This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe Biden's manipulation of the nation's gun regulations to create the category of so-called "ghost guns" now is going to be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The fight is over a rule fabricated in 2022 by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that imposed a new regulatory regime on the "buy build shoot" kits that are available online, or in stores.

Those let buyers build a working firearm.

But bureaucrats contend that the process is without any background checks.

The rule already has been struck down by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, but Biden's bureaucrats went immediately to the Supreme Court to gain support for their agenda.

The DOJ claims the Gun Control Act of 1968 permits the rule because it defines a "firearm" to include "any weapon … which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive," as well as "the frame or receiver of any such weapon."

A Fox News report said Firearms Policy Coalition President Brandon Combs, who brought the court challenge, explained his organization is pleased the court will hear the case.

"The Fifth Circuit’s decision in our case was correct and now that victory can be applied to the entire country," he told Fox.

The report said ATF is demanding that unfinished pieces of a firearm be considered a completed gun.

The high court, by a single vote, earlier allowed the rule to stay while the lawsuit moves through the judiciary.

"This is an important day for the entire liberty movement. By agreeing to hear our case, the Supreme Court will have the opportunity to put ATF firmly in its place and stop the agency from unconstitutionally expanding its gun control agenda," Combs said. "We look forward to addressing this unlawful rule in the court’s next term."

Plaintiffs in FPC's VanDerStok case include FPC, two individual FPC members, and Tactical Machining, LLC. The parties are represented at the Supreme Court by Cooper & Kirk, Mountain States Legal Foundation, and FPCAF.

"We are delighted that the court has agreed to hear our challenge to ATF’s frames and receivers final rule," noted Second Amendment Foundation chief Adam Kraut. "ATF has continuously exceeded its constitutional authority and violated the separation of powers by creating law – a job reserved exclusively for Congress. It is time for the Supreme Court to remind ATF that it may not do so and affirm the judgment of the Fifth Circuit."

The case dates back to April 2022 when the ATF published its final rule rewriting the law and regulations to make the term "firearm" include objects that are not firearms, along with firearms parts kits, in direct contradiction of Congress’ definition of those terms found in the Gun Control Act of 1968.

"This case typifies the Biden administration’s war on the Second Amendment," added SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "Clearly under Joe Biden, the ATF has unilaterally set itself up as the sole authority on firearms regulation, bypassing Congress and arbitrarily changing long-standing regulations to suit the administration’s anti-gun agenda."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center. 

JERUSALEM – The Biden administration's signaled intention to impose sanctions on an elite Israel Defense Forces unit is causing alarm throughout Israel, especially in light of late-breaking news reports indicating that still other units – in addition to the Netzah Yehuda Battalion – might also be in Washington's crosshairs.

According to reports from the Times of Israel, the Israeli military has downplayed U.S. political moves, claiming it was "unaware" of Washington's plans to sanction the unit – which has been involved in a number of controversial and violent incidents in the West Bank.

Comprised mostly of ultra-Orthodox and other religions male soldiers, members of the Netzah Yehuda ("Judea Forever") Battalion do not interact with female troops and are provided with additional time for Torah study and prayer. The battalion has been deployed to some of the hottest theaters of war, including on the northern border, carrying out missions in the West Bank, as well as pinpoint strikes in Gaza. And the unit has had its share of controversies, with convictions meted out after evidence emerged of alleged torture and/or abuse of Palestinian prisoners and other detainees.

Despite the IDF's public downplaying of the Biden administration's planned move, there was widespread condemnation from across Israel's political spectrum at the prospect, from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Opposition Leader (although current member of Israel's War Cabinet and former IDF Chief-of-Staff) Benny Gantz to former Prime Minister Yair Lapid. Both of the latter two leaders are implacable political opponents of Netanyahu, and while Lapid called the move a "mistake," he couldn't resist taking aim at Netanyahu and his government, accusing them of being the source of the problem.

Meanwhile, Israel's Defense Minister Yoav Gallant has been busy today, speaking with U.S. Ambassador to Israel Jack Lew, and due to speak with Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

"I expect the American administration to go back on its intention to impose sanctions on the Netzah Yehuda Battalion," Gallant said in remarks published by the Defense Ministry, warning that the planned move would set a "dangerous" precedent.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A new analysis from The Federalist exposes the Joe Biden administration for changing the nation's laws "to serve political purposes."

