With the whole world holding its breath amid the ongoing conflict in the Middle East over the past several weeks, President Trump’s ceasefire with Iran has restored some confidence to the markets — though some uncertainty remains.

Oil prices dropped and stocks surged after Trump’s announcement on Tuesday evening that a ceasefire had been reached with Iran.

Oil prices also plummeted as the Strait of Hormuz has been projected to be opened.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose over 1,300 points since the close of market on Tuesday following the announcement of the ceasefire.

Likewise, the S&P 500 saw a 2.5% jump from Tuesday to Wednesday in response to the news, moving from just over 6,600 to 6,785 when markets opened on Wednesday.

RELATED: Iran reneges on key point of ceasefire amid allegations of broken promises

Punit PARANJPE/AFP/Getty Images

The NASDAQ also saw a significant leap in response to the news, moving nearly 650 points for an almost 3% positive gain.

Oil prices also plummeted as the Strait of Hormuz has been projected to be opened. Crude oil WTI dropped from roughly 112 per barrel to just under 95 per barrel, a 17-point drop overnight.

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

​Politics, S&p 500, Nasdaq, Crude oil, Oil prices, Gas prices, Iran, Israel, Dow jones, President trump 

Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe said the recovery of a downed U.S. airman in Iran was a “no-fail mission” that required technology available nowhere else in the world.

In reference to an F-15E Strike Eagle fighter pilot who was lost in Iran, the CIA boss told reporters on Tuesday that the challenge of finding the pilot was comparable to hunting for a single grain of sand in the desert; but they did it.

‘If your heart is beating, we will find you.’

Director Ratcliffe revealed the agency used human and technical assets and also “executed a deception campaign to confuse the Iranians who were desperately hunting for our airmen.”

He added, “At the president’s direction, we deployed both human assets and exquisite technologies that no other intelligence service in the world possesses.”

While Ratcliffe stopped short of describing exactly what those “unique capabilities” were, an insider report by the New York Post claims that the CIA implemented a secret technology known as “Ghost Murmur.”

RELATED: Trump announces CEASEFIRE with Iran ahead of deadline

The mountainous yet barren region of the Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province in Iran offered an ideal setting for the technology’s first use, one source reportedly said.

The CIA director stated that even though the pilot was hiding and concealed in a mountain crevice, he was still visible to the CIA but “invisible to the enemy.”

It was “about as clean an environment as you could ask for” due to low electromagnetic interference, the source went on. With “almost no competing human signatures” and a strong “thermal contrast between a living body and the desert floor” at nighttime, operators enjoyed a second layer of confirmation that they had found their man.

“It’s like hearing a voice in a stadium, except the stadium is a thousand square miles of desert,” an unnamed source told the Post.

The “Ghost Murmur” tech uses long-range quantum magnetometry to identify the electromagnetic pulse of a human heartbeat. The heartbeat’s signature is separated from background noise to locate it.

The source, allegedly briefed on the CIA program, also said that “in the right conditions, if your heart is beating, we will find you.”

The source told the Post that the signal of a heartbeat is usually so weak it can only be measured in a hospital-style setting with sensors pressed to a person’s chest, however, advances in the technology — chiefly built around finding defects in synthetic diamonds — have made finding such signals more possible.

“The capability is not omniscient. It works best in remote, low-clutter environments and requires significant processing time,” the insider claimed.

RELATED: NASA astronaut gives very American response to DEI questioning

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps/Anadolu/Getty Images

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth told reporters at the same press conference that the pilot’s first message upon finding cover was “God is good.”

“We leave no man behind. And that is not luck. It’s the result of unmatched training, superior technology, unbreakable warrior ethos, and sheer American grit,” Hegseth added.

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

​Return, Cia, Iran, Trump, Secret, Heartbeat, Tech 

In a sudden change, Iran has reportedly once again closed off the Strait of Hormuz amid allegations that the ceasefire agreement has been violated.

Iran reportedly prevented ships from passing through the Strait of Hormuz Wednesday morning, even though opening the strait was a key aspect of the ceasefire agreement reached Tuesday night.

