New York Post
Polymarket promo code NYPMAX: Deposit $20, get $50 for the Stanley Cup Final
Deposit $20, get $50 trading bonus with the Polymarket promo code NYPMAX.
Right
The Hill News
World Cup stadiums earn prestigious certifications as green buildings before matches begin
Center
Most of the stadiums for this year’s FIFA World Cup have achieved green building status after a push for certification in the run-up to the tournament. As the tournament opens, 13 of the 16 stadiums have earned LEED certification, the world’s most widely used green building rating system, the U.S. Green Building Council said. Ten…
Compare Perspectives
Found 8 stories
The Gateway Pundit
WATCH: “Look at the Tapes! They Were Ushered into a Building” – Trump GOES OFF on Kristen Welker for Attacking J6 Patriots and Weaponization Fund Before Storming Out of Heated Interview (VIDEO)
President Trump on Sunday went off on NBC's Kristen Welker, defending January 6 Patriots against her vicious smears and eventually storming off the set. Welker repeatedly attacked the President over his $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund, which was created in exchange for Trump dropping more than $10 billion in legal action against the federal government for leaking his tax returns and weaponizing the justice system against him. The fund was recently scrapped in a backroom deal with Senate Republicans in exchange for ICE and Border Patrol funding. The post WATCH: “Look at the Tapes! They Were Ushered into a Building” – Trump GOES OFF on Kristen Welker for Attacking J6 Patriots and Weaponization Fund Before Storming Out of Heated Interview (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Far Right
US news | The Guardian
An Australian in the US: national identity is one thing, but it’s hard to cheer for either World Cup team | Tom Hawking
The Socceroos playing on football’s biggest stage in my adopted country would normally have me racing to book tickets. Not this year Is “USA! USA! USA!” a more fundamentally obnoxious chant than “Aussie! Aussie! Aussie! Oi! Oi! Oi!”? As an Australian who has spent most of the last 15 years living in the United States and is now a permanent resident, the Socceroos’ World Cup group match against the USA raises some questions. Has my adopted nation dethroned my homeland as the world’s foremost exponent of being unconscionably terrible to immigrants? And on a more personal level … who do I support here?Well, look, OK, there’s really only one answer to that second question. I’m not an especially patriotic type, but if anything does bring out my Australian-ness, it’s the World Cup – perhaps because it’s one of the few events at which we can still claim to be underdogs. And now, two decades after I rose at dawn to watch Australia’s dreams dashed by the intersection of Lucas Neill’s leg and Fabio Grosso’s general vicinity, I find myself living in a country hosting the tournament. Continue reading...
Center Left
Washington Examiner
Benson blasts California election system as ‘third-world nonsense’
Washington Examiner columnist Guy Benson sharply criticized California’s election system following the state’s primary elections, calling the process “embarrassing” and “third-world nonsense.” California’s voters’ high use of mail-in voting contributes to a lengthier vote-counting process, as election officials must carefully verify ballots before certifying final results, a process that can drag on for days after […]
Center Right
Alternet.org
Americans shouldn't feel guilty about rooting against the US in the World Cup
The 2026 World Cup promises to be the planet’s most-watched sporting event. It’s also poised to generate its fair share of controversy.Taking into account the history of corruption in FIFA, the sport’s governing body, it would be hard to blame anyone who decided to ignore this year’s competition.However, some viewers of this summer’s tournament may face an additional dilemma. Political tensions are high in the U.S., where most of the tournament’s matches will be played. The Trump administration is historically unpopular, and its critics are already concerned about sportswashing: when governments use the spectacle of athletic competition to burnish their image and distract the public.As I point out in my 2022 book, “The Ethics of Sports Fandom,” fans who are critical of their country’s behavior sometimes feel ambivalent about rooting for their national sports teams – and may even feel compelled to root against them. After all, it’s one thing to pull for your national team when patriotism feels uncomplicated. It’s quite another when you aren’t feeling very proud to be an American. The Cold War made it easy for many Americans to rally behind the 1980 U.S men’s hockey team in its victory over the Soviet Union in the “Miracle on Ice.” But what do you do when you don’t see your country as the “good guys”?Patriotism doesn’t mean blind loyaltySome fans might double down on their patriotic commitments during the tournament. They’ll use the occasion to champion America in all things, whether it’s the country’s battles in the Middle East or its national team taking on Paraguay at SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. Sports have a way of fueling nationalistic passions, and I fully expect plenty of people who don’t care much about soccer to channel their patriotic sentiments into the tournament.However, rooting for your country’s national soccer team doesn’t mean that you endorse everything your country does, any more than wanting a friend to get a promotion at work requires you to support all of their behavior. As the philosopher Eamonn Callan has argued, a proper love of country requires citizens to be clear-eyed about its faults. The true patriot highlights problems and works to correct them, independent of how much they want the national team to win their next match.By the same token, I think a deep love of country can coexist with ambivalent feelings about how the national team performs on the field. If patriots can disapprove of their country’s military adventurism – either because they see it as flatly unjust or because it casts their country in an unfavorable