The confirmation came in the recent hearing in a case in which a federal statute regarding tampering with evidence is playing a role.

The law states: "Whoever corruptly — (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both."

It has been used hundreds of times against those Jan. 6, 2021, protesters who were objecting to what they viewed as a skewed presidential election count, including President Donald Trump.

But the argument against its use is that it hasn't been used in other, similar, scenarios in the past.

The analysis is from Margot Cleveland, whose writings have appeared in dozens of major publications and who is a lawyer and graduate of Notre Dame where she was given the law school's highest honor, before she served for nearly 25 years as law clerk on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

During arguments, she explained, Biden's solicitor general "painted a picture of the Biden administration enlarging or contracting statutory language to serve political purposes."

The Biden administration's contention to the court is that the law has extensive application, "other than when Antifa burns a courthouse, a member of Congress pulls a fire alarm, or mostly peaceful protesters delay court or congressional hearings."

She explained, "Anyone paying the slightest attention to the Biden administration’s prosecution of J6 protesters and its slap-on-the-wrist coddling of other protesters knows there’s a double standard in play. But the justices’ questioning of the Biden administration during Tuesday’s oral argument in Fischer v. United States forced the government to attempt to justify that disparate treatment."

Questions from the justices prompted Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar to admit that the punishment is being used widely against J6 protesters, but in the eyes of the Biden administration, other situations didn't call for its use.

For example, a "sit-in" disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse, or a "heckler" at the State of the Union, or "pulling a fire alarm before a vote" in Congress, has Rep. Jamaal Bowman, a Democrat, did.

Prelogar said it was the opinion of the Biden DOJ that that conduct "has only a minimal effect on official proceedings."

But, Cleveland confirmed, the law has no exemption for minor "interference" with official proceedings.

"So, why would the Biden administration seek to exempt protests or other disturbances that have only a minimal effect on official proceedings from the scope of Section 1512(c)?" she wrote. "Simply put, because the Department of Justice has never used Section 1512(c) in the way it is being used against the J6 protesters."

That means, the analysis explained, the Biden DOJ was changing the law, "enlarging or contracting," to serve Biden's political agenda.

The analysis found that court appeared unlikely to go along with Biden's re-interpretation of the statute.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, now senior counsel for global affairs with the American Center for Law and Justice, is calling for the Environmental Protection Agency to be dissolved.

It's because it has been "weaponized" by extremists and its newest agenda is simply to destroy the gas-powered vehicle in ways that would injure American families.

The EPA, under direction from Biden, has been imposing rules and requirements that, if followed, eventually will make owning a gas-powered vehicle prohibitively expensive.

All the while the Biden administration is demanding that taxpayers subsidize the construction and sales of electric vehicles, which have range and weather limitations that gas cars do not. And are many times more expensive.

Pompeo explained Biden has been using the office of the president "to pursue political projects at the expense of American families. His administration has foisted a radical green agenda and divisive 'DEI' programs on the American people, resulting in high inflation and government waste at every level."

Now, he explained, Biden is adopting an even more drastic agenda: "Banning gas-powered vehicles."

"Just as Barack Obama did, Biden has weaponized the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to advance his political agenda at the expense of average American families. The EPA’s new rules, issued just a few weeks ago, demand that car manufacturers severely cut the emissions produced by their vehicles. The EPA claims these companies can meet the new benchmark if 44% of all new cars, SUVs, and pickup trucks are fully electric by 2030, with that percentage meant to increase through 2032. This is effectively a ban on gas-powered vehicles: As high demand for fewer and fewer new gasoline vehicles drives up prices, the foundation of American transportation – especially for families outside major cities – will become unaffordable or unavailable within the next decade. This is staggering, unconstitutional government overreach."

He pointed out electrics were only 7% of new car sales last year, mostly bought by "high earners." Fully half of the nation's battery-run cars are in California, where they continue to be a status symbol.

