.


President Trump Releases Video Of U.S. Military Striking Submarine Heading Towards U.S. Shores


by Anthony 14 hours ago






Unlike prior President’s in the United States, President Trump is taking the war on drugs seriously.

On Saturday afternoon, Trump confirmed on Truth Social that U.S. Special Forces has destroyed a large drug trafficking submarine that was navigating towards the United States.

The 47th President noted there was enough fentanyl on the submarine to kill 25,000 Americans.


Read Trump’s full statement he made on Truth Social below:

It was my great honor to destroy a very large DRUG-CARRYING SUBMARINE that was navigating towards the United States on a well known narcotrafficking transit route. U.S. Intelligence confirmed this vessel was loaded up with mostly Fentanyl, and other illegal narcotics.

There were four known narcoterrorists on board the vessel. Two of the terrorists were killed. At least 25,000 Americans would die if I allowed this submarine to come ashore.

The two surviving terrorists are being returned to their Countries of origin, Ecuador and Colombia, for detention and prosecution. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike. Under my watch, the United States of America will not tolerate narcoterrorists trafficking illegal drugs, by land or by sea. Thank you for your attention to this matter!

Backup here if needed:

📹 DESTROYED: Confirmed DRUG-CARRYING SUBMARINE navigating towards the United States on a well-known narcotrafficking transit route.

"Under my watch, the United States of America will not tolerate narcoterrorists trafficking illegal drugs, by land or by sea." – President Trump pic.twitter.com/N4TAkgPHXN

📹 DESTROYED: Confirmed DRUG-CARRYING SUBMARINE navigating towards the United States on a well-known narcotrafficking transit route.

"Under my watch, the United States of America will not tolerate narcoterrorists trafficking illegal drugs, by land or by sea." - President Trump pic.twitter.com/N4TAkgPHXN

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) October 18, 2025

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) October 18, 2025

NPR reported the following details on the latest mission by U.S. Forces:

The two survivors of an American military strike on a suspected drug-carrying vessel in the Caribbean will be sent to Ecuador and Colombia, their home countries, President Donald Trump said Saturday.

The military rescued the pair after striking a submersible vessel Thursday, in what was at least the sixth such attack since early September.

“It was my great honor to destroy a very large DRUG-CARRYING SUBMARINE that was navigating towards the United States on a well known narcotrafficking transit route,” Trump said in a social media post. “U.S. Intelligence confirmed this vessel was loaded up with mostly Fentanyl, and other illegal narcotics.”

The Republican president said two people onboard were killed — one more than was previously reported — and the two who survived are being sent to their home countries “for detention and prosecution.”

The repatriation avoids questions for the Trump administration about what the legal status of the two would have been in the U.S. justice system.

With Trump’s confirmation on his Truth Social platform of the death toll, that means U.S. military action against vessels in the region have killed at least 29 people.

------------------

From WLT Report
Link: https://wltreport.com/2025/10/18/pre...m_campaign=PTN





.

.

No Kings, No Grassroots, No Introspection

By John F. Di Leo
Oct. 19, 2025

On October 18, the un-American left held countless demonstrations across the country (allegedly about 2,500 of them), ranging from harmless picket lines to riotous violence.

The theme? “No Kings” — a declaration that America doesn’t believe in autocrats, and that here in America, politicians are not above the law.

It’s a theme as old as civilization. Some 2,500 years ago, during the days of Etruscan rule in ancient Rome, the infamous Rape of Lucretia so infuriated the people of Rome that they declared an end to the rule of kings, once and for all, driving the Tarquin family out of the city and establishing a republic on the spot.

From the overthrow of Tarquin the Proud in 509 B.C., then, the war cry of “No Kings!” has enjoyed a long and respectable pedigree as the fundamental “republican” (small r) war cry.

It’s short and sweet; it fits nicely on a picket sign — and in English, at least, chants come easy, since so many words rhyme with “kings.” But how much real meaning is there beneath the chants?

In theory, the cry of “No Kings!” indicates a refusal to tolerate dictatorship. But how long did that really last, historically speaking? When that cabal of homicidal Roman senators assassinated Julius Caesar in 44 B.C., their justification was, famously, that “He was trying to be king!”

But as students of antiquity all know, the Roman republic had ceased to be truly republican over a century earlier, and even before that, it was a form of government that we today would hardly recognize as elective in any form. The Roman Senate frequently appointed dictators for short terms, and by the late 2nd century B.C., Roman generals realized that they could just appoint themselves dictator, without the Senate’s blessing, for as long as they wanted, if they were popular enough with their troops.

Most famously, first Marius, and then Sulla completely broke the idea of a republic, but even after generations of dictatorial rule, the “No Kings!” war chant still inspired Caesar’s rivals enough that they thought the chant would justify them in the eyes of the public. Casca, Cassius, Bucilanius, Decimus, and of course Brutus were among the 60 senators who participated in history’s most famous murder.

Much like a century earlier, when groups of senators decided that the Gracchi — two Tribunes of the Plebs, Tiberius and then his brother Gaius — needed to be removed from the scene, the senators had used the same claim. These guys are trying to be king, they told themselves, so we must kill them. And so the Senate did, as violently as possible. When Casca et al. decided to terminate the rule of Julius Caesar, they had precedent.

Two millennia later, the Democrats of the United States apply the same basis. However violent the action, they can claim they are defending the United States from the rule of kings. Remember when Democrat activist John Wilkes Booth murdered President Abraham Lincoln, the nation’s first Republican president, and shouted out “Sic Semper Tyrannus!”? To their mindset, the accusation that their victim is trying to be a king is sufficient justification for violence.

What students of ancient Rome learn is that the Romans’ so-called republic, their periods of dictatorship, and certainly their five hundred years of emperors were all much more violent than their lives had ever been under the kings.

The ancient Romans — had they been capable of introspection (some were, but not many, apparently) — might indeed have realized that they were freer and safer under kings than under any other form of government they tried.

All of this leads us to the logical question today: If we were capable of being honest with ourselves, would we be better off under kings today, or in the so-called republics that rule most of the West?

France has no king. But the French had an election last year in which their populist party, known as National Rally, was predicted to do well, so the rival establishment parties (the Socialists, the Greens, the Republicans, etc.) banded together to freeze the National Rally out of the government. Clever, but hardly a republican move.

Germany has no king. But the Germans know that their populist party, the Alternative for Germany (AfD), is doing better and better in every election. Seven AfD candidates died in the weeks leading up to this September’s local elections, an unusually high, and statistically significant, number of deaths among candidates with an election coming up. It’s too early to be sure how many of these, if any, were assassinations, of course. Let’s just say it’s suspicious.

The United Kingdom has a king, but he doesn’t play a role in politics, so the U.K. may as well be viewed as a simple republic like the others. And how are Britons’ elections going? Well, with the U.K.’s populist party, Reform U.K., climbing higher and higher in the polls, the British establishment parties — Labor, the LibDems, and the Tories — have been acting like a uniparty of late, illegally postponing all the 2025 elections that Reform U.K. was expected to win. This is illegally extending the four-year terms of numerous mayors and city councils to five or even six years. With what justification? None. Just simple fiat. The U.K. establishment is choosing where to allow elections and where not to, choosing to extend the terms of their allies and thwart the will of the public wherever polling indicated that the public might disagree with the powers that be.

There are plenty of other countries worth looking into — Brazil's illegal prosecutions of their past president, Canada’s malevolent torment of truckers who had the audacity to protest illegal mandates, and on and on. The list is long, but the point is made. The absence of a king is no guarantee of freedom, security, or the protection of election rights.

In fact, take a look at the picket signs scattered across Saturday’s demonstrations. When we look at the positions of the people participating in these “No Kings!” rallies today, we see a rather undemocratic array of positions advocated by these alleged supporters of democracy, to put it mildly.

These demonstrators call for the kangaroo court persecution of a popularly elected president. They call for taxpayer-funded abortion on demand, the killing of a million innocents per year. They call for the destruction of Israel and the endorsement of sharia law here at home. They call for open borders, the dilution of American voting rights by millions of people per year. They call for the permanent empowerment of an unelected bureaucracy, immune to firing by the people’s elected government. They call for the defunding of both federal law enforcement and local police forces in order to turn over our neighborhoods entirely to the hands of the criminal element.

President Trump is no king. A tyrannical king wouldn’t permit rallies like this to take place, and anyone capable of even a morsel of introspection would see the fundamental flaw in this expensive and vulgar performance art. But introspection is just one more of the countless talents that these flawed amateur political scientists never learned at school.


John F. Di Leo is a Chicagoland-based international transportation manager, trade compliance trainer, and speaker. Read his book on the surprisingly numerous varieties of vote fraud (The Tales of Little Pavel), his political satires on the Biden-Harris years (Evening Soup with Basement Joe, Volumes I, II, and III), and his recent collection of public policy essays, Current Events and the Issues of Our Age, all available in eBook or paperback, exclusively on Amazon.


---------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...ospection.html






.

.

Democrats Are Mad Kings

By J.B. Shurk
Oct. 19, 2025

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt really got under Democrats’ reptilian skin last week when she correctly noted, “The Democrat party’s main constituency is made up of Hamas terrorists, illegal aliens, and violent criminals.” Botoxed and unnaturally preserved devil-worshipers from Nancy Pelosi’s generation haven’t been this worked up since President Lincoln freed their slaves. House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries did his best Greta Thunberg impression by sinisterly glaring at television cameras and slinging “How dare you?” insults in Leavitt’s direction. There’s nothing that Democrats despise more than a person willing to tell the truth.

It will be interesting to see whether Democrats’ main constituent groups — illegal aliens, violent criminals, Antifa terrorists, rabid communists, and Islamic jihadists — show up for the vaunted “No Kings” protests being staged around the country on October 18. Previous iterations of this loony leftist “primal scream” have mainly attracted geriatric women reliving their “free love” hippie days and cuckolded manservants carrying their wives’ purses.

It’s strange seeing so many old white people gathered in one place as if they were part of some wandering nursing home whose handlers (the same ones who fill out residents’ mail-in ballots) replaced patients’ daily pill cups with adrenaline shots and spiked the early-dine pudding rations with geezer rage. An impartial observer could be forgiven for assuming that the gates to these Potemkin protests include an exclusionary post: “To enter, you must have fond memories of President Roosevelt (Theodore or Franklin) and have skin so pasty-white that you are easily confused for a corpse.” After two decades during which the Democrat party has run on an explicitly racist platform — We hate white people, and we are entitled to steal everything they have — I suppose it makes sense that Democrats still retain so much support from those old enough to remember the Confederacy.

The October 18 “No Kings” extravaganza has been billed as the Democrats’ glitziest event of the year. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer — who is reportedly desperate to stave off a primary challenge from the hammer and sickle brigades running his party — has refused to fund the federal government until Democrats’ cosplaying “revolutionaries” can partake in at least one id-fest that permits their assorted criminals to burn down businesses and trash city streets.

However, there’s only so much mayhem the Matlock and Murder, She Wrote contingents can unleash when so many drooling participants must nap between protest chants and visits to the restroom. Previous “No Kings” performances have had all the pizzazz of a last-minute casting call for zombie extras in The Walking Dead.





If Chuck and Hakeem really want to make a statement, they’ll let the tens of millions of criminal illegal aliens go wild on the streets of America and ask New York City mayor-to-be Zohran Mamdani to release his jihadi hordes. Nothing says, “We love America” and “We should run the government” like a bunch of foreigners and anarchists screaming, “We hate America!” and “We must burn America to the ground!” Leave it to the Democrats to habitually take sides with America’s enemies.

In anticipation of the Democrat party’s latest day of rage, Los Angeles County has declared a “state of emergency” over Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations in the area, so that Democrat politicians can give illegal aliens “free” money. That’s right, Democrat officials in California and other pro-crime death traps steal money from American citizens in the form of taxes so that they can pay illegal aliens to violate U.S. immigration laws.

What do sane, rule-of-law jurisdictions call people who aid and abet criminal activity? Correct again, they are called criminals! But don’t tell Los Angeles! It’s criminal government identifies as a “sanctuary city”! Just as bearded perverts identifying as “women” are allowed to use the same restrooms as little girls in Democrat-controlled “safe zones” for sexual predators, criminal illegal aliens identifying as “law-abiding, undocumented citizens” are allowed to invade Democrat-controlled “safe zones” for foreign nationals. It’s so easy to justify outrageous things when you can fundamentally transform reality simply by renaming it!

