The lesbian chaplain at the church of Texas Democrat James Talarico doesn’t believe that Jesus Christ died for the sins of humanity. In fact, she’s not even sure Jesus ever existed.

Why do these people even identify as Christians?

Every time a report surfaces about this supposedly Christian church, it’s because they believe something or have said something that flies in the face of the very foundational beliefs of Christians.

Breitbart News reports:

The Rev. Babs Miller, a lesbian chaplain at Democrat Senate candidate James Talarico’s church, says that Jesus did not die for the sins of humanity – and is not sure whether God’s Son even really existed in the first place.

Miller is listed as an “out” lesbian chaplain at St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church, who came out of retirement to serve the church again in 2022 because she “missed the fun of doing ministry here, and I missed all the people.”

In an unearthed video, Miller stunningly reveals that she does not believe some of the bedrock foundations of the Gospel at all. She openly doubted Jesus’s entire existence, dismissed the virgin birth as nothing more than a wild idea rooted in paganism, and concluded that even if Jesus did exist, He certainly “didn’t die” for the sins of humanity.

“Part of what we encourage here is for people to think for themselves,” she said in what appears to be an undercover video featuring an individual asking if “we” really believe in Jesus’s virgin birth.

“It’s kind of like what they say in 12-step programs: Take what you want and leave the rest,” she said. “And I know that would greatly offend your relatives who want to hang on to these archaic rules. Mary and the virgin birth comes out of the pagan belief that the gods came down and impregnated people that people were still hanging on to during that time.”

It’s like these people are just playing at being Christians.

Why do they even bother if they don’t believe the most important parts of the faith?

The post REPORT: Chaplain at James Talarico’s Church Doesn’t Believe Jesus Christ Died for Humanity’s Sins appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The same FBI personnel who helped execute the unprecedented August 2022 raid on President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home are now racing to federal court, not to defend the raid, but to protect themselves.

Lawyers for a group of current and former FBI agents and analysts who worked the classified-documents case filed a motion Thursday in the Southern District of Florida asking U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon to clarify a prior order so their clients can sit in front of a Fort Pierce grand jury without walking into contempt, incomplete testimony, or a Fifth Amendment spectacle.

According to Associated Press, two of the former employees received grand jury subpoenas on Monday. One is slated to testify as soon as next week. Two more are scheduled the week after.

The FBI’s Miami Field Office had already reached out in July and August for “voluntary” interviews and warned that grand jury testimony would follow.

The Justice Department has floated immunity. It has not formally offered it. That is not how innocent fact witnesses usually behave.

They say they will talk, if the judge first gives them a shield.

The filing, first reported by Politico and detailed by Law & Crime, asks Cannon to confirm that her February order burying Volume II of disgraced Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Mar-a-Lago report does not gag these agents when they answer a grand jury.

The agents argue they are trapped. If they answer questions that touch non-public material in Smith’s buried report, they risk contempt of Cannon’s order. If they hold back, they look like they are hiding something. If they take the Fifth, they say, “innocent former federal civil servants” will look guilty.

Most of the clients, the filing says, were fired by FBI Director Kash Patel and are no longer federal employees. One of the subpoenaed agents reviewed the entire Volume II.

Another, represented by the same counsel, is identified as the Mar-a-Lago search-warrant affiant. Their lawyers include Abbe Lowell and Mark Zaid.

The Gateway Pundit reported in January that Patel had already begun clearing senior officials tied to the Trump and Mar-a-Lago investigations, including agents out of the Miami office connected to the raid.

Later reporting confirmed a wider ouster of staff who worked the documents case after it emerged that Biden-era FBI leadership had quietly pulled toll records on Patel and now-White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles while they were private citizens.

The raid itself never had clean probable cause inside the Bureau. The Gateway Pundit reported in December 2025, citing declassified emails reviewed by Fox News, that the FBI’s Washington Field Office told DOJ it did not believe it had established probable cause for a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. DOJ pressed ahead anyway. An official even said he didn’t “give a damn about the optics.”