President Trump has denied that Lebanon is included in the ceasefire, seemingly backing Israel’s continued advancements into the country.

According to an initial report, Iran has closed the strait in response to Israel’s ongoing military offensive in Lebanon.

The ceasefire agreement, announced by Pakistan’s prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, on Tuesday, specifically stipulated that the ceasefire applies everywhere, including Lebanon: “With the greatest humility, I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.”

RELATED: ‘Golden age of the Middle East’: Trump lays out plan for coming weeks after Iran agrees to temporary ceasefire

Elke Scholiers/Getty Images

According to multiple reports, President Trump has denied that Lebanon is included in the ceasefire, seemingly backing Israel’s continued advancements into the country.

These discrepancies raise more questions about the exact nature of the ceasefire deal and, perhaps, the authority with which Pakistan’s prime minister speaks on behalf of the two parties in the conflict.

For Israel’s part, the Israel Defense Forces announced that in “10 minutes,” they “completed the largest coordinated strike across Lebanon since the start of Operation Roaring Lion.” The strike reportedly targeted 100+ Hezbollah targets in Beirut, Beqaa, and southern Lebanon.

In his post, Prime Minister Sharif announced that the ceasefire would be further discussed at the upcoming “Islamabad Talks” on Friday.

This is a developing story.

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

​Politics, Iran, Strait of hormuz, Israel, Idf, Lebanon, United states, Trump, President trump, Shehbaz sharif, Pakistan, Hezbollah, Beirut, Israel defense forces 

If you think this is just another harmless piece of paperwork coming out of a state legislature, think again.

Minnesota’s HF 3865 is being sold as a simple clarification of collector car rules, but the reality is far more consequential. This proposal doesn’t just tweak the language — it redraws the lines around when you’re allowed to enjoy a vehicle you already own. And if it passes as written, classic car owners could find themselves boxed into a narrow window of “acceptable” use, with little room for the freedom that defines car culture.

Classic cars require regular use to remain functional. Sitting idle can lead to mechanical issues, from dried seals to fuel system problems.

For decades, collector vehicle laws have operated on a basic understanding. These vehicles are not daily transportation, and owners accept that limitation in exchange for reduced registration requirements and, in many cases, historic recognition. But within that framework, there has always been a reasonable level of flexibility. Owners could take their vehicles out for a drive, attend informal gatherings, test car repairs, or simply enjoy the result of years of restoration work.

HF 3865 changes that balance.

Centralized rule

The bill establishes a centralized rule governing how all collector-class vehicles can be operated in Minnesota. That includes vintage vehicles, classic cars, and other limited-use automobiles that have historically existed under a more flexible understanding between owners and regulators.

What makes Minnesota’s approach notable is that it cuts against the direction of travel in other states. In California — hardly a state known for regulatory leniency — lawmakers are advancing “Leno’s Law,” a proposal to ease emissions requirements for qualifying collector vehicles based on how rarely they’re driven and the practical limits of testing older cars.

Yes, even California is beginning to recognize that legacy vehicles don’t fit neatly into modern regulatory frameworks. Minnesota, by contrast, is moving to define — and restrict — how those vehicles can be used.

In practice, that shift matters. Once a centralized rule is in place, interpretation falls to regulators, inspectors, and law enforcement — each with their own threshold for what counts as acceptable use. What looks like a narrow clarification on paper can quickly become a broader constraint in reality.

Sunday drivers

That ambiguity doesn’t stay theoretical for long. It shows up in everyday situations: An owner takes a freshly repaired car out for a test drive and gets pulled over — does that qualify as permitted use? A weekend cruise without a formal event destination — allowed, or not? A quick drive to keep seals lubricated and the battery charged — reasonable to the owner, but potentially questionable to an officer enforcing a stricter reading of the rule. When the line isn’t clear, the practical burden often falls on the owner to justify the drive.

The concern isn’t just about what the bill says today, but what it enables tomorrow. When the state defines “appropriate use” for collector vehicles, it creates a framework that can be tightened over time — through enforcement patterns, regulatory guidance, or future amendments. What begins as a modest clarification can evolve into a far more restrictive system.

