Blog

Tyrant Gavin Newsom Panics: Threatens to Prosecute Anyone Helping President Trump Secure Fair Elections – Pushes New Felony Law to Criminalize Ballot Scrutiny Before Certification

In yet another desperate power grab, radical Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom is warning that anyone who dares help President Trump protect election integrity in California will be prosecuted.

He’s now moving forward with legislation to make it a FELONY to seize ballots before they’ve been certified by his hand-picked state and county officials.

This is the same Gavin Newsom who has spent years resisting basic election security while California’s system remains wide open to abuse.

In a video statement posted on social media, Newsom warned that anyone who assists President Donald Trump in what he described as interference with California’s elections would face prosecution under state law.

Newsom: Let me speak directly to anyone considering helping President Trump interfere with our election or our count: If you violate California’s laws, if you interfere with our voters, tamper with our ballots, or meddle in our election, you will be prosecuted. It doesn’t matter who gave the order.

That’s why I’m moving forward with new legislation that would make it a felony to seize ballots before the vote has been certified by state and county officials.

We will be the wall he cannot get past because we believe that, once an election is decided, the winner governs for everyone. That’s the architecture of American liberty.

Donald Trump—he doesn’t believe in that architecture.

Keep reading

The Looming Shadow of the “Useless Class”

Harari’s Warning: A New “Useless Class” Emerges

In influential circles tied to global institutions, a chilling phrase has entered the conversation: the rise of a “useless class.” Historian and World Economic Forum advisor Yuval Noah Harari has repeatedly warned that rapid advances in artificial intelligence and automation will render vast numbers of people economically irrelevant. In his book Homo Deus and various public statements, Harari describes this emerging group not merely as unemployed but as unemployable, stripped of meaningful contributions to the economic and political systems that define modern power.

Superfluous People: What Happens When AI Replaces Humanity

He has pointed out that in the 21st century, the central economic question may become what to do with “superfluous people” once algorithms outperform humans in most tasks. This is not abstract futurism. It reflects observable trends: AI already displaces roles in manufacturing, transportation, customer service, coding, analysis, and creative fields. Entire professions face obsolescence. When millions cannot secure stable employment, societies risk labelling them burdens rather than citizens with inherent worth.

Echoes of “Useless Eaters”: From Nazi Eugenics to Modern Efficiency

This language echoes darker historical precedents. The term “useless eaters” originated in early 20th-century eugenics and Nazi propaganda, where authorities deemed the disabled, elderly, or unproductive as drains on resources unworthy of life. Those regimes justified sterilization, euthanasia, and gruesome experiments on living humans deemed irrelevant, using economic and efficiency as grounds. While today’s discussions avoid explicit calls for elimination, the underlying logic of sorting human value by productivity should alarm anyone who values individual dignity.

Schwab’s Fourth Industrial Revolution: Mass Redundancy Ahead

Harari’s warnings align with broader elite conversations about technological disruption. Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, has addressed the Fourth Industrial Revolution and its potential to create redundancy for many workers. The concern is real: without robust adaptation, large segments of the population could become dependent on state or corporate systems, vulnerable to control.

Georgia Guidestones: The Elite Blueprint for Drastic Population Cuts

This feeds into visions of a restructured world. The Georgia Guidestones, a controversial monument erected in 1980 in Georgia and later destroyed, laid out ten guiding principles for humanity. Its first commandment declared: “Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.” That explicit target of drastic population reduction (over 90%) has fueled suspicions about long-term agendas among some influential figures who see overpopulation as a crisis. It underscores a mindset that prioritizes global limits over unfettered human flourishing.

15-Minute Cities and Depopulation: Easier Rule Over Fewer Subjects

Critics argue that depopulation pressures, whether through policy, technology, or subtle incentives, serve a strategic purpose. A smaller global population would make centralized rule far simpler for oligarchs and technocrats. Concepts like 15-minute cities, promoted as sustainable urban planning where residents access work, food, healthcare, and leisure within a short walk or bike ride, illustrate the point. Proponents highlight reduced emissions and convenience. Yet skeptics see them as prototypes for contained zones: easier to monitor, restrict movement within or between, and enforce compliance through digital systems and surveillance. In a depopulated world with AI handling production, the need for expansive human labor and freedom of movement diminishes. Elites could manage compact, dependent populations more effectively, where dissent or excess can be easily isolated.