In real America, he said, "Farmers, in particular, rely on tractors, harvesters, and sprayers that require the high power and endurance of diesel engines, while the 2022 Ag Census recorded that 1.47 million farms across America owned 3.16 million semi-trucks or pickups.

"Electric vehicles could potentially be of great benefit to farmers and small businesses someday, just as gas-powered vehicles are now – but today isn’t that day. That’s why our federal government should allow the natural power of the free market to produce electric vehicles that can genuinely compete with gas vehicles," he charged.

And it's more than about electric cars, he said.

"Biden’s rule is just another attack on freedom. Privately owned, gas-powered cars are central to the American way of life and will be for the foreseeable future. They provide reliable transportation that gets parents to work and kids to school at a price that is within the means of most Americans. They give families the freedom to travel together on vacations when flights are unaffordable – which they increasingly are."

Will electrics help in the future? Sure, he said.

But "the American people should have the choice to decide when, where, and how they adopt new technologies. As a free people, we – not the government – should get to decide."

Finally, he warned, Biden's "market manipulation" on the issue is set up to profit the Chinese Communist Party.

"The CCP controls nearly every stage of the electric-vehicle supply chain," he pointed out. "The Biden administration is aware of this issue, yet its solution has been characteristically ham-fisted: canceling tax credits for all cars with supply-chain connections to China – tax credits that were meant to help solve the affordability problem for American families."

He said, however, that the EPA now cannot be salvaged.

"This agency will always be weaponized by leftist extremists who are out to limit the freedoms of ordinary Americans, and we should act accordingly. The EPA should be dissolved."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Twice already, courts in Finland have cleared politician Paivi Rasanen of hate speech charges for simply posting a Bible verse.

That's not good enough for the prosecutor, who insisted he would take his efforts to punish her for her biblical views to the nation's Supreme Court.

And now that body has agreed to review the claims.

A report at CBN explains the high court body is taking up the "contentious case."

Rasanen, a member of parliament in Finland and former national officer, interior secretary, said, "The Supreme Court has today announced that it will give the prosecutor general the permission to appeal the unanimous acquittal of the Helsinki court of appeal concerning the charges about my statements."

She said her fight for "freedom of speech" will continue.

She pointed out that she could take the case, given a Supreme Court ruling at variance with several other courts, to the European Court of Human Rights should she choose.

"I have … a peaceful mind and I am ready to continue to defend free speech and freedom of religious before the Supreme Court and, if need be, also before the European Court of Human Rights," she said, according to the report.

It was just last November that the Helsinki Court of Appeal dismissed three criminal charges against her. That ruling made it a total of six judges who had not found anything illegal in her postings.

WND has reported on the ongoing attacks on Rasanen over the years.

Prosecutors reportedly are demanding tens of thousands of Euros in fines – as well as censorship of her comments.

A report from ADF explained Räsänen was accused by extremists in that nation's government of “hate speech” for "sharing her faith-based views on marriage and sexual ethics in a 2019 tweet, during a 2019 radio discussion, and in a 2004 church pamphlet."

Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola also is accused in the case, as he was part of creating a brochure with her comments.

Even earlier, a district court had ruled against the prosecutor's attempt to convict her, and at the appeals judges ordered the prosecutor to pay her legal fees.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe Biden's tall tales are legend. The one about the Amtrak conductor who was dead before talking with Biden. Then there are those foreign leaders who were dead when Biden recalled talking to them. There's his career as a truck driver. And he grew up in more "communities" than Delaware likely has.

But his newest likely is his tallest, and while the White House seems to be saying, "Nothing to see here, just move along," it's getting Biden a lot of attention.

Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley noted that Biden "has been long accused of false stories that have ranged from an invented arrest with Nelson Mandela to a zombie-like train conductor."

But the new one "stood out."

"President Biden suggested that his uncle Ambrose 'Bozey' Finnegan may have been eaten by cannibals in World War II. What is striking about this story is the specificity of the key facts … and the fact that they are entirely false (other than his uncle dying near New Guinea)."

Biden's specific comment was, "He was a hell of an athlete, they tell me, when he was a kid. He flew those single-engine planes as reconnaissance over war zones, and he got shot down in New Guinea. They never found the body because there used to be, there were a lot of cannibals, for real, in that part of New Guinea."

