Saturday, September 05, 2026

Belligerent Passenger Duct-Taped to Seat on American Airlines Flight

 An unruly passenger had to be restrained with duct tape and zip ties by fellow passengers following an unhinged outburst aboard an American Airlines flight from Dallas to Newark on Thursday night.

    An American Airlines passenger was restrained with duct tape and zip ties after an alleged outburst about two hours into a flight from Dallas-Fort Worth to Newark.

    Witnesses said the chaos erupted when a man began yelling at a male passenger next to him.

    The man was reportedly… pic.twitter.com/kb7i2ufzlN
    — Fox News (@FoxNews) September 5, 2026

    A passenger was duct-taped to his seat after allegedly making racist and anti-gay remarks on an American Airlines flight.

    According to TMZ, the man allegedly used the N-word toward a Black flight attendant and became violent, hitting another passenger and pushing a woman who… pic.twitter.com/GuqwkeEdoh
    — Complex (@Complex) September 4, 2026

    American Airlines passenger duct tape to his seat following unruly behavior onboard flight AA618 Thursday night.

    Arthur Lundeen, 67, of Arizona, was restrained to his seat with duct tape and his hands were restrained with zip ties, according to the Maryland Transportation… pic.twitter.com/s79nORwCvh
    — Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) September 5, 2026

    American Airlines passenger Arthur Lundeen, 67, of Arizona, was duct taped to his seat on flight AA618 after unruly behavior on a Thursday night flight.

    Zip ties were also used, he was handed over to police upon landing. pic.twitter.com/HsOVW8DsJo
    — AlphaFox (@alphafox) September 5, 2026

Recommended
This Texas City Just Cancelled Permits for a Leftist Protest and the Liberal Reactions Are Hilarious Joe Chalfant
Here Are More Details on What Happened to Maria Bartiromo Matt Vespa

Witnesses claim that the male passenger, approximately two hours into the flight, had begun “screaming about Jesus and going to Hell,” before a female flight attendant approached the man to calm the situation. The man then began to shout racial and anti-gay slurs before striking a fellow passenger, according to TMZ.

A female passenger then attempted to intervene, but was pushed away. The devolving incident prompted three male passengers to step in and subdue the belligerent passenger, eventually duct-taping him to his seat and further restraining his hands with zip ties.

The flight was then diverted to Baltimore, where the belligerent passenger was taken into custody by authorities.

"On Sept. 3, American Airlines flight 618 diverted to Baltimore (BWI) due to a disruptive customer," American Airlines told Fox News. "Upon arrival, law enforcement met the aircraft and assisted with deplaning the customer before the flight continued to its destination."

No federal charges for the incident have been filed at this time.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

What Lindsay Clancy's Attorney Did on the Courthouse Steps Was Abhorrent

 

Lindsay Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, went bonkers on the courthouse steps today in Plymouth, Massachusetts. He was unprofessional, graceless, and all-around insane. He thanked the female jury forewoman for outing the one juror who was dead set on convicting Lindsay Clancy. 

He thanked the jury, except for that one, saying the rest of the body was “robbed by one man, whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks from the lives of these other jurors.”

It’s reckless. He’s starting a lynch mob, because now these Lululemon freaks are going to find out who this individual is and target him. Maybe that was the long game. 

You can see why this guy is Clancy’s lawyer. 

Also, he claims he won the case. He did not. It was a mistrial, and the Plymouth County DA can and should refile charges. 

Clancy killed her three kids in January 2023 with exercise bands, claiming postpartum psychosis and overmedication drove her over the edge. 

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Here Are More Details on What Happened to Maria Bartiromo

 We know the full story behind Maria Bartiromo's removal from the airwaves of Fox Business. Some of the initial reporting has been clarified, and other details have been made more specific. Dylan Byers at Puck had the story:

    On July 16, President Trump gave a primetime speech about election integrity in which he attempted to revive long-disproven doubts about the legitimacy of the 2020 election. The president alleged that China had sought to interfere with the electoral process, and called on Congress to enact stricter voting requirements ahead of the midterms. A day earlier, Ralph Giordano, the senior vice president of programming for the Fox Business Network, sent a text message to Maria Bartiromo’s producers with guidance to forgo coverage of the speech on her upcoming show. Giordano’s primary intended recipient was ostensibly Patrick Ignozzi, the executive producer of Bartiromo’s show Mornings With Maria on Fox Business.

    […]

    Regardless, Bartiromo renewed her contract with Fox News Media in February of last year, and asked for specific provisions to ensure that Giordano would have no influence or oversight of her show, according to sources with knowledge of the contract negotiations. Nevertheless, Giordano continued to exert his broader influence through editorial guidance, such as the text message he sent to Ignozzi and other producers on July 15, which Ignozzi subsequently sent to Bartiromo.

    As it turned out, Bartiromo had been planning to cover Trump’s speech on her show, according to sources familiar with her plans. She had also planned to book Peter Navarro, a senior counselor to Trump who has aggressively pushed the voter fraud narrative, to talk about the president’s remarks and the administration’s broader concerns over election integrity.

    In an interview on Friday, Navarro told me that when Bartiromo received Giordano’s guidance, she took a screenshot and forwarded it to him to tell him that management was not letting her cover the speech—or, in his words, “censoring” it. Navarro subsequently passed that information “up the chain,” he said, informing senior administration officials of the guidance. One high-ranking White House official, whom Navarro declined to identify, reached out to Fox News leadership to express their frustration with the decision. (Status first reported yesterday that Bartiromo had shared internal editorial guidance with the administration. Both Fox News and a representative for Bartiromo declined to comment.)

Bartiromo wanted to report on President Trump’s July address on election interference, which included details about Beijing’s efforts to undermine our elections. Given that Bartiromo was named in the Dominion and Smartmatic lawsuits, the network decided not to air the speech.

Yet Bartiromo was ready to go with the primetime address this summer and had booked Peter Navarro as a guest. When told of the program change, she shared the message with Navarro, who forwarded it to the Trump White House. A high-ranking official, whom Navarro declined to name, then contacted the network, outing Bartiromo as the source. This incensed top Fox executives, Fox News Media C.E.O. Suzanne Scott and president Jay Wallace, who allowed her show to continue throughout the summer before yanking her off the air on August 9. The final episode of Morning with Maria aired on September 3, the day the network officially announced her departure. 

She is slated to be off-air for the foreseeable future- a ghost firing, if you will- though Bartiromo’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, who has a lengthy list of high-level media clients, has strongly pushed back on claims that Bartiromo was fired. 

She signed an extension with the network last February. Puck added that Giordano and Bartiromo were not on the best of terms at the network as well. 

    NEW: Maria Bartiromo’s lawyer Bryan Freedman sends statement:

    For many years, Maria Bartiromo hosted three number one rated television shows on Fox channels. She has been, without question, one of the hardest working journalists throughout her award winning career.
    The…
    — Dylan Byers (@DylanByers) September 4, 2026

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

This Texas City Just Cancelled Permits for a Leftist Protest and the Liberal Reactions Are Hilarious

 

Officials from the city of Dallas have canceled planned protest permits for the upcoming Republican Midterm Convention after requests from the Dallas Police Department, according to a local outlet.

The one-hour long protest planned for September 10 had its special permitting revoked. Dallas Police claim that the recommendation for revocation came because they would have preferred to work directly with protest organizers “for a quicker process.”

Event organizers claim that Dallas Police have repeatedly set meetings with organizers only to cancel moments before the meeting or to not show up altogether. Some organizers with the Dallas Against the Trump Agenda Coalition, the protest organizers, claim that the failure to communicate amounts to obstruction.

“They did try to get us in meetings with DPD, and constantly DPD didn’t show up,” Xavi Velasquez said. “DPD didn’t show up, and then whenever DPD reached out to us directly and set up a meeting, they canceled it right before the meeting. So, keeping that in mind, and with DPD running us off of City Hall property, we just have little faith in them respecting our rights.”

“Now we’re supposed to start all over again with the Dallas Police Department,” Jo Hargis told the Dallas Observer. “It just feels like the city and Dallas police are obstructing a rally of people expressing their First Amendment rights, and that it’s a mishandling on their part of an expression that we’re entitled to.”

The Republican Midterm Convention is slated to be the largest gathering of its kind since 2016. Over 20,000 people are expected to participate to hear about the success of the Trump administration since retaking office and the party’s plans to promote prosperity and security heading into 2028.

Attendees will hear from President Donald Trump, Vice President J.D. Vance, and many others across the two-day programming on September 9 and 10.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

California Was the American Dream. What Happened?

 person 1: We know that in California, Xavier, I think his name is Becerra, is going to win, but he is the most unimpressive of governors I’ve ever seen. Even Kamala Harris said he was not up to snuff, and she is, of course, one of the most unimpressive of mediocrities. 

person 2: He doesn’t come out and talk about the Biden immigration policies, which he was involved in when there were all of these unattended youth, 350,000 they can’t account for. 