RELATED: ‘Leno’s Law’ could be big win for California’s classic car culture

CNBC/Getty Images

Eroding the culture

For owners, this isn’t theoretical. Classic cars require regular use to remain functional. Sitting idle can lead to mechanical issues, from dried seals to fuel system problems. Owners often need to take vehicles out for test drives after repairs or simply to keep them in working condition. Limiting when and why those drives are allowed adds friction to ownership in a way that goes beyond paperwork — it affects whether maintaining these vehicles is practical at all.

There’s also a cultural cost to consider. Classic cars are not just transportation; they’re rolling artifacts of American design, engineering, and craftsmanship. They connect generations and preserve a hands-on relationship with mechanical systems that is increasingly rare. Restricting their use doesn’t just inconvenience owners — it gradually erodes the culture that keeps them alive.

Supporters of HF 3865 may argue that the bill simply clarifies existing rules. But clarity is not always neutral. When clarification narrows behavior, it functions as restriction. And when that restriction applies to how individuals use their private property — particularly in ways that have long been understood as reasonable — it deserves closer scrutiny.

Minnesota lawmakers have a choice to make. They can preserve the balance that has allowed collector car culture to thrive, or they can begin redefining it in ways that may be difficult to reverse.

For classic car owners, the stakes are simple: This isn’t just about regulation. It’s about whether the freedom to enjoy what you own is quietly being rewritten.

​Lifestyle, Classic cars, Minnesota, California, Emissions, Culture, Leno’s law, Jay leno, Align cars 

Don Lemon is in the headlines again — this time for floating the idea of running for president. On the March 29 episode of the “Pod Save America” podcast with former MSNBC host Alex Wagner, the former CNN anchor admitted that he’s open to running if the right opportunity presents itself.

BlazeTV host Pat Gray played and reacted to the clip on a recent episode of “Pat Gray Unleashed.”

Wagner asked Lemon if he was considering running for office. After a tangent about how he’s disadvantaged because he’s “not a white man” so the “rules are different” for him, Lemon said that he was open to the idea.

“Do I ever think about it? Yes. Could it happen? Yeah, it could happen if the opportunity presented itself — the right opportunity presented itself. … I think I could be president of the United States. I could definitely run this country better than Donald Trump,” he said.

“A towel roll could. You would be a marked improvement,” Wagner replied.

“As an independent though, there would be a hard time for me to run for anything because, you know, the way the system is set up. I’d have to choose a side. And so, you know, I probably would have to become a Democrat,” Lemon added.

“You know what else I think that I could run better than most people? … A news organization because I was there. I’ve been in the game for so long, and I’m not interested in being, you know, the anchor out front. I could come in and fix the bulk of their problems and lickety-split in no time flat,” he continued, noting that he’s currently “building his own channel.”

Pat says the only thing Don Lemon could run well is “maybe a gay bar.”

“What do you want to bet there’ll be over five people there watching?” he asks, referencing Lemon’s new channel.

Between Meryl Streep’s warning to women about the dangers of the SAVE Act and Lemon’s presidential aspirations, Pat “[loves] what’s happening with the left.”

“They’re all so brilliant,” he laughs sarcastically.

To see Lemon’s clip and hear more of Pat’s commentary, watch the video above.

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat’s biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Pat gray unleashed, Pay gray, Don lemon, Don lemon president, Alex wagner, Blazetv, Blaze media 

A new Republican-led bill pushing for bipartisan reform to the immigration crisis has sparked intraparty clashes over major amnesty concessions.

Republican Rep. María Elvira Salazar of Florida, who introduced the Dignity Act in the House, lashed out at her GOP colleagues critiquing the “compassionate” bill, even though some provisions provide a pathway to “legal status.” Salazar said that calling it an amnesty bill is a “deliberate distortion” of the legislation despite language protecting “Dreamers,” halting deportations, and allowing illegal aliens to enter a seven-year program for “renewable legal status.”

‘I want dignity for Americans.’

“At some point in the future, another legislator will write another law to give them path to citizenship,” Salazar said. “Right now, what we need to do is to buy peace for these people — allow them to stay to continue working, because they are needed.”

