Category: blaze media

Since Hamas’ brutal invasion of Israel on October 7, 2023, pro-Palestine protests have erupted across the Western world. Two years in, these riotous events calling for the death of America and Israel, the fall of the West, and jihadi violence continue to rage.

But Mark Levin can’t figure something out: If these protesters are so concerned about the Palestinian people, why aren’t they upset about Hamas’ recent brutality against Palestinians?

Protesters are in the streets screaming about Israel starving Gazans — “a lie,” Levin says — but they don’t bat an eye when Hamas, just hours after releasing hostages as part of the U.S.-brokered ceasefire and peace deal, orchestrates mass public executions of Palestinians.

Graphic videos and eyewitness accounts show masked Hamas gunmen dragging blindfolded and bound Palestinian men, whom Hamas deemed dissenters, into public squares in Gaza City and executing them at close range with high-powered rifles. Since the ceasefire began on October 10, numerous Palestinians have been killed in similar executions, including beatings, hangings in streets, and purges of suspected spies or anti-Hamas militias.

Further, the Doghmush clan, one of Gaza’s largest and most powerful Palestinian families and a longstanding enemy of Hamas, was targeted. A gang of Hamas military men infiltrated the family’s estate disguised as medical staff and proceeded to slaughter numerous clan members.

“Very few people are saying anything about this. I mean, this is coming out of reports out of the Middle East. It’s coming out of reports out of Gaza,” Levin says.

He wonders: Where’s the outrage from the same protesters who flooded campuses over false claims of Israeli genocide — while Hamas now unleashes a documented “reign of terror” on its own people in the territory Israel just surrendered?

Now Netanyahu’s threat to continue military operations against Hamas makes sense. The recent executions and Hamas’ refusal to return deceased hostages points to what Levin has been saying about the terrorist regime from the get-go: You can’t negotiate with them.

He laments the partial Israel Defense Forces withdrawal to enable the hostage release, as that’s what allowed Hamas to regroup and terrorize Gaza with public executions.

Levin warns that Israel will now insist on permanent security zones: “They’re going to have a defense security area — whether the Arab countries and Muslim countries like it or not, whether we like it or not — to protect their country. And they’re going to insist on it. This is what Netanyahu has said. This is what they’re going to do.”

Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of “the Great One” — Mark Levin as you’ve never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Levintv, Mark levin, Blazetv, Blaze media, Hamas israel, Ceasefire, Ceasefire israel hamas, Palestine, Pro palestinian protest 

Truck driving was once a career path that epitomized the American dream, offering high pay and lifelong job security. Yet in recent years, the industry has become trapped in a cycle of high turnover, continually refilling positions with inexperienced drivers, prompting concerns about road safety and national security.

Multiple truckers told Blaze News that the industry’s challenges stem from the myth that it is battling a truck-driver shortage. This narrative has been used to justify heavy government intervention, including taxpayer-funded programs that cover training and recruiting costs, significantly reducing the financial burdens previously borne by carriers or aspiring drivers.

Those who reject the truck-driver-shortage claim argue that this taxpayer-subsidized setup effectively incentivizes labor dumping that masks high turnover caused by dismal wages and poor working conditions.

‘We have an artificial supply crisis, not a driver shortage.’

Despite numerous government programs over the past several years addressing the so-called driver shortage, the issue persists, according to the American Trucking Associations, the industry’s largest national trade organization. The association has claimed a driver shortage since the 1980s, estimating it to be around 60,000 drivers in 2023. It projected that the shortage may reach 160,000 by 2028.

Yet more than 450,000 new commercial driver’s licenses are issued each year, according to the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, and many of those drivers enter long-haul trucking. Under the Biden administration, states issued over 876,000 CDLs between January 2021 and April 2022.

The American Transportation Research Institute, the ATA’s research arm that conducts studies, including analyses to support its driver-shortage claims, has received over $8 million in government contracts since 2007.

In a 2024 report, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine pushed back on the ATA’s driver-shortage studies, noting that they had “been conducted using proprietary techniques and assumptions that are not publicly defined,” adding that “it is not possible to evaluate the validity of their claims.”

“However, those claims are subject to, as a general matter, the basic economic principles of supply and demand. Notably, labor economists maintain that when demand for workers in an occupation increases, the normal response is to increase wages,” the report read.

RELATED: The fraud crippling American trucking: ‘Ghost’ carriers and ‘NO NAME GIVEN’ driver’s licenses issued to foreigners

Photographer: Bing Guan/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Plummeting retention

Some critics of the driver-shortage narrative contend that the real issue affecting the industry is driver retention caused by an unnatural suppression of wages and unsatisfactory working conditions, exacerbated by the Biden administration’s open-border chaos. By the ATA’s own estimates, the driver turnover rate is over 90%.

American truckers in the 1980s reportedly made an annual salary of more than $110,000, and today, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median wage in 2024 was just over $57,000. One report indicated that between 1980 and 2018, the industry experienced a 21% average wage decrease, while some areas of the U.S. experienced a 50% decline.

Shannon Everett with American Truckers United rejected the ATA’s narrative, arguing that if such a shortage did exist, wages would be on the rise.

