Tag: race

Down The ‘Racist’ Rabbit Hole – Why Are So Many Arrested Minorities Booked As ‘White’?

2025 has been a great year for noticing things that would have gotten one censored, canceled, or debanked just a few short years ago. 

In today’s episode, former DOE nuclear engineer Matt Von Swol notices something that’s been floating around for years; the insane number of minorities (mexicans and blacks) who are booked as “WHITE” when they get arrested – something which obviously manipulates ‘inconvenient’ crime stats – something that TPUSA’s Andrew Kolvet noted have been “widely corrupted to serve a racist agenda.’

“I searched through thousands of arrests in my county and every single Hispanic individual who has been arrested is labelled as “WHITE”” Van Swol posted on X. 

In other cases, a suspect’s gender and race were listed as ‘unknown’.

Keep reading

Danish Commercial Warns White Citizens About Breeding With Other Whites

Like it or not, advertising is culture.  Marketing is an expression of a society’s norms, values and demographics.  It is meant to serve the free market by appealing to either a target demographic or the most common demographic as a way to sell products and services.  That said, advertising can also be used as propaganda, designed to sell ideologies rather than soda, cars and insurance.

This has been the primary setting of marketing in the west for at least the past ten years – The vast majority of commercials have political messaging embedded within them.  Though it might not be obvious for the unaware, once you notice the patterns it’s impossible to avoid them.

A new propaganda advertisement paid for by Denmark’s state television and posing as a promotion for a science show called “Evolution.”  

The commercial features an “expert” interrupting a white Danish couple as they flirt with each other.  He explains to them that the history of war in Denmark introduced foreign DNA into their gene pool which “protected them from disease”.  He then compares their relationship to inbreeding and suggests they find new partners with more “exotic” genetics. 

The woman then smiles as if she’s intrigued by the idea.

The series was originally created in 2020, but is now being re-aired with “inbreeding” ads this year.  Perhaps Danish TV is unaware of the rapid political shift away from woke propaganda from 2020 to 2025?  This messaging is a stark contrast from Denmark’s “Do It For Denmark” ad campaign in 2014, which encouraged Danish couples to get busy and combat the nation’s population decline by making more babies.  

Keep reading

New York High Court Blocks Race-Grifters From Using Courts To Indoctrinate Children

our years ago, a group of race-grifter activists in New York City tried to sue their way into government-enforced racial quotas and race-centric curricula. But New York state’s highest court just decided they are not allowed to use the judicial system to mandate the indoctrination of children.

According to Defending Education (DE), which intervened in the case in 2021, far-left group IntegrateNYC’s attempt to abuse courts to create racial quotas for students and blame the racial make-up of school staff and a “white and Eurocentric curriculum” for poor education outcomes among the city’s black and Latino populations was put to an end Friday when the New York Court of Appeals dismissed the case.

The Education Article in the New York state constitution “does not permit judges to micromanage matters of educational policy, which are broadly entrusted to local control,” wrote Judge Michael J. Garcia, an appointee of former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, D-N.Y.

As laid out by Garcia, IntegrateNYC alleged that the city’s public education system “discriminates against and disproportionately affects Black and Latino students, leading to unequal educational opportunities and negative outcomes for those students” because of its systems for admissions and screening, the content of curricula, and the purported lack of diversity among teachers.

They claimed further that the school system was segregated because black and Latino students underperform on admissions exams because of “discriminatory standardized testing policies,” shuttling them to “inferior schools that are deficient in terms of physical facilities and instrumentalities of learning, resulting in poor educational outcomes.”

As DE put it, activists “sought to use the courts to inject race into all aspects of the city’s education system. … Plaintiffs claimed that the city’s school system is discriminatory because, in their eyes, not enough students from their preferred races are admitted to the city’s selective academic programs.”

Sarah Parshall Perry, DE’s vice president and legal fellow, noted that “the challengers to New York’s gifted and talented program had demanded consideration of race in order to prevent race discrimination.”

However, suing into existence a wide variety of political and policy preferences is a tried and true left-wing political tactic used in places where their political movement is incapable of getting their candidates elected to bodies — like legislatures or city councils — that should actually be responsible for dealing with these issues.

