An Atlanta-based progressive church is offering what it calls “glitter ashes” for Ash Wednesday this year, a ritual it says is meant to show remorse for “Christian cruelty to our LGBTQ siblings” and affirm LGBT identity, marking yet another instance of activist politics supplanting historic Christian belief in Protestant traditions.
According to The Church at Ponce and Highland’s <a href="https://www.churchatponceandhighland.org">website</a>, congregants attending its Ash Wednesday service will be offered a choice between traditional ashes and ashes mixed with purple glitter. The latter, the church explains, are intended to symbolize regret for the Church’s historic moral teaching and to encourage LGBT individuals.
“Glitter ashes show remorse at straight Christian cruelty to our LGBTQ siblings,” the church states. “For LGBT people, they are a reminder that we have but one life, and we should shine — not hide.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
For Ash Wednesday, one progressive church is offering &#8220;glitter ashes,&#8221; which is ash mixed with purple glitter, and which &#8220;straight Christians&#8221; can don as a sign of &#8220;remorse&#8230;to our LGBTQ siblings.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/1qX7kgmB57">pic.twitter.com/1qX7kgmB57</a>
— Protestia (@Protestia) <a href="https://twitter.com/Protestia/status/2021562193964400931?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In Christian tradition, however, ashes serve a very different purpose. Ash Wednesday marks the beginning of Lent, a penitential season ordered toward Good Friday and Easter. The ashes, applied in the shape of a cross, function as a memento mori, a reminder of human mortality, sin, and the need for repentance: “Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”
The Church at Ponce and Highland openly rejects that framework. “Christianity has gotten off track,” the website declares. “It’s time to get back to the life and teachings of Jesus.” The church describes itself as “diverse, pro-LGBTQ, member-led, inclusive,” and explicitly states that it requires no shared statement of faith. Instead, the church says it unites around “common practices,” which include encouraging doubt over defined doctrine, rejecting eternal punishment, and downplaying the salvific significance of Christ’s death.
“We emphasize Jesus’s love and how it can free us to love more (rather than only avoiding punishment),” the site reads. “Jesus’s life and teachings instead of focusing only on his death.”
The church further claims that historic Christianity was corrupted by “empires,” blaming traditional belief for colonialism, slavery, violence, and oppression. Traditional Christianity, it argues, emphasized “uniformity, power, violence, and eternal punishment,” while the church presents itself as part of an “alternate tradition” rooted in liberation, solidarity with the marginalized, and identity-based affirmation. While the church loosely associates itself with the Baptist denomination, it is ostensibly independent since it eschews any affiliation with the conservative Southern Baptist Convention, the dominant governing body of the denomination. The church was a member of the Convention until 2010— it left over the SBC&#8217;s policy of denying female ordination.
Within that framework, it makes sense then that Ash Wednesday is no longer oriented toward repentance before God but toward moral apology directed to the world. The church makes that shift explicit in its description of the service. “We will have both traditional and glitter ashes available,” the site states. “Glitter ashes show remorse at Christian cruelty to our LGBTQ siblings as well as our love and affirmation for LGBTQ people.”
Conspicuously absent from the church’s description is any reference to sin, divine judgment, or the resurrection toward which Lent is traditionally ordered. Rather than calling believers to repentance, the ritual is reframed as a symbolic acknowledgment of harm and a declaration of ideological alignment.
The result is a service that retains Christian imagery while redefining its meaning. Ashes, long a sign of penitence and mortality, are repurposed as a political statement. The language of repentance is redirected away from God and toward contemporary social causes.
By offering glitter ashes alongside traditional ones, The Church at Ponce and Highland presents two competing visions of what Ash Wednesday is meant to signify. One points toward repentance and redemption. The other toward affirmation and apology. Only one has grounding in the traditional observance the ritual was designed to mark, and in the Christian theology it was meant to serve.

Bible On Top Of Rainbow Flag

‘Glitter Ashes’ Offered At Progressive Church To ‘Show Remorse … To Our LGBTQ Siblings’