Despite clear-cut protections for illegal aliens, Salazar’s Dignity Act has secured 20 Republican co-sponsorships and 20 Democrat co-sponsorships.

RELATED: ‘She was screaming’: Rep. Brandon Gill clashes with Ilhan Omar as immigration battle heats up

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

While several Republicans have signed on to the bipartisan bill, prominent GOP House members have sounded the alarm.

Republican Rep. Brandon Gill of Texas slammed Salazar’s bill, saying it’s another case of “mass amnesty” and that it “would constitute a terrible betrayal of our voters.”

“Maria, your ‘DIGNIDAD Act’ would give legal status to over 10 million illegal aliens,” Gill said in a post on X. “It’s rank amnesty and everybody knows it. I want dignity for Americans — the people whose interests we represent — not illegal aliens. That means doing what we said we’d do: mass deportations.”

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

​Donald trump, Open borders, Amnesty, Immigration crisis, Maria elvira salazar, Brandon gill, Dignity act, Mass migration, Dreamers, Politics 

As an avid library-goer, I’ve watched with interest how American libraries continue to shift and evolve in our new “post-book” world.

That’s right, one thing you notice in libraries these days: There are fewer books. And the ones they do have are checked out less often.

She shrugged and said, ‘Libraries are for everyone. I’m not allowed to tell them to turn their phone down.’

If you can’t find the book you want, you can always reserve it through the library system’s website. But increasingly, those books are not located in a branch library. They are in a warehouse somewhere. In a state of storage.

When you receive these stored books, they often look strange and sickly. Like they haven’t seen sunlight in a while. Like they belong in a museum, an artifact from the past.

Into the future

A couple of years ago, I visited several recently completed public libraries in major North American cities: Seattle, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Calgary, among others. I noticed these libraries had been specifically designed in anticipation of a decline in book-reading.

These new buildings had “craft” areas, or recording studios, or computer labs. They had conference rooms, where they held workshops for seniors to help them use their smartphones, or instruct young people on how to start a business.

Most of these new libraries were socialistic in nature. They were becoming places where people could access social programs and government assistance. You could sign up for job training. You could get help with your taxes.

Prisons and psych wards

Another thing I noticed: The designers and architects of these libraries seemed to believe that rampant homelessness was not a passing trend. In their minds, this was a permanent situation, which libraries would need to accommodate and serve.

Because of this, many contemporary libraries look and feel very different from the classic library environment.

They had removed old, comfortable furniture and replaced it with unbreakable plastic chairs and tables. Reading lamps were gone, with harsh overhead LED lighting taking their place. Charging stations and sleeping lounges were favored over cozy study nooks. Couches or armchairs were made of odor-resistant, easily disinfected fabrics. Outdoor areas were constructed so they could be hosed down.

Because of these changes, many new libraries often looked like a cross between a prison and a psych ward. They’d been designed to house unclean, unpredictable, occasionally violent, and sometimes incontinent humans.

Shhhhhhhh!

One recent incident I found interesting: I was in a local library, and a patron was watching a TV show very loudly on his phone.

A librarian appeared to see what the noise was. I looked at her like, “Can you say something to that person?”

She shrugged and said, “Libraries are for everyone. I’m not allowed to tell them to turn their phone down.”

She wasn’t allowed? I thought to myself.

“But you,” she said, looking at me. “You can say something.”

Looking at the TV-watching patron, I didn’t feel inclined to confront him. But how could it be that the librarian wasn’t allowed to intervene?

In search of the ‘luxury library’

Like I said, I love libraries. I love the quiet. I love the atmosphere. I love being around other studious types like myself.

I’ve kept tabs on the libraries in my own city, frequently visiting some of my old favorites, to check on which ones are making progress and which ones are getting worse. (They’re all getting worse.)

But recently, I stopped doing that. I don’t go to the big central library building anymore. I have seen enough during recent years to know what that looks like.

Now what I do — at home and in other cities I visit — is figure out where the wealthiest parts of town are, and I find small regional libraries in those areas.

In such places, you have the best chance of finding the “original library experience.” Peace. Quiet. Clean carpets. Comfortable chairs.

