R Magic Brow

Shortly following his historic election victory last November, President Trump nominated loyal ally Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Of all his nominations, Stefanik faced the least opposition in her Senate confirmation hearing — even walking away with some Democrat support. Last week, however, Trump pulled her nomination, citing fear that Stefanik’s House seat would be replaced by a Democrat in a special election. Granted the GOP holds a razor-thin House majority (218-213) after January 2025 vacancies, losing her vote could very well jeopardize his legislative agenda. “Is this the right move from the Trump administration?” Jill Savage, host of “Blaze News Tonight,” asks Blaze Media senior politics editor and Washington correspondent Christopher Bedford. Bedford’s answer is a resounding yes. Ambassador for the United Nations is “kind of a pointless job,” he says. “The whole point of the United Nations in New York is just so we can get foreign diplomats and leaders liquored up, hookered up, and on tape and video, and then go back to them later and say, 'Hey, we need a favor because we saw you with six prostitutes in your hotel room and a pile of coke, and your wife wouldn't want to see that.’" Even still, he feels bad for Stefanik. The position is certainly “a stepping stone” and “a cool thing on your resume.” However, what’s far more important is the GOP’s House majority, and where the numbers currently stand, Trump can’t afford to lose Stefanik’s vote — especially with wild cards like Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Chip Roy (R-Texas) in the House. “It just comes down to the reality of giving the Republicans more breathing room particularly for this upcoming budget battle, which is expected in the next few weeks,” says Bedford. “So who gets [the position] now?” asks Blaze News editor in chief Matthew Peterson. “Maybe Ron DeSantis — you know someone who is not necessarily a Trump ally, but it'd be good to get them on the team but at the same time kind of sideline them a little bit,” says Bedford. To hear more of the conversation, including Bedford’s predictions on the upcoming budget bill, watch the clip above. Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Hope Walz called herself a "privileged white woman" and said she was refusing to attend a graduate school that had accepted her application. The daughter of the failed vice presidential candidate posted a video on social media explaining that she was angered by universities shutting down dissent from student protests. 'Given recent events I am not going to give my money, go into debt for, support institutions that don't support their students and the right to protest.'"I got into grad school. I will not be attending starting this fall though, and I will no longer be attending the university that I originally applied for," she said on the video posted to TikTok. "I applied for one school. I kind of had my heart set on it. That's what I wanted to do," Walz explained. "I'm not going to name the institution, but given recent events, I am not going to give my money, go into debt for, support institutions that don't support their students and the right to protest and speak out for their communities."The 24-year-old graduated from Montana State University in Bozeman in 2023 and was employed as a social worker at a homeless shelter as well as a ski instructor, according to her father. "Students deserve to be protected," she continued. "I'm not worried about if I were to be protected or not at said institution, I'm [a] privileged white woman, but I'm not going to put myself in a position where I'm giving money or supporting institutions that don't support their students." Walz said she might skip a year and find a suitable graduate school to attend next fall. Video of her comments was posted to social media, where she was widely ridiculed by some critics. Student protests have erupted at many campuses in the U.S. among anti-Israel activists opposed to the military action in the Gaza Strip after Hamas terrorists slaughtered people in southern Israel. Some of the protests have included vandalism and violence. The Trump administration has used immigration enforcement and the threat of federal fund rescission to force colleges and universities to take a harder line against student protests. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A left-wing comedian has been fired from hosting the White House Correspondents' Dinner after she made extreme comments against the Trump administration on a podcast. Amber Ruffin was fired from the gig on Saturday after the president of the White House Correspondents' Association said that the organization was "re-visioning" its annual dinner to make it less divisive. The statement did not mention her comments. 'It makes them feel like human beings, but they shouldn't get to feel that way because they're not.' Ruffin was asked how she was planning to ridicule both side of the aisle at the dinner when she proclaimed that she would be unable to do so because Republicans are so terrible. "They're kind of a bunch of murderers," she said while a guest on the "Daily Beast Podcast."Ruffin went on to say that the WHCA had asked her to give equal time to both sides. "There's no way I'm going to be frickin' doin' that, dude, under no circumstance!" she said. She went on to say that mocking both sides would make the Trump administration feel like human beings. "They want the false equivalency that the media does," she continued. "It feels great. It makes them feel like human beings, but they shouldn't get to feel that way because they're not." WHCA President Eugene Daniels said in a letter that the board unanimously decided not to have a comedic performance for the dinner, planned for April 26. “At this consequential moment for journalism," he added, "I want to ensure the focus is not on the politics of division but entirely on awarding our colleagues for their outstanding work and providing scholarship and mentorship