Conservative Blogger
Wednesday, September 30, 2026
Israel: 'Major Disaster' Avoided in Suspected Attempted Hijacking
 |
An Israeli official said a "major disaster was narrowly avoided" after a flydubai flight from Dubai to Tel Aviv diverted to Saudi Arabia Wednesday amid what Israeli officials described as an attempted hijacking by one of the pilots. The aircraft, flight FZ1073, landed safely at Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz Airport in Tabuk, reports The Jerusalem Post. The unnamed Israeli official said that investigators believe one pilot tried to hijack the aircraft, though it remained unclear whether he intended to crash it, fly it to Israel or carry out an attack similar to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States. Israel’s security establishment, including the IDF, Mossad and Shin Bet, increasingly believes the incident was an attempted terrorist attack, The Jerusalem Post reported. Unconfirmed reports said the copilot, reportedly an Omani national who had worked for the airline for about a year, stabbed the captain and tried to crash the plane before passengers subdued him. Israeli sources told the Post that initial investigations suggested the suspected attacker was Omani, but his identity had not been confirmed. Flydubai said all passengers were safe and accounted for, and that it was working with authorities. The airline planned to send another aircraft to Saudi Arabia to bring the passengers to Tel Aviv. Images appear to show damage to the aircraft's rear rudder, with part of it missing from the vertical stabilizer. The Boeing 737 MAX plunged from about 34,000 feet to around 17,000 feet in less than a minute during the incident. Arik Zer, a former Shin Bet head of flight security, told Israel's Channel 12 that the rapid descent likely caused the damage and that it was unlikely to have been caused by an object striking the plane. Israeli security officials, including the Israel Defense Forces, Mossad and Shin Bet, increasingly viewed the incident as a possible act of terrorism, the Post reported. There was no evidence the suspected hijacker had backing from a foreign government or organization. Video from the plane moments after the alleged attack shows the captain covered in blood on the floor outside the cockpit as passengers tend to him, The Times of Israel reported. A second crew member appears tied up beside him and seemingly unconscious. In another video recorded shortly after the fight, a passenger with blood on his face describes a hijacking and asks for help. "We're here during the hijacking of an airplane. At this point we've subdued the terrorists, we're approaching landing. Whoever is hearing me, we need help," he says. "We're landing in Tabuk, apparently in Saudi Arabia. An unknown, unfamiliar area. On the plane, everybody is safe and sound, other than the pilot. We need help." A passenger identified as Meital told Channel 12 that her husband helped subdue the attacker. She said a crew member in the cockpit "tried to crash the plane." "Someone shouted 'stabbing' and my husband immediately understood what was happening and rushed to the front of the plane, and along with other Israelis they neutralized the terrorist," she said. "There were stabbings and a lot of blood." "We're very emotional and under terrible stress, it's very difficult for me to talk," she added. The Times of Israel also reported that passengers in a video from the plane are heard saying, "You saved the plane. It's good for you." One passenger tells the person recording, "We were attacked and were guarding the pilot." "They tried to murder the pilot. We subdued [the attacker]," another passenger says. Someone points to a bound man and says, "This is the man who... stabbed him." In a separate video to his family, another passenger describes a "terrorist" who tried to take over the plane and says he helped subdue the attacker, who was tied up. A passenger separately told the Post that one pilot stabbed another and tried to force him out of the cockpit as the plane began to descend. Passengers seated near the front rushed to the cockpit and fought the attacker, the passenger said. The group removed him from the cockpit and helped two other pilots take control of the plane. The passenger said an Israeli dentist treated the stabbed pilot, whom the passenger described as being in critical condition. A statement from Tabuk airport confirmed that the pilot and first officer were wounded and taken to a hospital, but did not explain how they were injured. During the incident, the aircraft broadcast squawk code 7700, which indicates a general emergency, before switching to code 7500, used to signal unlawful interference, and later returning to 7700. Israel's air force scrambled fighter jets and raised its alert level as the situation unfolded, Walla reported. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened a security meeting with defense officials, and Israeli airspace was temporarily closed before reopening after the plane landed in Saudi Arabia. "The incident is under control, and all measures are currently being deployed in order to return the Israeli passengers safely to Israel," the Prime Minister's Office said. Authorities were investigating the identity and background of the pilot suspected of carrying out the attack. The incident led IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir to cancel a planned trip to the United States, where he was scheduled to meet with Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Adm. Brad Cooper, head of U.S. Central Command, the Post reported. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz and Zamir also considered sending Israeli military or civilian aircraft to bring the passengers home, Walla reported. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich called for Israel to "address the intent and not the results" in a statement after the incident. "Whoever tried to crash a plane and murder 180 Israelis must pay as if he murdered. He and every state or terrorist organization that sent him," Smotrich wrote. Sandy Fitzgerald ✉Sandy Fitzgerald has more than three decades in journalism and serves as a general assignment writer for Newsmax covering news, media, and politics. © 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved. |
Let's Go: Michele Tafoya Is on the Move in Minnesota, and It's Paying Off
 |
One of the least talked about Senate races nationally is the one in Minnesota, which features GOP nominee Michele Tafoya, a former sportscaster, taking on Democrat Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan. But it's one Republican voters need to watch, for reasons we've discussed before and which I'll emphasize again here. The last time the North Star State had a Republican senator was Norm Coleman, who served from January 2003 to January 2009. Between Minnesota's track record of electing Democrats in statewide races, combined with this being a midterm election year - which traditionally is a bad one for the president's party - one would think that Flanagan would be running away with it. But she's not. As we've previously reported, Tafoya has run a strong campaign and kept it close, with polls mostly showing her trailing Flanagan only by low single digits, with some of the results showing either a dead heat or the difference being within the poll's margin of error. And with roughly five weeks to go between now and Election Day, the latest one, from Insider Advantage, again shows them neck and neck: — Politics & Poll Tracker 📡 (@PollTracker2024) September 30, 2026 Tafoya's reaction when she saw the results? To urge Minnesotans to go and vote: How has she done it? In part by routinely reminding the state's voters of the myriad fraud scandals that occurred under the watch of both Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) and Flanagan. For her part, Flanagan has thrown Walz under the bus in an effort to try and avoid scrutiny of her actions:
Flanagan has also done herself no favors on other fronts:
— Dustin Grage (@GrageDustin) September 16, 2026 There was also this:
And this:
In other words, unlike Tafoya, Flanagan has a lot of baggage to exploit, most of which she brought on herself. This race reminds me somewhat of the Georgia gubernatorial race between GOP nominee Rick Jackson and former Atlanta mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, the Democrat nominee. Jackson has narrowed the polling gap by relentlessly targeting Bottoms over her abysmal record and statements made both during her time as mayor and after. Jackson, a businessman, is a newcomer to politics and thus doesn't have a lengthy record to pore over, which puts Bottoms at a distinct disadvantage headed into the November midterm election. Though Tafoya is well known in her state, she, too, is a newcomer to politics to the extent that Flanagan and her media allies have been reduced to digging through her social media feeds for things on which to try and ding her. But in Minnesota, which tends to trend blue in statewide races, Flanagan's attacks don't seem to be moving the needle in her direction. Meanwhile, Tafoya recently made her full case to voters in an opinion piece posted Tuesday by the Duluth News Tribune. In recent election cycles, we've seen voters in both parties take anti-incumbent/anti-establishment stances, in some cases preferring people who have little to no political experience in an attempt to shake things up. If that trend continues in November, Tafoya might find herself in the position of being the nominee who not only helps get her state back on track but also saves the Senate for Republicans. Wouldn't that be something? Credit: redstate.com |
Whoops: Adam Kinzinger Bets on His Own Biden Pardon, Now Faces Reported Federal Probe
 |
