WATCH: Unanswered questions surrounding Boston Marathon bombing

Part 1:

Part 2:

Now, some interesting new developments in the Boston Marathon attack as well. The media, quick to latch onto the lone wolf theory – you know, well, who are these guys, really? And then they immediately went, well, it was their religion. I’m not sure what religion.

But as the investigation continues to pan out, it is becoming increasingly likely that this event being done by a couple of guys who were just radicalized solely by taking the wrong turn on Google search is as likely as Benghazi happening because of a YouTube video. That’s not the truth. Lawmakers now say the Tsarnaev brothers were trained before the attack. Here’s a Congressman, Michael McCaul, the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. Watch this.

VIDEO

Rep. Michael McCaul: I think given the level of sophistication of this device, the fact that the pressure cooker is a signature device that goes back to Pakistan, Afghanistan, leads me to believe – and the way they handled these devices and the tradecraft – leads me to believe that there was a trainer, and the question is where is that trainer or trainers?

Okay, who is the trainer? Remember, this guy is a Republican. Now, let me give you the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, also revealing that the FBI is investigating persons of interest here inside the United States.

VIDEO

George Stephanopoulos: Do you know of any other people here in the United States who might have been part of this process of radicalizing Tamerlan?

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger: This is part of the investigation. It’s a domestic investigation, and it’s an international investigation. And we’re really good at this. The FBI’s very good with that, working with our other agencies. There are persons of interest in the United States.

Let me give you another Democrat. This is a Democrat Representative in the House on the House Intelligence Committee. He said he believed the Russians know more than they are telling us now.

VIDEO

Rep. Adam Schiff: But at the same time, if they were up on the mother or on someone related to the mother and listening, there’s got to be a basis for why they went up on her electronically or why they went up on one of her affiliates or associates. We don’t know that. We haven’t received that information from the Russians. I think they do know more than they’re telling us.

Okay, now here’s what’s of particular interest: the fact that the Russian authorities recorded a conversation between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his mother back in 2011. They’re talking about jihad together, and there’s a second call that was recorded between the suspects’ mother and an unnamed man under FBI investigation living in southern Russia.

The Russians just provided this information to United States over the weekend, so why were the Russians recording the phone call in the first place? What do they know? Well, again, there’s no answer yet. That seems to be the theme around many of the stories today. There are more questions than answers, but there’s something different, because it used to always take time. But there was something else that we used to also have, and that was trust for our own government, trust that eventually we would get to the meaning, trust that there were people actually trying to do the right thing.

The issue of the Miranda rights has caused all kinds of disagreement in the Boston Marathon attack investigation, and here’s where I stand. If you’re not a citizen, sorry, dude. If you are a citizen, you need to be granted those rights, no matter how big of a dirt bag you may be. It only counts when we uphold the rights of the people we really don’t want to give rights to. That’s when it’s important.

But there is controversy surrounding how the surviving suspect was Mirandized. A federal judge – her name is Marianne Bowler. She decided to go it alone. She went down to the hospital, and she rushed down there to set up a makeshift proceeding and read the suspect his rights. It’s like 16 hours into it. That’s important to remember.

According to House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Rogers, the FBI was “not happy about it” because, “They believed they needed more time. This is not a good way to stop another bomb from going off.” The FBI reportedly was blindsided and stunned when the judge showed up. Tsarnaev was providing valuable intelligence information and then suddenly stopped after his rights were read by this particular judge.

The FBI believes valuable information now has been lost due to the actions of this judge. So who is this judge? Who is the judge? Well, the Supreme Court held that a suspect has to be brought before the judicial officer within 48 hours. You’ve got 48 hours. The suspect has to be read their rights no matter what at 48 hours.

I believe you should be Mirandized right away, but others argue that the FBI should have been allowed the full 48 hours under the law. Okay, we can go back and forth on that one all day. Are you going to get to the next bomb, if there is a bomb? Okay, the debate goes on, and everybody’s focused on this debate, but nobody is looking at this judge.

Whether or not…is this legal? Yeah, but her timing is very interesting. We reached out to Judicial Watch. We asked them, how common is it for a judge to insert themselves into a case like this? Here’s what they told us in a statement just this afternoon. “What is unusual is the reported surprise of the FBI and the other officials at the turn of events. It looks as if the DOJ went around the FBI. The DOJ reportedly coordinated with everyone but the FBI.”

So in other words, Eric Holder went and coordinated with this judge but nobody else. Now, that seems strange for the chief law enforcement officer, doesn’t it? “Arraignments and other court proceedings do sometimes take place in hospitals. Once he was charged by justice in a federal court, it was a matter of time before Tsarnaev would have been read his rights. Don’t blame the judges, blame the Justice Department.”

Okay. Well, now let’s look at this here for a second, because I’ve got another theory. If you go by Judicial Watch, this is the decision of Eric Holder. But I again think we should ask who is this judge? Well, we started today just by going over her resume, and it’s fairly normal except for one part of her resume, a strange string of facts. One of her hobbies and interests include traveling overseas to Muslim countries for speaking engagements all the time.

