Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

When laws are debated in Congress that are too controversial to pass on their own, oftentimes sneaky politicians will attempt to place similar language into must-pass bills.

One of those must-pass bills is the National Defense Authorization Act, also known as the NDAA. The annual NDAA creates new programs, strategies, and authorizes the Department of Defense to procure new technologies.

This year, thanks to Gun Owners of America and the support of our grassroots members, we are happy to report that the proposed gun control amendments to the NDAA have been defeated.

So, you might ask, what gun control did the anti-gun politicians in Congress try to sneak into this year’s bill?

The answer is a permanent reauthorization of the Undetectable Firearms Act.

Gun Owners of America is the only pro-gun lobbying organization to historically oppose the Undetectable Firearms Act since its passage into law in 1988. 

The act itself began as an attempt to ban handguns like the Glock 17 when they were first introduced to the market in the mid-80s. At this time, polymer-framed handguns were a very new idea, and a misunderstanding about the Glock’s polymer frame prompted an idea that even though the Glock had a metal slide, its polymer frame would somehow make it undetectable to metal detectors and, therefore, be the weapon of choice for criminals.

When the act was finally passed through Congress, a compromise was made – so it did not affect any existing handguns.

Nowadays, with the advent of 3D printing, the Undetectable Firearms Act stifles manufacturers from producing smaller, lighter, and higher-performing handguns because they must meet the UFA’s weight requirement. This issue is compounded for the consumer handgun market because of the massive demand for concealed carry firearms, especially in light of the recent landmark NYSRPA v. Bruen decision.

In addition, security measures have come a long way since the 1980s. Metal detectors are quickly being replaced by AI detection technology and less invasive sensor-based body scanning. The Undetectable Firearms Act nowadays only serves as an arbitrary and capricious gun control statute masquerading as public safety.

The UFA has been reauthorized four times. The original act had a ten-year sunset clause. It was renewed in 1988 for five years, in 2003 for ten years, and finally in 2013 for another ten years.

Over these past 40 years, much has changed. More and more gun owners are starting to embrace the no-compromise mindset. As such, renewals of bills like the Undetectable Firearms Act will be harder and harder to pass. Because of the work of grassroots GOA members, members of Congress are starting to oppose gun control like the UFA, removing it from must-pass bills like the NDAA.

While gun owners should enjoy the victory, we must remain vigilant until the UFA is laid to rest permanently.

Gun Owners of America is urging our members to continue to call their elected representatives and let them know that they do not support the Undetectable Firearms Act.

*   *   *  

We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.

America is witnessing a seismic shift in its demographic landscape. Recent data from Idaho reveals an unprecedented trend: people are migrating not just for jobs, schools, or lifestyle, but for political alignment. The movement is reshaping the country, according to the Seattle Times‘ Danny Westneat.

The call to “Escape liberal hell,” as echoed by a Boise, Idaho real estate agent, is not just a catchy sales pitch but a sign of the times. Idaho’s voter database sheds light on this great political migration. Approximately 119,000 voters have moved to Idaho in recent years, with a staggering 65% registering as Republicans—a figure that overshadows the state’s already GOP-leaning demographic of 58%.

And it’s not just a trickle of discontented conservatives – it’s a flood. The data also suggests that the narrative of liberals, untethered by remote work, turning red states purple, has been upended. Instead, a “Republican fever dream” (as the Idaho Capital Sun called it) is materializing.

According to the data, among all Idaho voters who moved here from out of state:

• 77,136, or 65% are registered Republicans.
• 24,906, or 21% are unaffiliated.
• 14,711, or 12% are registered Democrats.
• 1,949, or 2% are a member of a third party, such as the Constitution Party or Libertarian Party.

This political realignment has become known as the “big sort,” where America’s national stratification not just by vocation or socioeconomic status, but by political allegiance. As Westneat writes, Idaho’s dream of becoming a fortress against liberalism—a so-called “American redoubt”—is materializing.

For states like Washington, Oregon, and California, this exodus of Republican voters is more than a demographic shift—it’s a political hemorrhage. According to the report, 75% of Californian expats in Idaho are registering as Republicans. This movement intensifies the political polarization, with red states becoming redder and blue states bluer.