I’ve just been handed a note from Silicon Valley’s censors and the European Union’s overseas word police. Apparently, it is “racist” to describe the illegal arrival of tens of millions of foreign nationals as an “invasion.” Such language implies that these uninvited foreigners are not welcome to break into the United States and sponge off the country’s depleted welfare programs. Telling foreigners that they must respect a nation’s borders is only valid in Ukraine. Everywhere else, it’s a textbook example of “hate.” Nobody wants to be accused of “hate.” As Charlie Kirk’s murderer amply demonstrated, leftists will kill anyone Democrats slander as “hateful.”

Ironically, the same Democrats who refuse to call the arrival of tens of millions of foreign nationals an “invasion” have no problem smearing federal law enforcement officers with that label. Illinois governor “Jabba the Pritzker” (hat tip to James Howard Kunstler for that gem) has repeatedly complained that President Trump’s mobilization of National Guard troops to protect federal property and the lives of federal agents constitutes an “invasion.” Jabba the Pritzker also insists that President Trump is Adolf Hitler reincarnated and that ICE agents are acting as his Nazi Gestapo.

This is how far down the demented rabbit hole Democrats have dragged us. A prominent Democrat politician seeking his party’s 2028 presidential nomination has no problem with rapists, murderers, narco-terrorists, human-smugglers, or sex-traffickers taking advantage of Democrats’ open borders policies to spread death and destruction across the United States. All those vile creatures are welcome in Illinois, California, Oregon, Massachusetts, New York, and wherever else Democrat politicians turn human misery into political power and personal profit. But if the president of the United States faithfully executes the duties of his office by preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution and safeguarding the lives and properties of the citizens of the United States, then Democrats will accuse him of being a “Nazi” and “invading” their lawless states.

The public pouting sessions that Democrats call “No Kings” protests feature plenty of this obnoxious insanity. ICE agents and other law enforcement officers are vilified as “slave-catchers,” “child-abusers,” and “violent thugs.” However, by demonizing federal agents who enforce immigration laws, Democrats are actively defending violent transnational gangs whose members abuse women and children and sell them as slaves. Only depraved Democrats could take sides with modern-day slavers and be so morally obtuse that they brag about supporting cartels. Only those who have never put their lives on the line for another human being could defame those who do as “fascists.”

How many women have to be murdered before anti-ICE rioters figure out that they are enabling evil on a continental scale? How many children have to be raped before “No Kings” blowhards realize that the animals they defend profit by inflicting trauma on the most vulnerable? Democrats have their slogans and their prefabricated signs. Apparently, they abandoned principles long ago.

Adding to the hypocrisy of the Democrats’ “No Kings” street theater is the fact that leftist billionaires fund these “mostly peaceful” but often fiery riots. American communists who have never had the guts to depart the United States for one of the many Marxist hellholes around the world carry their preprinted protest signs and scream obscenities at hardworking Americans who just wish to live their lives in peace. Meanwhile, they never ask themselves why wealthy oligarchs pay for their “revolutions.” Leftists are the least self-aware people on the planet.

Democrats’ “No Kings” demagoguery resembles “color revolutions” across the West. Leftists believe that they are entitled to reject the will of the voters. They wish to overthrow elected governments and rule instead. Despite protests, they are mad kings.


------------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...mad_kings.html






.

.

Sorry, Democrats — No Civil War is Coming

By John Kudla
Oct. 18, 2025

In 1776, American colonists, despairing that their rights as British citizens were being trampled upon by their overbearing king, George III, decided to secede from the British Empire. Thomas Jefferson wrote down their grievances in the Declaration of Independence. Just a few of them include the cutting off of trade, imposing taxes without consent, depriving the people of trial by jury, suspending colonial legislatures, and waging war on the colonists. I think Jefferson’s best argument was, “He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.” Yep, sounds as though they had reasons to rebel.

In 1861, following the election of Abraham Lincoln, wealthy landowners pushed eleven Southern states, where slavery was legal, to secede from the United States. Much of the rhetoric claimed that the war was about states’ rights, but that was mostly a smokescreen. Unlike the rebellion against King George, these people had no grievances — only fears that slavery would be abolished, ending the free labor on which their economic system depended.

Both of these political disputes got out of control and turned into armed conflicts. Both were civil wars, although we refer to the first conflict as a revolution. Both were wars over power; control; and, to some extent, money. The first one succeeded, and the second one failed, but not before much destruction and bloodshed occurred in both.

In 2025, there are rumors that we may yet see another civil war. A YouGov poll taken in June revealed that 40% of respondents believe that a civil war is likely or somewhat likely in the future. Democrats were more likely to see a civil war happening than Republicans by 48% to 32%.

Some of this may be the result of rhetoric from Democratic sources. In March of this year, Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) claimed, “Trump is working toward a civil war.”

Much of the Democrat rage is directed at ICE, AKA U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, for arresting and removing illegal aliens from the country. In April, Representative Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.), while visiting an ICE facility in Miami, said, “We need an uprising where people are taking to the streets.”

In blue cities, it gets worse. In November of 2024, Denver mayor Mike Johnston claimed he would oppose ICE operations with the Denver Police Department and that Denver’s citizenry would take part in the protests. “More than us having DPD stationed at the county line to keep them out, you would have 50,000 Denverites there. It’s like the Tiananmen Square moment with the rose and the gun, right?”

In August, in response to President Trump’s assertion that he was sending ICE and the National Guard to Chicago to help the city fight crime, Chicago mayor Brandon Johnson said, “The people of this city are accustomed to rising up against tyranny.” In addition, a week ago, Mayor Johnson signed an executive order declaring city property to be off limits to ICE.

On the national level, Democrats have a similar focus. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer has demanded that the government pay for health care for illegal aliens to end the government shutdown. On a separate topic, he recently declared that everyone should “rise up forcefully” against a tyrannical dictatorship, meaning the Trump administration, for prosecuting New York attorney general Letitia James for mortgage fraud.

Okay, rise up and do what, Democrats? Burn businesses and loot stores as in the George Floyd riots in 2020? Apparently, some leftists are suggesting that protesters at the coming No Kings rallies do just that. The only problem is that opposing the deportation of illegal alien criminals or prosecuting an allegedly dishonest government official is not as compelling a reason as demanding justice based on the assumption of police brutality against a minority, true or not. A riot is not the same thing as a civil war.

Do Democrats really believe there will be a popular uprising over ICE raids? A recent New York Times poll found that 54% of respondents were in favor of deporting illegal aliens. Even less surprising was a Harvard/Harris poll that found that 78% support the deportation of illegal alien criminals.

Here is what is really going on. Democrats are fighting for power, control, and money. Illegals represent power. If they are counted in the Census for congressional apportionment, they will add representation in blue states. This could help Democrats win control of the U.S. House of Representatives. If they are given citizenship, that would almost guarantee Democrats the ability to win national elections for the foreseeable future.

Power gives Democrats control. Control allows them to spend money on projects they deem worthy, such as health care and climate change. As we have seen with the Inflation Reduction Act, billions of dollars can be funneled through non-governmental organizations, which take a cut. In effect, this is a vast patronage system, where spending programs are designed to pay off friends and supporters, further strengthening the Democrat party.

Democrats are also worried they will lose money from their billionaire donors. The Trump administration is threatening to go after the Democrats’ big money supporters, such as George Soros and others, for allegedly funding violent protests and groups like Antifa. In the past, donors could do this without repercussions. Now, after the Kirk assassination, President Trump declared Antifa a domestic terrorist organization. Unfortunately, for the dark money sponsors of the Democrat party, support of a terrorist group is seriously against the law.

Democrats are essentially in the same position today that the Southern states were in 1861. They don’t really have any grievances, except that they lost an election. If you consider all of the money spent during the Obama and Biden presidencies, what do they have to complain about? In reality, they are afraid they will lose the power and control upon which their party’s spoils system depends.

Does this portend another civil war? Unlikely. Blue states could attempt to secede from the U.S., but that has been tried before. State and colonial militias formed the backbone of rebel armies in our two previous civil wars. However, those state militias, now known as the National Guard, are now far more integrated into the regular armed forces.

A professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara believes that California may attempt to secede by 2035. Although anything is possible, I think that is about as plausible as finding Bigfoot. Californians, ask yourselves a simple question. How many of you would be willing to fight a war for Gavin Newsom, Karen Bass, Adam Schiff, or Kamala Harris?

Uh-huh, I thought so.


------------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...is_coming.html






.

.

Trump Pushes The Limits Of Presidential Power

By Allan J. Feifer
Oct. 19, 2025

Now that Trump has seen success in the Middle East, at least for the moment, where does he go from here? We are left with the question of how he can top this and where he goes from here. What we know is that he will push the limits of presidential power, but not by abusing the Constitution or the law. Instead, he will do so through his personality, which is powerful, adaptable, and tireless.

Fortunately, we live in a target-rich environment.

Conflicts. The only one that matters today is the one in Ukraine.
Economics. Here, the President faces two challenging issues: first, shepherding us into a post-global warming economy, and second, dealing with an ascendant China that challenges us for world leadership.
Healing the country and bringing us closer together. Wouldn’t it be ironic if Donald Trump were the one to spread oil upon the waters, leading us back to a more civil society? Naysayers aside, this may be he toughest, yet most consequential priority the President may take on.



Image created using AI.


Of course, a lot of what Trump can achieve will depend on whether he can herd the colony of cats we call the U.S. government. The President’s span of control is not unlimited, regardless of the amount of help available. Everything requires effort, focus, and time in the court systems, ultimately becoming a political calculus.

Nevertheless, this is Trump we’re talking about, a man who routinely does things that conventional wisdom proclaims cannot be done. Therefore, a reasonable question to ask is: “What has enabled Trump to do things other Presidents have not been able to, at least to the degree and with the speed at which he has operated in the first nine months of his presidency?

The answer lies in his non-traditional use of power and his constant push against the traditional boundaries set by his predecessors, both of which have made him a lightning rod for anyone who either opposes his policies or is tied rigidly to the norms of how government has historically operated. Trump may seem at times to be clumsy, unengaged, bombastic, and heck, fill in the blank, but he understands power and how to optimize it.

Trump is certainly not diplomatic. With rare exceptions, he appears to shoot from the hip, but that really is an appearance only. Trump knows what his objectives are almost instinctively. Keeping the other side off balance is part of his negotiating style. Opponents often struggle to understand Trump, which makes him challenging to counter.

Trump understands that he is the president, and not just another guy in government. You can’t help but notice that every Cabinet official always opens his or her remarks by giving credit to the President for whatever is said. This is not about someone stroking Mr. Trump’s ego. It is part and parcel of the image the President wishes to project that Trump has a plan, and it is presented as an all-of-government argument. No one in his Administration is allowed to oppose his messaging.

Trump appears tireless. That strength enables him to outlast his enemies. There’s a famous story (unverified) but told to me by someone who claimed to have first-hand knowledge, that Trump was holding a business negotiation and wouldn’t let anyone leave the room (to go to the bathroom) until a deal point was resolved.

True or not, it highlights the truth that Trump, unlike the previous occupant of the White House, does, in fact, run rings around many of his staffers. The ability to focus his energy and concentrate on central issues better than his adversaries (some say friends) enables Trump to win on stamina alone at times.

The entire Trump team comes in with a plan to reinvent the modern world in a way that takes power away from communists and Islamists. Thus, his use of non-traditional power goes beyond our borders. We saw inklings of that when Trump threatened NATO in his first term to raise spending on their own defense.

Back then, our State and War Departments (Now the Department of War) virtually vomited with their view that Trump was single-handedly trying to destroy the Alliance; he was not, and Europe is beginning to pay its fair share. More importantly, they are acting as a political bloc under threat and are recalibrating their prior passivity.

Unlike a Marxist globalist who envisions a one-world government comprised of an untouchable expert class, Trump actually sees the world as an interconnected organic entity. But his nuanced America First view doesn’t demand American dominance; just American success. To that end, he will be a benevolent bully.

Trump possesses another superpower that Democrats hate—certainty of purpose. They are completely flummoxed by how Trump can move so quickly and adroitly from one issue to another, keeping them perpetually behind and reactive. This is because Trump believes that government is very much like business.

