MMN Editor

President Donald Trump said Sunday that the military is constructing a “massive complex” beneath a planned White House ballroom, which he said will feature bulletproof glass and drone-proof protections while being funded entirely by private donors.The project, which Trump said is designed to accommodate large events and visiting dignitaries, would expand capacity at the White House, where he said existing rooms are too small for major gatherings.”The military is building a massive complex under the ballroom, and that’s under construction, and we’re doing very well,” Trump said. Trump said the underground construction is already underway and tied to broader security measures surrounding the site, describing the ballroom as serving a dual purpose tied to what is being built beneath it.DEMS MOVE TO SET LIMITS ON TRUMP’S DONOR-FUNDED WHITE HOUSE BALLROOM, CLAIMING ‘BRIBERY IN PLAIN SIGHT’The ballroom itself will include a range of security upgrades, including reinforced materials and structural protections designed to guard against modern threats.”We have all bulletproof glass. We have drone-proof roofs, ceilings,” Trump said. “Everything is drone-proof and bulletproof, and unfortunately, we’re living in an age where that’s a good thing.”Trump said the project is being privately funded and will not rely on taxpayer dollars, emphasizing that the ballroom is being financed through personal contributions and outside donors.FEDERAL JUDGE QUESTIONS TRUMP AUTHORITY ON WHITE HOUSE BALLROOM PROJECTThe ballroom proposal was approved in February by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, which fast-tracked the roughly $400 million project following a unanimous vote of 6-0.The project will be built on the site of the former East Wing, which was demolished in October, and is expected to significantly expand the White House’s capacity for large events.Previous administrations have long relied on temporary structures to host major gatherings, as the old East Wing dining room had just a 200-seat capacity.MICHELLE OBAMA TAKES SWIPE AT TRUMP’S DEMOLITION OF WHITE HOUSE EAST WING”All of the money paid is paid by myself and donors…it’s all donors,” Trump said. “There’s not one dime of government money going into the ballroom.”He added that construction is progressing quickly and remains on track, describing the effort as both ahead of schedule and under budget as work continues.”We’re ahead of schedule and under budget,” Trump said.Trump also described the ballroom as being designed to match the look and scale of the White House, including its height and architectural style, calling it a tribute to the historic building.”I think it’ll be the greatest ballroom anywhere in the world,” Trump said. “It pays total homage to the White House, which is, I think, very important.”

A team with perennial Stanley Cup aspirations, the Vegas Golden Knights have countered a late-season swoon with a surprising coaching change, dismissing Bruce Cassidy.

Gaming is getting more expensive, and everyone is feeling the pinch.Sony (SONY) said it will raise U.S. prices for the PlayStation 5 lineup starting April 2. The standard PS5 will cost $649.99, the Digital Edition will cost $599.99, and the PS5 Pro will cost $899.99. At the same time, Microsoft (MSFT) is already charging $29.99 a month for Xbox Game Pass Ultimate.That is why a new report about Game Pass is turning heads. GameSpot, citing The Information, said new Microsoft Gaming CEO Asha Sharma is aiming for new methods to make Xbox products, including Game Pass, more appealing to a larger set of users. One idea that is being considered is cheaper Game Pass tiers.That is the key point for both readers and investors. Microsoft has not confirmed that it is launching ads in Game Pass. What is reportedly under consideration is lower-priced options for Game Pass. The ad-supported angle is still a possible next step. However, that is not the confirmed takeaway.Why this story mattersGamers are looking for cheaper ways to play.Microsoft is investigating how to grow Game Pass.Sony’s higher PS5 prices may give Xbox an opening.A cheaper Game Pass tier will appeal to both budget-conscious users and investors on the lookout for user growth.Microsoft is chasing a simple ideaThis story is easiest to understand through one word: value.When Microsoft hired Asha Sharma, the tech giant was very happy and said she had experience building global platforms and aligning business models with long-term value. That matters now because Game Pass is no longer the no-brainer bargain it once seemed to be.Related: Sony hikes prices for the PS5 and PS5 ProFor many players, monthly subscription costs are building up. A cheaper Game Pass plan could be an easy way for Microsoft to keep Xbox appealing at a time when consumers are looking to make sure that they do not lose too many dollars.For investors, the logic is also simple. A lower-priced option could bring more people into the Xbox ecosystem, even if everyone ends up paying for the most expensive tier. That could help Microsoft grow its reach first and worry about upselling later.What a cheaper Game Pass tier could look likeA lower monthly price with fewer perksSome games won’t be available on day one.Limited access to cloud gamingAn option with adsA package that comes with another subscription, like Netflix.An important thing to note; the ad-supported option does not mean each and every tier of this package is coming.The ad-supported idea is getting attentionThe part of the story that gets the most attention is a possible ad-supported initiative.

