California’s taxpayers are bearing an unsustainable burden, one that jeopardizes the state’s financial health and neglects the needs of its legal residents. The expansion of Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid program, to cover all low-income undocumented immigrants—irrespective of age or legal status—has saddled taxpayers with a massive, unjustifiable cost. As Representative Kevin Kiley (R-CA) has highlighted with his “ No Medicaid for Illegal Immigrants Act ,” this policy is a fiscal disaster that California cannot afford, especially given the state’s looming budget deficit. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for healthcare for illegal immigrants when our own citizens are struggling to access the services they’ve funded. California’s budget deficit is a glaring red flag. As of March 13, 2025, estimates peg the shortfall at $38 billion according to Governor Gavin Newsom. This crisis stems from dwindling tax revenues, a flight of high-income earners, and reckless spending. Yet, amidst this financial chaos, the state is pouring $9.5 billion this year into Medi-Cal for undocumented immigrants—a figure confirmed by the California Department of Finance, dwarfing earlier projections of $6 billion. Over the next decade, this could escalate to hundreds of billions, draining resources from vital services like education, infrastructure, and healthcare for legal residents. Kevin Kiley The strain doesn’t stop at Medi-Cal. Illegal immigrants in California tap into a web of taxpayer-funded social services: emergency medical care (partially state-funded despite federal mandates), public education for their children (costing billions annually), and even cash assistance through programs like CalWORKs for families with U.S.-born children. The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimated in 2023 that illegal immigration costs California taxpayers nearly $31 billion yearly across these services. Meanwhile, citizens face overstretched emergency rooms, underfunded schools, and neglected roads—services they’re entitled to but can’t fully utilize because funds are diverted to non-citizens. Healthcare access exemplifies this inequity. With Medi-Cal now covering an estimated 700,000 to 1 million undocumented immigrants as of 2024, the system—already serving 14.6 million Californians—is buckling. Provider shortages and low reimbursement rates mean legal residents, including seniors and the disabled, endure months-long waits for appointments or travel far for care. Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher has called it out: “The state is shelling out $9.5 billion on healthcare for illegal immigrants while emergency rooms overflow, hospitals teeter on the brink, and working Californians struggle to see a doctor.” Taxpayers are bankrolling a system that prioritizes illegal immigrants over their own families. No Medicaid for Illegal Immigrants Act Representative Kevin Kiley’s “No Medicaid for Illegal Immigrants Act,” introduced in January 2025, offers a solution. This legislation would prohibit states from using federal or state Medicaid funds to provide healthcare services to undocumented immigrants, with an exception for emergencies. Kiley argues it could save California billions annually—up to $6.5 billion by some estimates—freeing up funds to bolster care for citizens. “This common-sense legislation ensures that taxpayer-funded healthcare benefits are preserved for those who lawfully qualify, prioritizing the needs of American citizens and legal residents while promoting fairness and fiscal responsibility,” Kiley stated. His bill aligns with a growing sentiment that public resources should serve those who’ve contributed to them, not those who’ve bypassed the law. The fiscal irresponsibility is stark. To cover Medi-Cal costs through March, the state borrowed $3.4 billion, with more loans likely by June. Newsom has floated tapping the $7.1 billion rainy-day fund—meant for emergencies—to sustain this spending. Kiley’s legislation could halt this madness, as he emphasized in a March 13, 2025, post on X: “Newsom has squandered so much of our Medi-Cal funding on illegal immigrants that he’s now asking for a $3.4 billion loan to cover the costs. My legislation…will put an end to this scandal.” Assemblyman Carl DeMaio agrees, noting that cutting this program could avert such borrowing entirely. California’s taxpayers are fleeing—over 700,000 left between 2020 and 2022, taking $47 billion in adjusted gross income with them—yet those who stay are hit harder. A 2024 California Health Care Foundation report found over half of Californians skipped care last year due to cost, with many accruing medical debt. These are the people funding Medi-Cal’s expansion, yet they’re sidelined. Kiley warned on X in February 2025, “Over 10 years, [Medi-Cal for illegal immigrants] will add up to hundreds of billions that could have improved care for vulnerable California citizens.” Proponents of the expansion call it compassionate, but it’s a hollow gesture when it bankrupts the state and incentivizes illegal immigration. The Biden administration’s lax border policies fueled a surge—millions have crossed since 2021, many landing in California—costing federal and state taxpayers $16.2 billion in emergency Medicaid since then, per the Congressional Budget Office. Kiley’s bill counters this pull factor, redirecting resources to wildfire prevention, schools, or healthcare for veterans—needs he’s flagged as more pressing. California taxpayers deserve relief, not a bigger burden. Kiley’s legislation is a lifeline, ensuring Medi-Cal serves those who’ve earned it through citizenship or legal residency. The state’s $9.5 billion annual splurge on illegal immigrant healthcare is indefensible when citizens can’t get timely care and the budget teeters on collapse. It’s not cruelty to prioritize Americans—it’s justice. Sacramento must stop this giveaway and let Kiley’s bill restore sanity. Taxpayers shouldn’t foot the bill for those who cut the line.

