The cost of recruitment seems to be getting with the times.

A unique offer has been pushed out by a U.S. Army unit in Georgia involving the release of the highly anticipated Grand Theft Auto VI game, and it's surprisingly had some success already.

'The command team ... wanted to get soldiers excited to re-enlist.'

Fort Stewart in Georgia is home to the Army's 9th Brigade Engineering Battalion, and the unit also seems particularly keen on playing the new video game.

That's the logic behind the latest recruiting offer aimed at keeping soldiers in the forces for years to come.

Recently, federal officials told CBS News that the unit in Georgia was offering active-duty soldiers a four-day pass to play the game when it comes out in November, but only under the condition that they extend their contract with the military.

As reported by IGN, about 130 soldiers are eligible to extend their contract and receive time off after the November 19 release of the game, according to a copy of an Army memo circulating online.

"Any soldier who signs a re-enlistment contract between" August 1 and November 14 will be "authorized for a special four-day pass," the memo stated.

The memo was signed by commanding officer Lt. Col. Ryan Hodgson.

"This special pass is specifically designated to coincide with the highly anticipated release of the video game Grand Theft Auto VI," the memo added.

It may come as a shock to some readers, but the gamble has already paid off.

RELATED: Charlie Kirk murder online role play banned from Grand Theft Auto: 'Tasteless, unacceptable'

As of late August, at least 20 soldiers have taken advantage of the incentive and decided to extend their military contract, trading the four days of eye-and-thumb-blistering gaming for an extension of their service.

"The idea was to have a unique incentives program that connects to what soldiers are interested in," Lt. Col. Angel Tomko, a spokesperson for the 3rd Infantry Division, told CBS News. "The command team, in conjunction with the career counselor, wanted to get soldiers excited to re-enlist."

The aforementioned memo said it hoped to promote "retention, boost morale, and reward the continued dedication" of the soldiers in that battalion.

RELATED: Self-driving trucks are about controlling the roads — not making them safer

Stephen Morton/Getty Images

According to trading platform Polymarket, GTA VI could trigger a $1 billion deficit to the U.S. economy when it launches due to worker inactivity.

Economic analysis page Cost of America estimated that if around 1.5 million workers called in sick for work upon the game's launch, the billion-dollar deficit could become true.

A GameSquare survey showed that out of 1,000 respondents, 100 said they would be skipping work on launch day (10%), while another 300 (30%) said they were considering it.

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

Americans really love AI. They‘re especially fond of ChatGPT, with nearly 68 million people using it regularly. Some users are probably reading this piece right now. If so, then you should be worried.

Online, people say things they would never say to their spouses, colleagues, employers, or closest friends. Not in a million years. Not in a million lifetimes. They discuss crippling debt and ongoing infidelity. They share health concerns and religious anxieties. Too many disclose their darkest thoughts. The AI model listens attentively. Most importantly, it takes notes — lots of notes. This is troubling. But what it does with those notes is even more troubling.

The situation is especially concerning when parents ask LLMs for relationship advice.

According to a recent paper, aptly titled "The Algorithmic Self-Portrait: Deconstructing Memory in ChatGPT," the program saved 96% of stored memories on its own initiative, without user prompting or permission.

Meanwhile, a rather shocking 52% of ChatGPT’s memory files contain psychological insights into the user, detailing personality traits, behavioral issues, and other intimate observations. If someone asks for help proofreading a job resume while ranting about an annoying employer, ChatGPT will link the request to the context and add a note about the user's workplace concerns. The traditional surveillance state was, in many ways, painfully obvious, with mysterious phone calls, CCTV cameras, and men in trench coats tailing you home and parking across the street.

By comparison, AI software is highly effective at extracting extremely valuable info from its users without them ever noticing. To encourage voluntary self-disclosure, the creators of these programs only need to make them intuitive, very friendly, easy to use, and incredibly addictive. In return, they get a deep look inside their users' psyches. The company can store its findings in the cloud, turning it into an incredibly valuable asset to monetize and, more worryingly, weaponize. Both tech giants and hackers who eventually breach their systems could exploit these personal details and make Americans' lives absolute hell.

Family matters

The situation is especially concerning when parents ask LLMs for relationship advice. Mothers and fathers turn to AI to help them deal with tantrums, bullying, developmental disabilities, and bitter divorces. Teens turn to the same service for guidance on sensitive issues they feel embarrassed to discuss with their parents. This material can be stored indefinitely, creating a detailed dossier on minors who, through no fault of their own, cannot fully understand the long-term repercussions of sharing private details with a chatbot. They are children, after all, and children do silly, regrettable things. They don’t know better; the parents, however, really should.

If a company understands what makes an individual tick, it can pull the strings like a master puppeteer. Organizations can use this information to pressure users and subtly steer them toward specific purchases or political viewpoints. The U.S. Constitution was built on the idea that a society founded on individual liberty should encourage open debate about politically charged ideas. A free republic simply cannot survive if one highly influential group has limitless access to another's inner workings.

RELATED: OpenAI cancels its latest chatbot — it wouldn't stop acting like a supervillain

Heather Diehl/Getty Images

The companies that build these programs claim their products offer convenience and a uniquely personal experience. This may be true, but just because something is easy and effortless doesn’t mean it’s good. Smoking ticks both boxes, but only the most disingenuous or deluded would argue that the benefits of lighting up a cancer stick outweigh the risk.

This is serious. As AI grows in prominence and intelligence, more Americans will turn to ChatGPT and similar models for advice and assistance.

The cost of convenience

Software developers and oddball tech lords like Sam Altman shouldn’t get a free pass to conduct psychological profiling under the guise of convenience and time savings. Modern AI is cleverly and deliberately designed to appear more human than it is (let’s not forget that it’s not human at all, even if it happens to have a name like Claude). These programs are designed to respond in a friendly, nonjudgmental manner and to log the conversation for later reference. They act like the perfect companion, remembering every detail and never forgetting to compliment users on their supposed brilliance. They are omniscient and obedient, a lethal combination designed to flatter and ultimately deceive.

People start trusting this “friend” and share their hopes, desires, and deepest dreads without considering the long-term consequences. We are dealing with arguably the most powerful technology ever created. AI may very well be, on balance, a force for good, but that doesn’t mean it’s sensible to confess everything to a digital stranger posing as an ally. At best, it’s unwise. At worst, it’s destructive and can cause irreversible damage.

Tech executives love to say they only want to build products with the consumer's best interests in mind. No one should be comforted by these not-so-sincere promises. Personally, AI succeeds for them only if it knows a user more intimately than the user's children or spouse ever could. It is an unethical and unfair trade-off: The inner workings of an LLM like ChatGPT are treated as a black box, while the inner workings of an average American are mined and memorized.

Americans must recognize that companies like OpenAI are nowhere near as trustworthy as they claim to be. They must also recognize that psychological profiling is far more likely to expand than to ebb and ask themselves whether they are prepared to surrender ever-greater access to their private lives to companies that have every incentive to know more about them and the people they hold dearest.

Since 2019, the NFL has partnered with Jay-Z’s company Roc Nation to curate and produce the Super Bowl halftime show, making the billionaire rapper/entrepreneur the main decision-maker on the performer each year.

According to recent articles from Puck News and Deadline, Jay-Z has chosen himself as the performer for Super Bowl LXI.

“This somewhat blows my mind, but it's right on brand for the NFL and Jay-Z,” says “Fearless” host Jason Whitlock.

Whitlock begins by listing out the Super Bowl halftime performers since Jay-Z took control in 2019:

2020 — Shakira & Jennifer Lopez

2021 — The Weeknd

2022 — Dr. Dre, Snoop Dogg, Eminem, Mary J. Blige, Kendrick Lamar

2023 — Rihanna

2024 — Usher

2025 — Kendrick Lamar

2026 — Bad Bunny

“And now he's picking himself. This has really turned into a no whites allowed situation,” sighs Whitlock. “Diversity, equity, and inclusion is no part of Jay-Z's strategy or the NFL strategy as it relates to Super Bowl halftimes.”

