Neighborhood watch programs have long encouraged citizens to take pride in the welfare of their communities and to adopt a proactive approach to crime prevention. While maximizing citizen vigilance and cooperation with lawful authorities has been associated with reductions in crime, some liberals figure such efforts and the corresponding signage to be unnecessarily exclusionary.

After revolting last year against the decades-old program of communal self-defense and surveillance, woke city councilors in Ann Arbor, Michigan, have since blown taxpayer dollars on the removal of all remaining evidence of the city’s Neighborhood Crime Watch program.

‘Neighborhood watch signs are expressions of exclusion.’

According to the resolution passed by the city council on Dec. 15 directing the removal of over 600 Neighborhood Crime Watch signs in Ann Arbor, “Neighborhood Watch programs emerged in the 1970s during a period of national anxiety about crime and social change” and were “often rooted in assumptions about who did and did not ‘belong’ in a neighborhood, reinforcing race-based hyper-vigilance and suspicion particularly toward black, brown, and other marginalized residents and visitors.”

The resolution claimed that this dynamic in Ann Arbor, a city whose population today is 66.5% non-Hispanic white, “encouraged informal surveillance practices that disproportionately targeted people of color and contributed to patterns of exclusion under the guise of public safety.”

RELATED: Thugs ages 11 to 14 gang up on, mercilessly beat up victim on sidewalk — and adults are done: ‘I’m very fearful for my life’

Ann Arbor Mayor Christopher Taylor (D). Aaron J. Thornton/Getty Images

The signs that were posted throughout the city not only denoted a supposedly defunct program but anti-crime messages that “do not reflect Ann Arbor’s current public safety values or its commitment to nondiscriminatory enforcement, community trust, and safe spaces for all residents and visitors.”

Councilwoman Cynthia Harrison said when the resolution passed, “Signs don’t just sit there, they speak. For many people, especially black and brown residents and visitors, those signs have never felt neutral. They signal that unfamiliarity itself is suspicious, that their presence must be justified, that belonging is conditional,” reported the Michigan Daily.

Harrison joined Ann Arbor Mayor Christopher Taylor (D) and Councilwoman Jen Eyer on April 21 for the ceremonial tear-down of the final Neighborhood Crime Watch sign.

As their virtue-signaling campaign — which cost the city at least $18,000 from its general fund balance — came to a close, the leftist trio recycled the revisionist gobbledygook from their resolution.

“Neighborhood watch signs are expressions of exclusion,” said Taylor, reported MLive.com

Eyer stated, “It really hearkens back to a time when public safety was more about surveillance and exclusion of people from communities and trying to look out for anyone who looked different.”

After reiterating that the crime-prevention signs do “not align with our values,” Harrison stressed that “this is a great day.”

The Michigan Daily reported in March 1981 that “rather than quivering behind bolted doors, some Ann Arbor residents favoring stepped-up police protection are taking matters into their own hands.”

The Neighborhood Watch program, formally adopted the previous year in the wake of 30-year-old Rebecca Huff’s savage murder, “banded together neighbors in one-block sections of the city who look and listen for signs of criminal activity.”

“It’s more or less socializing and really getting to know your neighbors,” an Ann Arbor police detective said at the time. “People watch each other’s property, apartment-sit, and know each other’s cars. If a strange car is seen in the area, the residents can obtain the license plate number and call us on a special communication hookup.”

While Neighborhood Watch is officially no more in Ann Arbor, vigilant residents don’t need signs or permission to look after their communities and can always share insights and tips with one another on apps like Citizen and Nextdoor.

According to Neighborhood Scout, the likelihood of becoming a victim of a property crime and a violent crime in the Democrat-run city is 1 in 47 and 1 in 296, respectively.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here

​Ann arbor, Crime, Crime prevention, Crime watch, Criminality, Dei, Democrats, Inclusion, Inclusivity, Leftist, Liberal, Michigan, Neighborhood crime watch, Neighborhood watch, Neighborhood watch programs, Police protection, Public safety, Retardation, Safe spaces, Surveillance, Taxpayer dollars, Politics 

The White House revealed a plan to include a new image on an updated passport design meant to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the founding, and many on the left are outraged.

The limited edition passport now bearing the image of President Donald Trump will not be issued for all renewals, but only for people who seek the special issue at the Washington Passport Agency, according to the State Department.

‘No one can step up to stop this crazy s**t?’