If that had been [President Donald] Trump, he’d be in jail. So, he’s not very … I followed his career in California. He’s not very adept. He’s not a good speaker.

But again, Steve Hilton has all the answers. He really does, and he would be wonderful for the state. He’s running about 18% [behind]. Let’s just say that the polls, being all slanted and designed to raise Democratic money and create Democratic momentum, are exaggerated, as we know they have been in these other races. 

So, let’s say they’re eight points off. So, he’s ahead of Steve Hilton by eight to nine points.  

Now, my question is this: Why would anybody vote for a person tied in with Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris and Nancy Pelosi and that whole tradition of Bay Area politicians who’ve taken control of the state from the LA center of power of the 1970s and ’80s, when they gave us a huge government fraud program? Devastating wildfires due to their policies about not cleaning up the forest. 

The highest electricity rates in the continental United States. The highest gasoline rates in the continental United States. The highest income tax, state income tax, 13.3. The highest gas taxes. The highest number of homeless people. Almost the same as Appalachia, 21% below the poverty line. 

One out of every three welfare recipients, 50% of the births on Medi-Cal, welfare type of thing, 40% of everybody uses that health care system. And we’ve got a high-speed rail not far from where I’m speaking that we’ve spent $20 billion on, and it hasn’t laid, in 10 years—12 years—one foot of track. And this group of people has overseen that.  

And I have an answer for you. The answer is this, and I’ve said it before: 28% of the state was not born in the United States. 

Another 7 to 8 million of our 40 million Californians are the children of people, and that can mean they were just born here one day when their parents arrived, right? But anyway, they have not been fully integrated, acculturated, and assimilated. You add those two groups of first- and second-generation immigrants, and you get about 45% to 46% of the population. 

And when you look at where those immigrants came from, three large groups: south of the border, Mexico and Central America; India; and China. Those are all impoverished groups.  

So, in their way of thinking—and I talk to a lot of them—when they come to California and they see how far it has declined and what it was like in the 1960s as a can-do state that was at the cutting edge of aqueducts and water projects and the tripartite UC, CSU, JC system, and I think it was number nine in test scores, and it was well-governed, it was not corrupt, and they had one of the most sophisticated highway systems. 

When they see all that, they don’t know. They just say I don’t know. Listen, I grew up in Venezuela. I grew up in Oaxaca. I grew up… I’ve never seen a place like this. It’s wealthy. And you know what? The moment I set across—I put a toe across the U.S. border—these crazy people think I’ve been oppressed. 

And not only have I been oppressed, I’ve been oppressed by them. So, I come over from India or China or Mexico, and all of a sudden, my kids get preference getting into school. I get preference in civil service hiring.  

And if somebody said, “Well, Victor, you’ve said yourself that DEI was on the way.” I said, “It is the way out.” 

But there was just a statistic that Mission High School in San Francisco, 94% are not proficient in math and like 70% are not proficient in English, and it’s sending a huge amount of its graduates to UC Berkeley. And then there was an example of another school district where 95% are proficient. Instead of getting 45% of the applicants accepted like Mission, they got eight. 

In other words, they were penalized for turning out students that were superbly trained in math and English, and only 8% got in. That’s California, and it hasn’t changed.  

So, they look at that. So, I think those voters, I mean, they’re the majority. They’re 45%. I’m not talking about other ethnic … 

I’m not talking about third-generation people from those same areas. I’m talking about just first or second. So, it takes three generations to become conservative when you’re an immigrant from a poor country. It does. 

person 1: Yeah. 

person 2: In my experience, it does. 

person 1: Yeah. And to add to your statistics on California, just glancing at the California Post—that’s also the New York Post—today, Kentucky Fried Chicken’s closing down 44 stores, and U-Haul is reporting that more and more people are exiting the state as well. 

person 2: I see them every day. It’s crazy. It’s one of those weird stories where you see the national story that 11 million people have left, and you think, “Oh my gosh, there go the Reagan voters. There go the Pete Wilson voters. There go the George Deukmejian voters,” right? “There go the Arnold Schwarzenegger voters.” 

And then you start to see … I have a wonderful group of people I hadn’t seen since I graduated from high school, you know, 55 years ago, and one of them lives right here. 

He’s fourth generation. He just left to South Carolina. And I talked to another person—I won’t mention him—but I had just talked to him, and he was talking about a nice home near his in Fresno that I should look at, and I was considering it. And he’s in Arizona now, and I don’t blame him one bit. 

So, it’s everybody is leaving who would vote for a conservative, and everybody is coming who compares the welfare state of California and the DEI complex as superbly convenient to them and much better than the conditions that they had in India and China and Mexico.  

So, when somebody says to them, “You don’t know what California was like before these people took over. You should have seen what California was like under Reagan and Wilson and—” 

It worked. The universities worked. The highways were sufficient for the population at the time. We built nuclear plants. We were at the cutting edge of airports. LAX was not like it is now. It was not. And the California Water Project was going to have more reservoirs. 

And they say, “Well, go down to Chiapas. Go down to Michoacán. Go into, you know, a big city in India. Tell me that this is not better.” And that’s their frame of reference. And then you start meeting people from India in the third generation or from Mexico that have been here, and they don’t know the home country. 

Then they look at it and see this is a dysfunctional society because they can see it on the news, and they’ve traveled to other states. But that’s a long-winded explanation of why I want Steve Hilton to win. But I’m not as optimistic as I should be because he’s got an English accent too. 

Becerra has a slight Hispanic accent, and that … 

person 1: I saw him on Fox News. He said the polls are closing from the 25-point gap earlier, and now it’s below 10. 

person 2: I believe that. I believe that. But still, he’s also warring against another thing. California, I feel, is the most lax state as far as registration. 

We saw that in the mayor’s race where, is it Raman or whatever her name was? She had conceded, and then all these mail-in ballots came, and then people in the homeless communities were saying they were getting money to register the same day and vote. And I know that, having children at my house, years after they went out on their own, I would still get their ballots here. 

I got them for about five years, and I would write—I’d send them back—and it didn’t do any good. They just kept sending. Anytime you come in contact with a California agency, they send out a registration. That’s intentional. They want that edge, the Democratic Party. 

Yeah. The irony is that right during COVID, I read a Stanford Law article in the Stanford Law Review, they didn’t say so, but it was talking about the effort going on to get mail-in and early ballots in the 2020 election.

OK. So, remember, everybody, Molly Ball, I keep saying, wrote that article in Time Magazine explaining how that was a cabal. That was her words, not mine. Conspiracy, her words, not mine, to change balloting laws so you would have 70% of people not voting on Election Day who could not be audited. 

But the Stanford Review was talking about the incipient, just the beginning of that, and this left-wing neo-socialist review was criticizing it because they said, “This is full of so many holes and can’t be verified that the right will use it.” See what I mean?  

And I thought when I read it, I said, “No, you’re right about it can’t be verified, but it’s your guys who did it, and your guys know how to cheat a lot better than our guys do.” 

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

When the Left Ignores Federal Law and Sounds Like Neo-Confederates

 person 1: So, I asked two questions from Barry McDonald in the last episode. We’re doing two vacation episodes, you and I are. I know you’re doing two with the great Sami Winc. And he asked simply about sanctuary cities.

Victor, tell us: What are their dangers, their legal loopholes? I don’t know if you need to get into that. How did they come to be? Victor, you’ve talked about sanctuary cities before. They’re not just a simple happenstance in America. I think they’re dangerous things. But what do you think, my friend?

person 2: Well, they’re unconstitutional, that’s for sure. And I will just preface my answer with this: If Donald Trump, the MAGA movement, conservatives, Republicans adopted the idea of sanctuary cities, a neo-Confederate states’ rights idea right out of the mouth of John C. Calhoun, they would do something like this.

They would say, “The state of Utah, or a city of Casper, Wyoming, or Mobile, Alabama, we declare that we don’t honor the Federal Endangered Species Act. We just don’t honor it. So, if we have a developer and he’s carving out a golf course and there is a three-eared toad that’s endangered, he’s just gonna smash him because we don’t honor federal law here. We’re not gonna cooperate with the [Environmental Protection Agency].”

Or if somebody in a county, I’m not picking on states, I’m just doing it randomly, but let’s say a county in Arkansas said, “You know what? I can read the Second Amendment. It says I have a right to bear arms. And I find in our county, we’ve decided that it is unconstitutional to make you register a handgun with the federal government. So, we are a sanctuary city, and no one in this county in Arkansas is gonna register any federal guns, and we’re not gonna cooperate at all with the ATF, Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. If they try to come in here, we’re gonna protest, we’re gonna combine, we’re gonna do everything we can.”

