Wednesday evening saw reporters from nearly every major network and mainstream news outlet hand in their press badges and exit the Pentagon, following their refusal to sign a new policy issued by War Secretary Pete Hegseth.

“Today, the Defense Department confiscated the badges of the Pentagon reporters from virtually every major media organization in America,” the Pentagon Press Association announced in a statement.

“The Pentagon Press Association’s members are still committed to reporting on the U.S. military,” it added. “But make no mistake, today, Oct. 15, 2025 is a dark day for press freedom that raises concerns about a weakening U.S. commitment to transparency in governance, to public accountability at the Pentagon and to free speech for all.”

Those who did not sign the new policy which vows to not seek or obtain classified, sensitive, or leaked material said the document would expose journalists to potential prosecution.

Axios, which did not sign, also listed the following non-signers who have been effectively booted from the Pentagon premises: Fox News, NBC, ABC, CNN, NPR, AP, the Washington Post and the New York Times, and others. However, One America News (OAN) was a significant network that did sign it.

According to the NY Times, the request for a Pentagon press badge went from signing one page of rules/policy to a whopping 21-pages detailing what reporters can and can’t do: 

The new rules codify sharp limitations on access and raise the prospect of punishment — including revocation of credentials — for simply requesting information on matters of public interest. Lawyers representing national news organizations have been negotiating for weeks with Pentagon officials over the strictures.

Since being introduced last month, there’s been a full-on, very public revolt against the policy. Ironically, it was Hegseth himself who earlier in the Trump administration had been thrust into the center of controversy due to the embarrassing Yemen group chat Signal episode.

Outlets had been told to sign the pledge by Tuesday at 5 pm or surrender their press credentials within 24 hours. So by close of Wednesday, large groups of journalists were seen walking from the Pentagon to the parking lot with all of their things.

Hegseth responded on social media to this MSM media exit with a dismissive wave emoji directed at the outlets’ statements. He subsequently posted a list titled “Press Credentialing FOR DUMMIES,” outlining new restrictions such as visible badge requirements and a prohibition on “soliciting criminal acts.”

By Aidan Johnston, Director of Federal Affairs for Gun Owners of America,

The Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi is advancing an argument that threatens to hollow out the Fourth Amendment’s core protection: that Americans may be secure in their homes against warrantless searches.

The lawsuit is Case v. Montana. After a difficult breakup, William Trevor Case was at home alone when police arrived for a so-called “welfare check.” They spent nearly an hour outside his house. Officers walked around the property, shined flashlights through windows, and even discussed calling his relatives or reaching him directly. They never did. Instead, they retrieved rifles and a ballistic shield, broke down his door without a warrant, and shot him. 

Case survived, but his rights did not.

During this so-called “emergency” situation, police stood around for 40 minutes, armed themselves with rifles and a ballistic shield, went into Trevor Case’s home without a warrant, and shot him. https://t.co/vRpkDaKKX5 pic.twitter.com/lBTGWnszPT

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) October 15, 2025

The Montana Supreme Court upheld the police’s warrantless entry. Apparently, the government’s “reasonable suspicion” that Treavor Case might need “help” was sufficient to justify an armed warrantless intrusion into his home. That standard is alarmingly low. The Fourth Amendment requires probable cause and judicial approval before government agents may enter a home. It does not permit entry based on a hunch.

And it was not as if obtaining a warrant would have been difficult. A recent Harvard Law Review study found that 93 percent of warrants are approved on first submission, often in less than three minutes. With modern technology, police can draft and submit warrant requests directly from their phones. The officers in Montana had nearly an hour to seek judicial approval. They chose not to.

The U.S. Supreme Court addressed a similar issue in Caniglia v. Strom in 2021. In that case, officers entered a man’s home without a warrant after a domestic dispute, claiming they were acting as “community caretakers.” The Court unanimously rejected that argument. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Fourth Amendment’s protections do not vanish just because police say they are trying to help. The Court allowed for true emergencies—cases of imminent harm or death—but drew a clear line against open-ended “caretaking” exceptions.

The facts in Montana look nothing like an emergency. Body camera transcripts reveal that officers themselves doubted that Case required immediate aid. One noted that “chances are pretty slim” he needed urgent medical attention. They discussed staging medical personnel outside but decided against it. After forty minutes of hesitation, they declared the situation an “emergency” and broke in anyway.

