Normal Is the New Normal

American  Thinker 

It has been two weeks since Charlie Kirk was killed. Many, many words have been written and spoken about him and in reaction to his death. There have been many events, memorials, and eulogies, but also criminal acts. I’ve been reading and thinking, coming to a synthetic conclusion rather than reacting quickly.

There is absolutely no excuse for killing Charlie Kirk. No one should be killed for their words. They might be shunned, or even arrested, but never killed. No matter how vile the advocacy or idea, murder is not a rhetorical tactic.

His killing is, sadly and revealingly, simply an extension of the violent language and actions of the Left. Conservatives are routinely called Nazis, fascists, and murderers, the limiters of speech and haters of women, gays, trans, and indigenous people. Even before Kirk’s murder, innumerable commenters on X and Instagram have called for the death of conservatives. The Left does not argue; it exercises the heckler’s veto, screaming when conservatives speak, blowing air horns, physically assaulting conservatives. They blocked access for Charlie Kirk on campuses just as they blocked access to Donald Trump’s first inauguration and continue to block major roads by gluing themselves to the pavement in environmental protests. They interrupt speeches, political meetings, and football games with screaming, spraying glitter, even throwing paint and soup on precious artwork.

These are the behaviors of spoiled teens, not political expression. In any sane world these people would get significant fines and even jail time for their disruptions. Instead, leftist attorneys general and mayors refuse to arrest or condemn. They cite free speech rights as an excuse for disruptive actions. These same leftists do not enforce public order laws, claiming they are racist. In addition to the disruptions by the Left, open drug use, tent cities, and public defecation are not even cited; they are tolerated. Tolerated! There is an app for San Francisco to mark where human feces are on the sidewalks.

Our toleration of these behaviors and labels has led to their normalization and by extension, to imagining and then planning killing as a means of expressing political anger. After all, isn’t it righteous to kill oppressive Nazis and fascists? The result is the shooting of Steve Scalise, two assassination attempts on Trump, and the killing of Charlie Kirk. Leftists try to equate left-wing and right-wing violence, but this is utterly specious. They constantly cite J6 as evidence the Right is violent as well. But not only is tu quoque not a legal or rhetorical argument, there is a difference of kind and degree, a huge difference. Leftists use violence as a tool and a means of expression. It is a deliberately chosen method, not an emotional eruption.

Charlie Kirk has been memorialized with church services, public vigils, and prayer services. Black Lives Matter was expressed with three months of rioting that caused 1–2 billion dollars in damages. Can you imagine what these people would have done if a national leftist speaker had been assassinated by a right-winger? And if that person had been black…there would have been entire downtowns burned down and police killed. And they claim that both Left and Right use violence? That’s bulls–t and gaslighting.

But that is typical of the rhetoric of the Left. Any disagreement is hate speech. Kirk, who never condemned a soul, was repeatedly attacked by the Left for hating on gays, trans, and black and brown people. And just like Nazis and fascists, who doesn’t want to extinguish hate?

In the wake of Kirk’s death there have been three reactions on the Left. Some have legitimately grieved his death and the implications for our society. The other two reactions, however, have been to excuse his death because of his inflammatory words, or to rejoice in it. Excusing Kirk’s assassination by saying he was hateful and inflammatory is exactly like blaming a woman for her rape by saying she was wearing provocative clothing. And rejoicing in political killing? That’s sickening.

Society’s reaction here is revealing. Companies and universities won’t have it. Numerous people have been fired from their jobs for such postings, and rightly so. Jimmy Kimmel not only blamed Kirk’s death on MAGA, a claim refuted by the killer’s words and multiple police and FBI investigators, he planned even more anti-MAGA rhetoric as a further response. He refused to apologize for his speech, and was pulled from the air “indefinitely”, then claimed he never meant to dishonor Kirk’s death—he’s now back on the air after Disney reversed course. And all around America, people are volunteering for Turning Point USA. As of the last available count, they had requests for 62,000 new chapters. They had 900 existing prior to Kirk’s killing, plus 1,100 campus locations.

The collective reaction is one not simply of grief and horror but of disgust with the Left. Society has been fed a long list of distortions and lies for 20-plus years, and there is a collective, quiet refutation in word and deed.

The Left claims this reaction is hate and speech suppression, citing First Amendment rights. That’s more leftist garbage. The First Amendment prevents governmental suppression of speech, not societal. There is no obligation for anyone to listen, no obligation for employers to tolerate foul, hateful, or violent language by their employees. It’s an ironic and ludicrous claim from the same crowd that has screamed for firings for misuse of pronouns, refusal to accept “trans” behaviors, racial “micro-aggressions”, or denying systemic racism. You wanted equality and you got it, getting fired for your truly foul speech just as you fired us simply for expressing an opinion.

The Left has shown us all that it is willing to use disruption violence, and now murder, as political tools. There is a collective sense of enough—no more faux tolerance in the name of imaginary racism, sexism, and homophobia. No more disorder. And this is my conclusion from Kirk’s horrible death. No more. No more leftist manipulations and lies. No more toleration of violence. Normal is the new normal. It has always been normal, and society is going to re-assert that.

No more catering to the mentally ill who imagine they are a different gender. The long-established true incidence of gender dysphoria is 1/10,000, not the 1/167 figure ludicrously claimed by “sexual advocates,” and virtually exclusive to males.

No more toleration of homeless encampments, which impinge on public order and safety and are a breeding ground for disease and vermin.

No more public disorder in the name of freedom. The essential corollaries of freedom are responsibility, public manners, and restraint.

No more open, illegal immigration, a wink and a nod to behavior that begins and ends with illegality. There is a legal process to enter the U.S.; use it.

No more DEI, which is simply leftist racism and sexism. Merit is what counts.

The path to peace and normalcy isn’t through accommodation. That is not possible. We have surrendered to leftist misbehavior, gaslighting, and violence for far too long. And conservatives do not murder. That isn’t the path to normalcy either. The path is through the ballot box and at law. The Left can cooperate and we can create peace together. Or they can resist, obstruct, and sue. And we will vote you out and win at the bar.

No more. Normal is the new normal. Thank you, Charlie Kirk, whose death did not silence him but rather amplified him into millions of determined people.

Entertainment and podcast thread for Sept 26

 

All things happen through God.

To End Polarization, Defeat the Totalitarian Left

Townhall 

After a well-publicized case of political violence—such as a riot or assassination—commentators often speak of the need to “end polarization” and “cool down the rhetoric.” They sometimes assign blame to both sides and urge everyone to step back.

I’m all for reducing polarization and hate. But in our present situation, “both sides” are not equally at fault. As between the right and left sides of the political spectrum, the overwhelming majority of attacks are coming from the Left. The Right could act and speak like St. Francis of Assisi, but it would do little to reduce hate and violence.

In other words, those directing their comments to both sides are committing the fallacy of false equivalence .

The Evidence

Let’s examine the evidence:

Assassinations and assassination attempts: With a single exception of the wack-job who killed a Minnesota state lawmaker, the motivations for recent assassination attempts have been almost exclusively leftist. Examples include the assassination of Charlie Kirk and the two attempts on President Trump. Likewise, the suspect in the attempted killing of Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro apparently wanted to punish Shapiro for not supporting the “Palestinian” cause. And despite all the media chatter about Proud Boys and white supremacist groups, for political violence the Right has nothing like Antifa.

With rare exceptions, the Left is shooting at the Right. The Right is not shooting at the Left. (Nor should it!)

Riots: In the 60 years I’ve been following politics, every publicized political riot except the one on January 6, 2021 has been fostered or stoked by left-wing activists. The playbook for January 6 itself was written by leftists: their 2011 occupation of the Wisconsin capitol, the 2018 storming of the Supreme Court and invasion of the U.S. Senate office building, and the 2020 George Floyd insurrections. It was replayed when leftists flooded back into the Senate office Building last year.

Almost without exception, political riots are caused by the Left, not the Right.

Suppression of dissent. The leftist Biden Administration launched the most massive attack on the First Amendment in peacetime American history. Another confirmation of this just came from Alphabet, the parent company of Google and YouTube, which revealed that “Senior Biden Administration officials, including White House officials, conducted repeated and sustained” efforts to get Google and YouTube to censor content.

On college campuses, the dominant leftist culture routinely suppressesconservatives. Contrary examples are almost unheard of.

The Left is suppressing the Right; the Right is not suppressing the Left. 

Ultimate political goals. Conservatives and libertarians believe in freedom and small government. Most just want to live and let live. Leftists, by contrast, favor using force to bend others to their will. They favor moral shaming, higher taxes, more government spending, more economic regulation, more central authority, more restrictions on free speech, more bureaucratic control of health care, less scope for religious liberty, and seizure of private property.

Even when leftists use the term “freedom,” they do so perversely. That is, they apply the word “freedom” to programs of coercion. For example, the “freedom” of a sex change operation or an abortion always entails forcing others to pay for it or otherwise participate.

The Left seeks to coerce the Right; the Right is not trying to coerce the Left.

Political rhetoric. I’m not always happy with President Trump’s political rhetoric. But one reason it stands out is that it is so unusual for a conservative or a Republican to talk that way. We have learned that over-the-top rhetoric almost always comes from the Left. For many years, leftists routinely have labeled pro-freedom conservatives as extremists, radicals, Fascists and Nazis.

In 2021, I published the results of a Google Ngram that documented the point. The Ngram surveyed the use of various political insults in 20th and 21st century American writings. The results showed that the phrase “right wing extremist” appeared far more often than “left wing extremist.” Similarly, “far right” appeared much more often than “far left,” and “ultra conservative” much more than “ultra liberal.”

In other words, people on the Left were hurling these insults far more frequently than those on the Right. What made the findings particularly weird was that the period surveyed included the Cold War—when the dominant threat to America really did come from the far Left (Communism). But even in that climate, more opprobrium was hurled against the Right.

Here’s a personal experience along the same line: When I was active in Montana politics, I proposed a school choice plan far less sweeping than the one then promoted by then-President George H.W. Bush. So my plan was more moderate than the one proposed by a moderate Republican. Yet leftists charged that my plan showed that I was a “radical” and an “extremist.”

I admit that in the realm of rhetoric—unlike the others listed above—conservatives bear some blame. But even when conservative language was more measured, that restraint did not blunt the violence and suppression coming from the Left.

What Has Happened

When I was growing up, there were plenty of political liberals. They believed in government action, but they also recognized that individual human rights are important. Correspondingly, they acknowledged that there are limits on how much government should control people.

That has changed. Yesterday’s liberals have been largely replaced by today’s totalitarian leftists.

I first noticed the change about 15 years ago, while working on an interactive political website. Many of our participants were new “progressives” rather than old liberals. Like the liberals, they favored activist government. But unlike the liberals they acknowledged no moral limits on government—so long as it did what they wanted it to do. As I wrote at the time, America was being attacked by a new breed of totalitarians.

Those totalitarians have now infected much of American society and many of our institutions.

How We Should Respond

We cannot successfully appease totalitarian leftists, or get them to play nicely with us by playing nicely with them. (Read the much-overrated Saul Alinsky if you doubt me on this point.) They are unappeasable. Nor can we compromise with them—because, having gotten some of what they want in the compromise, they always will be back for more.

History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes. That’s why we can learn from history. Consider three historical parallels:

During the American Revolution, a large minority of Americans (called “Tories”) rejected the very idea of Independence. Many of them went to war against their fellow Americans, and were guilty of atrocities far greater than those inflicted by the British.

The hard-core Tories could not be appeased. They had to be defeated. Those who remained irreconcilable had to leave the country.

During the Civil War, a large minority of Americans rejected our Founding Creed. They did not believe that “all men are created equal,” nor did they concede that African Americans had any rights at all. Indeed, the more extreme Confederates (and I am not including heroes like Robert E. Lee in this category) literally held racial views that prefigured those of the Nazis.

Those people could not be appeased. They had to be defeated and denied the right to participate in government.