LGBTQ

Politics

Religion

Attorney General Pam Bondi repeatedly clashed with House Democrats during a contentious House Judiciary Committee hearing that devolved into shouting matches, reclaimed time, and accusations of political retaliation — all within the first hour.
From the opening gavel, Democrats signaled they intended to keep Bondi on a short leash. Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) warned in his opening statement that Democrats would aggressively reclaim their time during questioning, a promise they carried out with gusto throughout the hearing.
Multiple Democratic members interrupted Bondi mid-answer or cut her off entirely. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) repeatedly reclaimed her time as Bondi attempted to respond, preventing her from completing several answers, while continuing to speak for nearly 30 seconds after her own time had expired.
The most heated exchange came during questioning from Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), who accused the Department of Justice under Bondi of politically targeting New York Attorney General Letitia James. “It’s clear that you are going after her simply because she was holding President Trump accountable, and he wants to punish her,” Nadler charged, before abruptly pivoting in the final minute of his five-minute allotment to the Epstein files. His sole question: “How many perpetrators are you even investigating?”
Bondi pushed back forcefully, rejecting Nadler’s framing and insisting on answering on her own terms.
“I’m going to answer the question the way I want to answer the question,” Bondi said.
“No, you’re going to answer the question the way I asked it,” Nadler snapped, before declaring, “I’m reclaiming my time.”
As Bondi attempted to continue, Democrats interrupted again. At several points, Bondi dismissed the repeated disruptions as political theater. “Here he goes with their theatrics,” she said during one exchange.
Raskin then waded back in. “You can let her filibuster all you want … not on our time,” he said to Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH). “I told you about that, Attorney General, before you started.”
“You don’t tell me,” Bondi shot back.
“Oh, I did tell you, because we saw what you did in the Senate,” Raskin shouted in response.
Bondi had one more up her sleeve, however, calling Raskin a &#8220;washed-up, loser lawyer.&#8221;
Jordan was repeatedly caught in the crossfire as he attempted to restore order, &#8220;When you ask a question the witness gets to [answer], you may not like the answer, but she gets to answer.&#8221;
That did not appease some in the room. “Mr. Chairman, she is embarrassing you, this is your committee, and she is embarrassing you,” an unidentified Democrat shouted as Jordan called for time during another of Bondi’s responses.
“I would remind the committee that last Congress, Secretary [Alejandro] Mayorkas was here numerous times and he wouldn’t answer our [Republicans] questions even when we sent them to him ahead of time, in writing. So … I think the Attorney General is doing just fine.” Jordan responded to the heckler.
In contrast, several Republican members later yielded their allotted questioning time to Bondi, allowing her to respond at length without the threat of interruption. Democrats framed their questioning around claims that Bondi is weaponizing federal law enforcement against political opponents and shielding information related to the Epstein investigation. Bondi rejected those premises outright, accusing committee Democrats of mischaracterizing DOJ actions and prioritizing spectacle over substance.
The confrontation underscored the increasingly hostile dynamic between Democratic leadership on the committee and the Trump administration’s Justice Department. Rather than producing detailed policy discussion, the hearing instead showcased the deep partisan divide and an increasingly combative oversight process.
“The American people are smarter than that,” Bondi said. “And they see through their theatrics.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi Testifies In House Hearing

Pam Bondi Scraps With ‘Washed Up Loser Lawyer’ Raskin, Other Dems During Heated House Hearing

Pam Bondi Scraps With 'Washed Up Loser Lawyer' Raskin, Other Dems During Heated House Hearing

Epstein Files

House Judiciary Committee

Jeffrey Epstein

Pam Bondi

President Donald Trump issued a <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/02/unleashing-american-commercial-fishing-in-the-atlantic/?email=467cb6399cb7df64551775e431052b43a775c749&amp;emaila=12a6d4d069cd56cfddaa391c24eb7042&amp;emailb=054528e7403871c79f668e49dd3c44b1ec00c7f611bf9388f76bb2324d6ca5f3&amp;utm_source=Sailthru&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=02.09.25%20%E2%80%94%20Energy%20%26%20Environment%20--%20RF">proclamation</a> last week reopening the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument to commercial fishing, reversing restrictions first imposed by former President Barack Obama.
The monument, located roughly 130 miles southeast of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, spans nearly 5,000 square miles of Atlantic Ocean and includes deep-sea canyons and extinct volcanic seamounts that host a wide range of marine life, including whales, dolphins, sea turtles, seabirds, fish, and ancient coral species.
“A prohibition on commercial fishing is not, at this time, necessary for the proper care and management of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument,” Trump wrote in the proclamation on Friday.
Obama <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/09/15/watch-president-obama-creates-first-marine-national-monument-atlantic-ocean">designated</a> the monument in 2016 under the Antiquities Act, arguing that its undersea features and ecosystems required permanent protection from extractive activities amid concerns over climate change. During his first term, Trump lifted the fishing ban in 2020, only for Biden to reinstate it in 2021, citing potential harm to the monument.
In the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2026/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-unleashes-commercial-fishing-in-the-atlantic/">new proclamation</a>, Trump argues that existing federal law already provides extensive environmental safeguards and that a blanket fishing ban is unnecessary. He points specifically to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which regulates commercial fishing through regional councils using scientific assessments and conservation requirements.
“All of the fish species described in Proclamation 9496 are subject to Federal protections under existing laws,” Trump wrote, noting that many species found in the monument are highly migratory and not unique to the area. He also cited additional statutes, including the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Clean Water Act, and National Marine Sanctuaries Act, as evidence that marine ecosystems remain protected even without a fishing prohibition.
Trump’s proclamation formally revokes Biden’s 2021 order and restores the monument’s management to the framework Trump established in 2020, which allows regulated commercial fishing within its boundaries.
Environmental groups and Democratic lawmakers quickly condemned the move, calling it unlawful and dangerous to marine ecosystems. Critics argue the monument represents one of the most biologically significant and heavily protected marine areas in U.S. waters, encompassing underwater canyons deeper than the Grand Canyon and coral formations thousands of years old.
“This hugely misguided executive action would recklessly roll back protections for a marine monument we’ve worked hard to protect,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT). “This natural treasure should be preserved for future generations, not endangered by industrial fishing.”
The proclamation follows a broader push by the Trump administration to loosen restrictions on marine monuments. In April 2025, Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to review all existing marine national monuments with an eye toward reopening them to commercial fishing. On the same day, he <a href="https://oceanographicmagazine.com/news/trump-opens-vast-atlantic-marine-monument-for-commercial-fishing/">issued</a> a separate proclamation reopening large portions of the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument.
A federal court later blocked commercial fishing in the Pacific monument, ruling that the administration failed to follow required legal procedures, a decision conservation groups say could foreshadow similar challenges to the Atlantic proclamation.
“This latest attempt to undermine the monument is not only unlawful, but demonstrates a blatant disregard for the health of our oceans,” said Erica Fuller of the Conservation Law Foundation. “We’ve fought this battle before, and we’re prepared to do so again.”
The dispute ultimately reflects a deeper ideological divide over environmental policy. Trump’s proclamation frames the issue not as a rejection of conservation, but as a rejection of an environmentalist approach that treats human activity as incompatible with nature. Rather than imposing permanent prohibitions, the administration argues that conservation is best achieved through management, science-based regulation, and responsible use. As legal challenges loom, the fight over the monument may become a test case for whether conservation policy prioritizes stewardship or exclusion.