AI Job Apocalypse: Creating the Perfect Storm of Control

The fusion of AI-driven job loss and these control-oriented frameworks paints a grim picture. Displaced workers, stripped of purpose and economic agency, risk being recast as “useless” burdens in the eyes of systems optimized for efficiency. Harari himself has noted the profound inequality this could create, with a small elite of data owners and tech masters holding unprecedented power over the masses.

Euthanasia Explosion: From Terminally Ill to Depressed, Mentally Ill, and Children

Compounding these concerns is the rapid expansion of euthanasia laws across several nations. What began as a limited option for the terminally ill has broadened dramatically to encompass the depressed, mentally ill, and even children. In Canada, Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) has surged since its introduction in 2016. By 2024, there were 16,499 reported MAiD provisions, accounting for over 5 percent of all deaths in the country, with cumulative totals nearing 76,000. Cases increasingly include individuals with non-terminal conditions, disabilities, and vulnerabilities tied to poverty or isolation. In the Netherlands, total euthanasia deaths reached 9,958 in 2024, a 10 percent rise from the prior year. Psychiatric cases alone jumped to 219 from 138 in 2023, with a sharp increase among younger people under 30. Belgium and other jurisdictions show similar patterns of extending to minors. This normalization risks categorizing those with chronic illness, depression, or mental health challenges as burdens on the system. It reinforces the “useless eaters” logic by offering death as a solution to suffering that could instead prompt investment in care, community support, and human dignity. Such policies align conveniently with broader depopulation narratives, reducing pressure on resources while framing elimination as compassion.

Keep reading

Federal Court Rules Against Amish Families in Religious Exemption Case — Will Supreme Court Have the Last Word?

A federal court last week ruled against a group of Amish parents who sought religious exemptions from school vaccination requirements for their children — a ruling that legal experts suggest may lead to a U.S. Supreme Court showdown that could determine the future of religious exemptions nationwide.

In its ruling in Miller v. McDonald, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said New York State’s law eliminating religious exemptions from school vaccination requirements is “neutral and generally applicable,” doesn’t discriminate against specific religious practices and furthers the state’s interest in protecting the public from disease.

The plaintiffs, a group of parents and representatives of Amish schools in New York, sued New York’s Department of Health and Department of Education in 2023, alleging the state’s law barring religious exemptions violates the U.S. Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause under the First and 14th Amendments.

The parents face $118,000 in fines for noncompliance with the state’s vaccination requirements.

Last week’s decision was the second time the 2nd Circuit ruled against the plaintiffs. The same court previously dismissed the suit in 2024, upholding a decision by another federal court earlier that year.

In December 2025, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the 2nd Circuit, asking it to review constitutional questions arising out of a separate ruling, Mahmoud v. Taylor, in 2024. In that case, the Supreme Court found that parents have the right to request an exemption for their children from LGBTQ curriculum on religious grounds.

According to The Washington Post, last week’s ruling in Miller v. McDonald may “set the stage for a potential Supreme Court battle over vaccine mandates,” citing legal experts who suggested the court is likely to accept the case for review on constitutional grounds and in light of the Mahmoud v. Taylor decision.

Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University professor of health law and an outspoken vaccine proponent, told the Post he expects the Supreme Court to “reverse the appellate court’s decision” if it chooses to review the case.

A review could result in a ruling that would “allow religious vaccine exemptions nationwide,” the Post reported.

The Post reported last month that the Supreme Court has signaled that it “may be open to a constitutional claim based on the lack of a religious exemption for vaccine mandates in New York.”

A Supreme Court ruling in favor of the Amish plaintiffs would be “the anti-vaccine movement’s biggest win,” the Post wrote.

Keep reading

ABC’s Hostin: American Flags All Over the Community Make Me Feel Unsafe

Monday on ABC’s “The View,” co-host Sunny Hostin said she felt “unsafe” when a community has American flags “all over.”

Hostin said, “You know, I think unfortunately in this country, people have different lived experiences. So while some may have a lived experience like this, it is the best country in the world. And while there’s some stuff that goes on, you know, other things are OK. That, for me, was a defining image of modern America for black Americans, defining. Patriot Front is a white nationalist organization founded in 2017 after the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. You know what, they promote an ultra nationalist ideology that focuses on creating a white ethno-state in the United States with the ultimate goal of reshaping American society to align with their vision of racial and cultural homogeneity. As a black woman, I’m sitting there in my country, and that’s the type of fear I have to experience.”

She added, “When I walk into a community and I see American flags all over the community and I suddenly feel unsafe because there is a section of this country that has co-opted the American flag and they equate being an American or an American flag with white supremacy. And that should never be ever the symbol of white supremacy.”

Keep reading

US-Israel Military Merger Delayed: Here’s Why and How You Can Stop It

The U.S.-Israel military merger has not become law – yet.

Not because Congress rejected it, but because the House unexpectedly voted down the procedural rule governing debate on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

That vote delayed consideration of the bill, but it did not remove the military merger from it. When the House returns, Congress will almost certainly have another opportunity to consider the legislation.

The American people now have another opportunity to stop it.

What Happened?

The Massie-Khanna Amendment, which would have removed the military merger from the bill, was not made in order by the House Rules Committee, which serves as the traffic cop on legislation, deciding which bills and which amendments move forward.

In this case, the Rules Committee played dirty cop and the fix was in to make sure the House would not be able to vote on the military merger because the amendment was simply not placed in the rule. In fact, the amendment was not taken up by the committee and did not even receive a vote.

It was ignored.

Welcome to civics class, Washington, D.C. style, on how a bill isn’t made.

How Congress Was Prevented from Voting

Every piece of legislation has its own specific rule, which determines, among other matters, how much time will be permitted for debate, what amendments are made in order, whether legislation can be further amended from the House floor, and whether a point of order can be raised to challenge the bill.

The Rules Committee makes up the rules for each bill as it goes along.

And it does.

Since Republicans control the House, they determine the committee’s membership. The Rules Committee consists of nine Republicans and four Democrats.

This particular rule governed consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027, legislation that would increase annual Pentagon spending by an astonishing 67 percent to $1.5 trillion. The rule, approved by the committee on a partisan vote at the request of the President, also combined the NDAA with the so-called SAVE Act, restricting voter registration.

Before Members can vote on the underlying legislation, they must first vote separately on the rule. The rule establishes the terms of debate and determines which amendments may be considered.

If the rule goes down, the bill goes down with it.

Why Was the NDAA Vote Delayed?

Here is what happened.

Because of a dispute over the SAVE Act, the House voted down the rule. The NDAA never came before the House for debate or final passage. A disappointed Speaker adjourned the House until July 13.

As a consequence, the NDAA has not passed and the U.S.-Israel military merger it authorizes has not become law.

Yet.

The Fight Continues

When the House returns, the Rules Committee must meet again and draft a new rule. Based on what just happened in committee, there is every reason to believe the new rule will once again prevent any amendment from being offered to remove the military merger.

The Rules Committee should instead make in order the Massie-Khanna Amendment and other amendments that would remove the U.S.-Israel military merger and other deeply controversial provisions from the NDAA. Members of Congress should not be forced into an all-or-nothing vote on legislation of this magnitude without the opportunity to debate and vote on amendments on their merits.

Congress should not be asked to vote on final passage of the NDAA without first having the opportunity to consider amendments that remove the military merger and other controversial provisions.

If the Rules Committee refuses to allow those amendments, the merger provision will remain in the bill.

What we can do

Every Member of Congress should hear one simple message:

Urge House leadership and the Rules Committee to make in order the Massie-Khanna Amendment and other amendments that would remove the U.S.-Israel military merger and other objectionable provisions from the NDAA.

If the Rules Committee refuses, vote against the rule.

If the rule passes, vote against the NDAA until the military merger is removed from the bill.

This is the only way to stop this patently unconstitutional merger, which undermines American sovereignty and opens the door for Israel to drag the United States into more wars to advance its expansionist and murderous impulses.

This Fourth of July, celebrate Independence Day by defending the very principles upon which this nation was founded.

TAKE ACTION

The House is expected to take up the NDAA when it returns on July 13. The time to act is now, before a new rule is written and the bill returns to the House floor.

Let us truly celebrate our independence by staying independent. Please help spread the word by forwarding this article to your family, friends, and colleagues.

Find your Members of Congress:

House: https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

Senate: https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm

Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Representative or Senators.

Ask them to:

  • Support making in order the Massie-Khanna Amendment and other amendments to remove Section 219 from the NDAA.
  • Vote against the rule if those amendments are blocked.
  • If the rule passes, vote against the NDAA until Section 219 is removed.

Optional telephone script

My name is ______ and I am a constituent. I am calling to urge Representative ______ to insist that the House Rules Committee make in order the Massie-Khanna Amendment so the House can debate and vote on removing Section 219 from the NDAA.

If the Rules Committee refuses to allow that amendment, I urge the Representative to vote against the rule. If Section 219 remains in the bill, I urge the Representative to vote against final passage of the NDAA.

Congress should defend American sovereignty, uphold the Constitution, and reject any measure that integrates the executive and military functions of the United States with those of a foreign government.

Thank you.

Keep reading

Hypocrite Democrats FINALLY Start Bailing From Platner After Latest Allegations

I guess the Nazi tattoo, the despicable online posts, the portapotty fetish, and the domestic abuse allegations weren’t enough for Democrats to admit Graham Platner (D-Maine) is a horrible human being, but now, following fresh allegations of sexual assault, Democrats are finally heading for the exits.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), two of the Maine Senate candidate’s most loyal defenders, yanked their endorsements on Monday, and Khanna went even further by calling on Platner to quit the race altogether.

How noble of them.

Make no mistake about it, the report that FINALLY broke the dam is damning.

Jenny Racicot, a Maine resident who dated Platner, told Politico that he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections. She detailed the alleged incident in three interviews over two weeks. Politico also spoke with a man she dated afterward and reviewed documents, including emails between Racicot and her therapist, as well as messages in which she had warned an acquaintance against getting involved with Platner long before he ever ran for office.

Keep reading

Let’s Leave the Strait of Hormuz Alone

President Trump was reportedly “shocked” to see many thousands of Iranians in the street mourning at the funeral of the country’s late leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, over the weekend. Khamenei was assassinated by the United States at the beginning of the February US surprise attack on Iran.

The US attack on Iran was sold to Trump by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and US neocons as an easy “cake walk” that would lead the Iranian government to fall and be replaced with a US-friendly regime.

“I thought they hated him,” Trump said of the murdered religious leader of Iran.

Not only did the Iranian people not rise up to replace their leadership with one friendly to Washington, but the society seems to have become even more cohesive and patriotic. This should surprise no one, as when similar tragedies occurred in the United States – assassinations, 9/11, etc – we also as a society came closer together.

In Soccer when you kick the ball into your own goal, it is referred to as an “own-goal.” That is what President Trump achieved with his attack on Iran on February 28th. In fact, it was not just one “own-goal,” but a series of them. The blunder will likely go down in American history as one of the worst foreign policy moves in our history.

The Iranians did not rise up and declare support for the US. American military bases throughout the region are so severely damaged by Iranian retaliation that most cannot be brought back online. Scores of US military equipment has been destroyed or damaged at a cost of tens of billions of dollars. Countries in the region are rethinking their decision to essentially become protectorates of the United States now that it is demonstrated that they cannot be protected by the United States. American military power suddenly looks less powerful.

But perhaps the most destructive “own-goal” of the US attack is the Iranian decision to establish control over the Strait of Hormuz. Even in the US/Israeli attacks of last June, the Strait was kept open by Iran. It is a vital trade route and in everyone’s best interest to keep open for business.

