Can You Feel the Excitement? Kamala Is Back and in the Lead!

Townhall 

I warned you! It’s kind of hilarious, but a lot of folks don’t realize that the current number one candidate to win the Democratic nomination in 2028 is… not Gavin Hairstyle… not Alfred E. Buttigieg… not Jupiter B. Pritzker… not even Josh “Yeah Right, Democrats Are Gonna Nominate A Jewish Guy Who Won’t Apologize For It” Shapiro. It’s Kamala Harris. No, really, I’m serious.

“That’s crazy talk, Kurt. Why are you so crazy with your talking?”

I’m not crazy. The Democrats aren’t crazy, either – they are stupid and evil. I’m not giving them the insanity out – they need to own the sorry and degraded state to which they have devolved. But as wacky as it would seem to an outside observer, Kamala is not just in the mix. She’s at the top of it – she’s the froth on a defeat latte, and Democrats are about to gulp it down.

If you have doubts, that’s because you’re normal. After all, a normal person looks at Kamala Harris and sees a Chardonnay-sodden, cackling quarter-wit with a proven track record of failure. She not only famously lost the last election, but did so in such a way that, in a sensible party, she would be exiled to the political equivalent of Greenland before it became part of the United States.

Her first and most important decision in the 2024 election was legendarily dumb. She picked Tim Walz to be her running mate when she could’ve picked Josh Shapiro. I guess she had to nail down Minnesota for the Democrats rather than the swingiest of swing states, Pennsylvania. And more than that, her remarkable judgment led her to think that that mincing weirdo was going to win over all those male-identifying males who the Democrats have been disrespecting for the last few decades. Within the first couple of weeks, Governor Jazz Hands was revealed as a deployment-dodging, ChiCom-canoodling, show tunes-belting dork whose video antics trying to load a shotgun were the funniest thing to come out of his godforsaken freezer of a state until the recent video of Mogadishu West Mayor Jacob Frey pretending to enjoy forcing down a bowl of festering Somali swill. Of course, recently Tampon Tim was so wrapped up in the Somali fraud scandal he overlooked – putting it charitably – that he had to drop out of the race for reelection. That’s the guy she picked.

You had one job, Kamala, and you blew it – so to speak.

Her general election gaffes were the stuff of legend, including her inability to list even one thing she would’ve done differently from the human eggplant prior president, who held on to the power for as long as he possibly could, at least in part, because he absolutely knew his understudy would fumble the general election. Further, her campaign strategy was built on the reasonable notion that the more exposure human beings had to her, the more repelled they would be by her. She therefore avoided normal human beings and avoided interviews, and while this definitely hurt her campaign – Trump was everywhere, talking to everyone and doing hilarious and fun things like driving a garbage truck and working the McDonald’s drive-thru – one wonders if Kamala would’ve performed even worse with more exposure.

Signs point to yes. She comes off as stupid and annoying, which is a direct consequence of her being stupid and annoying.

But none of that matters because she’s a woman-identifying person of color. End of discussion. No, really, that’s it. That’s enough to win the election against the pale people o’ pallor who are her competition.

Every once in a while, somebody puts up a picture of her on Twitter and rants about how great it would be if she were president and not that mean old Donald Trump. This is either a result of people being stupid or thinking you are stupid. In fact, the biggest critics of Kamala Harris have always been other Democrats. They know she’s just an empty pantsuit that’s filled up with Franzia and commie nonsense. 

But she’s got that black thing going, and that double X chromosome thing, too, and don’t underestimate those. After all, this is the Democrat Party. Besides her unequivocal willingness to perform any act of submission to the pagan pinko gods, those are the only things that matter. She’s black and female, and that gives her a massive advantage because that’s all her party cares about.

Gavin Newsom is a white guy, the Patrick Bateman of the West Coast. That’s not going to go over with the Democrat base real well, although there are professional Democrat voices who are pretty much saying, “Hey, we gotta stop this nonsense with the naggy chicks and get us a white guy, or we will never win again.” But you’ve got to understand who really matters in the Democrat Party. It’s not the pros; it’s the activists and black women, and neither of those groups is going to pass over a BIPOC uterus-haver in favor of a rich boy who is about as ethnic as a Romney.

