Joe Biden and Xavier Becerra winked at massive child-trafficking

 Lefties and their media minions painted President Joe Biden’s border opening as humane and just, but it brought the largest child-trafficking operation in history.

A quarter-million unaccompanied children, waved into the interior, simply disappeared because the Bidenites made no real provision for keeping track of them — with Xavier Becerra, now running to become California’s next governor, one of the chief culprits.

US law requires the feds to carefully supervise and track unaccompanied minors they let enter the country, passing them only to vetted sponsors, ideally family or former neighbors, who agree to take good care of the kids, enroll them in school and ensure they show up to future immigration court hearings.

But Biden’s de facto “come on in” signals led to hundreds of thousands of children, mostly from South and Central America and many orphaned or abandoned, flooding in — and his people let the system collapse.

More than two-thirds of these kids fell off the radar: Their sponsors quit answering the phone, vanished from whatever address they’d provided and of course didn’t bring the children to court.

The Biden White House shrugged off its legal duties and let the chaos continue.

Some of the kids are likely with genuine guardians who simply think it best to avoid immigration authorities.

But thousands (at least) had been sent into our country by trafficking rings who had “super sponsors” — criminals using fake IDs to claim sponsorship of multiple unrelated children — indenture them to construction, factory or slaughterhouse jobs or simply sell them to pimps.

It seems the Biden crew accepted this child slavery, often open, as just a cost of its “just” immigration policies.

Kids working in meat-processing factories was hardly the worst; America’s cities are flooded with young girls forced into prostitution, sometimes “servicing” dozens of men a day.

All because Biden took office determined to undo all the “inhumane” Trump border policies.

Democratic politicians who’d wept over “kids in cages,” namely children in holding facilities (really just dorms with educational and recreational facilities) awaiting placement with legitimate sponsors, said nothing about kids in slavery.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has announced criminal indictments of some of the worst known super-sponsors, but the Justice Department has identified tens of thousands of addresses repeatedly used to sponsor children under the Biden crew’s oblivious eyes.

Specifically on the watch of Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, whose Office of Refugee Resettlement was supposed to protect the kids.

As the Bidens tour the country selling their books, and other administration alums like Becerra seek office, a decent press corps would demand answers on this nightmare.

Joe, Jill, Xavier: What do you have to say to the tween girls forced to sell their bodies on the streets of New York, Los Angeles and other “sanctuary” cities because you chose to wink at child enslavement?

https://nypost.com/2026/06/14/opinion/joe-biden-and-xavier-becerra-winked-at-massive-child-trafficking/

US Ambassador Michael Waltz details 'fundamental changes' in new Iran deal

 

U.S. Ambassador Michael Waltz discusses President Donald Trump's proposed Iran deal with 'Sunday Morning Futures.'

U.S. Ambassador Michael Waltz outlines crucial changes in the new Iran deal. He states the deal introduces robust verification mechanisms, unlike the previous agreement. Waltz emphasizes that sanctions relief will be performance-based, not upfront, ensuring Iran adheres to commitments on nuclear weapons and regional stability before receiving economic benefits.

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6398391599112

'Iran media publish purported details of Iran-US draft agreement'

 Iran's state-affiliated Mehr News on Sunday published what it described as details of a 14-point draft memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington, provides for the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets during the 60-day talks

The reported draft has not been independently verified, and neither Iranian nor US officials have publicly confirmed its contents.It appears to match a version first published by Mehr News on Friday.

According to Mehr, the draft begins with an immediate and permanent end to military operations across all fronts, including Lebanon, alongside a US commitment not to interfere in Iran's internal affairs and to respect the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic.

The report says Washington would commit to lifting the naval blockade within 30 days, withdrawing forces from around Iran and allowing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz under Iranian arrangements during the same period.

The draft also reportedly provides for the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets during the 60-day talks, with half the funds becoming available before negotiations begin.

The publication comes as regional and international leaders welcomed news of the framework agreement.

