News

F-35 Boss Admits Jet Fleet Has Outrun Its Own Support System as Readiness Tanks to Record Lows
News

F-35 Boss Admits Jet Fleet Has Outrun Its Own Support System as Readiness Tanks to Record Lows

/

The man running America’s most expensive fighter jet program just admitted what warfighters already know: the F-35 fleet has grown faster than Washington’s ability to maintain it.

Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Gregory Masiello, who heads the F-35 Joint Program Office, told senators this week that the world’s most advanced stealth jet has “outgrown” the system designed to support it.

That confession comes on the heels of a stinging Government Accountability Office (GAO) report showing the jet’s readiness has sunk to an all-time low.

Appearing before the Senate Airland Subcommittee, Masiello defended a massive $13 billion budget request for fiscal year 2027 — including 85 new jets and full funding for upgrades and modernization.

But while the Pentagon continues to pour billions into expanding the F-35 fleet, about three-quarters of the aircraft can’t perform all of their assigned missions.

According to GAO, only one in four jets are fully mission capable. Even Masiello, while disputing the methodology, admitted that roughly half the fleet can only fly limited sorties.

That’s a staggering statistic when considering the F-35 was sold as the ultimate answer to American air dominance. Back in 2016, the U.S. had 170 aircraft. Now there are over 1,300 operational jets across the world.

Marine F-35B Stealth Fighter Squadron Joins Indo-Pacific Force Posture in Japan
An F-35 Lightning II performs a maneuver Sept. 12, 2016 at Luke Air Force Base, Ariz. This sortie marks the 10,000th hour for the F-35 at Luke. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Devante Williams)

But the supply chain, maintenance capability, and parts inventory have lagged far behind that explosive growth — a classic example of bureaucratic planning failing to keep pace with reality.

The general was candid about the shortfall. “If I have over 1,300 operational aircraft out there, I believe we have set and enabled a sustainment system for about 7 to 800,” Masiello told lawmakers.

That means America’s fifth-generation fleet is flying almost twice as many aircraft as the system was designed to handle. No wonder more jets are grounded than ready.

As readiness rates continue to crash, even the Marine Corps has been forced to accept incomplete aircraft.

Masiello confirmed that six F-35Bs were delivered without radars, with hopes of retrofitting new APG-85 units later. When pressed on whether a radar-less aircraft could be considered fully mission capable, he conceded it could not.

In other words, the Marines are taking jets that can’t fight and claiming progress. That may work in a PowerPoint presentation, but not in a real war.

Marine F-35B Stealth Fighter Squadron Joins Indo-Pacific Force Posture in Japan
The U.S. Air Force 354th Air Expeditionary Wing and Marine Aircraft Group 12 performed a capabilities demonstration during a pre-planned readiness exercise at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan, July 7, 2022. The demonstration included U.S. Marine Corps F/A-18 Hornets, F-35B Lighting IIs, KC-130J Super Hercules aircraft, and U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptors and F-35A Lighting II aircraft, showcasing a high level of readiness and joint service capability in support of a free and open Indo-Pacific. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Jackson Ricker)

Masiello minimized the problem as a matter of supply rather than a broken system. The program, he claimed, simply underbought spare parts during years of rapid growth.

To counter that, he touted a new “Global Support Solution Reset” — a $13.7 billion sustainment push aimed at restoring basic readiness through 2031. But critics note that’s yet another billion-dollar fix-it plan following years of avoidable neglect.

Software glitches, canopy durability and the aging maintenance system are also major drags on the fleet’s performance. Each jet’s stealthy skin and intricate electronics demand high upkeep, but depot capacity and engineering support have lagged.

Masiello admitted that the jets’ unique canopies have a short lifespan, which is a particularly acute issue on stealth fighters where surface integrity determines survival.

The Pentagon’s modernization effort isn’t faring much better. The Block 4 update — a critical technology package meant to upgrade sensors, radar, and electronic warfare systems — is years behind schedule. Only 22 of 55 planned enhancements have been delivered.

Power and cooling shortfalls have delayed integration of new systems, and the engine upgrade needed to handle that load won’t arrive until 2031.

The longer these delays drag on, the harder it becomes to keep the F-35 ahead of emerging Chinese and Russian air threats.

GAO has been waving red flags for a decade, issuing 46 sustainment-related recommendations since 2014 and repeating calls for performance accountability in F-35 contracts.

F-35A Lightning II 'Frankenjet' Returns to the Skies After Years-Long Repair

Yet only 14 of those have been implemented. Lawmakers pressed Masiello on why so many fixes remain “in process.” He ducked the question, offering no specific tally of completed reforms. Washington has become skilled at promising transformations that never seem to materialize once the cameras are off.

Even as the oversight watchdogs sound alarms, members of Congress across party lines still praise the F-35’s unmatched stealth and combat capability. Former Navy pilot Sen. Mark Kelly, the Arizona Democrat, said after flying against an F-35 in an F-16, he “could not see it on radar even when I’m looking right at it.” That raw capability keeps the jet indispensable to U.S. air power — even if it’s too often sitting in maintenance bays instead of on the flight line.

