Daily Caller reported that the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) is dissolving following a series of lawsuits from social media companies accusing it of censoring conservative content.
The lawsuits, filed by platforms like X and Rumble, allege that GARM colluded with advertisers to withhold monetization from certain platforms and content creators.
GARM, an advertising coalition established by the World Federation of Advertisers, announced on Thursday that it would be discontinuing its operations. This decision follows intense legal battles with social media giants X and Rumble.
X and Rumble accused GARM of orchestrating a scheme with advertisers to stifle conservative voices and limit monetization options for platforms they identified as "disfavored." These allegations were a major factor driving the decision to disband GARM.
The lawsuits claim that GARM’s actions amounted to collusion. In a report released by the House Judiciary Committee in July, GARM was described as having directly organized boycotts and utilized indirect tactics against platforms, content creators, and news organizations deemed unsuitable for advertisers.
GARM’s guidelines, which labeled sensitive social issues and hate speech as inappropriate for advertising, were at the center of these allegations. Platforms like The Daily Wire were blacklisted under categories such as "conspiracy theories." Moreover, GARM reportedly pressured Spotify and The Joe Rogan Experience over content related to COVID-19 vaccines, alleging misinformation.
The World Federation of Advertisers notified its employees about the decision to dissolve GARM, describing it as a difficult but necessary action. In a statement issued on Friday, GARM expressed that the allegations against it had misconstrued its purpose and significantly drained its resources and finances.
“GARM is a small, not-for-profit initiative, and recent allegations that underestimate its purpose and activities have caused a distraction and significantly drained its resources and finances," GARM stated. "Therefore, GARM is making the difficult decision to discontinue its activities."
The lawsuit filed by X in Texas claimed that GARM members collectively withheld billions of dollars in advertising revenue from the platform. X CEO Linda Yaccarino emphasized the platform’s efforts to provide a safe and efficient advertising environment, criticizing the practices that led to the legal disputes. Linda Yaccarino commented:
We have proven our platform provides advertisers a way to showcase their brands and reach their target audiences safely, efficiently and effectively. The unfortunate reality is that despite all our efforts, hundreds of meetings and research to the contrary, many companies chose to dismiss the facts. To those who broke the law, we say enough is enough.
Rumble’s lawsuit echoed similar sentiments, contending that GARM used arbitrary content standards to drive an advertiser boycott against the platform. “The brand safety standards set by advertisers and their ad agencies should succeed or fail in the marketplace on their own merits and not through the coercive exercise of market power,” the lawsuit stated.
Rumble further alleged that GARM’s actions were detrimental, not just to platforms and content creators, but also to its own advertiser clients, who paid higher rates for ads because of the collusion. The lawsuit emphasized that this illegal activity came at the expense of multiple stakeholders.
GARM members faced backlash internally as well. A member reportedly expressed disdain for conservative news outlets, referring to their ideologies as “bullshit.” The member observed these outlets closely to catch them crossing the lines set by GARM's standards, further fueling the legal contentions.
In summary, GARM’s dissolution marks a significant turn in the ongoing battle over content censorship and advertising standards. The lawsuits from X and Rumble that drove this decision highlight the complexities and challenges faced in navigating the intersection of digital media, free speech, and responsible ad placement.
According to Daily Wire, Former President Donald Trump has unveiled plans to revolutionize America's energy production and safeguard the U.S. auto industry if he secures the presidency in the next election.
Trump made these declarations during a pre-recorded interview that aired on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures," hosted by Maria Bartiromo.
During the interview, Trump emphasized his commitment to boosting America's energy resources. He claimed that the U.S. holds more energy reserves than major producers such as Saudi Arabia and Russia. By tapping into these reserves, Trump aims to position the U.S. as a global energy leader.
"We’re going to get energy way down. Drill, baby, drill," Trump remarked, highlighting his strategy. He described the country’s energy resources as ‘liquid gold’ and stressed the potential to generate substantial revenue by exporting energy worldwide. Trump assured that this would lead to energy independence and lower domestic energy prices.
"We have more energy — we have more liquid gold, as I call it, under our feet than Saudi Arabia, than Russia, than anybody,” he continued. “We’re going to be energy-dominant, we’re going to make a fortune, we’re going to supply it all over Europe, all over the world. We’re going to be double and triple what they’re doing.”
