Fox News Channel
GOP Rep. Gill: MN Welfare Fraud Money ‘Could Have Been Funneled to Al-Shabaab Terrorists in Somalia’
During an appearance on Fox News Channel's "Hannity," Rep. Brandon...
Don't miss...
Afroman turns police raid into a win: ‘Blessing in disguise’ after free speech victory
Last month, American rapper Afroman (real name Joseph Edgar Foreman) won a defamation lawsuit against Ohio sheriff’s deputies who raided his home in 2022. Acting on a tip about drugs and kidnapping, the deputies kicked down his door with guns drawn, ransacked the house, and seized some cash — all captured on his home security cameras.
No drugs or evidence was found, and no charges were filed. Afroman then turned the raid footage into viral parody videos, including the hit “Lemon Pound Cake,” which prompted the deputies to sue him for defamation. On March 18, an Ohio jury ruled in his favor on the grounds of free speech.
Now he joins Matt Kibbe, BlazeTV host of “Kibbe on Liberty” to discuss the raid, the lawsuit, and what the victory means for free speech in America.
Afroman, who’s currently on tour, says that the incident with the Ohio deputies has turned out to be “a blessing in disguise,” as people have been showing their support like never before.
“We got way more people than I usually have, and man, you can feel it. I’’s something new in the air. Man, I’m back like Tina Turner after ‘What’s Love Got to Do With It,’” he laughed.
But before the victory, life was feeling dark, he admits.
“You start questioning your manhood when people come to where your family live and they kick the place in. … It’s outrageous for people to come to your house and tear it up — especially when they got all their information wrong,” he tells Kibbe.
Even after the cops found nothing in Afroman’s home, the arrogance and ill will they carried into the raid lingered throughout the lawsuit, he recounted. “They were unapologetic and sarcastic and kind of delighting in the fact that they did vandalize my property.”
The trial, he says, was “set up in the police officers’ favor.”
“They dismissed my claims before I even went to court, so I was just in court to discuss how much money I was going to pay, you know, the vandals and thieves,” he recounts, adding that the warrant used to access his home had many “flaws,” but the court refused to address it.
However, Afroman nonetheless won the case. The jury ruled that his videos, which he says he made to help “pay for the damages” caused by the deputies, were protected under his free speech rights.
“Ultimately, in a nutshell, the police officers lost the case, and freedom of speech prevails in America,” he says triumphantly.
But freedom of speech wasn’t the end of Afroman’s victory. The lawsuit ended up drawing unprecedented attention to his album and music videos.
“[Those cops] did more for my social media in three days than I could do for myself in 15 years,” he says, noting that he gained “800,000 followers” in a matter of days because of the lawsuit.
But the biggest victory remains the protection of the First Amendment.
“Some countries, you can’t say nothing. You got to shut up. You can’t speak out against the government. … But one of the beautiful things about America is, you know, you can speak,” he says.
“So, thank God I have it, and it’s the one thing that brought me justice.”
To hear the full interview, watch the video above.
Want more from Matt Kibbe?
To enjoy more of Matt’s liberty-defending stance as he gets in the face of the fake news establishment, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Afroman turns police raid into a win: ‘Blessing in disguise’ after free speech victory
Last month, American rapper Afroman (real name Joseph Edgar Foreman) won a defamation lawsuit against Ohio sheriff’s deputies who raided his home in 2022. Acting on a tip about drugs and kidnapping, the deputies kicked down his door with guns drawn, ransacked the house, and seized some cash — all captured on his home security cameras.
No drugs or evidence was found, and no charges were filed. Afroman then turned the raid footage into viral parody videos, including the hit “Lemon Pound Cake,” which prompted the deputies to sue him for defamation. On March 18, an Ohio jury ruled in his favor on the grounds of free speech.
Now he joins Matt Kibbe, BlazeTV host of “Kibbe on Liberty” to discuss the raid, the lawsuit, and what the victory means for free speech in America.