On February 28, 2025, President Donald Trump to sign an executive order designating English as the official language of the United States Last year, I walked into a Denny’s in California, hungry for a Grand Slam, only to find the menus were entirely in Spanish. No English option. In my own country, I couldn’t order a meal without fumbling through a language I don’t speak. That moment crystallized why I’m pro-English-only: we need a common language to function as a nation. On February 28, 2025, it was announced, President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order designating English as the official language of the United States—a victory I’ve been pushing for since day one of his term. As soon as Trump was inaugurated, I started posting @ his social media and the official White House account, rallying for a “Make English Great Again” movement. Today, he is delivering. Designating English as the official language would primarily apply to the federal government. Executive orders are directives issued by the President to manage the operations of the executive branch, which includes federal agencies and departments. They do not inherently have the force of law over states unless they are tied to specific federal funding conditions or regulations that states must follow to receive federal support. States could be indirectly affected if they rely on federal funding tied to compliance with this order. For example, if federal grants or programs previously required multilingual services and now prioritize English, states might need to adjust their own policies to maintain eligibility—or find alternative funding sources. That said, states have their own sovereignty under the U.S. Constitution (via the Tenth Amendment), and many already designate English as their official language independently (over 30 states have done so). The order doesn’t override state laws or force states to adopt English as their official language; it governs federal conduct. Critics of the order cry marginalization, fearing non-English speakers will lose out. Some call the executive order “xenophobic”. My Denny’s moment wasn’t about hating Spanish or Spanish speaking people; it was about needing English to navigate daily life in America. I’m pro-English-only because I’ve seen the chaos without it. Immigrants coming to America should assimilate by mastering English—reading, writing, speaking it.

A Black woman, once incarcerated, now elevated to a position of influence by a president accused of racial insensitivity. Alice Marie Johnson On February 20, 2025, during a Black History Month reception at the White House, President Donald Trump announced, Alice Marie Johnson , a woman whose life sentence he commuted in 2018 and fully pardoned in 2020, would serve as his administration’s "pardon czar. Alice Marie Johnson’s story is one of resilience and redemption. In 1996, Johnson, a single mother of five from Memphis, Tennessee, was convicted of nonviolent drug offenses related to a cocaine trafficking operation. She was sentenced to life in prison without parole—a punishment that many, including Johnson herself, viewed as disproportionately harsh for her role as a "telephone mule," relaying messages rather than directly handling drugs. Johnson spent over two decades behind bars, using her time to mentor fellow inmates, work in the prison hospice, volunteer in the church, and even become an ordained minister. Her case gained national attention in 2018 when reality television star Kim Kardashian West took up her cause. Kardashian met with Trump in the Oval Office, advocating for Johnson’s release. Just a week later, Trump commuted Johnson’s sentence, freeing her after 21 years in prison. In August 2020, during his re-election campaign, Trump granted her a full pardon, erasing the conviction from her record. Since then, Johnson has emerged as a prominent advocate for criminal justice reform, founding "Taking Action For Good" to push for clemency and support for others in situations like hers. As "pardon czar," she will advise the president on clemency cases, drawing on her personal experience and advocacy work to recommend individuals who she believes deserve a second chance. Speaking at the White House event, Trump praised Johnson as an "inspiration," noting that her 22-year imprisonment was for "something that today probably wouldn’t even be prosecuted." He added, “You’re going to look, and you’re going to make recommendations, and I’ll follow those recommendations.” Johnson’s appointment doesn’t erase Trump’s controversial history. His tough-on-crime stance, calls for harsher policing, and past remarks still fuel accusations of racial bias. Critics on X, like @JusticeNow23 dismissed the move: “One Black woman doesn’t undo years of dog whistles.” Can a single act—or even a series of them—redefine a presidency’s racial legacy? Donald Trump has faced accusations of racism throughout his public life, stemming from a combination of statements, actions, and policies that critics argue reflect racial bias or insensitivity. These claims span his career as a real estate mogul, television personality, and politician. Yet the appointment of Johnson complicates the narrative. Johnson herself has praised Trump, crediting him with giving her “a second chance at life.”

