The Real Victims of Biden’s Border Crisis

 

Person 1: This Antifa punk, who was caught on video yelling at an [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] officer, said, “I’ll kill your whole effing family, your children, your wife. All dead. I have your face.”

This is why ICE agents wear masks, because when they don’t, they’re exposed.

This guy is Nicholas Matthew Scelfo. He’s 27. He’s from Brooklyn, and he’s been arrested by the FBI for threatening to kill a federal agent. Scelfo was a participant in the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests and, more recently, in “No Kings” protests.

He is an oddball, I think, Victor, but a violent one. Your thoughts on what our ICE officers endure?

Victor DavisPerson 2: Well, that’s what Voltaire said of Admiral [John] Byng. The British have a strange habit. Every once in a while, they hang an admiral, pour encourager les autres, so they can encourage the others.

They need to make an example of people who do that.

It’s very ironic because I’m sitting here in California, where [Gov.] Gavin Newsom will sign into law a new statute that makes it illegal for people like [Nick] Shirley to photograph, you know, just because that’s supposedly intimidating to immigrants or something.

Fowler: “Learing” center employees.

Hanson: Yeah, “Learing.”

And here, for months now, these ICE demonstrators have gotten into their faces. They’ve threatened them, and nothing. No repercussions. None.

Basically, we are in a situation in America where a federal officer is trying to rectify the lax enforcement of the past and return people to their home country who came here illegally, the majority of whom—60% to 70% of whom they’re after—are still criminals.

We have an active resistance that’s threatening them all the time, sometimes with violence.

And the reaction of blue-state America is, “We’re going to make it illegal to do something they used to celebrate on ‘60 Minutes.’”

Remember the ambush interview where all of a sudden Dan Rather would pop out of a doorway when he’d see a corporate CEO walk by, then stick a camera in his face and a microphone and say, “Did you or did you not know about that carcinogen in your assembly?”

That’s what they did all the time, and the Left thought this was the greatest thing in the world.

But the Left is adolescent, so anything they feel adds to their power and influence—any means necessary—is OK. Then, when it’s used against them, they get paranoid.

They’re all mad at E. JJacean Carroll now because everybody knew she’d lied under oath when she said Reid Hoffman didn’t fund her lawsuit. That was a complete lie. He funded almost all of it.

Now they’ve decided to do something nobody does: enforce the perjury law.

And they say, “Oh, this is lawfare. This is vindictive.”

Her whole case was a bill of attainder that allowed her to have a suspension of the sexual harassment statute for one year, written specifically for her, so she could get [President] Donald Trump.

So, it’s really demoralizing to see what these young punks do.

I said to Sami the other day that 45% of them, Jack, are Mexican American middle-class people.

And nobody in the Mexican American community is doxing them or exposing them.

We’re talking about—

Fowler: The ICE officers.

Hanson: The ICE officers. Yeah.

They are celebrated because when 12 million illegal aliens come across the southern border, they do not go to Martha’s Vineyard. They do not go to Atherton. They do not go to Palm Beach.

We know they don’t go to Martha’s Vineyard. We know they don’t go to Nantucket.

They go to Hispanic communities like mine.

The result is that when you go to the emergency room, you can’t get served. Or when you take your mom for dialysis, she can’t get served.

Or you go to the store, and somebody is not speaking Spanish, they’re speaking an Indigenous dialect, and no one knows what to do.

Or you have truck drivers who can’t read English and are killing people with fake licenses. There was no requirement they had to meet to get them.

So, that’s the problem.

This is a class issue.

These are wealthy, upscale young punks and middle-aged retirees, mostly from the white and Asian elite of this country. They go out as a sort of sporting event, then disparage, slur, smear, and try to attack largely middle-class Mexican American officers.

No one talks about that, but that’s the real subtext of the entire thing.

Fowler: This is interesting on the elitist side.

I’m looking right now at a post on X from someone called “I Meme Therefore I Am,” who writes, “One of the left extremists who was arrested for kicking and biting ICE agents in New Jersey was previously charged with sexual abuse of children related to the dissemination and possession of child pornography.”

This character’s name is Brendan Geyer, and he graduated from Madison High School in New Jersey.

I’m going to tell you something, Victor. If you wanted to buy a house in Madison, New Jersey, you’d better have a couple million dollars.

These are hugely elite upbringings, and this was a very violent and ideological young man.

Hanson: That’s what no one talks about in this country.

There is something deeply troubling and disturbing about this postmodern culture that’s grown up in the bicoastal elite communities, where pampered white kids go to schools like Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and the rest.