The activists want somebody who’s literally too stupid and weak to oppose them when their idiocy gets too alienating for normal people. A guy like Gavin Newsom has an animal cunning that allows him to realize that there’s a line that regular people are not going to cross. He can fake moderation. Kamala can’t. She’ll recognize Hamas is the true government of Israel. She’ll give back Iran the bomb. She’ll hand over Taiwan to the Chinese and the Philippines, too. She won’t even bother with plausible deniability when she throws the border back open. When the activists rub the bottle, a gaseous Kamala floats out, manifests, and announces, “Your wish is my command.”

The black women, who have an outsized role in the party, just love her, and with South Carolina likely to be the first contest in the primary, they will be decisive in picking the nominee. Who’s going to compete with her gyn-noir bona fides? Pete Buttigieg is running about zero percent with black voters, a number that frankly seems a little high. The same with JB Pritzker – what’s the argument for this guy? “Sure, he’s not white, and he presumably has a penis in there somewhere, but on the plus side, he’s enormously fat?”

And Josh Shapiro? Yeah, the activists are going to just love a guy who opposes “Holocaust II: Electric Boogaloo.” Likewise, I’m sure all those black Democrat women – as well as the sexually frustrated white wine women – would just love somebody who’s Jewish in the sense that he practices Judaism.

In case you don’t understand me, I’m saying that antisemitism is a key component of the modern Democrat Party. Our side may be stuck with the occasional dummies like Candace Owens, but their antisemites are the rule and not the exception.

Now, according to one poll, Kamala Harris is leading at 33 percent, and in others, she’s also doing well. JD Vance seems to think she’s the likely nominee at this point, suggesting that it’s a fight between her and Brylcreem Boy to determine “the dumbest candidate.” Commentator Mark Halperin has her in the mix as well. But the most important take is from Kamala herself. She seems to believe that her book tour was a gigantic success and that she isn’t the ridiculous buffoon that she obviously is. Her ego and raw appetite for striving will push her into the race. Of course, this time she’s on her own. At every other juncture in her life, she’s been given political gigs by more powerful men pursuant to various arrangements. But no one will give her this one. She’s got to go take it, and that’s the problem for her. While she’s well-positioned to win the nomination thanks to her immutable genetic characteristics, she’s got a couple of big disadvantages.

She’s an idiot, and she’s a loser. But then, she’s a Democrat, so maybe they’re actually advantages.

Welcome to the Old World Order

Townhall 

Donald Trump has applied a sledgehammer to the post-World War II globalist program.

The purpose of the League of Nations and later the UN was to bring the world together and allow for discussion rather than war. The reality of the latter body is that it has been a disaster, its soldiers have famously misbehaved wherever they have been deployed, and it has been the site of fraud and hysterical anti-Israel antics. The idea of bringing the world together sounds good. If we can talk, maybe we can avoid shooting at each other. But in the Old World Order, countries knew their strengths and who their friends were—and they acted accordingly. Just as Biblical pharaoh showed that he could do the same plagues that God brought via Moses, countries knew their military standing versus their neighbors and potential friends and foes far away. This was important. Countries were somewhat careful not to blunder into wars that they could not win. Even Hitler was shocked when England declared war on Germany in fulfillment of its treaty obligations to Poland. The Russians dismissed the Japanese as monkeys and were thoroughly dismantled by the latter in the Russo-Japanese War, which was a major contributor to the Russian Revolution a decade later. When you don’t have the UN and other international bodies equalizing big and small, countries act their age, weight, and strength. When you do have these international groups, smaller countries can gamble and hope that the world body will save their derriere should they get into trouble.

This was also the situation with the EU. Weak economies like those of Greece and Italy took advantage of being glued to powerhouses like Germany to get cheap loans. When things went south, they paid big time for playing out of their league. They did not have Germany’s economy of the 1990s or its work and savings habits. And they have learned that being in the EU has upsides but comes with enormous risks. Greece recently announced with Israel that it hopes to move from being a purchaser of military systems to becoming a producer. That’s the way to think.

