Trump Takes Back His Surrender

As I previously wrote a few weeks ago, we lost the war with Iran.  Trump signed off on an MOU that effectively gave away the farm to Iran, signaling that we were cutting our losses and getting out of Dodge.

But what a difference a few weeks make.

My previous position: We lost the war. Iran negotiated several important concessions that made the MOU a de facto surrender document of the United States. Since I was a war skeptic to begin with, that pissed me off but I recognized the reality.

Now: Iran was too stupid to take the win. They had won the war and the cease fire negotiations, but they just couldn’t help themselves and continued firing on civilian ships to control the strait even though the MOU GRANTED them control after 60 days. All they had to do was run out the clock. Unbelievably dumb…

So this gave Trump the perfect opportunity to pull out of the MOU, which means we’ve done a take back on our surrender. What to do now? I don’t know what the administration is planning, but I have a modest suggestion…

To manage the cease fire after the Gulf War, CENTCOM set up two air coverage areas over Iraq, called Operations Northern Watch and Southern Watch. So, from the end of the Gulf War to the start of the Iraq War, the US military patrolled Iraqi airspace in accordance with the cease fire terms and fired on any Iraqi military aircraft that flew in those two zones. And fly they did. Every 10 days or so the Iraqi military would attempt to fly aircraft in one of the two zones and would promptly be shot down.

Now that seemed an annoying and expensive operation at the time, but in retrospect it was a far better alternative than…the Iraq War. So that’s what we should do. Establish a no-fly zone/air defense zone over the Iranian part of the Strait of Hormuz and simply blast them every time they try to interfere with shipping. Expensive? Yes. Annoying? Yes. Open ended? Yes (this could last for decades). But it’s far preferable than trying to escalate the war to an extent that required to overthrow the Iranian government because let’s face it, that would be a major war with ground troops and thousands of casualties.  And frankly, I’m not even sure we could do it.  What country would even let us stage that kind of effort?  

I think this is the best of a couple of bad options. I don’t want us to be in the Middle East in the first place, let alone carrying on continuous military operations, but the Pottery Barn rule applies; we broke it so we need to fix it, or at least band-aid it.

How The US Lost the War with Iran

The worst-case scenario actually became…the scenario.

As I wrote at the outset of the war, I was a skeptic of this action and did not see any imminent threat that would require such an action.  I still don’t.  Still, I thought, Trump has pulled off some successful military operations, including Operation Midnight Hammer that was supposed to take care of one of the reasons we went to war in the first place, eliminating the nuclear threat from Iran. So maybe he knew what he was doing.

Narrator: He did not.

It’s not just that the war went on longer than predicted, it’s that under the original war aim, we failed. Trump’s original goals were obliterating Iran’s missile capabilities, annihilating its navy, ensuring it never acquires a nuclear weapon, and severing its support for terrorist proxies. Of those, the only one we accomplished was destroying its navy, and that didn’t stop the Iranians from being able to shut off the Strait to commercial traffic.

And of course, when the much-lauded Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) came out, providing a cease fire, I couldn’t believe it; it read like a surrender document; ours.  Just to summarize quickly the worse points of agreement:

4)” … Immediately upon the signing of this MOU, the United States of America will begin the removal of its naval blockade and any disturbances or impediments against the Islamic Republic of Iran and will fully end the naval blockade within 30 days. During this period, the traffic of vessels will be in proportion to the numbers of pre-war traffic being restored by the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States of America further undertakes to remove its forces from the proximity of the Islamic Republic of Iran within 30 days after the final deal.”

So, we’re leaving regardless.

5) “Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge, for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa. The traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start and considering the need for removing the technical and military obstacles, and demining by the Islamic Republic of Iran will be instated within 30 days. The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialog with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz in discussion with other Persian Gulf littoral states in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.”

This must be worst part of the MOU. We are legitimizing Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz.  After the 60 days, they can…do what ever they want?  Charge big bucks for every ship crossing the strait?  This will create a very bad precedent for the world and international trade in general. If allowed to stand, the war will leave the world in a much worse place than before the war, and grant terrorist state Iran a massive financial boon.

6) “The United States of America undertakes with regional partners to develop a definitive, mutually agreed plan with at least USD 300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The mechanism for the implementation of this plan will be finalized as part of a final deal within 60 days. All required licenses, waivers and permissions needed for the relevant financial transactions will be granted by the United States of America.”

