Mamdani just did it! A deeply troubling line was crossed!

This is just horrible for our Jewish friends in NYC... Zohran Kwame Mamdani, the Mayor of New York City, has revoked the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism a definition widely recognized as a critical tool for identifying and confronting modern anti-Semitism.

At the same time, he rescinded an executive order prohibiting New York City employees from participating in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

These actions matter... By removing the IHRA definition, Mayor Mamdani has weakened protections for Jewish communities, making it harder to identify anti-Semitism when it disguises itself as “criticism of Israel.” By lifting restrictions on BDS, he has reopened the door for city-sanctioned discrimination against the Jewish People.

Let’s be clear Free speech does not protect hate speech. And anti-Semitism whether overt or rebranded is hate. What is happening in New York is not isolated. It is part of a broader, coordinated effort to normalize anti-Semitism, delegitimize Israel, and silence those who speak their biblical truths.

As anti-Semitism becomes more embedded in public policy and civic life because of this evil thinking. Silence is not an option. We Americans need to protect the Jewish people who are attacked, and  standing firm for truth, for Israel, and for biblical justice. Everyone has the right to freedom of speech, and worship in this country, and i'm agnostic I don't practice any religion, and I'm 100% against this move by Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

BREAKING: Judge Hannah Dugan FOUND GUILTY OF OBSTRUCTION!

A Wisconsin state judge, Hannah Dugan, is now facing a federal criminal trial following an FBI arrest tied to actions she allegedly took while on the bench. The case centers on whether a state-level judge improperly interfered with federal immigration enforcement by directing ICE agents to follow courthouse procedures during an attempted arrest near a courtroom.

Prosecutors argue the judge’s actions amounted to unlawful interference with federal law enforcement. The defense, however, maintains that Judge Dugan was following established courthouse protocols and acted within her judicial and administrative responsibilities by referring ICE agents to courthouse leadership rather than acting independently.

At stake in this case is a broader legal question about the limits of judicial authority, the balance between state courts and federal agencies, and how far a judge’s control extends beyond the courtroom itself. The outcome could have implications for future cases involving courthouse operations, judicial discretion, and federal enforcement actions. This video breaks down what happened, what each side is arguing, and why this trial is drawing national attention.