“Are you sick of living in a Blue State with high taxes, radical policies, and high crime?” reads an ad from one real estate company, Conservative Move (Motto: “Moving Families Right.”). “Find a new home in a state and community that reflects your values.”

Parallel economy?

This ‘big sort’ has birthed a cottage industry catering to political migration, particularly on the right. Companies like Conservative Move and GOP Agent aren’t just offering real estate services; they’re selling a lifestyle that aligns with political ideologies. It’s a trend that’s not slowing down, as evidenced by the over 150 attendees at a Seattle info session about moving to red states.

“The interest in moving to red states is not slowing down,” according to Conservative Move’s Facebook page.

As The Economist suggested in June, America might soon see parallel economies where partisanship dictates not just where people live, but what products they consume and services they use, like Patriot Mobile’s Christian conservative wireless network.

Violent crime is quickly spreading to suburbia. A new report shows gangs from South America have targeted mansions in wealthy neighborhoods across the Detroit metro area. This comes as the Biden administration’s disastrous open border policies have flooded the country with millions of illegal migrants, as well as progressive cities fail to enforce ‘common sense’ law and order. 

WXYZ Detroit reported at least 30 to 40 homes in upscale neighborhoods across Detroit have been targeted by “highly functional and well-trained” gangs from South America this fall.

Thieves are using high-tech “jammers” to disable WiFi home security systems. They’re primarily after cash, jewelry, and expensive handbags. 

Organized gangs of illegals are breaking into homes across America. pic.twitter.com/BIxJ1MYLw5

— Big Fish (@BigFish3000) December 8, 2023

Last week, Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard said thieves are part of “transnational gangs” operating across the country and are targeting multi-million dollar homes. 

In recent months, we have shared an emerging theme of thieves across the country targeting wealthy households:

• Lawlessness Spreads To Suburbia: Westport Man Carjacked In Own Garage
• Wealthy Chicago Neighborhood Shaken: Family Held Up At Gunpoint In Own Driveway

This disturbing trend comes as illegal migrant encounters by the Customs and Border Protection on the southern border hit a record high. President Biden’s disastrous open southern border has flooded the country with 9 million illegals since he took office. Also, Democrat lawmakers, some of whom are Soros-backed, fail to enforce common sense law and order, transforming some metros into lawless, crime-ridden hellholes. 

Democrats are turning this nation into a third-world-like state – and now criminals, emboldened by failed progressive policies, have the rich in their crosshairs in suburbia. 

The only advice for law-abiding Americans who want to defend their families and homes in suburbia, where the average police could be upwards of ten minutes or more, is to get proper firearms training from a professional. 

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Below is my column in the New York Post on the second indictment of Hunter Biden. The tax evasion charges were brought in a type of Voldemort indictment, skillfully detailing millions acquired from influence peddling without mentioning “he who must not be named.” Indeed, it says nothing of how or why millions were sent to Hunter.

Here is the column:

The 56-page indictment of Hunter Biden for tax evasion makes for racy reading, with the special counsel describing a four-year criminal pattern directed at maintaining Biden’s “extravagant lifestyle.”

That lifestyle included massive expenses for strippers, sex clubs, fast cars and other distractions.

The steps taken by Hunter to evade taxes are impressive, but not nearly as impressive as the efforts of the Justice Department to evade any direct implications for his father, President Biden.

In that sense, the indictment itself is a marvel of evasion.

There are three glaring omissions in the indictment that tend to shield critical payments and conduct that implicate the president.

The Burisma-Ukrainian money

First, the special counsel only indicts tax evasion that occurred in recent years.

That’s because the long “investigation” into Hunter inexplicably allowed the statute of limitations to expire on the most controversial payments starting around 2014 from Ukraine gas company Burisma.

Recent testimony from IRS whistleblowers suggests that wasn’t an accident. Investigators were stonewalled, they claimed, and the Justice Department was previously moving to reject any charges against Hunter Biden.