to the next generation of journalists.”Many on the left were outraged at the decision and accused Daniels of acting in opposition of free speech. "If you’re a journalist or lawmaker still planning to attend the White House Correspondents Dinner after WHCA cancelled Amber Ruffin to placate a petty tyrant, you need to dig deep and ask yourself why you’re going because it sure as hell isn’t to celebrate the First Amendment," responded transgender activist Charlotte Clymer. "These people are f**king cowards," replied writer Michael Harriot. "Let’s see if I got this right. This year the White House Correspondence Association will give special honor to 'journalistic excellence and a robust and independent media'. So they cancelled Amber Ruffin’s performance cuz the WH doesn’t like her," said left-wing actress Ellen Barkin. "Amber Ruffin is awesome and Eugene Daniels is a feckless coward and a sellout," said reporter Rodrigo Azurmendi. "Your decorum and empty values won't save you from Trump either. The WHCA is a joke."Ruffin has been a writer for Seth Myers on NBC and previously hosted her own show on Peacock. The Daily Beast said it reached out to both Ruffin and the WHCA for comment on the issue. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

From the beginning, the United States has been a commercial republic, drawing vast resources out of our heartland and through our ports to drive broad-based prosperity and dynamism. For generations, America’s core economic policy has been to ensure freedom of movement of goods and people, keeping the shipping lanes open and the lifeblood of our republic flowing. The rise of digital technology promised to wipe out obstacles to free exchange around the world. But the reality has been different. Increasingly sophisticated and persistent cyberattacks degrade — and, if left unchecked, destroy — our basic capabilities in our most strategically vital of economic operations: large-scale logistics and transportation. In 2017, the NotPetya cyberattack devastated global shipping, severely disrupting operations at Maersk, the world’s largest shipping company. Port terminals across Europe and the U.S. reverted to manual processes, causing billions in losses, weeks of chaos, and global supply chain paralysis. NotPetya was not merely a costly inconvenience; it was a stark warning of how cyberattacks can paralyze maritime logistics precisely when they're most needed. Yet despite the magnitude of this incident, lessons have largely gone unheeded. The lead-up to Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine again saw European ports targeted with disruptive cyberattacks, a clear demonstration of how cyber warfare sets the stage for military conflict. However, American maritime infrastructure continues to prioritize short-term economic efficiency gains over comprehensive cybersecurity resilience. Alarmingly, Chinese companies have supplied critical equipment to U.S. ports for years, raising significant cybersecurity concerns due to potential espionage and sabotage risks. Recently, U.S. authorities have begun steps to restrict or entirely remove Chinese-made cranes, surveillance systems, and automation technologies from critical American port facilities, recognizing the severe national security risks posed by foreign-controlled equipment embedded deeply within sensitive maritime infrastructure. That’s a good first step, if an overdue no-brainer. But we can hardly stop there. America’s rail infrastructure shares equally troubling vulnerabilities. Positive Train Control, mandated to prevent train collisions, relies on a proprietary wireless protocol operating on the 220 MHz spectrum, now proven susceptible to unauthorized access. Recent cybersecurity research demonstrated that reverse-engineered radios allow attackers to intercept and manipulate safety-critical signals, highlighting dangerous gaps in rail cybersecurity. Despite these vulnerabilities, the rail industry is pushing back against recent Transportation Security Administration cybersecurity proposals. Industry representatives argue that these regulations — including classifying PTC as a critical cyber system — are economically burdensome, unnecessarily prescriptive, and distract from existing security measures. Meanwhile, the rail industry's continued push toward consolidating essential safety systems, including the Centralized Traffic Control system, onto the vulnerable 220 MHz spectrum further amplifies cybersecurity risks, potentially turning vital infrastructure into a strategic liability during a crisis. This behavior abounds across the critical infrastructure industries, as executives push for low-cost solutions vs. upgrading to more secure ones. Extrapolating this across every sector, we can see how there might be tens if not hundreds of critical single points of failure. Unfortunately, self-fostered troubles like these even extend off-planet. Space launch infrastructure, critical for U.S. national security and economic stability — supporting GPS, global communications, and defense missions — also remains vulnerable. Decades-old launch facilities and outdated digital control systems present glaring cybersecurity weaknesses. Cyber disruptions in this sector could sabotage vital satellite deployments or delay crucial defense missions precisely at critical times. Securing transportation infrastructure isn’t merely economically prudent — it’s an urgent national security imperative. President Trump's second term provides a crucial opportunity to decisively address these vulnerabilities. Ports, railways, and space launch systems are not simply economic assets; they are strategic arteries our adversaries will target to incapacitate America’s response capabilities during crises. America must prioritize embedding cybersecurity resilience in every aspect of transportation infrastructure modernization. Allowing short-term efficiencies to override cybersecurity leaves America dangerously exposed exactly when strength and reliability are most crucial.