Entrepreneurial business people are distinctly different from your typical big business MBAs, whose gods are spreadsheets and Harvard Business Review Cases they try to emulate. Trump (a Wharton Business School grad) is cut from a different mold, i.e., classically aligned with the Gilded Age and late 1800s and mid-20th century real estate moguls—figures known for boldness, aggressive deal-making, and a flair for spectacle. Others like Jay Gould and Cornelius Vanderbilt: ruthless, deal-driven magnates who prioritized dominance over collaboration. And more modern magnates, such as Steve Wynn, Richard Branson, Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and Marc Andreessen.

Recognizing that Mr. Trump’s brain functions differently from that of non-entrepreneurial technocrats, diplomats, and politicians is crucial to understanding how he utilizes his power. Trump listens to subject matter experts who counsel him on areas where he lacks in-depth knowledge or can generate additional options. Ultimately, the limits of Mr. Trump’s power are buttressed by four tenets:

Adaptability keeps his options open.
Comprehending the big picture informs his goal-setting
Fearless and ready to do the unexpected
Steadfast with his own judgment

At the end of the day, it’s that first item in the list—adaptability—th at is Trump’s special sauce. Most other dealmakers of his persuasion are not accustomed to the level of public scrutiny, disclosure, and politically charged amplification of all their foibles, as Trump has. Unlike his enemies and contemporaries, such as the Clintons, Obama, and certainly former President Biden, Trump has withstood scrutiny that they could not have endured.

In the final analysis, President Trump is disliked by the Deep State because he is not one of them. One of them means that, most of all, he thinks like them, acts, and can be relied on to be a caretaker of what exists, rather than wrecking the house. That’s not Trump. Trump translates his vision into actions that frequently violate norms. By utilizing the levers of power at his disposal, he continually challenges traditional limits. To the extent he can, he pushes until pushed back in the name of saving the country from itself.

How history treats President Trump has yet to be written. He’s already positioned himself as a singularly important President who has reshaped and, in many ways, is relaunching America.

God Bless America!


Author, Businessman, Thinker, and Strategist. Read more about Allan, his background, and his ideas to create a better tomorrow at www.1plus1equals2.com.


-------------------

Source: American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...ial_power.html






.

.

Breaking the Left

By Thomas Kolbe
Oct. 19, 2025

Donald Trump is the master of memes -- and of the media. No modern political figure understands better how to energize the long-humiliated conservative-patriotic soul that has been crushed for decades by a left-liberal media zeitgeist. His Gaza performance is the latest chapter in the ongoing media revolution of our time.

Peace in Gaza: the guns have fallen silent between Israel Defense Forces and Hamas. What was unthinkable for decades has happened: a historic breakthrough. Hostage and POW exchanges -- all brokered by U.S. President Donald Trump.

The achievement alone commands extraordinary respect. But with Trump now mediating in Armenia-Azerbaijan, between Israel and Iran, and pressing ahead with unfinished work in Ukraine, a Nobel Peace Prize would seem almost inevitable.

And Trump, ever the media virtuoso, translated this geopolitical power move into the perfect, iconic imagery.


Trump Plays the Media Like a Grand Piano

Whether delivering his address in the Knesset or receiving European leaders and global political elites, the spectacle was unmistakable: a parade of dignitaries bowing before the American president -- a display directed not just at European audiences but at the power brokers of the Arab world as well.

The scene recalled the now-famous White House moment during the Ukraine debate: Ursula von der Leyen, Friedrich Merz, Keir Starmer, and Emmanuel Macron lined up like schoolchildren at the teacher’s desk, listening to the president.

The moment culminated in Trump’s demonstrative handshake with Macron -- a symbol of Europe’s complete submission to Washington’s dominant player.


Total Dominance

The world witnessed it in real time: Trump controls the iconography of power like no one else. He projects himself as the new ordering force in the Middle East, backed by allies like Saudi Arabia, now tied to Washington through billions in investment. Traveling aboard Air Force One between Washington, Tel Aviv, and Sharm el-Sheikh, he turned diplomacy into a livestream event.

Europe, once the colonial power in the region, was reduced to a spectator role. Even the congratulatory statements from European heads of state looked awkward against Trump’s monologue. His media strategy leaves no room for co-stars. This is a one-man show. And Trump plays the lead.


A Masterclass in Iconography

The list of Trump’s choreographed power moves is long. Remember the handshake with von der Leyen sealing the U.S.-EU trade deal? It was all about the image.

He hosted his European counterparts at his private golf resort in Scotland, flying them in via his personal helicopter -- no military escort. Everything followed a scripted, perfectly timed playbook. The message: America is back on top.





Europe, dimmed to its real geopolitical size, played second fiddle. The era of European globalism sneaking through the American back door -- via forums like World Economic Forum -- is over. So is the age of U.S. presidents pushing the European climate agenda, from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama to Joe Biden. Trump is burying the CO2 climate cult in America once and for all.


The Second Declaration of Independence

Repeatedly, the same image played out: in the Oval Office, Trump signs executive order after executive order, driving his cabinet to implement a deregulation blitz -- a second Declaration of Independence from the Old Continent.

Another media bombshell followed on April 2: in the Rose Garden, Trump declared a global tariff war. Through a few bold, poster-sized charts, he ended an era: the era of free riding on the dollar system was over.

Two days after the last London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) contract expired, the pricing of dollar credit returned to Washington’s control via the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR).


Beyond Symbolism

Most Europeans still don’t grasp the signal: the U.S. will no longer let itself be hitched to Europe’s geopolitical cart -- certainly not to die on European battlefields again. Not in a war with Russia that isn’t in America’s strategic interest.

The Trump-Putin media plot in Alaska made that message unmistakable.

Trump’s power lies in his ability to dominate narratives, shape symbolic language, and project an unapologetic American patriotism. Europe’s reaction is defensive: through the Digital Services Act, Digital Markets Act, planned chat controls and digital IDs, Brussels tries to claw back control of the narrative by brute bureaucratic force. But against Washington’s renewed self-confidence and civic model, the Eurocrats look like yesterday’s men.


The Butler Moment

The turning point came in Butler, Pennsylvania: after the assassination attempt, Trump, bloodied and defiant, raised his fist and shouted “Fight! Fight! Fight!” in front of the American flag. That image burned itself into the national psyche. It was a declaration of war against cultural Marxism -- the ideological core of Europe’s eco-socialist movement.

Trump had cracked the media code long before that. From flipping burgers at McDonald's to posing as a garbage truck driver -- it wasn’t cheap campaign theater. It was strategic authenticity, in stark contrast to the aloof eco-socialist bureaucrats.

The result: attention shifted to him, away from choreographed smear campaigns and the concealed frailty of Biden. Trump didn’t fake being “the people.” He embodied it -- and weaponized authenticity into power.


Dismantling the Machine

After his election, Trump moved fast to dismantle the Left’s media machine. The breakup of United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was a key moment. State-aligned broadcasters folded, funding pipelines to statist media, green ideology, and eco-socialist activism dried up.

Trump struck a chord with the times. He transformed media dominance and narrative instinct into electoral power. His biggest coup? Killing the CO2 myth. In Trump’s America, CO2 is no longer the demon gas upon which an eco-socialist nightmare could be built.

The question now is: How long before this media collapse of the Left reaches Europe? When it does, the rising conservative forces in Eastern Europe -- led by Viktor Orbán -- may find their historic hour has come.

In politics, good governance alone is never enough. You must project it -- with the right imagery, in tune with the zeitgeist.


-----------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti..._the_left.html







.

.

Big Government, Big Business, and the 2025 Nobel Prize

By Jesse Richman and Howard Richman
Oct. 18, 2025

This year’s Nobel Prize in Economics, awarded Monday, was shared by three economists for their contributions to economic growth theory, arguably the most important topic in economics because persistent long-term growth leads to geometrical advances in people’s living standards.

These economists agreed on the essential concepts of long-term growth theory, as laid out by Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter in 1942, and they were also all opposed to bigness and in favor of competition. They did, however, differ as to which kinds of bigness they opposed. Joel Mokyr opposed excessive bigness in government while the co-authors Phillipe Aghion and Peter Howitt opposed excessive bigness in business.


Mokyr’s Opposition to Bigness in Government

Mokyr’s economic history research partly focused upon why the industrial revolution took place in Europe, but not in Asia. He concluded that political and religious divisions within Europe during the industrial revolution and “industrial enlightenment” (his term) created a “market for ideas” which prevented any particular government or religion from having the power to repress “useful knowledge.” He held that when governments compete with each other, mankind benefits, but when governments “harmonize” their laws in order to prevent competition, mankind loses.

The invention of the airplane (discussed at 18.00 in this video) is one of Mokyr’s examples of how useful knowledge develops. Before tinkerers (in this case the Wright Brothers) invented their airplane, most scientists had theorized that heavier-than-air flight was impossible. After the Wright Brothers' invention, scientists developed improved theories which led to the development of better aircraft. The main point made by Mokyr again and again is that new technology drives new science, which drives new technology, which drives new science, and so on, and that’s how “useful knowledge” and economic growth occur together.


Aghion and Howitt’s Opposition to Bigness in Business

Aghion and Howitt won the Nobel prize for their joint papers which quantified Joseph Schumpeter’s creative destruction theory which held that economic progress occurs when new technologies replace old technologies causing destruction of some jobs and industries and the creation of other jobs and new more productive industries.

For example, when steam-powered railroads replaced hand-powered canal boats, transportation became more rapid, greatly increasing trade and economic development throughout our country, but those who were building canals and running canal boats lost their jobs. Similarly, when automobiles replaced horses, jobs shoeing horses and building carriages were replaced by much more productive jobs servicing and making automobiles.

Aghion and Howitt’s models suggest that one of the risks for sustained economic growth is that entrenched “Superstar Businesses” may lack incentives to engage in the vigorous innovation needed to further advance economic growth, and that such firms can leverage lobbying and political power to thwart competition. The paradox is that the pursuit of innovation tends to produce such firms, so breaking up such firms can also carry costs, requiring careful balancing. They write:

[M]ore vigorous antitrust could help counteract the power of superstar firms. An antitrust focus on innovation instead of price (see Gilbert 2020) would also help direct policy to the crux of the problem, since it is superstar firms’ suppression of innovation by competitors, not their price increases, that has created the problem. Breaking up large firms that suppress innovation and changing patent laws to disallow purely anticompetitive patent applications would also obviously help. But all these measures would be difficult to implement. Moreover, breaking up large firms risks losing the economies of scale that such firms bring, and preemptive mergers can be an incentive for a lot of start-up innovation. (p.8)

The founder of the long-term growth theory that Aghion and Howitt built upon, Joseph Schumpeter, was well aware of these challenges. He argued in favor of letting capitalism work -- that those businesses which dominate their industries due to their technological leads should not be broken up because those businesses have the funds and the will to invest heavily in new technologies in order to maintain their leads and are, as a result, a propelling force in modern capitalism.

Schumpeter cited Aluminum Company of America as a business whose monopoly was due to technological leadership and therefore should not be broken up even though its original patent had expired long ago. In a footnote on pages 101-2 of his classic 1942 book, he noted that after their patent expired, ALCOA was “successful in cost-reducing research, in the economical development of the productive apparatus, in teaching new uses for the product and in avoiding wasteful breakdowns.”

Even though Aghion and Howitt mathematized Joseph Schumpeter’s theory of Creative Destruction, they object to the part of his argument that businesses with technological leads should not be broken up because they propel the economic growth of modern capitalism. They argue, instead, that such break-ups be conditional upon the means by which such businesses maintain their leads. Anti-competitive and anti-innovation methods, such as lobbying government for protection or suppression of innovation, should be blocked wherever possible.


Conclusion

The prescription to take on the dual challenges of big government and anti-competitive big business articulated by the winners of this year’s Nobel prize in economics aligns well with the approach being pursued by the second Trump administration. Lawyer Logan Breed and coauthors write that:

Both “Big Monopoly” and “Big Government” are areas of focus for the agencies in the second Trump administration. Chair Ferguson and AAG Slater have articulated a guiding antitrust enforcement philosophy that considers the threat that Big Monopoly poses to competition, free markets, and “individual liberty” to be on par with the perceived dangers wrought by Big Government.

We favor Mokyr’s opposition to government that is so big that it can suppress innovation, and sympathize with Aghion and Howitt’s opposition to “Superstar Businesses” which turn from innovation to other means in order to preserve their dominance. Free markets, competition, and the ability of innovators to reap the benefits of their technological innovations are key. And this includes keeping big government from colluding with big business to suppress the next generation of innovation.