During the Cold War a small Fifth Column of Americans betrayed their own country by working for brutal foreign totalitarian powers. Those people had to be removed from positions of influence, and those guilty of espionage or violence had to be incarcerated or executed.

Reconciliation will not come by playing gently with totalitarian leftists. It will come when we defeat them.

How ‘They’ Killed Charlie Kirk and How They Might Lose the Mushy Middle

Tyler Robinson (allegedly) pulled the trigger, but he was armed with a deadly ideology, wound up by narcissistic rage, and sent out into the world by a leftist culture that told him, and a thousand like him, that “words are violence.” 

American  Thinker 

“They” killed Charlie Kirk. Tyler Robinson (allegedly) pulled the trigger, but he was armed with a deadly ideology, wound up by narcissistic rage, and sent out into the world by a leftist culture that told him, and a thousand like him, that since “words are violence,” violence is justified to stop those words. He allegedly texted his trans-gay partner, “I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.” Where did he learn that Kirk was the hateful one, rather than the one who took a gun to a word-fight? The Left. Oh, sure, they didn’t collectively pull the trigger, but they wrote the ethic and catechized the assassin in it. They cultivated the ethos that made the shot inevitable. They baptized narcissistic rage, and then wondered why someone snapped. When the assassin lashed out, it wasn’t a bug in their system. It was a feature.

The Closing of the American Mind

In 1987, Allan Bloom published The Closing of the American Mind, warning how American academics were becoming increasingly insular and, despite their then claims of “liberalism,” illiberal. A professor of mine, then, pooh-poohed it, as if Bloom’s concerns were over-wrought and hysterical. In the ‘90s, conservatives began to complain about “political correctness,” now a quaint-sounding concern. Then came, by the 2010s, “cultural Marxism,” Antifa hooliganism, and wokeness. Still, the vast middle swath of America wasn’t convinced it was a threat. Smash a storefront for “justice”? That’s activism. Shut down a Riley Gaines speech at San Francisco State University? That’s safety. Fire a man for his tweets? That’s accountability. Even if it was excessive, it was moral zeal, so they thought, or hoped. Then a shot rang out at Utah Valley University. Suddenly, the pooh-pooing is over.

For decades, they told us: their mind is not closing. It’s becoming “woke” and so awake to how benighted we are. Meanwhile, they became numb to their own hatefulness. “Tolerance” doesn’t mean, in their mouths, the allowance of different points of view. It means only allowing their point of view. “Hate” doesn’t mean shooting someone for their beliefs. It means believing something they hate. If we won’t use their pronouns, we are a threat to them. And if you’re a threat, what do you deserve? We saw that at Utah Valley University.

Immediately after shooting Kirk, the assassin apparently claimed Kirk was the one with hate. Try to imagine the utter lack of self-awareness, the self-righteousness that would put a Pharisee to shame, to shoot someone who was only conversing and accuse your victim of being the one with “hate.” The assassination was the logical culmination in a chain of events — closing of leftist minds, PC, DEI, Antifa, and wokeness — that was predictable, indeed predicted. We’ve warned about it for a generation. We’ve warned about how the culture of pronoun-naming, shouting-down, rioting, and cancelling would escalate. That culture killed Charlie Kirk.

We’ve seen it before. We’ve seen social media czars — like the head of Twitter’s “trust and safety” division — swearing to Elon Musk her allegiance to free speech, only to censor conservative documentaries at the first opportunity. We’ve seen judges declaring transsexual absurdities as “findings of fact.” We’ve seen Kamala Harris stabbing the air with her finger, lashing out at a journalist for daring to question her. But all this time, the mushy middle often could not see it.

Yeats warned us a century ago: the best “lack all conviction,” while the worst are “full of passionate intensity.” What made Kirk so great was that he was one of the best, and he did not lack conviction. That’s why they killed him, hoping the rest of us would lose our conviction. And if we do not, if we resist or deign to question them, they will rage, give us failing grades, categorize our TPUSA chapters or our churches as “hate groups,” censor our publications, stab their finger in the air, or, worse, find a sniper’s perch.

What We’re Up Against

This is what we’re up against: a generation trained to believe that they are truth incarnate, that their opponents are evil incarnate, and that their fury at being challenged is noble, as they congratulate themselves on their virtue, which they, in fact, lack. Meanwhile, we’ve also been up against a mushy middle easily distracted by the media’s ploys, like being more concerned about fired comedians than fired-upon leaders.

Yet, the out-pouring of love, compassion, and patriotism at the Kirk memorial on September 21 shows we must not despair. For a generation, the mushy middle of America has heard our warnings of the red storm rising from the Left, the dangers of their murderous ideology, already drenched in the blood of the preborn. They were not convinced. Maybe they were too busy, too intimidated by the wokesters’ smug assurance that they were on “the right side of history,” too sedated by the clapter provoking replacement for comedy by the likes of mediocrities like Jimmy Kimmel, too wooed by the sophistry of professors and pundits, or just not convinced that they should join in on the fray. Not just yet. But now, times may have changed. With, first, the open failure of the Biden idiocracy and, now, the true intent of what we’re up against laid bare in what they dished out to Kirk, and then, pretending to care about “freedom of speech” when Kimmel lied about it. They may be rousing from their slumber. Our task is to tell the truth, relentlessly, courageously, even when they call it “hate,” rescuing the mushy middle before they, too, catch the mind virus.

Charlie Kirk was killed by the culture of intolerance the Left birthed. Tyler Robinson was (apparently) just the final link in a long chain of lies. The question is whether America’s mushy middle has finally learned the lesson. Let’s hope.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Go Home Barack, You're Drunk: A President Whose Legacy Is Crumbling Struggles to Be Relevant Again

RedState 

With former First Lady Michelle Obama off with her brother doing her terrible podcast, former President Barack Obama seems to be either rattling around one of his mansions, taking exotic trips with exotic friends, or doing speaking engagements. The luster of "First Black President" and "fundamental transformation of America" had tarnished long before he decided to back the failure that is former Vice President Kamala Harris for the presidency, but with revelations from Michelle about how much she hated the White House, doesn't really like her children, and probably doesn't really like Barack, the tarnish may be covering up some deep rot. 

Yet, Obama continues to delude himself that what he has to say holds any relevance or weight. Proof that it doesn't? Obama, like others who have fallen from the annals of political grace, made these fact-devoid and inflammatory comments across the pond in the United Kingdom. It is interesting that he and his ilk dig into these criticisms of America and its current administration in foreign countries, rather than being challenged by the people they were supposed to be serving when they were in power.

On Wednesday, the former president hosted "An Evening with Barack Obama" in London's O2 Arena, where he decided to wax ineloquent about how he felt about President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy's initiative to isolate the root causes of autism. 

WATCH:

We have the spectacle of my successor in the Oval Office, making broad claims around certain drugs and autism that have been continuously disproved. And... the.. the degree to which... uh, that undermines public health. The degree to which that can do harm to women who are pregnant. The degree to which that creates anxiety for parents who do have children who are autistic. Which, by the way, itself, is subject to a spectrum,  and a lot of what is being trumpeted as these massive increases actually have to do with a broadening of the criteria across that spectrum so that people can get services and help. All of that is violence against the truth.

What is truth? Pontius Pilate said this when he was deciding whether Jesus Christ should be crucified on the cross. It fits Obama, who like Pilate, is cleansing his hands from the blood of the lives limited to poor health options and exorbitant costs because of his Affordable Care Act. Mr. "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," didn't feel true when he uttered those words. Or the way Obama weaponized his Department of Justice and intelligence arms against journalists, and then President Donald Trump. Lots of blood exists on those bony hands, and as more gets declassified and uncovered (thank you, DNI Tulsi Gabbard), it appears Barry needs to throw stones to distract from the cracks in his own glass house.

Not content to end his ramblings with trashing American leadership, Obama then added more fuel to the fire that his marriage is on shaky ground. 

Barack Obama admitted to “digging” himself “out of [a] hole” with his wife, Michelle Obama, following their time in the White House.

