The Home Affordability Crisis — Not Fake News

Homeowners vote red. Renters vote blue.

Will President Donald Trump’s 50-year mortgage make a red voter out of you?

That is what the president hoped on Saturday, when he posted the idea of stretching out the customary 30-year repayment terms for home mortgages to 50 years.

Turns out, that idea is smoke and mirrors. But at least Trump is recognizing that home affordability is a real crisis, not fake news.

“Affordability” is the campaign pledge that produced big wins on election day, and most of the winners were Democrats.

Affording a home is increasingly out of reach. The median age of the first-time homebuyer just hit 40 years old, according to the National Association of Realtors. Many women are worried about hitting the brick wall of no longer being able to bear children, and they still can’t afford a starter home.

In 1991, the median age of someone buying their first home was 28, but in the last few years it’s become the impossible dream for people even in their 30s. The implications are huge, not only for starting a family but also for voting.

Renters favor Democrats by almost two to one, according to data from the American National Election Studies. Homeowners are twice as likely as renters to identify as “strongly Republican,” reports Aziz Sunderji, an economist who analyzed several decades of this data.

Starting in the 1970s, renters were slightly more inclined to vote Democratic than Republican, but in the last 20 years, they have swung sharply leftward.

Making homeownership possible is not only good policy. For Republicans, it’s smart politics.

In New York City, people in their 30s who are earning good money — as much as $120,000 or more, according to economics reporter John Carney — cannot make the leap to homeownership. In the mayoral election, strong support for democratic socialist mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani came from Brooklyn neighborhoods inhabited by “downwardly mobile professionals” who are settling for cramped rental apartments and roommates. They have “no hope of buying a home,” Carney reports.

Scalded by the election results across the nation last week, Trump floated the idea of a 50-year mortgage on Truth Social, with side-by-side pictures of himself and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who devised the 30-year mortgage after the Depression to relieve homeowners.

The 50-year mortgage is a nonstarter because it’s prohibited by Dodd-Frank, among other reasons. But there are realistic steps to help first-time buyers get into the market.

Lowering mortgage rates will help. Many current homeowners, especially the elderly, who would like to downsize are locked into their current homes because they’re financed at low rates. If they sell and buy a new property, they’ll be stuck with higher interest rates. So they’re waiting, keeping urgently needed inventory off the market.

Trump has been all over Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to lower interest rates. He’s already done so twice, in September and October, and some predict another hike in December.

But long term, this is a problem of supply and demand. To increase the supply of new homes for sale, builders need to feel confident buyers will be able to pay the price. At the end of October, builder confidence was 37 out of 100, according to the National Association of Home Builders. What will boost their confidence? Job growth and consumer confidence.

With the government shutdown ending, job market data will soon be available again. Builders will be watching.

Meanwhile, politicians will have their eyes on the polls. Behind the poll numbers is widespread discontent that the American dream of homeownership is far out of reach. Republicans hoping to make gains in next year’s midterm elections better pay attention.

Meanwhile, Democrats know where their votes are: renters. In many states Democrats are pushing towns with mostly single-family housing to build apartment buildings, including units to be rented to low-income families. Trump identifies this as the Democrats’ “war on the suburbs.”

In Connecticut, leftists aligned with Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont are ramming through a bill this week that mandates how much affordable rental housing every region of the state will build. Forcing small Connecticut towns like Easton or Wilton to build apartment buildings and accommodate a large influx of renters will push up property taxes, as the towns have to build sewer lines, bus lines and more schools. The higher property taxes go, the further out of reach buying a single-family home is, especially to first-time homebuyers.

But Democrats are turning a deaf ear to these objections. They know the fundamental truth. The more renters move into a red town, the more likely that town is to flip blue.


Betsy McCaughey is a former Lt. Governor of New York State and Chairman & Founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths at http://www.hospitalinfection.org.

What Attracts People to False Teaching

What’s the allure of false teaching, particularly in regard to future things? Why do so many people go astray from what the words of Scripture tell us about what lies ahead for us and the world?

These questions again came to my mind after I received an email boasting that “dispensationalism is on the decline.” By that, the writer meant that many Christians are turning away from our belief in Jesus’ thousand-year rule on the earth. As evidence, he cited Kirk Cameron’s apparent switch from belief in a pre-Tribulation Rapture to Dominion Theology, which teaches that the church will usher in millennial conditions on Earth before Jesus returns to the earth.

As I thought about the email heralding the merits of Dominion Theology, I began to see a pattern of what made it appealing to the writer and thus to many other Christians.

It’s Popular

I responded to the email by asserting that our beliefs are not a matter of what’s popular, but they must find their basis in the words of Scripture. Sadly, a great many churches adhere to the belief that world conditions will get better, not worse. This viewpoint stems from the errant teaching that God has rejected Israel and the church is now God’s physical kingdom on Earth. Dominion Theology takes this a step further by asserting that it, not Jesus, will bring kingdom conditions to the nations.

They also claim that the antichrist is not a person but rather a spirit that the church will defeat.

Such teachings do not match the words of Scripture, not at all. Paul referred to the antichrist as the “man of lawlessness” (2 Thessalonians 2:3) and distinguished this person from the “mystery of lawlessness” that was already at work in the world in his day. He also revealed that the Lord would “kill” him at “his coming” (2:7-8). The Lord will end the antichrist’s reign of terror, not the church.

Jesus warned His disciples that the world would “hate” them (John 15:18-25); He never promised that they or the church would win the world over to their side. The Lord told us to expect persecution.

Human Wisdom and Experience Fueled by Emotion

When it comes to alternative beliefs regarding future things, human wisdom and experience play a significant role. The email I received mentioned a book, Victorious Eschatology. In the book’s description on Amazon, the author referred to his experiences that led to his passionate belief that the church would triumph over all the world’s ills.

Unfortunately, human wisdom and experience fueled by emotion lead many astray from the truth of God’s word. I remember watching a video of an author who described his encounter with God that led him to believe that everyone would someday receive eternal life, regardless of what they believe. Sadly, his persuasive and passionate presentation likely appealed to many Christians who lack a basic understanding of the Bible.

Is it not the same with cults and false religions? They start with someone claiming to have an encounter with God through which they received special revelation that negates the clear teachings of God’s Word.

My belief in Jesus’ imminent appearing is deeply personal. I can relate several stories, some emotionally charged, of how the Lord used my beliefs to comfort and encourage me in the darkest of times. However, that is most definitely not why I’m convinced Jesus is coming to take us to glory before the start of the Tribulation. I believe what I do about the Rapture because the words of the Bible support my eager anticipation of His appearing.

