Breaking Christian News – 2/27/2025

[ThePostMillennial.com] Attorney General Pam Bondi has said that she intends to release the Epstein files “hopefully” on Thursday. The files, which are expected to show the names of those who participated in Jeffrey Epstein’s illicit escapades on both what is known as Epstein Island and the private plane that has been called the Lolita Express. Bondi, speaking to Jesse Watters on Fox News, said that part of the delay in releasing the information was that there were over 200 victims whose identities must be protected before the files are released to the public. She said there were “a lot of names, a lot of flight logs, a lot of information.”… 

(Screengrab image: via HT)

[FoxNews.com] The Department of Justice has dismissed Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) lawsuits brought against various police and fire departments across the country under the Biden administration, which deemed aptitude tests in certain cases as discriminatory. … “American communities deserve firefighters and police officers to be chosen for their skill and dedication to public safety—not to meet DEI quotas,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said… Subscribe for free to Breaking Christian News here Click Here to read.

(Image: Pixabay)

“This behavior is unacceptable and those involved WILL be held accountable. These disgusting chat groups were immediately shut down when @POTUS issued his EO ending the DEI insanity the Biden Admin was obsessed with. Our IC must be focused on our core mission: ensuring the safety, security, and freedom of the American people … There are over 100 people from across the intelligence community that contributed to and participated in this—what is really just an egregious violation of trust…” -Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard

[PJMedia.com] What the Trump administration has uncovered in just five weeks about what has been going on in Washington is beyond belief. What has been happening in the National Security Agency, however, is beyond anything that has been found (at least so far) in showing leftist elitists’ self-absorption and contempt for the American taxpayer. It’s not the waste and fraud that DOGE has been uncovering. It’s much worse. (Image: Gage Skidmore-Wikimedia Commons /CCBY-SA2.0)

City Journal revealed Monday that although “the ‘intelligence community’ is one of the most powerful parts of the American national security apparatus,” some of those entrusted with the solemn responsibility to keep the nation safe “have another on-the-job priority: sex chats.”

That’s right: we’re paying these people to protect the nation from threats, and they’re spending their time on our dime talking about their various lurid obsessions, delusions, deviances, and perversions. And those words are far too polite for some of what they were doing…

…

And ABC News reported Wednesday that “more than 100 intelligence community employees will be terminated and have their security clearances revoked as the intelligence community investigates group chats that allegedly discussed explicit behavior, officials said.” By then, the process had already been set in motion; on Tuesday, Gabbard’s Deputy Chief of Staff Alexa Henning said: “The DNI sent a memo directing all intelligence agencies to identify the employees who participated in the NSA’s ‘obscene, pornographic, and sexually explicit’ chatrooms and to terminate their employment and revoke their security clearances. Deadline: Friday.”…

Read this article in its entirety Here.

[RedState.com] Diversity, equity and inclusion has been dying a slow death since Donald Trump assumed the presidency. It’s a philosophy that was aimed at evening the playing field for people of all races, genders and sexual persuasions, but instead it merely divided people and encouraged institutionalized racism, division, and putting someone’s characteristics over their actual merit for jobs and promotions. Now two financial giants, BlackRock and Bank of America, are moving away from DEI…

(Image: Unsplash-Javier Haro)

This case—like two others before it—will likely be appealed to the US Supreme Court. After declining to consider two previous cases this term challenging public school gender secrecy policies … the justices may not be able to put off consideration of how far the parental right extends for much longer.

[DailySignal.com] As further evidence of a sweeping national trend in constitutional analysis gone awry, yet another federal court has ruled that parents have no right to information related to the gender that their minor child chooses to identify as at public school. (Image: Pixabay)

In Foote v. Ludlow, the US Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit determined that the state’s interest in providing a “safe and inclusive” learning environment for students did not infringe upon parental rights and satisfied the lowest tier of judicial review.

In the case, parents of a middle school girl challenged Baird Middle School in Ludlow, Massachusetts, over its policy of hiding minor students’ “gender identity” information from their parents simply on a student’s say-so.

To date, more than 12 million American school students are now enrolled in schools that have express gender confidentiality policies, making the battle to protect parents’ primary authority in the upbringing of their children even more daunting.

In this case, the parents wrote to the school explaining that their daughter was gender confused but under professional care for that condition. They instructed the school that no one should communicate with her about the subject. One would think that would have settled the matter and the school would have honored the parents’ request. However, their daughter told school officials that she considered herself “genderqueer,” wanted to use another name, and didn’t want her parents to know.