And now comes Donald Trump and his “Board of Peace.” Many claim that he wants to sideline the UN and create a body of world leaders that will actually take care of the world’s business. His inclusion of Putin and Erdogan would seem to indicate that the president is thinking far past Gaza. There is a place for international cooperation. Churchill famously said that the only thing worse than fighting with allies is fighting without them. Trump wants leaders who act and are decisive. He is sick and tired of the UN, with its elevator-stopping shtick they pulled on him and Melania last year, and feels that he can get a lot more done without it. The UN and the WEF globalists, of course, do not like his approach. They believe that every effort—the war in Gaza, Covid, immigration—needs to be an international effort. Donald Trump, a man of action throughout his life, wants results and not committees. He wants to push the UN, WHO, and all of the other feckless, commie, third-world-controlled international bodies to the wayside and actually get stuff done. And that has always been the American way. Just as international bodies give undue power to weak and terrible countries, they emasculate the power of great countries. Everything is by vote. Everything is by committee. Everything requires discussion. The UN, in its various committees and deliberations, has denounced Israel more times than all other countries combined. We had one Nazi Germany; we no longer need a second.

So, Israel feels confident enough to not only give the UN the finger but also to take back its prime real estate in Jerusalem. In the neighborhood where UNRWA was headquartered, apartments routinely go for over $1 million apiece. The UN was a partner in Hamas’ attack, and without its support, infrastructure, money, and manpower, the 1,200 people killed during the surprise attack would still be alive. A dear friend who served in Gaza for the duration of the war made it clear: without UNRWA taking care of the day-to-day needs like education, food, and medicine, Hamas could not have planned and executed the attack against the communities in southern Israel. It is time to kick the UN out of New York. Leave them in Brussels and Zurich, as they are cities that also value bureaucracy over real progress. Third-world states like the UN, as it allows them to attack the Jews, receive huge amounts of other people’s money, and grant them an unearned legitimacy on the world stage. It’s like my coming in 72nd in a marathon and being put on the top pedestal with the record-holding winner. That is the UN, and that’s why #1 USA needs to dump it and take care of business with friends and foes, but not via committees.

Scott Bessent told the WEF crowd this week that the globalist adventure failed and is over. Donald Trump will no doubt tell the crowd something similar, if only in more colorful terms. When the League of Nations was formed, we did not have instant communication. Now we do, and we don’t need the UN or the like.

Entertainment thread for Jan 22

 

Finally a good news day.

Why Trump Wants Greenland and Why You Should, Too

American Thinker 

Donald Trump’s determination to bring Greenland under American control has been widely mocked as eccentric or theatrical.

That reaction misses the point.

Beneath the blunt language and headline-grabbing delivery lies a strategic argument rooted in geography, military physics, alliance realities, and the accelerating competition among global powers in the Arctic. Trump’s fixation on Greenland is not a whim. It is the product of a long-running belief that the island represents one of the most valuable pieces of territory on Earth for American security.

Failing to secure it would amount to a historic act of negligence.

Trump’s public interest in Greenland first emerged in August 2019, when reports revealed that he had privately asked advisers about purchasing the island from Denmark. He confirmed the interest himself, describing Greenland as strategically interesting and emphasizing the close alliance between the United States and Denmark. At the time, he framed the idea as exploratory rather than urgent, noting that it was not the top priority on his agenda.

Yet even then, the logic was clear. The United States already provided extensive military protection to Denmark. Meanwhile, Greenland sat at the crossroads of American, European, and Arctic security.

Trump also raised an economic argument during that period, claiming that Denmark was losing roughly 700 million dollars annually subsidizing Greenland. This reflected Trump’s broader view that the status quo was inefficient. In his telling, a U.S. purchase would relieve Denmark of a financial burden while placing the island under the protection of a military superpower capable of fully defending it.

