Nearly a year after Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk was assassinated at Utah Valley University, the man suspected of murdering him has been bound over for trial.

On Tuesday, after more arguments from both prosecutors and the defense, Utah District Judge Tony Graf determined that the state had met the burden of probable cause in the case against suspect Tyler Robinson.

‘Today’s decision … marks an important step in our family’s pursuit of justice.’

“It is hereby ordered that the defendant, Tyler James Robinson, is bound over for trial,” Judge Graf told the court.

Robinson, 23, now faces seven charges: aggravated murder, felony discharge of a firearm causing serious bodily injury, two counts of obstruction of justice, two counts of witness tampering, and misdemeanor commission of a violent offense in the presence of a child. During the hearing, Robinson’s attorney pleaded not guilty to all charges on his behalf.

If Robinson is convicted, prosecutors intend to pursue the death penalty. He is scheduled to appear in court again on October 23.

Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow, welcomed the judge’s decision. “Today’s decision, which comes nearly a year since Charlie was taken from us, marks an important step in our family’s pursuit of justice for him,” she posted to X Tuesday night.

RELATED: TPUSA plans return to UVU on solemn anniversary of the Charlie Kirk assassination

Francisco Kjolseth-Pool/Getty Images

“Every step in this process carries the weight of all that Charlie’s murder has taken from his family, especially his children who will grow up without their father. We are grateful to all who have continued to pray for us, support us, and stand with us through a year of unimaginable grief.”

While the Kirk family appears pleased that Robinson will be tried for murder, the process has been slow and painful. Kirk was fatally shot on September 10, 2025, and Robinson was arrested in connection with the deadly shooting within days.

However, the probable cause hearing in the case did not begin until July. Even on Tuesday, Robinson’s attorney, Richard Novak, claimed that when Charlie Kirk was alive, he “spoke hatefully of certain groups of people,” including gay people, those with different gender identities, and fornicators.

Blaze News has reached out to Novak for comment.

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

​Charlie kirk, Tyler robinson, Utah valley university, Turning point usa, Crime, Politics 

Lindsay Clancy’s triple murder trial remains unresolved after jurors failed to reach a verdict on Tuesday, their fourth day of deliberations.

While jurors determine whether to hold Clancy criminally responsible for strangling her three young children — 8-month-old Callan, 3-year-old Dawson, and 5-year-old Cora — there are outside forces apparently keen to apply additional pressure.

‘She is a wonderful, wonderful person.’

Massachusetts State Police arrested 56-year-old Dawn Light outside the Plymouth Superior Court around 3:40 p.m. on Tuesday and charged her with one count of intimidation of a witness, jurors, or person furnishing information in connection with criminal proceedings, a MSP spokesman confirmed to WCVB-TV.

While officials have yet to confirm whether the arrest was connected to the Clancy case, WBZ-TV’s Kristina Rex reported that sources informed her that “someone (who is not a media member) was arrested outside Plymouth Superior Court this afternoon, accused of filming jurors in Lindsay Clancy’s trial. Jurors allegedly saw the filming happening.”

MSP did not immediately respond to Blaze News’ request for comment.

If convicted on the intimidation charge, Light could face up to 10 years in state prison and/or a hefty fine.

RELATED: Female reporter caught mischievously smirking during Lindsay Clancy trial has smile wiped off her face

There has been a lot of commotion taking place outside the courthouse since Clancy’s trial began.

Hundreds of women have gathered — in many cases wearing pink and in some instances carrying their children — in support of the defendant.

A woman identified as Hannah E., who traveled from Houston to Massachusetts to show her support, told CBS News on Tuesday that she had postpartum depression after her second child was born and that she “understand[s] what happened to Lindsay.”

“I understand the course that she went and the way things affected her,” said the Texas mother.

Lindsay’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, told reporters that his client has received enough letters of support from sympathizers to fill three banker’s boxes.

“She knows that there are people out there that have not judged her and know that she is a wonderful, wonderful person,” said Reddington.

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

​Lindsay clancy, Postpartum depression, Massachusetts, Police, Intimidation, Murder trial, Plymouth, Politics 

Michigan U.S. Senate hopeful, Democrat Abdul El-Sayed, has been caught deleting old social media posts that contained shocking comments about the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Instead of holding El-Sayed accountable, left-wing media is now attacking Bari Weiss and CBS for pointing out the obfuscation.