Yes, I know, we’re not actually ponying up the 300 billion, but we are allowing and facilitating it.  Before this, Iran was totally cut off from the international banking system.  Now it will have access to credit.  That’s a lot of weapons it can buy for its terrorist proxy groups.

7) “The United States of America undertakes to terminate all types of sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the United Nations Security Council resolutions, IAEA Board of Governors resolutions, and all unilateral US sanctions, primary and secondary, in an agreed upon schedule as part of the final deal.”

Sanctions relief too.  Obama couldn’t have given away this much to Iran as Trump is trying to do.

8) “The Islamic Republic of Iran reaffirms that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran have agreed to resolve the disposition of stockpiled enriched material pursuant to a mechanism that will be mutually agreed upon in accordance with the schedule mentioned in paragraph seven, with the minimum methodology to be down blended on site under the supervision of the IAEA.”

Big deal.  Iran has been promising to not develop nuclear weapons for as long as they’ve been attempting to develop nuclear weapons.  And the “down blended” enriched uranium will never happen.  That will be so far in the future that when Iran reneges, it will barely warrant a news article here, and of course there is no enforcement mechanism.

10) “The United States of America undertakes that immediately upon the signing of this MOU and until the termination of sanctions, US Department of Treasury will issue waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum products and derivatives, and all associated services, including banking transactions, insurances, transportation, etc.”

Yes, we’re helping Iran get back in the oil business allowing Iran to export oil legally to whoever it wants.

11) “The United States of America undertakes to make fully available for use the frozen or restricted funds and assets of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon the implementation of this MOU. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran will mutually agree on the procedures related to the release of these funds during negotiations. Such funds, whether retained in the original account or transferred, shall be made fully usable for payment to any ultimate beneficiary designated by the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States of America undertakes to issue all necessary licenses and authorizations accordingly.”

This reads to me that Iran gets all its frozen funds back, some of which has been frozen since the hostage crisis.

So, what did the US get out of this?

A humiliating defeat.  Not on the battlefield, but the US is continuing its long experience with winning all the battles and losing the war.  And now, the threat of US military action against Iran is no longer much of a threat.  We gave it our best shot, and the regime survived.  Do you think they care a lot less about Trump threats of more bombs now than they did before the war started?  I think we know the answer.

How did we get here?

Based on the news reporting I read from The New York Times and others, early on Trump dismissed the regime change aspect of the military campaign, but the problem is, nothing about the war was going to work without it.  There was never going to be a “deal” with the current Iranian regime.  They are fanatics who can’t be dissuaded from their goals and use negotiations as merely time buying exercises. That’s been the entire history of Iranian “negotiations” for the past 47 years. Trump felt he could negotiate anything, but he can’t; not this.  And unless we are willing to go total war with Iran, meaning a full mobilization and a ground war to fight for territory inch by inch, the regime was not going to be overthrown.

So, the war may not quite be over, but it’s over enough to know we lost.  No final agreement coming out of the MOU is going to be better than what we have, and it’s not a good agreement; it’s a surrender.

The Iranian Consequence

In the two weeks since I had posted my early thoughts on our new Iranian war, which can best be summarized as skeptical but hopeful, certainly, the easy part, blasting Iran to pieces, is something that America can do well.  But what about later on?

If you are hoping for a western style democracy in which Persian Baddies will be hanging out in Tehran nightclubs doing beat poetry and looking to meet Western passport bros, don’t get your hopes up.  The late Shah had expressed a sentiment that was later distilled by Western journalists as Iran is not Switzerland, and Iranians are not Swiss.  The Shah just didn’t see a political structure that could support a western style democracy and his forced march to modernity required, in his mind, a monarchal dictatorship, hence the Shah’s secret police, the SAVAK.

But that period between a little modernity and a lot is tricky, so a coalition of communists and various other degrees of leftists and Shia fundamentalists overthrew the Shah and installed Ayatollah Khomeini, who promptly purged all of his communist and various leftist supporters and established one of the strictest theocracies this side of the 13^th Century.

