Category: Blazetv
Rufo report confirms: Yes, illegal aliens are receiving FREE sex-change procedures in Newsom’s California
On April 16, BlazeTV host and independent journalist Christopher Rufo published a shocking report titled “California Provides Sex-Change Procedures to Homeless Illegal Aliens.”
“It feels like one of those stories that is like right-wing Mad Libs, where you take all of the most intense right-wing trigger words, you smash them into a sentence. But in this case, it’s not imaginary. It’s all real,” he says.
On this episode of “Rufo & Lomez,” Rufo and co-host Jonathan Keeperman break down the shocking details of the report, react to the on-the-ground footage, and discuss how California voters have become so morally submissive that they now tolerate — and fund — even the most absurd and humiliating policies.
Rufo begins by playing a video clip of his co-author and City Journal colleague Jonathan Choe interviewing a homeless illegal immigrant from Mexico who identifies as a transgender woman and calls himself Jacqueline.
The man confirms that he received both hormones and breast implants for free in California via Medi-Cal.
“Even though you’re undocumented, you can get it,” he said, adding that he’s “waiting” for bottom surgery.
According to Rufo’s reporting, Jacqueline is one of many homeless illegal aliens living in San Francisco’s publicly funded shelters who have received such procedures at the expense of the California taxpayer. On-the-ground interviews and video also confirmed that word is spreading south of the border, encouraging trans-identifying migrants to come for these free procedures.
“[Choe] actually went to a number of homeless shelters in San Francisco, and at each homeless shelter, he found transgender illegal migrants who told him very directly, ‘We’re here to get hormones, breast implants,’ and, as Jacqueline says, ‘bottom surgery,”’ says Rufo.
He then plays a second video featuring another transgender-identifying illegal alien named Lyca — a biological male from Honduras who says he came to the United States explicitly to take advantage of the taxpayer-funded benefits that will pay for his transition. He candidly admitted that Medi-Cal is currently paying for his hormone therapy.
Both Rufo and Keeperman agree that California voters have become so afraid of moral backlash that they’re now greenlighting policies that are abjectly insane.
“The California taxpayer is in a findom relationship with the state,” says Keeperman.
A financial domination relationship is a BDSM kink in which a submissive person gives money or gifts to a dominant person without expecting sexual favors in return. Like other related kinks, the submissive party seeks gratification through humiliation.
Keeperman argues that this same twisted dynamic is at play between the California government and its constituents.
“If you live in California and you’re, like, a good secular cosmopolitan lib … the moral decision-making is incredibly difficult. … Every decision, every behavior, every utterance is freighted with meaning and the potential for sort of catastrophic loss, or you’ll be accused of being immoral,” he explains.
“They’ve reached total fatigue, and the state just makes these demands of them — like you have to support on tax day the surgeries for transgender illegals — and they’re comforted by this because it’s like this relief,” Keeperman adds.
Rufo agrees. “The California voter is in a completely submissive moral position. It will accept any moral demand, any moral imposition, any moral cost.”
“California voters have essentially given a blanket yes, and then the layer of activists, administrators, and fanatics within the California state government processes the paperwork, so that in the end, trans illegals are getting free castration surgeries in San Francisco,” he continues.
Keeperman counters, “But the thing is, it’s not just that it’s yes to anything; it’s yes to things that are the most humiliating and the most extractive and the least practically or pragmatically productive.”
“So it’s not like they’re pining for, you know, efficient infrastructure and public transportation. I mean, I’m sure they say they want that, but that’s not what gets done,” he continues. “What gets done instead is this kind of stuff, which is just facially absurd.”
Rufo says the reason genuinely beneficial initiatives, like improved public transportation, never actually happen is because “building train tracks is hard,” while “cutting the penises off of illegal migrants” isn’t.
“As I discovered in a previous story in Oregon — I imagine the same is happening now in San Francisco — they’ve actually developed surgical castration robots, and they can castrate,” he says, “and in a single operating room, they can do two of these castrations per day now using these castration robots.”
To learn more, watch the episode above.
Want more from Rufo & Lomez?
To enjoy more of the news through the anthropological lens of Christopher Rufo and Lomez, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Rufo report confirms: Yes, illegal aliens are receiving FREE sex-change procedures in Newsom’s California
On April 16, BlazeTV host and independent journalist Christopher Rufo published a shocking report titled “California Provides Sex-Change Procedures to Homeless Illegal Aliens.”
