American Gun-Control Group Is Funded By The Mexican Government

 The Mexican government has engaged an American gun-control organization, Global Action on Gun Violence, with a $300,000 contract to lobby U.S. officials, pursue firearm lawsuits, and train Mexican officials in U.S. gun policy. Their aim is to promote gun control in the United States.

Global Action on Gun Violence has ties to Democratic lawmakers and aims to influence U.S. gun laws.

The organization has worked on projects related to gun trafficking and has featured Democratic representatives in its communications.

Their contract with Mexico outlines strategies to target U.S. government officials and raise awareness regarding gun policy.

The group supports legislation like Sen. Dick Durbin's Stop Arming Cartels Act, which seeks to regulate the sale of large-caliber firearms and limit gun industry liability.

Global Action on Gun Violence has openly stated its intention to challenge Supreme Court rulings that protect gun rights, specifically advocating for the overturning of cases like District of Columbia v. Heller.

Despite setbacks like the Supreme Court's dismissal of Mexico's lawsuit against gun manufacturers, the group continues its lobbying efforts and public campaigns.

The collaboration between the Mexican government and an American advocacy group highlights international efforts to influence U.S. gun policy. The organization aims to leverage political connections and legal action to foster stricter gun control in America, alongside its ongoing campaigns against existing Second Amendment protections.

https://nataliegwinters.substack.com/p/american-gun-control-group-is-funded?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3382126&post_id=215926224&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=6dl2nb&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Senate Democrat Blocks Immediate Passage of House-Passed Data Center Utility Rate Bill

On September 17, 2026, a Senate Democrat, Martin Heinrich, blocked the immediate passage of a significant bill aimed at requiring data centers to cover their own energy costs. This bill had passed the House with overwhelming support but faced scrutiny in the Senate.

The Ratepayer Protection Act, which passed in the House with a vote of 417-3, encourages states to require data centers to pay for their energy costs, but it does not enforce this requirement.

Senator Jon Husted introduced the bill in the Senate, emphasizing the growing role of data centers in various sectors and predicting around 1,000 new data centers to be built in the U.S. over the next five years.

Heinrich argued that the bill lacks necessary federal enforcement mechanisms and suggested a stronger alternative, the Grid Savings Act, which would mandate that large energy consumers, like data centers, pay for the infrastructure necessary to connect them to the electrical grid.

Concerns about rising utility costs and the environmental impact of data centers are prevalent among voters, particularly as these centers consume significant amounts of energy — about 4% of the national grid — and have been linked to increased utility bills for nearby residents.

Residents have also reported disturbances caused by the noise from cooling systems used in data centers.

The blockage of this bill highlights ongoing debates within Congress regarding energy costs, infrastructure requirements, and the growing influence of data centers in everyday life. Legislators are urged to consider more stringent laws to address these concerns. 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/senate-democrat-blocks-immediate-passage-of-house-passed-data-center-utility-rate-bill-6089263?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge

Zhao Ziyang, Zhu Rongji, and the Limits of the Chinese Market Reform under the Communist Party Rule

The recent death of former Chinese premier Zhu Rongji on August 12 has sparked renewed interest in his contributions to China's economy. Zhu, who served from 1998 to 2003, was key in implementing market-oriented reforms during the 1990s. Comparatively, Zhao Ziyang, who served earlier from 1980 to 1989, also played a major role in China's economic transformation. Their differing views on the market economy reveal significant insights.

1. Zhu Rongji’s Reforms:

Zhu was pivotal in restructuring state-owned enterprises and promoting fiscal reforms.

He believed in markets, yet maintained that a strong, capable state was necessary for effective market operation.

His strategy involved selling off smaller state enterprises while keeping major sectors under state control, believing in the benefits of competition through mechanisms like WTO membership.

2. Zhao Ziyang’s Vision:

Zhao, a major figure in early economic reforms, pushed for greater market autonomy and criticized Maoist central planning.

