Commentary Culture Investigations

It’s not often that you can use the word “silly” to describe a movie, but when you can, you might be talking about something special, something inspired. I don’t mean a movie that embarrasses itself by making a complete hash of its subject, causing you to roll your eyes and shake your head. I mean a movie that wants to be silly and still hold your attention and entertain you. It’s a fiendishly tough thing to pull off. A deliberately silly movie is a high-wire act. It has to evoke the real world to get us involved in the story it’s telling and then create its own bonkers reality—and once it does so, it needs to keep topping itself in the silliness department because otherwise it will run out of gas.
The early Marx Brothers movies were exercises in sustained silliness. The In-Laws (my favorite American comedy) is about a completely normal guy who finds himself getting involved with a total lunatic and ends up as a result in front of a firing squad in a banana republic run by another lunatic who has conversations with a face he’s drawn on his hand (if you’re old enough, you’ll know what I mean when I say it’s Señor Wences).
And then, of course, there is the unparalleled champion of the silly movie, Airplane!, the picture with a thousand absurd jokes, in which (just to take a throwaway moment) a transplant surgeon at the Mayo Clinic is sitting in front of a bookcase filled with jars of Hellmann’s while a disembodied heart jumps around on his desk.
There have been precious few silly movies in recent years. The best of them, 2021’s Barb and Star Go to Vista Del Mar, is a Kristen Wiig vehicle about two small-town friends who end up at the wrong motel in Florida, run afoul of a global villainess, have a fight over a himbo, meet Tommy Bahama, and are saved from doom by a water sprite played by Reba McEntire. It was glorious. Nobody saw it, though COVID had a lot to do with that.
So my challenge to you is actually a favor to you. Go see Gail Daughtry and the Celebrity Sex Pass. It opens this weekend. It sustains its silliness for 93 wonderful minutes and, like all such jaunts, it will go anywhere and do anything. Like all great silly movies—think There’s Something About Mary—Gail Daughtry actually has a plot that’s easy to summarize in conventional terms. For example: There’s Something About Mary is nominally about a man still in love with his high-school crush who hires a private detective to track her down, whereupon the P.I. falls for her too and a romantic triangle ensues. It is on this conventional structure that the Farrelly Brothers stapled and hung and tied bits and jokes and situations and routines that grew ever more absurd and hilarious.
Gail Daughtry is about a content small-town Kansas girl who is on the verge of marrying her high school sweetheart when she discovers him with another woman—and determines to have a last fling herself before marriage. Pretty simple romcom premise, right? Yes—but no. The complication here is that her fiancé has his moment with a famous person (I won’t say who) after he and Gail have a conversation about which star they would have to excuse their beloved for straying with. Hers is Jon Hamm, and she determines to fly to Los Angeles to find him and use her “celebrity sex pass” with him.
At this point, the movie turns into a demented takeoff on The Wizard of Oz in which our heroine is Dorothy (remember, in that movie, Dorothy’s last name is Gale—Gail, get it?). The scarecrow is her partner in the town hair salon. The tin man is a disgraced paparazzo whose career was ruined when he was unable to get a photo of Hamm decades earlier. And the lion is the actor John Slattery, who costarred with Hamm on Mad Men and now lives in a garage in East L.A. where he shadow-boxes and spends his time writing Hamm desperate texts seeking to be his friend. They set off to find Hamm, whose Oz is the Chateau Marmont Hotel off Sunset Boulevard. They are all being pursued by a wicked witch—an Italian woman with unlimited resources who is trying to bring down the world financial system.
That’s all I’m going to tell you, except to say that Slattery is hilarious, cowriter Ken Marino plays the paparazzo with demented grace, Hamm does a wonderful and self-effacing turn as his worst self, and what can I say of Zoey Deutch? She is Gail, and like Cameron Diaz in There’s Something About Mary, she is a character you absolutely have to fall in love with if the movie is going to work at all. Deutch, who just delivered a beautiful and funny performance in a Netflix romcom-tearjerker called Voicemails for Isabelle, is absolutely incandescent here. She grounds the movie in something real before joining in the full-throttle lunacy.
Marino wrote the movie with the director David Wain; they’ve been working together for a quarter century since they made the summer-camp-movie parody Wet Hot American Summer together. That was a silly movie with a great premise that doesn’t quite work because it’s weirdly sloppy and visually amateurish. Gail Daughtry and the Celebrity Sex Pass is Wain’s seventh film, and he has achieved the command he lacked in 2001 when it comes to look and feel and pacing. What he has produced is a screamingly funny movie that doesn’t have an idea in its head. I can’t tell you how happy I was to sit in the dark with a laughing crowd and be stupid for 93 minutes.
John Podhoretz is the editor of Commentary and the Washington Free Beacon’s movie critic.
The post REVIEW: ‘Gail Daughtry and the Celebrity Sex Pass’ appeared first on .

Rep. Chris Pappas (D.), running for Senate in New Hampshire on an “anti-corruption” agenda against “corporate special interests” in Washington, serves on a House committee that oversees Uber, where his husband, a former lobbyist, serves in an executive policy role.
Pappas, a member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, is married to Vann Bentley, a policy manager for cybersecurity and privacy at Uber who previously worked as a lobbyist for Amazon, according to his LinkedIn profile.
That poses a potential conflict of interest for Pappas because of Uber’s aggressive lobbying activity, including on bills spearheaded by the transportation committee. Uber has spent $1.5 million on lobbying in the first quarter of this year alone, according to lobbying records, including in support of the BUILD America 250 Act, a five-year “surface transportation” bill for which Pappas voted in May.
Bentley, who lobbied for Amazon through 2019 and married Pappas in 2023, is not registered as a lobbyist at Uber, though he has sought to influence regulatory agencies that oversee the ride-share giant. Last year, Bentley submitted a motion to the California Public Utilities Commission to sway its decision on whether to make consumer data public, according to California state filings. Uber opposed the measure.
Lobbyists for Uber have contributed $5,250 so far to Pappas’s Senate campaign, according to campaign finance and lobbying records.
Pappas, running against former senator John Sununu (R.), a scion of a New Hampshire political dynasty, has leaned heavily on an “anti-corruption” platform in a bid to replace outgoing Democratic senator Jeanne Shaheen. Pappas, who has sounded the alarm to national Democrats after polls showing him only narrowly leading Sununu, has called for regulating “shadow lobbying,” described by a government ethics group as “someone who performs advocacy to influence public policy, like meeting legislators or their staff, without registering as a lobbyist.”
“Chris Pappas knows the system is rigged against people and in favor of corporate special interests, dark money groups, and entrenched politicians,” Pappas’s campaign website states.
It’s not the first time Pappas has faced scrutiny over his husband’s corporate gigs. In 2020, Pappas came under fire for failing to disclose that he was dating Bentley, a lobbyist for Amazon at the time. Pappas voted on several pieces of legislation on which Bentley lobbied for the retail giant. Pappas initially denied the relationship during a debate against then-Republican House candidate Matt Mowers, though he admitted to it afterwards.
“You’ve been dating a corporate lobbyist who actually was lobbying on behalf of Amazon at a time when you then went on to cast votes on Amazon’s behalf on bills they lobbied you on,” Mowers told Pappas during a debate.
“It’s not true,” Pappas replied during the debate, calling the allegations “outrageous” and accusing Mowers of homophobic attacks. Pappas later admitted after the debate that he was dating Bentley.
One Nation, a Republican group that opposes Pappas, has used the exchange as part of a new ad campaign to accuse Pappas of hypocrisy on the issue.
“Congress badly needs ethics reform,” the ad says.
Pappas and Bentley’s finances also pose problems for Pappas’s anti-corruption platform.
According to Pappas’s financial disclosure, he and Bentley own between $150,000 to $350,000 in Uber shares and between $15,000 to $50,000 in Amazon stock through Bentley’s 401(k) account.
Pappas has called for regulating stock ownership for members of Congress and limiting corporate special interest influence. He has also sponsored legislation that would ban lawmakers from trading stocks and require them to place stocks in a private trust.
Pappas’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
The post ‘Anti-Corruption’ Senate Candidate Chris Pappas, Whose Ex-Lobbyist Husband Works for Uber, Sits on House Transportation Committee That Uber Heavily Lobbies appeared first on .

Two-thirds of Americans say they are proud of America’s 250th anniversary, with 84 percent saying it’s time to celebrate America and 70 percent saying it’s the greatest country in the world or one of the few greatest.
Ninety-two percent say hard work is an important value to them personally, with 71 percent saying patriotism is important and 68 percent saying belief in God is important. Ninety-two percent say respect for private property, free markets, and free enterprise are extremely, very, or somewhat important to the United States’ identity as a nation, and 73 percent are extremely, very, or moderately proud of America’s history.
Americans have less confidence in the press than they do in the police, the military, or the executive branch of the U.S. government. Forty-four percent of people think the news media has too much power in Washington. Forty-two percent of Americans think religion currently has too little influence on what children are taught in public school.
What do all these statistics have in common? They are findings of a recent Wall Street Journal/National Opinion Research Center survey of Americans, and they weren’t reported in the Wall Street Journal. The Journal instead managed to put a negative spin on its own poll, publishing headlines contending “Poll Finds America in Dark Mood at 250” and “Patriotism, Religious Faith Lose Ground” that cherry-picked glum findings from the survey while omitting the more encouraging results. The online headline flagged that “America’s Support for Capitalism Has Declined Over Last Decade” without mentioning the finding about free markets and free enterprise.
The online version of the Journal includes a hyperlink to a 25-page pdf of the full findings, but few are likely to click through. The whole thing helps explain the survey finding about lack of confidence in the press.
Surveys have long found greater support for “free enterprise” than “capitalism,” even though the two terms describe essentially the identical system.
Changes in survey results can sometimes be significant, but focusing on the changes alone rather than on the levels can distort understanding. The Journal’s front-page summary of the survey emphasized the changes: “Just under half of Americans say capitalism is working very well or somewhat well, down from 60% who said so about a decade ago,” the Journal said. “The survey also found sharp declines in patriotism and religion.”
Yet even after the “sharp” decline in religion, 68 percent say belief in God is important. That may make the decline seem less alarming.
The National Opinion Research Center is a University of Chicago-affiliated research center that does about $100 million a year worth of research for the federal government. It also partners with other customers, including news organizations.
The interviews were conducted between June 11 and June 18, 2026, and the survey included 1,862 adults. The results have a margin of sampling error of +/- 3.4 percentage points. Forty-one percent of the people in the survey did not vote in the 2024 presidential election.
The Journal made the public mood seem more gloomy by selecting some narrow categories to report rather than lumping categories together. For example, a graphic about pride in America’s history only reported results for those who were “extremely” or “very” proud in America’s history without including or reporting those who said they were “moderately” proud. Some respondents may have just thought they were voting for moderation rather than extremism or may have thought of themselves as moderates. For the question, 34 percent said they were moderately proud, 15 percent said they were extremely proud, and 24 percent said they were very proud.
The author of the Journal article didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking an explanation for the negative spin.
I’m not saying that all the negativity is fake. Lots of people don’t like President Trump, and some of their negative feelings about him transfer to America as a whole. The country certainly isn’t perfect. The K-12 education system and higher education have in recent years overemphasized America’s flaws. And foreign adversaries are running sophisticated social media and information campaigns aimed at weakening America by emphasizing narratives of chaos, racism, and division. The survey findings showing some weakening in church attendance or in support for capitalism among young people are not unique to this poll; they are duplicated elsewhere, suggesting that there’s something to them. For those stuck in Northern states with bad tax and regulatory policies, the economy can feel grim, especially for young people.
Yet the vast majority of Americans aren’t fleeing for Canada or Europe. Instead, people from other countries want to come here. Readers tend to click more on bad news, so journalists have incentives that fuel the negativity bias. Yet the 84 percent of survey respondents who say it’s okay to celebrate are correct. As Dave Barry put it at the end of a column the other day, “What makes America great — prepare for a searing insight — is Americans. I don’t mean American politicians; I mean everyday, hardworking, generous, friendly, decent Americans, who I believe greatly outnumber the idiots.” The headline could have been, “Poll finds Americans in proud, celebratory mood at 250—and we’re right.”
The post News the Wall Street Journal Buried In Its Own ‘America 250’ Poll appeared first on .

In all likelihood, the activists will keep right on as they have, perhaps more covertly.

After Democrat Graham Platner finally dropped out of the Maine Senate race on Wednesday night, Thursday’s Morning Joe continued to try to defend him. Co-host Joe Scarborough said Republicans would be “beyond hypocritical” to wade into the issue, as he said it was “fascinating” that some were “summarily calling him a rapist now.” His co-host and wife, Mika Brzezinski, also joined in as she called the controversies, like the Nazi tattoo, “just a Tuesday” for some Republicans.

After the show played clips from Platner’s dropout announcement video, Scarborough first detailed Platner’s denials as strong. He said, “First of all, he denied these charges as clearly and as strongly as you can deny these charges.”

Scarborough then said it was “fascinating that there are people in the media, people that we know, that are just summarily calling him a rapist now,” as he claimed he and Brzezinski had the same defense for Brett Kavanaugh.

 

Morning Joe continued defending Graham Platner on Thursday.
Joe Scarborough said Platner “denied these charges as clearly and as strongly as you can deny these charges” before he said it was “fascinating” that “people in the media…are just summarily calling him a rapist now.” pic.twitter.com/liT7aMfpLt
— Nick (@nspin310) July 9, 2026
 

He said Republican outrage that Democrats would support Platner was “beyond hypocritical.” He continued: “That that is that is just sheer farce. This is even beyond South Park levels of farce.” 

Later in the show, after Scarborough’s whataboutism, MS NOW reporter Jackie Alemany detailed how Platner’s many controversies were now too much for voters:

This has been sort of one infraction too many, with this obviously being the most serious of a lot of these allegations. But as we walk through yesterday from the stories about his Nazi tattoo to all of these Reddit posts to then allegations of infidelity, sexting, to now this sexual assault allegation, there is a trust deficit that has emerged amongst voters.

 

After reporter Jackie Alemany detailed Platner’s scandals, including the Nazi tattoo and the sexual assault allegations, Mika Brzezinski remarked, “It’s just funny because for that list that Jackie just made, I mean, for some Republicans, that’s just a Tuesday. But whatever…” pic.twitter.com/pOlCv17sYs
— Nick (@nspin310) July 9, 2026
 

Brzezinski responded to Alemany’s thoughts and said, “It’s just funny because for that list that Jackie just made, I mean, for some Republicans, that’s just a Tuesday. But whatever, you know.”

Near the end of the 15-minute-plus-long segment on Platner’s demise, Scarborough warned Democrats in D.C. that, despite the many controversies and sexual allegations, many Maine Democrats still support Platner and the “Platner signs are still up.” 

He said some Maine voters “think that this is Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries and the Washington establishment coming to get him.”

 

Scarborough later warned Democrats about the Platner switch and said many Maine voters “think that this was cooked up in Washington DC.
He then explained how he and Brzezinski were “scratching their heads” as they received calls about “Platner needing to be off the ballot.” https://t.co/OD0sc4VJtz pic.twitter.com/JbdijJ5xgh
— Nick (@nspin310) July 9, 2026
 

Scarborough later said he and Brzezinski have been bombarded by phone calls and text messages from people who want Graham Platner off the ballot, who are high up in Maine politics.”

Scarborough then added he was not saying there was a conspiracy to get Platner, but that he and Brzezinski had been “scratching our heads for the last couple of weeks” as they wondered, “Why are we getting all these calls about Graham Platner needing to be off the ballot?”

For a show that did many softball interviews with Platner during his campaign, amidst the many controversies, it is not a surprise that Scarborough, a man who seemed to admire Platner as he compared himself to the now-disgraced candidate, was poised to defend him. 

The transcript is below. Click “expand”:

MS NOW’s Morning Joe

July 9, 2026

6:08:57 AM Eastern

(…)

JOE SCARBOROUGH: So, Willie, a couple things. First of all, he denied these charges as clearly and as strongly as you can deny these charges. 

Got to say, it’s fascinating that there are people in the media, people that we know, that are just summarily calling him a rapist now. 

For Republicans listening, this is something that Mika and I also said about Brett Kavanaugh. So, saying that people would come on this network and call Brett Kavanaugh a sexual harasser or rapist without any due process at all, perhaps they needed to take a deep breath. That said, regardless of how this was going to play out, the Democratic Party said, we’re not going to support you. They weren’t going to fund him. So he had no pathway for it. I just want to say, really. I mean, Republicans that are spending their time on Fox News and social media – 

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Oh yeah.

SCARBOROUGH: Outraged that Democrats would support – dare support a candidate who was accused of sexual impropriety, even when that candidate vehemently denied that. That is beyond hypocritical. That that is that is just sheer farce. This is even beyond South Park levels of farce. 

What I am reading on X, what I am reading in social media, what I am seeing on TV after the past decade. And by the way, if you want to talk about morally challenged candidates, you don’t have to look at the White House. You don’t have to look at Republicans bowing and scraping for the past decade.

Just look at Texas! Look at who Republicans are behind as they’re trying to suggest that Talarico is gay? But look at Paxton. He’s not. 

I mean, the hypocrisy. You know, Republicans should just really just shut up. They really should just shut up. If they’re going to be critical of Democrats for supporting a morally challenged candidate or one who has been accused of doing things that are morally challenged, it is so hypocritical. Willey, and they should just leave this to the Democrats to clean up their own house.

(…)

6:13:21 AM Eastern

JACKIE ALEMANY: I mean, we’ve had a bunch of reporters who have been on the ground in Maine over the last few weeks, Kevin Frye has been there all week, who are hearing that for voters they have sort of crossed the Rubicon here. 

This has been sort of one infraction too many, with this obviously being the most serious of a lot of these allegations. But as we walk through yesterday from the stories about his Nazi tattoo to all of these Reddit posts to then allegations of infidelity, sexting, to now this sexual assault allegation, there is a trust deficit that has emerged amongst voters. 

It might not have appeared in the polling just yet, but I’m not sure that Graham Platner has as much leverage as he thinks he does. And in the process, he is making, again, not just establishment Democrats, but other Democrats even angrier because he is poisoning the well going forward, he is not necessarily setting up his replacement for success.

BRZEZINSKI: It’s just funny because for that list that Jackie just made, I mean, for some Republicans, that’s just a Tuesday. But whatever, you know. There are so many hypocrisies here that we could go through, but that’s not constructive.

(…)

6:17:40 AM Eastern

SCARBOROUGH: But I will say this. And this is just a word of warning to Democrats in Washington DC.

Graham Platner was losing support with independents, no doubt about it. But I will tell you, Mika and I have heard nothing. Let me underline that: nothing but support from Maine Democrats on the ground for Platner. Platner signs are still up. They think that this is Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries and the Washington establishment coming to get him. They all have the same story. They started hearing ten days ago that people were coming up to Maine, and they were desperate to try to get Platner off the ballot, because they thought Susan Collins had too much on him and would destroy him. 

I will tell you, without revealing any names, that we have been bombarded by phone calls and text messages from people who want Graham Platner off the ballot, who are high up in Maine politics. And we’ve been getting that for the last two weeks. 

So, why do I say this? Because there’s a conspiracy? No, not at all. Go back to what I said at the beginning: A warning to Washington Democrats. 

You do need to listen to Graham Platner, because whether it’s true or not, just as Katty said about her son, who has been working on this campaign, rank-and-file Democrats who have been supporting Platner from the very beginning, think that this was cooked up in Washington, D.C. with a lot of money behind it, to find anything that could be found to get graham Platner off the ballot. 

And I will say, we know nothing about that. We just – Mika and I have been scratching our heads for the last couple of weeks, going: Why are we getting all these calls about Graham Platner needing to be off the ballot?

BRZEZINSKI: A 73-year-old woman who is just –

SCARBOROUGH: – Like constant, constant calls.

So, anyway, that’s what Democrats on the ground in Maine believe. So Washington needs to stay out of this. And Maine Democrats need to figure out who is going to replace graham Platner on the ballot.

BRZEZINSKI: Soon.

SCARBOROUGH: And if Washington thinks they can micromanage this and fix this, they need to listen to what Katty’s son said, because they’re going to piss off their base, and their base won’t come out and vote in the general election. They just won’t.

(…)

There are, theoretically, alternatives to the Patriots, but they either don’t measure up or Ukraine doesn’t have access to them.

Photo Credit:

American ThinkerBy Ron KeanThe movement’s mostly unknown origins go a long way to explain Jews who are hostile to traditional Judaism and to Israel.

Having been given the “abandon ship” order from the Kriegsmarine ship Graham Platner, MS NOW’s The Brief host Jen Psaki blasted the now-former Maine Senate candidate as a sexual predator who refuses to accept accountability for his actions. The problem for Psaki is that even after Lindsey Fifield’s original allegations of violence, she was one of the MS NOW allies Platner went running to in order to try to help him change the subject.

Psaki attributed Platner’s demise to Fifield and Jenny Racicot, “But now it is over. It’s over. Because—not of all the people who are out there patting themselves on the back. And there are a lot of them on Twitter, believe me, it’s driving me crazy. It’s because of the bravery of the women who came forward to tell their stories. That is why.”

 

Jen Psaki abandoned the KMS Graham Platner last night, a noticeable difference in tone from her interview with him a month ago “Those are the women who should be patting themselves on the back. Nobody else. And tonight, the video that he recorded and posted online announcing his… pic.twitter.com/m8ZMsgHlKl
— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 9, 2026
 

Introducing a portion of Platner’s announcement video, Psaki continued, “It is these women, and because there was no longer a path forward for Graham Platner. Once they did, of course, there wasn’t. It is because of those women. Those are the women who should be patting themselves on the back. Nobody else. And tonight, the video that he recorded and posted online announcing his decision, which was more than 11 minutes long, and it took quite a long time to get to the point, showed us more of who Graham Platner actually is. Someone who, in the face of incredibly serious and extremely credible allegations, seemed to blame everyone but himself.”

That all sounds nice, but Fifield’s original allegations were published in The New York Times on June 4. Fifield’s condemnation of The New York Times for not including others’ sexual assault allegations against Platner was posted to X on June 5. Psaki’s interview with Platner was on June 10, where she marveled at how Platner had managed to get “under Donald Trump’s skin,” and together they ridiculed the idea that Trump was going to lecture anyone on morality. The only possible reference Psaki made to Fifield was extremely vague allusions to “allegations about the way you treated women you dated in the past.”

 

Psaki’s June interview, for all intents and purposes, ignored Lyndsey Fifield, but here she claims “I started my career on the campaign trail. I was a campaign rat for many, many years through many campaigns, I have never witnessed a member of any political establishment,… pic.twitter.com/IptEVgCL32
— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 9, 2026
 

Back in present day, Psaki continued:

But what you just heard, there is a part that really stuck out to me, which is repeated denials and a repeated blame game. Now, I worked in politics for a very long time. I started my career on the campaign trail. I was a campaign rat for many, many years through many campaigns. I have never witnessed a member of any political establishment, whatever the heck that means, forcing a woman to come forward and falsely accuse someone of sexual assault in order to tank a specific campaign. You know why? Because that doesn’t happen. Because, again, it is so difficult for these women to come forward. Sometimes it takes years to come forward.

All that does is raise the question: Why didn’t Psaki press Platner on that when he was on her show?

Here is a transcript for the July 8 show:

MS NOW The Briefing with Jen Psaki

7/8/2026

9:02 PM ET

JEN PSAKI: But now it is over. It’s over. Because—not of all the people who are out there patting themselves on the back. And there are a lot of them on Twitter, believe me, it’s driving me crazy. It’s because of the bravery of the women who came forward to tell their stories.

That is why. It is these women, and because there was no longer a path forward for Graham Platner. Once they did, of course, there wasn’t. It is because of those women. Those are the women who should be patting themselves on the back. Nobody else. And tonight, the video that he recorded and posted online announcing his decision, which was more than 11 minutes long, and it took quite a long time to get to the point, showed us more of who Graham Platner actually is. Someone who, in the face of incredibly serious and extremely credible allegations, seemed to blame everyone but himself.

…

But what you just heard, there is a part that really stuck out to me, which is repeated denials and a repeated blame game. Now, I worked in politics for a very long time. I started my career on the campaign trail. I was a campaign rat for many, many years through many campaigns. I have never witnessed a member of any political establishment, whatever the heck that means, forcing a woman to come forward and falsely accuse someone of sexual assault in order to tank a specific campaign.

You know why? Because that doesn’t happen. Because, again, it is so difficult for these women to come forward. Sometimes it takes years to come forward. Now, we already knew, thanks to the Washington Post, that Platner had struggled with this decision, in part because he believed he should have a say in the process to replace his name on the ballot, something that the Maine Democratic Party has said loud and clear, is not going to happen. 

Photo Credit:

Perchance AIBy Thomas KolbeAs Germany’s public debt expands, the dynamics of its sovereign bond market are beginning to change. 

A new White House report exposes radical political activists’ takeover of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History.