“The Founding Fathers knew that an armed populace is the last defense against a government that forgets its limits. That’s why the Second Amendment matter[s] today — it makes tyranny a risky bet.”
— Vivek Ramaswamy, 7/2/23
President Donald Trump has a new city in his sights after he threatened to send the National Guard into Chicago and Baltimore in the name of fighting crime and deporting undocumented immigrants.
Trump has thus far targeted Democratic-run cities in Democratic-run states, but this time could be different, as the president eyes New Orleans — a Democratic-run “blue” city in the red state of Louisiana.
Trump told reporters in the Oval Office Wednesday, “So we’re making a determination now. Do we go to Chicago? Do we go to a place like New Orleans, where we have a great governor, Jeff Landry, who wants us to come in and straighten out a very nice section of this country that’s become quite, you know, quite tough, quite bad.”
He added, “You have New Orleans, which has a crime problem. We’ll straighten that out in two weeks, easier than D.C.”
Trump sent federalized troops into Los Angeles in early June, which a federal judge ruled this week was an illegal move. In a 52-page decision, Senior District Judge Charles Breyer barred the administration from deploying troops to engage in civilian law enforcement. Some 300 troops remain in L.A. and will be restricted in what they can do following Breyer’s ruling. The Department of Justice is appealing the decision.
Jennifer Bowers Bahney
For what seems like forever, conservatives have been calling out the train wreck that is the American educational system. Instead of teaching things that will help students become responsible, productive citizens, the agenda is all woke, and Donald Trump sucks. It is a good guess that we have at least two generations of budding young leftists who have been taught literally nothing about America, its friends, and enemies, and most importantly, the true difference between capitalism and communism, and what both systems of government really offer their citizens. Recently, that indoctrination was on full display. This is one kid. There are millions more like her.
WATCH: Patrick Bet-David offers an anti-capitalist a first-class ticket and $20,000 to live in a communist nation… she declines.
Her: “Name me a communist country.”
PBD: “Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea.”
Her: “Those aren’t communist countries.
She loves the idea of communism, just as long as she can enjoy capitalism at the same time !
The whole disturbing display took place on a recent episode of Jubilee Media’s “Surrounded” series. The premise of the show is to have one person debate a dozen others who disagree with them.This particular episode featured Patrick Bet-David, host of the “PBD Podcast,” and what appeared to be 20 or so burgeoning socialists/communists. Bet-David begins to spar with a young woman named Allannah. Bet-David offers up what most people attempting to carry on a rational debate with another would do; he gives statistics.
The stats he gives are the GDPs of both North and South Korea. Allannah’s response, “Are we judging countries based on GDP and not what they value for our humans…” At this point, she trails off, but it won’t be the first time she has no answer but to speak over Bet-David.
David then lays a hard truth on her, saying, “If you lived in North Korea, you wouldn’t be able to do what you are doing right now. You wouldn’t have a voice.” He tries again to compare the GDPs of both countries, but Allannah is not interested. She begins to blather on about how South Korea is:
“…owned by like five companies, in total, the entire country. You think that’s something to live by? If you aren’t employed by the top five companies, you are practically unemployed in that country. I’m not going to be free in a country like South Korea, where I’m only employed in five companies, or no job.”
This is what we are up against: more young people are abandoning capitalism and embracing socialism and communism.@PatrickBetDavid and entrepreneurs like him are living examples of free enterprise powering the American Dream — that’s how we can fight back against both. https://t.co/2yX4hk0Wjs— Doug Ducey (@DougDucey) September 1, 2025
Is she kidding? I would have loved it if Bet-David had asked her where she got her information. That tidbit would surely be gold. But wait, it gets way better. Bet-David then asks, “Do you like to be free where you can call somebody out like me? Do you like to be free, where you have a strong opinion? Do you like to be free to have your dreams…” Allannah again interrupts him and talks over him with this gem:
“I like to be free, but that’s why I’m anti-capitalist, because capitalism removes that choice. There is no real incentive in capitalism because the incentive is survival. When you get into communism, the incentive is for the common good.”
