Home Blog

‘Twice as Contagious’ Delta Variant Emerged In India Less Than a Month After Pfizer Announced COVID-Related Monkey Research—Pfizer HQ’d in Mumbai

  • Undercover video released Wednesday by Project Veritas shows Pfizer executive Dr. Jordon Walker—a medical doctor who graduated from Yale and UT Southwestern—claiming that his company was exploring ways to “mutate” coronavirus via “directed evolution.”
  • Dr. Walker revealed Pfizer scientists were “optimizing” the virus’ mutation process by putting “the virus in monkeys” and worried about potential outbreaks.
  • Pfizer announced back in September 2020 that it was conducting COVID-19-related studies with macaque monkeys.
  • Less than a month later, the Delta variant of the virus was discovered in India, where Pfizer has been operating since 1950 (Mumbai).
  • The Delta variant is “twice as contagious” as initial COVID variants and more likely to “put infected people in the hospital.”
  • Delta was first discovered in Maharashtra, India, the state in which Mumbai is located.

A new video released by Project Veritas on Wednesday showed Pfizer Inc. executive Dr. Jordon Trishton Walker claiming that his company had been exploring ways to “mutate” the coronavirus via “directed evolution.” He revealed that Pfizer scientists had been “optimizing” the virus’ mutation process by putting “the virus in monkeys” and worried about potential outbreaks.

Dr. Walker graduated from Yale and the University of Texas Southwestern medical school, according to Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe.

“We can do these selected structure mutations to make [coronaviruses] more potent,” the Pfizer executive said. “There is research ongoing about that. I don’t know how that is going to work. There better not be any more outbreaks because Jesus Christ.”

Pfizer announced it was conducting COVID-19-related studies with macaque monkeys in a press release published on September 9, 2020. And the first case of Delta, a variant of SARS-CoV-2, was discovered in India—where Pfizer has been operating for over half a century—on October 5, 2020, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), less than a month after Pfizer announced its COVID-related monkey research.

Pfizer has worked in India since 1950, its operations comprising “three manufacturing plants, two R&D centers and six regional centers for commercial operations and global support functions,” according to the company webpage. The pharmaceutical company represents “the fourth largest multinational pharmaceutical company in India.” Its headquarters are located in densely populated Mumbai, India’s largest city, on the country’s west coast.

The Delta variant was first discovered in Maharashtra, India, the state where Mumbai is located.

“B.1.617.2, a variant of Covid-19 is known as the Delta variant. It was first identified in October 2020 in India, and was primarily responsible for the second wave in the country, today accounting for over 80 percent of new Covid-19 cases,” said Dr. NK Arora, co-chair of the Indian SARS-CoV-2 Genomics Consortium (INSACOG), according to The Hindustan Times. “It emerged in Maharashtra and traveled northwards along the western states of the country before entering the central and the eastern states.”

The Delta variant was determined to be “twice as contagious” as initial COVID variants and more likely to “put infected people in the hospital,” an outcome echoing what Pfizer’s Dr. Walker admitted about his company mutating and optimizing coronavirus to be “more potent.” Yale Medicine says Delta was “more than twice as contagious as previous variants” and that “studies have shown it to be more likely than the original virus to put infected people in the hospital.”

“Does this undercover video mean that Pfizer has been using macaque monkeys in directed man-made mutagenic experiments?” asked Dr. Richard Bartlett, a 30-year medical practitioner and former appointee to then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s Health Disparities Task Force. “I also think it’s interesting that Pfizer has been in India since 1950 and that the first significant COVID variant, the Delta variant, appeared in India.”

“Dr. Walker has been working on the inside at Pfizer for a long time. Do his statements connect the dots between rapidly appearing mutations and a pharmaceutical company that is not only conducting directed mutations research but also providing the solution of a vaccine?”

Since at least 2019, the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) has invested tens of millions of dollars in COVID-related research involving macaques.

American Faith Scores Spot on NY Times Square Billboard: 1500 Broadway

Ad expected to receive 340,000 views per day.

QUICK FACTS:
  • Conservative news organization American Faith secured a billboard advertisement in New York’s Times Square that went live June 1, 2022 at 6 am.
  • The billboard is located at the heart of the Theater District in Midtown Manhattan at the 1500 Broadway skyscraper, sitting just above the world-renowned New York Police Department. The skyscraper’s tenants include ABC Studios, Disney, NASDAQ, Starbucks, Essence Magazine, and the China Daily newspaper.
  • American Faith’s ad will run 2 weeks per month across June, July, and August at a rate of 100 times per day.
  • It is estimated that the ad will be viewed by 340,000 people per day.
AmericanFaith.com billboard ad in Times Square, New York
AmericanFaith.com billboard ad in Times Square, New York
AmericanFaith.com billboard ad in Times Square, New York
AmericanFaith.com billboard ad in Times Square, New York
AmericanFaith.com billboard ad in Times Square, New York
AmericanFaith.com billboard ad in Times Square, New York
WATCH THE BILLBOARD DISPLAY AMERICAN FAITH’S AD:
BACKGROUND:
  • American Faith, a non-profit national news media network, provides uncensored news reported from a traditional Judeo-Christian worldview.
  • Phil Hotsenpiller, Biblical prophecy expert and Senior Pastor of Influence Church in Anaheim Hills, California announced the launch of American Faith in a news release published on July 15, 2021.
  • American Faith enjoys 3 million monthly views and 80,000 daily subscribers.

‘We Believe in the Christian Civilizational Foundations of Europe’: Hungary’s Orbán

“We see a growing demand for church institutions,” said Orbán.

QUICK FACTS:
  • Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán on Monday warned that Europe and Hungary have entered an “era of dangers,” after taking his fifth oath as prime minister in parliament.
  • Orbán spotlighted the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and the economy, as well as what he called the “cultural alienation [that] is growing between the western half of Europe and Hungary.”
  • Hungary’s Prime Minister said such cultural alienation between the two regions hs been brought about because his nation “believe[s] in the Christian civilizational foundations of Europe, and in the nation,” which other nations had “given up.”
  • “Everything that has happened since 2020 points in one direction: Europe and the Hungarian people in it have entered an age of danger. The decade began with the coronavirus epidemic and continued with the war. The sanctions from the war brought an economic downturn,” Orbán said. “The war and sanctions policy caused an energy crisis, and U.S. interest rate hikes brought an age of inflation.”
  • Orbán also highlighted the dangers of unmitigated immigration policy and its implications for the Christian population, saying, “All of this will bring the age of economic downturn, threatening epidemics may recur, migration may deepen and may intensify.” “Such is the program of the great European population exchange, the essence of which is to replace the missing Christian children with migrants,” Orbán went on to say. “Such an experiment is a program of gender madness and a liberal Europe that transcends nation-states and Christianity, and puts nothing in their place.”
ORBÁN SEES PATH TO SUCCESS:
  • The Hungarian Prime Minister was hopeful that Hungary could fend off Christianity’s decline by supporting churches. “It is a difficult task, but we can succeed. We can succeed because the Hungarians were carved out of hard wood, so we stubbornly resist the decline,” he said.
  • “We will provide the conditions for preaching the gospel. We see a growing demand for church institutions, and helping them will be important,” stated Orbán.
  • “Hungarians across the border can count on us, we will continue our work of national unification.”
ORBÁN SWIPES AT GEORGE SOROS:

“I shall strive to be worthy of this enormous trust, which is unprecedented in the whole of Europe,” said Orbán. “It is food for thought that we have won by the largest margin ever, at a time when all human reasoning suggested that we were also competing on the most difficult terrain. The Hungarian left and their international allies, politicians, financiers and the media all rallied against us. Let us make it clear: Brussels and George Soros were also playing to ensure our downfall. They threatened us however they could. No wonder this victory fills us with electrifying energy. My friends, there is nothing so exhilarating as to be shot at without result. We have won four times in a row, despite financial crises, a global pandemic, floods of migrants, and even a war that was – and is – threatening our country. Such a winning streak is unusual in Europe, and even in the wider Western world; and the scale of the victory is unprecedented.”