In any other context, an armed entry without a warrant would be understood as unlawful. The Constitution does not stop at the property line of a gun owner. If a homeowner responds defensively to armed intruders, the law recognizes the basic right of self-defense. What transforms that same scenario into a police action is supposed to be the warrant requirement. Strip that away, and the police have no more right to enter than anyone else.

Pam Bondi’s Department of Justice, however, has sided with Montana. 

FYI @TheJusticeDept supports the warrantless home invasion of gunv owner Trevor Case.

DOJ says federal agents (like @ATFHQ) “make warrantless entries into residences” & need to “prosecute cases” where they “encounter evidence of a crime” without a warrant. https://t.co/jsDfw4nci3 pic.twitter.com/a5dsrKiczu

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) October 15, 2025

In an amicus brief, DOJ argued that when police are “providing aid” rather than investigating a crime, they should not need probable cause or a warrant. That claim, if accepted, creates a dangerous loophole: police may simply reframe their role to avoid constitutional limits.

The risks are obvious. A neighbor calls for a welfare check. Officers arrive, say they are caretakers, and enter without a warrant. Inside, they confront a homeowner startled by strangers in his house. The encounter escalates, and the mere presence of a firearm becomes justification for force. What began as a welfare check ends as a shooting.

The Framers wrote the Fourth Amendment to prevent precisely this kind of abuse. 

Judicial oversight was designed to ensure that government agents could not force their way into private homes unless a neutral magistrate agreed the evidence justified it. By lowering the bar from probable cause to suspicion, the Montana court has eroded that safeguard.

Caniglia was unanimous and recent. For Pam Bondi’s DOJ to back Montana in this case is not simply inconsistent with precedent; it also undermines the Fourth Amendment principle that the home is a place of security. If the Supreme Court accepts this reasoning, the Fourth Amendment will be reduced to a formality.

Leftist Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, who appears to be friends with the “dark-money NGO King” – the Soros family, specifically Alex Soros…

… and was recently caught “half-naked” on George Clooney’s luxury motor yacht in Italy. 

Who has also seen collapsing poll numbers in a deep-blue state overtaken by radical leftists in Annapolis, who care more about criminal illegal aliens, higher taxes, an exploding deficit fueled by out-of-control spending, toxic social and criminal justice reforms, the promotion of the climate crisis hoax, and dark-money-funded NGOs.

Everyone knows Democrats aren’t competent managers but rather left-wing activists who squander the nation’s wealth created by those who actually build systems, whether at the state, local, or federal level. This understanding comes as Maryland’s fiscal deficit worsens, raising alarm bells within the Trump administration about whether Democrats in the state, specifically Moore, can properly manage the rebuild of the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge. 

18 months later… 

Fox Baltimore reports that U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy warned Gov. Moore that Maryland’s $2 billion rebuild project of the bridge, which relies heavily on federal taxpayer money, is coming under intense scrutiny because the project’s costs are “ballooning,” schedules are slipping, and certain hiring practices may violate federal law. 

“It’s my job to ensure the American people’s tax dollars are spent properly and major projects are completed on time and on budget,” Duffy wrote in a recent letter to Moore. “Ballooning project costs are already threatening to delay this critical project.”

Moore has not yet replied to Duffy’s letter and has avoided interviews despite repeated media requests, according to the local media outlet. 

In an exclusive interview with Fox Baltimore on Tuesday at Baltimore/Washington Thurgood Marshall International Airport, Duffy doubled down on his concerns that Moore and Maryland officials are not competent “stewards with the money”… 

“The federal government is going to pay for the project, but the governor is going to manage it. And when someone else pays, at a wedding, you get the finest alcohol, you’ll get the finest steak if someone else is buying. We need to make sure we’re looking out for the federal taxpayer and also rebuild this bridge.

“I don’t think he has been a good steward with the money, but also, we have sent a letter to all of our partners saying they have to follow the law.” 

Today, I reviewed the history of the Key Bridge rebuild, including what Maryland Gov. Wes Moore once highlighted as one of the best examples of state and federal partnership.

