Meta says it deleted ads off its platforms to get rid of scams, not hide them.

A review of internal documents, however, spurred allegations that Meta was attempting make certain ads "not findable" to government regulators.

'To suggest otherwise is disingenuous.'

According to a report by Reuters — which said it reviewed the docs — Meta began deleting possible fraudulent ads from its search function after Japanese regulators were upset over obvious scams on Facebook and Instagram that pushed fake celebrity product endorsements or investment schemes.

Reuters said that, according to the documents, Meta feared Japan would force the company to verify the identities of its advertisers.

In order to test Meta's work on "tackling scams," Japanese regulators allegedly used the search function on Meta's "Ad Library" to seek out fraudulent ads; the library acts as a "comprehensive, searchable database for ads transparency," the company states on its website.

This "simple test," as described in documents, was allegedly the avenue Meta took to make good with the regulators. Documents purportedly showed that Meta identified the top keywords and celebrity names that the Japanese were searching to find fraud, and then deleted ads that appeared fraudulent.

RELATED: OOF: Mark Zuckerberg's losing metaverse bet cost Meta $77B

Photo by Arda Kucukkaya/Anadolu via Getty Images

The deletions made certain content "not findable" for "regulators, investigators, and journalists," Reuters claimed.

A few months later, a Meta memo allegedly stated that "less than 100" of the unwanted ads had been discovered in the last week of a testing period, "hitting 0 for the last 4 days of the sprint."

This was apparently applauded by the Japanese government, and Japan did not end up forcing advertiser verification.

Meta then reportedly added the deletion tactics to its "general global playbook" to be deployed against, as Reuters described, regulatory scrutiny in other markets like the U.S., Europe, Australia, and more. The alleged playbook was a strategy to stall regulators and prevent advertiser verification requirements, the report claimed.

Meta told Return that it disputes that this is what the document shows.

A Meta spokesperson has since called the allegations disingenuous, and argued that Meta deleting fraudulent ads off its platforms is a good thing, not bad.

Meta spokesman Andy Stone told the outlet that there is nothing misleading about removing the scam ads from the library. "To suggest otherwise is disingenuous," he insisted.

RELATED: 2025 is so over and so is virtual reality

Photographer: Kiyoshi Ota/Bloomberg via Getty Images

"Meta teams regularly check the Ad Library to identify scam ads because when fewer scam ads show up there that means there are fewer scam ads on the platform," Stone added.

On top of claiming that verifying advertisers is "not a silver bullet," Stone said that chasing down scam ads is a job that will "never end."

Verification "works best in concert with other, higher-impact tools," the spokesman noted. "We set a global baseline and aggressive targets to drive down scam activity in countries where it was greatest, all of which has led to an overall reduction in scams on platform."

Meta also reportedly claimed that it has seen a 50% decline in user reports of scams over the past year.

Meta spokeswoman Michelle P. Fojas directed Return to an X post from Stone, who wrote, "Leave it to [Reuters] to fault Meta for removing scam ads from Facebook and Instagram. What disingenuous reporting."

Fojas also claimed that over the last 15 months, the number of scam ad reports Meta has received "has dropped by over half."

"We don't know what these purported documents are and Reuters won't share details," Fojas shared as a statement.

"It appears Reuters' supposedly shocking find is that criminal scammers focus on committing fraud wherever they can and the job of chasing them down never ends. That's precisely why we set a global baseline and aggressive targets to drive down scam activity in countries where it was greatest, all of which has led to an overall reduction in scams on platform."

Editor's note: This article has been edited after publication to include Meta's full remarks disputing Reuters' findings.

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

A woman has been shot in the face by federal agents and killed after ramming them with her car, according to a statement from the Department of Homeland Security.

Protesters initially claimed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers had shot the woman as she was driving away from them.

'This is the direct consequence of constant attacks and demonization of our officers by sanctuary politicians who fuel and encourage rampant assaults on our law enforcement.'

DHS Assistant Sec. Tricia McLaughlin released a statement contradicting the claims of the protesters.

"Today, ICE officers in Minneapolis were conducting targeted operations when rioters began blocking ICE officers and one of these violent rioters weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over our law enforcement officers in an attempt to kill them — an act of domestic terrorism," McLaughlin said in a statement on social media.

She said an ICE officer fired defensive shots after fearing for his life and the safety of the public.

"He used his training and saved his own life and that of his fellow officers," she added. "The alleged perpetrator was hit and is deceased. The ICE officers who were hurt are expected to make full recoveries."

Local reports said anti-ICE protesters began to curse and yell at the officers after the incident as they tried to secure the scene.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, a Democrat, immediately called for all ICE agents to leave the city in the wake of the shooting.

"I am aware of a shooting involving an ICE agent at 34th Street & Portland," he wrote on social media. "The presence of federal immigration enforcement agents is causing chaos in our city. We’re demanding ICE to leave the city immediately. We stand rock solid with our immigrant and refugee communities."

RELATED: Hilton Hotels cuts loose hotel location accused of refusing to host ICE agents

McLaughlin went on to blame anti-ICE rhetoric for the shooting.

"This is the direct consequence of constant attacks and demonization of our officers by sanctuary politicians who fuel and encourage rampant assaults on our law enforcement," she said. "These men and women who are simply enforcing the law on the books are facing 1,300% increase in assaults against them and an 8,000% increase in death threats."

This is a developing story.

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

Secretary of State Marco Rubio reportedly told lawmakers that the Trump administration has aspirations to purchase Greenland from Denmark, tempering rumors that officials are considering forcibly seizing the island.

'The United States is eager to build lasting commercial relationships that benefit Americans and the people of Greenland.'

During a closed briefing on Monday, Rubio and other administration officials briefed lawmakers about the operation to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and the plans for the country’s future, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Citing individuals said to be familiar with the recent briefing, the WSJ stated that Rubio “played down the idea that the U.S. could seize Greenland by force.” The report claimed that administration officials refused to rule out the possibility of an invasion.

However, the outlet noted that U.S. and European officials have reported no indications that the Trump administration is preparing for a military invasion of the self-governing Danish territory.

President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday, “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and the European Union needs us to have it — and they know that.”

RELATED: 'Very sick too': Trump sets sights on more countries after successful Venezuela operation

Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images

“President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated. “The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. military is always an option at the commander in chief’s disposal.”

Trump expressed interest in purchasing Greenland during his first term. He has insisted that controlling the island is essential for protecting the Arctic from Russia and China.

RELATED: JD Vance visits Greenland to make the case for annexation: 'We can't just bury our head in the sand'

Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images

“The United States is eager to build lasting commercial relationships that benefit Americans and the people of Greenland,” a State Department spokesperson told Blaze News. “Our common adversaries have been increasingly active in the Arctic. That is a concern that the United States, the Kingdom of Denmark, and NATO Allies share.”

The spokesperson added that Trump is committed to the United States’ relationship with Greenland, underscored by his decision to designate Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry (R) as special envoy.

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

After more than 30 years since pleading guilty to espionage that reportedly compromised several United States assets during the Cold War, an infamous Central Intelligence Agency officer has died in prison.

Aldrich Ames died on Monday, according to the Bureau of Prisons website.