The global dimension only complicates matters further. U.S. allies in Europe and the Pacific are buying F-35s faster than the logistics network can handle, pulling from the same strained spares pool.

Masiello disclosed that Poland plans to double its current 32-jet buy. That’s good news for deterrence against Vladimir Putin, but bad news for the parts pipeline already stretched to the breaking point.

Despite its problems, the F-35 remains the cornerstone of allied airpower and the most lethal strike platform in the sky. Masiello reminded senators that in recent combat operations against Iranian targets, the jet was “the only aircraft that can hit some of the targets” and “act as a quarterback of the joint force.”

F-35’s Near Miss Over Yemen Raises Questions About U.S. Strategy and Stealth Jet’s Role

That’s why America can’t afford to let bureaucracy and budget infighting cripple this essential tool of deterrence.

The reality is simple: the F-35 works when it works. But the system supporting it is barely keeping the wings attached. Until Congress fully funds sustainment, modernization, and spare parts production — and until the War Department fixes its contracting culture — pilots will remain grounded while America’s adversaries close the technological gap.

President Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth have pushed for stronger accountability in military programs like this, and that’s exactly what it will take to get America’s premiere jet back into fighting shape.

One Question Shattered the Democrats’ Phony Defense of Socialism [WATCH]
News

One Question Shattered the Democrats’ Phony Defense of Socialism [WATCH]

/

The Democratic Party is confronting renewed debate over the role of socialism within its ranks following recent primary elections in New York City and a televised interview in which a Democratic senator declined to identify a successful example of socialism when asked, as reported by PJ Media.

Political observers have pointed to a growing divide between establishment Democrats and candidates aligned with democratic socialist policies, particularly after three socialist candidates backed by Zohran Mamdani defeated establishment Democrats in New York City primaries.

The primary results also drew attention to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., who won his own primary but was met by socialist-aligned activists chanting, “You’re next!” after his victory.

The developments come as polling has suggested some voters believe the Democratic Party has shifted further to the left in recent years.

A CNN survey conducted in February found that the percentage of Americans who believe the Democratic Party has become too liberal reached its highest level recorded by the poll.

During CNN’s discussion of the survey, senior data analyst Harry Enten said, “The Democrats are moving to the left, the far left is gaining power, and there could be some electoral repercussions because what we see right now is voters — the clear majority — say that they are too liberal.”

The debate received additional attention during a CNBC interview with Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester, D-Del., when anchor Joe Kernen asked her to identify a place where socialism had been successful.

Kernen asked the senator to name “one place where it has been beneficial.”

Rather than answering directly, Rochester responded, “Is that another question, or is that for the next interview?”

Kernen replied that the question was “definitely for you” and again asked for “one place where it has been beneficial.”

Rochester again declined to provide an example, responding, “Well, when you have me come back on, we can talk about all the races.”

As the interview concluded, Kernen told the senator, “Get your answer ready.”

The exchange quickly circulated on social media, with political commentators from both parties weighing in on what the interview revealed about the Democratic Party’s messaging on socialism.

The discussion follows a series of political developments in which candidates identifying with democratic socialist policies have gained greater visibility within Democratic politics.

Their victories in local and state elections have prompted renewed questions about the direction of the party and how Democratic leaders plan to address differing views within their coalition.

The New York City primaries highlighted those tensions as socialist-backed candidates defeated several establishment Democrats, underscoring the growing influence of the party’s progressive wing.

Jeffries’ post-election encounter with activists also reflected those divisions, as demonstrators directed chants of “You’re next!” toward the House Democratic leader despite his own primary victory.

The issue has become part of a broader national discussion over how Democrats should position themselves heading into future elections.

While progressive activists have continued advocating for policies associated with democratic socialism, other Democrats have emphasized more moderate approaches in an effort to appeal to a broader electorate.

The February CNN polling cited during the debate has been referenced by analysts examining voter perceptions of the party’s ideological direction.

Whether the Democratic Party embraces its progressive wing more fully or attempts to appeal to moderate voters is expected to remain a key political question as candidates prepare for upcoming election cycles.

The recent New York primary results, the exchange between Rochester and Kernen, and the ongoing public debate over socialism have all added to that discussion.

Naval Academy Reinstates Mandatory Short Haircuts for Female Plebes
News

Naval Academy Reinstates Mandatory Short Haircuts for Female Plebes

/

The U.S. Naval Academy is turning back the clock to restore one of its oldest and most symbolic traditions—short hair for incoming female midshipmen.

In an age where the military has been pressured to bend to every passing trend, the academy is reminding future officers that uniform discipline, not personal preference, is the heart of service.

Starting again this summer in Annapolis, all incoming women reporting for Induction Day must have their hair cut to the chin.

The academy leadership described it as a “visible symbol” of transition from civilian to military life, where incoming “plebes” learn that joining the Navy or Marine Corps means putting the team above self.