Thanks to a report from CBS News, paired with a plunge into El-Sayed’s old Twitter account via the Internet Archive, we found two controversial 9/11-related posts El-Sayed removed from his X page.

‘They’re enraged an Islamist and his pals have become a liability in a major Senate race that could cut off a blue tsunami in November.’

“#COVID19 has taken over 3000 American lives — more than 9/11. I hope that means we’ll spend the next ten years fighting a war for public health & against climate change & poverty … like we launched a global #WaronTerror after 9/11. We could save lives, rather than take them,” El-Sayed tweeted on March 31, 2020.

Abdul El-Sayed/Internet Archive

“Today, I mourn the 3K lives, 6K injuries, & infrastructural devastation in NYC, perpetrated ignorantly in the name of my faith. Tomorrow, I’ll mourn ~1M lives, millions of injuries, & infrastructural devastation in 3 countries, perpetrated ignorantly in the name of my country,” he wrote on September 11, 2021.

Abdul El-Sayed/Internet Archive

The two tweets appear to have been part of a mass post-removal where El-Sayed’s campaign deleted everything prior to July 2023 “to prevent any old posts from being taken out of context.”

RELATED: Mike Rogers crushes ‘conman’ Abdul El-Sayed for being a weirdo in BRUTAL political ad

L-R: Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call; Sarah Rice/Getty Images

Former CNN reporter Oliver Darcy was quick to point out the CBS News story on his independent news site Status. However, instead of aiming his ire at El-Sayed for his previous tone-deaf comments, he instead criticized CBS News editor in chief Bari Weiss for doing her job.

Darcy penned an entire piece suggesting that drawing attention to El-Sayed’s deleted tweets about 9/11 was a racist “scandal”:

“They took a small nugget of news, forced into something much larger, and messed up,” one CBS News staffer told Status of the story.

A former senior CBS News staffer who remains in touch with former colleagues was more direct, calling the story “shameful” and telling Status, “The racism is overt.”

According to Darcy, “The obvious implication was that there was something sinister about the manner in which the prominent Muslim candidate invoked 9/11, even though his posts themselves were mundane.”

Curtis Houck, the managing editor of NewsBusters, had a different perspective, which he shared with Blaze News:

Oliver Darcy and his army of leaders are beyond crestfallen that anyone — let alone a non-woke, lesbian Jew with a track record like Bari Weiss — has sought to move a legacy news outlet a few ticks toward the center.

They’re enraged an Islamist and his pals have become a liability in a major Senate race that could cut off a blue tsunami in November.

All of the liberal, elitist outlets — including Darcy’s former employer CNN — have made articles about controversial deleted social media posts into an Olympic sport. In that respect, what CBS published was standard fare. What made it unforgivable was it actually went after someone on the left.

In response to a request for comment, an Abdul El-Sayed spokesperson told Blaze News: “Abdul has always unequivocally condemned terrorism and the September 11 attacks. Mike Rogers’ attempts to misrepresent Abdul’s beliefs are bad-faith lies meant to mislead Michiganders.”

As for the media’s attack on Weiss, it appears to be retribution for not towing the leftist line as she continues to turn CBS News into a balanced organization, no longer doing favors for the Democratic Party. Changes in media could spell trouble for the growing number of democrat socialist candidates this election season.

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

​Bari weiss, Cbs news, Abdul el-sayed, Democratic socialists of america, Social media posts, Politics 

The establishment of the Democratic Party was able to easily fend off a “moderate” challenge in the party’s primary for the U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts.

Incumbent Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who has been in either the House or the Senate for five decades, was declared the winner over challenger Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) only 30 minutes after polling closed.

‘What are you going to accomplish in the next six years that you haven’t been able to accomplish in the last 50?’

Unlike in other races, the progressives of the party backed the incumbent, Markey, rather than the challenger, described as more “moderate” despite a leftist record. Far-left Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York was among those who endorsed Markey.

Moulton meanwhile tried to argue that it was time for generational change to make way for younger candidates to take lead of the party.

“People ought to ask, ‘What are you going to accomplish in the next six years that you haven’t been able to accomplish in the last 50?'” said the 47-year-old Moulton.

Markey is 80 years old and has been in the U.S. Senate since 2013.

The octogenarian had attacked Moulton for not toeing the party line on transgender-identifying athletes competing in women’s sports. Moulton later backed off and apologized to the “trans community.”

“To the trans community feeling the weight and the pain of the Trump administration policies, I deeply recognize your trauma,” he said in the August debate with Markey. “And I’m sorry if my comments hurt you. That was not my intention.”