They get indoctrinated for four years, and they don’t know anything.

They don’t learn classical languages. They don’t know modern languages. They don’t know philosophy. They don’t know science or math.

They take therapeutic sociology and psychology, then become fodder for all these causes.

They’re so sanctimonious and self-righteous because they’re wealthy and entitled. Nobody in their entire lives has dared to bother them.

They have security patrols in their neighborhoods. They’re like little sheltered hothouse plants, and we’re supposed to take them seriously.

That is really the basis of the Democratic Party now. It is a DEI, socialist, Islamist, elitist coalition.

I think we need to talk more in those terms. These are class snobs.

They keep talking about oppression.

[New York City Mayor Zohran] Mamdani is a good example. He talks about whiter neighborhoods and all these oppressors.

He came from the 1% of Uganda. One percent in Uganda are of Indian ethnic background.

According to his own definition and the people around him, he is a settler colonialist.

I don’t believe that’s true, but they would say it’s true.

He grew up in affluence, came over here, and his parents gained even greater affluence.

He’s never really held a serious job outside of government, a board position, or serving as an assemblyman for a term.

He’s got all these pie-in-the-sky social ideas, and he’s got these racialist ideas.

He does not like Jews. That’s very clear.

He does not like white people, or he wouldn’t say, “I’m going to go after the nicer, whiter neighborhoods.”

When you talk like that, it’s a stark revelation of your soul.

That’s a very disturbing demographic—these very affluent left-wing people who are so self-righteous.

And you know what’s weird about it?

They transfer their wealth and privilege into their ideology. So they think you have to listen to them.

Black Americans don’t know what’s good for them unless they listen to Barack Obama, who can instruct them about why they can’t vote for anybody but Kamala Harris and why these people are all misled.

That arrogance comes from the idea that they’ve always had affluence, they’ve always been privileged, and they’ve always expected people to listen to them.

Why Britain’s ‘DEI Police’ Watched a 19-Year-Old Boy Die in Front of Their Eyes

 

To remind everybody what happened, we had a 19-year-old who had a confrontation with a 23-year-old immigrant, [a] Sikh from India. We don’t really know the particulars except the Sikh person was carrying a “ceremonial sword,” which is apparently allowed under DEI auspices because he has a religious exemption, but it was a pretty big blade.

He stabbed this 19-year-old white male repeatedly. Then his brother called the police and said the perpetrator was a victim of racism. The police came to the scene. The perpetrator said he had a little mark, which I couldn’t even see, and that this racist on the ground had attacked him and he had only defended himself.

That was all they needed.

So, then, the DEI police, and that’s what I’m going to use because that’s the thematic narrative, went to the anti-DEI person who was dying with a deep wound to the chest. His lungs were filling up with blood. I can relate to that because I had the same experience with three pulmonary arteries that were cut or broke apart, and I had two to three liters immediately in my lung cavity.

That’s not a good feeling when you can’t breathe and you’ll die with that blood in your cavity. They have to suck it all out.

So, he was there alive, and the police saw that. He was lying down, and they pulled on him to prop him up. He said, “I’m dying. I can’t breathe.” They completely ignored him, kept the cuffs on, and he literally bled to death in front of them.

They were just clueless and more worried about the perpetrator. Then they went home and hid the murder weapon. His mother did.

They found out the particulars of the assault and came back. The brother, I don’t think, has been arrested, even though he was the one who called in with the fake narrative that it was a matter of white racism, which really killed the kid.

That was what prepped the police.

In their defense, they knew that if they had arrested the Sikh perpetrator, they probably would have lost their jobs.

Then the family hid it, and the Sikh leader in the community said, “Oh, this is terrible. People are blaming us. We’re victims of hate now.”

My answer to him is: Don’t identify an individual as a collective unless you want to be a collective.

There was a member of your Sikh community who killed a person and murdered him. He is a murderer. He was convicted. Then there was another member of that Sikh community, a member of that family, who lied to a police officer.

That’s a felony. Then they hid the weapon. They were accessories after the fact. That’s a felony.

All you have to do as a self-proclaimed Sikh leader is say the following: “This does not represent the Sikh community. We are a group of individuals, and any time we find one of the members of our community has acted antithetical to our values, we condemn it most heartedly.”

That’s all he had to say.

Instead, he turned around and said, “Well, the poor Sikh community is now getting … ” If you’re going to be a collective, then people are going to say, “Well, this is what you do.” If you want to be individuals, then act like individuals.