Microsoft may make Game Pass cheaper, but there’s a catchPhoto by picture alliance on Getty Images

Earlier reporting has linked Microsoft to the idea of letting players watch ads. What do they get in exchange? Free or cheaper access to some Game Pass content. Console gamers are used to paying for a high-quality experience with few ads, so this would be a big change for them.Related: Microsoft drops support for key devicesThe report also said Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters is under discussions concerning the possible bundle ideas with Sharma. That is an important matter because it shows Microsoft may be considering doing something beyond a basic cheaper tier and looking at bigger subscription bundle ideas.What readers should understand about the ad rumorA cheaper Game Pass tier is the main idea under consideration.An ad-supported Game Pass version has not been confirmed.A Netflix-Xbox bundle has not been confirmed either.The main idea is that Microsoft might want a pricing model that is more flexible.For everyday readers, the takeaway is very simple. Microsoft may be trying to make gaming feel more affordable again.The message to stockholders is just as clear: if Microsoft can get more people to use Game Pass, it could help the Xbox business stay valuable in the long run.Sony’s price hike gives Microsoft an openingThis is where Sony plays a crucial role in the narrative.When PlayStation hardware gets more expensive, Microsoft holds a tremendous opportunity to look more consumer-friendly. Related: Samsung pulls off a stunning Galaxy S26 shockerXbox could tell gamers that they don’t need to spend as much up front to stay in a console ecosystem if they offer a cheaper Game Pass option.That might be the most important thing in the whole story. Microsoft might not be able to win by lowering the prices of its consoles a lot, but it could still compete by making the subscription side cheaper.What investors should watch nextIf Microsoft officially says anything about lower-priced Game Pass tiersIf the company talks about ads at allIf Netflix and Xbox ever make a dealWhether Sony’s higher PS5 prices will make more gamers who care about value switch to XboxWhether Game Pass growth becomes a bigger talking point under Asha SharmaThe consumer case is simple: if gaming keeps getting more expensive, players will be more likely to try a cheaper option.The case for investing is also simple: if Microsoft makes Game Pass cheaper, it might get more people to use it, which would make the Xbox ecosystem stronger over time.That doesn’t mean success, and Microsoft hasn’t said anything about a new tier yet. But it does make this rumor worth keeping an eye on.Related: Apple just got a brutal iPhone 18 warning

TheStreet aims to feature only the best products and services. If you buy something via one of our links, we may earn a commission.Why we love this dealWe’re all so busy, so we especially love products that are easy and convenient. As you’re preparing for spring cleaning, you can save yourself time as you’re giving your bedroom a refresh with a new bedding set. Luckily for you, we found a limited-time deal on a 7-piece bedding set – sheets, comforter, pillowcases – everything you need to refresh your bed, all in one simple package. With this sale, you’ll get everything you need for a spring reset for your bed for less than $4 a piece. The Velorose 7-Piece Bedding Set is just $27 right now at Amazon, down 31% from its regular price of $39. Shop before this limited-time deal ends to get your new sheets and comforter at an amazingly affordable price. If you’re looking for another reason to add this set to your cart besides its affordable price tag, it’s important to note that it has fewer returns than similar items and customers usually keep it. Velorose 7-Piece Bedding Set, $27 (was $39) at Amazon

Courtesy of Amazon

Shop at AmazonWhy do shoppers love it?This set includes everything you need for a beautiful, color-coordinated bed. Say goodbye to mismatched bedding when you upgrade to this matching set. The best sale price of $26 for a queen set is the black bedding, for a classic dark look, but you can also get it in a few other colors if you don’t mind spending a few dollars more. It’s also available in beige, dark gray, navy, Emerald Green, pink, red, and white. And if you’re shopping for multiple beds in the house, the manufacturer also has this set in other mattress sizes, including twin, twin XL, full, and king – just make sure to check for color availability and know that the pricing varies, yet many other options also have a deal offer right now. Shoppers love the thickness of the comforter, saying it keeps them warm without being too hot, making it perfect to use all year round. One shopper called it a “Soft, stylish queen bed-in-a-bag set that works year-round.” They continued, “The fabric feels soft and breathable, and the comforter has a nice balance of warmth without feeling too heavy, making it comfortable for all seasons. It doesn’t make noise when moving around at night, which is a small detail but definitely appreciated.” Many other shoppers agree that it is so soft, with one saying it is “soft and fluffy” and others noting that it is very comfortable. Many other shoppers note that the corners of the fitted sheet don’t fall off during the night while you move around. It’s designed with deep pockets to fix mattresses from 10 to 14 inches thick. One shopper said, “It is so soft, and the fitted sheet went on so smoothly. It didn’t slip or slide and remained taut in place. Great value.”Related: Amazon’s ‘lightweight’ 7-piece comforter set is ‘perfect for spring’ and the 19 colors start at $30When it comes to cleaning, this set is machine washable for easy care. The manufacturer recommends washing it separately. You simply run it on the gentle cycle using cold water. To dry, tumble on low heat. Details to knowMaterial: 100% polyester. Care: Machine wash.  Set includes: Comforter, flat sheet, fitted sheet, two pillowcases, and two pillow shams. This set ships in a vacuum-sealed bag, so when you first get it, you’ll need to fluff it back out. The manufacturer recommends either throwing it in your dryer on low heat or air drying it in the sun and then gently tapping it to get it back to its perfect shape and fluffiness. Shop more deals Jollyvogue 2-Pack Queen Pillows, $18 (was $28) at AmazonUtopia Bedding 2-Pack Down Alternative Pillows, $29 at AmazonOsbed 2-Pack Cooling Adjustable Pillows, $39 (was $47) at AmazonThis great deal on a complete bedding set won’t last forever, so pick up the Velorose 7-Piece Bedding Set while it’s available at the low, affordable price of just $27 at Amazon for a limited time. 