“It feels like one of those stories that is like right-wing Mad Libs, where you take all of the most intense right-wing trigger words, you smash them into a sentence. But in this case, it’s not imaginary. It’s all real,” he says.
On this episode of “Rufo & Lomez,” Rufo and co-host Jonathan Keeperman break down the shocking details of the report, react to the on-the-ground footage, and discuss how California voters have become so morally submissive that they now tolerate — and fund — even the most absurd and humiliating policies.
Rufo begins by playing a video clip of his co-author and City Journal colleague Jonathan Choe interviewing a homeless illegal immigrant from Mexico who identifies as a transgender woman and calls himself Jacqueline.
The man confirms that he received both hormones and breast implants for free in California via Medi-Cal.
“Even though you’re undocumented, you can get it,” he said, adding that he’s “waiting” for bottom surgery.
According to Rufo’s reporting, Jacqueline is one of many homeless illegal aliens living in San Francisco’s publicly funded shelters who have received such procedures at the expense of the California taxpayer. On-the-ground interviews and video also confirmed that word is spreading south of the border, encouraging trans-identifying migrants to come for these free procedures.
“[Choe] actually went to a number of homeless shelters in San Francisco, and at each homeless shelter, he found transgender illegal migrants who told him very directly, ‘We’re here to get hormones, breast implants,’ and, as Jacqueline says, ‘bottom surgery,”’ says Rufo.
He then plays a second video featuring another transgender-identifying illegal alien named Lyca — a biological male from Honduras who says he came to the United States explicitly to take advantage of the taxpayer-funded benefits that will pay for his transition. He candidly admitted that Medi-Cal is currently paying for his hormone therapy.
Both Rufo and Keeperman agree that California voters have become so afraid of moral backlash that they’re now greenlighting policies that are abjectly insane.
“The California taxpayer is in a findom relationship with the state,” says Keeperman.
A financial domination relationship is a BDSM kink in which a submissive person gives money or gifts to a dominant person without expecting sexual favors in return. Like other related kinks, the submissive party seeks gratification through humiliation.
Keeperman argues that this same twisted dynamic is at play between the California government and its constituents.
“If you live in California and you’re, like, a good secular cosmopolitan lib … the moral decision-making is incredibly difficult. … Every decision, every behavior, every utterance is freighted with meaning and the potential for sort of catastrophic loss, or you’ll be accused of being immoral,” he explains.
“They’ve reached total fatigue, and the state just makes these demands of them — like you have to support on tax day the surgeries for transgender illegals — and they’re comforted by this because it’s like this relief,” Keeperman adds.
Rufo agrees. “The California voter is in a completely submissive moral position. It will accept any moral demand, any moral imposition, any moral cost.”
“California voters have essentially given a blanket yes, and then the layer of activists, administrators, and fanatics within the California state government processes the paperwork, so that in the end, trans illegals are getting free castration surgeries in San Francisco,” he continues.
Keeperman counters, “But the thing is, it’s not just that it’s yes to anything; it’s yes to things that are the most humiliating and the most extractive and the least practically or pragmatically productive.”
“So it’s not like they’re pining for, you know, efficient infrastructure and public transportation. I mean, I’m sure they say they want that, but that’s not what gets done,” he continues. “What gets done instead is this kind of stuff, which is just facially absurd.”
Rufo says the reason genuinely beneficial initiatives, like improved public transportation, never actually happen is because “building train tracks is hard,” while “cutting the penises off of illegal migrants” isn’t.
“As I discovered in a previous story in Oregon — I imagine the same is happening now in San Francisco — they’ve actually developed surgical castration robots, and they can castrate,” he says, “and in a single operating room, they can do two of these castrations per day now using these castration robots.”
To learn more, watch the episode above.
Want more from Rufo & Lomez?
To enjoy more of the news through the anthropological lens of Christopher Rufo and Lomez, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Dead or vanishing scientists tied to NASA, JPL, and Los Alamos: Glenn Beck’s take may surprise you
A growing list of U.S. scientists and researchers — many tied to NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, defense, nuclear, or advanced tech programs — have died or gone missing since 2023.
Nine names are dominating the headlines:
- Michael David Hicks — NASA JPL research scientist; died July 30, 2023, age 59; cause never publicly disclosed, no autopsy record found.