RELATED: Democrat CAVES to trans lobby after previously warning party about alienating voters

Markey will now go up against Republican John Deaton in the November general election.

Massachusetts has been a reliably blue state and will likely not flip to Republican control in the midterms.

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

​Democratic primary, Seth moulton, Ed markey, Massachusetts, Politics 

For years, the tech elite touted the many benefits of AI, claiming it could revolutionize all kinds of industries and health care. Even as this technology strained our resources, wrecked our supply chains, and stirred up uncertainty over job loss, we were all told just to get in line — this is the future. That tune, however, is starting to change, as guys like Bill Gates are finally saying the things the rest of us have been saying all along: This tech could be dangerous. Is it too late for humanity to recover?

The Microsoft co-founder took to his own blog to post an extensive piece detailing all the ways AI could be good for humanity. As expected from a high-profile leftist, he leaned on the idea of equity, noting that AI can “make the world a fairer place and keep it from widening the divide between rich and poor.”

The tech elite created this problem, and now they have the nerve to warn everyone about the monster they contrived.

That sounds like a counterintuitive statement coming from an elite technologist worth $109.3 billion. If he’s prepared to relinquish his fortune for those beneath him on the ladder of success, I must have missed the memo.

On the flip side, AI is also a force capable of driving bad times ahead, if it’s abused. He focused on three main risk factors:

Jobs are disappearing to AI, and many of them could go away forever. Until recently, many AI CEOs even touted this as a good thing. You may remember when Elon Musk said that universal basic income was the future and that we should get so comfortable with a socialistic wealth system that we shouldn’t even save for retirement. Just in case it needs to be said, don’t do that. Even if Musk is right (though I doubt he is in this case), it’s always good to have a retirement backup plan.AI will enable people and other AI bots to do more harm. With respect to Mr. Gates, this isn’t a hypothetical. This is actually happening already. We’ve covered countless tales of AI breaking cybersecurity systems, hacking into websites, and running rogue without developers’ knowledge. For all intents and purposes, AI is spiraling out of control, and our cybersecurity systems are not ready for the crash that is coming, though the Trump administration is trying to rein in the damage with an AI review process for new frontier models.AI could slow our kids’ development. Sadly, this is already happening, too. Students are encouraged and even implored to use AI in the classroom, further contributing to waning literacy and critical thinking skills. It also helps students cheat instead of learning the curriculum. Worse still, AI has made it easier for predators to target students under the guise of education partnerships.

The tech elite made the bed we all lie in

The worst part is that the tech elite, like Bill Gates, created this problem, and now they have the nerve to warn everyone about the monster they contrived. Remember that Microsoft was an early backer of OpenAI, the company behind the first mainstream LLM, ChatGPT. Throughout their partnership, Microsoft injected $13 billion into OpenAI and held a license to wrap ChatGPT into Microsoft Copilot on Windows PCs and other devices. Today, Microsoft still holds a significant minority stake in the AI giant’s company, though it has pulled back in favor of building its own large language models.

And that’s just Microsoft.

The Gates Foundation partnered with Claude on a $200 million grant to install AI deeper into “global health, life sciences, education, and economic mobility” programs, even as Gates admits himself that this technology could be a threat to students and jobs.

RELATED: Google’s AI is taking over your Android. Here’s how to kick it out.

Is it too late to save humanity?

Gates sums up the dichotomy of today’s AI landscape with a single sentence: “AI will either be the greatest equalizer ever invented, or the worst source of injustice.” Unfortunately, it seems like we’re already leaning toward the latter, but that doesn’t mean we’re doomed.

There are signs that the AI race is running out of steam. The fearmongering over jobs, for instance, is already starting to abate. Of course, opportunistic CEOs like Sam Altman are disappointed, lamenting that AI hasn’t swept through the workforce nearly as fast as predicted. “I think it means we’ve all been too ambitious on timelines,” he recently said during an interview. “People keep doing the same things they’re doing. They keep buying from the same company. They keep sort of wanting to use their tools in the same way,” instead of turning to AI. While this doesn’t bode well for the AI takeover, it offers a rare glint of hope, that maybe humanity won’t have its God-given responsibility to work stolen by soulless bots.

There’s also a bright spot for education. Although a new semester has just begun, last year ended with college students booing graduation commencement speakers for merely uttering the letters “AI.” If enough of them reject what has become an invasion on their ability to think freely, create intentionally, and dream openly, then they may be better off than some of the adults who already trust AI more than they should.

