When Everything Is Fascism, Nothing Is

 From Unlicensed Punditry:

If I hear that America is sliding into fascism one more time, I’m going to puke.

Maybe I’m just hopelessly old-fashioned, but I still believe words are supposed to mean things. Fascism is a real thing. It has a history, an ideology, identifiable characteristics and some exceptionally ugly examples from the twentieth century. It does not simply mean that the president said something obnoxious, enforced a law you dislike, criticized a newspaper, deported someone, imposed a tariff, fired a bureaucrat or exercised an executive power differently than the last guy did.

Yet here we are.

“Fascism” has become less a political classification than a particularly nasty synonym for “authoritarian,” and authoritarian increasingly means “someone on the other political team using government power in a way I don’t like.”

When everything is fascism, nothing is.

That is not an argument that fascism is meaningless. Quite the opposite. It is an argument that a useful word has been abused to the point that its use in contemporary American politics often tells us more about the person saying it than the person being described. (Read more.)

Share

The Man Who Poisoned the World

 From Welcome to Absurdistan:

Man, Wednesday was satisfying. You know Fauci was repeating to himself, these doofuses won’t get anywhere near the real crime, I just have to endure this, and the DC judiciary will prevent me going to jail. They can needle at me but nothing will happen, I’m good, keep repeating the noble lie, the noble lie, the noble lie. I am Dr. Science. I will be remembered as the Great Man of the Trump Era. I’m good. Noble lie. 

 It’s who these people are and what they do. They believe themselves to be our natural leaders and we the proles who are dumb as rocks and need their guidance. “What is truth?” they say. It’s rhetorical. “Whatever I say is truth is truth”, they answer. The Science is whatever I say it is. White supremacy is the real evil. Men can have periods and babies, the only thing holding back people of color is prejudice not incapacity and culture. Climate change is catastrophic. We have to cap and pay and pay and pay. The Sixth Great Extinction is happening before our eyes. No other truth is allowed. Oh yeah, and whites are evil. White Anglo males are the locus of pure evil.

Yeah, we believe nothing, buster. Nothing. ‘The Science’ is dead. Trust in public institutions, especially health, is dead. We don’t believe NOAA, we don’t believe the United Nations. We know the World Economic Forum is filled with extractive demons. The rules-based order was created with our money and is also garbage. All the institutions are filled with unethical success-heads who would do anything to keep their jobs. No one is noble. Everyone is corrupt. The Senate is corrupt. The Judiciary is corrupt. The Democrats are corrupt. The Socials are fully corrupt. The Science is whatever you need to prosecute your perverse plans.

Luckily, there is the rough justice of nature. (Read more.)

 

From The Enterprise:

On July 29th, Anthony Fauci sat in a Senate hearing room, surrounded by lawyers, and invoked his Fifth Amendment right 111 times. He had been subpoenaed by Senator Rand Paul, who two days earlier had released 1,141 pages of Fauci’s pandemic diaries. The man who spent three years telling Americans that questioning him was questioning science declined to answer questions about what he had done. That image is arresting on its own. But it does not explain anything, and explanation is what has been missing.

Consider the strange shape of the Fauci controversy. For five years, investigators have accumulated an enormous quantity of material. There are grant documents, emails, inspector general findings, congressional depositions, failed predictions, guidance that reversed itself without acknowledgment, and evidence of pressure on dissenting scientists. What there has not been is a coherent account of why. Critics have generally settled for one of two stories, neither satisfying. Either Fauci was an ordinary bureaucrat who made ordinary errors under pressure, which fails to explain the pattern in those errors, or he was a cartoon villain executing a plot, which fails because no document shows anyone planning anything of the kind. Jeffrey Tucker has now supplied the missing piece, and it is worth understanding why his account deserves attention.

