News

News

Two Killed in Apache Helicopter Crash Near Fort Hood

Two people were killed Wednesday after an Apache helicopter crashed near Fort Hood, Texas, according to local authorities.

The aircraft went down in the Salado area outside the military installation, prompting an immediate response from emergency personnel.

The first emergency calls reporting the crash arrived at approximately 1:34 p.m. Central Standard Time. Cliff Coleman, a spokesperson for the Bell County Sheriff’s Office, provided the initial timeline during a Wednesday afternoon news conference.

Emergency crews responded to the crash site, but both individuals involved were later pronounced dead. Coleman said the official declaration of death occurred at 2:30 p.m., less than an hour after authorities began receiving calls.

Officials had not publicly released the names of those killed at the time of the initial announcement. Their military statuses also remained unconfirmed, leaving key questions unanswered as authorities worked to secure the area and notify families.

Coleman directed questions about whether the deceased were military personnel to the Fort Hood Criminal Investigation Division. That referral placed responsibility for additional details concerning the victims and their possible service connections with military authorities.

Fort Hood did not immediately respond to an inquiry seeking more information about the fatal crash. As a result, officials had not yet provided a detailed account of the helicopter’s mission, its unit assignment, or the circumstances leading to the accident.

Earlier Wednesday afternoon, Fort Hood confirmed that an Apache helicopter had crashed in Salado outside the boundaries of the base. The installation also acknowledged that emergency services were actively involved in the response.

“Our immediate priority is securing the site and supporting the initial response efforts,” said Brig. Gen. Ethan Diven, acting commanding general of the 1st Cavalry Division. His statement reflected the immediate focus on controlling the scene and assisting emergency personnel.

Diven also addressed the human cost of the tragedy as officials waited for more verified information. “Our thoughts are with the crew and their families as we await further information.”

The crash has now left two families facing devastating news while the military community at Fort Hood waits for answers. Apache crews perform demanding missions in sophisticated aircraft, and any fatal accident sends a shock through the ranks.

Authorities had not disclosed whether the aircraft departed from Fort Hood before the crash. They also had not identified weather, mechanical trouble, human factors, or any other possible cause as contributing to the deadly incident.

That absence of information is important because early speculation can quickly outrun the facts after a military aviation disaster. Investigators will need time to examine the wreckage, available flight information, maintenance records, communications, and other evidence before establishing what happened.

The Bell County Sheriff’s Office provided the clearest public timeline during the first hours after the crash. Military officials, meanwhile, remained responsible for answering questions tied to the aircraft, its crew, and any operational details that can eventually be released.

The Apache is one of the Army’s most recognizable combat helicopters, built around attack and reconnaissance missions in demanding environments. Its capabilities make it a central part of Army aviation, but Wednesday’s crash was first and foremost a deadly loss of life.

Officials did not immediately announce whether nearby roads, homes, or civilian property were affected by the accident. No additional casualties were reported in the initial information released by local authorities and Fort Hood.

More details are expected once the crash site has been secured and the appropriate authorities complete their initial work. Until then, the confirmed facts remain limited but grim: an Apache crashed outside Fort Hood, emergency crews responded, and two people were pronounced dead.

News

Joint Base Andrews Chosen for 26 HH-60Ws and New Helicopter Squadron

Joint Base Andrews in Maryland is set for a major helicopter modernization as the Air Force prepares to replace its aging utility fleet. The installation will receive 26 HH -60W combat search and rescue helicopters to replace the same number of UH-1N aircraft.

The advanced aircraft, commonly known as the “Whiskey,” will provide considerably greater speed, range, payload capacity and lift. Those improvements will give crews a more capable platform for missions involving federal contingencies, civil authorities and senior government leaders.

The transition will also bring 60 active duty manpower positions to Joint Base Andrews, according to the Air Force announcement released Wednesday. That personnel increase reflects the operational demands and expanded capabilities that will accompany the incoming fleet.

Joint Base Andrews will establish the 5th Helicopter Squadron on Aug. 27, making it the first unit at the installation positioned to receive the new helicopters. The squadron will lead the base into the Whiskey era as aircraft and personnel arrive.

Meanwhile, the 1st Helicopter Squadron will continue operating the older “Huey” helicopters until that unit converts to the HH 60W mission. Officials did not provide a specific date for the 1st Helicopter Squadron transition.

Both helicopter squadrons will support contingency response operations for the federal government, assistance to civil authorities and transportation for senior leadership. Those missions carry particular weight at Andrews because of its proximity to Washington and its role in protecting national command operations.

