The Supreme Court just handed Trump the nuclear key: the authority to fire entrenched Deep State agents embedded across federal agencies. For the first time in 90 years, the President can dismantle the bureaucratic dictatorship that’s hijacked our Republic.

FOR 90 YEARS, THE PRESIDENCY WAS A PRISON..

Since 1935, unelected operatives hid inside “independent” agencies like the FTC, SEC, and CPSC. These ideological soldiers wrote regulations like laws. Enforced them like tyrants. And they couldn’t be fired—not even by the President.

Until now.

THE COURT SWINGS THE HAMMER – TRUMP TAKES THE SWORD..

In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court confirmed President Trump’s power to remove Mary Boyle, Richard Trumka Jr., and Alexander Hoehn-Saric from the CPSC—shattering the legal shield created by the New Deal’s corrupt legacy.

This isn’t just a ruling. It’s a strike against the Deep State’s fortress. It cracks the entire foundation of Humphrey’s Executor—the case that let federal commissioners rule without accountability.

TRUMP CAN NOW:

• Purge federal agencies of leftist loyalists.

• Terminate obstructive commissioners.

• Seize control of energy, labor, commerce, and finance.

• Reclaim the executive power STOLEN from We The People.

The CPSC falls first. But 700 other Deep State seats could collapse next.

THE SILENT COUP IS BEING REVERSED..

For decades, elections didn’t matter. Permanent bureaucrats ran the country. Same agenda, same handlers, different puppet Presidents.

Now, that loop is broken. The regime’s firewall is burning. And they know it.

TRUMP’S WAR POWER IS RESTORED..

In 2016, Trump was surrounded. Saboteurs on every side. He couldn’t remove them. He couldn’t override them. That was the trap.

Now, that trap is gone.

This ruling unleashes him to:

• Clean house.

• Burn shadow governance to the ground.

• Rebuild an executive branch LOYAL TO THE PEOPLE.

This isn’t just a legal technicality. It’s the beginning of a federal exorcism.

THE DEEP STATE IS CORNERED – AND TRUMP HOLDS THE AXE..

No more “independence.” No more untouchables. No more invisible rulers with unearned power.

The Great Reclamation has begun.

And this time—they can’t stop him.

by Barron Trump

Steven Richards, Just the News

Hamas leaders are likely to be emboldened to carry on fighting by French and British proposals to recognize a Palestinian state in a break with Trump..

Frustrated by the deadlocked peace negotiations between Israel and Hamas, and seeing the chances of a two-state solution slipping away, several European countries led by the United Kingdom and France have now promised to recognize an independent Palestinian state to reaffirm their commitment to a permanent settlement.

However, far from encouraging a ceasefire in the conflict that has raged in the Gaza Strip for nearly two years, European efforts will only encourage Hamas to continue fighting, prolonging the conflict that has devastated Gaza, Trump administration officials and experts warn.

“You’re rewarding Hamas if you do that. I don’t think they should be rewarded,” President Donald Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One earlier this week while returning from a trip to Scotland.

Trump also previously criticized French President Emmanuel Macron’s July 24 vow to officially recognize a Palestinian state while downplaying the impact that European countries would have on the ongoing ceasefire and hostage negotiations, saying it wouldn’t “change anything.”

“The president expressed his displeasure and his disagreement with the leaders of France, the United Kingdom and Canada,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters at a press briefing Thursday. “He feels as though that’s rewarding Hamas at a time where Hamas is the true impediment to a ceasefire and to the release of all of the hostages.”

France and Britain, erstwhile global powers that have declined in importance under the American security umbrella, nevertheless hold some weight in the Middle East, a region previously colonized by the two countries following the First World War. Both countries have long advocated for a two-state solution, a proposal that would see an independent Israel and Palestine coexist alongside one another as homelands for their respective peoples.

But the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas, which is a designated terrorist group in the United States, has brutalized the notion that a peaceful coexistence is within immediate reach. Despite attempts by the United States to mediate a hostage rescue and ceasefire, negotiations between the sides have stalled, with no end to the conflict in sight.

Both the French and the British argue that moving to formally recognize a State of Palestine in the coming months – teaming up with Saudi Arabia and a coalition of Arab states – is important for charting a path forward for a post-conflict Gaza and West Bank that preserves the dream of a two-state solution.

“[The] prospect of two states, whose rights are recognized and respected, is in mortal danger,” said French Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs Jean-Noël Barrot at a United Nations conference on the Palestinian issue July 28.

“It is threatened by the barbaric attack of 7 October,” it is “Threatened by the unprecedented savagery and cruelty that Hamas terrorists unleashed,” and “Threatened by the shameful fate of the hostages who are still being held,” continued Barrot, referring to Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack on Israel.

But, it is also “threatened by the indefinite prolongation of Israel’s military operations in Gaza, launched in turn, which have long since ceased to have any military or political justification,” Barrot added, placing blame on Israel for mass displacement of Gazan civilians, destroyed places of worship, schools, hospitals and poor distribution of humanitarian aid.

The two-state solution “is about to give way to perpetual confrontation,” he also said. “That is something that France simply cannot resign itself to.”

The following day, United Kingdom Prime Minister Kier Starmer echoed the French minister, warning that a permanent peace settlement between the two sides is “under threat” by the ongoing conflict.

Starmer vowed that the United Kingdom would recognize an independent Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly meeting in September if the Israelis and Hamas do not make meaningful progress towards a ceasefire that includes Hamas releasing hostages, Israel increasing access to humanitarian aid, and Israel agreeing to commit to “a long-term, sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a Two-State Solution.”

