Biden presidency

Trump did it

The Left has furiously managed the decline of our nation, domestically and globally, for the better part of 15 years. The consequences are coming to the fore. In order to distract from the carnage now so visible in the wake of three Obama terms in power, Trump and the Make America Great Again majority must be falsely and persistently accused.

By Steve Woodward

Everything is Donald Trump’s fault. Everything deemed unpleasant, unexpected, uncomfortable and unbearable. Everything.

It’s a demonstrable falsehood, of course. But it is perpetuated by a surging, media-fueled blame culture. It is the Left’s last best hope.

Covid-19. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. January 6. October 7. These are among the large-scale events for which President Trump is to blame. (He was not even in office in some cases).

But there are more. Americans are cancelling summer travel because of Trump’s tariffs, reports The Wall Street Journal (the intent of which are purposely distorted by coordinated media talking points). A high death toll after recent Kentucky tornados? That’s on Trump, squeals The Washington Post. Even pop culture is in decline, concludes The Atlantic magazine. It interviewed art critic Dean Kissick, who scolds that we’re living in “the long 2017”, which an Atlantic writer describes as “a period in which anxieties related to Donald Trump and Brexit (Brexit?) have smothered culture with moralism, navel gazing, and conformity.” (Why is it that “critics” always try to get away with making statements devoid of substance or meaning? Morals are evil?)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is Trump’s “modern day Gestapo,” says Minnesota Marxist and Gov. Tim Walz, thus Trump and Trump alone must be blamed if even one potentially lethal illegal alien is temporarily jailed with a hoard of really lethal guys after their deportation to El Salvador. The “Maryland man”, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, became collateral damage in America’s long overdue war on mass illegal immigration, a war fought on two fronts — at the U.S.-Mexico border and through active arrests and deportations. Collateral damage is the price of war.

In the Left’s war on American sovereignty under the Obama/Biden regime of 2021-24, we witnessed repeated collateral damage — raped and murdered innocent citizens such as Laken Riley, Rachel Morin and Kaitlyn Weaver. Weaver was killed in July 2024, the victim of a high-speed auto collision. The driver of the speeding car was an illegal immigrant minor, 15, who just last week was sentenced to probation (emphasis added) and community service by a Trump hating Colorado judge.

No one on the Left, not presidents, not governors, not judges, is to blame in the aftermath of these one-off tragedies. The blame culture is real enough, and the media corrupt and pervasive enough, that any assignment of blame directed at Trump/MAGA can be justified, even legitimized.

They’ll probably get around to pinning Joe Biden’s prostate cancer diagnosis on Trump’s mean “Sleepy Joe” comments.

As obviously absurd as that would be, look more closely at the “doomed summer travel narrative”.

A couple told the Journal they are cancelling a bucket-list trip to France owed to Trump’s tariff re-balancing strategy. (The Left calls it a trade war, which is accurate if the context is that war is what other countries have waged against the United States for decades).

“We’ve been talking about Paris as long as we’ve been together, which is 54 years,” said Don Pratt, 75.

The Journal reports, “The couple sketched out a two-week itinerary that included England and Scotland, where his ancestors lived centuries ago. ‘Then the tariffs sort of got everybody around the world mad at us’,” Pratt said. “He worried about a chilly greeting if he showed up hoping to meet long-lost relatives. So instead, they recently booked a trip to take their adult son and his family to Walt Disney World … ”

This is a truly sorry side effect of Trump Derangement Syndrome. These mentally warped seniors traded reunions with relatives, memories of fabulous landmarks, and world-class cheese and wine for woke Disney drag queens and long lines of poorly dressed Americans swilling 32-ounce sodas. Are they devoid of any hint of national pride that once was presumed to be wired into the DNA of American citizens? Apparently, yes. They’re fine with high tariffs imposed by the French on products inbound from the U.S. and never contemplate why, for example, you’ll rarely see a Chevrolet Suburban navigating Parisian thoroughfare, or an award-winning Napa Cabernet Sauvignon on a Lyon wine list. The trip to visit the relatives would have been worth it just to explain how fair trade actually works.

Meanwhile, it’s tornado and hurricane season, and while many Americans delight at tracking and “modeling” potentially deadly systems and where they might be headed, media fear mongers are salivating, anxious to fire up the climate change narrative machine. Naturally, Trump’s fingerprints will be everywhere in the aftermath of high winds and surging water. (In stark contrast, the Left’s media slaves never raised similar concerns about Biden or North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper when thousands of the state’s citizens were abandoned after Hurricane Helene last September, and the devastation continues to roll off the back of Josh Stein, North Carolina’s latest Democrat governor.)