BACKGROUND:
  • Orbán was reelected as premier in the 199-seat assembly by 133 votes to 27 against.
  • The prime minister has been pursuing close ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying he would not support banning his country’s oil imports from Russia as the European Union has proposed. While speaking on state radio on May 6, Orbán said that such an embargo would drop an “atomic bomb” on Hungary’s economy.

Ep. 14 THE NEW WORLD ORDER

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (11.4MB) | Embed

Subscribe: RSS

In this episode of the Battle Ground podcast, Pastor Phil Hotsenpiller speaks on the new world order. He explains how its practices are tied to the Biden administration, the World Economic Forum (WEF), and socialism. He discusses America’s move toward digital currency and the declining value of the dollar and how it is tied to China’s success. Hotsenpiller shows proof of Biden’s move toward keeping China in power and the “need” for everyone to have “a little bit” of money. In Revelation, there is talk of these actions coming to fruition. Hotsenpiller explains how this could be tied to the mark of the beast. So listeners, keep your eyes peeled.

Levi Strauss Exec Says She Was Forced Out Over Her Views on COVID School Closures

Levi’s brand president said she was let go from the company over her stance on school closures due to COVID.

QUICK FACTS:
  • Longtime Levi Strauss & Co brand president Jennifer Sey wrote a post Monday explaining how the company forced her to leave over her opinions on COVID restrictions in schools.
  • “Early on in the pandemic, I publicly questioned whether schools had to be shut down,” Sey said. “This didn’t seem at all controversial to me. I felt — and still do — that the draconian policies would cause the most harm to those least at risk, and the burden would fall heaviest on disadvantaged kids in public schools, who need the safety and routine of school the most.”
  • Sey explained that the head of corporate communications called her in the Summer of 2020, urging her to stop speaking publicly and sharing her own personal opinions.
  • In recent weeks, Sey got the news from Levi’s CEO Charles Bergh that it was “untenable” for her to continue working for the popular clothing company, offering her a $1 million severance package, Fox Business reported.
SEY ON LEVI STRAUSS TODAY:

“I love Levi’s and its place in the American heritage as a purveyor of sturdy pants for hardworking, daring people who moved West and dreamed of gold buried in the dirt,” she said. “But the corporation doesn’t believe in that now. It’s trapped trying to please the mob — and silencing any dissent within the organization.”

BACKGROUND:
  • While stock prices doubled under her leadership, Sey was told she would not become the next CEO unless she stopped talking publicly, and shortly after, left the company without accepting the severance.
  • “In the end, no one stood with me. Not one person publicly said they agreed with me, or even that they didn’t agree with me, but supported my right to say what I believe anyway,” Sey said.
  • The culture of Levi’s has made it impossible for employees to have a voice without getting terminated, according to the former president.
  • “I like to think that many of my now-former colleagues know that this is wrong. I like to think that they stayed silent because they feared losing their standing at work or incurring the wrath of the mob,” Sey stated. “I hope, in time, they’ll acknowledge as much.”

Fmr. Ambassador: China Using One Belt One Road Initiative In Africa To Spread Authoritarianism Globally

A top diplomat under President Trump has sounded the alarm on China’s pursuit for global dominance. On Friday, former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Freedom Sam Brownback warned China is using its One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative in Africa to leverage its economic power in order to phase America out of the international stage. Brownback added U.S. lawmakers need to move fast to secure America’s position as top superpower.

China began pumping billions of dollars into Africa’s infrastructure beginning as early as the year 2000, before the Chinese Communist Party head, Xi Jingping, officially announced the initiative in 2013. The program aimed to bolster China’s relationships with several countries including Ethiopia, South Africa, Nigeria, Rwanda and Kenya.

Additionally, the CCP’s funds helped develop infrastructure projects such as transportation networks, port facilities and telecommunications infrastructure.

“They want that model of authoritarian control to expand around the world and they’re playing big in Africa. That hurts us if you get more countries going to this authoritarian model,” said Brownback. “Plus, there’s just the raw resource issue that China has been after for decades now in Africa, tying up these raw resources for their global economic dominance that they seek.”

BEIJING, CHINA - APRIL 27: Chinese President Xi Jinping gives a speech at a press conference after the Belt and Road Forum at the China National Convention Center at the Yanqi Lake venue on April 27, 2019 in Beijing, China. (Photo by Wang Zhao - Pool/Getty Images)

Chinese leaders touted the One Belt One Road initiative as a path towards establishing strong economic partnerships. However, Brownback argued China aims to exploit the region’s natural resources and lay down its authoritarian roots in the region, hoping to spread its influence throughout the world.

Experts have suggested the initiative has lost traction amid commodity prices plaguing African countries’ economies before the pandemic, and the near total halt of economic activity once COVID-19 struck their communities. Researchers say this is hindering African leaders’ abilities to pay off their debts to China.

Studies have predicted this could buy time for other superpowers to undermine China’s influence. Brownback stressed America needs to take steps to challenge China’s role in the region and promote religious, economic and personal freedom in Africa.

In the meantime, the former ambassador said he believes the American public will welcome this approach, as long as policy makers promote these ideals without acting as state builders.

Calling Natural Law ‘White Nationalism’ Is Racist, Period

Yale philosophy professor Jason Stanley either doesn’t know what natural law is or he’s espousing fundamentally racist ideas. There’s no middle ground.

A little dust-up on Twitter this week revealed something important about the ongoing debate over critical race theory and public education, and also the state of elite academia — namely, that much of what the left calls “anti-racism” is actually just regular old racism, shoddily repackaged.

Here’s what happened. An innocuous comment from Washington Examiner columnist Tim Carney, suggesting we need to teach natural law in public schools, prompted Matthew J. Peterson to reply that it’s not enough to ban critical race theory, we need to replace it with natural law. This in turn inspired Yale University philosophy professor Jason Stanley to aver (in a since-deleted tweet) that natural law is “a dogwhistle to white Christian Nationalism.”

Boy, that escalated quickly. And it didn’t stop there. The back-and-forth unleashed a string of outraged tweets about natural law, mostly from people who don’t seem to know what natural law is, confusing it for social Darwinism or some such. Stanley got some pushback for his gross mischaracterization of natural law and then complained, disingenuously, about “intentional misrepresentation” (later claiming his tweet was meant to be sarcastic) before logging off Twitter, saying, “This was a failure.”

Indeed it was, but the failure is deeper than professor Stanley is likely to admit. He wrote a book about fascism and teaches in the philosophy department of an Ivy League university, so he should know that natural law has nothing to do with white Christian nationalism. He should also know that suggesting, as Peterson did, that an education grounded in natural law is infinitely superior to one grounded is critical race theory isn’t some kind of racist dogwhistle.

Indeed, he should know that natural law stands in stark opposition to racism of any kind, because it posits that all human beings, regardless of their race or any other characteristic, have inherent rights, which can be discovered and applied through reason. Those rights arise from the fact of their humanity, not their race or religion.

As such, natural law is an antidote to racism and its various ideological offspring like white nationalism, not a cause of it. As Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas once said, “Those who deny natural law cannot get me out of slavery.”

Moreover, as a Yale philosophy professor Stanley should also know that natural law came largely from Aristotle, was later developed by Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas, and eventually became the basis for things like social contract theory, the rule of law, and representative government, culminating in our Declaration of Independence. He might even know that one of the foremost proponents of natural law today is Francis Arinze, a Nigerian cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church. If natural law has anything to do with white Christian nationalism, no one has apparently told Cardinal Arinze.

Maybe Stanley does know all this, but thinks only Ivy League professors like himself are smart enough to talk about natural law. If anyone else, especially a conservative, invokes it, it could only be to incite the unwashed masses with a racist dogwhistle. Surely, the only thing common folk must know about natural law is that it has something to do with western civilization, and is therefore racist.

Or maybe Stanley rejects the claims of natural law. Maybe he thinks that a philosophy or a system of laws and governance based on the notion that all people are created equal and are endowed by their creator with unalienable rights is in fact a great evil, and that people should be treated differently based on their race or sex or some other characteristic.

Believing all that would be a problem for Stanley because it’s racist — not opaquely or subtly, but straightforwardly so. I don’t know whether Stanley is, in his heart of hearts, a racist. Probably not. But his tweets about natural law, and the sentiments behind them, unequivocally are.