“These passports will feature customized artwork and enhanced imagery while maintaining the same security features that make the U.S. passport the most secure documents in the world,” said Tommy Pigott, a spokesperson for the State Department.

The Trump passports will be available shortly before the Fourth of July, and between 25,000 and 30,000 will be published.

Critics lodged their outrage on social media, with many falsely assuming that they would be forced to use the new passport design.

“It’s going to take the government so long to get his f**king face off of everything,” Democratic activist Adam Parkhomenko responded.

“You have got to be kidding me,” attorney Mike Levin said.

“No sitting president has ever done this. Coins, park passes, battleships, and now your passport. The man cannot find a surface he will not slap his name or face on. This is not patriotism. It is vanity,” Levin added.

“Do we all have to look like Trump or will these passport include our photos, too?!?” former Obama adviser David Axelrod joked.

“I’ve never been so relieved to have already renewed my passport,” said Mary Trump, the president’s niece.

“Why are the checks and balances in the US government not working? No one can step up to stop this crazy s**t?” another detractor said.

Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s press office mocked the announcement with a fake image of California licenses including the governor’s face.

RELATED: Trump administration mocks outrage of ‘unhinged leftists’ as construction of ballroom begins at White House

Others however, loved the idea.

“I am not due for a passport, but I am getting one of these beauties. It’s a piece of history,” one X user said.

“I love this!” Laura Loomer said.

A Polymarket trading exchange put the chances of Trump’s image being published on a passport at 73% after the announcement.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Trump passport design, 250th us anniversary, Trump image on passport, Liberal outrage, Politics 

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth was on offense Wednesday, sparring with Democrats on Capitol Hill on a variety of topics, the most laughable of which was President Donald Trump’s mental fitness.

Billionaire heiress and Democratic Rep. Sara Jacobs of California challenged Hegseth about Trump’s abilities to fulfill his role as commander in chief, asking if the secretary believes the president is “stable” enough for the job.

‘I won’t even engage with the level of disparagement.’

Without missing a beat, Hegseth quickly called out the hypocrisy of Democratic lawmakers like Jacobs who willingly turned a blind eye to the mental acuity of Trump’s predecessor.

“Did you ask the same question of Joe Biden for four years?” Hegseth asked. “You did not.”

RELATED: Veterans slam Democrat candidate for allegedly fudging military record

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call Inc/Getty Images

Jacobs tried to deflect Hegseth’s reply, arguing that Biden is no longer the president and implying that the question is no longer worth asking, but Hegseth wasn’t buying it.

“I won’t even engage with the level of disparagement that you’re putting on the commander in chief, who … is the sharpest and most insightful commander in chief we’ve had in generations,” Hegseth said. “You want to ask that question after you and your fellow Democrats defended Joe Biden, who could barely speak and didn’t know what day of the week it was?”

“He governed through an autopen,” Hegseth added. “We had a secretary of defense who went AWOL for a week. I can’t be gone for 10 minutes.”

Biden’s secretary of defense, Lloyd Austin, was actually hospitalized for two weeks.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Autopen, Capitol hill, Commander in chief, Congress, Department of war, Donald trump, Iran war, Joe biden, Mental fitness, Pete hegseth, Sara jacobs, Politics 

Congress created the temporary protected status program, often abbreviated TPS, in 1990 to bar the removal of foreign nationals who hail from countries roiled by civil unrest, violence, or natural disaster, regardless of their immigration status. Under the program, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security can designate a certain country for TPS for periods of up to 18 months.

While supposedly “temporary,” these status designations — presently extended to a dozen countries and shielding millions of foreigners — have in many cases been extended for decades.

Recognizing that the conditions previously cited as justification for TPS have materially changed for the better in some countries, the Trump administration has taken steps to revoke numerous TPS designations. This initiative has, of course, enraged liberal activists and beneficiaries of the program, who have mounted various legal challenges.

The U.S. Supreme Court — which cleared the Trump administration last year to strip Venezuelan migrants of TPS — heard oral arguments on Wednesday in the consolidated cases Mullin v. Doe and Trump v. Miot regarding the revocation of TPS for Haitians and Syrians.

Ahead of the hearing, Democratic Reps. Ayanna Pressley (Mass.) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.) joined Democratic Sens. Edward Markey (Mass.) and Lisa Blunt Rochester (Del.) in demanding the high court defend TPS for Syrians and Haitians, stating, “Do your job, uphold the law, save lives, and protect our communities.”