“How can you simultaneously have a driver shortage and a collapse in pricing?” Everett told Blaze News. “The trucking industry shows no signs of escaping a three-year pricing crisis. We have an artificial supply crisis, not a driver shortage.”

He stated that the ATA’s shortage claims are “counterintuitive to supply and demand economics.”

Another issue impacting driver retention is declining working conditions. Truckers told Blaze News that many drivers are typically paid by the mile, meaning any time spent waiting to load or unload is not compensated. Drivers lose $1.1 billion to $1.3 billion in earnings to detention time, according to a 2018 study from the Department of Transportation’s Office of Inspector General.

Some truckers argue that these slowdowns can create safety issues, as many drivers are in a rush to get back on the road to make up for the lost wages. These logistical inefficiencies stem from outdated warehouses, a need for more warehouse workers, and the lack of any direct and easily measurable cost impact on the retailers that operate the warehouses.

RELATED: The shocking details behind another fatal illegal alien truck crash

Photo by: Peter Titmuss/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Biden’s taxpayer-funded solutions

The Biden administration sought to address these issues by effectively throwing money at the industry. In December 2021, former President Joe Biden announced an action plan stating that the DOT’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration would provide over $30 million to states to “expedite CDLs.”

The administration’s Department of Labor and DOT partnered to launch the Driving Good Jobs initiative, which in part set out to “identify[] effective and safe strategies to get new entrants in the field from underrepresented communities, including women and young drivers between the ages of 18-20.”

The driver-shortage narrative has also been used to justify taxpayer-funded tuition assistance to driving schools, some of which are operated by large carriers. Aspiring drivers may qualify for Pell grants, with some driving schools eligible for federal student aid. The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act could also help to cover these fees.

In 2023, Biden’s FMCSA awarded roughly $48 million in grant funding to increase CDL “training opportunities and continue to improve the process to obtain a CDL.” The FMCSA also allocated $3.5 million to Commercial Motor Vehicle Operator Safety Training Grants, intending to “help reduce the severity and number of crashes involving commercial motor vehicles on U.S. roads by expanding the number of CDL holders possessing operator training.” This grant program prioritized active military members and veterans, but noted that “special consideration is given to students from underserved communities and refugees.”

’It’s classic corporate welfare combined with regulatory capture, Washington doing the bidding of the largest players at the expense of everyone else on the road.’

The ATA responded positively to the trucking action plan, stating that it was “encouraged that the Biden administration has not only recognized the importance of adding new and well-trained Americans to the trucking workforce, but has announced a path forward with what we believe will become a robust training opportunity for future commercial truck drivers.”

“Using apprenticeships will help any American pursue a career in this great industry for good wages and benefits in a safe manner without the significant debt many jobseekers can sometimes incur,” the ATA stated. “We applaud the Biden administration for taking these important steps and we look forward to working with them to ensure a smooth and rapid implementation of the commitments made.”

Meanwhile, Biden rapidly expanded so-called “lawful pathways” for foreign nationals, allowing asylum seekers, refugees, and those with Temporary Protected Status — even those who entered the country illegally — to apply for work authorization, thereby allowing them to join the trucking industry.

Biden’s action followed the Obama administration’s decision to remove the requirement to place drivers out of service for failing to meet English proficiency standards, further contributing to the road safety and national security issues in America’s trucking industry today.

“We believe that hundreds of thousands of refugees were intentionally dumped into the trucking industry for profit,” Everett told Blaze News.

These government interventions prompted an artificial surge in new, inexperienced truck drivers entering the industry, which, in turn, justified depressed wages, as employers treat the roles as entry-level and disposable.

RELATED: Exclusive: DOT withholds $40M from blue state for flouting English requirements for truckers

Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Who does the ATA represent?

Collin Long, the director of government relations for the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, told Blaze News, “The real issue isn’t a shortage of drivers, it’s a shortage of drivers willing to stay in an industry that treats them like disposable labor.”

“The big carriers prefer to churn through cheap, inexperienced drivers instead of investing in training and fair pay for professionals,” he said. “It’s a dangerous business model that puts every family on the highway at greater risk. Experience leads to greater safety, and ATA’s churn-and-burn approach undermines both.”

While the ATA maintains that there is a driver shortage, critics argue that the organization does not fully represent the industry, citing that its board is dominated by executives from large carriers. Yet the ATA reports that 91.5% of the country’s trucking companies operate 10 or fewer trucks. Critics also contend that the ATA has not adequately protected smaller trucking companies, instead prioritizing the interests of mega carriers.

‘If the ATA’s sole existence was to put the small guys out of business, they are very, very bad at their jobs.’

Long told Blaze News that the ATA’s policies have often been “detrimental to small-business truckers and to highway safety.”

“Whether it’s taxpayer-funded CDL mills or pushing to let 18-year-olds operate big rigs across the country, ATA’s agenda serves corporate megacarriers, not the men and women who actually keep America moving,” Long stated.

“OOIDA fights for small-business truckers trying to make a living, while ATA lobbies for policies that let the biggest carriers use taxpayer funds and government red tape to hamstring their competition,” he continued. “It’s classic corporate welfare combined with regulatory capture, Washington doing the bidding of the largest players at the expense of everyone else on the road.”