Full Story

FBI Asks Americans To Spy on Family, Friends to Prevent ‘Extremism’

The FBI is encouraging Americans to look for indications of “homegrown violent extremism” in their own families and report them.

The FBI is turning its monitoring capabilities on ordinary Americans, prompting the demand for snitches.

“Family members and peers are often best positioned to witness signs of mobilization to violence,” reads a tweet posted on Sunday from the FBI. In order to help prevent “homegrown violent extremism,” the agency advises Americans “to learn how to spot suspicious behaviors and report them to the FBI” by visiting its website.

A link provided by the FBI brings users to a PDF document titled, “Homegrown Violent Extremist Mobilization Indicators.” The document outlines a list of 46 “observable behaviors” that could help determine whether friends or family members “are preparing to engage in violent extremist activities.”

The top three indicators listed are:

  • “Preparing and disseminating a martyrdom video/statement, last will”
  • “Seeking religious or political justification for a planned violent act”
  • “Attempting to mobilize others to violence, especially family members and peers.”

Moreover, the document at one point seems to blur the line between a citizen’s “constitutionally protected rights” and “mobilizing to violence.”

“Law enforcement action should not be taken solely based on the exercise of constitutionally protected rights, or on the apparent or actual race, ethnicity, national origin or religion of the subject, or on any combination of these factors. Individuals are encouraged to contact law enforcement if, based on these indicators and the situational context, they suspect an individual is mobilizing to violence,” the document reads.

The Orwellian nature of the FBI document prompted Texas Senator Ted Cruz (R) to tweet that “In both Cuba & China, they also ask children to spy on their parents….”

As pointed out by RT News, the indicators and imagery used in the document suggest that its focus is to combat radical Islamic terrorism. But the FBI, along with the rest of the U.S. security apparatus, has turned its surveillance powers on specifically white, conservative America in recent months.

For example, since the unrest on Capitol Hill in January, FBI Director Christopher Wray has testified before Congress that the anti-government sentiment responsible for the trouble had been “metastasizing” in the U.S. for years. Wray insisted that “the problem of domestic terrorism … is not going away anytime soon.” And former Assistant Director Frank Figliuzzi last month even called for the arrest of high-level Republicans in order to “really tackle terrorism, this time domestically.”

Moreover, Joe Biden has connected the Capitol mob to “white supremacism,” which he called “the most lethal terrorist threat to our homeland today” during his first speech to Congress in April. Against this supposed “threat,” the Department of Justice has requested new powers of prosecution, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has asserted that right-wingers and conservatives, “inspired by foreign terrorist groups” and “emboldened by the breach of the U.S. Capitol Building,” are “plotting attacks against government facilities” and “threatening violence against critical infrastructure.”

Other indicators of extremism listed on the FBI document include: encouraging or advocating violence toward individuals, military or government officials, law enforcement, or civilian targets; unusual purchase of military-style tactical equipment other than weapons (such as personal protective equipment, body armor); dehumanizing people who are not in the identity group; and researching or discussing ways to evade law enforcement and lying to law enforcement officers/obstructing investigations.

Former Acting Director of National Intelligence for the Trump administration Richard Grenell also took to Twitter to ask “Why hasn’t the @fbi made more progress finding the BLM rioters from last summer?”

And others pointed out that real “homegrown” extremists such as those belonging to Antifa or preaching Critical Race Theory (CRT) are being ignored:

The FBI’s tweet comes after Facebook encouraged similarly draconian spy tactics on its platform.

Jon Fleetwood is Managing Editor for American Faith.

Pentagon Warns of ‘Increased Potential’ for Nuclear War: ‘An Unprecedented Range and Mix of Threats’

Newly released report from the U.S. Department of Defense says Russia and China’s newly expanded nuclear weapons arsenals and tactics have “increased potential for regional conflicts involving nuclear-armed adversaries in several parts of the world and the potential for adversary nuclear escalation in crisis or conflict.”

The Pentagon released a 67-page report titled “Joint Nuclear Operations.” It offers “fundamental principles and guidance to plan, execute, and assess nuclear operations.”

Download the “Joint Nuclear Operations” document here:Download
Cover of “Joint Nuclear Operations”

The report was released to the Federation of American Scientists last week in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, though it was originally completed in April 2020.

The introduction to the first chapter asserts that—at a time when the U.S. is working to “reduce [its own] number and salience of nuclear weapons”—China and Russia specifically have become more aggressive in developing their nuclear weapons capabilities.

“They have added new types of nuclear capabilities to their arsenal, increased the salience of nuclear forces in their strategies and plans, and engaged in increasingly aggressive behavior,” the report says. “There now exists an unprecedented range and mix of threats, including major conventional, chemical, biological, nuclear, space, and cyber threats and violent non-state actors.”

The report goes on to emphasize how our “adversar[ies]” show no signs of cutting back development of their nuclear capabilities.

“[N]o potential adversary has reduced either the role of nuclear weapons in its national security strategy or the number of nuclear weapons it fields. Rather, they have moved decidedly in the opposite direction,” the report warns.

“As a result,” it continues, “there is an increased potential for regional conflicts involving nuclear-armed adversaries in several parts of the world and the potential for adversary nuclear escalation in crisis or conflict.”

The document, prepared by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, goes on to list specific technologies and policies being pursued by Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran, for example, which it maintains are pressing toward an “increased potential” for nuclear conflict to occur. It states:

In addition to modernizing ” legacy” Soviet nuclear systems, Russia is developing and employing new nuclear warheads and launchers. It is also developing three new intercontinental-range nuclear weapon systems; a hypersonic glide vehicle; a nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered ground-launched cruise missile; and a nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered, undersea autonomous torpedo.

…

China has developed a new road-mobile, strategic, intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM); a new multi-warhead version of its DF-5 silo-based ICBM; and its most advanced ballistic missile submarine armed with new submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). It has also announced development of a new nuclear-capable strategic bomber, giving China a nuclear triad.

…

In the past few years, North Korea has dramatically increased its missile flight testing, most recently including the testing of intercontinental-range missiles capable of reaching the US homeland.

…

Iran retains the technological capability and much of the capacity necessary to develop a nuclear weapon within one year of a decision to do so. Iran’s development of increasingly long-range ballistic missile capabilities, and its aggressive strategy and activities to destabilize neighboring governments, raises questions about its long-term commitment to forgoing nuclear weapons capability.

American Faith has reported on remarks from Japan’s number two defense official warning about China and Russia’s apparent plans to launch a “Pearl Harbor” style attack against the U.S., as well as Chinese President Xi Jinping’s increasingly violent rhetoric.

Jon Fleetwood is Managing Editor for American Faith.

Voddie Baucham Discusses How Christians Should Deal With CRT In The Context Of Faith

Voddie Baucham discussed his book “Fault Lines” with Shaun Tabatt at the 2021 NRB in Dallas for the Shaun Tabatt Show, an interview program that links Christians to thinkers worldwide.

Baucham spoke on the roots of critical theory and how Christians may productively participate in the debate.

Two of Baucham’s major arguments in his book were the notion that disadvantaged minorities have privileged access to the truth that other people don’t; and the premise that white people are incapable of righteous actions in the area of race unless their interests coincide with those of people who are different races than themselves.

For Christians who are wondering how they might be a part of these discussions in a manner that is constructive, Baucham referred to a principle in 2 Corinthians 10:4 that says that arguments and lofty views made against the knowledge of God should be destroyed.

“We’ve got to understand what these things are. We got to identify them, and we’ve got to destroy them.,” he said. “The second thing is we take every thought captive to obey Christ, so our thoughts about race, our thoughts about ethnicity, our thoughts about sexuality, our thoughts about reconciliation, thoughts about history, all of those things have to be taken captive to obey Christ.”

He went on to add that one thing he tries to do is to give individuals the tools they need to understand, evaluate and discuss ideas intelligently. He said that Christians must educate themselves while adhering to the “wise as serpents and innocent as doves” principle.

“Ultimately we have to recognize that these things are at war with us, and we’ve got to fight,” he warned of the scandals and contentious topics that have engulfed the country.