Some presidents define their political party for generations. Even today, nearly four decades after he left office, you’ll still find many who self-identify as “Reagan Republicans.” While President Franklin Delano Roosevelt once had that sway over Democrats, one cannot say the same of his cousin and predecessor, Theodore Roosevelt, for Republicans.
Why, then, do so many young conservatives look to the Bull Moose as a guidepost?
I went to the America First Antitrust Forum to find out. Hosted by The (fittingly-named) Bull Moose Institute, the forum sought to elucidate what “America First antitrust action mean[s] in practice?”
The question is a fair one. Like “tariffs” and “protectionism,” one might have been forgiven in the pre-Trump era for considering “antitrust” as another progressive-era oddity without any relevance in modern policy. As with so much else, the rise of President Donald Trump in 2016 shattered the existing political consensus and ushered in an era of new possibilities. Or, in this case, old possibilities.
How are the new antitrusters going to fare after the Trump administration?
Unusually, though, the rise of the conservative antitrusters was driven not so much by Trump, but by his adversaries. After the shock of Hillary Clinton’s defeat wore off, liberal conventional wisdom curdled around an explanation of what happened. It was not that a critical mass of voters in key swing states, having considered both candidates, had found the Democrat wanting. The left writ large concluded, instead, that Americans had been tricked by Russian disinformation and social media “fake news,” a term that would later be appropriated by Trump as an invective against the mainstream media.
Liberal institutions, therefore, resolved to never let that happen again. A previously laissez-faire approach to content moderation began to tilt further and further to the left. Conservative viewpoints as such became subject to censorship, and those who regularly espoused them were often banned. It can be easy to forget now, but back then, “cancellation” meant being banned simultaneously from most or all of the big platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, and, as it was called at the time, Twitter. Payment processors often followed suit. You were, effectively, unpersoned.
Conservatives were caught flatfooted. On the one hand, it was plain that liberal institutions were coordinating to push them out of public life. On the other hand, support for limited government and free markets had been a cornerstone of the American right for a generation. Intense debate followed about what should be done.
The answer that won out was “something” — be that reforming or repealing Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, designating certain social media sites as public utilities, a prohibition on the Biden administration’s “jawboning” of social media sites over purported misinformation, or more vigorous antitrust enforcement. It became difficult to see the point in having a First Amendment if, in practice, it was becoming almost impossible for conservatives to exercise it where many of the most important conversations were happening.
The reply, mostly facetious from liberals and mostly naive from libertarian-minded conservatives, was often “build your own Twitter.” However, the dominance of liberal institutions and their willingness to act as an ideological cartel meant that that proves difficult. The case in point was that of Parler, a Trump-friendly social media network that exploded in popularity amid a series of “deplatformings” after the 2020 presidential election. The site’s launch was derailed when Amazon Web Services, the internet’s premier web-hosting service, blacklisted them, citing the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol Riot. Parler eventually found a new web hosting service, but they had missed their lightning in the bottle moment. The damage had been done.
It’s in this context that one needs to consider the trust busters of the new right. Even after Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter in 2022, the reelection of Trump in 2024, and the associated “vibe shift” against cancel culture, many conservatives have not forgotten how things had been allowed to get to that point. Aiden Buzzetti, President of the Bull Moose Project, told The American Spectator that “more conservatives are becoming familiar with the argument that market power and corporate consolidation can be just as big a threat to liberty as ‘big government.’” While it may have started with speech and tech, the new antitrusters are fully prepared to apply that philosophy consistently throughout the economy.
These are not the marginal figures that once debated social media censorship. In Trump 2.0, they’re making policy. One of the speakers was Andrew N. Ferguson, the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, the government body tasked with enforcing antitrust law. Mark Meador, another FTC commissioner, also addressed the room.
But for all of that history, Ferguson and the other speakers seemed oddly understated. The message seemed, at once, ultra-MAGA and anodynely centrist. They championed a muscular, America-first outlook that would prioritize American citizens above all others … by charting a course in-between those who wanted unbridled markets at the expense of justice, and those who would strangle economic prosperity in the name of unfairness. They touted an aggressive strategy of enforcing existing antitrust law by combatting deceptive business practices and monopolies. Substantively, it was the sort of thing it wouldn’t have been out of bounds to hear a moderate Republican or even a moderate Democrat say.
Or, perhaps, not even a moderate Democrat. One lawmaker singled out for praise at the forum was California state Sen. Scott Wiener. While Wiener might be considered a moderate by San Francisco standards, by any other metric, he reads as far to the left. What garnered him this praise was his Blocking Anticompetitive Self-preferencing by Entrenched Dominant platforms (BASED) Act. The creatively-named proposal would curb anti-competitive behavior by big tech by forbidding companies over a certain size from favoring their own products over those of competitors.
How are the new antitrusters going to fare after the Trump administration? The most plausible Republican 2028 presidential hopefuls, Vice President J.D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, are both sympathetic to the new right’s economic vision; Buzzetti told The American Spectator that Vance was “the closest, if I had to pick one.” By contrast, there are other Republicans “like … Mike Pence, who are in denial about how the right’s view of antitrust has shifted, but if you look at the 2028 polls, you can see that they’re relatively marginal.”
But what if the Democrats retake power in 2028? At first glance, that might prove an opportunity for the Pences of the world to reassert themselves. But unless liberals have recanted the “deplatforming” craze by then, they might well recreate the censorship-industrial-complex that gave rise to the new right’s new trust-busters in the first place.
READ MORE from Stephan Kapustka:
Why Are Virginia Democrats Suddenly Nervous About the Redistricting Amendment?
Did Illinois Dems Just Rebuke Wokeness?
Everything’s Bigger in Texas, Including Primary Battles