The fact that New York City, and more broadly the state of New York, is run by people who largely agree with IntegrateNYC’s premise means that the high court’s ruling against them is at the very least a credit to the state’s ability to maintain separation of powers (in this instance) — but also a testament to how weak the group’s claims were.

IntegrateNYC could not prove any kind of systematic racism or injustice, and they could not point to an operational law or ordinance that blocked black or Latino students from attending the schools they wanted to “integrate.” Rather, they essentially tried to blame poor student outcomes on racism.

Those students are also apparently negatively affected because they are apparently subjected to a “white and Eurocentric curriculum.”

Keep reading

DEI Government: Hunter Biden Admits His Dad Picked Kamala as VP Because She is Black

Hunter Biden has confirmed what many conservatives have long suspected about identity politics in the Democratic Party, admitting that his father only chose Kamala Harris as his vice president because she is black.

According to Hunter, his father, Joe Biden, selected Kamala Harris as his vice presidential running mate in 2020 out of “loyalty” to African American women, whom he described as the “most powerful force within the Democratic Party.”

This admission comes amid Hunter’s criticism of Harris’ new memoir, 107 Days, which chronicles her brief 2024 presidential campaign.

The book includes pointed criticisms of Biden, such as calling his re-election bid “recklessness” and recounting a tense pre-debate call where Biden allegedly made it “all about himself.”

The comments about Joe Biden’s decision to pick her were made during a three-hour interview on Hunter Biden’s Substack platform with journalist Tommy Christopher.

Hunter admitted he hadn’t fully read the book but found Harris’ attempts to separate herself from his father “personally painful” and accused her of taking the “easy path” for political expediency.

“I love what she represented, and I love the fact that my dad made the decision,” Hunter Biden said, according to a report from the New York Post.

“Let me tell you about loyalty,” Hunter continued. “The reason that he picked Kamala Harris is because of the fact that he believes, and I certainly believe, the most powerful force within the Democratic Party is and always has been the African American women.”

The Post report adds:

In early 2020, just after his once-struggling campaign began making a comeback, Joe had committed to making history by tapping a woman as his vice president. He only limited his selection process by gender, not by race.

Hunter called African American women the “heart and soul and the conscience of the Democratic party.”

“He chose her out of loyalty,” Hunter said. “I guess I don’t understand why someone would choose the expedient path as it relates to that relationship, their own political expediency.”

Keep reading

Massive SCOTUS Case Could Guarantee House Control For GOP

The Supreme Court took a second look at a case that could result in handing the Republican Party guaranteed control of the House of Representatives last week, and initial reports suggest a major ruling is on the horizon. If the highest court in the land strikes down Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais, the GOP’s hold over the House could become insurmountable.

Reports say that if Section 2 is removed, which has been interpreted previously as requiring the creation of majority-minority districts, the Republican Party could toss out a dozen Democratic-held districts in the South.

It all started when a group of voters challenged a 2024 congressional map by claiming that it pushes unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. This means the map sorts voters based on their race, which is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

The court heard two-and-a-half hours of oral arguments, with conservative justices signaling they are most likely going to undermine a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, though they might not strike it down completely.

“Wednesday’s oral argument was the latest chapter in a dispute that dates back to 2022, when Louisiana adopted a new congressional map in the wake of the 2020 census. Roughly one-third of the state’s population is Black, but the 2022 map had only one majority-Black district out of the six districts allotted to the state. That prompted a group of Black voters to go to federal court, where they argued that the 2022 map violated Section 2 of the federal Voting Rights Act, which bars discrimination in voting practices,” SCOTUS Blog reported.

U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick agreed that the 2022 map likely violated Section 2. She then forbade the state from using this particular map in future elections and ordered the state to create a new map featuring two majority-Black districts.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit supported that ruling. It then gave the state until January 15, 2024, to produce a new map; otherwise, the lower court would develop a plan for the 2024 elections.

Louisiana then created a new map that created a second majority-Black district. Complaints came forward from a group of voters who referred to themselves as “non-African American.” A three-judge federal district court ruled that the 2024 map violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause, as it sorted voters based on race. The court banned the state from using the map in future elections.

“In May 2024, the Supreme Court put the three-judge district court’s ruling on hold, which allowed the state to move forward with using the new map in the 2024 elections. Voters in the 6th District, the new majority-Black district, elected Cleo Fields, a former member of Congress who had represented another majority-Black district during the 1990s, to represent them,” SCOTUS Blog writes.