Exploring those earlier Ukrainian payments opens up questions about Hunter’s influence peddling and would have highlighted the conflict in his father’s extraordinary move to force the Ukrainians to fire a prosecutor investigating Burisma by holding back a billion dollars in aid for the country.

There is still no explanation why special counsel David Weiss would allow the statute of limitations to run out.

But this recent indictment keeps the focus squarely on taxes not paid, not how the money was “earned” in the first place.

Hunter the foreign agent

Also missing in the indictment is any charge against Hunter Biden as an unregistered foreign agent.

Recently, the Justice Department added a charge to the indictment of Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) that he ran afoul of FARA, the Foreign Agents Registration Act. FARA also was used to go after Donald Trump associates such as Paul Manafort.

The problem with charging Hunter with FARA is obvious.

It opens up questions about the millions of dollars going to the Biden family from foreign sources, a topic that Attorney General Merrick Garland has spent years avoiding.

In the second indictment, Weiss spends more time detailing the salacious use of this money rather than how and why it was given to the Bidens.

He just matter-of-factly describes millions flowing through these accounts from China, Romania, Ukraine, Russia and other countries.

The unindicted co-conspirator

By focusing on tax evasion alone, Weiss again avoids any direct reference to the focus of the influence-peddling used to raise these millions of dollars.

Even without mentioning the president, the implications of the indictment are devastating for the narrative and denials of Joe Biden.

The president has continued to maintain that he had no knowledge or interaction with these dealings. Those statements are clearly and knowingly false.

The president also maintained that his son has “never done anything wrong” and never accepted any money from China.

That is also untrue, according to the Justice Department and Hunter himself.

Yet Weiss continues to avoid any need to address the person who was the selling point of the influence peddling.

It was the same person who repeatedly called in to dinners and meetings, repeatedly attended events, and held meetings and photo shots for these clients.

Instead, Weiss indicts the failure to pay taxes on the proceeds of these dealings without addressing that underlying corruption.

It is akin to arresting a bank robber for speeding away from the crime scene without mentioning the reason for his flight.

In a scandal with dozens of references to the presidents and millions sent for influence and access, it took a steady hand for Weiss to avoid ever touching on President Biden’s role.

This was a truly Homeric feat — unseen since the Greek hero Odysseus won a competition by shooting an arrow through the tiny hole in a dozen ax heads.

It takes perfect aim not to avoid any contact. It is itself the very model of evasion.

…live by the sword, DEI by the sword!

Amid exponentially mounting pressure following her disastrous testimony to Congress this week, Liz Magill has “voluntarily resigned” as the President of the University of Pennsylvania.

Axios reports that the board of Penn’s Wharton business school on Friday sent a letter to the university’s board of trustees, after receiving no reply to a letter they sent on Thursday to Magill, in which they requested her resignation.

The letter read, in part:

“The Board will, of course, vote based upon each member’s beliefs and only the Board of Trustees, as the University’s fiduciaries, can determine the actions that are in the best interests of the University.

However, University inaction cloaked in statements of intent and informational meetings has fostered the current climate of fear on campus and has resulted in Government inquiries, Title VI litigation, and declarations by numerous media outlets that our beloved university is ‘ground zero for antisemitism on college campuses.'”

The letter comes after Magill rapidly backtracked on her congressional testimony in a video released Wednesday.

“In that moment, I was focused on our university’s long-standing policies, aligned with the U.S. Constitution, which says that speech alone is not punishable,” she said.

“I was not focused on, but I should have been, the irrefutable fact that a call for genocide of Jewish people is a call for some of the most terrible violence human beings can perpetrate. It’s evil, plain and simple.”

But now, she’s gone…

Here is the full letter: (emphasis ours)

Dear Members of the Penn community,

I write to share that President Liz Magill has voluntarily tendered her resignation as President of the University of Pennsylvania. She will remain a tenured faculty member at Penn Carey Law.

On behalf of the entire Penn community, I want to thank President Magill for her service to the University as President and wish her well.

We will be in touch in the coming days to share plans for interim leadership of Penn. President Magill has agreed to stay on until an interim president is appointed.