He famously described the idea as a large real estate deal, a phrase that drew ridicule but also revealed how he conceptualized statecraft as a transaction grounded in tangible assets. 

When Denmark’s government rejected the idea outright, Trump responded by postponing a planned state visit, explicitly citing Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s refusal to discuss a sale. The episode demonstrated that this was not a casual suggestion. Trump was willing to incur diplomatic friction to signal that Greenland mattered.

After several years of relative quiet, the issue returned with force in late 2024. As president-elect, Trump declared that ownership and control of Greenland were an absolute necessity not just for America’s national security, but freedom throughout the world. This was a marked escalation. Greenland was no longer merely interesting. It was essential.

By 2025, Trump’s rhetoric sharpened further.

Addressing Greenlanders ahead of their parliamentary elections, he publicly supported their right to determine their own future while inviting them to join the United States, promising safety and prosperity if they did so. In the same period, he stated bluntly that Greenland was needed for international security and that the United States was going to get it one way or the other.

The language was intentionally stark, conveying inevitability rather than negotiation.

The urgency intensified in January 2026, when Trump issued a series of statements tying Greenland directly to what he described as the Golden Dome, a next-generation missile defense system under development. He asserted that Greenland was vital to the system’s effectiveness and warned that if the United States did not secure the island, Russia or China would. He argued that NATO’s deterrent power depended overwhelmingly on American military strength and that NATO would become far more formidable with Greenland in U.S. hands.

Trump followed this with an even more aggressive declaration days later.

He accused Denmark and multiple European countries of creating a dangerous situation in Greenland. Then he announced escalating tariffs unless negotiations began for the complete purchase of the island. He stated that the United States had sought to acquire Greenland for more than 150 years and that modern weapons systems made acquisition especially urgent.

Trump also said that hundreds of billions of dollars were being spent on security programs related to the Golden Dome and that the system’s geometry required Greenland’s inclusion to function at maximum efficiency.

This focus on geometry is central to his argument and often overlooked.

Missile defense is not simply about technology. It is about angles, distances, trajectories, and early warning time. Attacks launched over the polar region reach North America faster and with less warning than those from other directions. Greenland’s location makes it uniquely valuable for radar coverage, space surveillance, and interception paths. Trump has argued repeatedly that leases or temporary basing agreements are insufficient for such a mission.

Speaking to reporters, he stated that countries defend ownership, not leases, and that Greenland would have to be defended as sovereign U.S. territory. He dismissed long-term lease arrangements as inherently unreliable.

Trump has also been explicit about adversaries.

He has said that while he respects the people of China and Russia, he does not want them as neighbors in Greenland and expects NATO to understand that reality. Aboard Air Force One, he stated that Greenland was already surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships and reiterated that the island was essential to U.S. national security. Whether critics view his perspective as exaggerated or not, it is beyond question that the Arctic is becoming a frontline in high-stakes global competition.

Beyond missile defense, Greenland represents control over emerging Arctic shipping routes, access to critical minerals, and a forward position in a region that is rapidly opening due to climatology shifts.

Trump has framed Denmark as incapable of defending the island on its own, at one point deriding its limited capabilities in deliberately provocative language. The provocation is intentional. It underscores his belief that only American power can credibly deter hostile encroachment.

Critics often respond by noting that the United States already maintains a military presence at Pituffik Space Base and enjoys defense agreements with Denmark. Trump’s counterargument is that access is not sovereignty. Access can be revoked, constrained, or politicized. Ownership cannot. Nowadays, hypersonic weapons compress decision times. Hundreds of billions of dollars are already being invested in missile defense. Trump sensibly sees partial measures as unacceptable risk.

In Trump’s calculus, annexing Greenland is not about the pageantry of empire. It is about preventing a future in which belligerent powers exploit geography to undermine American security. He believes that failing to act would invite precisely the instability critics claim to fear. The bluntness of his language obscures a simple premise. Geography still matters. Sovereignty still matters. And in the Arctic, hesitation can be fatal.