It’s New

It’s insanely ironic, is it not? Many of the same people who vilify the Rapture as a belief that no one held before John Darby in the 1800s promote Dominion Theology because . . . it is new. Yes, they do!

Based upon new revelation supposedly given to newly appointed apostles and prophets, its adherents cling to the hope that the church will usher in kingdom conditions on the earth. Even the name of this teaching, New Apostolic Reformation (NAR), emphasizes the recent nature of this theology.

However, its beliefs are not fresh. They represent a rehabilitated postmillennialism that flourished in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The two world wars put an end to its teaching that the church would bring kingdom conditions of peace and righteousness to the world.

We base our hope of eternal life on the words of the New Testament. The same must be true of what we believe about the Rapture, the Tribulation, Jesus’ return, and His reign over the nations. The words of Revelation 19:11-20:10 dispel all the NAR beliefs as well as its basis in Replacement Theology. These teachings rely on human-based interpretations of the book of Revelation rather than what the Apostle John plainly tells us about Jesus’ Second Coming, when He brings His kingdom to earth.

Identifying the church as God’s physical kingdom on Earth goes all the way back to Augustine, who popularized this idea in the fifth century. Dominion Theology is but a different wrinkle to the Dark Ages’ belief that God had called the church to physically rule over the nations.

Lack of Sound Biblical Teaching on Eschatology

False teachings, particularly in regard to eschatology (the doctrine of future things), flourish today because of a lack of sound biblical teaching. Most pastors either ignore Bible prophecy or teach that the church is God’s promised kingdom on the earth (or will be).

When we let the words of Scripture speak for themselves, they lead us to a belief in the pre-Tribulation Rapture. Our hope does not rest on human wisdom or experience but rather on what the Bible says.

Jonathan Brentner, Rapture Ready

What Really Happened on January 6, 2021

One would think that after the nation’s socialist media compared a 3-hour protest at a public building that escalated into a riot with 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and the Civil War for the past few years.  One would think they’d leave no stone unturned in getting to the bottom of every unanswered question about that relatively short time period.  But it appears that since they’ve exploited their version of the Reichstag fire to its fullest extent, they’ve suddenly lost all interest in the issue.  They’ve grown strangely quiescent over an issue that was an “impeachable offense” a few years ago.  This is supposed to be a critical event in the country’s history, compared to an “insurrection,” “domestic terrorism,” and a range of other terms on a rotating basis, depending on the propaganda requirements of the moment.

We’ve been featuring short documentary videos from the content creators Forgotten History, delving into the story of the ever-violent left — the KKKWeather UndergroundAntifa, and “dark woke.”  And we were set to move on to Democrat Woodrow Wilson in their most corrupt series, but we noted a brand-new video on the ‘Most Deadliest Day’:

The video description notes that

this documentary is based on publicly available records, congressional testimony, and mainstream reporting. It is for educational and journalistic purposes only.

In 2021, the media declared January 6 an “insurrection” and “the greatest threat to democracy in history.” But hidden footage, congressional testimony, and later investigations told a very different story — one the public was never allowed to hear.

Given recent revelations, we would also like to know: Why did it take 56 months to disclose there were hundreds of intelligence agents at the Capitol?

More than 360 FBI special agents and other staff from the Washington Field Office responded to the rapidly developing events at the U.S. Capitol Jan. 6, including 274 special agents and 89 intelligence analysts and support staff, the leaked report says. The professional staff did not deploy to the Capitol. A report issued in December 2024 reported 26 FBI informants at the Capitol on Jan. 6, including four who went into the building.

What about the report of videos that show that Capitol Police repeatedly used lethal force on protesters early on?  Or the report that an ex–Capitol Police cop was a forensic match for the Jan. 6 pipe bomber?

The even bigger bottom-line question is, when will we see these items investigated and finally see the true perpetrators brought to justice?

Sponsored

D Parker is an engineer, inventor, wordsmith, and student of history, former director of communications for a civil rights organization, and a long-time contributor to conservative websites.  Find him on Substack.

null

Image: PublicDomainPictures via PixabayPixabay License.

Related Topics: 2020 ElectionJanuary 6

New Image

13

sharethis sharing button
American Thinker on MeWe

 Print

 Email

Virginia Legalizes Online Cannabis PurchasesMood

The 87¢ Viagra Trick Especially for Men on Social Security.Friday Plans

Sponsored

View & Add Comments (13)

Around the Web

Walgreens Hides This $1 Generic Viagra – Here’s The Aisle It’s Really inFriday Plans

Here’s The Estimated Cost of a 1-day Walk-in Shower UpgradeHomeBuddy

These Animal Socks – The Perfect Christmas Gift!Yifare

Virginia Legalizes Online Cannabis PurchasesMood

Limited Edition 2025 Guitar Advent Calendar – AshburnYifare

Here’s What Gutter Guards Should Cost if You Qualify for Senior RebatesLeafFilter Partner

Show Your Patriotism With Limited Edition Christmas HatsRibili

Don’t Miss out on Our Stunning Sunset Coffee Cup in Christmas!Ribili

Here Are 29 of The Coolest Gifts for This 2025Yifare

5 Companies That Send People Money When They’re Asked NicelyThe Penny Hoarder

Unwrap Happiness: Animal Socks for Every Member of The FamilyRibili

If You Have More Than $1,000 in Your Checking Account, Make These 6 Moves ASAPThe Penny Hoarder

Revcontent

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com

FOLLOW US ON

American Thinker on Facebook
American Thinker on Twitter
American Thinker on MeWe
American Thinker on GETTR
American Thinker on Truth Social

Recent Articles

Blog Posts

Blog Archives

Trending Topics

Trending

Neuropathy is Not From Low Vitamin B. Meet The Real Enemy of NeuropathyFootRenew

Mail Order Cannabis is a Real Thing in VirginiaMood

Here’s What a New Roof Should Cost You in 2025HomeBuddy

Here’s The Estimated Cost of a 1-Day Walk-in Shower UpgradeHomeBuddy

Revcontent

Most Read

24hr

48hr

7 Days

Zero Days Without a Democrat Crime

Kevin Finn

Joe Rogan and Glenn Beck on the nine steps to civil war

D. Parker

With his attack on Dietrich Bonhoeffer, has Tucker finally and fully jumped the shark?

Andrea Widburg

How Trump kills four birds with one stone

Dale Bandy

Moving forward, the Trump administration has a big plan to clean up SNAP

Andrea Widburg

Top Contributors


Last 7 Days

Silvio Canto, Jr.