Louisiana and the Black voters then appealed to the Supreme Court, which listened to oral arguments for the first time since spring. The state stated that once the lower courts determined the 2022 map likely violated the VRA, it directed the state to redraw a map with a second majority-Black district. State Republicans’ primary goal was to provide protection for the state’s GOP incumbents, such as Speaker Mike Johnson and Rep. Julia Letlow, who is an active member of the House Appropriations Committee.

Keep reading

James O’Keefe Exposes MASSIVE $100 BILLION Federal Contracting Scam

An explosive new undercover investigation by O’Keefe Media Group (OMG) released Monday on X has blown the lid off a massive federal contracting scandal, a $100 billion scheme exploiting taxpayer-funded minority-preference programs under the Biden Administration.

In a shocking undercover video posted on X, OMG revealed how ATI Government Solutions, a federal contractor supposedly “Native American-owned,” admitted to exploiting the Small Business Administration’s 8(a) program to grab over $100 million in no-bid government contracts, while outsourcing up to 80% of the work to other firms.

“I tell you pass-throughs are a great thing!”
“We only do 20%… The rest goes to subs.”
“And remember, there’s no competition.”

James O’Keefe, posing as representatives from a fake cybersecurity firm called “Sev-Zero Solutions,” met Cromwell under the guise of hiring her catering side business.

Within minutes, the ATI executive bragged about how the company leverages its Native American tribal affiliation with the Susanville Indian Rancheria to obtain exclusive federal contracts, then turns around and pays subcontractors to do almost all the work.

O’Keefe Media Group (OMG) reported:

Within two minutes of sitting down with Melayne at a restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, she volunteered the entire scheme – no prompting, no hesitation. She told us she was the Director of Contracts for ATI Government Solutions. Then she dropped the real bombshell:

“Because we’re Native American-owned, we’re heavily favored for government contracts.” “There’s no bidding war.” Said Cromwell

She explained how ATI uses its tribal status to lock down multi-million dollar no-bid contracts, then passes off the majority of the work to subcontractors-firms that would never qualify on their own. Meanwhile, ATI keeps the lion’s share of the cash. Cromwell revealed to our undercover journalist;

“So, a lot of our subcontractors bid on contracts that were perfect in their industry, but because they weren’t Native American, they wouldn’t win it,” she said. “So we bid on it for them, they become our sub, and it’s an automatic win because you’re Native American status. There’s no bidding war.”

Under the 8(a) system, meant to empower disadvantaged businesses, “pass-through” contractors such as ATI serve as paper fronts, taking much of the money off the top while doing little or none of the work. Cromwell admitted the company performs only 20% of its multi-million-dollar no-bid federal contracts, subcontracting out the remaining 80% – a textbook case of a “pass-through” scheme.

“Correct. Yeah. They’re doing most of the work. But you want to really stay on, make sure they’re on time.”

“So, we do about 20% of the work.”

“You don’t want to share that,” – Cromwell added.

In short, ATI secures the contracts, gets the money, acts as a passthrough and it’s the tax payer who gets screwed over.

On paper, ATI is owned by the Susanville Indian Rancheria, a federally recognized native american tribal entity, in northern california.

Arian confirmed to us that if they were to appear as the owners of our company it would make it easier to obtain government contracts, and goes on to claim that we may need to relinquish 51% of the ownership to them.

OMG Undercover Journalist: “So really, it’s really just coming up with a number that you would want in order to appear to be the owner of our company. So we’ll discuss what percentage you would get when we come to the signing of the contract.”

Melayne confirms that ATI is abiding by this 51% tribal ownership…on paper.

“51% On paper. Correct. as long as it’s on paper. That you’re 51%, you’re good to go.” Said Cromwell.

ATI may be 51% tribally owned by the Susanville Indian Rancheria ON PAPER, But Melayne revealed to us that ATI was founded in collaboration with the Rancheria by two caucasian DC executives; Firmadge Crutchfeld and Scott Deutschman. And that they manage all of ATI’s operations.

In 2024, the Biden-Harris Administration awarded a record-breaking $183 billion in federal contracts to “small businesses,” including those under “socially disadvantaged” categories like 8(a).