The fleet replacement follows a recent reminder that the venerable Hueys are not getting any younger. One UH 1N assigned to the 1st Helicopter Squadron made an emergency landing in Washington, D.C., one month before the replacement announcement.

Crew members aboard that aircraft reported hearing “vibrating mechanical sounds” during the flight. The helicopter landed safely, but the incident highlighted the practical concerns associated with keeping aircraft built roughly half a century ago in demanding operational service.

“The current UH-1N fleet is 49 to 59 years old and lacks the speed, range, and lift capacity required to provide cost-effective, modern mission support,” the release states.

That is a blunt assessment, but an accurate one. The Huey earned its place in American military history, yet nostalgia does not create additional range, payload capacity or airspeed when crews are responding to real world missions.

“The HH-60W delivers significant increases in payload capacity, maximum airspeed, and mission range to ensure the aircraft can meet tasked mission requirements,” the statement continues.

The HH 60W was designed as an advanced combat search and rescue helicopter, giving it capabilities far beyond those of the medium utility aircraft it will replace. At Andrews, those capabilities will be applied to some of the federal government’s most sensitive transportation and contingency responsibilities.

The Air Force expects the new aircraft to reach operational capability at Joint Base Andrews in 2030. The years between squadron activation and that milestone will involve receiving aircraft, building trained crews and converting established operations to the new platform.

Joint Base Andrews is located in Prince George’s County, Maryland, just outside the nation’s capital. Its strategic position makes reliable aviation support essential, especially when federal officials require rapid movement or emergency response options.

The installation is also home to Air Force One and the 89th Airlift Wing. That wing provides airlift and communications support for the president, vice president, cabinet officials and other senior American leaders.

Bringing 26 Whiskey helicopters to Andrews will therefore amount to more than a routine aircraft swap. It will strengthen a base already central to continuity, executive transportation and contingency response in the Washington region.

The activation of the 5th Helicopter Squadron marks the first concrete organizational step in that process. Once operational, the squadron will help move Andrews away from an aging fleet and toward aircraft built for the speed, reach and lift demanded by modern missions.

Until the conversion is complete, the Hueys will continue carrying the load as they have for decades. Their service deserves respect, but after as many as 59 years in the fleet, it is well past time for fresh rotors and modern capability.

News

Furious Hasan Piker Erupts After Francesca Hong Suffers Stunning Primary Defeat [WATCH]

Hasan Piker, the prominent Twitch streamer and outspoken supporter of the Democratic Socialists of America, reacted angrily Tuesday night after Wisconsin state Rep. Francesca Hong lost the Democratic gubernatorial primary to Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, as reported by The New York Post.

Hong had entered Election Day with a substantial polling advantage, but Crowley ultimately defeated her by more than 3,000 votes.

Piker, who had campaigned alongside Hong during the closing weeks of the primary, blamed older voters for the result and questioned the broader strategy of the campaign.

Piker appeared especially frustrated while discussing a late-deciding voter who supported Crowley despite expressing support for Hong.

“I don’t want to read this because I will f—ing kill myself with a gun in a video game,” Piker said after reading the account.

“I can’t. I’m in a good mood overall,” he continued. “I want to put boomers in the machine, in the contraption, and not just boomers, like anyone that says that.”

As the results came in Tuesday evening and Hong began falling short of expectations, Piker also remarked, “Outlaw Thanksgiving and outlaw boomers.”

Hong had faced scrutiny during the campaign over previous positions that included calls to abolish police departments and cancel Thanksgiving.

She attempted to downplay some of those positions during the primary campaign.

Piker had interviewed Hong on his livestream program June 30, 2026.

During that appearance, Hong expressed support for abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, government-run grocery stores and a one-year moratorium on data centers, among other proposals.

Piker later acknowledged on X that his involvement with the campaign may have contributed to Hong’s defeat.

“This is part of why we came close to a victory but ultimately lost. i should never be the biggest surrogate of a campaign. POCAN, or national progs, would’ve alleviated some of the “electability” concerns of Hong, which were overstated & outright weaponized in the last week…”

He followed that post with another assessment of the campaign:

“”electability” in the primaries and “harm reduction” in the general still carry lots of boomers when it’s paired w/ a barrage of negative earned media + no defensive TV ads + no national prog endorsements. All in all, an unbelievably impressive showing for DSA Wisco ground game”

It remained unclear whether Piker’s admission was intended seriously or partly as sarcasm, given his history of provocative commentary.

Hong had been viewed as a rising figure on the party’s progressive left and received support from Piker during the final stretch of the primary.