- Frank Maiwald — NASA JPL principal researcher (longtime colleague of Hicks); died July 4, 2024, age 61, in Los Angeles; cause not released, single obituary only, no autopsy reported.
- Anthony Chavez — Former Los Alamos National Laboratory employee; vanished May 2025, age ~78; left home on foot with belongings left behind; still missing.
- Monica Reza — Aerospace/materials scientist with NASA/JPL and AFRL-linked rocket propulsion work; disappeared while hiking in Angeles National Forest, June 22, 2025, age 60; still missing after extensive searches.
- Melissa Casias — Los Alamos National Laboratory administrative assistant (reported security clearance); vanished June 26, 2025, age 53; left after dropping off husband, phones factory-reset, car/belongings left behind, seen walking on highway; still missing.
- Nuno Loureiro — MIT plasma/fusion physicist and professor; shot multiple times at his Brookline, Massachusetts, home on December 15, 2025, and died December 16, age 47.
- Carl Grillmair — Caltech astrophysicist with significant NASA/JPL-supported work; shot and killed on his front porch in Llano, California, February 16, 2026, age 67; suspect arrested and charged.
- William Neil McCasland (Ret. Air Force Maj. Gen.) — Former AFRL commander with classified space/defense program ties; disappeared from his Albuquerque home on February 27, 2026, age 68; still missing, search ongoing.
News coverage has ramped up significantly in the past couple of weeks over this story and continues to garner national attention, but Glenn Beck thinks the conspiracy theory that these cases are all somehow connected jumps the gun.
On this episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” Glenn pushes back on the hype by illustrating how easily one can ignite a conspiracy theory.
Glenn notes that these nine cases, while speculated to be connected, are really “a mixed data set.”
“If you go through all of these things, there are some confirmed crimes with explanations. … Some of them are missing person cases. … Some are isolated homicides,” he says.
The narrative that these nine scientists worked in closely related fields, Glenn argues, is a stretch.
“Pharma, fusion, space. … That doesn’t mean that there isn’t a connection there, but nobody is showing the connection here. That’s not a tight network,” he says. “That’s anyone who is near defense-adjacent technology.”
He also rejects speculation of “institutional silence.”
“Universities and laboratories and government, they rarely disclose the details. Privacy, ongoing investigations, legal liability, phrases like ‘passed away suddenly’ — that’s standard. … That’s not evidence of concealment,” he says.
“I’m not one to dismiss conspiracy theories, but it seems like we go out looking for some things,” he continues.
To illustrate how easily a conspiracy theory can gain traction, Glenn shares some recent data from his own industry.
“In the last 12 months, I’ve had eight people in my industry die,” he says, citing longtime radio syndication executive Gary Krantz, Pittsburgh radio icon and conservative talk host Jim Quinn, award-winning Texas radio journalist Matt Thomas, WMAL radio host John Lyon, and conservative talk radio pioneer David Gold, among others.
“Of course, Charlie Kirk, we know,” he adds.
“None of these are connected, but if I wanted to, I could do [it],” says Glenn.
“I have a list of maybe 25 names. They all died in the last year.”
Glenn issues a stark warning: “Be very, very careful about propaganda. … There’s a lot of information out there, but you can take information and make it into anything you want.”
To hear more, watch the video above.
Want more from Glenn Beck?
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
TPUSA Frontlines reporter brutally attacked by Antifa mob tells Sara Gonzales the full story mainstream media won’t touch
On April 11, TPUSA Frontlines reporter Savanah Hernandez was assaulted by multiple protesters who punched her, blew whistles in her face, and shoved her to the ground while she was filming an anti-ICE protest outside the Whipple Federal Building in Minnesota, with the mob chanting, “We are Antifa.”
Now she joins Sara Gonzales, BlazeTV host of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered,” to recount the brutal attack in detail and discuss the path to accountability.
After playing the clip capturing Hernandez being violently shoved in the back, Sara asks, “How do you feel? How is your body?”
Hernandez, insisting that she does not want to “over-dramatize” the situation, admits that she is “still in pain.”
“I really do feel like this was a brutal assault, and I still at this point am baffled as to why it took place because I wasn’t there to interview anybody. I was there to simply observe,” she says.
But even non-confrontational “point-and-shoot journalism” was enough cause for violence.