Given conservative justices’ questions and remarks during the lengthy hearing, these Democrats and the hordes of foreign squatters who’ve long been shielded from removal may be headed for disappointment.

Quick background

TPS has covered Haitian migrants since January 2010 and covers nearly 350,000 citizens from the Caribbean today. Syria was designated for TPS in March 2012 and has received several extensions over the past 14 years. Roughly 6,000 Syrians presently enjoy protected status.

RELATED: SCOTUS issues shocking ruling about ‘racial gerrymander’ map

JACQUELYN MARTIN/POOL/AFP/Getty Images

Having determined that neither country still meets the conditions for special status owing largely to significant improvements in domestic safety and stability, Trump’s DHS announced the termination of Haiti’s TPS in July and the termination of Syria’s status in September.

These revocations, which were supposed to take effect months ago, have been held up in the courts.

In Washington, D.C., U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes — a foreign-born, Biden-appointed, lesbian judge who previously worked as a lawyer to fight the first Trump administration’s immigration policy and helped the U.N. secure asylum for so-called refugees — obliged her fellow immigration activists on Feb. 2, blocking the revocation of Haiti’s TPS.

‘That’s what you got?’

Reyes, a Uruguayan native, claimed that former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem not only violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause when terminating the TPS designation for Haiti but had likely done so “because of hostility to nonwhite immigrants.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit refused on March 6 to block Reyes’ ruling, thereby keeping the special status for Haitians in place while the litigation moved forward.

In New York, U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, granted an injunction in November against the government’s termination of TPS for Syrians. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal on Feb. 17, prompting the Trump administration to ask the Supreme Court to weigh in.

Divided court

U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, who defended the administration’s revocation of the special statuses, sparred at the outset with liberal Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor over whether a TPS termination is open to judicial review, especially when the relevant statute makes expressly clear that there is to be no judicial review of any determination with respect to the TPS designation or termination or extension of a designation.

When asked by Justice Brett Kavanaugh why Congress would have barred judicial review as broadly as the administration now contends, Sauer pointed to the possible foresight that protracted legal review would inevitably undermine the temporary nature of the program and hinder the executive’s ability to conduct foreign policy in a timely and confident manner.

Sotomayor and Brown proceeded to dwell on the suggestion advanced by the plaintiffs in the Haiti case and by Judge Reyes in February that “discriminatory intent” played a role in the termination of that nation’s TPS designation, alluding to President Donald Trump’s derisive remarks about third-world nations such as Somalia, which he characterized last year as “filthy, dirty, disgusting, ridden with crime.”

While Sauer made clear that the government defended its decisions on non-discriminatory grounds, the liberal justices nevertheless appeared keen to read into extraneous comments by members of the administration, which were the primary focus of Geoffrey Pipoly, the attorney who argued on behalf of Haitian TPS beneficiaries.

RELATED: Illegal alien activists are furious at Trump administration after ‘cruel’ new ‘Dreamer’ policy drops

Alex WROBLEWSKI/AFP/Getty Images

Neither Justice Samuel Alito nor Justice Neil Gorsuch posed questions during Sauer’s arguments, perhaps signaling understanding of or even agreement with them, but spent considerable time poking holes in those posed by the challengers.

Ahilan Arulanantham, a lawyer for Syrian TPS beneficiaries, emphasized that the issue is whether the DHS secretary adequately followed procedure when arriving at her decision to revoke TPS status, not whether her assessment was correct that the conditions previously justifying TPS had in fact changed.

Justice Alito did not appear to be buying what Arulanantham was selling. Instead, Alito echoed Sauer’s concern that if the challengers’ argument regarding the government’s supposedly insufficient level of consultation with agencies was accepted, “it will create a hole in the judicial review bar that you could drive a convoy of trucks through,” and that it will always be possible to second-guess the DHS secretary’s decisions and process.

Pipoly, who piped up after Arulanantham’s time elapsed, desperately tried to make the case that the Haitian TPS designation was based on a “sham” of a review, not grounded by empirical support but by President Donald Trump’s “racial animus towards nonwhite immigrants.”

Justice Alito countered, however, that “TPS was terminated for quite a list of countries,” many of which are home to individuals who are or could be construed as white.