The country only has a bare 56% majority of Persians, with Azeri’s (14.3%) and Kurds (9.1%) coming in as the next two significant ethnic groups with a smattering of everyone else in the region. Traditionally, ethnic and religious minorities in a collapsing state squabble, and as Iraq shows, they can squabble extremely violently.

The real problem with Iran though is like every other country in the region, it is a kinship culture.  Clans and family relations take precedent of what we think of as communities and national allegiances. Everyone owes their first allegiance to their clan, not their nation which makes making a strong national state difficult.  A post Mullah Iran would likely follow one of three options:

Decentralized, weak, and corrupt: Like Iraq today, having to deal with the loyalties of various clans, Iraq is a weak country depending on a web of corruption to keep everyone from going back to shooting.  It has the form of democracy (but doesn’t everyone?) but isn’t really democratic.

Centralized authoritarian:  This describes the government of the Ayatollahs.  “But that is a theocracy” you say, well theocracy was simply the flavor of the ideology. The ruling power was a centralized clique that ruled with an iron hand and was not afraid to mow down a few thousand protestors to stay in power.

Strong man:  This is very much dependent on their being an able strong man who can rise to power, and with the strength of will, maintain it; like Nasser.  However, this is very much dependent on the right man being able to meet the right place in history. General Qasem Soleimani might have been able to fill that role, but oops, Trump took him out in his first term, and the constant US-Israeli attack on Iranian leadership means if there is such a strong man, he’s way down the list and may not even exist.

All this leads me to say no matter how successful the military aspect of the war, the post war mess that will be Iran will continue for a long time. It possibly will totally derail Trump’s domestic agenda, and when Democrats take back the House on an anti-war sentiment, derail Trump himself. 

Of course, I may be wrong and this wraps up as cleanly as Trump’s other two military adventures have been, leaving the US in a stronger place in the world (particularly against China).

Hopefully I’m wrong.

A President of Consequence

I’ll put myself down as a skeptic on this war on Iran. I didn’t see anything imminent that required immediate military action. However that’s how I felt about the earlier Iranian attack on their nuclear facilities and the nabbing of Maduro. In retrospect, Trump was right about those and I was wrong. That may say more about me being risk adverse in foreign policy than it says anything about Trump, but he pulled aces on both of those operations.

Whether he has another ace to pull out of this operation, or he’s overplayed his hand, is still up in the air. But nothing succeeds like success, so if he manages to pull this off by destroying Iran’s ballistic missile capability (likely), and replacing the current regime with one more interested in being part of the family of nations (far less likely), he’ll go down as one of the most consequential Presidents of the past century.

In his first administration, it seemed like the way he handled policy was by acting crazy, forcing opponents to consider if he would just go nuts and start lobbing nukes. This time, it seems if he has a three strikes policy; he’s happy to negotiate and work things out at the negotiation table, but f around and you will definitely find out.

I think the whole world has finally gotten that message.

When the Kool Kids Support Political Violence

I don’t have a lot to add to the social aftermath of the Charlie Kirk assassination. I tweeted (X’d Zittered whatever) my initial thought.

His facts were no match for someone's feelings. https://t.co/AB3byTxPeK

— Mike Street Station (@MikeStStation) September 10, 2025

But since then, the aftermath has been…garbage.

I wasn’t a particular fan or follower of Charlie Kirk.  But I couldn’t escape his presence, not just on reliable conservative outlets, but the broader culture. He was even parodied on South Park. His politics were strictly normie conservatism. Normie conservatism may seem quite radical these days considering the lurch leftward the culture has taken in the past few years, but his shtick was to go to college campuses and talk and debate, the original “change my mind.”  This provided a lot of social media fodder of a reasonable Charlie Kirk debating campus blue haired lefties and totally befuddling them. Over the years, that turned into a massive social media and cultural presence.

So of course, the left hated him, but they hate everyone who’s not a gender goblin freak, so what’s new?

Well, someone hated him just a bit more than normal, and took him out.  It happens.  Not regularly, and it’s not common, but it does happen. What doesn’t usually happen is the outbreak of joy, happiness, and satisfaction on the part of the left.  The massive social media approval of Kirk’s murder might be unprecedented, although it may have been there all along, waiting for a successful assassination.  Certainly, the two assassination attempts against Trump, if one had been successful, there likely would have led to this sort of social media outburst of joy.