Tucker is not a newcomer to this subject. He is the founder and president of the Brownstone Institute, a research organization he established in 2021 specifically to document the consequences of pandemic policy. Before that, he spent decades in economics publishing, working closely with Murray Rothbard, running the Mises Institute’s book program, and writing for the Epoch Times. In 2020, he helped organize the signing of the Great Barrington Declaration at the American Institute for Economic Research, which put him in the room with the scientists Fauci’s circle set out to destroy. He has ten books to his name. More to the point, he spent nearly a full week reading all 1,141 pages of the diaries before writing about them, which is more than most commentators managed, and it shows. (Read more.)

Share

Zohran Mamdani's Five Government Grocery Stores

 From The Enterprise:

Consider a model home. A builder puts up 200 houses in a new subdivision and finishes exactly one of them to perfection, with good countertops, landscaping, furniture staged by a professional, and lightbulbs all matching. Nothing about that house is fake. You can walk through it, open the cabinets, stand in the shower. The deception, if there is one, lies entirely in the inference the builder wants you to draw, namely that the other 199 houses will be like this one. The model home is real and unrepresentative at the same time, and those two properties are not in tension. They are the whole point.

New York City is building five model homes and calling them grocery stores. Conservatives should understand this before the ribbon is cut, because most of us are preparing to fight the wrong battle. The standard right-of-center prediction is that municipal groceries will produce surly clerks, bare shelves, rotting produce, and a quiet bankruptcy two years in. That prediction is reasonable if you look at Baldwin, Florida, which absorbed its town grocery in 2019 and gave up in 2024, or at Kansas City, which spent roughly $17 million on Sun Fresh Market and watched it close in August of 2025 after stretches of empty shelving and security problems. Those cases are instructive. They are also, I think, about to become a trap.

David Friedberg said as much on the All-In Podcast, and the remark deserves more attention than it received. His warning was that the stores would not fail in the visible way conservatives expect, and would instead “create an incredible success story for socialism,” complete with flattering coverage, contented employees, and demands that other cities copy the model. He was right, and the reason he was right is written into the city’s own procurement documents. New York has studied the American failure cases and designed around every one of them. (Read more.)

Share

Dictators for Life

From Tierney's Real News:

For the past decade, the fake news and liberals in America have been proclaiming that President Trump is trying to be a dictator for life, a King that can never be removed. That is a lie. That is BS propaganda from our enemies. The truth is that the REAL dictators are on the left and part of the Islamo-Communist Red-Green axis and this newsletter will PROVE that.

On Sunday night, in Nicaragua, Communist President Daniel Ortega stood in front of thousands of Sandinista loyalists at the 47th anniversary of the 1979 revolution and said what everyone already knew was true: there will be no more elections in Nicaragua. He finally admitted out loud that Nicaragua is a Communist dictatorship!

 “There won’t be any more elections here for them to try to seize the government and seize power. The days when parties backed by the Yankees and the Somocistas would return to power are over — never again.” (Read more.)

Share

Has Hitler’s Order for the Holocaust Been Discovered?

 From It Can Always Get Worse:

To summarise briefly: why the Holocaust happened is straightforward—because Adolf Hitler wished it to—but how and when the decision was taken is debated. The debate turns largely on whether there was a Führer Order for the Holocaust. While no such document has ever been found, this is not surprising. There was extensive destruction of Nazi documentation, and Hitler routinely conveyed orders verbally anyway, so, if there was a Führer Order, it was almost certainly never written down in the first place. Accentuating the difficulties, the surviving records are written according to a euphemistic official Nazi discourse that leaves room for interpretation, and Hitler—like Lenin—deliberately cultivated uncertainty within the regime about his role in the worst crimes.1

Historians are broadly divided into two camps, those who argue for a moment between July and December 1941 when a Führer Order was issued, and those who argue there was no “moment”, but rather an iterative process between Hitler at the centre and various lower officials in the occupied territories, where the Führer endorsed, rather than originated, the escalatory steps of the Shoah.