What sounds off the wall to some is, to Trump, a sober response to a changing strategic environment. Acquiring Greenland would lock in defensive advantages for generations, reinforce NATO through American dominance rather than ambiguity, and deny adversaries a foothold in the most sensitive approach to North America.

From that perspective, the real risk is not acting boldly, but assuming that goodwill, leases, and outdated assumptions will hold in a world that no longer plays by them.

In the end, Greenland is not about spectacle or bravado. It is about whether the United States chooses foresight over complacency in a world where geography still decides power. Donald Trump’s insistence reflects a belief that security cannot rest on borrowed access or fragile goodwill, but on control, clarity, and permanence. To secure Greenland is to secure time, distance, and deterrence.

History rarely forgives nations that see the board clearly and still refuse to make a decisive move.

🎭 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. 

Jennifer Welch, Irrational, Incensed, And Dangerous, Is The Democrat Party

Democrats want retribution and are increasingly uninterested in disguising it with any form 

of pretense about laws or morality.

The Federalist

The Democrat who people most need to be paying attention to right now isn’t in Congress and isn’t expected to run for president. It’s Jennifer Welch, the gaunt, puckered up nag who hosts a popular podcast and who now proudly displays on a regular basis just how dark and decayed the left’s collective soul has become.

It’s been fairly obvious for some time that the chief aims of the Democrat Party are to crush the independent American middle class and eliminate the nuclear family. They hate both with equal passion. But until recently, generally speaking, those goals were at least disguised with lies about “climate change” and “equity” and “our democracy.” Now it’s common for Democrats to drop all pretense and simply express their hatred outright for anyone with a different political opinion.

That’s Welch, exhibiting all the distilled irrationality and sulfuric acid contained in the average modern Democrat, but without any effort to conceal or pass it off as some intense form of empathy.

On a recent episode of her podcast with former CNN actress Jim Acosta, Welch spoke for all Democrats as to what the party wants, should it take power in Congress after this year’s midterm elections. “The blue tsunami means that Congress is going to haul Elon Musk, ‘Big Balls,’ and a bunch of other people’s ass in front and say, ‘What crimes did you commit?’ and it’s going to get really serious and the same with Trump,” she said. As a reminder, “Big Balls” is the nickname of a 20-something enlisted by Musk’s D.O.G.E. effort to shrink the federal bureaucracy, and his offenses to-date include asking government employees to describe their day-to-day work life and also interfering in the attempted assault of a female pedestrian being jumped by thugs, resulting in his own hospitalization.

Welch continued, “Because I believe — and this is just my opinion — that Trump and all of the bottom-feeding morons surrounding him, and Elon Musk and all the bottom-feeding, clinger-oners surrounding him— I think they commit crimes every day.” She didn’t say what crimes she suspects were committed as they potentially relate to the president, or Musk or “Big Balls,” but she didn’t need to because that wasn’t her point. “And I think to reconcile all of this is going to take hard core, not ‘integrity Democrats,’ [but] ‘f*ck-you Democrats,’ f*ck you for fucking over our country,” she said. “We are serious about this. We are prosecuting. We are going to uncover every document, every phone call, everything you did. We will be relentless about it. And that’s the mindset they’ve got to have. Because I think the electorate is going from, we’ve got to get [Trump] out, but also we want accountability.”

The point, rather, is to find a reason, or, if necessary, make one up, that puts Welch’s political opposites in prison. Or worse.

That’s what they want and, like Welch, they are increasingly uninterested in disguising it with any form of pretense about laws (actual laws, not just their gut feelings about what should be allowed) or morality. They simply experience scalding hot anger day in and day out and nothing short torturing non-committed Democrat voters will suffice.

In an episode this week on the New York Times’ “The Daily” podcast, Times content creator Charlie Savage previewed what’s coming, just as Jennifer Welch did. “If there are no checks and balances and the rule of law means nothing and there aren’t norms,” he said, “then it’s existential that that side stays in power, there has to be a war to prevent the other side from coming in.” Host Michael Barbaro replied, “It’s a government in which you have to annihilate your opponent.”

Yeah, that’s exactly how Democrats see it, and they’re not playing about it.

Minnesota Democrats Are Creating A Nullification Crisis Over Immigration

States are not allowed simply to thwart or undermine federal laws they don’t like. It’s treasonous, and should be treated as such.

The Federalist

The videos coming out of Minneapolis, of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers apprehending illegal immigrants in the streets while having to fight off aggressive and sometimes violent anti-ICE activists, are the predictable result of a Democrat strategy that amounts to nullification.

I mean nullification in the historical sense, like the Nullification Crisis of 1832 when South Carolina declared federal tariffs to be null and void within the boundaries of the state, and President Andrew Jackson threatened to send in the U.S. Army to enforce federal law.

What the Democrats of South Carolina did back then is essentially what the Democrats of Minneapolis are doing today, fomenting a 21st century nullification crisis by making it nearly impossible to enforce federal immigration law in the territory under their jurisdiction. Trump, who has ordered 1,500 active duty troops stationed in Alaska to prepare for a possible deployment to Minnesota, is well within his rights (and within historical precedent) to respond in the same vein as Jackson did to what amounts to a nullification crisis.

Indeed, the whole point of so-called sanctuary laws is to make it difficult or impossible to enforce federal immigration laws — to nullify them. Sanctuary policies like the ones operative in Minneapolis (and many other Democrat-controlled cities) prohibit state and local law enforcement from working with federal immigration authorities.

Under normal circumstances, when an illegal immigrant commits a crime the local authorities notify federal immigration officials before the offender is released, so that ICE can take custody and begin the process of deportation. The handover occurs between law enforcement agencies in a controlled, orderly, safe manner.

But in places where Democrat lawmakers have created sanctuary jurisdictions, local law enforcement is barred from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement in this way. Instead of handing over illegal immigrants to ICE, the police simply release them. That means ICE agents have to go out into the community, into neighborhoods and businesses, to track down and arrest illegal immigrant criminals wherever they might be.

This is obviously a much more volatile and dangerous way to enforce federal immigration law. And in Minneapolis, it’s even more volatile and dangerous thanks to anti-ICE activists and vigilante mobs attempting to disrupt, impede, and in some cases attack ICE agents. Indeed, it’s a recipe for violent clashes between ICE and anti-ICE mobs. A cynic might say that’s the entire point, to make federal immigration enforcement as chaotic and tense as possible in hopes of exactly the kind of confrontations that led to the death of Renee Good, the woman who was fatally shot earlier this month when she tried to ram an ICE agent with her vehicle.

The goal of fomenting such mayhem is straightforward: to thwart the enforcement of federal immigration law. Keep in mind, ICE is not doing anything beyond the scope of federal law in Minneapolis. It is not exercising any new or novel powers not authorized under federal statute. As Gregory Bovino, the Border Patrol commander in charge in Minneapolis said at a press conference this week, the operations and tactics of Border Patrol and ICE agents in the city are “born out of necessity” but are nevertheless “legal, ethical, and moral.”

“Our operations are lawful. They’re targeted. They’re focused on individuals who pose a serious threat to this community. They are not random and they are not political,” he said. The “necessity” Bovino refers to is that which has arisen as a direct result of Democrat sanctuary policies. Ordinarily, we wouldn’t see the very public, visible ICE operations now underway in Minneapolis and other sanctuary cities simply because criminal illegal aliens would be transferred to federal custody by local law enforcement.

But that’s not happening because Democrats don’t like federal immigration laws. Since they don’t have the political power to change them, they have decided, like Democrats in South Carolina in the 1830s, simply to declare them null and void in their territory.

This of course creates a very dangerous situation. In President Jackson’s time it nearly led to armed conflict between the states and the federal government — to open civil war. The idea that a state could simply nullify a federal law was a constitutional theory cooked up by Vice President John C. Calhoun, who infamously despised both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and whose theories would sow the seeds of the Civil War thirty years later.

For his part, Jackson felt strongly that states had no such power to nullify federal law. In 1830, he famously replied to a visitor from South Carolina who asked if he had any message for those in the state: “Yes I have; please give my compliments to my friends in your State and say to them, that if a single drop of blood shall be shed there in opposition to the laws of the United States, I will hang the first man I can lay my hand on engaged in such treasonable conduct, upon the first tree I can reach.”

Two years later, he put the same idea in less dramatic terms in his Proclamation to the People of South Carolina: “I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one State, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, inconsistent with every principle on which It was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed.”

The same could be said today of Democrat sanctuary policies, which are nothing if not a scheme for nullification of federal immigration law. Combined with what is clearly a well-organized, well-funded effort to impede and disrupt federal immigration authorities, there can be no question that the aim of Minnesota Democrat officials is to effectively nullify federal immigration law by making its enforcement impossible in the state.

Understood in that light, the Trump administration was entirely justified to issue grand jury subpoenas this week to top Minnesota Democratic officials including Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison. At this point, there is good reason to believe these officials have been obstructing federal law enforcement in the state. Instead of changing federal immigration law they dislike, they are attempting effectively to nullify it.

This, as Jackson said, is treasonous. And although we shouldn’t expect Trump to hang anyone from the nearest tree, we should demand that the Democrats perpetrating this nullification scheme be brought to swift and sure justice.

Democrats Created An Unconstrained Immigration Problem. It Requires An ‘Unconstrained’ Solution

The Federalist 

What’s playing out in Minneapolis and other major cities controlled by Democrats is as simple as this: That party willfully ignored our nation’s laws to import millions of destitute foreigners for the purpose of loading them up with welfare and earning their political support, and now that they’re out of power, they’re trying to keep their new constituents here by any means possible.

Those means include continuing to ignore the law and, in many cases, opposing the law. And this is why the public should have not a shred of concern for what Democrats have to say about how the current president, elected by voters in 2024, tries to fix the mess they created.

Thomas Edsall, a formerly respectable New York Times content creator, wrote a long piece this week bemoaning the “unconstrained” methods by which the Trump administration is using ICE to detain and remove illegal aliens, naturally sprinkling the entire article with references to racism. The phrases “white supremacist” and “white nationalist” appear a total of six times.

“ICE abuses,” wrote Edsall on Tuesday, “have revealed the crucial importance of alternative media — including Vox, Axios, Noah Smith’s Substack and 404 Media — in describing in great detail the accumulating body of evidence pointing to a federal agency run amok.”

I’m sure. And nobody should care what they have to say.

The people who excused or otherwise encouraged the mass importation of Third Worlders who now suck every cent they can possibly get from the American taxpayer don’t get to be offended or taken seriously now that there’s an effort to fix what they broke. They gave up the right to debate the correct ways to manage immigration when they said nothing less than open borders was acceptable. They had it 100 percent their way for four years, and it proved unpopular. A majority of the country rejected it and demanded a reversal.

We know that the people most inconvenienced by this colossal problem created by Democrats are the illegal aliens who have to be sent back home. They’re going to do everything they can to prevent being deported, which means this was always going to be a difficult and unsightly process. That doesn’t make it any less imperative, and the fact that the process is less than ideal doesn’t earn anyone the right to resist law enforcement.

Democrats can say the opposite until they run out of oxygen. They put the country in this situation. Their opinion on the matter doesn’t deserve consideration.

'Blue Lives Matter' Group Reveals the Greatest Operation Against Agitators Yet

RedState 

The anti-ICE crew is completely out of control at this point, trying to stop the enforcement of the law. 

We've seen them do a lot of vile and disgusting things, from disrupting a church service in St. Paul, Minnesota, to launching racist invective at a black ICE agent because they thought they were better than him. 

It's crazy that ICE agents and other federal agents helping to enforce immigration laws have to put up with this mania and obstruction. 

But it looks like folks who are anti-anti-ICE may be getting creative, as revealed in a post from Blue Lives Matter. 

This may be one of the greatest posts ever about fighting back against the leftist insanity. 

We're not saying that Blue Lives Matter was behind feeding false information to far-left, anti-ICE protestors. 

We're not saying we had teams comprised of HUNDREDS of off-duty cops and veterans volunteer to run decoy operations so far-left activists THOUGHT they were conducting ICE raids.   

We're not saying they were in fact they were just driving around in what appeared to be unmarked vehicles with tinted windows... drinking coffee and listening to Guns and Roses.... being chased down and surrounded by protestors.   

They went on to write:

What we ARE saying is that if it DID happen.... it sure worked remarkably well in NINE DIFFERENT STATES, allowing ACTUAL raids to successfully take place unimpeded, helping support the capture of HUNDREDS of criminals. 

Combat veterans, off-duty officers and patriotic Americans have had enough of the radical left... and are being activated across the country to back our #lawenforcement.  And they're smarter...more skilled... more driven... better trained than the left … and actually enjoy sitting in a deer stand for days on end just waiting. 

@DHSgov @ICEgov we’ve got you.

They're not saying they did it, mind you. But boy, do I love this! And where can we sign up? You can also do things like spam the locations where ICE isn't to the ICE watch phone numbers, messing up their ability to track ICE, if you have a few spare minutes to mess with them. 

Thank you, Blue Lives Matter guys (I mean, if it happened, that is...). Master level effort on behalf of us all, and good on you for putting in the time to help our country.

DHS Reports Massive Surge in Website Traffic As Millions of Illegals Make a Choice

RedState 

We’ve seen the ICE raids across the country as Donald Trump delivers on his campaign promise to crack down on the tsunami of illegal immigration that former President Biden ushered in. The law enforcement actions have caused huge meltdowns on the Left, with many Democrats openly supporting violent retaliation and attacks on federal law enforcement.

There are a couple of ways some of these dramas could be avoided, however.

One, you eliminate sanctuary cities and states, and then ICE wouldn’t have to chase down so many of these miscreants in the streets; they’d be handed over in an orderly fashion by local authorities and jails when possible.

Two, people here illegally can choose to go home quietly and peacefully by self-deporting, thus avoiding any interaction with the long arm of the law.

The Department of Homeland Security is reporting that more and more people are doing exactly that, and traffic to the agency’s self-deportation webpage has seen a dramatic surge since Trump took back the White House:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revealed record website traffic to the agency’s official site, with one of the most visited pages on the site including information on self-deportation through the CBP Home App. 

DHS reported a 68.49% increase in traffic from 2024. The department reports that its website received 102 million page views last year and 67 million unique visitors — an increase from 40 million page views in 2024. 

Those are some pretty impressive numbers. Meanwhile, reports indicate that at least 100,000 people have taken the cash bonus that DHS offers for those who wish to self-deport. The agency said that it’s the leadership of Trump and Secretary Kristi Noem that has turned things around:

"Under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump and Secretary Noem, DHS celebrated one of the most consequential periods of action and reform in American history in 2025," a spokesperson from DHS told Fox News Digital in a statement. "From delivering the most secure border ever and removing dangerous criminal illegal aliens, to fixing disaster response and ushering in a golden age of travel, DHS will continue to build upon this success and innovate to find ways to deliver for the American people."

We might expect the site to see even more traffic in the future, because on Wednesday, the department announced that it was upping the bonus from $1,000 to $2,600. I’d have to think some folks would do the calculus in their heads: “Do I want to get nabbed by ICE, or do I want $2,600 and a nice plane ride back to my home country? Think I’ll take the money.”

DHS says that since Trump took office, 2.2 million Illegal aliens have self-deported. Now the deal will be even sweeter:

"To celebrate one year of this administration, the U.S. taxpayer is generously increasing the incentive to leave voluntarily for those in this country illegally- offering a $2,600 exit bonus,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a release. "Illegal aliens should take advantage of this gift and self-deport because if they don’t, we will find them, we will arrest them, and they will never return."

The Left may squeal, moan, and shout — and attempt to violently disrupt ICE operations — but the reality they seem to miss is that this is what a majority of American voters wanted. Nobody said cleaning up Ole Joe’s mess was going to be easy or fun, but Trump promised he would do it.

And that’s exactly what he’s delivering.