Well, you can imagine what would happen. A Barack Obama or Joe Biden or Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton would say, “You’re an insurrectionist.” And they would call out federal troops because, in the Constitution, it’s clear that in matters of federal law, they trump state law. And that is a federal matter: immigration.

Somehow, we have over 600 entities, counties, cities, entire states like California. And that means that when law enforcement arrest, if you’re in California—and I’ve had this happen four or five times in the last 40 years, where an illegal alien on a Sunday afternoon or Saturday night went airborne drunk and plowed in and took out 10 almond trees or 20 vines, and we heard a big crash, and we went out there, and the car was littered with drugs and alcohol bottles, and the driver took off. Or sometimes, on two occasions, he was there.

I call the police and, first of all, I couldn’t possess the car. They wouldn’t let me tow it away or keep it to pay for the thousands of dollars of damage. But when they took him in and bailed him out, I said, “Are you gonna deport him if he’s illegal?”

“No, we’re not gonna deport him. We can’t.”

I mean, “We’ve had this now for, I guess, 15 years. We’re not gonna deport him. We don’t recognize federal immigration law here in California.”

And then you say, “Well, maybe you shouldn’t go to Yosemite. Maybe the federal government should say, ‘We own Yosemite, and we don’t want you to go into our national park until you honor our national law. You’re an American first and a Californian second.’”

But they get away with it. They get lower-court judges to rewrite the law.

And Donald Trump is the first president—and people should remember that, who are so critical of him. He’s the first person to challenge it. And he has tried to cut off transportation funds to these cities and some federal funds to these cities and entities and counties and states that break federal law.

And of course, the lower courts have opposed him. It’s a neo-Confederate idea. I thought we settled the issue, Jack, with Fort Sumter, which was a federal fort. Lincoln fortified it, and South Carolina fired on it. And they said, “Oh, it’s in our proximity.”

And Lincoln said, “No, no, no, no. It’s a federal fort. It’s federal land. And by the way, post offices and armories in your Confederacy don’t belong to you. They’re federal property.”

And that was really the pretext of the whole Civil War. The real issues were slavery, of course, and states’ rights, but the trigger was they were not going to let federal troops occupy federal property, which was illegal.

So, all of a sudden, I guess the Left has turned into right-wing states’ rights people.

person 1: Yeah.

person 2: And it won’t stop until the federal government goes to the Supreme Court and says, “You have the right to deny federal funds to entities that break federal law.” And believe me, they don’t allow any state, any red state, purple state, or county to defy federal law. Right. You know what I mean?

person 1: Yeah. I’m always struck by that, Victor, the accessibility to federal funds. From our youth, mine anyway, the implementation of the 55-mile-an-hour speed limit was somehow tied to if you didn’t do it, you weren’t getting federal funds.

person 2: Exactly. I remember that.

Yeah. I think it was Montana or Wyoming that said, “We’re not gonna do it.”

person 1: Yeah.

person 2: And they said, “If you don’t do it, you’re not going to get federal funds.” I don’t know why we can’t do that again.

Yeah. But what it means is you arrest somebody for drunk driving or for murder or for assault, and if he posts bond or there is no cash bail and you let him out, we used to say that you check their immigration status and you called [Immigration and Customs Enforcement]. And then ICE showed up, and they got him, and they looked at him, and they deported him if it was a crime that was a minor felony or a misdemeanor. They deported him immediately.

But now, as we saw with that judge, if ICE shows up at a hearing, not just on immigration status, but a felon, and they know that an illegal alien is there, the judge, as we saw in that one case, helped him escape from ICE.

person 1: The Wisconsin judge who got a rap on the hands.

person 2: Yeah. Nothing really happened to her.

They didn’t really do much to her. And law enforcement is ordered by these sanctuary mayors and governors and supervisors not to cooperate. It’s against the law.

[New York City Mayor Zohran] Mamdani will fire you if you are a policeman and you arrest an illegal alien, and when he gets out of jail, you call ICE.

person 1: Yeah. We talked on a recent episode about these 21 blue states and the District of Columbia suing the federal government over, you talked about it, illegal licenses. It just struck me while you were talking: It’s a crime, I guess, to be here illegally and to have a CDL license. But what about the people who are handing out the CDL licenses who are government workers? There is some criminal stuff.

There’s a federality going on there.

person 2: Yeah, there is. You remember, was it a candidate for governor in Maryland or somewhere that had an illegal alien living in their loft, in their barn, or garage? And people cited a statute that said knowingly harboring an illegal alien and abetting him was a crime. It is, but no one …

You know, the Left just says, “There’s your law, and then there’s our sense of morality, our law, and we’re better, we’re smarter than you are. We’re more morally superior. So, we like the law when it’s convenient, and it can be used to advance our agenda or to hurt your agenda. But otherwise, we don’t really follow it. We don’t really care.

“If we don’t have the court, we want to pack it. If we won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College, we want to get rid of the Electoral College. If we can’t win enough senators, we want to bring in two states and get four senators. If we’re in the minority, well, then the filibuster is great. When we’re in the majority, it’s a racist holdover.”

They’re like adolescents. They really are. Anybody that’s raised teenagers knows that they always look at the entire world through their self-interest for a year or two until they grow up. But they never grew up. They’re arrested development.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Sunday, August 30, 2026

The Leninist democrats want to Destroy America and Rebuild It

 

We often associate leftist movements, anarchists of the 19th century, Jacobins of the 18th century, Marxists, Bolsheviks, Symbionese Liberation [Army], the Weather Underground with violence.  

And the argument that they use is, we are for mandated equality and fairness and helping the underprivileged, and therefore to achieve those noble ends, which were morally and intellectually superior to those on the conservative side, we’re allowed to use any means necessary. And any means necessary is what’s happening right now. 

Hasan Piker is always in the news.

He’s the multimillionaire podcaster, second-generation Turkish immigrant, who just recently led a cheering crowd in a song, whipped up the crowd, mocking the assassination of Charlie Kirk. He even said, Charlie Kirk, Charlie Kirk. He was whipping them up in a classical demagogic fashion, cheering and celebrating the horrific televised murder of an American activist.  

Remember, he’s also told us that 9/11, we essentially deserved it. It was our fault, 9/11 was. 

He’s not unusual right now on the Left. Angie Nixon is a radical socialist, and she won the Democratic primary Senate campaign, and she will be in the runoff for Florida’s junior senator. She said recently that ICE, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, were slave catchers and that they were targeting black people, no different than people in the Confederacy, and that the U.S. government was trying to kill blacks. 

She doesn’t understand that under the auspices of DEI, which continues affirmative action, that blacks have given preferential treatment based on past transgressions that the majority of the country felt needed to be addressed.

No one is trying to kill young black people, much less the government. If you look at the murder rates, the statistics make her completely unbelievable. 

Almost 9 out of 10 murders by African Americans are committed by other African Americans. And when there are interracial violence, it’s six to 10 times more likely that an African American will harm, assault or kill a white person than vice versa. White people are underrepresented as assailants in hate crimes. black people are overrepresented. 

I only bring it up just to refute the slur that she’s made against the immigration system and enforcement service. ICE deported people from over 180 countries of all colors, all religions. 

Then we have another luminary in this new radical extremist movement, Abdul El-Sayed. He’s running now. He won the nomination in the Michigan senatorial race. He will be running against Mike Rogers for the Senate. He said—remember, he just—he said that before that he follows Sharia law. He was caught in a hot mic saying that we should not celebrate the death of the supreme leader, [Ali] Khamenei, in Iran. 

Remember, he had just ordered 40,000 of his own people to be slaughtered, that were protesting. And he said, “My constituents wouldn’t like that.” In other words, his constituents, which he’s proud of, were on the side of the Iranian theocracy that for 50 years has been the chief sponsor of terror in the world. 

When he tried to attack a fellow Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman, he said, ideally, you put one ogre on a pike, and then everyone else gets the message. That’s almost a blatant call to kill him and then to use that violence to intimidate other people. 

When there was an attack on a Jewish synagogue by a brother of a Hezbollah member, and he was in the United States, and he was asked to comment, what did he say? Hurt people. Deep breath. Hurt people. Justifying that. 

We’ve had four occasions now when the Secret Service shot at potential and actual Trump assassins. We’ve had Hollywood stars. We’ve had people like Robert De Niro, Kathy Griffin, Shakespeare in the Park in New York, celebrity cooks, and Snoop Dogg.  

They’ve said they’ve all tried to compete in imagining to us an audience through public media and social media whether they should kill Donald Trump, whether they should burn Donald Trump, whether they should stab Donald Trump, whether they could shoot Donald Trump, whether they could decapitate him, whether they could throw him over a cliff, whether they could blow him up. 