Ames claimed he needed the money simply to pay debts and relieve 'financial troubles, immediate and continuing.'

Ames was held in the Federal Correctional Institution in Cumberland, Maryland, where he was serving a life sentence without parole.

Ames, a career CIA agent, was arrested in 1994 on espionage charges years after he began cooperating with KGB agents in 1985. The information he provided to the Soviets is thought to have directly contributed to the compromising of several CIA and FBI sources, some of whom were executed after their discovery.

RELATED: Unveiling ‘Big Intel’: How the CIA and FBI became deep state villains

Photo by Jeffrey Markowitz/Sygma via Getty Images

Over nearly a decade, Moscow paid him $2.5 million in exchange for betraying state secrets to the Soviets during and after the Cold War. Ames claimed he needed the money simply to pay debts and relieve "financial troubles, immediate and continuing."

"Well, the reasons that I did what I did in April of 1985 were personal, banal, and amounted really to kind of greed and folly. As simple as that," Ames said in an interview archived by the National Security Archive at George Washington University, according to Fox News.

"I knew quite well, when I gave the names of our agents in the Soviet Union, that I was exposing them to the full machinery of counterespionage and the law, and then prosecution, and capital punishment, certainly, in the case of KGB and GRU officers who would be tried in a military court, and certainly others, that they were almost all at least potentially liable to capital punishment," he added. "There's simply no question about this."

Ames' wife, Rosario, was sentenced to 63 months in prison on charges of assisting his espionage.

Ames was 84 years old at the time of his death.

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

Nick Shirley, a 23-year-old conservative YouTuber and independent journalist, gained national attention in late December 2025 after posting a viral 43-minute video titled, "I Investigated Minnesota's Billion Dollar Fraud Scandal," in which he visited several Minneapolis childcare centers — primarily Somali-run — and claimed they were empty or inactive despite receiving millions in federal and state government funding.

Shirley's footage showed locked doors, blacked out windows, and no visible children during his visits despite public payment records, sparking national scrutiny, federal investigations by the FBI and DHS, a temporary freeze on childcare funding to Minnesota (and briefly nationwide), and political fallout — most notably Gov. Tim Walz (D) dropping his re-election bid.

On yesterday’s episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” Shirley told Glenn that the Minnesota day-care fraud he exposed doesn’t even scratch the surface. If we want to see how deep the corruption really goes, there are several people who absolutely must be investigated.

Shirley’s first thought when he uncovered that massive fraud scheme was, “If millions — quite literally billions — of dollars is being given to these day-care centers, how come the government doesn't know that the money is being spent here?”

More digging revealed the answer: “They’re all in on it,” he says.

“They just announced today the U.N. ambassador of Somalia is involved in all of this,” adds Glenn.

But he’s certainly not the only one with blood on his hands.

Tim Walz’s exit is almost certainly an evasion of deeper scrutiny or accountability for the fraud scandals. Glenn and Shirley agree that he must be investigated regardless.

But a Walz probe is just the beginning. “Everyone involved over at the capital in Minnesota and the DHS who was cutting the checks [needs to be investigated],” says Shirley.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who’s known for her advocacy for childcare funding, tops his list of people who need to be immediately investigated. “She has photos of her outside of ‘Quality Learing Center,”’ he says.

This center, which has repeatedly been mocked for missing the "n" in what is supposed to say “Learning,” was one of the main day-care centers featured in Shirley’s exposé. Extensive video footage shows a nearly empty parking lot, locked doors, and no visible activity despite the center receiving millions in funding and being licensed for dozens of kids.

Another person who needs to be investigated, says Shirley, is Omar Fateh, the Somali-American Democratic Socialist and Minnesota state senator who snagged a shady DFL endorsement in Minneapolis’ mayoral race through a rigged convention, only to have it stripped over vote irregularities.

“[Fateh] had a brother-in-law or some family member who was in charge of one of the day cares that had also been receiving $2 million, and they actually had so many violations they shut down the day care; then the next day they reopened,” says Shirley. “That guy was about to become mayor.”

“And so all these people are in on the fraud. They all know it's happening,” he reiterates.

“Well, somebody clearly had to. You can't have that much money rolling around. A lot of people knew,” Glenn agrees.

To hear more of the interview, 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.

Popular culture loves its image of Norsemen shivering in fur pelts, raiding British monasteries, and braving the icy North Atlantic. Yet while Vikings struggled to survive on the thawing margins of Greenland, a far richer and more formidable maritime power flourished thousands of miles away in the tropical warmth of southern India.

That power was the Chola Empire.

A modern golden age remains within reach — provided we do not cripple ourselves with fear of the very conditions that have so often underwritten human prosperity.

At its height between 985 and 1044 A.D., the Cholas projected force on a scale that made Viking longships look like backyard skirmishers. Their ships were technological marvels — floating fortresses capable of transporting cavalry, infantry, and weeks of provisions across vast distances.

The Cholas mounted a major naval expedition against the Srivijaya Empire, a dominant maritime power based in what is now Indonesia and the Malay Peninsula. This was an amphibious assault conducted thousands of miles from home ports, a logistical achievement comparable to modern naval operations. The Cholas toppled rulers, secured the vital Malacca Strait, and guaranteed safe passage for merchant guilds trading from the Middle East to China.

On land, they maintained a standing army that included thousands of war elephants.

Their wealth also found expression in stone. The Great Living Chola Temples — now recognized as UNESCO World Heritage sites — stretch across southern India and neighboring islands. Built without modern machinery, these monumental structures relied on elephants to haul massive stones from distances of up to 60 miles.

Chola society possessed abundant labor, food, and wealth. The question is why.

What enabled a civilization to generate the immense caloric and economic surplus required to build stone monuments and launch armadas across the Indian Ocean? A large part of the answer lies in climate — specifically, global warming.

The rise of the Chola Empire coincided with the Medieval Warm Period, which lasted roughly from 900 to 1300 A.D. This relationship between warmth and human flourishing is inconvenient for the modern climate-industrial narrative, which treats rising temperatures as an unqualified catastrophe.

Warmth strengthens tropical monsoons, the lifeblood of agrarian economies like the Cholas’. Recent scientific research confirms that fluctuations in the Indian summer monsoon shaped agricultural output and the rise and fall of major dynasties. Indian civilization flourished during the Roman Warm Period, fractured during the Dark Ages Cold Period, and reached new heights under the Cholas during the Medieval Warm Period.

The Chola Empire was sustained by the very kind of warming modern activists describe as an “existential threat.”

RELATED: ‘Green Antoinettes’ live large, preach small

ajijchan via iStock/Getty Images

In the Cauvery Delta — the empire’s heartland — this favorable climate transformed the region into the “Rice Bowl of the South.” Three harvests a year became common. Granaries overflowed. Revenues surged.

That surplus freed labor from subsistence farming and redirected it toward imperial ambition. Chola trade guilds thrived, exporting textiles, spices, and grain to the Chinese Song Dynasty — another civilization that prospered during this warm epoch.

Today, we find ourselves in another warming phase, emerging from the depths of the Little Ice Age that ended in the mid-19th century. Global crop yields have repeatedly reached record highs. India has re-emerged as a major grain exporter. The planet is experiencing a measurable “greening” effect as higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels fertilize plants and warmer temperatures expand cultivable land.