The NFL, he says, seems to have learned nothing from the toll Turning Point USA’s alternative halftime show took on Bad Bunny’s performance last year.

“TPUSA's halftime show was a raging success that actually hurt Super Bowl ratings. Bad Bunny's ratings dipped. The Super Bowl ratings did not do what they were supposed to do. ... Doesn't seem like the NFL has learned anything,” he says.

While Jay-Z is “not the same” as Bad Bunny, who “sang in Spanish” and “made homosexual references,” Whitlock still doesn’t think he’s a good choice for what’s supposed to be a family-friendly show.

“I find Jay-Z's music inappropriate for a Super Bowl halftime. It's gutter rap music,” he says.

To hear more, watch the episode above.

Want more from Jason Whitlock?

To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

My wife, Gracie, recently heard Dana Perino on “The Five” discussing how poorly Republican candidates explain their accomplishments. “Why won’t the Republicans listen to her?” she asked. Tyrus often makes a related observation: Republicans don’t know how to play with a lead. I told Gracie that much of what’s wrong with this country belongs squarely at the feet of the GOP.

Democrats announce their intentions. Republicans raise money promising to stop them. Washington gets bigger, Americans get the bill, and another Republican email requests $25. Before midnight, naturally. Apparently, losing requires a subscription.

Republicans want our votes; our opinions apparently weren’t part of the purchase.

In “The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers,” Aragorn commands the defenders of Helm’s Deep: “Show them no mercy, for you shall receive none!” The mercy rule belongs in T-ball for 5-year-olds, not politics, where a nation’s survival is at stake. Yet Republicans have spent decades playing as though their first obligation were to avoid upsetting the opposition.

We watched Bush absorb political beatings, McCain court people who never returned the favor, and Candy Crowley intervene during Romney’s confrontation with Obama. McCain reached so far across the aisle that he was practically horizontal. We sent Republicans to oppose the Democrats. They seemed determined to impress them.

Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh labored daily, exposing the left and teaching millions what fighting it looked like. “I don’t want to stand with them. I want to stand over them,” declared the booming voice of the Doctor of Democracy. “What do they offer that we want? What do they stand for that’s good for the country?” His exasperation carried through the golden EIB microphone and across the fruited plain.

Rush understood the glass jaw beneath the left’s self-appointed moral superiority. Its champions claimed the virtue, assigned themselves the intelligence, and expected everyone else to accept the verdict. Rush laughed at that verdict. He challenged the falsehoods beneath their claims and mocked the people accustomed to doing the mocking. As he put it, “Mock them, and they become unhinged.”

The Tea Party had put Washington on notice, and Romney’s defeat deepened the frustration. Voters who followed the experts’ advice about electability were tired of lectures from people who kept losing. Then Trump came down the escalator.

I told my son in 2015, “Trump’s going to win.” He asked how I knew. “Because the establishment doesn’t understand how pissed off the American people are.” Voters were furious about government fraud, grift, and overreach. Republicans campaigned against Washington, then unpacked as though they had checked into a resort. People wanted someone willing to take a political swing and make it hurt.

Trump did.

RELATED: JD Vance says he is 'DISGUSTED' with Republicans after controversial Ramaswamy ad

Daniel Heuer-Pool/Getty Images

Suddenly, people who had spent decades sneering at conservatives discovered an urgent national need for civility. Their media scribes encountered a Republican who questioned the interrogator, and their disapproval failed to produce the customary apology. Rush had shown us the glass jaw. Trump kept pounding it. I’ve never seen political derangement displayed so relentlessly or applauded so enthusiastically.

They warned Trump’s voters that he was combative. Yes. That was in the job description. His victories exposed Republican excuses, and his willingness to confront the press exposed their deference.

How much of the GOP’s helplessness had been habit? Some Republicans learned. Others still regard Trump’s voters as an unpleasant condition the party might recover from. They want our votes; our opinions apparently weren’t part of the purchase.

Now Republican candidates need coaching to defend their own record. How many seminars does this require? Dana, too many Republicans spent years selling us the fight. Trump made their customers start asking about delivery.

Start with the border. Maintaining control there would be enough for me. Customs and Border Protection reports that fiscal year 2026 was the first full fiscal year with zero Border Patrol releases into the country’s interior. Apparently, enforcement was possible!

Under the trade agreement with Japan, GlobalFoundries plans two new American chip factories, financed by up to $21 billion in Japanese investment. Trump’s Justice Department announced charges against 324 defendants in 2025 in alleged health care fraud schemes involving more than $14.6 billion in intended losses.

RELATED: Conservatives demand competition — except in their own primaries

Eric Lee/Getty Images

Trump’s administration also moved to speed permitting for AI infrastructure and canceled thousands of USAID awards. Innovation deserves room. Taxpayer spending deserves scrutiny. There is a record to campaign on, so defend it. Make opponents defend theirs. When reporters put words in your mouth, spit them out.

Here’s a freebie: Biden signed a law providing nearly $80 billion in additional IRS funding. Meanwhile, it took a young man with a camera to put Minnesota’s day care spending under national scrutiny. Why did elected Republicans need a YouTuber to make people ask where the money went?

Trump cannot supply every Republican’s backbone. If Democrats take Congress, candidates who failed to make their case should answer for it. If Trump carries them across the finish line, a thank-you should precede complaints about his manners.

They should also remember one of Rush’s favorite sayings: “They don’t make statues of great moderates in history.” I miss Rush. He spent decades teaching us how to fight, and millions of listeners learned. Too many Republicans learned only how to fundraise. They have less than two weeks to prove that winning wouldn’t ruin their business model.

The Air and Marine Operations component of U.S. Customs and Border Protection may have ruined a major payday for drug traffickers when it interdicted a boat with millions of dollars' worth of alleged cocaine.

The vessel was caught with three "undocumented occupants" from Venezuela on Oct. 7 in the seas just below Guayanilla, a town in southern Puerto Rico, according to a CBP press release.

'This seizure reflects the value of coordinated maritime enforcement and the vigilance of our personnel and partner agencies.'

CBP said the vessel was a "Yola-type" boat, which is a small, often handmade open vessel composed of wood or fiberglass.

Ponce Marine Operations crews transported the vessel to the Ponce port of entry for further examination.

In the vessel, officials discovered about 1,309 pounds of alleged cocaine, which they estimate to be valued at $9.4 million. A field test confirmed it was cocaine, CBP claimed.

The investigation into the confiscated substance is being led by the Homeland Security Task Force, as well as the prosecution efforts.

"Air and Marine Operations remains committed to protecting Puerto Rico’s maritime borders and disrupting transnational criminal organizations that seek to move dangerous contraband through the Caribbean," said Caribbean Air and Marine Branch Director Christopher Hunter.

"This seizure reflects the value of coordinated maritime enforcement and the vigilance of our personnel and partner agencies," he added.

RELATED: Liberals pounce to defend drug cartels after Trump reveals strike on drug-running gang members near Venezuela

Allegedly drug-running vessels in the Caribbean have become a flash point among critics of the administration who allege that the military strikes on boats are extrajudicial.

The strikes on allegedly drug-running boats preceded a military operation in January in which U.S. troops captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and transported him to the U.S. for prosecution. In a superseding indictment announced on October 8, he and his wife have been charged with conspiring to commit torture, narcoterrorism, and other drug and weapons crimes.

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

Kamala Harris has made election integrity a big talking point ahead of the midterms. The former vice president’s latest claims of cheating raise an obvious question: Does she object to voter-roll maintenance itself, or can she identify a lawful safeguard she actually supports?

At an appearance in South Korea last week, the former vice president alleged “overt cheating” in American elections, citing voter-roll purges. In September, she accused officials of “cheating by purging voter rolls.” Over the summer, she also criticized the SAVE America Act for requiring documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.