This comes on the heels that for the last essentially nine years there’s been no contrition, no apologies for a series of events that almost wrecked the sense of law and order in this country and severely damaged the integrity of the government and was a challenge to the Constitution. 

For three years, the FBI, a rogue agency under James Comey and then later Andrew McCabe, cooked up the Steele dossier, which was a complete fabrication, and tried to take out a Republican candidate for the presidency. Operation Crossfire Hurricane was all based on a lie. 

We were told in 2020 that a laptop with incriminating evidence, which the FBI had in its possession and had verified it was Hunter [Biden] laptop’s possession, it was his property with all the incriminating information on it, was cooked up by the Russians. Fifty former CIA and intelligence authorities swore on the eve of the election that the Russians and Donald Trump were colluding. It was a complete lie. No one has ever apologized. 

We had four prosecutors, Alvin Bragg, Letitia James, Fani Willis, Jack Smith. They all made up charges, and we know now that Alvin Bragg had to take a federal charge when he was a municipal prosecutor that the federal prosecutors thought was bogus. 

Ms. James went after an old loan and said that he didn’t—he exaggerated his collateral when the bank that issued the loan said he didn’t. 

Fani Willis, no need—she’s been so disgraced now. She’s been fined by the court. She made up most of the charges. She was essentially hiring her own paramour and then charging the state for their junkets. 

Jack Smith, he tried to rush a federal indictment of Donald Trump on the Mar-a-Lago raid, and he was trying to get insurrection. That case was thrown out. 

Not enough. They raided Mar-a-Lago, the private home of an ex-president. They said he had dozens of classified material. He had 11,000 documents, and all they could find under contention were 102 documents they claimed were classified. Then they scattered the documents on the ground and made it look as if Donald Trump was some type of criminal. 

At the same time, Joe Biden had done the same thing for 30 years in four locations. No one said a word. 

Over 20 states tried to take a Republican nominee off the ballot for the general election so the voters wouldn’t even have a chance. 

I’m not even gonna get into the social media where the FBI was partnering with social media to squash stories they felt were prejudicial to Joe Biden. 

What we’re witnessing is a revolutionary movement, as I said, and we have people who are celebrating the death of their opponents. They’re dreaming of how to kill their opponents. They’re praising people who murder. This is the starkest choice in November that we’ve had in a midterm election in my lifetime. 

There is a vast gulf, a huge chasm between what the Democratic Socialists are advocating and what traditional conservatives are trying to maintain. 

If they win, we will see the beginning of a destroyed border, and we will return to 12 million people within a four-year period crossing unaudited. We will see a war on fossil fuels, even as we were the greatest producer of gas and oil in history.  

We will see biological men green-lighted to compete in female sports. Antisemitism will be the trademark and anti-hatred, not anti-Israelism, hatred of the only democracy in the Middle East. 

We will see a full-fledged return of diversity, equity, inclusion, prejudice and bias. 

What we’re talking about is a revolutionary group who often is telling us, “If you elect us, you will not recognize the United States as you’ve known it. We must destroy it and rebuild it along socialist and totalitarian designs.” 

Remember that when you go in December, and vote for somebody who says, “We are not ashamed of what America is. We’re the greatest nation in the world, and we’re the greatest nation in the world because of our traditions, our Constitution, our protocols, and we have nothing to apologize for.” 

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

We Need to Stop Letting in Ungrateful Immigrants

 

All Americans support legal immigration, especially legal immigration that is diverse, as I said, measured in numbers that can be assimilated and acculturated and integrated, meritocratic, so we get people who come here with skills that ensure that we, the people of the United States, will not have to support them, and they have some knowledge of the traditions and customs and protocol of the United States, as well as English fluency. 

But from time to time, that hasn’t happened. And when you have that combined with illegal immigration, as we did under the Biden administration, when 12 million people came in, sometimes at rates of 10,000 a day, plus over a million and a half legal immigrants, then you have a pool of 30 million illegal and legal immigrants and 53 million people who were not born in the United States. 

So then people lose their support for immigration. 

It happened in the early 20th century, say from about 1900 to 1910. About 1.5% of the population, 1 million people, half a million some years, but some years a whole million, came into the United States from Southern and Eastern Europe. And they had very different ideas about politics. 

Many of them were anarchists. They joined unions, and an anarchist, we remember, had killed William McKinley. He was an American-born anarchist, but there was a lot of worry that immigration at that level of 1.5% of the population every year from people who were not integrating but had radical ideas about changing America was dangerous, and it lost public support for years. 

The same thing is happening, as I said now, because of the numbers, but also because we’re seeing a new type of immigrant. 

Usually, we say the immigrant is good for America because he’s eager to get here. He’s eager to work hard. He loves the United States. He’s studied the United States. He wants to leave his homeland and start anew, and then he makes us say, “Wow, look at that energized immigrant that loves this country. We’ve got to snap out of it and compete.” 

That was the idea of immigration, one of the ideas. 

Not now. 

We’re getting a lot of immigrants that are coming from failed states, mostly as a result of communism and socialism. Some of them come legally, some come illegally, and they’re coming in numbers that we can’t fully assimilate. 

But there’s a new type of legal immigrant, and these are immigrants from the first generation or their children in a second generation from failed states. 

And so, let me ask you a question. What do Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat of Michigan, or Ilhan Omar, a Democratic representative from Minnesota whose family came from Somalia, Rashida Tlaib was from the West Bank, or [Alexander Ocasio-Cortez], whose father came from Puerto Rico, who was also a Democratic congresswoman, or the podcaster Hasan Piker, who’s from a multimillion-dollar family in Turkey and was born here and then returned to Turkey, or New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who came here from Uganda, or Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, who came from Egypt, his family did, or Melat Kiros, whose family and she came from Ethiopia, or Rep. Ro Khanna, a representative congressman from California whose family and his wife’s family came from India, second generation, or Gustavo Gordillo, who is a first-generation immigrant from Peru—and I could go on, but that should be enough. 

What do they all have in common? Let’s count them. 

No. 1, most of them are pretty wealthy. Ro Khanna‘s family is probably worth a quarter of a billion dollars. Hasan Piker drives a Porsche. He has a multimillion-dollar home. His family is worth millions. Ilhan Omar, whether truthfully or untruthfully, filed a financial report that said she was worth $30 million. We can talk about Mr. El-Sayed. He filed a tax return for over $600,000. 

But besides that, they are mostly wealthy, they’re also, with exception of AOC, Muslims, which is fine, except they accentuate their Islamic identity to the extent that Mr. El-Sayed has even said in an unguarded moment that he didn’t want to mention anything about the killing of the Supreme Leader, the theocratic enemy of the United States in Iran, because that might upset his constituents. 

But in addition to being quite wealthy and Islamic and from failed states, many of them, as soon as they arrived here or their parents, equated their own race or their religion or their antithesis to what they call the oppressor or victimizer class, the white male heterosexual Christian we all know who’s supposed to be responsible for all the sins of the world, as somehow exploiting them. 

In other words, think of the argument. You come from a failed socialist state in Somalia or Uganda or Egypt. You set one foot in here or your parents set one foot in here, and immediately you lodge complaints against the gracious host that welcomed you in and welcomed you in with security, prosperity, and freedom that you did not have under the system that you left, but which you seem to now champion in a very chauvinistic way. 

And no sooner than you come without any knowledge of the United States’ nature or history or protocols, you’re so bold that you start to demand socialist changes. 

You want to abolish the Senate. You want reparations. You want to reopen the border. You want to get rid of the filibuster. You want to get rid of the Electoral College. You want to pack the court. You want to change the capitalist system. You want to tax billionaires not on what they make, but on their worth. You want to go after people who have two homes. 

All these are radical things that are outside the American tradition. 

And what people are just stunned by is they thought that under the old immigrant paradigm that you come from your home country and you vote with your feet. 

In other words, you’re saying, “I want to be a new American. I want to take advantage of this system that attracted me there and gave me a home where I had no home.” 

But not now. 

Now is, “I’m very wealthy and I like to come to America and I’d like to experiment, on Americans and impose a foreign socialist system that they have never wanted, and I want to run for office. I want to be a podcast influencer. I want to use my wealth and influence to change the country that I fled to and kind of emulate the system that I fled from.” 

Why are people doing this? Why, we have to ask ourselves, why would you, why would you leave the country that has failed you and go to a country that welcomed you and then be so ungracious? 

I think the primary reason is immigrants from these areas put their finger in the air and they say, “Where do the winds of advantages blow?” 

Not where the right and conservative that says, “We welcome you, but we’re an entrepreneurial capitalist system, and we want you to take care of yourselves, so go to it, and we’ll give you the advice and the infrastructure so you can be successful.” 

