Kirill Dmitriev, Putin’s special envoy for investment, declared in a recent interview that the United States and Russia are discussing a much wider palette of business opportunities.

"No Kings" organizers promote "Vote Blue" and partisan slogans that their own national coalition rulebook explicitly prohibits at Saturday's rallies.

Viral video shows Jerry Seinfeld dancing and mocking anti-Israel hecklers at the Chicago Theatre as security escorted protesters from the venue.

ChinaAid founder Bob Fu says reports of Pastor Wang Yi's advanced liver cancer in a Chinese prison are credible but cannot be independently verified.

Candidates in Michigan, Georgia, South Carolina and Maine delivered personal accusations and unexpected admissions during debates that have led up to their elections.

Alex Murdaugh's defense team is betting on a Y-STR DNA test by Othram that prosecutors call "high risk" ahead of his April 2027 murder retrial.

Fletcher's Original Corny Dogs sells 550,000 corny dogs each year at the Lone Star State's iconic fair using the same 84-year-old recipe.

A suspected MS-13 member wanted for homicide and a teenage Tren de Aragua associate facing murder charges were among 131 ICE gang arrests.

Colorado’s former top judicial watchdog is taking on the state’s most powerful officials one case at a time, and the filings are now on the public docket.

Florida police investigating a mass shooting threat online determined that a teenage girl had tried to frame her ex-boyfriend to get him in trouble.

Officials at Riverview High School were alerted to the mass shooting threat via an email on Wednesday that included a screenshot of an Instagram post, according to police.

'It doesn't matter if it's a joke, it doesn't matter if it's from AI, it doesn't matter if you're mad, and it doesn't matter if you're trying to pin it on someone else. You're going to face the consequences.'

Hillsborough County sheriff's deputies responded and found that the post appeared to come from a male student who attended the school.

After police interviewed the male student, they determined the post did not come from him but was actually created by his ex-girlfriend.

The 15-year-old was a former student at the high school and had made the hoax image with the use of artificial intelligence, according to police.

When they interviewed her, she admitted to sending the false screenshot to the school administrators.

The girl was charged with written or electronic threat to conduct a mass shooting or act of terrorism and two other charges related to the threat.

RELATED: Family says Alabama woman was kidnapped after being 'lured' by toddler on side of a highway, but skeptics are crying hoax

"Threatening a school is a felony in Hillsborough County. And it doesn't matter if it's a joke, it doesn't matter if it's from AI, it doesn't matter if you're mad, and it doesn't matter if you're trying to pin it on someone else. You're going to face the consequences," said Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office chief communications officer Amanda Granit.

Retired Federal Bureau of Investigation special agent Rich Kolko said people falsely believe they won't get prosecuted for online behavior.

"People sit at home, they're sitting at their desk, and they feel they have this keyboard anonymity," Kolko said to WFLA-TV.

"They think nobody can find them or nobody's going to bother them. They're just playing on their computer; it's no big deal. Well, as this young lady learned and as too many other people have learned, it is a big deal," he added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Houthi missiles struck Aden International Airport Friday night as the Saudi-led coalition intercepted fire over the Red Sea.

Dillon Fillion, a 22-year-old Domino's driver and Iowa House candidate, credits Charlie Kirk with helping Gen Z men embrace conservative principles.

A federal judge ruled Trump's lawsuit against New York City's sanctuary policies fails, citing the Tenth Amendment's anti-commandeering doctrine.

On October 10 at Share the Arrows — Allie Beth Stuckey’s annual Christian women’s conference — the BlazeTV host and soon-to-be mother of four announced a project she and her husband have been working on since early last year: Ana Kate, a pro-life cycle, pregnancy, and postpartum tracking app.

But this project isn’t just about creating a conservative Christian alternative to the plethora of cycle and pregnancy tracking apps out there. It’s also about countering the evil perpetuated by those secular apps.

On a recent episode of “Relatable,” Allie shared the why behind Ana Kate by exposing how most popular cycle and pregnancy tracking apps boldly support abortion.

