You don’t get to move here from a village on the other side of the world and tell American citizens we don’t have a right to enforce our laws.
It doesn’t work that way.
@JohnStrandUSA on X
Actually, it DOES work that way as Omar, Mamdani and others continue to preach, plot and profit at the expense of American tax dollars and the American Constitution they loathe.
Until these people are arrested, deported and/or tried for treason, we the people remain hostages in an occupied nation.
Don’t get me wrong — President Trump is the greatest, an authentic American hero. But we are not a free nation once again until the bad guys HANG.
“Physician, heal thyself!” Jesus said to those gathered in the synagogue at Nazareth.
The admonition was aimed at hypocrisy and moral blindness — a warning that those who presume authority must first examine their own conduct.
Today, someone needs to repeat those words to health care professionals who have allowed Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) to corrode their ethics and professionalism.
That warning applies just as much to nursing as it does to medicine.
Nursing emerged as a modern profession in the mid-19th century under the leadership of Florence Nightingale. In 1893, the Nightingale Pledge codified the profession’s moral foundation, committing nurses to “devote myself to the welfare of those committed to my care” and to “do no harm.” Compassion, neutrality, and duty were not optional — they were the profession’s reason for being.
The American Nursing Association Code of Ethics requires, “The nurse’s primary commitment is to the patient, whether an individual, family, group, community, or population.” I presume groups include Republicans, Trump supporters, and ICE agents.
Medicine, with nursing as one of its pillars, exists to heal the sick and comfort the vulnerable. While some may be drawn to health care for technical challenges, flexible schedules, or job security, the vast majority of nurses enter the profession with sincere intentions to help others. That shared moral commitment is what allows patients to trust those caring for them during moments of fear, pain, and helplessness.
Which makes the following question unavoidable: Why are some nurses now publicly calling for the torture, abuse, and death of people whose political views they dislike?
As a surgeon, I can state unequivocally that political affiliation does not alter human anatomy, physiology, or disease. Blood vessels do not constrict based on voting history. Tumors do not grow faster in conservatives. Gravity, bullets, and blunt trauma are blissfully indifferent to ideology. Health care professionals are expected to be the same — delivering the best possible care regardless of race, religion, class, or politics.
Yet Trump Derangement Syndrome has reached pandemic levels among a militant and increasingly visible cadre of health care professionals, infecting even those entrusted with others’ lives. Increasingly, a vocal minority of nurses and other health care workers – individuals granted extraordinary access and authority — openly fantasize about harming political opponents. This is not merely unprofessional behavior. It is a profound ethical failure.
Consider the case of a nurse at Virginia Commonwealth University Health who was fired after posting TikTok videos suggesting ways to harm ICE agents. This was not abstract rhetoric. She proposed injecting agents with succinylcholine, a neuromuscular blocking agent that causes complete muscle paralysis, including of the respiratory muscles. Without ventilatory support, the result is death. The drug has long been described as an “ideal murder weapon” precisely because it leaves little external evidence.
A trained nurse would understand this. Which makes her suggestion all the more chilling. This was not ignorance. It was medically informed malice.
The nurse also suggested filling water guns with poison ivy or poison oak extract to spray into agents’ faces. If that proved ineffective, another nurse recommended that single female nurses use dating apps to lure ICE agents out for drinks, spike those drinks with laxatives, and incapacitate them. Nurse Ratched, reporting for duty.
This nurse likely entered the profession with altruistic intentions. But the TDS mind virus transformed her from caregiver to would-be executioner — all while basking in the applause and clicks of social media.
These nurses are not alone.
An Ohio nurse publicly wished that White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt would suffer a fourth-degree perineal tear while delivering her second child. Such an injury involves tearing through the vaginal wall, anal sphincter, and into the rectum — requiring surgical repair and risking lifelong fecal incontinence and sexual dysfunction. This is not casual cruelty. It is grotesque medical sadism.
A Florida nurse echoed the sentiment in even more graphic terms, writing online: “I hope you f*cking rip from bow to stern and never sh*t normally again, you c*nt.” This is the language of hatred, not healing. Yet it came from someone entrusted with patient care and human well-being.
Not surprisingly, her Florida nursing license was promptly revoked.
If a family member of mine were hospitalized, these are precisely the nurses I would hope not to encounter.
Then there is Erik Martindale, a Florida nurse anesthetist, who publicly declared that he would not provide anesthesia for “MAGA” patients, claiming it was his “ethical oath” to do so. He later suggested his account had been “hacked,” a defense now as familiar as it is unconvincing.
Would Mr. Martindale allow a conservative patient to awaken during surgery — a rare but devastating complication — and consider it justified? Would pain control become a political privilege? Once ideology dictates care, there is no logical stopping point. History offers grim reminders of where that road leads.
Defenders of such conduct often invoke “free speech.” But health care is not a college quad or faculty lounge. The American Nurses Association Code of Ethics explicitly requires compassion and respect for every patient, regardless of “social or political status.” Political discrimination is not protected expression within the profession. It is an ethical violation.
We saw a preview of this moral decay during COVID. Remember the TikTok nurses dancing in hospital corridors, turning intensive care units into makeshift discos? I understand the stress health care workers endured during the early pandemic. Blowing off steam is human.
But broadcasting choreographed routines to millions, while families were barred from visiting dying loved ones, signaled something deeply wrong. I was one of those family members. Watching nurses dance for clicks while patients died alone was neither comforting nor inspiring. It was alienating.
In 2018, a Georgia dermatologist lost her medical license after filming and social media posting herself singing and dancing over sedated patients during surgery. Was that performance meant to prepare her for operating or to monetize social media attention? The line between professionalism and narcissism had already been crossed.
Health care is not activism. A hospital is not a protest rally. A patient is not a political avatar.
The moment a nurse or physician begins sorting patients into deserving and undeserving categories based on ideology, the profession ceases to be one of healing and becomes something far more dangerous. History offers grim reminders of what happens when medicine is subordinated to political belief rather than ethical duty.
Trump Derangement Syndrome is not merely a cultural punchline. In health care, it manifests as moral corrosion. It replaces compassion with contempt, restraint with rage, and professionalism with performative cruelty. It convinces otherwise decent people that harming others is virtuous so long as the target is politically acceptable.
Patients do not arrive at hospitals as Republicans or Democrats. They come frightened, vulnerable, and often powerless. They must trust that those caring for them will place duty above ideology. Once that trust is broken, the entire system rots from within.
“Physician, heal thyself” was not simply a rebuke. It was a warning. If health care professionals cannot diagnose their own moral sickness, they risk becoming the very thing they once swore to oppose. Nurses and doctors must decide whether their highest allegiance is to politics, or to the sacred obligation they voluntarily assumed.
There can be no coexistence between political hatred and medical ethics. One of them must give way.
Donald J. Trump’s return to the White House has been a parade of bold, daring accomplishments. Few presidents would dare to dream of matching it.
Elected with a resounding mandate in 2024, Trump wasted no time implementing a transformative agenda that reshaped the nation in tangible, measurable ways. He secured the Mexican border with unprecedented rigor. He is revitalizing the economy through deregulation and tax relief. From brokering international peace deals to dismantling bureaucratic waste, Trump’s administration compiled 365 wins in 365 days.
On immigration, Trump achieved negative net migration for the first time in fifty years, removing over 2.6 million illegal aliens, including 400,000 convicted or charged criminals. Meanwhile, fentanyl trafficking was reduced across the southern border by 56 percent. Border wall construction resumed in critical sectors like El Paso and the Rio Grande Valley.
The Remain in Mexico policy was reinstated, and catch-and-release ended nationwide, resulting in zero interior releases for eight consecutive months. ICE enforcement capacity doubled through aggressive recruitment, the largest surge in agency history. Temporary protected status for over 500,000 migrants was revoked, and refugee resettlement was dramatically curtailed to protect American security.
Homicides fell by the largest margin in U.S. history, overdoses dropped 21 percent, and task forces in Washington D.C., Memphis, Chicago, and New Orleans brought murders to decades-long lows. The Tren de Aragua and MS-13 gangs were dismantled, while nationwide federal law enforcement operations restored deterrence to urban centers and curtailed violent criminal networks.
The Trump administration’s Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement office resumed delivering direct support to victims, and 62,000 missing migrant children were rescued from trafficking and exploitation.
Inflation stabilized at 2.4 percent, mortgage rates hit three-year lows, and existing home sales reached the strongest pace in three years. The Working Families Tax Cut saved 5.9 million jobs, eliminated taxes on tips, overtime, and Social Security benefits for seniors. Deregulation efforts produced $5 trillion in savings while attracting $10 trillion in domestic investment.
Trump’s foreign policy achievements were equally sweeping.
The Israel-Hamas conflict ended with the Gaza Peace Plan. Ceasefires were brokered between Israel and Iran, Armenia and Azerbaijan, India and Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, Cambodia and Thailand, Kosovo and Serbia, and Egypt and Ethiopia. Groundwork was laid to hopefully resolve Ukraine-Russia tensions. Iran’s nuclear program was neutralized through military and intelligence action. Narcoterrorist Nicolás Maduro was captured, crippling illicit revenue streams for the Venezuelan regime.
U.S. military readiness surged through the largest investment in decades, artificial intelligence was integrated into defense planning, VA backlogs were cut 60 percent, and more than 51,000 homeless veterans were housed.