But as the OMG exposé shows, many of these firms are front companies exploiting racial-preference loopholes to funnel billions to private consultants and politically connected insiders.

Keep reading

Cincinnati Police Chief Who Was Sued For Anti-White Discrimination Placed on Leave

Cincinnati Police Chief Terri Theetge was placed on paid administrative leave after she was sued for anti-white bias.

“The City continues to face serious public safety challenges that underscore the need for stability at the command level. Therefore, I’ve named Assistant Chief Adam Hennie as Interim Police Chief. Our focus remains on maintaining stability within the department and ensuring the highest standards of service to our residents. I have full confidence in Interim Chief Hennie and the department’s command staff to continue their dedicated work at this time,” said City Manager Sheryl Long, WLWT reported.

“Assistant Chief Adam Hennie has been named interim chief,” the outlet reported.

Recall that Theetge previously blamed social media after a violent mob of mostly black males beat a white couple at jazz festival over the summer.

Teresa Theetge held a press conference on the beating of the white couple.

Theetge said five people in connection to the mob beating were charged. She also blasted social media posters for their coverage of the mob beatings.

“The post that we’ve seen does not depict the entire incident. That is one version of what occurred,” Theetge said.

“I think by the irresponsibility with social media is it just shows one side of the equation quite frequently without context, without factual context, and then people run with that and then it grows legs and it becomes something bigger that we then have to try to manage as part of the investigation,” she said.

“Social media and mainstream media and their commentaries are misrepresentation of the circumstances surrounding any given event,” she added.

Keep reading

Texas declares war on plan to seize one of America’s richest counties and turn it into a ‘melanated’ community

Texas is suing a man state officials claim is trying to ‘overthrow the local government’ of an oil-rich county by offering black people free houses to move there and vote how he wants. 

Carpetbagger Malcolm Tanner bought two five-acre plots of land in Loving County, on the Texas/New Mexico border, according to the state’s lawsuit.

The Indiana man, who claims to be running for president in 2028, has offered the land to up to 1,000 ‘melanated people’ for free. 

‘It’s a movement going on called the “melanated people of power,” Tanner says in one Instagram reel. 

‘It don’t matter where you are on the world. It could be Africa, Asia, as long as you melanated. That’s the only thing that matters. It’s for us. It’s for us.’

‘Do not miss out on your opportunity to be a homeowner, to have a deed.’ 

Through social media posts, Tanner explains that he will take over Loving County, which he calls ‘Tanner County.’

In the state’s lawsuit, Attorney General Ken Paxton claims he will get his melanated residents to vote as he wants, easily outvoting the 64 citizens recorded by the last US census – but with a total taxable value of over $18 billion in 2024 thanks to petroleum.

Already dozens of people have taken him up on his offer to move and collect $5,000 a month, the state claimed in a lawsuit.

‘Despite there being no homes or utilities on the land, Tanner has induced dozens of people, including many women and children, to move onto and inhabit the land without any provision for the proper disposal and treatment of sewage,’ Paxton said in a press release announcing the lawsuit.

‘These individuals are forced to live in RVs or other makeshift shelters.’

Keep reading

Despite Headlines, There Is No Reduction in Voting Rights

Liberals and Democrats are claiming that the Supreme Court is poised to make a ruling that will restrict voting rights because race will no longer be considered in districting.

This is false.

Under the U.S. Constitution, all adults aged 18 and over have the right to vote, and they will continue to have that right. No ruling or policy under consideration eliminates or limits that constitutional guarantee.

What critics are truly upset about is that race will no longer be used to determine electoral districting. The Trump administration argued that race had been overemphasized in the process, violating the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. The move aims to ensure that district boundaries are drawn based on population and geography, not racial calculations.

This debate, and the exaggerated claims that someone is losing their rights, reveal a deeper divide between the two parties. Republicans argue that equality means the same rules for everyone, regardless of race. Democrats, on the other hand, insist that equality requires different rules for different groups based on race

The Supreme Court appeared inclined to further restrict the use of race in redistricting. During recent arguments, conservative justices, including Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts, questioned whether race-based remedies should continue indefinitely, suggesting that the Court may soon impose new limits on when race can factor into drawing congressional maps.

The Court’s three liberal justices, however, warned that weakening Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act would effectively dismantle the law and reduce minority representation in Congress.