Versus, “You are a victim. You’re a non-white victim. You’ve been oppressed. There are affirmative action opportunities for you, both in college admissions and scholarships, race-based scholarships. There is preference in hiring. You can lodge complaints and complain that if you’re not doing well, the entire system is against you and innately prejudiced. We have a whole array, we on the Democratic leftist side, of subsidies for housing, food, legal advice, education, and all we ask of you is to retain your own ethnic, religious, foreign identities, or at least make them as important or more important than your American identity, which is going to be incidental, and therefore show us fealty and loyalty at the polls. Do that, and we will take care of you.” 

And unfortunately, what is the most ironic of all is a lot of these new immigrants who are very affluent are imposing a socialist system, they think, on Americans as if we’re the lab rats and they are the experimenters, and that’s not a very successful way to win the American people over to the cherished idea in the past of legal immigration. 

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Why Trump Gets Results While Diplomats Fail

 

person 1: I think Donald Trump has got, as I said earlier, an anaconda Civil War strategy of the North. He’s gonna squeeze them as much as he can, and as they start to pop, they will send off missiles or drones from their vestigial fleet, and he’ll hit them hard. And he hopes that will continue, that containment will continue to the midterms.

I would expect an October surprise by the Iranians to try something to get in the headlines and lose Trump the election. And then after the election, I would think that the Israelis and the Americans would hit them very hard at the slightest provocation, and that would be pretty, pretty devastating.

Meanwhile, there’s the wild card no one talks about, and that’s what are the Iranian people going to do when they can’t even afford fruit, they can’t afford milk, they can’t afford electricity, they can’t afford gas, they can’t afford diesel, they can’t afford kerosene or natural gas? It’s all scarce.

So, they’re either going to retaliate against the regime, and there’ll be more massacres, or they will just keep quiet, but they’re not going to be active economically and fully generating wealth. They can’t do it anymore given what we’ve done to them.

Is that victory? I don’t know. But I think, in our time for this particular mission, the mission was they’re very close to getting a bomb, stop them, and stop them in a cost-benefit analysis.

Tragic we lost 17 dead, but the bigger picture, to attack a country with 93 million people that was the bully of the entire Middle East and to defang it with losing three or four planes, 17 tragic, tragically soldiers, but about $55 billion. But I don’t think anybody thought you could—take that versus a trillion dollars in Iraq and probably $2 trillion in Afghanistan over 20 years.

Jack person 2: Victor, I have a bunch of questions from Barry McDonald, but I’m gonna leave his entrée to them, and I’ll ask some of his other questions later. But here’s one that’s kind of related, ’cause you’re just giving your counsel in a way. But how would you—how would Victor advise President Trump?

And I don’t think that necessarily is advising him related to Iran, and we know, Victor, that you are not pro-advising the president of the United States. But pick. If there was an issue or a topic that you could give some counsel on, what would it be?

person 1: He doesn’t need my counsel, I’ll say that first.

And I’m not a politico that lives in Washington, and I don’t know the scuttlebutt, and I don’t know the personalities involved. But just as an outside observer, maybe from a historical point of view, he has … His trademark is that he addresses things that no one wanted to address.

Government, the size of government with DOGE. And for all the DOGE controversies, government has shrunk dramatically by about 400,000 jobs. Nobody thought you could close the border. They didn’t wanna get near it. The wall was inert after [Joe] Biden [was elected]. He stopped that, and he took a big hit with [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] because it’s one thing …

It’s easy to let in 12 million people, 10 million scattered all over the United States, 500. It’s very hard to find them and coerce them to go back because they had broken the U.S. law, and he did that.

And everybody talked about getting rid of the nuclear program or not allowing them to have a bomb, and none of the prior seven presidents did it.

OK, so, in that context, I think he needs to talk about the last two years, something that is not popular, but he’s not gonna be running again, and that is we are on an unsustainable spending spree. We have $31 trillion. It’s going to be geometric now. People are talking about $40 trillion in two or three years.

We’re spending a billion dollars a day in interest, and it’s gonna be almost impossible to pay that sum back if we don’t do things. And what we have to do, we’re going to have to take a hard look at Medicare and Social Security, which are death—that is, that’s political kryptonite. But you’re gonna have to talk about it.

And the Left will not … All the Left will do is demagogue it. But for the sake of the country, you’re going to have to look … And I think they can—all of this fraud we’re seeing in California, Minnesota, Chicago is reminding people that the entitlement state is way out of control. So, I think they’re going to have to just …

I think if they could just say, “We’re gonna have a hiring freeze and a budget freeze, and we’re not gonna spend any more than we did the year before and let inflation be the actual cut,” I think that would be something that has to be addressed. The other thing is there isn’t a multiracial democracy of our size that works under tribalism.

Indonesia doesn’t work to the extent that it’s really a democracy. India I don’t think works very well. If it worked, we wouldn’t have hundreds of thousands of Indians waiting to come into this country. And I don’t think Brazil works very well. And they all have caste systems and tribal systems and a multiplicity of languages and religion and everything.

And so, what I would suggest is then that he really—he’s done a great job with DEI, but I would suggest what he does is to say, “We’re all one, one people. Americanism, being an American is essential, not incidental, and we’re not going to talk about tribalism or race anymore.” And we’re gonna codify that and try to get legislation if he survives in midterms or through executive orders to expand on what he’s done because that’ll kill a society, this sectionalism—fractionalism, sectarianism, tribalism.

Yeah. And it’s gotta stop. And these democratic socialists have substituted race for class, and all they talk about is race, and it’s gonna destroy the country. So that’s another thing that I would advise him. As far as his methodology and technique, I go back and forth.

Of course, all of us say, “Why does he have to tweet at 2 in the morning?” Or, “Why does he have to make fun of Rob Reiner after he was killed?” Or, “Why does he have to do this or that?” And it doesn’t do any good to say, “They’re worse. They tried to kill him. They didn’t just talk about being insensitive or use crude language.”

The people who tried to kill him were all imbued with leftist ideology. And then the movie stars and the media had a rivalry about how best to imagine his death, and they do it all the time. So he’s in the big leagues. It’s not, it’s not beanball. So, but that said, I think I would be a little quieter and don’t say much about Iran.

Just say, “This is what we’re doing today.” But when I say I’m ambiguous about that is because that he says things like—I’ll give you two examples. Oman basically crossed him on the Strait of Hormuz and other issues. He said, if they’re gonna do that and they’re in our way, we’ll bomb Oman.”

We’re not gonna bomb Oman. It’s an ally. I don’t know what—

person 2: He used more colorful language than that.

person 1: Yes. Yes, bomb the blank. And then he—South Korea, he had called up and said, “For the strait and other things, we’re thinking of internationalizing, and you’re a big importer of foreign crude oil and natural gas. Would you want to participate in Iran?”

Meaning, I think he was trying to imply you have ships, you could help keep up open the strait. He wasn’t asking for ground troops. I don’t even think he was asking for air. They said no. So then he said, “North Korea has been very nice to me lately, and I’m gonna pull out some troops from South Korea.”

You remember when he came in the first time, he said, “We’ve had 39,000 troops there for how long?” We had a lot more, so he’s basically saying, “75 years we’ve protected you from this lunatic, your lunatic brethren country in the north, and all we ask of—and we’ve lost 35,000 dead doing it in the Korean War, so all we ask of you is to participate, not in a dangerous, combative way, but just join a Western effort to keep the strait open so it would free our ships so we can concentrate on the problem of Iran.”

And they said no. And under Biden, remember, he said, “We’re not gonna charge you anything.” Trump was charging him $3 billion a year for our troops to be there and talked about going up to $10 billion. But the way he said it, the way it was portrayed, “Trump is crazy. One day he’s saying he’s going to attack Oman. The next thing, he’s pulling troops out of South Korea ’cause they weren’t nice to him.”

You see what I mean? And I think people are gonna say, “Victor, we’re over that. That’s so then. That’s so history. So what? We don’t care anymore what the Left said.” I know that, but the key, his agenda depends on the independents.

So, when I get calls and stuff, it doesn’t bother me, to tell you the truth, not at all. But I get calls from family members, friends, and they’ll say, “You know what? If I look at what Trump actually did in foreign policy or domestic—it’s great, but why does he do this?” And then they go on a rant, right? So, those are …

It’s a hard call, but is—does that mean that tough, crude, often profane language shocks people and it’s an intensifier or a catalyst for his policy, or does it—does it turn off people? I don’t have that answer, but I think he might experiment by toning it down a little bit.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Don’t Trust the Midterm Polls

Let’s have a periodic check on the status of the midterms that we’re now less than 80 days away from. The Democrats are riding high. They feel that historical trends, i.e., 39 out of the last 41 midterms, the in party in the White House loses seats, and there’s not very many seats Republicans can afford to lose, and they may lose the House and Senate. 

They’re already, I guess you’d call it, measuring their drapes, but in the sense that they’re already explaining how they’re going to go after the Trump family, the Trump family associates, cryptocurrency concerns, any hangers-on, people going to the Middle East and investing. They’re gonna open it wide open. 