Qatar's prime minister, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and other officials have publicly endorsed the breakthrough, while US President Donald Trump described it as a "great deal" that would bring peace and security to the region and lead to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

One of the most politically sensitive provisions concerns the scope of future negotiations.

According to Mehr, discussions would be limited to the fate of enriched uranium, enrichment activities, sanctions relief and economic reconstruction. Iran's missile program and support for allied armed groups would be explicitly excluded from the agenda.

On the economic front, the draft reportedly calls for the suspension of sanctions on Iranian oil, petrochemical products and related exports, allowing Tehran full access to the resulting revenues. It also includes a requirement for the United States and its allies to present reconstruction plans worth at least $300 billion for Iran.

Mehr reported that the two sides would then enter a 60-day period of negotiations aimed at reaching a final agreement covering Iran's nuclear program and the lifting of US primary and secondary sanctions, as well as UN Security Council and IAEA-related restrictions.

Under the reported framework, Iran would reiterate its commitment under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty not to pursue nuclear weapons. During the negotiating period, the United States would reportedly refrain from deploying additional forces to the region or imposing new sanctions.

The contents published by Mehr, however, remain unconfirmed and could still be subject to change as both sides move toward formal negotiations.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/202606141204

Japan to explore rare-earth mining in Greenland to cut China reliance

Japan is planning to send a delegation to Greenland this summer to assess opportunities for rare earth mining, according to a report by Nikkei.

The group is expected to include representatives from Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, trading houses and the Japan Organization for Metals and Energy Security. The delegation is expected to meet with Greenlandic officials and evaluate the island's resource potential.

For investors, the trip underscores intensifying global competition for critical minerals used in electric vehicles, wind turbines, semiconductors and defense systems. Investors are increasingly focused on securing alternative supplies of rare earth elements as governments and manufacturers seek to reduce dependence on China, which dominates much of the world's rare earth mining and processing capacity. Any progress toward developing Greenland's deposits could create opportunities for mining companies, industrial suppliers and strategic investors tied to critical-mineral supply chains.

Greenland, a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, has attracted growing international attention because of its sizable untapped mineral resources and strategic Arctic location.

Interest in the island intensified earlier this year after the White House indicated President Donald Trump was exploring options to expand U.S. influence in Greenland, raising concerns among European allies. Those discussions have since shifted toward diplomatic engagement.

For Japan, access to Greenland's rare earth reserves could help diversify supply chains and strengthen resource security as competition for critical minerals continues to increase worldwide.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/japan-eyes-greenland-rare-earths-as-supply-security-concerns-grow/ar-AA25CB5L

Medicare carries lifetime warning for late enrollees

 Delaying Medicare enrollment can trigger penalties that permanently inflate monthly premiums under CMS rules.

The penalty structure covers three components of Medicare coverage, Parts A, B, and D, along with a separate excise tax risk for retirees who are still contributing to health savings accounts.

Your initial Medicare enrollment period lasts seven months, beginning three months before your 65th birthday month and ending three months after. 

If you miss that window without qualifying for employer health coverage, you could face penalties that remain attached to every future premium payment.

How enrollment works for those who qualify

Workers who are already receiving Social Security or Railroad Retirement Board benefits at least 4 months before turning 65 are automatically enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B, CMS confirmed.

Everyone else must actively sign up through the SSA during their initial enrollment period to avoid late enrollment penalties.

Part A late enrollment carries a time-limited surcharge

Medicare Part A covers hospital stays, inpatient care, skilled nursing facility care, and some home health services, according to CMS.

Most beneficiaries pay no Part A premium because they or a spouse earned at least 40 quarters of Medicare-covered employment, the agency confirmed. For those workers, missing the Part A enrollment deadline carries no financial penalty.

Beneficiaries who do not qualify for premium-free Part A pay a monthly premium of up to $570 in 2026, depending on their work history, CMS reported.

The Part A late enrollment penalty equals 10% of the standard monthly premium, but unlike the Part B and Part D penalties, it is not permanent.

Beneficiaries pay the Part A penalty for twice the number of years they delayed enrollment, the agency confirmed.