Former Republican and perpetual Trump antagonist Adam Kinzinger pocketed $823 betting on former President Joe Biden’s pardons, including his own. Federal regulators are reportedly investigating how the former Illinois congressman placed those bets. The account under scrutiny traded on Kalshi in December 2024 and January 2025, before Biden left office. Three people familiar with the investigation told POLITICO that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is examining the transactions. Kalshi is also conducting a review. Kinzinger has already admitted that he placed the bets, but he denies knowing anything the public didn’t. Kinzinger was on CNN that January railing against Trump and insisting he wanted no part of a Biden pardon. He was willing to put money on the question, though. Asked about the trades, the former congressman told POLITICO he had read and understood the rules. He took them to mean he couldn’t work for the involved agency, have inside information, or influence what happened. In his telling, he was clear on all three:
Kalshi bars participants from betting on events in which they're directly named, and also does not allow trading with inside information or any influence over the result. One of Kinzinger's bets had his own name on it. Whether that's enough to constitute a violation is what investigators are determining. Kinzinger says neither Kalshi nor the CFTC has contacted him about an investigation. Both declined to comment to POLITICO. As for his other bets, he put the total at roughly 25 and said he mostly lost money. The $823 came from the pardons. And he'd already given CNN viewers quite a lecture about why he didn't want one. On January 6, 2025, Anderson Cooper asked Kinzinger about a possible pardon. Kinzinger warned that Trump’s allies would use investigations to force his opponents to spend money defending themselves. Then came the speech about his own innocence, with another swipe at Trump:
Biden issued the preemptive pardons for January 6 committee members in his final hours as president. RedState covered the outgoing administration’s extraordinary protection for the left-wing panel at the time. Kinzinger spent November 2024 calling Kalshi a "corruption time bomb" on Substack. On Tuesday, while being questioned about his own trades on the platform, he said he was generally pleased with its screening efforts. The bet on his own pardon, though? He volunteered that himself. Biden's pardon was beneath him when Cooper asked. On Kalshi, it was worth a wager. Credit: https://redstate.com/ |
James Talarico Finally Admits That He Still Supports the Radical Trans Agenda
 |
A new hidden camera video of Democrat James Talarico just captured the Senate candidate admitting that he would fight as a radical to “fight for” transgender children with the same fervor that he had in the Texas Legislature. Despite his insistence that he opposed gender reassignment surgeries for minors and that he himself transitioned into a social moderate once winning the nomination, when speaking with individuals he believes are supporters, Talarico openly states that “The way I fought for trans kids in the legislature is how I will fight for them in the US Senate.” “My position hasn’t changed,” Talarico added when pressed as to whether or not he would continue his radical agenda in the U.S. Senate. In 2023, Talarico voted against Senate Bill 14, which sought to outlaw gender transition surgeries for minors in Texas and prohibited state funds from being allocated to entities that performed them. Talarico would label the bill “the most dangerous bill that’s being heard on this floor this session.” Talarico’s opinion on the bill perhaps grew even stronger as time went on, as he would eventually refer to the passage as right-wing “Christofascism” in the state of Texas. Talarico will take on Republican Ken Paxton for control over the Senate seat on Election Day, just 35 days away. Credit: townhall.com |
Hell Freezes Over As The View's Sunny Hostin Drops a Remarkable Take on the Cornell Gang Rape Story
 |
Hold on! Did The View’s Sunny Hostin give a solid opinion on the Cornell seven? Yes, she did — a classic case of a broken clock being right twice a day. Hostin, known as patient zero for a lot of dumb takes on this insufferable program, pointed out that much of the reporting on this case is inaccurate, that a rush to judgment shouldn’t be made, and that there’s a lot to unpack. She’s not wrong. The case involves a 2024 gang rape allegation at the school, where a now-former female student alleges she was drugged and raped at a fraternity. The problem is that the initial investigation didn’t turn up anything. She also said that, at the time, it was consensual. Now, a new civil suit has been filed, and the Internet is running wild:
Well done, Sunny. We know this won’t last, but for now, in this case, that’s the right take. Joy Behar needed to take a chill pill, though.