All in all, it resembles the murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, which led to massive social media approval. To me, this shows a trend, maybe a generational one, in which younger people tend to support political violence. Certainly, a collection of polls show that has a greater and greater approval. So, for a certain subset of the country, political violence against your political enemies is normalized.  The comments on Bluesky, a leftist holding pen, show the virulent hatred, including hit lists, of potential next victims.

It’s been noted before, but the entire point of calling your opponents “Fascists,” or “Nazi’s” is to dehumanize them.  That’s the entire point of “punch a Nazi,” which I discussed several years ago. Who exactly is a Nazi?  The other guys.  All of them. So political violence becomes not merely normalized, but acceptable and righteous.

Not every lefty has been posting cheers and celebrations however. Some have decided that they want to keep their jobs, but they have posted comments along the lines of well Kirk said this, and he was quoted saying that, so there. That’s almost just as bad. He said things I don’t like so…look what happens.

Message received.

You simply can’t have the politics of a third world shithole and also have a modern pluralistic democracy.  You have to choose one, and unfortunately the left has already chosen for all of us.

The Big Beautiful Bungled Opportunity

Well after a long slog through the sclerotic institutions, the “Big Beautiful Bill” finally passed, ending the suspense of a bill that was going to pass in some version or another anyway. But we had all of the drama of a CW show, with pretend nail biters like the end of Senator Thom Tillis’ career, and the snore inducing filibuster by Hakeem Jefferies.
I was never a fan. I oppose gigantic omnibus type bills on principle. The principle being that if you are trying to cram everything into an everything bill, you intend to cram stuff in that would never pass on its own, and that you don’t want me to know what’s in it. Gigantic big bills seem inherently corrupt to me.
On the plus side, I do appreciate all of the money going into border and immigration related activities. Under this President, that means deportations on a massive scale, so I am happy about that. That’s change I can believe in. On the negative side, one of my pet peeves, the SALT Tax deduction, was raised from 10,000 to 40,000. If you want to talk about a tax cut for the rich, there it is. If you don’t know, the SALT deduction allows you to deduct your state and local taxes from your Federal Income taxes. It’s literally a tax cut for high income earners in high tax States. Things could be worse however. Before Trump’s 2017 Tax Bill, the SALT Deduction was unlimited; a totally crazy give away to Blue State rich people who opposed that tax bill (and this one). Still, politics is the art of the possible, so at least there is some limit.
My real problem with the bill is that Trump and the GOP totally bungled a massive political opportunity by making the individual income tax rates permanent. This isn’t a new tax cut, just a continuation of the 2017 tax rates. But all of the blame for the addition of the 3.3 trillion deficit (over 10 years) falls on Republicans. So now that the tax cuts are permanent, now what? Are Republicans still going to be running on cutting taxes when their base will barely be paying any?
Here is what should have happened; they should have only extended the 2017 individual tax cuts for 3 years. That accomplishes two things;
It dramatically cuts the “deficit” projected by the CBO. The stupid fights with Rand Paul and Thomas Massie on adding to the deficit could have been totally avoided. Plus, it would have taken away the massive deficit talking point that Democrats have run with (as if now I’m supposed to believe that Democrats care about deficits).
It provides an issue to run on for 2028, and if the Republicans lose, a way to stick Democrats with a massive tax increase under their governance. That makes the 2028 election about your taxes going up of Democrats win. Instead, with the tax cuts now permanent, Republican cries of “but muh taxes” will fall on deaf ears. Then you’ll find out that Democrats can easily live with those deficits after all.

Predictions in the Black Swan Era

In the years that I’ve been doing predictions, political and otherwise, on this blog, I’ve had a fairly decent track record; certainly, better than your average New York Times Opinion columnist, but humility comes for us all, and my one prediction for the new year, that Trump would not become President, went down in flames.

Not that I’m sad about it, far from it.  I’m loving the New Trump World Order, and can’t wait to see what happens next since it’s apparently beyond my powers of prediction. My predictive powers were no match for the Black Swan Event that is Donald Trump.  As mentioned in my previous post, I figure that we now reside in the least likely timeline; one where Trump “lost” the 2020 election (when it’s odd that he even won the first time) and then wins again in 2024, and proceeds to out-conservative every previous “conservative” President.

See?  The least likely timeline.