ALSO READ: ‘Radical Chic’: Is the Left’s Embrace of Marxism the Ultimate Virtue Signal?
If you are a parent, or even if you are not, this has to scare the hell out of you. Patrick Bet-David then makes Allannah an interesting offer.He offers to not only pay the $2,350 expense of renouncing her American citizenship, but will also pay all of her expenses for a one-way trip to the communist nation of her choice. Bet-David brings up the usual suspects, Cuba, Venezuela, and North Korea. As her allotted time runs out, she declares, “Those aren’t communist countries.”
Allannah is a shining example of what young people believe communism to be. They have no clue that the countries Bet-David mentioned have extensive histories and current practices of citizens being randomly killed and tortured, random arrests and detention, censorship, and little to no religious freedom. These places are where she expects to be “free?”
The people in this video are the next generation of American leaders. If that doesn’t scare you, what will?
🚨 @patrickbetdavid literally offered this anti capitalist a fully paid one way ticket to any communist country pic.twitter.com/XOT5eMnLEL— PBD Podcast (@PBDsPodcast) August 31, 2025
Becky Noble, Red State
More than 1,000 current and former employees across the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) signed a letter on Wednesday morning calling for Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s resignation.
Addressed to Kennedy and members of Congress, the signatories accused the secretary of endangering the health of Americans. Save HHS, the group behind the letter, told ABC News it’s been sent to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Senate Committee on Finance and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce as well as Majority and Minority leadership.
“We swore an oath to support and defend the United States Constitution and to serve the American people. Our oath requires us to speak out when the Constitution is violated and the American people are put at risk,” the letter reads, in part.
It continues, “Thus, we warn the President, Congress, and the Public that Secretary Kennedy’s actions are compromising the health of this nation, and we demand Secretary Kennedy’s resignation.”
In a statement to ABC News, HHS communications director Andrew Nixon said the CDC “has been broken for a long time” and it will take “sustained reform and more personnel changes” to restore trust in the institution.
“From his first day in office, [Kennedy] pledged to check his assumptions at the door — and he asked every HHS colleague to do the same,” the statement read, in part. “That commitment to evidence-based science is why, in just seven months, he and the HHS team have accomplished more than any health secretary in history in the fight to end the chronic disease epidemic and Make America Healthy Again.”
Employees from almost every agency signed the letter, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health. The letter states the employees did so in their personal capacity, on their personal time and without the use of government equipment.
In the letter, HHS employees said Kennedy continues “to endanger the nation’s health” with examples such as the ousting of newly-installed CDC director Susan Monarez, followed by the resignations of four top CDC leaders.
The letter also referenced an interview Kennedy gave to Scripps News last month in which he said trusting experts “is not a feature of either a science or democracy,” which staffers referred to as “ongoing verbal attacks” of the HHS workforce.
Employees also expressed dismay over Kennedy’s June move to remove all 17 members of the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel, the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) — which makes recommendations on the safety, efficacy and clinical need of vaccines — and replaced them with eight of his own hand-selected members, many of whom have expressed vaccine-skeptic views.
Employees from almost every agency signed the letter, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health. The letter states the employees did so in their personal capacity, on their personal time and without the use of government equipment.
In the letter, HHS employees said Kennedy continues “to endanger the nation’s health” with examples such as the ousting of newly-installed CDC director Susan Monarez, followed by the resignations of four top CDC leaders.
The letter also referenced an interview Kennedy gave to Scripps News last month in which he said trusting experts “is not a feature of either a science or democracy,” which staffers referred to as “ongoing verbal attacks” of the HHS workforce.
Employees also expressed dismay over Kennedy’s June move to remove all 17 members of the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel, the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) — which makes recommendations on the safety, efficacy and clinical need of vaccines — and replaced them with eight of his own hand-selected members, many of whom have expressed vaccine-skeptic views.
Employees from almost every agency signed the letter, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health. The letter states the employees did so in their personal capacity, on their personal time and without the use of government equipment.
Mary Kekatos, ABC News
By J.B. Shurk
Americans who don’t spend time in Europe might not fully appreciate what a powder keg the Old World has become. However bad social relations in the United States now are, they are at least an order of magnitude worse on the other side of the Atlantic. European self-hatred is dissolving traditional cultural bonds. Mass immigration is compounding age-old rivalries. Europe is one spark away from exploding.