As for the security of our digital systems, the Trump administration is already trying to keep us safe by reviewing frontier models before they’re released to the public. There are pros and cons to this approach, but at least it’s an attempt to ensure that Bill Gates’ prophetic nightmare never comes to pass.

​Artificial intelligence, Tech 

A 37-year-old man was arrested for battery after allegedly touching himself inappropriately while creeping behind a female employee at a Florida store.

On Friday the Miami-Dade Sheriff’s Office released some of the disgusting details at a media briefing.

‘It is pretty shocking that he would do something like this in front of the camera and in front of kids and anyone looking.’

Officers responded to the Ross clothing store on Southwest 56th Street on Aug. 17 at about 4:15 p.m. for a report of a battery.

The alleged perpetrator had fled, but police found the victim as well a witness.

The witness said that the man was touching himself while the female worker was stocking shelves at the store.

“The male just happened to get into an area where she was working at and took a liking to her and started taking pictures, as we see on the video of her, of her buttocks and getting close to her,” said Lead Detective Diego Mendoza.

“The witness went to loss prevention about this, and when she came back, she saw the subject getting directly behind the victim, who was crouching down on the floor, and he sprayed her,” he adds.

Some news reports say that the man ejaculated onto the worker, but others say he sprayed her with an “unknown liquid.” WTVJ-TV reported that police were DNA testing the liquid, which was described as “cloudy” and “sticky.”

Police said they were able to identify a suspect as Sean Edward Uribe based on the witness picking him out of a lineup. He was arrested a week later a the office of his probation officer.

Mendoza said Uribe had been arrested previously for similar incidents.

“This is not the first time he has done this,” he said. “He is well known to our unit. But it is pretty shocking that he would do something like this in front of the camera and in front of kids and anyone looking.”

RELATED: Camera shows DoorDash driver allegedly masturbating at woman’s door after delivering food

Mendoza said the latest charge would be a felony because of the previous convictions.

“My concern is that he is doing this to a number of women across Miami-Dade County,” he added. “I am sure multiple females are not even aware he has done that to them. I am sure this guy has done this multiple times to multiple people and multiple females all over Dade County.”

Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Mindy Glazer set his bond at $10,000 and ordered a public defender to represent him.

Uribe lives with his mother, according to CBS Miami.

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

​Masturbating, Gross, Disgusting, Crime 

For decades, American hiring and admissions have been distorted by a legal and bureaucratic regime that promised equal treatment while repeatedly rewarding institutions for sorting people by race and sex. The Civil Rights Act itself does not exclude white men; Title VII protects employees from discrimination because of race and sex regardless of which race or sex they are. But affirmative action rules, consent decrees, diversity mandates, contracting preferences, and institutional risk management created powerful incentives to treat demographic categories differently.

Incentives shape behavior. Universities, Fortune 500 companies, government agencies, and nonprofits learned to fear discrimination claims, bad publicity, activist campaigns, and regulatory scrutiny. Long before “wokeness” became a corporate religion, lawyers and compliance departments were already teaching institutions to think in terms of protected groups, disparate impact, representation targets, and litigation exposure.

The right does not need another conference panel lamenting DEI. It needs lawyers willing to make discrimination expensive. Equal protection will not enforce itself.

The practical question was never simply who had rights on paper. It was whose complaints institutions expected to carry consequences.

For years, conservative media documented the resulting discrimination against white men. DEI programs openly advertised preferences, scholarships excluded applicants by race or sex, and employers sometimes boasted about hiring goals that would have been scandalous if the preferred and disfavored groups were reversed.

Yet a nasty and stupid trend has emerged on the right: The same people who spent a decade describing the system now mock young white men who notice its effects.

They call them losers. They accuse them of victimhood. They insist that any man who works hard enough can simply transcend a system conservatives themselves spent years condemning.

That is politically and morally incoherent.

After Donald Trump’s compelling victory in 2024, Democrats discovered they had a serious problem with male voters, especially white men. It turns out that a political coalition saturated with rhetoric about “whiteness,” “male privilege,” and “toxic masculinity” will eventually alienate some of the people being described as social pathologies. Progressives produced endless postmortems about podcasts, masculinity, and how Democrats might win young men back.

RELATED: This is what existential politics looks like

Blaze Media Illustration

Republicans should have recognized the opening immediately.

