SHE’S OUT? Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer Claims She is NOT RUNNING for President in 2028

The field of Democrats running for president in 2028 is going to be huge, but according to Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, she will not be one of them.

Perhaps Whitmer just doesn’t want to answer the many questions that would come up about her horrible Covid-19 policies. Or maybe she just wants to leave the tough foreign policy questions to more qualified people, like AOC.

Either way, the country will probably be better off without Big Sister running for president.

RedState reports:

2028 Panic Mode: Whitmer Out, Polls Brutal for Democrats

We’re a long way out from 2028 — we’re not even through the midterms yet — but modern-day political campaigns are never-ending, and already pundits are speculating on who will succeed Donald Trump as president.

On the GOP side, most of the money is on either Vice President JD Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio earning the nomination, with some conservatives dreaming of a joint ticket.

Over on Team Democrat, meanwhile, the field is unclear, mostly because it’s so bad. They seemingly have no Bill Clinton or Barack Obama to jump out of the woodwork and inspire the base. California Gov. Gavin Newsom arguably gets the most press, but his résumé is so shockingly awful that it’s hard to see him getting through the primaries, much less the general. Former VP Kamala Harris? Voters have seen that movie before, and very few are demanding a sequel.

Another name that has been bandied about in the past is Michigan Gov. Gretchen “I will take away your seeds!” Whitmer. Well, you can count her out, because on Thursday she said no can do…

Keep reading

Mamdani’s Housing Program Follows the Socialist Playbook: Create the Crisis, Seize the Property

“When necessary, we will take aggressive legal action to remove negligent owners and property managers. And for buildings that have suffered chronic neglect, we will work to transfer ownership to responsible stewards,” said New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, explaining how the city plans to seize private property and transfer it to “stewards that include community land trusts, non-profits, or even the tenants themselves.”

The good news is he will not be taking property from all landlords, only the ones he decides are bad. “Through our new citywide campaign, Fix the City, we will focus on the worst landlords in New York City.”

Mamdani does not seem troubled by the fact that his proposal appears to violate the Fifth Amendment, which states, “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Even before being elected, he announced that he would be seizing private property. As a candidate, Mamdani declared: “We will use every single tool at our disposal, including seizing buildings from slumlords, to ensure that each and every New Yorker is given what is their right, a safe place to call their home.”

Now, as mayor, he is moving to act on it. On May 27, Mamdani unveiled his 112-page “Block by Block” housing plan in Gowanus. The enforcement mechanism involves the city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development will launch a “Fix the City” initiative to conduct roof-to-cellar inspections in targeted buildings and aggressively use the 7A Program, through which the city can initiate legal action to remove negligent owners and property managers from day-to-day management.

The plan also has Housing Preservation and Development collaborating with other agencies and borough district attorneys to pursue criminal charges against property owners.

What Mamdani is proposing is a textbook Austrian economics interventionism cascade. Austrian economics, the discipline in which the author of this article is educated, holds that rather than solving problems and making life better for citizens, government intervention generally exacerbates problems, making them worse, more widespread, and increasingly difficult to resolve. Each resulting distortion is used to justify the next intervention, which in turn causes the problem to get worse, necessitating more government intervention, making things worse…until all properties fall under state control.

The landlord crisis Mamdani claims to be solving was created by the very rent control policies his administration is now doubling down on.

The methodology for creating a crisis that allows the state to seize property begins with artificial rent controls such as freezes and rent ceilings. Below-market rates destroy the landlord’s incentive to maintain and invest in property. When rents fall below a certain level, the landlord may not even be able to afford repairs and maintenance.

The rational economic response for a landlord who is forced to rent at rates below operating costs is to defer maintenance. The building deteriorates. The landlord becomes, by definition, a “bad landlord,” not from malice but from economic necessity created by the policy itself.

The city then uses the deterioration it caused as the legal and moral pretext to seize or transfer the property. The government manufactured the problem and now presents itself as the solution.