Harris can keep calling voter-roll purges ‘cheating.’ But California’s unanswered questions and New Jersey’s documented registration failure demand more than talking points.

Harris wants to turn basic election safeguards into the boogeyman of election administration. But isn’t the point to ensure that only American citizens vote in our elections?

Election officials must not improperly remove eligible voters. They also have an obligation to identify ineligible registrations. Harris talks about purges without making that distinction. Americans deserve to know which safeguards she opposes and why.

Start with California, Harris’ home state. On Monday, the Justice Department charged 28 lawful permanent residents with federal election-related offenses, including fraudulent registration and illegal voting. Eleven were arrested. The charges are allegations, not convictions, but the cases warrant serious attention.

Federal prosecutors say all 28 appeared on a list of more than 20,000 people the government believes are likely noncitizens registered in California. The Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security sued the state on October 15, seeking to stop ballots attributed to people on that list from being counted until their citizenship is verified.

Governor Gavin Newsom (D) called the lawsuit an attempt to “suppress California voters.” The state should be able to show how it verifies eligibility and corrects its rolls.

It cannot. A separate public records response exposes an accounting problem: California’s statewide voter-registration system “does not contain a voter status reason for cancellation due to non-citizenship.” The state could not provide a count of registrations canceled for that specific reason. Why not?

New Jersey supplies an even clearer example of why verification cannot be an afterthought. In July, Governor Mikie Sherrill (D) acknowledged that a “serious software error” had registered approximately 6,600 people who answered “no” when asked whether they were U.S. citizens during motor vehicle transactions. The “error” occurred between June 2023 and June 2024.

RELATED: California makes ‘massive concession’ in lawsuit over 20,000 'likely noncitizen' voters, DOJ says

CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP/Getty Images

A subsequent state accounting found that about 340 newly registered people had actually voted. New Jersey claims it has no evidence that those votes changed an election result. That does not excuse a system that registered people after they expressly declined to attest to citizenship.

At a House Judiciary hearing in September, I noted that at least three New Jersey elections in 2025 were decided by a single vote or ended in a tie. When a race is that close, election officials cannot shrug off registration errors.

New Jersey voters understand the stakes. A Rutgers-Eagleton poll released this month found that 82% of state residents support requiring photo ID to vote in person, while 71% favor documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register.

Even Sherrill has expressed support for voter ID. That requirement establishes identity; proof of citizenship establishes eligibility. They serve different purposes, and neither question should be brushed aside with a slogan about voter suppression.

RELATED: ‘DON'T TRUST THE POLLS’: Failed Democratic candidate melts down after ANOTHER pollster outed as a total fake

Katie McTiernan/Anadolu/Getty Images

Minnesota has its own lesson in the need for clear rules. Governor Tim Walz (D) signed a 2023 law that lets residents get standard driver’s licenses without proving lawful immigration status. During an October 2025 legislative hearing, state Rep. Patti Anderson (R) pressed state elections director Paul Linnell on whether those licenses could be used as voter identification. He failed to give a direct yes-or-no answer.

Minnesota does permit a driver’s license as proof of residence for Election Day registration. Citizenship eligibility is a separate requirement. Election officials should be able to explain the distinction simply, especially when lawmakers ask about vulnerabilities.

Accurate voter rolls, citizenship verification, and clear identity rules protect the votes of eligible Americans. Officials should explain how those safeguards work and correct failures when they find them.

Harris can keep calling voter-roll purges “cheating.” But California’s unanswered questions and New Jersey’s documented registration failure demand more than talking points. If she believes these safeguards are improper, she should explain which ones — and what she would do instead.

Thomas Sowell has a suggestion for young people heading off to college: Get an education while you’re there.

He’s even put together a reading list.

Sowell's introductory statement makes clear that he expects readers to question what they find, including his own arguments.

The economist and author, now 96, launched Facts Against Rhetoric last year to help people find arguments they might otherwise go through their entire schooling without encountering. It’s an extensive collection of books, essays, interviews, lectures, and online courses, organized by subject and available to anyone with the curiosity to start clicking.

Introducing the project in an April 2025 interview with Peter Robinson, Sowell described his purpose as “enabling students to get an education despite being in college.”

Parents paying the tuition may find something useful here too.

The site is a meticulously curated collection of educational resources on subjects ranging from “Intellectuals and Ideologies” and “Italians Around the World” to economics, education, and race. Alongside direct links to interviews, lectures, articles, and courses, Sowell provides extensive bibliographies pointing readers to books, specific chapters, and articles, often noting where and in what formats they’re available. You can click through to watch Sowell challenge claims about the “wage gap” for blacks and women on William F. Buckley Jr.’s “Firing Line” in 1981 or listen to Edward R. Murrow's 1943 account of a brush with death on an RAF bombing run over Berlin.

Although 96, Sowell is hardly taking a victory lap here. He is on a mission, the urgency of which he explains in his introductory statement. A college graduate has decades of life ahead of him, during which he will encounter questions his professors never anticipated. Even if everything they taught him were correct, memorizing their answers would leave him poorly prepared to think through those new problems.

He will need some practice disagreeing with people. Preferably before his livelihood depends on it.

A former Marxist’s reading list

In his long life, Sowell has had to revise a few convictions of his own.

Born in North Carolina in 1930 and raised partly in Harlem, he dropped out of Stuyvesant High School, worked a succession of jobs, and served in the Marine Corps. Eventually he earned degrees from Harvard, Columbia, and the University of Chicago. He went on to teach at Cornell, Amherst, and UCLA, among other institutions.

Along the way, he was a Marxist. Studying under legendary free-market economist Milton Friedman did not immediately cure him. In Sowell’s telling, a summer working at the Department of Labor in 1960 proved more effective. Investigating unemployment in Puerto Rico’s sugar industry, he wanted to test whether minimum-wage requirements were contributing to the problem. His colleagues’ lack of enthusiasm for an inquiry that might undermine their own department’s policy helped change his understanding of government.

Decades later, Facts Against Rhetoric gives readers plenty of opportunities to examine the conclusions he reached. His own books appear throughout, alongside work by economists, historians, journalists, and other scholars.

The selections plainly reflect his sympathies. Under socialism, for example, you’ll find Friedman's 1993 talk "The Rise of Socialism Is Absurd" as well as a reading list, including Joshua Muravchik’s “Heaven on Earth: The Rise, Fall, and Afterlife of Socialism" and Paul Hollander's "From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship." Anyone hoping for encouragement to join the revolution will have to look elsewhere.

But there is considerably more here than a collection of arguments to deploy against your liberal brother-in-law.

Start anywhere

For a first visit, try the capitalism section, which links to Friedman’s 1979 appearance on “The Phil Donahue Show” and his lecture “Is Capitalism Humane?” Both offer a manageable introduction before you commit to the books listed below them, including Friedman’s “Capitalism and Freedom.”

Readers who prefer a more structured approach can follow the economics page to Hillsdale College’s online “Economics 101: Principles of Free Market Economics.” The same page points to Sowell’s “Basic Economics” and Walter E. Williams’ “Race and Economics,” along with shorter selections on subjects including affordability and unions.

Parents may want to begin with education. Here Sowell assembles material on schools, colleges, admissions, and academic performance. There’s an interview about his “Charter Schools and Their Enemies,” a discussion with Robert Pondiscio about Success Academy, and a link to Stanford’s 2023 National Charter School Study for readers who want to examine the research.

The college section also includes psychologist Steven Pinker’s interview with Reason’s Nick Gillespie, “What Went Wrong at Harvard.” Pinker discusses academic freedom, the policing of acceptable opinion, and why universities get into trouble when they pronounce on controversies their students and faculty should be free to debate.

For a longer excursion, the biographies page points to videos and articles on figures including Calvin Coolidge, Albert Einstein, and Frederick Douglass. Among a list of recommended books on John D. Rockefeller sits Ron Chernow’s “Titan"; readers considering Stephen Kotkin’s multivolume biography of Stalin — recommended here — can sample his work in the lecture “Stalin at War.”