Yet, despite these unprecedented accomplishments and so many more, public perception remains strikingly disconnected from reality.
The January New York Times/Siena College poll found that only 32 percent of registered voters believed the country was better off than when Trump returned to office. 49 percent said it was worse. Trump’s approval rating stood at 40 percent, disapproval at 56 percent, and a majority of respondents, 55-42 percent, described his first year as unsuccessful.
These figures were released just days after the White House’s “365 Wins in 365 Days” announcement. They reveal a populace largely unmoved by achievements that objectively transformed policy, economy, and security.
Skepticism of this polling is not misplaced. The New York Times has long demonstrated a pattern of framing narratives through a left-leaning lens. It often underreports Republican accomplishments while amplifying Democratic perspectives. Trump condemned the poll as “fake” and “fraudulent,” denouncing it on Truth Social as a rigged effort to undermine his agenda. He promised to incorporate it into a multibillion-dollar defamation suit against the Times.
Yet even as the survey deserves profound suspicion, its existence reflects the reality of perception. These numbers shape voter attitudes and inform media-driven narratives that cannot be ignored. Republicans in this midterm year face a strategic imperative: they must seize Trump’s first-year successes as the centerpiece of their messaging.
From the 89-percent drop in wholesale egg prices to the $1,100 annual boost in real earnings, from the elimination of catch-and-release to the dismantling of transnational gangs, the facts are overwhelmingly positive and tangible. Every elected Republican—federal, state, and local—should internalize these victories and integrate them into debates, campaigns, and public engagements.
The GOP’s focus must be on energizing Trump supporters and persuadable voters through evidence-based celebration of his staggering accomplishments. Not attempting to convince lefty ideologues to give Trumpism a second look. The midterm outcome hinges on turnout, not conversion.
Paul Gottfried, in his January 20 essay Does America Want to Be Saved?, underscores the enduring polarization that shapes the electoral landscape. He recognizes Trump as “by far the most transformative” president he has observed since the Eisenhower era. Gottfried cites immigration law enforcement, tax relief, economic growth, anti-discrimination policies protecting white men, peace deals, and targeted law enforcement as unparalleled achievements.
Yet Gottfried cautions that these victories often fail to sway a leftist electorate whose base remains entrenched, ideologically committed, and resistant to persuasion. He notes that this opposition encompasses many government workers, certain racial minorities, and ideological constituencies such as unmarried college-educated women. These opponents of Trump mobilize efficiently in elections, maintaining turnout levels that are hard for Republicans to match.
The key insight is stark but actionable: the GOP cannot rely on swaying the ideologically rigid opposition but can, and must, motivate its own voters by highlighting Trump’s transformative wins.
In this hyper-polarized environment, Republicans should pivot to offense, showcasing clear, measurable improvements. There are record-low border crossings, historic reductions in crime, dramatic economic gains, and foreign policy breakthroughs. That approach does not promise universal approval. However, it ensures that the electorate sympathetic to Trump’s agenda understands the stakes and responds accordingly at the ballot box.
Ultimately, Trump’s first year stands as a case study in extraordinary achievement amid widespread misperception.
His administration delivered measurable benefits across immigration, crime, the economy, foreign policy, and government efficiency. Yet public recognition lags, distorted by media bias and partisan framing. Republicans’ success in November depends less on convincing the unreachable left than on rallying their own voters around the facts of a proven record.
Energizing the base through specific, demonstrable accomplishments, rather than general rhetoric, offers the clearest path to preserving congressional majorities and consolidating America First gains. This is the strategic lesson of 2026: objective success must be communicated relentlessly to counter a distorted public narrative.
Voter motivation, grounded in clear evidence of achievement, is the GOP’s most powerful tool.
Trump’s first year was not merely good; it was transformational. The disconnect between reality and perception is not a weakness of policy but a challenge in persuasion. Republicans must pivot, act decisively, and harness the power of undeniable facts to win hearts, votes, and, ultimately, the American future.
John Ford Cotto, American Thinker
Donald J. Trump’s return to the White House has been a parade of bold, daring accomplishments. Few presidents would dare to dream of matching it.
Elected with a resounding mandate in 2024, Trump wasted no time implementing a transformative agenda that reshaped the nation in tangible, measurable ways. He secured the Mexican border with unprecedented rigor. He is revitalizing the economy through deregulation and tax relief. From brokering international peace deals to dismantling bureaucratic waste, Trump’s administration compiled 365 wins in 365 days.
On immigration, Trump achieved negative net migration for the first time in fifty years, removing over 2.6 million illegal aliens, including 400,000 convicted or charged criminals. Meanwhile, fentanyl trafficking was reduced across the southern border by 56 percent. Border wall construction resumed in critical sectors like El Paso and the Rio Grande Valley.