Trump critiqued the current energy policies affecting New England, blaming the high energy prices on the lack of pipeline infrastructure. He argued that New York’s restrictions prevent essential pipelines from being built, significantly affecting energy costs for consumers in that region.
"Do you know people in New England — they pay some of the highest prices in the world because we don’t have a pipeline, because New York won’t let a pipeline go through a very poor section of New York," Trump noted.
The former president also laid out plans to impose tariffs aimed at protecting the American auto industry. He expressed concern over the future of U.S. car manufacturing, warning that the industry could collapse within two years if Vice President Kamala Harris were elected.
Trump claimed that foreign nations, such as China, are heavily investing in new auto plants, which could overshadow American car production. He pointed out that auto manufacturing in the U.S. has dramatically declined, with significant portions being relocated to other countries.
"Those people in Michigan that love me and that I love, and they’re going to give us a victory because their auto industry won’t exist in two years if she [Harris] gets elected — China is going to make, and other countries are going to make, all the cars. They’re building some of the biggest auto plants,” he said.
Trump highlighted statistics to underline the downturn in U.S. auto manufacturing. He noted that auto production is down 64% from its peak. Mexico, he said, has captured a significant share of U.S. manufacturing — around 32%. To address this, Trump suggested reintroducing tariffs to curb car imports from Mexico and other countries.
"By the way, when you add it all up, including the taxes and everything else, we’re going to create jobs like you’ve never created before. If you look at auto manufacturing, it’s down 64% from its high number of jobs and everything else. But we used to be the world manufacturer, and every year it gets eaten away, and a big factor is Mexico,” he detailed.
Former President Donald Trump vowed to enhance the U.S. economy by ramping up energy production and imposing tariffs to protect the auto industry if he wins the upcoming presidential election. These commitments were shared during his interview on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures." Trump emphasized the nation's abundant energy resources and the potential economic benefits of energy dominance. Additionally, he underscored the need for tariffs to revive U.S. auto manufacturing and counteract international competition, particularly from China and Mexico.
The 2024 Paris Olympics have been unforgettable, with stories that have both amazed and amused audiences around the world.
According to the Western Journal, the Netherlands’ Femke Bol secured gold in the 4x400m relay but it was her unique voice, reminiscent of Mickey Mouse, that captivated the public.
The Paris Olympics have given rise to numerous notable moments, from distinctive opening ceremonies to the widespread attention of athletes like Turkish sharpshooter Yusuf Dikec. However, it was Femke Bol, a 24-year-old athlete from the Netherlands, who stole the spotlight on Saturday. Bol’s remarkable performance in the 4x400m relay earned the Netherlands a hard-fought gold medal.
Following her gold medal run, Bol’s post-race interviews began to circulate widely. Audiences quickly noticed her voice, which bore an uncanny resemblance to the iconic sound of Mickey Mouse. Clips from the World Indoor Championships in March 2024, where Bol’s voice first caught public attention, have resurfaced and added to her fame.
Another notable instance was during the 2023 Oslo Diamond League. Bol, known for setting records, once again showcased her distinctive high-pitched voice. This characteristic has left many intrigued and amused.
Bol’s unusual voice is likely a result of Vocal Cord Dysfunction (VCD). According to Runner’s World, this condition occurs when the small muscles in the larynx remain closed during inhalation, making it difficult to breathe. Audience members have taken a light-hearted approach to this, making humorous comments on social media platforms.
One social media user drew a comparison to Algerian boxer Imane Khelif, who faced controversy but competed in the women's division in 2023. The comment humorously emphasized that Bol's voice, unlike Khelif's case, is clearly not influenced by male hormones or genetics.
The social media community has been abuzz with reactions to Bol’s voice. While a significant portion found humor in her situation, others expressed admiration for her incredible athletic skill. Outkick noted that the high-pitched voice in Bol's interviews is likely due to the physiological demands placed on her during competition.
Despite the amusing quirk, Bol’s dedication and athletic prowess have remained the main takeaway from her Olympic performance. She has proven herself as a talented runner and a sports personality with an unexpected charm.