But, President Trump and his diplomatic officials have pushed back on this Europe-led effort to recognize a Palestinian state, characterizing it as unproductive at best and a gift to Hamas at worst. Ultimately, they view the European effort as more likely to prolong the conflict rather than bring about a peaceful outcome.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says the decision to recognize a Palestinian state later this year if no ceasefire is reached only encourages Hamas to obstruct any negotiations in the meantime.

“If Hamas refuses to agree to a ceasefire, it guarantees a Palestinian state will be recognized by all these countries in September,” Rubio said in an interview on Fox News Radio on Thursday. “So they’re not going to agree to a ceasefire. I mean, it’s so clumsy.”

By threatening to recognize a Palestinian state to spur peace negotiations, France and Britain are placing pressure on the wrong party. According to the Trump administration, Hamas is the main party stalling negotiations, while Israel has shown a willingness to make concessions to achieve a ceasefire.

David May, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies who focuses his research on Israel and Palestine, told Just the News that “Hamas will only compromise when it feels intense pressure and when it thinks that continued fighting would present an existential danger to the group” because the group is primarily motivated by destruction of the Israeli state.

“Almost immediately after European support for recognizing a Palestinian state started dominating headlines, Hamas began changing agreed-upon ceasefire terms and introducing new demands,” May said. “When Europe places all the demands on Israel and doesn’t condition them on requirements of Hamas, the Iran-backed terrorist group just has to sit back and let European pressure do the work for it.”

The day after French President Macron vowed to recognize a Palestinian state, ceasefire and hostage negotiations with Hamas broke down over what the United States said was Hamas’s unwillingness to negotiate. The United States and Israel announced they were pulling out of the talks with Hamas because the American president said the group “didn’t want to make a deal.”

“I think they want to die. And it’s very bad. And it got to be to a point where you’re going to have to finish the job,” President Trump told reporters. Trump’s chief negotiator Steve Witkoff also blamed Hamas for the breakdown.

It is unclear whether the terror group was made aware of the French president’s announcement before it submitted the latest ceasefire proposal, which was unacceptable to the Israeli and U.S. negotiators.

Nevertheless, the European support for a Palestinian state appears to have emboldened the group. Hamas later praised the French and British promises of Palestinian recognition, even though both countries said that it would be unacceptable for the terror group to remain in control of the Gaza Strip.

“Any effort made at the international level to support our Palestinian people and their legitimate rights is appreciated and welcomed,” Hamas said in a statement. The group also demanded the “unconditional recognition” of a Palestinian state, the New York Times reported.

May said that the European intervention would end up having the “opposite effect” from what they intended.

“Rather than empowering moderate Palestinians, as the Europeans hope would happen, it would have the opposite effect,” May said. “Not only is there no credible moderate Palestinian leadership, this action as a result of a war Hamas started would prove to the Palestinians that they can only achieve independence through violence, and Hamas will be crowned as the deliverer of Palestinian statehood.”

The U.S. Senate confirmed former Fox News star and longtime Trump ally Jeanine “Judge Jeanine” Pirro as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia.

It can be recalled that President Trump appointed Pirro to the position following Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC)’s derailment of Ed Martin’s Senate confirmation in May.

Tillis, who voted to confirm Biden’s radical pick for Attorney General Merrick Garland, told reporters that he opposes the nomination of Ed Martin for DC US Attorney for political reasons.

He said he would have supported Martin for any district except the District of Columbia.

President Trump described her as “one of the Top District Attorneys in the History of the State of New York.”

Trump: Jeanine Pirro, I have no doubt, will be an exceptional US Attorney for the District of Columbia, one of the truly most important positions in our country of any position, where she will restore public safety in our nation’s capital, break up vicious street gangs and criminal networks, and ensure equal justice under the law. You’ll see very, very big improvements in the DC area, that I can promise you.

On Saturday evening, the U.S. Senate confirmed Jeanine Pirro as the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia with a razor‑thin 50–45 vote.

More from CBS:

The Senate on Saturday approved the nomination of Jeanine Pirro, an ardent loyalist of President Trump and a Fox News fixture, confirming the cable news personality to a top prosecutor post in Washington, D.C.

Pirro, a former county prosecutor and elected judge, was confirmed in a 50-45 vote. She has been in the job as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia on an acting basis since May. Before then, she co-hosted “The Five” on Fox News on weekday evenings, where she frequently interviewed Mr. Trump.

The U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia is a powerful position with a huge staff, budget and portfolio. Her confirmation came days after the Senate approved the nomination of Emil Bove, Mr. Trump’s former defense lawyer, to serve on a U.S. appeals court.

Majority Leader John Thune said the Senate will adjourn until Sept. 2 once they finish with the round of votes scheduled for Saturday evening.

“I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourns to then convene for pro forma session only,” Thune said.

Senators have 12 votes remaining following Pirro’s confirmation, which is why Thune asked for senators to stay in the chamber to expedite votes. There was no objection.

Pirro’s elevation comes amid intense uproar from Senate Democrats and the far-left legal establishment.

They had vociferously attacked her as an election‑denier, citing her role in amplifying the “Big Lie,” and filed smears accusing her of being an unelected partisan operative in the nation’s capital.

Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin even wrote Senate leadership calling her “a partisan instrument of the Donald Trump administration,” urging outright rejection of her nomination.

“I write with grave concern about President Trump’s nomination of Jeanine Pirro to lead the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. Over the past decade, Ms. Pirro has consistently demonstrated that her loyalty lies with Donald Trump the person, not with the Constitution or the rule of law.