Severe tornadoes hammered parts of Kentucky on May 16, 2025. The Washington Post breathlessly reported that “Jackson, Kentucky, is four meteorologists short of what agency officials have deemed ideal staffing” and blamed that on sweeping, (overdue) audits of federal agency staffing and payrolls. Kentucky’s Lexington Herald Leader ran with an ominous headline — “Did staffing cuts at weather service affect Kentucky’s tornado response?” — but its reporter couldn’t find anyone on the scene who answered in the affirmative.

“As planned in advance, neighboring offices provided staffing support to the office in Jackson,” a spokesperson said. Read that closely. Resources, in this case human resources, were coordinated as needed under extreme circumstances. Is that not what taxpayers should expect from federally funded agencies and their field offices?

During his recent unhinged rants while “performing” in the United Kingdom, cranky, old Bruce Springsteen took blaming Trump to new depths, in once case decrying “residents” being taken “off American streets” and sent to “foreign detention centers”. These of course are dangerous illegals being returned to their countries of origin. In other words, definitely not “born in the USA”.

Springsteen finally calmed down and attempted poignancy, quoting writer James Baldwin, who observed, “In this world, there isn’t as much humanity as one would like, but there’s enough.”

Is there enough? Where is the humanity in a nation overrun by illegal immigrants, mostly gang trained males, killing our citizens? Where is the humanity in gutting American manufacturing jobs in favor of cheap foreign labor? (Springsteen’s contemporary Billy Joel lyricized about “closing all the factories down [in Allentown]”, remember?) And where is the humanity in covering up Biden’s prostate cancer diagnosis until even compliant media no longer could sustain the lie that he was mentally competent as a sitting President?

Trump ascends

By Steve Woodward

There is a Santa Claus, after all. His name is Jack Smith. Rather than jolly, he is a petulant, tormented “special counsel” who was tasked with sending Donald Trump to prison for a long time. Smith, and his enabler, Attorney General Merrick Garland, had it all figured out. Almost. They missed one detail. They never imagined Trump’s resurgence as a presidential candidate in 2024. They never thought he would win. Again.

Framing the Thanksgiving season as the start of the most wonderful time of the year is, suddenly, more than just a recitation of an old lyric. Smith has made it so by dropping, suddenly, baseless criminal cases against Trump. The highest profile was a four-count case purporting that Trump and his allies sought to “overturn” the 2020 presidential election results. An even more flimsy case also was halted — the one alleging Trump improperly retained classified documents in his Mar-a-Lago residence (though he had every right to possess them).

Smith was unapologetic even as his pirate ship sunk into the murky waters of irrelevance. “This outcome is not based on the merits or strength of the case against the defendant,” Smith insisted in a statement after the November 25, 2024, announcement. He would have us believe that Trump was doomed if not for those pesky elections results earlier this month.

This, of course, ignores more significant defeats Smith absorbed at the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court throughout the arduous process. A July 1 SCOTUS ruling was the kill shot. “The court issued its landmark opinion in Trump v. U.S., which gutted the J6 case by concluding most of the conduct cited in the indictment represented official acts protected by presidential immunity,” writes independent reporter Julie Kelly.

“Even if Trump had lost the election,” Kelly continues, “the J6 indictment would not have survived another immunity test before the Supreme Court.”

If Smith is Santa, assign head elf status to New York Judge Juan Marchan, who recently delayed indefinitely the sentencing of Trump in connection with 34 so-called felony convictions Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg manufactured last summer. Like Smith, Marchan faced the reality that the persistent “lawfare” gig is up. It’s over, folks. Trump dodged a real bullet and now has been spared this unprecedented judicial firing squad.

Our American legal system is not as fungible as those who sought to exploit it had presumed. This year we can ignore seasonal advertising campaigns to ignite our Christmas “spirit”. Instead, in this historic season, we can embrace something much more inspiring than a TV ad showcasing a Mercedes-Benz topped by a giant red bow covered by fake snow.

Look no further than the pollsters. They have pivoted from swing state prognostication on Trump vs. Harris to polls seeking to gauge the “national mood”. Even some Democrats are feeling giddy, and admitting it.