The spotlight on her voice has not overshadowed Femke Bol’s athletic achievements. Her phenomenal effort in the 4x400m relay is a testament to her dedication and skill. The Netherlands’ victory was earned through grit and determination, qualities that Bol embodies.
As the Olympics continue highlighting extraordinary talents, Bol's story underscores the unique, personal aspects that make these events memorable. Her voice has become a point of endearment that complements her undeniable talent on the track.
In conclusion, the 2024 Paris Olympics have produced fascinating narratives, from memorable performances and controversies to endearing quirks. Femke Bol’s gold medal achievement and distinctive voice have created a story that is both amusing and inspiring.
Bol’s unique voice due to Vocal Cord Dysfunction has charmed many, providing a light-hearted yet compelling dimension to her Olympic triumph. While social media humor and commentary abound, the focus remains on her extraordinary athletic performance and the spirit of the Olympics.
Despite a lack of confirmation, speculations continue about a past relationship between Vice President Kamala Harris and Sharon Stone’s ex-husband, Phil Bronstein.
According to Daily Mail, the speculation about a previous romantic involvement between Kamala Harris and Phil Bronstein has persisted for many years without verification. Phil Bronstein, now 79, has steadfastly declined to comment on the matter.
A former official from San Francisco has stated they often saw Harris and Bronstein together and believed they were romantically involved. Bronstein and Harris have been acquainted since 2003, the same year his marriage to Sharon Stone ended following a Komodo dragon bite incident.
Bronstein and Harris were part of the same social network, frequently attending gatherings, such as at Tosca Café in 2004. An article penned by Bronstein in 2018 painted a picture of a young, focused Kamala Harris observing a pool game at the café.
In the 2018 piece, Bronstein described Harris as mysterious and analytical, a quiet, focused, and restrained observer. This evening took place when Harris was a political newcomer, only one year into her tenure as San Francisco's district attorney.
Despite the continuous rumors, Harris and Bronstein have never publicized any relationship, although they made occasional public appearances together, such as during the Project Avary dinner in 2008. Bronstein has provided mixed signals, refusing to comment directly on the speculation.
A Harris’s office staff member mentioned that while the rumors were known, Harris never discussed them. Meanwhile, Amelia Ashley-Ward, a close friend of Harris, expressed disbelief in the rumor, emphasizing that Harris would have confided in her. "I don’t know anything about any relationship she had with Phil Bronstein," Ashley-Ward said.
Other insiders also dismissed the possibility of a serious relationship between the two. One staffer from the DA’s office suggested Harris might have had a few dates with Bronstein but strongly doubted it was significant or prolonged.
Bronstein has consistently spoken positively about Harris. In a 2020 Q&A, he supported her vice-presidential candidacy, highlighting her integrity, strength, and commitment to social justice. He praised her multifaceted heritage, seeing its value for a political ticket in contemporary society and noting her potential to balance Joe Biden's perceived deficiencies.
By 2014, Harris had married Doug Emhoff after meeting him on a blind date the previous year. Bronstein, on the other hand, married Christine Borders and relocated to Hawaii with their two children.
Despite years of rumors, there hasn't been a single piece of solid evidence confirming any serious romantic relationship between Harris and Bronstein. The story remains a blend of speculation, occasional public sightings, and a few insiders' comments, with Bronstein and Harris themselves staying largely silent on their personal histories.
The pair met at social gatherings and were seen together at notable events such as the Project Avary dinner in 2008. Contradictory insider statements leave their rumored relationship as a persistent question mark.
Bronstein consistently praised Harris, advocating for her vice-presidential selection in 2020. Harris went on to marry Doug Emhoff, while Bronstein moved to Hawaii with his new wife and children. The rumors endure, lending an air of mystery to their past interactions.
When questioned about President Biden's Supreme Court reform proposals, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch voiced a stern warning about maintaining judicial independence.
During an interview with Fox News Sunday host Shannon Bream, Gorsuch discussed the importance of an independent judiciary and the complex U.S. legal system.
President Biden recently proposed several reforms, including implementing term limits, a code of conduct for justices, and restrictions on presidential immunity. These suggestions, revealed by a White House official in late July, aim to enhance accountability and transparency within the highest court.