A welcomed new development has occurred in the field of journalism and in society in general: the rise of the citizen journalist. These are ordinary citizens (all young people) who, using the simple technology at hand, do what journalists — whether conservative or liberal or libertarian — should be doing, which is going out on the street and, either uncovering crime and malignant bureaucracies, or going to protests and persistently asking hard questions of the participants. The phenomenon has become an institutional-less institution.
This is the opposite of what most of the journalists in newspapers, television networks, and political websites, not to mention local news outlets, are doing. The staff in these established institutions have gotten into the habit of simply staying in their comfortable offices scouring for news by combing through the wires or internet for something that they might use.
An additional benefit is that citizen journalists upload their stories, op-eds, interviews and investigations directly onto the internet, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, etc. (Instagram in my opinion is the best because it does the least censorship), without hoping for a gatekeeping editor’s approval to run their stories. But, more importantly, since all of the regular news establishments tend to have the effect of preaching to the choir, unpleasant facts and stories are not spiked (which is always the case with liberal outlets), but will randomly crop up when surfing the net and people who live in a bubble will be exposed to facts.
James O’Keefe
The first, and best known, of these citizen journalists is James O’Keefe. He first became famous in America with his hilarious ACORN expose. Through Project Veritas, and with the use of undercover videos, he went on to engage in undercover recordings of infamous individuals, almost all of them leftists, and undeniably disgusting. There was Michael Beller, the PBS principal lawyer, who dreamed of putting Trump voters in re-education camps (not the only leftist to dream of doing so). People who worked in Facebook bragged about censoring conservatives. Charlie Chester, a CNN director, was recorded admitting that the network engaged in propaganda during Trump’s first presidency, that it can be used to mold people’s minds, and how to do it. The same occurred with Google (remember, all these institutions claimed to be impartial).
The encouraging results from Shirley’s expose has helped to bring attention to other citizen journalists who are uncovering local sponsored fraud.
Matthew Rosenberg, a correspondent with the New York Pravda (Times) laughed at his colleagues’ pretentious claims of being “traumatized” over January 6. There was the Bernie Sanders campaign organizer who thought the Soviet Union’s concentration camps were a good thing. There was also the recording of election fraud in Minneapolis among the Somali immigrants, which was linked to Ilhan Omar (the New York Pravda ran cover for the Somalis). O’Keefe also infiltrated the anti-ICE groups in Minnesota. And many other stories.
Needless to say, he became anathema to liberals. When Twitter was run by Communists in pre-Musk days, Project Veritas was first defunded then removed. Biden’s FBI ransacked the homes of O’Keefe and others working in Project Veritas. He sued and was sued by the New York Pravda and others, always winning (thanks partly due to having the financial backing to withstand the onslaught).
Andy Ngo and Nick Shirley
Andy Ngo was another citizen journalist who specialized in covering Antifa’s criminal activities and lack of repercussions from the Democrat establishment in the northwest. For this, he was put in the hospital by those Communists. As usual, the liberals blamed the victim.
Whereas it seemed like O’Keefe and Ngo were alone, we now see an army of citizen journalists. Nick Shirley recently skyrocketed to fame by exposing the gargantuan fraud being committed by the Somali Muslims in Minneapolis. Which, admittedly, was not difficult because they were operating in the open (Quality Learing Center), with the backing of the Democrats. The  Somalis were also scamming millions from the public through a Feeding Our Future program. His videos are eye-opening. And infuriating.
Trials of the involved criminals have resulted in convictions, including an attempt by Somalis to bribe a juror. No Democrat officials have been arrested, despite the evidence.
Gov. Tim Walz implied that the citizen journalist’s efforts at uncovering fraud was due to “white supremacy.” We can now understand why the Democrat elites chose Walz to run as Vice-President; next to Walz, Kamala Harris sounded intelligent.