Part B’s permanent 10% penalty grows with each full year of delay

The costliest enrollment mistake involves Medicare Part B, which covers outpatient care, physician services, and preventive health screenings for Medicare beneficiaries, according to the CMS.

For each full 12-month period of delayed enrollment, the monthly Part B premium increases by 10%, the CMS explained. That penalty is not a one-time fee.

The standard monthly Part B premium for 2026 is $202.90, reflecting an increase of $17.90 from the prior year, the agency confirmed.

A retiree who delayed enrollment by two full years would face a 20% surcharge, adding approximately $40.58 to that monthly base amount.

The total monthly Part B cost would reach $243.50 after rounding to the nearest 10 cents, CMS noted in its published enrollment guidance. 

Over a 20-year retirement at current premium levels, that two-year delay alone would translate to roughly $9,739 in cumulative penalty payments.

Ryan Ramsey, associate director of health coverage and benefits at the National Council on Aging, urged future enrollees to treat these deadlines as nonnegotiable.

“Planning ahead can help you enroll in Medicare with confidence and avoid penalties that could plague you for years,” Ramsey noted.


Prescription drug coverage imposes its own lifelong surcharge

Medicare Part D, which provides prescription drug coverage, carries a late enrollment penalty that is calculated monthly rather than annually.

Beneficiaries who go 63 or more consecutive days without creditable drug coverage after their initial enrollment period lapses will trigger the penalty, CMS confirmed. 

The Part D late enrollment penalty is calculated by multiplying 1% by the ‘national base beneficiary premium’ ($38.99 in 2026) and by the number of full, uncovered months you were eligible to join Medicare drug coverage but didn’t.

A 14-month delay past the Part D deadline would result in a 14% penalty under the CMS formula, adding $5.50 per month to the plan premium after standard rounding.

Like the Part B surcharge, this fee is permanent and will be charged for as long as the beneficiary holds prescription drug coverage through Medicare.

The national base beneficiary premium can change each year, which means the dollar amount of the Part D penalty may rise alongside program costs, Medicare noted.

Employer coverage creates a limited exception to Medicare penalty rules

Workers who remain employed after age 65 and carry health insurance through a qualifying employer-sponsored group health plan are not required to enroll in Part B immediately, CMS stated.

The Part B special enrollment period is available while still covered by the employer plan and continues for 8 months after either employment or group coverage ends, whichever comes first, CMS confirmed.

The employer group plan must cover workers at a company with 20 or more employees to qualify for the special enrollment period exception, as specified by CMS. 

Not all employer-based health insurance qualifies as creditable coverage for Part D purposes, CMS confirmed, and plan sponsors are required to issue an annual creditable coverage notice documenting the plan’s status.

Retirees who rely on Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) continuation coverage after leaving a job should confirm whether their prescription drug benefits meet the creditable coverage standard, as COBRA plans are evaluated on a case-by-case basis under CMS rules.

Health savings accounts carry a separate Medicare enrollment risk

Retirees who contribute to a health savings account face a penalty if they continue making deposits after enrolling in any part of Medicare.

Contributions made after enrollment are classified as excess, and the Internal Revenue Service imposes a 6% excise tax on those funds each year.

For workers who delay Medicare enrollment past age 65, Part A coverage can be applied retroactively for up to 6 months, but only after the month they turned 65, meaning HSA contributions during that lookback window become excess contributions.

The 6% excise tax accrues annually while excess contributions remain in the account, creating an ongoing cost that many near-retirees may overlook.

IRS guidance and standard Medicare planning advice direct HSA accountholders to stop contributions six months before applying for Medicare to avoid penalties triggered by retroactive Part A coverage.

Workers who retire at 65 without aligning their last deposit and their enrollment date risk triggering an ongoing excise tax alongside their premium penalties.

https://www.thestreet.com/health/medicare-carries-lifetime-warning-for-late-enrollees

What exactly does a ‘deal with Iran’ look like?

