Tackle Your Credit Card Debt by Paying 0% Interest Until 2027

The brutal stabbing death of 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska on a Charlotte light rail train has gripped the nation, a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities that linger in everyday public spaces. Zarutska, who fled Ukraine’s war-torn streets just two years ago, was heading home from her job at a local restaurant when

Decarlos Brown allegedly attacked her without provocation, leaving her to bleed out amid indifferent commuters. The U.S. Department of Justice swiftly elevated the case to federal charges, with Acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina, Sandra J. Hairston, declaring in a statement, “Iryna Zarutska was a young woman living the American dream — her horrific murder is a direct result of failed soft-on-crime policies that embolden criminals and endanger innocent lives.”

This isn’t just rhetoric; it’s a call to confront the policies that let such violence fester unchecked.

President Trump didn’t hesitate to spotlight the tragedy during a recent address, vowing to pursue the death penalty and linking it to broader failures in urban safety. His words cut through the noise: the need for swift, severe consequences to deter the next attacker.

Yet on MSNBC’s *The 11th Hour*, host Stephanie Ruhle framed the story not as a rallying cry for protection, but as a potential political football. In a segment airing Tuesday, she posed the dilemma to her guest, former Alabama Senator Doug Jones: “Today, the man accused of killing a 23 year old Ukrainian refugee in Charlotte, North Carolina, was charged with a federal crime. This is an absolutely horrific crime. How do you navigate, ensuring that justice is served without allowing this young woman’s horrible murder to become hyper-politicized on the national stage?”

Ruhle’s question sets the tone—acknowledging the horror while rushing to warn against “hyper-politicization.” It’s as if shining a national light on a refugee’s slaughter risks overshadowing the quiet work of prosecutors. But in a country where mass transit stabbings too often fade from headlines, that spotlight might be exactly what ensures the case doesn’t gather dust in local dockets. Zarutska’s story, after all, echoes countless others ignored until a high-profile voice demands accountability. Federal involvement here isn’t theater; it’s the machinery of justice grinding into gear, bolstered by resources that local forces alone can’t always muster.

It’s time to kick the government out of your healthcare. America First Healthcare helps freedom-loving Americans get better health insurance that costs 20% less.

Jones, seizing the moment, twisted the narrative further by pinning the blame squarely on the president. “Well, unfortunately, it’s been the President who’s hyper, you know, has gone crazy with this, with this one murder. And it was tragic. It was horrible. I am glad the feds have stepped and investigated this, to make an example. To show that the federal government is doing something other than just patrolling the southern border. That they are actually doing things to help state and local law enforcement in a community. I think that’s a good thing. And they can use the federal government resources,” he said.

Then came the pivot: “But the problem you’ve got and the President’s speech about this, the president’s comments about this, was just pandering to a base of folks throwing red meat out there to try to use this for political advantage. That is not appropriate. This is the criminal justice system. Even the defendant is-is even, although he is on videotape, he’s still under—in this country, in the eyes of the law, innocent until proven guilty.”

Jones’s praise for federal action rings hollow when he immediately dismisses Trump’s emphasis as mere “pandering.” Drawing parallels to border security isn’t a distraction—it’s connecting dots between unchecked migration strains and urban crime spikes, a thread the Justice Department itself wove in its charging documents. And invoking “innocent until proven guilty” feels like a lecture from someone who, as U.S. Attorney in Birmingham decades ago, once defended the system against its own excesses.

If anything, Trump’s push amplifies the very federal resources Jones claims to celebrate, turning a single tragedy into momentum for reform. Without that “red meat,” as Jones calls it, would the DOJ have moved this fast? The suspect’s federal indictment suggests otherwise.

The conversation veered into even murkier territory when Jones speculated on media priorities, revealing a cynicism that undercuts sympathy for any victim. “But now this has become such a political issue, that I—and there’s so many others. You know, I wonder, I wonder, Stephanie, would this have been such a political issue if this hadn’t have been a pretty blonde, Ukrainian and was a poor black woman coming up in the subway just trying to get home from a domestic,” he mused, trailing off but implying a clear hierarchy of heartbreak.

The suggestion? Coverage hinges on appearance and origin, not the raw inhumanity of the act. It’s a jab at selective outrage, yet Jones wields it to downplay the story altogether. Charlotte’s light rail, like New York’s subways, sees violence claim lives across all backgrounds—Black, white, immigrant, native-born. A 2024 CNN report on similar transit attacks noted over 200 assaults in major cities that year alone, many involving marginalized riders who never make national news. Zarutska’s case demands attention not because of her looks or passport, but because it exposes cracks in a system meant to shelter the vulnerable.