That partnership now seems to be deteriorating as the federal government is increasing scrutiny. pic.twitter.com/KSCIJj4ozr

— Gary M. Collins (@realgarycollins) October 16, 2025

Duffy’s criticism of Moore and radical leftists in Maryland didn’t stop at their fiscal management. He warned new concerns about the state’s approach to diversity hiring, particularly regarding race- and sex-based contractor selection. 

“A long time ago, we got rid of contracting based on race and sex,” Duffy said, adding, “That can drive the cost up and the time frame up for completion.”

Eighteen months later, and still no new bridge (China would’ve had this built in six months). The project exemplifies the incompetence of Democrats who masquerade as competent managers but are actually left-wing activists. Their intent isn’t to build but to squander the nation’s inheritance through socialist and Marxist policies.

Authored by Bill King via RealClearPolitics,

Over the last week, the decision on whether to extend the enhanced ACA subsidies has increasingly become the defining issue of the shutdown.  It is an issue that is fracturing the Republican Party and threatening to derail their midterm election prospects.

Unpacking the numbers

From the outset, the Affordable Care Act subsidized the purchase of health insurance by some lower-income Americans on the health insurance exchanges. The subsidy was based on a sliding scale that set a maximum a person would pay as a percentage of their income. The ceiling for the subsidy was originally 400% of the federal poverty level (FPL). Today, that is about $60,000 for an individual, a little over $80,000 for a couple, and $124,000 for a family of four.  Anyone who exceeded that ceiling got no subsidy when purchasing their insurance.

For those below the ceiling, the government would pick up the cost of the insurance that was above a percentage of the person’s income. That ranged from just over 2% to almost 10%. According to CMS Marketplace data, the subsidy typically covered 75-85% of the premiums for this group. Before the expansion, nearly 9 million Americans received the subsidy, and they accounted for over three-quarters of all Marketplace enrollment. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the subsidy was costing the federal government about $50 billion annually.

During the pandemic, Congress expanded the eligibility criteria for the subsidy by eliminating the income limits. But the expansion was only temporary, scheduled to expire at the end of 2025. Since the expansion was adopted during the pandemic and was set to expire automatically, a narrative emerged that the expansion was a pandemic response that would no longer be necessary after the pandemic ended. But the truth is that the expansion had nothing to do with the pandemic. The pandemic was just a pretext to expand coverage, something Democrats had long sought to do. The automatic termination was included to reduce the projected effect on the deficit. This allowed Democrats to use the reconciliation process to avoid a Republican filibuster.

The expansion eliminated the 400% of FPL limit. However, the benefit was capped by requiring that individuals must pay 8.5% of their income toward the premium before they could receive any subsidy. Furthermore, the premium is based on a particular level of coverage that currently costs about $10,000 per year for a single adult.

The net effect of the expanded subsidy rules is to reduce the subsidy as a person’s income increases gradually. For most people, the subsidy goes to zero at an income of about $120,000 for an individual and about $240,000 for a couple. This opened the subsidy to millions of Americans who did not previously qualify. As a result, the number of Americans participating in the Marketplace leaped from 11 million to 21 million, and those receiving some subsidy went from about 8.8 million to 13.3 million. The average monthly subsidy went from $525 to just over $600. The expansion benefits have been costing about $40 billion per year. This is consistent with the CBO’s estimate late last year of the cost to extend the enhanced subsidy. That would add about 2% to the projected federal deficit.

Unpacking the politics

The Democrats adopted the expansion on a straight party vote. Not a single Republican voted for the original extension. However, it turns out that Americans across the political spectrum came to strongly support the expansion of the subsidies.

A poll by the KFF (fka the Kaiser Family Foundation) found that 77% of Americans want Congress to extend the subsidies. The extension enjoys remarkable support across the political spectrum. Even self-identified MAGA Republicans favor the extension 56-43.

Earlier this year, KFF conducted a detailed analysis of the effect of the expiring subsidies by congressional district. Those most impacted are skewed toward districts currently held by Republicans. In all but one district with an incumbent Republican, voters over 60 who are currently receiving the subsidy would see an increase in their premium of over 100%. These individuals make up 7% of the population of those districts. Since they are over 60, most are likely registered voters and typically vote Republican.