It didn’t take long before Hernandez was identified as a Turning Point USA reporter. The man who discovered her identity, she says, was William Scott Kelly (also known as “DaWokeFarmer”), who was previously arrested and charged for his role in storming Cities Church in St. Paul in January this year.
“This is the same guy who, you know, incited a mob against me on Saturday, and then that mob consisted of multiple people swinging sex toys in my face, hitting me with them,” Hernandez recounts.
She then addressed the main group that allegedly assaulted her.
“There were three individuals in particular — DeYanna, Chris, and Paige Ostroushko — that were extremely aggressive,” she says.
“[DeYanna] is the first one who came up to me, began shoving me, putting her fingers in my face. Her husband came up behind me and shoved me,” she says, noting that this all happened “before the actual assault.”
“Then we found another camera angle of [Chris] instructing his own daughter to, quote, ‘Blow the whistle in her effing ear.’ So he instructed his daughter to come up to me and assault me, and she did,” Hernandez continues, as Sara plays a video capturing this exact moment.
“I want people to understand that this response happened because I was standing on a public street filming a protest. That’s it. That was the response,” Hernandez says.
Instead of retaliating, Hernandez says she actually started asking the group standard questions like, “Why are you here?” and, “Why is this important to you?”
“So, I gave them the opportunity to even utilize my platform, talk to me, and they decided to twist everything into this narrative of, ‘It doesn’t matter — you’re bad and we’re going to brutally assault you,”’ Hernandez says.
“They pre-planned this attack. They coordinated it,” she insists. “They attacked me and then in live time tried to rewrite the narrative to say that I was the agitator.”
The attack was “so horrific,” she says, that even “left-wing streamers” were saying, “Yeah, we can’t support this.”
Sara is horrified by the assault on her friend and fellow journalist.
“Someone, for the love of God, lock these people up because they’re brutal criminals,” she pleads.
Justice appears to be under way.
Chris Ostroushko, Paige Ostroushko, and Lorenzo Amadeo Garcia (Paige’s boyfriend) have been arrested and had charges recommended by the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office in connection with the April 11 assault on Hernandez.
“It is now up to the county prosecutor essentially to decide whether or not they want to bring forward those charges,” says Hernandez, who admits that she “[doesn’t] have any faith in the state” because of how liberal Minneapolis is.
“Luckily, the feds are also involved. … Both DHS and the DOJ are involved, and I’m happy to see this because I do want federal charges brought forward,” she adds.
To hear more of the conversation and see footage from the protest, watch the episode above.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Sara Gonzales exposes CAIR’s latest ploy to turn Texas students into ‘little soldiers’ for Islam
BlazeTV host and investigative journalist Sara Gonzales has been extensively reporting on what she describes as the “Islamification of Texas” — the deliberate spread of Islamic influence in the state through mosques, schools distributing Qurans, hijabs, and other Sharia materials, taxpayer-funded Islamic institutions, “Sharia compounds,” halal practices, and cultural accommodations at the expense of traditional Texas and American values.
On this episode of “Come and Take It,” Sara exposes the Council on American-Islamic Relations — which Texas has designated as a foreign terrorist organization — for pushing whitewashed lessons about Islam to be included in Texas curriculum.
“Islamists have come to conquer. They can’t conquer without brainwashing the youth. … When you do that, you can indoctrinate little soldiers one generation at a time,” says Sara.
One way they accomplish this, she explains, is by changing the curriculum so that Islam is presented as “beautiful and flowery and tolerant and diverse,” while “the beatings, the honor killings, the terror, the Islamic slave trade … the third-world mentality” are intentionally omitted.
Last week, the Texas State Board of Education held its key April 2026 meeting for first reading/approval of the new social studies and reading curriculum changes set to take place in 2030.
CAIR representatives made an unexpected appearance and testified, urging the board to reject what they called “biased” revisions to the social studies TEKS that they argued unfairly link Islam to terrorism and downplay Muslim contributions to history.
According to Texas-based news outlet Texas Scorecard, “One of [CAIR’s] arguments was that the standards ‘lack a definition of terrorism and falsely associate it with one religion by using the controversial phrase ‘radical Islam.'”
Sara agrees that “radical Islam” is a controversial phrase but not for the same reason CAIR thinks it is. “It is a little redundant to say radical Islam because the entirety of Islam is inherently radical,” she says.