light on the international stage – there is nothing fundamentally unpatriotic about not wanting the U.S. to do well in the World Cup. Other fans might invoke the mantra that it’s important to simply keep politics out of sports – that the games should be a refuge from the controversies that plague so many other aspects of civic life.But as I argue in my book, fully separating politics and sports is almost impossible. It requires fans to view athletes as nothing more than bodies who exist to perform on the field. It means team executives and owners do little more than sign paychecks. And it ignores the reality that sports are woven into the social, economic and political life of communities.Outcomes don’t change a thingFor fans who choose to watch, then, my suggestion is to view the action on the field as you would any other sporting event. Root for whomever you want to win, for more or less any reason that moves you. Because for all the political significance attached to the World Cup, the winner or loser of any given contest has essentially no broader political significance. The problems that existed before the tournament will still demand attention when it is over, no matter who happens to win. Success or failure on the pitch isn’t likely to bring about meaningful political change. After all, whether a government has the right legislative agenda or approach to foreign policy is totally divorced from its national soccer team’s ability to score goals.Viewed in this way, rooting for your country’s national soccer team doesn’t imply blind loyalty to your country or ignorance of its flaws. It simply means that you want the athletes who represent your country to win the game they are playing on that particular day.Athletes have long been able to navigate this ambivalence. You’ll regularly hear them trying to separate a love of their country and its people from support of problematic regimes. When Iranian soccer player Mehdi Taremi refused to celebrate a goal in a January 2026 Greek Super League match, he embraced precisely such a position. Thousands of people had been killed during protests of the Iranian regime, and the moment called for a different reaction.“There are problems between the people and the government,” he said.
Left
Raw Story
MAGA world sent into frenzy over 'bombshell' news on Trump shooter's emails to cop
The release of heavily redacted FBI records showing that a sheriff's deputy exchanged emails with would-be Trump assassin Thomas Crooks before the July 13, 2024 shooting — as Raw Story reported — sent MAGA world into overdrive this weekend, with commentators across the political spectrum demanding answers about what those emails said and why the documents remain concealed.MeidasTouch, the liberal political media outlet, reached nearly 500,000 views with a post summarizing the Judicial Watch release, noting that "the records remain heavily redacted, concealing the nature of the communications."Kaelan Deese, a political reporter, called it "a bombshell in their Thomas Crooks FOIA fight," and flagged the recovery of the gray remote device with an antenna from Crooks' pocket as a detail warranting further scrutiny.Sara Gonzales, a conservative commentator at The Blaze, kept her focus on the emails: "The public deserves to know why and when Crooks contacted law enforcement."Not everyone agreed the word "exchange" was warranted. Heather Champion, a conservative social media personality, urged precision: "I don't know if 'exchange' is correct but they did receive emails from Thomas Crooks before the July 13 Trump rally."Left-wing podcaster Jimmy Dore, who has previously raised questions about the official account of the shooting, used the records to revisit a string of unresolved details. "So you're telling me there's some nefarious stuff surrounding the supposed assassination attempt of Trump?" he wrote. "You mean the one where the cops admitted to seeing him THREE TIMES in a restricted area with a scope and a backpack and yet never did anything? The one where a bunch of people in the crowd saw the shooter on the roof but no cops or secret service officers or sheriff's deputies or State troopers saw him?"Shane Cashman, a journalist, offered the most pointed response, cataloging the same unanswered questions in a sardonic thread while warning against the leap to conspiracy. "There's literally nothing weird about Thomas Matthew Crooks emailing a deputy from Butler, PA before the assassination attempt," he wrote, before listing item after item: that Crooks practiced at the same range Homeland Security used, that local police and Secret Service spotted him with a rangefinder and texted about him for over an hour before he climbed the roof, that no Secret Service drones were flying that day while Crooks allegedly had one, that his house had no trash or silverware and his body was cremated ten days later before Congress could view it. "This is like when people say the CIA was shadowing Oswald before he, and he alone, shot JFK."What nobody knows, still, is what those two emails said.
Far Left
The Gateway Pundit
WATCH: Pete Hegseth CALLS OUT Globalist European Leaders for Allowing Third World Invasion in D-Day Address, Says Beaches in Europe “Stormed” by “Dangerous Ideologies”
War Secretary Pete Hegseth, while speaking in France on Saturday, went off on American allies in Europe for allowing their borders to be flooded and their people to be slaughtered. Hegseth delivered remarks at the Normandy American Cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer, France, on Saturday, commemorating the 82nd anniversary of the Allied invasion of Normandy, where he linked Normandy to today's invasion of Western Civilization. The post WATCH: Pete Hegseth CALLS OUT Globalist European Leaders for Allowing Third World Invasion in D-Day Address, Says Beaches in Europe “Stormed” by “Dangerous Ideologies” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Far Right
The Federalist
At D-Day Event, Hegseth Warns Of European Beaches ‘Stormed’ By Third-World Migrants
Hegseth said many countries in Europe 'grew comfortable' after World War II and 'forgot that peace is not wished into being.'
Far Right