Kansas Group Caught Buying Votes With Gift Cards – Trump Responds: “We Have Photographic Evidence”

President Trump announced on Sunday that in Kansas, Democrat groups have been caught bribing voters.

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach announced on Saturday that he sent a cease and desist letter to Bluestem Kansas, a leftwing nonprofit, ordering them to “immediately stop offering voters incentives tied to voting in the November 3 general election.”

Kobach’s office said in a press release that they’ve obtained evidence from a voter who was offered a $5 gift card by a canvasser with the group.

“Under K.S.A. 25-2409, election bribery includes giving, offering or agreeing to give a benefit in exchange for voting at a public election. It is a severity level 7, nonperson felony. Federal law, 52 U.S.C. § 10307(c), separately makes it a crime to pay or offer to pay anyone for voting in an election that includes federal candidates,” the release notes.

Kobach said in a statement, “As attorney general and before that as secretary of state, I have prosecuted many cases of voter fraud in Kansas, including voting by non-citizens and double voting. But I never thought that a group in Kansas would be so brazen as to go door-to-door three days before a general election offering voters monetary incentives.”

“This sounds like Chicago in the 1950s, not Kansas in the 2020s. As long as I am attorney general, those who violate our election laws will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” he continued.

President Trump highlighted the election fraud on Truth Social on Sunday, revealing that Kobach has “photographic evidence” of the operative “going door to door in Wichita offering gift cards to people for votes.”

Keep reading

Pelosi, Schumer, and Other Democrats Lash Out at Haley Stevens for Endorsing Mike Rogers – Michigan Democratic Chair Kicks Her Out of Party!

Rep. Haley Stevens is facing backlash from top Democrats after she crossed party lines and endorsed Republican Mike Rogers in the heated Michigan Senate race on Sunday.

The state’s Democratic Party chairman even declared that she is no longer a member of the party, “nor will she be in the future.”

As The Gateway Pundit reported, Stevens broke away from her party and joined Mike Rogers at a black church this morning before announcing her official endorsement of the Trump-backed Republican.

“I don’t belong in Abdul’s campaign. I do not stand with Hasan Piker, who gets trafficked on our college campuses. A dear friend of mine earlier today was saying that education is on the ballot, and she’s absolutely right. And what our students see, what our children see, and who we are as Michiganders is not hate, and is not what we are getting out from our Democratic nominee right now,” she continued.

“So, I am just one person. I love this state, as some of you know. I’ve, you know, run a campaign saying that it was a love letter to Michigan, and I’m here to declare who we are as Michiganders. This is Phil Hart’s seat for the U.S. Senate. This is the conscience of the Senate right now and our Michigan moment. And I’m just letting you know where I am. I’m still a very proud Democrat. I still very much believe in everything I voted for and said, and I’ve worked really hard, and will continue to do so in all the ways life’s opportunities afford. Godspeed, and love you all so much.”

Keep reading

El-Sayed Supporter Thrown Down by Police After Tackling Conservative Reporter on Michigan College Campus, Screams “I Should Have F*cking Killed You” During Arrest

A self-described liberal mental patient attacked and threatened to kill a conservative reporter during a free speech event at the University of Michigan on Sunday.

According to independent reporter Cam Higby, the insane woman is an Abdul El-Sayed supporter.

Liz Benichou, a Jewish activist who was filming man-on-the-street interviews on campus, was shoved to the ground by the lunatic during an apparent debate.

Out of nowhere, the woman shoved her to the ground and jumped on top of Benichou as multiple individuals tried to hold her back before police arrived.

The cop threw her on the ground and slapped cuffs on her as she tried to resist and screamed profanities at the cops, admitting to the attack. “What the f*ck are you going to do to me because I hit a f*cking dumb ass b*tch in the face?” she said.

Then, as police loaded her into the cruiser, she began screaming, “You stupid f*cking c*nt!” She screamed at Benichou, “I should have f*cking killed you when I had the f*cking chance!”

Keep reading

Beyond Netanyahu: What Israel’s Election Means for Palestinians

In the past, many Palestinians and Arabs followed Israeli elections closely.

They did so not because they entertained illusions that a Zionist leader would deliver peace and justice, dismantle the occupation or remove illegal settlements. Rather, they feared that some Israeli leaders were worse than others. They hoped to avert the worst-case scenario.

Over time, however, that distinction gave way to the belief that all Israeli leaders were essentially the same. This is not pessimism. It is experience.