Kevin Finn

Eric Utter

J.B. Shurk

Joseph Ford Cotto

Last 30 Days

Silvio Canto, Jr.

Eric Utter

J.B. Shurk

Joseph Ford Cotto

Clarice Feldman

Kevin Finn

Christian Vezilj

Thomas Kolbe

Wendi Strauch Mahoney

Susan Quinn

https://3a904ff51187c96ef33896733f997a70.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.htmlAbout Us | Contact | Privacy Policy | RSS Syndication © American Thinker 2025

The Red-Green Alliance is Still Powerful

We have been through a lot, and we are going through a lot. Getting President Trump elected was a great gift, and he has, as expected, done amazing things. But we are still in trouble. Most readers here already know this, but it still bears repeating. The American radical Left is dangerous—literally an existential threat to our existence as a constitutional republic (much of which has already been eroded over decades of effort by our internal enemies).

Leftists know they are in trouble, and like cornered animals, can be expected to become increasingly violent. But we are also in trouble because, as a nation, we still don’t completely get it. We all breathed a sigh of relief following the 2024 election, and many took that as a sign that, at least for the moment, the fight was over. But as you know, the real fight is just beginning.

Manufactured Crisis

Every agenda the radicals inflict on us is part of an overarching strategy to sow chaos, division, and hate, and it’s been working pretty well so far. (I describe this in detail in my latest book, Manufactured Crisis: The War to End America.)

The troubling examples we’ve seen almost daily for years are reaching a fever pitch. Antifa-style groups attack ICE, police, and conservative gatherings. The media often lies about, misrepresents, or neglects to report it. A recent TPUSA meetup in San Francisco nearly turned into an outright war.

Leftists know they are in trouble, and like cornered animals, can be expected to become increasingly violent. But we are also in trouble because, as a nation, we still don’t completely get it. We all breathed a sigh of relief following the 2024 election, and many took that as a sign that, at least for the moment, the fight was over. But as you know, the real fight is just beginning.

Understand this: “Antifa” is only the latest name adopted by a group of paid agitators who’ve been plying their trade for decades. They were the core of “Occupy Wall Street,” Black Lives Matter, and many other “movements.” These absolutely ignorant people fantasize a utopian communist future, but don’t know what greets them if they succeed: the firing squad.

This fact is written in plain English by Sergey Nechayev, the anarchist whose 1869 Revolutionary Catechism became the blueprint for Lenin’s Soviet takeover of Russia and all subsequent communist revolutions. Nechayev even goes so far as to lay out an order of execution for the segments of society marked for extermination.

Immigration

With the rise of Zohran Mamdani and other Islamists in America (e.g., Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar), we constantly hear the “Red/Green Alliance.” This alliance between Islam and the Left is nothing new. I wrote two books that coined the phrase, The Red/Green Axis, both of which predicted much of what is happening as a result of our myriad immigration policies regarding both legal and illegal immigration, asylum, and refugee resettlement.

The Red/Green Axis is not a temporary alliance between two competing forces. It is all communism. It is yet another way to create chaos, division, and conflict in America. Soviet communists have owned the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots since the 1950s. They have allowed the so-called “Islamic Radicals” to unleash death and destruction around the world as a false flag operation to draw our eyes away from the real enemy: the “former” Soviet Union (it hasn’t really changed) and Communist China.

Border Czar Tom Homan has focused on the criminal aliens first, which, of course, is a top priority, but other illegal aliens have enormously negative impacts across all aspects of society. They have been, and in many cases still are, using welfare benefits to which they are not entitled. They create housing shortages everywhere; they bring in numerous diseases, many of which used to be thought eradicated, and new ones, like the deadly Chagas disease. They have overcrowded our public schools, making decent education almost impossible for American kids, even without the radical indoctrination.

There are over 400 languages spoken in public schools in America today. Many of these are unknown dialects for which there are no interpreters. The following chart comes from my 2019 Red/Green Axis 2.0. It is shocking but true. I guarantee you it is worse today.

But that is only one of the many problems. Democrats want to count illegals to augment the jerrymandered districts that favor them. This and the massive illegal alien vote fraud, which is occurring today, are the two greatest threats. Today’s Democrat party has one overarching goal: to create a one-party nation. And make no mistake, it would be a communist nation.

In fact, the open borders agenda has been pursued by the international communist movement since the 1920s and 30s. Read the following, described by Col. Archibald Roosevelt (Teddy’s son), in a 1950s pamphlet. It’s copied directly from International Labor Defense, a Soviet front group, which, in the 1930s, demanded:

[C]omplete right of asylum for all emigrants who have been compelled to leave their own country for political or economic reasons; that they should not be expelled or extradited; they shall be allowed to enter all countries without documents or visas; they shall be given identification papers valid in all countries; unrestricted right to stay in any country; full right to work and to relief in case of unemployment; immediate cancellation of all expulsion and extradition orders; the release of all arrested emigrants, and finally the right to take part in the political and trade union life in the country in which they have found asylum.*

Doesn’t this sound exactly like today’s demands from the open borders crowd, including the Democrat party? The Democrat party has been sympathetic to communism since the 1930s. But today’s Democrats, confronted with declining support from Americans, also see importing voters as necessary to their survival. And they don’t care who it affects. The truth of that can be counted in billions of dollars and thousands of American lives lost at the hands of illegal aliens!

The 2026 election will soon be upon us. Democrats are still committing vote fraud, and this must be stopped to the extent possible in the short time remaining to us. If Republicans lose either of the Congressional chambers, President Trump’s agenda will become much more difficult to achieve. As the true leaders of our nation, We the People need to do everything we can in our own states to lobby our legislators for voting reform. No more mass mail-in voting. No more early voting or same-day registration. Voter ID is essential and can be passed in states even if the congressional effort fails. We should be demanding loudly that redistricting exclude non-citizens. We’ve had enough!

We need to get on this right away, people. Our very lives, as well as those of our children and future generations, are literally at stake.

James Simpson is an economist, businessman, investigative journalist, and author. His latest book is Manufactured Crisis: The War to End America. His website is www.crisisnow.net. Follow Jim on XFacebook & Instagram.

Mamdani, Debs, and the Rise of Democratic Socialism

A.F. Cronin

Zohran Mamdani, mayor-elect of New York City, quoted Eugene Debs in his acceptance speech last week. “The sun may have set over our city this evening, but as Eugene Debs once said: ‘I can see the dawn of a better day for humanity.’”