The Remain in Mexico policy was reinstated, and catch-and-release ended nationwide, resulting in zero interior releases for eight consecutive months. ICE enforcement capacity doubled through aggressive recruitment, the largest surge in agency history. Temporary protected status for over 500,000 migrants was revoked, and refugee resettlement was dramatically curtailed to protect American security.
One after the other, they’re going down. It seems our U.S attorneys and other prosecutors have been busy! Georgia, Massachusetts, California, Michigan, Louisiana, and Oklahoma have all seen arrests recently of Democrats in various positions from state legislatures to city councils. Way to go!
“Georgia Democrat State Rep. Dexter Sharper was charged with defrauding the federal government by falsely claiming unemployment while he earned income.”
Next, up to crazy liberal Massachusetts where a one-time “Bostonian of the Year,” Monica Cannon-Grant is up on public corruption charges.
Like Massachusetts, even deep blue California has a Democrat facing trial. “Longstanding” Los Angeles city councilman Curren Price is “accused of corruptly directing nearly $1 million in public funds to his wife’s consulting firm.”
Detroit, Michigan’s got troubles with three Democrats, notably a judge and her father. This one is particularly disgraceful as it involves stealing from the incapacitated.
“Andrea Bradley-Baskin, a judge on Michigan’s 36th district court, is accused of stealing from the estates of incapacitated individuals in a $273,000 conspiracy involving their court-appointed guardians, a group home operator and even her own father.”
Louisiana has arrested a Baton Rouge councilman, Cleve Dunn, on a list of public corruption charges.
Donald Trump’s political war chest grew dramatically in the second half of 2025, according to new campaign finance disclosures submitted late Saturday, giving him an unprecedented amount of money for a term-limited president to influence the midterms and beyond.
Trump raised $26 million through his joint fundraising committee in the back half of last year, and another $8 million directly into his leadership PAC. And a super PAC linked to him has more than $300 million in the bank.
All together, a web of campaign accounts, some of which he controls directly and others under the care of close allies, within the president’s orbit have $375 million in their coffers.
The funds far outstrip those of any other political figure — Republican or Democrat — entering 2026, and have no real historical precedent. And Trump could put them to use this year for the midterms, or to shape future elections, even as he cannot run for president again.
Trump continues to outpace any other Republican in raising money, both from large and small-dollar donors. His joint fundraising committee — Trump National Committee, which pools fundraising for a variety of Trump-aligned groups — accounted for 1 in 8 dollars raised on WinRed, the primary Republican online fundraising platform, during the second half of 2025, according to a POLITICO analysis.
And no super PAC raised even half as much in 2025 as the $289 million from MAGA Inc., the Trump-aligned super PAC that both the president and Vice President J.D. Vance appeared at fundraisers for last year.
Trump has given few clues as to how he might put the funds to use. Trump National Committee primarily sends funds to the president’s leadership PAC, Never Surrender, with a bit of money also going to the Republican National Committee and Vance’s leadership PAC, Working For Ohio.
Candidates cannot use leadership PAC money for their own election efforts. But the accounts — which are common across Washington and have long been derided by anti-money in politics groups as “slush funds” — allow politicians to dole out money to allies or fund political travel.
Never Surrender spent $6.7 million from July through December, with more than half of that total going toward advertising, digital consulting and direct mail — expenses typically linked to fundraising.
So far, Trump’s groups have held their powder in Republican primaries. While Trump has endorsed against a handful of Republican incumbents now locked in competitive primaries — including Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky — and threatened others, he hasn’t used money. A super PAC targeting Massie, MAGA KY, is run by Trump allies but has largely been funded by GOP megadonor Paul Singer.
MAGA Inc.’s only election-related spending last year was to boost now-Rep. Matt Van Epps in the special election in Tennessee’s 7th District.
Trump’s massive war chest makes him a political force, independent of the traditional party infrastructure. The RNC — which derives a significant portion of its fundraising from Trump — had $95 million in the bank at the end of the year, roughly a quarter of what the Trump-linked groups have.
And their rivals at the Democratic National Committee are far worse off — at just over $14 million, while owing more than $17 million in debt.
The Justice Department’s latest release of the Epstein files offers fresh insights into how former President Bill Clinton’s staff communicated with Jeffrey Epstein and his longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell, including sometimes-lewd email exchanges.
The document dump comes just days before an expected House contempt vote against the Clintons after they rebuffed a subpoena to testify in a bipartisan probe into Epstein.
The Republican-led House is expected to vote this week to hold both Bill and Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress for failing to testify. House Oversight Republicans and even some Democrats voted in committee last month to hold the former president and secretary of state in contempt.
Friday’s release of the Epstein files – more than 3 million documents – follows a smaller, earlier batch in December that revealed never-before-seen photos of Bill Clinton and Epstein together and a shirtless Clinton in a hot tub with someone a DOJ official described as a “victim” of Epstein’s sexual abuse.