But Turley did the research and reported the facts: "The more glaring problem is that Bozey was not flying a plane and was not shot down. It was not a single engine plane but a Douglas A-20 Havoc with two Pratt & Whitney R-985 Wasp Junior 9-cylinder radial engines. He was not the pilot but a passenger on a plane. (Indeed, he was not referenced in the official report as a pilot but a staffer at the Headquarters of the Fifth Air Force). The plane had mechanical problems and crashed near New Guinea. He did not disappear in a sea of cannibals but the actual sea when he and other passengers failed to get out of the wreckage."

That official document confirms, "On May 14, 1944, an A-20 havoc (serial number 42-86768), with a crew of three and one passenger, departed Momote Airfield, Los Negros Island, for a courier flight to Nadzab Airfield, New Guinea. For unknown reasons, this plane was forced to ditch in the ocean off the north coast of New Guinea. Both engines failed at low altitude, and the aircraft’s nose hit the water hard. Three men failed to emerge from the sinking wreck and were lost in the crash. One crew member survived and was rescued by a passing barge. An aerial search the next day found no trace of the missing aircraft or the lost crew members."

Turley noted that there actually is a connection between a president and cannibals, but it's not Biden.

"One of the documented stories of Japanese cannibalism involved another president. George H.W. Bush was a combat pilot in World War II and survived being shot down over the Pacific during a raid on the island of Chichi Jima in September of 1944. He was not alone. Nine other airmen went down, but only Bush was able to evade capture because he bailed out over the sea. Nevertheless, he only survived because other pilots gave covering fire as he paddled away in a life raft.

"The other eight were not so lucky. James Bradley’s book Flyboys: A Story of True Courage details the tragedy that unfolded. They were beaten and tortured and eventually beheaded. Major Sueo Matoba then had their flesh prepared for an officers’ feast and a party in his quarters. Also Captain Shizuo Yoshii hosted a similar feast and both General Yoshio Tachibana and and Rear Admiral Kunizo Mori, the army and navy commanders of the island, reportedly partook in the meals. The four airmen used for the meals were Marve Mershon, Floyd Hall, Jimmy Dye, and Warren Earl Vaughn," he said.

He pointed out, "As is often the case, the White House simply refused to address the false claim and made it sound like reporters were denigrating the service of his uncle by asking about the cannibal story."

The Daily Mail noted, "It was the latest in a litany of stories Biden has told which have later been found to include factual errors or exaggerations. On board Air Force One on Thursday reporters repeatedly asked Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, to confirm the president's cannibal story, but she did not. She joked that there was 'no cannibal tab' in her binder of information."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe Biden already is trailing President Donald Trump in many of the polls addressing the coming election in swing states – those vote totals that most likely will decide the presidency.

He attacks Trump constantly, threatening Americans that the probable GOP candidate would destroy "democracy," as running on his own accomplishments likely isn't going to happen.

Those would be inflation of some 19% since he took office, a world in turmoil, a southern border crisis that is threatening the wellbeing of even "sanctuary" cities, trillions in spending on "green" ideologies, and much more.

Of course, his age and mental capacities loom large and ominous in the campaign.

But now there's a new headwind: A call for him to be "compelled to resign" if, in fact, a report that he knew in advance of Iran's plans to launch a war against Israel, and did nothing, is correct.

The call appeared this week from Peter Laffin, a contributor to the Washington Examiner who also has written in RealClearPolitics and the National Catholic Register.

He reported, "An anonymous Turkish diplomat told Reuters this week that Turkey played the role of a back channel intermediary between the United States and Iran in the run-up to the Iranian missile strike in Israel. According to the source, Tehran informed Turkey of its plans for the strike in advance in an effort to limit the potential for further escalation. In response, the U.S. allegedly conveyed to Tehran through Ankara that any action would have to be 'within certain limits.' The White House has denied the claim."

But, he said, "If the report is accurate, and, in particular, if President Joe Biden greenlit a strike against a key American ally, he must be compelled to resign the presidency immediately.