A recent CBS News/YouGov poll (November 19-22, 2024) instructs us that more than half of Americans (55%) feel happy or satisfied about Trump’s win. Even more revealing is this: Among Democrats surveyed in the same poll, 56% said they are motivated to support Trump or, at least, are not motivated either way (to support or oppose his policies). What is left unsaid is the likely conclusion that these Americans can’t imagine Trump will not deliver measurable improvements easily surpassing the Biden-Harris dumpster fire.

YouGov conducted a separate poll (November 17-19), through which we have learned that 57 percent of Americans aged 18 to 29 hold a favorable view of Trump. That is staggering optimism coming from a bracket of young people who have been educated to regret their nation’s founding and condemn its inherent racism and inequality. In fact, the further we are removed from Election Day’s verdict, the more that palpable optimism is building among the youngsters. Trump’s favorability increased by 19 points compared to YouGov’s poll posing the same question between November 9 and 12.

I encountered a young man who is part of the 18-29 demographic after he arrived in Pinehurst for Thanksgiving week. He attends an elite East Coast university where woke anti-semites have protested to demand a “free Palestine”. But none of that was on his mind when our paths crossed.

Without prompting this came out: “I’m so happy that we have a new president,” he said.

So much for college kids being swept up by a Harris-Walz wave of joy. It’s beautiful to behold. College students rejected them. Black men abandoned them. Hispanic voters will be taken for granted by Democrats no longer. Consider that in 2020 about one-third of Hispanic Catholics voted for Trump. He saw their support surge to 53% in this election, according to CNN exit polling.

A concerted effort by Ralph Reed and his Faith and Freedom Coalition to inspire Christian voters to cast ballots for Trump — a new survey released earlier this year revealed that 51% of “people of faith” planned to sit out the election (decline to vote) — delivered results, too.

From ReligiousNews.com: Exit poll data from CNN and other news outlets found that 72% of white Protestants and 61% of white Catholics said they voted for Trump. Among white voters, 81% of those identified as born-again or evangelical supported Trump, up from 76% in 2020.

While cable TV’s arrogant chattering class panics, as its ratings and relevance plunge toward an abyss, cultural commentator Bill Maher suggests acknowledging that the American people brutally rejected the narrative that MSNBC and CNN have repeated, first to protect a mentally declining Joe Biden, and ultimately to help people decipher Harris-Walz “messaging”.

“(Trump) is not who I would choose to administer the colonic, but it’s not like the bureaucracy isn’t bloated,” Maher said. “It’s not like the debt isn’t $36 trillion. It’s not like there aren’t thousands of regulations that do stop people from living lives that they could live better and don’t do anything. There is woke in the military. Whatever they’re going after … I’m not going to pre-hate anything.”

The pre-hating of Trump’s cabinet appointees already is under way. Matt Gaetz for attorney general, as it turns out, was pre-hated by Republicans who remain deeply skeptical of the MAGA movement (at their peril) even more than the media knives that were out for Gaetz. Don’t be surprised if the next act in this saga is a Gaetz boomerang that destroys these Swamp creatures, including South Dakota Sen. John Thune — the new Republican majority leader — who was fine with Merrick Garland for AG in 2021 but would not stomach Gaetz. (Thune has an ally, North Carolina RINO Sen. Thom Tillis).

Eventually, Trump will have his cabinet of disrupters and change agents, and the Leviathan will be tamed. The ascension of MAGA will not be deterred as it was during the first Trump administration. But even more glorious to behold will be the comeuppance imposed on the Jack Smiths, the Braggs, the Merchans, and the frothing D.C. judges who have maniacally jailed American citizens who entered the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, to defend what our founders and American soldiers died for.

As legal scholar Mike Davis observes, the Conspiracy Against Rights clause of the federal code can (must) be used to charge these judges with felonies for violating the Constitutional rights of Americans.

“These judges are culpable,” Davis said during a November 25, 2024, appear on Steve Bannon’s War Room program.

If there is a thread of justice left in this world, these January 6 judges soon will occupy the same cells vacated after Trump pardons the patriots who sat in them and were vilified because they refused to back down in the face of a massive fraud plot in 2020. They arrived at the U.S. Capitol with a viable request: Delay certification and audit the small number of states in which massive shifts in vote totals occurred between the evening of November 3, 2020, and the following morning after which, in the case of Pennsylvania, poll workers were sent home in large numbers.

