Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. via Nameless.tv


Montana Republican Senator Tim Sheehy has alarmed critics after he reportedly broke the arm of Brian McGinnis, an anti-war U.S. Marine veteran and political candidate, while helping U.S. Capitol Police remove him from a Senate Armed Services Subcommittee hearing for protesting the war in Iran.
McGinnis is running as a Green Party candidate in North Carolina's Senate race. Roughly half an hour into the hearing on military readiness, proceedings were interrupted when a man identified as McGinnis began shouting from the room.
At one point he yelled:
“America does not want to send its sons and daughters to war for Israel.”
Capitol Police moved in to remove him from the chamber. McGinnis—who was dressed in a military uniform—appeared to resist as officers tried to escort him out, according to video of the incident. As the confrontation shifted toward the doorway, Sheehy stepped down from the dais and helped officers lift McGinnis and push him toward the exit.
During the struggle, McGinnis’ left hand appeared to become wedged between the door and its frame. Sheehy then tried to free it, prompting someone nearby to accuse him of breaking McGinnis’ hand. When another person asked McGinnis if his hand was okay, he replied, “No, it’s not.”
Police ultimately escorted McGinnis from the room while Sheehy returned to his seat. Outside the hearing room, McGinnis could be heard in the video saying that his left arm had been broken.
You can watch what happened in the video below.
Mark Elbourno, a Green Party official managing McGinnis’ Senate campaign, told reporters that McGinnis was arrested following the disruption and taken to George Washington University Hospital. Elbourno said he did not know the extent of McGinnis’ injuries.
In a statement, the Capitol Police said McGinnis faces three counts of assaulting a police officer, three counts of resisting arrest and one count of crowding, obstructing and incommoding—an allegation that he blocked an entrance or passageway—in connection with the interruption of the committee hearing.
Police said McGinnis “put everyone in a dangerous position by violently resisting and fighting our officers’ attempts to remove him from the room.” The department also alleged that he “got his own arm stuck in a door to resist our officers and force his way back into the hearing room.” According to the statement, three officers were treated for injuries by local emergency medical services.
Elbourno disputed the allegations, denying that McGinnis assaulted any officers:
"He wasn't assaulting anybody. … He just wanted to be heard [and was] speaking loud and clear. He was assaulted, actually. They broke his arm."
Sheehy later took to X to comment on the incident and lied when he referred to what video captured as de-escalation and said that McGinnis wasn't engaged in peaceful protest:
"Capitol Police were attempting to remove an unhinged protestor from the Armed Services hearing. He was fighting back. I decided to help out and deescalate the situation."
"This gentleman came to the Capitol looking for a confrontation, and he got one. I hope he gets the help he needs without causing further violence."
You can see his post below.
He was swiftly called out.
Since the incident, McGinnis is drawing substantial public support, with a fundraising campaign on GoFundMe raising nearly $83,000 as of this writing—well past its $70,000 fundraising goal.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was criticized after she rejected reports that the U.S. struck a girls' elementary school in Iran, killing 175 people, insisting in remarks to the press pool that it's just Iranian "propaganda" that they've "fallen" for.
Iranian state media and health officials said the strike occurred early Saturday morning in Minab, in the country’s southern Hormozgan Province. Journalists from international news organizations have not been granted access to independently verify the reported death toll or the circumstances surrounding the strike.
Neither the U.S. nor Israel has claimed responsibility for the attack. Video footage circulating online appears to show black smoke rising from a damaged building decorated with murals of crayons, children and an apple.
CBS News said it was able to geolocate the video to a building in Minab that Iranian state media identified as Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School. Iran’s school week runs from Saturday to Thursday, and students were reportedly in the middle of their morning session when the strike occurred.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in remarks earlier this week the U.S. would not intentionally target a school, that "our objectives are missiles, both the ability to manufacture them and the ability to launch them."
And Leavitt went further, insisting journalists had fallen for "propaganda" when responding to a reporter who asked if the U.S. had indeed bombed an Iranian school:
"Not that we know of. The Department of War is investigating this matter."
"And I would just tell you very strongly the United States of America does not target civilians, unlike the rogue Iranian regime that targets civilians, that kills children, that has killed thousands of their own people in the past several weeks and uses propaganda quite effectively, and unfortunately, many people in this room have fallen for that propaganda.”
"I would caution you from pointing the finger at the United States of America when it comes to targeting civilians because that's not something that these armed forces do."
You can hear what she said in the video below.
Many have condemned Leavitt's response.
Some theories circulating online have suggested that a misfired Iranian missile may have caused the strike on the school. However, The New York Times and other open-source analysts have disputed that claim, noting that a single errant missile would be unlikely to produce the kind of precise damage observed across multiple buildings at the nearby naval base.
U.S. officials say the incident remains under investigation. If it is ultimately confirmed that an American bomb struck Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School, a key question will be whether the strike was accidental or the result of targeting based on outdated intelligence.
Janina Dill, an expert on the laws of war at University of Oxford, said attackers are obligated to “verify the status” of their targets to ensure civilians are not harmed. Failing to do so, she said, could constitute a violation of international law.
We're all different people with different interests, and it's perfectly okay that we like different things.
But there are some people who passionately, even vehemently, draw the line at other people liking or disliking dogs.
For some, dogs are man's best friend and much better companions than most people, perfect to snuggle with, play with, and travel the world with.
For others, dogs are inconveniently social, invading personal space with jumping and licking, barking, and can develop an unpleasant smell after being outside if they are infrequently bathed.
While loving dogs is celebrated and seen as a green flag across social media, the idea of disliking dogs is deeply questioned and even considered a moral failing by many, questioning how someone could dislike something that's generally so kind, buoyant, and selfless.
TikToker Maddi Cerasuolo, who provides hot takes and food recommendations, decided it was time to set the record straight, arguing that we should normalize people not liking dogs just as much as enjoying them as companions.
In the video, Cerasuolo argued:
"Dog lovers will act like we are the red flag."
"I actually think it's the complete opposite. I think it's people who prefer dogs over humans."
"I don't wanna pet your dog. I don't wanna see a picture of your dog. I don't wanna hear about your dog."
"Please keep your dog away from me."
You can watch the video here:
@madswellness This might be the biggest hot take ever but I’m tired of hiding #dogs #doghater #doglover #dogsofttiktok
Fellow TikTokers who were also fellow dog haters suddenly felt seen.