"Such an act, even if taken with the apparent best long-term interests of the ally in mind, represents a stunning betrayal that has the potential to erode trust among allies around the globe. Given the swift rise of the authoritarian axis in the East in recent years, coupled with America’s waning global influence, a scandal of this magnitude must not be tolerated."

He pointed out that the "alleged approval" actually "fits within Biden's overall stance toward Tehran, which is largely indistinguishable from that of former President Barack Obama. In the Obama-Biden view, Iran is not a rogue nation bent on the destruction of the West — the frequent 'death to America' chants by lawmakers and citizens notwithstanding — but a rational international actor that can be reasoned with and bought off at the right price."

After all, under Obama the U.S. sent "billions of taxpayer dollars" to Iran's mullahs to purchase a temporary and "toothless" nuclear deal.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

"Within certain limits."

That was the caution Joe Biden gave to Iran just before it attacked Israel with drones, missiles and more, essentially allowing the act of war, mounting evidence is revealing.

It was Reuters that reported just days ago a diplomatic source said Iran told Turkey about the plans to attack, and "Washington had conveyed to Tehran via Ankara that any action it took had to be 'within certain limits."

Reuters said the Turkish source, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed "Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan had spoken to both his U.S. and Iranian counterparts … to discuss the planned Iranian operation, adding Ankara had been made aware of possible developments."

The report continued, "Earlier this week, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke to Fidan to make clear that escalation in the Middle East was not in anyone's interest."

The source confirmed, "Iran informed us in advance of what would happen. Possible developments also came up during the meeting with Blinken, and they (the U.S.) conveyed to Iran through us that this reaction must be within certain limits."

The report explained Iran's attack was in response to Israel's decision to take out suspected targets at an embassy in Damascus.

Now a report from Israel365News explains how Iranian officials "communicated their intent to launch a massive attack against Israel with the intention that this message be conveyed to the United States."

That report explained through those same diplomatic channels, "the U.S. conveyed its tacit assent" on one condition.

The report noted Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian also confirmed Iran gave neighboring countries and the United States 72 hours’ notice that it would launch the attack.

Biden officials claimed Amirabdollahian was lying.

"That is absolutely not true," a senior Biden official, unidentified in the report, said. "They did not give a notification, nor did they give any sense of … 'these will be the targets, so evacuate them.'"

The Middle East, forever in turmoil over demands from Palestinians and others that Israel be eradicated, has been at a fever pitch since last Oct. 7, when Muslim terrorists in Hamas, based in the Gaza Strip, invaded Israel and butchered some 1,200 civilians, often in horrific ways.

Israel365 reported one U.S. official said, "We received a message from the Iranians through the Swiss as this [attack] was ongoing. This was basically suggesting that they were finished after this, but it was still an ongoing attack. So that was (their) message to us."

It was only hours before the attack that Joe Biden went public with a comment that he would not divulge secrets, but he "expected" Iran to attack Israel "sooner, rather than later."

Biden then over the weekend, after the attack, dispatched State Department spokesman Matthew Miller to express pride that Biden "played a critical role" in preventing loss of lives.

But Biden's permissions, according to the report, did not extend to saying Israel could respond to the attack.

Israeli officials have confirmed that will happen, but they are not publicizing details ahead of time.

The report explained, "Despite the indications that the Biden administration had prior knowledge and given tacit permission for the attack, the White House blamed President Trump for Iranian aggression. On Sunday, White House national security communications spokesperson John Kirby gave an interview in which he blamed the previous administration for exiting the JCPOA nuclear agreement with Iran."

President Trump's administration pulled America out of that deal, noting that it provided a pathway for Iran to obtain nukes despite its goal of preventing that.

Israel365 said, "It should be noted that since Biden took office, his administration has removed sanctions, accounting for an additional $32 billion to $35 billion in oil revenue for Iran. About 70% of Iran’s oil exports are to China. The administration also paid the Iranian government $6 billion in ransom in return for five hostages.

"In 2020 the State Department assessed that Iran sends $100 million a year to Palestinian terrorist groups including Hamas and Hezbollah. Last year Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said that his group receives $70 million from Iran, plus long-range rockets but recent reports claim that this increased to $350 million in the last year."

