‘Democrats want to go back to their extreme open border policies’

The Justice Department's inspector general has declined to investigate allegations of prosecutorial misconduct surrounding the wrongful indictment of Olympian David Hearn, referring the matter to a separate internal oversight office, CBS News reported Wednesday.

‘Everything went black’

The New York Post cover on Oct. 19 summed it up in two words: “FRANCE BURNS.” Over the weekend, there was massive unrest in France from leftist extremists. So there were several interesting journalism patterns. 

Labeling. Typically, reporters didn’t want to label protesters as “far left,” let alone “left.” Note to reporters: When Greta Thunberg shows up in solidarity, it’s a leftist protest. But some reporters stayed vague, like ABC’s Marcus Moore: “A protest that started with high school students now spiraling to more general concerns about the cost of living, and France’s future.” Anyone with eyes could see it wasn’t just “students” in the streets, and that it’s not just about economics. 

Funny Riots? During his one-day work week, Comedy Central star Jon Stewart unfurled the whole “hey, the French are natural rioters” comedy: “They stormed the Bastille! Other than adultery, it’s the most French thing you can do! It’s like blaming immigrants in America for remembering the Alamo. Riots are just a part of the general ambiance in France!” Would this be funny to people whose cars and businesses were looted or destroyed? 

Political Exploitation. After a few days of violence and destruction, the political implications inevitably break out. The New York Times front page on Oct. 20 lamented: “French Right Has Opening In Upheaval: Riots Fit Rhetoric as Election Approaches.” 

NBC’s Richard Engel hit that message repeatedly. “Although French authorities and police have not linked immigrants to the rioting, it’s the same argument France’s far-right parties are using, hoping to capitalize on the chaos to win key elections in the spring.” 

But that’s not as odd as CNN saying riots are being used by President Donald Trump for “fearmongering,” like they didn’t spend about four years fearmongering for political gain after the Jan. 6 riot. CNN reporter Alayna Treene lamented that Trump used “some of this darker rhetoric … using this kind of fearmongering to try and convince voters to turn out for his party.” Then host Sara Sidner added the Democrat Helper spin: “And to be fair, no Democrat who was running or otherwise has said they want to burn America to the ground.”  

Speaking of Jan. 6 obsessives, CNN senior political commentator Adam Kinzinger tweeted more than 50 times since the riots broke out from Oct. 17-20, and none of them were commenting on the French riots.  

MS NOW host Stephanie Ruhle also complained Trump “resorted to fearmongering.” Fellow host Ali Vitali suggested this “fearmongering” “makes sense” when crime and chaos is a good issue for Republicans. The graphics on screen screamed: “TRUMP USES FRANCE RIOTS TO SPREAD FEAR.” As if MS NOW hasn’t spread fear of impending fascism and democracy extinction for a decade now. 

Blaming Trump for France. MS NOW’s Ruhle somehow blamed Trump for unrest in France: “But we have to remember, the riots started, of course, over school conditions, but it’s also over high prices. And you can draw a direct link to the high prices in Europe to President Trump’s war in Iran.” Jon Stewart attempted this lame spin, too: “In France, they’ve burned down an entire city because of a war they didn’t start and aren’t even any part of.” 

If journalists want to boast about holding governments accountable and strengthening democracy, they could begin by discouraging lawlessness—violence and property destruction and looting—which can only lead to pessimism about our civil society. All riots are bad. Don’t make excuses or engage in riot-splaining like they did in 2020. That’s an idea Americans can and should unite around.  

COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM 

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

Liberal Americans who fled to Europe after President Donald Trump’s reelection told Wired magazine that they made a mistake and found European countries not what they are cracked up to be.

The post Report: Expats Who Fled to Europe Because of Trump Get Wake Up Call, Regret the Move appeared first on Breitbart.

Justice may have finally caught up to a 58-year-old Chicago woman now charged with involuntary manslaughter for allegedly leaving narcotics within reach of a toddler in her apartment back in March. Just before his second birthday the little boy died

The post Chicago Female Felon Charged in Toddler’s Death for Allowing Access to Fentanyl Pills in Her Apartment appeared first on Breitbart.

The Department of Homeland Security announced a crackdown on food stamp fraud and the arrests of five illegal migrants who unlawfully exploited the program for benefits meant to aid needy American citizens.

The post Homeland Security Announces Anti-Fraud Crackdown on Illegal Migrant Food Stamp Fraud appeared first on Breitbart.

Police arrested a man after his wife reported him for binding her to a chair and putting her in the basement so he could watch football

The post Virginia Man Accused of Duct Taping Wife to Chair So He Could Watch Football appeared first on Breitbart.

Next summer could get very interesting for me

A federal judge in Texas sentenced a human trafficker from Guatemala to 30 years in prison for his role in setting up a deadly 2022 human smuggling attempt that killed 53 migrants who were stuffed in a hot trailer in South Texas. Law enforcement officials arranged his extradition to the United States so he could face the charges.

The post Guatemalan Human Trafficker Gets 30 Years for Role in 2022 Deadly Migrant-Smuggling Conspiracy appeared first on Breitbart.