Gorsuch refrained from delving deeply into Biden's proposals. He remarked, "I did not want to get into what is now a political issue during a presidential election year," emphasizing the need to avoid politicizing the judiciary. He cautioned about the delicate balance required to protect judicial independence, especially during periods of heightened political scrutiny.
Addressing the essence of judicial impartiality, Gorsuch highlighted its significance for all citizens, especially those facing government scrutiny.
He stated, "It's there for the moments when the spotlight's on you, when the government's coming after you. And don't you want a ferociously independent judge and a jury of your peers to make those decisions? Isn't that your right as an American? And so I just say, be careful."
Furthermore, Gorsuch's comments extended beyond the courtroom to discuss the broader implications of an independent judiciary. He referenced the need for Americans to trust one another and resolve differences outside of government intervention, echoing sentiments for a more community-focused approach to problem-solving.
Gorsuch turned the discussion to the overwhelming number of laws in the United States. He articulated that both citizens and government officials struggle to keep up with the extensive legal code. "We need laws to keep us free and safe, but having too many has resulted in people committing violations without even meaning to do something wrong," he explained.
In his book "Over Ruled: The Human Toll of Too Much Law," co-authored by Gorsuch, he elaborates on how the intricate web of legal requirements often ensnares ordinary Americans unintentionally. His critique underlined an ongoing concern where citizens inadvertently breach laws while attempting to lead regular lives.
To illustrate his point, Gorsuch cited issues with the IRS hotline, revealing, "It turns out for a period of time they were giving wrong answers about a third of the time." This example underscores the complexities within the tax code, highlighting a broader issue of accessibility and comprehensibility within U.S. laws.
In discussing potential conflicts with other branches of government, Gorsuch emphasized that his guiding principle remains the Constitution. "The answer is the Constitution," he stated unequivocally. His dedication to constitutional adherence anchors his judicial philosophy and approach to legal interpretations.
Gorsuch referenced a philosophy shared by his colleague, retired Justice Stephen Breyer, to bridge ideological divides. Gorsuch recalled, "My good friend [retired Justice] Stephen Breyer says, ‘If I listen to almost anyone talk for long enough, I’m gonna find something they say that we can agree on.' Maybe we should start there." This sentiment advocates for dialogues and finding common ground through conversation.
Justice Neil Gorsuch's comments on the proposed Supreme Court reforms come at a critical juncture. President Biden's suggestions aim to enhance accountability, but Gorsuch warns against politicizing the judiciary. He underscores the importance of judicial independence, the complexity of U.S. laws, and adherence to the Constitution in navigating conflicts. His reflections call for a balance between governmental oversight and community-driven problem-solving.
Law enforcement's failed pursuit reportedly allowed Thomas Matthew Crooks to fire shots at Donald Trump during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, resulting in multiple casualties.
Radio transmissions have revealed that a botched 29-minute hunt by law enforcement gave Crooks time to shoot at Trump, resulting in injuries to the former president, the death of supporter Corey Comperatore, and critical injuries to two others, as the Daily Mail reports.
Crooks was identified as a suspicious person at 5:42 pm by a counter sniper, who quickly lost sight of him near a structure known locally as the AGR building. Missing the opportunity to apprehend Crooks due to early communication lapses marked the start of a chaotic pursuit.
Sergeant Ed Lenz received the message two minutes later and used his cellphone to relay the details to a state trooper. Unfortunately, attempts by a local tactical team to send photos of Crooks stalled due to reportedly poor cell reception. By 5:49 pm, officers struggled further with downed internet and cell services, nullifying critical coordination with the Secret Service teams.
The Secret Service sniper teams were uninformed of Crooks’ suspicious activity due to the fractured communication chain and separate command posts. Miscommunication continued as Crooks' description was inaccurately passed along, hampering timely identification.
Crooks then advanced towards the Sheetz gas station, a vital location that was pinpointed by a sheriff’s deputy at 6:04 pm. He managed to climb onto the AGR building roof by exploiting an HVAC unit, eluding capture as minutes ticked by.