You encounter kind, thoughtful librarians (as opposed to the PTSD librarians you encounter in the war-zone libraries).

Actual families visit these places. Moms with their kids. Teenagers after school.

There’s no need for armed security at the front door. There are no Narcan canisters rolling around in the bathroom.

What about the children?

But even these places are subject to change, as they continue to expand their purview.

In one such “luxury library” I frequent, the library has become a kind of part-time nursery school. During certain hours, one half of the building fills up with small children. There are toys and games and little play areas set up for them.

Because this small library is basically one giant room, I am exposed to the screams and cries of the children. They run around. Occasionally, I find them hiding under my table as I work.

I don’t mind the children at all. I don’t have children of my own and always enjoy their antics. And the library has to do something with that space, don’t they?

RELATED: When did America’s public libraries become homeless encampments?

Genaro Molina/Getty Images

Still searching

Even in these wealthy neighborhoods, it’s clear that the libraries are struggling to find ways to remain relevant to their communities.

They have my sympathies. I don’t want libraries to go away. But what purpose will they serve going forward?

I’d prefer that libraries not become another arm of the “nanny state,” full of progressive propaganda and social activism. (“Drag Queen Story Hour” is trying to make a comeback at one library in my city.)

And what about the homeless? Is it really the fate of our great American library system to become a charging station and nod-out zone for drug addicts and street people?

But such is the nature of our socialist society. Tiny enclaves of luxury. Prisons and psych wards for everybody else.

The only solution I have found is to seek out these “luxury libraries” — and make full use of them. And I recommend that others do the same.

​Lifestyle, Culture, Books, Libraries, Social services, Blake’s progress 

It didn’t take long for a federal government agency originally designed to censor certain foreign entities and curate their narratives on terrorism to be turned on Americans.

Then-President Barack Obama issued an executive order in 2011 establishing the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications within the State Department — an agency tasked initially with “using communication tools to reduce radicalization by terrorists and extremist violence and terrorism that threaten the interests and national security of the United States.”

Obama broadened the mission of the agency and renamed it the Global Engagement Center in another executive order just months prior to President Donald Trump’s electoral victory in 2016.

‘Greatest level of disinformation risk.’

The Global Engagement Center — overseen by a steering committee of deep-state officials, codified into law in the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, and afforded both grant-making authorities and the ability to “leverage expertise from outside the federal government” — eventually became, as one former intelligence source told investigative reporter Matt Taibbi, “an incubator for the domestic disinformation complex.”

In the final days of the first Trump presidency, the deep state and its censorship contractors — desperate to control the narratives about the 2020 presidential election and the COVID-19 virus — apparently turned this “disinformation complex” on Blaze Media in a proof-of-concept test.

According to discovery evidence gleaned by the Federalist in a now-settled case against the government, the Global Engagement Center backed a trial targeting Blaze Media and the free speech it platforms, despite concerns at the State Department about possibly censoring an American company with an American audience in contravention of the agency’s foreign-focused mandate.

Damning discoveries

The Global Engagement Center — which Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged “actively silenced and censored the voices of Americans they were supposed to be serving” — was nominally closed in January 2025, then effectively killed by the Trump administration last April under its final name, the Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference Hub.

Two years prior to the agency’s demise, the Federalist and several other plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Global Engagement Center and the State Department.

RELATED: The trial lawyers come for online free speech

Artur Debat/Getty Images

The lawsuit accused the government of actively intervening in the news media market through the Global Engagement Center “to render disfavored press outlets unprofitable by funding the infrastructure, development, and marketing and promotion of censorship technology and private censorship enterprises to covertly suppress speech of a segment of the American press.”

Prior to negotiating a deal with the State Department and settling the case last week, the Federalist obtained discovery evidence confirming that the Global Engagement Center had regularly backed and promoted censorial technologies including NewsGuard and the Global Disinformation Index.

Blaze Media previously reported that NewsGuard and the Global Disinformation Index generated blacklists of supposedly risky or misleading news outfits with the aim of getting them demonetized and directing funds to news organizations that advanced establishment narratives.