The Gospel and CRT

With so many famous church leaders jumping on the race bandwagon, Baucham wonders when the gospel became inadequate in dealing with certain cultural issues. He contends that it’s blasphemy to assume that the Scriptures and the Gospel are insufficient, and that people need critical race theory in order to understand rationally the relationships between groups of people.

The author of the “Fault Lines” emphasized that the CRT works like a religion because of the worldview they’re promoting as an answer to key issues about identity that deviate from the Christian narrative of “creation,” “fall,” “redemption,” and “consummation.”

As an example, Baucham cited the United States as a country where the “oppressor-oppressed” paradigm has been emphasized. He also said that CRT has its own “cosmology, saints, martyrs, and priesthood,” which he referred to as “ethnic gnosticism.”

Baucham continued by stating that he has come across people who frame the discussion in terms of a “balanced view,” which he defined as incorporating at the very least the premise of critical race theory while using the word gospel. He disputed this and said that he finds it amusing that those, like himself and Owen, who approach the issue from a biblical standpoint are assumed to be unbalanced from a people’s standpoint.

Listen to Voddie Baucham and Shaun Tabatt’s discussion below.

Communism Survivor Speaks Out Against Critical Race Theory

Lindell Says Trump ‘Will Be Back’ In The White House By ‘August’: MyPillow CEO’s New Election Fraud Evidence

“Things are going great. I couldn’t be happier—the way things are going in our country right now,” said Lindell.

MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell told Alex Jones in an interview this week that he has enough proof of election fraud having taken place during the 2020 U.S. presidential election to put Donald Trump “back” in office.

“Like I said before: Our President will be back. I said August—I could be off by a month or two,” Lindell told Jones.

Jones suggested that Joe Biden is a “Chinese agent” and that Trump is “our real President” before praising Lindell for “quarterbacking the resistance” and pointing to cryptic words recently spoken by Trump.

“I believe in you,” Jones told Lindell, “And I know you’ve been behind the scenes. I’ve talked to a lot of folks you’ve been working with.” Jones added that Trump himself believes the White House will be his again “sooner than you think.” “[Trump] believes when the evidence comes out, there’s a strategy,” said Jones.

Lindell said the “strategy” is to take his evidence to the Supreme Court, which according to Lindell will vote unanimously “9-0” to reverse the 2020 election result.

“When the Supreme Court looks at this, it’s not subjective evidence. So it’s going to be 9-0. Not 8-1, 7-2. It has to be 9-0 because this isn’t subjective evidence. So they’re going to pull [the election] down,” lindell said to Jones.

Earlier this week, American Faith covered Mike Lindell’s interview with a cybersecurity expert who explained how “PCAP” computer data received by Lindell on Jan 9 allegedly proves that China “attack[ed] our country” by flipping millions of votes from Biden to Trump.

Watch Lindell’s full interview with Jones:

Jon Fleetwood is Managing Editor for American Faith.

Trump ‘Insurrection’ Myth Debunked by Bipartisan Senate Committee Review

A months-long, bipartisan Senate investigation report debunks the Jan 6 “insurrection” myth and Donald Trump’s connection to it.

“Whatever legal or constitutional test you apply, Trump incited the violent Capitol attack,” proclaimed a Feb 2021 USA Today headline. Its byline: “What’s at stake is a president’s freedom to incite a violent attack on his own government.”

The month prior, and five days after the Jan. 6 Capitol unrest, a Washington Post opinion piece rested blame for the “invasion” of the United States Capitol Building squarely on the shoulders of President Trump. “As I watched the despicable display by those who invaded the Capitol at the behest of the president, I was moved to tears and consumed with anger,” lamented the WaPo author. “I strongly urge Congress to impeach, convict and remove the president from office.”

Not to be outdone in the use of anti-Trump histrionics, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi accused the 45th President of being “an accessory” to murder. “The crime, in some cases [regarding the Capitol unrest], was murder,” Pelosi stated in an interview with MSNBC. “This president is an accessory to that crime because he instigated that insurrection that caused those deaths and this destruction.”

Watch Pelosi’s interview:

But a new Senate report has been compiled by the Senate Homeland Security and Rules committee. The 99-page document—titled Examining the U.S. Capitol Attack: A Review of the Security, Planning, and Response Failures on January 6—was spearheaded equally by Democrats and Republicans: U.S. Senators Gary Peters (D-MI) and Rob Portman (R-OH), Chairman and Ranking Member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Roy Blunt (R-MO), Chairwoman and Ranking Member of the Committee on Rules and Administration.

Here’s the full report.

The report was thorough. In its own words, it focused on “the security, planning, and response failures related to the violent and unprecedented attack on January 6th” and included “a series of recommendations for the Capitol Police Board, United States Capitol Police (USCP), federal intelligence agencies, the Department of Defense (DOD), and other Capital region law enforcement agencies.” If anything could show that President Trump “incited an insurrection,” it’s this Senate investigation.

But did the report reveal that President Donald Trump “incited the violent Capitol attack”? Or that he led “a violent attack on his own government”? That an “invasion” occurred “at the behest of the president”? Or that Trump was “an accessory” to murder?

Not even a little bit.

To begin with, even far-left CNN admits the Senate report fully “omits Trump’s role” on Jan 6. In other words, CNN admits the report hardly even mentions Trump, let alone connect him to any violence or instigation thereof.

You can practically see the big red vein popping out of these CNN writers’ collective forehead (the article was co-authored). Look:

“There are also several glaring omissions in the report including any examination of Donald Trump’s role in the riots,” moans CNN, “raising questions about whether lawmakers, in their quest for bipartisanship, exposed the limits of a Congress divided and unable to agree on certain truths, particularly those related to the former President’s actions.”

Not only does CNN admit the Senate reported no malfesance on the part of President Trump, but they also acknowledge the exhaustive nature of the Senate’s investigation. They say the Senate analysis “marks the most comprehensive government report” regarding security failures leading up to Jan 6. See here:

“Congressional investigators pored through ‘thousands of documents,'” tallies CNN, “received written statements from 50 police officers who defended the Capitol, and got testimony from a wide array of current and former officials who played a role in the security preparations and response. … [T]he evidence and interviews were gathered over months from bipartisan staff and members on two committees.”

Thousands of documents. Written statements. Official testimony. Gathered for months. By Republicans and Democrats. And none of it pushes the myth that President Trump “incited an insurrection.”

Most importantly, however, and as CNN also admits, the language of the Senate report completely excludes the word “insurrection” outside of witness quotes and footnotes, a fact both Democrat committee members as well as their Republican counterparts were pleased with. “The language that was chosen was purposeful—and represents the consensus of the four members and their respective staffs,” a Senate committee aide said, according to CNN. “We did our very best to stick to the facts as we understood them and leave characterizations in quotes where there were characterizations.”

There was no “insurrection.” Trump didn’t “incite” anything. So says the official Senate report compiled by the Senate Homeland Security and Rules committee.

In fact, we all know that in reality, President Trump instructed the crowd not to do anything violent, but to, in his words, “peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” Here’s the video evidence:

And after learning about the unrest, President Trump immediately also instructed the crowd to “go home now,” adding “We have to have peace. We have to have law and order”:

If anyone’s guilty of inciting violence, it ain’t Trump. It’s the Left:

Jon Fleetwood is Managing Editor for American Faith.

Read “An Invented Insurrection” by Human Events; “DOJ Charges BLM Supporter Who Allegedly Stormed Capitol, Instigated Trump Supporters” by The Western Journal;

COVID ‘Was Developed In a Lab’: World-Renowned Scientist and Berkeley Prof

MIT postdoctoral fellow with over 10,000 citations and an Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California Berkeley say the hypothesis that COVID was engineered in a laboratory is “firmly based in science.”

The “rare and unnatural combination” genetic sequence found in the COVID-19 virus provides “damning” evidence that “the leading theory for the origin of the coronavirus must be laboratory escape,” according to Dr. Steven Quay and Professor Richard Muller.

Steven Quay (MD, PhD)—trained as a postdoctoral fellow in the Chemistry Department at MIT (Massachusettes Institute of Technology)—has over 360 published contributions to medicine and has been cited over 10,000 times, placing him in the top 1% of scientists worldwide, according to PR Newswire. He holds 87 US patents and has invented seven FDA-approved pharmaceuticals which have helped over 80 million people.