The policy isn’t new. In fact, it dates all the way back to 1976, when the first women entered the Naval Academy. Back then, the haircut rule wasn’t about appearance—it was about equality, unity, and a shared standard.

For over forty years it stood as a powerful tradition until 2019, when it was scrapped under the guise of “modernization.”

Now, under restored leadership and renewed focus on readiness and professionalism, the rule is back.

Officials say this decision reinstates a common standard across gender lines. “The haircut marks the moment when civilians begin setting aside individual preferences and start embracing the responsibilities, expectations, and identity of future Navy and Marine Corps officers,” the academy stated.

United States Naval Academy Lockdown After Threats, One Person Injured and Airlifted

In short, it’s not about hair—it’s about discipline and the beginning of transformation.

Predictably, the change has sparked some online chatter. A few commenters were “shocked” and complained that the return to short haircuts symbolized a backward step.

But others, including many seasoned officers and alumni, applauded the decision as a long-overdue reset to the institution’s roots.

After years of political correctness creeping into military culture, this move signals that the naval service is once again placing unity and standards above fashion trends.

Navy Lieutenant Commander Kellie Sbrocchi, an academy graduate and active-duty officer, put the moment in perspective for new midshipmen.

“This is your first test, not because the Naval Academy wants you to hate your haircut, but because it’s about learning that you are more than your comfort zone and more than your appearance,” Sbrocchi said.

Her words reflect the purpose behind the policy: the military’s job isn’t to make recruits feel good about their individuality—it’s to mold leaders who can serve under pressure.

Julie Kubal, a 1996 graduate, echoed those sentiments, recalling that when she entered the academy, the haircut was simply an expectation. “It didn’t seem like that big of a deal in the grand scheme of all the things I had to worry about,” she said.

Like any rite of passage, she explained, the haircut marked a transition from civilian life to military readiness.

Only after months of plebe summer did growing hair back feel like a genuine reward for enduring the process and coming out stronger.

Critics, of course, frame this as some kind of regression. Kubal herself noted that in today’s environment, “where standards are being questioned,” such reversals may seem “punitive.”

A Marine General Will Command the Naval Academy for the First Time in 180-Year History
Lt. Gen. Michael J. Borgschulte, who lettered as a linebacker at the Naval Academy in 1990, gave a pep talk to the team in Annapolis, Maryland, days before their annual game against the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in December 2024. Navy photo by Ronnie Gillis.

But in reality, bringing back short hair isn’t punitive—it’s restorative. It reinforces that men and women at the Naval Academy are held to the same expectations and that military training is about shared sacrifice, not personal expression.

For far too long, parts of the military establishment have been distracted by social engineering experiments and media optics over combat readiness.

The decision to restore the short-hair requirement suggests a quiet revolt against that mindset—a reassertion that America’s officer corps begins with discipline, tradition, and the humility to follow orders before giving them.

Historically, grooming standards have never existed to please the mirror. They exist because they represent uniformity, practicality, and the willingness to conform to mission before self. Every Marine knows that lesson by heart.

Every sailor who’s seen action at sea knows personal comfort comes last. The Naval Academy’s call to return to its core symbols of unity is a small but meaningful step back in that direction.

There’s also an unmistakable message here about identity. The academy’s leadership is telling future officers that military identity is not defined by hairstyle or external appearance—it’s measured by character, commitment, and the ability to lead under pressure.

That’s the foundation our War Department, under strong leadership like Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, continues to stand on.

For new plebes walking through the gates of Annapolis this summer, that first haircut will be more than just a trim—it’s their first lesson in humility and service.

The Navy’s officer pipeline doesn’t need influencers or activists. It needs warriors who understand that real equality is forged in shared sacrifice, not special exceptions.

Tradition is what keeps the force disciplined and lethal.

The Naval Academy’s move to revive its standard haircut isn’t nostalgia—it’s leadership. It’s the kind of quiet correction that signals America’s military academies just might be finding their way back to the fundamentals of strength, order, and purpose.

Recruits Ordered Back to the Needle as Pentagon Reverses Course on Flu Shots
News

Recruits Ordered Back to the Needle as Pentagon Reverses Course on Flu Shots

/

The Pentagon has quietly pulled back its promise of vaccine choice, walking back War Secretary Pete Hegseth’s earlier move that allowed troops to make their own decision about flu shots.

Despite April’s announcement that flu vaccination would be voluntary across all branches, the War Department has now reinstated the requirement for all new recruits entering basic training.

A Pentagon official confirmed that this reversal falls under an “exception to policy” granted to the military services, meaning that every recruit will once again have to roll up their sleeve before taking their oath.

The move has sparked confusion within the ranks and some frustration among those who saw Hegseth’s original decision as a return to personal liberty in the armed forces.

According to Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell, all four services received exemptions allowing them to reimpose the requirement at boot camps. This means the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps will all demand flu shots for incoming trainees.

The Navy was first to publicly confirm the decision, stating that the requirement was approved by the Under Secretary of War.

