayers cover "abortion care services" in Medicaid and the Child Health Plan Plus. That scheme essentially involves abortion corporations routinely getting huge checks from taxpayers.

Her agenda also demands that public employee insurance plans cover killing the unborn.

The report explained, "She reduced pregnancy and life to a price tag, concluding that those children should just die because it's cheaper. … She was essentially saying that expectant mothers should kill their children rather than give birth, because it would be cheaper for the government."

In fact, McCluskie claimed, "This bill will actually decrease costs for our Healthcare Policy and Financing Department, our Medicaid expenditures in both this year and out years, as the savings from averted births outweigh the cost of covering reproductive health care for all Coloradans."

The Gateway Pundit pointed out, "Anyone who looks at children and childbirth in such cold, calculating terms has truly gone down an evil path."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth launched fiercely into the Atlantic on Wednesday for continuing to claim war plans were mistakenly shared on Signal with the magazine's editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg.

"So, let's me get this straight," Hegseth posted on X.

"The Atlantic released the so-called 'war plans' and those 'plans' include: No names. No targets. No locations. No units. No routes. No sources. No methods. And no classified information.

"Those are some really sh*tty war plans.

"This only proves one thing: Jeff Goldberg has never seen a war plan or an 'attack plan' (as he now calls it). Not even close.

"As I type this, my team and I are traveling the INDOPACOM region, meeting with Commanders (the guys who make REAL 'war plans') and talking to troops.

"We will continue to do our job, while the media does what it does best: peddle hoaxes."

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt also jumped into the fray Wednesday, saying: "The Atlantic has conceded: these were NOT 'war plans.'

"This entire story was another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well-known for his sensationalist spin."

Anna Bross, senior vice president for communications at the Atlantic, released a statement from the publication Wednesday, indicating:

"Attempts to disparage and discredit The Atlantic, our editor, and our reporting follow an obvious playbook by elected officials and others in power who are hostile to journalists and the First Amendment rights of all Americans. Our journalists are continuing to fearlessly and independently report the truth in the public interest."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'Brittany had one condition for them'

A married Indiana teacher is facing dozens of charges after allegedly asking three underage boys to "gangbang" her while wearing a mask from the horror film "Scream."

Prosecutors in Martinsville, Indiana, say five more victims are accusing former Morgan County teacher Brittany Fortinberry of sexual abuse, with some of the boys as young as 13 when the alleged group sex took place.

The new allegations come after the 31-year-old former instructor was originally charged with sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy and sending explicit messages, pictures and videos to other children at Eminence High School in Martinsville.

The Daily Mail reports: "The boy told Detective Williams that Fortinberry, 'would always make him food and would buy him anything he wanted' including 'vapes, weed, and THC carts (cartridges)', according to his affidavit.

"He made claims about several instances where Fortinberry allegedly plied him and friends with mushroom pills before encouraging them to touch her sexually.

"'Brittany would peer pressure them if they didn't want to take the shrooms,' the affidavit reads. 'Brittany would grab their arm she would say, "just let it happen."'

"His mom told cops that her son claimed that, 'Brittany would put the shrooms on a peanut butter sandwich so they couldn't taste them.'

"The boy claimed there was once occasion where Fortinberry picked him and two friends up and took them to the mall, before calling their parents to ask if they could spend the night.

"Once there, the then 13-year-old alleged Fortinberry ordered him and his two friends to have group sex with her, despite the youngsters all being underage.
"'Brittany had one condition for them to have the gangbang with her and that was that they had to wear a Scream mask to f**k her,' the affidavit states. …

"The latest alleged victim claims Fortinberry picked him and two friends up from the mall and took them back to her home where they engaged in a 'gangbang'. The boy, who was 13 at the time, claims Fortinberry's husband Nicholas was aware of the alleged abuse."

WTHR reports Nicholas Fortinberry has been charged with intimidation and failure to report, and prosecutors have filed to increase Brittany's bond from $20,000 to $150,000.

The Metropolitan School District of Martinsville confirmed Fortinberry was hired as a substitute teacher Oct. 24, 2023, before resigning on Jan. 9, 2024.

The district issued a statement indicating:

"The Metropolitan School District of Martinsville was notified of serious allegations against a former employee. The District is fully cooperating with law enforcement and remains committed to ensuring a safe learning environment for all of the MSD of Martinsville students.

"This former employee was hired as a substitute teacher on October 24, 2023, obtained a State-issued Emergency License, and resigned from the MSD of Martinsville on January 9, 2024; the resignation was not related to sexual misconduct allegations.