We are currently entering the ACA reenrollment period, and many Americans are learning for the first time how much their premiums may go up. As a result, Republican members of Congress are hearing from their constituents. It is, therefore, not surprising that a growing number of Republican members are breaking with the leadership on extending the subsidies. Most notable has been MAGA loyalist Marjorie Taylor Greene.

A compromise on subsidies may be the off-ramp to end the shutdown. If the Senate were to pass a clean bill with an extension of the subsidies, it is hard to imagine the House would not do the same.

There’s probably no more polarizing and outright catchy vehicle on the road than the Tesla Cybertruck. Depending on who you ask, the Tesla Cybertruck is either the future of American engineering or a stainless-steel political statement.

But to some at a Cybertruck meetup in Palm Springs, it’s simpler than that, according to a new profile by Wired. “To me, it’s just a vehicle that I love,” says Andrew Castillo, a stock trader from Los Angeles. “It has no political affiliations at all to me.”

The event was organized by Michael Goldman, who runs the 53,000-member Facebook group Cybertruck Owners Only. Goldman, who nicknamed his truck “Beastie,” says reactions are often strong — both positive and negative. “When I first got it, my wife really made fun of me for it,” he says. “She actually made a T-shirt. It says ‘It looks like a brick and moves like a beast.’” Her opinion changed after seeing it in action towing dump trailers and hauling equipment. “Now she says it’s actually pretty cool.”

Goldman recalls one of his more extreme encounters in a Whole Foods parking lot, when a woman driving an electric Mustang left a note on his truck that read, “This is an extension of your small dick.” When he confronted her, he says, “She called me a Nazi.” After he pointed out his last name — Goldman — and that he’s Jewish, the conversation shifted. “She broke down in tears and apologized,” he says. “It just blew my mind that people will judge someone based on the vehicle they drive.”

Russ Taylor, who runs an off-road rally business called Smugglers Runs, added: “I loved just the style, the look—it’s totally unique.” Taylor says the reactions he gets are mostly limited to stares or hand gestures. “It’s kind of dumb that it’s become a political statement,” he adds. “It’s just a vehicle.”

Castillo says that compared to his past luxury cars, Cybertruck owners are unusually open and friendly. “With Bentleys or Rolls-Royces, people were standoffish,” he says. “With Cybertruck owners, it’s, ‘Hey, you want to see it? Come on. You want to test drive it? Come on.’ They’re more inclusive.”

For Frank and Diane Brabec of Indio, California, the truck has been a surprisingly practical addition. “It took me about three days to get used to it because it’s so different to drive,” says Frank, a consultant. “It’s the only vehicle [in the U.S.] with steer-by-wire—no physical connection between the wheel and tires.”

“We’ve only been flipped off like three times,” she adds, laughing. “Maybe four.”

Reactions from strangers are part of the package. At the same Palm Springs meetup, a driver in a sedan slowed down just long enough to shout, “Your cars are fucking ugly!” before speeding off. Castillo only smiled. “Some people just aren’t playing with a full deck of cards,” he said.

Wired writes that Jose Reynoso, a small-business owner who uses his Cybertruck for advertising, says Musk’s public controversies made things complicated. “For the CEO of a company that makes a product a lot of Americans buy to put us in the middle of everything because of his controversies — it was sad to see that,” he says. “We saw wives and kids being harassed just because we were driving a Tesla.” For that reason, he doesn’t take the truck to client sites anymore.

Others, like Roger Davis from San Diego, embrace the attention. “What I love about the truck is just how it’s so polarizing,” he says. Davis says he’s taken his truck through the Rubicon Trail, spending about $50,000 to outfit it for off-road travel. The experience was grueling but, according to him, transformative. “I just felt the presence of God and a deep peace and love,” he says. “It really reset my life.”

Shawn Hyman and Nannette Vaglica, a couple from Palm Desert, appreciate the quieter side of the Cybertruck experience. “It’s a different feeling than a gas car,” says Nannette. “There’s no shifting — it’s supersmooth.” Shawn adds, “Instant power. Instant torque.” They admire Elon Musk, too. “He’s a brilliant mind,” says Nannette. “I didn’t care about his politics,” Shawn adds. “He’s building some really neat stuff.”