The world is currently in the midst of one of the technological “creative-destruction” phases that Schumpeter celebrated. The robotics and artificial intelligence revolution is being driven by the very IT companies that some naïve anti-trust enforcers would have broken up. These “Superstar Businesses” are currently investing huge amounts of money so that they won’t be left behind. Their huge investments will likely bring about a much more prosperous future for the American people and for the world.

The Richmans co-authored the 2014 book Balanced Trade published by Lexington Books, and the 2008 book Trading Away Our Future published by Ideal Taxes Association.


----------------

Source: American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...bel_prize.html






.

.

The Dems Say 'My Bad' and Keep the Keys

By Kevin Finn
Oct. 18, 2025

For the most part, conservatives (actual Americans) have championed the virtues of personal responsibility and the rule of law. Among the Left, however, responsibility has become a relic, replaced by a hollow ritual; the scripted apology, a vague nod to "responsibility," and then a return to the corridors of power. Scandals that would have once demanded resignation now evaporate into the ether, leaving voters to question the very meaning of accountability. Performative contrition has supplanted true reckoning, breeding cynicism and empowering careerists at the expense of the Republic.

The pattern is predictable and infuriating. For example, the obnoxious Democrat Katie Porter is gunning to replace Gavin Newsom. Resurfaced videos captured her brusquely terminating an interview and unleashing a profanity-laced tirade at a campaign aide. For a state reeling from skyrocketing crime and homelessness and a $20 billion budget deficit, Porter's volcanic temper evoked not leadership but the very elite entitlement conservatives condemn. Her response? A tepid "almost apology.” "I could have handled things better," she demurred, recasting her outbursts as the mark of a "fierce" warrior. No mea culpa for the damage done to public discourse, just a campaign shrug that the footage was "edited" or "taken out of context". As of now, Porter marches toward the ballot relatively unscathed. In a healthy state, such volatility might end a career. But in California it gets a pass.

In Virginia, contender for the state Senate, Democrat Jay Jones, offers a grimmer tableau. Leaked texts from September exposed his venomous threats against fellow Democrat and House Speaker Don Scott -- graphic visions of violence that chilled even bipartisan sensibilities. Jones mustered a weak apology, "I take full responsibility for my words," confessing the messages left him "sick to my stomach." Yet the Democrat machine issued no rebuke, no demand for him to step down. Jones continues to cling to his ballot spot, embodying the conservative critique: When threats of harm become mere "grave mistakes", the thin veneer of civility is eroded.

In November, 2024, Pennsylvania's Diane Ellis-Marseglia, Bucks County commissioner, ignited a firestorm by greenlighting the tally of 600 invalid ballots during a heated U.S. Senate recount, flouting the state Supreme Court's edict in a bid to tilt the scales. "Precedent doesn't matter anymore in this country," she scoffed. Conservatives saw this as the death knell for electoral integrity, echoing the lawless spirit that birthed January 6 investigations. Her follow-up? An "impassioned" boardroom apology: "The passion in my heart got the best of me... I made a mistake." Yet she retained her perch -- no Democrat ouster, despite GOP protests. Her defiance of judicial authority? Normalized as passionate zeal.

GrokIn Vermont, Democrat Lt. Gov. David Zuckerman turned advocacy into a joke in August 2024. He repeatedly foisted free menstrual products on lawmakers, a gesture denounced as mocking the gravity of women's health debates. His olive branch was a botched bid for equality: "I feel terribly sad that in this day and age, a man cannot talk about pure biology and making a space that has historically been very male dominated, more inclusive for women. Now, maybe, like many other issues, I’ve been out ahead of the curve, and maybe I was too far ahead of the curve and made people uncomfortable.”

I’ve got one word for that: Yikes!

The House awarded him a token slap on the wrist. This underscores conservatives' lament -- when mockery masquerades as progress, accountability withers.

While these episodes pale in comparison to others -- Russiagate, Benghazi, Hillary’s illegal servers, the Afghanistan withdrawal, the COVID response, etc. -- they nevertheless illuminate a profound disconnect. What passes for accountability in Democrat circles is less a mechanism of justice than a public relations sleight-of-hand. In theory, accountability demands answerability, a full, transparent dissection of one's actions and their ripple of harm.

As stewards of the public trust, elected officials must lay bare their transgressions, own the damage to institutions, colleagues, and citizens alike. The scrutiny from voters, the press, or legislative watchdogs must ensure decisions align with the common good. Representatives should be held responsible for their actions and decisions and face rigorous examination within the legislature to prevent abuse.

Conservatives revere this as the Founders' genius: a system where power answers to the people, mitigating the corruption that toppled empires. Yet these recent spectacles reveal that answerability devolves into empty platitudes -- "I could have handled it better" -- to placate the masses without probing deeper wounds. Ellis-Marseglia's "passion got the best of me" glossed over the attack on electoral faith; Jones's nauseating regret ignored the terror inflicted on a family. Such half-measures pervert discourse into "performative politics," where stances prioritize drama over depth, eroding substantive debate. No dissection of systemic failures, no vows of reform -- just enough contrition to reset the news cycle.

Worse still is the absence of enforceability. Ideally, missteps trigger tangible repercussions: resignation to restore honor, fines to sting the wallet, or hemorrhaged support signaling voter disgust. Power holders adapt or face ouster at the ballot box. Enforcement fosters self-correction and upholds norms. This electoral check compels leaders to prioritize constituents over cronies, echoing the republican virtue James Madison extolled in Federalist No. 51. But in performative purgatory, consequences evaporate. These Democrats soldier on with minimal polling dip or party support intact. Porter's campaign chugs along, Zuckerman's gavel falls unmolested. No fines for Ellis-Marseglia's court-jilting, no bench for Jones's bloodlust. Government drones bask in very low accountability for poor outcomes, ensconced in a performative politics circus where lobbyist cash shields the guilty. This enables career politicians to exploit the system. Burrowing into their sinecures while citizens bear the costs -- higher taxes, eroded borders, and a judiciary mocked.

The fallout for public trust is devastating. True accountability reinforces civic norms, deterring future recklessness by proving no one is above the fray. It rebuilds faith, reminding citizens that self-governance thrives on mutual reckoning. On the other hand, performative variants breed cynicism. Scandals evolve into "just politics," normalized as the cost of partisan warfare. Gallup's 2025 trust index reveals only 28% of U.S. adults expressing “a great deal” of support in institutions. But there is a significant shift in Republican confidence after Donald Trump replaced Joe Biden as President -- 37% of Republicans view federal institutions favorably, against Democrats' 28%.

Without enforceability, power ossifies, birthing a situation where Democrats like Porter or Zuckerman entrench themselves, adapting to echo chambers instead of voters. Elections turn into meaningless spectacles, with removals from office becoming increasingly rare, as career politicians manipulate the system to protect their positions.

We're seeing the results – the exodus of millions fleeing blue states for red refuges like Florida, where accountability -- via ethics probes and voter ID -- restores order.


----------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti..._the_keys.html






.

.

So is Trump the 'Fascist' that Leftists Keep Saying He is?

By Stephen Helgesen
Oct. 17, 2025

It seems that no political conversation in America is complete these days without somebody calling somebody a fascist, and if you are unlucky to be caught up in one of those discussions, you will no doubt hear one name shouted out louder than all the others. And that name is spoken more often than all of the other top ten most evil fascists of all time. I am referring, of course, to the 47th president of the United States, Donald John Trump.

For many left-of-center Americans, Trump has risen to the top of their lists of the most heinous, the most evil and the most dangerous enemies of democracy.

For them, he is the progenitor of all fascists that have scorched the Earth with their death and destruction, no matter Trump has killed no one and has, himself, been the target of at least two assassination attempts on his life.

Just yesterday, Donald Trump was in Israel helping to celebrate the return of Israeli hostages after brokering a ceasefire with some real fascist captors, Hamas. That may have earned him a few points with most of the world (certainly with the Israelis), but his critics will tell you that his presence in Israel standing next to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whom they also regard as a fascist and a war criminal, lost him all the points he gained.

Before we get too far down the field, let's see what the geniuses at ChatGPT have to say about what constitutes a "fascist."

The AI engine said:

A fascist is someone who backs a mass-mobilizing ultranationalist rebirth project that rejects liberal democracy, concentrates power in a single leader or party, treats political violence as purifying, and subordinates individual rights to the imagined unity and purity of the nation.

Taking the definition apart, I have difficulty ascribing an "America first" posture as being fascistic. Ronald Reagan used the phrase, "Make America Great Again" in his 1980 campaign, and Bill Clinton used it in his remarks in 1992. Many presidents before Donald Trump were supporters of an America-first doctrine like Woodrow Wilson, Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge. Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat while Harding and Coolidge were Republicans.

If we're going to go fascist-label-crazy then I suppose we'll have to include Reagan, Clinton, Wilson, Harding and Coolidge into the club because each believed that a strong, prosperous and united America was a bulwark against fascism, not part of its DNA.

And the term ultranationalist, I would argue, cannot be applied to Donald Trump. An ultranationalist is someone who holds an extreme view of nationalism that elevates the nation above all other values, often demanding cultural/ethnic homogeneity, viewing outsiders or internal minorities as threats, and accepting harsh (sometimes authoritarian or violent) measures to secure the nation’s “unity” and “purity."

While Trump may be using extreme measures to re-secure America's border, he is not opposed to legal immigration nor does he hate minorities.

While Trump believes in a strong America, he does not view the U.S. as a nation to be respected over its values. On the contrary, he believes that the nation is its values and those values must be protected.

The next item:

concentrates power in a single leader or party, treats political violence as purifying, and subordinates individual rights to the imagined unity and purity of the nation.

It is no secret that Donald Trump wants power to realize his goals, but he is not advocating political violence as a means to achieve them nor is he trying to take away people's rights for either an imagined or real unity and purity of the nation.

He is willing to let his actions stand the test of the courts and will obey their rulings when they have been through the entire appellate process.

This is not the mark of a fascist that would overrule the courts and take the law into his own hands.

Many of his critics would point to the events of Jan. 6, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC as a moment that would define Donald Trump's motives and validate his "fascistic" tendencies.

On that very day, he told his supporters to proceed in a peaceful manner to the Capitol building to make their voices heard, and at no time did he encourage violence.

This is not the trademark of a fascist.

ChatGPT did give me a list of the "top ten" world-recognized fascists, and nowhere was Donald Trump on that list.

However, the names did include leaders of nine European countries and one Asian country: Germany, Italy, Spain, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Norway and Japan.

There are, however, warning signs of fascism that every nation should be aware of and they are:

• The myth of national decline and rebirth calling for an urgent call to “save” the nation

• An exclusionary view of citizenship (ethnic or cultural litmus tests)

• A tendency towards militarism and readiness to use force against perceived “enemies” both internal and external

• Illegal suppression of dissent; loyalty tests; leader-centered politics

• Revisionist/irredentist aims (recovering “lost” territories or past glory)

Both critics and supporters of Donald Trump have a duty to come together and debate the above five points and leave the "fascist" epithet out of the conversation until all voices are heard.

Can a fascist also be a dictator and are both the same?

A dictatorship describes a form of rule (one person wielding unchecked power), while fascist rule describes a specific ideology and movement. A fascist regime is almost always a dictatorship — but many dictators aren’t fascists. Trump does not wield unchecked power. He is limited by our Constitution and the separation of powers. Neither he nor His MAGA movement advocate for a one-party system though they are understandably happy that the Democrats are in disarray.

The left has never let the facts about fascism influence their opinion of Donald Trump. To them, he is a fascist and will always be one.

That is the sad part of American political discourse today. The facts of any matter are deemed irrelevant by the American left because of their pathological hatred for Donald Trump. They are unable to discuss any issue without first calling Trump a fascist. Charlie Kirk's assassination is emblematic of the reality that certain Americans are incapable of a spirited conversation or debate without resorting to name-calling or violence.

Fascism has many faces.

There is another form of abuse that has worked its way into our body politic, and it's similar to fascism in the way that it depends on the cruel, unjust and unaccountable use of power to intimidate those who would exercise their right to conduct an open and civil dialogue.

I'm speaking of tyranny, more specifically the tyranny expressed by the radical left's coercion and ruthless condemnation and vilification of their opponents. This is not to say that there are no right-wing practitioners of tyranny. There are, but nowhere near the degree that we see every night on the left-leaning news media.