Fishing In Alaska, United States –

Another Win For Fishermen After Trump Rolls Back Obama Fishing Limits

Barack Obama

Donald Trump

Environment

Executive

new england

A coalition of state attorneys general led by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier is warning major corporations that participating in coordinated “plastics sustainability” initiatives could expose them to serious antitrust and consumer protection liability, according to a <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eCxmUDluD7iaEOb6c9qOFvmbrXw03vW9/view">letter</a> obtained by The Daily Wire.
The letter, sent Tuesday, targeted 78 companies affiliated with several prominent plastics and packaging advocacy groups, including Amazon, Lego, Intel, and Microsoft. The attorneys general argue that collective commitments to eliminate products, reduce packaging options, or alter product quality may unlawfully restrain trade by limiting output and bypassing normal market competition.
The warning focuses on companies involved with the U.S. Plastics Pact, the Consumer Goods Forum, and the Sustainable Packaging Coalition. These organizations promote industry-wide targets aimed at reducing or eliminating certain plastic products and mandating recyclability and content standards. According to the attorneys general, those targets are not simply aspirational—they function as coordinated pressure campaigns that can distort markets and harm consumers.
This letter follows earlier warnings sent directly to the advocacy groups in October, escalating scrutiny from the organizational level to individual company participation.
The attorneys general warn that companies that continue to adhere to or enforce these policies may face enforcement under the Sherman Antitrust Act, as well as state and federal consumer protection laws. The letter emphasizes that membership in an industry association does not shield companies from liability if their conduct results in reduced output, degraded product quality, or higher prices.
Collective action lies at the heart of the concern. The advocacy groups themselves have acknowledged that their goals cannot be achieved through individual corporate decisions alone, but require coordinated commitments across competing firms—a hallmark of the kind of conduct antitrust laws are designed to prevent.
The letter draws on legal <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/attorneys-general-warn-financial-institutions-of-antitrust-violations-over-climate-activism">scrutiny</a> of so-called “net-zero alliances”—industry groups that coordinated commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions—as a cautionary example. In those cases, state attorneys general raised antitrust, fiduciary, and consumer protection concerns because competitors aligned on output-related targets and standards instead of competing independently. Some companies responded by withdrawing from the alliances, causing the initiatives to dissolve or weaken without full enforcement actions.
The attorneys general argue this history is instructive because the plastics advocacy groups at issue rely on similar coordinated commitments across multiple companies, which can produce the same anti-competitive effects antitrust law seeks to prevent.
The letter also cites a recent federal court ruling allowing antitrust and consumer protection claims against BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street to proceed. The court found that allegations of coordinated climate commitments leading to reduced output and market manipulation could support legal claims. The attorneys general contend that this precedent directly applies to plastics initiatives.
The letter stresses that environmental or social intentions do not exempt companies from antitrust law. Even for public-interest reasons, courts have consistently held that agreements to restrict output or reduce quality remain illegal. As the attorneys general note, no legal exception allows companies to collude to “protect consumers from their own choices.”
Beyond antitrust concerns, the attorneys general warn that companies may mislead consumers if they promote sustainability targets that are unrealistic, artificially imposed, or unlikely to be met—particularly if they fail to disclose the costs, tradeoffs, or feasibility of those commitments.
Attorney General Uthmeier framed the warning as a response to ideological pressure on corporations. “Multiple advocacy organizations have pressured companies into artificially changing the output and quality of their goods and services in ways that normal market forces would not otherwise bring about,” Uthmeier said. “Advocacy for a particular agenda is not a basis to mislead consumers.”
Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, compared the plastics initiatives to ESG-driven net-zero alliances. “When corporations coordinate through advocacy groups to restrict products, degrade quality, or manipulate markets outside normal competitive forces, that raises serious antitrust and consumer protection concerns,” Isaac said. “Coordinated pressure to eliminate products or reduce quality without regard to consumer demand is not sustainability—it is cartel-like behavior dressed up in advocacy language.”
Will Hild, Executive Director of Consumers’ Research, framed the letter as broader pushback against ESG-driven coordination. “State Attorneys General are sending a clear message to corporate America: you cannot collude with woke activists to push a political agenda and expect to escape scrutiny,” Hild said. “These plastics initiatives are not about serving consumers; they are about quietly eliminating products, reducing quality, and driving up costs.”
The attorneys general now demand that companies explain the legal basis for continued participation in these initiatives and provide documents showing why their conduct does not violate antitrust or consumer protection laws. The letter warns that failure to respond could trigger subpoenas or other compulsory legal action.
Requests for comment sent to Amazon, Intel, Lego, and Microsoft were not returned before publication.

US-NEWS-FLA-AG-TRUMP-ENDORSEMENT-OS

State AGs Tell Companies Their Sustainability Pacts Violate Antitrust Laws

Antitrust

Economy

Environmentalism

James Uthmeier

U.S.