“I was digging myself out of the hole I found myself with Michelle,” the former President of the United States told historian David Olusoga and the audience at the O2 Arena in London Wednesday, per the Daily Mail.

“Now I’m at about level ground,” he quipped.

In April, Barack, 64, elaborated on how he had to fix the issues in his marriage to Michelle, 61, after the politician’s back-to-back terms in office from 2009 to 2017 took a toll on their relationship.

“I was in a deep deficit with my wife,” he told Hamilton College president Steven Tepper in a conversation at the time.

“So I have been trying to dig myself out of that hole by doing occasionally fun things,” Barack added.

And in May 2023, the “Our Oceans” narrator said being out of the White House allowed him to “have a little more time with her.”

No word on whether Michelle Obama is in London with him. Last week, on the couple's Portofino, Italy vacation aboard Steven Spielberg's $250 million superyacht, the pair arrived separately but did cruise together. But obviously, the scent of trouble in the Obamas' marriage still lingers in the air. 

Riddle me this: if you were a former president of the United States, why would you need to mention your marriage at all? Are there not a wealth of topics you could discuss, particularly on the world stage? It is a curious choice for a critical time. Distraction, deflection, and ginning up sympathy are some of Obama's signature tricks. So, expect him to keep pulling these tactics out as the walls of his legacy continue to crumble.  

Gavin Newsom Goes Too Far, Compares Stephen Miller to an SS Agent—Hitler's Notorious 'Schutzstaffel'

RedState 

We’ve mostly stayed away from the juvenile and unfunny “Governor Newsom Press Office” social media account, because even though it’s official, it’s frankly just insipid. Apparently, some staffers think it’s really funny to have the far-left governor talk like Trump, but it doesn’t work because it has none of the humor of Trump and is completely out of character with the wooden Newsom, who in reality talks like an AI chatbot.

But their silliness crossed the line of decency Monday when they made a post comparing White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, who is Jewish, to a member of the SS—the Schutzstaffel, Adolf Hitler’s sadistic personal police force. Although the post was made earlier in the week, it’s getting renewed scrutiny as domestic terror attacks continue throughout the country, including the fatal shooting at an ICE detention center on Wednesday night.

This is the Democrats toning down the rhetoric, folks:

The demonic post continues. Note, he (or his infantile team) repeats the "'SS' MILLER" slur:

HIS TANTRUM WAS SO LOUD IT TRIGGERED A SMALL EARTHQUAKE IN SAN FRANCISCO (SCIENTISTS ARE CALLING IT THE “MILLER QUAKE”). HE IS FURIOUS THAT I, GAVIN C. NEWSOM (THE REAL LEADER OF AMERICA), JUST SIGNED BEAUTIFUL NEW LAWS TO HOLD TRUMP’S SECRET POLICE ACCOUNTABLE: NO MASKS, NO RAIDS IN OUR SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS. KIDS, TEACHERS, NURSES ARE SAFE AGAIN BECAUSE OF ME! “SS” MILLER IS NOW GROUNDED. NO JUICE BOX. NO CARTOONS. WHEN YOU’RE READY TO STOP TERRORIZING AMERICANS, STEPHEN, YOUR DADDY (ME!) MIGHT UNGROUND YOU. UNTIL THEN, IT’S “TIME OUT.” YOU ARE WELCOME, AMERICA! — GCN

Meanwhile, this type of domestic terrorism is occurring regularly:

---

Law Enforcement Says ICE Facility Shooter's Own Words Destroy Dem Narrative

Man Arrested for Making 'Terroristic Threat' Against Charlie Kirk Vigil in Texas

---

Where do you start with this toxic post? Obviously, the repeated use of terms like “Nazi,” “Third Reich” and “Gestapo” that are routinely thrown around by Democrats to describe Trump, members of his administration and law enforcement officers are going to incite rage in this who aren’t clued in enough to understand that what we’re seeing is nothing like the fanatical movement that took over Germany, and almost the world.