Afroman, who’s currently on tour, says that the incident with the Ohio deputies has turned out to be “a blessing in disguise,” as people have been showing their support like never before.
“We got way more people than I usually have, and man, you can feel it. I’’s something new in the air. Man, I’m back like Tina Turner after ‘What’s Love Got to Do With It,’” he laughed.
But before the victory, life was feeling dark, he admits.
“You start questioning your manhood when people come to where your family live and they kick the place in. … It’s outrageous for people to come to your house and tear it up — especially when they got all their information wrong,” he tells Kibbe.
Even after the cops found nothing in Afroman’s home, the arrogance and ill will they carried into the raid lingered throughout the lawsuit, he recounted. “They were unapologetic and sarcastic and kind of delighting in the fact that they did vandalize my property.”
The trial, he says, was “set up in the police officers’ favor.”
“They dismissed my claims before I even went to court, so I was just in court to discuss how much money I was going to pay, you know, the vandals and thieves,” he recounts, adding that the warrant used to access his home had many “flaws,” but the court refused to address it.
However, Afroman nonetheless won the case. The jury ruled that his videos, which he says he made to help “pay for the damages” caused by the deputies, were protected under his free speech rights.
“Ultimately, in a nutshell, the police officers lost the case, and freedom of speech prevails in America,” he says triumphantly.
But freedom of speech wasn’t the end of Afroman’s victory. The lawsuit ended up drawing unprecedented attention to his album and music videos.
“[Those cops] did more for my social media in three days than I could do for myself in 15 years,” he says, noting that he gained “800,000 followers” in a matter of days because of the lawsuit.
But the biggest victory remains the protection of the First Amendment.
“Some countries, you can’t say nothing. You got to shut up. You can’t speak out against the government. … But one of the beautiful things about America is, you know, you can speak,” he says.
“So, thank God I have it, and it’s the one thing that brought me justice.”
To hear the full interview, watch the video above.
Want more from Matt Kibbe?
To enjoy more of Matt’s liberty-defending stance as he gets in the face of the fake news establishment, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
The AI backlash is going viral. Here’s how Trump wants to fix that.
Public distrust of AI platforms has reached an all-time high, especially when it comes to users’ private data. Not only are people leery of the AI platforms themselves, but they’re also concerned over how the government can access and use this information. Until recently, AI development felt like the Wild West, with little regulation to get in the way of supposed innovation. That’s all about to change, however, with a brand-new federal bill based on the big national framework Trump rolled out in advance.
The study
In late March, cybersecurity software company Malwarebytes conducted a survey among its newsletter readers, asking them to share their thoughts on AI and user privacy. After collecting 1,200 responses, the results were clear: A staggering 90% of readers simply don’t trust AI with their data.
There are a lot of good things in the bill, but it falls short in other key areas.
One of the main distrust drivers stems from fears of “personal data being used inappropriately” by both corporations and the government. Recent large data breaches that put user credentials directly on the dark web, along with commercial surveillance campaigns, have further contributed to the problem.
To combat the distrust, users have turned to privacy tools, such as VPNs, ad blockers, and identity theft protection services. However, these only go so far when AI platforms can circumvent the usual digital defense mechanisms to learn more about your online presence than it was ever meant to know.
The only firm solution to assuage public distrust is to give the AI companies some legal guardrails to ensure that they don’t overstep the rights and security of the people, with the majority of respondents agreeing that they “support national laws regulating how companies can collect, store, share, or use our personal data.”
The bill
A new federal bill proposed by Senator Marsha Blackburn aims to bridge the gap between AI’s fast-paced development and shielding the public from emerging dangers brought on by these rapidly evolving platforms. Dubbed the Trump America AI Act, the bill will codify President Trump’s previously touted National AI Legislative Framework by focusing on two major goals: protection and empowerment of the following:
1. Protections for children
AI developers are required to “prevent and mitigate foreseeable harm to users” with an emphasis on protecting the data, mental health, and safety of minors. AI developers can also be held legally accountable for any damage done by a failure to comply.