The same thing is true here in the United States. No one has been more supportive of the Sikh community than I have, both on this broadcast and in person.

Sometimes I kid my Sikh friends at one of the largest temples that’s 2 miles from my house. I’ve talked about them many times.

Yes, they’re all good friends. They’re wonderful people. They’re wonderful citizens. I don’t even think I should use the term “wonderful people.” They’re wonderful individuals that I know.

One of the most admirable is Simon Siyodi. He’s a good friend of mine. I like him enormously.

But my point is this. I teased him. I said, “If you’re going to have this huge Sikh temple with these flags of the Sikh nation, why don’t you at least put an American flag on your temple?” Sometimes I’ve seen it, sometimes I haven’t.

When these accidents were overwhelmingly perpetrated by illegal aliens, and here in California, overwhelmingly the Sikh drivers did not know English, did not take the regular test, and were given exemptions.

There was an attempt by federal authorities to say those licenses, which were fraudulently issued and led to some deaths of innocent people, would not be valid in other states.

The Sikh community then said, “We want a letter in support.”

That was the same idea. Why would you do that? Why wouldn’t you say, “These members of the Sikh community who entered the United States illegally, resided illegally, got driver’s licenses under fraudulent circumstances, acted recklessly, and killed people through their recklessness, we condemn these people. They’re not representative of our community.”

They didn’t do that.

I think that’s another sign that it’s going to hurt the community and hurt the community terribly.

Yes, I’m on a working farm, and there’s a big machine that is very important to finish.

The other thing, very quickly, Jack, is that this is the anti-George Floyd scenario.

Here we have parallel tracks. Here is a 19-year-old without a record who was minding his own business.

Here is George Floyd, a career felon who broke into a home, put a knife at a pregnant woman’s belly, and was convicted. In the process of encountering the police, he was:

A) Committing a felony by passing counterfeit currency.

B) Committing a felony by resisting arrest.

C) Committing a misdemeanor by being under the influence of fentanyl.

The police intervened in both cases.

In the case of George Floyd, they used an approved police maneuver to subdue him. Due to his ongoing COVID-19 condition, his fentanyl intoxication, a jury found Officer [Derek] Chauvin’s use of his knee—he passed out and said he couldn’t breathe.

At that point, they called an ambulance. The ambulance came, took him to the hospital, and he died.

Officer Chauvin was given a murder charge, convicted, and has since been attacked in prison, as I understand it.

The country’s reaction to that was four months of looting, arson, violence, 35 people killed, 1,500 officers injured, $2 billion in damage, courthouses burned, precincts burned, churches burned, and 14,000 people arrested.

That day almost ruined the universities because afterward they dropped the SAT and standards for admissions.

Now, of course, you see left-wing faculty saying, “Please bring back the SAT. The students are too poor to do the work. We don’t know what we’re going to do.”

Stanford said the same thing.

“We can’t water down the curriculum anymore because the graduates cannot get the type of jobs the Stanford brand would ensure them because employers caught on to us.”

It changed everything. It changed the military with DEI. It changed popular culture with critical race theory. It started the defund-the-police movement.

All from that incident.

In Britain, there will be no mass arson, riots, nothing.

The murderer was convicted.

I hope the members of the family who either hid the weapon or gave fraudulent information to the police will be charged and held accountable.

I hope the Sikh community will say, “These people do not represent our values and are not really members in good standing of our community. We want to integrate and assimilate into British culture.”

Explaining Britain’s ‘Sickly Reversed’ George Floyd Moment

 

There was a murder in Britain in the town of Hampshire that’s got worldwide news because it’s kind of iconic of the whole problem of immigration and DEI in the Western world.

The facts are not in dispute. A young man who was a student, Henry Nowak, was walking and encountered another, I think, young person.

I think he was twenty-three. Vickrum Digwa, who was a Sikh immigrant, either first or second generation, it wasn’t specified. And apparently, they exchanged words, and they had some confrontation. We’ll wait to see what surveillance cameras show. But Mr. Digwa pulled out his ceremonial Sikh sword and used it as a weapon and stabbed Mr. Nowak repeatedly, apparently fatally, in the chest.

And when police arrived, Mr. Nowak was on the ground bleeding out, clearly bleeding out and muttering, “I’m dying.”

What was the reaction of the police? Did they render immediate first aid and restrain Mr. Digwa? No. No. What they did was they—Mr. Digwa then made up a lie, and we’ll get to that later, that he had been a victim of racism, that Mr. Nowak had exchanged words that were racial in nature to him that prompted the stabbing.