“Navy recruit training currently includes the Influenza vaccine as an exception to policy approved by the Under Secretary of War,” a Navy official told Task & Purpose. That’s bureaucratic language for: the Pentagon says it’s optional—unless you’re new.

The shift comes after reports of flu outbreaks among Air Force trainees. On June 16, one Air Force basic trainee died of flu-like symptoms at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas.

A Congressman later claimed that over 200 recruits were sick at the same installation. When the policy had been voluntary, only about 40 percent of trainees at Lackland had decided to take the shot.

An Air Force spokesperson admitted that medical teams have been scrambling to contain the outbreak.

“Over the last three weeks, the 37th Training Wing, in close coordination with the 59th Medical Wing, has been managing a localized influenza outbreak among trainees at Basic Military Training,” the spokesperson said. The base has reportedly implemented isolation and treatment measures for those showing symptoms.

Military Branches Push Back with 'Robust Exceptions' on Hegseth's Freedom-Based Flu Shot Policy
A 507th Medical Group technician administers a flu vaccine to a member of the 507th Air Refueling Wing at Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma, on Dec. 3, 2022. (Master Sgt. Grady Epperly/U.S. Air Force)

Even so, this explanation raises more questions than it answers. Were the outbreaks significant enough to justify a complete reversal of policy? Many in the ranks suspect that risk aversion, not readiness, drove this swift change in direction.

Undersecretary of Personnel and Readiness Anthony Tata reportedly signed off on the exceptions for multiple departments, including the Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, NSA, and War Health Agency. According to Parnell, those decisions were made after “thorough risk assessments” meant to safeguard “operational readiness, lethality, and force generation.”

In short, it’s the standard Washington language that always appears before another mandate.

Hegseth’s initial directive in April had been celebrated by many troops who saw it as a long-overdue correction to years of heavy-handed vaccine orders.

After all, in the Biden-era Pentagon, vaccine mandates became a political flashpoint, creating tension between civilian leadership and the rank-and-file warriors tasked with defending the nation.

Hegseth’s new policy had symbolized a cultural restoration—a belief that America’s fighting men and women could be trusted with their own health decisions.

Now, however, the War Department seems intent on sending the opposite message to new recruits. Instead of treating them as responsible adults preparing for service, the bureaucracy appears to view them as liabilities needing constant government supervision. It’s a sharp contrast to Hegseth’s philosophy of building tough, self-reliant warriors.

Medical personnel at Lackland did confirm they are treating affected trainees with Tamiflu, an antiviral medication used to ease flu symptoms. But even as they do, questions remain about whether the War Department’s response is proportionate.

Military Drops Flu Shot Mandate 'Effective Immediately', Citing Restored Freedom
The flu vaccine has been required annually for U.S. military personnel since the 1950s. (Senior Airman Andrew Garavito/U.S. Air Force)

Mandating a medical procedure for tens of thousands of recruits because of one tragic death may show more concern for political optics than genuine operational necessity.

Ironically, this episode also places the Pentagon at odds with its own stated goal of empowering the services to manage health decisions locally.

The fact that the services are rushing to comply with “exceptions to policy” granted from Washington proves that the centralized reflex remains alive and well.

Many in the military community see Hegseth’s broader effort—to restore freedom, strengthen morale, and end unnecessary mandates—as a fight worth having. Internal pushback like this only shows how deeply rooted Washington’s bureaucratic instincts remain.

The War Department can insist that this is about readiness, but every soldier, sailor, and airman watching knows what it truly is: another reminder that the Pentagon struggles to let go of control once it’s had a taste of it.

Radical Brooklyn Coffee Shop Owner Calls Israel ‘Nazi Germany,’ Bans Congressman Dan Goldman Publicly
News

Radical Brooklyn Coffee Shop Owner Calls Israel ‘Nazi Germany,’ Bans Congressman Dan Goldman Publicly

/

The owner of a Brooklyn coffee shop that recently sparked controversy by publicly banning a pro-Israel member of Congress has come under renewed scrutiny over a series of social media posts criticizing Israel, including comments comparing the Jewish state to Nazi Germany and accusing it of genocide, as reported by The New York Post.

Parviz Mukhamadkulov, founder of Poetica Coffee in Park Slope, has repeatedly commented on LinkedIn posts discussing Israel, the war against Hamas, and the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks.

His online activity includes statements defending Hamas-related narratives, criticizing Israel’s military campaign, and attacking Israeli leaders.

In one response to a video posted by United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, Mukhamadkulov wrote:

 “Israel is the Nazi Germany of current time.”

His comments also extended to discussions about the Holocaust. Responding to a photograph of an emaciated young girl wearing an Auschwitz prisoner uniform shortly before she was executed, Mukhamadkulov wrote:

“This is a horrible story. That is why it’s important we talk against the genocide Israel is committing against Palestinians.”

In another exchange beneath a post by Guterres, Mukhamadkulov argued that Israel’s military campaign was unrelated to recovering hostages or protecting its citizens.