- Pro: AI providers would be immediately responsible for their chatbots encouraging and even coaching young and vulnerable people on how to take their own lives.
- Con: AI developers will need a way to verify the age of their users, potentially leading to the mass collection of user IDs, resulting in a digital database. Also, while the bill protects minors’ user data, adults are exempt, failing to solve the concerns expressed in Malwarebytes’ survey.
2. Protections for communities
U.S. companies across all industries, as well as federal agencies, must send quarterly reports to the Department of Labor that detail AI-related impacts on the workforce, including job layoffs and displacements. Data centers are also barred from siphoning energy resources from communities and driving up prices.
- Pro: As AI-driven layoffs have already begun, this is a good first step to highlight how AI realistically affects the unemployment rate.
- Con: Although companies must report AI-related job losses, the bill doesn’t prevent the displacement of employees outright. Companies can still fire employees en masse in a way that would cripple the workforce, impact the economy, and drive the U.S. toward forced universal basic income.
RELATED: Elon Musk’s Terafab is coming, and you’re not ready
onurdongel/Getty Images
3. Protections for intellectual property
AI companies are prohibited from feeding their LLMs with copyrighted materials, including books, movies, music, and more. Under the bill, AI is excluded from fair use under the Copyright Act.
- Pro: Content creators no longer have to worry about their creative catalogs being stolen, uploaded, copied, and remixed into new bodies of work when prompted by users on any given platform. They retain full ownership of their content without threat of subjugation.
- Con: A lack of copyrighted information could lead to gaps in AI platforms’ knowledge graphs, potentially slowing or even stifling development.
4. Protections for conservatives
AI companies are banned from injecting woke ideologies into their large language models, and AI chatbots are no longer allowed to express biases against conservative ideas and values, all of which will be verified through third-party audits.
- Pro: Despite efforts to attract support on the right, many Big Tech giants are still dominated by left-wing elites. These safeguards will ensure that their personal and factional beliefs don’t poison the datasets behind their platforms, instead aiming to support truth and facts.
- Con: The bill isn’t specific enough in defining the woke ideas, political biases, and discrimination it aims to prevent. Unless the bill intends to leave a loophole for the left to exploit, these exact parameters need to be spelled out, lest they be left open to interpretation.
5. Protections for innovation
One of President Trump’s biggest AI goals is to secure America’s place as the global leader in AI technology. As such, this bill encourages partnerships between the government, businesses, and education to accelerate research and development with limited barriers to the infrastructure needed for rapid growth.
- Pro: This piece of the bill ultimately centralizes the resources underpinning the United States’ AI development, including computing power, datasets, and advanced infrastructure. By combining the knowledge and experience of multiple groups across various expertise with the best technology available, our AI program will theoretically evolve even faster than it already has over the last several years.
- Con: Centralized AI development that happens too quickly could potentially lead to developmental mistakes with big consequences, such as launching untested models that underperform, building agents that aren’t fully capable of completing the jobs they’re designed to do, and even causing economic instability should an AI bot or agent run rogue within critical infrastructure, such as businesses, medical facilities, and even military applications.
History in the making
This is a unique time in history. Society has never witnessed a more disruptive technology than generative artificial intelligence, and it takes a lot of watching, waiting, debating, and legislating to get the regulations right for a piece of tech that will touch nearly every facet of modern life.
The Trump America AI Act is merely a launch pad — a starting point — that will guide America’s future of AI research, development, and execution for decades to come. There are a lot of good things in the bill, but it falls short in other key areas:
- It doesn’t protect adult users’ privacy, especially in terms of user data and surveillance.
- It doesn’t protect human workers from mass layoffs and unemployment.
- It indirectly encourages a digital ID database for age verification with no clear guidelines on how IDs should be gathered, stored, or deleted.