In assessing the evidence historians are working with in coming to these divergent conclusions, one aspect I highlighted was:

SS operatives involved in implementing the Final Solution … have uniformly testified that their orders came directly from Hitler. There is no reason to doubt the SS men were substantially correct, that Hitler stood behind the fundamental decision for the Holocaust and every decision of significance as it escalated. But it does not settle the question of a Führer Order because none of the SS officials heard Hitler’s verbal instruction(s) personally; they all heard of Hitler’s will through [Heinrich] Himmler. And Himmler did not specify to his subordinates whether, during his increasingly frequent face-to-face meetings with Hitler from the summer of 1941 onwards, the Führer had approved or initiated genocidal measures. (Read more.)

 

Will there be another genocide? From Welcome to Absurdistan:

Fourteen years ago I published a book one chapter of which entirely dealt with the forests fires curently raging across Canada choking the lungs of Americans from Maine to Chicago. It was published by Harper Collins in New York, and received a good old fashioned push by their PR department.

I woke up at 4 am to get on drive time in Texas and Atlanta. I must have spoken to 30 million people - in theory - the PR kept me up on the numbers each radio host had, I spoke to the big names, including the sainted Dennis Prager which pleased HC no end. In each interview I hit the major highlight of the book - the most shocking crime against people and nature - outlining how “natural regulation” installed by the UN FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) had made the forests thick, desiccated: visualize a whole bunch of unthinned little trees leaching all the water from the soil, fire ladders growing up the trees, just waiting for a lightning strike or stupid “activist” kid to trigger conflagration.

All over the world, these policies, these regulations had been forced in a series of iniquitous meetings where entire nations were placed under the rule of weedy, stupid, vicious idiots who called themselves “scientists” employed in Turtle Bay, who had, courtesy of the Rockefellers and a bunch of other malignant families - basically the ones holding the debt of the New York Federal Reserve - crowned themselves Lords of Nature. And, as I began to understand, planned to take it all from us. (Read more.)

Share

Catherine Herridge Uncovers Shocking Revelations About The Biden Family

 From Zero Hedge:

Herridge, a veteran Emmy-winning investigative reporter, has previously pursued stories on the Hunter Biden laptop, the Biden family's foreign business dealings, and related corruption allegations - reporting that put her at odds with CBS leadership and the broader media consensus.

In February 2024 she was among those laid off in a round of cuts. CBS then seized her reporting files, including materials involving confidential sources. Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, Herridge described the seizure in stark terms: "When my records were seized I felt it was a journalistic rape."

She added that "CBS News' decision to seize my reporting records crossed a red line that I believe should never be crossed by any media organization" and that "When the network of Walter Cronkite seizes your reporting files, including confidential source information, that is an attack on investigative journalism."

She has maintained that she simply "reported out the facts of the story. I called balls and strikes." The network eventually returned the files under pressure from the House Judiciary Committee and her union.

Earlier, during the 2020 campaign, the Biden team had already labeled her a "partisan, rightwing hack." Her treatment fits a pattern of institutional pushback against journalists who refused to look away from the Biden family's financial ties.

Those ties have been documented for years. House Oversight Committee investigations, led by Chairman James Comer, obtained bank records and witness accounts showing Chinese Communist Party-linked money flowing to Biden family members.

Comer stated that the documents demonstrated the family had received funds from CCP-connected entities and that family members "attempted to sell access & influence around the world." (Read more.)

Share

Persecution: Dems Target Christians Again

 From The Western Journal:

Roman Catholic nuns are engaged in a legal battle with New York over a state law encouraging terminally ill patients to end their lives. Becket, a law firm that tackles cases of religious freedom, filed suit last Friday. The group is asking a federal court to block the law before it goes into effect Aug. 5. Just The News said the groups represented in the suit are numerous: Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm, Little Sisters of the Poor, the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne, Missionary Sisters of St. Benedict, Diocese of Rockville Centre and its Bishop John Barres, and other orders.

The outlet noted the law in question is the New York Medical Aid in Dying Act.

A short description of the law describes it as a way for “a terminally ill, mentally capable adult with a prognosis of 6 months or less to live to have the option to request, obtain and decide to ingest medication to die peacefully in their sleep if suffering is unbearable.”