Her blind loyalty to Trump, her embarrassing support for the ‘big lie’ that the 2020 election was rigged in the face of all evidence to the contrary and 60 federal and state court decisions rejecting such claims, her unswerving defense of convicted January 6th rioters, and her incendiary rhetoric urging President Trump to seek retribution against his alleged enemies all make clear that she lacks the intellectual honesty, personal temperament, integrity and fundamental constitutional fidelity required to lead this important office.”

Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit

A PILF review found nearly 50,000 registrants on the Empire State’s rolls are registered in at least one other state.

New York is known for a lot of things: The Big Apple, Niagara Falls, and Buffalo wings. The Empire State also lays claim to some of the worst voter rolls in the country, according to a new report from an election-integrity watchdog.

According to the Public Interest Legal Foundation, nearly 50,000 registrants on New York’s voter list are registered in at least one other state. About half of those — 24,873 registrants — are also registered in Florida. Another 6,247 have duplicate registrations in North Carolina, and another 5,724 are also on New Jersey’s voting rolls. 

PILF’s review stated 6,788 cases of duplicate or triplicate registrations were found at the same residential addresses because of name variations, typographical errors, or missing Social Security data. The mess includes 3,845 registrants with placeholder or likely false birth dates going back to the turn of the 20th century.

A sample of 15 records found six registrants who had died dating back to 1998, and four registrants who could not be matched to any Social Security or credit bureau data, putting in doubt the authenticity of the records.

“New York is a disaster,” J. Christian Adams, president and general counsel of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, told The Federalist in an interview. “They have got millions of voters in New York who don’t have complete voter files, don’t have full names, don’t have driver’s license numbers, things required under federal law.”

‘Slipping Through the Cracks’

A lawsuit filed last month by Mount Vernon City Council candidate Bill Schwartz alleges the New York City suburb of some 80,000 residents saw its voter rolls surge by 30 percent — or nearly 10,000 voters — in the course of a year, and the numbers heavily favor Democrats, the New York Post reported. The complaint asserts the city’s voter rolls include registrants born as early as 1901, more than suggesting there are dead people in Mount Vernon’s voter file. Schwartz charges the list includes registrants who have not voted in over a decade.

“The requested relief arises from documented irregularities and credible allegations of election fraud in the June 24, 2025 Democratic Primary, including the unexplained addition of over 9,600 new voter IDs, purging of enrolled voters without notice, and mismatches in voter ID and registration data,” the lawsuit states.

Schwartz lost a party primary election in June, the Post reported. Mount Vernon is a Democratic Party stronghold in Westchester County. 

“When the voter rolls are that sloppy and no one at the Board of Elections is answering questions, you start to wonder what else is slipping through the cracks — or being pushed through them,” Schwartz told the Post. “I’m asking the court to step in and make sure the November election and future elections are conducted fairly, transparently and by the book.” 

‘We’ve Got to be Vigilant’

As The Federalist reported earlier this week, voter rolls are sloppy all over. The Public Interest Legal Foundation has tracked more than 19,000 registrants on Pennsylvania’s voter rolls with second registrations in other states. PILF found north of 32,000 suspect voter records in New Jersey. In Maine, the foundation flagged 18,453 apparently deceased registrants in the state’s voter files.

PILF successfully sued the state for refusing to release voter registration records as required under the National Voter Registration Act. In internal communications uncovered during the lawsuit, the watchdog said it found Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows’ office “flagged PILF and other organizations for government staff to discredit and attack on social media.”

“Other emails show coordination with left-wing advocacy groups to portray PILF and even other sitting Secretaries of State as purveyors of disinformation in the lead-up to congressional hearings,” asserts a PILF press release. 

Dirty voter rolls in states across the country is an alarming concern as partisans prepare for next year’s midterm elections. Adams said the concern is particularly worrisome in key battleground states. 

“It’s going to make a difference in places like Wisconsin, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Nevada,” he said, adding that “Nevada is worst of all.”

Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat, told NPR just days before November’s election what Democrat elections officials have long said: the system is safe and secure. Trust us. 

 “I hope, notwithstanding that recent news, that people look at numbers … and they understand that the system really is one of integrity,” Simon told the left-leaning news outlet. He was responding to a glitch in Minnesota’s new automatic voter registration system that added nearly 1,000 noncitizens to the voter rolls. Simon said elections officials quickly caught the “mistake” and removed the ineligible voters from the database. 

PILF has sent letters to several state elections officials seeking meetings to further discuss sloppy voter rolls. Adams said failure to clean the voter lists of ineligible registrants presents a significant threat to election security. 

“We’ve got to be vigilant. We’ve go to make sure everything is being done even-handed.” 

M.D. Kittle, The Federalist

Kamala Harris on Thursday defended Joe Biden’s fitness to serve as president and blasted her fellow Democrats for “piling on” after his disastrous debate performance exposed the cognitive decline she helped conceal.

“I feel very strongly that, um, I mean, it’s an instinct of mine to be, um, someone who does not participate in piling on,” she told Stephen Colbert during an appearance on the Late Show to plug her new book about the election. “And I was not going to pile on. And I just wasn’t going to do that. And there was a lot of piling on at that time, and I just wasn’t going to participate in that.”

Utilizing her remarkable gift for off-the-cuff eloquence, Harris praised Biden for “aspiring to have integrity,” and urged Colbert and other Democrats to stop criticizing the disgraced octogenarian. “Let me say something about Joe Biden,” she said. “I have an incredible amount of respect for him. And, um, I think that the way that we should be thinking about where we are right now is to remember that we had a president of the United States who believed in the rule of law, who believed in the importance of aspiring to have integrity, and to do the work on behalf of the people.”