President Magill shared the following statement, which I include here:

“It has been my privilege to serve as President of this remarkable institution. It has been an honor to work with our faculty, students, staff, alumni, and community members to advance Penn’s vital missions.”

Best,

Scott L. Bok
Chair, Penn Board of Trustees

Her resignation comes a day after a bipartisan group of House lawmakers is demanding the governing board members of Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and the University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) dismiss their presidents following their controversial responses at a campus anti-Semitism hearing.

In a Dec. 5 letter, 72 lawmakers expressed their disappointment over the responses from the three college presidents during the hearing “Holding Campus Leaders Accountable and Confronting Anti-Semitism” held the same day.

In the letter, the group, led by Representatives Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), noted that:

“The university presidents’ responses to questions aimed at addressing the growing trend of anti-Semitism on college and university campuses were abhorrent.”

“This should have been an easy and resounding ‘yes.'”

“There is no context in which calls for the genocide of Jews are acceptable rhetoric. Their failure to unequivocally condemn calls for the systematic murder of Jews is deeply alarming. It stands in stark contrast to the principles we expect leaders of top academic institutions to uphold,” the letter wrote.

“It is hard to imagine any Jewish or Israeli student, faculty, or staff feeling safe when presidents of your member institutions could not say that calls for the genocide of Jews would have clear consequences on your campus.”

One down, two to go…

(L-R) Claudine Gay, president of Harvard University, Liz Magill, president of University of Pennsylvania, Pamela Nadell, professor of history and Jewish studies at American University, and Sally Kornbluth, president of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, testify before the House Education and Workforce Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, on Dec. 5, 2023. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

The resignations won’t be enough though…

On Dec. 7, Chairwoman Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) of the House Education and Workforce Committee announced that the committee had launched an investigation of Harvard, MIT, and UPenn.

The committee said it would review the schools’ policies and disciplinary records and examine “their seemingly deplorable record.” “The testimony we received earlier this week from Presidents Gay, Magill, and Kornbluth about the responses of Harvard, UPenn, and MIT to the rampant anti-Semitism displayed on their campuses by students and faculty was absolutely unacceptable,” Ms. Foxx said.

…and remember, Marc Morial told us all that DEI departments aren’t responsible for the safety of Jews on campus.

Authored by Paul Thacker via The DisInformation Chronicle (subscribe here)

Editors at the New York Post commissioned me to write a piece last weekend explaining how the Democratic Party has been targeting Elon Musk for buying Twitter and taking away their ability to censor critics and label them “disinformation.” The issue came to a head after Musk vented during an interview when asked about Disney and other companies pulling advertising over alleged antisemitism on his platform.

“If someone is going to try and blackmail me with advertising? Blackmail me with money? Go fuck yourself,” Elon Musk said. Musk repeated the advice with a wave of his hand toward Disney’s Bob Iger, a Musk critic and Biden administration donor and functionary.

“Go. Fuck. Yourself. Is that clear? Hey, Bob, if you’re in the audience.”

Within hours of the intervew, dozens of parodies began appearing on X, including this one. But if you read about the exchange in any media outlet, you would think Musk was coming unhinged, attacking advertisers who support his own company.

This is far from reality. Democratic operatives including Disney’s Bob Iger have been harassing Musk since he took over Twitter and released company documents showing the government and Democratic Party aligned organizations were censoring Americans. You can read some of my reporting on these Twitter Files here, here, here, here, and here.

After the New York Post published my essay, I found that Musk had predicted a dirty tricks campaign over a year and a half ago.

The tactics being used against Musk are quite simple to understand if you know the various figures involved, their backgrounds, and finances. First, Democratic Party attack groups like the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) and Media Matters for America gin up fake studies that accuse Musk of allowing hate, antisemitism, racism (whatever label they feel is effective) to flourish on social media. Second, Biden campaign donors like Disney’s Bob Iger express panic and flee X, complaining that they can’t be associated with hate.

The media won’t report on this, but it’s a basic squeeze play once you know the characters involved.