These are the people, of course, who never investigated the Biden family or Hunter Biden. That’s no excuse if there’s culpability, but nonetheless, you can count on a two-year investigation of Donald Trump and a never-ending impeachment inquiry, and the end of the MAGA agenda should he lose the House and the Senate. 

Donald Trump is strangely confident. He now has finally hit on a strategy that he feels will work. Earlier, I called it the “Anaconda Strategy,” the idea that he is squeezing a debilitated Iran. In other words, the kinetic 40 days of bombing have left the nuclear military-industrial complex in shambles. 

And this time, he’s not just blockading, he’s not just having an embargo on goods. He is not just freezing the bank accounts of Iranian grandees. He’s not just debanking the entire country. He’s going to third parties and saying, “You and China and Russia and Europe have been trading with this country even while we were bearing the burden of defanging a potential nuclear renegade nation, and we’re going to isolate you. We’re not gonna do business with you if you do business with Iran.”  

And the Iranians now are crying foul. They’re saying we’re colonialists. But what I’m getting at, after all that military damage from Feb. 28 for the next 40 days, and after all the blockades, they’re not able to withstand a renewed squeezing. 

And so, time is actually on our side. The second part of this strategy is Donald Trump has now put the war on the back burner. He is saying that we don’t need to have ground troops. We might not even go in and bomb them again unless they egregiously attack an ally of ours or one of our carriers or ships. 

We have managed it now. The strait is mostly open, and whatever the status of the nuclear stockpile or enriched uranium of the theocracy, it’s pretty clear they can’t get at it.  

Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah don’t seem to be getting money. They don’t seem to have enough rockets to threaten the Gulf States or Israel, at least to get through their missile defenses. 

And so, we’re just going to concentrate, Trump thinks, on the economy.  

So, what he is doing now is he and JD Vance are barnstorming the country, and they’re starting to make headway. They’re not worried about the polls that show a generic 7% Democratic advantage and betting odds and polls that say they’re gonna lose the House because they looked at the recent primaries. 

El-Sayed, the candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic candidate for the Democratic senatorial seat in Michigan, was polling ahead 10 points, and he scarcely won by a point and a half.  

Francesca Hong, the Wisconsin Democratic candidate for governor, was polling ahead 10 or 15 or 20 points. She lost and lost handily.  

Mr. [Alexander] Vindman, who was running for Senate in Florida, was polling ahead. He lost to a crazy, wacky Ms. [Angie] Nixon, a democratic socialist.  

So, what I’m getting at is the polls are worthless. And what we need to look at is what the status is right now. 

The war is starting to wane. If it should end or if the Iranians crack in the next 60 to 70 days, that would be a spectacular achievement that Donald Trump—you know, we’ve tragically lost 17 Americans—but at a tolerable cost in blood and treasure, he ended a 50-year problem that seven presidents said was existential. 

You could not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon, and the pressure that he’s put on them and the damage he’s inflicted would probably, in the next year or two, prompt a renewal of internal opposition against a theocracy that is bleeding.  

The second thing to remember very carefully is, as I said earlier, the redistricting, the red state redistricting and the Supreme Court prohibition on racial gerrymandering might give him an additional four or five seats. 

But the most important developments are money and the agenda of the new Democratic Party.  

Very quickly, Donald Trump has got a war chest of about $400 million, and he’s now going to use it. He says he’s going to use it all in his political action committees to help save the Republicans in the midterms. 

Elon Musk said that he is going to match dollar for dollar the Democratic oligarchic class that if they start to donate in great amounts to Democratic candidates.  

So, the money issue probably favors also, like, the redistricting and maybe the course of the Iran war that could wane and be not an issue. 

But the most important thing to conclude is the Democratic Party. No one thought that the Democratic socialists would ever try to absorb and even seem to succeed in absorbing the Democratic Party. I mean, Nancy Pelosi, Hakeem Jeffries, Chuck Schumer, they’ve all said they have no problem with the Democratic socialists, that they … 

It’s a big tent party, and they’re going to help them win their seats. But the problem is, once you have the money and the effort and the attention, and you show what the democratic socialists are, like, defunding the Pentagon, defunding the police, opening the border, mass amnesties, warring on fossil fuels, isolationist foreign policy, the transgender issue reopened with biological men now by statute free to compete in women’s sports. I could go on and on. 

They even want to destroy the Senate and the Electoral College, not to mention packing the Supreme Court, ending the filibuster, and bringing in new seats in the Senate by admitting new blue states such as Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico.  

And so, what I’m getting at is, the more we learn about the democratic socialists, and the more that the Democratic Party feels they’ve already taken over the apparatus of the party and they’re going to join them, or at least they’re not going to oppose them, they’re gonna be culpable or responsible for what these people say. 

And they’re saying all sorts of stuff, not just antisemitic venom, not just anti-Israel venom, but questioning the very legitimacy of the United States government, the way that our Founders created a legislative, judicial, and executive branch, the Declaration of Independence. Our entire traditions, they’re saying, are flawed at their origins. 

They got worse during our maturity, and now they’re god-awful right now. That’s not a winning message.  

So, the midterms are very much up in the air.  

Contrary to historical precedent, there’s still a chance that the Republicans can save both the Senate and the House.  

 

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Nixon Was the ‘Most Naturally Bright President’ We’ve Ever Had

 

person 1: So, I’m anxious to hear about our John Tyler, but also Richard Nixon, who is probably the more infamous of the two, although I’m not sure he should be.

person 2: I don’t think he’s infamous. He’s actually enjoying a renaissance right now among young people.

John Tyler was our 10th president. He was an accidental president. He was the first president who was elevated to the presidency as vice president. It doesn’t really say in the Constitution that the vice president shall become the president.

It said the vice president can fulfill the duties when the president is incapacitated. So, he’s kind of famous that when William Henry Harrison died after 31 days in office, he didn’t just start doing it. He said, I want to be sworn in as the president, and that wasn’t in the Constitution. But that inaugurated that and later amendments reified that.

So, he was this Virginia slave owner, and he was in the Democratic Party. He was originally a Jacksonian from 1841 to 1845, so we’re getting very close. He’s gonna be followed by [James] Polk, and he followed [Martin] Van Buren, who wasn’t very popular. And we’re getting closer and closer to the big 1861 divide. He did nothing to slow that down.

He said he abhorred slavery, but he never sold his 40 or 50 slaves he had. He’s famous for having the most children of anybody. I think he had 15 children. Fifteen. He was married twice. Eight children the first time, seven the second.

person 1: I did not know that. That is crazy.

person 2: Yeah, he was, and he was very … He was a hotshot young guy in the Jacksonian period.

And he was a pillar or a primary guy in the Democratic Party, and he arose with a John Calhoun idea of states’ rights. And [Andrew] Jackson had been a big critic of the Adams family elite and the federal government, the Federalists. But once the South Carolinians said they were not gonna pay tariffs in 1832, I think Jackson became a tough Federalist.

And same thing with the Trail of Tears. He just went in, and he did what he had to do, he thought, and he really empowered the presidency. And that Tyler was on the other Calhoun side and broke with him. But when you look at over the four years, it’s really hard to see anything that he did. He had a treaty with China.

He tried to finesse the Democratic Party. He didn’t split with the Democrats in the North who were opposed to slavery. And he said, “On the one hand, I’m opposed to slavery. On the other hand, we have all these slave owners in my native state, and we’ll have a civil war if we outlaw it. So, let’s just pass it on.” And then the next president will be Polk.

He was much better. But when you look at presidents that are rated, I mean, there’s, at the very bottom … And these are left-wing historians. Everybody should remember that. People, when you see presidential rankings, I think [Barack] Obama’s like eight or something. They’re all left-wing. The next Lincoln, remember, his Springfield, Illinois, train ride from Chicago or whatever it was, as he was the young Mr. Lincoln saving us from ourselves.

But in any case, I think he’s rated like 39th or 40th, along there with James Buchanan and Millard Fillmore. And if they put Nixon in there, that’s very unfair. He was a good president. He just made a couple of mistakes. He mussed his hair up, so to speak, as they say in “Dr. Strangelove.”

person 1: Yeah, but nothing … He didn’t do even half as bad as some of the stuff we’ve seen recently.

person 2: I mean, what he did was, essentially, he had a bunch of zealots and an ex-CIA officer thought that the Democrats had … Larry O’Brien was crazy, or he was mental, the head of the DNC, and they wanted to get stuff on him.

So, they broke in, and then they contained it, and then they got arrested, and they wanted money. So, then they went into the lower rings of the White House. Howard Dean was the presidential counselor. He finally heard about it, and then he came and told Nixon, and Nixon basically said, “What in the blank? Are you kidding me? We’ve got an election.”