Less than 24 hours after announcing her decision to pass on California governor’s race in 2026, prompting speculation about a presidential comeback in 2028, Harris unveiled 107 Days, the book she “wrote” about last year’s election and why it wasn’t her fault that she lost because she didn’t have enough time to introduce herself to the American people (after serving as vice president for four years).

Harris told Colbert the book was “basically what I would offer as a behind-the-scenes, um, sharing of what it means to run for president.” Her goal was to invite normal Americans to “see from the inside what it is in a way that they can see something about themselves that tells them, ‘Hey, I can do that.'” Indeed, it’s safe to say that anytime Kamala Harris does a thing, most observers will conclude (correctly) that they could do it (better).

Colbert, the former comedian whose failure to earn money prompted CBS to abolish the Late Show, spoke truth to power by grilling Harris about her complicity in the cover-up of Biden’s decline. (Not really.) “First of all, you look rested,” he said. “I’m happy for you.” The host went on to ask a probing question that was “on everyone’s mind right now.” The question was: “How’s Doug?” Kamala cackled in response while the audience cheered. Colbert effusively praised Harris (without evidence) as a “very hopeful and dynamic presidential candidate” who was “very qualified for the presidency.” It was her eighth appearance on the show.

Asked about her decision not to run for governor of California, Harris blamed the “broken” system and said she wasn’t interested in trying to fix things from within. “I believe and I always believed that as fragile as our democracy is, our systems would be strong enough to defend our most fundamental principles,” she said. “And I think right now that, um, they’re not as strong as they need to be, and I just don’t want to, for now, I don’t want to go back in the system.”

Andrew Stiles, Washington Free Beacon

Devon Kash

The American film industry, long a bastion of cultural influence, is teetering on the edge of obsolescence, and Google’s Veo 3, an AI-powered video generation model launched in May 2025, may have delivered the fatal blow. This technological upheaval is not only a disruption of Hollywood’s economic model but a long-overdue reckoning for an industry steeped in liberal bias, out of touch with traditional values and increasingly irrelevant to the average person.

Veo 3, with its ability to generate high-quality videos from simple text prompts or static images, threatens to dismantle the bloated budgets, overpaid actors, and elitist gatekeepers of Tinseltown, while empowering independent creators to produce compelling content without the need for vast financial resources. Veo 3 is poised to end Hollywood’s reign, send its actors to the unemployment line, liberate creative individuals, and expose the industry’s liberal excesses as a relic of a bygone era. Hollywood has long been a symbol of American creativity, but its dominance has come at a cost. The industry’s reliance on massive budgets—often exceeding $200 million for a single blockbuster—has created a system where only a handful of studios, backed by corporate conglomerates, can afford to produce films.

These budgets fuel exorbitant salaries for A-list actors, who command tens of millions per project, while crews, writers, and smaller players scrape by. The result is an inefficient, top-heavy industry that prioritizes spectacle over substance, often alienating audiences who crave authentic storytelling. Veo 3 upends this model by enabling anyone with a computer and a vision to create professional-grade videos. Capable of producing 8-second clips in up to 4K resolution with synchronized audio, Veo 3 can generate everything from cinematic scenes to marketing content with stunning realism. For example, a prompt like “a cowboy riding through a dusty desert at sunset, with galloping hooves and a haunting harmonica” yields a visually and aurally immersive result, rivaling the output of multi-million-dollar productions.

This democratization of filmmaking threatens to render Hollywood’s lavish budgets obsolete, as independent creators can now compete without the need for studio backing.

The implications for Hollywood’s workforce, particularly its actors, are dire. Actors, especially those at the top, have long been the face of Hollywood’s excess, earning astronomical sums while contributing little to the creative process beyond their celebrity. Veo 3 eliminates the need for physical actors by generating lifelike characters from text descriptions. A creator can input “a grizzled war veteran delivering a stirring speech” and receive a fully realized scene, complete with nuanced expressions and synchronized dialogue, without ever hiring an actor. This capability could lead to widespread unemployment in an industry already grappling with a 12.5% unemployment rate in August 2024, a figure likely understated due to underreported claims. The Screen Actors Guild, which fought an 8-month strike in 2023 partly over AI concerns, foresaw this threat, but Veo 3’s rapid advancement has outpaced their ability to adapt. For conservatives, this shift is a market-driven correction, stripping away the privilege of an overpaid elite who often use their platforms to push progressive agendas, from climate activism to identity politics, that clash with the values of middle America.

Veo 3’s impact extends beyond economics, striking at the heart of Hollywood’s cultural dominance. The industry has long been criticized for its liberal bias, a perception rooted in its history and reinforced by its output. From the 1930s, when Warner Bros. produced “social consciousness” films promoting New Deal policies, to modern blockbusters that weave in themes of diversity, equity, and inclusion, Hollywood has often aligned itself with left-leaning ideologies. A 2011 book, Primetime Propaganda, documented how TV executives like Friends co-creator Marta Kauffman admitted to favouring liberal writers and marginalizing conservatives, creating an echo chamber that alienates conservative audiences. Recent examples, such as Disney’s Snow White reboot, criticized for its progressive messaging, and the backlash against The Marvels for its perceived “woke” undertones, highlight a disconnect with viewers who feel Hollywood prioritizes ideology over entertainment.