Yet, we are told to feel guilty.

Coal, oil, and natural gas — fuels that protect humanity from the elements and power modern economies — are vilified. Environmental extremists implicitly argue for a colder world, despite the historical record showing that colder periods brought famine, disease, and social collapse.

The Chola Empire stands as a reminder of what human ingenuity can achieve when the climate cooperates. Its ships sailed on prosperity sustained by warmth. Its temples rose from a society rich in calories and confidence. Its civilization commanded respect across continents.

We face a similar opportunity today. A modern golden age remains within reach — provided we do not cripple ourselves with fear of the very conditions that have so often underwritten human prosperity.

As America celebrates its 250th year, the very organization planning the celebration has now been accused of spreading "progressive propaganda."

On Tuesday, America250 made a post praising former President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his novel list of "freedoms."

'Celebrating the socialist campaign positions of FDR as fundamental to American history was not what I expected when I hit the follow button.'

In a graphic, the post says, "On this day in 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt outlined four universal freedoms people the world over ought to enjoy."

"Spoken during a moment of uncertainty, the Four Freedoms helped define what America stood for — and continues to stand for," the post reads.

While the list starts with freedoms generally familiar to all Americans, specifically freedom of speech and freedom of worship, FDR also added a couple of novelties: "freedom from want" and "freedom from fear."

RELATED: Soros-tied No Kings protesters plot to sabotage US Army's 250th anniversary parade

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call Inc. via Getty Images

The Federalist's Brianna Lyman called out what she called America250's "progressive propaganda": "'Freedom from Want' is not a constitutional freedom nor a natural right. It was invented by FDR and his socialist cohort to justify welfare expansion and redefine rights as government grants — flying directly in the face of what America *actually* stands for."

"Making up a right like 'Freedom from Want' — and then pretending like this is a core American value, is shameful revisionist history from America250," Lyman added.

At the end of the series of graphics, the America250 post says, "President Roosevelt spoke them. Norman Rockwell painted them. We will strive to live them."

The Tennessee Star's Tom Pappert commented, "Celebrating the socialist campaign positions of FDR as fundamental to American history was not what I expected when I hit the follow button."

According to the America250 website, the "nonpartisan" U.S. Semiquincentennial Commission was established by Congress in 2016 to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

While it is not clear who runs the social media accounts, notable figures on the commission include several members of Trump's Cabinet, Democrat and Republican congressmen and senators, and 16 private citizens.

The chair of America250, Rosie Rios, was appointed by President Joe Biden and previously served in both the Obama and Biden administrations in some capacity, according to her biography.

Former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama and their spouses are listed as "honorary national co-chairs" of America250.

America250 did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

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

Personally I think springtime is the best time to start something new — after all, the sunshine gets warmer, everything is budding and greening up, and my energy level is definitely higher than it is right now, in the “bleak midwinter.”

Nevertheless January 1 looms large. We're less than a week into the new year, a time that practically begs us to turn over a fresh page, a new leaf.

The idea is putting my daily meeting with God on my calendar as a nonnegotiable appointment.

So let’s talk about how to use 2026 to improve your relationship — with your creator.

Because that is unquestionably the most important task on our to-do list. Full stop.

How to do that? Well some things never change. God gave us an instruction manual, and immersing ourselves in that should be our absolute highest priority. This includes:

• reading the Bible by ourselves;
• reading the Bible with others;
• studying the Bible by ourselves;
• studying the Bible with others;
• memorizing the Bible by ourselves (you can do this with others too, but it’s really more of a solitary pursuit);
• reading what other people have written about the Bible; and
• listening or watching other people teach the Bible (priority one is your weekly sermon by your own pastor — after that, my highest recommendation is the treasure trove of sermons John MacArthur left behind, covering all the New Testament books as well as many Old Testament books and topics).

And of course along with immersion in the Word, which involves absorbing things God wants us to learn and act upon, He also welcomes us into His very presence. We are invited to bring our worship and gratitude to Him in prayer as well as our every request and concern, big or small.

Yeah, it always comes back to those two things.

Prayer and the Word.

And now here are some suggestions about how to prioritize these most important of life activities, now that 2026 is underway ...

The morning meeting

I read this idea this year on Substack (if anyone can remind me of who suggested it, please comment, and I’ll update with the link), and it hit me hard. Probably because I find too much of the day slipping away from me even though I’m not bound to external employment hours, and I know I need to take better control of my time. I’m still wasting too much sand!

The idea is putting my daily meeting with God on my calendar as a nonnegotiable appointment. You can make this appointment any time of the day that works for you, but I do think morning is preferable if you can swing it. This meeting can be as long or brief as this stage of your life requires, but give it a hard start time and a hard stop time (of course you can always tweak this as life changes).

A meeting requires an agenda. You can make a general agenda for all meetings, or you can prepare a separate agenda for each daily meeting. Right now I’m working with an ambitious general agenda, but giving myself grace to skip some items if need be. Here’s my meeting agenda:

1. Read-through-the-Bible time

No, I’m not doing it in a year. I’m doing a three-year plan, because I want to savor what I’m reading and avoid the “check-it-off-for-the-day” mindset.

I used Biblereadingplangenerator.com to create exactly what I wanted to cover — the Bible chronologically as it happened, with the prophets intertwined with other Old Testament passages where they fit chronologically, and the New Testament letters in the order they were written.

I removed Psalms and Proverbs from the plan, then added them back in at a rate of one per day (one Psalm, one chapter of Proverbs). This is because I’ve learned that I need to really slow down to savor the depth and wisdom contained in these two books.

Another benefit of taking three years for this is I have time to read and analyze the study notes in my Bible or even look up other commentary perspectives.

A final part of this agenda item: reading through books about the books of the Bible I’ve completed (this falls under the general category of “reading what other people have written about the Bible”).

2. Daily Bible chunks

There’s probably a more elegant way to say that. But the point is, since read-through-the-Bible time stays in each book of the Bible for quite awhile, I want to dip my toe into other sections as well on a regular basis. Here’s how I’ll divide it up by each day of the week this year, reading generally shorter sections of each book (I use my study Bible’s book outlines to guide me):

• Monday - Torah/OT history (Genesis through Song of Solomon, but minus Psalms and Proverbs, since I’m already in them daily)
• Tuesday - OT prophets (Isaiah through Malachi)
• Wednesday - Gospels
• Thursday - Acts
• Friday - Paul’s letters
• Saturday - other Epistles
• Sunday - Revelation

Notice the emphasis on the New Testament, since my foundational Bible reading will be mostly Old Testament for at least two years!

3. Devotional

If I’m working through a devotional, here’s where I’ll do that.

4. Memorization

I’m trying something new this year! I want to memorize whole big chunks of the Word. I think I’m going to start with the tiny book of Jude, where the topic is false teaching. Very relevant for 2026, I believe.

I’ll study it first before beginning to memorize, a verse or two at a time. I'm planning to do this with my mini-discipleship group, so there’ll be at least two of us working our way through it.

5. Other reading or training

I’ll try to work my way through my enormous “books I’d like to read” list during this time as well, since I have countless spiritually enriching titles collected but not yet read. Or I’ll watch videos I’ve been saving to work through, like Stand to Reason’s excellent apologetics series.