So, they got through the election of ’72. The second-largest popular vote landslide in history was Richard Nixon’s 1972 thrashing of George McGovern. Only Lyndon Johnson, playing on the sympathy of the Kennedy assassination, had beaten Barry Goldwater like that. It was just incredible.

So, here he was at the top of the world, and he had all … He was juggling all of these key balls. First of all, he had Vietnamization, and he went into Vietnam, and he was given a mess in 1969, and he had drawn down from about 500,000 troops to almost none. And he was negotiating with them, and he knew that when we were leaving, they would take advantage of them.

But we had first-generation laser-guided bombs, so he started bombing the North, not like Operation Rolling Thunder, but Operation Linebacker. And they started targeting key personnel of the communists in North Vietnam, generals, agents, etc. And they, that made a profound approach.

So, he had a peace deal, and he thought he could get out, and he did get out.

So, there was a viable South Vietnam. That was the whole point. Of course, after Watergate, they sold the Vietnamese out, and they wouldn’t give them air support, so they got … And then at the same time, he was trying to triangulate with [Henry] Kissinger, his secretary of state and his national security adviser in one office.

First person to do that. Marco Rubio is doing it now. And Kissinger said, well, you have to triangulate. Triangulate. And they said, well, wait a minute. They’re all comm—he said, “They’re both communists. They’re both bad, but we can play off one against the other.” So, we said no. China, under Nixon—he went to China.

He saw a decrepit old Mao [Zedong]. He didn’t hold … He was the arch anti-communist during the McCarthy period, and he was Ike’s vice president for eight years. Ike treated him really badly, too, when they … That famous thing when they said when Nixon ran for president in 1960, when he lost to JFK, “Well, can you say something in praise of your former vice president, now candidate?”

He said, “Give me a week” or something like that. Give me a few days to think about it. So, Ike could be very cruel to people for all of his … He was a good president, too, but … And so, he was solving the Vietnam. It was solved by the time of Watergate. He had really started the détente process by being really tough.

He saved Israel in the Yom Kippur War of ’73. He was under enormous pressure. Kissinger was sort of working on getting Anwar Sadat to flip from the Russians and have a new peace deal if he got the Sinai back. But Kissinger was kind of tinkering around like, “Let’s not give them too many Phantom jets and try to help tit-for-tat.”

And Nixon said, “Get those transports and you put anything on it and you get over there and save the Jews.” And that’s very ironic because when he had his tapes come out, he just used derogatory language about everything. He didn’t really mean it, though. He was just, “The Jews are, they’re smart people. You got to be careful, don’t you think?” Stuff like that. And that hurt him.

But my point is, if you look at what he did about the Vietnam War, and then the Left started liking him. He created the EPA. He created the endangered species list. He created the toxic waste list, all of that. He was really good on the environment.

And the problem with him was I think he was probably the most naturally bright president we’ve ever had. He was smart. He was the best poker player in in a large group in the Navy. I know my grandfather, my maternal grandfather, was a Democrat. He got my parents really angry. And they said, “You can’t vote for Dick Nixon.”

And he said, “Well, he was the best poker player in the Navy. He, five-card stud, you couldn’t beat the man. It’d be good to have him as president. He’s sharp, Pauline. He’s sharp.”

And so, I remember that, and a couple of other things we forget now. 1960, you can make an argument … I know the Left says, “Well, Victor, you’re just a conspiracy theorist, but you could make the argument that Richard Nixon lost that election by 0.2%.”

In Cook County, Illinois, Chicago, there were some questionable ballots, and there were some questionable ballots in Texas. And had he demanded a recount and got … there might have been. The Democrats might have lost Illinois and lost the Electoral College, and he was very good about that.

He said, “A losing candidate does not question, or if we do that, our reputation worldwide … ”

He always thought of things in terms of foreign policy. So when all of these things were going on, and he’s thought that … And he got us off the gold standard for good or evil, but he was working on all of these things to end the Cold War, and he might have done it.

And then when it came to John Dean, he was looking at the papers every day, Woodward and Bernstein, Nixon’s gonna be guilty. We’re gonna finally get Nixon. Tricky Dick. They hated him, and so he dug down. And so he said, basically, “Well, what do they want? They got caught, so take care of them, meaning when they get out, give them money.”

And that looked really bad because they denied he did. Said Nixon didn’t know, and Dean turned state’s evidence. Dean was a sneaky blank mean … I remember he took money and borrowed it out of the White House to remodel his patio or something like that. But in any case, once the Watergate started, today, when you look at today, I mean, there was Deep Throat.

That was just a disaffected Mark Felt, FBI agent. He just wanted to be FBI director and was gonna rat everybody out. So when you look at… I mean, Barack Obama in the Oval Office had [John] Brennan, [James] Clapper, and [James] Comey, and he knew that Steele dossier was fake, and he was basically saying, “Go back and give me assessments that show me that Donald Trump is a Russian collusion,” when there was no evidence.

We know that. We know that he spied on the AP reporters. We know that. We know that Obama spied on James Rosen, spied on his grandmother’s text messages. They got mad for the secret bombing of Cambodia. Well, it wasn’t secret with Barack Obama. He detailed 500 assassination drone missions on the Pakistani border and killed two citizens.

Maybe they deserved it, maybe not. And he bombed Libya. They said [Iran’s] an illegal war. What are you doing? Well, what was Libya for seven months of bombing with no congressional authority. I could go on, and you saw what [Bill] Clinton did.

So, given how astute he was and what a great president he was in foreign policy and why he had really silenced the Left, they wanted to get rid of him, and they got rid of him.

He resigned in the summer of ’73. They knew that Jerry Ford was kind of a nice guy but not really sharp and that they could manipulate him.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Blue States Are Betting Your Life on Illegal Truck Drivers

 

person 1: Twenty-one states and D.C. sue Trump administration to protect illegal alien drivers from the feds. This is from RedState.

So, 21 states and D.C. are effectively telling the Trump administration that they are more concerned about protecting the identities of illegal aliens than keeping American drivers safe on the roads. That’s the conclusion one can draw from stunning new lawsuits filed to keep the Department of Transportation from obtaining the identities of illegal aliens who have obtained commercial driver’s licenses.

Two lawsuits filed on Thursday, that’s a week ago from the day this particular episode is airing. Two lawsuits filed challenge the federal demands for Commercial Driver’s License Information System, CDLIS, records containing driver names, dates of birth, license numbers, and Social Security numbers, etc.

, that’s my state of Connecticut, your state of California, and 19 others, are just cool and dandy with these lunatics on the road. Your thoughts, Victor?

person 2 Yeah, well, I mean, I’m not a good person to talk to because we just drove back on Friday, the 200 miles from Stanford to Selma, and I can tell you that it is very, very scary to see the professionalism of the truck driver decline to such a degree because, I mean, when that truck, truck is in the right …

Part of it is the infrastructure of California under [Gov. Gavin] Newsom is so ossified. He didn’t do anything to improve it, and it’s Third World-like.

But when you see that truck driver go in the left lane, he doesn’t look at his rearview mirror to see who’s behind him. His theory is, “I’ve got 20 tons and nobody’s going to mess around with me.” And they just pull out, and then they get in the left lane, and they decide how many trucks they want to pass at 65 or 70. Forget the 55-mile limit. No one follows that anymore. And just keep going down the left lane until traffic, you know, that wants to go 80, I guess.

Now what they’re doing, Jack, is that, and maybe some of our listeners in California have noticed, they have screens, and they pull down on the side, you know, so you can’t look in at all. If you’re in a pickup or an elevated SUV, you can’t see who the driver is, so you have no idea.

On Aug. 8, we were driving back from Northern California and we, excuse me, from the Sierra, and we were cruising along making perfect time, and we were only 4 miles from home, and we passed the last exit before our exit, so we couldn’t get off, and the entire 99, three lanes, was just stopped for two hours on Aug. 8.

And we came in about 11:30. It had been stopped since 8:30. It was backed up 5 or 6 miles. It stayed stopped till 10 at night, 10 at night. And apparently, a truck driver with two big trailer tankers with a total of 8,000 gallons of gas was just driving along fast, saw a small box truck parked in the right lane where it had broken down, and he either tried …

He either was changing lanes back into the right, no one … The initial reports were he was changing lanes and not attentive, but he hit it. It was clear off the side of the road, and his truck exploded. He wasn’t hurt, and we had this toxic black plume, plume, flume or plume, either one, all over Selma.

And that traffic, it cost people 12, 15 hours on the main lateral north-to-south route in the center of the state. And to this day, they won’t tell you who the driver was. It’s just a complete news blackout. They won’t tell you who was culpable. News blackout.

California has sent down apparently an order that if there is a truck driver and the news people have not got to the scene and interviewed him, we are not going to release the information. At least we’re not going to release it in a prompt manner, even though it’s a public highway and even though the employees are public.