Hollywood’s liberal tilt is not just a creative misstep but a betrayal of American principles. Films like The Tillman Story, which portrayed Pat Tillman as an anti-war figure, and An Inconvenient Truth, criticized for exaggerating climate change claims, exemplify how Hollywood has weaponized storytelling to advance progressive narratives. The industry’s hostility toward conservatives is palpable: actors like Antonio Sabato Jr. have claimed their careers were derailed after expressing support for Donald Trump, and conservative organizations like Friends of Abe operate in secrecy to avoid professional repercussions. Veo 3’s arrival is thus seen as a divine reckoning, a tool that bypasses Hollywood’s gatekeepers and allows creators to tell stories that resonate with heartland values—stories of faith, family, and patriotism that Hollywood often ignores. The success of faith-based films like The Chosen and Sound of Freedom, which grossed $250 million on a $15 million budget, proves there’s a hungry audience for content that reflects conservative ideals.

For creative individuals, Veo 3 is a game-changer, leveling the playing field in a way that aligns with individual liberty and free-market innovation. Previously, aspiring filmmakers faced insurmountable barriers: studio approval, union regulations, and the need for multimillion-dollar budgets. Veo 3, accessible through platforms like the Gemini app, Google Flow, and Vertex AI, allows anyone to create professional-quality content for as little as $19.99 a month with a Google AI Pro subscription. A small-town filmmaker in rural America can now produce a scene of “a small-town parade with American flags and cheering crowds” without ever leaving their desk. This empowerment aligns with the conservative belief in self-reliance, freeing creators from Hollywood’s bureaucratic stranglehold and enabling them to tell stories that reflect their communities’ values.The potential for Veo 3 to foster a new wave of conservative storytelling is immense.

Unlike Hollywood, which often caters to urban, multicultural audiences, independent creators can use Veo to produce content that speaks to the heartland. A patriot in Texas could generate a short film about a veteran’s homecoming, complete with realistic visuals and stirring music, and distribute it on platforms like X or Rumble, bypassing traditional studio channels. This shift could give rise to a decentralized film industry, where creators compete based on talent and vision, not access to Hollywood’s elite networks. The success of Am I Racist?, a conservative mockumentary that grossed $12 million on a $3 million budget, shows that audiences are eager for content that challenges Hollywood’s orthodoxy. Veo 3 amplifies this trend, enabling creators to produce similar projects at a fraction of the cost.

However, Veo 3 is not without limitations, and its impact on Hollywood must be tempered by practical realities. The current 8-second clip duration restricts its use for feature-length films, requiring creators to stitch together multiple segments, which can disrupt narrative flow. Audio generation, while impressive, struggles with short speech segments, occasionally producing unnatural dialogue. Prompt accuracy is critical; vague inputs can yield subpar results, demanding a level of skill that not all amateurs possess. Additionally, regional restrictions, such as the unavailability of image-to-video features in the European Economic Area, could limit global adoption. These challenges suggest that Hollywood’s demise may not be immediate, as studios can still leverage their expertise in long-form storytelling and global distribution networks. Yet these limitations do not diminish Veo 3’s revolutionary potential.

Devon Kash

Why not just say “no deals” with Hamas at all? That seems to be Hamas’ position now that France, Canada, and the UK have decided to recognize a Palestinian state while Hamas continues to hold hostages. In fact, Hamas has stopped talking at all, save with one entity:

There is growing pessimism in Israel over the possibility that Hamas will show flexibility and return to the negotiating table, an Israeli source told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday.

The feeling within the government is that the talks are nearing collapse, an Israeli official said. “It now seems that an expanded military operation in Gaza is inevitable,” the official said.

“Hamas has cut off contact,” an Israeli source said. “There are no real negotiations with them.”

Hamas has also partially severed ties with Qatar and Egypt, another official familiar with the talks told the Post.“At the moment, they are primarily engaged in talks with Turkey,” the source said.

One can grasp why Hamas wants to cut off Israel and the US, and maybe even Egypt, which suppresses Hamas’ parent org, the Muslim Brotherhood. Why cut off Qatar, which has not just acted as an interlocutor but has sheltered Hamas leadership for more than a decade in Doha? The Qataris have not just made Hamas leaders into billionaires, they are essentially the only thing standing between them and the Mossad, which would love to make them pay for October 7.

Hamas cut off Qatar for demanding their exit from Gaza this week. The entire Arab world has had enough of Hamas, especially as a proxy for the Iranian mullahcracy. Mostly at this moment, the Arabs want them out because they are the biggest remaining obstacle to a settlement for the Palestinians, an issue about which they tired long ago:

The world’s Arab countries for the first time have joined unanimously in the call for Hamas to lay down its weapons, release all hostages and end its rule of the Gaza Strip, conditions that they said could help the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The surprise declaration, endorsed on Tuesday by the 22 member nations of the Arab League, also condemned Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, which set off the devastating war in Gaza. The statement came at a United Nations conference in New York on a two-state solution to end the decades-long conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.

“In the context of ending the war in Gaza, Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, with international engagement and support, in line with the objectives of a sovereign and independent Palestinian state,” said the declaration. It was also signed by all 27 European Union states and 17 other countries.

The Turks and the Iranians are the only countries still willing to help out Hamas. The Iranians have no way to influence events now, not after Israel and the US depantsed the IRGC in the 12 Day War, and the Turks would dearly love to interfere with Israel’s security. They have zero value as interlocutors as well, which means that Hamas simply refuses to make any deal at all that doesn’t result in renewing their grip on power.

That makes the two-state solution a moot issue at the moment. France, the UK, and Canada can “recognize” it all they want, but Israel will not stop the war without the return of the hostages, both alive and dead. The chutzpah of those nations demanding otherwise may be breathtaking, but it’s not impressive, nor will it impact the trajectory in Gaza — except to make Israel more determined to erase Hamas before they can claim statehood.