The Nazis killed at least six million European Jews, and slaughtered millions more Poles, Soviet prisoners, people with disabilities, Romani (often referred to as Gypsies), Slavs, and more. To compare what’s happening in this country to what happened in those world-changing dark days, or to compare anyone currently in power to one of the most evil and destructive humans ever to have existed, Adolf Hitler, is abhorrent.

Meanwhile, there’s another disturbing angle: Newsom’s post is wildly antisemitic. Breitbart notes:

Referring to a Jew as a Nazi is widely considered a form of Holocaust denial, as well as antisemitic, because it can — as in this instance — indicate an intent to invert the identities of the perpetrators and the victims of the Nazis’ crimes against humanity.

Newsom’s gang has gained some notoriety for their inane, inauthentic posts, but this is something entirely different than humor. It’s bigoted, it’s incendiary, and it’s utterly toxic.

Newsom has shown over and over that he is incapable of shame, but mocking a Jewish person with Holocaust references might be a new low, even for him. We can hope and pray—and work to ensure—that his political career comes to a crashing halt when he terms out at the beginning of 2027.

Democrats Are Literally Holding This Country Hostage

The  Federalist 

Now that Democrats and the media are straight-up blaming their political opponents for getting gunned down by leftists, it’s clear that the Democrat Party and the media are not only accepting of the spate of violence we’re seeing, they’re openly instigating it.

Democrats target MAGA heroes or even just ICE agents carrying out the administration’s policies, and all we’re hearing in response from the perpetrator’s political leaders is some variation of, “That’s a shame, but what did they think was going to happen?” When that’s the dynamic countless other potential assassins and violent actors are seeing on display, there is no other conclusion for them than that whatever sick intentions they have are justifiable.

In an interview Thursday on CNN, anchor John Berman asked Democrat candidate for Texas attorney general Nathan Johnson to react to President Trump rightfully declaring that the violence was coming from the “radical left.” Johnson called the remark “irresponsible,” then blamed Trump for the shooting this week at an ICE detention facility in Dallas, in which the gunman marked his bullet casings with the words “ANTI-ICE” and the result was one death and multiple serious injuries.

“[I]t’s with some irony because he is the one who is fanning the flames of violence in this country,” Johnson said of Trump. “And it’s just absolutely reprehensible behavior. He blames the media, he blames Democrats, he blames anyone but himself, and that’s problematic in this country.”

The same day on MSNBC, analyst Christopher O’Leary, formerly with the FBI, seriously suggested that the administration would do itself good to change its policies, lest it invite more violence. “We can tone down the rhetoric, and that’s the right message,” he said. “But you also have to start looking at what policies you’ve implemented and what tactics you’re using, because, if you tone down the rhetoric, but you leave those other pieces in place, nothing’s going to change.”

Asked what law enforcement can do to put a stop to the carnage, “Well, the first thing is, you take the underlying drivers away.” The “underlying drivers” O’Leary was referring to, as he said, were “the militarization of ICE and other federal law enforcement, the wearing of the masks, the aggressive tactics,” which is to say, measures the administration has undertaken to enact the agenda President Trump was elected by voters to implement.

More than 100 House Democrats last week refused to support a resolution condemning political violence. Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar is on cable news every two seconds denigrating the legacy of Charlie Kirk, who not even a month ago was shot in the neck in front of children.

This is a very long and deadly way of saying we can’t have free and fair elections in this country without the threat of Democrats and the media provoking violence, should the results not go their way. That violence, as we’ve seen, comes to pass and people are dead because of it.

Getting shot and then being told it’s your own fault is nothing short of malignant sociopathy. We’re being held hostage by the Democrat Party and the media.

MSNBC Analyst Threatens Trump: The Violence Will Continue Until You Do What We Want

The  Federalist 

MSNBC analyst Christopher O’Leary threatened that violence against the right will continue until violent leftists are given what they want.

O’Leary made this threat while discussing a Wednesday shooting in which one individual was killed and two others were injured after a gunman opened fire on an ICE transportation vehicle in Dallas. Investigators announced that rounds found near the shooter — who died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound — were inscribed with anti-ICE messaging. Notably, there was a bomb threat at the same facility last month, according to DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin, as The Federalist previously reported.