6. Throne room time

This is where we gratefully accept His gracious invitation to come directly to the foot of His throne with all our prayers.

I’ve always tried to systemize my prayers, keeping lists and focusing on different people and needs on different days, but I’ve never journaled my prayers. The reason I’m excited to do this now is this — I’m excited to crack open my new five-year prayer journal.

The idea of this is to write out a prayer (or prayers) for each day, then after a full year of filling the journal, we circle back and fill it out a second year and a third and a fourth and a fifth — reviewing the previous year’s entry as we do.

I can’t wait to see how God works in my life as I review prayers I prayed a year earlier!

RELATED: How to bring Charlie Kirk's vision to life — starting in your own family

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

A few final thoughts

So that will be my morning meeting in 2026. I will devote a couple of hours to it every day. After all, I’m in the season of life where I can devote more time to this most worthy endeavor, and I’m excited to make that commitment.

I’ve written a few other pieces to help you plan, execute, and enjoy this most marvelous time of the day:

• A basket of God
• Quiet time 101 (although your morning meeting does not have to be quiet!)
• Creating space for God

With the year just beginning, there is nothing more important to lock in for 2026 than your time with God.

Happy (and God-centered) new year to all of you!

A version of this article previously appeared on the She Speaks Truth Substack.

Police in Clovis, New Mexico, said they received a 911 call just after 12:30 a.m. Friday from a residence in the 2500 block of East 7th Street.

The caller — a 20-year-old male — stated that he was shot by someone who broke into his home and that he also shot the person who broke in, police said.

It was the second fatal shooting that week in Clovis, which is about three and a half hours east of Albuquerque.

The caller added that he and a female were hiding in a closet, police said.

Police and emergency medical services responded to the scene, police said.

The male caller suffered a gunshot wound and was taken to Plains Regional Medical Center, police said.

A second male — identified as 20-year-old Keilyn Parker — also was in the home and had been shot. Parker was taken to Plains Regional Medical Center but didn't survive his injuries, police said.

The Major Crimes Unit has been activated to investigate this event, police said.

Those with information about this incident are asked to call the police department's nonemergency line at 575-769-1921, police said, adding that information can be provided anonymously through the tip411 program, accessed by going to www.police.cityofclovis.org. Anonymous tips also can be provided to the Curry County Crime Stoppers at 575-763-7000, police said.

RELATED: Gun-wielding male kicks down door of home, opens fire at homeowner. But his target is armed too.

Image source: Clovis (N.M.) Police Department

It was the second fatal shooting that week in Clovis, which is about three and a half hours east of Albuquerque.

Police said they received a 911 call around 3:30 p.m. Dec. 29 about a 15-year-old male with a gunshot wound. Police said officers and EMS personnel responded to the scene, and the teen was taken to Plains Regional Medical Center, but he did not survive.

The police chief in a later Facebook post said the teen and his friends were playing with guns in a bedroom, and a witness said one of the juveniles was handling a gun that was believed to be unloaded when it discharged.

Following the shooting, the victim’s friends fled the residence and took the reported firearms with them, police said. The shooter was identified as a 16-year-old, police said. A warrant was filed in district court for involuntary manslaughter, minor in possession of a handgun, tampering with evidence, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, police said.

The teen was arrested around 6 p.m. Dec. 31 and booked into a juvenile detention center, the Albuquerque Journal reported.

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

President Donald Trump told reporters on Sunday that those responsible for the historic fraud in Minnesota — members of the Somali community in particular — aren't just ripping off the Gopher State but the country at large.

"Think of it: $19 billion at least they've stolen from Minnesota and from the United States," said Trump.

"We're not going to pay it any more. We're going to have [Gov. Tim] Walz go pay. We're not going to pay them, and we're not going to pay California, and we're not going to pay Illinois."

In the wake of the president's remarks, the Trump administration cut off five Democrat-run states' access to over $10 billion in federal child care and family assistance funds.

'It's a giant scam.'

On Tuesday, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that it had barred California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York from accessing nearly $2.4 billion in Child Care and Development Fund money; $7.35 billion in Temporary Assistance for Needy Family funds; and $869 million in Social Services Block Grant funds.

"Families who rely on child care and family assistance programs deserve confidence that these resources are used lawfully and for their intended purpose," HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O'Neill said in a statement. "This action reflects our commitment to program integrity, fiscal responsibility, and compliance with federal requirements."

HHS Assistant Secretary Alex Adams, the head of the Administration for Children and Families, emphasized the government's responsibility to "ensure these programs serve the families they were created to help," adding that "when there are credible concerns about fraud or misuse, we will act."

RELATED: Tim Walz's nightmare continues as HHS shuts off $185M to Minnesota amid allegedly 'fake' Somali day care centers

Photo by Mandel NGAN/AFP via Getty Images

HHS indicated that the funding freeze will remain in place until the ACF completes a review and determines that the affected states are in compliance with federal requirements.

'It's cruel.'

Adams and O'Neill also announced on Tuesday that the Trump administration is ending Biden-era practices of providing child-care centers with payments up front without verifying attendance.

Democrats melted down over the funding pause, characterizing the effort to ensure taxpayer dollars aren't siphoned away by fraudsters as an attack on children.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, whose state has seen its share of day-care fraud, said in response to the funding freeze, "It's vindictive. It's cruel. And we'll fight it with every fiber of our being."

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) tried downplaying the fraud, claiming that "this has nothing to do with fraud and everything to do with political retribution that punishes poor children in need of assistance."

"Rather than making life easier and more affordable for our families, Donald Trump is stripping away child care from Illinois families who are just trying to go to work," said Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D). "Thousands of parents and children depend on these child-care programs to help them make ends meet, and now their livelihoods are being put at risk."

Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, a Democrat with aspirations of becoming his state's next governor, tweeted, "Donald Trump has declared war on Colorado. He is now robbing thousands of vulnerable Colorado families of the critical support they need to afford food, housing, and health care."

Trump raised the matter of fraud in Minnesota during a New Year's Eve event, then noted that "California is worse, Illinois is worse, and, sadly, New York is worse. A lot of other places. We're going to get to the bottom of all of it. It's a giant scam."

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

Democrats bear clear responsibility for Minnesota’s spiraling federal program payment scandal. Either they failed to conduct meaningful oversight of billions in public funds over many years — or they conducted none at all. Their early response to the scandal explains why: They subjected its perpetrators to an unconscionably low standard of scrutiny.

What began as a fraud investigation into federal programs meant to feed poor children has expanded rapidly. During the pandemic, a nonprofit called Feeding Our Future became the centerpiece of what federal prosecutors described as the largest COVID-era fraud scheme, involving roughly $300 million. That scandal soon widened to include fraud in autism services and housing programs. Now investigators allege that day-care centers billed taxpayers for caring for nonexistent children — one facility even displaying signage with a misspelling of “learning.”

No criminal enterprise of this size and duration emerges unless its participants believe they will not face consequences. Democrats let the fraud happen.

As revelations mount, consequences follow. Former vice presidential nominee Tim Walz abruptly abandoned his bid for a third term as Minnesota’s governor. Yet nothing suggests the full scope of the scandal has come into view, either geographically or financially.