Controversial live-streamer Clavicular could be facing years in prison following an arrest on drug and forgery charges.
The streamer, whose real name is Braden Peters, was <a href="https://ktar.com/arizona-news/clavicular-arrested-scottsdale/5819599/">taken</a> into custody on February 7 in Scottsdale, Arizona. Peters, 20, was later charged with multiple offenses, including two felony counts, according to court records reviewed online.
During an initial court appearance, which was <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVWl-gK9y4Y">streamed</a> on Peters’ Kick channel by a friend who was present at the time, a judge determined there was probable cause to proceed on all charges. The hearing quickly circulated on social media as viewers watched the legal proceedings unfold in real time.
Court documents show Peters was booked on two Class 4 felony counts: possession of a forged instrument and possession or use of a dangerous drug. He also faces a Class 1 misdemeanor charge for a minor using false identification to gain entry into a liquor establishment.
At the hearing, Peters’ attorney challenged the forgery charge, arguing it failed to meet the legal threshold required under Arizona law. Defense counsel asserted that the statute requires intent to defraud, and claimed the alleged fake identification was merely discovered during questioning, not actively used to deceive anyone.
The defense also questioned the legitimacy of the search that allegedly led to the drug charge, arguing there was insufficient justification and that employees at the venue never claimed Peters presented false identification. Counsel further suggested Peters was acting as a promoter at the location, a claim they argued undermined the state’s case.
Despite those objections, the judge ruled that the circumstances surrounding the arrest were sufficient to establish probable cause on all counts. A status conference has been scheduled for February 23 at 8:30 a.m., with a preliminary hearing set for February 26 at the same time.
If convicted, Peters could face substantial prison time. Under Arizona law, a Class 4 felony carries a maximum sentence of 3.75 years for a first-time, non-dangerous offender. The misdemeanor charge carries a potential sentence of up to six months in jail, along with fines that can reach $2,500.
Should the court impose the felony sentences consecutively, Peters’ total prison time could reach 7.5 years, placing his maximum possible sentence near eight years, with the addition of any time imposed for the misdemeanor. If the sentences are instead ordered to run concurrently, the maximum prison term would be significantly lower.
Peters has built an online following around extreme physical discipline and self-improvement content — not all of it traditional. He has previously acknowledged a history of drug use, including admitting to methamphetamine use.
During an <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8qj9RNA938">interview</a> with Daily Wire host Michael Knowles, Peters said, &#8220;I do meth, yeah. Meth is very similar to &#8230; Adderall, but it&#8217;s got a little bit better psychoactive benefits &#8230; stimulants cause appetite suppression.&#8221; When pressed on why he was doing meth despite its negative effects, he replied, &#8220;I have enough willpower to be able to taper off of meth.&#8221;
Clavicular also drew public backlash last month for viral clips in which he and a circle of controversial online figures — including Nick Fuentes, Andrew and Tristan Tate, Justin Waller, and streamer Sneako — participated in live-streamed partying, which included the playing of a Ye song that has been widely condemned for its antisemitic lyrics.
He previously drew national attention in December after appearing to run over a supposed “stalker” with his Tesla Cybertruck during a livestream. Authorities later declined to file charges in that incident, though the platform temporarily banned his account.
This most recent bump against the law only adds to the deeply online saga surrounding the controversial streamer, whose career, if he&#8217;s convicted, may come to an abrupt, and lengthy, pause.

Clavicular

Cortisol Spike: Controversial Streamer Clavicular Arrested, Faces Two Felony Charges

Arizona

Courts

Crime

Drugs

New Hampshire lawmakers are reversing a decision made in the emotional aftermath of the Parkland school shooting, advancing legislation that would prevent public colleges from banning lawful weapons on campus — a move Republicans argue restores constitutional rights unfairly stripped from young adults.
On Thursday, the New Hampshire House voted 188–165 to advance House Bill 1793. The legislation would prohibit publicly funded colleges and universities from restricting the lawful possession or use of weapons, including firearms and non-lethal self-defense tools such as tasers and pepper spray. The bill will now be reviewed for any fiscal impact before moving to the Senate.
The vote marks a sharp departure from 2018, when a bipartisan coalition rejected a campus carry proposal amid heightened national concern over gun violence following the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
State Representative Sam Farrington (R–NH), who is also a current University of New Hampshire student, led the charge and framed the issue as one of equal protection and fundamental rights. Farrington argued that the right to self-defense does not disappear simply because someone steps onto a college campus. “College students are adults,” Farrington said during the debate. “They are entitled to the same protections under the law as every other citizen in New Hampshire.”
New Hampshire allows both open and concealed carry without a permit, but has historically left decisions about campus weapon policies to individual institutions. The bill passed on Thursday would remove that discretion for public colleges, ensuring legality as expansive as the broader state itself.
Representative Farrington rejected arguments that college students are uniquely unfit to exercise their Second Amendment rights, noting that many are already trusted with the most serious of civic responsibilities. “If we’re told students are too immature or irresponsible to carry a firearm,” he said, “how do we justify allowing them to vote — or to fight and die in foreign wars?”
Democrats warned that allowing weapons on campuses would make students and faculty less safe, particularly in close quarters like dormitories and classrooms. Representative David Meuse (D–NH) argued that campus carry restrictions are location-based, not age-based, and apply equally to students, staff, and visitors. “These rules aren’t about who you are,” Meuse said. “They’re about where you are.”
Republicans countered that such reasoning creates gun-free zones that leave law-abiding citizens defenseless while doing nothing to deter criminals. Farrington emphasized that self-defense is not a government-granted privilege, but a natural right.
“Natural rights are not given by governments,” he said. “They are granted by God alone.”
Supporters of the bill also pointed to evidence from other states. There are currently 11 states that allow campus carry, and Republicans argued that dire predictions of increased violence have not materialized. Representative Jennifer Rhodes (R-NH) dismissed claims that the policy would make campuses more dangerous, saying states that have adopted campus carry have seen no corresponding rise in violent crime.
If approved by the Senate, which favors the GOP 16-8, the legislation would mark a decisive reversal from New Hampshire’s post-Parkland hesitation on campus carry, and a clear statement from Republican lawmakers that constitutional rights follow citizens wherever they lawfully go, including public college campuses.