In the Global Disinformation Index’s fall 2022 report, for example, NPR, the Washington Post, and other liberal news outfits were labeled as the “least risky sites,” whereas Blaze Media, Reason, the Federalist, the Daily Wire, the New York Post, and other conservative publications made the top 10 list of “riskiest sites” and were smeared as having the “greatest level of disinformation risk.”

It turns out that Blaze Media was targeted for more than just a blacklist.

Testing Americans

In an August 2020 press release, NewsGuard showcased that it and two other technology companies — PeakMetrics and Omelas — had won a $25,000 contract earlier that year offered jointly by the State Department and the Pentagon to develop solutions that would help the departments evaluate “disinformation narrative themes in near real time ‘by identifying online sources spreading COVID-19 disinformation or misinformation narratives.'”

The Federalist obtained evidence that these Global Engagement Center-funded companies ran a test from Dec. 14, 2020, until Jan. 7, 2021, wherein Blaze Media was apparently a featured target.

The Global Engagement Center reportedly explained ahead of time that the test would entail PeakMetrics “first identify[ing] popular yet potentially divisive narratives relevant to the U.S. elections that are trending across channels.”

Omelas, in turn, was supposed to provide “evidence of direct attribution of these narratives to state-sponsored sources of disinformation.”

After PeakMetrics and Omelas assessed which narratives were becoming “integrated into domestic messaging,” NewsGuard “would highlight which sites the narratives continue to surface from and ‘provide information on the reliability, popularity, and endurance of the sites and dissemination platforms,'” reported the Federalist.

This proposed plan apparently made at least one person at the State Department uncomfortable. In a September 2020 email, the person apologized for a lack of clarity regarding the proposed test, noting that the agency had “explained to CYBERCOM” that it would be “impossible” to “focus on domestic audiences” and that “this test will NOT focus on US audiences.”

A PeakMetrics report — produced by the State Department and reviewed by the Federalist — suggested these reassurances, which prompted a department official to approve the test, were misleading.

The report explained that the outfits “collaborated to create a mockup of a joint dashboard incorporating all three companies’ capabilities.”

PeakMetrics noted further that it had performed a preliminary analysis on “Omelas’ ‘Unrest and Violence in America’ narrative,” then integrated its “technology enrichment for sources,” allowing “operators to garner insights such as technology stacks used for a site, IP addresses (and IP2GEO) associated with the site, and potentially affiliated sites using the same ID for particular technologies.”

The report added that “analysis of this metadata can provide unique insights into networks of disinformation propagators.”

PeakMetrics’ report featured two examples of so-called “disinformation propagators”: Sputnik News — a Russian state-owned news agency — and Blaze Media, one of America’s largest independent media companies, which the report claimed had a “record of promoting conspiracies [sic] and misinformation surrounding prominent figures and elections.”

Through a grant of over $2 million to a third party, the State Department funded the testing of the three companies’ technology and financed the test bed on which they collaborated, the Federalist noted.

“Our government financed testing for private technology companies to improve their products — products that target American[s’] speech and seek to silence domestic media outlets,” the Federalist summarized.

PeakMetrics and Omelas did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Matt Skibinski, the COO of NewsGuard, attempted to downplay the finding, telling Blaze News, “This small contract with the Trump administration’s Global Engagement Center was exclusively for the purpose of tracking narratives emanating from Chinese and Russian media outlets. The scope of work was extremely specific, even going so far as to list the foreign-owned publications that would be the subject of our monitoring.”

Skibinski did not deny that Blaze Media was used in the test.

“PeakMetrics simply incorporated that publicly available rating into its dashboard to test whether this would be useful,” said Skibinski. “Again, this was not part of the scope of work we were paid for, and again, The Blaze [sic] was rated well before we had this unrelated small Trump administration [Global Engagement Center] contract covering foreign disinformation.”

“We did it because we thought it might be a useful capability that could lead us to future contracts,” said Skibinski.

HOW YOU CAN HELP: Independent media only survives if readers step in. Stand with us and get uncensored access to what they tried to suppress.

​Blaze news, Newsguard, Censorship, Global engagement center, Gec, Censor, Covid, Politics, Leftism, Statism, Totalitarianism, Omelas, Peakmetrics, Federalist