Richard A. Muller (PhD) is an emeritus professor of physics at the University of California Berkeley and a former senior scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Muller has publications in Scientific American, Physics Today, Nature, and Science.

These scientists revealed in a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) publication that the COVID-19 virus has a “genetic footprint” that has “never been observed in a natural coronavirus.”

“In fact, in the entire class of coronaviruses that includes CoV-2, the CGG-CGG combination has never been found naturally. That means the common method of viruses picking up new skills, called recombination, cannot operate here. A virus simply cannot pick up a sequence from another virus if that sequence isn’t present in any other virus,” state Quay and Muller.

Screenshot from “Is considering a genetic-manipulation origin for SARS-CoV-2 a conspiracy theory that must be censored?” by Rossana Segreto (PhD) at the University of Innsbruck Institute of Microbiology taken June 7, 2021

This “double CGG” is suppressed naturally but common in laboratory work. In fact, Quay and Muller explain that the double CGG sequence is the “sequence of choice” in lab work because it’s “readily available and convenient, and scientists have a great deal of experience inserting it.” Moreover, the double CGG creates a useful “beacon” allowing scientists to “track” the insertion in the lab.

“Now the damning fact. It was this exact sequence that appears in CoV-2. Proponents of zoonotic origin must explain why the novel coronavirus, when it mutated or recombined, happened to pick its least favorite combination, the double CGG. Why did it replicate the choice the lab’s gain-of-function researchers would have made?” ask the doctors.

The doctors critique a natural, or, zoonotic origin for COVID as difficult to believe because it is unlikely that random mutations would result in such sequencing.

“Yes, it could have happened randomly, through mutations. But do you believe that? At the minimum, this fact—that the coronavirus, with all its random possibilities, took the rare and unnatural combination used by human researchers—implies that the leading theory for the origin of the coronavirus must be laboratory escape,” they say.

But Quay and Muller claim there is “additional scientific evidence that points to CoV-2’s gain-of-function origin,” the most compelling of which is the “dramatic differences in the genetic diversity of CoV-2, compared with the coronaviruses responsible for SARS and MERS.”

“Both of those were confirmed to have a natural origin; the viruses evolved rapidly as they spread through the human population, until the most contagious forms dominated. Covid-19 didn’t work that way. It appeared in humans already adapted into an extremely contagious version. No serious viral ‘improvement’ took place until a minor variation occurred many months later in England,” the scientists say.

“Such early optimization is unprecedented, and it suggests a long period of adaptation that predated its public spread. Science knows of only one way that could be achieved: simulated natural evolution, growing the virus on human cells until the optimum is achieved. That is precisely what is done in gain-of-function research,” they add.

Doctors Quay and Muller conclude the WSJ piece by reiterating that the double CGG sequence is “strong evidence of gene splicing” and that the absence of COVID’s diversity “suggests gain-of-function acceleration.”

“The scientific evidence points to the conclusion that the virus was developed in a laboratory.”

Although Dr. Anthony Fauci publicly rejected the lab origin hypothesis, his email recently obtained via FOIA (Freedom of Information) request reveal that he was not only aware of the possibility of a man-made origin of COVID but also working behind the scenes to discredit the theory because the U.S. financed some of the lab’s research at Fauci’s behest.

President Donald Trump said he’d seen evidence that gave him a “high degree of confidence” the novel coronavirus originated in a laboratory in Wuhan, China as early as April of 2020.

Jon Fleetwood is Managing Editor for American Faith.

American Red Cross Website Says Vaccinated People ‘Cannot Donate Convalescent Plasma’

The American Red Cross is insisting that individuals who have received the COVID-19 jab “are not able to donate convalescent plasma.”

The Red Cross’ own website claims that while the organization is “working as quickly as possible to evaluate this change,” it is not accepting blood donations from certain vaccinated people at this time.

On the site, one headline asks the question, “Can I donate COVID-19 convalescent plasma if I have received the vaccination?” Here’s their answer:

“At this time individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine are not able to donate convalescent plasma with the Red Cross. The Red Cross is working as quickly as possible to evaluate this change – as it may involve complex system updates. Please know, the Red Cross is committed to building a readily available inventory of convalescent plasma to ensure patients battling COVID-19 have all treatment options available to them.”

Here’s the screenshot from redcrossblood.org:

Screenshot from redcorssblood.org taken on May 21, 2021.

On another page, redcrossblood.org says again, “Individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine are not able to donate convalescent plasma with the Red Cross.”

Screenshot from redcrassblood.org taken on May 21, 2021.

The Mayo Clinic—recognized as the No. 1 hospital overall and top-ranked hospitals in twelve specialties by U.S. News & World Report—explains what convalescent plasma is:

“Convalescent plasma therapy uses blood from people who’ve recovered from an illness to help others recover.”

In other words, blood is considered “convalescent” if it comes from an individual who contracted an illness but who has recovered from that illness. As the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states, “Convalescent refers to anyone recovering from a disease.”

The Mayo Clinic goes on to explain that “Blood donated by people who’ve recovered from COVID-19 has antibodies to the virus that causes it,” adding that “[t]he donated blood is processed to remove blood cells, leaving behind liquid (plasma) and antibodies. These can be given to people with COVID-19 to boost their ability to fight the virus.”

Therefore, the Red Cross’ statement that “individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine are not able to donate convalescent plasma” does not mean that their organization considers all blood from anyone who has been vaccinated to be tainted (as some have claimed). But it does mean that the Red Cross’ website confirms that a certain group of individuals cannot donate their blood specifically because they’ve received the COVID “vaccine.”

A recent Reuters report confirms this:

“The American Red Cross’ current policy is to only accept convalescent plasma donations from people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have not had the vaccine. Although, if plasma donated by people vaccinated against COVID-19 has a high-level of COVID-19 antibodies it may be used as convalescent plasma.”

A March publication from The Washington Post also confirms this:

“Those who have been vaccinated can also donate platelets and AB Elite plasma to the Red Cross, but the organization is not accepting convalescent plasma from people who have taken a vaccine.”

But why is the American Red Cross refusing convalescent blood plasma from these vaccinated individuals?

The Red Cross’ “Merrill” told Lead Stories via telephone on April 12 of this year that “The FDA has outlined a very complicated qualification process. It would require the Red Cross to make a series of updates to our system. We are trying to evaluate the feasibility of implementing it, how long it would take to update it as well as the hospital demand for convalescent plasma.”

Lead Stories linked to an FDA webpage, which indicates that such convalescent plasma is not “approved.”

“Because convalescent plasma for the treatment of COVID-19 has not yet been approved for use by FDA, it is regulated as an investigational product,” reads the FDA webpage.

But the FDA page linked by Lead Stories does not indicate why it is that specifically vaccinated, COVID-recovered individuals cannot donate blood. In fact, the word ‘vaccine’ only appears one (1) time in the over 1,500-word article and only in reference to how “investigational convalescent plasma is collected,” not why such vaccinated individuals cannot donate their blood plasma.

It is at this time unclear why the American Red Cross and FDA are refusing convalescent blood plasma donations from these COVID-recovered, vaccinated individuals.

Jon Fleetwood is Managing Editor for American Faith.

‘Do whatever you want’: Software to manipulate totals found on voting machines

Trump: ‘This will prove true in numerous other states’

A lawyer fighting an election-fraud case in Antrim County, Michigan, has revealed that the voting machines there contained a software program that could have been used to manipulate vote totals.

In fact, lawyer Matthew DePerno said in a podcast interview that with the MySQL program installed on the machines, and them all being linked, someone with access could “do whatever you want.”

DePerno, just a day earlier confirmed in a court hearing that there were 1,061 “phantom votes” in the county during the 2020 presidential election, because while a recount of ballots tallied 15,962, the Michigan secretary of state’s database showed only 14,901 votes were cast.

His latest concerns were raised during an interview with JD Rucker at the NOQ Report.

Rucker said the bombshell that DePerno delivered was that all of the voting machines were connected to each other through an intranet, that itself was not connected to the internet. However, he said a laptop computer with access to the intranet and access to the internet was left on during the Election Night counting.