Everett similarly contended that the ATA “has evolved into an entity entirely focused on the interests of the billion-dollar mega carriers and power-only brokerages.”

When asked whether he believes the ATA has helped or hurt smaller trucking companies, Justin Martin, a 15-year trucking industry professional who goes by SuperTrucker on X, told Blaze News that it was a “very complicated issue.”

“The gut instinct of most trucking companies, like the smaller guys, they think that the ATA hurts them. And if the ATA had their way, that is 100% true,” he explained. “But everything that the ATA has done has actually helped the small guys over the years because there are over half a million trucking companies in the United States. … So if the ATA’s sole existence was to put the small guys out of business, they are very, very bad at their jobs.”

However, Martin argued that the ATA has been “messing with the wage mechanism” within the industry. He explained that by constantly pushing the claim of a driver shortage, it not only justifies government-funded driver training, but it also allows the ATA to increase rates for shippers.

The ATA did not respond to a request for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​News, American trucking industry, American trucking, Trucking industry, American trucking associations, Ata, Truck driver shortage, Commercial driver’s licenses, Cdls, Cdl, Commercial driver’s license, American transportation research institute, Atri, Joe biden, Biden, Biden administration, Biden admin, Department of transportation, Dot, Transportation department, Federal motor carrier safety administration, Fmcsa, Politics 

Liberal actor and podcaster Michael Rapaport has come a long way since calling President Donald Trump the “worst possible motherf**ker we could have in power,” referring to Melania Trump as a “dumb animal,” and wishing ill on Barron Trump in March 2020.

Rapaport, among the Jewish liberals who ditched the Democratic Party over its capture by anti-Semitic radicals and its ruinous approach to immigration, supported Trump in last year’s presidential election. Now, he’s throwing his support behind former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) in hopes of sparing New York City from having socialist New York Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani (D) become its mayor.

“I’m a lifelong New Yorker born and raised in Manhattan. This is the most importance race for mayor in my lifetime. Zohran Mamdani is not fit for office,” Rapaport said in a recent video.

‘You’re a wolf in sheep’s clothing.’

“His warped mind and hate-filled heart are rotten to the core,” continued the actor. “‘Freeze rent?’ Come on. Freezed rent will lead to less buildings, fewer apartments, and higher rents. ‘Defund the police’ will lead to more crime. ‘Raise the taxes’ will lead to less money in your pockets. He’s a moron. Zohran the moron.”

Mamdani has indicated that if elected, he will “immediately freeze the rent for all stabilized tenants,” raise the corporate tax rate from 7.25% to 11.5%, and slap New Yorkers earning more than $1 million annually with an additional 2% tax.

Mamdani suggested in a June 28, 2020, tweet that the New York Police Department “is racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety” and stressed that it was necessary to “defund the police.” While the socialist has vowed to frustrate the enforcement of federal immigration law in the New York City, Mamdani now claims that he doesn’t want to defund the police.

RELATED: Democrats face their ‘David Duke moment’ in New York City

Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

On Saturday, Rapaport — who is actively campaigning against Mamdani and soliciting donations for a political action committee to “promote anti-Mamdani speech” — noted in another video that early voting had begun and urged New Yorkers to take action, stating, “We’re going to send this dead-eye, fake-smiling, black-hearted 34-year-old back to the unemployment line.”

The latest Victory Insights poll indicated that Mamdani is the clear front-runner in the race, leading Cuomo by over 18 percentage points, 46.7%-28.6%.

The poll indicated further that “a whopping 26% of voters are considering moving out of the city if Mamdani is elected.”

“There was a time when I exclusively, blindly voted for Democrats,” said Rapaport. “I do not recognize who they have become, and anyone with eyes, ears, and a shred, an ounce, of moral decency cannot disagree with what I am saying.”

The actor suggested further that the Democratic Party “needs to take a long f**king look in the mirror as to who they want to lead in this country, because it is heading down the wrong path.”

Rapaport mocked Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), both of whom have endorsed Mamdani, then hammered the socialist mayoral candidate over his repeated refusal to condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada.”

After alluding to Mamdani’s recent meeting with Siraj Wahhaj — a jihad-supporting imam whom federal prosecutors characterized as being an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing — Rapaport noted that Mamdani was living in New York City at the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, stressing, “Don’t you remember what that did to the city? Don’t you remember the devastation, how families were ripped apart? 9/11 — 9/11 was globalizing the intifada.”

“You’re a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” added Rapaport.

The actor indicated that for donations of $25 or more to his anti-Mamdani PAC, supporters secure the chance to win a flight to New York to meet Rapaport and to hang out with him before one of his comedy shows.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Mamdani, New york, New york city, Michael rapaport, Democrat, Democratic, Mayor, Election, Nyc, Zohran, Politics 

Halloween may be marketed as a harmless night of costumes and candy — but mental health experts have been warning for decades that the holiday can unleash very real psychological trauma.

“We need to understand that Halloween can actually amplify some of the psychiatric disturbances of people who were either victims of satanic ritual abuse or who were just traumatized by the fear and the just depravity that some people like to showcase on Halloween,” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey explains.