So, what did the police do? They put handcuffs on the dying young Mr. Nowak. And of course, he died with the handcuffs without any medical attention at all.

Then, Mr. Digwa apparently went back to his home, and his mother, and I guess members of his family or somebody, he and his mother then hid the murder weapon in the house.

And at some point, the police finally caught on after Mr. Nowak died, or they had surveillance, or they had witnesses, that there had been no racial taunts, that that was a complete lie.

And they had watched and, in some ways, abetted the death of Mr. Nowak, who was a white male and was on the wrong side of the oppressor-oppressed binary, apparently.

What are we gonna make of this British insanity?

We’ve had our version here, too. You know, in a very strange way, it is sort of a George Floyd in a really sick reversal.

Mr. Nowak, unlike George Floyd, was not a career criminal. He was not being handcuffed because he was passing counterfeit currency and high on fentanyl and resisting arrest as Mr. Floyd was.

He was dying. He was bleeding out. It’s a little easier to see someone as in extremis when they say, “I’m dying,” and there’s a pool of blood around them than Mr. Floyd when he said, “I can’t breathe.” That’s not to excuse Mr. [Derek] Chauvin necessarily.

But it’s far more egregious for police to handcuff a man bleeding on the ground than to use a standard approved measure to restrain a suspect that was resisting arrest that went south when he stopped breathing.

More importantly, what was the reaction of the public in these two different cases? In the case of George Floyd, you had a career criminal committing a felony, passing counterfeit currency, actively resisting arrest and under the influence of drugs, who tragically died when Officer Chauvin put a knee on his neck, which arguably had been a protocol that had been approved in a number of police departments in the United States.

What was the reaction? The United States blew up for four months. Four months, 2 billion dollars’ worth of damage, 35 people killed, 1,500 officers injured, arson, federal courthouses torched, police precinct torched, iconic church torched, luminaries like Kamala Harris bragging that this will not stop.

These demonstrations will go on. They should go on, blah, blah, blah, blah. What was the reaction in Britain to Mr. Nowak? Silence.

What can we learn from all this? We’ve talked about the problems with DEI. DEI not only destroys meritocracy and promotes people who did not earn that admission or that hiring based on widely accepted criteria that everybody accepts.

We’re an equal opportunity Western civilization. We are not a mandated equality of result, at least we weren’t until recently.

But there’s another wrinkle to DEI. Once a person is informally or formally, identified as a victim or the oppressed, that serves as a get out of jail card. That is the end of deterrence.

They feel if they got into the university with a SAT score that’s two hundred points lower than someone else, then when they take a class and they don’t do well, the same type of exemptions will apply on and on and on.

And obviously, Mr. Digwa felt that in Britain today, the fact that he was an immigrant of color gave him an exemption to lie, to take a knife out.

Of course, if you have a visible knife in Great Britain It’s a felony. It’s against the law, but an exemption is given because of his, I don’t know, immigration status or for religious reasons.

But he felt that he could use that as a weapon with impunity. He could stab somebody, then he could hit the button word racism, and that would direct the police away from him, the perpetrator, to the dying victim, to the extent they’d even put cuffs, not one bandage, no mouth-to-mouth recitation, nothing.

All they did was handcuff and make his plight worse, and he bled out.

DEI is a very deadly, dangerous phenomenon. Once you identify a group of people not by active oppression but by the color of their skin, and you say no matter what their class is, and I would say the Sikh community in Europe, but especially in the United States, is, as a member of the Indian diaspora, the most affluent immigrant group in the United States right now.

Mr. [Zohran] Mamdani found that out when he said he was going to go after whiter neighborhoods and people pointed out that he is more exclusive if he’s going to talk in collective terms and so-called white people.

It’s also kind of tragic that the Sikh community has been one of the most hardworking, law-abiding communities of immigrants in America and in Europe.

And they’ve had a tendency to look at themselves as individuals, not as collectives. But it would be a shame if the Sikh community did not condemn members of their own community if they’re going to talk in collective terms.

They’re under no obligation to single out Mr. Digwa in Britain. But if they talk about the Sikh community, then they are, and they had.

One of the Sikh leaders in Great Britain said that now the Sikhs were subject to hate crimes. And so, he was trying to take the onus away from the murderer to now his community is victimized.

Wouldn’t it have been better for the Sikh leader to come out and say, “Mr. Digwa is not representative of our community.