The estimated cost continues to climb. Last summer, a federal prosecutor put the total at more than $1 billion. Just last month, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson warned the figure could reach $9 billion — and that estimate covers only the schemes already uncovered. As trials proceed, new defendants emerge, and plea deals surface, the total is likely to rise farther.

Instead of demanding answers, Democrats rushed to deflect scrutiny. In Seattle, newly elected mayor and self-described democratic socialist Katie Wilson inserted herself into the controversy by issuing a statement “on the harassment of Somali childcare providers” and posting a hotline number for alleged “hate crime” victims — before any comparable fraud investigation had even begun.

Minnesota Democrats adopted the same playbook. They framed oversight itself as “racism,” attempting to shut down inquiry by exaggeratedly embracing the broader Somali community from which many of the fraudsters came. That rhetorical move does more harm than good. It links an entire community to criminal activity — something Democrats appear not to mind if it shields them politically.

Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan illustrated the tactic in a video statement delivered while wearing a hijab: “I am incredibly clear that the Somali community is part of the fabric of the state of Minnesota.” Flanagan, notably, is also running for the U.S. Senate in 2026.

The symbolism revealed more than intended. Democrats did not merely treat the Somali community as “part of the fabric” of Minnesota. They treated fraud perpetrators as apart from the fabric — exempt from scrutiny, audits, and accountability.

RELATED: ‘More corrupt than Minnesota’: Trump mocks Newsom after launching California fraud investigation

Photo by MAURO PIMENTEL/AFP via Getty Images

Local reporting points to warning signs stretching back more than a decade. Yet Democrats allowed massive federal programs to operate under standards so lax that fraud flourished unchecked.

Despite their rhetoric of inclusion, Democrats effectively segregated oversight itself. They refused to apply basic accountability to billions in taxpayer dollars. At minimum, that constitutes gross incompetence.

The underlying reality is simpler. Democrats let the fraud happen. Whether through neglect or willful blindness, they allowed these programs to operate without serious supervision while evidence of abuse accumulated.

Fraud on this scale does not persist without a sense of impunity. That impunity may have grown gradually through years of nonexistent audits and rubber-stamped claims. Or it may have been reinforced more explicitly. Either way, no criminal enterprise of this size and duration emerges unless its participants believe they will not face consequences.

The precise nature of Democrat culpability remains to be determined. Was it incompetence? A DEI mindset that discouraged scrutiny? Political quid pro quos? Tim Walz’s sudden exit from the governor’s race suggests that the answers may prove damaging.

What is already clear is this: Minnesota’s fraud scandal did not happen in spite of Democratic governance. It happened because of it.

If you want a clear picture of where the American auto market is heading, don’t look at political speeches or glossy concept vehicles. Look at where manufacturers are spending — and writing off — real money.

Case in point: Ford’s $19.5 billion decision to abandon plans for a next-generation all-electric F-150.

Ford’s leadership is now openly saying what many in the industry have been signaling quietly: Customers are not moving in lockstep with regulatory timelines.

The company’s change of direction for its massive BlueOval City complex in Tennessee is one of the clearest signals yet that the industry’s all-electric future, at least as it was sold to consumers and investors, is being fundamentally rethought.

Instead of building a new electric F-150 Lightning there, Ford will pivot the facility toward producing lower-cost gasoline-powered trucks while shifting electric strategy toward hybrids, extended-range electric vehicles, and smaller EVs.

Demand in the driver’s seat

This move matters because Ford did not quietly slow production or delay a model year refresh. It wrote down billions of dollars in electric vehicle assets, restructured long-term plans, and publicly admitted that customer demand — not forecasts or incentives — is now driving decisions.

Ford expects roughly $19.5 billion in special charges tied to this pivot, most of which will hit in the fourth quarter, with an additional $5.5 billion in cash costs spread through 2027. Of that total, $8.5 billion represents EV asset write-downs. That is corporate language for investments that will not deliver the returns originally promised.

Yet Wall Street’s reaction was telling. Ford stock rose about 2% in after-hours trading following the announcement and remains up nearly 40% this year. Investors appear to see this not as failure, but as realism.

Sticker shock

The electric F-150 Lightning was once positioned as proof that electrification could conquer America’s best-selling vehicle segment. In theory, the idea made sense. In practice, the numbers never fully added up. High prices, heavy battery packs, range limitations under real-world towing conditions, and charging concerns narrowed the pool of potential buyers. Demand softened even as incentives increased.

Ford now plans to transition the Lightning into an extended-range electric vehicle, pairing an electric drivetrain with a gasoline-powered generator. This is not a retreat from electrification. It is an acknowledgment that pure battery-electric power trains do not yet meet the needs of a large portion of truck buyers.

Ford CEO Jim Farley framed the shift plainly. High-end EVs priced between $50,000 and $80,000 were not selling in sufficient volume. That reality is difficult to ignore when inventory sits on dealer lots and profit margins evaporate.

Hybrid vigor

At the same time, Ford is going all-in on hybrids, including plug-in hybrids, and reinvesting in its core strengths: trucks, SUVs, and commercial vehicles. This reflects a broader industry trend. Hybrids offer meaningful fuel economy improvements without requiring buyers to overhaul their driving habits or rely on charging infrastructure that remains inconsistent in many parts of the country.

Ford’s revised outlook projects that by 2030, about half of its global volume will come from hybrids, extended-range EVs, and fully electric vehicles combined. That is a significant increase from today, but it is far more balanced than earlier projections that leaned heavily toward full electrification.

Lightning rod

One of the more curious elements of Ford’s announcement is its plan to build a fully connected midsize electric pickup starting in 2027, based on a new low-cost “Universal EV Platform.” The company suggests this truck could start around $30,000, a figure that raises serious questions.

To put that claim into context, Ford’s Maverick Hybrid, which uses a small 1.1 kilowatt-hour battery, already approaches $30,000 in many configurations. A midsize EV pickup would likely require an 80 kilowatt-hour battery or more. Battery costs have declined, but not nearly enough to make that math easy — especially while maintaining margins.

Consumers will ultimately decide whether such a vehicle makes sense. Price, capability, range, and charging convenience will matter far more than marketing language. Automakers are learning, sometimes the hard way, that affordability cannot be willed into existence by press releases.

Batteries included

Ford’s restructuring also includes repurposing battery plants in Kentucky and Michigan for a new stationary energy storage business. This is a strategic move that acknowledges batteries may find more reliable profitability off the road than on it, particularly in data centers and grid stabilization applications where weight, charging time, and cold-weather performance are less critical concerns.

The broader lesson here is not that electric vehicles are disappearing. They are not. It is that the one-size-fits-all electrification narrative has collided with economic and consumer reality. Automakers were pushed, through regulation and incentives, to prioritize battery-electric vehicles at a pace the market could not fully absorb.

When policy environments change, as they recently have, manufacturers regain flexibility. Ford’s leadership is now openly saying what many in the industry have been signaling quietly: Customers are not moving in lockstep with regulatory timelines.

From a business standpoint, Ford is attempting to stabilize profitability. The company raised its adjusted earnings guidance for 2025 to about $7 billion, even as these restructuring charges weigh on net results. It is aiming for a path to profitability in its Model e EV division by 2029, with incremental improvements beginning in 2026.

That is a long runway, and it reflects how difficult it has been to make EVs profitable at scale. Traditional internal combustion and hybrid vehicles continue to subsidize electric losses across the industry. Ford is now being more transparent about that reality.

RELATED: American muscle-car culture is alive and well ... in Dubai

Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Turning radius

This shift also has implications for American manufacturing and jobs. BlueOval City was originally pitched as a cornerstone of the electric future. Its revised mission underscores how quickly industrial strategies can change when assumptions fail. Gasoline and hybrid trucks remain highly profitable, and demand for them remains strong.

Ford insists this is a customer-driven strategy, not a retreat. In many ways, that framing is accurate. Consumers have shown they value choice, reliability, and affordability more than power-train ideology. They want vehicles that fit their lives, not policy targets.

For buyers, this could be good news. A more balanced market tends to produce better products at more reasonable prices. Hybrids, extended-range EVs, and efficient gasoline vehicles all play a role in reducing fuel consumption without forcing trade-offs many drivers are unwilling to accept.

For investors, Ford’s announcement may mark a turning point toward discipline and realism. Writing down nearly $20 billion is painful, but continuing to chase unprofitable volume would be worse.

For the industry, the message is unmistakable. Electrification is evolving, not ending. But it will happen on consumer terms, not political timelines.

Ford’s course correction is not about abandoning the future. It is about surviving the present — and doing so with a clearer understanding of what American drivers are actually willing to buy.

The American car industry would be in a much stronger position today had its CEOs not embarked on the EV joy ride with politicians promising subsidies. Next time maybe the brands will listen to the customer.

Political violence in the United States no longer lives in the realm of theory. We are watching it unfold in real time. Assassination attempts, targeted harassment, and violent disruptions have become disturbingly common. The chaos at Berkeley in November offers a bracing reminder.

A majority of Americans now believe a political candidate will be assassinated within the next five years. We have already witnessed two assassination attempts against President Trump, the brutal murder of Charlie Kirk, and a foiled plot to kill Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Increasingly, this violence draws fuel from activist organizations that exploit tax-exempt status to advance their agendas through intimidation rather than debate.

If the government is serious about de-escalating political violence, it must lawfully deploy every available tool.

That exploitation must end. The federal government already has the tools to act. It should use them — starting with the IRS.

We cannot tolerate nonprofits mobilizing radicals under the banner of free speech while trampling the First Amendment rights of others. At Berkeley, activist groups operated as coordinated foot soldiers. One organization, “By Any Means Necessary,” lived up to its name. Protesters circulated flyers depicting Charlie Kirk’s assassination, labeled attendees “fascists,” and openly called for President Trump’s removal.

This is not debate. It is coercion.

Growing numbers of activists no longer seek persuasion but submission. Polling reflects the danger. Roughly one-third of Americans under 45 now say political violence is sometimes justified. Berkeley showed what that belief looks like when put into practice.

The moment demands a firm, whole-of-government response. As a former state criminal prosecutor and Senate chief of staff, I understand that crises require decisive action. Protecting citizens and enforcing the law are core functions of government. The time to act has arrived.

The first step toward dismantling the nonprofit infrastructure that enables political violence is straightforward: The IRS should revoke tax-exempt status from organizations that finance or coordinate violent activity. Cutting off these funding streams deprives radical networks of oxygen.

Critics will claim this amounts to political targeting. That claim collapses under scrutiny.

RELATED: Trump declared war on leftist domestic terror. The IRS didn’t get the memo.

Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

The real problem is that the IRS has lost focus. For years, the agency engaged in overt political targeting — scrutinizing conservative groups while leaving ideologically aligned organizations untouched. That imbalance allowed certain nonprofits to operate with near impunity while exploiting the protections of tax-exempt status.

Restoring evenhanded enforcement does not mean ignoring violations on the left. It means applying the law as written. The IRS has both the authority and the obligation to act when nonprofits facilitate violence. Looking the other way is not neutrality. It is abdication.

Consider Antifa, which has been designated a domestic terrorist organization yet continues to benefit indirectly from nonprofit support structures. That contradiction should not stand.

If the government is serious about de-escalating political violence, it must lawfully deploy every available tool. That includes the IRS. The assassination attempts against President Trump should have been a wake-up call. The murder of Charlie Kirk should have erased any remaining illusions.

Subversive actors are gaming the nonprofit system to tear the country apart — using tax-exempt dollars to silence, intimidate, and physically endanger those exercising their most basic constitutional rights.

We either enforce the law now, or we accept that the violence will escalate.

An 81-year old widower and Navy veteran said he was forced to seek help through a note on his mailbox after his live-in caretaker became allegedly abusive.

The victim, who didn't want to be identified publicly, said that 60-year-old Denise Williams took away his phone and his car keys after getting angry with him at his house in Lantana, Florida.

'She jumped on my chest and started grabbing it, my phone, and she finally got it and scratched me.'

"Every month, every day, she got a little bit worse," the man said to WPBF-TV.

Williams got so angry at the state of the man's bathroom that he tried to call 911 after she yelled at him. She stopped him by squeezing his hand until he could no longer stand the pain.

"She jumped on my chest. I was lying down, trying to get my phone, and she jumped on my chest and started grabbing it, my phone, and she finally got it and scratched me," he said.

Williams then took steps to ensure that he not call for help, according to the victim.

"Then she grabbed my phone, the two house phones, the landline phones, and my car keys, dumped them in her room, and locked the door," he added.

He decided to scrawl a plea for help on a note left on his mailbox.

"Call the police," it read.

The mail carrier saw the note and reported it to his supervisor. That supervisor reported it to the Lantana Police, who responded to the call and found Williams at a nearby gas station with the man's debit card and checkbook.

Williams was charged with numerous counts, including battery on an elderly victim and robbery. She was booked into the Palm Beach County Jail.

RELATED: Elderly woman beaten to death with a rock — police found her daughter 'covered in blood'

Despite the ordeal, the man says he's worried Williams has nowhere to go. He said she had worked for him for about two and a half years and been paid $2,000 a month to care for him.

"I'm sorry for her. I really am," he said. "Because she has no place to go right now, other than where she's going after she gets out of the hospital."

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

Less than four months after announcing his re-election campaign, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) has had a major change of heart.

“This is really, really sad news that Tampon Tim Walz announced this morning that he is dropping out of the 2026 Minnesota gubernatorial race,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales comments on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”

“Tim Walz is out. He’s out in 2026. And he actually is out in large part due to Nick Shirley, a YouTuber who exposed a rampant Somalian fraud that is happening in Minnesota. And I don’t want to call him a random YouTuber guy to discredit him,” she continues.

“He heard about the fraud that was happening in Minnesota. He went out there. He had a guy that gave him all of this research of all of the fraudulent day care centers that are stealing millions of taxpayer dollars,” she says.

In videos posted to YouTube and social media, Shirley knocks on the doors of these Somali day cares and asks if he can speak to someone about his son potentially attending. Each time, he’s either shooed away or told that his son cannot attend the empty day care.