"During the individual's employment period with the MSD of Martinsville, there were no identified reports of sexual misconduct to the administration or the anonymous tip line. We want to assure families that the MSD of Martinsville conducts a full criminal background check for all new employees, as part of the standard hiring procedures. The background check report indicated no criminal activity for this former employee.
"The safety of the MSD of Martinsville students is our number one priority. As such, the District encourages students and parents to report concerns through the STOPit anonymous reporting system for the MSD of Martinsville. Thank you for your attention to this communication."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'The government should not have a hold on the economy in such a way that it can truly distort entire markets'

When Joe Biden and other Democrats in his political party worked on the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act, they often talked about its global warming ideology, its social agenda points, its tax law updates.

But not how it would reduce inflation, because, as even left-leaning CBS found, "The Inflation Reduction Act is aimed at tackling a host of problems, from climate change to catching tax cheats, but there's one issue it may not solve: reducing inflation."

Biden himself, confessed, the law has "nothing to do with inflation."

A report from the Heartland Foundation found, "The Inflation Reduction Act was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden on August 16, 2022, but the contents of the legislation are contradictory to its stated purpose."

That study found the point of Biden's law, adopted with support only from Democrats, was "the creation of an enormous renewable energy slush fund, paid for by deficit spending."

That means it sets up the government to borrow money to give away to the Democrats' compatriots who run green energy companies and foundations.

The initial estimates were for those green agenda actions to cost some $369 billion, estimates that almost immediately were boosted to $1.8 billion.

Now a report at Just the News documents a warning from the Cato Institute that if left unchanged, the IRA could demand from American taxpayers almost $5 trillion.

Actually, the warning is that it will cost $4.67 trillion, 12 times the original claimed costs.

Cato also warns that the "subsidies are undermining innovation and driving investments toward subsidy farming rather than satisfying consumer demand," the report said.

"The government should not have a hold on the economy in such a way that it can truly distort entire markets, and that's what the Inflation Reduction Act is," explained Cato's Joshua Loucks.

The study recommends that the law be fully repealed, or if not, have significant limitations placed on its green subsidies, limits which now are nonexistent.

Loucks said the assessment was based partly on the fact that there have been wildly divergent estimates for the bill's costs, from the CBO's original $369 billion on up.

"We decided to go on our own fact-finding endeavor here, and that's what resulted in this paper," Loucks said.

Biden's scheme provides tax credits for production of energy, or tax credits for investing in green ideologies.

It's set up so that there's really no end date to all the cash handouts.

They estimated that over the next 10 years, the IRA could cost taxpayers up to $1.97 trillion, and by 2050, up to $4.67 trillion.

It also notes that the real problem is that Biden left the law open so that tax credits are "stackable," meaning a company could cash in on its operations in multiple ways.

"The options for entrepreneurs are unlimited, which is part of the problem in terms of the incentive structure that this law builds. I think it takes the entrepreneurial spirit, the entrepreneurial spirit of Americans, and essentially turns them towards chasing subsidies instead of satisfying consumer demand," an author of the Cato report explained.

The study also found that most of the subsidies will end up in the bank accounts of large corporations and the entirety is structured so that there are companies "that exist for the sake of taking in these subsidies," the report said.

The study found not only does the plan not address inflation, it doesn't really address "climate in any meaningful way."
"It just funnels money to special interest groups and does nothing to really address how we're going to transform our economy in a way that is equitable and beneficial for all Americans," Loucks said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A federal appeals court has dumped a district judge's decision to block, nationwide, President Donald Trump's efforts to limit tax money being spent on the racist "diversity, equity and inclusion" programs within the federal government.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted the block created by Judge Adam Abelson of Baltimore.

Trump had signed an order directing federal agencies to terminate "equity-related" grants or contracts and then followed up with an order requiring federal contractors to certify that they don't promote DEI programs, which often are based on race.

Abelson claimed Trump's pursuit of an ideology not based on race probably violated free speech rights.

The city of Baltimore and others had sued.

Now the 4th Circuit has reinstated Trump's orders to curb tax money being used on those programs. The ruling means that Trump's orders can be enforced while the lawsuit over them continues.

Abelson had made his injunction valid nationwide, part of a trend of lower court judges assuming the authority of the executive branch and making decisions for the entire nation, a move over which the U.S. Supreme Court already has expressed alarm.

The appeals court said Abelson's ruling simply went too far.

The Department of Justice said the president simply was targeting DEI programs that violate federal civil rights laws.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

'Parents, now is the time that you share the receipts of the betrayal that has happened in our public schools'

The Department of Education, which will be reduced in a major way if President Donald Trump's government efficiency campaign proceeds as he has planned, has in the interim opened a portal for people to report discrimination in K-12 schools.

In an announcement, the agency said it's EndDEI.Ed.Gov website is for parents, students, teachers and community members "to submit reports of discrimination based on race or sex in publicly funded K-12 schools."

"The secure portal allows parents to provide an email address, the name of the student's school or school district, and details of the concerning practices," the agency said. The information will then be evaluated for "investigation."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Supreme Court has signaled it likely will end Mexico's demands, through the American court system, that multiple gunmakers in the U.S. pay it billions and billions of dollars.