The latest files include frequent communications between Maxwell — who is currently in prison for sex trafficking — and Clinton staffers between 2001 and 2004. It was during this period that Bill Clinton travelled with his staffers on Epstein’s private plane at least 16 times according to a CNN analysis.
Also among the newly released files is a list of sexual abuse accusations against President Donald Trump from unverified tips that the Justice Department compiled last summer. That list also references allegations against Bill Clinton.
Both men have denied any wrongdoing related to Epstein. Asked for comment on the allegations against Trump in the documents, the White House referred to a Justice Department statement that “this production may include fake or falsely submitted images, documents or videos.”
A spokesperson for Clinton has repeatedly said the former president cut ties with Epstein before the disgraced financier was charged with soliciting prostitution in 2006 and didn’t know about his crimes. Clinton has also denied ever having visited Epstein’s island.
Clinton and Trump are among numerous high-profile names included in the Epstein files released by the Justice Department. After Trump’s DOJ balked at releasing the files, Congress passed a law last year mandating their disclosure. Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while in prison awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.
Maxwell’s emails
The names of the Clinton staffers in the emails are often redacted – showing only “WJC” in the email recipient or sender line, which appears to refer to William J. Clinton’s office post-presidency.
Clinton spokesman Angel Ureña told CNN that Bill Clinton did not send any of the emails in the Epstein files.
“I can’t confirm whose it was, I can only tell you whose it wasn’t: Bill Clinton’s,” Ureña said. “I’d say he has never emailed but in truth he has done so twice in his life, both as President. Once to former astronaut and Senator John Glenn while he was orbiting the Earth aboard the Space Shuttle Discovery, and another to the US troops serving in the Adriatic.”
Ureña also said Clinton “neither had nor shared a device or account or address with anyone.”
Much of the communications between Maxwell and Clinton’s staff reviewed by CNN pertain to travel and dining logistics, and sometimes last-minute invites to the former president himself. It’s unclear whether the communications were related to the business of the foundation or personal dealings of Clinton or his staff.
In one email from April 2003, Maxwell wrote to a redacted Clinton office mail address: “Glad you are coming to the dinner – JE says do you think CLinton would like to come – let me know.”
In another email from December 2001, a Clinton staffer asked Maxwell for Prince Andrew’s phone number to coordinate a golf outing during a trip by Bill Clinton to Scotland. Maxwell replied, “Just spoke to Andrew. He is not currently in Scotland but is going to m. He says if I give him a no. he will ring Clinton. Doug, do you want him to call you ?”
It’s unclear who “Doug” refers to but a top Clinton adviser at the time was Doug Band. CNN has reached out to Band for comment.
Maxwell was sometimes flirtatious in her emails to redacted Clinton office email addresses. In one exchange, Maxwell wrote to a Clinton staffer that she told a tabloid what “supper stud you are and how I have a crush on you and how you are hung like a horse and- well you get the picture. Hope you don’t mind!”
In another 2002 exchange, a person whose name is redacted wrote to Maxwell from a Clinton email address: “Went home with someone I have before, a 40 year old blonde big boobby widow if you can believe that. I really need to stop drinking.”
There’s no evidence in the files that Maxwell personally emailed the former president and vice versa. In one email where the sender name is unredacted, Band said that he and Clinton shared a Blackberry account.
Nearly a decade later, after Maxwell was publicly accused of recruiting and sexually abusing girls with Epstein in 2009, she was still welcome in Clinton circles.
As CNN’s KFile previously reported, Maxwell was a guest at the prestigious Clinton Global Initiative conference in September 2013. Maxwell was honored for her now-defunct TerraMar Project, an ocean conservation non-profit she founded in 2012 that did more to restore her reputation than the ocean floors.
Contempt of Congress
At the same time that the Justice Department and Epstein’s estate have released documents showing Clinton’s interactions with Epstein, Republicans in the House have clashed with the Clintons’ camp for months over testifying as part of their probe.
While the panel waived in-person appearances for seven others who were subpoenaed as part of its ongoing investigation, House Oversight Chair James Comer insisted that the Clintons appear in person for closed-door interviews.
The Republican repeatedly argued that the former president had specific information relevant to the investigation because Epstein visited the White House and Bill Clinton flew on his private plane.
Attorneys representing the Clintons repeatedly asserted in letters that they were being unfairly singled out and called the panel’s subpoenas for their testimony “invalid and legally unenforceable.”
With photographs of former U.S. President Bill Clinton behind him, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer (top right) (R-KY) speaks during a hearing at the U.S. Capitol January 21, 2026 in Washington, DC. – Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Clintons’ counsel sought a last-minute off-ramp and offered to make the former president available for an interview with Comer, Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the panel and some staff in New York “on areas within the scope” of the panel’s Epstein probe.