Consider, for example, the expansion of illegal Jewish settlements during the Oslo peace process under Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

Between 1992 and 1995, the number of Israeli settlers in the West Bank, excluding East Jerusalem, increased from 111,673 to 140,235 – a rise of more than 25 percent, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, drawing on Israeli statistical records.

The same pattern continued under the Labor government of Ehud Barak.

Within his first six months, Barak’s government issued tenders for 3,196 settlement housing units, exceeding the annual average under his right-wing predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu.

When Naftali Bennett formed a coalition government in June 2021 that included the Arab party Ra’am, settlement expansion continued unabated.

According to Peace Now, the Bennett–Lapid government advanced plans for 7,292 settlement housing units during its first year, a 26-percent increase over the annual average recorded under previous Netanyahu governments.

The settlements are themselves a driving force behind the occupation. They require land, and therefore land confiscation; protection, and therefore an expanded military presence; water, roads and infrastructure, and therefore the appropriation of Palestinian resources. Together, these elements deepen dispossession and generate further Israeli violence.

According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, the West Bank contained 645 Israeli settlement sites, outposts and other occupation installations by the end of 2025, including 350 settlement outposts.

The Palestinian Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission reported that Israeli authorities targeted approximately 29,335 dunums of Palestinian land through declarations of so-called “state land” between October 2023 and August 2026—one of the largest waves of such land appropriation since Oslo.

By September 2026, the Commission had also documented the advancement or consideration of plans for more than 18,000 additional settlement housing units across the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem.

Alongside this expansion is the violence unfolding across the West Bank.

By the end of 2023, the West Bank had experienced its deadliest year for Palestinians since the UN began systematically recording casualties in 2005.

The Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission documented 23,827 attacks by Israeli forces and settlers against Palestinians and their property during 2025 alone. In the first seven months of 2026, settler attacks increased by 63 percent compared with the corresponding period of the previous year.

Typically, this violence, carried out by the Israeli occupation army and armed illegal settlers, is contextualized within the ongoing genocide in Gaza. But violence in the West Bank also serves another purpose beyond collective punishment: the confiscation of Palestinian orchards, the annexation of land, the expansion of settlements and the crushing of Palestinian resistance, including nonviolent opposition to this colonial enterprise.

Any Israeli candidate in the October 27 elections who supports settlement expansion does so with full knowledge of its consequences: further dispossession, military occupation, annexation and violence.

The difference between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, and politicians presented as less extreme, is often one of language, strategy and timing.

Former Israeli military chief and Yashar party leader Gadi Eisenkot, for example, openly supports the expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, despite his reputation as a more ‘moderate’ alternative to Netanyahu.

What, then, about Gaza?

Keep reading

Israel’s Ugly Election Aftermath: Netanyahu’s War Against Israeli Palestinians

Netanyahu’s response to the October 27 election has been extraordinary, even by his increasingly incendiary standards. Having failed to secure a governing majority, he and Likud have moved from contesting political opponents to questioning the legitimacy of the electorate itself.

Israeli Palestinian voters turned out in unprecedented numbers, helping the two “Arab-led parties”, as the Israeli government refers to them, win 19 seats. Netanyahu responded with allegations of widespread fraud, bribery and foreign interference, without producing a shred of evidence of systematic electoral manipulation.

The distinction matters. Israel’s Central Elections Committee said there was no basis for claims that the integrity of the vote had been systematically compromised. The Shin Bet likewise stressed that its narrowly focused investigation into possible foreign interference did not implicate Israeli-Arab voters collectively. President Isaac Herzog warned against tarnishing an entire community. Yet Netanyahu’s political machinery continued to portray the result as a “stolen election” and an “assault on Israel.”

It was a new low to a shrewd veteran politician who has sustained his career on incendiary campaigns. But this is not simply a sore loser refusing to leave the political stage. It is an attempt to redefine legitimate democratic participation according to ethnic and ideological criteria – and to pre-tarnish those Israeli parties willing to cooperate with the “Arab parties” and perhaps to set the stage for a new attack against Iran, to foster domestic support.

An Israeli Palestinian citizen’s vote is constitutionally valid when it supports Netanyahu’s political survival; apparently, it becomes suspect when it threatens it.

Qatar: Another convenient scapegoat

Netanyahu’s latest accusation introduces a familiar foreign villain: Qatar. Likud alleged that Doha, possibly alongside Turkey, financed organizations mobilizing Palestinian voters, thereby helping manufacture the electoral defeat of the Israeli right.

Like most calculated nonsense, the accusation is politically convenient. Qatar hosts Hamas’s political leadership, has mediated negotiations over Gaza, and has become an established target of Israeli nationalist rhetoric. Yet the evidence presented so far does not establish that Qatar financed electoral fraud or manipulated the Israeli vote.

Qatar categorically denied interference, describing the allegations as a disinformation campaign. More damaging to Netanyahu’s narrative, the Central Elections Committee’s acting director-general, Dean Livne, rejected claims of widespread electoral fraud as baseless. The committee stated that there was no basis for alleging systematic damage to the election’s integrity.

The Shin Bet confirmed that, while its foreign-interference investigation was limited, originated in its own intelligence rather than information supplied by political parties, it did not implicate an entire community of Palestinian voters.

Investigating possible foreign interference is legitimate; converting an unfinished intelligence inquiry into proof that its “Arab citizens” stole an election is political manipulation. Netanyahu has transformed a narrowly defined security investigation into an expansive political indictment.

Qatar may be a convenient suspect, but it cannot substitute for evidence. And foreign interference, even if established in individual cases, cannot invalidate the lawful votes of hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens, which is what Palestinians are.

Keep reading

NPR Reveals Democrat Scheme To Rig AIs Into Deceiving Voters

Democrats love to decry misinformation, and they do so for a very specific reason: to distract from the fact that misinformation and Narrative™ control are the most powerful tools in their toolbox.

Don’t get me wrong; everybody wants to control The Narrative™. That is why everybody has a PR agent of some kind and uses rhetoric to persuade people. It’s just that the Democrats have a vice grip on the cultural means of production and the bureaucracies and institutions that provide “reliable” information, so Republicans have a tough time competing on this battleground, and their voters tend to be a lot more skeptical of narratives in the first place.

One of the brilliant things about decrying “misinformation” or “money in politics” is that you are telling people what they want to hear – that deceiving people is bad and that buying elections is wrong – and that makes people less likely to notice that you are deceiving people and buying elections.

After all, you are the people against that, right?

Yeah, well, no. Not in the least. The Left is all about both. Obama ran against both, for instance, but he ran the most expensive campaign in history, by far, when he ran and won, and one of the tools his campaign used was manipulating Google results to create a playing field that favored him.

Life in 2026 is far more complicated and sophisticated, and Democrats have adapted well to the landscape. And they have deep connections in Big Tech and own the PR landscape, so it shouldn’t surprise us that their geniuses have figured out how to poison AI to feed sophisticated misinformation to voters.

Ahead of the midterms, some voters are turning to ChatGPT to help them decide who to vote for. When asked for information about candidates in some highly competitive races, NPR found that OpenAI’s AI chatbot cited a set of websites that are thinly veiled political ads made to look like reporting from local news outlets.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, when asked “Which House candidates in [Michigan’s 4th Congressional District] care about affordability?,” the chatbot said Democrat Sean McCann had the “Most detailed published affordability plan” at the very top of its answer. The stakes in this race are high – it’s one of the competitive U.S. House races that could determine control of the chamber.

ChatGPT’s response when NPR asked “Which House candidates in [Michigan’s 4th Congressional District] care about affordability?”

As a citation, ChatGPT linked to a website called the Kalamazoo Beacon. The Beacon labels its articles as “news articles” in the website’s source code. The outlet also describes itself in the site’s source code as “Reporting on Kalamazoo, southwest Michigan, and the issues shaping lakeshore communities.”

But the Kalamazoo Beacon has only published 16 stories, all about McCann, his policy positions and his record as a state legislator, NPR’s review shows.

The Beacon is one of 10 “local news” websites that promote one Democrat apiece in competitive U.S. House races. The 10 sites are part of a larger group of 37 websites identified by the digital security firm VisionHeight that promote many more candidates, mostly Democrats, for a slew of federal, state and local offices, as well as some nonpartisan posts like judges.

ChatGPT’s citation of these websites highlights how AI-generated answers can become yet another avenue for stealthy political advertising as more voters consult chatbots before they head to the polls.

This is a far more sophisticated version of a tactic Democrats have used in the past: creating fake newspapers delivered to people’s homes, presented as “news” but really PR packages for candidates or parties.

But those were fairly transparent; seeding fake news into AI is not, because AI presents information as if it comes from neutral “news” sources, when in fact it is just laundered propaganda not identified as such.