Rather than contacting the parents or honoring their very clear requests, the school deferred to the girl’s wishes. Only when one of the teachers inadvertently slipped up by telling her parents that their daughter was being called by a different name at school did the parents once again have the chance to strenuously direct the school principal and superintendent not to discuss such matters with her.

Their wishes were ignored again.

To add insult to injury, school officials asked the young girl if her parents “were providing [her] with appropriate care,” if she was comfortable discussing issues with the non-school counselor chosen by her parents, and what bathroom she would like to use. This occurred by text, in online chat rooms, and in closed-door conversations without the parents’ consent or presence.

Like so many others, the parents in Foote v. Ludlow asserted that by concealing their child’s gender identity information, the school had interfered with their right to direct their child’s upbringing under the due process clause of the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

While judicial recognition of the parental right is more than 100 years old, dating to the Supreme Court’s 1923 ruling in Meyer v. Nebraska, there are categories of educational decisions in which parents do not have a constitutional interest, such as the development of curriculum or a school’s administrative policies like a dress code or use of school facilities. But gender identity—how a child chooses to identify or express herself—is a matter that goes to the heart of parenting, as one federal court has held.

Not so with the 1st Circuit in Foote v. Ludlow.

The court got much of the legal analysis right until the very end of its opinion, when things went very, very wrong.

The court accurately determined that school confidentiality policies function like exercises of “legislative” (rather than “executive”) governmental authority. In other words, Baird Middle School’s policy was more akin to something like legislation—a law or policy applicable to all students—as opposed to an exercise of “executive” authority—the singular conduct of one teacher, for example. That matters because it determines which standard of judicial review should apply and what legal threshold the parents need to meet for their claim to succeed.

By (correctly) determining that the policy was “legislative” in nature, court noted that the parents had to show that the government school had interfered with a “fundamental right:” here, the right to direct the care, upbringing, health, and education of their minor child. This, too, was the correct analysis.

Considering the fact that the Supreme Court in Troxel v. Granville noted in 2000 that the parental right is “perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court,” this calculous should have been an easy one.

For the 1st Circuit, it apparently wasn’t.

The Foote v. Ludlow court determined that the school had not infringed upon that fundamental parental right because the gender confidentiality policy was more administrative in nature, designed to create a welcoming learning environment for all students. In that way, parents had no say within the context of school administration, bathroom assignments, or pronoun use.

In other words, the parents’ right to direct the upbringing of their child and direct government officials to respect their right to take care of their child’s mental and emotional health was akin, to school officials, a dress code or some other purely administrative rule.

The court wrote:

[T]he Parents are challenging how Baird Middle School chooses to maintain what it considers a desirable and fruitful pedagogical environment. … Because public schools need not offer students an educational experience tailored to the preferences of their parents … the Due Process Clause gives the Parents no right to veto the curricular and administrative decisions identified in the complaint.

The court went on to further limit the parents’ right to be involved with their own minor daughter’s education by reasoning:

Parents remain free to strive to mold their child according to the Parents’ own beliefs, whether through direct conversations, private educational institutions, religious programming, homeschooling, or other influential tools. … Outside school, parents can obtain information about their children’s relationship to gender in many ways, including communicating with their children and making meaningful observations of the universe of circumstances that influence their children’s preferences, such as in clothing, extracurricular activities, movies, television, music, internet activity, and more.

In this jaw-droppingly cavalier discourse, the court seems to be saying: Public schools are parent-free zones. And by the way, maybe you should just pay closer attention to what your child is doing.

In the end, the court concluded that the school had no “duty” to assist parents in the exercise of their fundamental right by informing them of their daughter’s gender identity information. In applying the lowest tier of judicial scrutiny to determine the constitutionality of the school’s actions, it found that under “rational basis” judicial review, the school’s policy was rationally related to the legitimate objective of “promoting a safe and inclusive environment for students.”

This case—like two others before it—will likely be appealed to the US Supreme Court. After declining to consider two previous cases this term challenging public school gender secrecy policies (originating in the 4th and 7th Circuit Courts of Appeal), the justices may not be able to put off consideration of how far the parental right extends for much longer.

Sarah Parshall Perry is a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies.