Full Story

As Biden Pushes Founders’ America to the Brink, Americans Must ‘Revisit the Original Plan’: Gen. Flynn

An article written by former United States Army Lieutenant General Michael Flynn.

James Madison, hailed as the father of our Constitution, is probably turning over in his grave given the shredding of our God-given constitutional values and principles upon which we were founded.

Madison recognized that since concentrating power leads to tyranny, dividing government power was essential for the preservation of liberty. He will never be accused of being short-sighted about the threats government would pose to the people.

Madison and others set out deliberately to design a form of government that would limit abuses and withstand the test of time. America now faces that test, and the central question that has emerged is: Will we pass the test, or will we fall into the abyss of history as other nation-states have done?

Along with other framers of our nation’s Constitution, Madison argued for dividing federal power among the three branches of our government — legislative, executive, and judicial. These should be studied and clearly understood by every American schoolchild from an early age, but to our nation’s and our children’s detriment, they are not.

And what is even less understood is why the Founders adopted a structure that they knew would result in conflict among the branches. In truth, the constitutional structure was designed not to enhance the efficiency of the government but to impede the exercise of raw governmental power and to protect the liberty of the people.

Full Story

Google, Soros, & Gates-Fund Media Outlet ‘Project Syndicate’ Publishes Op-Eds For China’s State Media

Project Syndicate – a media outlet that counts funding and written contribution from George Soros, Bill Gates, the United Nations, and Google – is engaged in “media partnership” deals with several Chinese state-run media outlets, The National Pulse can today reveal. 

The globalist propaganda outlet – founded in 1995 – has also been lauded by the Chinese Communist Party’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with its Twitter account praising the outlet’s content defending genocide in Xinjiang as “objective and informative.”

Project Syndicate published op-eds and analysis from “prominent political leaders, policymakers, scholars, business leaders, and civic activists” and partners with non-western media outlets to amplify their spread.

Full Story

Apple tells GOP lawmakers Parler is approved to come back to its app store

‘Huge win for free speech’

Apple will allow Parler, the pro-free speech alternative social media app favored by conservatives and Trump supporters, back on to its iOS app store, the tech giant told Republican lawmakers Monday.

Parler was kicked off the iOS Store in the days following the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol after Apple accused the company of failing to moderate violent content on its platform. Until now, Parler users have been unable to download the app on iOS devices. Apple had said Parler would not be allowed back in its store until the company made changes to comply with the App Store Review guidelines.

“There is no place for hateful, racist, discriminatory content on the App Store,” Apple reportedly told Parler last month.

But in a letter responding to an inquiry from Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) about Apple’s actions toward Parler, Apple Senior Director of Government Affairs for the Americas Timothy Powderly said his company has been “engaged in substantial conversation” with Parler about bringing the app into compliance with its guidelines.

Full Story

YouTube To Remove ‘Dislike’ Feature As Biden WH Content Continues To See Likes Massively Trail Dislikes

As President Biden’s White House YouTube channel continues to see videos’ “dislikes” massively trump “likes,” the video platform announced it is testing a new design that obscures a public dislike count.

The move was announced via Twitter on March 30th, with YouTube explaining “in response to creator feedback around well-being and targeted dislike campaigns, we’re testing a few new designs that don’t show the public dislike count.”

As a result, only the accounts publishing videos will be able to see the dislike to like ratio.

Full Story

Cloudflare Internet Outage 2025, The Day the Web Broke

data privacy

A critical outage at Cloudflare disrupted major portions of the internet early Tuesday, taking down key platforms like Elon Musk’s X, ChatGPT, Downdetector, and even several news websites. The failure exposed just how dependent the web has become on a few centralized infrastructure providers.

The issue originated inside Cloudflare’s Global Network and triggered widespread HTTP 500 errors. These server-level failures affected Cloudflare’s dashboard, APIs, and many client sites. Cloudflare acknowledged the outage on its System Status page, noting the root cause has been identified and a fix is underway.

The outage hit while Cloudflare was performing scheduled maintenance around 5:00 a.m. ET. Early signs point to a botched internal configuration rather than an external cyberattack. As a temporary measure, Cloudflare disabled WARP access in London—WARP being its encryption tool for private browsing and secure network connections.

Platforms that rely heavily on Cloudflare, including social media, cloud-based services, and even outage tracking tools like Downdetector, were all impacted. Downdetector itself became unreliable, peaking at over 11,000 user reports of service interruptions before the number began to decline.

Even tech communities not often in the headlines felt the effects. 3D printing platforms like Printables and Thangs were among the many services showing error messages. Some news sites, including Axios, became completely inaccessible, as their Cloudflare protections blocked access altogether.

This outage follows a similar incident in October involving Amazon Web Services. That failure was caused by a faulty API update in DynamoDB that broke the DNS system, preventing users from connecting to critical databases.

From a conservative perspective, these cascading failures underscore the fragility of the internet’s current architecture. A small number of cloud service providers—Amazon, Cloudflare, Microsoft—control an overwhelming share of digital infrastructure. This centralization poses serious risks for national security, business continuity, and free speech. When one of these providers fails, millions of Americans and businesses are effectively silenced or cut off.

As reliance on cloud services grows, lawmakers and tech leaders will need to consider the consequences of such concentration. A decentralized and resilient internet should not be dependent on the maintenance schedule of a single corporation.

The Value of Life

David Vilches/Unsplash

The word euthanasia has re-entered mainstream conversation with stunning speed—just as it once did in the dark years of the Third Reich. In 1938, German publications openly debated which lives were “still valuable to the State,” declaring that those deemed unworthy could be “destroyed” for the supposed good of society. History has shown us where such thinking leads. It always begins with redefining the value of a human being. . .

This content is only available for American Faith Premium Subscribers. For as low as $3.99/mo, you can access all our Premium content, learn more here.

If you are already a Premium subscriber, please log in to view this content.

 
 
 
 
 
 

$10 Million Fine Dropped: Illinois Dem Escapes Campaign Finance Scandal

American flag (David Everett Strickler/Unsplash)

Illinois Senate President Don Harmon will not face penalties for an alleged $10 million campaign finance violation after the State Board of Elections deadlocked on whether to proceed. The board dismissed the case on Tuesday, leaving critics demanding legal clarity and calling for court intervention.

The case stems from Harmon’s personal donation of over $100,000 to his own campaign in January 2023. That self-funding lifted state-imposed contribution limits for other donors. However, Harmon’s campaign then accepted additional contributions that exceeded limits in what critics claim was a violation of Illinois election law during the following cycle.

Despite a hearing officer and the board’s general counsel recommending enforcement, members were split on how to interpret the law—particularly what defines an election cycle for state senators, who serve staggered four- and six-year terms. Harmon is next up for reelection in 2026.

Board Chair Laura Donahue admitted the deadlock has left the state in “limbo” and said it will likely fall on the courts or legislature to clarify the statute.

Board member Jack Vrett expressed concern over inconsistency in enforcement. He emphasized that if Harmon’s committee were any other political organization, fines would have been issued, saying that adherence to the law should be equal and not determined by political rank.

The Liberty Justice Center, which has already filed to intervene, announced it will now move forward in court. The group argues that legal action is necessary to determine whether Harmon’s actions broke state law or whether the board has unlawfully failed to act.

From a conservative Christian perspective, the board’s decision highlights growing public frustration over selective enforcement of election laws. When powerful politicians are spared accountability due to procedural gridlock, it undermines public trust and sends a message that political elites operate above the rules. Restoring integrity to the electoral system requires equal enforcement of campaign finance law, regardless of office or party.

Hobbs Pay‑to‑Play Scandal? $400K Deal Under Fire

katie
(Photo by Carmen Mandato/Getty Images)

Arizona legislators launched a formal investigation into Governor Katie Hobbs this week, alleging a potential pay‑to‑play scheme tied to a large rate increase for a foster‑care provider that made big political donations.

According to the probe, the nonprofit Sunshine Residential Homes—which serves youth in group homes—received a roughly 30 percent payment‐rate hike worth millions from the Arizona Department of Child Safety after donating about $400,000 to Gov. Hobbs and the Arizona Democratic Party. The funding bump was granted while other providers were denied similar increases. A legislative advisory team was formed to coordinate with the state Auditor General and prosecutors on the matter.