Allie begins by sharing a story from one of her friends who used the cycle tracking app called Natural Cycles. When she noted in the app that her last pregnancy was “unexpected,” she was suddenly inundated with “ads for abortion centers on Snapchat.”

“I do not know if Natural Cycles is selling that kind of data to those entities that are then selling that data to places like Planned Parenthood and abortion clinics to send you advertisements. … I do know, based on what Natural Cycles does say on their app, that they are pro-abortion,” says Allie.

“They have articles promoting abortion, directing its users to Planned Parenthood for abortions, and linking directly to their site."

Another popular cycle and pregnancy tracking app is Flo. Allie notes that according to the app site, “being able to access a safe abortion is a crucial part of health care.”

“Abortion is not health care because it is killing the life of a child,” she says.

Ovia is another cycle/pregnancy tracker used by millions of women.

“Ovia has an entire abortion section in its reproductive health library. Current articles include ‘What is a medical abortion and how to access one’ and ‘Preparing for pregnancy in states with abortion bans and restrictions,’” says Allie.

“Its post-abortion guide tells readers what emotions to expect after an abortion. It can also include, they say, immense relief,” she adds.

While the Euki cycle tracking app does include a pregnancy tracker, it nonetheless has information about abortion.

“They have a built-in abortion provider search,” says Allie, comparing the app to Ana Kate, which has “a pro-life practitioner directory search.”

Clue is yet another cycle tracking app that supports abortion.

“Clue was very against the overturning of Roe v. Wade. They said, 'At Clue, we strongly believe that the very personal decision to end a pregnancy should be made in the context of legal, regulated healthcare, with shame or fear of prosecution,”’ says Allie.

She explains that Flo also responded to the Dobbs decision by “launching an Anonymous Mode,” allowing users to use the app without linking their names, emails, IP addresses, or other identifiers to their health data.

“So they're trying to protect you from the big bad government, who wants to protect these babies inside the womb,” Allie says.

“Now, this is all opposed to Ana Kate,” she explains.

“Our tagline is ‘For women. For life.’ … We are for women in that we are for women. We exist for women. And we are for life. We are for the life of a woman, but we are also advocates for [life],” Allie shares.

“We believe that all babies, no matter the circumstances surrounding their conception, no matter their age, no matter their size, are fully made in God's image and should be protected fully … and we are not ashamed of that.”

To hear more about Ana Kate, check out 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.

Johnny Garcia faced two unpaid suspensions from the Bexar County Sheriff's Office for insubordination and negligence as he runs for Texas' 35th District.

If you drive at night, you know the problem. An SUV approaches from the opposite direction, and suddenly its headlights hit you like a spotlight. You squint, look toward the edge of the road, and hope you can still see your lane. If a lifted pickup is riding behind you, your mirrors can become another source of blinding glare.

When you cannot see clearly behind the wheel, that is more than an annoyance. It is a safety concern.

Are American drivers benefiting from available lighting technology, or are regulatory differences making it harder and more expensive to bring that technology to market?

Now the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is preparing to modernize federal vehicle lighting standards after years of complaints about headlight glare. Announced October 6, the rulemaking effort will examine LED lighting, automatic high beams, headlamp height and aim, and other visibility issues affecting drivers.

If headlight technology has advanced so dramatically, why are the rules governing it still struggling to keep up?

Glaring problem

America's minimum and maximum headlight brightness standards have not changed since 1997. Since then, vehicles have gained advanced safety systems, cameras, and increasingly sophisticated lighting technology. Yet the federal rules governing headlights have struggled to keep pace.

Not every LED headlight is dangerous, and not every complaint proves a vehicle violates federal standards. But headlight design, vehicle height, and improper aim can affect how much light reaches another driver's eyes. The growing popularity of taller trucks and SUVs makes the problem especially noticeable to people driving lower vehicles.