At 6:11 pm, an officer confirmed that Crooks was armed but struggled to take immediate action due to the shooter’s exacting position on the roof. Moments later, he was identified in white shorts by a local officer, sparking a race against time to prevent the tragic outcomes that followed.
The delay in contained action became apparent as another officer observed Crooks by a pine tree with a suspicious backpack. Despite numerous sighting reports, Crooks remained at large, resulting in a critical lapse in neutralizing the threat.
Prominent mishaps in communication, including missed messages and faulty player descriptions, culminated in a tragic confrontation where Crooks opened fire, wounding Trump and killing his supporter, Corey Comperatore.
In addition to the death of Comperatore, two others were critically injured in the frenzy, further intensifying the already dire situation.
The lapse in decisive response led to the resignation of Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle. The magnitude of the communication gaps and missteps during the 29-minute window illuminated glaring inefficiencies within the law enforcement's operational protocols. Reflecting on the encounter, the series of missed opportunities served as a stark reminder of the importance of cohesive and effective communication in high-stakes situations.
The tragic event of July 13 underscores the criticality of flawless coordination within various law enforcement departments, particularly in protecting high-profile figures during public gatherings. The resignation of Cheatle highlights a necessary overhaul within the Secret Service in response to this grave incident.
In retrospect, the disjointed attempts to relay crucial information about Crooks reveal a severely flawed system warranting immediate rectification. The 29-minute unsuccessful pursuit, fraught with technical and operational failures, ended with life-altering consequences for the victims and a nationwide call for improved law enforcement procedures.
A chilling discovery about an ancient Egyptian mummy has revealed the harrowing circumstances surrounding her death.
A study released on Friday delved into the gruesome demise of the so-called "Screaming Woman," who died in excruciating pain approximately 3,500 years ago, resulting in her mouth being left agape in her last moments, according to the Daily Caller.
The mummy, named the "Screaming Woman," was found to have suffered a cadaveric spasm upon her death, a condition where the body's muscles stiffen due to intense pain. This rare phenomenon resulted in her face frozen in a tormented scream. The study provided insights into her life and death, indicating she was about 48 years old at the time of her passing.
Researchers examined the mummification process, which revealed unusual methods. Dr. Sahar Saleem, a co-author of the study, highlighted that "the classic method of mummification in the New Kingdom [circa 1550 to 1070 B.C.] included the removal of all organs except the heart." However, in the case of the Screaming Woman, all organs were left intact, suggesting a unique burial practice.
The embalming substances used were of high quality, including juniper resin and frankincense, typically employed to deter insects and bacteria. Her preserved state, along with her dyed natural hair and wigs, suggested she was of considerable wealth and influence. The woman wore rings and elaborate wigs that further indicated her high status. These indicators of wealth pointed towards a significant societal position, potentially linked to her burial near prominent figures.
Her final resting place was near the tomb of Senenmut, a well-known architect and government official of the time. Given the proximity of their burials, it is speculated that the Screaming Woman might have been closely related to Senenmut. The family ties could potentially explain the luxurious embalming process and burial rituals.
Saleem remarked on the facial expression of the mummy, clarifying that "the mummy’s screaming facial expression in this study could be read as a cadaveric spasm, implying that the woman died screaming from agony." This phenomenon has historically been associated with violent deaths, such as assaults, suicides, and drownings.
Even though it is clear that she died in extreme pain, the specific cause of her death remains unknown. The lingering mystery around her demise has led researchers to consider several possible causes, including assault, suicide, drowning, or severe internal ailments.
The research underscores the significance of the Screaming Woman's unique mummification and burial. Using imported embalming substances and maintaining her organs inside the body indicate the possible importance and wealth of the individual. This method of embalming diverged sharply from the standard practices of her time.
Her ancient remains also demonstrated signs of health issues common in that era. Tooth attrition and joint degeneration were noted, which likely contributed to her suffering. However, these conditions would not alone account for the intense pain captured in her final expression.
The Screaming Woman's story adds a poignant layer to our understanding of ancient Egyptian burial rituals and social hierarchies. The extraordinary measures taken to preserve her body highlight a respect for her status and a desire to honor her in death.
As Saleem noted, the condition captured in the Screaming Woman's death is rare but can occur in various severe and traumatic circumstances. This insight invites further exploration into the exact details of her life and death. What remains clear is that her death was harrowing, and her legacy has been immortalized through both her burial and the recent scientific scrutiny.