In much the same way that Google will launder Wikipedia answers as authoritative in its AI summaries, making the left-leaning “editors” at the site extremely powerful in creating a Truman Show reality, the fake “news” sites provide another layer of credibility to campaign propaganda.

The set of 37 websites presents candidates in different, overlapping groups. Each of the 10 Democrats covered by a site purporting to cover local news is also the sole subject of a site that offers opinion articles about why voters should support them. The various candidates, who are running in different states, also show up in roundup-style articles on five more websites that have names such as “Public Safety Democrats” and “Democratic Women in the House.”

The volume of websites and articles may also help the network’s operator boost their preferred narratives, DiResta said.

Another 12 websites, each focusing on a state, covered the House candidates in those states as well as other state and local candidates running for office. The state and national websites also boosted an 11th House candidate that did not have her own dedicated site purporting to be local news.

While most of the sites are openly partisan, the articles published by the network link out to sources for the claims they make, such as congressional voting records, mainstream news articles and partisan news sources, such as the pro-Democrat Courier network.

The genius of these sites is that they are not meant to be read by humans at all. They are designed to optimize for web crawlers and cross-link so the network appears far larger and more credible than it actually is. It’s the same principle used in academic journals, where citations serve as a form of credibility checking (“peers take this work seriously”), which has led to junk papers actually getting more citations because they create a web of cites that make them appear influential.

Keep reading

Connecticut Democrat State Rep. Arrested for Stealing Opponent’s Campaign Signs – Apple AirTag Tracker Led Investigators to Her Home

State Rep Anne Hughes (D) was charged with larceny after stealing campaign signs belonging to her opponent.

Apple AirTags in the signs led law enforcement to Anne Hughes’ home.

Hughes posted an ‘apology’ to Facebook after she got caught.

“Yesterday I removed lawn signs that shouldn’t have been on public property. I apologize for removing them rather than contacting the police or my opponent’s campaign to remove them, and I take full responsibility and accountability for my actions,” Hughes said.

“Campaigns should be about issues and differences of ideas, not yard signs. I apologize for the distraction, and am committed to having civil discourse with my opponent for the duration of this campaign season,” Anne Hughes said in a Facebook post on Saturday.

State representative Anne Hughes was arrested on Friday after several stolen political signs were located on property owned by Hughes, according to police.

The Easton police department received a complaint from the Darrell Harris campaign staff that several political signs were stolen from the side of the road in the area of Route 59 and Judd Road.

After further investigation, police say that an AirTag tracker showed that at least one of the signs was located on property owned by Hughes.

A follow-up investigation was conducted by police, which led to Hughes returning several signs, including the sign with the AirTag tracker.

Police found probable cause to issue Hughes a misdemeanor summons for sixth-degree larceny.

Keep reading

Democrat Rep. Jim Hines Threatens Elon Musk, Says Democrats Have War Gamed Fantasy Violent Election Day Chaos Caused by Musk Manipulating Algorithms That Causes Armed Citizens to Attack Polling Places

Democrats have war-gamed potential Election Day chaos that includes armed groups attacking polling places after being manipulated by Elon Musk, according to Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) in remarks to the left-wing news site MeidasTouch published Friday.

Himes threatened X social media site owner Musk, saying, “I’m looking at you here, Elon Musk…We’re watching very closely.”

Himes speculated that Musk could manipulate algorithms to spread rumors about illegal aliens voting that would provoke armed groups to attack polling places, giving President Donald Trump the opportunity to bring in federal law enforcement.

Himes, who has served in Congress since 2009, is the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Himes said the group that ran the war game included Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Rep. Joe Morelle (D-NY), lawyers, and nonprofit groups.

Himes noted Musk has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to support Republicans this election and owns X. Himes said Musk or others could spread false rumors or manipulate algorithms to stir up chaos and violence.

Transcript:

Jamie and I, again with Joe Morelle and others, and lawyers and as he said nonprofits, we’ve, we’ve, we’ve wargamed a lot of these scenarios and one of these scenarios, and I’m looking at you here Elon Musk because you know, he in particular has been a massive financial player in this election. Hundreds of millions of dollars of his own fortune has gone into supporting Republican candidates. And of course he controls a major social media platform uh, X, what used to be Twitter.

