Chauvin was sacrificed on the altar of political warfare and gleefully handed over as a pound of flesh to the left-wing mob demanding a scalp in exchange for George Floyd’s death.

Experts agree: George Floyd—a career criminal and drug addict—wasn’t murdered by Officer Chauvin.

Floyd died because he ingested a lethal number of drugs, causing his heart to give out. But none of that mattered once that infamous photo of Chauvin restraining Floyd with his knee, exactly as he was trained to do, spread like wildfire online.

Speaking of that, here are photos of officers being trained to use that exact move on suspects.

But none of that mattered. That viral image was the shot heard ’round the world—and it sealed Chauvin’s fate before he ever stepped into a courtroom. […]

— Read More: revolver.news

NSC Spokesperson Sean Savett wrote a statement on behalf of the Regime titled regarding so-called “anomalous health incidents” affecting hundreds of U.S. personnel and family members while suggesting possible causes for the mysterious happenings including electromagnetic or acoustic energy. These mysterious symptoms, which include unexplained head pressure, ear pain, and dizziness, reportedly began in 2016 and have spread to roughly a dozen overseas locations.

The press release starts by bragging about the Regime’s actions and supposed progress in countering these scary incidents.

“Upon taking office, the Biden-Harris Administration spearheaded a dedicated effort to address anomalous health incidents reported by our colleagues,” the statement by Savett reads.

“We convened departments and agencies across the U.S. Government to develop new policies to expand access to and improve medical care for affected personnel, ensure incidents could be reported freely and without stigma, and provide benefits to eligible employees under statutes passed by Congress, including the HAVANA Act which President Biden signed into law,” the press release continues. […]

— Read More: www.thegatewaypundit.com

Section 702 allows U.S. intelligence agencies to collect information en masse from foreign targets through large-scale surveillance programs, which may sometimes collect the non-public data of U.S. citizens and others inside the United States. Ordinarily, to collect such information, the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment requires the government to obtain a warrant against individual targets.

Critics of Section 702 believe the law’s provisions infringe upon the civil liberties of activists and dissidents. Conservatives, in particular, have assailed the law after its use in 2016 to surveil Trump campaign advisers during investigations of Russian influence.

Gabbard has been a longstanding critic of Section 702, including during her terms in Congress as a Democrat. She switched to the Republican Party last year.

“[T]he civil liberties of the American people have been trampled on under the blank check of Section 702 … [it’s] allowed our government to collect, retain, and search communications of everyday Americans without a warrant and with blatant disregard for our Fourth Amendment constitutional rights,” Gabbard wrote on Twitter in 2018. […]

— Read More: www.theepochtimes.com

The updated guidelines categorize prohibited content into two tiers. Tier 1 bans dehumanizing speech, such as comparisons to “animals” or “pathogens,” and stereotypes such as claiming that certain groups control financial, political, or media institutions. Allegations of serious immorality or criminality, such as calling someone a terrorist or pedophile, are also prohibited.

The policy also forbids mocking alleged hate crime victims, using targeted slurs, or expressing harmful wishes, such as hoping someone contracts a disease or experiences a disaster. Even expressions as simple as saying someone “makes me vomit” fall under the banned list when targeting individuals based on protected characteristics.

Tier 2 extends restrictions to statements that support exclusion or segregation, such as denying someone access to spaces, jobs, or social services. Insults based on character, mental capacity, or physical worth are similarly prohibited, though some exceptions are made for gender-based insults in specific contexts, like romantic break-ups.

Contradictions and Exceptions

The policies do make exceptions for certain types of speech. Accusations of mental illness or abnormality are permitted when based on gender or sexual orientation, under the justification of reflecting political and religious discourse. Similarly, gender-based exclusion in spaces like bathrooms or sports leagues is allowed. […]

— Read More: reclaimthenet.org

After leaving her hometown of Siguatepeque, in Honduras’ central highlands, she learned that Donald Trump had won the US election touting a crackdown on immigration – one that she feared could shrink her chances of reaching the US after a nearly 3-month trip through central America and Mexico.

Speaking from a shelter in the southern Mexican state of Oaxaca in December, the 39-year-old told CNN she was racing against the clock to reach the US’s southern border with Mexico before Trump’s January 20 inauguration.

“We’ve been told that when Trump starts, he won’t let us in,” Altagracia, who asked CNN not to share her last name over fears it would impact her asylum claim in the US, said on a phone call…

“Everyone wants to arrive before [Trump] does,” another migrant, from Cuba, told CNN. “I hope Trump understands that many of us have degrees” that could benefit the US, he said.