The February attack and Iran’s strong regional response led the country to embrace what some have called a de facto nuclear weapon: control of the Strait. Explaining why he signed the memorandum of understanding with Iran last month, President Trump mentioned the damage being done to the US economy by the closure of the Strait and the possibility that matters may even get worse without the agreement. The US economy desperately needed the Strait to be open.

Now, however, progress toward peace with Iran continues to be thwarted by the stubborn insistence on the US side that the Strait of Hormuz must not be controlled by Iran and that a fee system for passage through the Strait cannot be instituted by Iran and Oman. Several skirmishes have already taken place in the area, threatening to take the US back to war.

It is in the best interest of the United States to abandon claims on Hormuz – which is thousands of miles away – and live with the consequences of Trump’s mistake. Another war cannot win what two previous wars have lost. Let Iran control the Strait and let international trade and commerce be re-established. Let’s leave the Strait alone!

Keep reading

Banking On Magic

Monthly Budgets Under Assault

American consumers are being squeezed. Between high grocery prices, rising utility bills, and hefty prices at the pump, little float remains in monthly budgets. An unexpected medical bill or car repair is all it takes to blow the household budget.

We’re all living through stressful macroeconomic crossroads here in mid-2026. For a while, it appeared the post-pandemic inflationary dragon had been slain. We were promised inflation would soon return to the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent target.

But that was before the U.S.-Israel attacked Iran and a new energy shock was triggered. Perhaps the MOU negotiations and reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, with UN evacuation, will soften things in the months ahead. Nonetheless, we do not expect there to be long-lasting relief.

When energy costs spike, they don’t just stay at the pump. They weave their way into the price of just about everything you buy, eat, or touch. And right now, as the Federal Reserve transitions into a new era under inbound Chair Kevin Warsh, the combination of elevated oil prices, persistent consumer price inflation, and nosebleed stock market valuations have created an abundance of risks that are not being properly appreciated.

In short, your purchasing power is being eroded, the new Fed chief is caught between a political rock and an inflationary hard place, and the stock market is behaving like gravity doesn’t exist. To understand why your monthly budget is under assault, we must look at how inflation is composed.

Economists love to talk about core inflation. This metric conveniently strips out food and energy prices because they tend to be volatile. It’s the economic equivalent of saying, “Aside from the rain, it’s a perfectly dry day.”

But as consumers, we live in the real world. We can’t choose to skip buying food or filling the gas tank.

Invisible Tax

Right now, the headline numbers are singing a discordant tune. The May 2026 Consumer Price Index (CPI) report clocked in at a stubborn 4.2 percent year-over-year inflation. The April Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index – the Fed’s preferred metric – sat at 3.8 percent. Both are a country mile away from that 2 percent target.

Thanks to ongoing geopolitical friction and conflict with Iran, a barrel of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude – the light sweet stuff – spiked above $100 a barrel in May. It has since dropped to about $69. However, this is well above the $57 price that a barrel of WTI crude fetched at the start of the year. Moreover, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve has been drained to a 43-year low. Refilling it will put an elevated price floor under the price of oil in the months ahead.

Higher oil prices haven’t just been an inconvenience for commuters. Rather, they’re a supply shock that behaves like an invisible tax on the entire global supply chain. When a barrel of oil crosses the triple-digit threshold, a domino effect ripples through the economy.

For starters, diesel fuel gets much more expensive. The trucks delivering fresh produce to your supermarket, the container ships bringing electronics across the ocean, and the delivery vans bringing packages to your doorstep all pass those fuel surcharges directly down the line.

Modern farming is also incredibly energy intensive. From petroleum-based fertilizers to the diesel that runs massive harvesters, expensive energy directly translates to more expensive eggs, milk, and bread.

So, too, there’s the rising input costs for petrochemicals. These are the building blocks of 95 percent of manufactured goods, including packaging, synthetic fabrics, medical devices, and construction materials.

When energy prices rise, it doesn’t take long for transitory spikes to harden into long-term, sticky consumer price inflation. Businesses can absorb higher input costs for a month or two, but eventually, they protect their margins by changing the price tags. That is exactly what we are seeing play out across the retail landscape today.