Keep reading

Marco Rubio: The Neocons’ Golden Boy

Marco Rubio has increasingly been pushed by the neocons to become the 2028 presidential nominee, and they seemingly view him as their “golden boy” who will keep the wheels of the war machine turning. But I’m always interested in the why. Let’s take a journey.

To understand Rubio’s hawkish foreign policy, you first have to understand his background. Rubio’s parents were Cuban immigrants who fled Cuba before Fidel Castro took power, but the sting of the communist takeover still had an immense impact on his family. His grandfather played an especially significant role in shaping Rubio’s worldview. In an interview with The Washington Post, Rubio said his grandfather described “how communism destroyed lives in Cuba and how the United States had a unique role to play in the world as the enforcer of freedom.” (Marco Rubio’s Cold War). To put it simply, the idea of the United States acting as the world’s policeman was instilled in Rubio at a very young age, and that mentality has only intensified throughout his political career.

Rubio has built a reputation as one of the most consistently hawkish Republicans in modern politics. Over the years, he has backed countless U.S. interventions and aggressive foreign policy measures, including support for the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, the removal of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela, economic sanctions against the Chinese Communist Party, continued aid to Ukraine, and hardline measures against Iran. That is one hell of a résumé, and it tells you everything you need to know about Rubio. In fact, he has become such a foreign policy fixture that many Americans have likely forgotten about his domestic positions altogether. Rubio represents the classic interventionist mindset, and if it were up to him, the administration would likely push even harder to fulfill its self-appointed mission of policing the world – a strategy that has repeatedly failed and consistently ended in disaster. History has not been kind to that approach.

With all of this in mind, it becomes crystal clear why Rubio is being pushed so aggressively for 2028. He will give the establishment exactly what it wants. Analysts have described Rubio as “rebooting the neocons for the MAGA era.” If Rubio seeks the Republican nomination in 2028 – which I believe he will – he will undoubtedly receive enormous backing from the war class. The shadiest PACs, the most aggressive foreign lobbying groups, and individuals with massive financial interests tied to defense contractors and global conflicts will all line up behind him. He is the neoconservative golden boy, and they will do everything possible to put him in the White House.

Keep reading

Now We Know Who Was Really Behind E. Jean Carroll’s Bogus Allegations Against Trump

E. Jean Carroll’s rape allegations against President Donald Trump were never credible, and now she’s under investigation by the Department of Justice for perjury. Now, Byron York is digging into the case and has uncovered what could be the most elaborate political setup in history.

Trust me, the picture coming into focus is damning. Carroll has claimed, without any evidence, that Trump raped her sometime in 1995 or 1996. She can’t remember which year. Nothing about her allegations makes any sense. Are we supposed to believe that she simply stayed quiet about it through Trump’s rise to fame and politics, through his 2016 presidential run, and through the wave of #MeToo accusations that dominated the news cycle? Carroll said nothing about it for decades, and her stated reasons range from concern over her elderly Republican mother’s health to worries that speaking out might actually help Trump win key states.

Right. Sure.

It wasn’t until 2019 that she came forward with her bizarre allegations. But she didn’t tell the police, she didn’t go to an elected official, or even to a journalist. She chose to disclose it in a book. Why? Because no other option would generate royalties.

And Carroll had a history of grifting, too. Before the book even dropped, she was charging admission for her “Most Hideous Men in NYC Walking Tour,” a 90-minute #MeToo landmark stroll through Manhattan. The tour started at the Bergdorf Goodman entrance on 58th Street, which just so happens to be exactly where she claims she first encountered Trump the day of the alleged assault. She had been leading paying groups past that spot before she’d told the world what had supposedly happened there.

Now here’s where the origins of these allegations get genuinely interesting. Carroll, by then a certified celebrity of the anti-Trump resistance, attended a party at writer Molly Jong-Fast’s Manhattan home, a gathering the New York Times described as “Resistance Twitter come to life.” The guest list included George Conway, who apparently advised Carroll to sue Trump for defamation.