Meanwhile, Alex Ferguson, a Cybertruck wrapper from Austin, Texas, has built a business around the vehicle’s notoriety. “When Tesla announced it, I bought all the domain variations of ‘wrapping Cybertrucks,’” he says. Since then, he’s wrapped more than 400 of them, many in cosmic or “space” designs. “It’s usually Tesla fans or space fans or engineering people,” he says.

Despite the controversies, quirks, and insults shouted from passing cars, Cybertruck owners say the experience has been overwhelmingly positive. “Kids love it,” says Castillo. “People cheer. I’ve had some nice cars, but never one that made people cheer.”

Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Coast Guard has seized about 100,000 pounds of cocaine since launching Operation Pacific Viper in August, officials reported Oct. 15.

The Coast Guard and its partners are targeting vessels suspected of bringing illegal narcotics such as cocaine into the United States from Central and South America.

The operation aims to stop drug trafficking and human smuggling by cartels and criminal organizations.

The Coast Guard has seized an average of about 1,600 pounds of cocaine every day since starting the operation, prohibiting about 34 vessels from reaching the United States and apprehending 86 suspected drug traffickers.

“The Coast Guard’s seizure of over 100,000 pounds of cocaine, in such a short time frame, is a remarkable achievement,” said Rear Adm. Jeffrey Novak, deputy commander of U.S. Coast Guard Pacific Area, in a statement.

“When we say the Coast Guard is accelerating counter-narcotics operations, we mean it.”

The maritime force is scouring drug smuggling routes in the eastern Pacific and dismantling narco-terrorist networks, Novak added.

“We are complementing the Coast Guard’s unique law enforcement authorities with cutting-edge capabilities to stop the flow of deadly drugs that threaten U.S. communities,” he said.

The operation requires interagency and international coordination, according to the Coast Guard.

U.S. Southern Command’s Joint Interagency Task Force-South, based in Key West, Florida, detects and monitors aerial and maritime movement of illegal drugs. Once a suspected drug trafficking crew zeros in on the U.S. coastline, the law enforcement phase of the operation starts, and the Coast Guard takes control.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem said the operation is a disruptor.

“Operation Pacific Viper has proven to be a crucial weapon in the fight against foreign drug traffickers and cartels in Latin America and has sent a clear message that we will disrupt, dismantle, and destroy their deadly business exploits wherever we find it,” Noem said in a statement.

Noem credits the Coast Guard for “saving countless American lives” with the operation.

In September, the Coast Guard captured seven suspected smugglers transporting about 13,000 pounds of cocaine in the Pacific and sank the boat as part of the operation.

The sinking was part of a live-fire exercise, removing it permanently from cartel use, according to the Coast Guard.

Also on Oct. 15, Coast Guard members received their paychecks despite the government shutdown. Noem announced the day before that Coast Guard members “will not miss a paycheck this week” as they carry out their missions. 

The DHS oversees the Coast Guard during times of peace.

After 10 years and nearly $1 billion in total project costs, the Barack Obama Presidential Center is finally nearing completion and has been opened for limited public tours.  The facility is set to officially go into operation in the spring of 2026, however, at least $230 million in construction costs still remain and the Obama Foundation simply doesn’t have it.  Total reserve funds are $116 million and this does not take into account the cost of paying staff to maintain the center.

Not only is the future of the site in limbo, the building is also being called “the tomb” by many locals in the South Side of Chicago where it is located.  Though the media frequently refers to the design as “warm and inviting”, it looks more like a concrete bunker nightmare that one might find in Soviet era Russia.   

The center’s notably harsh aesthetics are oddly similar to many pieces of architecture constructed in Russia during the height of communism using methods that seem to suck the life out of the surrounding environment.  One cannot help but notice the dystopian similarities.  Some might ague that buildings can’t really be “political”, but these are people that don’t understand architecture.  

Residents in the area reportedly describe the building as a “totalitarian command center dropped straight out of 1984.”  Obama’s adoring fans, though, say that the building is a beautiful symbol and tribute to the accomplishments of the Black American community.  They also claim that the center will be an “economic catalyst” for the neighborhood, which is suffering from fiscal decline.