That said, AI regulation has to start somewhere, and the Trump America AI Act is still in its infancy. There will be opportunities to amend the bill as it moves through the legislative process. For now, this version offers a solid foundation for governing the AI tech of tomorrow.
The AI backlash is going viral. Here’s how Trump wants to fix that.
Public distrust of AI platforms has reached an all-time high, especially when it comes to users’ private data. Not only are people leery of the AI platforms themselves, but they’re also concerned over how the government can access and use this information. Until recently, AI development felt like the Wild West, with little regulation to get in the way of supposed innovation. That’s all about to change, however, with a brand-new federal bill based on the big national framework Trump rolled out in advance.
The study
In late March, cybersecurity software company Malwarebytes conducted a survey among its newsletter readers, asking them to share their thoughts on AI and user privacy. After collecting 1,200 responses, the results were clear: A staggering 90% of readers simply don’t trust AI with their data.
There are a lot of good things in the bill, but it falls short in other key areas.
One of the main distrust drivers stems from fears of “personal data being used inappropriately” by both corporations and the government. Recent large data breaches that put user credentials directly on the dark web, along with commercial surveillance campaigns, have further contributed to the problem.
To combat the distrust, users have turned to privacy tools, such as VPNs, ad blockers, and identity theft protection services. However, these only go so far when AI platforms can circumvent the usual digital defense mechanisms to learn more about your online presence than it was ever meant to know.
The only firm solution to assuage public distrust is to give the AI companies some legal guardrails to ensure that they don’t overstep the rights and security of the people, with the majority of respondents agreeing that they “support national laws regulating how companies can collect, store, share, or use our personal data.”
The bill
A new federal bill proposed by Senator Marsha Blackburn aims to bridge the gap between AI’s fast-paced development and shielding the public from emerging dangers brought on by these rapidly evolving platforms. Dubbed the Trump America AI Act, the bill will codify President Trump’s previously touted National AI Legislative Framework by focusing on two major goals: protection and empowerment of the following:
1. Protections for children
AI developers are required to “prevent and mitigate foreseeable harm to users” with an emphasis on protecting the data, mental health, and safety of minors. AI developers can also be held legally accountable for any damage done by a failure to comply.
- Pro: AI providers would be immediately responsible for their chatbots encouraging and even coaching young and vulnerable people on how to take their own lives.
- Con: AI developers will need a way to verify the age of their users, potentially leading to the mass collection of user IDs, resulting in a digital database. Also, while the bill protects minors’ user data, adults are exempt, failing to solve the concerns expressed in Malwarebytes’ survey.
2. Protections for communities
U.S. companies across all industries, as well as federal agencies, must send quarterly reports to the Department of Labor that detail AI-related impacts on the workforce, including job layoffs and displacements. Data centers are also barred from siphoning energy resources from communities and driving up prices.
- Pro: As AI-driven layoffs have already begun, this is a good first step to highlight how AI realistically affects the unemployment rate.
- Con: Although companies must report AI-related job losses, the bill doesn’t prevent the displacement of employees outright. Companies can still fire employees en masse in a way that would cripple the workforce, impact the economy, and drive the U.S. toward forced universal basic income.
RELATED: Elon Musk’s Terafab is coming, and you’re not ready
onurdongel/Getty Images
3. Protections for intellectual property
AI companies are prohibited from feeding their LLMs with copyrighted materials, including books, movies, music, and more. Under the bill, AI is excluded from fair use under the Copyright Act.
- Pro: Content creators no longer have to worry about their creative catalogs being stolen, uploaded, copied, and remixed into new bodies of work when prompted by users on any given platform. They retain full ownership of their content without threat of subjugation.
- Con: A lack of copyrighted information could lead to gaps in AI platforms’ knowledge graphs, potentially slowing or even stifling development.
4. Protections for conservatives
AI companies are banned from injecting woke ideologies into their large language models, and AI chatbots are no longer allowed to express biases against conservative ideas and values, all of which will be verified through third-party audits.