And since phased agreements would only encourage that development, the Israelis declared today that they will no longer negotiate within that framework. It’s now all or nothing, thanks largely to the incentives set by feckless Western leadership as well as Hamas’ intransigence. And the US is endorsing this new policy:

As negotiations with Hamas stall, Israel and the United States are now aligned on aiming for a comprehensive framework in place of a partial ceasefire and hostage-release deal, a senior Israeli official told reporters during a Thursday briefing.

“There will be no more partial deals,” the official was quoted as saying, explaining that Israel and the US now concur on the need to “shift from a framework for the release of some of the hostages to a framework for the release of all of the hostages, the disarmament of Hamas and the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip.”

“At the same time,” the source was quoted as saying, “Israel and the US will work to increase the humanitarian aid, while continuing the fighting in Gaza.”

This has implications for Benjamin Netanyahu’s strategy, as the Times of Israel points out:

If actualized, the new stance would mark a major shift for Israel, which came up with the phased hostage deal framework during the first year of the war, as it enabled Israel to secure the release of some of its hostages, while maintaining the ability to resume the war — something Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu needed to maintain his coalition, as far-right partners threatened to collapse the government if Israel agreed to a permanent ceasefire.

This is true, but incomplete. Phased negotiations suited Hamas far more than Israel. It allowed Hamas to seek massively unbalanced swaps between hostages and Palestinian prisoners, plus various tactical concessions from Israel. Phased negotiations also allowed for the Hamas Hokey Pokey, wherein Hamas would offer concessions, Israel would agree, and Hamas would subsequently change its position and get Western negotiators to press Israel for more concessions. 

Politically speaking, Netanyahu probably needs a deal now more than ever. However, he’s not going to concede on Hamas’ status, certainly not after the entire Arab world just told them to lay down their weapons and exit Gaza. The deal Netanyahu needs is one that ends the war on those terms. There is no point in creating phased deals short of that where Hamas attempts to evade that outcome and remain in control of Gaza. And, ironically, the moral retreat by our allies on this war has made that clearer than ever to the Israelis.

Ed Morrissey, Hotair

With apologies for bluntness, the mainstream press f[–]d around, now the mainstream press is finding out.” —Matt Taibbi.

By now, it must be kind of obvious that Mr. Putin of Russia was staged-up into a demon for the convenience of Hillary Clinton — resulting in a decade of deformed US foreign relations that has dragged us to the edge of a third world war. Nice work, Democratic Party!

I will proffer a harsh truth to you: the best outcome in Ukraine would be for Russia to win the war as expeditiously as possible, neutralize and disarm the place, change-out its illegitimate government, and let it revert to being the frontier backwater it was for eight decades previous, when it was not a problem for the other nations of the region.

Mr. Putin has put up with our country’s psychotic nonsense with remarkable patience. The idea that he seeks to conquer western Europe was a preposterous confection of the neocon crazies in our State Department and Intel “community.”

The long game for the neocon crazies has been to use NATO as the instrument to break up Russia and gain control of its resources. This was after Secretary of State James Baker told Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, in discussions over German reunification, that “not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.” Starting in 1999 with the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland, sixteen additional nations were induced to join NATO, encroaching on Russia’s borders, with new military bases and missiles. It was a stupid game.

And it failed. Ukraine was the final gambit. The US destabilized it on purpose in 2014, installed a series of governments we could control, made it a ward of US taxpayers, sprinkled it with bio-weapons labs and money laundries, and gave Mr. Zelenskyy the go-ahead to start shelling the Donbas provinces adjacent to Russia. After years of that, Mr. Putin moved to stop it in 2022. The development of drone weapons, along with US-based satellite targeting tech, has prolonged the war. But, of course, the Russians, too, have modernized their own weapons arsenal to match that. The current state of things is a slow Russian grind to defeat a Ukraine that has run out of available fighting men and is apparently short of all weapons besides its drones.

On the campaign trail, Mr. Trump promised to end the Ukraine war in a New York minute. That proved more difficult and complicated than he realized. He said lately in so many words that he has “lost patience” with Mr. Putin for failing to join a ceasefire as a prelude to peace talks. Accordingly, Mr. Trump set a fifty-day deadline and then shortened it to twelve-days, running out on August 8-9 (accounting for time zones). Failure to comply will cause Russia to suffer a new round of sanctions. Mr. Putin has shrugged off that threat, saying that time has proven Russia to be sanction-proofed.

Some kind of game is afoot in all this. Neither Trump nor Putin could possibly want to turn this fiasco in Ukraine into a greater war that will destroy what’s left of Western Civilization. You might find this startling, but for all our efforts to anathemize Russia, it is still a part of Western Civ. After its soviet experiment failed, Russia wanted above all to reintegrate economically with Europe, but the neocons here and the globalists of Europe would not allow that. They became determined instead to wreck Russia — a vicious ethos likely to have emanated from the UK, with its lingering imperial delusions. (For Germany, it has brought only economic suicide.)

You might suspect that Mr. Trump has to pretend to be tough with Russia to counter the still-lingering suspicion — germinated by the Hillary Clinton campaign a decade ago — that he is “Putin’s puppet.” By coincidence, strange or not, that trope is now unraveling with the release of the RussiaGate intel archive that the rogue DOJ and FBI squirreled away since the Trump 1.0 term in office. Mr. Patel found a trove of documentary evidence in a burn-bag in a back room at FBI headquarters. DNI Tulsi Gabbard retrieves more previously-hidden evidence by the day from the vast NSA data base. It ought to be clear now that the initial Hillary Clinton campaign prank metastasized into the worst perversion of abusive government power in our country’s history, and is yet on-going.