The Gateway Pundit followed that trail again in April after Judicial Watch forced out more FBI records on the “Plasmic Echo” investigation. Field agents again warned that they lacked probable cause and wanted to work through Trump attorney Evan Corcoran. Biden’s Justice Department wanted the wide-scope raid: residence, office, storage. They got it.

Now those same files, those same decisions, and those same people are in front of a Florida grand jury.

The Gateway Pundit reported in January that a grand jury had been ordered empaneled in Fort Pierce to put Crossfire Hurricane and the Mar-a-Lago raid under scrutiny. That is the same courthouse where Cannon sits, the judge who already tossed Jack Smith’s documents case.

The current probe, according to AP, is examining an alleged conspiracy to deprive Trump of his civil rights and keep him from power, stretching from the Russia investigation through the 2022 search.

The post Fired FBI Agents Involved in Mar-a-Lago Raid Ask Judge Cannon for Clarity After Grand Jury Subpoenas — Lawyers Raise Fifth Amendment Self-Incrimination Concerns appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway opened a consumer-fraud investigation Friday into ActBlue, the liberal fundraising machine that processed nearly $1.8 billion in 2025 for about 23,000 Democratic candidates and progressive groups.

Hanaway’s office says it is looking at possible violations of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, including fraud, misrepresentation of foreign contributions, and unfair practices.

According to a press release from her office:

Political contributions from foreign entities in any form are strictly prohibited by federal law. After investigating ActBlue, the U.S. House Committee on Administration forwarded information regarding its conduct to the Attorney General’s Office for potential investigation. The Attorney General’s investigation will examine whether ActBlue sent any funds raised through fraudulent contributions to a Missouri political office, campaign, or committee. ActBlue is a fundraising platform widely used by almost 23,000 Democratic candidates and groups. In 2025, they raised nearly $1.8 billion for progressive causes across the nation.

Recent reports indicate that through faulty, potentially deliberately unsound, donation verification processes, ActBlue could have received and used money directly from foreign sources. It is also suspected that ActBlue receives donations by way of prepaid cards or gift cards, a difficult-to-trace method that has been used by foreign donors to conceal contributions. Additionally, there is reason to believe fraudulent contributions are being made to ActBlue under false identities or on behalf of other individuals without their knowledge.

The Attorney General’s Office is also inquiring about multiple resignations, terminations, and whistleblower complaints. Employees who may have flagged weaknesses in fraud-prevention systems, objected to internal decisions, or believed ActBlue was not properly addressing fraud risk were potentially suppressed or punished for speaking out.

“When political fundraising is compromised, public trust and the foundations of our democracy are put at risk. Missourians deserve a political system built on honesty and confidence that campaigns are not being financed through unlawful foreign sources,” said General Hanaway.

“Political fundraising must never become a pathway to deception, influence, or special treatment,” Hanaway added.

House Report Drops ActBlue Slack Messages Showing Staff Knowingly Waved Through Foreign Donations — “Passport Verification” Was Just Counting Characters

Hanaway's investigators are working to determine if any money raised on a bad contribution landed in a Missouri campaign, committee, or office.

ActBlue has until 10 a.m. Central on October 8 to turn over documents, communications, and internal records.

The post Missouri AG Launches Investigation into ActBlue Over Foreign Money, Gift Cards, and Fired Staff appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

President Trump’s $100,000 fee on new H-1B petitions has effectively ended the program as a route for new foreign workers. According to the White House’s proclamation, employers paid the fee for only about 700 workers in the year after it took effect, and consular processing requests fell nearly 97 percent.

State Department data show that H-1B visa issuances fell 74 percent between February 2025 and February 2026, while visas for H-1B spouses and children fell 81 percent. On September 18, Trump extended the fee through September 2027. A federal judge had already ruled the fee an unconstitutional tax, and the First Circuit refused to reinstate it while the government appeals.

The H-1B restrictions are part of a broader tightening of legal and illegal entry. At the southern border, encounters fell to about 8,900 in August 2026, 96 percent below the December 2023 record of 249,700. DHS reports 16 straight months in which the Border Patrol released no illegal aliens into the interior.