RELATED: The left doesn’t like it when minorities think for themselves

Jemal Countess/Getty Images for MoveOn

The library card

One of the site’s biographical recommendations is an extended interview with Sowell himself, “Thomas Sowell: A Free Man.”

In it, he recalls arriving in Harlem as a child and being taken to a public library by another boy. Sowell had never seen so many books. He also couldn’t afford to buy one, which made the purpose of the visit somewhat mysterious.

His young guide persuaded him to get a library card. Sowell borrowed two books and began acquiring the reading habit that would occupy much of the rest of his life.

Now he has some suggestions for the rest of us. His introductory statement makes clear that he expects readers to question what they find, including his own arguments: “Whether you end up agreeing with me or with them is beside the point.”

Pick a subject, follow a link, track down a book. You can disagree with Professor Sowell — or not — after you’ve done the reading.

I was scrolling in bed when a clip of James Hetfield at the Sphere in Las Vegas came across my feed. I watched it three times.

He thanked the crowd for traveling to see Metallica, then said the band wasn’t there, like some other entertainers, to influence anybody. “Metallica’s agenda is love, energy, and heavy music, baby!”

The second you make half your audience feel unwelcome, you have a problem. Nobody buys a ticket to see a spokesperson.

The place went nuts. I might have cheered a little myself.

Hetfield has never been one for political sermons. Lars Ulrich, who leans left, has said the two hardly ever talk politics. They’ve spent more than 40 years in a band together and somehow managed. Their fans have too.

I spent my early 20s singing in a band on the road, including five summers on Warped Tour, so I’m not going to pretend music and politics never mix. Warped had plenty of both. Bands railed against the government between songs every day. But it was anti-establishment stuff: kids sticking it to whoever was in charge. I don’t remember anyone telling half the parking lot they were bad people because of how their parents voted. We were all in it together, sweaty, sunburned, and broke.

That’s what has changed. Too often, what comes from the stage isn’t rebellion. It’s a lecture aimed at the people who paid to be there.

Look at what happened to Macklemore. He was dropped from Ed Sheeran’s tour in September after saying “Free Palestine” onstage. Stadium operators objected; other performers quit in protest. Suddenly the tour itself was a political fight, and the music was an afterthought.

Here’s the part that gets me. On Warped Tour, the bands were the ones pushing back against people in power. Sure, the whole thing was sponsored by Vans. But the feeling was rebellion, not a lecture dressed up as a concert.

Now some of the biggest artists are among the richest, most-followed voices in the culture. They wield plenty of power themselves, and they use the stage to tell regular people what to think. It feels corporate and ridiculous.

RELATED: GUITAR HERO: Metallica front man puts music before political ‘bulls**t’

Mike Lewis Photography/Redferns

That’s not punk. That’s a sermon with a light show.

Which means a 63-year-old guy at the most high-tech venue on the planet, refusing to join in, might be the most rebellious thing I’ve seen from a stage in years.

I’ve worked in PR a long time, and I’d tell any client the same thing: The second you make half your audience feel unwelcome, you have a problem. Nobody buys a ticket to see a spokesperson.

Write the political song if you’ve got one in you. Metallica has. But when the lights go down, that room belongs to the people who paid to be in it. Hetfield is one of the few who still acts like it.

Love, energy, and heavy music. That’s the whole agenda, and it’s the right one.

Two Ohio adults were arrested for subjecting nine children to "horrific, disgusting" living conditions at their home in Licking County, police said.

Jonathan Parr and Jacquelyn Coleman were arrested on Oct. 14 after police reported finding the children living among hundreds of insects, including cockroaches.

'I can tell you from being out there that the living conditions were horrific, disgusting.'

The children, ages 1 to 13 years old, were also allegedly subjected to abuse involving lack of food and water and insufficient living space.

The children were taken into emergency custody after someone at a Licking County school called Child Protective Services.

That CPS worker interviewed the children, who allegedly detailed the abuse at the home.

After police obtained a search warrant, about a dozen Licking County SWAT team members raided the home and found the horrific living conditions.

"I can tell you from being out there that the living conditions were horrific, disgusting," said Licking County Sheriff’s Office Capt. Jay Cook.

Police called the bathroom an "abomination" and reported finding several firearms at the home within view of the beds where some children slept.

Parr admitted that he made the children stand for five to 10 minutes as a punishment but denied other allegations, according to police.

Coleman was arrested during a traffic stop and allegedly claimed she ignored the abuse because she had nowhere else to stay.

The two were not married but had four children together. It's unclear which of the children were Parr's and which ones belonged to Coleman.

Deputies confiscated an iPhone, a tablet/iPad, and multiple weapons from the home.

RELATED: Texas cops investigating odor at home believed someone died inside — they found 2 children living in horrific conditions

Coleman and Parr were each being held on $150,000 bonds at the Licking County Jail. They each face one charge of endangering children, but other charges may be added in the future.

Parr's mother also lived at the home, but she was not charged.

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

France has spent centuries defending its independence, but BlazeTV host Nick Freitas warns that the country now faces a different kind of battle: one over the future of Western civilization itself.

This battle is being waged by a very unlikely team: the left and Islam.

While the pair has very “different ultimate objectives” and very “different worldviews,” that isn’t stopping them from “using each other to achieve their objectives.”

“The left is arrogant enough to believe that Islamists just really want to be woke leftists, they just need to experience a more elaborate welfare system. And then Islam recognizes that look, they do not have the military or economic power to achieve the sort of conquest that they used to,” Freitas explains.

Rather than give up on their conquests, Islam changes “to more asymmetric strategies,” of which Freitas says there are many.

“They talk about ‘taqiyya,’ it’s the idea that you can lie to your enemies. Now again, they will say, ‘Well, no, no, no. This is only like if you’re in a position of extreme, you know, potential harm and you have to lie to be able to save yourself. It’s not just that we can lie in general,’” he says.

“Except that when you see it interpreted by different imams, you get different interpretations, you get different applications for it,” he adds.

And in this case, Islam is using the left as a way to get in on “decolonizing” the West and creating a moral legitimacy for its strategy.

“Now, I’m trying to come up with a moral framework, which provides the left the ability to commit aggressive acts of violence or looting or destruction. And it’s not aggression. It’s just defense,” Freitas says.

“This is decolonization. This is taking back what’s rightfully ours. Because after all, you’re on stolen land, right? This is just taking back what belongs to us because after all, the only reason you have it is not a result of your own efforts,” he continues.

“No, it’s because of oppressive systems that you put in place, which exploited one people in order to enrich yourselves,” he adds.

And the decolonization message echoing through France was founded by a man who claimed that violence was necessary.

“Their argument was colonization was violence. Decolonization has to be violent,” Freitas says, pointing out that their attention has shifted to “decolonizing France.”

“Decolonize it of what?” Freitas asks. “You have to decolonize it of this Western ideology, of Christianity, of capitalism, of property rights, of markets. That’s what has to be decolonized now.”

“If that’s what decolonization is, then what you really mean is you need to uproot, supplant, and destroy the culture that you believe is guilty of the original colonization. That is what has to be destroyed, and that’s what the left wants,” he adds.

“Making the Argument with Nick Freitas” is available on BlazeTV+, YouTube, and major podcast platforms.

Start watching Nick Freitas NOW at blazetv.com and use the promo code NICK for $20 off your BlazeTV+ subscription.

U.S. Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) told an audience at the University of Chicago that she wants future investigations of Trump administration officials to send a deterrent message. Young people considering jobs in a Republican administration, she said, should wonder whether joining it might buy them “a ton of problems.”

Slotkin describes her proposal as accountability for corruption. But listen to the threat embedded in her political strategy: Make public service under the wrong president so frightening that talented young conservatives never enter government. She said the quiet part out loud, and conservatives would be fools to ignore it.

If the system is fraying, the worst response is to abandon every position of legitimate authority while the other side organizes.