When Democrat state Rep. James Talarico tells you who he is, you should believe him. Or maybe not.

Talarico is one of the most radical leftists in Texas politics, but from his recent campaign stunts, you’d never know it. Suddenly, he has flip-flopped away from his radical past on Immigration and Customs Enforcement, abortion, and transgenderism.

When CNN hosted a town hall last week, Talarico played the nice guy. He stood open to questions from voters about his controversial statements, including the Bible’s supposed silence on abortion, abolishing ICE, and his claim that God is nonbinary.

In true politician form, Talarico gave smooth answers—but they don’t add up with his past.

For instance, when asked if he supports abolishing ICE, Talarico denied it.

“No and I never have. We need Immigration and Customs Enforcement in this country,” he said. “But that’s not what we’re seeing.”

This softened response is an about-face from Talarico’s past statements, especially while campaigning in the Democrat primary.

“It’s time to tear down this secret police force,” Talarico said in a primary debate earlier this year. He has also argued in favor of replacing ICE with an agency that is “actually going to promote public safety.” While this may not technically be abolishing ICE, one could argue he is splitting hairs.

The Daily Signal asked Talarico’s campaign how he reconciles his recent claim that he does not support abolishing ICE with his previous statements calling to “tear down” and replace the agency, but the spokesperson did not respond in time for publication.

Also during the town hall, Talarico seemed to temper his stance on abortion. When a Catholic voter asked about his support for abortion, she asked how she could trust a leader who refused to protect some of the most vulnerable.

“I can respect anyone who is consistently pro-life,” Talarico opined. “But what I think we can do is come together on reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies and the number of abortions, because if we treat this issue as a public health problem and not a culture war problem, then we can actually make progress together.”

“I also want to see fewer unwanted pregnancies,” he added. “I want to see fewer abortions.”

A remarkably agreeable stance—unlike his previous arguments that the Bible supports abortion or that Christians have no biblical basis to be pro-life.

To justify abortion, he even pointed to the biblical account where the angel Gabriel told Mary she would give birth to Jesus. “To me, that is an affirmation in one of our most central stories that creation has to be done with consent,” he said. “You cannot force someone to create.”

But now, Talarico the seminarian supposedly wants to see fewer of something he argued the Bible endorses.

Also during the town hall, he called to end “big money in our politics” and to ban corporate PACs and super PACs.

Meanwhile, Talarico’s own campaign is backed by the super PAC “Lone Star Rising,” whose biggest donor, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, is a close associate of Jeffrey Epstein. Hoffman is bankrolling the super PAC, propping up Talarico’s campaign, to the tune of at least $11.5 million.

Talarico’s head-spinning inconsistencies go even further.

In a September interview with Fox News, Talarico tried to backtrack on claims about transgenderism. He even claimed he would support a national ban on transgender procedures for minors and that he would “oppose trans athletes playing in girls’ sports if it endangers safety or fairness.”

This is quite a difference from the Talarico of the past, who in 2023 voted against Senate Bill 14, which protected minors from gender procedures, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormones. Not to mention his viral statements that he loves “trans kids” and that “God is nonbinary.’

Talarico appears to be following a political playbook as old as time: embrace a radical agenda during the primaries, then rebrand as a centrist in hopes of winning the general election. But if Texas voters look beyond the campaign rhetoric and examine his record, they’ll see he’s anything but a political centrist.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

On this full episode of LARRY, Larry O’Connor breaks down President Trump’s explosive Oval Office comments about Ilhan Omar, her first public response since federal agents searched her Washington, D.C., home, and the growing questions surrounding the Minnesota fraud investigations. Plus, Trump credits YouTuber Nick Shirley’s reporting with helping lead to 115 arrests, new Wall Street Journal reporting raises questions about Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan’s academic record, and former NBC Sports reporter Michele Tafoya confronts Flanagan over fraud during their heated Senate debate. With Trump declaring Minnesota is now in play, could Democrats be facing a political earthquake in a state they thought was safe?

On this full episode of LARRY, Larry O’Connor breaks down President Trump’s explosive Oval Office comments about Ilhan Omar, her first public response since federal agents searched her Washington, D.C., home, and the growing questions surrounding the Minnesota fraud investigations. Plus, Trump credits YouTuber Nick Shirley’s reporting with helping lead to 115 arrests, new Wall Street Journal reporting raises questions about Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan’s academic record, and former NBC Sports reporter Michele Tafoya confronts Flanagan over fraud during their heated Senate debate. With Trump declaring Minnesota is now in play, could Democrats be facing a political earthquake in a state they thought was safe?

On this full episode of LARRY, Larry O’Connor breaks down President Trump’s explosive Oval Office comments about Ilhan Omar, her first public response since federal agents searched her Washington, D.C., home, and the growing questions surrounding the Minnesota fraud investigations. Plus, Trump credits YouTuber Nick Shirley’s reporting with helping lead to 115 arrests, new Wall Street Journal reporting raises questions about Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan’s academic record, and former NBC Sports reporter Michele Tafoya confronts Flanagan over fraud during their heated Senate debate. With Trump declaring Minnesota is now in play, could Democrats be facing a political earthquake in a state they thought was safe?