Ironically, the site may indeed revamp the area, but in the process it is driving up property costs to the point that homes are unaffordable for current lower income residents. 

Alderwoman Jeanette Taylor of Ward 20, which is near where the center is being built, told the Daily Mail last month she has fought against some aspects of the building out of concern for her constituents. Families will be displaced because of higher rents, the tabloid quoted her as saying. 

“Every time large development comes to communities, they displace the very people they say they want to improve it for,” Taylor said.  Homes worth $400,000, which the lawmaker argues are unaffordable for South Side denizens, are popping up around the area.  Rents are also climbing, with some living in the South Side reporting that two bedroom apartments jumped from $800 per month to over $1800 per month. 

In May of this year, President Donald Trump criticized the project as a “disaster” that has come in many millions over budget.  Trump also warned about the DEI methods used to recruit construction contractors.

Obama did proudly proclaim that his library would be built with DEI initiatives and diverse contractors in mind (mostly black contractors).  Now his foundation is running out of funds.  Costs have ballooned due to terrible planning as well as lawsuits over “racial discrimination”.  Black companies argue that they have been subjected to unfair scrutiny in their building methods, while the New York engineering firm in charge of the library argues that the builders exhibit low experience and poor performance.      

Get woke, go broke.   

Authored by Jeff Minick via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

In the 1954 film “The Bridges at Toko-Ri,” based on James Michener’s novel and set during the Korean War, Adm. George Tarrant ponders the bravery of the Navy carrier pilots he commands, and then wonders aloud, “Where do we get such men?”

That same question occurs when we consider the life and death of Lt. Lance Sijan.

On Nov. 9, 1967, Sijan was flying as the backseat pilot of an F-4C fighter on a mission over North Vietnam when a malfunction in the timing fuse of a bomb enveloped the aircraft in flames. Sijan ejected into the night sky and fell into the triple-canopy jungle below, but the other pilot, Col. John Armstrong, went missing and was later presumed dead.

With no food and only a little water, and suffering from a broken leg, a fractured skull, and a damaged right hand, Sijan nonetheless evaded the North Vietnamese troops hunting him for the next 46 days. Even after his capture, he remained defiant, escaping at one point for a few hours, undergoing brutal torture, and finally dying of pneumonia.

The Man in the Making

When we look at Sijan’s background, we find only hints rather than firm reasons for his valiant attempt to escape his pursuers and the bravery he demonstrated during his torture, which was regarded with awe by his fellow prisoners.

Born and raised in Milwaukee, where his family owned and operated a restaurant, he and his younger sister, along with their immigrant parents, were active in the Serbian Orthodox Church. An outstanding high school athlete and student—he was an all-city football player and president of his school’s student government—he then entered the U.S. Air Force Academy, where he played varsity football for two years, and graduated in 1965.

Football would have offered Sijan lessons in endurance and courage, as did the rigid training at the Academy, which might have contributed to Sijan’s determination to resist capture despite his broken body. The military’s Code of Conduct for prisoners of war doubtless inspired him as well. Instituted in 1955 in response to the sometimes poor performances of POWs in the Korean War, the Code mandated that POWs resist the enemy as much as possible and make every effort to escape.

An Ordeal That Beggars Belief

Add all these factors together, however, and they don’t come close to explaining the source of his dauntless willpower in the jungle and in prison.

During those 46 days when he successfully hid from North Vietnamese troops, Sijan endured the vicissitudes of the weather and the terrain, all while suffering pain from his wounds. He was able to move by crawling or by lying on his back and pushing himself along. He ate plants, grubs, and insects, and drank by licking dew from grass when there was no rain and he couldn’t find a stream. When the enemy finally found him on Christmas Day, he was lying unconscious in a jungle road, rail-thin and wearing tattered clothing. He was three miles from his touchdown site.

That he had made this odyssey without a friend at his side or a word of encouragement from anyone only makes Sijan’s nightmarish trek even more extraordinary.

Unbroken

Two eyewitnesses later testified to Sijan’s heroism once captured. Capt. Guy Gruters, who had known Sijan at the Academy, and Maj. Robert Craner were also captives at the holding area known as “The Bamboo Prison.” He told them of his time in the jungle, and they observed firsthand the brutal torture of their wounded and sick comrade-at-arms in the enemy’s attempts to gain information. When the three men were transferred to Hoa Lo Prison, known to American captives as the Hanoi Hilton, Gruters and Craner bore witness to the continuance of Sijan’s vicious torture.