The peaceful transfer of power depends on losers believing they can survive defeat and return to fight another election. That assumption is eroding.

From the Bush-Gore recount to birtherism, Russiagate, and the battles over COVID-era voting rules, every disputed election has taught Americans to question the legitimacy of the next result. A political system cannot endure indefinitely when losing means permanent exclusion, financial ruin, or the threat of prosecution.

Eventually, the incentive to win at any cost overwhelms the willingness to accept defeat. The ballot is supposed to decide who holds office, not which faction gets to use the state to erase its rivals.

Donald Trump accelerated that deterioration because he inspires a peculiar derangement in his enemies. Progressives convinced themselves that Trump was a fascist dictator preparing a thousand-year Reich. They portrayed ordinary political disagreements as existential emergencies and justified extraordinary tactics as necessary resistance.

The campaign to stop Trump continued after he left office. His opponents pursued lawsuits, criminal cases, and ballot challenges designed to prevent his return. Conservatives watched the machinery of politics become an instrument for destroying the opposition. The law may permit a particular lawsuit or prosecution. That does not mean Americans should be comfortable watching every political contest turn into a criminal investigation.

Trump also survived two assassination attempts in 2024. The atmosphere of political hatred should disturb anyone who expects elections to settle disputes without bloodshed. Instead, much of the left treats Trump's second administration as an even more terrifying prospect because he has learned something from the first: Personnel determine whether a president can govern. The specter of Cheeto Hitler now excuses an endless war against anyone who might help him.

Trump entered Washington in 2017 without understanding how thoroughly permanent bureaucracies could frustrate his agenda. Officials who considered themselves guardians of the government against its elected leader resisted him from within. This time he has pursued loyal appointments and executive action aggressively.

RELATED: The global meritocracy myth sells Americans’ inheritance cheap

Blaze Media Illustration

Progressives understand that a Republican administration staffed by people committed to its program is harder to neutralize than one staffed by its enemies. So the fight has shifted from Trump himself to the Americans willing to serve him.

That is what makes Slotkin's remarks so revealing. Young graduates already face a difficult choice between a prosperous private career and the headaches of federal service. Now imagine telling them that four years at the Department of Justice or Homeland Security could lead to crippling legal bills once Democrats regain power. You need not imprison every conservative official. Ruin a few careers, and the next generation will learn to stay away. An opposition that cannot recruit competent personnel cannot govern, however many elections it wins.

Trump's greatest failure may be his refusal to impose meaningful costs on those who abused power against his movement. Anthony Fauci is not in prison. Officials who conservatives believe weaponized investigations have escaped accountability. Radical activists continue to operate, while prosecutions of political violence remain uneven at best. In repeated games, cooperation survives only when defection carries a price. Tit for tat is not a pleasant rule, but one side cannot endlessly punish the other while expecting restraint in return. Without consequences, bad conduct becomes a winning strategy.

The danger reaches beyond staffing.

Researcher Jennica Pounds, known online as DataRepublican, has published recordings and documents she says reveal preparations for a constitutional crisis involving a network called the United Democracy Alliance. According to her account, former military, intelligence, and diplomatic figures have discussed scenarios in which contested elections, executive branch action against protests, and defiance by Democrat governors could trigger a challenge to federal authority.

DataRepublican interprets those preparations as the groundwork for a seizure of power. Her account describes proposed political red lines, including a federal response to mass protests, that could become triggers for a confrontation between governors and Washington.

RELATED: This is what existential politics looks like

Blaze Media Illustration

One can chalk up the recordings as contingency planning, but the distinction grows thin when political operatives begin gaming out how governors might seize power amid a constitutional crisis. Elections are supposed to settle who governs. Planning to declare Washington illegitimate when an election or federal response goes the wrong way raises the stakes beyond ordinary opposition politics. Conservatives cannot afford to treat that possibility as an abstraction. They should examine the recordings, demand public answers, and prepare to defend their institutions.

No sane person should welcome domestic unrest. A country in which each election threatens imprisonment, confiscation, and violence would become unrecognizable. Americans have spent generations assuming that partisan combat ends when the ballots are counted. That bargain cannot survive if each party views the other as an enemy to be destroyed. Conservatives should demand lawful accountability for genuine wrongdoing, defend constitutional procedures, and refuse the comforting fantasy that decorum alone will restore the old rules.

None of this is permission to withdraw from politics. It is a reason to become harder to exclude. Vote. Recruit candidates. Build institutions. Win local offices. Know your sheriff, your neighbors, and the people responsible for keeping order. Cultivate lawyers, administrators, and young professionals willing to serve despite intimidation.

If the system is fraying, the worst response is to abandon every position of legitimate authority while the other side organizes. Democracy may not survive in the form Americans remember. The power conservatives build now will determine whether they have any say in what follows.

Nayib Bukele, the president of El Salvador, announced a military operation to rescue four hostages in Haiti and threatened the gangs involved.

In a statement on social media, Bukele issued a statement to the gang leaders and gang members that said if the hostages were not safely returned, he would mount a larger operation.

'We have already finished with the gangs in El Salvador, and we can finish with you too.'

Bukele said in the post translated by X from Haitian Creole that the four hostages were "cowardly" taken after they went to a market.

"Our kidnapped men are not combatants," he wrote. "They are aviation technicians who are part of our mission in Haiti, within the framework of an international mission. Our mission consists only of pilots and technical personnel, whose primary job is to carry out medical evacuations and save lives, not to wage war."

He went on to say that if the hostages were not returned alive, the Haitian gangs would face a far greater military operation.

"We have a single objective: to bring our four compatriots back home alive, without any harm," the president wrote.

"However, I want you, the gang leaders, to understand one thing very clearly: Today's attack is nothing compared to what is coming if we do not get all four hostages back alive. And do not take our word for empty threats," he added.

"We have already finished with the gangs in El Salvador, and we can finish with you too," Bukele added.

The president has been praised for taking a hard line against organized crime in El Salvador by sending criminals to an infamous prison for terrorists. Crime has dropped in the country, but humanitarian groups have accused Bukele of violating human rights and implementing an authoritarian state.

He added a video in the post that appeared to show military trucks in the operation in Haiti.

RELATED: Two Texans allegedly plotted to kill men on island with homeless mercenary force and take women and children as sex slaves

The operation was in retaliation for gang attacks on a gang suppression force with over 2,000 troops from El Salvador, Chad, Jamaica, and Guatemala.

"To the gang bosses terrorizing Haiti: Your days of operating with impunity are numbered," said Mike Waltz, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, on Monday. "You can burn vehicles, erect barricades, terrorize the local police, terrorize civilians, but the Gang Suppression Force is coming for you. The international community will not tolerate it."

"We still have time to avoid this,' Bukele added in his statement Wednesday.

"Return our four compatriots to us alive, without any harm, and everything will go back to how it was before the kidnapping. The decision is in your hands," he concluded.

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

Abdul El-Sayed wants to represent Michigan in the U.S. Senate, but BlazeTV hosts Stu Burguiere and Dave Landau believe he’s one of the weaker Democrats running this November — and his latest controversy isn’t helping.

“El-Sayed’s a uniquely bad candidate for the Democrats,” Stu says, noting that the “Republicans have a chance there.”

“You feel like when you’re coming down [to] the closing days of a campaign, you’d rather not be answering questions about your family being on the terrorist watch list and being in the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s suboptimal,” he adds.

“Michigan Democrat confirms sister-in-law’s terror watchlist lawsuit days before Obama campaign appearance,” one headline from Fox News reads.

“He had to fight back against this because people are like, ‘Hey, we were thinking, like, what if U.S. senators didn’t have sisters that were on the terror watch list,’” Stu jokes.

And in a clip of El-Sayed on NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” it’s clear that he didn’t make things much better.

The clip begins with an older clip where a reporter asked El-Sayed if he had any ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, to which he responded “no.” The reporter then asked if his family did, and he responded “no” again.

