International
German chancellor loses vote of confidence in parliament, likely triggering snap election
From LifeSiteNews
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier is expected to set February 23 as the date for an election
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has lost the vote of confidence in the Bundestag (German Parliament) after the breakdown of the government coalition.
On December 16, members of the Bundestag voted 394-207 against Scholz, with 116 abstentions. The vote of confidence was seen as a formality, and Scholz was expected to lose after the liberal FDP (Free Democratic Party) left the government coalition in early November.
As the German Tagesschau reported, Scholz met German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier at Bellevue Palace after the vote and asked him to dissolve the Bundestag.
Steinmeier has 21 days to decide whether he agrees and calls a snap election within 60 days. He is expected to do so and announce February 23 as the date. Had the coalition not dissolved, the next regular federal election would have taken place in September 2025.
Since the vote was only a formality, the parties used the debate in Parliament to campaign for the upcoming election. Scholz used his speech to launch an attack against the FDP. The “weeks of sabotage” by the Liberals under party leader Christian Lindner had not only damaged the coalition government but also democracy as a whole, he claimed.
CDU/CSU leader Friedrich Merz responded by defending the FDP and called the attack on Lindner “sheer insolence.”
Merz accused Scholz of leaving the country in one of the biggest economic crises in post-war history and failing at the EU level. “You are embarrassing Germany,” he stated. The Chancellor’s behavior in the European Union was “shameful,” Merz said.
Alice Weidel, co-head of the AfD (Alternative for Germany), slammed the left-wing government coalition, stating that its “damage” would burden Germany for decades to come. She pointed to the “decline” of the automotive and mechanical engineering industries and the exodus of the chemical industry due to “exploding energy costs.”
She viewed Donald Trump’s election as an opportunity to end the war in Ukraine through diplomacy while criticizing Scholz and Merz for making a “pilgrimage” to Kyiv to “throw even more good money after the money that has already been burned.”
Weidel warned that deploying German troops in Ukraine would risk Germany becoming a party to the war. She also stressed that “anyone who votes for Friedrich Merz is voting for war.”
The federal government will remain in office after losing the vote of confidence until the election of a new Parliament. However, the current coalition consisting of Scholz’s SPD (Social Democratic Party) and the Greens does not have the necessary majority and needs members of the opposition to vote alongside them if they want to pass any new laws.
Business
Will Paramount turn the tide of legacy media and entertainment?

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
The recent leadership changes at Paramount Skydance suggest that the company may finally be ready to correct course after years of ideological drift, cultural activism posing as programming, and a pattern of self-inflicted financial and reputational damage.
Nowhere was this problem more visible than at CBS News, which for years operated as one of the most partisan and combative news organizations. Let’s be honest, CBS was the worst of an already left biased industry that stopped at nothing to censor conservatives. The network seemed committed to the idea that its viewers needed to be guided, corrected, or morally shaped by its editorial decisions.
This culminated in the CBS and 60 Minutes segment with Kamala Harris that was so heavily manipulated and so structurally misleading that it triggered widespread backlash and ultimately forced Paramount to settle a $16 million dispute with Donald Trump. That was not merely a legal or contractual problem. It was an institutional failure that demonstrated the degree to which political advocacy had overtaken journalistic integrity.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
For many longtime viewers across the political spectrum, that episode represented a clear breaking point. It became impossible to argue that CBS News was simply leaning left. It was operating with a mission orientation that prioritized shaping narratives rather than reporting truth. As a result, trust collapsed. Many of us who once had long-term professional, commercial, or intellectual ties to Paramount and CBS walked away.
David Ellison’s acquisition of Paramount marks the most consequential change to the studio’s identity in a generation. Ellison is not anchored to the old Hollywood ecosystem where cultural signaling and activist messaging were considered more important than story, audience appeal, or shareholder value.
His professional history in film and strategic business management suggests an approach grounded in commercial performance, audience trust, and brand rebuilding rather than ideological identity. That shift matters because Paramount has spent years creating content and news coverage that seemed designed to provoke or instruct viewers rather than entertain or inform them. It was an approach that drained goodwill, eroded market share, and drove entire segments of the viewing public elsewhere.
The appointment of Bari Weiss as the new chief editor of CBS News is so significant. Weiss has built her reputation on rejecting ideological conformity imposed from either side. She has consistently spoken out against antisemitism and the moral disorientation that emerges when institutions prioritize political messaging over honesty.