During the meeting, CAIR-Austin Operations Manager Shaimaa Zayan argued, “When terrorism is not clearly defined and used only in association with Muslims, we ignite hate and prejudice against the Texas Muslim community. Definitions and labels matter, and our students deserve standards that help them objectively and critically evaluate both historical and current events.”
But Sara says it doesn’t ignite hate and prejudice but rather rightful “fear and trepidation” based on Islam’s long history of terrorism.
“Your entire ideology essentially calls for terrorism, and you guys have your [feelings] hurt because we give you credit for that?” she counters. “It’s in your books. It’s in your teachings. If you don’t like it, I don’t know … go consult Allah or whatever.”
To hear more, watch the video above.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Glenn Beck reveals what everyone is missing about the Trump Jesus meme
Last Sunday, President Trump posted an AI-generated meme of himself dressed in white and red robes, his hand appearing to hold a glowing orb, while healing a sick person in a hospital bed. Many interpreted the image as Trump depicting himself as Jesus and were deeply offended by what they perceived as religious blasphemy. Others defended the post as an innocent joke.
But Glenn Beck says all of these reactions are missing the bigger issue.
Citing a Washington post article that framed the meme as the cause of rare, strong backlash and blasphemy accusations from Trump’s evangelical and Catholic supporters, Glenn begins by calling out the outlet for politically capitalizing on a tasteless joke in order to rile up and divide Trump’s supporters.
“It’s not like Jesus is Muhammad. You can do whatever you want to Jesus in this country and nobody cares, it seems,” he says. “Since when did the Washington Post care about something that could be looked upon as blasphemy for Christians?”
“They only care because it’s political,” he argues.
Glenn explains that social media has become a powerful tool that enemies — domestic and foreign — use to push propaganda, stir up dissent, and manufacture outrage.
Research has just shown that foreign powers are doing this in America right now.
Glenn cites recent data showing that “60% of the most viral posts on X about Iran in the first weeks of the fighting came from accounts based outside of the US. Foreign accounts generated 155 million views compared to 93 million from real American viewers.”
“That’s not organic outrage, okay? That’s Iran. That’s Russia. That’s China flooding the zone with deepfakes, doctored images of sunken ships, scripted narratives designed to make us fight one another,” he argues.
These foreign powers “don’t care if you love Trump or hate Trump,” Glenn continues.
“They just need everybody at each other’s throats.”
The biggest issue with Trump’s Jesus meme, says Glenn, isn’t what it might or might not have conveyed; the biggest issue is that it served as fuel for the social media outrage machine that keeps us fighting one another, which is exactly what our enemies want.
“[Social media] is a .50-caliber machine gun aimed at your head and this civilization every single day. It’s a nuclear weapon,” he warns.
To hear more, watch the video above.
Want more from Glenn Beck?
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Sunny Hostin of ‘The View’ claims it costs $400,000 A YEAR for child care — Pat Gray loses it
“The View” is back in the headlines for spewing more ignorant nonsense.
During a discussion reacting to conservative activist Isabel Brown’s comments at CPAC, where she encouraged young women to have more children, Sunny Hostin said it was “reckless” to encourage people to have kids during the current economic climate.
“I think it’s just really reckless to be suggesting that people should have children when you now know in this country there’s this affordability crisis,” Hostin began.
BlazeTV host Pat Gray says just this statement alone is “outrageous.”
“It’s reckless to suggest people have children? Are you kidding me?” he asks in shock. “We’re already below replacement level right now … so do you want America to just disappear eventually?”
But Hostin wasn’t done.
“For a two-person household, a married household, you need over $400,000 for child care — over $400,000. Most people don’t make over $400,000,” she continued, accusing Brown of “advocating for people to be born into poverty, people not being able to feed those children, people not being able to educate those children, and people not being able to house those children at the same time when this government is cutting all of the services that would allow people to have families.”
Co-host Ana Navarro then asked a clarifying question: “$400,000 over the lifetime of the child?”
“No, it’s a year! It’s an annual income exceeding $400,000 to afford child care,” Hostin doubled down.
Pat can’t help but laugh at the absurdity of Hostin’s claim. “It’s not $400,000 a year to have a baby!” he howls.
“They are so butt stupid. It’s embarrassing. I’m embarrassed for them, and I can’t stand them.”