In recent months, Musk has sued both the Center for Countering Digital Hate and Media Matters for America for making false allegations of hate at X that have driven away advertisers. Both groups claim to be nonpartisan but actually work to attack opponents of Democratic Party policies.

If you read any story in the press about the CCDH, you would think they’re some lefty nonprofit laboring away to keep the world safe from online hate. A couple headlines just to give you a flavor for this.

But as I documented in an investigation for Tablet, political operatives with the conservative wing of the British Labour Party founded the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) in 2018 to attack people on the Left and Right. The group’s leader, Imran Ahmed, now asserts that he is  “at the forefront of reporting on the hate proliferating on X/Twitter since Musk completed his takeover in late October 2022.”

In reality, Ahmed is also a former Labour Party political operative who ran CCDH and another Labour Party front group to attack the left wing of his own party with vague accusation of hate. While in the UK, Ahmed’s groups helped to run Jeremy Corbyn out of Labour Party leadership and tanked the lefty news site Canary, after starting a boycott of their advertisers.

Former Canary editor Kerry-Anne Mendoza described Ahmed’s war against her leftist news site as a scorched earth campaign that destroyed their advertising revenue and forced mass layoffs. “They accuse you of hate,” she told me. “Our regulator said the opposite, but that was irrelevant.”

Targeting advertisers seems very similar to Ahmed’s current tactics against Musk, no?

Since Ahmed moved the group to Washington, DC, in 2021 one of CCDH’s main targets, aside from X and Elon Musk, has been presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr., who leads Biden among young voters, and is suing the administration over censorship. This should not surprise anyone as CCDH’s chairman is Simon Clark, a former senior fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP), a think tank founded by John Podesta, who chaired Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign against Donald Trump.

Ahmed does not disclose CCDH’s funding, but I found that 75% of it comes from dark money sources. Some of this money may be coming out of Hollywood—Bob Iger’s home base. One of the board members on CCDH’s tax records is talent agent Aleen Keshishian, who reps actor Mark Ruffalo, an Ahmed ally in his crusade against Musk.

After I tweeted a series of Twitter Files on Imran Ahmed’s work with the old Twitter to censor people, Musk responded, “Anyone know who is supporting this rat?” A month later, Musk sued CCDH for “faulty reports” that were driving away advertisers. “CCDH’s scare campaign to global advertisers … is an attempt to stifle freedom of speech on the X platform.”

Media Matters has a similar political history, but you won’t find many media outlets explaining this to readers. Instead, reporters often ignore Media Matters’ Democratic Party ties or choose to describe them as a “watchdog.”

When CNN wrote a dismissive article on Musk’s lawsuit, they even described one of Media Mattes’ employees as a “senior investigative reporter.” One of the media experts CNN quoted to downplay the lawsuit is Joan Donovan, one of the many academic “misinformation researchers” who have popped up in recent years to argue in favor of social media censorship.

Again, reality is rather different from what you might read.

The New York Times reported in 2004 that Democratic political operative David Brock created the group in 2004 with help from the Center for American Progress. The paper later noted that Media Matters served as part of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election “outrage machine.”

After Clinton’s loss, Brock freaked and released a 49-page memo marked “private and confidential” that explained how Media Matters was being retooled to move into the digital space and attack “misinformation.”

But when Biden beat Trump, the Media Matters political machine pivoted to harangue Musk and Twitter, criticizing him, in one example, for helping Stanford Professor Jay Bhattacharya look into the Twitter Files to see why he had been placed on a “blacklist.”

After I published Twitter Files showing that the company had provided privileged access to lefty reporter Taylor Lorenz, who had gotten Dr. Bhattacharya banned, Media Matters jumped to downplay the documents.

Media Matters has also harangued Musk for retweeting news about immigration problems at the southern border, for example. But as border issues have overwhelmed the Biden administration, Media Matters has ceased raising this election issue as a preferred attack.

After Media Matters published a flimsy report a few weeks back that alleged Nazi content ran on X alongside advertisements from major corporations—claims which caused multiple advertisers to freeze spending—Musk immediately sued the group. “As the most prominent online platform dedicated to hosting free speech, X and its predecessor Twitter have long been the target of Media Matters,” reads the lawsuit.