Becket said the groups it represents cannot prescribe suicide drugs in accordance with their faith, nor can they direct patients in how to obtain them or facilitate a suicide in any way. Becket argued the law will require them to do so.

“Beginning August 5, any healthcare provider who declines to prescribe suicide pills could still have to tell terminally ill patients about their ‘right’ to kill themselves, help them meet the requirements for obtaining suicide pills, and direct them to a provider willing to prescribe the lethal drugs. Refusal invites significant fines, license revocation, or even time behind bars. (Read more.)

Share

The Sin of Cultural Misrepresentation Does Not Apply to Western Culture

 From Chronicles:

If any proof is needed to show that the entire progressive edifice is nothing but a strategically deployed façade designed to subvert Western culture, one needn’t look very far to find it. Still, a recent article published in Variety goes out of its way to demonstrate it. 

The piece focuses on Disney’s new live-action version of the children’s story Moana. The original 2016 animated film is a classic hero’s journey—and notably, it’s one of the few modern Disney movies that didn’t give in to the prevailing trope of treating its female lead like a girl boss to demonstrate that she is, thereby, worthy of the audience’s respect. But instead of just letting a great Polynesian story remain a compelling adventure on its own terms, Disney treats the culture the original film depicted like it’s too fragile to exist in a live-action version without the intervention of DEI box-ticking commissars. 

Instead of art, we now get identitarian policing. Experts like Dr. Grant Muãgututi’a were brought in to micromanage every piece of minutiae—from the scenery, communication, and dance moves to Moana’s specific mannerisms and traditional Mãori tribal tattoos. Everything had to be vetted—in Muãgututi’a’s words—“to ensure the tradition of respect within the culture was accurately reflected.”

Now, I have no problem with minority actors being cast in roles that authentically represent their backgrounds. We’ve come a long way, and I think we can all agree that it was ridiculous—and, admittedly, pretty hilarious—it was to see Sean Connery “Japanified” in his James Bond role or Fisher Stevens affect an exaggerated Indian accent in Short Circuit. 

But for the past decade, the Western canon has been at the mercy of revisionists and ideologues who would rather shoehorn identity politics into these stories than create anything original. This has led to the relentless race-swapping of established historical and mythological characters—yet this progressive obsession with “representation” only ever seems to flow in one direction. (Read more.)

Share

Best Picture No Longer Means Best

 From The Enterprise:

Christopher Nolan may have made The Odyssey to adapt Homer, but Universal also had to make it for the Academy’s confidential diversity, equity, and inclusion spreadsheet. Before the Academy will even consider a 2026 film for Best Picture, the studio must document compliance with it’s identity-based standards covering race, sex, and gender identity of the actors, crew members, interns and even executives. Nolan’s cast contains many excellent performers. But under the Academy’s rules, excellence alone is no longer the measure, and that changes how we should read every casting announcement coming out of Hollywood, including this one.

Start with what the rules actually say, because most moviegoers have no idea they exist. Since 2024, a film cannot compete for Best Picture unless its distributor submits a confidential Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry form, known as the RAISE form, and demonstrates compliance with 2 of 4 standards. Standard A concerns what appears on screen. It can be satisfied if at least one lead or significant supporting actor submitted for Oscar consideration belongs to an Academy-approved list of racial and ethnic groups, or if at least 30% of secondary and minor actors come from at least two categories that include women, racial minorities, LGBTQ+ people and people with disabilities, or if the story itself centers on one of those groups. Standard B counts the crew, requiring qualifying department heads, or at least six technical workers from designated racial groups, or a 30% overall crew threshold. Standard C counts paid interns and apprentices from the designated groups. Standard D counts senior marketing and distribution executives by race, sex and sexual orientation. Of course, none of standards give a picture any credit for hiring white men - they are specifically excluded.

Notice what this is. It is not a mission statement or an aspiration. It is a numerical eligibility gate, with thresholds, categories and a filing deadline. For films released between July and December of 2026, the RAISE form is due November 12, 2026 at 5 p.m. Pacific. The form is confidential. The Academy knows which demographic evidence each studio claims. You do not, and you never will. (Read more.)