Shirley’s mother came to her son’s defense, stating, “Tim Walz knew this was going on, and instead of doing anything about it, he calls people who are trying to call it out, like my son Nick Shirley, a white supremacist. They’re not saying, ‘Thank you for showing this. Thank you for showing what’s going on.’ Instead, we’re called white supremacists because we’re trying to save our country.”
Shirley then followed up the issue of fraud by going to California, where he revealed daycare and hospice fraud by foreigners to the tune of $170 million (one of these supposed hospices was in a car wash). Estimates of the fraud could reach into the billions. Again, this was out in the open; the Democrats aided and abetted it; that is why the fraud was so easy to find; there was no need to hide it, the fraudsters had Democrats’ protection.
It is interesting that local newspapers started reporting the fraud after Shirley, and they credited him. They should be asking themselves why didn’t they uncover the obvious fraud long ago? Or even now.
As with O’Keefe, Shirley has been attacked. Governor Newsom ridiculed him, portraying him as a pedophile, instead of praising him, not too surprising considering he is a Democrat who traveled and partied while the rest of the state was in lockdown during covid. “He’s literally working to support the fraudsters,” said Shirley of Newsom. “Meanwhile, he could be working to expose the fraud.” Democratic Sen. John Fetterman criticized Newsom for the tasteless post. There have also been death threats by leftists, not so farfetched when we see other citizen journalists being physically attacked by groups of Antifa, the totalitarian paramilitary branch of the Democratic Party.
At any rate, to date, 280 hospice licenses have been revoked. And J. D. Vance was appointed by Trump to lead the war on fraud. Hopefully, convictions will follow. And deportations.
Incidentally, it should become obvious that Somalis had to have had help to carry out these intricate, yet obvious, fraud.
More Citizen Journalists Are Stepping Up
The encouraging results from Shirley’s expose has helped to bring attention to other citizen journalists who are uncovering local sponsored fraud and other things that Democrats wished would stay hidden.
There is Malia Marks in Democrat-controlled Seattle, who has uncovered fraudulent day care centers by foreigners who are raking in taxpayer money. One investigator, going by the moniker Muckraker, found election fraud in New York. The people posting Libs of Tik Tok found a wild eyed school librarian calling for the assassination of Trump. Karlyn Borysenko discovered that many Antifa terrorists hold day jobs, including teaching where they indoctrinate students into becoming Communists.
Savanah Hernandez in New York City revealed a black market being carried out by immigrants, resulting in arrests. Nick Sortor found an Antifa safe house in Portland, a city run by Democrats. Angela Rose and an assistant decided to investigate a winery supposedly owned by Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, perhaps one reason she has become a multimillionaire.
Tyler Oliveira investigated Hassidic Jews who are milking the welfare system in New York; some of them have been arrested for welfare fraud. Cam Higby was able to intercept and broadcast an anti-ICE group’s efforts to obstruct law enforcement. He was previously attacked by a leftist.
James Klug does no undercover work, to my knowledge, but just as effective he goes where leftists congregate and asks them questions, which makes their brains have convulsions.
Overseas
In the UK, citizen journalist Tommy Robinson has been covering the crimes of the Pakistani rapists that the Labour government is importing and protecting as well as other crimes. For his efforts, he has been censored and thrown in prison by the government (along with many political prisoners).
In Russia, citizen journalists are being stamped out by Putin’s dictatorship. One such citizen journalist, Pavel Talankin,  had to emigrate to show what was happening in schools.
We Need More Citizen Journalists
See how effective citizens can be when they get involved instead of waiting for the government to “do something!”? In today’s zeitgeist, their work is vital.
READ MORE from Armando Simón:
Echoes of Cuba in Caracas
The Nobel Peace Prize Hits Rock Bottom
Reminder: Voter Fraud Needs Our Attention
Armando Simón is the author of Very Peculiar Stories and When Evolution Stops.
 