New Hampshire State Capitol In Concord

New Hampshire Could Soon Allow Guns On College Campuses

New Hampshire House Passes Bill To Allow Guns On College Campuses

President Donald Trump fired back after several American Olympians used their respective press conferences to criticize the state of the United States under the current administration, saying their participation comes with personal moral and political considerations. 
Freestyle skier Hunter Hess said representing the United States currently “brings up mixed emotions,” explaining that he views national representation selectively. Hess said he considers himself to be representing “friends and family back home” and “the things that I believe are good about the U.S.”
“If it aligns with my moral values, I feel like I’m representing it,” Hess said.
Trump responded to Hess directly in a Truth Social post on Sunday, saying, &#8220;U.S. Olympic Skier, Hunter Hess, a real Loser, says he doesn’t represent his Country in the current Winter Olympics. If that’s the case, he shouldn’t have tried out for the Team, and it’s too bad he’s on it. Very hard to root for someone like this. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!&#8221;
Freestyle skier Chris Lillis also acknowledged discomfort with current political conditions, citing immigration enforcement and recent protests as factors shaping his perspective. “A lot of times athletes are hesitant to talk about their political views and how we feel about things,” Lillis said. “I feel heartbroken about what’s happened in the United States,” in reference to ICE and border enforcement efforts.
Lillis said he hopes the country can better reflect values he believes should define the United States. “I think as a country we need to focus on respecting everybody’s rights, making sure that we’re treating our citizens, as well as anybody, with love and respect,” he said. “That’s the America we’re trying to represent.”
The remarks, made by athletes across multiple sports, highlight a broader tension between individual political views and the traditional role of Olympic competitors as representatives of the nation as a whole.
Political messaging surrounding the Olympics has also come from figures outside the current U.S. team. Gus Kenworthy, a U.S. and U.K. dual citizen who previously competed for the United States but is representing Great Britain this year, posted a photo on social media showing the phrase “f*** ICE” written in urine in the snow.
The caption accompanying the post included a script for Americans to use when calling elected officials, urging them to end funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Border Patrol. Kenworthy was not disciplined by either the International Olympic Committee or the British Olympic Association.
Figure skater Amber Glenn also addressed the issue, framing her Olympic platform as an opportunity to speak out on political and social concerns, particularly those affecting the LGBT community. “It isn’t the first time we’ve had to come together as a community and fight for our human rights,” Glenn said.
She added that policies under the Trump administration are “not just affecting the queer community but many other communities,” and said she hopes to use her visibility to encourage others. “I hope I can use my platform to encourage people to stay strong in these hard times,” Glenn said.
Glenn also addressed criticism directed at athletes who speak publicly about politics. “A lot of people will say, ‘You’re just an athlete, stick to your job, shut up about politics,’” she said. “But politics affect us all. It is not something I will just be quiet about.”
The comments have drawn attention as the Olympic Games have historically emphasized national unity, with athletes competing under their country’s flag rather than as representatives of individual political causes. U.S. Olympians traditionally serve as representatives of the entire nation during international competition, regardless of personal political views — a role that has periodically come into tension during times of domestic political division.
The U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee has not commented on the athlete statements.

U.S. Olympics

Trump Fires Back After Olympians Say They Have ‘Mixed Emotions’ Representing America