Comer rejected the offer, however, and asserted that the Clintons were trying to get special treatment. When negotiations fell apart, neither Clinton appeared for their scheduled in-person depositions.
When the committee moved to hold the Clintons in contempt, it wasn’t just Republicans who backed it: Nearly half of the Democrats on the committee also voted to advance the contempt to the House floor, arguing that their votes were intended to protect the power of a congressional subpoena.
The committee vote rankled top Democrats, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who argued that the Clintons were still negotiating with Congress and suggested no proceedings should move forward against the Clintons until after the Justice Department has released all of the Epstein investigative files.
A successful contempt vote by the GOP-controlled House would be symbolic — as a rebuke to the Clintons — but also could be used as a tool to compel them to testify. It could have legal consequences, too, as the matter would be referred to the Justice Department for potential prosecution if the House approves it.
There’s still the possibility for a deal before the House votes. Last week, Comer suggested to reporters “there is an opportunity” for the two sides to reach an agreement.
Ephesians 6:12-13 (King James Version) For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
What if the Democrat Communist Party wanted to build America up and be a supporting Party rather than wanting to destroy her. There is no question or hiding the fact anymore, if you want to tear this country apart you will join the Democrats and watch city after city destroyed. If you want America strong and the leader of the free world you will be a Republican.
The Dims claim to be peaceful and exercising their First Amendment Rights to freedom of speech although they will not allow anyone else that Right. Try wearing a MAGA hat in one of those peaceful demonstrations and you will find yourself bloodied and beaten. They have shown their love of violence and intimidation as you see around the country. They not only disagree with you they want you dead for standing in the way of their perfect form of gummit.
This movement was birthed out of a form of gummit which murdered at least 200 million of their own citizens for wanting freedom. This massive number may be low since they took the word of the dictators who claimed it much lower for obvious reasons. Some estimate Mao alone may have killed around a billion citizens by starving Mongolians who did not want Communism and fought for freedom after WWII.
Most of those countries are still jailing and murdering political prisoners and the Chinese are still horribly brutal by harvesting body parts before they kill them. This has been repeated over and over yet these free-thinking Communists think it will be different if they are in charge although these rioters prove just the opposite. We have to look at the two shootings and ignore the trashing of buildings and cars and torture of ICE officers who are doing something they disagree with.
They’re standard tactic is distraction. Communism was called Socialism by Hitler and was all the rage with England and FDR and his Great Society (Great Socialism). The world was nearly all in agreement although Lenin called his version Communism since he made the complete transformation of Centralized gummit which owned everything. Patton basically destroyed their one world dream by defeating Hitler.
The entire Buggywhip Press claimed how wonderful Russia was and such a superior more focused form of economics since there was no greedy businesses. Greed is the incentive Socialism does not have and why you need brutal dictators to motivate. The world was nearly completed with a one form gummit with different levels of Socialism/Communism in nearly every country except Japan and China.
Socialism became evil after Hitler was conquered and they found out about the gas chambers and ovens. This is when the mediots pushed Communism as the best form of economics and Socialism became the ugly stepchild to the point of claiming Hitler was a Christian to bash Christianity for the next fifty years. Later it was shown Hitler was actually a pagan who believed some bizarre spiritualism trying to bring gods back from the dead and evolving a super race using Darwinism.
After Alexander Soltzenytzn’s books came out explaining the Gulags being run by Nazi war criminals and the hundred million starved or tortured to death, communism was no longer fashionable. Now enough time has passed from Hitler they have forgotten how evil Socialism was and are now Democrat Socialists again and definitely not Communists. All the girls love it and is so hip and new.
The Dinosaur Press has taken it to the next level and made MAGA the Nazis to deflect from the truth about Socialism. After eighty years and no historical education they can tell young people the old everything is free and the evil rich will pay for everything like was done in the Wormy Apple. The same lie which has been told for a hundred years and has made piles of skulls a mile high.
You see the same Brownshirts from Nazi Germany, Mao’s China, Castro’s Cuba, and Stalin’s Russia terrorizing the people around the country. You see the fighting against their political enemies and the elimination of churches and God. This is the classic takeover by Communists which has murdered hundreds of millions taking out the one country standing in their way of a one world communist gummit.
Deflect and destroy is their primary weapon and this is what the ICE revolt is all about. This has nothing to do with MinneSomalia or dead protestors and everything to do with surrendering to the Communists beating drums and blowing whistles acting like jackboot thugs.
It is smelly cleaning up the sewer Biden dumped on America and the Communists are asking why it stinks hoping Americans will fall for their trick. The same trick they have been using for a hundred years hoping it will work one more time and take out the last hope on the planet. It is up to Patriotic Americans to stand one more time and throw out the real Nazis onto the trash heap of histoir once and for all.