Meanwhile, the snowflakes at The Atlantic are melting down and turning on their own, placing blame for Jack Smith’s demise on AG Garland, owed to his habit of being “obsessive about proceduralism” (following the rules) because this “attention to detail meant the system failed to do the basic work of holding (Trump) accountable (for) … serious crimes.”

But what the fierce defenders of Trump Derangement Syndrome never will understand is that the 2024 election outcome never was about these sham lawsuits and court cases. They occupy a smoldering pile of discarded ploys and narratives also littered by masks, social distancing and needles that dispensed dangerous mRNA serums.

Playwright David Mamet seizes on why voters rejected all of it and embraced Trump’s MAGA revolution. He expresses it beautifully.

“The horror of the past four years—the appeasement of terror, the slavish support of our enemies, the abandonment of the state of Israel, the assaults on free speech—seemed to me the descent into chaos which has been the end of every world power,” Mamet wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed.

“Rome, Greece, Nineveh and Tyre, Babylon, Nazi Germany—all were eventually returned to dust. … The Old Testament is a record of decline of those civilizations which fall away from God; and promises that a return to his precepts will restore his grace. We know that one day America, as all things, will go one with Nineveh and Tyre. But not today.”

Not in our time. America’s comeback begins now. See ya, Kamala. Good luck, Jack Smith.

Rogan’s heroes

“It may be that this present system, with no modifications and no experiments, can survive. Perhaps the money-making machine has some kind of built-in perpetual motion, but I do not think so. To a very considerable extent, the media of mass communications in a given country reflects the political, economic and social climate in which it grows and flourishes. That is the reason our system differs from the British and the French, and also from the Russian and the Chinese. We are currently wealthy, fat, comfortable and complacent. We have currently a built-in allergy to unpleasant or disturbing information. And our mass media reflect this. But unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.” — Edward R. Murrow, October 15, 1958, speaking to the Radio and Television News Association’s annual convention

By Steve Woodward

Distilled to its essence, CBS correspondent Edward R. Murrow’s speech delivered to broadcasting colleagues 66 years ago warned that television, then in its infancy, already had begun to betray its audiences and imperil its long-term viability. There is no one even remotely similar to Murrow remaining in the 21st century corporate media. Murrow cared about truth, substance and an informed population, all now obsolete.

Murrow also said this during his remarks in 1958 in Chicago: “I have decided to express my concern about what I believe to be happening to radio and television. … I have no feud, either with my employers, any sponsors, or with the professional critics of radio and television. But I am seized with an abiding fear regarding what these two instruments are doing to our society, our culture and our heritage.”

The Democrat Party’s precipitous march to the ideological Left likely began long before Murrow’s speech, around the time Woodrow Wilson ascended to the U.S. presidency in 1912 espousing “progressivism”. It ebbed and flowed in the decades ahead, revived by Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal and Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society.

But the Democrats soon entered a period of near extinction in presidential politics, putting forth presidential aspirants named George McGovern, Jimmy Carter, Ted Kennedy, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis. Carter was the only one who actually made it to the Oval Office as president but his gain was the Democrat’s loss. His ineptitude assured Carter will be remembered among the most failed presidents.

Then, in 1992, along came William Jefferson Clinton, the youthful but obscure governor of Arkansas. It is notable that his ascension to the presidency coincided with the first cracks in network television’s absolute information dominance. Cable TV’s CNN cemented its legitimacy during riveting coverage of Operation Desert Storm in 1991. The internet was coming into its own with 10 web sites up and running (including the Raleigh News & Observer’s Nando.net, one of the first digital platforms adopted by a newspaper). There would be nearly 3,000 functional web sites by 1995. And a former disc jockey named Rush Limbaugh was conducting an experiment that would become a genre — conservative talk radio, of which he would be king for 30 years.

Deep beneath the surface, something else was happening that would influence and corrupt mainstream media in ways Murrow could not have foreseen. Public schools and institutions of higher education pulled away the veil. Educators devolved into indoctrinators committed to diminishing American exceptionalism, severing the connective tissue of Judeo-Christian values that defined its citizens, and challenging every societal boundary by seeking to normalize transgenderism, relativism (the end of delineating between right and wrong) and climate-change hysteria. Despite progress toward diminishing racial inequality made by the civil rights movement, the mantra among educators increasingly was moving toward dismissing the U.S. as irredeemably and systemically racist to its core.

This was the precursor of a cultural shift across mass media. Newsrooms and television studios gradually became infested by graduates of these institutions, today’s editors, producers and reporters who view journalism through an activist lens. As the Democrats moved further Left, the media went with them, no longer inspired by the objective nobility of their journalistic forefathers — Murrow, Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley, John Chancellor and Charles Kuralt, et al.