Share

Spying and Lying

 From Sharyl's Substack:

The news that Special Counsel Jack Smith spied on Congress and then lied about it should be of no surprise.

It’s far from the first time something like that has happened.

And since nobody has been held accountable in the past in any meaningful way, why would anybody expect the behavior to stop? Why wouldn’t the abuses expand?

The same could be said after the forensically proven government spying on me and my family. I was an investigative correspondent at CBS News at the time. The Department of Justice has defended the improper spying against me, in court. under Obama, Trump, and Biden—rather than holding the guilty parties accountable.

Let’s look at an early scandal that left the guilty officials unscathed and foreshadowed more to come.

In March 2013, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper gave false information under oath before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) asked him directly: “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Clapper replied: “No, sir… Not wittingly.”

This was untrue. We didn’t know it at the time but the National Security Agency (NSA) was secretly collecting massive amounts of telephone metadata, records of who called whom, when, and for how long, on tens of millions of Americans through the Section 215 program, along with other bulk surveillance programs. (Read more.)

Share

Limited-purpose Libel

 From Mark Judge at The New Criterion:

To understand the negative effects of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the 1964 Supreme Court case that changed American libel laws, consider the example of David Enrich. An investigative reporter for The New York Times who participated in the paper’s smear campaign against Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, Enrich is the author of Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful (2025), a book that defends the press and, specifically, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. Though Enrich has expressed regret for his own sloppy and malevolent reporting, it is protected by the very legal victories he celebrates in his own book.

The events of the case began in 1960 when The New York Times published a political advertisement critical of Southern opposition to desegregation that condemned the Montgomery police force but also contained inaccuracies. This led L. B. Sullivan, the Montgomery police commissioner, to sue the Times for libel. Sullivan prevailed in the trial court and won the appeal in the Supreme Court of Alabama. The Times then appealed to the Supreme Court. In an opinion authored by Justice William Brennan, the Court reversed the lower-court decisions: to be guilty of libel, a media outlet had to be guilty of “actual malice.”

Insight into the case is provided by Carson Holloway, a professor of political science at the University of Nebraska, in his new book No Liberty to Libel: The Constitutional Case Against New York Times v. Sullivan, published by Encounter Books. (Editor’s note: The New Criterion and Encounter Books are both published by Roger Kimball.) As Holloway describes it, 

“Actual malice” here carried a specific, technical meaning—that the allegedly defamatory claims had been published with knowledge of their falsity, or at least with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity. To win damages in a libel action, the Court held, plaintiffs who were public officials would have to show not only that they had been defamed by a false publication, but also that the falsehood had been published knowingly or recklessly. This new standard gave the press (and others) what the Court believed was the constitutionally required breathing room to discuss vital public issues without undue fear of incurring large damage awards for erroneous publications—with the admitted side effect that some public officials who had actually suffered reputational damage from false reports would be unable to secure legal redress for their injuries.

In the years after Sullivan, Holloway notes, “additional rulings proceeded further down the trail blazed by the Sullivan Court, extending the ‘actual malice’ requirement to cases involving not only public officials but also ‘public figures.’” In 1967, the Supreme Court found in both Curtis Publishing Company v. Butts and Associated Press v. Walker that the actual-malice rule should apply not only to libel cases brought by public officials but also to those brought by all public figures—entertainers, professional athletes, musicians, business leaders, or university presidents. “Many who do not hold public office at the moment are nevertheless intimately involved in the resolution of important public questions,” Chief Justice Warren wrote in his decision on Curtis Publishing Company v. Butts. He continued, “our citizenry has a legitimate and substantial interest in the conduct of such persons, and freedom of the press to engage in uninhibited debate about their involvement in public issues and events is as crucial as it is in the case of ‘public officials.’” (Read more.)