 

A new movie, The Story of Everything, opens in over 1,000 theaters nationwide April 30.   According to the synopsis posted at the movie web site:
The Story of Everything is a cinematic exploration of the cosmos that reveals the hidden hand behind our universe. From the precise laws that govern the stars to the intricate patterns found in every living cell, the film traces evidence of intentional design throughout nature. Whether examining distant star-forming clouds or the spiral structure of DNA, we discover a consistent signature woven into the fabric of existence.
The new movie is based on the 2021 best seller, Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries that Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe,” by Stephen Meyer, director of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture.
The three scientific discoveries of Meyer’s book title are:
1) The Universe Had a Beginning
A great deal of evidence indicates that the universe (space, time, matter, and energy) came into existence from nothing about 14 billion years ago.  Since there were no natural causes before nature came into existence, we cannot hope to ever find a “natural” explanation for this “big bang.”
Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity showed that a beginning was theoretically possible, and other scientists discovered powerful evidence of such a beginning.  But if it is hard to imagine that the universe had a beginning, it is equally hard to imagine that it did not. For example, if the universe were infinitely old, shouldn’t all stars have burned out long ago, as hydrogen fused into helium and heavier elements?  How long ago — a quadrillion years ago?  Why not long before that?
2) The Laws and Constants of the Universe Are ‘Fine-tuned’ For Life
The universe that came into being from nothing is not arbitrary but is exquisitely tuned to allow life to exist and flourish. It is now known that the values of many basic physical constants, such as the strengths of the four fundamental forces, the masses and charges of the basic particles of physics, the speed of light, and Planck’s quantum physics constant, had to be almost exactly what they are in order for any conceivable form of life to exist in our universe.
As the late physicist Stephen Hawking wrote, “the remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life.”
3) The Secret of Life Is the Information Within Living Things
Perhaps the best way to get an idea of the incredible complexity of every living cell, and what Meyer means by the “information” contained in living things, is to watch this episode “Secrets of the Cell: with Michael Behe. Or watch some or all of videos 3,4,5,6,10 of the video series produced by Michael Kent, a recently retired bio-scientist from Sandia Laboratories in Albuquerque.
Kent’s videos 1 and 2 deal with the other two discoveries discussed in Meyer’s book, the big bang and the fine-tuning of the laws and constants of our universe, and of the initial conditions at the big bang.
In his introductory video Kent says of his “recent discoveries,” which include the three discussed in Meyer’s 2021 book and thus in the new movie:
These are discoveries of science that are not controversial. They are findings of science that are very strongly supported. Scientists may disagree about the implications or the conclusions to make from these findings, but there is little or no debate about the discoveries themselves…. At the core of this debate is the question of how much evidence is needed for one to be convinced of design. For some people, those committed to materialism, no amount of evidence could ever be enough.  But I don’t think that’s true for most people.
The trailer at the movie web site is designed more to stimulate interest than to inform, but a glance at the cast, which includes Stephen Meyer, Michael Behe, James Tour, John Lennox, David Berlinski, and Peter Thiel, makes it clear that this will be a powerful and influential film. Look for it in a theater near you, April 30-May 6.
If you don’t have the time or opportunity to see The Story of Everything but can spare seven minutes, I recommend  A Mathematician’s View of Evolution. This short video makes what I believe to be the strongest argument of all for design, by simply looking at what you have to believe to not believe in intelligent design.
READ MORE from Granville Sewell:
What Science Now Knows — and the Public Rarely Hears
A Mathematician’s View of Evolution
What is the Scientific Theory of Intelligent Design?
 
 

This column doesn’t make a practice of picking fights with other columnists. But once in a while, as I did with Fox News personality Andy Napolitano about a year ago, someone writes a column that is so off base that I feel compelled to respond. Mr. Napolitano was feted in Moscow by Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov and by Alexander Dugin, Mr. Putin’s philosopher and close adviser. He was taken in by them and believed everything they told him. Which was entirely false.
Such is the case with the column written by Mr. Steve Cortes in RealClearPolitics on Saturday.
Mr. Cortes paints a picture of President Trump’s burden and opportunity to bring peace to Ukraine. Mr. Cortes recounts how Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky first investigated and then exiled Gen. Valeri Zaluzhnyi. Mr. Cortes, a pollster, then relies on some of his own polls to conclude that U.S. voters want us to end the “quagmire conflict” in Ukraine. He adverts that the Ukrainian people deserve a new election but that cannot be done, he writes, without Mr. Trump creating a cease-fire or possibly a peace treaty.
First, Gen. Zaluzhnyi was “exiled” to serve as Ukraine’s ambassador to the United Kingdom — a key partner providing much of Ukraine’s weaponry. How is that a demotion?
Second, is this a quagmire conflict for the United States? It absolutely isn’t because we have no boots on the ground nor any airpower engaged in the war.
Third, Mr. Cortes avoids any discussion of the other party to this war, Russia, which has control of how the war will end.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said in 2005 that the fall of the Soviet Union was “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [20th] century.” Mr. Putin wants nothing more than to reassemble the old Soviet empire by force or other means.
Mr. Putin is, as I’ve written as many times, a “Duganist,” i.e., a follower of Russian philosopher (and I use the term loosely) Alexander Dugin. Mr. Dugin has written, in his Foundations of Geopolitics, that unless Ukraine is returned to Russian rule, Mr. Putin may as well not bother to try to try to reassemble the rest of the Soviet empire because it will be impossible.
Mr. Putin has no desire for peace in Ukraine and he, above any other participant in the war, gets the decisive vote.
Mr. Cortés is entitled to his opinions. But he needs to back up those opinions with the facts of the Ukraine war.
About ten days ago, Russia hit Ukraine with some 948 drone attacks in a single day, the largest such attack since the Russian war of aggression on Ukraine began in February 2022. (That is according to The Economist magazine which has an abiding dislike for Mr. Trump.)
Russia’s economy is on a war footing. Iran has a factory in Russia to manufacture drones. Iran may be diverting some of the drones to its own war. According to several reports, Russia is providing Iran with intelligence to help it attack and kill Americans.
Mr. Trump, as he should be, is preoccupied with the war in Iran. His war efforts and his best negotiators are trying to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions. They won’t succeed unless there is regime change in Iran.
How Mr. Trump is supposed to create a peace or even a cease-fire Mr. Cortes doesn’t say.
What compromises could Mr. Trump make to end the war in Ukraine? Mr. Putin isn’t interested in compromise. He wants to win the war and is exceptionally unlikely to engage in negotiations that would stop the war unless Ukraine concedes much of its territory and, even then, Russia would have the opportunity to rearm and relaunch its war of conquest in Ukraine.
As Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said, “Ukraine is not America’s war — and yet we’ve contributed more to that fight than any other country in the world.” It is a European war and the NATO nations and the European Union are content to let it continue as a stalemate rather than engage their diplomats in trying to end it. They are content to let it go on unless and until Mr. Trump causes a cease-fire or peace deal. Once again, they — and Mr. Cortes — want us to take on a responsibility that isn’t ours.
Mr. Cortes is entitled to his opinions. But he needs to back up those opinions with the facts of the Ukraine war. He needs to include in those opinions more than hope that Mr. Trump can make a deal for a cease-fire or any sort of peace.
If Mr. Trump could wave a magic wand and create peace in Ukraine he would have done so by now. It’s not within the realm of possibility while Mr. Putin objects to any semblance of peace.
READ MORE from Jed Babbin:
Straits of Uncertainty
The Missing Definition of Victory in Iran
The First Week of Mission: Iran
 