Democrats argue that Section 2 is essential for protecting minority voting rights and warn that a conservative victory in the current Louisiana case could trigger widespread redistricting. They claim this would reduce the number of minority-held seats, particularly across the South.

However, the United States does not have a quota system, and no congressional seats are specifically designated as “minority seats.” Fair, race-neutral voting would simply result in all seats being awarded to the candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of race.

The Court’s decision, expected by mid-2026, could mark another major rollback of federal race-based policies, following the 2013 elimination of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and the 2023 decision ending affirmative action in college admissions.

Democrats claim that minority “voting power” or “electoral influence,” will be diluted. The Act prohibits voting practices that “deny or abridge the right to vote on account of race.” Over time, courts have interpreted “abridge” to include not only preventing people from voting but also drawing district lines that intentionally dilute minority voting strength. Democrats argue that the Act ensures the right for every vote to carry equal weight and influence.

Keep reading

Here Are 6 Key Moments From SCOTUS Arguments In Landmark Race-Based Redistricting Case

UPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES — The U.S. Supreme Court held oral arguments in a pair of high stakes redistricting cases that could significantly reshape American electoral politics.

Known as Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. Callais, the matter focuses on a dispute over the use of race in Louisiana’s congressional map. While the state’s initial map included a single black-majority district, a lawsuit and subsequent legal battle led lawmakers to redraw the map to include a second black-majority district, producing another legal battle that centered on the state’s allegedly unlawful use of race when creating the new map.

During oral arguments, the justices probed parties on the facts of the respective cases and the longstanding judicial conflict over provisions of the Voting Rights Act (Section 2) and 14th Amendment (equal protection clause). Here are some of the biggest moments from the hearing.

Jackson Said What About the Disabled?

Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has never been one to shy away from making ill-advised statements, whether they be in interviews or opinions. So, it wasn’t surprising when the Biden appointee suggested race be considered by states in redistricting because black Americans are systemically “disabled” and don’t have legitimate access to the elections process.

“Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act against the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible to people with disabilities, and so it was discriminatory in effect because these folks were not able to access these buildings,” Jackson said, effectively arguing that it doesn’t matter whether such discrimination is intentional or not.

“I guess I don’t understand why that’s not what’s happening here. … We are responding to current-day manifestations of past and present decisions that disadvantage minorities and make it so that they don’t have equal access to the voting system, right? They’re disabled … We say that’s a way in which you see that these processes are not equally open.”

Thomas Asks a Simple (Yet Meaningful) Question

As the longest serving member of the current court, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas has often served as a critical voice of reason in many matters that come before the highest bench in the land. One of the ways he does this is through simple, yet meaningful, questions to parties in oral arguments.

While questioning Louisiana Solicitor General Ben Aguiñaga, Thomas asked “what role” the federal district court’s block on the state’s initial map “play[ed] in development of” the new map that included a second black-majority district. The state solicitor general disclosed that the court’s order is the “only reason” Louisiana drew a new map.

“Justice Thomas, [that court decision] is the only reason [this new map] exists,” Aguiñaga said. “We fought tooth and nail in the Robinson litigation itself in telling the courts that we did not think the Constitution permitted us to draw a second majority-black district. As you know, under protest, we drew [the new map] because the threat was that the federal courts would do it if we didn’t.”

“We would never pass [the new map] in the first instance without Robinson, Justice Thomas,” he added.

[READ: In Race-Based Redistricting Battle, Louisiana Urges SCOTUS To Uphold America’s ‘Color Blind’ Constitution]

DOJ Official Silences Sotomayor

Arguing on the side of Louisiana, Principal Deputy Solicitor General Hashim Mooppan got into a testy exchange with Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor over the Pelican State’s creation of a second-black majority district.

In debating the racial and political motivations behind the creation of maps like Louisiana’s, Mooppan noted the racial double standard that exists where if the block of voters in question were white, there wouldn’t be a debate about whether there should be an additional district tailored to their community.

“If these were white Democrats, there’s no reason to think they would have a second district. None,” Mooppan said. “And so what is happening here is their argument is, because these Democrats happen to be black, they get a second district. If they were all white, we all agree they wouldn’t get a second district. That is literally the definition of race subordinating traditional principles.”

Keep reading