In case you think Disney’s Bob Iger is absolved of political guilt, take a gander at his partisan bona fides.

In the final months of the 2020 election, CNBC reported that Iger was one of Biden’s largest donors, giving $250K to his campaign. Even before Biden had been sworn in as President, Iger then began angling for a position in his administration—possibly as ambassador to China.

This last summer Iger claimed that he did not want to get involved in “culture wars” before hiring a loyal Biden aide to run Disney’s crisis communications and deal with … culture wars.

Iger remains a critical donor for Biden’s reelection, according to New York Magazine.

Disney now faces renewed calls for a boycott by Musk’s legion of online supporters. But you don’t need to love, hate, or be indifferent about the guy to be concerned. I am, however, eternally grateful that Musk gave me and other reporters access to Twitter’s internal company documents, something no other CEO has ever done in the history of our democracy.

And what worries me as I watch this unfold: if a political party—either Democrat or Republican—can target the richest, most powerful man in the country because he doesn’t support all their policies, who might be next? Isn’t that what’s important?

President Biden is in serious trouble, with his political standing now at the weakest point of his presidency, according to a new poll from the Wall Street Journal.

The poll shows Biden trailing behind former President Donald Trump in a hypothetical 2024 showdown by 4 percentage points, a gap that widens with the inclusion of third-party candidates, signifying a potential upheaval in the traditional two-party dynamics.

Dislike of Biden has become widespread – with just 23% of voters feeling they’ve been positively impacted by Biden’s policies, starkly contrasting with the nostalgic economic reminiscence of the Trump era. The term “Bidenomics,” once a banner of hope, now flounders with less than 30% approval, reflecting widespread disillusionment. No wonder the White House has stopped using the term.

The Democrat president faces serious perception issues.

Voters say Trump is the better bet than Biden to secure the border (by 30 percentage points), tame inflation (by 21 points) and build the economy (by 17 points). Biden leads on who can best deal with abortion policy, and voters say that he more than Trump respects democracy. But the president is viewed as no better than Trump on cutting medication costs—a key Democratic initiative.  –WSJ

“If this race is about policy and performance, then Donald Trump has a significant advantage,” said Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio, who conducted the Journal survey with Democrat Michael Bocian. “If this race is about temperament and character, things like that, then Biden has an advantage.”

“Things were thriving under Trump. This country is a business and it needs to be run by a businessman,” said 53-year-old Aimee Kozlowski of Goffestown, NH, a Republican who plans to vote for Trump, and says that her competitive gymnastics facility has been hurt by inflation.

The poll also uncovers a dissonance between public economic pessimism and recent positive economic indicators, such as a robust GDP and low unemployment.

The president has been adjusting his messages on the economy to put more focus on taming inflation rather than on job creation. Creating high-paying jobs was a central goal of Democratic-backed legislation that funded new infrastructure and manufacturing, but voters see jobs as less of a concern than high prices. The White House recently unveiled a new supply-chain council aimed in part at stemming inflation, and Biden recently called on companies to “stop the price-gouging.” 

The president and his campaign have also amplified their focus on Trump’s most contentious comments, such as his description of opponents as “vermin” and his statement last week that he would be a dictator on “Day 1”—specifically to close the border and open more land for oil drilling—both of which suggest an authoritarian approach to a potential second Trump term. Trump’s allies say Democrats are trying to distract from economic issues and problems at the southern border. -WSJ

Of course, the Journal also found a never-Trump independent voter, Michelle Bannon, who says the former president is “not qualified at all,” adding “I don’t know that Biden can go another four years, but I’ll cross my fingers and vote for him. He’s the lesser of two evils.”

From 10,000 feet, Trump is smoking Biden in most polls in general.

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

The Biden administration has asked Israel not to respond to recent attacks by Yemen’s Houthis, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

The Houthis, formally known as Ansar Allah, have fired missiles and drones at Israel in response to the Israeli onslaught in Gaza and have targeted Israeli-linked commercial ships in the Red Sea. US warships have responded to the Houthi attacks and have downed several Houthi missiles and drones in recent weeks.