Europe is a perennial battlefield. Many of our ancestors, after all, left the old country to escape religious, economic, and cultural conflicts that had endured for centuries. Those historic grievances — always simmering in times of peace before boiling over into outright violence — are passed from one generation to the next. Modern European nations are the product of two thousand years of shifting borders and alliances, and native Europeans trace their family lineages back to regional tribes whose ancient territories do not fit neatly within the politically drawn maps of today.
If you think geographical accents in America make it tricky for a Mississippian or Minnesotan to communicate effectively with an English-speaker from the Bronx, consider that Europe is home to nearly three hundred native tongues. Switzerland has four national languages — including Romansch, which derives from the spoken Latin of the Roman Empire. The cornucopia of indigenous languages, dialects, vocabularies, and accents makes it possible for local residents of small towns to recognize “outsiders” immediately. Even more impressively, they can usually tell — just by listening — which towns a stranger’s grandparents once called home.
Two world wars — both ignited in Europe and responsible for immense European destruction — propelled a mid-twentieth-century political movement calling for the eradication of national borders. The European intelligentsia who became the founding members of the continent’s fledgling transnational bureaucracy blamed national pride for Europe’s carnage and effectively turned “nationalism” into a dirty word.
Oddly, this was also a time when crumbling empires, such as France and the United Kingdom, were at least tepidly supporting the national independence of former colonies. Likewise, it was the beginning of a half-century U.S.-led campaign to encourage national revolutions in European countries stuck behind the Soviet Union’s Iron Curtain. So Western power brokers framed nationalism as a kind of intolerable ethos on par with Mussolini’s fascism and Hitler’s national socialism while encouraging former nations or proto-nations in Central Europe, Africa, and Asia to break away from the respective empires that controlled them. While Western leaders pushed for the integration of distinct European nations into a single “Union,” they also promoted national independence movements under the rationale that all humans possess a natural right to self-determination.
In the eighty years since the project for European integration began in earnest, those latent contradictions have transformed Europe into a tinderbox with even greater potential energy for self-destruction than existed before WWI and II. While the bureaucratic ruling class has actively repressed the historic identities of native Europeans, it has flooded the continent with foreigners who are encouraged to retain their own cultural identities. In this way, a Hungarian or Pole or Dane who celebrates his country’s unique heritage is denounced as a “far-right nationalist,” while a Frenchman who insists that African and Middle Eastern immigrants assimilate to the European way of life is denounced as a “racist” and “bigot.”
This anti-European monstrosity was created deliberately. Simultaneous suppression of Europeans’ national identities and protections for foreign nationals create a kind of “multiculturalism dynamo” that converts Europeans into something alien. Stripped of their native religion, culture, and historic customs and forced to praise foreign religions, cultures, and customs taking hold in the West’s civilizational void, Europeans are effectively assimilated within their own lands. Europeans are taught to despise their own civilization and to bow down before those who seek to replicate a foreign civilization inside Europe. Europe’s bureaucratic ruling class uses foreigners to beat the Europeanness out of Europeans.
Perhaps because a critical mass of Europeans finally realizes what Europe’s unelected bureaucrats have done, a “Great Awakening” is spreading across the continent. After decades of submitting to cultural erasure, a patriotic fervor is taking root once again. As many now see it, if globalism’s war on nationalism means that only nations outside Europe will survive, then European peace is not worth the cost.
Many Americans will dismiss this resurgence of European nationalism as “too little, too late,” but I would strike a more optimistic chord. Sometimes we must be pushed to the edge of the cliff before we find our footing and forcefully fight back. When surrender means falling into the sea and survival requires moving in the opposite direction, the right choice is also the only one.
In the United Kingdom, a grassroots movement of ordinary Brits has initiated “Operation: Raise the Colors.” The strategy is simple: British citizens are encouraged to prominently display and wave the Cross of St. George and Union Jack flags.
What could possibly be offensive or dangerous about raising the flags of England and the United Kingdom? Nothing. Yet the globalist Establishment is losing its collective mind. Leftists insist that the flags should be replaced with something more “multicultural” and that only “far-right racists” would stoop so low as to patriotically raise the country’s flags. Open-borders politicians are calling the flag-waving “extremist,” “hate-filled,” and “white supremacist.” In other words, the British people have forced Britain’s “elites” to acknowledge that they have no loyalty to and only antipathy for the United Kingdom.
This rather anodyne form of political speech is proving remarkably effective at exposing globalism’s suicidal contagion. In London, it is perfectly normal to see so-called “gay pride” flags, “Palestinian” flags, Pakistani flags, Iranian flags, and the flags of almost every third-world nation now offloading its citizens onto the shores of the U.K. If a British citizen were to express outrage over the fact that a panoply of foreign flags is flown brazenly throughout the capital, constables would intimidate the outspoken “offender” into silence by threatening him with prosecution for imaginary “hate speech.” Revealingly, however, these same petty tyrants throw hissy fits when native Brits dare “raise the colors” of their own nation’s historic flags.
Similar movements are picking up steam. Ten years ago, it was more common to see such patriotic displays on the streets of Balkan nations or amid independence parades in the Basque region or other areas of Europe seeking national recognition. Today it is easy to stumble into a sea of Dutch, Danish, German, Italian, Swedish, Norwegian, Finnish, Hungarian, Polish, Czech, or Greek flags when crossing borders. Eighty years after the European Union began constructing its continental empire, the “colonies” appear eager to reclaim their right to self-determination.
I think it’s fair to say that ordinary Europeans are no longer willing to remain quiet as the bureaucratic ruling class kills what’s left of Europe and hands the carcass to foreign conquerors. As an American with absolute fidelity to the millennia-long promises of Western civilization, I find these patriotic revivals timely rebuttals to a globalist Establishment that prefers our death.
I cannot tell you how many times I have come across the words of Welsh poet Dylan Thomas translated into one of Europe’s many native languages. “Do not go gentle into that good night” and “Rage, rage against the dying of the light” show up on message boards like faint heartbeats on an EKG machine. Many in Europe don’t want to die. To live, they’ll have to fight.
J. B. Shurk, American Thinker
In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, a curious new religious group began spreading throughout the fledgling United States. Their official name was the United Society of Believers in Christ’s Second Appearing – known colloquially as “Shakers” for their tendency to fall into ecstatic trances and literally shake or tremble during worship.
The Shakers are most famous today for their belief in strict celibacy – even within the confines of marriage. All members, whether single or married before joining, had to agree to remain chaste for their entire lives. Because of this, their communities had no biological offspring. They only added new members through attracting converts (a rather difficult sell) and occasionally adopting children.
While the Shakers’ numbers initially blossomed to more than 4,000 scattered across a dozen or so communities, eventually they ran into a rather predictable problem: it’s nearly impossible to keep an ideological movement alive without its members creating more new members.
Having children is the lifeblood of any culture, ideology, or religious movement, ensuring that beliefs, traditions, and values are passed down to the next generation. Without family and procreation, even the most passionate faith or cause withers away, relying on the uncertainty of converts rather than the stability of raising one’s own successors.
That’s why the global fertility crisis now gripping every region of the world outside Africa and the Middle East is so alarming – but the data shows that the number of births per woman is not distributed equally along the political spectrum.
According to survey results from the U.S. General Social Survey and the World Values Survey which the Financial Times recently reported on, fertility rates are falling much faster among people who identify as left-wing compared to those who identify as right-wing. The trend holds true in the United States and throughout the developed world.
In the United States, fertility rates among the most right-wing individuals have remained virtually unchanged since the 1970s, hovering between 2.5 and 2.7 births per woman – above the replacement rate of 2.1. For the most left-wing individuals, however, the fertility rate has plummeted from 2.8 in the 1970s to just above 1.8 from 2010–2024. Across the entire developed world, we see the same thing: the more right-wing a woman is, the higher her expected number of offspring will be.
This matters because children are extremely likely to adopt the same or similar political views as their parents. Even among kids from conservative households who go off to college and get a full dose of progressive indoctrination, the data shows they end up voting in patterns remarkably similar to their parents.
According to Pew polling in 2023, 81 percent of teenagers whose parents are conservative identify as conservative, while 89 percent of teens whose parents are liberal identify as liberal. The family remains a far stronger transmitter of ideology than even the most determined professor or activist.
From a political perspective, that means liberal-progressives could soon be facing an ideological extinction of their own making. Like the Shakers of early America, they simply aren’t producing enough new liberals to maintain their population. That means Democrats could soon find themselves with a lack of new voters to replace older liberals who never had children.
Looking at progressive beliefs, it’s no surprise that the left has found itself in this predicament – particularly when it comes to its message to women and girls.
For decades, the left has told women that motherhood is a burden and that raising children is less fulfilling than climbing the corporate ladder. Liberal elites have snickered at family life while telling young girls that they should sacrifice their unborn babies on the abortion altar for the sake of their careers or personal comfort. (Is it any wonder that liberal women are, as a group, the most unhappy and loneliest people in America?)
Conservatives, meanwhile, could be headed for a period of cultural dominance in the long term – and may even reverse the looming population cliff that the developed world is now barreling toward.
If the current trends continue and conservatives reproduce above replacement rate while liberals continue their fertility rate collapse, at some point the vast majority of kids born will be born to conservative parents, who will pass their values on to their offspring. The U.S. population may continue to decline, but at some point, so long as conservatives remain above replacement rate and keep passing their values onto their children, the population will bottom out and then tick back up.
other words, being conservative may in the long run prove to be an evolutionary advantage.
Skeptics will counter that progressivism doesn’t need high fertility to survive because its ideas spread through institutions – schools, universities, the media, and now major corporations. And that’s true to a point. Institutions can manufacture converts. But history shows that no institution is more powerful than the family.
Extrapolated out over the course of many generations in the United States, the demographic math is stark. The left’s refusal to embrace family life and childbearing means it is planting the seeds of its own decline. Meanwhile, conservatives who continue to embrace children, marriage, and family could not only inherit the future politically, but also be the only demographic capable of reversing America’s population decline.
The refusal of the Shakers to have children guaranteed that their ideas would die with them. Progressives today are making the same mistake on a much larger scale. At its current pace, the Democrat Party may eventually be defeated not by Republicans at the ballot box, but by the inevitable consequences of their anti-child, anti-human ideology.
Shane Harris is the Editor in Chief of AMAC Newsline. You can follow him on X @shaneharris513
by Jim Hᴏft Sep. 2, 2025 8:20 pm1022 Comments
Jonah Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and longtime Never-Trumper, suggested that the Democrats could send the military to confiscate firearms from law-abiding Americans
Goldberg framed his comments during a panel discussion on violent crime in major Democrat-run cities, comparing it to Donald Trump’s efforts to use federal resources to restore order in places like Chicago.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson signed an executive order last month, titled the “Protecting Chicago Initiative,” aimed at preventing the potential deployment of the National Guard by President Donald Trump to address the city’s rampant crime issues.
Johnson, a far-left Democrat, claims the order is necessary to defend residents’ constitutional rights amid fears of what he calls an “unconstitutional and illegal military occupation.”
The executive order comes as the Trump administration considers using Naval Station Great Lakes, a Navy base near Chicago, as a staging ground for immigration enforcement operations involving more than 200 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents.
Trump has been vocal about addressing Chicago’s crime woes, recently stating after deploying the National Guard to Washington, D.C., that his team would “straighten out” Chicago next, calling it “a mess” under an “incompetent mayor.”
During a CNN interview, Goldberg argued that if Republicans set certain precedents (like Trump’s use of power), then Democrats could use the same logic on issues they care about, such as guns.
He claimed if a Democratic governor like Pritzker (IL) or Newsom (CA) says “We have a gun crisis in America”, then under that precedent, they could justify sending in the National Guard to confiscate guns.