It demanded, in a lawsuit brought in the state of Massachusetts, that seven major U.S. gun manufacturers and a gun wholesaler be held responsible financially for the horrific death toll from the drug cartel warfare that has engulfed parts of Mexico now for a generation.

A report at Scotusblog, which monitors, reports on, and analyzes Supreme Court actions, said the justices on Tuesday "signaled" they were likely to end Mexico's claims.

"A majority of the court appeared to agree with the gun makers that the Mexican government's suit is barred by a 2005 law intended to shield the gun industry from lawsuits in U.S. courts for the misuse of guns by others," the report said.

Mexican officials had demanded not just billions of dollars but "an end to the marketing and trafficking of illegal guns to Mexico."

Those officials have made claims that American gun makers "deliberately" designed guns knowing that military-style machines will be appealing to drug cartel members. Then, the officials claimed, gunmakers sell their weapons to gun dealers, who sell them to gun buyers, who act as "strawmen" for delivery of guns in Mexico.

It ended up at the Supreme Court after the 1st Circuit noted Mexico's claims that gunmakers "aided and abetted illegal sales."

Lawyer Noel Francisco told the justices on behalf of the gunmakers that "when Congress enacted the law at the center of the case, the Protecting Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, it intended to 'prohibit lawsuits just like this one"" the report explained.

A representative for the Mexican government claimed that the lawsuit should be allowed to go forward.

At issue is whether gun makers helped cartels violate U.S. gun laws and whether the resulting injuries were the responsibility of the gunmakers.

The report said Justice Neil Gorsuch pointed out that for a violation to have occurred, the gun makers had to have intended to do that.

"Other justices questioned whether Mexico had provided enough details in its complaint for its case to move forward," the report noted.

Even leftists on the panel, including Ketanji Jackson and Elena Kagan, expressed doubts about the legitimacy of Mexico's case.

It was left to Justice Samuel Alito to cite the elephant in the room, President Donald Trump's insistence that Mexico do more to prevent the flow of illegal drugs into America, a dispute that has triggered tariffs already.

In this case, he said, Mexico alleges that U.S. gun manufacturers are contributing to illegal conduct in Mexico. But he noted there are "Americans who think that Mexican government officials are contributing to a lot of illegal conduct" in the United States.

Then, he wondered, should a U.S. state sue Mexico in a U.S. court for "aiding and abetting illegal conduct within the state's borders" that causes harm?

A report at Courthouse News suggested that "Mexico received little sympathy from the Supreme Court" in the dispute.

Defendants include Smith & Wesson Brands, Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Beretta U.S.A. Corp, Glock, Sturm, Ruger & Company and Colt's Manufacturing Company.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Democrat lawmakers in a state legislature have turned into thought police, issuing a formal censure against a Republican representative who expressed her opinion regarding allowing men to participate in women's sports events.

The report on what happened to Rep. Laurel D. Libby, a Republican in Maine's House of Representatives, has been documented by the Washington Stand.

The action, a formal censure and ban on letting her speak because of what the Democrats wildly claimed was a lack of "good moral character," is supposed to be in place until she "apologizes."

The fight is one that's going on across the country, as leftists promoting what Joe Biden held as one of his standards for his presidency, a promotion of the LGBT lifestyle choice, continue to fight for their ideology in the wake of President Donald Trump's announcement that the government now recognizes two sexes, male and female.

The vote for Libby's punishment was 75-70 along party lines.

Democrats claimed, 'The House finds the conduct of Representative Laurel D. Libby to be reprehensible and in direct violation of our code of ethics."

Libby's opinions enraged Democrats when she wrote on social media about a male who won the state's girl's class B championship in pole vault.

Her comments included that one year earlier, "John tied for 5th place in boys pole vault. Tonight, 'Katie' won 1st place in the girls' Maine State Class B Championship."

Libby told the Washington Watch program that she was silenced for speaking up for girls who were "displaced from the top of the podium by a biological male."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Amid the turmoil going on in Canada's government now, with the coming departure of Justice Trudeau from its leadership ranks, analysts have suggested that globetrotting banker Mark Carney has a path to replacing him.

But a candidate who right now is considered an also-ran has made a stunning demand that Canada work with nuclear-equipped allies to create a "a closer security relationship that guarantees our security in a time when United States can be a threat."

The comments are from Chrystia Freeland, who said, "The U.S. is turning predator, and so what Canada needs to do is work closely with our democratic allies, our military allies. I would start with our Nordic partners, specifically Denmark who is also being threatened, and our NATO European allies. I would be sure that France and Britian were there who possess NUCLEAR WEAPONS and I will be working urgently with these partners to build a closer security relationship that guarantees our security in a time when United States can be a threat."