The narrative from parts of the media that President Donald Trump has canceled Black History couldn't be further from the truth. BLACK HISTORY MONTH Contrary to the misleading headlines like this one " Trump administration pauses Black History Month, other observances under DEI ban ", Trump has indeed proclaimed February 2025 as National Black History Month, continuing the tradition of recognizing the monumental contributions of Black Americans to our nation. The confusion arises from a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) directive , which has caused a stir by pausing internal agency celebrations and events related to several cultural observances, including Black History Month, Pride Month, Holocaust Remembrance Day, and more. This directive, issued in response to Trump's executive orders aimed at eliminating certain diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs within federal agencies, specifically targets the activities and events organized by the DIA, not the recognition of these months themselves. This distinction is crucial: the months are not being canceled, but the DIA has decided to halt its own organized activities celebrating these observances. This decision is a reflection of the agency's interpretation of the executive orders rather than a direct mandate from the White House to erase these cultural acknowledgments from the calendar. The media frenzy, however, seemed to conflate this agency-specific action with a broader cancellation of Black History Month. The DIA's move, while significant in its own right, does not affect the national recognition of Black History Month. President Trump's proclamation affirms this, with the White House confirming through Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt that the administration would continue to celebrate the month. President Trump has recognized Black History Month throughout his presidency, both terms included. It's essential to clarify the scope of these executive orders. They are targeted at what some view as potentially divisive or politically motivated DEI programs within federal agencies. However, they do not extend to the cultural recognition of months like February for Black history or June for Pride. This February, let's celebrate Black History Month for what it is - an opportunity to recognize, learn from, and appreciate the vast contributions of Black Americans to our shared history. And let's also remember the importance of truth in journalism, especially in an era where misinformation can spread faster than facts.

The lawsuits, centered on the deaths of several victims alleging that SCE was negligent in its failure to de-energize power lines during the high-risk Santa Ana wind conditions. Civil Rights Attorney Ben Crump Civil rights attorney Ben Crump has filed lawsuits against Southern California Edison (SCE), filing multiple wrongful death lawsuits following the devastating Eaton Fire that swept through Altadena and Pasadena earlier this month. The fire, which has claimed at least 25 lives and destroyed thousands of structures, has left a community in mourning and seeking accountability. Eaton Fire Crump, alongside co-counsel Anne Andrews and other legal teams, argues that timely power shutoffs could have prevented the ignition and spread of the fire in the densely populated areas of Altadena, a community with significant historical Black homeownership. "These were preventable tragedies," stated Crump at a recent press conference. "Southern California Edison had a duty to act responsibly by shutting off utilities during high-risk conditions, but they failed to do so, leading to the loss of lives and homes." The Eaton Fire, reported to have started on January 7, 2025, quickly escalated due to the dry vegetation and high winds, devastating the region. The lawsuits claim that SCE's aging infrastructure and lack of vegetation management around electrical equipment were direct contributors to the disaster. In addition to Crump's actions, the NAACP has also filed lawsuits against SCE, focusing on the disproportionate impact of the fires on underserved communities. Derrick Johnson, NAACP President and CEO, emphasized the organization's commitment to justice for the Altadena community, stating, "Altadena—a community deeply rooted in Black history and homeownership—deserves justice." The legal actions against SCE are not isolated. Several other law firms have filed at least 14 lawsuits related to the Eaton Fire, representing numerous plaintiffs who have lost homes, businesses, or loved ones. As Altadena begins the long process of recovery, with community efforts and mutual aid rising to the challenge, the lawsuits underscore a demand for accountability and systemic change to prevent future tragedies.