Olympics

Sports

While Super Bowl LX will feature a sweeping display of U.S. airpower over Levi’s Stadium, Air Force officials confirmed Friday that F-22 Raptor fighters originally slated to participate were reassigned to operational missions as military demands intensified. The Raptors’ removal underscores the reality that the military aircraft showcased during major national events remain on active standby, even during the most-watched sporting event of the year.
The flyover will now include Air Force B-1 Lancer bombers and F-15C Eagle fighters alongside Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets and F-35C Lightning II jets. But careful observers noticed something unusual on the commemorative flight suit patch released ahead of the event: a silhouette of the F-22 still appears.
According to the Department of the Air Force, that inclusion reflects earlier planning, not a last-minute error. Katie Spencer, the Air Force’s Sports Outreach Program manager, said planners initially sought to showcase fifth-generation fighters from both the Air Force and Navy, pairing the F-22 with the Navy’s F-35C. That plan changed as real-world requirements intervened.
“Operational tempo has increased,” Spencer said, explaining that the Raptors were reassigned to active missions before final approval of the flyover.
While officials declined to provide specifics, the decision comes amid heightened U.S. military activity across multiple theaters. American aircraft have conducted recent strikes against ISIS targets in Syria, and F-22s played a critical role last year in Operation Midnight Hammer, the B-2 bomber-led campaign against Iranian nuclear facilities. The F-22 also participated in Operation Absolute Resolve in Venezuela, establishing U.S. dominance in the airspace over Caracas.
Even without the Raptors, Sunday’s flyover is designed to project both scale and symbolism. The B-1 Lancer, a long-range bomber capable of delivering massive conventional firepower, will lead the formation, flanked by fighters representing multiple generations of U.S. air dominance.
F-15C Eagles from California’s Fresno Air National Guard Base were added late in the planning process to complete the formation, filling the gap left by the F-22s. Planners said the choice reflects the broader theme of the event: marking the nation’s upcoming 250th anniversary with a display that blends heritage, readiness, and modern capability.
Officials also emphasized that Super Bowl flyovers do not require additional taxpayer funding. The flights are conducted as part of scheduled training, allowing aircrews to practice precise timing, coordination, and maintenance recovery under real-world conditions.
“These flyovers serve as time-over-target training,” Spencer said, noting that the same proficiency displayed during major combat operations is built through exercises like Sunday’s formation flight.
On the field, a joint color guard from the Military District of Washington, drawing members from every branch of the armed forces, will render ceremonial honors before kickoff. With Levi’s Stadium’s open-air design allowing for a larger-than-normal formation, officials said fans can expect a visceral experience, despite the omission of the fifth-generation fighter.
 “They’re going to hear something special,” Spencer said. “They’re going to feel it.”
The Seattle Seahawks and New England Patriots face off Sunday at 6:30 p.m. ET.

F-22

F-22s Pulled From Super Bowl Flyover, Rerouted At the Last Moment For ‘Operational Assignments’

Air Force

General

Military

Super Bowl

U.S. Military

Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) is warning Democrats that the same anti-law-enforcement instincts that fueled the post-George Floyd unrest are now being repackaged as immigration policy, as violent protests erupt once again in Minneapolis.
In a Fox News op-ed published Friday, Kennedy argued that Democratic officials who once flirted with defunding the police are now applying the same playbook to immigration enforcement, dismissing federal agents as racists, undermining the rule of law, and inviting chaos in the process. “As I’ve watched the protests in Minneapolis, it seems obvious to me that America is at risk of falling face-first into another disastrous anti-law enforcement crisis,” Kennedy wrote. 
The Louisiana Republican framed the unrest as a familiar pattern: leftist activists seize on a crisis, demonize law enforcement, and pressure Democratic officials to stand down rather than restore order. According to Kennedy, the results are always the same. 
“There are some people in this world who enjoy hurting other people and taking other people’s stuff,” he wrote. “They’re not sick. They’re not confused. They’re not mixed up. … They’re just antisocial.”
Kennedy argued that the “defund the police” movement exploited a handful of high-profile misconduct cases to push what he called a fundamentally dishonest narrative, that law enforcement officers are worse than criminals and should be replaced with social workers.
Before Floyd died in 2020, Kennedy said, such ideas were fringe, embraced primarily by radical academics and leftist activists. But Democratic leaders in Minnesota, including Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, ultimately chose to appease what Kennedy mockingly labeled the party’s “Karen wing” rather than enforce the law. “They let rioters seek revenge on law enforcement, stood by as police precincts burned and sat in silence as activists defamed the countless good cops who kept their cities safe,” he <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/sen-john-kennedy-democrats-defund-the-police-plan-failed-here-go-again">wrote</a>.
The consequences, Kennedy argued, were measurable and severe. In the wake of the Floyd riots, commercial burglaries surged by 43%, carjackings jumped 93%, and murders rose 44%, according to crime data cited in the op-ed.
Even years later, Kennedy noted, police departments have struggled to recover from the damage. Nationwide, departments remain understaffed compared to pre-2020 levels. In Minneapolis, the police force is still roughly one-third smaller than it was before Floyd’s death, despite ongoing recruitment efforts.
“Maintaining a strong police force is not a light switch you can flick on and off as the woke mob demands,” Kennedy wrote, arguing that years of demoralization drove officers out of the profession altogether.
Now, Kennedy says Democrats appear poised to repeat the same mistake, this time targeting immigration enforcement instead of local police. As federal agents move to enforce immigration laws in Minnesota, leftist activists and Democratic officials have accused ICE and Border Patrol agents of racism and “white supremacy,” rhetoric Kennedy argues is designed to delegitimize enforcement entirely. 
“Instead of arguing that cops are a bigger problem than criminals,” Kennedy wrote, “Walz and Frey have joined the Karen wing of the Democratic Party to say that enforcing immigration laws is racist and vetting migrants is a form of White supremacy.” 
Kennedy warned that activists are once again exploiting unrest in Minneapolis to pressure Congress into defunding federal law enforcement agencies, including ICE and the Border Patrol, a move he argues would repeat the same disastrous errors of the defund-the-police era.
The senator’s warning comes as Democrats increasingly frame immigration enforcement as a civil rights issue, even as violent protests and property damage accompany demonstrations against federal agents in major cities.
Democrats across the country have increasingly made immigration enforcement and reform of ICE a central part of their 2026 policy agenda, particularly in the wake of two fatal shootings of leftist protesters in Minneapolis by federal immigration agents. Party leaders in Congress, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), have tied their support for funding the Department of Homeland Security to a sweeping set of proposed changes aimed at “rein[ing] in ICE,” including requiring body cameras and visible ID for agents, restricting arrests without judicial warrants, banning enforcement near sensitive locations like schools and hospitals, and instituting uniform use-of-force standards. 
Leftist members of Congress and activists have pushed even further, with some calling for abolishing the agency outright or defunding it entirely, arguing ICE has become “beyond repair,” while Democratic strategists warn that hardline abolition language could complicate efforts to build broader support for more moderate reforms. 
For Kennedy, the lesson of the last five years is clear: undermining law enforcement does not produce justice or safety; it creates disorder. “If anyone should recognize the deep-dish stupidity of the defund-the-police movement,” he wrote, “it should be the officials who watched their cities burn the first time.”