Credit: https://townhall.com/ |
Trump celebrates ‘Golden Age’ of tech, following WH luncheon with top AI leaders
 |
President Donald Trump is seeking to shed new light on the artificial intelligence (AI) boom, declaring that the United States is set to embark on a tech-powered “golden age.” Earlier on Tuesday, Trump unveiled America.gov — a new AI-powered chatbot designed to streamline public services — during an all-day White House summit. Held amid ongoing public skepticism regarding AI safety regulations, the event convened 30 top tech executives, including xAI founder Elon Musk, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Outside of the West Wing following a luncheon with the tech giants, Trump addressed the surmounting warnings from prominent AI leaders regarding safety regulations in the wake of reports of several AI agents “going rogue.” Trump argued that AI companies are responsible for their own “self-policing” for tech safety guardrails, instead of implementing new legislation.
Standing at Trump’s side with reporters and other AI leaders, Musk celebrated the accomplishments of the tech boom as well, saying that the advancement could even possibly bring “universal high income” to the U.S.
The meeting also addressed the substantial power and land requirements of AI data centers. Trump acknowledged public concerns over data center expansion and suggested that technology companies work with local communities to address energy needs — including oil and gas resources and grid support — while also investing in local economies. Deepening anxiety over the scope of AI’s capabilities and power have skyrocketed after several former AI researchers publicly stated that the technology was being developed too quickly, without safety guardrails in place. Last week, fears mounted further when the FBI allegedly became a victim to a rogue AI bot that targeted three government websites. Tuesday’s event offered the administration an opportunity to highlight the promises of AI, shifting the narrative away from the warnings issued by left-wing tech CEOs in recent weeks. Proponents argue the technology will energize the economy, advance scientific discovery and accelerate crucial medical research. Credit: https://www.oann.com/ |
Trump-Xi Summit Sold as Triumph but Delivers Small, Procedural Wins
 |
President Donald Trump’s big photo op with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Washington handed him something real — and something smaller than the cable-news narrative. The summit produced a narrowly focused AI safety channel and a modest extension of a trade truce, not a sweeping treaty. But on shows like Jesse Watters Primetime, the optics were sold as the last card the administration needed: triumph, leverage, and the promise of bringing Iran to its knees.What went down — and what really changedWhat officials announced was procedural: a U.S.–China channel to manage AI incidents and a pledge to keep talking on trade while keeping the current tariff truce in place. That’s useful — nobody wants an AI mishap that sparks a military crisis — but it’s not an industrial-policy surrender or a magic fix for decades of competitive tension over chips, semiconductors, and export controls. The hard stuff — technology restrictions, supply-chain decoupling, Taiwan — got punted like it always does. For regular folks, a functioning AI incident channel could mean fewer headline-grabbing near-misses involving autonomous systems or misinformation campaigns that ripple into our markets. The trade truce extension buys breathing room for small manufacturers and farmers who’ve been guessing whether tariffs will jump again; it keeps a messy set of variables from tanking a deal on your shop floor or in your supply closet. Fox’s narrative vs. the record On Fox, Jesse Watters and guests framed the trip as President Donald Trump having “forced” Xi to sign on the dotted line — a knockout political move. Viewed against the official outcomes, that’s hype. You can cheer the administration for restoring hard-nosed engagement and for using the bully pulpit to press Beijing; you shouldn’t mistake ceremonial wins and procedural channels for wholesale capitulation or total victory. The distinction matters. When pundits declare a “historic” breakthrough, markets take it seriously, companies make inventory decisions, and voters adjust their expectations. If a Midwestern factory reorders parts because tariffs look stable, that’s a concrete win; if the spin machine overpromises, ordinary people end up footing the bill for reality’s correction later. Iran: squeezed economically — or still in the game?The June memorandum of understanding with Iran was wrapped