And one of the scenarios we gamed out is that one of these lords of, uh, of technology decides in the middle of the day to start propagating misinformation to, and again there’s a thousand scenarios here none of which are particularly happy to contemplate, but one of them is that Elon Musk and I don’t mean to, you know, say he’s the one who’s going to do this, but he certainly has the power to alter those algor, algorithms or to tell a story that is false, you know, to say that reports in Michigan are that massive numbers of the undocumented are voting in the election. And in that moment, this is an opportunity to manipulate people. And if a whole bunch of guys with guns in Michigan see a bunch of social media posts that suggest falsely that, you know, the undocumented are, are, are voting in Detroit, the you know, what’s to stop them from jumping into trucks armed and showing up at polling places?

Now local police are overwhelmed and you know, heaven forbid there’s some sort of violence and the local police are overwhelmed. What do you think the president’s going to do? Well, he’s going to send in federal uh, law enforcement.

So, um again, um I, I, I don’t want to suggest that that is absolutely the scenario that is going to happen, but you can’t be too suspicious or prepared. And so, you know, we have been in contact with um, uh, these many leaders who do not have the benefit of the doubt these days to say, you know, we’re watching very closely. There are, more importantly, there are lawyers who are watching very uh, closely about whether you take any steps that are either aggressive against uh, the proper functioning of our democracy or negligent.”

Keep reading

Son of Alaska’s ‘Decoy’ Dan Sullivan works for Dem Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez

The son of an Alaska Senate candidate accused of trying to draw votes away from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan works for Democratic Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, who previously served alongside Mary Peltola in the leadership of the Blue Dog Coalition.

Noah Casey Sullivan, the son of retired Petersburg teacher Dan J. Sullivan, serves as a field representative for Gluesenkamp Perez, whose district covers southwestern Washington. Congressional salary records list Noah Sullivan working in that position during 2025 and 2026.

Gluesenkamp Perez and Peltola served together as Blue Dog Coalition co-chairs during the 118th Congress.

The employment connection comes amid broader scrutiny of whether Democratic operatives helped put a second Sullivan on Alaska’s ballot to confuse voters and benefit Democratic challenger Peltola.

Dan J. Sullivan entered the race as a Republican in May, challenging the incumbent, Dan S. Sullivan. Republicans questioned his party affiliation, previous contributions to Democrats, and campaign materials they alleged resembled the senator’s branding. Donation records cited in a National Republican Senatorial Committee letter identified $650 in contributions to Democratic candidates between 2010 and 2025.

The challenger also received assistance launching his campaign from political consultant Amber Lee, who has supported Peltola and worked with Democratic candidates. The Petersburg Pilot reported that Lee helped prepare his announcement and website. Sullivan said he found her business through an online search.

Sen. Sullivan has accused the challenger of deliberately exploiting their shared name.

“His whole purpose of running is to confuse Alaskans, to make them think – Alaskan voters – that somehow he’s me, so they could rig the vote in favor of Mary Peltola,” he said in an interview with CNN.

“This is just corruption. They’re trying to cheat. I mean, there’s no plausible explanation.”

The Petersburg candidate has defended his candidacy, telling the Anchorage Daily News: “I have done nothing that should prevent me from running in this race. I filed correctly. I paid my fees. I’m not quite sure what the stink is, but I guess I’ll find out.”

Alaska election officials initially removed him from the ballot after determining that his candidacy was not filed in good faith. The Alaska Supreme Court upheld his eligibility in June, ruling that officials could not impose additional qualifications beyond those established by the US Constitution.

The dispute escalated this week after a New York Times investigation reported that Peltola campaign aides and Democratic operatives participated in efforts to recruit a candidate sharing the incumbent’s name. NBC News reported that federal investigators issued at least three dozen new subpoenas and document preservation requests, including to the Peltola and Dan J. Sullivan campaigns. Gov. Mike Dunleavy also ordered a state investigation.

Roughly 58,000 Alaskans had already voted when the recruitment report emerged, according to Fox News.

Peltola initially dismissed the reporting as “just another distraction” intended to “sell newspapers.”

Peltola denied knowing about the recruitment effort at a campaign event Thursday. Dan J. Sullivan has also denied running at Democrats’ direction or having contact with her campaign.

Keep reading

The Democrats’ ‘All Trick, No Treat’ Strategy

The gloaming deepened on a Halloween in the early 1970s. A restless gaggle of youths just turned teens pondered making a final stab at trick-or-treating. The problem? They had no costumes, having earlier laughed at how such garb was for little kids, not for them. But now, uncool or not, those costumed kids were getting free candy. They were not.