“President Trump is the only guy I know of that can end this war honorably and justly. There have been hundreds of thousands of people killed and injured on both sides…” -Senator Lindsey Graham

[WashingtonStand.com] President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on Wednesday that the outlines of an economic deal involving rare earth minerals has been reached between the two countries, as the US president continues to pursue the brokering of an agreement between Ukraine and Russia to end their three-year war. (Screengrab image: via WION /Reuters)

The Wall Street Journal reported that specific details of the deal have yet to be worked out, including security guarantees for Ukraine. But one clause of the agreement states that the US “supports Ukraine’s efforts to obtain security guarantees needed to establish lasting peace.”

“This deal is part of our broader arrangements with the United States,” stated Zelensky. “This deal can be part of future security guarantees.”

The agreement calls for the creation of a co-owned fund involving rights for the US to mine rare earth minerals in Ukraine such as graphite and lithium (critical for the manufacture of batteries) as well as titanium. It also “sets out the terms and conditions of an investment fund for the rebuilding of Ukraine.”

Zelensky will reportedly travel to the US on Friday for further discussions with Trump over the proposed deal. “This agreement can have a major success or quietly pass by,” Zelensky remarked. “And I believe that a major success depends on our conversation with President Trump.”

Lawmakers like Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) are expressing optimism at a prospective deal that could be both economically beneficial for the US and could help strengthen security within Ukraine.

“President Trump is the only guy I know of that can end this war honorably and justly,” he contended during Tuesday’s “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins.” “There have been hundreds of thousands of people killed and injured on both sides. Putin invaded Ukraine, I think, for a couple of reasons. Ukraine is the richest country on the continent of Europe when it comes to critical minerals—about $7 trillion. That’s why Putin wants to take Ukraine, for the money. He wants to reconstruct the old Soviet Union, Russian Empire. Those are ambitions he has.”

Graham continued, “… Ukraine is literally the richest country in Europe. They’re sitting on trillions of dollars worth of critical minerals. If President Trump can pull this off, doing a deal with Ukraine and the United States regarding partnering in the critical minerals space, that gives us something to defend. We’ll have an economic interest we’ve never had before. It makes Ukraine very valuable. The goal is to make sure we don’t have a third invasion. Now, how do you avoid that? If we have economic interest in Ukraine, it makes it less likely Russia will invade because they’d be hitting American companies. We need to keep helping the Ukraine militarily by … selling them—not giving them—weapons. They’re the most lethal army on the continent of Europe, and I want to make them stronger over the next decade by buying American weapons, which is good for our economy.”

Graham further suggested that Ukraine’s admittance to NATO, which has historically been a serious point of contention for Russian President Vladimir Putin, could paradoxically be determined by Russia. “President Trump is going to get a good deal for Ukraine, but he’s not out to humiliate Putin [by] putting Ukraine in NATO,” he argued. “… My idea is if [Russia] ever invade[s] Ukraine again, … Ukraine automatically goes into NATO. Let Russia decide if Ukraine is in NATO and let it be a tripwire.”

Graham went on to predict that in order for a peace deal to be reached between Ukraine and Russia, Ukraine will likely have to give up part of its territory that Russia invaded and is now occupying.

“[T]here will be eventually some kind of land swap here [to] stop the fighting, get a ceasefire and do a deal that prevents a third invasion,” he surmised. “Ukraine will decide what they can accept, and there will be a negotiation, and the only way you’re going to get a successful outcome is if Russia does not invade again, and they’re deterred. I don’t know how the land swap will wind up ending, but there will probably be one. My goal is to make sure that Ukraine is a sovereign, independent, democratic nation when this war is over and that China will be less likely to invade Taiwan.”

However, other Republicans like Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) insist that a peace deal must require all of Ukraine’s territory taken forcibly by Russia to be returned, especially in light of Zelensky’s offer to resign earlier this week “if [it guarantees] peace for Ukraine.”

“I think that’s a huge act of sacrifice on his part and on behalf of his country,” Perry asserted during Tuesday’s “Washington Watch.” “That having been said, I would modify that deal. If I were President Trump, I would say, ‘Look, if Zelensky is willing to step aside, Ukraine’s original territory must be restored.’ And Russia cannot be involved at all in the election of the next president of Ukraine.”

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins concurred, further maintaining that restoring Ukraine’s original borders will help deter hostile actors around the globe from attempting similar unprovoked invasions like Russia’s. “[W]e should not reward behavior like Putin’s invading another sovereign nation. I think that could be … an invitation to China to take Taiwan. … That would be like giving Hamas and the Palestinians … their so-called ‘two-state solution’ after their invasion of Israel. We don’t want to reward that type of behavior.”