The study shines a light on the methods and substances used in ancient Egyptian mummification, expanding our knowledge of their cultural practices. Despite the best efforts of modern science, the exact nature of her final moments remains a mystery, deepening the intrigue surrounding her life and death.
CNN has made a pivotal decision, ceasing the operations of its opinion section indefinitely.
According to The Hill, CNN has permanently closed its opinion section to reduce spending and improve its position in the media industry.
On Wednesday afternoon, specific writers were officially informed about this significant shift through email notifications. The email, sent by an opinion editor, briefly mentioned the closure but did not provide further elaboration. This left many contributors wondering about the detailed reasons behind the shutdown.
A senior executive at CNN confirmed that the decision to terminate the opinion section was taken at the beginning of the month. The confirmation corroborated a post written by journalist Claire Atkinson on her Substack, The Media Mix, which first detailed the closure.
The executive stated, "We did make the decision at the beginning of the month to sunset the opinion vertical on CNN.com; as a result, we will no longer have a standalone Opinion section."
The opinion section of CNN was renowned for offering a platform to a diverse array of voices. This included recent articles focused on diverse topics such as the upcoming 2024 presidential election, the Olympics, and the influence of Generation Z on social media.
Currently, the opinion section's homepage features a thought-provoking column by Veronica Goodman titled "Project 2025 is coming for our kids, too." This exemplifies the varied and impactful content that the section provided its readers.
The email from the opinion editor delivered the news succinctly: "Just a quick note to let you know that unfortunately CNN has decided to shut down the opinion section. I hope our paths cross elsewhere!" This left writers with questions but limited answers.
Efforts to curb spending and revive the network's standards are high on the agenda for CNN’s CEO Mark Thompson. Following a challenging year marked by widespread layoffs and declining ratings after Jeff Zucker’s departure, these actions aim to recalibrate the network's strategy and financial stability.
This decision is expected to have a noticeable impact on CNN's content strategy. For years, the opinion section served as a space for vibrant debates and thought-provoking pieces. By closing it, CNN might redirect these resources to other areas deemed more essential for its future success.
Despite this, many contributors and readers may feel the loss of a platform that provides a critical space for commentary and diverse perspectives. The end of the opinion section will mark a significant shift in how the network engages with its audience.
Claire Atkinson’s Substack post, which brought initial attention to the closure, highlighted this move as part of CNN's broader strategy to adapt and evolve in a changing media landscape. It underscores a transitional period for the network, faced with both challenges and opportunities.
To conclude, CNN has permanently shut down its opinion section as part of broader initiatives aimed at cost reduction and reestablishing the network’s reputation. This decision was communicated to writers through emails on Wednesday, with a senior executive confirming its finalization at the beginning of the month. The opinion section featured diverse content, including views on major topics like the 2024 presidential election, the Olympics, and the influence of Generation Z.
Former President Donald Trump is launching merchandise that is sparking interest and critique alike.
According to Newsweek, Trump began selling an upside-down American flag hat in May, coinciding with backlash against Justice Samuel Alito for flying the inverted flag at his Virginia home.
Trump's store has added a new piece of apparel: a hat with an upside-down American flag. The release comes at a contentious time, with Samuel Alito facing criticism for allegedly displaying an inverted flag at his home.
Following the 2020 presidential election, the inverted flag has surfaced as a symbol for Trump supporters. President Trump claimed the election was tainted by widespread fraud, although substantial evidence for such claims was never produced.
Justice Samuel Alito, who serves on the U.S. Supreme Court, became a focus of scrutiny after a report from The New York Times. On January 17, 2021, the newspaper indicated an upside-down flag was flown at Alito's Virginia residence.
Later, Alito claimed his wife had flown the flag briefly in response to derogatory language on a neighbor's yard signs. This incident has fed concerns about impartiality and perceived conflicts of interest regarding Trump-linked cases.
By definition, U.S. flag etiquette reserves the inverted display for moments of dire distress as a signal of extreme danger. Critics argue that Alito's involvement in such symbolism compromises judicial objectivity.