 
 
 
 

Here’s a simple truth. The modern Left hates America and loves the Third World. So much so, they want America to be the Third World. And judging by the blue state of Democrat-run cities, they’ve mostly succeeded.
Twenty years ago, the thought of children walking past filthy drug-ridden homeless encampments to get to school would have disgusted members of both major parties. Today, it’s a daily routine in LA, San Francisco, Seattle, Chicago, and other once great burgs. Likewise, the idea of people voting without showing IDs — after a Democrat Administration basically invited 21 million illegal aliens into the country — is opposed by 83 percent of Americans, including the majority of minorities. But Dem politicians are ready to die on that hill, to the point of infantilizing blacks and women as too stupid to attain proper identification.
“It’s Jim Crow 2.0,” drones soulless Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, contradicting his own position in the saner 1990s: “Everywhere people go, they’re asked for a Social Security card. In fact, one way to prove you’re a bona fide person who can have a job is to ask for a driver’s license and a Social Security card.”
Yet blacks and women will overwhelmingly vote for that party, and not the one that treats them as competent adults. Because both groups have succumbed to 65 years of relentless, divisive Marxist propaganda — that whites have it in for blacks and men for women — initially fed by academia and media, then cemented by the government in the service of feminism.
Highly paid advertising executives greenlit the same attitudinal commercials putting men in traditional female roles.
In the case of black people, LBJ’s Great Society devastated their once strong nuclear family by displacing fatherhood — a feminist dream. But as destructive as this was, it paled before the abomination that was Roe v. Wade, which sanctioned the slaughter of 65 million unborn babies. In fact, of the Left’s three-legged stool — racism, homophobia, feminism — only feminism remains standing, firmly enough to dominate American society in the 21st Century.
Racism never took permanent hold for the simple reason it’s a total fabrication. White people don’t hate blacks (there are exceptions for everything). They don’t even think about race. Unlike Democrat leaders riding the chimera of white supremacy. With their zenith being the canonization of degenerate criminal George Floyd, the political imprisonment of policeman Derek Chauvin, and the grift of Black Lives Matter. As for homophobia, liberal gays beclowned themselves by pretending they could just switch sexes, to the point of male pregnancy.
But feminism survived, and thrived. It made women crazy — enough to replace maternal fulfillment with ideological fanaticism, like harassing ICE agents in the middle of a dangerous operation to capture criminal illegal aliens, AKA Democratic voters. Their own voting has damaged this country, by electing incompetent losers of both sexes who have made their lives less safe.
Just ask Sheridan Gorman. Wait, you can’t. She was murdered earlier this month by an illegal alien scumbag the Biden people caught at the border and released into the country. Chicago Democratic Alderwoman Maria Hadden had a simpler explanation for the horror. “They might have unintentionally startled this person at the end of the pier, unintentionally.” Put aside any doubt you may have about Hadden’s qualification for high government office. She earned the position, according to the feminist rulebook. She’s the first openly queer Black woman elected to the Chicago City Council.
Politically, I can do very little about feminism damaging the country, other than vote for sane, intelligent conservative candidates. But culturally, I might make a difference. My field — arts and entertainment — is controlled by hack agenda-driven women, and their beta male sycophants. Together, they have ruined the screen industry and diminished literature. Because their goal in both areas is not storytelling, which they lack the talent for, but brainwashing, for which they also lack the talent.
Case in point: two commercials running on Fox News, that I couldn’t pin down for this article. The first one is a laxative ad featuring a nervous man in the bathroom cowering about the solution he must take — until his serene Asian wife explains to him the safety of the product. The other is a wife asking her husband what international cuisine he prefers for dinner, and he shoots down each of her suggestions.
I mostly ignore commercials — other than note the steep drop in quality from the Mad Men era — but subconsciously it hit me. Highly paid advertising executives greenlit the same attitudinal commercials putting men in traditional female roles. No real man in the universe would simper to his wife about taking his toilet medicine. And the cliché, “It’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind,” no longer applies to women but to indecisive little men.
Switch the genders to reflect truth, and you’d have women with sad lives, AKA feminists, wasting theirs on protesting the ads. While normal men and women will do what they always do — not buy the product. They won’t even muster the interest to boycott it as they did Bud Lite. It’s too insignificant, though the feminists who made the commercials were probably proud of themselves for their jabs at manhood.
Two bits of science-fiction news back me up. Project Hail Mary, a non-woke sci-fi film featuring a competent straight white male (Ryan Gosling), has made $300 million in two weeks — at the theaters — from a predominantly male audience plus large female audience. While Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, offering nothing but girlbosses and weenie males, got canceled last week. Guess which model Hollywood will follow. We good writers will go the opposite way.
READ MORE from Lou Aguilar:
When the Legends Die — Chuck Norris
The Fall of Britain — and the Warning for America
Cuba’s Long Night Nears Its End