Governor Hobbs, however,dismissed the investigation as nothing but partisan politics, calling it “a shameless stunt” and insisting her office had no involvement in or communications about the rate increase. She affirmed she has always put Arizonans first and said she may support future disclosure legislation, though she vetoed one such bill last year.

From a faith‑based and conservative standpoint, the allegations highlight serious concerns about transparency, integrity, and government stewardship of taxpayer funds—especially when vulnerable children are involved. The situation raises the question: when a service provider supporting foster children gives substantial political contributions, should there be stronger safeguards to ensure decisions are based on need rather than influence?

For conservative voters who endorse limited government, accountability, and personal responsibility, this case underscores why oversight matters. If political donations can influence funding decisions for agencies caring for children, the public’s trust in government erodes. Whether the allegations prove true or are politically motivated, they will likely carry major implications for the governor’s re‑election campaign and for legislation around political disclosure in Arizona.

NPR Wins Back $36 M Contract After Trump‑Era Funding Battle

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) has agreed to fulfill a multi‑year, $36 million contract with National Public Radio (NPR) that it previously suspended amid pressure from the Donald Trump administration. The dispute, which reached federal court, centered on allegations that CPB redirected funds to a newly created entity under political influence.

NPR filed a lawsuit accusing CPB of violating the First Amendment and the Public Broadcasting Act when CPB reversed course and awarded grants intended for NPR’s satellite distribution system to a new group called Public Media Infrastructure. Under the settlement, CPB will restore funding for NPR’s Public Radio Satellite System and NPR will drop certain claims as part of this tranche.

From a conservative Christian perspective, this case offers a complex picture. It showcases the tension between government funding of media and editorial independence. While taxpayers rightly expect accountability and transparency—especially in publicly backed organizations—news outlets must also preserve freedom of speech. The settlement underscores the importance of balancing both principles: limiting taxpayer subsidies and ensuring media freedom from political retaliation.

NPR framed the outcome as a win for independent journalism and the First Amendment. CPB stated the agreement allows it to focus on system‑wide innovation in public media infrastructure and end costly litigation. With federal subsidies for public broadcasting largely rescinded by Congress this year, local stations previously relying on CPB funds now face further uncertainty.

TPUSA Rejected…Again: A Christian Campus Afraid of Conservative Students

Charlie Kirk
(Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

As an alumna of Point Loma Nazarene University (PLNU), class of 2021, I never imagined I’d be writing yet another lament for the school that shaped my early adulthood.

But here we are: For the third time, PLNU has denied students the chance to form an official chapter of Turning Point USA (TPUSA), the conservative student organization founded to champion free markets, limited government, and individual liberty on campuses across America.

This latest rejection, announced via email from University President Kerry Fulcher on November 5, 2025, isn’t just a bureaucratic hiccup—it’s a glaring symptom of an institution that has lost its way, prioritizing “campus climate” over the very diversity of thought it claims to foster.

Let’s rewind for context, because this isn’t a one-off grudge.

Back in 2021, during my senior year, I rallied a group of like-minded students to launch a TPUSA chapter. We saw it as a natural fit for a Christian university: a space to equip young believers with tools to engage the culture boldly, unapologetically defending biblical truth in a world gone mad.

Our application? Shot down flat.

The reason? It supposedly didn’t “align with the university code of conduct.”

Meanwhile, the LGBTQ+ pride club, whose events and messaging often clashed head-on with Nazarene doctrine on human sexuality, waltzed away with the “Diversity of the Year” award that same year. Hypocrisy doesn’t get much thicker than that.

Fast-forward to now, and history rhymes with excruciating precision. The current crop of applicants, over 200 students strong, including freshmen, juniors, and everyone in between, poured their hearts into a polished proposal.

Elected leaders like Ginger Friess, the would-be president, cited her grandfather’s early support for TPUSA as inspiration, emphasizing a mission to “create loving people” rooted in Christ.

Luke Cole, the prospective secretary, described the email rejection as a gut punch: “I felt silenced when I got that email. I felt like I couldn’t speak anymore.”

Brooklyn Stratton, the vice president hopeful, nailed the stakes: “College is our formative years… I feel like not giving people the opportunity to explore which side of politics they’re on doesn’t align with free speech at all.”

What sins did this group commit to earn the boot?

According to the Associated Student Body (ASB) Board of Directors, which holds veto power over clubs, the application echoed language from TPUSA’s Professor Watchlist—a tool that exposes educators pushing radical ideologies in the classroom. Even though the students explicitly disavowed participation in it, the mere whiff of similarity was enough to deem it a threat to “constructive communication” between students, faculty, and admins.

Oh, and the proposed tie-in with TPUSA Faith? That’s out too, for supposedly duplicating campus ministry efforts and advancing an agenda to “eliminate wokeism” in the church. Never mind that PLNU’s own “B.R.E.A.K.” club dives deep into “privilege” and “gender justice,” or that the Center for Justice and Reconciliation hosts sessions on “immigration and racial justice” that sound like they were scripted by AOC’s staff.

Those get a green light, complete with funding from the student activities pool. TPUSA? Crickets.

This denial lands especially hard in the shadow of Charlie Kirk’s tragic passing in September of this year.

As I wrote in an open letter to PLNU shortly after, the campus’s silence on his death was deafening—a man who built TPUSA into a beacon for young conservatives seeking to live out their faith without apology. Instead of mourning a brother in Christ, some students and even faculty celebrated his demise, turning grief into a rallying cry for the very chapter now rejected.

Friess put it bluntly: “I watched students and faculty, who identified as Christian, celebrate human death on campus… and I was deeply troubled by that.”

Stratton echoed the isolation: After Kirk’s death, she and others felt “targeted,” desperate for a community to process it all. In a place billed as “Christ-centered,” where chapel once promised spiritual formation, this feels like outright betrayal.

And let’s not kid ourselves about the progressive creep I’ve witnessed firsthand. During my time at PLNU, chapel devolved from worship to a social justice seminar: Lyrics scrubbed of “He” or “Father” for God to appease the gender-fluid crowd; guest speakers preaching lefty takes on abortion as “bodily autonomy,” open borders, and Pride parades. My New Testament professor docked points for daring to say “mankind” instead of “humankind.”

I stayed quiet too long, cowed by the ridicule; hearing slurs whispered in dorms, watching peers self-censor out of fear. It wasn’t until my final year that I mustered the guts to fight for my voice on my campus. Years later, former classmates confessed they agreed with me but lacked the spine to say so. That’s not education; that’s indoctrination.

The double standard scorches.

PLNU bends over backward for clubs that amplify woke narratives—environmental justice outfits partnering with leftist NGOs, racial equity groups hosting “anti-whiteness” workshops, feminist collectives framing traditional marriage as oppression. None trigger hand-wringing over “divisiveness” or “mission misalignment.” But let conservative students ask for a table at the club fair, a shot at the activities budget, or a room for a speaker like Kirk? Suddenly, the floodgates of caution open wide.

Associate VP Lora Flemming’s spin, that this isn’t a “rejection of conservative perspectives” but a nod to “truth and grace,” rings hollow when the grace flows one way. As Stratton asked, “Is my administration… giving a space for not only diversity of being but diversity of thought?” The answer, tragically, is no.

This infuriates me. It frustrates me to my core.

As a conservative Christian, I chose PLNU expecting a haven where faith and freedom intertwined—a place to grow as salt and light, not to tiptoe around offense. Watching my alma mater muzzle the next generation of bold witnesses? It’s a gut-wrenching abdication of the gospel’s call to “not conform to the pattern of this world” (Romans 12:2).

These students aren’t radicals; they’re patriots yearning to explore ideas, debate policies, and defend life, liberty, and the unborn without apology. Denying them that space isn’t neutrality—it’s suppression.

Yet—and this is the bitter pill many on the right won’t swallow—PLNU is private.

It takes no federal dollars, so no First Amendment cudgel forces its hand. The trustees, donors, and denominational brass can curate their ideological garden however they please. If they’ve decided TPUSA’s flavor of conservatism is too spicy for their Nazarene palate, that’s their legal right. Private entities get to err, to equivocate, to even cower.