A 1991 Washington Post article documents how Halloween has historically triggered emotional breakdowns, suicidal episodes, and violent behavior among patients suffering from multiple personality disorder (now classified as dissociative identity disorder).

Many of those patients linked their trauma to childhood abuse — and in some highly disturbing cases, alleged satanic ritual activity.

“Patients with multiple personality disorder (MPD) exhibit bizarre behavior in which personalities with distinct histories and voices — called ‘alters’ — emerge from a ‘host’ personality under the influence of severe stresses. The illness is believed to arise most often as a defense against child abuse that is typically sexual and physically painful,” the article reads.

“Of the 12 patients in the hospital today, six are having trouble with memories related to Halloween,” said Bruce Leonard, a psychiatrist who treats child abuse victims at the Columbine Psychiatric Center outside Denver, the article continues.

In the article, Leonard explained that a former patient of his was flying to Colorado from her home in Michigan to spend Halloween in the hospital, after “physically threatening her psychiatrist in Michigan” for the weeks leading up to it.

Another psychiatrist, Bennett G. Braun, told the Washington Post that “patients become increasingly suicidal, increasingly agitated” around Halloween.

Five of Braun’s hospitalized patients were “reliving Halloween trauma,” while one of his patients “with a history of satanic cult abuse” was being kept in the hospital until the holiday was over.

Another patient of his attempted suicide on Halloween the year prior and claimed to have been a childhood participant in “rites involving human sacrifice.”

“About 20% of MPD patients … claim that their childhood abuse involved organized satanic rites. Although few psychiatrists treating these patients today deny that their patients have a history of child abuse, there is great debate about whether the ‘satanic’ events actually occurred or are fantasy grafted onto recollections of more conventional abuse,” the article reads.

“So we don’t actually know if they actually endured satanic ritual abuse or if it had something directly to do with Halloween, although some of them seem to be able to cite specifically what happened to them on Halloween, or if this is a symptom of their psychiatric problems,” Stuckey says.

“But I think it’s an interesting phenomenon, and I do think that we should give more weight to presenting very scary, gruesome, morbid things to children before they have the ability to be able to understand it,” she continues.

“I don’t think it’s lighthearted to scare children and to present them with things that celebrate death and darkness and fear. I do think that you are setting them up for some kind of trauma. … And I think we do need to take that seriously,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Upload, Free, Video phone, Sharing, Camera phone, Video, Youtube.com, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Allie beth stuckey, Relatable, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Mpd patients, Dissociative identity disorder, Washington post, Halloween, Demonic, Halloween demonic, Satanic ritual abuse 

At Arizona State University, where I teach, faculty were recently told to “decolonize our curriculum.” On the surface, the directive sounded progressive: Expose power structures, elevate marginalized voices, and promote inclusion. But a closer look revealed something deeper.

“Decolonization,” as defined by many academic theorists, has less to do with confronting material exploitation and far more to do with dismantling the Christian worldview itself.

Leftists celebrate the new archbishop as a victory for progress. Yet the victory coincides with the collapse of the church that achieved it.

In today’s universities, decolonization has become a framework for deconstructing Western civilization — its moral assumptions, its epistemology, and, most of all, its biblical foundations. The movement borrows heavily from Marxism: Everything becomes a struggle between oppressors and oppressed, and redemption comes not through faith but through revolution.

Christianity has long condemned greed, injustice, and oppression. It calls for compassion, justice, and humility. The biblical ethic already provides a moral standard against exploitation. What “decolonization” targets, then, is not exploitation itself but the very source of the Christian moral order: creation, sin, redemption, and divine authority. Strip those away, and what’s left is a vacuum quickly filled by ideology — Marxism, postmodernism, or nihilism disguised as liberation. Think Antifa in the ivory tower.

The church follows the university

That same dynamic now defines the Church of England. The recent appointment of Sarah Mullally as archbishop of Canterbury — the first woman ever to hold the title — was heralded as a triumph for “equity” and “representation.” Yet the decision has fractured the Anglican Communion. Churches in Africa and the Global South have declared they will no longer recognize Canterbury’s authority.

Their leaders insist the move abandons biblical teaching: The pastoral office, they say, is reserved for men — not as a symbol of domination but as a form of service patterned after the Old Testament priesthood and Christ Himself. Scripture, not patriarchy, defines this calling.

The irony is painful. The very church that once sent missionaries to Africa now lectures African believers on theology — in the name of “decolonization.” British progressives who claim to defend the oppressed now reject the self-governing authority of African churches, imposing instead a white, European moral framework they no longer believe in.

The logic of ‘liberation’

The academic rationale behind this mirrors what I see on campus. In decolonization theory, patriarchy is treated as a system of control, and dismantling it becomes an act of liberation. But the Christian vision of leadership never equated masculinity with power. It defined male pastoral authority as a burden of service, not a privilege.

This distinction matters. In pagan antiquity, priestesses wielded ritual power at Delphi and other shrines, while biblical religion defined priesthood in terms of obedience and sacrifice. Christianity’s inheritance of that pattern was countercultural — not oppressive. To erase that distinction under the banner of equality is to mistake service for subjugation and hierarchy for injustice.