However, resurfaced tweets from El-Sayed’s half sister are calling that answer into question.

“Had an amazing talk with my mom about her activism in the Muslim Brotherhood during the early 70s while she was in college #respect,” one X post from his half sister reads.

“My family has long been MB, but I’ve always felt that it has navigated the political sphere poorly/destructively,” she wrote in another.

And in another, she wrote, “Praying for all my family that supports the #MB in #Egypt. Lie low, stay safe.”

When another NBC reporter called him out for the contradiction, El-Sayed responded, “And you want to ask me about what was happening in Egypt in 1970? Are you serious?”

“I’m telling you, like, I have no ties,” he added.

“Your mother had no ties?” the reporter pressed.

“I have never had these conversations with my mother. ... You’re using hearsay evidence from a tweet. ... It’s just not serious,” El-Sayed said again.

“You’ve also gone after the president for truthfulness, so when people ask you a question, they all do expect the truth,” the reporter continued.

“Are you insinuating that somehow I was lying?” El-Sayed asked.

“Yes,” Stu answers for the reporter. “And you’re lying again there.”

“And your sister tweeted it. It’s not hearsay,” Dave agrees.

“It’s not hearsay,” Stu adds. “Your freaking sister has said it not just once but multiple times.”

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave's lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

"Saturday Night Live" veteran Kenan Thompson appears to be the only current cast member publicly scolding Shane Gillis over his controversial opening monologue.

And Thompson is prepared to treat the 38-year-old comedian like a naughty child.

'I think you need to educate yourself on how things might impact people.'

Performance review

Speaking at Axios' Media Trends Live event in New York City on Tuesday, Thompson said he would have to sit Gillis down for a little talk if he returned to host "SNL."

"I'm sure we would have a conversation of, like, 'How do you think that went?' ... Like a little kid," Thompson told host Sara Fischer.

"I would just sit him down and be like, 'So what do you think we could change there, pal?' And just figure it out."

Thompson's remarks stand out among reactions from Gillis' "SNL" colleagues. The current cast has largely avoided publicly criticizing the comedian, while prominent alumni Dana Carvey and David Spade have come to his defense.

Even Michael Che, who co-hosts the show's "Weekend Update" segment, declined to condemn Gillis when pressed during an appearance on "Today."

"That's comedy," Che said, explaining that he couldn't criticize Gillis for a joke that didn't land.

Carvey was less reserved.

"I just didn't understand the kerfuffle — only because to me, I just saw it as what we call, I'll just say it, a joke!" Carvey said on his "Fly on the Wall" podcast with Spade.

Not every former cast member has been supportive. Ego Nwodim and Cecily Strong have both mocked Gillis' joke about women dressing like "whores" at the gym.

But Thompson, now in his 23rd season on "SNL," has offered perhaps the most patronizing response yet.

RELATED: Joe Rogan pounces on uproar over Shane Gillis joke about women dressing like 'whores' at gyms

'Harmful' ha-has

Thompson said he didn't necessarily consider Gillis a mean person, but suggested the comedian needed to learn that his jokes could hurt people.

"I don't think jokes are necessarily harmless just because they're jokes and you didn't intend it to be a certain kind of way," Thompson said. "I think you need to educate yourself on how things might impact people."

He also warned that comedians must balance their "creative liberties" with "watching your step as far as harmful words are concerned."

The remarks came more than a week after Gillis' third hosting appearance on "SNL," during which he joked that women at his gym were dressing like "whores."

RELATED: 'I say worse things than that every day': Jimmy Carr issues hilarious defense of Shane Gillis

Rosalind O'Connor/NBC via Getty Images

Stealing the spotlight

Thompson also seemed annoyed that the controversy had drawn attention away from the rest of the episode.

"Everybody's focusing in on this one specific word," he complained, adding that other parts of the monologue and the show were getting "overshadowed."

The actor pointed to new cast member Grace Reiter's performance and musical guest Rosalía, saying both deserved more attention than the debate over Gillis' remarks.

"It's sad, because nobody is even talking about it," Thompson said.

He went on to complain that the discussion had become a "back-and-forth on what's offensive and what's not."

When asked whether Gillis would be invited back, Thompson acknowledged that the decision wasn't his to make.

But he insisted that a return would require a "real chat" about avoiding behavior that creates a "wave pool" for the rest of the cast.

For now, Gillis has not publicly responded to Thompson's proposed fatherly intervention.

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

A man was arrested after he allegedly rammed his car into Australian Member of Parliament Helen Haines, an independent lawmaker.

Haines was getting something from her car outside her Wangaratta office in the state of Victoria when the man drove his Toyota Land Cruiser into her, pinning her against the car.

'Motivation is one of ⁠these things that we absolutely need to explore. His motivation for this, what we allege is a deliberate attack, is very much a centerpiece of the investigation.'

Then he reversed and drove into Haines again, according to Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke.

Bystanders rushed to help Haines while a local barber detained the 43-year-old alleged attacker until police arrived. He was later identified as Brendan Nugent.

Doctors amputated Haines' left leg at a Melbourne hospital on Monday, and two days later her right leg was amputated as well.

"The good news in all this is that Helen is alive and she’s stable. That is the most important thing for our family," her husband said to reporters outside the hospital on Wednesday. "We are grateful and thankful that, at this stage, both her heart and her mind are in good shape."

Prime Minister ⁠Anthony Albanese characterized the incident as a "deliberate attack."

No link between the suspect and Haines was initially discovered by investigators, Victoria Police Chief Mike Bush said.

"Motivation is one of ⁠these things that we absolutely need to explore. His motivation for this, what we allege is a deliberate attack, is very much a centerpiece of the investigation," Bush said.

Police are investigating whether he might have extremist anti-government views.

"Like everyone, we're examining social media associations, talking to witnesses, friends, and colleagues," Bush added.

Nugent was charged with one count each of dangerous driving causing serious injury, intentionally causing serious injury, and causing harm to a public official. He was also charged with cannabis possession and cultivation.

RELATED: 'Complete lizard person': Chuck Schumer gives stunningly tone-deaf remarks following Australia attack

"It's a reminder that the world is a more dangerous and divided place than it was a generation ago," Albanese said on Wednesday.

"I think that Australians do want to see their politicians be able to go about their business, to be able to get something from the back of their car, for goodness sake," he added.

Wangaratta Mayor Irene Grant said the 30,000 residents of the town are stunned over the incident.

"What has happened to Helen has caused the community to step back in utter disbelief. We can't believe it; people are horrified by what has happened,” she told the AFP.

Haines is 65 years old and has been married to her husband for 40 years.

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

“Saturday Night Live” veteran Dana Carvey has a name for Shane Gillis’ crude, widely condemned remarks about women at the gym: a joke.

The comedian weighed in on the backlash to Gillis’ October 10 “Saturday Night Live” monologue, in which he declared, “I haven’t been to the gym in so long, I didn’t know women just dress like whores now.”

'I just didn't understand the kerfuffle.'

Schitt fit

Gillis went on to describe the revealing shorts women wear to work out, repeatedly portraying himself as a creep for noticing. The routine drew condemnation from fellow entertainers, including “Schitt’s Creek” star Dan Levy, who called the remarks misogynistic.

Carvey, who spent seven seasons on “SNL” from 1986 to 1993, couldn't understand the fuss.

“I just didn’t understand the kerfuffle only because, to me, I just saw it as what we call — I’ll just say it — a joke,” he said on his “Fly on the Wall” podcast with fellow “SNL” alumnus David Spade.

“Like ... when you say jokes, you’re not literally saying women are whores. You are literally joking. Isn’t that kind of the idea?”

Then, apparently reconsidering the wisdom of his defense, Carvey added: “No? Did I just get canceled?”

RELATED: John Doyle: Why women are committed to proving Shane Gillis’ point

Tough crowd

Carvey acknowledged that a joke that might have destroyed at the comedy clubs Gillis regularly plays could land differently in NBC's Studio 8H.