The major news organs, who were accomplices in RussiaGate, won’t publish or broadcast any of the recent discoveries about exactly how the hoax evolved into a body of delusion that took over the brains of half of the country and led to a string of additional vicious hoaxes including the Covid-19 operation, the stolen election of 2020, and the J-6 prosecutions. Maybe nothing can be done about the perfidious New York Times or Washington Post because the First Amendment allows lies to be printed within the limits of the libel laws. But the TV networks have additional obligations to the public interest under the broadcast regulations and they can lose their licenses. Perhaps they should and will.

For the moment, realize that we are in the middle of a maelstrom. Arrests and prosecutions are coming, and Mr. Trump’s clock is ticking on the Ukraine war. Upping the ante on the war is the last thing our country needs. The RussiaGate disclosures afford the president an out on his strong-arm tactics with Mr. Putin and his support of the Zelenskyy regime.

James Howard Kunstler

Is college worth all the expense and trouble these days? I used to think it was. But look at all the changes for the worse.

So much of what passes for a college education these days is indoctrination in political correctness.

A recent study reported in Newsweek found that one in four Gen Z college graduates regret attending university—all the trouble, all the expense, all the debt. Pew Research Center says Gen Z are those born from 1997 through 2012.

Writing for Newsweek, Suzanne Blake observes: “As artificial intelligence transforms the workplace and student debt balloons, a significant portion of Generation Z now expresses regret over their college education. According to a new survey by Resume Genius, 23 percent of full-time Gen Z workers regret attending college, and 19 percent say their degree didn’t contribute to their career.”

Blake adds, “Only 32 percent said they’re content with their education path and wouldn’t change it, according to Resume Genius.”

I am so glad that I was able to study at college in the 1970s. It was liberal, but it wasn’t Marxist.

To me, a large part of the problem is that college these days represents perhaps one of the largest “mission drifts” in history.

What was the original reason for colleges in the first place? All the original colleges and universities in North America—all of them (certainly as early as the settling and founding eras) —were thoroughly Christian. But today most of these schools stand for the exact opposite. But the liberals didn’t start these schools. They just eventually took them over, turning them away from God.

Consider just a quick run-down of these schools that many of our nation’s founders attended:

∙The original motto of Harvard was (in Latin): “For Christ and the Church”—with the word Veritas (Latin for Truth) on the college seal. In the early 20th century, they jettisoned everything but the word Veritas. Founded in 1630, named after Rev. John Harvard, a 1643 statement of the school’s goals said, “Every one shall consider the main End of his life and studies, to know God and Jesus Christ which is Eternal life. John 17.3.”

∙William and Mary was Anglican in its founding and as such, Jesus Christ was pre-eminent. Among other things, two of the Statutes of the College of William and Mary (1727) state the school’s purpose: “That the Churches of America, especially Virginia, should be supplied with good Ministers after the Doctrine and Government of the Church of England; and that the College should be a constant Seminary for this Purpose… That the Indians of America should be instructed in the Christian Religion…”

∙Yale was founded to train ministers of the Gospel in the Connecticut area in 1700, and named after the Puritan benefactor, Elihu Yale. Its 1745 charter stated, “All scholars shall live religious, godly, and blameless lives according to the rules of God’s Word, diligently reading the Holy Scriptures, the fountain of light and truth; and constantly attend upon all the duties of religion, both in public and secret.”

∙An early advertisement for King’s College, which opened in 1754 and is now Columbia University, read: “The chief thing that is aimed at in this college is to teach and engage children to know God in Jesus Christ.” The same Columbia that now sees many pro-Hamas riots.

∙Rev. Jonathan Dickinson was the first president of the College of New Jersey, which later became known as Princeton. Dickinson once said, “Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ.”  Its official motto even now is reported to be, “Under God’s Power She Flourishes.”

∙Dartmouth was originally founded for the purpose of training ministers of the Gospel and missionaries to the Indians.

And on and on it goes. Too bad we have been largely cut off from this important tradition.

In fact, the phenomenon of the university was created by the Church around 1200 AD. The University of Paris was one of the very first, and Christian theology was a key part of the curriculum.

Dr. Paul Maier of Western Michigan University once said, “You had students from England, studying in Paris who decided to go to a place where the oxen crossed the river, Oxenford, otherwise known as ‘Oxford.’ And that gave birth to Cambridge. Cambridge gave birth to John Harvard, coming over to the United States, Harvard University in 1636. That was the background of our state university system, as well as our private university system, and so on to the universities we have today. Direct Christian origin.”

Today we have cut ourselves off from the ancient wisdom found in the Scriptures, and instead find ourselves adrift in a sea of relativism. No wonder so many young graduates regret going to college.

Dr. Jerry Newcombe

“The truth is stranger than fiction” (as attributed to Mark Twain) 

Conspiracy theorists have long thought that Seth Rich’s death was an assassination facilitated by the Deep State — a Machiavellian hit by the Deep State to cover for its operation known as Russian Collusion because Rich could expose it as false from the beginning.  It was an actual “Spy vs. Spy” episode, straight out of Mad Magazine — except our side went full Stasi against the American people.  There were the DOJ, FBI, CIA, ODNI, and others in the Intelligence Community (I.C.), except NSA director Adm. Mike Rogers (See more).