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

“While it is crucial that the Department [of] Health and Human Services (HHS) support pandemic preparedness, four years of the Biden administration’s failed oversight have made it necessary to review agreements for vaccine production, including Vaxart’s.” -Robert F. Kennedy Jr., HHS Secretary

[TheGatewayPundit.com] Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has halted a $240 million contract signed by the Biden administration to develop an oral COVID-19 vaccine. (Screengrab image: via MeritTV)

The contract, which has now been paused for 90 days, is with biotech company Vaxart Inc.

The project’s freeze comes just before 10,000 people were scheduled to begin clinical trials for the oral vaccine on Monday.

Kennedy and his team will review the initial study before deciding whether to terminate the contract or allow it to continue…

Continue reading Here.

“The pain is so debilitating. I have never felt so helpless in my entire life. I’ve always been trying to be the best provider I could be caring for other people. Now I can’t even drive my kids to school in the morning anymore… it’s devastating. I have really had to mourn the life that I thought I was going to have because I will no longer be able to be the same person I’ve always wanted to be because of a virus and a vaccine. It’s absolutely destroyed my life…” -Brittany Burnette

[TheGatewayPundit.com] Tennessee native Brittany Burnette devoted her life to caring for the elderly, putting her patients first as a nursing home director… (Image: Pixabay)

Burnette, now 34, took the Pfizer vaccine in January 2021…But months later, she developed unbearable pain in both hips.

…Finally, after undergoing an MRI, the shocking truth emerged: her hip bones were dying.

By December 2021, Burnette had to undergo her first hip replacement. Just months later, she needed a second. What followed was an unrelenting cascade of surgeries—shoulders, knees, elbows, feet—all as her bones continued to collapse.

…

After nearly a year of suffering, a doctor made the connection that many refuse to acknowledge: the COVID vaccine had triggered a catastrophic immune response, cutting off the blood supply to her bones…

Read this article in its entirety, and view images Here.

“…Father we pray You’ll give the President, and Vice President wisdom as they lead. Father I pray for all of our colleagues that are here around the table and in this room; Lord God we pray that we would lead with a righteous clarity … as we serve the people of this country, every prospective agency, in every job that we have, that we would humble ourselves before You…” -Scott Turner, HUD Secretary

[CBN News] President Trump convened his first cabinet meeting Wednesday, and the milestone was marked with prayer. (Screengrab image: via X-Secretary Turner)

Scott Turner, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, led Trump’s new team in an opening invocation.

“Father the Bible says that blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, Father today we honor You in Your rightful place and thank You for giving us this opportunity to restore faith in this country and be a blessing to the people of America, and we pray in our meeting that You would be glorified in our conversation. In Jesus name, Amen,” Turner prayed as the group responded with “Amen.”

Watch the video of that prayer Here.

While prayer moments were also a visible part of President Trump’s first term, he said earlier this month that he’s had a deeper realization about God since he was nearly killed by a would-be assassin’s bullets during a campaign rally in Butler, PA last summer.

“None of us knows exactly when our time on earth will be over,” Trump told those gathered at the National Prayer Breakfast. “You never know—a truth I confronted a few short months ago when there was an incident that … was not fun.”

The president has frequently said he believes the Lord saved him that day. “God was watching me,” Trump said.

“It changed something in me,” he said. “I feel even stronger. I believed in God, but I feel much more strongly about it. Something happened.”

MORE ‘It Changed Something in Me’: Trump Admits Attempted Assassination Transformed His Belief in God

* From Trump to Washington and Jefferson: 7 Times Presidents Have Openly Praised God, Prayer, and Miracles

After the Cabinet meeting’s opening prayer, Trump then gave the floor to Elon Musk to talk about the DOGE efforts. He attempted to clear up some of the recent drama about emails to federal workers.

“What we are trying to get to the bottom of is we think there are a number of people on the government payroll who are dead, which is probably why they can’t respond, and some people who are not real people and just like fictional individuals… some collecting paychecks… so we are literally just trying to figure out are these people real? Are they alive? And can they write an email?” Musk explained.

One million workers have responded to the email, about half the number of federal workers. Trump said those who did not respond “are on the bubble” and might be let go.

The White House also instructed federal agencies to begin planning to eliminate positions calling it a “reduction in force.” Agency leaders have to submit their plans by March 13.

Benjamin Gill oversees internet and social media content as the Multimedia Manager for CBNNews.com.