O’Leary blamed the violence on “conditions” that result in people “acting out,” arguing these perpetrators believe they have no other “recourse.”

“Politically motivated [terrorism], it doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It happens because conditions have been set that people start acting out against.”

O’Leary then lists the “conditions” as “the wealth gap, oppressive policies … the militarization of ICE and other federal law enforcement, the wearing of the masks, the aggressive tactics. So, the people who are starting to act out against this feel it’s their only recourse. Again, this is predictable. We see this happening throughout our history and in other places as well.”

“So, you know, we can tone down the rhetoric, and that’s the right message,” he continued. “But you also have to start looking at what policies you’ve implemented and what tactics you’re using, because, if you tone down the rhetoric, but you leave those other pieces in place, nothing’s going to change.”

When asked by host Katy Tur how to prevent “the next person from doing this,” O’Leary suggested: “The first thing is, you take the underlying drivers away.”

In other words, unless the right caves to radical leftist demands, violence will continue. O’Leary’s comments would be the same as saying we can eradicate armed robberies if we just let criminals have anything they want for free.

O’Leary’s comments give the left a ridiculous bargaining chip: threaten violence unless opponents cave to your demands. Instead of rationalizing violence, O’Leary and the rest of the propaganda press should be condemning the continued bloodshed spurred by radical leftists.

Comey Responds Predictably to Indictment With Self-Pitying, Sanctimonious Video—'I Am Innocent'

RedState 

As we’ve been reporting Thursday evening, former FBI Director James “St. Jim” Comey has now been officially indicted the Department of Justice on two of three counts sought by prosecutors—one count of making false statements and one count of obstruction of justice—just days after President Donald Trump demanded the DOJ act "now" to bring prosecutions against Comey and other political foes, as our Becca Lower reported.

The D.C. rumor mill had been churning loudly over the last day or so that the charges were coming, but now they’re here, and Comey took to Instagram to profess his innocence and deliver one of those infamous sanctimonious sermons that he’s become famous for.

I mean, he titled his memoir “A Higher Loyalty,” implying that he was on a moral level far above that of most normal plebes. But he’s not afraid, he said in an Instagram post following the indictment becoming official (snide commentary in brackets by yours truly throughout the article):

My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump. But we couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way [because we’re just so incredibly high-minded].

We will not live on our knees, and you shouldn't either. [Who asked you to get on your knees? Weird.] Somebody that I love dearly recently said, that fear is the tool of the tyrant, and she's right.

Watch:

Rather than make any mention of the charges that he faces, or talk about the lies he allegedly told Congress, he waxed poetic about… voting.  

But I'm not afraid. And I hope you're not either. [I’m not. Because I didn’t break the law.] I hope instead, you are engaged, you are paying attention, and you will vote like your beloved country depends upon it, which it does. [We did vote, in November—because our country depended upon it.]

My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system—and I'm innocent.

So let's have a trial. And keep the faith.

I’m not sure what to say about this message, because there’s not much concrete information in it—except for the fact that he maintains he’s innocent—and it’s mostly just him doing what he does best, pontificating vaguely about his supposed amazing values. I don’t know about you, though, there’s always something that seems slightly “off” about him to me… He’s frankly just a little bit odd. As I wrote Wednesday in anticipation of the indictment:

If there was a law against being really strange, Comey would be indicted for that too.

Meanwhile, RedState’s Nick Arama reported that there are grumblings afoot about possible deepstaters at the DOJ who have their knickers in a twist over the indictment. As Arama said, “But then again, if you have people resigning over James Comey's indictment, don't threaten me with a good time. Feel free, go ahead and resign.”

The next question is: will there be another shoe (or shoes) to drop? The president has made it clear that he wants to see Crusading New York Anti-Trump NY Attorney General Letitia James and California Rep. Adam “I’ve got the evidence!” Schiff face charges over mortgage fraud.

Will they be the next to be posting hostage-type videos to Instagram? Stay tuned.