Her brand centers on the belief that journalism should clarify rather than obscure. During President Trump’s recent 60 Minutes interview, he praised Weiss as a “great person” and credited her with helping restore integrity and editorial seriousness inside CBS. That moment signaled something important. Paramount is no longer simply rearranging executives. It is rethinking identity.
The appointment of Makan Delrahim as Chief Legal Officer was an early indicator. Delrahim’s background at the Department of Justice, where he led antitrust enforcement, signals seriousness about governance, compliance, and restoring institutional discipline.
But the deeper and more meaningful shift is occurring at the ownership and editorial levels, where the most politically charged parts of Paramount’s portfolio may finally be shedding the habits that alienated millions of viewers.The transformation will not be immediate. Institutions develop habits, internal cultures, and incentive structures that resist correction. There will be internal opposition, particularly from staff and producers who benefited from the ideological culture that defined CBS News in recent years.
There will be critics in Hollywood who see any shift toward balance as a threat to their influence. And there will be outside voices who will insist that any move away from their preferred political posture is regression.
But genuine reform never begins with instant consensus. It begins with leadership willing to be clear about the mission.
Paramount has the opportunity to reclaim what once made it extraordinary. Not as a symbol. Not as a message distribution vehicle. But as a studio that understands that good storytelling and credible reporting are not partisan aims. They are universal aims. Entertainment succeeds when it connects with audiences rather than instructing them. Journalism succeeds when it pursues truth rather than victory.
In an era when audiences have more viewing choices than at any time in history, trust is an economic asset. Viewers are sophisticated. They recognize when they are being lectured rather than engaged. They know when editorial goals are political rather than informational. And they are willing to reward any institution that treats them with respect.
There is now reason to believe Paramount understands this. The leadership is changing. The tone is changing. The incentives are being reassessed.
It is not the final outcome. But it is a real beginning. As the great Winston Churchill once said; “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning”.
For the first time in a long time, the door to cultural realignment in legacy media is open. And Paramount is standing at the threshold and has the capability to become a market leader once again. If Paramount acts, the industry will follow.
Bill Flaig and Tom Carter are the Co-Founders of The American Conservatives Values ETF, Ticker Symbol ACVF traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Ticker Symbol ACVF
Learn more at www.InvestConservative.com
Education
Johns Hopkins University Announces Free Tuition For Most Students

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Johns Hopkins University (JHU) announced on Thursday it is making tuition free for families earning less than $200,000 and will waive both tuition and living expenses for those making less than $100,000.
The university stated that “a majority of American families” will qualify for the fee exemption, allowing most students to attend without contributing a single dollar. The decision is meant to help recruit “the best and brightest students to Johns Hopkins irrespective of their financial wherewithal.”
“Trying to understand financial aid offers can be overwhelming,” David Phillips, vice provost for admissions and financial aid at JHU, said in the announcement. “A big goal here is to simplify the process. We especially want to reach students and families from disadvantaged backgrounds, rural locations, and small towns across America who may not know that a Hopkins degree is within reach.”
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
In 2018, Michael Bloomberg donated nearly $2 billion to the university, the largest ever single gift to a U.S. university. JHU said it used this money “to become permanently need blind and no-loan in financial aid.”
The university also receives the most federal funding of any university, raking in more than $3 billion from the government in fiscal year 2023 for research and development alone. This is more than double what the next highest recipient of federal funding that year, the University of Washington, received.
Despite this, JHU in June complained that federal funding cuts forced it to institute a hiring freeze and pause annual pay increases for employees. In its message to the community at the time, the university also mentioned its disagreement with “recent efforts to limit or withhold visas from the international students and scholars.”
Some universities admit mass numbers of foreign students in order to pad their pockets, as such students often pay full tuition and fee costs without financial assistance.
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy2 days agoRichmond Mayor Warns Property Owners That The Cowichan Case Puts Their Titles At Risk
-
Business2 days agoMark Carney Seeks to Replace Fiscal Watchdog with Loyal Lapdog
-
Business2 days agoP.E.I. Moves to Open IRAC Files, Forcing Land Regulator to Publish Reports After The Bureau’s Investigation
-
International1 day agoIs America drifting toward civil war? Joe Rogan thinks so
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoEU’s “Democracy Shield” Centralizes Control Over Online Speech
-
COVID-192 days agoMajor new studies link COVID shots to kidney disease, respiratory problems
-
Energy2 days agoCanada’s oilpatch shows strength amid global oil shakeup
-
Fraser Institute16 hours agoCourts and governments caused B.C.’s property crisis—they’re not about to fix it