According to the Journal, the US is concerned an Israeli response could spark a major regional war. US officials told Israel that the US would handle any potential response, although POLITICO reported that the administration is not planning on directly targeting the Houthis, at least for now.

The POLITICO report said the Pentagon has drawn up plans to strike the Houthis, but they have not been presented or recommended to President Biden.

The report said there is a “high-level consensus within the administration that it does not make sense for the US military to respond directly to the Houthis.”

Saudi Arabia has also urged the US not to strike the Houthis over concerns that such an attack could jeopardize the Saudi-Houthi peace process. A ceasefire between the Saudis and the Houthis has held relatively well since April 2022, but a lasting peace deal has not yet been signed.

The US announced sanctions targeting the Houthis on Thursday that target 13 people and firms allegedly involved in the sale and shipment of Iranian commodities. The Treasury Department claims the network has transferred tens of millions of dollars worth of foreign currency to the Houthis.

Houthis make today’s @ftweekend front page. The trump card they held but never played in 8+ years of war against the Saudis: Red Sea disruption. In the Axis of Resistance’s support for Palestine, the Houthis hold the greatest leverage over western economies. How far will they go? pic.twitter.com/IXSxTlOzU4

— Iona Craig أيونا كريچ (@ionacraig) December 9, 2023

The US has backed a Saudi-led coalition against the Houthis since 2015 in a brutal war that has killed at least 377,000 people. But it’s rare that the US and the Houthis directly exchange fire.

If political windsock Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) wants to rehabilitate his image as a snake in the grass, he’s got his work cut out for him.

A clip of an Oct. 28 address given at Oxford University in the UK has gone viral (oddly, or not, within a day of the former speaker’s endorsement of Donald Trump), in which the former speaker sings the praises of the Democratic party, while slamming Republicans just three weeks after his ouster as House Speaker.

“When you look at the Democrats, they actually look like America. When I look at my party, we look like the most restrictive country club in America,” McCarthy said to laughter and applause.

Watch:

“When I look at democrats they actually look like america, when I look at [republicans] they look like the most restrictive country club” pic.twitter.com/9Vq1P6zwTB

— Edgar  (@EdBonillaB) November 28, 2023

As The Blaze‘s Auron MacIntyre notes: “McCarthy is not some weird outlier, he is not a “RINO”, he held THE key leadership position in the party until a few weeks ago and was defended by “serious-minded people who wanted to get things done,”” adding “This is the Republican Party.”

There are a few good GOP members, but most are simply stewards for the regime, an R next to their name gets them elected in their district but they fully buy into the prestige hierarchy presented to them by the powers that be

— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) December 9, 2023

There are 100s just like him, it’s not one guy

— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) December 9, 2023

The clip resurfaced within a day or so of McCarthy announcing his support for Trump.

“I will support the president. I will support President Trump,” McCarthy told CBS Sunday Morning in a preview of the interview released Friday, adding that he would gladly accept a position on Trump’s cabinet  if one were offered.

“In the right position. Look, if I’m the best person for the job, yes,” McCarthy said. “I worked with President Trump on a lot of policies. We worked together to win the majority, but we also have a relationship where we’re very honest with one another.”

“If Biden stays as the nominee for the Democrats, I believe Donald Trump will win.” Former House @SpeakerMcCarthy talks with @costareports about his future, including his openness to serving in a prospective Trump cabinet, THIS SUNDAY. pic.twitter.com/5oj2ZTNO3w

— CBS Sunday Morning 🌞 (@CBSSunday) December 8, 2023

The time to grow a political spine has long passed, Kevin.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

U.S. climate envoy John Kerry made a pledge with over 60 other nations to slash emissions from refrigerators and air conditioners in a bid to tackle climate change.

On Tuesday, 63 nations, including the United States, joined a pledge to cut down cooling-related emissions at the COP28 United Nations climate summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The Global Cooling Pledge requires countries to reduce such emissions by at least 68 percent by 2050 compared to 2022 levels. The focus of cooling-related emissions would be on appliances like air conditioners and refrigerators. The pledge also proposes setting up minimum energy performance standards for appliances by 2030.