The Trump administration deserves credit for taking aggressive action against DEI. But much of the GOP still seems embarrassed by the idea of representing white men as a constituency with legitimate interests. This is bizarre. A party that promises equal protection should have no difficulty saying that discrimination against white men is wrong for exactly the same reason discrimination against anyone else is wrong.

The political failure is glaring because young white men are not asking for a patronage machine. Most want the same things politicians promise everyone else: decent work, affordable homes, marriage, children, and confidence that effort will be rewarded rather than filtered through a demographic spreadsheet.

Conservatives who spent years explaining how DEI distorted institutions cannot suddenly sneer at those consequences when the victims are inconvenient. If the system has been biased, fix it. If the law promises equal treatment, enforce it. And if Republicans refuse to defend a constituency increasingly voting for them, they should not be surprised when those voters conclude that the party likes their ballots more than it likes them. A coalition cannot survive forever on gratitude for being less hostile than the other side.

The law already says so.

In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that the race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina violated federal law or the Constitution. The ruling did not abolish every consideration touching race, and universities quickly looked for ways to preserve diversity goals through essays, recruitment, socioeconomic proxies, and other methods.

That is what institutions do when incentives remain unchanged: They adapt.

Corporations made similar adjustments as legal pressure against DEI increased. Some renamed programs, changed language, or removed explicit demographic preferences. But nobody should expect a half-century of institutional habit to vanish because the Supreme Court issued one opinion or because an executive order changed the mood in Washington.

Law changes behavior when violating it becomes expensive.

That is the lesson the left understood long ago. Civil rights organizations built durable legal institutions capable of finding plaintiffs, financing cases, generating publicity, and making discrimination costly. Lawyers could build careers bringing important cases. Universities and corporations knew that a bad decision could become a lawsuit, a settlement, a headline, or all three.

RELATED: Stop ‘owning the libs’ and start owning institutions

Blaze Media Illustration

The right has built far less comparable infrastructure for people alleging discrimination because they are white or male.

Organizations such as America First Legal have begun bringing these cases, and other public-interest firms challenge race- and sex-based preferences. But the scale remains small compared with the institutional ecosystem that has enforced progressive civil rights priorities for decades. Many potential plaintiffs still assume nobody will take their case, that suing will destroy their career, or that publicly claiming discrimination against white men will make them objects of ridicule.

That social taboo is a powerful enforcement mechanism all by itself.

The answer is not to create special rights for white men. They do not need them. The answer is to enforce the rights they already possess with the same tenacity brought to every other discrimination claim.

That means sustained lawfare.

When a university uses a racial preference that violates the law, sue. When a corporation excludes applicants from a program because they are white or male, sue. When an employer retaliates against a worker for objecting to unlawful discrimination, sue. Find plaintiffs. Fund cases. Build precedent. Publicize victories. Thousands of cases, week after week. Make compliance departments understand that discriminating against white men carries real legal risk.

Not every angry employee has a case. Not every disappointing admission or promotion decision is discrimination. But where unlawful discrimination exists, conservatives should stop treating litigation as somehow beneath them.

Institutions respond to incentives. For decades, the incentives pushed them toward demographic engineering while telling white men that noticing was shameful. If equal protection means anything, those incentives must run in both directions.

The right does not need another conference panel lamenting DEI. It needs lawyers willing to make discrimination expensive. Equal protection will not enforce itself.

​Civil rights act, Dei programs, Law enforcement, Male voters, Supreme court, Trump administration, White men, Constitution, Donald trump, Democrats, Corporations, America first legal, Opinion & analysis 

Common sense versus crazy is the defining feature of today’s politics.

On immigration, the choice is between enforcing the law and tolerating policies that burden U.S. workers and communities. On elections, the SAVE America Act has exposed the same divide: More than 80% of Americans support voter ID, yet Democrats continue to resist basic election-integrity safeguards.

Do lawmakers recognize biological reality and protect children from irreversible treatment, or do they protect the establishment that branded dissent dangerous?

But one contrast between Republicans and Democrats this cycle is even more fundamental: whether government should recognize biological sex as real.

That fight now runs through women’s sports, military readiness, and the treatment of children suffering from gender dysphoria. Common sense says boys are boys, girls are girls, and children should not be rushed into life-altering medical interventions. The alternative is crazy.

For years, the gender-medicine establishment told vulnerable children that puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries could align their bodies with an internal identity. Too often, institutions presented those interventions with more certainty than the evidence justified.