Share

Why We’re Dismantling the ICC

 From U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio:

Most of us would struggle to imagine a world in which U.S. soldiers, police officers, Border Patrol agents and elected leaders could be dragged before an international court, tried by judges from random countries across the globe, found guilty under international laws we neither consent to nor control, and then imprisoned thousands of miles from America.

But that is what the International Criminal Court now claims the power to do.

The ICC was born at the turn of the century. At first, it was marketed as a narrow backstop to prosecute the gravest crimes. Now the ICC and its allies seek a standing world tribunal with near-unlimited reach, empowered to override the courts and constitutions of the U.S. and other sovereign states—and to prosecute and arrest our citizens. (Read more.)

Share

The 400,000 USAID Deaths

 From DataRepublican:

South Sudan’s independence was the product of a twenty-year American political project that united four constituencies who agreed on nothing else. Evangelicals found Christians enslaved by an Islamist government; Francis Bok, captured at age seven, became the first formerly enslaved person to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The Congressional Black Caucus found Arab militias enslaving Black Africans; the apartheid divestment playbook was redeployed against Talisman Energy, the last major Western oil company in Sudan. Neoconservatives found a state sponsor of terrorism that had hosted bin Laden. Liberal interventionists found a genocide in Darfur; the Save Darfur rally on the National Mall in 2006 drew tens of thousands of people.

The Darfur Peace and Accountability Act passed the House 416 to 3. All four constituencies arrived at the same policy: pressure Khartoum, support the south, self-determination. The Save Darfur Coalition merged in 2011 — referendum year — into “United to End Genocide”. The momentum from one crisis was redirected to engineer the independence of a different part of the country.

Meanwhile, Operation Lifeline Sudan had been running since 1989 — sixteen years of airstrips, supply chains, and NGO networks that USAID inherited. OLS was the first time the UN negotiated directly with a non-state armed group, implicitly legitimizing the SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) as a governing authority before it governed anything. (Read more.)

Share

The Empathy Weapon

 From The Brownstone Institute:

It never mentions the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which has paid out over $4 billion to families over the decades – a federal court that exists for the sole purpose of acknowledging that these injuries are real. You’d think that would make conversations about risk perfectly reasonable. Apparently not. Instead, raising the topic at all gets you labeled dangerous.

It never mentions the work of researchers like Toby Rogers or organizations like Children’s Health Defense who’ve spent years digging into the actual data on adverse events, pushing back on the accepted risk-benefit math, and demanding that manufacturers and regulators show their work. For what it’s worth, agreeing with everything they publish isn’t the point. These people don’t exist in any mainstream conversation about vaccines. They’re not debated. They’re not refuted. Just absent. If I didn’t know better I’d call that a guardrail, not a mere oversight.

I would argue that absence is doing more to erode public trust than anything those researchers have ever published. When parents go looking for answers and find a whole world of data the New York Times pretends doesn’t exist, they may conclude the Times is handling its readers, not informing them. (Read more.)

Share

'The Trial': A Rare Documentary Reveals the Hell of a Communist Show Trial

 From Mark Judge at Hot Air:

A cold Moscow winter in 1930 is the setting for The Trial, a rarely seen but vitally important 2019 documentary by Ukrainian filmmaker  Sergei Loznitsa. The Trial - which should not be confused with Trial, the great 1955 anti-communist drama starring Glenn Ford - is constructed of restored black-and-white footage from one of Joseph Stalin’s first show trials, recorded in 1930 in Moscow. Stalin had falsely accused a political rival of seeking to sabotage the USSR at the behest of French Prime Minister Raymond Poincaré and other Western leaders. In shocking footage, the accused, all innocent, confess to crimes they never actually committed. 

    The Trial is not available on streaming, but I reached out to director Loznitsa and his team was kind enough to provide me with a screener. I am currently in talks with them to perhaps show the film at the upcoming Anti-Communist Film Festival. The Trial is a film that should be shown in every university classroom in the United States and the West. It depicts the kind of nightmare that our own American socialists would not hesitate to inflict on the rest of us. (Read more.)