The Debs quote is, to most people, obscure. It is deliberately so. Most Democrat voters have no idea who Eugene V. Debs was, what he did, or the ideology he espoused—but that ignorance is paving the way for hardcore socialism.

Debs was the Socialist Party of America’s candidate for President of the United States during the early years of the 20th Century. He ran five times: 1900, 1904, 1908, 1912, and 1920. A vocal opponent of the First World War, Debs had publicly called for resistance to the draft. In 1918, Woodrow Wilson’s administration arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned him for sedition. Debs had to run his 1920 campaign from his cell in a federal prison. He didn’t win, but he was hailed as a socialist hero by fellow socialists the world over.

The quote Mamdani used was lifted from Debs’s statement to the court upon his conviction, excerpted in part below:

I never so clearly comprehended as now the great struggle between the powers of greed and exploitation on the one hand and upon the other the rising hosts of industrial freedom and social justice. I can see the dawn of the better day for humanity. The people are awakening. In due time they will and must come to their own.

It is interesting to note that Debs used the term social justice—remember, this is 1918. He also used the words “greed” and “exploitation”; words currently (and continuously) used as bludgeons by contemporary leftists.

Unsurprisingly, Debs’s statement is archived at Marxists.org, a site which includes additional links to all of Debs’s writings. It seems that Marxists.org holds Debs’s work in high esteem.

Mamdani is a long-standing member of Democratic Socialists of America, the organization Eugene V. Debs led for many years. The Democratic Socialists of America is “the largest socialist organization in the United States” and, in their words, “a political and activist organization, not a party”.

It should be noted that on October 25th of this year Bernie Sanders was awarded the 60th Eugene V. Debs Award by the Eugene V. Debs Foundation. While Mr. Sanders, is not a card-carrying member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), he has described himself as a democratic socialist for years. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a member of the DSA.  And, unsurprisingly, Rashida Tlaib is as well. In fact Tlaib’s and Mamdani’s smiling faces grace the home page of the Democratic Socialist of America.

According to Wikipedia there are 212 office holders in America who are either members of the Democratic Socialists of America or have been endorsed by DSA. Most of them run as Democrats.

It bears mentioning that Karl Marx espoused socialism as the necessary transitional step between capitalism and communism in both The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital. And don’t forget, the formal name of the Soviet Union was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Apparently the central committee didn’t think they’d reached full communist status yet.

Back to Mamdani.

The 34-year-old Mamdani was on the ballot as the candidate for both the Democrat party and the Working Families Party, a political party with the motto “Making our Nation Work for the many, not the few”.

One would assume that since different political parties have different platforms they would field different candidates. But this is not always the case. The phenomenon where parties “share” candidates is called “fusion voting”. And it’s not just Democrats who “fusion vote”. Curtis Sliwa was a candidate for two parties as well: the Republican Party and the Protect Animals Party. Sliwa rescues stray cats. Lots of them. So New York City Republicans had to “share” Sliwa with the city’s cat people, and the Democrat party “shared” Mamdani with the Working Families Party. “Fusion voting” awards votes to the candidate, not the party. This means a candidate’s total vote count is the combination of votes he or she received regardless of the differing parties voters may have supported. For example, Sliwa’s vote total was the sum of the Republican and the Protect Animals Party votes. Mamdani’s total was the sum of Democrat and Working Families Party votes.

Mamdani garnered a mere 50.4% of the overall vote and approximately 15% of his vote came from Working Family Party voters. Long-time Democrat Andrew Cuomo ran as an independent and received 41.6 % of the vote. Curtis Sliwa received a mere 7.1%. The combined total of Cuomo and Sliwa votes would not have bested Mamdani’s 50.4%. However, if Mamdani didn’t get the 15% from the Working Family Party, Cuomo would have won.

By comparing his unimpressive victory — a single mayoral race won with just 50.4% of the vote — with “the dawn of a better day for humanity”, Mamdani exhibits the typical leftist god-complex, and the extraordinary arrogance that comes with it. Like Obama’s self-aggrandizing “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal…” Mamdani’s assertion that his victory will reset the human race, and the implication that he is the one to lead humanity to the “better day”, is hyperbolic to say the least.

New York City is, and has been, a Democrat town for a long time. If voters understood what Mamdani’s socialism will mean in reality, I suspect many would have voted for a different candidate. Promises of “free” buses, government run grocery stores, and a “de-commodified” housing market don’t exactly translate to freedom and prosperity for the people—and Mamdani’s fiery acceptance speech reminded us of his true nature with his nod to socialist icon Eugene Debs being an ominous sign. “The dawn of a better day” for New York City will not be what they imagined.

A.F. Cronin is a writer living in Los Angeles. He has written for American Thinker, The Federalist, and other periodicals.

The BBC’s rise and fall: from Trump to the Gaza war.

A skewed Trump speech edit, a Gaza film built around a Hamas operative’s son, and repeated factual distortions have plunged the BBC into a credibility crisis. Conservatives are celebrating, Trump is threatening a major lawsuit, and the network faces a steep political cost

There is no need to attribute superpowers to Donald Trump. No American president, not even a narcissist in White House mode, can shake a public broadcaster in another country and continent and trigger the resignation of its director general and head of news.

The BBC misled the public about Trump. It deceived viewers who had always regarded it as a reliable source of news: if it aired on the BBC, it happened, and the facts had already been verified. In the week before last year’s U.S. presidential election, the network’s “Panorama” program broadcast a documentary titled “Donald Trump: A Second Chance?” The film included clips from Trump’s Jan. 6, 2021, speech to supporters and led viewers to believe the president encouraged them to storm the Capitol, said he would march with them “to fight like hell,” and warmly embraced the violence that followed.

But it has now emerged that the filmmakers omitted a critical part of Trump’s remarks, the section in which he urged his supporters to “peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” Other parts were edited with a clear agenda. For example, instead of airing “We are going to walk down to the Capitol and we are going to cheer on our brave senators,” the network broadcast, “We are going to walk down to the Capitol… and I will be with you, and we will fight, we will fight like hell,” stitching together fragments spoken 50 minutes apart.

Trump, predictably, threatened to sue the network for billions, and an earthquake followed inside the BBC. But the Trump episode was only the final straw. In recent years, the network has repeatedly eroded its own reliability, perhaps the most valuable currency in journalism. It happened during the war in Gaza, where the BBC was caught distorting coverage and embedding a clear anti-Israel line. It happened in one-sided coverage of transgender issues, climate policy, immigration, and the rise of the far right in Britain. The problem was not that the BBC took a side and filled its ranks with progressive voices. The problem was that it bent the truth to fit the agenda it had chosen. In other words, it stopped delivering neutral news and began shaping a worldview. A commercial channel might do that. A public broadcaster meant to represent all citizens of the United Kingdom cannot.