He and Spade noted that the “SNL” audience tends to consist largely of dressed-up young women — not necessarily the crowd most receptive to Gillis' observations about women's gym attire.

Spade, who appeared on “SNL” from 1990 to 1996, was similarly unfazed.

“Listen, it got some laughs, but of course, I think he knows that one’s going to be a button-pusher, but he doesn’t care,” he said.

Spade also found something contradictory about the response to Gillis, particularly in a culture that demands respect for sex workers while condemning women such as actress Sydney Sweeney.

“I will say it’s almost comical that there’s people that say, ‘Oh, don’t make fun of OnlyFans. Don’t make fun of strippers. These are sex workers. They need to be respected.’ And then everyone hates Sydney Sweeney. And it’s like, what? Which one is it?”

Ultimately, Spade suggested that the difference between an acceptable “SNL” joke and an unacceptable one often comes down to the audience's reaction.

“I think at 'SNL,' if something kills, it gets a pass,” he said. “If something totally bombs, then they get in a lot of trouble.”

RELATED: 'I say worse things than that every day': Jimmy Carr issues hilarious defense of Shane Gillis

Al Levine/NBCU Photo Bank/NBCUniversal/Getty Images

Natural-born killer

Carvey and Spade aren't the only comedians to defend Gillis.

British comic Jimmy Carr dismissed the controversy, saying he makes worse jokes every day.

Two other former “SNL” cast members also had kind words for Gillis. Victoria Jackson, who appeared on the show from 1986 to 1992, was considerably less diplomatic than Carvey.

“He’s right about gym girls dressing like ‘whores,’” Jackson told Entertainment Weekly. “When did ‘camel toe’ become acceptable gym fashion and grocery shopping attire?”

Former cast member Jeff Richards, meanwhile, called Gillis a “really funny guy” and an “obvious natural.”

Gillis' monologue may have offended a sizeable contingent of entertainers. But among some of the comedians who once worked on the same “SNL” stage, the response has been considerably less scandalized.

Jeff Richards, a cast member from 2001 to 2004, called Gillis a "really funny guy" and an "obvious natural."

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

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Atlanta, Georgia, is the latest to be attacked with an incendiary device, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The FBI said the alleged device was tossed at the ICE agency on Tuesday evening. An active scene on Ted Turner Drive in downtown Atlanta is being investigated.

An 'unidentified male suspected of involvement in an attempted arson' had been caught on camera.

"The FBI continues to investigate an incident involving a Molotov cocktail-style device thrown at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in downtown Atlanta at approximately 8:15 p.m. on October 20," FBI Atlanta posted to X late Wednesday morning.

"The device caused minor damage. FBI agents are now reviewing evidence and following leads. No arrests have been made."

A subsequent post a few hours later indicated that an "unidentified male suspected of involvement in an attempted arson" at the building had been caught on camera.

WSB-TV reported that Atlanta police first arrived at the scene and the FBI and Homeland Security arrived later. Some of the evidence reportedly found at the scene included a plastic lighter and a shopping bag with what appeared to be two bottles of lighter fluid.

A WSB news crew said they got a look at the scene and saw no sign anything caught fire nor any damage caused.

The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

RELATED: DHS: Deadly Dallas ICE shooting came a month after bomb threat at same office

Liberal activists and agitators have protested ongoing ICE operations to detain and deport illegal aliens. Some have led to heinous attacks against ICE officers, and two detainees were killed and a third injured in an attack just over a year ago in Dallas.

In July, one anti-ICE activist was captured on video allegedly spraying an incendiary liquid at a federal office in New York City and lighting it with a lighter.

He then set off some fireworks and tried to flee before he was "tackled and detained" by a security officer, according to a DHS statement.

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

The mayor of the central Florida city of Kissimmee dodged an impeachment trial, only to end up in handcuffs.

Jackie Espinosa — who was born in New Jersey and elected mayor in 2024 with some Democrat support — was arrested on Wednesday morning. According to the Osceola County charging affidavit, she has been slapped with one count of first-degree felony organized scheme to defraud $50,000 or more and one second-degree felony count of grand theft of over $20,000 but less than $100,000.

'It is about public service, not self-service.'

The mayor has been dogged for months by allegations that she personally benefited from Business Boost 2.0, a COVID-19 relief grant program that she championed and helped create in September 2025. The program reportedly relies in part on federal funding made available through the American Rescue Plan Act.

In a lengthy complaint filed in March, Kissimmee resident Alex Alemi alleged that after Espinosa successfully pushed for the program's creation, three of her businesses — Adanse LLC, which is owned by the Espinosa Family Trust; Kissimmee Diner Inc.; and the Real Estate Gallery LLC, which is registered under her husband's name — applied for and received grants from Business Boost 2.0, reported the Orlando Sentinel.

The mayor and her family allegedly received at least $50,000 in funding from the program.

Espinosa admitted to the Sentinel in May, "Three of my 13 businesses got a grant, yes, of our family-owned businesses."

RELATED: Who wants to be a millionaire? Trump issues nationwide bounty on fraudsters

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier. Joe Raedle/Getty Images

She claimed, however, that the federal funds that floated the program "were available way before I was the mayor."

The ethics complaint filed in March also alleged that the city's former attorney, Olga Sanchez de Fuentes, was fired for raising concerns about the grants. The city commission voted 3-1 to fire her in February, though Espinosa supported the move.

The mayor claimed that terminating Fuentes "wasn't a Jackie thing; this was a commission thing."

Public outrage prompted a months-long impeachment effort against Espinosa. However, that was thwarted in August by a deadlocked city commission vote on whether to hold an impeachment trial.

The scandal did not, however, die with the deadlocked vote.

Last month, the Florida Commission on Ethics announced that it had found probable cause that Espinosa "had an employment or contractual relationship with an entity doing business with her agency when her business accepted grant money that was administered by her agency."

Weeks later, WESH-TV reported that Espinosa agreed to a $2,000 fine as well as to a public censure and reprimand. The reprimand agreement is pending.

"After weighing the available options, I believe resolving it now is the appropriate path forward," the mayor said after agreeing to the fine. "I am ready to put this chapter behind us and focus my attention on what matters most: serving the people of Kissimmee, as I have since day one, with professionalism, integrity, and dedication."

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, who made clear last week that "preventing fraud is a priority for [his] office," said during a press conference on Wednesday, "We hold corrupt public officials accountable. If you are going to abuse your office, if you are going to abuse the public trust to enrich yourself or family members, we are going to find you, and we are going to hold you accountable."

In Espinosa's case, Uthmeier claimed, "The evidence makes very clear that there was intent to engage in this conflict of interest" and that she "ultimately abused her office to enrich herself."

Florida Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia alleged that:

seven businesses located in properties owned or managed by Jackie Espinosa's family received a combined total of $90,000 in grant funds. $50,000 went to Espinosa's businesses while $40,000 went to tenants in Espinosa's businesses. So $50,000 directly, $40,000 indirectly. During the course of the [Florida Department of Financial Services] investigation, we found that Jackie Espinosa herself applied for the grant on behalf of her family's businesses.

"Public service means that you work for the public," said Ingoglia. "It is about public service, not self-service."

If convicted, Ingoglia said that Espinosa could end up in prison for three decades.

Florida Department of Law Enforcement Commissioner Larry Keefe said to those wondering why this case is a big deal, "If you don't hold public officials accountable in these public corruption cases then the whole system really unravels, and that's not an exaggeration. There has to be accountability. When public officials betray the public trust, it's not just limited to them in their discrete circumstances. It diminishes the trust and credibility that the public has in all of the other public officials who are honest, who are doing a great job, who are giving their life to a noble career."

Espinosa's office did not immediately respond to Blaze News' request for comment.