But some people are not giving up on the Prediction game.  Nate Silver was a lefty golden boy for a while, loving his predictions as long as they showed Democrats winning, and becoming a pariah when they didn’t. Pro tip to Democratic pollsters, give the people what they want, even if it turns out totally wrong.  Who can forget the excitement the media had over the Iowa poll showing Harris leading 47% to 44%? Amidst all the praise for pollster J. Ann Selzer, she blew it big time. Still, she gave the people what they wanted and promptly retired after the election.

So here’s Nat Silver presenting his post-election,  113 predictions for Trump’s second term. Being too cheap to actually subscribe to his substack (substack? How the mighty have fallen) I only saw 8, but they are instructive.  Rather than simply saying “I predict this” Silver establishes a probability to each prediction, allowing him to have totally opposite prediction.  You literally can’t lose with that. I may have to steal it…

So let’s look at Kreskin’s Silver’s top 8 elections.

Number One: Democrats win the House in the 2026 midterms. Probability 85%

On the one hand, this seems the easiest election to make.  Republicans are hanging on by a thread, and generally the President’s party loses seats in the mid-terms, so you don’t need fancy calculations to make that conclusion.  However, the Democrats seem totally unable to put together any winning message, or any message at all.  Right now the average person could be forgiven if they think the Democrats mainly stand for stopping the deportation of pro-terrorist non-citizens and keeping illegals in criminal gangs in the country.  That’s not a winning message.  It could change, but right now I would put the probability at 50%

Number Two: Democrats take control of the House before the 2026 midterms through special elections or party switches. Probability 10%.

I think the odds might be even higher. Last week President Trump removed Elise Stefanik from nomination as the US ambassador to the UN because the House currently has a two-seat majority; razor thin.  probability is 40%.

Number Tree: Democrats win the Senate in 2026. Probability 15%.

Nah.  1%.

Number Four: Democrats win the presidency in 2028. Probability 55%.

I actually think this is about right.  Conventional wisdom has it that Covid killed Trump’s chance for a consecutive second term, but a lot of regular people were just tired of the antics, the crazy statements that would run for two or three days on the news cycle only to be replaced by the next set of crazy statements, and the shear speed of the news.  Every day it was something. Even with a successful second term people will be exhausted (not me I love it).  Unlike his first term however, he faces a far more weakened news media environment; he more or less beat them. So, I’ll match Silver with a 55% probability.

Number Five: Democrats win a trifecta (House + Senate + POTUS) in 2028. Probability 40%

All three? I mean, it’s early so there is no telling but I would go lower, 20%

Number Six: Mike Johnson remains Speaker of the House through 11/3/2026. Probability 60%

I think Johnson is hanging on by a thread. Sure, there is no obvious successor, but then there wasn’t one when Kevin McCarthy was deposed either. I think the challenges are really going to put a strain on his speakership.   I would say the probability is closer to 40%.

Number Seven: At least one new Supreme Court vacancy in the 119th or 120th Congress. Probability 85%

Silver has a point here. Thomas and Alito are old and are unlikely to survive past a possible post Trump Democratic President. The smart move for both of these Justices would be to retire sometime during the Trump presidency to get replacement judges to lock in their gains. However virtually no Supreme Court Justice has ever thought this way. RBG was stricken with cancer when the Obama administration begged her to retire. Nope. She wouldn’t do it. Ego Uber Alles. Probability 35%

Number Eight: A third party is a significant factor (>=15% or more of the popular vote at any point after Labor Day) in the 2028 race. Probability 20%

This is more about Silver’s leftism than any real possibility of a third party doing that well in the 2028 race. There is a struggle going on between the pre-woke era Democrats (think Bill Maher) and the current wokesters who are running the party. The Republicans are mostly united behind Trump and there isn’t really room for their few (but in powerful positions) anti Trump politicos.  In either case there doesn’t seem to be much of a chance for a new movement to break through by 2028. Probability 1%.

I’ll come back to this at a later date to see how Silver and I compare and stack up.

We’re in the Least Likely Timeline

I think that we now reside in the least likely timeline.  If you think about it, how likely are the following events?  First of all; Trump.  Trump running in 2016 and actually winning. Trump then “lost” the 2020 election, was charged in multiple States for multiple Lawfare crimes with the full force and support of every major institution in the country, with the intent to put him in jail for the rest of his life, had two assassination attempts against him during the campaign, with one coming within a millimeter of taking his life  and… he beats them all, wins the Presidency with both the electoral and popular vote, becomes President (again) and has an absolutely stunning couple of weeks and making more conservative changes to the government than all the GOP Presidents since Reagan put together.