Her campaign nevertheless encountered difficulties over positions that opponents highlighted as outside the mainstream of the electorate.

Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did not endorse Hong during the Wisconsin primary, even as both backed other progressive candidates in competitive Democratic contests.

In Michigan, Abdul El-Sayed defeated Rep. Haley Stevens after receiving strong backing from Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez.

In Minnesota, Peggy Flanagan defeated Rep. Angie Craig in the Democratic Senate primary with support from the two progressive leaders.

Neither El-Sayed nor Flanagan had called for canceling Thanksgiving, however.

The Wisconsin result represented a setback for the Democratic Party’s socialist wing after Hong had maintained a double-digit polling advantage in much of the campaign.

Crowley’s victory demonstrated that the electorate did not necessarily follow the expectations established by pre-election surveys.

Piker had also appeared alongside Hong and Rep. Ilhan Omar at a campaign event in Milwaukee on Aug. 2, 2026.

His public support made him one of the more visible progressive surrogates for the Hong campaign.

The primary outcome now leaves Crowley as the Democratic nominee for Wisconsin governor.

Piker’s reaction has added another layer to the post-election debate over whether Hong’s campaign could have benefited from more traditional Democratic endorsements and a less polarizing public profile.

For a campaign that had spent weeks emphasizing its progressive credentials, Tuesday night’s result offered a reminder that winning a primary still requires convincing voters outside the online activist bubble.

News

Army Throws Open Test Ranges to Supercharge Private Weapons Innovation

The Army is opening key military test ranges to private companies, giving American innovators direct access to facilities built to replicate the brutal conditions of modern combat. The initiative targets faster development of drones, counter drone systems, long range fires and affordable interceptors.

Under the new policy, companies may request access even if they have no existing government contract or formal partnership. That change could help promising technology escape the bureaucratic swamp that too often keeps useful equipment stuck in presentations instead of proving itself in the field.

The Army is making four ranges in the United States and one overseas available through the program. Those sites are Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, West Cibola Range in Arizona, Camp Shelby Joint Forces Training Center in Mississippi, Camp Grayling in Michigan and the Africa Multidomain Training and Experimentation Center in Morocco.

Each location offers different environments and testing capabilities, allowing the Army to match private proposals with the most appropriate site. Companies can submit requests through an online portal that also lists range parameters and available testing options.

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll said the service intends to eliminate needless obstacles between innovators and realistic military testing. “A company with a good idea shouldn’t need a team of lawyers and a program of record just to prove their equipment works,” Driscoll said.

“So we fixed that,” Driscoll continued. “One front door, testrange.army.mil, a real person to walk you in, and on the other side, everything the modern battlefield demands: contested airspace, degraded signals and the space to test at real scale.”

That is a direct answer to a procurement culture that has often rewarded paperwork endurance rather than battlefield performance. Instead of requiring a small company to navigate a maze of offices and attorneys, the Army is offering a clearer path to demonstrate whether a system actually works.

The effort arrives as the War Department pushes broad reforms designed to accelerate the acquisition of drones and counter drone equipment. Modern battlefields have shown that inexpensive unmanned aircraft can threaten troops, vehicles, installations and critical infrastructure without requiring an adversary to risk a pilot.

The War Department also created Joint Interagency Task Force 401 to streamline counter drone operations and acquisition across the federal government. The task force recently launched an online marketplace intended to connect military requirements with systems capable of detecting, tracking and defeating hostile drones.

The pressure to move faster has increased amid concerns about American interceptor inventories following the country’s war with Iran. Reports have claimed that the United States used roughly two thirds of the Patriot missile interceptors it possessed before the conflict, raising serious questions about replenishment and production capacity.

War Secretary Pete Hegseth disputed a CNN report claiming military commanders had warned that American interceptor stockpiles were critically depleted. Even so, the War Department is pressing weapons manufacturers to accelerate production of critical munitions because slogans and studies will not refill launchers.

Companies using the new portal can request access to a range, although the Army cannot promise a specific testing location or schedule. Officials will evaluate each proposal and determine which site can safely and effectively support the requested trial.

Camp Grayling will play a particularly important role for drone developers because it is preparing to host an “electromagnetic unreliability test event” for private industry beginning in September. The event is expected to return quarterly and will recreate electronic warfare conditions observed during Russia’s continuing war against Ukraine.

Those conditions matter because drones that perform perfectly in a clean commercial environment can fail quickly when navigation signals are jammed, communications are disrupted or airspace is contested. Camp Grayling will give companies an opportunity to discover those weaknesses before American troops encounter them during actual combat.