“So Tim Walz has some explaining to do. And instead of that, in his announcement, he blames everybody but himself actually. He said, ‘We’ve got conspiracy theorist right-wing YouTubers breaking into day care centers ... and demanding access to our children,’” Gonzales comments, shocked.

Walz went on to claim that President Trump is demonizing “our Somali neighbors” and “wrongly confiscating childcare funding that Minnesotans rely on.”

“I came to the conclusion that I can’t give a political campaign my all. Every minute I spend defending my own political interests would be a minute I can’t spend defending the people of Minnesota against the criminals who prey on our generosity and the cynics who prey on our differences,” Walz added.

“So he’s actually saying, ‘No, no, no, no, no. It’s your fault. And actually, the criminals are the victims,’ is what Tim Walz is saying,” Gonzales says.

“I would highly encourage people to continue finding all of this fraud that is happening and connecting all of the dots because I feel like it’s a pretty good bet that it can all be connected to Ilhan Omar and Tim Walz,” she continues, adding, “And by the way, Tim Walz should have been gone a long time ago.”

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.

When President Donald Trump stood before reporters Saturday and invoked the Monroe Doctrine, he was not indulging nostalgia. He was announcing enforcement. Then came the line that removed all ambiguity: The Monroe Doctrine, he said, will now be known as the Donroe Doctrine.

The leftist political class recoiled on cue. Mainstream commentators scoffed. Corporate editorial boards feigned alarm. Strip away the theatrics, and the meaning was clear. The United States has decided to resume responsibility for the Western Hemisphere — not in the language of empire, but in the language of order, law, and consequence.

One reality is already clear. The Western Hemisphere no longer serves as an unguarded corridor for corruption, narcotics, and foreign subversion.

The Monroe Doctrine emerged in 1823, when President James Monroe warned European powers that further colonization or political interference in the Americas would not be tolerated. It never meant isolationism. It reflected realism.

Power vacuums invite conquest. Disorder invites domination. The early American republic understood that if Europe continued exporting its political systems into the New World, the hemisphere would remain unstable and unfree. America declared an end to European colonial ambition long before “decolonization” became a fashionable academic slogan.

Over time, enforcement varied in wisdom and restraint. Theodore Roosevelt’s corollary warned that chronic wrongdoing in the Americas could require U.S. intervention. During the Cold War, Washington invoked the doctrine — sometimes clumsily — to block Soviet expansion and nuclear weapons in the hemisphere.

Through each phase, the premise endured: The Western Hemisphere is a distinct political space, and the United States bears a special responsibility to prevent it from becoming a staging ground for criminal regimes and foreign adversaries.

That responsibility eroded in recent decades, replaced by a dangerous fantasy: that cartel-run states can invoke sovereignty to excuse any behavior so long as it occurs within their borders — or moves outward through drug routes and illegal oil networks. Venezuela stands as the clearest casualty of that delusion.

The U.S. Department of Justice indicted Nicolás Maduro on narco-terrorism charges for conspiring with drug cartels to flood the United States with cocaine. This was no symbolic gesture. It marked a recognition that Venezuela under Maduro is not a normal sovereign government, but a criminal enterprise masquerading as one. Enforcement, not rhetoric, gives such indictments meaning. That is what the Donroe Doctrine signals.

Democratic critics objected immediately, even though the indictment originated under the Biden administration. Some argued that because the United States cannot remove every tyrant everywhere, it lacks moral authority to act against any single one. That is moral paralysis disguised as principle. By that logic, no law should ever be enforced because more criminals remain at large. Police would stop making arrests. Courts would close. Justice would dissolve into excuses.

Others insisted Venezuela’s sovereignty places it beyond American reach. Sovereignty does not magically convert criminal conduct into legitimacy. A regime that finances itself through narcotics trafficking, collaborates with cartels, launders money through international systems, facilitates human trafficking, and exports violence across borders has already violated the sovereignty of others — especially the United States. Cocaine and fentanyl ignore borders. So do the trafficking networks Venezuela enables. By its conduct, the Maduro regime declared hostility. Enforcement followed.

Venezuelan officials now appeal to international law. The claim borders on parody. Venezuela ranks among the world’s most corrupt regimes. Its institutions lie hollow. Its courts serve politics. Its elections perform theater. For such a regime to suddenly demand protection from a rules-based order it has systematically violated is not irony; it is audacity. This is not a government. It is a cartel with flags and uniforms.

RELATED: The Venezuela crisis was never just about drugs

Photo by XNY/Star Max/GC Images

The more revealing question is not why the United States finally enforced its laws against a narco-state but why so many Western politicians rushed to defend it. How many careers, campaigns, and institutions have drawn quiet benefit from regimes like Maduro’s? How many activists and academics repeat talking points that align perfectly with the interests of Caracas, Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran?

America’s adversaries understand Venezuela well. China, Russia, Cuba, and Iran treat it as a strategic asset — oil-rich, geographically close to the United States, and governed by leaders willing to trade sovereignty for survival. Through Venezuela, hostile powers gain leverage and access in the Western Hemisphere. Only America’s political class pretended this did not matter.

Venezuelans themselves understand what is at stake. Many celebrated the renewed enforcement of U.S. law because polite diplomacy never delivered accountability. They lived under a regime that destroyed the economy, emptied shelves, silenced dissent, and drove millions into exile. They do not fear American responsibility. They welcome it. While American professors protest Donald Trump and plead for Maduro, Venezuelans cheer Trump and hope for freedom.

The Donroe Doctrine does not promise instant liberation or universal justice. It promises something more basic and more necessary: Criminal regimes will no longer receive legitimacy simply because they occupy a seat at the United Nations. Traffickers, tyrants, and their patrons now face consequences.

Whether this approach extends beyond Venezuela remains to be seen. But one reality is already clear. The Western Hemisphere no longer serves as an unguarded corridor for corruption, narcotics, and foreign subversion.

The age of moral neutrality is over. The age of the Donroe Doctrine has begun.

Journalist Nick Shirley’s name is on the tip of everyone’s tongues after his massive exposé of Somalian day-care fraud plaguing the taxpayers of Minnesota under Tim Walz’s watch — but that’s not the only event he’s covered.

“I’ve spent a lot of time in London,” Shirley tells BlazeTV host John Doyle at AmFest.

“I’ve been to a few of the marches that have been held there. I originally went there just to see what was happening cause I’ve heard of illegal immigration — or mass migration, not even illegal, because a lot of their immigration is legal — but how mass migration has shifted London,” he explains.

“Do you have to worry at all while you’re over there getting that kind of content that, like, the police are going to arrest you for hate speech or something?” Doyle asks.

“Yeah, that’s the thing that’s interesting about being in London. You don’t have to worry about being attacked per se. You have to worry about being arrested for the videos you make inside of London. So, I always film, and then I post them once I get out of London,” Shirley says.

And recently, Shirley has been impressed with the amount of people who have been taking to the streets to protest censorship or mass migration.

“They had, like, over a million people out in the streets of London. That was pretty incredible just to see how many people are actually very, not as much interested, but more so impacted by what’s happening in their country that a million people came out to support,” he explains.

This protest in particular was about both free speech and mass migration.

“Were people more or less happy to see an American over there in support of them?” Doyle asks.