Sen. Cotton Holds Capitol Hill Press Conference To Discuss Ongoing College Campus Protests

Sen. Kennedy Slams ‘Karen Wing’ Of The Democratic Party Over Defund ICE Rhetoric

Congress

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

John Kennedy

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Thursday highlighted new crime statistics showing a historic drop in violent crime nationwide, arguing the data vindicates President Donald Trump’s law-and-order agenda just one year into his return to office.
Citing figures compiled by the Council on Criminal Justice, Leavitt said the national murder rate fell in 2025 to its lowest level since 1900, a decline she credited to expanded federal law enforcement activity, border security, and the administration’s focus on removing violent criminal illegal aliens from American communities.
“This dramatic decline is what happens when a president secures the border, fully mobilizes federal law enforcement to arrest violent criminals, and aggressively deports the worst of the worst illegal aliens from our country,” Leavitt said during Thursday’s press briefing. “The numbers don’t lie.”
Leavitt pointed to a sharp increase in federal arrests under the Trump administration, saying the FBI doubled its violent crime arrests in 2025 compared to the previous year. She said more than 67,000 arrests have been made since Trump’s inauguration, which the administration says represents a 197% increase over the same time period under the Biden administration.
According to Leavitt, the FBI has also significantly expanded its operations against organized crime, disrupting 1,800 gangs and criminal enterprises nationwide, a 210% increase from the year prior. “The FBI has arrested 1,700 child predators and more than 300 human traffickers across the country,” Leavitt said. “Since President Trump took office, six of the FBI’s Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitives have been captured right here in our nation’s capital.”
Leavitt further highlighted crime reductions in Washington, D.C., following Trump’s decision last summer to nationalize the city’s police force and deploy hundreds of federal agents and National Guard troops to the district. While the move drew fierce criticism from Democrats and civil liberties groups at the time, the administration now says the results speak for themselves.
“As of last week, D.C. homicides were down 62%,” Leavitt said. She added that motor vehicle theft had dropped by 53% and that 2025 recorded the fewest violent gun crimes of any year in available data for the nation’s capital. More than 2,000 arrests have been made since the federal takeover, Leavitt said, noting that National Guard members remain deployed in the city as part of the administration’s continued crime suppression efforts.
The Trump administration has pursued similar enforcement strategies in other major cities, including Memphis, Tennessee, where federal agents and National Guard troops were deployed with the support of state and local officials.
Leavitt said nearly 5,600 arrests have been made in Memphis since the deployment began. “As of last week, aggravated assaults are down 53%, sexual assaults are down 53%, and robberies are down 70%,” she said.
Leavitt framed the administration’s broader crime strategy as inseparable from its immigration enforcement priorities, emphasizing the removal of criminal illegal aliens as a central pillar of public safety policy. The administration has repeatedly described its enforcement focus as targeting “the worst of the worst” offenders, deploying federal resources to cities where local leadership has struggled to contain violent crime.
While Democrats have accused Trump of overreach and politicizing federal law enforcement, the White House has leaned heavily into the crime statistics as evidence that its approach is working, particularly in cities long governed by left-wing leadership. Leavitt said the administration intends to continue expanding federal law enforcement operations in high-crime areas. 
“This is what tough, unapologetic law enforcement looks like,” she said. “And it’s saving lives.”
&nbsp;

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavit Holds Press Briefing At The White House

Leavitt Highlights Historic Crime Decline As Murder Rate Hits Lowest Level Since 1900