Other facilities will support different priorities. Dugway Proving Ground can accommodate long range fires testing, while West Cibola Range is currently limited to drone and counter drone evaluations, giving the Army specialized venues instead of forcing every technology into the same testing template.

The U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command is leading the initiative with support from the Mississippi National Guard, the Michigan National Guard and U.S. Africa Command. Their cooperation should provide private industry with realistic test opportunities while giving military evaluators an earlier look at potentially useful systems.

Opening these ranges will not solve every acquisition problem, but it attacks one of the most obvious ones: innovators need somewhere to prove their claims under military conditions. If the Army keeps the process focused on performance instead of paperwork, American troops could receive better weapons faster and taxpayers might finally see fewer good ideas buried under red tape.

News

Senator Demands Navy Answers as USS Abraham Lincoln Deployment Drags On

Sen. Richard Blumenthal is demanding a detailed accounting from the Navy about conditions aboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln as its Middle East deployment stretches well beyond the original schedule.

His questions cover basic supplies, crew welfare, operational readiness and who approved each extension.

The Connecticut Democrat, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, sent a letter Wednesday to War Secretary Pete Hegseth and acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao. Blumenthal requested information about reported problems involving water, plumbing, mail, mental health, deck safety and other quality of life concerns.

The letter followed a Military Times report describing concerns raised by relatives of Lincoln sailors. Family members claimed multiple sailors had attempted to go overboard during the deployment, which has been extended indefinitely while the carrier supports United States military operations against Iran.

The report also described mounting strain among sailors and their families as the mission continued without a firm return date. Extended operations are sometimes required when national security demands it, but sailors still need reliable supplies, working equipment and clear leadership from the chain of command.

According to Blumenthal’s letter, the Lincoln departed Naval Base San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025, for what was expected to be a seven month deployment. The carrier is now approaching its ninth month at sea and has reportedly gone more than 200 days without a port call.

Blumenthal asked the Navy to provide the date of every extension issued during the deployment. He also wants officials to identify who authorized each change and explain the operational requirements that made the additional time at sea necessary.

The senator requested a list of significant living condition problems identified aboard the carrier. His examples included mold, broken toilets, malfunctioning laundry facilities, inadequate water supplies and shortages of basic hygiene products.

He further asked when commanders first learned about those issues and what corrective steps followed. That is basic accountability for a ship carrying thousands of Americans through one of the most demanding operational environments in the world.

Crew readiness was another major focus of the letter. Blumenthal asked what measures the Navy is using to evaluate fatigue, morale, mental health and the overall readiness of sailors aboard the Lincoln.

The senator also wants to know whether commanders have recorded increases in safety incidents, medical problems, disciplinary cases or other warning signs connected to the extended deployment. The number of consecutive days at sea can affect everything from concentration on the flight deck to maintenance performance deep inside the ship.

The Navy has not released a precise number of Lincoln sailors who allegedly attempted to go overboard or engaged in self harm during the deployment. The service did not answer Military Times inquiries, but it disputed the report in a statement provided to Task & Purpose.

“Based on information available to the command, we have not identified an increase in reported suicidal ideation or suicide attempts aboard the ship,” officials said.

Navy officials said they recognize that extended deployments impose considerable pressure on service members and their families. They added that sailors aboard the Lincoln have access to medical professionals, counselors, chaplains, fleet services and family support resources.

The service also said current reports from the carrier confirm continuous access to clean water and functioning air conditioning.

Officials did acknowledge mail disruptions as well as changes to resupply and replenishment operations, problems that become increasingly frustrating as weeks at sea pile up.

Blumenthal’s letter extends beyond the Lincoln and asks how the Navy plans to sustain a carrier presence in the Middle East during the next 12 to 24 months. He requested an assessment of how future rotations could affect scheduled deployments, maintenance periods and carrier availability in the Indo Pacific and other theaters.

The senator also asked whether current demands for aircraft carrier coverage exceed what the Navy can sustainably provide under its existing fleet structure and deployment model. That question cuts to the heart of the matter, because no amount of Washington scheduling wizardry can create additional carriers, crews or maintenance capacity out of thin air.

Concerns involving the Lincoln follow the USS Gerald R. Ford’s return to Norfolk, Virginia, on May 16 after a 326 day deployment. That voyage set a record for the longest carrier deployment since the Vietnam era, highlighting the relentless pressure being placed on the Navy’s carrier force.

The Lincoln remains on mission while the Navy considers the senator’s request and manages operational requirements across several theaters.

Hegseth and Cao now face the task of balancing combat demands with crew readiness, while ensuring Congress and Navy families receive clear facts instead of bureaucratic fog.

News

Bush Spokesman Stuns Obama Adviser with Explosive 2008 Democrat Primary Revelation [WATCH]

A discussion about election integrity on CNN Tuesday night brought renewed attention to a disputed episode from the 2008 Democratic presidential primary in Indiana involving then-Sen. Barack Obama, as reported by Red State.

Pete Seat, a former spokesman for President George W. Bush and the Indiana Republican Party, appeared on a CNN panel that included former Obama adviser David Axelrod and CNN commentator Adam Kinzinger.

During the discussion, Seat described allegations surrounding petition signatures that helped Obama qualify for the ballot in Indiana.

According to Seat, Democrats were accused of submitting fraudulent signatures on ballot petitions, including petitions connected to Obama.

The allegations ultimately resulted in criminal convictions. Seat also pointed to the case of a former Democratic governor who said his name appeared on a petition even though he had not signed it.

The disputed signatures were relevant because candidates seeking access to the Indiana ballot were required to meet petition requirements.

The allegations therefore raised questions about how Obama’s campaign qualified for the state’s 2008 Democratic primary ballot.

Axelrod asked Seat how officials determined that there had been a problem with the signatures. Seat explained that the alleged irregularities were uncovered later.

The exchange prompted disagreement among the panelists over whether the episode should be considered an election issue.

Kinzinger dismissed the significance of the matter, saying, “That’s not a voting issue.”

He further argued that it was not a matter involving “stealing the election” or “illegals are voting issue.” Instead, Kinzinger characterized it as “an Indiana issue.”

Seat disagreed, arguing that the matter remained relevant to questions about election administration and ballot access.

The discussion highlighted a broader distinction between different types of election-related problems. Election integrity concerns can involve more than whether an individual voter casts a ballot illegally.

Questions can also arise over candidate ballot access, petition requirements, election administration, and the procedures used to verify signatures.

The Indiana controversy dates to the 2008 presidential primary, when Obama was competing for the Democratic nomination against Hillary Clinton.

Indiana’s primary was held May 6, 2008, and became an important contest in the Democratic race.

The discussion also turned to voter identification and public attitudes toward election security.

A 2025 Pew Research Center survey found that 83 percent of Americans supported requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification.

Support included 95 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters and 71 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters.

Gallup has reported an even higher level of support, with 84 percent favoring photo identification requirements at polling places.

Gallup also found that 83 percent supported requiring proof of citizenship when someone registers to vote for the first time.

The figures illustrate that voter identification has support among voters across party lines, although the issue remains politically contested.

The debate over voter ID continued in the Senate this year. Sen. Jon Husted, a Republican from Ohio, introduced legislation that would have directed states to deny ballots to voters who failed to present photo identification.

According to the report, all Democratic senators present voted against the measure.

The vote provided Republicans with another point of disagreement with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who had previously said his caucus supported “common-sense voter ID.”

The broader debate over election security includes questions about voter identification, proof of citizenship, ballot handling and the verification of election-related documents.

The Indiana episode discussed on CNN involved allegations concerning petition signatures rather than claims that ineligible voters cast ballots. The distinction was central to the disagreement among the panelists.

There has been no suggestion in the discussion that the disputed petition signatures established that the 2008 presidential election itself was stolen.

Rather, the episode raised questions about the process by which a presidential candidate qualified for the ballot.

Seat’s account brought an older election controversy back into the national political conversation while the country continues to debate election administration and safeguards.

The CNN exchange also demonstrated how differently political figures can characterize the same election-related incident, with Seat emphasizing its significance and Kinzinger arguing that it did not constitute a voting issue.

Questions surrounding ballot access, petition signatures, and voter identification remain part of the larger national debate over election procedures and public confidence in elections.

News

Democrats Accused of Rigging Their Own Election as Human Error Triggers Bizarre 30,000 Ballot Fix [WATCH]

Milwaukee election officials faced renewed scrutiny Tuesday night after a counting error delayed the release of results until shortly after 1 a.m. and required workers to process roughly 30,000 ballots again, as reported by Trending Politics News.

Officials attributed the problem to “human error” involving five of nine memory sticks transported from Milwaukee’s central counting facility to the county courthouse.

Rather than containing election results, the five devices contained audit logs.

Milwaukee Election Commission Director Paulina Gutierrez said the voting machines themselves were not responsible for the problem.

Officials said an incorrect selection was made while downloading information onto the memory sticks, leaving the devices with the wrong files.

The mistake forced election workers to return to Milwaukee’s central count facility and download the correct results from five machines.

Workers then transported the replacement data back to the courthouse so the county could complete its tally.

The unexpected delay quickly generated questions online, particularly among voters who have previously expressed concerns about Milwaukee’s election-night counting procedures.

The additional processing involved approximately 30,000 ballots.

Milwaukee County Clerk George Christenson announced the final Milwaukee totals shortly after 1 a.m.

David Crowley finished with 65,131 votes, or 43.04%, while Francesca Hong received 62,739 votes, or 41.46%, according to county officials.

Christenson said the election system includes several additional safeguards intended to identify errors during the canvass and auditing process.

“At the end of the day, we will start the canvass tomorrow or the next day, which essentially is an audit. And we also do two extra voluntary audits. So there are plenty of checks and balances in the system to alleviate any of those concerns,” Christenson said.

Officials emphasized that the issue involved the devices used to transfer election information, not the voting machines themselves.

Five memory sticks had received incorrect files, requiring election workers to obtain the proper results and complete another round of processing.

Wisconsin’s election procedures have contributed to previous delays in Milwaukee. State law does not allow election officials to process absentee ballots before polls open on Election Day.

As a result, election workers can face a substantial volume of absentee ballots during the evening after voting concludes.

Tuesday night’s delay, however, involved a separate issue. Officials acknowledged that the incorrect information had been downloaded onto five memory sticks.

The explanation quickly became a subject of political debate online.

Critics questioned how tens of thousands of ballots could require additional processing because the wrong information had been selected during a data-transfer procedure.

There has been no official finding that the error altered the election outcome or that anyone intentionally manipulated ballots. The officials involved have described the incident as an operational mistake.

The episode nevertheless adds another layer of scrutiny to Milwaukee’s election administration.

Delays, technical problems and counting complications can become especially contentious when election results are being closely watched, and voters are waiting for final numbers.

County officials said the upcoming canvass and additional voluntary audits will provide further opportunities to review the results and identify potential discrepancies.

The final Milwaukee totals showed Crowley leading Hong after the delayed count. Crowley received 65,131 votes compared with Hong’s 62,739, according to the totals released by the county.

The incident also illustrates the distinction between an election-counting error and evidence of intentional misconduct.

While officials acknowledged that approximately 30,000 ballots had to be processed again, authorities have not announced evidence showing that the mistake was deliberate or that it changed the results.

For election officials, the immediate task is to complete the canvass and auditing procedures.

For voters, the late-night delay is likely to keep attention focused on how election data is transferred, reviewed, and ultimately certified.

The controversy began with a simple operational mistake but ended with election workers returning to the central counting facility, retrieving replacement data and delaying the final Milwaukee results until after midnight.

News

Former MSNBC Host Chris Matthews Blasts DSA Radicals Over ‘All This Crap’ [WATCH]

Former MSNBC host Chris Matthews criticized the Democratic Socialists of America and warned that Democrats outside the DSA are being forced to defend positions they may not support during an appearance on MSNOW’s Morning Joe on Aug. 12, 2026, as reported by The Gateway Pundit.

Matthews was discussing the Wisconsin Democratic primary and the broader debate over the direction of the Democratic Party when he challenged the idea that the party could simply operate as a “big tent” while avoiding responsibility for positions promoted by its more progressive elements.

His comments came as Democrats continue to debate the influence of the Democratic Socialists of America, commonly known as the DSA, and the extent to which candidates should distance themselves from its agenda.

Matthews specifically cited positions involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement, border enforcement, prisons, and the Pentagon.

“We’re going to get rid of ICE. Not just ICE. We’re going to get rid of the border. We’re not going to have a border anymore. We’re not going to effectively control people entering and leaving the country… We’re going to get rid of prisons. We’re going to get rid of the Pentagon.”

Matthews then questioned how the United States would respond to threats against American diplomats and other national interests without a military.

“Well, what happens when your hostages are your former diplomats — like what happened with President Carter? People take your diplomats hostage. What do you do then? You need an army. You don’t like to have an army, but you do need to have one.”

The former MSNBC host also addressed comments from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, commonly known as AOC, who has described the Democratic Party as a broad coalition.

“AOC… came out and said, ‘We’re just a big tent party.’”

Matthews said that description creates a problem for Democrats who do not identify with the DSA.

“Well, the problem with the big tent defense is every Democrat has to defend all this crap coming from the left. They’ve got to say, ‘I believe in all this crazy stuff, and that makes me a Democrat.’ You’ve got to say, ‘No, no, I’m not a member of the DSA, and here’s why,’ and make it very clear.”

The remarks attracted attention because Matthews is a longtime Democratic political commentator and former host of Hardball on MSNBC.

His comments represented a criticism of the party from within its own political-media orbit rather than from a Republican candidate or conservative commentator.

The discussion followed the Wisconsin Democratic primary, where the influence of the party’s progressive wing has been closely watched.

The results also raised questions about whether candidates associated with the Democratic establishment could outperform expectations against candidates supported by the party’s socialist and progressive activists.

Matthews argued that the positions associated with the DSA could create a political burden for other Democrats.

Instead of allowing candidates to rely on the party’s broad coalition as a defense, he said Democrats who disagree with the DSA need to make that distinction clear to voters.

The debate comes amid a larger argument within the Democratic Party over immigration enforcement, national defense, criminal justice and the role of socialist organizations in Democratic campaigns.

Matthews’ comments also highlighted a practical problem for Democrats running in districts or states where voters may not share the views of the party’s most progressive activists.

Candidates must decide whether to embrace those positions, reject them, or attempt to maintain distance while remaining part of the same political coalition.

The DSA’s influence has become a recurring issue in Democratic politics, particularly as progressive candidates have sought to expand their role in primary elections.

While the organization and its supporters have gained attention in several races, Matthews’ remarks suggest that their growing visibility may also be creating friction within the broader Democratic coalition.

The Wisconsin primary may have provided a setback for some DSA-backed candidates, but the movement remains active in Democratic politics.

The question now is whether mainstream Democrats can separate themselves from the organization’s agenda without alienating the progressive voters and activists who have become an important part of the party’s coalition.

For Matthews, the answer appears to involve making those differences explicit rather than relying on the “big tent” argument to cover every faction of the Democratic Party.

The exchange illustrates the continuing fight over what the Democratic Party should represent heading into the 2026 election cycle.

News

Fort Hood Soldiers Can Now Buy Beer and Hard Seltzer Right at the Dining Hall

Soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas, can now add a cold beer or hard seltzer to their dining hall order. Army officials confirmed that the newly opened 42 Bistro has become the first of the service’s modernized dining venues to sell alcohol.

The bistro opened in February as part of the Army’s effort to rethink how soldiers eat on post. Officials describe it as a “campus-style dining venue,” modeled after the cafeterias commonly found at colleges and universities.

Unlike a traditional Army dining facility, 42 Bistro is operated by a private contractor and offers more flexible choices. The concept is meant to give troops modern food options without turning every meal into another exercise in standing in line and accepting whatever lands on the tray.

“Our soldiers are adults, so we’re treating them accordingly,” said Lt. Col. Joseph Payton, a spokesperson for III Corps at Fort Hood. “This provides another dining option for eligible patrons while maintaining the standards of responsible alcohol consumption expected across the installation.”

Beer, wine, hard seltzers and ciders will be available only to customers who meet the legal drinking age. Fort Hood officials said sales will run from 5 to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday and from noon to 7 p.m. on weekends.

Those limited hours make clear that the Army is not replacing morning coffee with hard cider. The policy simply gives eligible soldiers another choice while keeping alcohol sales within rules established by installation leadership.

Soldiers living in the barracks traditionally use meal plans to purchase food at Army dining facilities. At 42 Bistro, they instead use “freedom dollars” to cover breakfast, lunch and dinner, giving them more flexibility over how their meal benefits are spent.

Alcohol is not included in those meal benefits, however, so soldiers must pay for it separately. Purchases require cash or a card, meaning Uncle Sam is still buying the cheeseburger, not the beer sitting beside it.

Other campus style dining halls may eventually follow Fort Hood’s lead. Army Materiel Command officials said each of the service’s new venues will be allowed to offer alcohol when senior commanders decide that doing so is appropriate.

At Fort Hood, the decision was approved by Lt. Gen. Kevin Admiral, the commanding general of III Armored Corps. Admiral is also expected to become the next commander of Army Europe and Africa.

The Army first announced in January 2025 that private companies would be brought in to operate cafeterias modeled after college dining centers. Later that year, officials revealed plans to overhaul at least 10 dining halls across the United States, including facilities in Alaska and Hawaii.

Officials previously said alcohol sales could provide private contractors with another source of revenue. That matters because contractors need enough customer traffic and sales to keep these modern dining facilities operating, a basic economic reality that even military bureaucracy occasionally recognizes.