On legal entry, Trump’s December 16, 2025, travel proclamation took effect on January 1, 2026. It fully restricted visas for nationals of 19 countries and partially restricted visas for nationals of 19 more, including Nigeria, Cuba, and Venezuela. In May 2025, the State Department under Secretary Marco Rubio announced that it would aggressively revoke visas of Chinese students with ties to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.

By August 2026, the department had revoked more than 175,000 visas of all types. Consulates issued 26 percent fewer nonimmigrant visas and 48 percent fewer immigrant visas in February 2026 than in February 2025. Active international student records fell by more than 70,000 between August 2025 and August 2026.

This tightening matters for American workers. Despite liberals’ claims, employers do not hire H-1B workers because Americans cannot do the jobs. They hire them because they can pay less.

Indian nationals received 71 percent of the 399,395 H-1B petitions approved in fiscal 2024. Labor Department rules allow employers to offer H-1B workers wages below the local median. In fiscal 2019, 60 percent of H-1B positions were certified at those lower wage levels. For a software developer in Washington, D.C., the lowest level allowed pay about $41,746 a year, or 36 percent below the median. Trump’s 2025 proclamation cited that same figure.

The Labor Department’s March 2026 proposed rule found that 63 percent of certifications used the two lower wage levels. Offered wages averaged $10,191 less than the government’s survey average for the same jobs.

In a free market, supply and demand set wages. The H-1B program lets employers use government-certified wages below the local average, giving them a reason to hire foreign workers for less. American job seekers must then compete with people willing to accept much lower pay, putting downward pressure on wages for everyone.

Usually, Democrats and liberals argue that there is no evidence that increased immigration or illegal immigration suppresses wages. When they are forced to acknowledge that legal and illegal immigrants can suppress wages, they say the effect is limited to the lowest-paying jobs. Ironically, many of those jobs did not use to pay so little before illegal immigration increased.

Liberals claim to want to help minorities, yet Black workers are among those most affected by wage suppression in lower-paying jobs. During the June 27, 2024, presidential debate, Trump said illegal immigrants were “taking Black jobs.”

Democrats mocked him on social media. Rep. Gwen Moore posted, “Hello from my office at my Black job!” Others shared photos of Black physicians, astronauts, fighter pilots, and professors under #BlackJobs. They missed his point: Black workers can be disadvantaged by competition for lower-paying jobs.

In 2010, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights found that illegal immigration tended to reduce wages and employment among low-skilled American citizens, a disproportionate share of whom were Black men. Economists George Borjas, Jeffrey Grogger, and Gordon Hanson found that a 10 percent immigrant-driven increase in the supply of workers in a skill group reduced Black wages by 2.5 percent and the employment rate of Black men by 5.9 percentage points.

The National Academies of Sciences also identified native-born high school dropouts and prior immigrants as the workers most likely to see their wages reduced by new immigration.

Immigration increases the number of workers in the labor pool. As the labor pool grows, wages fall. The effect on U.S. wages is amplified by the much lower incomes in immigrants’ countries of origin.

Consider people arriving from countries where $10 a day would be a dream salary. In America, even $15 or $20 an hour is far more than they could earn at home. The IMF projects 2026 GDP per capita at $94,430 in the United States, compared with $15,779 in Mexico, $14,874 in China, and $2,813 in India. The figures are $2,902 in Cambodia, $5,115 in Vietnam, and $1,556 in Nigeria.

A retail salesperson in California earned an average of $20.07 an hour. At that rate, one hour’s pay exceeds a week’s minimum wage in Nigeria. A day and a half of pay equals a month’s average income per person in India or Cambodia, and two weeks of pay exceeds a month’s average income in Mexico or China.

An immigrant from India, Vietnam, Cambodia, or Nigeria offered $5 an hour to work illegally would earn more than they could earn at home. If employers can find workers willing to do a job for $5 an hour, they will not hire Americans who demand $15. So anyone who says immigration does not suppress wages is insane.