“I’m all for crime reduction. But the conservatives were celebrating this. You listen to the mayor of Chicago talk about the gun crisis in America. Well, what is to stop—given the precedent that Donald Trump is setting—what is to stop a Democrat, a Governor Pritzker, a Governor Newsom, from saying, “We have a gun crisis in America, just as legitimate on the facts and arguments as a crime crisis, and we’re going to send the National Guard into states to go get their guns”? There have to be standards here.”
Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit
MS-13 gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia was released from a Tennessee prison on Friday and headed back to Maryland to be with his family, according to his attorney.
Fox 17 News reported:
Kilmar Abrego Garcia has been freed from Putnam County Jail and is on his way to reunite with his family in Maryland, his lawyer confirms to FOX 17 News.
This comes after a U.S. magistrate judge was expected to grant the release Friday as he awaits trial on federal human smuggling charges.
“Today, Kilmar Abrego Garcia is free. He is presently en route to his family in Maryland, after being unlawfully arrested and deported, and then imprisoned, all because of the government’s vindictive attack on a man who had the courage to fight back against the Administration’s continuing assault on the rule of law. He is grateful that his access to American courts has provided meaningful due process.” -Abrego Garcia’s lawyer Sean Hecker said in a statement to Fox 17.
As reported late last month: A Tennessee-based federal judge previously ordered the release of MS-13 gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia – and a Maryland judge, appointed by Barack Obama, immediately blocked ICE from detaining Abrego Garcia.
Last month, a federal magistrate judge in Tennessee agreed to delay the release of MS-13 gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia so he doesn’t get deported.
A federal grand jury in Tennessee recently indicted Kilmar Abrego Garcia for “transporting undocumented migrants within the United States.”
He was charged with one count of conspiracy to transport aliens and one count of unlawful transportation of undocumented aliens.
The DOJ previously told the Court that Abrego Garcia will be deported to a ‘third country’ that is not El Salvador after he is released from a Tennessee jail.
Last month, US District Judge Waverly Crenshaw, an Obama appointee, ordered Kilmar Abrego released from prison.
Judge Paula Xinis, also an Obama appointee overseeing the civil suit filed by Abrego Garcia’s wife, immediately barred ICE from taking Abrego Garcia into custody.
The Department of Homeland Security has not yet released a statement on Abrego Garcia’s newfound freedom.
Cristina Laila, Gateway Pundit
Chicago’s lawless mayor vows to do everything possible to stop President Trump from arresting violent criminals in Chicago — an obligation the mayor refuses to honor. Isn’t someone in a position of power who uses that power to make sure violent criminals run free just as bad (or worse) than the murderers, looters and rapists themselves? When do we arrest the glorified mobster for actively making life comfortable for thugs like himself? This is war, and war was declared by these fascist politicians who are destroying American cities right before our eyes.
As one of my readers put it, “I’ve lived and worked in the Chicago area most of my life and Johnson is without a doubt the most tone deaf and incompetent mayor I’ve seen. Even his own constituents think he’s bad on the subjects of Illegals and crime.”
A meme says, “Democrats are no longer a political party. They’re a mental disorder.”
And much more: They are a globalist totalitarian network of fascist, socialist, Communist monsters who exploit the gullible, the ignorant and the mentally disturbed in pursuit of an insatiable quest for power and unearned wealth.
Michael J. Hurd
In response to President Trump’s plans to allow 600,000 Chinese students into the country, Michael Flynn, Jr. said, “This is not what I voted for.”
Indeed. This is not what I voted for either. MAGA supporters are apoplectic about Trump’s plans. Trump’s base is pissed. And justifiably so.
Chinese students are allowed here by their government for one reason–to spy. Unlike Russian spies, who use established tried-and-true espionage methods like dead drops and secret codes, the Chinese flood their adversaries with millions of spies (mostly students) who pick up millions of tiny pieces of information, like, as someone once described, gathering millions of grains of sand on a beach blanket.
This presents an unwarranted and misguided threat to our national security. China is now our principal adversary. As soon as Trump leaves office, they will pounce on Taiwan, even if Vance wins in 2028.
President Trump has betrayed his base, indeed the country, by this foolish move. He has placed our country in jeopardy.
The Artful Dilettante