 The headline: “U.S.-Iran peace deal could be finalized ‘in the next 24 hours,’ Pakistan’s PM says.”

The article does not identify who would perform the electronic signing for Iran.  There appear to be four possible Iranian power centers that could sign. 

1. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) are the guys with most of Iran’s best weapons.  They are still proclaiming maximal Iranian goals, so not them. 
2. The regular Iranian Army.  They seem to be invisible in matters of governance and foreign affairs, so not them. 
3. Iran’s supreme leader, its ayatollah, who has absolute, dictatorial control over Iran, and who also keeps proclaiming Iran’s maximal goals.  So not him.
4. Iran’s civil government leaders, who appear to be those actually participating in negotiations.  They have no weapons and, apparently little real authority in military and foreign affairs.  But they appear to be the only option for Iranian signatures. 

So America will be signing a deal with an Iranian “government” that has neither weapons nor internal political power.  It’s like signing a deal with a king’s palace housekeeper. 

And of course, this can easily become a non-deal that never happens, again. 

Even if Iran’s powerless government signs a deal, it doesn’t matter.  This deal will collapse from Iranian violations within days. 

Why?  Because Iran’s ayatollah doesn’t want it, and the IRGC that doesn’t want it will keep using its weapons to protect its Hezb’allah proxy in Lebanon, to enforce control over shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, and to sporadically lob missiles and drones at its neighbors and U.S. military bases and forces. 

Iran will, however, use the electronically signed “deal” as a propaganda club in Western media to shame any U.S. retaliations against Iranian violations. 

It’s not as though we can’t see all of this coming.  The entire history of American dealings with Islamic nations and terrorists keeps repeating — again and again and again. 

We will, once again, have been suckered into a deal with an Islamic enemy that knows it earn virgins and a place in Allah’s heaven for lying to non-Muslims to advance the cause of Islam. 

What MAGAns cannot understand is why Trump would even try to make a deal with our deadly enemies, knowing they are liars and cheats who break any deal if it advances Islam. 

All that MAGAns can hope is that Trump will then quit nattering on about deals and smash the hell out of the IRGC and Iran’s fanatical, world conquest–seeking mullahs. 

If Trump does not act quickly and decisively against Iranian violations, we will witness the collapse of his second term, Republicans losing the midterm elections, significant demoralization within the MAGA movement. 

That’s what a BAD deal looks like.

So, Mr. President, will you finally act to win victory over Iran when it openly betrays your trust, or will you flush your MAGA movement support down the toilet while Iran exerts its dominance over the Middle East? 

Texas Hughes: Born in WWII, Army Security Agency Morse code intercept, MBA statistics, computer programmer, software/budget analyst, small business owner, support contractor for U.S. Army Air Defense, intelligence and logistics operational evaluation testing.  Been poor, been well off.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/06/what_exactly_does_a_deal_with_iran_look_like.html

Race-Based Mitigation Of Murder Sentences Remains Indefensible And Deadly

 by Monty Donohew

Recent high-profile sentencing controversies involving young black perpetrators of murder have stirred reflexive activist voices, predictably mobilized around narratives like “systemic racism.” They argue that historical injustices, residual biases, and broader societal inequities should temper justice for individual offenders. Even if we grant, for the sake of argument, that such disparities exist and exert some lingering influence, this line of reasoning collapses under scrutiny of both the data on violent offenses and the foundational logic of individual justice. Excusing or mitigating murder on racial grounds is not compassionate; it is corrosive to the rule of law and, crucially, lethal to the very communities it claims to protect.

The Data on Violent Offending: Patterns That Demand Accountability

Official government statistics paint a consistent picture that cannot be wished away by appeals to history. The Bureau of Justice Statistics’s National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which relies on victim reports rather than potentially biased arrest data, has long documented stark interracial disparities in violent crime. Analyses of recent BJS reports, including patterns from Criminal Victimization, 2024, align with prior years showing black-on-white violent offending rates per capita vastly exceeding the reverse—on the order of 45–50 times higher in some calculations of non-homicide violent crimes, after population adjustment (see Table 13).

FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) data on homicides tells a similar story. In recent years for which offender race is known, black American males (roughly 13–14% of the population) account for approximately 50–55% of murder offenders.  Black homicide victimization rates are also disproportionately high, around 21.3 per 100,000 in recent BJS figures, meaning the overwhelming majority of these tragedies are intra-racial. 

These aren't artifacts of “over-policing” or “selective enforcement.” Victimization surveys and clearance data for the most serious crimes show robust behavioral disparities. Conservative scholars like Thomas Sowell and Heather Mac Donald have repeatedly emphasized that acknowledging these patterns is not bigotry; it is empirical honesty.

Individual Justice: The Non-Negotiable Foundation

American jurisprudence rests on the principle that justice is individual, not collective. A murderer’s race, ancestry, or claims of systemic grievance do not alter the moral weight of taking a human life. Granting mitigation based on group identity transforms the courtroom from a temple of equal justice under law into an arena of racial score-settling. This violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause and erodes the deterrent power of punishment.

Even U.S. Sentencing Commission data, which sometimes shows modestly longer average sentences for Black males after controlling for other factors, does not justify race-based leniency for murder.  The response to any residual disparity should be color-blind reforms improving procedures for all, not injecting racial preferences that further undermine public confidence. “Systemic racism” as a catch-all explanation is often unfalsifiable: disparities are taken as proof of the system, which then excuses the behaviors producing the disparities in the first place. This circularity serves no one.

The Deadly Boomerang: More Lost Black Lives, Not Fewer

The cruel irony activists ignore is that advocacy for race-based mitigation and the cultural messaging that accompanies it, framing perpetrators as victims of circumstance, downplaying personal agency, and teaching children that the system is rigged against them, does not save black lives. It destroys them.

The data on family structure is decisive. Roughly 70% of black children in the U.S. are born out of wedlock, compared to far lower rates in other groups. Father-absent homes are among the strongest predictors of criminal involvement across races. When public discourse and child-rearing emphasize grievance over responsibility, discipline, and two-parent norms, the result is more young men entering the pipeline of impulsivity, gang culture, and violence.

Lenient policies, such as reduced bail, lower prosecutions for serious crimes, or sentencing discounts tied to race, undermine deterrence precisely where it is needed most. High-crime neighborhoods, overwhelmingly black and urban, suffer the highest victimization rates. When murderers face lighter consequences, the message to potential offenders is clear: the stakes are lower. Studies and real-world experience (e.g., post-2020 crime spikes following “defund” and bail reform movements) show that weakened enforcement leads to more homicides, not fewer. Black victims bear the brunt.

Sowell has noted the tragic inversion: left-leaning advocacy often centers empathy on the perpetrator as a product of “the system,” while neglecting the law-abiding black citizens who live in fear and lose children to the resulting chaos.  Raising generations on narratives of inevitable victimhood and excused accountability does not foster resilience or flourishing; it perpetuates cycles of fatherlessness, school failure, and street violence. The empirical outcome is unambiguous: more funerals in black communities, not fewer.

Principles Over Grievance

Granting the existence of historical wrongs or residual frictions and challenges does not license violence today. Murder is not a form of protest or reparation; it is a profound violation demanding proportionate response. True justice and genuine progress require rejecting racial essentialism in sentencing, recommitting to color-blind standards, and promoting cultural renewal centered on family stability, personal agency, and accountability.

Anything less is not equity or fairness; it is surrender to the patterns that have already claimed far too many lives. The data and the moral logic align: equal justice under law protects the innocent and deters the guilty, regardless of race. Pretending otherwise is not only indefensible; it is deadly.

The soft bigotry of low expectations, dressed in ideological academic or judicial robes, propelled by protest chants and slogans, has a body count. Until we confront behavioral realities with honesty rather than narrative comfort, the winter of demographic and cultural despair will claim more victims, disproportionately from the very children raised on excuses.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/06/race_based_mitigation_of_murder_sentences_remains_indefensible_and_deadly.html