Seattle’s communist Mayor Katie Wilson has announced plans to mobilize the city’s police force to gather intelligence on ICE agents conducting immigration enforcement operations and share that information with “community partners” on the streets.
Wilson said she will also bar federal immigration officers from utilizing city-controlled property, “including parks, parking lots, plazas, vacant lots, garages, and Seattle Center – for civil immigration enforcement.”
The mayor urged other local government entities, including the Seattle School District and Seattle Municipal Court, to adopt similar restrictions.
“Whoever you are, and wherever you come from: if Seattle is your home, then this is your city,” Wilson said in a statement.
Specifically, the mayor directed the Seattle Police Department “to investigate, verify, and document reports of immigration enforcement activity.”
Under the mayor’s plan, if a federal immigration enforcement operation is underway in the city, officers will be sent to the location to document the activity “with in-car and body-worn video, verify the identification of apparent federal agents, and secure scenes of potentially unlawful acts to gather evidence for prosecutors,” KOMO News reported.
Additionally, the city will mandate “closer cooperation between departments and community [anti-ICE] organizations, sharing information through a hotline operated by a community-led partner to connect residents with resources and support.”
Wilson also announced the launch of the Stand Together Seattle Initiative, inviting private property owners to post notices stating that federal agents may not access their property without a warrant.
City employees will receive training on how to report and respond to federal law enforcement activity and “conduct privacy reviews to limit potential data exposure, including reviewing data-sharing agreements in vendor contracts.”
The self-identified Democrat-Socialist said the city will allocate $4 million, previously appropriated by the City Council, to left-wing organizations providing legal defense to illegal aliens and “community support.”
Wilson urged the city to move quickly to organize and “keep people safe.”
Seattle Police Chief Shon Barnes said officers will continue to focus on public safety regardless of immigration status and comply with laws barring participation in immigration enforcement. While the department has no authority over federal agents or policies, Barnes said officers will document incidents if notified.
“The Seattle Police Department’s primary responsibility is the life safety of all people,” he said.
“If you want to live a happy life, tie it to a goal, not to people or things.” — Albert Einstein
So true. Viktor Frankl, in “Man’s Search for Meaning,” also wrote of purpose and goals as central to a happy life. People will often let you down, and people are not under your control. Your goals are largely under control. Show me a person without goals or purpose, and you will be showing me an unhappy person. Relationships with people and material things can contribute to a meaningful life, for sure; but if you try to replace goals with other people or with things, you will be chronically disappointed.
Perhaps the most discouraging condition of the modern age is the absolute breakdown in communication among members of society. It once seemed reasonable to expect that the Internet and social media might aid in our understanding of each other. Instead, online forums are filled with people who speak the same language but interpret words entirely differently.
With the arrest of former CNN commentator Don Lemon for allegedly violating the religious rights of worshipers in Minneapolis, Democrats and the corporate news media have universally condemned Attorney General Pam Bondi for somehow “infringing” upon Lemon’s First Amendment rights as a so-called “journalist.” They intentionally ignore how Lemon joined others in storming a church, intimidating congregants, and causing emotional harm to those worshipers (including children) who understandably felt as if they were under attack. Lemon and his apologists continue to defend the organized raid of a Christian service as some kind of “protest” and describe the unwanted intruders as “protesters.” For those who were made to suffer through the invasion, however, their ordeal felt like an act of terrorism perpetrated by terrorists whose intent was to scare those assembled to worship.
When society can’t agree upon the difference between “protest” and “terrorism,” we have a serious problem. We have seen this dilemma play out all over the Minneapolis area recently. Democrat officials describe federal agents conducting lawful arrests as “terrorists” and “Nazis” and defend criminal illegal aliens as “victims.” Trained mobs of leftist agitators who intentionally obstruct the professional duties of law enforcement officers insist on calling themselves “legal observers” and “peaceful protesters.” When Democrat officials and members of the corporate news media describe people who commit crimes as “legal” and “peaceful,” it is impossible for society to share any common respect for the law.
As a society, we have been debating government attacks on free speech and government-engineered censorship with increased frequency at least since the presidency of Barack Obama. Obama was the first modern American president to really go on offense against what he called “fake news,” “misinformation,” and “disinformation.” He started the pressure campaign on Silicon Valley’s tech titans to “police” their social media sites for “false” information. While many of us vocally objected to this incipient collective of government and industry “experts” deciding for the rest of us what is “true,” Obama and his supporters insisted that “incorrect” information constituted an unacceptable national security threat.