See?  The least likely timeline.

None of this seems “normal.”  Normal of course not being so easy to define since there are multiple moments in history when unlikely events have made it clear that we’re leaving an old age and entering a new one.   However, my view of normal goes like this:

It’s 2015 and Donald Trump decides promoting the next season of The Apprentice is more important than a quixotic quest for the Presidency.  He continues to be a beloved celebrity and public figure instead of being hated by much of the planet. Jeb(!) Bush, the most prepared Presidential candidate in the history of forever, uses his 100 million dollars to purchase win the Republican nomination.  His only serious competition is Ted Cruz; the conservative alternative, who bends the knee at the convention. Meanwhile Hillary Clinton of course wins her nomination.

Hillary wins the election of course, but Jeb makes such a moving and touching conciliation speech that even the mainstream media say it was a good speech, “if only this guy had showed up during the campaign!”  Jeb disappears into the mist of elder GOP statesmen with a solid record of losing to burnish their credentials.  

By the time 2020 rolls around, we’re in the middle of Covid so all of the voting rules again mean there are no rules.  The Republican nominee, Ted Cruz, is mired in a DNC lawsuit that makes the claim that he, being born in Canada, is not a “natural born citizen” and thus is ineligible to be President.  Naturally nothing was said about this until the day after Cruz won the nomination.  So, Hillary wins again!

By the time the 2024 rolls around, it doesn’t really matter who the Republican candidate is, since without the pushing of the Overton Window that occurred with Trump, Republicans are where they are most comfortable, being the me-too party, only not as much.  The political struggle over Hillary’s amnesty bill isn’t about having it, but how many, and what are the requirements.

Everything I wrote about a non-Trump Timeline seems like the path we were heading on until Trump came down the escalator and totally upended history.  Through most of my life, I’ve been a skeptic of The Great Man theory of history; assuming that human nature is the lash driving the rise and fall of powers.  In a general sense, that does seem the natural flow of history.

But then a great man shows up, yells “fight, fight, fight!” and I’ve no idea where we’re going.

Second Chances

Whew…looks like I was wrong and Trump actually became President.  The Inauguration is in the bag. As I reiterated here and here, my big single prediction for the year was that no matter what happened with the Presidential election, Trump would not be President.

Oops.

Of course I’m glad to be wrong on that. I had listed all of the shenanigans that could have taken place even with a Trump win.  Instead, no shenanigans took place, even with the most obvious place for it, the certification of the election by the House.  That turned out to be a mostly calm process, with no disputes on the validity of any electoral votes; the first time since 1988.

And now, with the swearing in taking place, it’s real.  Trump became President…again.  Although not unprecedented it’s so rare that this is only the second time in US history that a President has lost a reelection and then ran again and won.  So strange times.  Trump will be busy with an initial flurry of executive orders on the border, pardons for J6’ers and much else.  However, the democrats have inflicted massive damage to the country in the meantime and some are unlikely to be fixed.  It’s peak irony that Joe Biden leaves a far more authoritarian America for Trump to inherit.

Just a few examples of some of the ways that the country has gotten more authoritarian over the past year.

Biden DHS docs suggested Trump supporters, military and religious people are likely violent terror threats

A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) advisory board suggested that supporters of former President Donald Trump – as well as those who served in the military or are religious – have a greater possibility of posing domestic terrorism risks, according to internal files obtained by America First Legal (AFL).

What a coincidence that the ruling party’s political enemies wind up as a domestic terrorism threat!  What are the odds?

FBI Arrests Journalist Steve Baker Over His January 6 Coverage

An investigative journalist for TheBlaze who has extensively covered the FBI’s handling of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol protest and incursion was arrested Friday and charged with multiple alleged crimes.

The outlet reported Friday that reporter Steve Baker was charged with four misdemeanors that were related to the coverage of the events of that day.

Breaking, FBI arrests reporter for coverage; the end.