The irony of ‘progress’

Leftists celebrate the new archbishop as a victory for progress. Yet the victory coincides with the collapse of the church that achieved it. Attendance across England has cratered; belief is evaporating. The light they claim to be spreading has gone out.

Meanwhile, Christianity burns brightly in the very regions now scolded for their “backwardness.” African churches remain faithful, growing, and theologically vibrant — a continuity stretching back to Augustine of Hippo, the African theologian whose writings shaped European Christianity for a millennium.

RELATED: The castration of Christendom

Photo by FILIPPO MONTEFORTE/AFP via Getty Images

If decolonization truly sought to redistribute power, it would look to Augustine’s model: a church grounded in scripture, not ideology; global, not provincial; rooted in divine order, not social theory.

The lesson

When my university asks me to “decolonize” my teaching, I ask in return: into what? If the answer is Marx, Freud, or Foucault — the very European thinkers who replaced faith with power analysis — then the process is just another colonization under a different name.

But if the goal is to return to the Bible’s vision of creation, fall, redemption, and service under Christ, then by all means, decolonize. Reclaim what ideology stole. Because the alternative is what we now see in England — a church that traded revelation for relevance and ended up preaching nothing at all.

Christians should take heed: The light leaving Canterbury won’t stay confined to England.

​Opinion & analysis, Archbishop of canterbury, Sarah mullally, Church of england, Anglican, Global anglican future conference, Africa, Global south, Decolonialization, Marxism, Christianity, Arizona state university, Leftism, Sin, Redemption, Priesthood, Karl marx, Sigmund freud, Michel foucault 

Only in the upside-down world of elite evangelicalism could repentance look like rebellion.

David French recently made a telling admission: He is “nervous” about “something” that is “stirring in Christian America.” That “something,” French insists, is that contrary to news that a Christian revival is under way in America, what is actually happening is not revival but “religious revolution.”

Revival always looks like revolution to those who’ve made peace with decay.

The evidence? Jan. 6 (of course), a nuanced Christian debate about empathy, and Charlie Kirk’s memorial service.

Authentic revival, according to French, would be focused on the self because true revival “begins with the people proclaiming, by word and deed, ‘I have sinned.'”

But so-called MAGA Christianity, he claims, announces a different message: “It looks at American culture and declares, ‘You have sinned.'” French continues:

And it doesn’t stop there. It also says, “We will defeat you.” In its most extreme forms, it also says, “We will rule over you.” That’s not revival; it’s revolution, a religious revolution that seeks to overthrow one political order and replace it with another — one that has echoes of the religious kingdoms of ages past.

And don’t be fooled when these revolutionaries call themselves “conservative.” All too many conservative Christians are actually quite proudly radical. They want to demolish the existing order, including America’s commitment to pluralism and individual liberty, and put their version of Christianity at the center of American political life.

It’s clear that French sees the stirring of Christian faith across America — Christians re-engaging in politics, education, and culture — but instead of feeling encouraged or hopeful, he sees it as dangerous. He wants you to believe that ordinary Christians working to build communities shaped by biblical values are flirting with authoritarianism.

But what he can’t seem to imagine is that maybe this is what authentic renewal looks like: Christians waking up to the world around them, tired of pretending their convictions don’t belong in public life.

Revival, after all, always looks like revolution to those who’ve made peace with decay.

Domesticated faith exposed

French’s nervousness reveals something deeper than politics. It exposes a theology that’s been domesticated, one that treats faith as a private matter rather than a public demonstration of allegiance to Jesus Christ.

In his view, repentance is safe only when it stays inside the confines of the individual heart. But Christian faith is not individualistic. Repentance — literally meaning “turning back” or “returning” to God — is not limited to what one person can do for themselves. The Bible does not recognize the division that French asserts.

Instead, when people repent and turn back to God, hearts are transformed and households are changed. And when households change, communities change. And when communities change, culture is transformed.

RELATED: The left’s new anti-Christian smear backfires

jokerpro/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Every true revival — from King Josiah’s reforms (2 Kings 22-23; 2 Chronicles 34-35) to the Great Awakenings — has looked political to those invested in the old order. That’s because repentance, by its nature of not being limited to the self, always has public consequences. You can’t toss aside sin and put on the “new self,” as the apostle Paul calls it, without eventually dethroning the idols of the city.

The gospel doesn’t just save people. It literally institutes a new Kingdom, one in which all reality is reordered around the lordship of King Jesus.

So when French frets about Christians who are “quite proudly radical,” he misses the point. He sees a problem with Christians who want to tear down the “existing order” — as if that order has borne good fruit — and assumes they’re driven by a lust for power and control. That critique is worse than lazy. It’s slanderous.

In truth, these Christians aren’t seeking power and control. They’re simply refusing to bow to the false gods of our age.

Repentance reshapes reality

The “existing order” that French defends isn’t morally neutral, working for the flourishing of all people. No. It’s an anti-God order that calls confusion “compassion,” celebrates sin, and treats moral clarity as a threat to democracy. It’s an order where drag queens read to children, abortion is called “health care,” and Christians are pushed to the margins of polite society.