For the dog lovers out there who are feeling slighted, it seems that Cerasuolo's feelings do not exclusively apply to dogs.
"Since I don't like dogs, you might be thinking that I'm a cat person."
"I'm sorry to tell you that I'm just not an animal person."
"To me personally, cats are even worse. I would prefer a dog; I'm not even going to lie."
"Cats for me, they're scary. I'm petrified by cats."
The TikToker then argued the same point from her previous video.
"I know you might be thinking, 'This girl is a serious red flag.'"
"But I think that people who prefer any sort of animal over humans, that's the red flag. That's a red flag to me. I said what I said."
@madswellness Replying to @jjjenny_89xo Someone had to say it😬😬 #cats #catsoftiktok #cathater #cat
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but it's interesting that people are entitled to like animals as much as they want, but not dislike them to the same degree.
This TikToker made it clear that she does not wish ill will on animals and would love to see all of them have a warm and comfortable home.
They're simply not welcome around her.
There used to be laws in place for someone's likeness being used without their consent, and most certainly if their likeness was being used in an exploitative way for profit.
But now with the rise of AI-generated photographs, advertisements, and other digital products, the lines seem to have become muddied between the illegal stealing of someone's likeness and AI "inspiration."
Model and TikToker @vanellimelli030 is one of the likely many victims of this practice since she found out that she now has an "AI twin" out in the universe.
The TikToker created a series of street fashion photographs back in 2023 with an excellent city, grunge, and slightly steampunk look.
Just days ago, a friend of hers sent her a video advertisement, and she discovered that instead of employing her for the duration of a photoshoot, or at least paying her for her photographs, a company had instead apparently run her photos through a system and created an AI-generated likeness of her.
The resemblance was uncanny, with very similar eyebrows, freckles on the face, the same characteristics of the nose and mouth, and a similar eye color.
The only real difference between the model and her AI twin was that the AI-generated person had short hair, which was the style the real-life model had ironically just had her hair cut and styled into.
In the caption of the video, the TikToker wrote:
"They say imitation is the highest form of flattery... but I don't feel flattered."
"This can't be the future and should not be normalized."
You can watch the video here:
@vanellimelli030 they say imitation is the highest form of flattery… but i don’t feel flattered. this can’t be the future and should not be normalized. 🚫What do you guys think?
Fellow TikTokers were enraged and hoped that the model would find a way to fight back.











TikToker @venellimelli030 has a point that the saying, "Imitation is the highest form of flattery," goes way back, but instead of feeling like flattery, this feels like exploitation and stolen property.
It's unclear what the TikToker can do about the company using her likeness without her consent, since she did submit her photographs of her own free will, but clearly, some new rules need to be put into place to protect people, artists, and other creatives from similar situations happening in which their hard work is fed into a machine.
Employees in commission-based positions are feeling increasingly pressured to acquire new clients, retain previous clients, and solve the issues their clients call in about with high satisfaction ratings.
Even though tensions are high, and the pressure they're feeling may be unrealistic for any one person to take, that doesn't give them the right to mistreat people who do not want to sign up or want to cancel.
An employee at Spectrum, which provides internet and cable services, did not seem to get that memo when she received a call from TikToker @anissahm15.
A service worker went to the TikToker's home to assist with an issue, but unsatisfied with the results and with the service, TikToker @anissahm15 decided it was time to cancel her subscription to Spectrum.
She called customer support, where she was connected with a very disgruntled representative, who was immediately ruffled by the idea of someone wanting to cancel their service, especially after a service worker had already been sent out.
The customer service representative lashed out:
"I'm so tired of trying to help people all day long! People like you."
"I swear, if somebody tried to call me and offer to cut my bill in half, send out a service person for free… I would jump all over that. People just don't appreciate anything anymore."
The TikToker kept her tone level and repeatedly asked for the representative to connect them with their supervisor instead. The customer representative told the TikToker no, that she would not be speaking with the supervisor, and questioned why she would behave like this after repeated attempts to help her resolve the issues she had with the company.
The representative even resorted to saying she only had five minutes left in her shift, to which the TikToker asked to be transferred.
The representative also said she'd have to wait a long time to be able to speak with their supervisor, to which the TikToker said that was fine.
Confused, the representative clarified what was "fine," and when the TikToker said she was fine waiting a while to speak with the supervisor, she screamed at her again.
In response to the screaming, the TikToker asked again to be transferred, and the representative hung up on her.
You can watch the video here:
@anissahm15 spectrum plsssss get better customer service i literally just called nicely to cancel my service😩😩. #spectrum #meanlady #customerservice #fyp #helpmefindher
Fellow TikTokers were alarmed by the Spectrum employee's screaming and, well, passionate response.















This kind of work can be exhausting and highly stressful, but that is not an excuse to mistreat a customer who calls in.
We can cancel any subscription at any time for any reason, and the customer representative did not need to hear that reason before forwarding the call, even if other attempts had been made to keep the customer with the company.