Drivers should not have to choose between seeing the road and being able to look at it without being blinded. Automakers have spent years promoting smarter vehicle technology. It is reasonable to ask why headlights cannot do a better job of illuminating the road without compromising visibility for everyone else.

Blind spot

In 2022, the NHTSA authorized adaptive driving beam headlights, technology designed to adjust portions of the high-beam pattern to reduce glare for other drivers while maintaining illumination elsewhere on the road.

The concept is straightforward. Instead of simply switching between high and low beams, the system can modify where the light shines around other vehicles. That can help drivers see more of the road without directing the full beam into someone else's eyes.

But authorization did not lead to widespread adoption. U.S. requirements differed from those used in other markets, and systems available overseas did not automatically qualify for American roads. Those differences have slowed the introduction of adaptive headlights, which have been common in Europe for more than a decade.

Are American drivers benefiting from available lighting technology, or are regulatory differences making it harder and more expensive to bring that technology to market?

Safety standards matter, but regulations should solve problems, not create unnecessary obstacles to practical solutions. NHTSA needs to explain what it learned from the 2022 decision and how its new rules will avoid repeating the same mistakes.

Safety first

Blindingly bright headlights are certainly annoying, but are they dangerous?

A 2025 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety suggests that the danger may be overstated. Examining crash reports from 11 states between 2015 and 2023, researchers found that glare was cited as a contributing factor in just one or two out of every 1,000 nighttime crashes. That rate remained essentially unchanged over the nine-year period.

In fact, headlights have become considerably safer by several measures. In 2016, just one of more than 80 headlight systems tested by IIHS earned a good rating. By 2025, roughly half did. And the share producing excessive glare fell from 21% in 2017 to just 3% in 2025.

Better illumination has also been associated with fewer crashes. An earlier IIHS study found that vehicles with good-rated headlights had 19% fewer nighttime single-vehicle crashes and 23% fewer nighttime pedestrian crashes than vehicles with poorly rated headlights.

But IIHS acknowledges that crash reports cannot capture every instance of dangerous glare. The vehicles producing it often aren't involved in the resulting accidents, making it difficult to determine exactly what caused the problem.

Whatever the crash statistics show, drivers clearly aren't happy. A 2026 AAA survey of 1,092 American adults found that 60% considered headlight glare a problem, while 73% of those affected believed it had gotten worse over the previous decade.

Those responses are not proof that glare is causing more crashes, but they demonstrate that the concern is widespread.

Both sets of findings belong in the discussion. Regulators should measure real-world safety outcomes while investigating why so many drivers report the same problem. Dismissing those complaints is no more responsible than claiming every bright headlight is unsafe.

RELATED: Volkswagen bet big on EVs. Now it's making room for gas-powered SUVs.

Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images

Bright future?

NHTSA's review should focus on measurable results. Can headlights illuminate the road effectively without creating excessive glare? Are lamps properly aimed? Do vehicle height and lighting design create predictable problems for other drivers? Can adaptive systems be tested consistently and approved without unnecessary barriers?

Automakers, safety researchers, lighting experts, and drivers should have a voice in developing standards that manufacturers can meet and regulators can enforce.

Drivers can help, too. Dirty windshields, damaged lamps, improper headlight aim, and unsuitable aftermarket lighting can make visibility worse. But consumers cannot fix outdated federal standards on their own.

The goal should not be to make headlights weaker. It should be to make them smarter, more effective, and less likely to blind other road users.

Washington now has another opportunity to modernize rules that have fallen behind automotive technology. The question is whether regulators will deliver sensible standards that improve visibility or create another complicated process that leaves drivers facing the same problem.

What do you think? Are today's headlights dangerously bright, or is the problem being overstated? And should automakers be required to adopt smarter lighting technology when it can reduce glare without sacrificing visibility?

Oversight Project's Mike Howell warns Ilhan Omar's HSI raid signals deeper congressional accountability failures and predicts more revelations ahead.

AUSA Exposition attendees question Trump's optimism about an Iran deal, arguing military and economic sanctions must intensify before Tehran talks.