Share

Election Integrity Fiasco in Maryland

From American Thinker:

Maryland election officials are facing a serious test of public trust after a vendor coding error reportedly caused some voters to receive incorrect mail-in ballots during the 2026 gubernatorial primary.  The error involved ballots mailed before May 14, 2026.

Maryland State Board of Elections (SBE) administrator Jared DeMarinis said at the May 28, 2026 state election board meeting that more than 563,000 voters were included in the affected mailing but that the “vendor could not accurately identify” which voters had received the wrong ballot.  DeMarinis further clarified that there were “over 447,000 voters” whose ballots may have been affected.  The board identified the error and attempted to correct it by sending out hundreds of thousands of replacement ballots.  President Trump commented on the matter shortly after the issue became public.

Kate Sullivan, director of the SecuretheVoteMD, a volunteer election integrity organization, believes that the election board likely chose a remedy that was not only unnecessarily chaotic, but legally questionable under Maryland law:

The State Board of Elections had a simple, legal solution sitting right in front of them. They should have complied with Maryland Election Law §11-303.2 — the “first ballot” rule, which requires them to verify the original ballots as they come in, count the correct ones, and cure the incorrect ones while there was still time.

That is exactly what the law requires. Instead, they flooded the system with replacement ballots, locked the originals in a vault until certification day, and issued guidance that overrides the “first ballot” statute entirely. One has to ask, when an election authority ignores an obvious lawful remedy and chooses a legally questionable path that potentially disenfranchises voters, it is no longer sufficient to call it a mistake. Marylanders deserve a full accounting of why this approach was chosen — and by whom.

Now SecuretheVoteMD is demanding that the Maryland State Board of Elections take five concrete steps before the November 3, 2026 general election to protect voters from disenfranchisement.  In sum, the organization is asking election officials to address key questions on the record: how the original erroneous ballots are being identified, what adjudication standard is being applied, how many original-batch ballots were received, how many were rejected, what notification process will be used for affected voters, and how the chain of custody was maintained from receipt through counting. (Read more.)

Share

Scandal ‘Million Times Worse Than Epstein’ Explodes

 From the Daily BS:

For years, Britain’s political and bureaucratic elite insisted critics were exaggerating, stereotyping, or simply stirring up trouble. Now, thanks to a bombshell citizen-funded investigation and a megaphone provided by Elon Musk, one of the darkest scandals in modern British history is back in the spotlight — and the questions are getting harder to ignore.

Musk lit the fuse this week when he blasted Britain’s handling of the grooming-gang scandal and called for consequences not just for the predators, but for the officials who allegedly stood by while vulnerable girls were abused.

“The politicians who turned a blind eye to the Rape of Britain must go to prison,” Musk wrote on X after the release of a sprawling independent report commissioned by Member of Parliament Rupert Lowe. (Read more.)

Share

The UN, Slavery, and History’s Selective Amnesia

 From The European Conservative:

In March 25th, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution describing the transatlantic slave trade and the enslavement of Africans as “the gravest crime against humanity.” The text was adopted by 123 votes to 3, with 52 states abstaining, including France, Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom, and most European countries. The United States, Israel, and Argentina voted against.

The symbolic significance of this resolution is considerable. No one would dispute that the transatlantic slave trade constitutes one of the greatest tragedies in human history. For several centuries, millions of Africans were deported to the Americas under appalling conditions, reduced to the status of commodities, and integrated into an economic system based on their dehumanisation. The memory of this crime deserves to be acknowledged and passed on.

But it is precisely because the history of slavery is too grave to be exploited that we must question the ideological assumptions underlying this resolution. For the controversial nature of the text does not lie in its condemnation of the transatlantic slave trade but in what it omits.