“Very much so, because they say that if it wasn’t for Donald Trump, who knows what would happen with the West,” Shirley says.

“They feel a lot more safe, and they feel like their country is going to be in a lot better position,” he continues, “because Trump does stand for Western values, and he doesn’t want to see these other countries get diminished.”

Want more from John Doyle?

To enjoy more of the truth about America and join the fight to restore a country that has been betrayed by its own leaders, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Just days after the inauguration of democratic socialist New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, his administration is having to face damaging accusations from critics.

Mamdani picked housing rights activist Cea Weaver to join his team, but her past comments equating homeownership to white supremacy have led to widespread condemnation.

'That level of thinking only comes from extreme privilege and total detachment from reality.'

Among those decrying the pick is former New York City Mayor Eric Adams, also a Democrat.

"Homeownership is how immigrants, Black, Brown, and working-class New Yorkers built stability and generational wealth despite every obstacle," Adams wrote on social media.

"You have to be completely out of your f***ing mind to call that 'white supremacy,'" he added. "That level of thinking only comes from extreme privilege and total detachment from reality."

Adams included a screenshot of the questionable post made by Weaver in 2019.

"Private property including and kind of ESPECIALLY homeownership is a weapon of white supremacy masquerading as 'wealth building' public policy," she wrote.

Mamdani rode into the mayor's office on a wave of residents' grievances over high housing costs by promising to extend rent control. Critics of the policy, including many economists, oppose rent control because it leads to abandoned rental units and, paradoxically, higher rents.

In other resurfaced comments, Weaver implied that white people would need to change their relationship to private property for the sake of social justice equity.

RELATED: Mamdani makes bizarre promise on World Cup tickets — and gets wrecked in community note

"I think the reality is, is that for centuries we've really treated property as an individualized good and not a collective good," Weaver said in video-recorded comments.

"And transitioning to treating it as a collective good and towards a model of shared equity will require that we think about it differently," she added. "And it will mean that families, especially white families but some [people of color] families who are homeowners as well, are going to have a different relationship to property than the one that we currently have."

Mamdani's director of appointments has already resigned over comments on social media deemed anti-Semitic.

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

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella says the general public is looking at artificial intelligence through the wrong lens.

In a recent blog post, the India-born executive told readers to start viewing AI platforms as "bicycles for the mind."

'While AI can improve efficiency, it may also reduce critical engagement.'

Nadella explained that he prefers users would think of AI "as a scaffolding for human potential vs. a substitute" for human labor.

This scaffolding should be used to achieve goals, not replace humans in their roles, he continued, before saying debates around AI should not include an argument as to whether or not something is "slop."

"We need to get beyond the arguments of slop vs. sophistication and develop a new equilibrium in terms of our 'theory of the mind' that accounts for humans being equipped with these new cognitive amplifier tools as we relate to each other. This is the product design question we need to debate and answer."

"Slop" was named as Merriam-Webster's Word of the Year for 2025 and was defined as "digital content of low quality that is produced usually in quantity by means of artificial intelligence."

With this definition in mind, it is no wonder that Nadella would rather his users shy away from using such a term.

RELATED: CRASH: If OpenAI's huge losses sink the company, is our economy next?

The blog post, titled "Looking Ahead to 2026," envisioned a world where it is not even considered to not integrate AI into regular tasks.

Society must account for AI's "'jagged' edges" and enable rich and safe "tools use" to advance to proper "scaffolds," Nadella claimed.

Consistently using this term to imply assistance in man-made projects en masse, Nadella described the use of AI as necessary in the face of "scarce energy, compute, and talent" resources.

"If Nadella wants people to stop referring to AI output as slop, then the AIs should be improved so they no longer produce slop," said Josh Centers, a tech expert from Chapter House.

Interestingly enough, the very same slop that generative AI models have produced recently have actually not enhanced human thinking, according to studies. As PC Gamer noted, Microsoft even co-authored a study that showed reliance on AI models can reduce independent problem-solving capabilities.

"Surprisingly, while AI can improve efficiency, it may also reduce critical engagement, particularly in routine or lower-stakes tasks in which users simply rely on AI, raising concerns about long-term reliance and diminished independent problem-solving," the paper revealed.

RELATED: ROTTEN APPLE? Top execs bail on CEO Tim Cook as woked-up tech giant fumbles lead

Chona Kasinger/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The study also noted that AI tools "appear to reduce the perceived effort required for critical thinking tasks among knowledge workers, especially when they have higher confidence in AI capabilities."

Content creator Kabrutus — who represents a community of more than 470,000 disenfranchised gamers — has heavily criticized AI when it does churn out "slop."

"I think Nadella's main goal on wanting us to stop using the term 'slop' to refer to their AI is because he realizes AI is perceived as something very negative on many different fronts," he said.

He added, "Nadella is trying to make people stop using this term while the 'AI culture' is still small, because it's easier. Once AI gets HUGE, and pretty much everybody calls it 'slop,' it will be impossible to revert the situation."

"Why is he so worried about it?" the Brazilian asked. "Because AI is going to be one of the flagships of 'his' company in the near future, and if people perceive AI as 'slop' it will be much harder to sell them AI-based products, right?"

Meanwhile, Lewis Brackpool, U.K. director of investigations for Restore Britain, said he sees slop as something that defines "meaningless, talentless content creation that numbs the brain" and is plastered all over social media.

Brackpool explained that asking people not to use the term "slop" seems like "a marketing tool to prevent criticism of a product that could hurt sales numbers" and act as a coping mechanism for a company because "their product likely sucks."

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

While a few Republican politicians are dissenting on the issue of strikes in Venezuela, a CNN analysis found that President Donald Trump has an "iron grip" on the party.

Harry Enten said that polling showed there was no "rift" in the party and that a large majority supported the president. He made the comments during a segment on CNN Tuesday.

'The vast, vast majority of Republicans are with Donald Trump on this issue.'

"Let me be very clear: There is no rift in the Republican Party!" Enten said forcefully.

"Yes, there are some folks like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie who are quite skeptical of this," he added. "They are very much in the minority."

Enten pointed to an Ipsos poll that found 65% of Republicans supported the ouster of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, while only 6% opposed the action. A Washington Post poll found that 74% of Republican respondents supported the action and only 10% opposed it.

"The vast, vast majority of Republicans are with Donald Trump on this issue," he added. "Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene are very much in the minority. Very few Republicans are with them."

He pointed to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that showed Republican support for the president actually increasing slightly from 84% six months ago, to 85% currently.

"The bottom line is this: Donald Trump has had an iron grip, an iron grip on that Republican base for a long period of time," he added.

Video of Enten's comments were widely circulated on social media.

RELATED: Sunny Hostin says Maduro's arrest was an act of 'piracy' and 'imperialism' — but Ana Navarro says it made her cry with joy

Enten went on to say on social media that support for the Venezuelan strikes had increased among all Americans, likely because it was such a successful operation.

"Trump has to like the dramatic change in the polls on Maduro's ouster," Enten wrote. "Support for it is through the roof (up 16 pts) vs. pre-ouster. We saw a similar rise in support over time for the Iran strikes in mid-2025. Americans like what they deem as successful military operations."

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