FIGHT THE OLIGARCHY? Rep. Ro Khanna Reportedly Lives in a Luxury Home With a Four-Story Elevator, Owns Three Private Golf Courses

Rep. Ro Khanna of California is part of the leftist coalition that is supposedly all about fighting the oligarchy. He’s just doing it from the comfort of a luxury home with a multi-floor elevator, while driving an SUV that cost about $200,000.

This is no different than Bernie Sanders flying private jets all over the country as he demands that we ‘tax the rich’ more than we already are. Of AOC driving a Tesla, as she complains about Elon Musk.

They all love to complain about the evils of wealth. Except their own, naturally.

Check out this eye-popping report from the Washington Free Beacon:

‘Ro’ Me the Money! How Progressive Class Warrior Ro Khanna Lives Like the Oligarchs He ‘Fights,’ With In-Home Elevator, $190K Range Rover, and Family-Owned Golf Courses.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Calif.) has emerged as a potential contender for the Democratic presidential nomination while denouncing the ultra-rich who “hoard wealth and engage in financial speculation.” But the progressive, Silicon Valley congressman and his family live a life of staggering luxury, fueled by dynastic wealth they did not earn and protected by the same thicket of trusts, anonymous corporations, and foundations that Khanna condemns.

Khanna lives in a $6 million, 8,000-square-foot luxury home with a four-story elevator and so much premium marble that even the two laundry rooms have marble counters. The Northwest Washington, D.C., home is now for sale, as the Khanna family prepares to move to an even larger, more expensive house a few miles away in the Northern Virginia suburbs.

Khanna’s two children, who are minors, have large ownership shares in three private golf clubs, a significant stake in a $65 billion wealth management firm, and investments in hedge funds that focus on distressed debt, of which Khanna has been critical. Khanna’s wife drives a $190,000 Range Rover she was so displeased with that she sued the dealer.

A Washington Free Beacon investigation into Khanna’s finances finds that the progressive truthteller’s lifestyle is funded by his wife, Ritu Ahuja Khanna, an heiress to her father’s Cleveland auto parts fortune.

Anyone surprised?

Keep reading

Congress Confronts MKULTRA: Testimony Warns Of Ongoing CIA Mind Control Capabilities

The deep state’s favorite tools of control just got dragged back into the light. Today, the House Oversight Committee’s Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets held the first congressional hearing on the CIA’s MKULTRA program since 1977.

What could have been a dusty historical review turned into a direct warning that the same machinery of mind control, memory manipulation, and behavioral experimentation may never have shut down – and could now run on far more powerful modern engines.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna and her colleagues are doing what previous Congresses largely refused to do: forcing sunlight on one of the intelligence community’s darkest chapters.

The testimony made one thing unmistakable. The CIA lied to lawmakers decades ago about the program’s success. Advances in neuroscience, cyber tools, and artificial intelligence have handed covert operators capabilities Sidney Gottlieb could only dream of. And American citizens remain potential targets.

Keep reading

Trump made $1 billion from crypto, financial disclosure shows

President Donald Trump earned more than $1 billion from his cryptocurrency ventures, according to his personal financial disclosure released on Tuesday.

The personal financial disclosure showed that the president earned at least $524 million from the sale of cryptocurrency tokens through the Trump-connected World Liberty Financial.

The president’s disclosure also listed earnings of an additional $636 million from CIC Digital LLC, an affiliate of the Trump Organization — the majority of which came from a $635 million licensing agreement with Celebration Coin for the sale of the president’s $TRUMP meme coin.

The more than 900-page document lists several of the president’s assets and sources of income.

Keep reading

Empire At 250: Can The Principles Of 1776 Survive The American Police State?

“The people are the only legitimate fountain of power.”

– James Madison

This is a year of strange anniversaries.

Two hundred and fifty years ago, a band of revolutionaries declared their independence from a king.

America’s founders rejected concentrated power. They denounced standing armies. They distrusted government secrecy. They risked their lives to escape a ruler who could tax without consent, wage war without accountability, and govern without meaningful restraint.

Twenty-five years ago, after the attacks of September 11, 2001, America embarked on a very different journey.

The federal government claimed extraordinary emergency powers. Surveillance expanded. Wars multiplied. Executive authority grew. Constitutional safeguards were weakened in the name of security.

One anniversary marked a revolt against empire. The other marked the normalization of it.

Now, as America prepares to celebrate 250 years of independence, we are confronted with a bitter irony: the republic born in rebellion against empire has become an empire in everything but name.

Worse, the U.S. government is violating the very principles that justified the American Revolution.

Graft, grift and corruption. Endless wars. Profiteering. Trillions squandered abroad while the nation sinks deeper into debt at home.

A government that governs increasingly by executive order and emergency decree. A government that wastes taxpayer money with impunity, rewards political loyalty over constitutional fidelity, installs loyalists in positions meant to serve the public, dismantles safeguards against corruption, shields insiders from scrutiny, and treats accountability as an inconvenience.

National states of emergency that never seem to end. Efforts to nullify constitutional guarantees such as birthright citizenship. Expanded death penalty powers. A growing willingness to bypass Congress, sidestep constitutional restraints and rule by fiat.

Surveillance programs that track where we go, what we buy, who we know, what we say and what we believe. Fusion centers, facial recognition, license plate readers, AI-assisted monitoring, financial tracking, intelligence-sharing agreements and a sprawling security apparatus that treats privacy as a loophole and dissent as a threat.

Keep reading

Americans Want Peace, Israel Wants War

America wants peace. Israel wants war. The great majority of Americans want an end to the war against Iran. The great majority in Congress just want more contributions from the Israel Lobby and its supporters.

Now, most members of Congress are really squirming. They know that most of their constituents are fed up with foreign wars and want this stupid war in Iran over, the sooner the better.

But they are afraid to criticize Israel’s war for fear of the Israel Lobby steering big campaign contributions against them. Their silence is deafening.

Most members are trying to keep quiet. Almost no one other than Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, and the Israel First crowd are enthusiastic about this war.

The only ones speaking out strongly in favor of it are members who have received and/or who hope to receive millions in campaign contributions from the Lobby like Senators Ted Cruz, Lindsay Graham, Tom Cotton and others.

They didn’t even criticize Israel when it was starving and killing more than 20,000 children in Gaza. Congress would have rushed to pass a resolution of condemnation if it had been done in any other country than Israel.

But the killing goes on, even during so-called ceasefires. Thousands have been killed over this past year by Israeli forces in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.

We don’t hear and see as much about all this killing because Israel was losing the public relations battle, and pro-Israel billionaires bought up significant parts of the national media that they did not already own.  Lesser-known conservative “influencers” and podcasters were given money, and 1,000 ministers were given free trips to Israel. Even TikTok was bought because its coverage was supposedly causing too many teenagers to have anti-Israel opinions.

However, all the pro-Israel propaganda has not worked so far. Even President Trump has apparently gotten angry at times with Netanyahu, telling him at one point that he shouldn’t blow up an entire apartment building to get at one person.

And Vice President Vance told the world in a press conference that Israel’s cabinet should realize that President Trump was the only world leader still supporting  Netanyahu and that two-thirds of all the military equipment and ammunition used by the IDF in these latest wars had been paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

The very few members of Congress and commentators who are criticizing President Trump for giving into Iran in the Memorandum he signed need to be asked what their alternative is.

Keep reading

Here’s How Devastating the Birthright Citizenship Ruling Is

The Supreme Court handed down some good rulings on Tuesday, but one of them, Trump v. Barbara, was truly stinking hot garbage, to put it as nicely as possible. It was one of the most consequential rulings in a generation, and if you’re not furious about it, you haven’t been paying attention.

As my PJ Media colleague Athena Thorne put it, the Supreme Court ruled that “any basic skank who can sneak onto American terra firma and give birth is automatically the parent of a U.S. citizen, with all the rights and benefits that implies.”

On The Five on Tuesday, Jesse Watters didn’t hold back in his reaction to the ruling.

“I’m angry,” he said. “Are you?”

And that set the tone for everything that followed.

He focused on Justice Samuel Alito’s dissent, which Watters described as a genuine alarm bell. Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas, he noted, saw this for what it was — a case with enormous implications that the court essentially fumbled. “He said in his dissent, this was one of the most important cases the court’s ever seen, and we blew it,” Watters said. “He and Thomas were basically like, ‘Yeah, this devalues and degrades U.S. citizenship because it opens it up for anchor babies and for birth tourists.’”

The example Watters used was, honestly, terrifying.

Under birthright citizenship as it currently stands, a Chinese Communist Party official could bring his pregnant wife to Guam, deliver the baby on American soil, then fly that infant back to Beijing, complete with a U.S. passport in hand. That child could grow up in China, get funneled through whatever the CCP wants him for, and then, at 18, have access to American welfare programs. He could vote. And theoretically, at 35, he could become eligible to run for president.

It’s a scary thought, because yes, that’s what the decision would enable.

“That’s the stupidest thing anyone ever thought of,” Watters said. “Literally.”

The historical context makes the ruling even harder to swallow.

Watters noted that the senator who authored the relevant language in the 19th century made it clear that it was never intended to cover foreign nationals or the families of foreign diplomats. The amendment’s architect agreed. So did the president at the time, Ulysses S. Grant. “The guy that sponsored it,  the guy that initiated, the architect of, this 14th amendment, the AG, the president at the time, Grant, all said, yeah, no foreigners, no visitors,” Watters said.

Keep reading

Colorado Primaries Could Impact The Midterm Elections Nationwide

Colorado Democrats voted Tuesday in primaries that could hand Republicans their most useful campaign weapon of the 2026 midterms: proof that the socialist wave crashing through New York City was never just a New York problem.

Three weeks ago, the Democratic Socialists of America notched a trio of wins in New York City that sent establishment Democrats into a panic. Darializa Avila Chevalier knocked off Rep. Adriano Espaillat, chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, in the 13th District on a platform that included shutting down prisons, eliminating ICE, erasing the southern border, and opposing the deportation of illegal immigrants regardless of criminal record. Claire Valdez took the 7th District running on citizenship and voting rights for people who entered the country illegally, taxpayer-funded transgender medical treatment, and the elimination of private health insurance. Brad Lander won in the 10th District by nearly 30 points, defeating Rep. Dan Goldman, one of the most prominent anti-Trump voices in the caucus and the man who led the push to impeach the president.

Colorado now gets to answer the question everyone in Washington has been asking since New York’s results came in: was that a fluke confined to one deep-blue city, or the opening act of something bigger? Sen. Michael Bennet and Rep. Diana DeGette, two of the biggest names in Colorado Democratic politics, both face primary challenges that party insiders are taking far more seriously than they expected to a month ago.

CNN’s Harry Enten warned Democrats about the implications last week after the New York primaries. “What is true in New York City in a Democratic primary ain’t necessarily true nationwide with the general electorate,” Enten said last week. The Democratic Socialists of America have a net favorable rating of +17 among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, according to Enten’s data, but are 27 points underwater with the electorate as a whole. That 44-point canyon between the party’s base and everyone else is precisely the gap Republicans intend to exploit. “Socialism has become increasingly popular among Democrats, but it is a much tougher sell in the rest of the electorate,” Enten said. Favorable views of socialism among Democrats climbed from 50% in 2010 to 66% today. Among everyone else, the number has barely moved, sitting at 30% now versus 29% sixteen years ago.

Keep reading

Israel-Lebanon Deal On Life Support: Israel Won’t Withdraw, And Lebanon’s Christians Are Split On Whether It’s A Lifeline Or A Trap

The US-brokered “Trilateral Framework” signed in Washington on June 26 — sold as a “first step toward peace” — is fraying within days. The 14-point deal ties any Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon to the “verified disarmament of non-state armed groups,” a plain reference to Hezbollah. A now-public security annex states: further IDF pullbacks are conditioned on “results, not time” — on “successful completion of agreed upon and verifiable disarmament,” with no withdrawal timeline at all. Israel can therefore stay indefinitely and call it legal.

Netanyahu, visiting troops in the self-declared “security zone” alongside Defense Minister Israel Katz, said Israel “will not leave southern Lebanon until the threat has disappeared”; Katz added they “will not withdraw a millimeter” until Hezbollah is disarmed. Since disarmament is the precondition for a withdrawal Israel refuses to start, the sequencing seems circular by design. Israeli strikes have continued across the south, the Bekaa, and Beirut’s southern suburbs. Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem branded the deal “null and void,” a “humiliation,” and vowed to keep fighting until Israel leaves — a rejection driven by the Iran-backed militia’s determination to keep its weapons and its war, not by any concern for the Lebanese state.

The Christian angle is where Western coverage flattens a real divide — and it’s worth getting right, because Israel has a documented history of cultivating Lebanese politicians.

On one side, Samir Geagea’s Lebanese Forces cheered the pact as “the most significant political step taken by the Lebanese state in half a century.” But Geagea is the most Israel-friendly voice in Lebanese politics — so his enthusiasm should be weighed accordingly, not taken as the Christian consensus.

The Free Patriotic Movement, Lebanon’s second largest Christian party, founded by former President Michel Aoun and led by Gebran Bassil, did not celebrate but seems open to finding a way forward. Bassil’s verdict: the agreement “is beneficial if we regain all our rights, and dangerous if it is a recipe for strife,” demanding “responsible engagement.” The party said it backs “a comprehensive and lasting peace” but that peace “cannot be achieved through surrendering to Israeli demands or sacrificing Lebanese rights,” warning the framework “lacks guarantees for Israeli withdrawal” and that its use of “redeployment” instead of withdrawal leaves “the door open for the continuation of the occupation.”

Keep reading

They Told You Your Dishwasher Could Spy on You

Back in 2012, Wired published an article titled “CIA Chief: We’ll Spy on You Through Your Dishwasher.” That was not some wild theory. That was based on remarks from then-CIA Director David Petraeus, who was speaking about the so-called Internet of Things at an In-Q-Tel summit, the CIA’s own venture capital arm. Petraeus called these technologies “transformational,” especially for their effect on “clandestine tradecraft.” In plain English, the intelligence world saw your home appliances, television, car navigation system, light switches, phone apps, and connected devices as the next great surveillance frontier.

Petraeus said that “items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled” through RFID, sensor networks, embedded servers, and internet-connected devices. That is the quote everyone should remember. They were not hiding it. They were telling you directly that the smart home would become the spy home. Once upon a time, they had to bug your chandelier. Now they simply wait for you to buy the device, install the app, connect it to Wi-Fi, and sign away your privacy in some user agreement nobody reads.

Wired correctly noted that these devices would produce tagged, geolocated data that could be intercepted in real-time. The dishwasher quote was not really about dishwashers alone. It was about the entire home becoming a listening post and tracking station. Your television, thermostat, lighting system, refrigerator, phone, PlayStation, car, smartwatch, and now even your pet’s microchip become pieces of a surveillance net. This is precisely how tyranny advances, not with a knock at the door, but with convenience, entertainment, and a monthly subscription.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Rules Police Conduct a Fourth Amendment “Search” When Grabbing Your Google Location History Data Through Geofence Warrants

The U.S. Supreme Court held Monday that law enforcement officers conduct a Fourth Amendment search when they obtain cell phone users’ precise Location History data from Google using a geofence warrant.

In a 6-3 decision in Chatrie v. United States, the Court ruled that Americans have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their cell phone location information, even when that data is stored by a third-party technology company such as Google. The ruling represents one of the Court’s most significant digital privacy decisions since its 2018 Carpenter decision involving historical cell-site location data.

Justice Elena Kagan authored the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Brett Kavanaugh, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Jackson separately concurring.

Justice Neil Gorsuch concurred only in the judgment, while Justice Samuel Alito dissented, joined in part by Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Barrett also filed a separate dissent.

This builds directly on the landmark Carpenter v. United States (2018) decision, which already required warrants for cell-site location information (CSLI).

The Court made clear that Google’s even more precise and sweeping Location History data — which logs a user’s location every two minutes or so, within about 20 meters, and can even reveal elevation and which floor of a building someone is on — deserves at least the same protection.

The case, Chatrie v. United States (No. 25-112), arose from a May 20, 2019, armed robbery of a credit union in Midlothian, Virginia. Police had surveillance footage and witness statements but no suspect. On June 14, they obtained a Virginia magistrate’s geofence warrant directed at Google.

Keep reading