In a free country, a man’s faith is his own. No American should have to pass a religious test to hold office. The Constitution forbids it, and decency forbids it too. 

But a candidate’s honesty belongs to the voters. So too does his judgment, and so too the company he keeps and the comparisons he chooses to make. 

This week, Abdul El-Sayed, the Democrat nominee for Senate in Michigan, released a new ad called “Prayer.” In it, he tells voters he prays every day and that “Faith is a thing there’s just too little of in Washington.” 

Let me be clear: I do not question Mr. El-Sayed’s faith, and I take him at his word that he is a man of prayer, and he, as an American Muslim, deserves the same religious liberty we Catholics have fought to protect for two centuries. 

What I question is something else. El-Sayed has repeatedly answered fair questions with false equivalences, and he has put Catholics and our Church at the center of them. 

The First False Equivalence 

Asked on national television about sharia, El-Sayed answered: “Nobody is trying to push sharia law on anyone else, just like I hope nobody is trying to push canon law on anybody else.” 

It sounds even-handed. It is not. 

The Code of Canon Law is the internal legal order of the Catholic Church. It governs how the Church administers sacraments, organizes dioceses, and disciplines its own clergy. It makes no claim over the criminal code of any nation. It does not bind non-Catholics. A faithful Catholic can live a lifetime of virtue without ever opening it. 

Classical sharia is a different kind of thing. Many American Muslims understand it as a matter of personal devotion, and that is their right. In its historic jurisprudence, though, sharia is a comprehensive legal order. It reaches into family law, criminal punishment, and the governance of the state. That is why it is written into the constitutions of several nations, and canon law is written into none. 

One can respect both traditions and still see that they are not the same. A Senate candidate should know the difference. If he does know it, he should not blur it to win an argument. 

The Second False Equivalence 

Pressed about reports of his family’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, El-Sayed compared himself to John F. Kennedy, whose Catholicism was treated in 1960 as a threat to his loyalty. 

The comparison fails on two counts. 

First, Kennedy was questioned about his Church. No one serious is questioning El-Sayed’s religion. The questions concern a specific political movement. The Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology helped give rise to some of the most violent Islamist groups of the past century, and several of America’s own allies in the Middle East have outlawed it.

The Catholic Church never threatened the physical safety of the American people. To place the two side by side is not a defense. It is a disservice to the Catholics who once endured that suspicion. 

Second, Kennedy met the questions head-on. He stood before a room of skeptical Protestant ministers in Houston and told them plainly: “I do not speak for my Church on public matters, and the Church does not speak for me.” He did not call his questioners bigots or interrogate them for asking him questions about his faith. He simply answered them. 

El-Sayed’s half-sister wrote publicly that their mother and family were long active in the Brotherhood in at least half a dozen X posts. He calls her posts “hearsay.” When a Michigan voter named Tommy asked him point-blank whether he would disavow the Muslim Brotherhood, El-Sayed answered, “Sure, yeah, absolutely, but … ” and then proceeded to put Tommy on trial for his beliefs as though he were running for Senate, which left Michiganders still waiting for one plain sentence with no qualifiers: “I disavow the Muslim Brotherhood.” 

The Company He Keeps 

Before the primary, El-Sayed campaigned alongside Hasan Piker, a streamer who once told his audience that “America deserved 9/11.” El-Sayed has called that remark “dumb.” 

Dumb? The greatest tragedy in America since Pearl Harbor and one of the most horrific acts of mass killing in recent history. Just dumb? 

Shouldn’t Americans be concerned that even his attempt to mitigate Hasan’s position as dumb undersells the evil committed by Islamic terrorists? No one has been able to extract from him a plain and simple condemnation of radical Islam on any score. 

And that isn’t the only thing Piker had to say. He also called Mao Zedong, who murdered 60 million people, a hero; reminisced for the time to return to the lynching of African Americans; and called for crowds of socialists to murder capitalist pigs in their blood. 

Catholics and other Michiganders are not wrong to notice, and noticing it is not prejudice but an act of reasonable judgment. As St. Paul says, “Do not be led astray: ‘Bad company corrupts good morals.’” 

Questions Are Not Attacks 

What concerns me most is the pattern. Journalists from across the spectrum have asked El-Sayed about these matters, conservative outlets and mainstream networks alike. Too often, he has met them with irritation and accusation instead of answers. 

A man who wants a seat in the United States Senate should welcome scrutiny. He is asking for the trust of every citizen in his state, including those who do not share his faith. 

His faith is not on the ballot, but his candor and judgment are. And when the man asking for a Senate seat answers hard questions with false comparisons and wounded anger, we can honestly conclude that he is just not ready for the office. 

Kennedy understood that a candidate earns trust by answering. Michigan deserves no less. El-Sayed is not answering; he is systematically deflecting. That is a very bad sign. Too bad of a sign to trust him to represent Michigan.