During these sessions, Sijan strictly adhered to the Code of Conduct and refused to give the enemy any information. Back in his cell, fed and assisted by his fellow prisoners, he continued to dream of escape.

On Jan. 22, 1968, Sijan died of pneumonia, abuse, and his jungle ordeal. Later, when U.S. authorities confirmed his death, he was posthumously promoted to captain and, in 1976, received the Medal of Honor. Part of the citation in that award reads: “During his intermittent periods of consciousness until his death, he never complained of his physical condition and, on several occasions, spoke of future escape attempts. Capt. Sijan’s extraordinary heroism and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty at the cost of his life are in keeping with the highest traditions of the U.S. Air Force and reflect great credit upon himself and the U.S. Armed Forces.”

The Air Force Academy marked Sijan’s heroism—he was the first Academy graduate to receive the nation’s highest military honor—by naming a building after him, Sijan Hall. More importantly, fourth-classmen (freshmen) are required to know his story in detail. Established in 1981, the Lance P. Sijan USAF Leadership Award recognizes Air Force personnel who have exhibited the highest standards of leadership and character in their duties and in their personal lives.

If we return to Adm. Tarrant’s “Where do we get such men?” the answer remains elusive.  Courage of this magnitude struck even his fellow prisoners as superhuman, a mystery beyond human explanation. What we must hope for, however, is that men and women possessed of such tremendous character continue to appear in our country’s time of need.

What arts and culture topics would you like us to cover? Please email ideas or feedback to features@epochtimes.nyc.

China’s major expansion control measures on its rare earth minerals appear to be backfiring, as on Thursday Japanese Finance Minister Katsunobu Kato called for the Group of Seven nations to “unite and respond” to China’s actions from last week. This after the Trump administration slammed the “global power grab” efforts by China as it seeks to have a “chokehold on the world of rare earth and rare earth materials.”

Germany’s finance minister has as a result signaled that a coordinated response from the bloc is likely coming, and Australia’s Prime Minister is expected to hammer out an agreement on critical mineral supply chains during an upcoming trip to Washington. China’s ‘retaliation’ is fast alienating those Beijing thought it could rally to its corner after Trump first unveiled steep tariffs, marking a sharp reversal from the global mood of six months ago.

Bloomberg has referenced the following to illustrate this reversal as follows: “Whether a miscalculation by Beijing — or an opportunistic bid by a superpower eager to police critical supply chains — the showdown taking shape marks a setback for Chinese efforts to build relationships on the world stage. Only weeks earlier, Xi’s show of bonhomie with India’s Narendra Modi sent a message that China could be an alternative partner for nations roiled by Trump’s upending of US foreign policy.”

According to the latest Chinese response Thursday, Commerce Minister Wang Wentao has blamed a series of “restrictive measures” by the US after the Madrid trade talks. He made the comments while meeting with and trying to woo Apple CEO Tim Cook into deepened cooperation and increased investment with China.

Simultaneously, Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yongqian told a press conference: “The U.S.’ interpretation seriously distorts and exaggerates China’s (rare earths export control) measures, deliberately stirring up unnecessary misunderstanding and panic.” A further summary of Beijing’s latest response:

• The US approach to this situation is vastly distorting reality.
• The US is holding China to standards that they wouldn’t hold themselves to.
• Decoupling from the US is not a realistic or rational option.

The day prior, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer issued a firm US stance, saying, “To paraphrase the secretary in one of our recent meetings with the Chinese, this is the last time we want to be talking about rare earths with the Chinese.”

Greer continued to Fox Business, “Unfortunately, that is not the last time they want to be talking about it. The reality is, there are a lot of areas where we can trade with the Chinese. Our trade is wildly imbalanced. So it needs to be more balanced. And there is a lot of, as the secretary said, areas of risk.” 

China’s new rare earths rules, set to take effect later this year, were an obvious shock to foreign governments and companies which now may have to acquire licenses from Beijing which can be denied, even if trading products containing Chinese-sourced materials outside of China.