He advanced the idea that lasting market economies require secure property rights and rule of law, emphasizing that political institutions must support economic frameworks.

His later reflections, revealed during house arrest, showed an evolution towards endorsing parliamentary democracy as essential for economic stability.

3. Institutional Framework:

Economist Chenggang Xu's analysis highlights that while Zhu implemented various reforms, he did not change the underlying political system, which remained centralized and authoritarian.

Zhao's final thoughts suggest that without political accountability and safeguarding of rights, economic reforms are vulnerable to reversal.

The differing approaches of Zhu Rongji and Zhao Ziyang illustrate vital insights into the relationship between economic reform and political structure in China. Zhu favored a strong state to guide economic change, whereas Zhao argued for a foundational shift towards democratic governance to ensure sustainable reform. 

https://mises.org/mises-wire/zhao-ziyang-zhu-rongji-and-limits-chinese-market-reform-under-communist-party-rule

Courthouse Coup, Minnesota Style

In an interview with the New York Times, former chief judge Patrick Schiltz of Minnesota's federal district court revealed a judicial effort to obstruct the government's deportation plans, indicating a troubling collaboration among judges.

1. Emergency Lunch Meeting: Schiltz organized a lunch with fellow judges to discuss whether he should overturn a magistrate's decision related to arrest warrants during a protest. He was resistant despite strong evidence of potential wrongdoing.

2. Judicial Plot Against Deportation: Schiltz suggested that this meeting was not just about the warrant but was a strategy session aimed at undermining the government's Operation Metro Surge, aimed at deporting undocumented migrants.

3. Contempt Orders Against ICE: The day after the lunch, Schiltz filed an order accusing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of violating multiple court orders. He claimed this was a result of negligent behavior, which was contradicted by his earlier aggressive statements.

4. Misleading Statements: Schiltz initially accused ICE of severe infractions but later admitted that many were due to administrative errors rather than intentional defiance of the law.

5. Judicial Collaboration: The New York Times reported that judges had been working together in an unprecedented manner, sharing strategies and templates to quickly address habeas petitions rather than handling cases independently as required.

6. Rapid Response Mechanisms: Judges in Minnesota were reportedly compelled to stay constantly connected to work, worried about missing important petitions, leading to a rush in decision-making without proper legal processing.

7. Judicial Criticism of the Administration: Schiltz openly criticized the administration's policies during the interview, with the DOJ spokesperson noting that the judges' public comments on ongoing cases raise concerns over their impartiality.

8. Judicial Donor and Activist: The Times did not mention Schiltz's history of supporting organizations helping undocumented migrants, which could indicate a conflict of interest in his judicial actions.

9. Call for Investigation: Schiltz's actions suggest a need for further inquiry into judicial conduct and possible overreach, highlighting a significant concern regarding federal judges undermining executive authority.

The revelations from Judge Schiltz raise serious questions about the role of federal judges in immigration matters and their coordination against government initiatives. The potential for judicial overreach demands scrutiny and possibly corrective actions to ensure judicial independence and accountability. 

https://www.declassified.live/p/courthouse-coup-minnesota-style

The Stakes Are Too High to Sit Out the Midterms in Virginia (and Elsewhere)

Early voting for Virginia's midterm elections began on September 18, 2026. This election is crucial as it may significantly influence the future of the state, not just through candidate decisions but also by several important amendments on the ballot.

1. Constitutional Amendments:

Three amendments proposed by the Democrat-controlled legislature are on the ballot.

Amendment 1: Seeks to enshrine a right to abortion throughout pregnancy in the state constitution, criticized as misleadingly labeled and radical.

Amendment 2: Aims to redefine marriage in a way that includes same-sex couples and introduces broader gender ideology, despite existing legal recognition from the Supreme Court's 2015 decision.

Amendment 3: Proposes automatic restoration of voting rights for felons after serving time, criticized for being too lenient and undermining community standards.