By designating the transatlantic slave trade as ‘the gravest’ of crimes against humanity, the UN appears to be establishing a moral hierarchy among historical atrocities—as if certain sufferings could be considered superior to others and as if one could objectively measure the horror and declare that one crime surpasses all others. This wording partly explains the numerous European abstentions, for whom, for many years, the Holocaust has been held up as the ultimate benchmark of human barbarity. Regardless of the comparison with the Second World War, the motivations for which may be suspicious, several states argued that it was not for the UN to establish a hierarchy among crimes against humanity. Should we place Auschwitz and Kolyma, the Armenian genocide and the genocide of the Tutsis in Rwanda on a graduated scale, as if ranking the competitors in a macabre contest?

But the main difficulty lies elsewhere. This resolution completely ignores the existence of other slave systems which have nevertheless shaped the history of Africa and the world for over a millennium. (Read more.)

Share

Another Obama Judge

 From Tierney's Real News:

I don’t know about you but I’m exhausted by all the corruption, obstruction and deceit from Obama judges and prosecutors. For years, Trump supporters have watched the same script play out over and over again: President Trump tries to fix something, drain some swamp creatures or deliver results for the American people—and the permanent Washington machine responds with lawsuits, activist judges, and the familiar cast of Obama-driven operatives.

The latest act played out at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. A federal judge blocked urgent renovations to a crumbling national landmark and ordered Trump’s name stripped from the building. This wasn’t neutral justice. It was judicial power-grab meets lawfare, engineered by the same Obama-tied networks that have spent a decade trying to stop Trump.

On May 29, 2026—conveniently on JFK’s birthday—U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee, issued a sweeping 94-page ruling. He blocked the board’s plan for a full two-year closure needed for $257 million in critical structural repairs funded by Congress in the Big Beautiful Bill and declared that only Congress could alter the Kennedy Center’s name. (Read more.)

Share

Britain Mourned George Floyd. Why Won't It Mourn Henry Nowak?

 From Amuse on X:

Begin, then, with the deaths a nation could not stop talking about. When George Floyd died under a Minneapolis officer’s knee in May 2020, Britain responded as though the killing had happened in Bristol rather than 4,000 miles away. The Guardian’s own survey of that summer found demonstrations in more than 260 British towns and cities, from Shetland to south Wales, with crowds of 15,000 in Manchester and well over 210,000 marchers nationwide by mid June. The future Prime Minister knelt for the cameras. This is worth dwelling on, because it proves something the British establishment now seems eager to deny about itself. It is fully capable of treating a police death on another continent as a domestic moral emergency. The machinery exists. The will exists. The question is only when it switches on.

Now set against that the case of Henry Nowak. Last December, Nowak, an 18-year-old finance student at the University of Southampton, walked home from an evening out with his football teammates and was stabbed five times by Vickrum Digwa with a 8.5 inch blade, one wound piercing his heart. When officers arrived, Digwa told them what prosecutors would later call a wicked lie, that he was the victim of a racist attack. The gravely wounded teenager told police he had been stabbed. They handcuffed him anyway. They arrested the dying boy on the word of the man who had killed him, and only when Nowak collapsed did they remove the cuffs and begin first aid. He died at the scene. This week a Southampton jury convicted Digwa of murder, rejecting his claims of self defence and racial provocation, and convicted his mother of assisting an offender for hiding the weapon. Hampshire’s Deputy Chief Constable apologized that Henry was handcuffed and arrested in the moments before he lost consciousness, the Independent Office for Police Conduct opened an investigation, and his reported final words, according to trial reporting and the shadow home secretary, were the three that a nation had treated as sacred only six years earlier: I can’t breathe.

Let me anticipate the first and fairest objection, because the strength of this argument depends on conceding it. The two deaths are not medically identical, and no honest observer should pretend otherwise. Floyd was wasn’t killed by the police but from a fatal overdose of fentanyl according the coroner’s report. Nowak was murdered by a private criminal, and Hampshire Police have cited a pathologist’s view that the depth of the chest wound meant officers could not have saved him even had they believed every word he said. If the claim here were that the police killed Henry Nowak in the way Democrats claimed an officer killed George Floyd, that claim would be false. But that was never the comparison worth making. The variable under examination is not the cause of death. It is the response of a society to a death, and on that variable the two cases are almost laboratory clean. (Read more.)

Share