With the bombshell release of documents (and here) by DNI director Tulsi Gabbard and more releases every day, Rich’s death at the hands of the Deep State is no longer a conspiracy theory.  I agree with Director Gabbard’s conclusion: Accountability and the rule of law must be restored.

Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people. …

Their egregious abuse of power and blatant rejection of our Constitution threatens the very foundation and integrity of our democratic republic.  No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to ensure nothing like this ever happens again.  The American people’s faith and trust in our democratic republic and therefore the future of our nation depends on it.

Gabbard spoke at the regular White House press conference.  CNN cut away while Gabbard was speaking.  Why?  Fraud by omission on a significant news story of the day?  The legacy media are up to their usual spin.  Politico was less biased than the rest so far.  Politico does have a link to the documents.

The circumstances surrounding the death of Rich are well known to the American Thinker readers.  I will limit this piece to new information.  I did glean one thing from these releases that is significant to the death of Seth Rich, which I’ll explain soon.

METRO DC police quickly attributed Rich’s death to a street robbery gone bad.  Any Deep State involvement was swiftly dismissed as a fantasy of conspiracy theorists by the authorities and echoed by the legacy media. 

Attorney Ty Clevenger and I have made many attempts to bring information about Rich’s death to the congressional oversight committees.  The silence has been deafening.  I empathize with A.G. Pam Bondi and FBI director Kash Patel.  Especially since the DOJ, FBI, ODNI, and CIA are principals in this conspiracy — who destroy, withhold, hide, curate, and create evidence under the guise of classification, ongoing criminal investigations, or national security from the American people. 

The absence of information leads to speculation and conspiracy theories.  Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn (ret.), a victim of egregious lawfare by the Deep State, is beginning to wonder.  Gen. Flynn knew too much, as likely did Rich.  People have little awareness of what it takes to put together a good criminal case, let alone prosecute it, especially when the DOJ is in the tank.  People’s expectations often stem from fictional accounts in movies and TV, where everything typically happens within 60 to 90 minutes.

Ty’s information was the source of this article in The Gateway Pundit:

BREAKING: Attorney Ty Clevenger Exposes FBI’s Role in Hiding Seth Rich Records and Perpetuating the Russia Hoax — Sends Scathing Letter to Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, and Trump Officials

And later:

Attorney Ty Clevenger BLASTS FBI’s “Weak” Excuses in Seth Rich Case — Demands Congress to Haul FBI Into Hearings: “Patel and Bondi Have Allowed the FBI to Continue its Pattern of Obfuscation and Delay”

On the day of Gabbard’s bombshell press release, Clevenger filed his latest motion in his FOIA case against the FBI for non-release of Seth Rich’s records.  Patel and FBI deputy director Dan Bongino recently disclosed the existence of a hidden evidence room at FBI HQ.  Senate Judiciary chairman Chuck Grassley revealed the existence of a previously hidden feature of the FBI’s record management system, “Prohibited Access,” that cloaks files from discovery by most FBI personnel and FOIA requests.  Clevenger wants the FBI to search using this cloaking feature and the hidden evidence room for Rich-related evidence.

By divine providence, I recently stumbled across this Rolling Stone article.  It is an excerpt from Andy Kroll’s book A Death on W Street.  This article included the civil defamation case brought by Matt Couch, a blogger and journalist.

I sat straight up in my chair with a chill running up my spine when I saw that journalist Michael Isikoff was a defendant/appellee in this appellate case brought by Couch. 

Matt Couch doxxed a quasi-witness in the Rich case.  Deborah Sines, an AUSA with the D.C. District Office, was assigned to the Seth Rich investigation.  There’s this: 

He [Couch] claimed that the witness had worked in the intelligence community and was possibly a “plant.” Couch said the witness had “worked for the CIA for a decade,” which there was no publicly available evidence to support.  The post went on to say that this onetime intelligence agent now worked as a veterinary technician …

Sines could hardly believe it when she read Couch’s post.  The woman listed in the post was indeed the only quasi-witness to the crime.  According to Sines, the woman said she’d been out walking her elderly dog when she heard loud bang sounds and then saw two Black men running away from the direction of the sound.  Sines hadn’t told anyone about the witness. … Neither had the detective on the case.

Yet Couch had too much specific information — down to the correct spelling of the woman’s name. … The witness had apparently told one neighbor what she’d seen and no one else.  (The witness did not respond to requests for comment.) Sines doubted the conspiracy theorists had gotten the information from the woman’s neighbor. … That left one explanation: the name had come from someone on the inside.

Couch accidentally revealed one of his sources, who was an active METRO Police officer, Douglas Berlin.  Sines traced the leak to Berlin.  Sines reported Berlin to METRO Police.  Officer Berlin later resigned after being interviewed by the I.A. unit.

Berlin’s union representative said he’d likely face a thirty-day suspension and told him to go along with it. … But Berlin refused to do it.  He resigned from the force.  “I loved that job.  It was my passion,” he would later say. …

No amount of contradictory evidence could change his mind.  And as he would later say, he was hardly the only one on the force to feel this way.  Even within DC’s own law enforcement agency, the Rich theories had seemingly found a willing audience.

As I asked in the beginning, was Seth Rich assassinated by operatives of the Deep State to prevent the exposure of the Russian Collusion narrative as false before the 2016 election?  I believe that his death warrants a complete and thorough investigation to determine one way or another.  There is more to come as this house of cards begins to fall.

As I began this tale with Twain, I will end with this: “Dead men tell no tales.”

Ron Wright is a retired detective, having served thirty-five years with Riverside P.D., Calif.  Ron earned a B.A. in political science from Cal State University, Fullerton, and a Master of Administration from the University of California, Riverside.  X @