The case got a critical boost when the New York legislature passed the Adult Survivors Act in 2022, which allowed sexual assault claims to be filed regardless of expired statutes of limitations. Carroll had helped advocate for the bill. The Act went into effect on November 24, 2022, and within hours, Carroll filed a second suit, this time adding a rape allegation in addition to defamation.

Keep reading

Self-Engineered Decay: Why Israel’s Political Collapse Cannot Be Separated from Its War Crimes

For those unfamiliar with the intricate machinery of Israeli politics, the unanimous 110-0 vote to dissolve the Knesset on May 20 appears to be an earth-shattering event. On the surface, it looks as if the days of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition of far-right extremists are numbered. The reality, however, is far more complex.

Israel’s current political implosion is fundamentally tied to its failure to escape the ghosts of October 7. When the country’s military defenses collapsed on that day, Israel was transformed from a state with a formidable reputation as an invincible regional superpower into one trapped with a struggling army, structurally incapable of decisively winning a single war.

Since the launch of the devastating genocide in Gaza, neither the Israeli government nor the military establishment has been able to answer two fundamental questions:

One, how did the world’s self-proclaimed “invincible army” collapse in a matter of hours, leaving the entire Southern Command – whose sole job was to keep Gazans besieged – in total shambles?

Two, why has that same heavily funded military machine failed to achieve a decisive victory despite the near-total destruction of the Strip and the unprecedented slaughter and wounding of much of its population?

Complicating the matter is Benjamin Netanyahu’s pathological refusal to honestly investigate either the October 7 intelligence failure or the subsequent conduct of the Gaza war. Instead, he focused entirely on domestic damage control and image management, aggressively marginalizing or firing intelligence official, or high-ranking bureaucrats who challenged his narrative. Rather than pursuing a viable exit strategy, Netanyahu treated the defense apparatus as a public relations shield.

Consequently, opposition voices – initially led by Yair Lapid and his Yesh Atid party – began demanding Netanyahu’s resignation and snap elections. What began as predictable political fallout quickly evolved into a sweeping popular movement.

Public confidence in the government continues to plummet. Recent opinion polls consistently show that a vast majority of Israelis believe Netanyahu acts out of personal political survival rather than national interest. Data suggests that if elections were held today, his right-wing bloc would suffer a catastrophic defeat at the hands of a newly consolidated opposition – namely Beyachad (‘Together’), the newly formed unified list established by Naftali Bennett and Lapid.

Netanyahu, whose legacy as Israel’s longest-serving prime minister is now defined by strategic failure, subsists in a profound personal and political crisis. His deliberate escalations of regional conflict served no distinct military purpose; instead, they merely highlighted his desperation, turning his rhetorical pledges of “total victory” into a hollow attempt to prevent his coalition from fracturing.

Meanwhile, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich exploited Netanyahu’s vulnerability to advance their own extremist agendas. Bent on rapid colonial expansion, they accelerated West Bank annexation, pushed draconian laws to execute Palestinian prisoners, and tightened the siege on occupied East Jerusalem.

Under normal circumstances, the sheer scale of the domestic, economic, and diplomatic harm engineered by this coalition should have removed it from power. Yet Netanyahu survived by exploiting deep social fractures and relying on unconditional support from Washington.

This survival shield was further fortified by the initial impotence of a fragmented political opposition and a perpetual wartime atmosphere that Netanyahu cultivated to freeze dissent. Not even his corruption trials derailed his career; he adapted state institutions into instruments of personal survival.

Yet the ultimate irony of Israeli politics is that pressure came not from mounting casualties or international isolation, but from compulsory military conscription of the ultra-Orthodox, or Haredim.

For decades, secular Israelis complained about the sweeping draft exemptions granted to yeshiva students, but the political elite routinely shrugged it off as a secondary culture war that could be managed via backroom political dealings.

Israel’s overextended, multi-front war of attrition completely smashed that equilibrium. The issue was violently pushed back to the surface because the military quite literally ran out of bodies. The true gravity of this manpower crisis was exposed when the army Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, explicitly broke ranks during a closed-door security cabinet meeting to warn that “the IDF is going to collapse in on itself.”

Keep reading

SURE THEY ARE: Democrat Weirdo James Talarico Claims Republicans Are Secretly Supporting Him

James Talarico, the Democrat freak who’s running for U.S. Senate in Texas and loves trans kids, claims that lots of Republicans are secretly supporting his campaign. Uh huh. Sure they are.

This is the sort of desperate, utter baloney that is usually reserved for later in the campaign cycle. Remember White Dudes for Kamala Harris? How did that work out?

Talarico’s act is already wearing thin. He basically uses Christianity to support far left ideas. In case you haven’t noticed, the only time he ever brings up his faith or his religious beliefs is to defend something the radical left believes.

This bit about Republican voters secretly supporting him is simply not believable.

From The Hill:

Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D) said Tuesday that his campaign for Senate is attracting some support from previous President Trump voters who are becoming more disillusioned with the president’s policies, saying they whisper to him at rallies “like they’re in the witness protection program.”

Talarico argued during an interview on MS NOW that Trump has done “the exact opposite” of what he promised in 2024, pointing to the administration’s initial reluctance to release the Jeffrey Epstein files and the conflict in Iran, among other issues.

“A lot of the president’s supporters in Texas are feeling disillusioned, they’re feeling disillusioned with this extremism and this corruption that is embodied by politicians like Ken Paxton,” Talarico said. “And so, we have a real opportunity to build a big coalition of Democrats, independents and Republicans who are fed up with this extremism and this corruption.”

Talarico is facing embattled Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in the November midterms, after Paxton — with a final-hour endorsement from Trump — crushed incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) in the Republican primary runoff Tuesday.

Even if a Trump supporter was disillusioned with Trump, they’re not going to turn around a suddenly support a far left candidate like Talarico.

No one shifts that hard from one side to the other. People on Twitter/X are calling it out.

Keep reading

Woke Boston mayor finds time to promote menstruation event for the TRANSGENDER community

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu’s office for LGBTQ advancement is promoting a transgender menstruation event. 

The outwardly liberal mayor has made no secret of her love of progressive causes, despite presiding over a city whose budget came up $50 million in the red just a month ago.

Wu’s LGBTQ office partnered with the Massachusetts National Organization for Women and multiple local pro-LGBTQ groups to present an event called ‘Trans Period Pride’ on June 17. 

The event, which will be held at a branch of the Boston Public Library, promises to be ‘another consciousness raising conversation around transgender experiences with menstruation.’

The Instagram post promoting the talk is decked out in the shades of pink and light blue traditionally associated with the transgender pride flag.  

Attendees will be treated to a catered meal and free period underwear on behalf of the mayor and the sponsoring groups.  

The Daily Mail has reached out to both Mayor Wu and the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Advancement for comment. 

Wu has been a controversial figure in Beantown, despite cruising to a second term in the mayor’s office.

Keep reading

US government prepares to print $250 note featuring Trump’s face

US President Donald Trump’s administration is preparing to print a new $250 bill that could feature a portrait of him, if lawmakers allow the move.

Federal law bars printing US money with the image of a living person, but Trump allies in Congress have introduced legislation that would make an exception.

A Treasury Department spokesperson told the BBC the agency “is conducting appropriate planning and due diligence” in response to the legislation.

The lawmakers behind it said the bill amount would symbolise the country’s 250th anniversary this year. If approved, it will be the latest example by Trump and his allies to put his face, name, and likeness on national institutions and symbols.

Artistic concepts of the $250 bill have not been publicly released but designs have been requested by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP), a sub-agency of the Treasury that develops and produces US currency. The Washington Post first reported the Treasury Department’s plans.

“Should this legislative mandate be signed into law, the BEP is moving proactively to produce a $250 commemorative note which will appropriately recognize the 250th Anniversary of our great nation,” the Treasury spokesperson said in a statement.

Trump’s signature is already set to appear on US paper notes as part of the nation’s semiquincentennial celebrations.

The new legislation was introduced last year by US House Representative Joe Wilson, a Republican from South Carolina. It would need approval from both the US House and Senate.

When asked about a possible new bill during a White House briefing on Thursday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said “it’s all in the hands” “of Congress and that, while his department was preparing in case the legislation passes, the Treasury would follow the law.

The move to create the $250 note could also break with a different federal law that specifies the denominations that can be produced. That law doesn’t include $250.

US Senator Mark Warner, who sits on the Senate’s Committee on Banking, criticised the plans.

“As Americans struggle with the rising cost of gas, groceries, housing, and health care, President Trump’s priorities for taxpayer dollars are completely detached from the challenges families face every day,” Warner, a Democrat from Virginia, said in a statement.

“If this White House put even half as much energy into working to lower costs as it does into stoking the president’s ego, American families wouldn’t need that new $250 bill just to fill up their gas tanks.”

Keep reading

The Danger Of Chris Murphy’s Collectivism

Senator Chris Murphy’s new book Crisis of the Common Good, released today, warns that six “cults” have poisoned American life: profit, globalism, technology, consumption, credentialism, and corruption. He calls for a revival of collectivism and the “common good” to restore meaning and connection. The message sounds noble until you notice how many of these cults Murphy and his party actively practice while telling the rest of us to reject them. That hypocrisy is not just rhetorical—it reveals why his brand of collectivism is dangerous.

Start with the cult of profit. Murphy condemns corporations for putting earnings above workers and communities. Yet as senator he has backed massive spending packages, green-energy subsidies, and regulatory regimes that deliver windfalls to connected corporations and unions while raising costs for small businesses and families. Connecticut’s own high taxes and business exodus under decades of Democratic governance show the results of this selective outrage. Murphy’s comfortable lifestyle, built on public salary and elite donor networks, hardly models sacrifice for the common good.

The cult of globalism fares worse. Murphy criticizes the flattening of local communities by international forces. In practice he has supported expansive immigration, climate accords that bind U.S. policy to global bureaucracies, and trade arrangements that accelerated manufacturing decline. His “common good” apparently includes open labor markets that depress wages in working-class towns—the very places he claims to champion. True localism would prioritize American workers and sovereignty, not abstract global citizenship.

On technology, Murphy correctly flags social media’s damage to young people. But his party long partnered with Big Tech for content moderation that suppressed dissenting views while amplifying progressive narratives. The same elites who decry “addiction” benefit from the platforms’ power when it serves their ends. Genuine reform would break monopolies through competition, not more Washington control that inevitably favors the connected. Let us not forget he’s all over Instagram, Facebook, and X right now hawking the book, attacking opponents, and building his brand. He uses the platforms daily to enrich his influence while calling for government to regulate their “predatory” side.

Credentialism is Murphy’s personal tell. A Williams College and UConn Law graduate, he rose through the very elite institutions that gatekeep opportunity and devalue trades and practical skills. His policy prescriptions—student-debt transfers and expanded federal higher-education spending—primarily aid those already on the credential ladder while ignoring the skilled trades that built middle-class America. The man who preaches against credential worship is its product.

Consumption and corruption close the circle. Murphy attacks materialism yet pushes entitlement expansions that substitute government checks for productive work and family responsibility. He demands money be removed from politics while thriving in a Democratic fundraising ecosystem fueled by tech, Hollywood, unions, and dark-money networks. His “common good” is curiously selective: centralized power is fine when it advances progressive priorities.

Murphy’s collectivism is not the organic cooperation of families, churches, and local associations. It is top-down state power that crowds out individual responsibility, weakens civil society, and concentrates authority in Washington bureaucracies. History is clear: such approaches erode the very communities they promise to save. The real path to meaning and connection runs through limited government, free enterprise tempered by virtue, strong families, and decentralized decision-making—not another layer of federal programs sold as moral renewal.

Keep reading

The Great “Red Hat” Psyop: How the Establishment Co-Opted MAGA

The official narrative spoon-fed to the masses is that the MAGA movement is a grassroots, anti-establishment rebellion aimed at dismantling the uniparty, ending forever wars, and draining the swamp. We are told day in and day out that the system is terrified of this populist uprising, but when we strip away the partisan cheerleading, we are witnessing one of the most successful psychological operations in modern political history. The establishment didn’t defeat the populist uprising; they bought it, rebranded it with a red hat, and used it to manufacture consent for the exact neoconservative, state-expanding policies the movement initially swore to destroy.

If a Democrat had expanded the surveillance state, spiked the national debt, unilaterally banned firearms accessories, and filled their cabinet with Wall Street mega-donors and war hawks, the right would have revolted in the streets. Because there is an “R” next to the name, however, they cheer and beg for more. The state is not shrinking in the slightest. It is merely under new management, and the boot on your neck has simply been painted a different color.

If you want to understand how a purportedly anti-war movement was so easily hijacked by the establishment, look no further than the grifter class of MAGA influencers who actively manufactured consent for the pivot. Social media personalities like Catturd and Gunther Eagleman—alongside prominent digital operatives like Benny Johnson and Jack Posobiec—spent the entirety of the campaign posturing as staunch non-interventionists. They loudly decried the military-industrial complex and the endless funding of foreign proxy wars. Yet, the moment the administration changed hands and the military crosshairs shifted toward sovereign nations like Iran, these same influencers entirely abandoned their supposed principles. They are now openly salivating over the prospect of flattening a sovereign nation, cheering on the exact same neoconservative warmongering they built their alternative-media brands opposing. It raises a glaring, uncomfortable question: are these digital operatives simply spineless sycophants, or are they quietly being paid to parrot the uniparty’s new, blood-soaked marching orders?

The sheer hypocrisy of this digital vanguard is especially sickening when contrasted with those who actually held the line. Before his brutal assassination, Charlie Kirk was one of the most outspoken voices against the neoconservative push for a war with Iran. Regardless of where one stood on his broader politics, Kirk used his massive platform to fiercely oppose the very foreign entanglements the current administration is now aggressively pursuing. Had he not been killed, there is little doubt he would be standing firmly against this blatant betrayal of the anti-war platform today. Instead, the influencers who rushed to fill the void have chosen the path of least resistance. They now operate as state-sanctioned PR firms for an aggressive military agenda simply because the bombs are authorized by a president wearing a red tie. By transforming genuine anti-interventionist sentiment into rabid partisan cheerleading, these grifters provided the ideological cover necessary for the state to march the country right back into the endless wars the base initially voted to escape.

Consider the campaign promise to end the forever wars, pull out of foreign entanglements, and put “America First.” The empirical reality of the administration’s foreign policy is a direct continuation of the military-industrial complex’s most aggressive ambitions. The administration has stacked its ranks with hawkish neoconservatives and previous “never-Trumpers,” such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and even Lindsey Graham, all of whom prioritize regime change and unyielding military support for Israel over domestic liberty.

Dropping bombs and violently coercing the US taxpayer to fund a global military empire in the name of a foreign country is a blatant violation of human freedom and constitutional limits. The state continues to extort the working class to fund foreign militaries and interventions, regardless of the populist rhetoric spilling from Trump’s podium. This is not America First; it is the empire first, Israel first, Lockheed Martin first, and it is funded by the silent theft of the American citizen.

Keep reading