“We want to lay out a pathway to reduce cooling-related emissions across all sectors but increase access to sustainable cooling,” said Mr. Kerry, who joined representatives from other countries in the pledge, Reuters reported.

Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) criticized the pledge in a Dec. 6 X post: “John Kerry lost his run for president & has been trying to assert his revenge on everyday Americans ever since. If he gets his way, our cars, our appliances, and food will be gone. All from a man who flies around on his wife’s private jet.”

Mr. Kerry’s pledge comes as the Biden administration has proposed rules that could harm to the home appliance market. In July, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a rule to slash the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) by 40 percent by 2028, calling the chemical a “climate super-pollutant.”

HFCs are used as refrigerants in appliances like air conditioners, heat pumps, and refrigerators. Since January last year, the import and production of HFCs require special allowances. During this time, the costs of replacing refrigerants have spiked.

In an August 2022 analysis, Ben Lieberman, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, noted, “Service technicians say that replacing refrigerant lost from a leak now costs upwards of $800, about double what it did a year ago.”

“Moreover, EPA’s HFC quotas tighten in the years ahead, so the ratchet will keep turning, surely causing homeowners’ bills to increase further still.”

Earlier in March, the Department of Energy proposed rules under which refrigerators would be subject to a stricter set of energy efficiency standards. The rule comes into effect in 2027.

Cooling Concerns

At present, cooling equipment accounts for 20 percent of total electricity consumption. The UN estimates this to more than double by 2050. Emissions from such cooling is projected to account for over 10 percent of global emissions by mid-century.

According to the UN, as temperatures rise, demand for cooling equipment is also expected to increase. By 2050, installed cooling capacity is estimated to triple due to rising temperatures, increasing incomes, and a growing population.

“The cooling sector must grow to protect everyone from rising temperatures, maintain food quality and safety, keep vaccines stable and economies productive,” said Inger Andersen, Executive Director of United National Environment Programme.

“But this growth must not come at the cost of the energy transition and more intense climate impacts. Countries and the cooling sector must act now to ensure low-carbon cooling growth.”

One of the proposed ways to cut down cooling emissions is through the use of passive cooling measures like insulation, ventilation, natural shading, and reflective surfaces. The UN estimates that passive cooling could curb the growth in demand for cooling capacity in 2050 by 24 percent.

“Imagine a slum community, an informal settlement, the housing made of corrugated iron, and on the side an air conditioner … The aspiration of everyone as temperatures rise and incomes rise is that their wealth is measured by their cooling,” Freetown mayor Yvonne Aki-Sawyerr of Sierra Leone said during a COP28 news conference, per Reuters.

Coal Pledge

Mr. Kerry’s pledge follows another climate commitment he made last week that the United States would not construct any new coal-fired power plants and would get rid of existing ones entirely.

“To meet our goal of 100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035, we need to phase out unabated coal,” he said in a statement at the Dubai climate summit.

“We will be working to accelerate unabated coal phase-out across the world, building stronger economies and more resilient communities. The first step is to stop making the problem worse: stop building new unabated coal power plants.”

According to data from the Department of Energy, 19.7 percent of electricity generation in the United States last year came from coal.

In 2022, coal-fired plants accounted for 36 percent of global electricity, more than half of which came from China, which is building new coal plants at a rapid pace, undeterred by various climate pledges and goals that the country’s own leadership has paid lip service to.

According to a February report by the Global Energy Monitor and the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, coal power construction starts, new project announcements, and plant permissions “accelerated dramatically” in China in 2022—with two new coal power plants being permitted per week.

“50 GW of coal power capacity started construction in China in 2022, a more than 50 percent increase from 2021. Many of these projects had their permits fast-tracked and moved to construction in a matter of months,” the report said.

“A total of 106 GW of new coal power projects, the equivalent of two large coal power plants per week, were permitted. The amount of capacity permitted more than quadrupled from 23 GW in 2021.”

Tom Ozimek and Reuters contributed to this report.