“Thinking Israel does anything remotely humane at this point is naive. It was never about hostages or about security. The IDF and the Israeli government depends on conflict to stay in power.”

Mukhamadkulov also posted comments accusing Israel of deliberately targeting children during its war against Hamas.

“Explain to me why Israel is killing babies?” he wrote in response to a video shared by TheJewishVoice founder David BenHooren.

The video included remarks from Hamas leader Khaled Mashal stating, “After October 7th, the Palestinian state will extend from the river to the sea.”

According to the Anti-Defamation League, the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is an antisemitic slogan and rallying cry used by Hamas supporters who seek Israel’s destruction through violent means.

The renewed attention follows an incident involving Poetica Coffee and Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y. Last week, Goldman stopped by the Park Slope coffee shop for a cup of coffee.

Afterward, the business publicly announced on Facebook that he would no longer be welcome because of his support for Israel.

The shop wrote:

“Hey Congressman Dan Goldman, we see that you stopped by our shop today for a coffee. Do you see how it doesn’t taste like genocide juice? Or are you still having a hard time telling the difference?”

The public message quickly spread online, drawing criticism from supporters of Israel and prompting federal attention.

Following the coffee shop’s decision to deny Goldman future service based on his support for Israel, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division opened an investigation into the matter.

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said the department considers the incident “potentially illegal” and announced that federal officials would investigate the circumstances surrounding Poetica Coffee’s actions.

Dhillon said the Justice Department will “bring an enforcement action” if the investigation determines one is warranted.

Mukhamadkulov’s past social media activity has since received additional attention as critics point to a pattern of statements attacking Israel and Israeli leadership, including posts referring to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “war criminal.”

The controversy comes against the backdrop of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, during which the terror group abducted 251 people and killed more than 1,200 men, women, and children in a surprise assault. Israel subsequently launched military operations against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

The Justice Department’s investigation into Poetica Coffee remains ongoing as federal officials examine whether the shop’s public refusal to serve a customer because of his support for Israel violated federal civil rights laws.

JPMorgan DEI Exec Fired: Caught on Video Dumping and Stealing Knicks Trash Can During Parade [WATCH]
News

JPMorgan DEI Exec Fired: Caught on Video Dumping and Stealing Knicks Trash Can During Parade [WATCH]

/

A JPMorgan Chase executive director has learned the hard way that woke titles and corporate slogans cannot cover up foolish behavior captured on camera.

Angie Baez, a forty year old diversity and inclusion specialist turned self-styled community engagement expert, was fired by the banking giant after viral footage showed her emptying a Knicks themed trash can onto a Manhattan sidewalk and walking away with it in broad daylight during the team’s championship parade.

The video spread quickly across social media, drawing mockery from those who have grown weary of the incessant virtue signaling from corporate America’s social justice class.

Dressed head to toe in Knicks gear, Baez was seen brazenly dumping street trash on the ground before casually strolling off with the blue and orange receptacle, a limited edition item made for the parade.

WATCH:

JPMorgan Chase confirmed to the New York Post that Baez “is no longer with the company” following an internal review of the incident.

A representative said the firm moved swiftly once they confirmed the identity of the employee in the viral clip.

Baez herself could not be reached for comment, and sources told the Post she had attended the parade in a personal capacity.

According to her now scrubbed LinkedIn profile, Baez had been promoted more than a year ago to executive director of community and industry engagement for card and connected commerce, a title that sounds straight out of the corporate diversity handbooks currently gathering dust across Wall Street.

Prior to her Chase tenure, she worked as an executive director of diversity, equity, and inclusion at the Infatuation, a lifestyle website the bank had acquired in its push into culture marketing.

Ironically, the Infatuation once described Baez as a bright voice whose “dedication to making a positive impact shines through in every aspect of her work.”

The bio praised her Bronx roots, Dominican heritage, and passion for creative storytelling, insisting she was “leading the way toward a more inclusive and equitable future.”

That future apparently included petty theft and littering on camera.

Baez’s background reads like a corporate bingo card of modern progressive career paths.

Before joining Chase, she served as a diversity and inclusion lead at Squarespace and held similar roles at Saks Fifth Avenue, Hudson’s Bay, and Saks Off 5th.

She even co founded a collective called Same Page Co., described as a queer, black, indigenous, and people of color owned talent agency whose mission was to expand media representation.

When contacted, representatives from Same Page Co. did not comment, though plenty of online observers were ready to point out the hypocrisy of the situation.

After all, the DEI crowd has spent years lecturing ordinary Americans about moral purity, privilege, and accountability while shielding their own from consequences.

JPMorgan, to its credit, finally took decisive action, something other institutions have often avoided for fear of offending the social justice caste.

While the theft itself might sound minor, it still violated New York City law.

The trash can in question would fall under property valued below one thousand dollars, making the offense a potential case of petit larceny, a misdemeanor usually carrying a fine or community service.

The public littering that occurred on video could earn a separate citation.

Even the New York City Department of Sanitation could not resist commenting.

“Dumping trash onto the street and stealing public property for your own personal use are both illegal, antisocial behaviors, and not what New Yorkers do. On top of all that, doing both on camera is incredibly stupid,” the agency said in a statement to the Post.

It was a blunt assessment that most sensible taxpayers would likely agree with.

The NYPD said it had not received any complaint regarding the trash can incident and that Baez has not been charged.

That may change if city officials decide the public embarrassment was not enough punishment.

Either way, the damage to her reputation is already severe, especially for someone whose professional identity revolved around “representation” and “community values.”

For critics of corporate diversity programs, the situation has become a potent symbol of how hollow much of that world has become.

DEI offices and consultants have siphoned billions in company funds while producing little more than slogans and public relations slideshows.

When one of their own gets caught quite literally dumping garbage on the street and stealing public property, it speaks volumes about what passes for leadership in that world.

Baez may try to relaunch herself in activist or media circles, though the viral clip will follow her.

It is a visual that cuts straight through the polished language of her career materials and exposes the hollowness of her moral branding. As one online commenter quipped, “She spent her career talking about inclusion. Now she is excluded from Wall Street.”

The incident might fade from headlines soon, but many Americans see it as a rare instance when consequences caught up with a member of the self righteous elite that thrives on preaching virtue while practicing something else entirely.

For once, a corporate DEI executive did not get a pass. Instead, she got pink slipped, and the public got another reminder of how absurd the class of professional progressives has become.

AI Supercharges the Kill Chain, But Humans Still Pull the Trigger
News

AI Supercharges the Kill Chain, But Humans Still Pull the Trigger

/

U.S. military leaders are making it clear that artificial intelligence is meant to be a powerful force multiplier—not a replacement for human judgment on the battlefield.

Even as the American war machine becomes more digital, generals and strategists emphasize that humans remain firmly in charge when it comes to pulling the trigger.

During the most recent operations against Iran, AI played a critical role in speeding up how fast targets were identified and hit. According to a sworn declaration from Cameron Stanley, the Pentagon’s chief digital and AI officer, the United States deployed over 2,000 munitions to 2,000 distinct targets in just 96 hours.

That kind of precision and speed would’ve been unthinkable without AI’s analytical muscle behind the scenes.

But the revelation raised eyebrows about just how deeply AI is embedded in what the military calls the “kill chain”—the process of finding, fixing, tracking, targeting, engaging, and assessing enemies. While skeptics worry about robots making life-and-death calls, commanders insist it’s still the men and women in uniform who make those choices.

Retired Army Gen. Joseph Votel, who led U.S. Central Command from 2016 to 2019, said this technology helps process information at speeds no human staff could match.

“We oftentimes were leaving a lot of information on the floor because we just didn’t have the processing capability,” Votel noted. “AI can sift through mountains of data faster than a room full of analysts.”

That kind of processing power means faster decisions and a far more lethal and effective strike capability. Still, the question remains whether an AI-assisted future could slip toward autonomy.

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. David Deptula, now dean of the Air Force Association’s Mitchell Institute, draws a hard line. “The critical distinction is between AI supporting the kill chain and AI controlling the kill chain,” he warned.

Deptula, who masterminded the 1991 Gulf War air campaign, argued that retaining “appropriate human judgment over the use of force” is the cornerstone of both ethics and U.S. policy.

America’s rules of engagement, he emphasized, rest on commanders having full moral authority and accountability—something no algorithm can replace.

The U.S. military has always used automation to some degree. Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Dean Korsak pointed out that even landmines are semi-autonomous weapons.

“Once emplaced, [a landmine] cannot distinguish friend from foe,” he said. The early tech may have been crude, but it revealed the enduring challenge of balancing autonomy with control.

That’s why today’s military technologists are doubling down on data quality, validation processes, and oversight.

Korsak underscored that “appropriate human oversight” is non-negotiable when autonomous systems enter the field. The more complex the system, the tighter that human leash has to be.

Meanwhile, rivals like China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran are sprinting in the opposite direction. Retired Lt. Gen. Ross Coffman, who helped lead U.S. Army Futures Command, says America’s adversaries are actively working on systems where AI doesn’t just assist but decides when to shoot.

“An example would be a weapon system with a sensor enabled with artificial intelligence that can detect movement and the weapon would automatically fire,” Coffman explained. “That’s what our adversaries are developing.”

That kind of thinking makes American commanders bristle. Giving machines the power to decide who lives or dies removes moral and tactical command—the essence of warfighting leadership. The U.S. military sees AI as a way to compress the time from intel to action, but never to surrender human agency.

The conversation speaks to a broader tension in modern warfare. On one hand, AI can cut through layers of bureaucracy and speed up decision-making so America can strike first and hard.

On the other, the use of algorithms in lethal operations raises questions of ethics, accountability, and international law.

Yet, as every warfighter knows, ethical warfare doesn’t mean sluggish warfare.

In fact, President Trump and War Secretary Pete Hegseth have long emphasized that American dominance comes from combining human willpower with the best tools technology can produce. AI is simply the next evolution of that doctrine.

Commanders want the world to know: America is not building Skynet or replacing warriors with robots.

It’s building smarter fighters who can make decisions faster while maintaining the moral compass that defines our military.

As AI continues its march onto the battlefield, one thing seems certain. Machines may speed up the kill chain—but Americans, not artificial code, will always call the shots.

Bongino’s Emergency Monologue: ‘The Evil’s Not Coming, The Evil Is Here’ [WATCH]
News

Bongino’s Emergency Monologue: ‘The Evil’s Not Coming, The Evil Is Here’ [WATCH]

/

Dan Bongino delivered an emotional message to his audience, urging Americans to recognize what he described as a defining moment for the country and calling on citizens to confront what he believes are growing threats to the nation’s future.

Bongino opened his remarks with a direct appeal, emphasizing that his comments were not intended as rhetorical flourishes but as a sincere request for action.

“Listen, please, please, I’m not figuratively begging. It’s a literal. I’m begging you, please,” Bongino said.

He argued that every generation throughout history has been confronted with unique challenges that required ordinary citizens to respond.

“Every generation has its fight. Every generation has dealt with this,” Bongino said.

According to Bongino, history demonstrates that evil actions are carried out by individuals willing to exploit others unless confronted by people prepared to resist them.

“There are a lot of human beings who have the capacity to do very stupid, very evil things, and good men and women like you out there in the audience have to wear the armor of God and go out there and fight this stuff,” Bongino said.

Bongino acknowledged that many Americans simply want to enjoy their daily lives and spend time with their families, but argued that current events make disengagement impossible.

“I know we just want to live our lives. I know you just want to like hit a movie or a soccer game with your kids on the weekend, but this fight’s at your doorstep,” Bongino said.

He rejected any suggestion that his language was exaggerated for dramatic effect.

“This is not melodrama, it’s not hyperbole for effect. I don’t need it, I don’t have any time for it,” Bongino said.

Instead, Bongino maintained that the United States is facing a serious threat requiring immediate attention.

“This country is under attack,” Bongino said.

Drawing on historical imagery, Bongino compared today’s circumstances to moments when Americans sounded warnings during earlier national crises.

“Every generation has its fight. There were Paul Reveres and Paulette Reveres running through the street, maybe not on horseback right now, sounding the alarm,” Bongino said.

He referenced recent events in New York City as evidence supporting his concerns.

“What happened in New York City last night? Again, the evil’s not coming. The evil is here,” Bongino said.

Bongino also said additional information would soon become public and argued that the evidence would reinforce his warnings.

“We’ve got receipts incoming evidence in coming that if it doesn’t frighten you it’s because you want the country to fail and you want the destruction that’s going to follow, that’s the only, that’s the only excuse, that’s the only excuse,” Bongino said.

He told viewers that his program would continue presenting factual information supported by documentation.

“We got a big show today. I got a lot to talk about,” Bongino said.

Bongino argued that once viewers examine the information he intends to present, they will have to decide how to respond.

“And once you’re done again with this series of fact-based, in their own words, data and receipts,” Bongino said.

He concluded by delivering a forceful condemnation of those whom he believes tolerate or accommodate the threats he described.

“If you’re accommodating this, ladies and gentlemen, you are an enemy of this country. You are a traitor to this country,” Bongino said.

Bongino said his criticism was directed at people whom he believes ignore or excuse calls for societal collapse and political violence.

“When people are openly talking about the freaking collapse of Western civilization, and bringing violence here. Openly talking about it, and you’re accommodating it,” Bongino said.

He closed by emphasizing that he chose his words intentionally.

“You were a traitor, and I use that word carefully and deliberately. You are a traitor,” Bongino said.

WATCH:

Stephen Miller Delivers the Harsh Reality of Today’s Democratic Party [WATCH]
News

Stephen Miller Delivers the Harsh Reality of Today’s Democratic Party [WATCH]

/

White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller argued that the Democratic Party has fundamentally changed from the coalition it once was, saying it has abandoned the political center in favor of what he described as a radical ideological agenda.

Miller contrasted today’s political environment with earlier decades, when he said both major parties included a broader range of viewpoints.

“Look, we used to have a country, you could pick what time period, maybe say the 1980s with Tip O’Neill and Ronald Reagan,” Miller said.

According to Miller, Democrats at that time ranged from center-left to center-right, creating room for ideological diversity within the party.

“We used to have a country where you had a center-left Democrat party, really a center, I would say a center to center left with many members who were actually center right,” Miller said.

He pointed to groups commonly referred to as Reagan Democrats and Blue Dog Democrats as examples of that political spectrum.

“These were called Reagan Democrats or Blue dog Democrat, so that was the spectrum the Democrat party lived in, from center left to center right,” Miller said.

Miller contrasted that with what he described as the Republican Party’s traditional conservative philosophy.