U.S. Rep. Bob Onder (R-Mo.) wants Congress to answer that problem with H.R. 7651, the Chloe Cole Act, which targets providers where accountability is most likely to be felt: civil liability.

The bill would create a federal cause of action allowing patients and families to sue medical providers that prescribed puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones or performed sex-rejecting surgeries on minors.

Chloe Cole, the bill’s namesake, is a detransitioner and activist who says she was pushed toward irreversible treatment without clear, informed consent. Her own malpractice case has made her one of the most prominent critics of pediatric gender medicine.

The legislation also arrives as institutions that once claimed broad consensus are facing harder scrutiny. The Trump administration filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission against the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, challenging claims about medical necessity and insurance coverage.

RELATED: Taxpayers paid $9.6 million for a gender ideologue’s puberty-blocker study. She hid it. Now we know why.

L-R: Luis Soto/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images; Michael Tullberg/Getty Images

In a recent legal filing, WPATH described portions of its guidance as “opinion” rather than binding scientific consensus. That distinction is important. Parents were told for years that the science was settled. Now the institutions involved are emphasizing judgment, interpretation, and professional opinion.

Malpractice cases are moving too. In the Varian case, a jury awarded $2 million in damages over a sex-rejecting surgery. Individual lawsuits may expose failures one patient at a time. The Chloe Cole Act would be a major step toward stopping this industrial-scale profiteering once and for all.

As Congress returns for its pre-midterm September sprint, the choice is once again common sense versus crazy. Do lawmakers recognize biological reality and insist on caution before children undergo irreversible treatment, or do they protect a medical and political establishment that insisted for years that dissent itself was dangerous?

Congress has already seen versions of the same fight. Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) is leading the charge to define men and women clearly under Title IX. Before the August recess, Heritage Action key-voted an amendment from Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) to codify President Trump’s “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness” order requiring service members to serve in accordance with their biological sex.

The legislation asked Congress to say something extraordinarily simple: Men serve as men, and women serve as women. Every Democrat who voted on the amendment went on the record against it.

The Chloe Cole Act offers another clean vote. Members can side with children and families seeking accountability for irreversible medical treatment or with the institutions like the billion-dollar transgender lobby that told the country for years that common sense had to yield to crazy.

​Biological sex, Congress, Gender dysphoria, Puberty blockers, Save america act, Womens sports, Chloe cole act, Democrats, Opinion & analysis 

For years, a handful of powerful corporations have wielded control over the nation’s food supply, with small farmers and ranchers being hit the hardest.

Now, the Trump administration says it is finally taking action.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins tells Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck that president Trump “will arguably go down in history as the most pro-rancher, pro-farmer president in American history.”

And under this administration, Rollins explains that officials are fighting “decades of massive consolidation in agriculture, offshoring of our food supply in agriculture, the loss of hundreds of thousands of farms and ranches.”

“There is no national security, there is no freedom, unless we can feed and fuel ourselves,” she adds.

And Glenn, who operates a ranch himself, is no stranger to this struggle.

“I’ve got to go to Denver to sell my cows. I can’t get them processed, really, in my state because I don’t process enough meat. … People can’t go and process their beef in our state and then sell them to the local grocery store,” he explains.

“Which, you know, I don’t understand the people on the left. They’re for these big huge conglomerates. And then on top of it, they understand farm to table,” he says. “How do they not understand that same concept with beef and chicken?”

Glenn also points out that “85% or almost 90% of all beef is processed through these big four.”

“It was not like that 20 years ago. It’s never been like this. This is a massive monopoly,” he says, before asking, “Are you going to make it easier for people to be able to build processing plants in their own states and get state inspections?”

“Yes,” Rollins answers.

“What we have done over the last year is really invested in small and midsize packing. So that a co-op, a group of farmer-owned — we’ve got some great examples of this, by the way, around the country that are building this out with the help of USDA grants and loans,” Rollins says.

“And there is an opportunity here. … A few weeks ago, Tyson announced the closure of three of their plants. They’re shifting a lot of their processing. … That opens up, Glenn, about 20% of the market for smaller and midsize companies to come in. American-owned, to rebuild and to catch some of that market that is now opening up,” she continues.

“So as tough as that decision was, that announcement was — I actually think the long-term implications are very positive for this industry,” she adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Agriculture, Brooke rollins, Donald trump, Small farmers, Small ranchers, Usda, Glenn beck, Big beef, Blazetv show