Fascism is here to stay.

As long as there is freedom of speech there will be those who cry "fascism" and not be called to task for it.

In America, every one may be heard and is subject to the judgment of the court of public opinion. At present, there is no statute of limitations on insensitivity, stupidity or the willful disregard of basic civility. Our Constitution affords us all certain inalienable rights, and among them is the right to be wrong, but, thankfully, it does not forbid society from punishing those who are repeat offenders.


Stephen Helgesen is a retired American diplomat specializing in international trade. He has lived and worked in 30 countries over the course of 25 years under the Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, Clinton, and G.W. Bush administrations. He is the author of fourteen books, seven of them on American politics, and has written more than 1,500 articles on politics, economics, and social trends. He now lives in Denmark and is a frequent political commentator in Danish media. He can be reached at: stephenhelgesen@gmai l.com.


------------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...ing_he_is.html






.

.

America is Back: ICE Raids, Crushing Cartels, and Confronting Venezuela

By Mike Robertson
Oct. 17, 2025

(See also, “US jets buzzing Venezuela and Trump issues CIA lethal cover action order” by Monica Showalter.)

In the shadowy corridors of power, where Democrats have long peddled their illusions of a kinder, gentler America, the truth has finally broken through like a sledgehammer. For two decades under leftist presidents—think Obama’s apologies and Biden’s bungles—the United States surrendered its edge, trading raw strength for rainbow flags and eco-sermons. Wokeism and DEI weren’t just words; they were weapons of self-destruction, softening our borders, weakening our military, and inviting chaos from abroad.

Adversaries laughed as they grew bolder, turning empty threats into real assaults on our allies, flooding our streets with poison that hooked millions. Illegal aliens poured in, draining resources and spiking crime, all while Americans were lectured on “compassion and tolerance.” There is a strong feeling that it was nothing but a deliberate policy that masked national suicide.

But no more. President Donald Trump’s thunderous declaration—“America is back”—during his March 5, 2025, address to a joint session of Congress wasn’t just rhetoric; it was a battle cry. In his second term, Trump has unleashed a torrent of actions to reclaim what was lost, proving that real leadership means defending prosperity and security without apology. Ten months in, the results are undeniable: borders fortified, cartels reeling, and global foes on notice. This isn’t hawkishness; it’s justice.


The Democrat Debacle: Borders Breached and Lives Lost

Many pundits claim the Obama-Biden eras were a catastrophe for American sovereignty. Under their watch, illegal immigration exploded, turning the southern border into a revolving door for criminals and opportunists. From 2020 to 2024, encounters with inadmissible migrants hit a staggering 10.8 million since FY2021 alone, a figure that shatters previous records and exposes the sheer incompetence—or worse, complicity—of Democrat policies.

By 2023, the unauthorized immigrant population had ballooned to a record 14 million, representing over 4% of the U.S. population and a whopping 27% of the foreign-born. These weren’t just numbers; they fueled a crime wave and a drug epidemic intertwined like venomous snakes.

Fentanyl, that deadly scourge peddled by cartels, claimed lives at an alarming rate. Provisional data shows overdose deaths peaking during the Biden years, with opioid-related fatalities surging amid the chaos. By 2023, stimulant-involved overdose rates had nearly doubled from 2018 levels, hitting 8.6 per 100,000 for cocaine alone, while overall drug deaths hovered near historic highs before a slight dip in late 2024—too little, too late.

Experts link this horror directly to unchecked migration, where smugglers exploited weak enforcement to flood communities with poison. Democrats called it “humane”; Americans called it betrayal.


Trump’s Triumph: Borders Locked, ICE Unleashed

The Trump administration had a plain understanding of what to do with all that mess. It has ramped up ICE operations with a ferocity unseen in years, conducting sweeping raids that send a clear message: America’s generosity has limits. Enforcement and removal stats for 2025 show a marked uptick in arrests and deportations, reversing the Biden-era leniency that turned sanctuaries into safe havens for lawbreakers.

No more catch-and-release nonsense; now it’s catch-and-deport, protecting taxpayers from the abuse of social benefits that illegals gamed under Democrats. This crackdown isn’t isolated—it’s part of a broader war on the interconnected threats of migration, crime, and drugs.


War on Cartels

Finally, the White House recognized the real villains. The Mexican cartels, allegedly propped up by Nicolas Maduro’s regime in Venezuela, which has turned that oil-rich nation into a narco-state. Investigations reveal deep ties between Maduro’s “Cartel of the Suns”—a network of Venezuelan military officials—and Mexican syndicates like Sinaloa, funneling drugs north while raking in billions on Americans.

There is a strong belief that drug trafficking has become a prime funding source for Maduro’s grip on power, with Venezuelan authorities shifting from mere bribery to active partnership in the trade.

What is Trump’s response? Decisive action. In 2025, he authorized covert CIA operations inside Venezuela to disrupt these flows, clamping down on migrants and narcotics at the source. A naval buildup in the Caribbean, ostensibly for interdiction, has escalated pressure, with strikes on Venezuelan vessels labeled as “extrajudicial” by critics but hailed as necessary by patriots. Trump has even floated land strikes against cartel targets, vowing to end the threat without full-scale war.

And why not eye Venezuela’s oil fields? Seizing control could bolster U.S. energy security, starving Maduro’s machine while padding our budget. This isn’t imperialism; it’s payback for years of hostility that cost American lives.


Reviving the Military: From Absurdity to Dominance

No restoration is complete without a battle-ready military. Trump’s speech at Marine Corps Base Quantico laid it bare: goodbye to the Democrat-era transgender experiments that distracted from lethality.

His executive order banning transgender service members, upheld by the Supreme Court, refocuses the armed forces on winning wars, not social engineering. In a fragmenting world, this shift restores the U.S. as the unchallenged No. 1 power, ready to deter aggressors.


Peace Through Strength: Global Wins and Ukraine’s Tightrope

Trump’s might isn’t just muscle—it’s diplomacy with teeth. His administration has brokered ceasefires worldwide, most notably the historic Gaza Peace Deal, a 20-point plan that ended hostilities between Israel and Hamas. Acclaimed as a triumph, it proves America can enforce peace when Democrats only sowed division.

The outlier? Russia-Ukraine, a mess inherited from Biden’s blunders. Speculation swirls around providing Kyiv with Tomahawk missiles, hardly a game-changer for long-range strikes after HIMARS rockets, Abrams tanks, and F16 interceptors failed to turn the tide of the war. Still, a delicate balance should be maintained: arming Ukraine without escalating into “Trump’s war.” Yet, with Zelenskyy’s counteroffensive dreams fading, the Oval Office prioritizes American interests over endless aid.


America Reclaimed: Prosperity and Security Restored

For years, Democrats abused Americans’ rights to safety and success, paving a road to hell with their “good intentions.” Ten months into Trump’s second term, the nation sees the payoff for the wise choice in November 2024. This is America back—not as a global nanny, but as a world power.


----------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...venezuela.html







.

.

Trump was right about crime rates

By Mike McDaniel
Oct. 19, 2025

Dr. John R. Lott Jr. is an unusual researcher in these days of fake research. Head of the Crime Prevention Research Center, Lott conducts meticulous research on issues of crime, guns and related topics. What makes Lott unusual is he provides his data sets and methodology on request. He doesn’t make things up. He's actually fully transparent.

He drives Democrats crazy.

The honest among them—there are a few—will say they hate his conclusions but can’t fault his methods. The rest wildly attack his work, but are always long on heated, hyperbolic rhetoric and short on valid argument.

In a recent Real Clear Politics article, Lott addresses the reality of American crime rates. He begins by harkening back to the Trump/Harris debate where Trump correctly asserted crime was increasing:

ABC moderator David Muir immediately fact-checked him, claiming, “President Trump, as you know, the FBI says overall violent crime is coming down in this country…”

Lott noted the usual Democrat media suspects backed Muir. The Wall Street Journal, Vox and Axios among them. NPR, who Democrats are holding the government hostage to refund, headlined: “Violent crime is dropping fast in the U.S. – even if Americans don’t believe it.”

Their unbelief was well founded.

However, a new Bureau of Justice Statistics report, which includes data through 2024, shows that Trump was right during the debate when he said, “Crime here is up and through the roof.” The National Crime Victimization Survey shows violent crime surged 59%, with rape and sexual assault up 67%, robbery up 38%, and aggravated assault up 62%. That’s the largest four-year increase in the survey’s 52-year history.

It will come as no surprise to learn during Trump’s first term, crime, particularly violent crime, decreased, but rose substantially under Biden’s Handlers.

But how can anyone, with a straight face, claim crime dramatically decreased under Biden? Lott points out that the government collects two types of statistics: the FBI’s annual Uniform Crime Report and the National Crime Victimization Survey done by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The former is dependent on law enforcement agencies reporting to the FBI. The latter is a survey of about 240,000 Americans. Unsurprisingly, in 2024, the media used FBI statistics.

That’s unsurprising because for longer than the Biden years, police agencies stopped providing stats to the FBI or provided only sanitized stats. This has been particularly true of big city, Democrat ruled police agencies. Police chiefs and other high-ranking cops don’t get those high-paying jobs without pleasing their Democrat masters. That means statistics showing their no bail, no prosecution, no proactive policing, utterly insane policies are eliminating crime. That’s their narrative, and they’re stickin’ to it. Officers are forced to ignore crimes or classify felonies as misdemeanors. Lott notes:

Before 2020, the FBI and Bureau of Justice Statistics trends generally moved in tandem. Since then, they’ve diverged sharply: The FBI reports fewer crimes, while more Americans say they’ve been victimized.

Here’s another concerning trend:

Between 2010 and 2019, victims reported 63.3% of violent crimes to police. In the last three years, that number plummeted to 48.8%. Arrests fell as well – from 26.5% before COVID-19 to just 16.6% afterward.

Why would arrests decline? The Ferguson effect has been a powerful inhibitor. Allied with it has been the Defund the Police movement. Both have taught officers that arresting violent criminals, particularly if they’re black, is dangerous to their health and careers. Officers, with good cause, believe they’re more likely to be prosecuted than criminals, and any arrest, no matter how valid, could end their career. Lott notes an additional problem:

Progressive prosecutors in cities like New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles have also made a habit of reducing felony charges. In Manhattan, for example, the district attorney’s office downgraded felonies 60% of the time – with 89% downgraded to misdemeanors and 11% to less serious felonies. Chicago has labeled some murders as “death investigations” rather than homicides.

Even red state police departments haven’t been reporting to the FBI because they’ve come to distrust it. This is significant because the statistics of our blue major cities can badly skew national results even if every red state agency accurately reports. When they don’t, the problem worsens and statistics more closely resemble Democrat narratives rather than objective truth.






So, blue cities lie and resist any effort by President Trump to make them safer, lest Democrat incompetence and malice be exposed in ways that can’t be covered up. They were more than happy to have troops ringing the Capitol after January 6, but not now.

And they’re never happy about Lott telling the truth about crime rates.


Mike McDaniel is a USAF veteran, classically trained musician, Japanese and European fencer, life-long athlete, firearm instructor, retired police officer and high school and college English teacher. He is a published author and blogger. His home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor.


--------------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...ime_rates.html






.

IDF khuyến cáo người dân khu vực Galilee gần biên giới có thể nghe thấy tiếng nổ và chứng kiến nhiều thiết bị bay không người lái, máy bay, tàu hải quân cùng binh lính di chuyển.

Ngày 19/10, Lực lượng Phòng vệ Israel (IDF) thông báo bắt đầu một cuộc tập trận quân sự kéo dài 5 ngày dọc biên giới với Liban theo kế hoạch từ trước.

Cuộc tập trận mô phỏng nhiều tình huống, bao gồm phòng thủ khu vực và ứng phó với các mối đe dọa.

Theo phóng viên TTXVN tại Israel, IDF khuyến cáo người dân khu vực Galilee gần biên giới có thể nghe thấy tiếng nổ và chứng kiến nhiều thiết bị bay không người lái, máy bay, tàu hải quân cùng binh lính di chuyển.Mặc dù Israel và phong trào Hezbollah tại Liban đạt lệnh ngừng bắn vào tháng 11/2024, các hoạt động giao tranh lẻ tẻ vẫn diễn ra, với nhiều cuộc tấn công của IDF nhằm vào các mục tiêu của Hezbollah tại miền Nam Liban gần biên giới./.

Chồng Ngân Collagen nhiều lần gọi công an phản ánh việc người dân tụ tập, livestream trước biệt thự ở Cần Thơ, nhưng chưa làm đơn khiếu nại.
Trả lời Tri Thức - Znews chiều 19/10, đại diện công an phường Hưng Phú (Cần Thơ) cho biết đơn vị nhận nhiều cuộc gọi phản ánh từ Lê Trung - chồng Ngân Collagen - trong hai ngày qua về tình trạng người dân tụ tập chụp ảnh, livestream trước biệt thự và một số kênh mạng đưa tin sai sự thật về gia đình anh.

Cơ quan chức năng thông báo Lê Trung cần đến trực tiếp trụ sở công an phường để làm đơn khiếu nại. Tuy nhiên, người này liên tục dời ngày vì "bận rộn công việc cá nhân".

"Sau nhiều lần báo bận, người chồng hẹn chúng tôi thứ 2 (ngày 20/10) đến làm việc", đại diện công an phường Hưng Phú nói.Trước đó, sau đợt kiểm tra công ty dưới quyền sở hữu Trần Thị Bích Ngân (Ngân Collagen) của Sở An toàn thực phẩm TP.HCM ngày 17/10, cuộc sống, tin tức về "phú bà Cần Thơ" thu hút sự quan tâm của cộng đồng mạng. Đáng chú ý, căn biệt thự tại Cần Thơ được Ngân Collagen giới thiệu giá trị 500 tỷ đồng trở thành từ khóa hot.

Ngày 18/10, số người đến địa điểm này ngày một đông buộc cơ quan chức năng vào cuộc sơ tán. Cùng lúc đó, nhiều tài khoản cũng phát trực tiếp khung cảnh nhà Ngân Collagen thu hút hàng chục nghìn lượt xem.

Ngân Collagen bắt đầu bị cộng động mạng "réo tên" khi DJ Ngân 98 bị khởi tố, bắt tạm giam về tội Sản xuất, buôn bán hàng giả là thực phẩm. Điều này xuất phát từ vụ việc hồi tháng 5, trong đó "song Ngân" đã đấu tố sản phẩm giảm cân họ quảng bá, buôn bán.

Giữa thông tin công ty nhiều lần thay đổi người đại diện và hiện đã đóng cửa, dừng hoạt động, "phú bà Cần Thơ" vẫn hoạt động tích cực trên mạng xã hội. Cô vẫn quảng bá các sản phẩm thuộc hệ sinh thái doanh nghiệp và khẳng định công việc kinh doanh của công ty Ncollagen vẫn diễn ra bình thường.

"Xin đính chính công ty đã phối hợp làm việc cùng cơ quan về các sản phẩm detox kết thúc vào tháng 6 chứ không phải như những thông tin đăng sai lệch như hiện tại", Ngân Collagen phản hồi một bình luận dưới clip trên kênh TikTok ngày 17/10.

Ngân Collagen được biết đến với biệt danh "phú bà Cần Thơ". Cô xây dựng hình ảnh người phụ nữ thành công, khoe lối sống xa hoa và được chồng yêu chiều. Nữ TikToker sở hữu kênh TikTok, Facebook với hơn 600.000 lượt theo dõi ở mỗi nền tảng.

Công ty Ngân Collagen từng bị Thanh tra Sở Y tế TP.HCM xử phạt 35 triệu đồng do các sản phẩm như “Mặt nạ thải độc khoáng Detox N-Collagen”, “Serum Skin Care” và “Whitening Perfect Cell” có nhãn mác chứa thông tin chưa chính xác, gây hiểu nhầm về bản chất sản phẩm vào năm 2021.

Nga thực hiện chiến dịch oanh tạc lớn nhất từ trước đến nay vào ngày 17/10, với 109 cuộc không kích, hơn 6.000 UAV tấn công và gần 5.000 đợt pháo kích.Lực lượng Hàng không Vũ trụ Nga cho hay họ đã phát động chiến dịch oanh tạc lớn nhất từ trước tới nay nhằm vào Ukraine, theo báo cáo của Tổng tham mưu Quân đội Ukraine. Các cuộc tấn công được tiến hành vào ngày 17/10 vừa qua, bao gồm 109 cuộc không kích trên khắp lãnh thổ Ukraine.

Đợt oanh tạc được triển khai song song với việc phóng 6.024 UAV, cùng với việc gia tăng bắn phá pháo binh, với tổng cộng 4.941 đợt tấn công riêng lẻ nhắm vào các vị trí và hạ tầng quân sự của Ukraine.

Tiêm kích ném bom Su-34 chịu trách nhiệm phần lớn các cuộc oanh tạc, và từ khi chiến sự quy mô lớn bùng nổ vào tháng 2/2022, nó đã trở thành xương sống của Lực lượng Hàng không Vũ trụ Nga. Đây là phiên bản được tăng cường mạnh mẽ từ tiêm kích chiếm ưu thế Su-27, nặng hơn khoảng 50%, có tầm bay dài nhất và khả năng mang vũ khí lớn nhất so với mọi loại tiêm kích trên thế giới.Việc Su-34 có tiếng phản xạ radar giảm gần tương tự tên lửa hành trình, kết hợp với năng lực tác chiến điện tử tiên tiến và độ cơ động cao hơn mang tính tiêm kích nhiều hơn là máy bay ném bom, đã giúp nó có độ sống sót cao bất chấp cường độ hoạt động lớn trên các tuyến đầu. Mức sản xuất loại máy bay này đã tăng hơn gấp đôi kể từ đầu 2022, ước tính khoảng 30 chiếc mỗi năm, và Su-34 đã được mua sắm với số lượng lớn hơn nhiều so với bất kỳ loại tiêm kích hậu Xô viết nào khác.

Quân nhân tiền tuyến thuộc Quân đội Ukraine, khi trao đổi với nhiều cơ quan truyền thông phương Tây, đã than thở về “sức công phá khủng khiếp” của các cuộc tấn công bằng glide bomb (bom lượn), mà Su-34 chủ yếu là phương tiện phóng.

Họ nhấn mạnh rằng những cuộc oanh tạc này, sử dụng bom có lượng thuốc nổ lên tới 500 kg, đang phá hủy các hầm hào ngầm của họ; một binh sĩ so sánh tác động của chúng với “cánh cổng của địa ngục”, và nói rằng Lực lượng Hàng không Vũ trụ Nga “gửi chúng tới từng đôi một, tám quả trong một giờ… Tiếng ồn như một chiếc tiêm kích lao xuống trên bạn”.Sự cạn kiệt và kiệt sức của hệ thống phòng không Ukraine đã cho phép Su-34 ngày càng đóng vai trò lớn trong việc yểm trợ hỏa lực dọc các tuyến đầu.

Bình luận về các vụ tấn công bằng bom lượn hồi tháng 5/2023, người phát ngôn Không quân Ukraine, Đại tá Yuri Ignat, cảnh báo: “Những quả bom đó có thể bay khoảng 70 km và chúng có thể nhắm vào các cơ sở hạ tầng trọng yếu, trường mẫu giáo, khu dân cư và các cơ sở giáo dục cùng y tế, và chúng ta không thể đối phó hiệu quả với loại đạn này. Phòng không của chúng ta kém hiệu quả trước chính những quả bom này, nhưng chúng ta nên cố gắng bắn hạ các chiếc Su-34, là phương tiện mang những đầu đạn đó”.

Người phát ngôn còn lưu ý về biến thể dẫn đường mới của bom FAB-500: “Họ đã biến bom FAB-500 thành thứ gì đó tương tự của JDAM phương Tây. Họ gắn cánh và một bộ điều khiển. Quả bom dẫn đường có thể bay khoảng 70 km tới mục tiêu”.

Việc mở rộng đội Su-34, cùng với việc nâng cao tỷ lệ sẵn sàng chiến đấu, đã được bổ trợ bằng một sự bùng nổ lớn trong sản xuất tên lửa đạn đạo, tên lửa hành trình và UAV sử dụng một lần, điều này đã làm tăng áp lực đáng kể lên hệ thống phòng thủ của Ukraine.

.

Trump’s DOJ hammers a Deep State traitor

By Amil Imani
Oct. 18, 2025

Lightning incinerates the swamp as President Trump’s DOJ unleashes a relentless thunderbolt on John Bolton, the war-mongering neocon whose August 22, 2025 FBI raid exposes his treachery in a blaze of classified leaks and anti-Trump betrayal. Federal agents stormed Bolton’s Bethesda home and D.C. office, seizing two iPhones, four computers, hard drives, and “secret” white binders labeled “Trump I-IV” and “allied strikes” under Espionage Act warrants.

On October 16, 2025, a D.C. grand jury convened to slam felony charges — potentially five counts — for mishandling classified docs and leaking via private email during Bolton’s 2018–2019 NSC tenure, a direct stab at Trump’s America First peace agenda. No mercy: Trump’s DOJ, led by Kash Patel, brands Bolton a “lowlife” and “unpatriotic,” crushing the Russia hoax enabler who fueled endless wars and sabotaged diplomacy with North Korea and Iran. This is the reckoning for a traitor’s downfall, and Trump is delivering it.

The raid’s firestorm erupts from Bolton’s own treachery, hoarding classified docs in his office — unlike his home, where no secrets surfaced — revealing daily activity logs and Iran strike plans emailed to personal accounts, a felony breach risking national security. Court filings unsealed in September detail the haul: USB drives, hard drives, and binders marked “secret,” with the FBI authorized to force facial and fingerprint unlocks on Bolton’s devices. The New York Post exposed the grand jury’s October 15 move, calling the case “airtight,” with prosecutors eyeing charges tied to Bolton’s 2020 memoir, The Room Where It Happened, which allegedly exploited classified intel for profit while defaming Trump’s peace deals. Bolton’s pre-raid salvo — slamming Trump’s Putin talks as “Nobel-chasing” weakness hours before agents hit — seals his fate as the Deep State’s poster boy, now facing a legal guillotine for his hawkish sabotage. Trump learned of the raid via TV and roared approval, with Patel’s DOJ vowing to bury Bolton alongside Comey and Brennan in a purge of swamp traitors.

Bolton’s war-monger legacy fuels the inferno. He’s the Bush-era neocon who pushed Iraq’s quagmire, championed Syrian air strikes, and defied Trump’s 2019 order to de-escalate with Iran, earning his ouster as national security adviser. His memoir’s leaks, cleared only partially by NSC review, sparked DOJ fury for endangering allies like South Korea with exposed strike plans. The Washington Post notes Bolton’s defiance: He refused to testify in Trump’s first impeachment, siding with Deep State plotters like Vindman, whose own probe now mirrors Bolton’s fate. Critics like Bernie Sanders cry “retribution,” but the Foundation for Defense of Democracies hails the raid as exposing Bolton’s “reckless” leaks that aided Iran’s proxies by revealing U.S. tactics. This isn’t politics; it’s accountability for a hawk who’d rather burn the world than back Trump’s peace.

The Deep State’s fingerprints smear Bolton’s plot, tying him to the Russia hoax architects — Comey, Brennan, Clapper — who face their own DOJ fire for false statements and fraud. Patel’s “Government Gangsters” list, detailed in his 2024 book, ranks Bolton fifth among traitors, accusing him of feeding anti-Trump narratives to Mark Milley and leaking Ukraine aid details to spark impeachment. The Wall Street Journal confirms: Bolton’s private emails, uncovered in August, show “daily activity” logs sent to unknown recipients, risking exposure of NSC secrets to adversaries like China. His alliance with Joint Chiefs chairman Mark Milley, now under scrutiny for 2021 China calls, cements Bolton as a cog in the cabal that framed Trump’s 2016 win as Kremlin collusion. No wonder the raid hit hard — Bolton’s office held binders detailing Trump’s private talks, a betrayal that demands prison, not pardon.

Trump’s DOJ, with Pam Bondi as A.G. and Patel at the FBI, turns the tables to crush Bolton’s ilk. The grand jury, per the Daily Mail, eyes up to seven years for each Espionage Act count, with prosecutors like Emil Bove building a RICO case linking Bolton to broader Deep State schemes. This aligns with probes into Comey (false statements) and Letitia James (mortgage fraud). Politico notes the stakes: Bolton’s indictment could deter future leakers, fortifying Trump’s control over classified intel as he negotiates Ukraine’s endgame and Gaza’s peace. The Atlantic whines about an “authoritarian” DOJ, but MAGA knows: This is justice, not revenge, for a war-monger who’d sell America for a warhead.

Bolton’s downfall reverberates beyond his ruin, exposing the neocon rot that fueled Iraq and Syria disasters while undermining Trump’s diplomacy with Putin and Kim. NBC reports that his allies — Vindman, Yovanovitch — face similar scrutiny, with DOJ subpoenas targeting their Ukraine leaks as part of a “Deep State” network. Trump’s executive order on declassification, signed September 15, 2025, greenlights releasing NSC logs to expose Bolton’s role in the Russia hoax, a move the Heritage Foundation lauds as “transparency for patriots.” No firewall shields this traitor; Bolton’s legal team scrambles, but the evidence buries him.

President Trump’s raids and indictments are dismantling the Deep State’s war machine, with Bolton as the trophy for MAGA warriors. No retreat: Patel and Bondi vow to jail leakers, from Bolton to Brennan, ensuring that America First triumphs over neocon treachery. Patriots, demand convictions.


-----------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...e_traitor.html







.

Bảo tàng Louvre, điểm đến văn hóa được ghé thăm nhiều nhất thế giới tại Paris, phải tạm đóng cửa ngày 19/10 do vụ trộm xảy ra ngay lúc mở cửa đón khách.Bộ trưởng Văn hóa Pháp Rachida Dati xác nhận vụ việc, cho biết vụ trộm xảy ra “ngay khi bảo tàng mở cửa vào buổi sáng”.

“Không có ai bị thương. Tôi đang có mặt tại hiện trường cùng ban quản lý bảo tàng và lực lượng cảnh sát. Công tác điều tra đang được triển khai khẩn trương”, bà Dati đăng tải trên nền tảng X (trước đây là Twitter).

Phía Bảo tàng Louvre ra thông báo chính thức, cho biết cơ sở đóng cửa trong ngày vì “lý do đặc biệt”, đồng thời gửi lời xin lỗi đến hàng nghìn du khách đã lên kế hoạch tham quan vào cuối tuần, theo CNN.

Trong khi đó, Bộ trưởng Nội vụ Pháp Laurent Nuñez xác nhận nhiều "món trang sức vô giá" đã bị đánh cắp tại bảo tàng trong vụ việc.

Phát biểu trên đài France Inter, ông Nuñez cho biết vụ trộm “quy mô lớn” diễn ra tại phòng Apollo, nơi trưng bày Bộ trang sức Hoàng gia Pháp cùng nhiều báu vật quý hiếm, bao gồm bộ sưu tập bình đá cứng của vua Louis XIV.

“Nhóm thủ phạm đã đột nhập từ bên ngoài, sử dụng thang nâng hàng gắn trên xe tải để tiếp cận bảo tàng”, ông nói.Theo mô tả, những kẻ trộm đã cắt phá khung cửa sổ bằng cưa máy, sau đó lấy đi một số món trang sức có giá trị tinh thần đặc biệt và không thể định giá. Bộ trưởng Nuñez cho biết nhóm này gồm “3 hoặc 4 người” và toàn bộ vụ việc chỉ kéo dài vỏn vẹn 7 phút. Sau khi gây án, chúng tẩu thoát bằng xe máy trước khi lực lượng an ninh có mặt.

“Rõ ràng, chúng đã trinh sát hiện trường từ trước. Đây là một nhóm tội phạm chuyên nghiệp, hành động cực kỳ nhanh và chính xác”, ông Nuñez nhận định.

Bộ Nội vụ Pháp cho biết một danh mục chi tiết các hiện vật bị đánh cắp đang được lập để phục vụ điều tra.

“Tôi tin tưởng rằng cảnh sát sẽ sớm tìm ra thủ phạm và thu hồi những báu vật đã mất”, Bộ trưởng Nuñez khẳng định.

Nằm giữa lòng Paris, Louvre là nơi lưu giữ hàng trăm nghìn tác phẩm nghệ thuật vô giá, trong đó có kiệt tác Mona Lisa của Leonardo da Vinci, Venus de Milo hay Victory of Samothrace - những biểu tượng của văn minh châu Âu và là điểm nhấn của nền di sản thế giới.

Đây không phải là lần đầu tiên Louvre đối mặt với những sự cố an ninh nghiêm trọng. Năm 2022, bảo tàng từng phải tạm đóng cửa vài giờ sau khi một nhóm hoạt động môi trường tấn công vào khu vực trưng bày Mona Lisa.

Từng bị Man United bỏ xa cả trong lẫn ngoài sân cỏ đầu thập niên 2010, Liverpool nay đã trở lại mạnh mẽ - không chỉ giành lại vị thế trên sân mà còn trở thành đối trọng đáng gờm về tài chính.Dưới bàn tay của Fenway Sports Group, “Lữ đoàn đỏ” viết nên một trong những câu chuyện phục hưng ấn tượng nhất của bóng đá hiện đại.

Từ vực thẳm 2010 đến đỉnh cao 2025
Mùa hè năm 2010, Fenway Sports Group (FSG) - tập đoàn Mỹ đứng sau đội bóng chày Boston Red Sox - mua lại Liverpool với giá chỉ 300 triệu bảng, khi CLB đang trên bờ vực phá sản. Thời điểm đó, Man United vừa đăng quang chức vô địch nước Anh thứ 19, vượt qua kỷ lục 18 lần của Anfield.

Khoảng cách giữa hai “đại kình địch” không chỉ nằm ở số danh hiệu. Về tài chính, Man United vượt trội ở mọi chỉ số. Trong năm tài chính 2010, doanh thu của họ đạt 286,4 triệu bảng, cao hơn Liverpool gần 100 triệu bảng.

Mỗi trận sân nhà, Old Trafford thu về 3,6 triệu bảng, trong khi Anfield chỉ đạt 1,5 triệu bảng. Khán đài chính cũ kỹ, dù chứa đầy ký ức của Hansen hay Dalglish, không thể đáp ứng tiêu chuẩn của một CLB châu Âu tầm cỡ.

Thậm chí ở lĩnh vực thương mại, Man United còn bứt phá mạnh mẽ với hợp đồng tài trợ khổng lồ cùng AON, giúp doanh thu năm sau tăng 25%, đạt 103 triệu bảng. Trong khi đó, Liverpool, sau triều đại hỗn loạn của George Gillett và Tom Hicks, phải vật lộn để tránh sụp đổ. “Thế cờ đã đảo ngược”, Ryan Giggs khi ấy từng nói đầy tự hào.

Từ một CLB ngập trong nợ nần và chia rẽ, Liverpool dần thay đổi dưới bàn tay của Tom Werner, John W. Henry và Mike Gordon. Họ đầu tư có chọn lọc, đặt nền tảng vững chắc thay vì đốt tiền theo xu hướng.

Trọng tâm của chiến lược nằm ở một triết lý bóng đá thông minh: tuyển dụng dựa trên dữ liệu, mua rẻ - bán cao, tái đầu tư hợp lý, và tìm đúng con người để dẫn dắt. Sự xuất hiện của Jürgen Klopp năm 2015 là mảnh ghép định mệnh.Từ đó, Liverpool không chỉ hồi sinh trên sân với những danh hiệu Premier League và Champions League, mà còn vươn mình thành đế chế thương mại toàn cầu.

Tháng 2 vừa qua, Liverpool công bố doanh thu thương mại 308,4 triệu bảng cho năm tài chính 2024, tạm vượt Man United. Dù sau đó “Quỷ đỏ” báo cáo 333 triệu bảng cho năm 2025, khoảng cách giờ chỉ còn rất hẹp - một kỳ tích nếu nhìn lại năm 2010.

Thỏa thuận hợp tác mới với Adidas, bắt đầu từ tháng 6 năm nay, được xem là hợp đồng lớn nhất lịch sử CLB. Nếu đạt mọi mục tiêu, doanh thu có thể lên tới 100 triệu bảng/năm - biến Liverpool thành một trong những thương hiệu bóng đá giá trị nhất thế giới.

Sự bứt phá này đến từ hai yếu tố cốt lõi: thành công thể thao và quản trị hiệu quả. Klopp giúp đội bóng chiến thắng, còn bộ máy điều hành của FSG biến chiến thắng thành tiền, rồi biến tiền thành nền tảng cho thành công tiếp theo – một chu trình khép kín và bền vững.

Man United vẫn là “cỗ máy tiền”, nhưng đã lỗi nhịp
Ở chiều ngược lại, Man United vẫn là thương hiệu toàn cầu, nhưng đang vật lộn với chính di sản của mình. Khoản nợ hơn 1 tỷ bảng, những mùa giải thất vọng, sự thiếu định hướng từ nhà Glazer, cùng các đợt sa thải hàng loạt trong bộ phận thương mại khiến “con tàu” đỏ lạc hướng.Thật nghịch lý, dù mắc sai lầm suốt hơn một thập kỷ, Man United vẫn tạo ra 666,5 triệu bảng doanh thu - cao hơn đôi chút so với 613,8 triệu bảng của Liverpool. Họ vẫn là “cỗ máy in tiền”, nhưng là cỗ máy kẹt bánh răng: mạnh mẽ, ồn ào, song không còn tinh tế.

Sau 15 năm, Liverpool giờ được định giá khoảng 4 tỷ bảng - gấp hơn 13 lần số tiền FSG từng bỏ ra. Câu hỏi đặt ra: Liệu họ sẽ tiếp tục, hay tìm người kế nhiệm?

Không dễ để bán một CLB cỡ này. Man United phải mất hơn một năm để bán chưa đến 30% cổ phần. Chelsea, khi đổi chủ năm 2022, cũng phải chia nhỏ cho nhiều nhà đầu tư. Liverpool, nếu ra giá toàn bộ, chỉ có vài thế lực tài chính toàn cầu đủ sức đáp ứng.

Nhưng điều FSG lo hơn cả, không phải là tiền. Đó là tìm người kế thừa đúng tinh thần Liverpool - không lặp lại sai lầm năm 2007, khi cố chủ David Moores bán CLB cho Hicks và Gillett, mở đầu giai đoạn hỗn loạn tăm tối.

Ngày FSG bước vào Anfield, Man United giống như “người anh cả” toàn năng. 15 năm sau, “người em” Liverpool không chỉ đuổi kịp mà còn thách thức ngôi vương tài chính của bóng đá Anh.

Và khi hai đội gặp nhau lúc 22h30 tối 19/10, câu hỏi không còn là “ai mạnh hơn trên sân”, mà là ai sẽ là biểu tượng của thời đại mới - CLB biết tự đổi mới để sống sót, hay CLB vẫn ngủ quên trên ánh hào quang cũ?

Ngày 18/10, Phong trào biểu tình No Kings, tạm dịch là Không cần vua - xuất phát từ Mỹ nhằm phản đối các chính sách của Tổng thống Mỹ Donald Trump – đã nhanh chóng lan rộng khắp châu Âu, biến nhiều thành phố lớn tại đây trở thành điểm tập hợp của các cuộc tuần hành.
Không chỉ diễn ra tại New York, Washington hay Los Angeles, phong trào biểu tình No Kings - đã đồng loạt diễn ra tại Berlin, London, Paris và nhiều thành phố lớn khác tại châu Âu nhằm phản đối các chính sách của Tổng thống Donald Trump, đặc biệt trong các lĩnh vực nhập cư, giáo dục và an ninh.Tại Berlin, đám đông người biểu tình tập trung thành nhiều nhóm, giương biểu ngữ, với thông điệp mạnh mẽ phản đối xu hướng bị xem là “tập trung quyền lực quá mức” của Tổng thống Donald Trump.

Ông Peter Isaac, một công dân Mỹ đang sinh sống tại Đức cho biết: “Tôi không thể chấp nhận và bày tỏ sự quan ngại trước những thay đổi đã diễn ra kể từ khi ông Donald Trump tái đắc cử. Điều này không chỉ đặt ra vấn đề nghiêm trọng đối với nền dân chủ Mỹ, mà còn tạo ra một tiền lệ nguy hiểm cho nhiều quốc gia khác trên thế giới. Các mạng lưới ủng hộ Tổng thống Donald Trump đang mở rộng ảnh hưởng vượt ra ngoài biên giới Mỹ, và đó chính là điều khiến tôi phải lên tiếng”.

Tại London, khu vực trước Đại sứ quán Mỹ trở thành tâm điểm của phong trào biểu tình, thu hút hơn 400 người tham gia. Nhiều người mặc trang phục hóa trang châm biếm phong cách “vua chúa”.