Because I think it could be, I’m not saying, I’m not suggesting it was someone who was not authorized to drive or got one of these pseudo licenses, but it’s very dangerous.

And when these states do this, they’re basically telling their population, “We’re taking a gamble with your lives because we’re going to play the odds because our virtue-signaling sense of self-guilt is more important than your collective safety. So we don’t want to know that we force poor little illegal aliens who are driving without properly qualifying on a driver’s test. We don’t want to impair their future or their careers, but we’re willing to risk your safety.”

That’s what it is. Simple as that.

person 1: Nearly half the states in America are essentially pro-criminal.

person 2 Yeah, they are. And we’re willing to take some collateral damage because we’ll get more media play that we’re morally superior to everybody than we will be culpable for the lives that these drivers have and will take in the future.

And it is scary when you see, when you get on an interstate in California or an intrastate, and you know that 60 years ago they promised there would be three lanes in each direction, and there’s still two. And you see a truck on the left and the right, and that truck doesn’t feel like it’s doing anything wrong. And they’re just plowing down at 65 to 75 miles an hour.

And you see all these drivers trying to cut in front of you to get around this obstacle. And then you look at how they drive, and when they have two trailers, the other one looks like the tail of a fish. It just goes back. Right. It wiggles, or a dog wiggling.

And at that speed, they don’t have any idea about speed, calibration …

person 1: Physics.

person 2 Physics, yeah.

They don’t have that 10 years of driving 20 tons. They don’t know the history of driving. They don’t know the protocols. They don’t know the language. And so, they do crazy things like flip U-turns or miss an exit and then back up on the shoulder to see if they can still get out after they’ve passed it.

And they don’t signal when they switch lanes, or they stay in the left lane as if they own it. Or I’ve seen now three lanes on the 99 where they’re in all three lanes for a particular time, for 5 or 6 miles.

And I go to rest stops, and when they come in, they’re of all different nationalities, and they don’t speak English. They speak native languages. I’ve at least seen they speak in an Indian dialect, Punjabi dialect, Chinese, Spanish, you name it. But they don’t, you know, they don’t seem …

person 1: Yeah. When I was driving down to see you a few weeks ago, there were some billboards, more than one, that were trucker-related that were, I’m pretty sure, Sikh. The language was …

So, the amount of these drivers just in California alone has got to be massive.

person 2 I don’t understand that because allegedly 30% to 40% of the truck drivers are Sikh immigrants. But the Sikh community is a very law-abiding, very successful community. It emphasizes, as I said in the case of [Zohran] Mamdani, if you look at all faiths and ethnicities of India, the census says Indian Americans are the highest-income ethnic group in the United States.

So, they’re very affluent. They’re highly educated. I don’t know why they would be protective of illegal Sikh, if that’s who it is, and Punjabi drivers coming through Mexico to get across the border illegally or overstaying a visa who don’t speak English and then put people at risk because they were able to finesse a driver’s test given that California waived the requirements for illegal aliens, apparently.

And then they would not join … You know what I mean?

I only say that because they signed a petition. Do you remember that?

person 1: Mm-hmm.

person 2 The Sikhs of Canada and the United States suggesting that what I’m saying right now was somehow culturally or racially insensitive.

But it isn’t, because they’re endangered too on the roads.

person 1: Right.

person 2 And so, it’s not aimed at any one group. It’s aimed at the idea of allowing someone here illegally who doesn’t speak the language and did not pass an authentic test to be let loose on the public with a dangerous machine.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

Opposing Democrats Is a Literal Matter of Life and Death

 

Every election season (and election seasons are getting longer and longer), we hear from Democrats about just how wonderful Medicare, the health insurance program for the elderly and disabled, is. It’s so amazing that they want to destroy everything that currently exists and replace it with this entitlement for everyone. To the average person, especially a leftist trained to look to government to take care of them, this sounds great – who doesn’t love Medicare? Well, me, for one, and a lot of people who know how it actually works. As you watch Democrats across the country campaign on this issue, maybe try to ask them about just a few of the obvious problems with Medicare they don’t want you to think about.

In this discussion, you have to put aside the cost. Medicare is going broke, and so is the country. “Medicare for All” is, in part, an attempt to extend its life. If you go from 66-ish million enrollees to 350 million premium-paying people (who don’t have any other option but joining), there will be a major influx of money that will, temporarily and mostly on paper, look pretty good. But doctors won’t be able to afford their entire practice, as Medicare “reimbursements” – code for what the government will pay for any given procedure – are, oftentimes, less than the cost to deliver the service.

Who could stay in business where everyone pays less than it costs for a good or service? No one. And if government pays more, the program costs more. The death spiral starts slow, but it is always steady.

This, of course, is just 15 years after Obamacare promised to end the uninsured problem and save every family $2,500 a year in premiums. Neither came remotely close to happening and were never really expected to – Democrats were the car salesman telling you the Corvette will get you chicks, knowing full well your balding, 200 extra pounds self could barely fit in the car.

You don’t get to change one part of an equation and have no effect on the rest of it; that’s not how life works.

More than that, however, is the simple fact that if Medicare is so wonderful, why does it require supplemental insurance? Unless you’re enrolled in Medicare, you have no idea how it works.

To get your Social Security, which you’ve also paid into your whole life, you have to enroll in Medicare Part A. Meaning that if you have insurance you like, the feds make you give it up – coerced enrollment – in order to get the money everyone pretends is in your account. Something wonderful and popular wouldn’t need to do that.

When you get there, you still have to pay premiums, which takes up a bunch of your Social Security money. Then you have to get Medicare Part B. Part A covers your hospital care, but you hopefully won’t be spending your time in the hospital, so the rest of your medical care is covered by Part B. Both of these “plans” pay only a portion of your costs, which is why you need the additional supplemental insurance, as those costs add up.

Suddenly, you’re paying a lot of money for something that’s “free.”

Oh, and if you want prescription drug coverage (and you do), you have to sign up for Medicare Part D, which is even more premiums. Then you just have to hope the government has chosen whatever prescriptions you may need to be worthy of inclusion in your plan so you can get them; otherwise it’s out of pocket or something else you must hope works as well.

Sounds like Utopia, doesn’t it?

The only thing single payer Medicare for All does is give politicians and bureaucrats complete control over your existence. From the cradle to the grave, what care you can get will not be determined by you and your doctor, but by elected and unelected people to whom you are a number in a spreadsheet. True, private insurance is not perfect, but you and your doctor can appeal their decisions and bring public pressure through media, and political pressure by contacting your Congressman, to change their decisions. When it’s the government standing in your way, who do you appeal to?

The answer is no one.

There’s a reason the world’s rich come to the United States for their healthcare, fleeing their single-payer systems when they get seriously ill. There’s a reason busloads of Canadians come to the United States for cancer treatment rather than wait in line and die in their “free” system.

What none of these leftists will tell you is, sure, socialized medicine is great…unless you get really sick. Have the flu, you can get a shot. Break your arm, you can get it set. Find a lump…get in line, and in six to eight months you’ll be able to meet with a specialist to see how best to begin the process of starting some kind of treatment. Provided, of course, you live that long, and it’s not too late by then to do anything about it.

The ultimate price control in healthcare is rationing care. No one wants to admit it, but that’s how it works. Slow-walk care and see who lives long enough to get it. The percentage is low.

But, they say, the overhead for Medicare is “Waaaay cheaper” than in the private sector, and that’s how we can save money – the efficiency! Ever known a government agency to be efficient? Medicare forces the doctors to do the paperwork – the push it off on them. Think of how efficient you could look on paper if you could force others to do your work.

Literally nothing they tell you is true or the whole picture. But once you’re in, they’ve got you.

This is why the filibuster is so important. Yes, without it Republicans could pass a lot of things, but Democrats would easily repeal them when they were in power and replace them with liberal priorities. The difference is the damage liberal policy priorities do is irreversible.

If Democrats destroyed the private health insurance market completely by making it illegal, then Republicans regain control and make it legal again, what do you think would happen? I can tell you the answer is nothing. Nothing.

The health insurance system in this country is very complex because of all the government interference – state and federal regulations, etc. Democrats would wipe it out, putting every company out of business. No one, no matter how rich, would invest in rebuilding something that would take years to do, knowing that Democrats could come back in at any moment and wipe it out again. Like life, once you wipe out the freedom in healthcare, it is gone – you only get one shot.

The government’s interference can be rolled back while the market still exists, and it should be, but once it’s gone, it is gone. That’s why we can’t let this happen, no matter what, by any means necessary. And those means start with voting against every single Democrat anywhere you find them on the ballot this fall, and every fall thereafter.

Democrats have never been more dangerous; we cannot allow them the literal power of life and death over everyone because we know what they’d choose.

Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,
Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )