Does Trump Really Want to Be President Again? ~ VDH

Given events since Trump’s departure, 

he should be in the driver’s seat. But he is not.

by Victor Davis Hanson for American Greatness

Team Trump has sometimes compared Donald Trump’s current quest for a nonsequential second term to two-term President Grover Cleveland’s similar three election bids. 

Cleveland remains our only elected (1884) president to have lost a reelection bid (1888)—in a disputed vote—only to be reelected four years later (1892). 

Yet Trump seems determined instead to follow a different, and bullheaded, Teddy Roosevelt model. 

Roosevelt left the presidency (1908), sat out four years, and then lost a reelection bid in 1912, split and alienated the Republican Party, and ensured the election of the progressive Woodrow Wilson. 

Joe Biden’s first “corrective” two years have been an utter disaster. 

Biden birthed hyperinflation. He destroyed a secure border and Trump’s energy self-sufficiency. Crime is now out of control. The United States was humiliated abroad in Afghanistan. Rising interest rates will soon spark a recession. 

 After promising to unite the country, Biden smeared half the voting population as “un-American” and “semi-fascist.” 

In addition, almost all of Trump’s prior complaints, predictions, and assertions that the media dismissed as conspiratorial, or crackpot have proven eerily prescient. 

Hunter Biden’s laptop was all too authentic. 

The FBI was compromised and acted as an agent of the Democratic Party. Anthony Fauci proved a partisan. 

Russian collusion was an utter hoax. It was engineered by Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and the FBI. 

The Wuhan lab did likely birth the engineered COVID virus. That fact wascovered up by the media and public health establishments. 

Donald Trump did not take “nuclear codes” to Mar-a-Lago. He did not plan on hawking his presidential papers for profit. 

Germany did weaken NATO. Berlin was foolish to mortgage its future with energy dependency on a hostile Vladimir Putin. 

The Biden family was utterly corrupt. It was deeply involved in lucrative quid pro quo machinations abroad with China and a crooked Ukrainian government-related company. 

John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, Anthony Fauci, and Robert Mueller all either did mislead, feign amnesia, or lie either to Congress or while under oath. 

Twitter was corrupt in asymmetrically banning the free expression of conservatives. Silicon Valley elites did conspire to sandbag Trump. 

The media was a fake news corrupt enterprise, as we see from the new Twitter trove, and the mass firings at CNN. 

So given events since Trump’s departure, he should be in the driver’s seat. But he is not. 

Why? 

Rather than offering detailed correctives for Biden’s disastrous record, Trump is again dabbling in social media madness. He needlessly floated the absurd idea that constitutional norms might need to be changed to allow the disputed 2020 election result to be overturned. 

He seems oblivious that the Left, not conservatives, talk of altering the Constitution. They call for the destruction of the Electoral College, and wish to dilute the Second Amendment and redefine the First. 

Why did Trump need to descend into personal invective when prior to the midterms, many primary polls were confirming his front-runner status? 

Why did he not remain magnanimous, unite the party, and focus on giving millions to his endorsed but endangered candidates like Dr. Mehmet Oz, Blake Masters, and Herschel Walker? 

Why did Trump bizarrely claim that possible presidential rival candidate Glenn Youngkin’s name sounded “Chinese”? What was the logic of attacking Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) wife in racialist terms? 

Every elected public official or candidate—with the exception of Barack Obama who once was photographed smiling with a grinning, Jewish-hating Louis Farrakhan— knows there is only one rule concerning antisemites: Go nowhere near them. 

Yet Trump dined with two, the now unhinged Kanye West (“Ye”) and the 20-something crackpot Nick Fuentes. 

Why would Trump all but announce before the midterms that after the election he would be a candidate? 

Or why right before November 8, did Trump attack Ron DeSantis (“DeSanctimonious”), the miracle-worker Republican governor of Trump’s own Florida? 

Did Trump wish to rile up left-wing Trump-haters to rush to the midterm polls, or to persuade miffed conservative DeSantis voters to stay home? 

In the impending Trump-DeSantis collision, voters will be looking for resolution of two respective unknowns. 

One, will Donald Trump run on his stellar record, avoid controversy, and stick to the issues? And will he thereby win back independent, swing voters on assurances that they could get more MAGA successes, but this time around without the insults and spats? 

And two, could DeSantis assure Republicans of a fire-in-the belly, Trumpian zeal to take on the Left, while soberly promoting a MAGA agenda—and thus win over the hard-core Trump base? 

So far, De Santis is reassuring donors and primary voters he can be as tough as his record is impressive. 

But Trump is not encouraging the donor class and independent voters that he has learned that melodramas and social media riffs are not his friends.

X22, Red Pill news, and more- December 8

 

Evening, I want to know when Hetty is coming back. Here's tonight's news:

The 'China Model' and the WEF

posted by Scott S. Powell at American Thinker

For decades Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum (WEF) has been recruiting and cultivating corporate and political leaders from all over the world to embrace a vision and plan for a complete social, political, and economic transformation -- a “Great Reset” -- which is nothing short of a communist “New World Order.” This plan calls for the end of sovereign states; the end of private property and the remaking of the economy based on environmental, social, and governance rankings; the replacement of oil and gas with so-called green and sustainable sources of energy; the transformation of agricultural production; the replacement of traditional money with social credit score-linked digital currency; and the requirement of universal health passports -- to name some key WEF objectives.

After the G20 meeting in Indonesia on November 15-16, 2022, WEF chairman Klaus Schwab broadcast on CGTN TV that “the Chinese model is certainly a very attractive model…” For Schwab, China is the model because the totality of its social controls is what is needed to facilitate the Great Reset. So, let’s recap the main elements of the Chinese model and then examine the correlation to the WEF program.

China is a one-party state ruled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which now has the distinction, along with North Korea, of having the most complete totalitarian control over its people of any state in all human history. The CCP has now accomplished:

• the near total control of peoples’ thinking and knowledge of history through state control of schools, the internet, and all media
• the control of people’s behavior through a digital currency controlled by the state with accounts for every Chinese citizen -- accounts that the government can turn off when account holder’s social credit score drops or when the account holder travels outside a zone prescribed by government
• the control of people by requiring universal health passports
• the control of people by way of wall-to-wall facial-recognition camera surveillance    

The China model has also embraced a “zero-COVID” policy, wherein citizens have been put under virtual house arrest for months, making it impossible to even go out to buy food -- all for the cause of achieving zero COVID cases. The world just got a glimpse of the powder keg that is China when the simmering grievances against this draconian zero-COVID policy erupted in unprecedented street protests all over the country on November 25, 2022, after ten people burned alive in a high-rise apartment in the city of Urumqui. These deaths were the direct result of government’s policy of enforced quarantines that that included welding apartment doors shut to prevent escape.

Diverse countries from Canada, Holland, and Germany to Australia, New Zealand, and Sri Lanka have all experienced severe injury from policies implemented by political leaders groomed by Schwab and his Young Global Leaders program.

In Canada, it is well known that Prime Minster Justin Trudeau is one of Schwab’s most favored young leaders. In 2017 Schwab had a reception for Justin Trudeau, in which he said, “we penetrate the cabinets… and I know that half his cabinet are actually [WEF] Young Global Leaders.”

Canadian policies appear to have come right out of the WEF playbook. Obsessed with climate change and the achievement of zero emissions, Trudeau has imposed a carbon tax, and ordered farmers to reduce fertilizers by 30% use by 2030. Trudeau also signed the Known Traveler Digital ID program -- a WEF initiative -- without the Canadian people’s consent. Trudeau’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Chrystia Freeland, is all in, co-chairing a WEF Zoom meeting in December 2020 to convey that goals after the pandemic should revolve around restructuring society, canceling oil and gas development, and censoring the internet. In 2022 Freeland was in lockstep with the WEF during the Canadian trucker’s protest, when she shut down the corporate and personal bank accounts of truckers and donors to the trucker protest.

In Germany, Angela Merkel was recognized as a leader by Schwab in the late 1990s and remained prominent within the WEF during her 16-year stint as chancellor of Germany. In 2011 she upended Germany’s energy makeup, shuttering coal power plants (supplying 50% of Germany’s power), phasing out nuclear power plants (supplying 23%), and accelerating wind and solar renewable energy. As a result, today Germany faces the self-inflicted disaster of unprecedented energy shortages and dramatic price increases, causing Germany’s two largest steel manufacturers to close operations, along with the closure of paper and glass manufacturers. Now Germany’s showcase automotive industry is at risk.

In the Netherlands, Prime Minster Mark Rutte was recognized as a promising global leader by Schwab by about 2017 -- when Rutte was entering his third term. In 2020 he was chosen to host the flagship event of WEF’s Food Action Alliance called the European Food Innovation Hub. The following year WEF’s European Food Hub project was funded by the Dutch government and established in Wageningen, the Netherlands.

In June 2022, Rutte’s ruling coalition announced the requirement for Holland to cut emissions of pollutants -- predominantly fertilizers made up of nitrogen oxide and ammonia -- by 50% by 2030.  When it was learned that would require dramatic livestock reduction and the closing of thousands of farms, Dutch farmers took to the streets like Canadian truckers, only in their tractors, shutting down commerce and traffic on highways for months. Unfazed by these disruptive protests, the Rutte government has pushed ahead, and announced it will buy out, and seize, if necessary, some 3000 farms.

Why should this happen in Holland, the number two exporter (after the U.S.) of agricultural products in the world? One Dutch legislator who filed a  FOI request for correspondence between Dutch Government officials and Schwab between 2016 and 2021 thinks that evidence shows that Holland’s priorities and policies shifted and became aligned with WEF’s initiative to “transform the way food is produced, supplied and consumed.” 

On the other side of the world, Schwab and the WEF have made major inroads with the ruling class in both Australia and New Zealand. 

The record and content of email between Australian prime minister Scott Morrison and Schwab from 2018-2022 obtained by a Freedom of Information filing with the Australian government suggests that Morrison is acting as a proxy to WEF’s “Great Reset.”  Morrison admits, “Australia… sees close alignment between the WEF and Australia’s trade and investment policy priorities…” 

Jacinda Ardern, the present prime minister of New Zealand was first elected MP in 2008 when she was twenty-eight, the same year she was elected to be the president of the International Union of Socialist Youth, a role which also took her on a China visit. She was first chosen for the WEF Young Global Leaders program in 2014. In her first term as prime minister, Ardern was faced with making leadership decisions as COVID-19 arrived in New Zealand in late February 2020. Her draconian lockdown policies were among the most severe among nations -- so much so that some charged her with purposely trying to see just how much control a “democracy” could hold over the people. In November 2020 correspondence to Arden, Schwab wrote, “The Forum will work closely with your office to ensure… the ensuing Great Reset process are of maximum value to your country and its role in shaping the post-Covid-19 world.” 

Sri Lanka, a lush country of rice paddies and banana plantations, was in the news last July when its president, Gotabaya Rajapaska, fled the country after riots erupted over inflation, shortages of food, power blackouts, and government bankruptcy. It turns out that Rajapaska was the fall guy, for he left Sri Lanka in the hands of the prime minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, the devoted “Member and Agenda Coordinator for WEF,” who was the chief architect of the green energy transition that had brought on the collapse after banning nitrogen-based fertilizers and curtailing fossil fuel use in Sri Lanka. 

The average Sri Lankan was clueless, but the government under Wickremesinghe didn’t miss a beat amid the crisis, implementing a nationwide QR code digital ID to facilitate a national fuel rationing scheme. All of this would be considered unbelievable fiction for a country whose long history never included a food crisis or shortage, if so many Sri Lankan people’s lives weren’t in fact devastated and destroyed by misguided policies from WEF elites.

It’s really past the time that people recognize that the elite capture, influence, and control from Chinese communists and that of the clubby cult of Klaus Schwab and the WEF are two fronts of the same irregular war. If they are not rejected and stopped freedom will be lost.

Why is TIME POY President Zelenskyy Banning Christianity in Ukraine?

posted by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse 

Time Magazine Bestows “Person of Year” Award to 

the World’s Largest Beneficiary of Taxpayer Funding

Comrade rebels, this is as fitting an attribution as one could make, given the state of international affairs.

Time Magazine has decreed their oft coveted “Person of The Year” award to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the world’s richest man as delivered by congress via U.S. taxpayers.

The actor-turned-president was bestowed the honor during an announcement on Wednesday by Time Magazine Editor-in-Chief Edward Felsenthal on the TODAY show.

The media outlet credits Zelenskyy’s courage, leadership and magnanimous stewardship of Ukraine’s defense, as well as victory in framing the international public image of the embattled nation.

(Via NPR) – […] “Whether one looks at this story of Ukraine with a sense of hope or a sense of fear, and the story is, of course, not fully written yet … Zelenskyy has really galvanized the world in a way we haven’t seen in decades,” Editor-in-Chief Edward Felsenthal said when revealing the news on the TODAY show.

The cover features a profile of Zelenskyy in his classic army-green sweater, surrounded by individual figures and crowds of protesters. They are interspersed with bright yellow sunflowers and blue-and-yellow Ukrainian flags. (read more)

Given the background, it doesn’t come as a surprise.  Zelenskyy has previously made political opposition parties illegal and removed all media from Ukraine that is not state authorized.   However, the move to ban a Ukraine orthodox religion is still a considerable escalation into totalitarian extremes; all supported by the U.S. State Dept.

As Carlson notes in the latter part of his monologue, the insufferable propaganda has enmeshed the Ukrainian face of western government, “It’s just a grotesque post-modern psy-op, and anyone still falling for this is brain damaged.”  WATCH:

Carlson is correct.  The Ukraine narrative has been a western, state department + CIA, designed operation from the outset.  On the backside it’s a political money laundering operation feeding defense contractors, corporations, western politicians, congress, political campaigns and DC think tanks.

Approximately two-thirds of the American electorate bought into the media promoted Ukraine construct; which. again, is not surprising considering that roughly 72% of healthy adult Americans lined up for an untested. experimental and sketchy COVID vaccine, the result of government advocacy and pressure.

New York and California in a Race to Hit Rock Bottom

With two of America’s leading states hell-bent on self-destruction, the source for our future optimism will have to come from somewhere else.

by Brian Lonergan for American Greatness

Throughout much of the 20th century, America’s status as an economic superpower and the world’s standard-bearer for freedom and opportunity was due in no small measure to the successes of New York and California. Today, those states have become symbols of America’s decline, as the consequences of their incompetent, partisan leadership are now undeniable. Nowhere is this clearer than how these two formerly great states have addressed immigration.

Despite the fact that several counties in upstate New York are fairly moderate politically, the state government is largely influenced by New York City, and the leadership of New York City is not living in the same reality as the rest of us.

Two elected officials from the Big Apple at the state capital in Albany are currently pushing a bill that would allocate as much as $300 million to provide legal services for illegal aliens fighting deportation. The state that was arguably hardest hit by the pandemic and is still recovering would have to make a $55 million down payment next year to get the program started.

This is not just a bad idea, but a complete misunderstanding of immigration law. Entering the country illegally is a civil matter, not a criminal one. Litigants in civil matters have no right to legal representation paid by the state.

This has not stopped the city from finding a back door to help immigration violators avoid deportation. Earlier this year an investigation by the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) found that the Vera Institute of Justice, a New York-based progressive nonprofit, worked with the city to develop a program to provide free or low-cost legal assistance to aliens.

While the group provides a one-time grant to initiate the program, its aim is for the program to be funded with taxpayer funds thereafter. Vera has spread the program to at least 20 other communities across the nation.     

New York City Mayor Eric Adams just spent months complaining in the media about how a few busloads of illegal aliens from Texas were crippling the city’s social services. Why, then, are city’s representatives in the state government trying to keep even more aliens in the city?

California, meanwhile, makes a good case for being known as the most unhinged state when it comes to immigration policy. At the height of the pandemic and with limited resources to help its legal residents, Governor Gavin Newsom announced a plan to distribute $125 million to illegal aliens living in the state as relief assistance during the pandemic.

The Golden State’s law to close all its detention facilities run by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was so unacceptable that even the left-leaning Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck it down in September.

California’s immigration virtue signaling carries a hefty price tag. State residents foot the bill for more than $23 billion in costs directly attributable to illegal immigration and its effects. That breaks down to almost $2,000 for every legal household each year. This from a state that is already carrying more than $1.3 trillion in total state, county, and municipal debt.

In addition to the crippling financial burdens it brings, New York and California’s obsession with illegal immigration has contributed to soaring crime rates. Due in large part to the hellish reign of sanctuary Mayor Bill de Blasio, the New York City of Rudy Giuliani—credibly called the “Safest Big City in the World” at the time—quickly became a place where deportable aliens are charged with sexual assault and murder against grandmothers on public sidewalks.

With the anti-borders policies of Newsom, Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón, and others in place, California also has a runaway crime problem. Former L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti released a video in 2019 promising to defy the Trump Administration and federal immigration authorities.

“I want you to know, you do not need to be afraid,” Garcetti said. “Your city is on your side, and rest assured, here in Los Angeles, we are not coordinating with ICE.” 

That kind of permissiveness disguised as compassion has a body count. Last year Karen Ruiz, a 35-year-old mother in Pacoima, California, was shot dead in her driveway. The incident was recorded on her home security camera. Police identified the shooter as Herbert Nixon Flores, her ex-husband, and father of her child, who shot and killed himself days later.

Flores had an extensive criminal history and was a repeat immigration offender. He had been sought by ICE for removal after a previous arrest, but the LAPD denied the detainer request as part of the city’s sanctuary policy.

With madness like this, it should surprise no one that IRLI’s ranking of the country’s most dangerous sanctuary communities in August included New York first, Los Angeles second, and San Francisco fifth. California and New York also hold the top two positions in states with the most residents moving out.

America has always stood apart from the rest of the world as a nation of unbridled optimism. With two of its leading states hell-bent on self-destruction, the source of our future optimism will have to come from somewhere else.

Why Elon Musk’s ‘Twitter Files’ Matter

A rant. 

posted by David Harsanyi at The Federalist

Mostly because the evidence confirms all my priors.

Elon Musk’s release of emails relating to Twitter’s 2020 presidential election censorship efforts confirms that big political media, Big Tech companies, and former intelligence officials were part of a ratf—ing operation in 2020. It confirms that the social media platform suppressed unfavorable stories to benefit one party, dispelling the notion that the platform acted as a neutral arbiter. It confirms that claims of “dis-” and “misinformation” are often used by censors to quash inconvenient news and debate. And the reaction from political journos to these revelations confirms there are no regrets.

We haven’t even seen all the emails. Not that we need a Ron Klain email demanding Twitter suspend the New York Post’s account to know what happened. Coordination doesn’t necessitate explicit instructions from a political Svengali. People know what to do without being told. Partisans coalesce around talking points and groupthink metastasizes. This happens all the time on both sides. It happened when journalist Matt Taibbi was reporting on the Twitter files the other night, and virtually every big left-wing account dropped nearly the same rhetoric and framing to smear him.

What we learned was that plenty of Twitter higher-ups knew the company’s rationale for killing a major news story right before an election was hopelessly rickety.

“I’m struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this as unsafe,” wrote communications official Trenton Kennedy about the Hunter story. “Can we truthfully claim that this is part of the policy?” then-Vice President of Global Communications Brandon Borrman asked.

But then, General Counsel Jim Baker, one of the Democrats who helped run the Russia collusion swindle on Americans (who was fired Tuesday for vetting the first batch of released emails without telling management), responded that it was “reasonable for us to assume that they may have been [hacked] and that caution is warranted.”

All they needed were 51 former intelligence officials, including known perjurers like Jim Clapper and John Brennan, to claim the Hunter Biden story had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” They passed this deceitful claim to the unscrupulous “journalist” Natasha Bertrand, then at Politico. From there, the story was repeated endlessly by gullible reporters and/or willful hacks. And Twitter had its justification.

They would never be able to hide the story, but they could undercut the public’s trust in the newsworthy aspects. If more voters believed that Joe had known about his son cashing in on the family name or that there was circumstantial evidence that the former vice president was a beneficiary of those shady Chicom and Ukrainian deals, it could have mattered. And, after the media had convinced themselves that the Hillary Clinton email scandal — a completely legitimate story — had handed the election to that orange fascist, they would never let journalism get in the way again.

Now, if journalists had gotten their hands on a laptop containing pictures of Don Jr. weighing out 21 grams of crack with a, um, “sex worker,” there is not a social media platform or major media outlet in the universe that would have banned the story. And if that laptop had contained circumstantial evidence linking the Republican presidential candidate to a 10 percent cut of that Burisma cash it would have dominated the news — and rightfully so.

Yet, The Washington Post’s Philip Bump and Glenn Kessler are still arguing that their newspaper couldn’t pass along the story without doing its own independent verification. When I noted that The Washington Post did not make a habit of handing over data and sources to competing newspapers, Bump responded: “You didn’t know that other outlets won’t run a report on a Post scoop without confirming it themselves? You seem surprisingly underinformed about how actual journalism works, which I suppose isn’t really a surprise.”

Am I? Because media outlets, including The Washington Post, run scoops from other organizations all the time and simply credit the competing outlet. It would have taken Bump only a few minutes to pursue his own archives to find dozens of such examples. This has not only been the norm since I started in the business more than two decades ago, but since journalism was invented.

Of course, the Hunter story — with receipts, hard evidence, and on-the-record witnesses — had far more journalistic substantiation than virtually any of the anonymous one-source Russia-collusion “scoops” that Bump and The Washington Post peddled for years. Though, to be fair, some of those stories, like Jeffrey Goldberg’s “Losers and Suckers” story or The New York Times’s Russia “bounty” story — which WaPo columnists shared as irrefutable and unimpeachable — seemingly pulled their sourcing from the ether.

That’s not to say that major outlets didn’t talk about the Hunter story. They did. Quite a bit. Rather than deploying reporters to gather evidence to either verify or debunk specifics, reporters ran process stories to discredit the reporting. The New York Times ran an anonymously sourced piece highlighting the supposedly nagging “doubts” in the New York Post’s newsroom over the veracity of the emails. NBC’s Ken Dilanian reported that the Feds were examining “whether alleged Hunter Biden emails are linked to a foreign intel operation.” (What was the outcome?) Left-wing activists Ben Collins and Brandy Zadrozny wrote about “How a fake persona laid the groundwork for a Hunter Biden conspiracy deluge” and “Inside the campaign to ‘pizzagate’ Hunter Biden” — which, as with most of their writing, amplifies fringe positions to discredit genuine stories. The Washington Post’s preposterous “explainer” ignored the most revelatory aspects of the reporting and instead asked rhetorical questions like, “What does the Biden campaign say?” and “What does Hunter Biden say?” and “How do we know the email is authentic?” (Their answer: “We do not.”) The Post had never treated a scoop that confirmed their narrative from another major left-wing outlet in this way. And, of course, all the emails would be authenticated.

Others have made a big deal over the fact that Trump was president when all this happened (true) and that Twitter hadn’t engaged in any First Amendment violations (probably true). So what? Limiting speech during a presidential campaign is still an illiberal and unethical act, even if it is legal. And entrenched state interests — intelligence officials, for example — can work to undermine the political process in numerous ways. Not long ago, Mark Zuckerberg told Joe Rogan that Facebook had limited the Hunter Biden story because of warnings from the FBI about “misinformation.” In better times, the news of a giant, rent-seeking company censoring a political story at the behest of the Feds would set off blaring alarms among outlets that fashion themselves the bulwarks of democracy.

Now, I have no clue if the Hunter story would have turned the 2020 election, and neither do you, but it would be truly refreshing if those dismissing the Twitter files would simply admit that they believe Donald Trump, and Republicans in general, are existential threats to “democracy,” and so journalistic ethics and free expression ideals need to be shelved for the greater good. It’s an illiberal position, sure, but an honest one.

Project Veritas Undercover Highlights Chicago School Dean Bragging About Sharing Sex Toys with Minors in Classroom

Well, this is creepy and sick.  Project Veritas Undercover has captured video of a Chicago school dean of students bragging about how he organizes sexualization of minors in school complete with butt plugs, dildos and other sex toys for the students to play with.

[Project Veritas] –  Project Veritas released a new video today exposing a high-ranking private school official, Joseph Bruno, who admitted that he teaches underage children about sex with items such as “butt-plugs” and “dildos.”

Bruno, who works as the Dean of Students at an elite school in Chicago called Francis W. Parker, said that these were the items brought into the classroom by an LGBTQ+ group.

“So, I’ve been the Dean for four years. During Pride — we do a Pride Week every year — I had our LGBTQ+ Health Center come in [to the classroom]. They were passing around butt-plugs and dildos to my students — talking about queer sex, using lube versus using spit,” Bruno said.  WATCH:

These people are not stable, they’re sick.  

Who sexualizes students and children like this?