This MSNBC exchange didn’t stop at the murder; it looped back to broader gripes about crime-fighting tools, namely the National Guard’s role in Washington, D.C. Jones reminisced about his prosecutorial days: “When I was the United States Attorney—a long time ago now, 20 something years ago—we had joint federal-state investigations. We had joint federal state—not just that we had task forces, we had folks working together, particularly. We had a program specifically that dealt with illegal guns. We trained local law enforcement officers. That program came because the city of Birmingham came to me and said, ‘We need help. We need the power of the federal government to help us with this.’ But we were strategic. We had law enforcement agents that were helping to train, working together, investigative agents, using the resources of law enforcement. We didn’t call in the National Guard.”

He then mocked the current deployment: “I think I’m glad the president went out to dinner. I go out to dinner all the time in Washington, D.C. A lot of people do, especially when you got Congress in session. The National Guard has been wonderful up there to help spruce up the flowers and to put mulch around the flower beds. But it’s ridiculous to have a non-law enforcement, a military agency in there to try to help a crime problem.”

Ruhle chimed in: “And ridiculously expensive, Doug?” To which Jones replied, “Ridiculously expensive.”

Jones paints the Guard as glorified gardeners, ignoring the tangible gains. Metropolitan Police data tells a different tale: since the troops arrived under Trump’s emergency order, violent crime plunged 39% year-over-year, with murders dropping a staggering 53%. Sure, some soldiers handle cleanup—Metro patrols and trash duty keep streets safer for everyone—but that’s no accident. Visible presence deters chaos, much like Birmingham’s pleas for help that Jones once answered with training alone.

His old city still grapples with a murder rate hovering around 100 annually, per local outlets, while D.C.’s surge shows results where softer approaches fell short. Calling it “ridiculous” dismisses lives saved, not to mention the fiscal bargain when weighed against the cost of unchecked bloodshed.

In the end, segments like this on MSNBC don’t just critique; they erode trust in the very institutions fighting back. Zarutska’s murder isn’t a prop for anyone’s agenda—it’s a failure we can’t afford to spin away. Whether through federal charges or Guard patrols, the focus must stay on results: safer trains, fewer graves, and justice that doesn’t discriminate by headline potential. As Charlotte ramps up transit security in her wake, the real question isn’t politicization—it’s why it took her death to spark change.

The Biggest Threat to Your Retirement Is Actually a Very Good Thing

When you look at the headlines today, you’ll see experts in the retirement industry warning about big threats to your financial security:

De-dollarization and the rise of BRICS

Soaring national debt

Unstable interest rates

Weakened U.S. dollar

All of these are real concerns. But they aren’t the biggest threat to your retirement savings. The true risk isn’t political, monetary, or global.

It’s longevity.

Why Longevity Is the Silent Threat

For most of human history, the problem was the opposite — life expectancy was short, and few people even reached retirement. Today, thanks to medical advancements, healthier lifestyles, and better living conditions, people are living longer than ever before.

And while that’s a wonderful thing, it comes with a financial catch: Your retirement account has to last far longer than you might expect.

A 65-year-old couple today has a 50% chance that one of them will live to 90.

Some projections suggest that many of us will live well into our 90s, even 100+.

This means your nest egg may need to stretch not for 15 years, but 25, 30, or even 40 years.

That’s where the real danger lies: running out of money before you run out of life.

The Retirement Equation Has Changed

While market volatility, debt crises, or central bank policies may feel like the scariest threats, they’re temporary storms. Longevity, however, is a structural shift. Every extra year of life is another year of expenses, another year of inflation erosion, and another year of financial pressure.

If your retirement plan doesn’t account for longevity, you could face tough choices later in life — downsizing, working when you’d rather not, or becoming financially dependent on others.

How to Take Control

The good news? Longevity is a blessing — as long as you’re prepared for it. With the right planning, your retirement savings can work for you instead of against you. The key is learning how to protect your wealth, outpace inflation, and ensure your savings grow even as you live longer.

That’s why our friends at Augusta Precious Metals created a free resource to help you get started:

👉 Get Instant Access to  the report, “How to Take Full Control of Your Financial Future”

This brief report will show you practical strategies to safeguard your retirement from the biggest threat of all — the one that comes from the gift of living longer.

Don’t let longevity catch you unprepared. Take the steps today to secure tomorrow.