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

A convicted serial rapist in California who was originally sentenced to 124 years in prison has been released after serving approximately 20 years behind bars. Many are outraged that the serial rapist, who also is the great-grandson of legendary cosmetics mogul Max Factor, was released from prison after being convicted of drugging and sexually assaulting multiple women.

NBC News reported that 62-year-old Andrew Luster was released from prison on parole on Oct. 11 "after serving his full sentence as required by law," according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

'By drugging his victims into a coma-like state, Andrew Luster played Russian roulette with the lives of his victims so he could abuse their comatose bodies.'

The Ventura County Star reported that Luster is registered as a sex offender on California's Megan's Law website, with a Glendora address — and he will have to register as a sex offender for life and will be on supervised parole for the next three years.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation said in a statement released on Sunday that "this is not an early release."

"According to voter-approved propositions, determinate-sentenced incarcerated individuals may reduce their carceral time due to the earning of worktime and good conduct credits," the CDCR continued. "In this case, Andrew Luster received 977 days of pre-sentence credit and was eligible for credit-earning opportunities while incarcerated."

Luster was first arrested in July 2000 after a college student accused him of raping her at his home, according to court documents obtained by People magazine.

People magazine said investigators discovered a video of Luster drugging and raping the victim as well as two other women while executing a search warrant at his home.

More from People:

His trial began in late 2002, and two weeks in, he was able to convince the judge to lift the conditions of his parole so that he could visit his lawyer in Los Angeles over the holidays. Luster — who claims he knew little about this plan and that it was orchestrated by one of his lawyers — soon found himself hiding out in Mexico after paying someone to sneak him over the border.

In June 2003, Luster was heading out for a taco when he was apprehended by popular bounty hunter Duane "Dog" Chapman in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, the Guardian reported, adding that that witnesses told police that Chapman's crew "had used an aerosol spray and handcuffs to subdue the rapist, bundled him into one of their two vans, and drove off."

RELATED: Ex-University of Kentucky cheerleader who admitted killing her newborn baby learns fate — judge delivers brutal reality check

The Los Angeles Times previously reported that Luster was convicted on 86 counts of rape and drug charges after a jury viewed videotapes he made of himself engaging in sexual acts with three women rendered unconscious by GHB — or gamma-hydroxybutyrate, a "date-rape" drug.

Fox News reported that Luster's 124-year prison sentence was thrown out in March 2013, and he was resentenced to 50 years behind bars because the original judge reportedly made a legal error.

J. David Nick, who represented Luster during his efforts to overturn the sentence, said in an interview that the original judge improperly stacked prison terms without making the findings required under California law, according to Fox News.

Ventura County District Attorney Erik Nasarenko said in 2024 that releasing Luster would be a "grave injustice to the survivors and a threat to public safety," KCAL-TV reported.

According to Nasarenko, Luster "preyed upon young women, primarily in college bars" between 1996 and 2000 while he was in his early 30s, drugging his victims with GHB.

"Luster engaged in sadistic sexual abuse of their comatose bodies," Nasarenko stated in 2024. "In two of the attacks, Luster recorded his rape and sexual abuse of the victims."

Ventura County Senior Deputy District Attorney Anthony Wold condemned the possibility of Luster's release in a 2025 statement:

By drugging his victims into a coma-like state, Andrew Luster played Russian roulette with the lives of his victims so he could abuse their comatose bodies. Even now, he attempts to rewrite the history of his heinous crimes to falsely mitigate his culpability to gain early release. He remains a highly dangerous sexual predator. We continue to maintain he should serve his full sentence. He's earned it.

However, the Ventura County District Attorney's Office said Luster was scheduled to be released from prison no later than Oct. 31, 2026.

KCAL reported that Luster is living in Glendora, which has drawn outrage from city leaders.

"The city of Glendora is beyond disappointed," Mayor David Fredendall stated. "We are outraged."

Fredendall blamed Luster's early release on Proposition 57, a California ballot measure voters approved in 2016 that expanded parole eligibility and sentence-reduction credits for eligible offenders.

"When California voters approved Proposition 57 in 2016, they were assured by Governor Jerry Brown and his administration that dangerous offenders would remain behind bars," Fredendall continued. "His campaign went so far as to promise that sex offenders would be 'absolutely ineligible for parole under Prop 57.'"

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation stated that Proposition 57 was "overwhelmingly approved by voters in the November 2016 election to enhance public safety, to stop the revolving door of crime by emphasizing rehabilitation, and to prevent federal courts from releasing prisoners."

The CDCR said Prop 57 also "establishes a parole consideration process for determinately sentenced and indeterminately sentenced people convicted of nonviolent crimes, as defined by California Penal Code, who have served the full term for their primary criminal offense and who demonstrate they no longer pose a current, unreasonable risk to the public."

According to the CDCR, Proposition 57 "gives incarcerated people the opportunity to earn additional credits for good behavior and participation in rehabilitative, educational, and career training programs so they are better prepared to succeed and less likely to commit new crimes on the outside."

Meanwhile, Fredendall added, "The State may argue that this was not technically an early release. It can point to sentencing credits, legal calculations, and administrative requirements. However, those technical explanations do not address the larger concern: how an individual originally sentenced to 124 years in prison for heinous crimes is able to walk out of a secured facility after only 20 years."

Fredendall continued, "The people of Glendora should not have to worry about their safety because of a decision by the State that allows an individual with a history of rape and violence to now live in close proximity to schools, parks, playgrounds, churches, and community centers."

"The victims deserve better. The people of Glendora deserve better. California must do better," the mayor demanded.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation did not immediately provide more details to Fox News regarding Luster's release date, an explanation of the sentencing calculations, and details about his parole supervision.

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

France opened its doors to immigrants who initially rejected their culture but now have quite literally set fire to it.

“It turns out that if you mass import a culture that refuses to assimilate and actually hates Western civilization instead of embracing it, eventually once they’ve outnumbered you, they turn on you,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales says.

These immigrants, she says, are “simply coming to leech off the empathetic Westerner” while “targeting the things that represent your rich history and your architecture and your culture.”

“The way in which these acts are carried out is done just to humiliate you, the native born,” she continues. “That is what liberal immigration does.”

And a post shared by Alice Cordier only drives home Gonzales’ point.

“I went to witness the riots in Paris. I’m going to tell you the truth: It was only young people from African immigrant backgrounds who came to attack our police officers and firefighters, loot our shops, and destroy everything,” she wrote.

“An elderly French couple in their 80s was robbed and left in their underwear on the street. The steeple of a 150-year-old church was completely burned down. This is not a social revolt for better education. It’s a taste of an ethnic war that took place today,” she added.

“African-Muslim immigrants to be clear,” Gonzales says, pointing out that “this is what the left wants for us here.”

“It’s what they were working toward before Donald Trump was elected to fix it. Elected the second time,” she continues.

“But the question is, when it comes to this liberal immigration policy and the end result of that, can we put the genie back in the bottle?” she asks. “Because you have places like Michigan and Minnesota, are they too far gone? We have way too many Muslims in positions of power in this country.”

“We have 18 Muslim judges, 11 Muslim mayors, 98 Muslim city council members, 63 Muslim board members, 46 Muslim state House and assembly members and 4 Muslims in the House of Representatives,” she explains.

“Obviously, we will have at least one more in the Senate if Abdul El-Sayed actually gets elected in Michigan,” she adds, pointing out that gaining institutional power is part of the “long game for them.”

“They’ve not been bashful about the fact that they are trying to get a stronghold in all of the institutions in our country,” she says, before playing a clip of one Muslim speaking at the MAS annual convention last year.

“Once we have internal unity, we now need institutional strength. Not just cheap protests, but actual strength. Think tanks, lobbying groups, every mechanism available to us, social media, legal advocacy, political literacy. We cannot outsource our narrative to journalists that don’t care about us,” he said to the crowd.

“We need our own outlets, our own media, our own lobbying. That has to come from within institutional strength,” he added.

“It makes you wonder,” Gonzales comments, “are they here to uphold the American way of life or not?”

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.