“Then you had a, then you had a Republican party, right, a conservative party,” Miller said.

He argued that the Democratic Party has since abandoned its previous ideological range.

“And over time, the Democrat party has abandoned all of that,” Miller said.

Instead, Miller said the party has embraced what he characterized as a revolutionary political movement.

“And they have instead adopted this radical revolutionary, and in many cases violent ideology that wants to tear America down and destroy everything that we know and love, from top to bottom,” Miller said.

Miller described that agenda as one promoting widespread disorder and weakening law enforcement.

“Right, living in a state of total anarchy, without police, without law enforcement, where criminals can rape and maim and murder with impunity,” Miller said.

He also argued that the movement influences education and culture in ways he believes undermine traditional American values.

“Where your kids are taught from the age of two to hate America, to hate their God, to hate their parents, to hate their family, to even hate their own gender, that’s their agenda,” Miller said.

According to Miller, he does not believe there is room for compromise with those ideas.

“And no, you cannot a middle ground with that,” Miller said.

Miller then pointed to President Donald Trump’s political movement as an alternative that he said appeals to Americans across party lines.

“Ultimately, what President Trump is doing and what he is leading is an America First movement,” Miller said.

He argued that the movement seeks to attract Democrats who no longer identify with the direction of their party.

“That says we need Democrats to come vote for us to leave that insanity,” Miller said.

Miller concluded by warning that the nation faces serious consequences if, in his view, the Democratic Party’s current direction continues unchecked.

“Because ultimately that’s just a death knell for America,” Miller said.

WATCH:

Establishment Democrats ‘Get Their Butts Kicked’ as Radical Insurgents Take Over NYC [WATCH]
News

Establishment Democrats ‘Get Their Butts Kicked’ as Radical Insurgents Take Over NYC [WATCH]

/

A series of Democratic primary victories by candidates backed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has intensified debate over the direction of the Democratic Party, with CNN political commentator Van Jones describing the results as a major setback for the party’s establishment, as reported by Townhall.

The primary elections resulted in victories for all three congressional candidates endorsed by Mamdani, marking a significant night for the party’s progressive wing and raising questions about the influence of its more traditional leadership.

Among the most closely watched races was New York’s 10th Congressional District, where former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander defeated incumbent Rep. Dan Goldman.

Lander secured nearly 65 percent of the vote, ending Goldman’s bid for another term in Congress.

Goldman, who was first elected in 2022, became nationally known for serving as lead majority counsel during President Donald Trump’s first impeachment inquiry and later as lead counsel to House impeachment managers during the Senate trial.

Following the election results, Van Jones said the Democratic Party was experiencing a growing divide between its longtime leadership and insurgent progressive candidates.

“This is a battle between the establishment and this insurgency. And the roof is collapsing on the Democratic party establishment tonight,” Jones said during CNN’s election coverage.

Republicans also reacted to the election results, arguing the victories reflected a broader ideological shift within the Democratic Party.

National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Mike Marinella issued a statement criticizing the outcome.

“Tonight wasn’t just a bad night for so-called ‘Leader’ Hakeem Jeffries. It was the night the Democrat establishment officially surrendered to Zohran Mamdani and the socialist wing of their party,” Marinella said.

“Every House Democrat, in safe and competitive districts alike, will now answer to the radicals calling the shots. And Americans should be terrified by where the Democrat Party is headed.”

Fox News national correspondent Bill Melugin also summarized the night’s results, noting that candidates endorsed by Mamdani prevailed in all three House primaries.

According to Melugin, Darializa Avila Chevalier won the Democratic primary in New York’s 13th Congressional District.

He wrote that Chevalier has advocated abolishing prisons, abolishing ICE, abolishing borders, defunding the police, and has stated that “all deportations are wrong,” including for violent criminals.

Melugin also noted a prior social media post in which Chevalier wrote, “I forgot to get napkins, so I just wiped my hand on the American flag behind me.”

Melugin also highlighted Claire Valdez’s victory in New York’s 7th Congressional District.

According to his summary, Valdez supports granting citizenship and voting rights to illegal immigrants, using taxpayer funds for transgender medical treatments, and eliminating private health insurance.

Brad Lander’s victory in New York’s 10th Congressional District completed what Melugin described as a clean sweep for Mamdani-backed candidates.

Melugin noted that Lander has supported abolishing ICE, forgiving all outstanding federal student loan debt, estimated at nearly $2 trillion, and expanding the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Mamdani gets a clean sweep, a bad night for Hakeem Jeffries, and big questions for where the Democratic Party is heading,” Melugin wrote.

The primary results highlighted growing tensions within the Democratic Party as progressive candidates continue challenging incumbents backed by establishment figures.

Goldman’s defeat was among the night’s highest-profile losses, removing one of Congress’ most prominent anti-Trump Democrats after a single term.

The outcome also places renewed attention on how Democratic leadership will respond as progressive candidates continue gaining ground in primary contests ahead of the general election.


Scroll to Top