Oil prices may be moderating. But the impact on consumer prices from the oil price spike is here to stay.

This is why consumer prices will never return to where they were last year, and certainly not to where they were in January 2020. Not unless new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh gets his productivity miracle… 

Keep reading

New York Bodega Owners to City: Drop Dead!

It’s been more than 50 years since the New York Daily News reported that President Gerald Ford would veto any bailout for the city’s endless red ink with the headline, “Ford to City: Drop Dead.” Ford never said exactly that, of course, but the headline created such a backlash that Ford backed down a few months later, putting his signature on $2.3 billion worth of emergency loans. That’s about $14.3 billion in 2026 money — a very nice little bailout, indeed.

Today, New York City bodega owners know that nobody will bail them out when the city’s Commie-Islamist Mayor Zohran Mamdani puts them out of business, which is why they just silently told him to drop dead.

Or at least that’s the impression I got from a Monday morning New York Post exclusive detailing the showdown between Gracie Mansion and local retailers threatened by Mamdani’s campaign promise to build and operate city-run grocery stores.

“Business owners gripe that city officials are only now seeking their input — and seemingly as an afterthought — after sparking alarms in April with a surprise plan to build a public grocery store in East Harlem at La Marqueta,” the Post reported. “That store will cost a whopping $30 million to build – and threatens the livelihood of more than a dozen existing stores nearby.”

All of that is to be expected. The city can throw Other People’s Money at its socialist stores until it runs out, while typical grocers operate on razor-thin 2% profit margins. Considering the services they provide and the complexity of their operations, the real crime is how little money they make.

But I digress, as I usually do.

What I love about this story — and what makes it so newsworthy — is the sheer gall of the Mamdani administration. 

“We met with bodega owners so they could help us plan and ensure that we take into account their challenges and their role as a part of the food ecosystem,” Julie Su, deputy mayor for “economic justice,” told the Post in a statement. But what really happened was that bodega owners reported to City Hall last week at Su’s invitation for a roundtable discussion, “only to get barraged with ‘intrusive’ questions about their businesses,” according to the Post’s source.

The questionnaire bodega owners were expected to fill out included questions like, “What items are sold the most at your stores?” and “Where is your profit margin the greatest?” 

The correct answer to questions like those is, “Get stuffed.” The polite answer is, “Try running a bodega and figure it out for yourself, or get stuffed.”

Instead, an anonymous bodega owner who spoke to the Post said, “They wanted us to share proprietary information with them but they don’t answer our questions and that’s why there is distrust.”

“Tell us how to run you out of business with your hard-won institutional knowledge and your tax dollars” is pretty much the height of gall, I thought. But then I read the part where Su told the Post, “One of the questions we wanted to understand is whether there are key products bodegas sell and rely on that we should not sell. That’s how serious we are about not undercutting them.”

Keep reading

UK Police Crack Down On Dangerous New Threat – People Standing Around Doing Nothing

British policing has reached new depths of absurdity and authoritarianism. Officers are inventing pre-crimes, harassing citizens for lawful filming or standing in public, and deploying to pubs to warn people off tweeting about councillors.

All while the same forces stand guard over brand-new taxpayer-funded houses handed to migrants and turn a blind eye to patterns of two-tier enforcement that have defined recent years.

In one widely shared incident, a female officer was caught on camera confronting a man peacefully filming in a public space.

In the footage she claims his mere presence “might” wind people up and lead someone else to lose their temper, threatening arrest to “prevent a breach of the peace.”

No actual crime had occurred. No law was being broken. As the man pointed out, the logic is straight out of the dystopian story Minority Report: punish the law-abiding person in case an offence is later committed.

The man was simply exercising his right to record in public. The response is to treat him as the threat.

This is far from an isolated incident.

Another viral video shows a male officer with wild, agitated behaviour confronting a citizen for filming. He threatens arrest for a “technically public order offence,” then pivots to demands for details, ultimately detaining the man.

Observers note the officer appears erratic, with exaggerated facial expressions and eye movements that have sparked widespread comment about his fitness for duty. The citizen was going about lawful business. The officer escalated without clear legal basis.

Keep reading