into this narrative as the economic hammer that will “leave Iran broke.” The MOU was consequential: ceasefire language, plans to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and big financial figures floated for reconstruction and accounts. But it was also fragile, conditional, and immediately tested by subsequent incidents at sea. For Americans, the stakes are plain. A calm Strait of Hormuz lowers shipping insurance, stabilizes tanker rates, and can ease pressure on gasoline prices. But handing Tehran large sums without ironclad safeguards risks funding the same proxies and programs that threaten the region. The MOU could be leverage — or it could be a risky transfer of bargaining chips that vanishes the minute violence resumes. Call it what you want: smart diplomacy mixed with theatrical advantage, or cautious, incremental steps dressed up as grand victory. The question for voters isn’t the cable boast — it’s whether the administration can turn modest, procedural gains into durable security and real economic benefits for Americans. Are we watching the start of a strategy, or just another headline dressed up as the last card? Credit: https://patriotpowerednetwork.com/ |
Chairman Grassley: Jack Smith Took Nearly 5,000 Trump Donor Bank Records
Newly released committee files rocked the Senate Judiciary hearing room this week when Chairman Chuck Grassley waved what he called proof that the Arctic Frost probe cast an alarmingly wide net. The GOP release and committee questioning showed investigators sought and — by admission of former Special Counsel Jack Smith — obtained broad financial and donor records tied to people who gave to President Trump and allied groups. That admission and those documents are the new, concrete development here, and they raise real questions about privacy, scope and oversight.
What the committee documents actually say
Republican materials released by Chairman Grassley describe subpoenas that sought “statistical data and analysis relating to donors and fundraising efforts” and “broad financial data” tied to conservative groups and donors in every state. GOP summaries even cite a specific total for checks collected — nearly 5,000 (the release claims 4,782) — though major outlets have not yet independently verified that exact figure. What is clear from the files is the scale: the probe reached beyond a small circle and swept up ordinary Americans who gave money to political causes.
Smith’s own words in the hearing
Under tough questioning, former Special Counsel Jack Smith acknowledged his office “acquired financial information.” He defended those steps as necessary to investigate alleged crimes tied to efforts to block the peaceful transfer of power, saying he made decisions “without regard to President Trump’s political association.” That answer will not satisfy skeptics who see a dangerous precedent whenever the Justice Department collects bank details and donor lists tied to political activity.
Privacy, legal risks and political fallout
Donor records can include addresses, routing numbers, account details and signatures. Whether the FBI and the special‑counsel team needed such breadth is a legal and policy question that deserves a real answer, not hand‑waving. Republicans on the Judiciary Committee already plan more oversight: telecom subpoenas, referrals and pressuring agencies for documents. Democrats, by contrast, call the subpoenas routine. Voters, though, should want a clearer line between legitimate law enforcement and sweeping inquiries that scoop up private citizens who merely donated to a campaign.
Bottom line: this week’s hearing was not business as usual. Chairman Grassley put new documents on the table and got a partial admission from Jack Smith. Now Congress must follow where the paper trail leads — and the Justice Department needs to explain, in plain language, why collecting donors’ financial information was necessary. If the answer is thin, the remedy should be sweeping oversight and real limits on how investigators gather Americans’ private data. After all, in a free country, political giving should not come with a risk of government snooping.
Credit: https://patriotpowerednetwork.com/
Tuesday, September 29, 2026
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison testifies during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing in the U.S. Capitol Bu...
-
((L-R) Randy Fine attends the Scott Jennings “A Revolution of Common Sense” Book Launch on December 02, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by ...
-
If she were White there would have been 🦗 An arbitrator has directed the Washington Post to rehire Karen Attiah, the opinion columnist wh...