Amazon Bowed to White House Pressure to Suppress Books Skeptical of COVID-19 Vaccines

Amazon yielded to pressure from President Joe Biden’s White House to suppress books that opposed COVID-19 vaccines, according to documents reviewed by The Daily Signal.

The House Judiciary Committee obtained the emails, which demonstrate the White House’s pressure on Amazon to suppress “anti-vax books” and the company’s decision to take action against the books.

Old news, but the fact that the government tried to suppress books should still be big news.

Bombshell Report Exposes Feds’ Targeting Of ‘MAGA’ And ‘Trump’ On Bank Transactions  

The House Judiciary Committee obtained the emails, which demonstrate the White House’s pressure on Amazon to suppress “anti-vax books” and the company’s decision to take action against the books.

And of course, Biden’s out the door attempt to single handedly amend the constitution on its own.

That’s Not How Constitutional Amendments Work

This morning, Biden declared on X that “the Equal Rights Amendment is now the law of the land.” Well, there you have it: The Constitution has a 28th amendment, and women’s rights have been enshrined across the country.

Or not. Biden can’t change the Constitution, because the Constitution doesn’t allow him to.

Breaking news to the guy with 50 years’ experience in government, but you can’t tweet a new constitutional amendment.

Trump of course won’t be able to get away with any of this stuff.  But now that the administrative state has stretched its legs, I’m not sure things will stamp back.

But that’s for later.  Right now, I’m just enjoying that I was wrong.

Slouching Towards Terrorism

The murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson has kicked up a hornet’s nest of darkness in America’s id. On the one hand, the female adoration of a murderer is one of the least surprising things being exposed.  No surprise that the sex that writes love letters to murderers in prison and are the primary consumers of the True Crime genre would go gaga for the Unibrowbomber, Luigi Mangione.  Unlike your usual class of loser, therefore unappealing murderer, Mangione is educated and from a wealthy family.  Is the guy good looking?  I’m no woman whisperer, but I suspect if they guy showed up at your house with his name embroidered on his shirt to fix the plumbing; no.  But put the same guy In an orange jumpsuit after being excused of killing the CEO of a company in an unpopular industry and he’s practically a rock star.

But that’s simply human nature.  What’s more disturbing is the deterioration of our culture.  This cold-blooded murder has turned out to be very popular.  Besides being a sex symbol, he’s also becoming a folk hero as well.  Spiked took the view hidden guilty thoughts, were once hidden, but now, due to social media, are displayed for all to see. 

But does that explain Senator Warren’s excuse for murder?

“The visceral response from people across the country who feel cheated, ripped off, and threatened by the vile practices of their insurance companies should be a warning to everyone in the healthcare system,” Warren said, pointing to the outcrying of support from people online in support of Luigi Mangione, who is a suspect in the killing.

“Violence is never the answer,” Warren added. “But people can only be pushed so far.”

In a statement to POLITICO after this report published Wednesday, Warren said, “Violence is never the answer. Period. I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.”

Well, I’m glad she cleared that up.  Violence is never the answer unless you push people too far.  Then watch out!

More disturbing than one senator is The Hill reporting on polling about the murder.

A poll found 41 percent of adults under 30 consider the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson acceptable, more than the 40 percent in that demographic who consider it unacceptable.

Anger over health insurance companies has been in the spotlight after Thompson was fatally shot Dec. 4 in New York City.

Luigi Mangione, a 26-year-old, was arrested last week in Pennsylvania and faces charges in Thompson’s killing.

The survey from Emerson College Polling found 68 percent of all respondents found the actions of the person who shot and killed Thompson unacceptable.

But a startling 24 percent of those aged 18-29 found it “somewhat acceptable,” and 17 percent of that group found it completely acceptable.

Since Thompson was shot, first in the back and then again as he fell to the ground, a number of social media posts from people saying they do not have sympathy for his death have gained popularity.

Spencer Kimball, the executive director of Emerson College Polling, said 22 percent of Democrats said they found the killing acceptable, compared to 16 percent of independents and 12 percent of Republicans. He said the overall findings underscored “shifting societal attitudes among the youngest electorate and within party lines.”

Shifting societal attitudes indeed.  Shifting to a much coarser society it appears that sees terrorism as the stuff of hot folkheros.

Oh, just one more thing.  On last night’s Saturday Night Live, during the weekend update when Mangione was mentioned, the audience cheered.