The election of Barack Hussein Obama in 2008 opened the floodgates of a newly emboldened state-run media, not beholden to scrutinizing the powerful but more prone than ever to fawning over Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America and enabling those in his orbit to increase their power.

The zenith of Obama’s iron boot control over a compliant and corrupt media came amid the 2012 election cycle during a debate between Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney, aka, the Candy Crowley debate. The media had spent weeks running interference for the Obama-Hillary Clinton debacle in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012, when four Americans died amid a terror attack on the U.S. embassy. During an October debate moderated by CNN’s Crowley, Romney seized on the Obama administration’s refusal to acknowledge the coordinated assault as an act of terror. Crowley jumped to Obama’s defense on live television. “(Obama) did call it an act of terror,” she said. (In reality, Obama and Clinton shamelessly blamed the attack on a viral internet video beyond their control).

That debate, artfully choreographed by CNN, enabled Obama to move the race from a dead heat to a decisive victory (332 electoral votes to Romney’s 206) despite his tepid approval rating (46%), high unemployment (8.3%) and growing contempt toward ObamaCare. Of course to have used these realities against Obama would have been dismissed as “racist”, which is what the Left often said about Limbaugh and his millions of loyal listeners.

It is sadly ironic that Limbaugh passed away just as alternative media was beginning to take root in the aftermath of Trump’s 2016 dismantling of Hillary Clinton’s coronation. Trump became the first president to recognize the utility of social media, going after his adversaries and corrupt media outlets with his so-called “mean tweets” using Twitter (before he was blackballed by the tech elites).

But this alternate media landscape was coming rapidly to the fore as critical thinkers (Conservatives) watched Trump Derangement Syndrome transform The Atlantic magazine, The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC and, to a lesser degree, Fox News, into naked appendages of the Left. The corner was turned during pandemic lockdowns and vaccine mandates, and the ascension of Joe Biden to the White House by precise leveraging of COVID hysteria.

The mainstream media overlords were dismissive of Steve Bannon’s War Room, and the Joe Rogans, Dinesh D’Souzas, Charlie Kirks, Sebastian Gorkas and Dan Bonginos expanding audience across the live streaming spectrum. By the time Trump launched his bid for re-election, millions of MAGA faithful were tuning into Newsmax, the Real America’s Voice network, Rumble and, more recently, the Tucker Carlson Network, where the likes of Elon Musk and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. sat down for lengthy, granular interviews.

Trump’s campaign recognized the influence of alternative outlets, most notably Rogan’s vast audience. A three-hour interview with Rogan attracted a seismic 45 million views on You Tube, and 25 millions across Spotify and other platforms (The Wall Street Journal, November 8, 2024). Trump also did 90 minutes of live-streamed chat with a video gamer phenom named Adin Ross (at the behest of Trump’s teen son, Barron). Across all of 2024, Trump was a guest on 20 podcasts, the Journal reports. (Kamala Harris dodged Rogan altogether).

The net effect of this dramatic shift raises a question future Republican presidential candidates must ask: Why would I consent to a network controlled, prime time television debate with a Democrat ever again? Answer: You wouldn’t. You shouldn’t. Consider this stunning data point. The Journal, citing the Associated Press VoteCast survey, notes that Trump got the support of 56% of male voters ages 18 to 29. Where do these youngsters go for news and analysis? TikTok and podcasts. Period.

The TV networks are bleeding viewers and that erosion was bad news for the Harris-Biden bid for reelection. CNN’s prime time lineup does not even reach one million households (it has fallen to 792,000), and its viewers’ median age is 69. MSNBC’s 1.3 million prime time household audience has a median age of 70. These folks have likely never have heard of Rogan, Kirk and their media peers.

The Journal’s Kimberley Strassel observes that the media’s fierce defense of the Left backfired this time because “a narrative full of fantasy enabled Democrats to live in a world disconnected from the mood and worries of the country”, which were laser focused on the economy, illegal immigration and the absurdity of men competing in women’s sports.

In the aftermath of Trump’s resounding comeback win on November 5, there is something else to celebrate (and relish). Think about it. The smug network bastards who despise 80 million-plus Americans who voted for Trump/MAGA — Jake Tapper, Rachel Maddow, Joy Reid, Anderson Cooper, Margaret Brennan and David Muir, along with many others — are hurtling toward complete irrelevance. It’s over.