This is seen also as big shot across the bow to the US defense industry in particular, sending the Pentagon on a new buying spree, as we reported, and sending rare earths stocks vertical this week.

And a Chinese state media take on the back-and-forth accusations…

🇨🇳🇺🇸Why the US officials become so hostile to China because of the rare earths?

The US doesn’t lack rare earth reserves (7th globally with 1.8 million tons). But it buys over 70% of its rare earths from China annually ($170 million).

The dependency lies in the purification… pic.twitter.com/q8PnxJEtdF

— Li Zexin 李泽欣 (@XH_Lee23) October 16, 2025

Analyst and critical minerals expert Gracelin Baskaran of the Center for Strategic and International Studies told CNBC earlier in the week that “What this essentially means is that it will deny licenses to foreign militaries and companies that are producing military use end goods.”

“It undermines the development of the defense industrial base at a time when there is rising global tension. It is a very powerful negotiating tactic because it undermines national security,” Baskaran added.

While Beijing is essentially saying “two can play” at Trump’s tariffs game with its export curbs- again, pieces are now in play which could prove this a massive backfiring and miscalculation resulting in the opposite: China’s isolation.

Update (1925ET):

An 18-count indictment accused President Trump’s former national security adviser-turned-adversary, John Bolton, of mishandling classified national defense information (NDI), including eight counts of transmission and ten counts of unlawful retention.

According to the indictment, Bolton used personal email and messaging accounts to transmit Top Secret intelligence about foreign adversaries, future attacks, and U.S. foreign-policy relations. He also kept classified files at his home, including sensitive intelligence about foreign leaders and U.S. intelligence sources.

The FBI Baltimore Field Office led the investigation, with oversight from the Justice Department’s National Security Division. The indictment outlines two core allegations:

1. Eight counts of transmission of NDI under the Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. §793(d)),

2. and Ten counts of unlawful retention of NDI under §793(e).

Attorney General Pamela Bondi wrote in a statement, “There is one tier of justice for all Americans. Anyone who abuses a position of power and jeopardizes our national security will be held accountable. No one is above the law.”

Justice Department Statements Regarding Indictment of Former National Security Advisor John Bolton https://t.co/lrNzDZqzvi @FBIBaltimore pic.twitter.com/yLcEqSjkLF

— FBI (@FBI) October 16, 2025

Each count carries a maximum of 10 years in federal prison, meaning Bolton faces up to 180 years if convicted on all charges. 

Here are some of the highlights of the indictment:

While John Bolton was trafficking top secret intel to his friends, Iran apparently hacked his email account, according to the 18-count federal indictment against him. pic.twitter.com/teVfK8KWts

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) October 16, 2025

From the John Bolton indictment –

Bolton’s personal email – which contained classified info – was hacked by Iran.

Bolton notified the Gov’t of the hack – but did not mention his possession of the classified info/docs. pic.twitter.com/sacZtRK6Kk

— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) October 16, 2025

Lmfao this is allegedly an exchange John Bolton had with his friends while sending them classified information:

“More stuff coming!!!… None of which we talk about!!!”

“Shhhh” pic.twitter.com/KRY1olXzWD

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 16, 2025

Read the full indictment:

*   *    * 

The US Justice Department has charged former National Security adviser John Bolton for his handling of classified documents, Bloomberg reports, citing a person familiar with the matter.

Bolton was indicted by a federal grand jury in Maryland, according to the report.

The indictment came hours after several news outlets reported that the indictment was imminent. 

Bolton’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said his client did nothing inappropriate with classified records – however part of the criminal investigation into Bolton has focused on what resembled diary entries of private notes he made for himself on an AOL email account – which may have contained classified information. 

He allegedly shared highly classified information with his wife and daughter, CNN is also reporting. 

The FBI executed a search warrant on Bolton’s Maryland home and Washington, DC office over the summer – during which agents seized multiple documents labeled “secret,” “confidential,” and “classified” – including some which mentioned weapons of mass destruction, according to court records. 

Bolton on leaking of classified information. Give him what he wants. https://t.co/Gf7jVPx9wk pic.twitter.com/fBwLi3vfyX

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) October 16, 2025

*  *  *