Karoline Leavitt

Trump Administration

Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) is refusing to comply with a Justice Department investigation into a video she helped organize that urged U.S. service members to resist what she described as “illegal orders,” escalating a standoff with federal prosecutors.
Slotkin said this week she will not sit for a voluntary interview with investigators, saying in a <a href="https://x.com/SenatorSlotkin/status/2019474013307715592">statement</a> on X Thursday, “I’m not gonna be sitting for this inquiry. I’m not gonna legitimize their actions,” even as her legal team prepares for what it says could become litigation against the Justice Department.
Slotkin’s attorney informed U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro that the senator would decline a voluntary interview and requested that the office preserve documents for “anticipated litigation,” in letters first obtained by the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/slotkin-illegal-orders-video-justice-department-interview-06b6c041b158b2ed5911c52a16868764">Associated Press</a>. A separate letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi urged her to immediately terminate the inquiry and reject an FBI interview request.
The investigation stems from a video Slotkin released last year alongside five other Democratic lawmakers, all with prior military or intelligence experience, urging active-duty service members to refuse orders they believe to be unlawful. Republicans criticized the video as reckless and potentially encouraging insubordination, while President Donald Trump publicly accused the lawmakers of sedition.
Slotkin has sought to reframe the video as a civics lesson rather than a call to disobedience, insisting it was meant only to remind troops of their duty to reject illegal commands. But she has simultaneously accused federal authorities of attempting to silence her through intimidation.
“They are purposely using physical and legal intimidation to get me to shut up,” Slotkin said. “But more importantly, they’re using that intimidation to deter others from speaking out against their administration.”
Slotkin further warned officials at the Justice Department that while recent Supreme Court rulings have expanded presidential immunity, those protections do not extend to officials enforcing the law on the president’s behalf.
 “The Supreme Court may have given the president near-immunity on most matters,” she said, “but they’ve given no such immunity to those doing his bidding.”
The Justice Department’s requests have so far been voluntary, placing the burden on prosecutors to decide whether to escalate the inquiry by issuing subpoenas to sitting members of Congress. Asked whether she would comply if subpoenaed, Slotkin paused before responding, saying only that she would “take a hard look at it.”
Slotkin has portrayed the investigation as part of a broader campaign of intimidation, citing threats against her family and property following renewed attention to the video. “If they can do this to a sitting senator,” she said, “just imagine what they could do to a community leader, a business leader, or a mom who goes viral on the internet.”
The dispute has also raised questions about accountability for lawmakers who invoke military authority in partisan messaging, even as Slotkin positions herself as a victim of political overreach. The Pentagon has separately investigated Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ), another participant in the video, while Kelly has sued over efforts to discipline him.
Slotkin, a former CIA analyst and three-term House member before winning her Senate seat in 2024, has increasingly leaned into confrontation with the Trump administration. She has publicly urged Democrats to abandon restraint, “I&#8216;m from the Midwest and for us, leaders like our coaches are just — they have got some alpha energy to them,” Slotkin said when asked how she’d fix Democratic messaging in 2025. 
Her push to bring “alpha energy” back to the party has coincided with a divisive start to her Senate tenure. “I did this to go on offense,” Slotkin said of her refusal to cooperate. “To put them in a position where they have to own their choices.”
Whether that strategy forces the Justice Department to retreat now rests with federal prosecutors weighing how far to press an investigation into members of Congress who are openly daring them to act.

Elissa Slotkin

Dem Senator Thumbs Her Nose At DOJ, Rejects Call To Answer For ‘Illegal Orders’ Video

Dem Senator Refuses To Comply With DOJ Investigation On 'Illegal Orders' Video

First Amendment

Jeanine Pirro

Mark Kelly

New Hampshire Republicans have opened a nearly 50,000-voter registration advantage over Democrats as the Granite State heads toward the 2026 midterms, a shift that could reshape historically fluid federal and statewide races, even as the state’s electorate keeps a blue streak in national contests. 
New data from the state’s Secretary of State shows Republican enrollment topping 315,685 voters compared with 266,413 registered Democrats, giving the GOP a sizable edge heading into a series of tightly contested elections. While the numbers signal momentum for the GOP, New Hampshire’s electoral identity remains nuanced. The state has voted for the Democratic nominee in every presidential contest since 2004, including the 2024 race, in which Vice President Kamala Harris carried the state even as Republicans strengthened their control of the governorship and state legislature. 
Most striking is the size of the undeclared bloc. Nearly 375,000 Granite Staters lack formal party affiliation, outnumbering both major parties and allowing them to participate in either primary under New Hampshire’s semi-open system. Those voters have helped shape split outcomes in recent cycles, breaking for Democrats in federal contests and for Republicans down-ballot. 
The current registration gap is the product of a longer post-COVID trend. Since 2021, Republican enrollment in New Hampshire has steadily climbed, accelerating after the 2022 and 2024 election cycles, while Democratic registration has largely stagnated or declined modestly. State data shows Republicans have added more than 45,000 voters since late 2023 alone, while Democratic numbers have remained relatively flat over the same period. The growth has come largely at the expense of undeclared and inactive voters re-registering with the GOP, reflecting broader national shifts in party alignment following pandemic-era politics and cultural debates.
Republican strategists argue that a growing registration lead is more than cosmetic. In a 2025 briefing after the announced retirement of Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the National Republican Senatorial Committee released a briefing on the chances of the future Senate race: “New Hampshire demonstrates a favorable political environment for Republicans in this toss-up Senate race. With a registration advantage, an edge on the generic ballot… Republicans are well positioned to flip this open Senate seat in New Hampshire regardless of who either party nominates.”
Democrats are not ignoring the trend: national party leaders have launched an ambitious voter registration drive to counter Republican gains in key states, acknowledging that shifts in party enrollment have eroded Democratic ground in recent cycles. Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said large-scale registration efforts are needed to “chip away” at GOP advantages ahead of 2026. 
The implications of a GOP registration edge extend beyond registration rolls into competitive races. With Shaheen retiring, the open Senate seat is a high-profile target for Republicans. How Republicans and Democrats capitalize on voter-file shifts, mobilize independents, and generate turnout could ultimately decide not only the Senate contest but control of the state House and other federal seats.
New Hampshire’s electoral landscape remains uneven and hard to predict; a voter registration advantage for the GOP and firm Republican control at the state level, yet a history of Democratic success in federal contests and a sizable undeclared voting bloc. The coming months — from primaries through the midterms — should be a good test of whether party registration is a viable predictor of purple state tendencies going forward.

Welcome to New Hampshire Sign

Red New Hampshire? GOP Registration Eclipses Dems By Nearly 50K

Elections

New Hampshire

Menu

Drew Berkemeyer