The second claim is that immigrants do jobs Americans do not want to do. That is not exactly true, either. There is no job Americans refuse to do. What Americans may refuse is a dirty or difficult job at a low wage.

Americans work as garbage collectors. The job is smelly, physically demanding, and starts early, but municipal sanitation workers can earn good wages and benefits. Cut that pay to $5 an hour, and Americans would have little reason to take the job. Immigrants willing to work for that rate could then fill it.

Wage suppression also affects workers beyond the lowest-paying jobs. When employers fill jobs at the bottom with people willing to work for $5 an hour, workers who would otherwise have held those jobs compete for positions in the next wage bracket. That increases the labor pool there and puts downward pressure on those wages. The same pattern can continue up the ladder.

The post Trump’s H-1B Visa Crackdown and How Legal and Illegal Aliens Suppress Wages appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

A surveillance company is reportedly trying to pull offline a public map showing the reach of its own network. The map, created by cybersecurity researcher Joshua Michael, identifies roughly 300,000 devices tied to Flock Safety across the country.

According to The Intercept, the map draws on location data from a snapshot of Flock’s records archived by Michael in December 2025.

It lists more than 170,000 cameras and over 130,000 other devices, including acoustic sensors and equipment that connects third-party cameras.

Flock has publicly said it operates more than 120,000 cameras. The figures reflect different counts and methods, The Intercept reported.

On Thursday, Michael received a trademark complaint from Doppel, an AI “social-engineering defense” firm that said it was acting on Flock’s behalf.

The demand: stop using the “FLOCK SAFETY” mark and take the map down, citing supposed customer confusion. The site already carries a disclaimer that it is not affiliated with Flock.

Gadget Review reported the complaint arrived less than 24 hours after the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism held its hearing titled “Always Watching: Flock’s Nationwide AI Surveillance Network.”

Flock CEO Garrett Langley was invited. He did not show. Neither did the CEOs of Axon, Motorola Solutions, or Verkada.

This is not Flock’s first attempt to muzzle the mapmakers.

In early 2025, Flock lawyers sent a cease-and-desist to Will Freeman, creator of the crowdsourced DeFlock map, claiming the name “diluted” the company’s trademark.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation told Flock to pound sand. Federal anti-dilution law carves out criticism and commentary. Freeman kept the map up. DeFlock now catalogs well over 100,000 ALPR locations nationwide.

Langley went further than a lawyer letter. In a Forbes interview last year he branded DeFlock a “terroristic organization,” lumping camera-mappers with Antifa.

He later apologized after the backlash went bipartisan, including from Tucker Carlson, and admitted the remark was a mistake. Mapping tax-funded cameras on public poles is not terrorism. It is the opposite of terrorism. It is sunlight.

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Flock’s billion-dollar platform was caught routing local plate data to federal and out-of-state agencies on a scale cities never authorized.

A San Francisco class action alleged more than 1.6 million outside queries of that city’s cameras in seven months, FBI, ICE, CBP, ATF, DEA and others.

Flock is not a public company. It is a privately held Atlanta firm, valued in the $7–8 billion range, backed by Silicon Valley names including Andreessen Horowitz. Cities lease the cameras. Flock keeps the cloud, the software, and the national search architecture.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott ordered state agencies to cut off funding after reports that tens of millions in Texas dollars had been used to seed the network. Abbott put it plainly: Americans do not surrender their privacy when they drive to work, drop their kids at school, or go to church.

Sen. Josh Hawley has been investigating the same web. Fox News reported that Texas cities from Pflugerville to Hood County pulled the plug amid privacy and data-sharing fears. Missouri Rep. Eric Burlison and Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie introduced the “Flock-Off Act” to cut federal money for the rollout.

The Gateway Pundit interviewed Burlison as he tore into the surveillance state and the claim that opposing Flock is “anti-police.”

The post Flock Safety Wants the Map of Its Cameras Taken Down After Researcher Exposes 300,000-Device Dragnet appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.