We’ve spent years as conservatives championing that freedom: Bakers declining wedding cakes, photographers opting out of same-sex shoots, platforms moderating as they see fit. “Live and let live,” we preached, until it’s our ox being gored. Now, with boycotts brewing and donor revolts afoot, some demand PLNU “bend the knee.”

That’s not principle; that’s payback. True conservatism honors association even when it stings, trusting that sunlight and scrutiny—not state mandates—will expose the rot.

Still, sunlight demands we shine it.

To PLNU’s leaders: Heed Matthew 5:11-12—”Blessed are you when people insult you… Rejoice and be glad.” Jesus didn’t build safe spaces; He built truth-tellers. To the students: Rise like Esthers and Davids. Meet off-campus if you must; your voices can’t be vetoed forever.

And to donors and parents: Vet your tuition dollars. A “Christian” university that silences the gospel’s unashamed heralds (Romans 1:16) isn’t worth the coastal view.

PLNU, you were once my cliffs-edge sanctuary. Don’t make me mourn what you’ve become. Open the door—or watch the next generation walk out it for good.

While all facts presented in this article are accurate and supported by credible sources, any opinions or independent views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of any affiliated organizations or publishers.

Khashoggi Who? Trump’s Saudi Visit Sparks Outrage

chingraph/Getty via Canva Pro

President Trump defended Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman during a high‑profile bilateral press conference, responding bluntly to a question about the 2018 killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Trump labelled Khashoggi “extremely controversial” and insisted the crown prince “knew nothing” of the murder, adding “things happen.” Meanwhile, bin Salman offered a brief acknowledgement that the incident was “painful … a huge mistake.”

The meeting marked bin Salman’s first visit to Washington since Khashoggi’s murder, and served as a diplomatic reset for U.S.–Saudi ties. Trump praised bin Salman’s human rights track record and announced Saudi investment commitments approaching $1 trillion in the U.S. The atmosphere contrasted sharply with past years when bin Salman was a global pariah.

Trump sharply criticized the media. When asked by an ABC News reporter why Americans should trust the crown prince given U.S. intelligence findings linking him to the murder, Trump fired back, calling the outlet “fake news” and accusing the reporter of “embarrassing our guest.” He reiterated that “you don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that.”

From a conservative Christian perspective, the episode raises questions of moral accountability and U.S. foreign‑policy priorities. Leaders entrusted with international alliances bear responsibility to uphold human dignity and transparency. While strategic ties with Saudi Arabia may advance national interests, unwavering support for a leader accused of authorizing a journalist’s murder challenges principles of justice and truth.

The turning point suggests that geopolitics and economic incentives have overridden earlier demands for accountability. The crown prince’s warm reception and sweeping praise from Trump signal a recalibration: the Khashoggi case, once a major diplomatic liability, has been largely sidelined.

Epstein Coached Plaskett? Intel Committee Seat in Jeopardy

(AP Photo/John Minchillo, File)

The House Freedom Caucus introduced a resolution Tuesday to remove U.S. Virgin Islands Delegate Stacey Plaskett from the House Intelligence Committee. The move follows explosive revelations that Plaskett was “actively coached” by Jeffrey Epstein during a 2019 congressional hearing. The late billionaire, convicted of sex crimes involving minors, allegedly advised Plaskett on how to question Michael Cohen, former attorney to President Trump.

Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina led the effort, introducing the resolution as the House debated a bill to declassify more information related to Epstein. Recently released documents from the House Oversight Committee include emails and texts showing Epstein’s influence over Plaskett’s official duties.

Plaskett had accepted campaign donations from Epstein during the 2016 and 2018 election cycles, years after his conviction. Though she initially defended keeping the contributions, she later announced she would donate an equivalent amount to organizations in the Virgin Islands. Epstein owned a private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands and was charged with federal sex trafficking crimes shortly before his death in 2019.

The resolution from the Freedom Caucus highlights Plaskett’s long-standing political and personal connections to Epstein. It describes her association as deeply inappropriate, particularly given her past service in the Department of Justice and current role on the Intelligence Committee. The resolution declares that her collaboration with Epstein compromises her judgment, integrity, and fitness to serve in a role that requires access to classified intelligence.

The resolution concludes with a call for Plaskett’s immediate removal from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. It underscores the need for strict ethical standards for lawmakers, especially those overseeing the nation’s most sensitive security matters.

Healthcare Reform Trump 2025, The Revolution Begins

(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

The White House signaled Tuesday that healthcare reform is back on the national agenda. James Blair, deputy chief of staff, confirmed President Trump is preparing to propose a sweeping healthcare plan that could surpass what Congress is currently willing to support. Republican lawmakers expect a framework to lower insurance costs, expand Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), and dismantle significant portions of the Affordable Care Act.

Blair stated at a policy event that the administration will introduce legislation and explore bipartisan cooperation. However, if Democrats reject negotiations, the White House is prepared to use the budget reconciliation process, which bypasses the Senate filibuster. According to Blair, President Trump “would like to go bigger than the Hill has the appetite for,” signaling a high-stakes legislative push.

At the same time, House Republican leaders reinforced their alignment with Trump’s direction. During a closed-door presentation, they highlighted data showing premiums have risen 80 percent since the ACA’s passage. Another statistic claimed more than half of Obamacare enrollees did not submit a single claim in the past year—raising questions about cost efficiency and value for taxpayers.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise and committee chairs are reportedly crafting a proposal that emphasizes consumer choice, transparency, and direct control over healthcare dollars. Conservative lawmakers believe removing enhanced subsidies and returning funds directly to individuals aligns with market-driven principles and fiscal responsibility.

President Trump voiced his support for a bold approach, stating that healthcare funds should go straight to the American people, not to large insurance companies. He emphasized giving Americans the freedom to negotiate and buy their own better coverage. His message: “Power to the people.”

Healthcare reform is gaining urgency as pandemic-era subsidies, extended under the Inflation Reduction Act, are set to expire by the end of 2025. Democrats have shown little interest in compromise, despite previously shutting down the government to protect these subsidies. In contrast, the Republican Study Committee is advocating a second reconciliation bill focused on restoring affordability and reducing dependency on federal programs.

Conservative voters concerned with limited government, personal responsibility, and pro-family policies will closely watch this legislative fight. The direction of American healthcare could be reshaped by how far Congress is willing to go with the Trump administration’s reform agenda.

Push to Break Up Education Department Gains Momentum

Linda McMahon
Education Department Secretary Linda McMahon (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

The Trump administration announced its latest effort to dismantle the Department of Education, explaining that new interagency agreements seek to break up federal bureaucracy.

The new partnerships with the Departments of Labor (DOL), Interior (DOI), Health and Human Services (HHS), and State will improve management of education programs by leveraging the skills presented within the other Departments.

According to the Education Department, the DOL will take part in the Elementary and Secondary Education Partnership to “empower parents and states, promote innovation, and deliver program improvements in pursuit of better outcomes for students in elementary and secondary education,” a press release on the matter explains. The DOL will further participate in a Postsecondary Education Partnership.

With DOI, the Education Department will launch the Indian Education Partnership to solidify the agency as the “key point of contact for Tribes and Native students.”

With HHS, the Education Department will establish the Foreign Medical Accreditation Partnership and the Child Care Access Means Parents in School Partnership.

Alongside the State Department, the Department of Education will create the International Education and Foreign Language Studies Partnership.

“The Trump Administration is taking bold action to break up the federal education bureaucracy and return education to the states,” Secretary of Education Linda McMahon stated. “Cutting through layers of red tape in Washington is one essential piece of our final mission. As we partner with these agencies to improve federal programs, we will continue to gather best practices in each state through our 50-state tour, empower local leaders in K-12 education, restore excellence to higher education, and work with Congress to codify these reforms. Together, we will refocus education on students, families, and schools – ensuring federal taxpayer spending is supporting a world-class education system.”

President Donald Trump signed an executive order in March to begin dismantling the Department of Education.

“Closing the Department of Education would provide children and their families the opportunity to escape a system that is failing them,” the order declared, adding, “Ultimately, the Department of Education’s main functions can, and should, be returned to the States.”

123...3,834Page 1 of 3,834
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2025 American Faith Media Network. All rights reserved.