Yet to French, the problem isn’t the godlessness but the Christians who dare call it out, stand against it, and seek to reform it. This brand of “respectable” faith demands silence in the face of cultural collapse. It’s the faith that turns a blind eye to societal sin over fear that conviction may be mistaken for cruelty or — gasp — power-grabbing.

But a Christianity that never offends the world will never change it. Jesus didn’t die to make the world more comfortable. He died to make you and me new people, and new people — those whose allegiance to Jesus bears conformity to his Kingdom — inevitably shape the world around them.

Call it “Christian nationalism,” call it whatever you want, but the truth is this: The existence of the Kingdom of Heaven, which Jesus inaugurated, means that Christians right now are living out obedience to Christ. Christ is reigning, and that means His people, wherever they live, make their communities and countries more Christian.

And a more Christian world requires confronting the idols of our time and tearing them down, not politely negotiating with them.

Perhaps French is right: A revolution is under way. But it’s not happening in Washington. It’s unfolding quietly in small-town homes and churches across America, where Christians are repenting, rebuilding, and reordering their lives around the Kingdom of God.

Revolution unto God

We’re now back to where we began: Only in the upside-down world of elite evangelicalism could repentance look like rebellion.

But maybe that’s exactly what real repentance is supposed to look like in a culture that is so drunk on self-worship that it has not only rejected God or tried to erase Him, but it has tried to become like God.

French sees danger where there’s actually deliverance: A generation of Christians waking up, tired of compromise, refusing to bow to Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. He mistakes courage for cruelty and conviction for control. But the truth is simple: You can’t have revival without resistance, and every age that bows to godless idols sees repentance as subversion.

If repentance and revival is returning to God, then revolution is what happens when enough people finally do.

​David french, Maga christianity, Christianity, Christian, Biblical truth, New york times, Bible, Jesus, God, Faith 

America loves to celebrate those who stand tall. Our founding ideals are built around independence, and we even set aside a holiday to honor it. We cheer for pioneers, entrepreneurs, and innovators who rise by their own strength.

But a nation’s greatness is not measured by how it treats those who can stand alone. It is revealed by how it treats those who cannot stand at all.

A nation that calls itself compassionate must prove it, not only in speeches and foreign aid but in how it treats the most vulnerable under its own roof.

Every day, millions of Americans live outside the myth of self-reliance. Some are children born with profound disabilities. Others are veterans carrying wounds long after the battle ends. They are aging parents fading into dementia and families exhausted by a loved one’s addiction or mental illness.

Alongside them are the people who care for them — unseen by most and too often alone.

Forgotten and invisible

Roughly 65 million family caregivers in this country provide more than $600 billion in unpaid care each year, nearly the annual budget of Medicare. They lift, bathe, feed, and speak for their loved ones, often sacrificing their own health and future in the process. More than half now perform complex medical procedures once handled only by professionals in hospitals. Yet too many feel invisible in the nation they help hold together.

Contrast that with the tens of billions we spend each year on health care for those who entered the country illegally. In California alone, the state spends more than $8.4 billion on care for undocumented patients, much of it routine care sought in overcrowded ERs. Meanwhile, family caregivers desperately work to keep vulnerable loved ones out of those same waiting rooms, where exposure can mean infection, pain, or worse.

If we can find billions for those who broke our laws, why do we struggle to support citizens who save our health care system hundreds of billions every year? What does that reveal about what, and whom, we truly value?

Actionable change

President Donald Trump has called family caregivers “heroes” and pledged to do more to support them. I know the president has a great deal on his plate. But so do 65 million Americans caring for chronically impaired loved ones, often with little help, no training, and few resources. Their plates are full every single day. And for most, they never get cleared.

We do not need a new bureaucracy or a 2,000-page bill to change course. Here are a few ideas the president could direct right now, and after four decades of doing this work, I have many more.

A refundable tax credit could acknowledge the value of unpaid care, for example.

Redirecting a portion of existing Medicaid dollars to follow patients home could strengthen families and reduce institutional costs. Those redirected funds would not vanish into untraceable programs; they can be monitored, audited, and measured with far greater transparency than the billions funneled into sanctuary cities, where accountability is often little more than a slogan.

Expanded respite care and flexible work policies could prevent burnout and keep caregivers in the workforce.

None of these ideas is radical. All cost far less than nursing-home care, which can often run in excess of $90,000 a year per person. Most importantly, they honor human dignity and strengthen the family, the bedrock of any stable society.

And if we are serious about making America healthy again, we must look beyond hospital beds and prescriptions. Health is not measured only by vital signs. It is also measured in how well we equip those caring for loved ones who will not get better. Many chronic conditions will not reverse. Many wounds will not heal. But how we support the people who shoulder that relentless work says as much about our nation’s health as any policy ever could.

Take care of our vulnerable

November is National Family Caregivers Month, a chance to look past speeches and slogans and ask ourselves whether our compassion is genuine or just convenient. The weakest among us strip away illusion and show us who we are. They test whether our values are convictions or just words. And those who care for them do the same.

RELATED: When the soul flatlines, call a ‘Code Grace’

Photo by Bevan Goldswain via Getty Images

A nation that calls itself compassionate must prove it, not only in speeches and foreign aid but in how it treats the most vulnerable under its own roof. Scripture reminds us that we will be judged by how we care for “the least of these” (Matthew 25:40). Caregivers live that command daily, bearing one another’s burdens (Galatians 6:2) and reflecting the heart of God in the most ordinary, extraordinary ways.