CNN quotes an ACLU lawyer who tells them people in danger will “flee regardless of what they know or hear about US restrictions on asylum.” This may be true for some portion of migrants who are facing threats at home, but it’s well known at this point that most of the migrants coming across the border are coming for a new life and a better job. That’s why the majority of people who apply for asylum are rejected. Contrary to what the ACLU claims, these are mostly economic migrants and many of them might decide to stay home if it wasn’t so easy to game the US asylum system.

Meanwhile, we have lots of progressives on this side of the border arguing that once someone arrives they shouldn’t be sent back, not even if they commit a crime. Here’s Greg Sargent writing for the New Republic.

The Laken Riley Act, which has passed the House with 48 Democrats backing it, would require the Department of Homeland Security to detain undocumented migrants accused of minor crimes like burglary, theft, larceny, and shoplifting, putting them on track to deportation. This is dubious policy: DHS already has the authority to detain such undocumented immigrants; the bill would merely require this…

What happened to Laken Riley—a nursing student murdered by undocumented migrant Jose Ibarra after he’d previously committed minor crimes—was a horror, and Ibarra has rightly received a life sentence for it. But as American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick points out, it’s extraordinarily rare for low-level offenders to go on to commit murder; now Immigration and Customs Enforcement would be required to detain every such offender, a potentially huge waste of resources that could be used to pursue more serious criminals. His case should not be the basis for such massive policy changes.

I always love hearing this argument, that fringe cases make bad law, from the same progressive corner of the Democratic party that supported defunding police over a handful of police interactions with black men over the past decade. Black Lives Matter’s whole purpose was to turn fringe cases into demands for radical new policy and even then they frequently got the facts wrong about those cases in order to justify their own crusade (remember Hands up, don’t shoot!). But when it comes to illegal immigrants murdering or raping Americans the same elements on the left caution us not to overreact. […]

— Read More: hotair.com

The less hysterical NSIDC would appear to be the same NSIDC that published a paper updated as recently as last July asking, “has Antarctic sea ice hit a breaking point?”. As the Daily Sceptic has reported in the past, Antarctica has been a bit of a disappointment to the climate cry-baby crowd since it has shown little warming for at least 70 years. “Now scientists are eager to know if climate change has finally caught up with Antarctica sea ice,” notes the NSIDC paper. Helpful as ever in the mission of preaching climate Armageddon, Rannard of the BBC provides us with an “experts say” quote: “Without its ice cooling the planet, Antarctica could transform from Earth’s refrigerator to a radiator.”

Interestingly, the second author on the Rannard story was ‘data’ specialist Becky Dale who subsequently enrolled for the six-month sabbatical run by the Green Blob-funded Oxford Climate Journalism Network. This is a crash course in climate catastrophisation reporting. Previous participants have been asked to write about how fruits such as mangos are less tasty than in the past due to climate change. A recent speaker has called for “fines and imprisonment” for those expressing scepticism about “well supported” science.

The ’mind-blowing’ quote that made headlines around the world has been attributed to Dr. Walter Meier of the NSIDC. Dr Meier, reported Rannard and Dale, “is not optimistic that the sea ice will recover to a significant degree”. At the height of the scare, Meier claimed the 2023 winter dip was far outside anything we’ve seen. Again as we have reported in the Daily Sceptic, Dr. Meier seems a tad forgetful of the past work he has done on the obvious cyclical nature of Antarctica sea ice. Ten years earlier, Meier was part of a science team that unlocked the secrets of early Nimbus satellite photographs. These revealed significant Antarctica sea ice variability in the 1960s including a high in 1964, not seen again until 2014, and a low in 1966, similar to the recent dip. At the time, Meier commented that extreme ice highs and lows “are not that unusual”.

During November and December 2024, mid to late spring in the Southern Hemisphere, the daily Antarctica sea ice loss was 140,000 square kilometres compared to 165,000 sq kms for the 1981-2010 average. By the end of December the sea ice extent was roughly around the average recorded in the 30 years to 2010. Now it seems the NSIDC is a re-convert to stressing long-term trends, noting that the 2016-2024 timeline “is too short to definitely determine that a regime shift has occurred”. […]

— Read More: dailysceptic.org

But what does ChatGPT think? Glenn’s head researcher asked ChatCPT the likelihood of each of Glenn’s predictions, and the results spell trouble for 2025.

Which of Glenn’s predictions did ChatGPT say will come true? Find out below:

1. The internet will be destroyed and reborn through AI.

Summary: AI will restructure the internet, centralizing control with tech giants, raising concerns over censorship.

ChatGPT Probability: 90%

Further Explanation:

Glenn began with a harrowing fact: the internet, as we know it, is slowly dying. We don’t truly have access to “the internet” in its entirety, but rather, we have a small sliver curated by those who control the indexes and brokers of the web. The slow decline of the internet is evident in the increasing irrelevance of many existing pages and documents, with countless dead links and broken websites. This issue demonstrates the growing problem of content disappearing, changing, or becoming irrelevant without updates to reflect these changes.