Additional campus style venues have opened in recent months, including the Stack House Bistro at Fort Carson, Colorado, and the Belvedere Bistro at Fort Drum, New York. Army officials did not say whether commanders at either installation are considering alcohol sales.

The broader goal is to persuade more soldiers to use dining facilities and the meal benefits already available to them. To accomplish that mission, the Army is testing takeout, delivery, longer operating hours and food selections designed to appeal to younger troops.

Some Army dining facilities have closed because too few soldiers were using them. Those closures have contributed to “food desert” problems on installations, leaving troops with limited access to convenient meals despite money already being deducted for dining plans.

Early results suggest the new approach may be working. An NBC report found that Fort Carson experienced a threefold increase in soldiers using their meal plans after its redesigned dining facility opened in April.

Fort Hood’s decision adds another incentive for soldiers to remain on post, eat at the bistro and spend time with fellow troops. It also treats service members like responsible adults while preserving commander oversight, legal age restrictions and the Army’s standards for alcohol consumption.

For soldiers accustomed to rigid dining schedules and limited menus, the change is a notable quality of life upgrade. A meal plan that offers modern food, flexible service and an optional cold drink may prove more effective than another lecture about why troops should visit an empty dining hall.

News

Jen Psaki Accidentally Exposes Democrat Bosses Who Pick Nominees Behind Voters’ Backs [WATCH]

Former White House press secretary Jen Psaki made a striking admission during MSNOW’s coverage of the Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial primary, saying Democratic Party leaders once played a decisive role in selecting nominees rather than leaving the choice entirely to voters, as reported by the Gateway Pundit.

Psaki made the comments while discussing how the Democratic nomination process has changed over time.

Her remarks quickly drew attention online because of the contrast between the party’s emphasis on democracy and her description of how its nomination system previously operated.

“We both remember well when party leadership really selected the nominees.”

Psaki continued by saying the practice was understood inside political circles even when it was not openly described that way.

“Now, you would never say it that way exactly, but they would. Now we can [say it]. We’re free!”

She explained that party leaders could influence the outcome by directing resources and endorsements toward preferred candidates.

“They really did, because they would put money behind it. They would endorse. And now it looks very much like party leaders are not picking the nominees.”

Psaki added:

“In fact, party leaders pushing nominees is a negative.”

The comments came during discussion of the Wisconsin Democratic primary for governor, where polling had drawn attention ahead of Election Day.

Psaki also addressed polling that had projected a substantial advantage for Democratic Socialist candidate Francesca Hong.

According to the discussion on the program, many polls had shown Hong with a double-digit lead heading into the primary.

Psaki said the actual vote count was developing differently, with establishment-backed candidate David Crowley performing better than expected.

“Okay, I know we’ve been talking about this, but it’s just worth restating that most polls headed into election day show Democratic Socialist Francesca Hong with a VERY safe double-digit lead in the Wisconsin gubernatorial primary.”

“And she could certainly still win…but as you can see, with a little more than half of the vote in Francesca Hong is down to the establishment-backed candidate, David Crowley, which is, I think, not where most people expected this to sit, with 51% of the vote in…”

The race also raised questions about early voting and turnout. Psaki pointed to more than 100,000 votes cast during July, including early and mail-in voting.

“What’s interesting to me, one of the things is that there was over 100,000 people who voted in July, and during early vote and vote by mail. That was a period of time where Crowley was in and out of the…he was in and out of the race, right?”

The Wisconsin primary became a useful case study in the broader discussion about the relationship between party organizations, endorsements and voters.

Psaki’s comments specifically focused on the difference between the traditional influence of Democratic Party leadership and the current political environment, where she said party leaders increasingly face resistance when attempting to push particular candidates.

The remarks also highlighted the limitations of polling in a closely watched primary.

Hong’s reported polling advantage did not necessarily translate into the same margin once votes were counted, while Crowley’s position improved as returns came in.

The discussion comes as both major parties continue to debate the proper role of party organizations in primary elections.

Party endorsements, fundraising networks and campaign infrastructure can give candidates significant advantages, but primary voters ultimately determine nominees through the electoral process.

Psaki’s description of the Democratic Party’s past nomination practices is likely to fuel additional discussion about how much influence party leadership should have over the candidates presented to voters.

For a party that has frequently emphasized the importance of democratic participation, Psaki’s admission provided an unusually candid glimpse into how political insiders viewed the nomination process in earlier years.

The Wisconsin results also provided another reminder that election-night expectations can change quickly once voters, rather than pollsters or party strategists, have their say.


Scroll to Top