In his first week back in the White House, Donald Trump moved swiftly to enact a series of executive orders aimed at fulfilling his campaign promises and reversing policies from the previous administration. Here's a summary of Donald Trumps executive orders: Immigration and Border Security : Trump has issued orders to enhance border security, including the use of military personnel for immigration enforcement , declaring an "invasion" at the southern border, and restarting the construction of the border wall. He has also suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and plans to reinterpret birthright citizenship, potentially ending it for children of undocumented immigrants. Executive Orders and Legislative Actions : Trump signed numerous executive orders, from a hiring freeze in the federal government to revoking Biden-era policies. He has signed orders to end work-from-home policies for federal employees, reclassified workers to make them easier to fire, and frozen new regulations. His administration has also moved to withdraw from international agreements like the Paris Climate Accord and the World Health Organization. Pardons and Legal Actions : Trump issued pardons for nearly all defendants involved in the January 6 Capitol siege, effectively nullifying their convictions. This has sparked controversy, with some viewing it as endorsing political violence. He also delayed the enforcement of a ban on TikTok, giving his administration time to reassess the policy. Cultural and Social Policies : Trump signed orders affecting gender identity recognition and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, aiming to recognize only two genders and dismantle DEI initiatives within the federal government. This has led some companies to follow suit in their policies. Economic and Energy Policies : Trump has directed actions to roll back emissions standards, promote fossil fuel production, and end the ban on offshore drilling. He has also promised to reduce regulatory burdens to lower costs for goods, although some of these actions might require Congressional support to fully implement. Disaster Response in North Carolina and Los Angeles : In his first week in office, President Trump visited both North Carolina and Los Angeles to address the aftermath of natural disasters. In North Carolina, Trump surveyed areas hit by Hurricane Helene, criticizing the previous administration's response and promising federal aid to help rebuild. He spoke about the need for quicker disaster response and suggested reforms to FEMA, which he described as too bureaucratic. In Los Angeles, dealing with extensive wildfire damage, Trump met with local leaders, including California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom

With Barbara Lee announcing her candidacy for mayor, the city faces the prospect of continuing its journey under progressive governance. Barbara Lee, a seasoned progressive politician , has announced her candidacy for mayor at a time when Oakland residents have shown a clear inclination towards change by ousting progressive leaders like the previous Mayor Sheng Thao and District Attorney Pamela Price in historic recall elections. The progressive Lee, who is originally from Texas, is deeply popular in Oakland and had been urged to run for mayor by her supporters.-The Guardian Barbara Lee is deeply entrenched in progressive politics and has been a familiar name in Oakland for decades. Her tenure in Congress was marked by her staunch advocacy for progressive causes, from her solitary vote against military force post-9/11 to her efforts in social equity and healthcare reform. Why more of the same progressive ideology might not serve Oakland One of the most pressing issues in Oakland is crime. The city has witnessed a significant uptick in property and violent crimes, leading to a palpable sense of insecurity among its citizens. Critics argue that progressive policies, which often advocate for police reform and reduced law enforcement budgets, have inadvertently weakened the city's response to crime. If elected, Lee might continue this trend, potentially exacerbating the situation unless a balanced approach is adopted. The city has experienced significant challenges under progressive leadership, particularly in terms of public safety and fiscal management. The recall of Mayor Sheng Thao and Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price, both of whom were elected on progressive platforms, highlights a public backlash against the policies they championed. These leaders were recalled with overwhelming margins, indicating a voter dissatisfaction with the direction the city was heading. The recalls were driven by concerns over rising crime rates and perceived mismanagement of city finances, which have led to budget deficits and the potential closure of public services like fire stations For Lee, there's an opportunity to redefine what progressive leadership means in Oakland by integrating practical solutions with her ideological commitments. She would need to address the criticisms levied against past progressive leaders by showing a willingness to adapt policies to the city's current needs. This context raises the question: does Oakland need another mayor with a progressive agenda?

Actor Denzel Washington was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Joe Biden. This accolade, which is the United States' highest civilian honor, was presented to Washington for his profound contributions to American culture, his work in film, and his extensive philanthropy, particularly his long-standing commitment to youth through his role as National Spokesman for the Boys & Girls Clubs of America. Denzel Washington Honored with the Presidential Medal of Freedom Denzel Washington's career in Hollywood spans over four decades, during which he has portrayed an array of iconic and diverse characters, securing him two Academy Awards, three Golden Globe Awards, a Tony Award, and the Cecil B. DeMille Lifetime Achievement Award. His performances have not only captivated audiences but have also set a high standard for acting in cinema. From his Oscar-winning role in "Glory" to his intense portrayal in "Training Day," Washington's work has been both critically acclaimed and widely influential. His recent involvement in "Gladiator II" and his past accolades underscore his enduring impact on the film industry. His dedication to the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, where he has served as National Spokesman for over 25 years, has been instrumental in providing mentorship and opportunities for young people across the nation. His advocacy for social justice and generous contributions to various other causes demonstrate his commitment to using his platform for the betterment of society. The ceremony took place in the East Room of the White House, where President Biden highlighted Washington's "exemplary contributions ." The Medal of Freedom's purpose is to recognize individuals who have made significant impacts in various fields.