To claim the BBC was a victim of the power struggle between progressives and conservatives would miss the point. Conservatives had to do very little in this battle. The scale of bias, accompanied by blatant inaccuracies, shows that the damage was largely self-inflicted.

The agenda mattered more than the truth To many, the BBC has become an anachronistic institution. It still produces excellent content, but it is a dinosaur. The digital revolution hit it hard in two ways. In 2027, the license-fee model that requires British citizens to pay 174.50 pounds a year for public broadcasting is set to expire. In an era of Netflix and Spotify, the arrangement no longer seems sustainable.

The second blow was even more severe. The BBC was not only a news channel. It set the global standard for credibility. Social networks, packed with their own political agendas and eager to challenge the BBC’s line, waited for any slip. Twenty years ago, no one could shake the BBC. Today, anyone with a social media account can try.

Mistakes happen. But such a long series of errors, errors that made clear there was a serious problem in the network’s editorial process, indicates something deliberate. The network continued to act with arrogance, forgetting that it could be scrutinized.

Take “Gaza: How to Survive a War Zone,” a documentary about life in Gaza during the conflict, which the BBC promoted heavily until it was revealed that its central narrator, a 13-year-old boy, was the son of a Hamas operative. The BBC had to pull the film. A basic fact-check that would have taken minutes could have prevented the embarrassment. As with the Trump documentary, the agenda mattered more to the network’s leadership than the truth. It takes a remarkable level of arrogance to produce, promote, distribute, and air such content while assuming no one will uncover the distortion in the age of social media. When executives removed the film, they said they had “lost confidence in it.” The damage to Israel, however, was already done, fueling already heated pro-Palestinian and antisemitic sentiment on British streets.

A celebration for conservatives.

The BBC is considered a conservative institution. The torrent of criticism in recent days, which includes accusations from the White House that it is a propaganda channel broadcasting fake news “100 percent of the time,” is a label that sticks. Trump and Israel, only two examples, gave the network many legitimate reasons to criticize them. But reality did not seem to satisfy the BBC. It continued piling on additional accusations. Conservatives now enjoy a double victory. Not only has the network lost its credibility, it has also confirmed a central claim of the political right: that mainstream media lean toward the left.

The timing has also been disastrous. The British right, including its hard-line faction with strict immigration policies, is heading toward a likely victory in the next election. At least half of Britain’s license-fee payers, along with many foreign governments, were waiting for the BBC to stumble, and the network did not miss a single trap. It ignored several internal sexual harassment allegations. Gary Lineker, the former footballer and popular host of the network’s flagship soccer program, compared the Conservative government’s asylum policy to policies of 1930s Germany. He was suspended and later reinstated due to pressure from colleagues, but the BBC did not renew his contract after another incendiary post about Israel. During the Glastonbury Festival this summer, the channel did not cut away when Bob Vylan led the crowd in chants of “Death to the IDF.”

The Trump case was extreme, not only because of the distortion itself but also because of the political terrain on which it occurred. As he has done with major U.S. media outlets, Trump seized on the moment to dismantle the BBC’s credibility and threaten litigation. During a meeting with British right-wing leader Nigel Farage, he heard claims of BBC interference in the British election, responding, according to Farage, “with words that cannot be printed.” But the BBC is not CBS. It is not a private network that can pay billions and move on. It is now trapped in the middle of a political confrontation that is about to reshape it entirely. If Britain wants fair trade agreements with Trump or seeks U.S. help in deterring Russia, it will have to pay a price, and the BBC is likely to be part of that cost.

Zeev Avrahami, Ynet

Zero Days Without a Democrat Crime

Another day, another Democrat found to be involved in some sort of fraud. I don’t think there’s a single member of that entire party who speaks the truth or plays by the rules. And the legacy media — ever the loyal lapdogs of the Left — fawns over these people, burying scandals or spinning them as virtues. From multi-million dollar fraud schemes tied to congressional insiders to impersonating lawyers to springing illegal aliens. From doctored court evidence to unconstitutional residency fraud, the evidence piles up like Kamala’s campaign debts. We’re witnessing a pattern of blatant lawbreaking enabled by a complicit media that prioritizes Marxist idolatry over accountability.

Let’s start with the squalid underbelly of Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s orbit. One of her associates was busted in a stunning $2.9 million fraud scheme, involving fake claims and embezzlement that robbed taxpayers blind. Calls for Omar’s deportation exploded, given her history of controversial statements and suspicious allegiances. We hear nothing but crickets from the legacy media, who instead amplify Omar’s anti-Israel rants as “bold leadership.” This is protectionism for a squad member whose allies treat public funds like a personal ATM.

Which brings us to Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett, the self-proclaimed champion of the downtrodden whose “woman of the people” routine detonated like a bad fireworks show. FEC filings reveal her campaign splurged over $25,000 on luxury hotels and limo services — Ritz-Carlton stays, West Hollywood Editions, Vegas resorts — none in her Dallas district or even in Texas. Add $50,000 on security while she preaches defunding the police and calls ICE “slave patrols.” It’s hypocrisy on steroids: a freshman congresswoman living large on donor dollars, jetting to Martha’s Vineyard while her constituents struggle with crime and inflation. Who does she think she is, BLM? Maxine Waters?

Yet the media swoons. A deranged liberal radio host, Stephanie Miller, was filmed kissing Crockett’s sneakers, gushing about worshipping the ground she walks on — and bragging about it on X. The legacy media? Probably too busy fact-checking Trump tweets from 2016.

This groveling spectacle is symptomatic of the Left’s cult-like devotion that shields criminals. The same filings show her rarely in Texas, yet she eyes a Senate run against John Cornyn. She admits that no Democrat can win, but is spending big on polls anyway. The media response: softball interviews where she’s hailed as a “rising star,” her lavish spending dismissed as “necessary travel.” If a Republican did this, it would be front-page impeachment fodder. This is yet another example of Michael Anton’s “Celebration Parallax” which may be stated as: “the same fact pattern is either true and glorious or false and scurrilous depending on who states it.”