Pat is shocked that “The View” wasn’t forced to address Hostin’s fallacious numbers. “Is that something that the lawyer or somebody could fact-check somewhere along the lines so they come back and correct that garbage?” he asks.
But thus far, no such correction has been made.
Pat wonders how the audience of “The View” is stomaching Hostin’s lie about childrearing — “How many of their viewers have children and understand the fact that it’s not $400,000 a year to clothe them, feed them, house them?” he asks.
“They have to,” says Jeffy, arguing that “anyone with any kind of brain, even a numbskull … knows that it doesn’t take $400,000 a year for a child.”
To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.
Want more from Glenn Beck?
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
‘You’ve lost the right to exist’: Matt Walsh rips ‘incapable’ ruling in Iryna Zarutska case
Last August, 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska was fatally stabbed in an apparently random attack while riding the light rail in Charlotte, North Carolina. Last week, however, her alleged killer, Decarlos Brown Jr., was found “incapable to proceed” to trial on the state murder charge due to mental health issues.
The decision has sparked national outrage. Social media is ablaze with furious comments like “no justice for Iryna”; Republican lawmakers are warning the decision will cause more erosion of trust in the system; even some mainstream coverage is framing it as another failure of soft-on-crime policies.
BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey was certainly appalled by the decision.
“How in the world did we get here?” she asks in disbelief.
On a recent episode of “Relatable,” Daily Wire host Matt Walsh joined Allie to answer that very question.
– YouTube
Walsh begins by arguing that “the concept of being incompetent to stand trial makes no sense” and that it “shouldn’t be a category.”
“Because the way that I look at it … either you knew exactly what you were doing and you did it anyway, and that makes you evil beyond measure, or it’s true that you really don’t understand that you’re not allowed to do that, in which case, that’s all the more reason, as far as I’m concerned, why you are not fit for human society,” he explains.
Decarlos Brown Jr.’s case, as well as many other cases, is the result of the psychiatric industry “[medicalizing] the human condition,” Walsh argues.
“And now because academics, psychiatrists, and communists … have taken over criminal justice and have for decades — at least since the mid-20th century — all human evil is now just categorized as a medical problem,” he tells Allie.
The result of this inversion of objective morality is that criminals are turned into the victims.
“The justice system looks at the most evil people as victims of some sort of condition, which means that all we can do is offer them treatment. What we can’t do is actually punish them. And that’s just totally absurd and wrong,” says Walsh.
Unless it’s a “white male” who commits the crime, Allie points out.
“We see that kind of story much less often,” she says.
But “if you’re part of a victim group, you get advocacy from the public, from the media, from some kind of mob pressure, from these groups like the Innocence Project or the ACLU, and you are much more likely to be seen as absolved of your crimes or mentally unstable or something like that.”
She continues, “It’s not just that progressive ideology has medicalized the existence of evil in human nature; they’ve just done it for certain groups of people, which is even worse in my estimation.”
“Yeah, absolutely. I mean, that’s a major factor as well,” Walsh agrees.
“If you’re anything but a white male, then you can claim victim status … and then you add in the supposed mental health challenges … then you get even greater victim status.”
Regardless of the skin color of the perpetrator, Walsh entirely rejects mental illness as an excuse for criminal behavior: “What was your mental state at the time? I don’t care! … I don’t care what you were feeling; I don’t care what you were thinking. I care what you did. That’s all that matters. And if you did something this heinous … by my estimation, you’ve lost the right to exist.”
To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Domestic fraud > Iran war: Christopher Rufo says crushing blue-state scams is the GOP’s political winner
On April 3, BlazeTV host Christopher Rufo released an investigative report in City Journal documenting fraud in the state of California under current Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom. According to his team’s research, California lost at least $180 billion to fraud and improper payments in programs like Medi-Cal (California’s Medicaid), unemployment insurance, and general welfare since Newsom took office in 2019.
Rufo believes targeting domestic fraud is a fool-proof “political winner” for the Trump administration — certainly more than the Iran war, which he says is “at best a 50/50 issue.”
“Portraying Minnesota and New York and California and other bastions of blue governance as havens of outright fraud, ripping off taxpayers, seems like the kind of domestic policy agenda — along with immigration, along with a couple of other issues — that can be a winner, both substantively … but also politically,” he tells “Rufo and Lomez” co-host Jonathan Keeperman.