Tại Paris, hàng trăm người cũng tập trung tại khu vực Quảng trường République, giương cao khẩu hiệu “Không có vua trong một nền Cộng hòa”.

Bên cạnh đó, các cuộc biểu tình cũng nhanh chóng lan tới các thành phố như Helsinki - Phần Lan, Lisbon – Bồ Đào Nha và Rome - Italy, nơi các nhóm nhỏ tập trung trước Đại sứ quán Mỹ nhằm phản đối các quyết sách gây tranh cãi của Tổng thống Donald Trump như tăng cường trục xuất và siết chặt chính sách nhập cư, đề xuất cắt giảm biên chế liên bang, giảm ngân sách cho các trường đại học và tổ chức giáo dục…

Theo thống kê, đã có hơn 2.600 cuộc biểu tình diễn ra trên toàn thế giới liên quan đến phong trào No Kings, phản ánh tác động của xã hội dân sự trong bối cảnh toàn cầu hóa, khi một quyết định tại Washington có thể dẫn đến các phản ứng trên phạm vi toàn cầu chỉ trong thời gian ngắn.

Giới phân tích cho rằng các cuộc biểu tình từ Mỹ nhanh chóng lan rộng sang châu Âu cho thấy sự liên kết mạnh mẽ giữa các phong trào xã hội dân sự quốc tế trong việc bảo vệ giá trị dân chủ và quyền con người. Từ Berlin đến London, tiếng nói No Kings không chỉ nhắm vào cá nhân ông Trump mà còn nhắm vào xu hướng tập trung quyền lực và suy giảm cơ chế kiểm soát quyền lực ở các nước phương Tây.

Dù hứa hẹn ưu đãi lớn về nguồn quỹ liên bang, đề xuất của chính quyền Tổng thống Trump bị nhiều trường hàng đầu phản đối vì lo ngại can thiệp chính trị và đe dọa tự do học thuật.Chính quyền của Tổng thống Donald Trump đang vấp phải làn sóng phản đối từ giới học thuật khi hàng loạt trường đại học danh tiếng tại Mỹ, trong đó có Đại học Virginia, Viện Công nghệ Massachusetts (MIT), Đại học Brown, Đại học Pennsylvania và Đại học Southern California đồng loạt từ chối ký vào thỏa thuận nâng cao chất lượng học thuật trong giáo dục đại học.

Thỏa luận này được gửi đến 9 trường đại học Mỹ, được coi là một sáng kiến do Nhà Trắng quảng bá như bước đi nhằm “nâng cao chất lượng đại học Mỹ”. Tuy nhiên, thỏa thuận này lại bị đánh giá là công cụ gây sức ép chính trị lên các trường.

Liên tiếp bị từ chối
Đến nay, 5 trong số 9 trường được Nhà Trắng gửi lời mời đã chính thức từ chối ký kết, trong khi các trường khác vẫn im lặng. Nhiều lãnh đạo giáo dục nhận định rằng thỏa thuận của ông Trump mang tính chính trị nhiều hơn là học thuật, tạo tiền lệ nguy hiểm cho việc gắn điều kiện chính trị vào các nguồn tài trợ nghiên cứu.

Bản thỏa thuận dài 10 trang được Nhà Trắng gửi đến 9 trường đại học hàng đầu vào đầu tháng 10, kèm theo lời hứa “ưu tiên đặc biệt trong việc tiếp cận nguồn quỹ liên bang” cho những trường chấp thuận ký kết.

Đổi lại, các cơ sở giáo dục phải đồng ý với hàng loạt điều khoản của ông Trump như đóng băng học phí, giới hạn sinh viên quốc tế, loại bỏ yếu tố chủng tộc và giới tính trong tuyển sinh...

Tuy nhiên, phần lớn các trường đều cho rằng bản thỏa thuận này đang can thiệp vào quyền tự chủ đại học, vi phạm nguyên tắc xét duyệt dựa trên năng lực và tiềm ẩn nguy cơ hình thành hệ thống hai tầng trong cấp vốn liên bang.

Một số lãnh đạo học thuật cảnh báo, việc gắn tài trợ với điều kiện chính trị có thể khiến các dự án nghiên cứu quan trọng, thậm chí là những nghiên cứu có giá trị cứu người, bị từ chối chỉ vì trường không chịu ký vào thỏa thuận.

Trong thư gửi Bộ trưởng Giáo dục Linda McMahon và hai quan chức Nhà Trắng, quyền Hiệu trưởng Đại học Virginia Paul G. Mahoney khẳng định nhà trường không tìm kiếm bất kỳ sự đối xử đặc biệt nào để đổi lấy việc thực hiện những mục tiêu học thuật cốt lõi.

Ông cho biết nhà trường đồng ý với nhiều nguyên tắc trong thỏa thuận nhưng vẫn từ chối ký kết để bảo vệ tính độc lập học thuật và minh bạch trong tài trợ nghiên cứu.

Theo New York Times, Đại học Virginia trở thành trường công lập đầu tiên trong nhóm 9 trường từ chối đề xuất của chính quyền ông Trump, chỉ vài tháng sau khi cựu Hiệu trưởng James Ryan phải từ chức dưới áp lực từ Nhà Trắng vì có liên quan đến chính sách đa dạng, công bằng và hòa nhập (DEI) của trường.

Tiếp tục lôi kéo
Khi ngày càng nhiều trường từ chối, Tổng thống Trump lại quyết định mở rộng lời mời ký kết thỏa thuận cho toàn bộ cơ sở giáo dục đại học trên cả nước, gọi đây là “cơ hội để khôi phục kỷ nguyên hoàng kim của giáo dục Mỹ".

Nhưng phản ứng của giới học thuật cho thấy điều ngược lại. Nhiều trường và tổ chức giáo dục đồng loạt phản đối, xem thỏa thuận là “sự kiểm soát của chính phủ đối với các quyền tự do cơ bản của đại học.

Liên minh gồm 35 tổ chức giáo dục đại học đã ra tuyên bố chung chỉ trích đề xuất này, cho rằng nó đi ngược lợi ích của các cơ sở, sinh viên, học giả và của cả quốc gia.

Trước làn sóng phản đối, Nhà Trắng vừa tìm cách lôi kéo, vừa xen kẽ đe dọa. Trong khi mời thêm các trường như Đại học Arizona State, Đại học Kansas và Đại học Washington tham dự cuộc họp trực tuyến để thảo luận về tầm nhìn chung, người phát ngôn Nhà Trắng Liz Huston cũng cảnh báo bất kỳ cơ sở giáo dục nào không chịu thực hiện các cải cách cần thiết sẽ đồng nghĩa với việc tự tước bỏ sự hỗ trợ của chính phủ trong tương lai.

Hai nguồn tin của Forbes và New York Times cho biết cuộc trao đổi hôm 17/10 diễn ra trong không khí thân thiện, và các quan chức trong chính quyền ông Trump tỏ ý sẵn sàng xem xét, điều chỉnh một số nội dung của bản thỏa thuận trong những tuần tới.

Cũng theo các nguồn tin trên, tỷ phú tài chính Marc Rowan, người được xem là kiến trúc sư của bản thỏa thuận gây tranh cãi, đã trực tiếp tham dự cuộc họp.

.

Trump’s crime crackdown claims historic results

By Wendi Strauch Mahoney
Oct. 18, 2025

Operation Summer Heat was the FBI’s three-month, nationwide surge to “crush violent crime,” according to FBI director Kash Patel, who spoke about it in the Oval Office alongside President Trump on Wednesday. The bureau coordinated the operation across all 55 field offices, focusing on the “worst of the worst” offenders — gang members, armed robbers, narcotics-traffickers, and violent fugitives — while also running child-exploitation rescues and weapons and drug seizures. The operation began June 24, 2025 and ran through September 20.

Restoring law and order and removing violent offenders from communities has been a central priority for the Trump administration. According to Patel, the FBI and its law enforcement partners made a record number of arrests in three months — more than 8,700. They also seized 930 pounds of fentanyl, 98,250 pounds of cocaine, and 2,281 firearms. In the same period, authorities secured at least 2,100 indictments, and 1,053 child victims were identified and located nationwide.

A review of the publicly available data on Operation Summer Heat confirmed results from 16 field offices to date. Additional field offices may be lagging in submitting data, and other figures may appear through Department of Justice links or local agency releases. Below are a snapshot table and chart that compile all statistics released so far:

PICS

The Phoenix field office edges out Boston in total arrests, 411 to 404, followed by Baltimore in third place at 224. Phoenix also tops the list for child victims identified and recovered (103) and drug seizures (63), while Baltimore trails by just one seizure at 62.

Patel said the FBI and its partners have located around 5,400 children nationwide, a “30 percent increase over the previous administration,” and “arrests for violent crimes against children alone are up 10 percent.” Patel also said gang arrests are up 110 percent in the last seven months, and transnational organized crime arrests are up more than 12 percent in the same time period. President Trump’s homeland security adviser Stephen Miller has been a key architect of immigration policy, including a new task force with a focus on drug cartels and transnational crime.

Patel stated that his proudest achievement has been to stem the deadly flow of fentanyl into the U.S. “The FBI,” said Patel, “has seized 1,900 kg of fentanyl — enough doses to kill 127 million Americans.” He complimented the president for “empowering the Department of Justice to go after the worst of the worst.” Patel also shared that the FBI is working on “capturing the FBI 10 Most Wanted Fugitives,” many of whom have been “on the run for years.” Patel added, “In seven months, we captured not one, not two, not three, but four of the FBI’s top 10 fugitives. The Biden administration captured four in four years.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters that Summer Heat “set the stage” for this week’s crime-busting successes in Memphis. “Last night alone in Memphis, there were 70 arrests, 12 guns seized, and agents arrested a 70-year-old man who raped a child under the age of three. That one case makes everything we are doing worthwhile,” Bondi added.

Deputy attorney general Todd Blanche shared what he described as two notable, real-world accomplishments behind the Summer Heat statistics. One of the stories he shared involved “a hotel in the middle of a town in Alaska that was being run as a drug den.” Blanche continued,

There were over 1,000 calls to 911 for over four years during the last administration. There were multiple violent crimes, drug dealers, overdoses and murders at this one hotel — ruining a community. Summer Heat went in there. They not only arrested all the participants that were controlling the hotel, but they seized the hotel. And so that’s one example of what Summer Heat means to everyday Americans that just want to live in peace.

An Aug. 25, 2025 report in the Anchorage Daily News corroborates Blanche’s account, noting that the probe into the notorious Spenard property — the Chelsea Inn — spanned “nearly five years.” Michelle Theriault Boots from the Anchorage Daily News wrote,

Hotel manager Chantel Lynn Fields, 36, and owner Kyoung Soo Seo, 62, are both charged with conspiracy to maintain a drug-involved premises at the Chelsea Inn. ... The Chelsea Inn has been the site of several fatal incidents in recent years, including the killing of an employee in 2020, a shooting in 2023 and a stabbing of a tenant in June.

During the years from 2020 to 2025, Anchorage police were called some 1,214 times to 3836 Spenard Road, including 22 times for assaults, 85 times for warrants and 134 times for disturbances, according to data provided by the department.

The other success, said Blanche, involved a “large narcotics-trafficking group that was selling fentanyl in the state of Washington. They were shipping fentanyl, using commercial aircraft, putting fentanyl pills and powder in suitcases, flying them from the Southwest border, mostly Arizona, all the way to Washington. It had been going on a very long time. And the entire organization was arrested.”

Patel calls Summer Heat the most “successful operation in U.S. history” — a claim that lacks a strict apples-to-apples yardstick. Even so, by sheer scale and speed, it appears to be among the largest short-window crime-surge operations on record. The closest analogue is Operation Legend, a DOJ-led surge launched in 2020 during the first Trump administration by Attorney General Bill Barr, named for four-year-old LeGend Taliferro.

Barr launched Operation Legend to combat violent crime, and it ran from July 8, 2020 through late 2020. The surge brought roughly 6,000 arrests, including around 467 homicide suspects and the seizure of more than 2,600 firearms nationwide. Agents also recovered approximately 70 pounds of heroin, 35 pounds of fentanyl, 660 pounds of meth, 300 pounds of cocaine, and over $11M in illicit proceeds. No centralized, national child victim tally was reported for the 2020 operation.


--------------------

From American Thinker
Link: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...c_results.html






.