But how can a society that disagrees about the distinctions between “protest” and “terrorism” or “criminal obstruction” and “legal observation” possibly decipher what is “correct” and “incorrect” information? When people with power accord themselves the additional power to declare what is “true,” a viewpoint monopoly inevitably rises to crush dissent. For free speech to function in any authentic form, the public sphere must remain a space where all information — whether true or false — is vigorously debated.
Otherwise, all we have is State-sanctioned dogma — or what the quietly dissenting members of communist societies once derisively referred to as “political correctness.” In a distressing sign of collapsing respect for free speech across the West, too many nations today actually police citizens’ speech in order to ensure that their thoughts and words comply with narratives constructed and deemed “correct” by the government. They do this despite having emerged victorious from a twentieth-century Cold War that routinely distinguished Western respect for freedom of speech from the suffocating Iron Curtain of the Soviet Union’s speech police.
The divisions within society have become so great that Democrats and Republicans in the United States can’t even agree about what should be protected as inviolable free speech. Conservatives and other non-leftists have felt the sting of censorship since Obama’s presidency. Without explicit warnings or explanations, Big Tech companies began removing online advertisers and other sources of revenue from conservative websites. Social media companies covertly limited the visibility (and therefore influence) of conservative writers. Search engines relegated popular conservative publications to obscurity by burying their keyword matches many pages back in relevant hits. Without any official announcements from government or corporate authorities, it became clear that conservative voices were being targeted for elimination.
Since Obama’s presidency, that cancerous viewpoint discrimination metastasized in many directions: Banks closed the accounts of conservative publications and institutions. Web hosts refused to support conservative websites. After the 2020 election, the titans of Big Tech conspired to censor any Americans who argued that various forms of electoral fraud had handed Joe Biden the presidency. The Biden administration piggybacked on Silicon Valley’s embrace of censorship by working with social media companies to censor anyone who disagreed with the government’s COVID policies. That censorship became so pronounced that even medical research was targeted for deletion under the pretense that concerns for “public health” and “national security” justified the censorship of scientific debate. As censorship of the 2020 election and COVID became more widespread, those who were doing the censoring kept pushing the envelope. For a while, it really looked as if Democrat-embraced narratives concerning everything from man-made “global warming” to “transgenderism” would be declared sacrosanct and too “politically correct” for Americans to debate. Feeling emboldened to declare “public truths,” the Biden administration turbocharged Obama’s initial directive for social media censorship by building the architecture for a “Disinformation Governance Board” whose purpose was unapologetically directed toward limiting conservative points of view.
For Republicans, conservatives, and other non-leftists, Democrats’ collusion with Silicon Valley to censor information deemed “untrue” constituted an unparalleled attack on Americans’ free speech. As with so many other conflicts in society today, ordinary Democrats didn’t recognize this threat at all. When they did acknowledge that conservative voices were being silenced, many immediately justified those infringements on Americans’ natural rights by repeating Obama’s original propaganda that “fake news,” “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and even simply information that fellow leftists judged as “harmful” to society deserved no First Amendment protections.
Perhaps more troubling, even as Democrats argue for mass censorship, they portray themselves as victims of censorship. When parents insist on protecting their children from “transgender” indoctrination, sexually explicit guides encouraging minors to engage in adult activities, and outright pornography, Democrats pretend that parental supervision violates free speech. When the FCC reprimands Jimmy Kimmel for lying to the American public by falsely blaming Charlie Kirk’s assassination on President Trump’s MAGA movement (instead of a leftist in a gay relationship with a “trans” furry and someone who allegedly disparaged Charlie’s Christian faith as a form of “hate”), Democrats pretend that Kimmel (who enjoys more free speech than almost anyone in America) is being censored. When Don Lemon joins a gang of leftist agitators to trespass inside a church, disrupt worship services, and terrorize those assembled to commune with God, the corporate news media pretend that the person doing the terrorizing is somehow a “victim” of government attacks on the First Amendment.
Right now in America censorship of non-leftists is justified, while any pushback against leftist orthodoxy is falsely portrayed as censorship. If this corrosive double standard weren’t already obvious, “comedians” such as Stephen Colbert make it more glaringly so each day. Just last week Colbert “joked” that federal agents who enforce America’s immigration laws are worse than Nazi Germany’s SS troops. Unlike members of that Nazi paramilitary organization, who would have surely imprisoned or murdered Colbert before he even had a chance to speak, ICE and Border Patrol agents put their lives on the line every day to arrest pedophiles, rapists, and murderers illegally residing in the United States. Colbert calls those law enforcement officers “Nazis,” and he will continue to enjoy the privilege of expressing his vile viewpoints on television.
However, when ordinary conservatives are censored online, Colbert says nothing. The powerful play “victim,” while the powerless are targeted and silenced. We may speak the same language, but our words don’t mean the same things.
THE ARTFUL DILETTANTE 