As I often remind fellow caregivers, healthy caregivers make better caregivers. Our terms do not expire. Our loved ones do. But we must make sure we do not — not emotionally, not spiritually, not physically, and not fiscally. Strengthening those who bear this work strengthens families.

Strong families build stronger communities, and stronger communities sustain a strong nation. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, “The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.”

​Opinion & analysis, Opinion, Caretaker, Caregiver, Vulnerable, Illegal aliens, Illegal immigrants, Healthcare 

Artificial superintelligence is still a hypothetical, but we’re inching closer every day. What happens when we finally create a digital beast that vastly surpasses human intellect in all domains?

MIT physics professor Max Tegmark warns that if that day comes, we’ll be in deeper trouble than we can imagine.

Despite the evident dangers and widespread hesitation, people like OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, a leading figure in the AI boom, are determined to see it happen at any cost.

“Sam Alman believes he’s creating God. … There’s a lot of people in Silicon Valley that want to meet God of their creation,” says Glenn Beck, who’s been warning for years about the dangers of an artificial intelligence takeover.

Tegmark is equally disturbed by Altman’s dystopian tech dreams, which go even beyond creating artificial superintelligence. In his 2017 essay “The Merge,” Altman describes the fusing of man and machine as a necessary step to keep up with superhuman AI. He even suggests that we will be able to “design our own descendants.”

Most people, however, want nothing to do with this transhumanist, cyborg future, but it’s looking like Altman and other tech billionaires are set on pushing humanity in that direction anyway.

“So how do you stop it?” Glenn asks.

On this episode of “The Glenn Beck Program,” Tegmark outlined four ways we can push back against the AI revolution.

1. Reject the ‘inevitable’ AI myth

“Lobbyists from these companies keep trying to convince us that it’s unstoppable,” Tegmark says. “That’s the number one psy-op trick in the book.”

Just because a technological advancement is possible doesn’t mean it will come to fruition, he explains. He gives the example of human cloning, which is technically feasible today but not practiced due to ethical, legal, and practical obstacles.

“The consensus around the world was we could lose control over our species if we start messing with ourselves in that way, and it became so stigmatized it just didn’t happen,” he says. There’s a chance ASI and cyborgs will be viewed similarly — technically possible but too risky to try, especially if people at large start rejecting the notion that these advancements are inevitable.

2. Control > chaos

Some will argue that the United States has to trudge forward in the AI race because we’re competing against China, but Tegmark reminds that ASI is a “suicide race” because once we reach superintelligence heights, humans will become slaves to a digital master.

But China values only one thing more than technological dominance: control.

The United States, finally back on top as a global superpower thanks to President Trump, isn’t interested in losing control either. “The way the U.S. or China will compete for dominance is not by doing something that’s going to take away the power from both countries,” Tegmark says.

3. Call for government regulations

Glenn is still concerned about people like Sam Altman, who have unlimited money and resources, continuing to push AI to new heights, but Tegmark says they’re biding their time as unrestricted tech pioneers.

“Once upon a time, there were no regulations on biotech. They could sell any medicine they wanted in the supermarket, and sometimes this caused tragedies,” Tegmark says.

He points to the 1950s and ’60s sedative thalidomide, which was prescribed to pregnant women to treat morning sickness. The medication proved so harmful — over 100,000 severe birth defects — that the drug was not only banned, but the government began regulating the biotech industry as a whole to prevent future devastations.

“We’ve done the same thing with every other industry,” Tegmark says.

“So saying that AI companies should be the only companies in America that don’t have to meet any safety standards is really just asking for corporate welfare for AI companies,” he adds.

4. Amplify the public voice

Many people don’t voice their opposition to the AI race because they think either they’re powerless to stop it or that they’ll be condemned as Luddites. But Tegmark says neither is true.

“Less than 5% of Americans actually want a race to superintelligence,” he says.

And now our voices can be heard. Through his Future of Life Institute, Tegmark has created a petition aimed at holding AI developers accountable for the risks of advanced AI. Many high-profile people from both sides of the political spectrum have already signed it, including Glenn.

I urge you to sign this,” Glenn says.

“This is the end of humanity if we lose control of our technology,” he adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, Max tegmark, Mit, Ai, Artificial intelligence, Asi, Artificial superintelligence, Cyborg, Sam altman, Blazetv, Blaze media 

Every October, some Christians wrestle with how to handle the season of ghosts and goblins. The evening before All Hallows’ Day — meant to honor the saints — has long since been hijacked by darker themes.

As the Babylon Bee recently joked, the parental mood this time of year can swing between cautious curiosity and comic dread. Its headline read: “Mom Can’t Decide Between Allowing Her Kids to Dress Up for Halloween or Having Them Get to Heaven.”

Plenty of kids and parents still favor clever over creepy — even if most Halloween events these days lean more toward horror-movie grotesque than good-natured fun.

Halloween may have gone off the rails since my childhood, but families can still enjoy the “scary stuff” without getting cozy with the occult.