“If you put Syrians, Turks, Greeks, and other people who live around the Mediterranean in a lineup, you think you could say those people are, all of them, are they all nonwhite?” Alito said, prompting an acknowledgment from Pipoly that Syrians “may be classified as white.”

After Alito nuked the notion that TPS revocation is solely bound up with race, Justice Gorsuch pressed Pipoly to disentangle the DHS secretary’s determination — which is not subject to judicial review — from the DHS’ ultimate termination of the TPS status.

“How can it not be judicial review of the determination if you’re postponing the determination?” Gorsuch asked.

“The final agency action here that was postponed is … the termination, not the determination, which is not subject to judicial review,” Pipoly responded.

Pipoly does not appear to have won over Gorsuch with his tortured attempt to strike a distinction between the two since Gorsuch replied, “That’s what you got?”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Department of homeland security, Foreign nationals, Haitian migrants, Immigration status, President donald trump, Scotus, Supreme court, Temporary protected status, Tps, Us supreme court, Congress, Dhs, Alito, Ketanji brown jackson, Haiti, Haitians, Syrians, Politics 

When Glenn Beck exploded onto Fox News almost 20 years ago, he was must-see TV for half a year straight. People tuned in the way they once watched car chases on live news — just to see what wild truth he would drop next. Then the mainstream media shrugged and moved on.

Beck didn’t vanish; he built his own media ecosystem, and today he continues to comment on politics with the calm fury of a man who has watched too many countries trade liberty for “safety.”

From 2016 to 2024, over 76,000 killed by their own government’s health care system — now the fifth leading cause of death in adults.

Recently he trained his gaze on Canada, calling what is left of a once-great democracy “an oligarchy with the trappings of democracy.”

As a Canadian who occasionally writes for Blaze Media, I sat down to watch. Beck’s segment on my country losing its freedoms was sharp, but I kept thinking he was starting three steps too late. The real story begins with free speech — because once that is gone, the rest of the Bill of Rights becomes decorative wallpaper.

We’re literally one Senate vote away from burying it under Bill C-9, Bill C-8, and the Online Harms Act (rebranded, I’d bet my maple-leaf pin, as the cuddly-sounding “Online Safety Act”). Parliament usually packs up in the third week of June. Mark my words: We’ll have the final nail in the coffin of free speech before summer recess.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has fulfilled none of the promises he made prior to the last federal election in April 28, save one — his pledge to censor Canadians’ free speech.

The 10 hallmarks of a truly free nation

Before assessing Beck’s critique of freedom in Canada, let’s lay out what he says actually keeps a country free. Glenn says that democracies are “rare and historically very fragile” things. Here are the core “pillars” — straight from Glenn’s list, with a few Canadian reality-check footnotes.

Rule of law, not rule of man: The law applies equally to citizens, leaders, and institutions. No one is above it; no one is beneath it.Free, fair, and regular elections: Citizens must actually choose their leaders through transparent, competitive votes. Power must be transferred peacefully. Note: The old Soviet Union held elections too. One party was on the ballot. Very festive.Protection of individual rights: Some freedoms can never be voted away by majority rule: freedom of speech, religion, assembly, and due process. This is the real foundation — lose it and everything else collapses. I would rank this No. 1. Canada clearly disagrees.Separation of powers: The legislature makes laws; the executive enforces them; the judiciary interprets them. Canada’s “responsible government” fuses the first two together like a bad marriage.Independent judiciary: Courts must be able to rule against the government without fear. Our courts now openly brag about being “progressive.”Free press and open information: Media that questions power, not media subsidized by it.Civilian control of the military.Protection of minority rights.Economic freedom and property rights.A culture that values freedom.

Beck’s segment walked through these and found Canada coming up short on almost every one. Even worse is the polite shrug with which Canadians greet each new restriction.

Accountability? What accountability?

Beck opened with the jaw-dropping scandal that broke in 2021: A scientist at Canada’s highest-security lab shipped live Ebola to China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology and “collaborated with the Chinese military on bioweapons research.” Parliament “ordered the documents four times.” Liberals blocked it every single time, sued, stonewalled, and then called a snap election to kill the probe.

As Beck dryly observed, “That’s rule of law being violated and separation of powers being violated.” Three years later, the auditor general found nearly $400 million in outright corruption. Parliament shut that down too.

Then Trudeau “resigned.” “One-third of 1% of Canadians — the elite inner circle — handed the prime minister’s office to Mark Carney” in a leadership race that smelled like a script. Carney racked up a cartoonish 80% in every riding, including opponent Chrystia Freeland’s own back yard. That’s right: She somehow only managed to attract 20% of Liberal voters on her home turf.

Satirical gold: The party that once preached “sunny ways” now runs on North Korean turnout numbers and zero raised eyebrows.

Elections, emergencies, and the slow-motion coup

The Canadian Security Intelligence Service confirmed Chinese interference in the 2019 and 2021 elections. “Trudeau was briefed.” Nothing happened. One Liberal MP openly urged supporters “to collect a Chinese Communist Party bounty on a Conservative candidate. No charges.” Five MPs “flipped” to the Liberals in five “convenient” months, handing them a two-seat majority. Meanwhile the House of Commons simply stopped sitting for eight months — Canada governed by executive decree.

Beck asked what is really operating in Canada: “Democracy by design, or is it democracy by manipulation?”

Then came the 2022 Freedom Convoy. Trudeau “invoked the Emergencies Act,” “froze the bank accounts of protesters” and their supporters, and treated peaceful assembly like a national security threat. “Two federal courts, including the Court of Appeal,” ruled it unlawful and a Charter violation. The government is still appealing to the Supreme Court — because in Canada, judicial rulings are apparently suggestions.

Layer on the censorship bills: C-18 (Online News Act) “that forced Google and Meta to pay Canadian outlets for links.” Meta just blocked news entirely. C-11 (Online Streaming Act) put Netflix, YouTube, and Spotify under DEI and “Canadian content mandates.” Then there are the coming C-8, C-9, and Online Harms/Safety Act that could turn Scripture into hate literature.

Throughout, Beck didn’t need to raise his voice. The facts spoke loudly enough.

Property rights? Optional. MAID? Canada’s growth industry.

Property rights have been quietly torched too. Ontario’s Bill 212 “lets the province ram through highway projects” and “override municipal bylaws.” In Waterloo, the government is in the process of acquiring roughly 770 acres of prime farmland — using NDAs that limit public visibility around land deals, alongside the looming threat of expropriation that puts pressure on landowners to sell. New Brunswick merged municipalities and jacked rural taxes 50%-60%. Rural British Columbia now requires government permission to sell eggs or give riding lessons — or “face a $50,000-a-day fine.”

In British Columbia, Aboriginal title claims — imposed when the provincial government embraced the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples — have turfed homeowners. Native chiefs — who are the only real winners in this land-grab — are claiming huge swaths of the province because their ancestors might have claimed it or occupied it at some time in the past.

No matter what the racial yardstick in use, having unique rights or special status based on your ethnicity is blatantly racist and a flagrant violation of equality under the law — a concept that used to define Canada and all democratic countries.

And ask Katie Pasitney and Karen Espersen of Universal Ostrich Farms whether farmers really own their land or have any protection from the ravenous Canadian Food Inspection Agency and its vicious “stamping out” policy. The CFIA invaded and occupied their farm and then massacred hundreds of ostriches because it merely suspected the birds of having H5N1 avian influenza. The government bureaucrats refused to test the birds and threatened anyone else who did with a $500,000 fine and six months in jail.

And then there’s Medical Assistance in Dying. “Legalized in 2016 for those with reasonably foreseeable deaths,” the safeguards were dropped in 2021. “In 2024 alone, 22,535 Canadians requested it; 16,499 received it.” That’s 5.1% of all deaths. “From 2016 to 2024, over 76,000 killed by their own government’s health care” system — now the fifth leading cause of death in adults. Doctors are offering MAID for back pain and mental health.

As Beck stated with grim precision, “when the state controls your health care and offers death as a solution to its own failures, you’re no longer a citizen. You’re a cost center.”

RELATED: Aftermath of a slaughter: Universal Ostrich Farms vows to hold Canada accountable

Katie Pasitney

The cage is already built

Beck closed with the line that still echoes: “The slide is gradual. The language is polite. The slogans might even make people feel good — until one day, you realize the cage was built around you. You’re free to walk around, but not out.”

Canada still has the maple-leaf flag, the Parliament buildings, and the elections. “The forms remain.” The substance has been replaced by a “managed oligarchy with democratic trappings.”

“Power is consolidated now. Dissent is managed. The individual exists to serve the state.”

Beck turned to the camera and spoke directly to Americans: “Look how far Canada has fallen. Now recognize, America. This is your future.”

He’s right. The cage is comfortable, the guards speak softly, and the signage says “Equity, Inclusion, and Safety.” But once the door clicks shut, apologies won’t open it again.

Wake up, Canada — maybe it’s time we stopped saying “sorry” and started saying “enough.”

A version of this essay originally appeared on Krayden’s Right.

​Free speech, Glenn beck, Emergencies act, Mark carney, Canada, Justin trudeau, Maid, Culture, Letter from canada 

Voters in New York City just got a reality check after the fountain of socialist campaign promises from Mayor Zohran Mamdani has apparently run dry in just a few months.

Standing with New York City Council Speaker Julie Menin, Mayor Mamdani was forced to announce some unexpected hang-ups that will likely interfere with delivering on many of his campaign promises of free stuff.

‘Everyone saw this coming … every single person.’

“New York City faces a budget crisis of a historic magnitude,” Mamdani said in his speech. “We inherited a deficit larger than any since the great recession. Years of mismanagement and chronic underbudgeting, alongside a structural imbalance between what New York City sends to the state and what we receive in return, have taken a toll.”

Mamdani admitted that savings alone cannot fix this crisis, saying that “we need new revenue” and a “structural reset in our relationship with the state” to close the gap.

RELATED: Mamdani walks back popular progressive campaign promise to pedestrians

Angelina Katsanis/Bloomberg/Getty Images

“Together, we are extending the executive budget deadline from this coming Friday until May 12 because a crisis of this scale cannot be solved without state action. … Speaker Menin and I have already identified meaningful savings, and we will continue that work carefully, deliberately, and without cutting the services that New Yorkers rely on,” Mamdani continued. “But we cannot do it alone. That is why we are standing together this morning: to underscore what is at stake and to call on Albany to deliver additional revenue.”

Matt Van Swol said what everyone was thinking when they heard the news: “Everyone saw this coming … every single person. Money has to come from somewhere and businesses and the wealthy will always go to where taxation is lower and incentives are higher.”

“If you want more income, make your state more friendly to those groups, don’t demonize them,” he added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Albany, Budget crisis, Mayor mamdani, New york city, New yorkers, Politics, Revenue, Socialist campaign promises, Taxation, Wealthy, Historic magnitude, Zohran mamdani, Socialist mamdani 

Jimmy Kimmel’s “widow” joke about first lady Melania Trump has sparked sharp criticism from the Trump administration — with President Donald Trump and Melania Trump going so far as to call for ABC to fire the comedian.

“Our first lady, Melania, is here. … So beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow,” Kimmel said in his monologue.

Not only did the president and the first lady not find the joke funny, but the timing made its reception even worse.

“As the first lady of the United States pointed out this morning, just two days prior to the shooting, ABC’s late-night host Jimmy Kimmel disgustingly called first lady Melania Trump an ‘expectant widow,’” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said after the most recent attempt on President Trump’s life.

“Who in their right mind says a wife would be glowing over the potential murder of her beloved husband?” Leavitt continued.

“And having experienced what I did with the first lady on Saturday night, I can tell you that she was anything but that. This kind of rhetoric about the president, the first lady, and his supporters is completely deranged,” she added.

While members of the Trump administration have made it clear they’re not happy with Kimmel, BlazeTV host and comedian Dave Landau has a controversial take.

“I’m going to go ahead and say that’s a funny joke,” he tells co-host Stu Burguiere.

“You like the joke,” Stu comments, surprised.

“It’s fine. You keep trying to kill him, so they’re saying you have a good look for an expectant widow. I understand that people don’t like the guy who’s saying it, but there’s logic and reason to the joke, and it’s a still a joke,” Landau says.

“You don’t have to like it, but I will never be on the side of throw somebody off of TV or cancel them based on something that was a joke,” he continues.

“We agree on that,” Burguiere says, adding, “I’m totally with you.”

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave’s lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Abc, Blaze media, Blaze news, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Blaze podcast network, Blaze podcasts, Blazetv, Comedian, Dave landau, First lady, Jimmy kimmel, Jimmy kimmel live, Melania trump, Stu burguiere, The blaze, Trump administration, Widow joke, Expectant widow, Karoline leavitt, President trump, Trump, The trump administration, Cancel culture, Cancel culture in comedy, Stu and dave do america