Keeperman wholeheartedly agrees: “[Domestic fraud] is such a good thing for us to be focusing our attention on, not just because it’s a huge problem that we need to eradicate from our public life and is creating all sorts of downstream pathologies that are making everyday life just more difficult for ordinary Americans, but because it also demonstrates … the problems of democratic governance.”
The best part is that large-scale fraud isn’t even that difficult to uncover.
“A guy like Nick Shirley just takes a camera, finds some public documentation, and just goes and knocks on some doors, and you can uncover that easily hundreds of millions, if not billions, in fraud,” he says, “and so yes, this is the best message for the GOP and for Republicans going forward.”
The mass exodus of people from California, Keeperman argues, is evidence that domestic issues are what people care about most.
“California has, despite being one of the nicest places to live in the country, has net out domestic migration and has had net out domestic migration for the last decade, if not longer,” he says.
“People are voting with their feet on this, and so yes — this is all just to say [domestic fraud] is an obvious winner.”
Rufo confirms Newsom’s direct role in California’s out-migration.
“There’s two stats that we came across in this reporting that I think are really important,” he says.
“Under Gavin Newsom, the state’s population has declined by 0.2%, which is the first time that California’s population has declined ever since it became a state … but at the same time that the population declined, Medicaid spending … for low-income people doubled.”
“And so you have the population going down and then the health care expenses under Medicaid doubling,” he explains, pointing out the vicious cycle of fraud money flowing to unions, which funds politicians, who expand the system even more.
The result, Rufo says, is a two-tiered society. The combination of astronomical taxes and high cost of living creates a population where residents are either “rich enough where it doesn’t really matter” or “poor enough where it doesn’t really matter because you have every part of your life subsidized.”
“I think that’s why people are saying, ‘I’m out,”’ he says.
To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.
Want more from Rufo & Lomez?
To enjoy more of the news through the anthropological lens of Christopher Rufo and Lomez, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Why modern rejection of God goes back to ancient church heresy: The Robertsons break it down
There was a time when God revealed himself in astonishing, tangible ways.
In the Old Testament, he led the Israelites through the wilderness by appearing as a pillar of cloud and fire; he descended on Mount Sinai with thunder, lightning, thick smoke, and a loud trumpet blast to deliver the Ten Commandments; he took the prophet Elijah to heaven in a whirlwind with a chariot and horses of fire; and the list goes on.
But since the coming of Jesus, God has been much more subtle in how he reveals himself. Many Christian testimonies include encounters with God, but they are usually experienced in quiet, personal moments.
John Luke Robertson believes this is why so many people today refuse to believe in God. On this episode of “Unashamed,” he joins Al Robertson, Zach Dasher, and Christian Huff to unpack exactly that.
John Luke points out that Jesus’ own life and ministry were clearly marked by subtlety.
“He could have said at 12 years old, ‘I’m the Messiah,’ and started it from there, but He waited till He was 30,” he explains.
Even after his ministry began, Jesus often told people — including his disciples and those he healed — to keep his miracles secret. Multiple times in the Gospels, he is recorded saying “my time has not yet come” when people tried to force his hand or make him king too soon.
When he finally faced the cross, Jesus still remained subtle in admitting his divinity, responding to direct questions like “Are you the Son of God?” or “Are you the King of the Jews?” with humble affirmations such as, “You have said so” or “you say that I am.”
“All the way up till the very end, he didn’t have this big reveal of who he was. … And I think we see that same thing with God now,” says John Luke.
John Luke recalls hearing an atheist explain that he doesn’t believe in God because if he were real, “He would have revealed himself more openly.”
But if you look back through history, this isn’t a modern issue. For centuries people have been demanding more obvious or dramatic power.
“I was just reading this book talking about the same thing,” says Christian. “It was these two early historians … and they were saying they don’t believe the gospel and Jesus because they’re like, ‘After the resurrection, why would he appear to women and to peasants? … Why would he not appear to Caesar and Pilate and all these powerful people?”’
In the next segment of the show, the panel moves deeper into how this expectation of a more dramatic, public revelation of God has roots in ancient heresies that the early church had to confront — errors that still influence skeptical thinking today.
To hear it, watch the episode above.
Want more from the Robertsons?
To enjoy more on God, guns, ducks, and inspiring stories of faith and family, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
