Blog

This is how the age of American dominance comes to an end

Regardless of how the conflict between the United States and Iran formally concludes, its symbolism is already unmistakable. An ancient civilization, one of the oldest continuous states in human history, has emerged as the final obstacle to the project of American global dominance. That alone tells us something about the direction in which the world is moving.

For historians, the deeper meaning of the current Middle Eastern crisis lies in the confrontation between two powers at opposite ends of the historical spectrum. Iran is arguably the world’s oldest centralized state, with roots stretching back to around 530 BC. Since then, it has never ceased to exist as a unified political entity. That continuity is remarkable. Even Russia, the major Western European powers, India and China have all experienced fragmentation at various points in their histories.

The United States, by contrast, is among the youngest major nations – barely 250 years old. Its history is ten times shorter than that of Persia. In that sense, the present conflict pits antiquity against modernity, a civilization forged over millennia against a state that rose rapidly in a uniquely favorable historical moment.

In purely military terms, such comparisons mean little. The United States retains overwhelming destructive capacity. If it chose to do so, it could devastate Iran. This is, after all, the only country in history to have used nuclear weapons against civilian populations. That fact alone should temper any illusions about the limits of American power.

Yet the long-term significance of this confrontation lies elsewhere. It isn’t about whether Iran can defeat the United States in a conventional sense. It’s about whether the current international order, one shaped by American dominance, can continue to function as it has.

Keep reading

Killing and Indifference

Is personal freedom a reality or a myth? Does the government execute the will of the governed or the will of those who finance its officials? Does the Bill of Rights restrain the government? Are the levers of government power pulled by those the governed have elected or those we don’t see? Do elections change anything?

Can the president kill people whom he suspects might commit a crime? Aren’t even those who would cause great harm entitled to due process? Isn’t everyone entitled to a fair trial in front of a neutral judge and jury before any punishment can be administered?

Aren’t all persons legally innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty? Isn’t this presumption of innocence the linchpin of American jurisprudence? At trial and before punishment, isn’t it the government’s obligation to prove every element of the crimes charged? Isn’t there no such thing in American jurisprudence as a presumption of guilt?

Aren’t punishments prescribed by law? Can the president make up a punishment and direct the military to administer it to folks he thinks are probably guilty of criminal behavior? Can federal officials perform unlawful acts with impunity just because they are ordered to do so by the president? Is “probably guilty” a sufficient legal standard for punishment?

In war, can the combatants morally target civilians and their structures? Is war waged against the people of a given country, or against its government and military assets? What happens when there is killing without consequence?

Which is worse, a president who kills whomever he wishes or a Congress that funds the killing and is indifferent to the moral, constitutional and legal consequences?

Can the president morally bomb civilians “into the Stone Age” in a country where the civilian population has little control over the government? Why kill or ruin large numbers of civilians whose liberation you have urged?

What is the purpose of a Constitution if it is not followed? Why take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and then not do so? Why limit war making to the Congress but then ratify the president’s war making as if the Constitution authorized it? If the U.S. bombs other countries to temper their offensive military appetite, who or what will temper America’s offensive military appetite?

Can Congress fund a war it has declined to declare? Why are undeclared wars now commonplace? What to do about a Congress that escapes its constitutional duties? Which is worse, a president who fights an undeclared war or a Congress that does nothing about it?

What is Congress afraid of? Where in the Constitution is the president empowered to spend billions killing foreign persons in an undeclared war? From what source does the president derive power to destroy a foreign land? Why was there no great American debate about war before the president began his killings?

Can the president order killings because he is in the mood for it or because it is fun? Doesn’t the Constitution establish a system of checks and balances so that one of the three branches of the federal government cannot amass power at the expense of either of the other two? Don’t the Constitution and history lay out the functions and powers of the branches of government, and aren’t they supposed to check each other so as to assure personal freedom?

What good are treaties if they’re not followed? Why are treaties the supreme law of the land along with the Constitution itself and all federal statutes? Why does the government violate treaties like the Geneva Conventions and the United Nations Charter that U.S. officials wrote and U.S. presidents signed or acknowledged and the U.S. Senate ratified?

Can the president choose which laws he personally will obey and which he will personally violate? Can the government legally break its own laws? Can the president spend money from the U.S. Treasury that has not been authorized by Congress? Can the president impose a sales tax on all goods entering the U.S. from foreign countries? Can the president pick and choose which statutes to enforce and which to ignore? Why is computer hacking a crime, unless it’s done by federal agents?

Can the president put his own name on American cash? Can he put an image of his face on all your cash? Does Congress still write the laws and appropriate funds, or does the president now do these things on his own?

Is the president required to tell the truth? Is the government required to tell the truth? Why is it that the government can lie to the people but it is a crime to lie to the government? Does the government work for us, or do we work for the government? Does the government know more about us than we do about it?

What happens when the government is untruthful and the people believe it? Isn’t truth the essential bond between the government and the governed in a free society? Doesn’t the government derive its just powers from the consent of the governed? What happens when the government does things to which the governed have never consented?

Keep reading

Clinton Judge Rips Hegseth, Orders Pentagon to Restore Press Access

US District Judge Paul Friedman, a Clinton appointee on Thursday once again sided with The New York Times and ordered the Pentagon to restore press access.

Last month Judge Friedman ruled that the Pentagon’s new press policy restricting press credential of reporters is unconstitutional.

In October, Pentagon reporters turned in their badges after they refused to sign Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s new security rule.

“Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth demanded that reporters agree by 5 p.m. Tuesday to a new policy, under which they would need to pledge to not obtain or use any unauthorized material, even if the information is unclassified — or hand over their press badges in the next 24 hours,” The Hill previously reported.

By that afternoon, Pentagon reporters turned in their badges.

Keep reading

Democrats Turn to Unconstitutional Exit Taxes After Their Policies Drove the Wealthy Out of Blue States

Democrats believe all our money belongs to them. They believe they have the moral and legal authority to take the money we earn and redistribute it to their preferred constituencies, while ignoring (or even facilitating) massive fraud and enriching themselves in the process. 

With the news of massive fraud scandals in Minnesota and California, it’s clear we don’t have a revenue problem; we have a fraud problem, and we’d bet the majority of our deficit could be erased if we eliminated fraud. But Democrats don’t have any interest in doing that. They just keep taxing people more and more to make up for their fiscal mismanagement. 

And when they raise taxes, the people who can afford to move from those blue states to tax-friendlier red states. That leaves the blue states with even more self-inflicted budget woes.

Rather than roll back wealth taxes, Democrats have decided to tax the people even more in the form of an exit tax, and that concept is gaining traction in blue states.

Keep reading

Iran has prevailed, and the Middle East has changed

US President Donald Trump has, in the end, found a way out of the situation he created by embarking on a reckless war against Iran. The threat of destroying an entire civilization provided him with the pretext to step back.

Indirect negotiations between Tehran and Washington, conducted through intermediaries, primarily Pakistan and, behind it, China, have produced a ceasefire. Trump may claim that Iran was cowed by his threats, but the reality is different.

A ceasefire under conditions where the Strait of Hormuz remains under Iranian control suggests that Tehran has not backed down. Washington, in effect, has.

It is too early to speak of any “golden age” emerging from these talks. But the outlines of the conflict’s outcome are already visible.

Keep reading

Adult Illegal Alien Who Groped Over a Dozen Girls “In Between Their Legs” at Fairfax, VA High School Found Guilty on Nine Assault Charges

An adult illegal alien who was charged for groping minor teen girls at a high school in Virginia was found guilty on nine assault charges on Thursday.

As reported last month, parents were outraged after an 18-year-old illegal alien groped over a dozen girls “in between their legs” at a high school in Fairfax County, Virginia.

The alien, identified as Israel Flores Ortiz, is turning 19 soon and is only in the 11th grade.

Why have authorities allowed a 19-year-old man – who is in this country illegally – to sexually assault minor teen girls in the hallways at school for several months??

“There’s a group of about 12 individuals that have reported this assault,” one mother told 7News.

“It was all perpetrated by a single individual who is a stranger to the girls. He just sneakily walked up behind them and put his hand in between their legs,” she said.

“It was not just a butt smack or a butt grab. It was a groping of a private area. It had been occurring for several months,” she added.

Keep reading

Leaked DOJ report finds Biden admin colluded with abortionists to target pro-lifers

A nearly 60-page report form the Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) containing “damning evidence of collusion and unethical behavior” between the Biden-era DOJ and pro-abortion entities, including the National Abortion Federation (NAF), has been leaked the leftist news outlet MS Now.

“Upon assuming office, the Biden DOJ shattered the public’s trust by weaponizing the FACE Act to advance a pro-abortion agenda, and DOJ’s Civil Rights Division was at the forefront of this weaponization,” says the draft, according to MS Now.

Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue who has seen the evidence on which the report was based, spoke to LifeSiteNews after the leak of the document. According to MS Now, the document is likely to be publicly released as early as next week. Terry told LifeSiteNews that he and Terrisa Bukovinac, founder of Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (PAAU), were granted access to the unredacted records on March 4, 2026. Bukovinac and Terry met with DOJ officials in Washington, D.C., because the documents reference Terry by name and Bukovinac’s organization.

Terry said the report contains clear evidence of unethical coordination between Biden lead prosecutor Sanjay Patel and pro-abortion groups, including the NAF, while more than 70 attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers in the months after Roe v. Wade was overturned went largely uninvestigated and unprosecuted.

Keep reading

Mamdani’s Proposed Racial Equity Tax Targeting White Neighborhoods

The mayor of America’s largest city, socialist Zohran Mamdani, has a plan to tax white people more. This appears to be an egregious violation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which calls for all races to have equal protection under the law.

On April 7, 2026, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani released the Preliminary Citywide Racial Equity Plan, described as the first government-wide racial equity framework in the city’s history, along with a “True Cost of Living” measure. The plan spans 45 agencies and includes more than 200 agency-level goals, over 800 strategies, and roughly 600 performance indicators.

The framework is inseparable from a property tax proposal Mamdani advanced during his mayoral campaign, in which he called for shifting tax burdens from outer-borough homeowners to “more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods,” arguing the current system undertaxes high-value real estate.

Keep reading

Did Democrat Senator Mark Kelly Just Admit to Committing War Crimes During Desert Storm?

Commentator Wiz Buckley criticized current claims of potential war crimes tied to U.S. military strategy involving Iran, pointing to past military operations and raising questions about consistency in how such actions are evaluated.

Speaking during an interview, Buckley framed his remarks by emphasizing the broader perspective of military personnel.

“Well, good afternoon, Emily. Thank you for having me,” he began.

“I want to lead with this. There is not a young man or woman out on the tip of the spear that wants any of this war is the ultimate failure of the human condition.”

Buckley said that members of the U.S. military operate under the direction of civilian leadership.

“So just know that the United States military wants to avoid all of this,” he said, adding, “but we follow the orders of the Commander in Chief.”

He then turned to what he described as a reaction from critics who have raised concerns about possible war crimes.

“And Emily, I got to be honest with you,” Buckley said.

“Let me lead with this. The people frothing at the mouth today, clutching their pearls about alleged war crimes.”

Buckley specifically referenced Senator Mark Kelly, a former naval aviator, in his remarks. “If the president decides to target infrastructure, and I’m going to target a fellow naval aviator, the guy is just making my skin crawl right now is Captain Mark Kelly,” Buckley said.

He pointed to U.S. military operations during the Gulf War as a comparison. “Captain Kelly flew A-6s in Desert Storm,” Buckley said.

He referenced the opening phase of the conflict, describing it as “shock and awe in the first 24 to 48 to 72 hours of Desert Storm,” and stated that “all we targeted was infrastructure, power plants, TVs, bridges, roads.”

Keep reading

Obama-Appointed Judge DISMISSES DOJ Lawsuit to Obtain Massachusetts’ Unredacted Voter Rolls

Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge Leo T. Sorokin has dismissed the Trump DOJ’s lawsuit demanding the Commonwealth’s full, unredacted statewide voter registration list.

The case, United States v. William Francis Galvin, was part of the Department of Justice’s aggressive nationwide crackdown to force states to turn over their voter rolls under Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 to root out dead voters, non-citizens illegally registered, duplicates, and other irregularities that threaten the integrity of our elections.

But in Massachusetts, Democrat Secretary of State William Francis Galvin refused to hand over the data. The DOJ sued. And now, an Obama judge has let him off the hook on a technicality.

According to the 13-page order issued Thursday, Judge Sorokin ruled that the DOJ’s demand letter failed to include a proper “statement of the basis” for requesting the records, as required by the 1960 law.

The judge wrote that the Attorney General’s August 14, 2025, letter stated the purpose (to check compliance with NVRA and HAVA list maintenance rules) but offered zero factual basis, no specific concerns, no anomalies, no complaints, just a blanket demand for Massachusetts’ entire computerized voter list.

The court slammed the demand as “facially deficient” and tossed the entire complaint and motion to compel. Motions to dismiss from Galvin and intervenors were declared moot.

This marks the fourth loss for the DOJ, with zero wins, out of 30 active cases.

Keep reading