Morrow foresaw this moment coming.

“This instrument (television) can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire,” he said in 1958. “But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it’s nothing but wires and lights in a box.”

Partisan or patriot?

By Steve Woodward

British prime minister Neville Chamberlain holds a most dubious distinction as a failed leader derailed by diplomatic appeasement.

In his quest to prevent World War II in 1938, Chamberlain attempted to cut a deal with a rising German political figure, Adolf Hitler. Chamberlain pursued appeasement despite writings and speeches by Hitler that failed to hide his lust for war and the creation of a German empire, and even after Hitler’s forced annexation of Austria in March 1938.

Chamberlain proclaimed that he achieved “peace for our time” when he returned from meetings with Hitler and other European heads of state after signing the Munich Agreement in September 1938. By early 1939, Hitler’s Germany began it rampage across the continent, trampling the pages of the agreement under foot.

Hitler proceeded to do precisely what so many had warned Chamberlain about. World War II soon became inevitable.

Comparing contemporary leaders or nations to Hitler and the Third Reich typically is ill-advised because he was no mere tyrant. He was a murderous monster. Ask Donald Trump, who is neither but is often portrayed as Hitler-in-waiting by the fear mongering Left.

But there is a parallel between Chamberlain and his underestimation of Hitler happening before our eyes in 2024. There certainly is nothing Hitleresque about Trump, the MAGA movement, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris or a corrupt corporate media. The parallel lies in the underestimation by Republicans and so-called independents of who these people are, and their insistence that we must “tone down the rhetoric” and “end the polarization”.

Columnist John Hood of the John Locke Foundation – a constitutional government research institute – laments the nation’s political partisan divide in a recent, oddly timed column amid the final countdown to election day 2024.

“I do indeed believe in bridging the partisan divide,” Hood writes. “For one thing, our discourse has become coarse, often even revolting.”

You don’t say, Mr. Hood? If we could only reason with Islamic jihadists. If we could somehow empathize with virulent antisemites parading in our streets and disrupting universities in defense of an Iran-backed terror plot that killed 1,200 innocents in Israel on October 7. 2023. If we could embrace the measured temperament of, say, Neville Chamberlain.

He prattles on: “Understand that others probably see things differently from you not because they are evil or stupid, but because they possess a different set of facts, experiences, assumptions and values.”

The partisan divide Hood laments is not, as he would have us believe, a drifting to extremes on both sides. Arguably, conservatives remain steadfast in defending our core principles in the spirit of William F. Buckley, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. Meanwhile, since the improbably ascension of Obama beginning 20 years ago, the Left has not merely drifted but sprinted further away from any pretense of “leaning” Left of center.

Hood seems to have missed numerous glaring examples, so let’s refresh his murky memory.

They were more measured, at first, in their dismissive contempt for conservative Republicans and their Christian tendencies. Barack Obama mocked us during a private event for “clinging to guns and religion”. Hillary Clinton scoffed, also behind closed doors, about a “basket of deplorables”. Then along came Trump in 2016. Gloves came off. The media concocted Russian collusion. Democrats in Congress pursued Trump’s impeachment on baseless grounds. And lusting for Trump’s demise, the Left seized upon a manageable virus unleashed by their Chinese ally, to impose formerly unimaginable tyranny, locking down cities and leveraging a well-orchestrated “health crisis” to hijack an election in 2020.

The emergence of a Biden regime has turned ordinary Americans into January 6 political prisoners. It has ushered in an era of lawfare in an effort, futile as it turns out, to diminish or even imprison Trump. It has normalized crime and homeland insecurity by deliberately allowing untold millions of illegal immigrants to surge across the U.S-Mexico border.

It has brought us to a place where Hillary Clinton, no longer behind closed doors, is calling for the imprisonment of Americans for exercising a right to free speech. And to a place where vice president Kamala Harris is installed without a single vote having been cast as her party’s presidential nominee, platforming a campaign that defends abortion, ignores the economic realities crushing the American people and brazenly mocks those who dare express their Christian faith.

During a rally in La Crosse, Wisconsin, Harris denounced two college students who in defiance of her threats to nationalize abortion shouted, “Christ is king”. She shot back: “You guys are at the wrong rally.”

Only a deranged atheist would be “triggered” by the mention of Jesus Christ. Is this a “polarizing” moment, Mr. Hood?