Moving along to California Representative and Fang Fang fiasco survivor Eric Swalwell, who is now facing disqualification. Official deeds declare his Washington, D.C. home his “principal residence,” with no verifiable California address despite representing the Golden State’s 14th District. The Constitution demands residency in the state you serve — Swalwell mocks it. Public records show no owned or leased home in California; his “hometown” Livermore address has belonged to another family since 2008. This is fraud. Swalwell built his career slamming opponents as “out of touch,” and has literally checked out of his state. The legacy media outlets that hounded Trump over emoluments clauses yawn here, recycling Swalwell’s anti-Trump lawsuits as heroic.

The rot continues. Attorneys for former FBI director James Comey have allegedly doctored transcripts. Kevin Clinesmith isn’t alone! In Senate testimony evidence, they altered words to fabricate a question from Texas senator Ted Cruz that never happened — pure fraud in a court filing. Tampering with official records invites contempt or evidence charges. Comey’s team even cited a movie for defense, hiding identities while claiming innocence. This from a man who lectured America on integrity. Predictably, legacy media outlets like the NY Times framed this as a “dispute” rather than obstruction of justice.

null

More felonies have emerged from the Democrats’ obsession with illegal immigration. A staffer for Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth impersonated an immigration attorney to free a four-time-deported Mexican national convicted of DUI. He demanded access to his “client,” secured a signature on official forms, then tried filing unsigned versions — collaborating with a law firm to cover his tracks. DHS condemned this as “political games” endangering agents and detainees. Duckworth, a vocal defunder of border enforcement, remained silent. The media? Fox broke the story, the others buried it amid climate summit fluff.

Finally, under Gavin Newsom’s sanctuary regime, California’s DMV issued 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses to illegals ineligible under federal law — many unable to read English road signs. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy revoked them all, exposing deadly risks after crashes killed Americans. Newsome, globetrotting to Brazil for “climate deals,” left highways vulnerable. Nineteen other states enable this lunacy, but California’s scale is astonishing. The legacy media praised Newsom as a “visionary” presidential contender with his failures spun as bold progressivism.

Sponsored

Buying Cannabis Online is Now Legal, and Incredibly ConvenientMood

Here’s What It Would Cost to Install a Stair Lift in Your HouseHomeBuddy

Here’s How Much You Should Pay for Affordable Gutter GuardsLeafFilter Partner

From Thin to Thick: This Hair Care Tip is Going ViralHaloGrow

These incidents — fraud, impersonation, document tampering, residency lies, and luxury abuse are part and parcel of Democrat DNA. They flout laws while demanding obedience from citizens. The media’s role is criminal complicity. They amplify foot-kissing sycophancy, ignore FEC bombshells and whitewash impersonation as “advocacy.” Conservative outlets expose the truth while the legacy media covers it up to protect the regime.

We (conservatives) alert citizens to the crimes. We tell Democrats, “This person stole money from you! These people are funneling deadly narcotics, child sex slaves, and violent cartel members into your neighborhoods! This person committed mortgage fraud! This one sold 20% of our uranium and classified hypersonic missile tech to Russia!” Their response? “Trump is literally Hitler. I’m voting Blue.”

null

And they are. New York City residents just voted for an Islamist communist, and Seattle residents just elected a communist, excuse me, two “democratic socialists.” Said new mayor Katie Wilson, “We will not allow grocery chains to close stores at will.” That I’ve got to see.

The sheriff of neighboring Pierce County, Keith Swank, predicted that with the election of Katie Wilson, crime will rise, prosecutions will decrease, and she will fire the current police chief within a year.

Joe Walsh was right. You can’t argue with a sick mind.

America demands accountability: investigations, indictments, resignations, and deportations. Prosecute transcript tamperers, revoke illegal licenses, scrutinize every FEC filing, call out every lie, and have the IRS randomly audit elected representatives, staffers, bureaucrats, and their family members.

Why the delay? Perhaps AG Pam Bondi is afraid of making martyrs out of leftists before midterms. When the Left fabricated evidence and issued scurrilous indictments against Trump, it galvanized conservatives and we rallied behind him. Is she afraid the same thing could happen if she goes after prominent leftists? At this point, what do we have to lose?

We’re facing Sophie’s Choice. If no one is held to account, they won’t stop. If we hold them to account, we could energize their base. I say we put our cards on the table and enforce the law.

Accountability starts with us refusing to shy away.

Image: AT via Magic Studio

Related Topics: DemocratsCongressCorruptionNewsom

New Image

9

sharethis sharing button
American Thinker on MeWe

 Print

 Email

Virginia Legalizes Online Cannabis PurchasesMood

Why CVS is Quiet About The New 87¢ ED PillFriday Plans

Sponsored

View & Add Comments (9)

Around the Web

CVS Hides This $1 Generic Viagra – Here’s The Aisle It’s Really inFriday Plans

Here’s The Estimated Cost of a 1-day Walk-in Shower UpgradeHomeBuddy

Here’s How Much You Should Pay for Affordable Gutter GuardsLeafFilter Partner

Rheumatologist: I Beg You! Don’t Eat This if You Have Arthritis!Instaflex

Here’s What It Would Cost to Install a Stair Lift in Your HouseHomeBuddy

Ashburn: You Can Now Buy Cannabis Online and It’s 100% LegalMood

Doctors Shocked: Natural Method Restores Hair Growth at Any StageHaloGrow

Parasitologist: One Bite Will Rid Your Body of All Parasites!Para911

This Household Trick Removes All Parasites in Your Body Overnight!Paratoxil

Restaurants in Ashburn With Good Senior DiscountsThe Consumer Guide

Here’s What a New Roof Should Cost You in 2025HomeBuddy

If You Have Hip or Knee Pain, Write Down The RecipeInstaflex

Revcontent

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com

FOLLOW US ON

American Thinker on Facebook
American Thinker on Twitter
American Thinker on MeWe
American Thinker on GETTR
American Thinker on Truth Social

Recent Articles

Blog Posts

Monthly Archives

Trending Topics

Trending

Neuropathy is Not From Low Vitamin B. Meet The Real Enemy of NeuropathyFootRenew

Here’s What It Would Cost to Install a Stair Lift in Your HouseHomeBuddy

How Much Does a New Roof Cost for a 1500 Sq. Ft. House?HomeBuddy

Buying Cannabis Online is Now Legal, and Incredibly ConvenientMood

Revcontent

Most Read

24hr

48hr

7 Days

New York Bleeds Out

William Levin

Rod Dreher’s Checklist on Groyperism

James Soriano

Judicial Overreach Threatens the Republic

J.B. Shurk

Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Mamdani Wolf? Not me!