To address this growing problem, experts suggest that a massive “reboot” of the internet is necessary. Rather than continuing to patch up these issues each year, they argue that a thorough cleaning of the digital space is required, which is where AI comes into play. Google has already proposed using AI to scour the web and determine which content is still relevant, storing only active links. Glenn worries that we will embrace AI out of convenience to fix the problems facing the internet but ignore the widening door to the potential dangers that such convenience brings. […]

— Read More: www.glennbeck.com

The brief order – which ensures Trump will be branded a “convicted felon” at his inauguration in 10 days – noted that Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh would have granted the application. In other words, Trump appointee Amy Coney Barrett sided with the liberals on the bench. In retrospect, CNN belief that Justice Barrett might be the “last best hope for Supreme Court liberals” proved to be accurate.

Thanks to Barrett’s defection, the Supreme Court will stand by as Judge Juan Merchan sentences Donald Trump over felony offenses that many legal analysts consider to be a sham.

The Supreme Court offered two reasons it said it refused to grant the application. “First, the alleged evidentiary violations at President-elect Trump’s state-court trial can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal. Second, the burden that sentencing will impose on the President-Elect’s responsibilities is relatively insubstantial in light of the trial court’s stated intent to impose a sentence of ‘unconditional discharge’ after a brief virtual hearing,” a note on the Supreme Court’s docket read.

After the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump wrote on TruthSocial that he appreciated the “time and effort of the United States Supreme Court in trying to remedy the great injustice done to me.”

He went on to say that he was innocent and would appeal the case.

“For the sake and sanctity of the Presidency, I will be appealing this case, and am confident that JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL,” Trump wrote.

Trump’s application for a stay was submitted on Jan. 8 and argued that “the prospect of imposing sentence on President Trump just before he assumes Office as the 47th President raises the specter of other possible restrictions on liberty, such as travel, reporting requirements, registration, probationary requirements, and others—all of which would be constitutionally intolerable under the doctrine of Presidential immunity.”

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan has indicated that he wouldn’t impose a punishment including incarceration. He denied Trump’s request to halt proceedings as did two state appeals courts this week.

Trump told the U.S. Supreme Court that Merchan had erroneously admitted certain evidence of his official acts as president and failed to acknowledge a form of immunity for presidents-elect. He asked the court to take up his case and consider those issues, as well as whether he was entitled to an automatic stay due to an appeal on presidential immunity.

Trump was found guilty in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying records in relation to an alleged payments to adult film actress Stephanie Clifford. Merchan is expected to enter a judgment of conviction on Jan. 10 and potentially offer a statement criticizing Trump’s behavior.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who brought the indictment against Trump in 2023, told the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 9 that it should reject Trump’s application and allow the state courts to continue handling the issue. Bragg said Trump was asking for an extraordinary intervention by the justices and that Trump had not yet exhausted his state-court remedies.

“Any stay here risks delaying the sentencing until after January 20, when defendant is inaugurated and his status as the sitting President will pose much more severe and potentially insuperable obstacles to sentencing and finality,” Bragg’s brief read.

The president-elect said that the opinion written by Merchan “goes against our Constitution, and, if allowed to stand, would be the end of the Presidency as we know it.”

“Klaus Schwab’s Fourth Industrial Revolution and the agenda of global finance have found an active ally in Pope Francis,” Viganò asserted in a recent video message.

“Far from remaining a neutral observer, which would already be unprecedented, Francis has become an enthusiastic collaborator, using his position of moral authority to endorse initiatives that seek to dismantle traditional society.”

“Within the Church, he pursues a parallel agenda to erode its foundations, aiming to replace it with a philanthropic entity rooted in Masonic ideology,” he stated.

This dual agenda, Viganò claims, highlights a broader conspiracy between what he terms the “Deep State” and the “Deep Church.” […]

— Read More: www.independentsentinel.com

As luck would have it, the New York Post was on the case, enlisting the help of forensic lipreader Jeremy Freeman, a University College London-certified expert witness for litigants.

According to Freeman’s translation, Trump, 78, told Obama, 63, that they would have to “find a quiet place” later in the day to discuss a “matter of importance.”

It would appear as though Trump was hoping to have a conversation about an unspecified international agreement outside the reach of probing cameras.

Trump at one point leaned toward Obama and said, “I’ve pulled out of that. It’s the conditions. Can you imagine that?” prompting a chuckle from Obama.
Trump added, “and after, I will.” […]

— Read More: amgreatness.com