2. Political Landscape:

The Virginia political scene is seen as heavily influenced by Democrats, who have been accused of manipulating electoral issues with deceptive language in proposals.

Previous elections showed this tactic, such as gubernatorial candidate Abigail Spanberger presenting herself as moderate only to pursue a leftist agenda once in office.

3. Religious and Community Reactions:

Leaders within the Diocese of Arlington and other religious groups have publicly opposed the proposed amendments, considering them threats to traditional values and ethical conduct.

Despite opposition from some religious leaders, there are concerns about mixed messages within the Catholic Church regarding abortion, as some politicians continue to receive communion despite pro-choice stances.

4. Call to Action:

The article emphasizes the need for strong voter turnout against the proposed amendments and Democrats' governance, portraying these as detrimental to Virginia's moral and community fabric.

Calls for reclaiming control of the legislature and voting for Republicans, viewed as a less extreme alternative to Democrats.

The midterm elections in Virginia represent a significant moment for voters to voice their opinions against radical changes to state laws. The choice ahead is framed as crucial not only for local governance but also as a broader statement against perceived leftist agendas. Voting is urged as a necessity for safeguarding community values and future well-being. 

https://spectator.org/the-stakes-are-too-high-to-sit-out-the-midterms-in-virginia-and-elsewhere/

Minnesota's Anti-ICE Relief Fund Shut Down Due To Rampant Fraud

Hennepin County, Minnesota, has closed a $2 million relief fund meant to aid businesses affected by federal immigration enforcement due to significant fraud. This program was initiated after a controversial operation led to the deaths of two citizens.

The relief fund, created for businesses impacted by federal immigration actions starting in December 2025, faced overwhelming fraud.

Out of approximately 300 applications, only 82 were considered valid, leading the county to distribute only $500,000 before halting the program.

Investigations revealed that many businesses listed did not exist, and numerous applications used identical AI-generated content.

Hennepin County Commissioner Jeff Lunde noted the incident indicated a deeper issue, stating there was no deterrent against fraud.

The scandal has drawn national attention, with accusations linking fraudulent activities to Minnesota's Somali community.

Investigative efforts had previously exposed a $250 million fraud related to the nonprofit Feeding Our Future.

Both state officials and federal representatives, including President Trump, have spotlighted the issue, with calls for criminal investigations and the establishment of a permanent Fraud Division at the DOJ receiving bipartisan support.

The collapse of the relief fund highlights significant challenges within Minnesota’s welfare system, illustrating broader concerns about fraud and misuse of taxpayer funds in social services. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/minnesotas-anti-ice-relief-fund-shut-down-due-rampant-fraud

House Panels Flag ActBlue Foreign Donation Risks

 A report from three House committees claims that ActBlue, a major Democratic fundraising organization, may have allowed foreign donations and failed to adequately prevent fraud.

Weak Verification Policies: The report suggests that ActBlue's passport verification process is insufficient since it does not reliably check U.S. passport numbers and allows foreign actors to bypass fraud detection.

Instruction to Analysts: Fraud-prevention analysts were reportedly told to be lenient, giving donors the "benefit of the doubt," even when there were red flags.

ActBlue’s Defense: An ActBlue spokesperson disputed the allegations, stating that 99.99% of its contributions in 2023 came from verified U.S. donors. They insisted the platform requires a U.S. passport number for foreign addresses.

Internal Conflicts: Despite claims of a multi-layered vetting process, the report indicates that ActBlue's system does not validate passport numbers against official databases.

Documented Foreign Contributions: The report notes that ActBlue accepted contributions from foreign donors, including cases with questionable documentation.

CEO's Non-Compliance: ActBlue’s CEO, Regina Wallace-Jones, invoked her Fifth Amendment rights during an investigation hearing, refusing to answer questions.

The ongoing investigation into ActBlue continues as the committees assess its compliance with fraud prevention and the potential acceptance of illegal foreign donations.

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/house-republicans-act-blue-foreign-donations/2026/09/18/id/1269949/