Joan Swirsky

Mama said no free buses

Silvio Canto, Jr.

Top Contributors


Last 7 Days

Eric Utter

J.B. Shurk

Silvio Canto, Jr.

Joseph Ford Cotto

Jack Cashill

Last 30 Days

Silvio Canto, Jr.

Eric Utter

Joseph Ford Cotto

J.B. Shurk

Clarice Feldman

Christian Vezilj

Thomas Kolbe

Kevin Finn

Wendi Strauch Mahoney

Susan Quinn

nullAbout Us | Contact | Privacy Policy | RSS Syndication © American Thinker 2025

×

You come back because the truth matters
Thanks to patriots like you, we stay independent—no Big Tech, no corporate money

Stand with truth. Stand with America.

If you are already a member, please login here.javascript: 0

×

null

The new Epstein Files are no smoking gun

In an April 2, 2011 message to his associate and fixer Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein wrote “i want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.” Then, the word VICTIM appears in a black box, followed by “he has never once been mentioned. police chief, etc. im 75% there.”

Never mind that the late financier who didn’t kill himself never seemed to use punctuation or capitals in his personal communication. This message does appear to be damning, if kind of vague. “I have been thinking about that…” Maxwell said, but what, exactly, remains unclear.

The VICTIM in the note is Virginia Giuffre, who earlier this year said Trump had committed no improprieties for her. And The White House, naturally, has issued a blanket denial. “The fact remains that President Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club decades ago for being a creep to his female employees, including {Virginia} Giuffre,” said Trump spokesperson Karoline Leavitt in a statement to the press. “These stories are nothing more than bad-faith efforts to distract from President Trump’s historic accomplishments, and any American with common sense sees right through this hoax and clear distraction from the government opening back up again.”

Also in play now is the Master of Whisperers, the journalist Michael Wolff, who in 2015 warned Epstein, before a Presidential campaign debate that CNN was “planning to ask Trump tonight about his relationship with you — either on air or in scrum afterwards.” “If we were able to craft an answer for him, what do you think it should be?” Epstein responded.

“I think you should let him hang himself,” Wolff said. “If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable P.R. and political currency.”

Like the rest of you, I finds this very juicy. But he also doesn’t necessarily see these emails as some sort of smoking gun that reveals the President to be a malignant pedo.

They’re a trickle, not a torrent, and are really more revealing of the power dynamics behind Trump’s first election than they are of any shenanigans at Mar-a-Lago or on Epstein Island.

As Wolff told Epstein, “of course, it is possible that, when asked, he’ll say Jeffrey is a great guy and has gotten a raw deal and is a victim of political correctness, which is to be outlawed in a Trump regime.”

“Political correctness” is now called “woke,” but that’s very prescient. “Democrats continue to carelessly cherry-pick documents to generate click-bait that is not grounded in the facts,” said a Republican on the House Oversight Committee. In last year’s interview with deputy attorney general Todd Blanche, Maxwell said of Trump that she “she never witnessed the President in any inappropriate setting in any way. In the times that I was with him, he was a gentleman in all respects.” Angel Trump or Devil Trump? Cockburn honestly can’t guess anymore. Only the ghost of Jeffrey Epstein knows for sure.

The House Oversight Committee released some Jeffrey Epstein emails this morning, and, sure enough, Donald Trump is in the Epstein Files. Like a malignant ghost that haunts the President’s dreams, Epstein has risen from the great beyond to point his bony finger at Donald Trump, saying, “it was you all along.” Or has he?

In an April 2, 2011 message to his associate and fixer Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein wrote “i want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.” Then, the word VICTIM appears in a black box, followed by “he has never once been mentioned. police chief, etc. im 75% there.”

Never mind that the late financier who didn’t kill himself never seemed to use punctuation or capitals in his personal communication. This message does appear to be damning, if kind of vague. “I have been thinking about that…” Maxwell said, but what, exactly, remains unclear.

The VICTIM in the note is Virginia Giuffre, who earlier this year said Trump had committed no improprieties for her. And The White House, naturally, has issued a blanket denial. “The fact remains that President Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club decades ago for being a creep to his female employees, including {Virginia} Giuffre,” said Trump spokesperson Karoline Leavitt in a statement to the press. “These stories are nothing more than bad-faith efforts to distract from President Trump’s historic accomplishments, and any American with common sense sees right through this hoax and clear distraction from the government opening back up again.”

Also in play now is the Master of Whisperers, the journalist Michael Wolff, who in 2015 warned Epstein, before a Presidential campaign debate that CNN was “planning to ask Trump tonight about his relationship with you — either on air or in scrum afterwards.” “If we were able to craft an answer for him, what do you think it should be?” Epstein responded.

“I think you should let him hang himself,” Wolff said. “If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable P.R. and political currency.”

Like the rest of you, I finds this very juicy. But he also doesn’t necessarily see these emails as some sort of smoking gun that reveals the President to be a malignant pedo.

They’re a trickle, not a torrent, and are really more revealing of the power dynamics behind Trump’s first election than they are of any shenanigans at Mar-a-Lago or on Epstein Island.

As Wolff told Epstein, “of course, it is possible that, when asked, he’ll say Jeffrey is a great guy and has gotten a raw deal and is a victim of political correctness, which is to be outlawed in a Trump regime.”

“Political correctness” is now called “woke,” but that’s very prescient. “Democrats continue to carelessly cherry-pick documents to generate click-bait that is not grounded in the facts,” said a Republican on the House Oversight Committee. In last year’s interview with deputy attorney general Todd Blanche, Maxwell said of Trump that she “she never witnessed the President in any inappropriate setting in any way. In the times that I was with him, he was a gentleman in all respects.” Angel Trump or Devil Trump? Cockburn honestly can’t guess anymore. Only the ghost of Jeffrey Epstein knows for sure.

Spectator World

Obamacare Didn’t Fail — It’s Working Exactly As Intended

I’m old enough to remember when the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) passed. It was 2010, and I had just joined Twitter the previous fall while I was on maternity leave following the birth of my second son. That means I recall exactly how Obamacare’s passage unfolded.

It was forced on an unwilling American people by the Democrats, who shoved it through Congress without a single Republican vote. Many people, myself included, warned it was a bait-and-switch scheme that wouldn’t lower healthcare costs but would usher in single-payer socialized medicine.

Now that we’re facing another negotiation on Obamacare subsidies, it’s time to remind you that Barack’s signature legislation didn’t fail. Nothing “went wrong” with it. It’s working exactly as designed because its purpose was to crash the private insurance industry and become a political wedge issue.