She was the first female judge to speak in Kuwait. She also appeared at the United Arab Emirates, and let me put aside here for a second another big piece. She also visited the U.S. embassy in Belgrade, but besides that one, all of her international trips, she goes to Muslim countries to speak to them.

And here’s the last piece of this: She made a trip to Egypt last year. Now, this according to the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, she was there for a conference on cross-border financial investigations organized by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations in cooperation with the Egyptian judicial and law enforcement authorities.

Okay, so the Department of Homeland Security picks her to go because she keeps going over to the Middle East. They pick her to go and be a part of this, but that’s not the only reason why she was there. She also was to meet with the defense team and observe the trial of the six NGOs accused of receiving foreign funding and operating illegally in the country. Do you remember this?

We talked about how strange this was during the Arab Spring. All of these kids from both the Republicans and the Democrats, they were all there, and they were accused of funding street protest during the heat of the Arab Spring. Everybody was chanting for democracy, and the radical leftists rushed to Egypt to help and so did all of these kids. And they were scooped up, and they were held.

And then all of a sudden, they were just released. Yet, that’s one of the reasons why that judge was there. What is it about this judge and her particular interest in the Muslim countries? What is happening here? Is this just a coincidence? Maybe, very well may be. Why is she so eager to defend those who are fueling the riots? Oh, probably because she’s in good graces with this administration, and those weren’t riots; those were freedom fighters to help the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood.

We’ll continue to seek answers on all of the questions in the stories, but like I said, only more questions are coming, not more answers, including the crazy mother of the Boston bombing suspect. Something’s wrong here. She has said some truly outrageous things. Watch.

VIDEO

Zubeidat Tsarnaev: They already are talking about that we are terrorists. I am terror – they told that I was doing some terroristic, you know. What did they tell? Some kind of operation, I was kind of preparing here or I already did something, I don’t know. People are telling different, you know, information I get. They already want me, him, and all of us to look as terrorists. So yes, I would prefer not to live in American now. Why did I even go there? Why? I thought America was going to like protect us, our kids. It’s going to be safe for like any reason.

Yeah, it’d be safe. You could come over. You could be, you know, part of let’s say a marathon, and you wouldn’t be blown up. Yeah, I don’t know why you came here. I ain’t gonna miss you. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

Here’s the amazing thing here is if you don’t like America, if you don’t trust America, she rings true to you. She rings true to you. This is important. She also told the Associated Press, “I’m sick and tired of all this nonsense that they make up about me and my children. People know me as a regular person…” Yeah, they did Lee Harvey Oswald, too.

“…and I’ve never been mixed up in any criminal intentions, especially any linked to terrorism.” Never been mixed up in crime, really? That is quite a bold statement considering we have the mug shot. She shoplifted $1,600 in merchandise from Lord &Taylor. Ironically, Lord & Taylor is the store that also had the videotape of her sons planting the bombs.

Also, we have now the taped phone conversations that she had with her son about jihad, and another person on the watch list, so it’s quite a statement to make. But again, if you listen to her, and you don’t like us, if you mistrust us, she rings true. It causes more doubt.

The reaction of the mom, the dad, the crazy aunt, all of this, immediately discredits the United States, but not just outside, here at home as well, I believe. The assumptions are so cartoonish, they’re so fake, it’s role-playing. Why would she leap to such bizarre, unsupported conclusions without any evidence at all? Why would she point the finger to America? Why would she say, “I’ve never done anything”? Because most people won’t look it up.

This is the tactic they use against Israel. We haven’t had it used here in our own country. This is the first time. This is something new for America. This has moved us into a new place, because what’s different this time is we don’t trust our own government. Back on September 11, we would all stand together, but now we have an inherent distrust of the U.S. We have an inherent distrust of the media. We know we’re not getting the truth.

And remember, back after September 11, the truthers didn’t ring true to anybody, because we would never have believed that before. The truthers are a mixed bag. It’s Ahmadinejad, radical Muslims, and Michael Moore, and all they have to do is plant the seeds of doubt whenever and wherever they can. With her and her husband’s stories changing in such a strategic way, I can’t help but wonder – is somebody coaching her?

I said this is a lot like Israel. Let me bring you up to speed on one other thing, one other thing I haven’t seen anybody talk about. On the day of the bombings, everybody lept to connect the bombings to the tax day and the Tea Party. Have you heard anybody point out that April 15 was also the 65th anniversary of Israel’s independence? I mean, given the bombers were radical Islamists…reasonable to search for the connection there?

Should we expect that the tactics of bombings and terror normally used against Israel to happen here more frequently? By the way, the White House cared about this 65th anniversary of Israel so much that they say well, because of sequester, we had to cancel the dinner celebration for the Jewish Heritage Month at the White House.

Yeah. Oh, and one other thing: here’s the bombing scene, and you’ll notice that this is the area here, and there’s the Israeli flag. I mean, is it too much to assume that maybe – has anybody looked for the Saudi on the surveillance tape from the day before? The scripts don’t match. The media is not telling you the truth. The government is also not telling you the truth.