US To Let Russian Oil Tanker Deliver Fuel To Cuba: Report

A week after Russian tankers loaded with fuel for Cuba were diverted due to a months-long US oil blockade, the US Coast Guard is permitting a Russian vessel carrying an estimated 730,000 barrels of crude oil to reach Cuba, the NY Times reports, citing an official briefed on the matter.

The tanker – Anatoly Kolodkin – owned by the Russian state-controlled shipping company Sovcomflot under U.S. sanctions since 2024 – left Primorsk, Russia on march 9, and is now expected to dock at the port of Matanzas as early as Monday night or Tuesday.

This development marks a notable pause in the administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign, which has included threats to third-party nations, the escorting of at least one earlier tanker away from Cuba, and recent Treasury Department measures explicitly barring Cuba from any waivers on Russian-origin oil. Despite two U.S. Coast Guard cutters positioned in the region capable of interception, no orders were issued to stop the vessel. The Coast Guard referred questions to the White House, which did not respond.

The decision avoids an immediate and potentially thorny naval confrontation with Russia in the Caribbean, even as President Trump has publicly suggested military options toward Cuba. At a recent investment conference, Trump stated he believed he would have “the honor of taking Cuba” and added, “Cuba is next, by the way,” in reference to possible use of force after the Iran conflict. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has similarly called for new leadership in Havana, stating that “Cuba’s economy can’t change unless their system of government changes.”

NOW: Trump on Cuba: “Within a short period of time, it’s going to fail, and we will be there to help it out.” pic.twitter.com/ssPdCmDraq
— Bruce Snyder (@realBruceSnyder) March 30, 2026
Temporary Relief for a Collapsing Energy Grid

The arrival could buy Cuba at least a few weeks of breathing room before its fuel reserves are exhausted again. The island has suffered repeated nationwide blackouts – including one lasting 29 hours in March – severe gasoline and diesel shortages, paralyzed agriculture and transportation, and deteriorating medical services. Diesel, the most critical product from this crude once refined, powers trucks, tractors, and many smaller power plants; shortages have even left humanitarian aid stranded in warehouses. Meanwhile, waste has been piling up.

Energy analyst Jorge Piñón of the University of Texas told the Times that the cargo will take roughly three weeks to refine and another week to distribute nationwide. While not a permanent fix, it should help stabilize the grid, reduce blackouts, and support essential government functions, including security forces. Cuba already generates about 40% of its electricity from domestic crude and has accelerated solar installations, but the remaining capacity relies heavily on imported diesel and fuel oil. Piñón estimates the Russian oil could be consumed in under a month, with some reserved for strategic needs. “It buys them time,” he said, “but this is not a magic wand.”

Earlier attempts at relief have faltered: another Russia-origin vessel (the Sea Horse, carrying diesel) diverted and remains in Venezuelan waters without discharging its cargo. Cuba has received only minimal fuel imports in 2026 amid the tightened blockade, which intensified after the U.S.-backed change in Venezuela’s leadership.

Cuban officials, including Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernández de Cossío, have signaled resolve, stating the military is preparing for possible aggression while hoping it does not occur. Former Cuban diplomat Carlos Alzugaray observed that the Trump administration appears to expect the Cuban government to collapse under pressure, but Havana believes it can endure – and has been negotiating, apparently. 

Tyler Durden
Sun, 03/29/2026 – 22:10