That’s why, for example, Democrats demanded a year-long extension on the COVID-era subsidies. For those of you without a calendar in front of you, that would have made the subsidies sunset on the eve of the midterm elections. That’s not a coincidence. Democrats absolutely planned to use the subsidies as an election issue. If these subsidies are necessary, and the only thing staving off a “healthcare crisis” — as the Democrats keep telling me — why would they have a sunset date at all?

For political gain. That’s why.

For now, Republicans seem to have denied them that leverage, and it should stay that way.

But I digress.

As I said, Obamacare is working precisely how Democrats wanted it to, and on two fronts. First, the political wedge issue, and second, as the vehicle by which they’ll run us over with socialized medicine.

Avik Roy said, “[Obamacare] overcharged healthy people that needed insurance to help fund the cost of insurance for sick people, and overcharged young people… The end result is, if only sicker and older people buy insurance, the price of insurance for everybody goes through the roof.”

That is accurate. But that was also intentional. Despite the fact that Nancy Pelosi said we had to pass the bill to find out what’s in it, the framers of the legislation knew exactly what they were doing.

Kamala Harris, who was a few million votes away from the Oval Office, said she would abolish private health insurance in favor of a single-payer system. She’s not alone. Other prominent Democrats, including Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Bill de Blasio, are on record as advocating for the elimination of private insurance.

If you want a taste of what government-run healthcare would be like, we’ve already got it thanks to Obamacare. Increased wait times, exploding costs (because nothing is more expensive than when it’s “free”), and bureaucratic control of healthcare decisions that should be between a patient and her doctor. I guess that last provision only applies when the woman wants to kill her unborn child. But it would be much more insidious than that in the era of woke.

Yesterday, I wrote about Do No Harm winning a suit to undo a Biden-era rule that rewarded doctors who implemented “anti-racist” plans for their practices. During my interview with Dr. Goldfarb, we touched briefly on woke changes to things like the kidney transplant list, where racial differences were removed despite the fact that Blacks and Whites have different kidney function. The long story short: these “anti-racist” changes definitely cost White people spots on the transplant list, and probably led to deaths.

Now imagine that policy across the entirety of healthcare. My aunt, who is also White, fell over the weekend and broke her hip. Thankfully, she had surgery on Monday and is on the road to recovery. But what happens in a world of socialized medicine where “anti-racist” policies rule the day? Would she have gotten surgery in a timely manner? Would she have gotten surgery at all? She’s older, after all, and retired.

Republicans need to reframe the debate on Obamacare. It’s not broken. It didn’t “go wrong.” It was designed to make private insurance unaffordable. It was meant to create the exact “healthcare crisis” we’re experiencing now, so that Democrats could swoop in and promise “free” healthcare via socialized medicine.

That’s the message we need to take to voters, and a Republican Congress needs to put forth a bill to repeal Obamacare in full and return free market principles to health insurance. The alternative is costly, both in cash and in lives.

Amy Curtis, Townhall

Planned Parenthood Makes Over $250 Million Killing Babies in Abortions

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit in Boston heard oral arguments today whether a provision of the July 4 “One Big, Beautiful Bill” that ended Medicaid reimbursements for one year for Planned Parenthood and other big abortion providers can remain in effect while legal challenges continue.

In September, on an unanimous 3-0 vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit reversed the earlier preliminary injunctions by Judge Indira Talwani and allowed the Trump administration to resume blocking Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood while the case proceeded

Planned Parenthood filed the original lawsuit on July 7, three days after the bill was signed by President Trump. The ever-accommodating Judge Talwani, an Obama appointee, issued a Temporary Restraining Order the same day, followed by a preliminary injunction on July 21. She ruled that Planned Parenthood had shown a “substantial likelihood of success.”

However, in its July 14 memorandum in opposition to the temporary restraining order, HHS wrote

Both houses of Congress passed a budget reconciliation bill—the One Big Beautiful Bill— and the President signed that bill into law. Among many other decisions about how to allocate limited federal funds, one provision of the bill restricts the types of entities that may receive federal Medicaid funds. In particular, that provision directs that certain tax-exempt organizations and their affiliates may not receive federal Medicaid funds for a one-year period if they continue to provide elective abortions. In other words, the bill stops federal subsidies for Big Abortion. All three democratically elected components of the Federal Government collaborated to enact that provision consistent with their electoral mandates from the American people as to how they want their hard-earned taxpayer dollars spent. But Plaintiffs—Planned Parenthood Federation of America (“PPFA”) and its members (together, “Planned Parenthood”)—now want this Court to reject that judgment and supplant duly enacted legislation with their own policy preferences. Indeed, they demand emergency injunctive relief forcing the Government to continue to support them with taxpayer funds.

That request is legally groundless and must be firmly rejected.

Later the memorandum made a crucial, fundamental distinction:

Importantly, the statute does not depend on whether any entity advocates for abortion. Planned Parenthood and its members may continue to engage in First Amendment activity; they can only be disqualified from Medicaid if they continue to provide certain abortions on or after October 1, 2025. If Planned Parenthood and its affiliates cease providing those abortions, they could receive Medicaid funds even as they continue to advocate for abortion. And restricting funding for abortion providers does not violate the First Amendment. [Emphasis in the original.]

“In a report released ahead of the hearing, Planned Parenthood said the legislation cost $45 million in September alone as clinics across the country paid for treatment for Medicaid patients out of pocket — a rate that the organization says is unsustainable,” Safiyah Riddle reported for the Associated Press.

Riddle included this standard Planned Parenthood line in her story. Under the subhead “A range of services hit,” she wrote

Planned Parenthood is the country’s largest abortion provider, but abortions only constituted 4% of all medical services in 2024, according to the organization’s annual report. Testing for sexually transmitted infections and contraception services make up about 80%. The remaining 15% of services are cancer screenings, primary care services and behavioral health services.

Dr. Randall K. O’Bannon, NRL’s director of Education & Research, told NRL News Today, “There’s a reason Planned Parenthood will give up federal funding rather than give up abortion. It’s simply too big a part of the organization’s identity and its bottom line.”

A standard “in-clinic” first-trimester surgical abortions go for $600 or more (chemical abortions cost more), meaning the revenue coming from 400,000+ abortions a year easily dwarfs the receipts coming in from 1.5 million packets of birth control or 170,000 PAP tests (cancer screens).

Money from abortion+ plus its identity as an “abortion provider” are mighty powerful incentives.

Dave Andrusko, Life News