The strongest indicator that the era of naïve partisanship is over, and that it has been usurped by an understanding that we stand at a crossroads of distinct choice – good vs. evil, America First vs. America in managed decline – is proven by the very public denunciation of the latter by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard and, most recently, Democrat hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman.

Ackman, CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management, not only openly endorses a second Trump presidency. He outlines 33 policies embraced by the Obama-Biden-Harris that mirror what America’s most “aggressive adversaries would likely implement if they wanted to destroy America from within and had the ability to take control of our leadership.”

A review of Ackman’s concerns refutes the flimsy narrative advanced by Hood that we just need to mind our manners and we’ll all be sharing an ideological hot tub before we know it.

In fact, Mr. Hood, I would warn that it is dangerous, and intellectually dishonest, to lump evil and stupid together when exposing the agenda of the Left. The Left is inherently Godless and, thus, evil to its core, but stupid? Certainly not. Dismantling a nation and eroding its values, its culture, requires vast intellect, actually. The term “evil genius” applies. Utterly despicable, compassionless and arrogant, the George Soros-Klaus Schwab-Barack Obama deep state overlords do not want for intellect or resolve.

Thus, opposing them is not merely a partisan choice. It is duty.

The Harris file

By Steve Woodward

The ascension into public life and political power by Kamala Harris makes Barack Obama’s improbable rise seem noble and inspiring by comparison. That’s quite a statement considering Obama’s sordid path to the White House.

He was “the least experienced politician in at least one hundred years to obtain a major party nomination for President of the United States,” wrote David Freddoso in his 2008 book, “The Case Against Barack Obama”. “He (was) the product of a marriage between two of the least attractive parts of Democratic politics – the hard-core radicalism of the 1960s era and Chicago’s Machine politics.”

While Obama was artfully positioning himself to become a U.S. Senator from Illinois in 2003, Harris was navigating her way through the San Francisco political scene after earning a degree from the University of California’s Hastings School of Law and working for several district attorneys. Her mentor was also her periodic romantic interest, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown (photo nearby), a married man who had been opening doors for Harris for the better part of a decade.

An attorney who often crossed paths with Harris was Harmeet Dhillon, who arrived in the Bay Area as Harris was becoming more politically connected. In the ensuing years, Dhillon, an active member of the San Francisco Republican Party (who knew it existed?) marveled at Harris’ ability to move from one job to another while accomplishing very little and working minimal hours.

During a fascinating 110-minute interview by Tucker Carlson on his streaming Tucker Carlson Network (home of many such in-depth interviews, and, as of October 10, 2024, James O’Keefe’s intense documentary exposing the extreme crisis ongoing along the U.S.-Mexico border), Dhillon describes in detail what The Wall Street Journal aptly described as “the lightness of being Kamala Harris”. These are among the most revealing of Dhillon’s memories:

“(Harris) really has been kind of a shapeshifter throughout her entire career and existence,” Dhillon tells Carlson.

“One of the interesting things that I found when looking at her background is the first time she registered to vote was at age 29. … So, many years after coming to the United States (Harris lived in Montreal with her divorced mother, a professor, from age 12 through 18), and during the year that she dated … former mayor and (California state house) speaker Willie Brown is the year that she registered to vote (1993). … Well after she became an attorney, well after she became a prosecutor, she hadn’t registered to vote.”

Dhillon marvels at the flimsiness of Harris’ record as a prosecutor during those early years, first in Alameda County’s D.A. office, then San Francisco’s more visible D.A. office.

“In Alameda County she specialized in child sex crimes, an important job,” Dhillon said. “According to research that was done by some of her opposition when she ran for (San Francisco) district attorney in 2003, she tried something like eight cases that they can prove there, during her eight years as a prosecutor.”

Eight cases in eight years.

Two years in the San Francisco D.A.’s office failed to deliver the high-profile positions she wanted. Harris (photo nearby) abruptly quit and went to the city attorney’s office, a lateral move. During that time, Willie Brown appointed Harris to a pair of “patronage jobs” that required little work but helped Harris earn more than $400,000 during a five-year period on top of her prosecutor’s salary.

“She was marked out as privileged in her 20s and 30s, very early on,” said Dhillon, who recalls that Brown also provided Harris with a free car, a BMW no less.

Brown’s ultimate leveraging of his influence came with a dual objective. He was anxious to rid the city of a D.A. (Terrance Hallinan) who was launching too many investigations into corruption involving Brown’s cronies. And, he prioritized the D.A. job as Harris’s next move up the political ladder. Harris, despite an unremarkable career to date, was inaugurated as the city D.A. in 2004.