“We don’t take religious objects and use them as weapons to kill somebody. And when we kill somebody, we don’t lie about it to the police and are responsible that for his plight and falsely make up charges of racism. Much less do we aid and abet a murderer by hiding the murder weapon. We don’t do that.”

Again, they’re under no compunction to say that. But once you collectively say the Sikh community is suffering from people’s threats, then you live and die with collectivism.

And if it’s going to be that you’re collectively victims, then you might want to say that you want to separate yourself as a collective from a murder and people who abetted that murder.

The same thing is happening in the United States. Again, the Sikh community, and I have neighbors and some of my closest friends, they’re one of the most, industrious and hardworking immigrant communities there is.

Recently, though, we had an epidemic of Sikh illegal alien truck drivers. Many of them were caught without valid driver’s license or with driver’s license that were really not legitimate because they did not know the English language, and there was a lot of high-profile, horrendous, catastrophic accidents where they were driving semis and killed innocent drivers.

Sikh community is no obligation to defend them or to say … but once they think they’re going to talk collectively, and they did. They wanted petitions. They said, “This is unfair.”

Once you do that, then you lose that, that moral high ground. It would have been much wiser for people in the Sikh community to say, “We are the most law-abiding immigrant community.

“We do not talk about ourselves in collective terms. We are individuals. These individuals broke U.S. law. They committed a crime, criminal act, by coming into this country illegally, and they were not qualified to drive, semi-trucks in the manner that they did or to drive them at all, and we condemn that.

“They’re not representative of the values of the Sikh community.”

That message did not get out like that. And so it would be tragic if other ethnic groups have looked at the progression of DEI and the exemptions and deterrence that allows to jump on that DEI wagon.

Why would it be tragic? Because public opinion is moving in the opposite direction.

People are tired of victim, victim, victim, victimizer, victimizer, victimizer. They want to go back to individual people and not collectives.

movies seen (letterboxd Diary 2026 edition)

 

What Did Democrats Say in Their 192-Page Autopsy?

 

The Democrats have an autopsy report that was just released that supposedly would explain why they lost the 2024 election. They were shocked. Remember the NPR poll, for example, on the eve of the election, said that Kamala Harris was beyond the margin of error. 

In other words, she was ahead by more than three points just before the balloting began. Remember the Iowa poll that said that Kamala Harris was going to win by three points, and she lost by eight or nine, I think. So, the point is, they were shocked, and they wanted to know what happened. And they should want to know what happened because they had more money. 

She raised a billion dollars. If you look at the aggregate Biden-Harris total campaign chest, they outraised Donald Trump by a billion dollars. Donald Trump was also, for much of 2022, 2023, and 2024, sidelined off the campaign trail dealing with five criminal and civil lawfare suits. So, they thought they should have won. 

And that’s in addition to the media. You remember the debate with JD Vance and Tim Walz and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris debates with Donald Trump. The moderators were more or less on the side of the Democrats. 

 So, they had all these advantages, support, and they lost. So they wanted to know why. Well, you and I know why they did. 

Because they had an agenda, and what was that agenda? The trans issue, the open borders issue, the 10 to 12 million illegal aliens issue, the 500,000 criminals who came across issue, the highest urban crime rates in a generation issue, the war on fossil fuels issue, the 9.2% inflation in 2022 under Biden and, in the aggregate, on key staples, maybe a 20% or 30% rise in prices, the catastrophe in Afghanistan, the sense of appeasement that allowed [Vladimir] Putin to think he could go into Ukraine. 

I could go on. Two theater wars, one in Ukraine, one in the Middle East, etc., etc., etc.  

They didn’t mention any of that. They didn’t mention any of that because that is the agenda, the platform, the policies of the new Democratic Party. They feel that the Green New Deal is great and we should war on fossil fuels, cut back on gas and oil production. 

They believe that there are three sexes and that biological men have a perfect right to dress in girls’ dressing rooms or compete in women’s sports.  

They believe the border should be open. They believe that 10 or 12 million illegal aliens wasn’t enough. They believe that it was good to get out of Afghanistan the way we did. 

They didn’t criticize that. They believe in DEI and racial preferences. So, they weren’t going to say that that agenda, none of it , which is supported by the American people, was the undoing.  

They also didn’t say that the party that talks about democracy and that Trump is a dictator didn’t talk about the manner in which Joe Biden, who won 14 million votes in the primaries, was forced out by a bunch of backroom insider politicos. 