- Pro: Despite efforts to attract support on the right, many Big Tech giants are still dominated by left-wing elites. These safeguards will ensure that their personal and factional beliefs don’t poison the datasets behind their platforms, instead aiming to support truth and facts.
- Con: The bill isn’t specific enough in defining the woke ideas, political biases, and discrimination it aims to prevent. Unless the bill intends to leave a loophole for the left to exploit, these exact parameters need to be spelled out, lest they be left open to interpretation.
5. Protections for innovation
One of President Trump’s biggest AI goals is to secure America’s place as the global leader in AI technology. As such, this bill encourages partnerships between the government, businesses, and education to accelerate research and development with limited barriers to the infrastructure needed for rapid growth.
- Pro: This piece of the bill ultimately centralizes the resources underpinning the United States’ AI development, including computing power, datasets, and advanced infrastructure. By combining the knowledge and experience of multiple groups across various expertise with the best technology available, our AI program will theoretically evolve even faster than it already has over the last several years.
- Con: Centralized AI development that happens too quickly could potentially lead to developmental mistakes with big consequences, such as launching untested models that underperform, building agents that aren’t fully capable of completing the jobs they’re designed to do, and even causing economic instability should an AI bot or agent run rogue within critical infrastructure, such as businesses, medical facilities, and even military applications.
History in the making
This is a unique time in history. Society has never witnessed a more disruptive technology than generative artificial intelligence, and it takes a lot of watching, waiting, debating, and legislating to get the regulations right for a piece of tech that will touch nearly every facet of modern life.
The Trump America AI Act is merely a launch pad — a starting point — that will guide America’s future of AI research, development, and execution for decades to come. There are a lot of good things in the bill, but it falls short in other key areas:
- It doesn’t protect adult users’ privacy, especially in terms of user data and surveillance.
- It doesn’t protect human workers from mass layoffs and unemployment.
- It indirectly encourages a digital ID database for age verification with no clear guidelines on how IDs should be gathered, stored, or deleted.
That said, AI regulation has to start somewhere, and the Trump America AI Act is still in its infancy. There will be opportunities to amend the bill as it moves through the legislative process. For now, this version offers a solid foundation for governing the AI tech of tomorrow.
Miguel Tanfelix, sasabak sa unang solo hosting stint para sa upcoming travel show na ‘Planet XP”
_2026_04_11_23_36_54.jpg)
Hindi naitago ni Miguel Tanfelix ang kaniyang excitement sa kaniyang unang solo hosting stint para sa upcoming travel show na “Planet XP.”
Miguel Tanfelix, sasabak sa unang solo hosting stint para sa upcoming travel show na ‘Planet XP”
Hindi naitago ni Miguel Tanfelix ang kaniyang excitement sa kaniyang unang solo hosting stint para sa upcoming travel show na “Planet XP.”
DMW urges Filipinos in Lebanon to avail of repatriation amid attacks
The Department of Migrant Workers (DMW) is urging Filipinos in Lebanon to avail themselves of government repatriation efforts as tensions escalate following continued attacks by Israeli forces.
DMW urges Filipinos in Lebanon to avail of repatriation amid attacks
The Department of Migrant Workers (DMW) is urging Filipinos in Lebanon to avail themselves of government repatriation efforts as tensions escalate following continued attacks by Israeli forces.
Alex Eala set to face Leylah Fernandez in Stuttgart Open Round of 32
Alexandra “Alex” Eala is set to face Leylah Fernandez in the Stuttgart Open Round of 32 as she continues her clay-court swing in Germany.
Karl Eldrew Yulo finishes 7th in floor exercise finals of Gymnastics World Cup Croatia leg
Karl Eldrew Yulo finished seventh in the floor exercise finals of the Gymnastics World Cup in its final leg in Osijek, Croatia, on Saturday.