But the next move, the one that would facilitate the fast tracking of Harris to Vice President of the United States, remained on the horizon – Attorney General of California.

Dhillon well remembers that Harris sought to position herself as being against runaway spending on political campaigns when she launched her run for AG.

“If you agreed to cap your fund-raising and spending at $211,000 in 2003, you got a statement published in the voter guide that was mailed to all the almost half a million voters in San Francisco, registered voters, saying that you had voluntarily agreed to confine yourself to that spending cap. So it’s like (agreeing to) a level playing field and it’s a little bit of a gold star that you’re agreeing not to engage in corruption and wasteful spending and cronyism by raising money from all kinds of unknown sources. So she agreed to that. She filed a piece of paper. She signed it under penalty of perjury, saying I, Kamala Harris, agree to this voluntary spending limit.

“Most of the candidates running for office in California and San Francisco … agreed to that spending limit.”

In a three-way race for AG Harris trailed, a distant third, right out of the blocks and was gaining no ground. Willie Brown took note. This was to be the seminal moment when Harris demonstrated that she was a corrupt member of the San Francisco machine, even as a novice politician. It has defined Harris ever since and is the bedrock of her unlikely campaign for President of the United States in 2024.

“She realized,” Dhillon told Carlson, “she was going to have to really supercharge her spending. Willie Brown helped her with this. Willie Brown also helped raise money for independent expenditures to support her as well. One of her campaign themes was that she was going to be tough on drugs, tough on marijuana. In 2003, the recreational use of marijuana was not legal in California. She was very tough on pot.

“So apparently some pot activists who didn’t like this … were pouring over the campaign finance records. And it’s a pot activist who realized that Kamala Harris had raised over $300,000 and had spent over $300,000. So this person … let the other campaigns know; they filed an ethics complaint against her. And at the end of the election, she had spent over $600,000, so triple the amount that she was allowed.

“But thanks to hiring a good lawyer and making the excuse that, the form changed, I didn’t really understand the meaning of this, so please lift the cap, she got the San Francisco Ethics Commission (to look the other way). And by the way, many of those people on the Ethics Commission owed their positions to Willie Brown.

“It’s a crime, by the way. She could have been prosecuted for a misdemeanor had she been properly held accountable for this significant campaign finance violation and anybody else would have. But the Ethics Commission simply lifted the cap, which is not in the statute. So instead of disqualifying her, which would have been the normal punishment and prosecuting her, she simply got away with it. So in her first race for elected office, she ignored the campaign finance limits. She used corrupt patronage from her former lover to raise the money.”

Against this backdrop, Harris would run for U.S. Senate and win on her first try in 2016. She was selected by a two-term vice president, Joe Biden, to be his “person of color” running mate for VP when he ran and was installed in 2021.

And here we are. To fully contemplate what an unqualified, unethical and unbearable individual Harris is as a U.S. vice president and would-be president, contrast her story and record with that of our nation’s first vice president, John Adams.

He was a farmer who would become a scholar, a political philosopher and a consequential foreign diplomat at a time in U.S. history when the nation’s viability depended on loans from bankers in Amsterdam. Adams secured them. Before that, he authored the Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, the oldest written constitution (emphasis added) in the world still in effect.

In David Rubenstein’s magnificent collection of interviews with master historians of our time, “The American Story”, he engages legendary historian David McCullough in a conversation about Adams, about whom McCullough published the quintessential biography in 2001 (“John Adams”, Simon & Schuster).

McCullough points to a clause in the Massachusetts Constitution, which Adams wrote in 1780. He “wrote the whole (constitution),” McCullough says. “It’s a clause that was never in any constitution up till then and is still not in any other constitution except New Hampshire’s.”

Imagine a San Francisco machine politician or one of its mutations, contemplating, let alone writing:

“Wisdom and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, being necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as these depend on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in the various parts of the country, and among (all), it shall be the duty of the legislatures and magistrates, in all future periods of this Commonwealth, to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries of them in public schools and grammar schools in the towns; to encourage private societies and public institutions … to inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and frugality, honesty and punctuality in their dealings; sincerity, good humor, and all social affections, and generous sentiments among the people.”

Today, Democrats like Harris reflexively tune out after the opening words, wisdom and knowledge. How very quaint. How very irrelevant.