One day he was there, one day he was forced off the ticket, and almost within 24 hours, Kamala Harris was coronated as the nominee. Everybody came in lockstep, endorsed her. The vote at the convention a few weeks later was pro forma. And guess what? She had run in 2020 against Biden and had not gotten one delegate. 

So that was an entire coup, so to speak, that was contrary to the perception of the Democrats that they were the party of democracy. They weren’t going to talk about it being far left.  

So, what did they say in this 192-page, poorly written report? It was written by Mr. [Paul] Rivera, who’s a politico analyst, an activist, an analyst, a friend of Ken Martin’s who did it. 

The report has misspelled words. It’s kind of incoherent. There are no footnotes. He didn’t want to release it, but he was forced to because he had earlier made a promise that he would. Those were the admissions. Well, what was the commission? Well, it was that you didn’t attack Donald Trump hard enough. They attacked him all the time. 

They called him a fascist. They called him a liar. They called him a dictator. But they had to say that.  

And then, second of all, they said that they didn’t properly prepare Kamala Harris. They did prepare Kamala Harris. They kept her out of reach from media and the public for 30 or 40 days. They did all they could to coach her. 

They had private planes for her staff. They had wardrobe consultants. They had speech consultants. They had Hollywood producers advise [her]—they had everybody. But they couldn’t do it, not because they didn’t try, because Kamala Harris was one of the most inept candidates that we have seen in modern political history. 

Any time that she got on the stage and she started talking about metaphysics, time, being, thought, her eyes would sort of go into a corkscrew and “Twilight Zone” music would come on, and she was just, you know, coconut palms and being and what could be and all.  

And it was just embarrassing. It was so embarrassing that people thought she was intoxicated because her sentences, her paragraphs, her grammar, her syntax made no sense. 

So, it wasn’t that they didn’t prepare her; it’s that they handed a nomination to someone who was selected after the aftermath of George Floyd on the basis of her gender and race, and she had nothing, nothing in her past that would show that she was qualified.  

She did have one thing. She was the most left-wing senator based on her voting record, to the left of Bernie Sanders, in the entire U.S. Senate. 

So what would an accurate autopsy say? The accurate autopsy would say our message is too far left and nobody wants it, so we have to disguise it. 

And then it could say, look what Joe Biden did. He got elected, and he turned out to be the most far-left president since FDR. 

Now, how did we do that? We did that—forget about the balloting and elections and changing the voting laws and all the things that Molly Ball bragged about in her Time essays of cabals and conspiracies. 

They did it because Joe Biden served as a waxen effigy. Old Joe Biden from Scranton, the good guy, the union guy, the lunch-bucket guy. It was all a myth. And then the Obama team came in and used him as sort of a puppet, pulled the strings, and then rushed through this agenda. And it took four years for people to catch on to what was happening. 

This guy was non compos mentis, and they couldn’t believe it, that he was president, but it served a purpose. And a lot of candidates saw that. [Abigail] Spanberger in Virginia saw that. And it looks like some of the Democrats running for the mayorship and the governorship in California see that. 

In other words, they feign like they’re moderates. They suggest they are moderates during the campaign, and then when they’re elected, they have the socialist redistributionist agenda.  

So, in conclusion, if the autopsy wanted to be accurate, it would have done this. We lost the 2024 campaign because we had a radical agenda that reflects the Jacobin neo-socialism of the new party. 

For us to get elected on a national basis, we have to hide that agenda. We have to hide that agenda, lie to the people, act like we’re moderates, say we’re for fracking, close the border, say we are not objecting to deportation, tough on crime, don’t defund the police—all of that Kamala Harris was not able to do. 

She may have tried here and there, but she did not modify or hide or mask or disguise that agenda with a veneer of moderation. 

Second of all, she should have never been nominated. She was completely unqualified to be a presidential candidate. She had run in 2020. She was the weakest of eight or 10 candidates. 

She dropped out before the Iowa and New Hampshire caucuses, and she didn’t get a single delegate. That should have told them something.  

And number three, Joe Biden had a terrible record. Terrible record. And the Democrats did everything they could to demonize Donald Trump, to make the campaign about Donald Trump, to keep Kamala Harris out of reach, to hide her so people wouldn’t find out how crazy and inept she was. 

That was not enough.  

And so, all they had to do was say we can’t change our message; it’s toxic; let’s hide it. We can’t get good candidates, and we anoint them, and that was another problem. So we need a better candidate that can better mask and disguise this radical socialist agenda that we have until he or she is elected president. 

That would have been honest.