Louisiana Representative Mike Johnson was re-elected as the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives on the first ballot of the new Congress This swift victory was not anticipated, given the internal frictions within the Republican Party, but it was significantly bolstered by an endorsement from President-elect Donald Trump. Speaker Mike Johnson Mike Johnson's re-election was marked by a rare unanimous support from the Republican caucus, ending a vote that many speculated could devolve into a contentious multi-ballot affair similar to the one that preceded his initial election in 2023. The vote showcased a unified front from the GOP, with Johnson securing the minimum required for a win in the narrowly controlled House. This outcome was particularly notable as it initially seemed Johnson might struggle, with dissent from conservative hardliners like Representative Thomas Massie openly opposing his candidacy before the vote. The pivotal moment that likely shifted the dynamics in Johnson's favor was Donald Trump's endorsement on December 30, 2024. Trump, who has maintained significant influence over the Republican Party, expressed his full backing for Johnson, labeling him a "good, hard-working, religious man" who would continue to lead the party to victories. This endorsement came at a critical time when Johnson was facing potential opposition within his ranks, particularly over his handling of government funding bills and a perceived lack of aggressive policy pushes favored by the party's right wing. With a Republican majority in both the House and the Senate, and Trump's presidency, there's a clear path for the GOP to push through its legislative priorities. Johnson's role will be crucial in navigating the complex dynamics of a unified government, especially with a slim majority that requires near-total party unity. Johnson has committed to advancing Trump's agenda, which includes sweeping reforms in areas like immigration, tax policy, and reducing the federal workforce. His speakership is expected to prioritize these issues, potentially using mechanisms like budget reconciliation to bypass filibuster in the Senate, ensuring that Trump’s policies can be enacted with a simple majority. Trump’s endorsement might also tighten party discipline, as few Republicans would risk opposing a speaker who has the full support of their party's leader. However, this could also mean that the more moderate or centrist Republicans might feel pressured to align more closely with Trump's vision, potentially alienating some of the electorate in swing districts. The quick election of a speaker prevents the kind of legislative paralysis seen in previous sessions without a clear leader, ensuring that the House can move forward with its agenda. This was particularly important as the new Congress is set to certify Trump's election on January 6, a task that requires a functioning House.

Joe Biden's legacy as the 46th President of the United States will likely be remembered as one of the worst presidencies in America's history. Photo Credit X Joe Biden's legacy might well be one of lost opportunities and mismanagement. His presidency, intended to be a return to normalcy and stability, instead became a period where the U.S. witnessed economic challenges, foreign policy missteps, and a deepening political divide. The historical narrative might not be kind to Biden, as his term is often cited in discussions about the worst presidencies in American history, characterized by both policy failures and personal controversies. Biden took office amid promises to restore economic stability following the global health crisis. However, his presidency has been marked by soaring inflation rates, which have hit levels not seen in decades. His administration's massive spending packages, like the American Rescue Plan, contributed to this inflation, disproportionately affecting the middle and working classes through increased costs of living. Public sentiment, as reflected in various polls, shows a significant portion of Americans believe Biden's economic policies worsened their financial situation. On the international stage, Biden's legacy is arguably tainted by perceived foreign policy blunders. The most glaring example was the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, which led to the fall of Kabul to the Taliban, leaving behind a power vacuum and a humanitarian crisis. This event not only damaged U.S. credibility on the global stage but also raised questions about strategic foresight and leadership. Afghan Witdrawl Additionally, his approach to the Ukraine-Russia conflict has been criticized for lacking a coherent strategy, leading to a prolonged conflict with significant geopolitical repercussions. One of the starkest failures of Joe Biden's administration has been its handling of the U.S.-Mexico border. Under Biden, there's been an unprecedented surge in migrant crossings, leading to an overwhelming of border resources and infrastructure. Biden Border Crisis Biden's reversal of many deterrent-focused policies from previous administrations, including stopping the construction of the border wall and ending the "Remain in Mexico" policy, signaled an open invitation to migrants. The situation not only strained local communities with resource demands but has also been linked to increased crime rates and the smuggling of drugs like fentanyl into the U.S. Joe Biden's mental decline significantly impacted both his presidency and public perception. Throughout his term, moments of confusion during public speeches, frequent gaffes, and visible struggles with memory and coherence have been hard to ignore. It was one such gaffe during a debate with Trump that ultimately ended his run for re-election, highlighting his struggles in real-time to a national audience. Biden's personal legacy is further complicated by ethical questions, particularly around the controversial pardon of his son , Hunter Biden. This action has fueled narratives of corruption, tarnishing his public image and contributing to a narrative that his presidency was one of the most ethically dubious in recent history. Biden's presidency has been characterized by an increase in political polarization. Joe Biden's approval rating hitting a low of 34% underscores the public's dissatisfaction with his presidency, reflecting one of the lowest points for an outgoing president in recent history. As time passes, it will be up to historians to decide his exact place, but current sentiment leans towards a presidency that many believe did more harm than good to America's standing both at home and abroad.

In documenting the presidency, I've personally covered numerous incidents where President Biden's cognitive abilities appeared to falter, his brain seeming to 'freeze' during public appearances, interviews, and the presidential debate. These episodes were not subtle; they were visibly clear and often unsettling to observe. However, rather than acknowledging these signs, both the media and Democratic leaders consistently urged the public to disregard what they were witnessing, often labeling such observations as misinformation or politically motivated attacks. This directive to "not believe our lying eyes" has significantly contributed to skepticism about the integrity of political discourse and corporate media reporting during Biden's term. The Wall Street Journal , detailed accounts from nearly 50 individuals familiar with the inner workings of the Biden administration paint a picture of a presidency marked by a quiet, yet significant, management of President Joe Biden's declining cognitive abilities. From the outset of his presidency, Biden's aides seemed to recognize the challenge his age and mental acuity posed. According to the Journal, as early as the first few months of his term, aides noticed Biden's fatigue during extended meetings and his propensity for making mistakes. This led to a strategy where interactions were kept short, and meetings were strategically scheduled around his "good days and bad days." A national security official was quoted saying, "He has good days and bad days, and today was a bad day so we’re going to address this tomorrow." The White House, under the stewardship of Biden's closest advisors, reportedly operated like a protective shell, managing his engagements and limiting access to him. This included rescheduling or canceling meetings based on his daily condition. The report suggests a system where even cabinet members and lawmakers felt disconnected from the President, with Representative Adam Smith of the House Armed Services Committee noting he had more personal interaction with former President Barack Obama despite being less senior at the time. Policy-making and decision processes might have been influenced or even controlled by a select group of advisors, raising questions about the true center of executive power. The Journal's piece has also cast a shadow over media credibility. For years, reports questioning Biden's fitness for office were met with aggressive rebuttals from the White House, often branded as partisan attacks or conspiracy theories. Critics argue that the media, particularly those with a left-leaning bias, might have shied away from aggressive reporting due to political fears or an unwillingness to acknowledge the situation, thus impacting public trust in media narratives. The initial reaction from the White House and Biden's allies was to dismiss the Journal's report as a political hit job, especially given that prominent Republicans like former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy were quoted. The handling of Biden's cognitive decline is a cautionary tale about the lengths to which political entities will go to maintain power.

A recent incident at Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee, was initially perceived as a hate crime turned out to be a fabricated race hoax. The incident involved vulgar and racist messages scrawled across the campus, specifically around the National Panhellenic Council Plaza, which honors historically Black fraternities and sororities. Over the Thanksgiving break in November 2024, messages containing racial slurs and profanity, including phrases like "F N-word, Trump Rules," were discovered on campus. The discovery led to widespread concern and condemnation from the student body and faculty, leading to an immediate investigation by both campus security and the Memphis Police Department. Initially, these messages were seen as acts of racial intimidation and bias, sparking an emotional response from the community. Thanks to diligent efforts by campus safety officers and the Memphis PD, the investigation concluded that the hate crime was fabricated . The individual responsible for the messages admitted to creating a hoax with the intent to blame others, specifically aiming to cast a negative light on supporters of Donald Trump. Rhodes College confirmed to Fox News that the perpetrator had taken responsibility for the act. The college expressed that this incident caused significant pain within the community and announced they would pursue all legal avenues to hold the individual accountable. Race hoaxes are not isolated incidents; they reflect broader societal issues regarding the politics of race and the weaponization of racial discourse. Such hoaxes can undermine legitimate grievances and create distrust, making it harder for real victims of hate crimes to be believed or supported. Furthermore, they can fuel political polarization, with each side using these incidents to validate their narratives about the state of race relations in the U.S.