The recovery from the Hamas terrorism in Israel had not even died down before Biden "extended a sanctions waiver to allow Iran to access upwards of $10 billion in electricity revenue once held in escrow in Iraq," the report noted.

Israel's attack on a consulate annex in Damascus, which was cited as the reason for the most recent war maneuvers, killed 16, including seven Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps soldiers, five Iran-backed militia, one Hezbollah fighter, one Iranian adviser and two civilians.

The civilian toll was far less than the civilian toll during Barack Obama's tenure, when he ordered multiple overseas strikes.

But among those killed in Damascus was Brig. Gen. Mohammad Reza Zahedi, who is reported by Iranian government publications as being the schemer behind the Oct. 7 terrorism by Hamas.

Reports suggest that of the 170 aerial drones, 30 cruise missiles and 120 ballistic missiles Iran fired at Israel, half failed to launch or crashed in flight. Estimates are that only a handful of ballistic missiles reached Israeli territory and did some damage.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A pitched battle has erupted in California over the decision by one city to take an easement away from the Lions Club and remove a Christian cross the organization had illuminated at holidays for years.

The situation has been profiled by CBN, which noted the effort to restore the cross continues.

The cross has been on the site since several owners sold the city 1.1 acres of land in the 1970s, but the Lions retained an easement for the cross, the report said.

Atheists in recent years had complained they didn't like it, so the city's solution was to take over the easement and remove the monument.

Now a coalition of Christians is renewing their campaign to have the 28-foot-tall cross restored.

The metal and plexiglass structure had been illuminated on a hill overlooking Albany Hill for decades, CBN said.

It was the East Bay Atheists who began insisting in 2015 that the cross on the private easement be torn down.

They claimed it showed a "preference" for one religion and offended them.

The city's mayor at the time in 2017 soon joined the campaign. Peggy McQuaid, in office, said the city did not support the "continued presence" of the cross.

Then in 2018 a judge claimed the cross, on a private easement, violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution, which forbids setting up a state religion.

The city could have sold the plot of ground that was covered by the easement, but instead opted to pursue the destruction of the cross.

The Lions club now has sued to regain its easement, and the cross, the report said.

The complaint notes the court refused to acknowledge that the club had a property right "to display the cross.'

"The First Amendment of the Constitution protects individuals and private entities from such blatant state hostility to those wishing to express symbols of faith and hope," Brad Dacus, president and founder of Pacific Justice Institute, told CBN.

"We at PJI are committed to defending such constitutionally protected expression."

Lions Club chief Kevin Pope told the Washington Times in an interview that city leaders "seem to hate what it represents, and rather than take an amount of money for the land … they've decided to spend what we think is probably close to $1 million" fighting the cross.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

It was many years ago already, but at the Denver convention for Democrats when Barack Obama was nominated, he ranted and grimaced, and promised America was about to fundamentally change.

Since then, the evidence shows he wanted to push the United States into a socialist realm of government mandates and control – remember the demands in Obamacare?

But Democrats now have gone far beyond, according to a commentary from Chris Queen, an editor at PJ Media.

Now, he explained, Democrats now want "to end America."

"For starters, the left has put all its chips in on abortion. It only took a couple of decades for leftists to go from 'safe, legal, and rare' to 'shout your abortion.' Killing babies has become a rite of passage for left-wing women, and pushing abortion is now a non-negotiable talking point," he said.

In fact, it's one of the key talking points on which Joe Biden has based his presidency.

"It has become important to the Democrats to advocate for abortion as much as possible because fewer babies mean fewer future Americans (and potential Republican voters)," he explained.

Then there's the "LGBTQETC" movement.

Also a Biden priority, Queen explained it "is antithetical to human flourishing because gay and lesbian couples can't naturally produce children."

But, he said, "The transgender movement is even more pernicious because gender transition puts transgender individuals at high risk for infertility. Democrats don't care that transgender people are messes of chemicals, wrong hormones, and fake body parts, and they definitely don't care that they're rendering thousands of individuals unable to have children."

Third up is the border crisis created by Biden when he took office and trashed all of President Donald Trump's security plans.