Amid the enveloping darkness, Jack-o’-lanterns flickered and costumed children tittered and flitted from door to door. Time was expiring. What to do?

One youth, his face etched with angst, hesitantly floated a trial balloon in the gloaming. “Let’s just knock doors like this.”

The gaggle eyed one another’s black T-shirts, jeans, and boots. The bald suggestion hung in the air until –

Shrugs. Swiftly, pillowcases were pilfered from their unwitting parents and the gaggle’s quest for treats sans costumes commenced.

It didn’t go well. The adults who actually answered their doors to the gaggle were less than impressed by these youths’ brazen attempt to get candy. Their glares and questions were always the same. “Where are your costumes?”

The youths’ response, too, was constant: “We’re late 20th-century teenagers.” Almost invariably, it went over like a lead balloon (or, given it was the late 1970s, more like a Led Zeppelin). Needless to say, no free treat was forthcoming.

There was, however, a singular exception to the rule. One elderly man, upon opening his door, did let out a low whistle at the restless gaggle’s “gumption.” But this backhanded compliment was all he tendered before he yanked his candy bucket back behind his less-than-politely closed door.

The lesson of this Halloween horror story? Sometimes you need to wear a costume to get what you want.

Today, this lesson forms the basis of the Democrats’ general election strategy.

In their primaries, many successful Democrat candidates won by appealing to their party’s extreme, America-loathing, socialist wing. It was an authentic approach, for they were making a legitimate appeal to like-minded left-wing extremists. Being and articulating exactly who they are, these radical candidates received what they sought from their fellow travelers – the Democrat Party’s nomination.

Yet, while a necessary step, the nomination was not the ultimate destination. Thus, on the cusp of the general election, these far-left, extremist Democrats in competitive seats resembled the gaggle of restless youths from that Halloween back in the 1970s.

Were these Democrats to wage general election campaigns by remaining true to their radical selves, some citizens may well begrudgingly admire their gumption for admitting they are “21st-century Bolsheviks” and, in some socialist circles, reward them with a vote or two. But the bulk of voters would find these radical Democrats unpalatable. As a result, these extremists would not get the treat they sought – namely, enough votes to win the general election.

Their cynical solution? The Democrats’ “all trick, no treat” political strategy.

Armed with millions in billionaires’ chump change (and heaven knows what other funding sources), these Democrat extremists conveniently doff their hidebound socialist ideology, wrap themselves in the American flag, and tuck their hammer and sickle beneath it. Ta-da! These hardcore leftists are now the costumed “moderates” knocking on your door begging for your vote.

But before you reward them for temporarily cloaking their radicalism, recall the recent past when they tricked enough citizens into treating them with their vote.

How quickly these alleged moderates ripped off their masks and revealed themselves in word and deed.

These radical Democrats passed trillions of dollars in spending bills that enriched their political cronies and spurred rampant inflation; opened wide the border for millions of illegal entries; imposed the illiberal, inherently divisive diversity, equity, and inclusion identitarian ideology; weaponized the police powers and intelligence agencies of the state against those who dissented from their radical policies, including concerned parents and devout Catholics, among others; and waged their postmodernist war against objective truth, particularly Judeo-Christian principles and Western civilization generally.

It’s all a trick. And there is no treat – well, at least not for you.

Ironically, like the restless gaggle of youth who have no other option, it is the GOP whose nominees are trick-or-treating sans costume. They are who and what they claim to be: protectors and promoters of the permanent things of faith, family, community, and country.

No wonder the other part of the Democrats’ “all trick, no treat” campaign strategy is their deceitful ads trying to garb these GOP candidates in threadbare falsehoods equally as outrageous as the “moderate” costumes they cloak themselves in.

In fact, ironically reverting to the garb of the 1970s gaggle of youths, these far-left Democrats wear costumes of black T-shirts, jeans, boots, and sundry other “blue-collar” garb to court working voters, of whom they have, at best, an abstract understanding. All the while they calumniate their Republican opponents and ignore how their own party’s failures have caused the very problems they decry.

As for answers, however, they do have them. But you won’t hear them until they have tricked their way back into office and treated themselves to the levers of power over your life.

Only then will these radical Democrats once more rip off their “moderate” Captain America masks and reveal that their radical plans were already put forward during their primaries, when they were being themselves and talking to their fellow Democrat extremists.

Keep reading