The hat, emblazoned with Trump's name upside down within an American flag emblem, has added another layer to the evolving debate. While the exact reference remains ambiguous, the symbol is no stranger to public consciousness associated with Trump and his supporters.
Linking further to this timeline, Citizens for Ethics noted that the new hat had made its way into the Trump store by May 30, 2024. This date closely follows the New York Times' publication concerning Alito’s flag episode.
The hat's product description plays on the notion of turning matters upside down, relating it to fostering creativity and action. It also emphasizes the hat's seasonality and limited edition status.
The inverted flag first became associated with Trump following his claims of a rigged 2020 election. He lost to President Joe Biden, but not without vocal accusations of electoral fraud—which remain unfounded.
Some supporters took to employing the inverted flag, an act that culminated with the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. The emblem became one of distress among Trump enthusiasts, claiming democracy itself was endangered.
Former President Trump introduced a hat featuring an upside-down American flag, stirring responses connecting it to pro-Trump symbolism and Justice Samuel Alito's flag controversy. The hat aligns with earlier periods of unrest surrounding the 2020 election and the January 6 riot, coupled with critical views on Alito's impartiality in handling Trump-related cases. This merchandise release mirrors ongoing dissent and reflections on American political and judicial landscapes.
Fox News reported that Vice President Kamala Harris has drawn significant criticism for equating certain Homeland Security agencies to the Ku Klux Klan and endorsing a debunked narrative about Border Patrol agents allegedly whipping migrants.
In November 2018, then-Senator Harris confronted Ronald Vitiello, President Trump’s nominee for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency, during a Senate hearing. Her statements have caused outrage among Homeland Security personnel and Republican lawmakers.
She questioned him about possible similarities between ICE and the KKK, citing a 2015 tweet where Vitiello had likened the Democratic Party to a "neo-Klanist" group. Vitiello expressed regret for his tweet.
Harris asked Vitiello about the perception that ICE uses its power to instill fear and intimidation, especially among Mexican and Central American communities. "Are you aware of the perception of many about how the power and discretion at ICE is being used to enforce the laws and do you see any parallels?" Harris questioned. Vitiello responded, "I do not see any parallels."
Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel accused Harris of exploiting the comparison for political gain. "Kamala Harris is trying to launch her 2020 campaign off of comparing ICE officers to the KKK, and it's absolutely disgusting," McDaniel tweeted.
In 2021, during a surge of Haitian migrants in Del Rio, Texas, Harris commented on images of Border Patrol agents on horseback allegedly whipping migrants. She expressed her support for an investigation, stating, "What I saw depicted about those individuals on horseback treating human beings the way they were was horrible."
Harris was "deeply troubled" by the images, comparing the treatment of the migrants to historic abuses against Indigenous and African American people during slavery. "It also invoked images of some of the worst moments of our history," she remarked.
However, a subsequent investigation revealed no evidence of agents whipping migrants, though minor infractions by the agents were noted. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas clarified, "Let me just correct you right there because actually the investigation concluded that the whipping did not occur."
Harris' comments caused a stir among Border Patrol agents who felt misunderstood. An anonymous agent voiced their frustration, saying, "Again, it is clear that those in charge, a term that is disgusting to use, have no clue about our operations and frankly operate by ignorance and unhinged emotions."
Despite the investigation's findings, Harris has not retracted her statements about the incident. She has also not responded to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.
Ronald Vitiello, who served as the acting ICE director, did not share Harris' view of the agency. During the 2018 hearing, he acknowledged the agency's controversial perception but rejected any comparison to the KKK. "I do not see any parallels," he firmly stated.
Harris questioned the agency's use of power, suggesting it invoked fear, especially in Mexican and Central American communities. She pressed Vitiello, "Sir, how can you be the head of an agency and be unaware of how your agency is perceived by certain communities?"
Vice President Kamala Harris has faced criticism for her controversial comparisons of ICE to the KKK and for supporting a narrative about Border Patrol agents whipping migrants that was later discredited. Her remarks have sparked outrage among Homeland Security personnel and Republicans, emphasizing the ongoing political divide over immigration policies in the U.S. Despite the backlash, Harris has not retracted her statements, positioning immigration as a potential focal point in her political future.