And I have to tell you, I thought about it a lot this weekend. I thought, you know what, maybe everybody else in the media has gotten the call saying hey, look, you’re harming the investigation. That doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t make any sense at all, because they would’ve called us. Somebody would have said to us, but instead, we have law-enforcement officials calling us. We have people in the federal government who are instrumental in this case calling us saying please don’t give up on this…please, please, please.

The administration keeps downplaying the threat of Al Qaeda, downplaying – it’s crazy talk to even say anything about Saudi Arabia. They say that Al Qaeda is decimated, but yet their activities seem to be ramping up. They say nothing is happening, could possibly happen with Saudi Arabia, and yet the Saudi Arabians, their fingerprints are all over this.

We told about the incidents in Canada and Spain. Now there’s a story today about the terrorists beginning their spring offensive, something that we’ve been afraid of seeing happen here. It may just be getting started. This is something I’ve told you for years that when we would really be weak, when our enemies felt, okay I think they’re done. They’re at their weakest point, they’d say “go.” Are we there?

The way our government has gone out of their way to lend credibility to the secular and legitimate Muslim Brotherhood while denying any potency left in Al Qaeda and other spinoff radical Islamic terror organizations, we have set ourselves up for big, big trouble, and I don’t think anybody except the few in Washington and in our law-enforcement agencies really care.

The Muslim Brotherhood is not secular, and the only thing legitimate about them is the threat that they pose to you and your family. They have been exported around the world, and they go to work radicalizing people. That’s what they do. They are basically an extension of Saudi Arabia and the radicals there.

The Muslim Brotherhood is financed by contributions from their members, and many of those members just happen to be in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They fund many of these mosques, in fact, the mosque the bombers attended in Boston, the Islamic Society of Boston, the ISB, Islamic Society of Boston. They admitted to receiving millions of dollars from Saudi banks.

It’s run by the Muslim American Society, the MAS, which has been described by prosecutors as a North American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. Extreme radical Yusuf al-Qaradawi, former trustee at the Islamic Society of Boston. It was founded by an Al Qaeda fundraiser who’s currently serving time in federal prison, and the current imam who also spoke at the Islamic Society of Boston said, “grab onto the shovel, grab onto the gun, and the sword.”

The list goes on and on, and this is just one mosque, the one in Boston. There are many. America cannot continue to ignore the warning signs, but it is more than just an administration failing to recognize the warning signs. This administration is aiding and abetting. They are adding to the warning signs.

Let me give you this warning sign. This is from a concerned Islamic leader. This guy is a good guy, speaking at the State Department in 1999. He said – remember ’99 – “The most dangerous thing that is going on now in these mosques…is the extremists’ ideology…because they are very active…They took over more than 80 percent of the mosques that have been established in the U.S.…A danger might suddenly come that you are not looking for…We don’t know where it is going to hit.”

Islamists call the mosques a rabat. It means “military fortress.” They’ve basically set up the radical Islamic version of the Mafia. The Brotherhood and CAIR and other legitimate organizations are then filled with the made guys. They’re completely legitimate. Uh huh. Really? I’ve seen The Sopranos. This is the Islamic version of The Sopranos. They sit around the table in the scheme while the rabats have the mob enforcers carrying out their hits. And that’s what those two kids were.

We keep going out of our way to help Saudi Arabia in times when we really shouldn’t be. Why, is the question. Why are we helping the Muslim Brotherhood? There’s a deal with Saudi Arabia, and I think we all know it. I mean, geez President Bush, I think actually kissed one of the princes on the lips. It was creepy.

We outwardly claim to have a mutual enemy in Al Qaeda, and we tell the Saudi’s, and they tell us, hey, we’re both against Al Qaeda, but in reality, we should say our enemy is not only Al Qaeda which came from within you, but the Islamic radicals that believe that jihad is more than an internal struggle also come from you.

Al Qaeda believes this. The Muslim Brotherhood believes this. Hezbollah believes this. Much of Saudi Arabia believes this. And why are we helping them? We’ve helped them in Egypt. We’ve helped them in Syria. We’re helping them now in Syria. It was Al Qaeda who was blamed for Benghazi, because we were running guns through Turkey into Syria, for what? For the Muslim Brotherhood at the request of Saudi Arabia.

We have helped fund the Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood. I will tell you one thing that the press will not, nor will the administration, or the terrorists’ mom, and this is the good part; I want you to know while all of these questions are out here, I want you to know that I personally have seen patriotic Americans coming out of the woodwork in our government right now and coming out of the woodwork in law enforcement.

They will not sit down. They are warning. They are begging for someone to listen. I don’t know why the rest of the networks won’t do it. I don’t know why anybody else won’t do it, but people are being threatened with jail time now for helping. But they’re not going to sit down, and this is much bigger than you think and much bigger and different than you are being told. You keep asking questions, and know that we here at TheBlaze will continue to do the same.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.