Between church services that mark the feast of All Saints and wholesome fall festivities, there’s room for fun without flirting with the demonic. I’ve seen it firsthand.

A nod to more innocent times

When I was growing up in Pittsburgh, my siblings and I spent many happy hours at the Sarah Heinz House, a youth club sponsored by the H.J. Heinz Company. Think of it as a hometown version of the YMCA — a place where kids could swim, play, and learn, without a screen in sight. Sadly, the complex was turned into apartment loft space in the early 2000s after more than a century of serving the community.

Every Halloween, the club hosted a costume party. Back in the mid-1960s, devil horns and fake blood were still frowned upon, so creativity mattered. One year, I cut arm and neck holes in a 13-gallon black trash bag, slipped it on, and topped it with a bamboo rice hat.

I went as a “Chinese Garbage Bag.” Somehow, I won “Most Original Costume.” (No, the prize wasn’t a bottle of Heinz ketchup.) Today, that outfit would probably get me thrown out before I reached the door for “cultural appropriation.”

Even so, the spirit of ingenuity survives. Plenty of kids and parents still favor clever over creepy — even if most Halloween events these days lean more toward horror-movie grotesque than good-natured fun.

Some families simply skip the whole thing. They hand out candy at the door and call it a night. That’s fine too.

New York’s Halloween capital

Here in my current corner of the world — Tarrytown, New York — avoiding Halloween takes real effort. The town goes all in. It’s bigger than Christmas.

Washington Irving, America’s first literary celebrity, rests behind the Old Dutch Church in Sleepy Hollow Cemetery, made famous by “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow.” The story comes alive every October with parades, tours, and re-enactments.

At the end of the annual parade, the Headless Horseman rides through town, pumpkin in hand, to the crowd’s delight. The celebration owes more to folklore than witchcraft — this isn’t Salem, after all — and it gives locals a fun, spooky way to honor a beloved American story.

Not everything hits the right note, though. Some newer attractions in the nearby Rockefeller Preserve have turned too gruesome, especially in 2023, when organizers displayed gore-soaked scenes just weeks after the October 7 terrorist attacks in Israel. Even Halloween should have limits.

Scary, but silly

For families who prefer their frights with a laugh, I recommend a few old-school classics. Start with Disney’s 1949 animated “Legend of Sleepy Hollow,” narrated by Bing Crosby. It’s a perfect mix of charm and chills.

My personal favorite — any time of year — is “The Ghost and Mr. Chicken” (1966), starring Don Knotts. It’s delightfully corny and just spooky enough. “Atta boy, Luther!”

And if you’re in the mood for something truly obscure but delightful, you can find my own 1992 amateur film “The Chartreuse Goose” in two parts on YouTube. Think of it as my humble homage to Don Knotts, made with more enthusiasm than budget.

RELATED: Vampires, werewolves, and the very real evil stalking our souls

Photo by FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP via Getty Images

Books for the brave

For those who like their autumn reading with a hint of the supernatural, Jonathan Cahn’s “The Avatar” fits the season. It builds on his earlier book “The Return of the Gods” and offers a sobering look at modern spiritual forces disguised as politics.

For little ones wrestling with nighttime fears, my children’s book “Hamster Holmes: Afraid of the Dark?” might be a gentler companion — no ghosts required.

The light beyond the lanterns

Whatever your family’s approach, October doesn’t have to be a tug-of-war between faith and fun. You can honor the saints, roast a few marshmallows, and maybe laugh at Don Knotts along the way.

Then, as Halloween fades and November begins, we move toward the true seasons of joy — Thanksgiving and Christmas — where the light always wins out.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at American Thinker.

​Opinion & analysis, Halloween, Don knotts, Sleepy hollow, Spooky story, Scary, Family friendly, Books, All saints day, Sarah heinz house, Children, Occult, Candy, Scary stories 

As a car enthusiast who’s spent decades wrenching on everything from classic muscle cars to modern vehicles, I love gadgets that deliver real results without voiding warranties or requiring a trip to the shop.

That’s why the Pedal Commander caught my eye — it’s a plug-and-play throttle controller that promises sharper acceleration, better fuel efficiency, and customizable modes, all without touching your engine.

I clocked a solid 0-60 improvement of about 0.8 seconds using a simple app timer, though your mileage will vary by vehicle.

I installed one on my daily driver, a 2016 Porsche Cayenne Diesel, and tested it over 500 miles of city, highway, and spirited backroad driving. Spoiler: It lives up to the hype for most drivers, but it’s not a magic bullet for everyone.

Installation: easier than an oil change

Right out of the box, the Pedal Commander feels premium — compact aluminum unit with a wired controller and a mobile app. Hooking it up took me under 10 minutes: Unplug your stock throttle connector under the dash, plug in the device, and mount the controller wherever it’s handy (I stuck mine near the steering column on the carpet). No tools, no cutting wires, and crucially, no permanent mods to your car.

The included app (iOS/Android) pairs instantly via Bluetooth, letting you tweak settings on the fly. For tech-averse folks, the physical buttons on the controller handle 90% of adjustments or use the phone app — it’s simple.

Performance punch: bye-bye throttle lag

The star of the show is how it eliminates that infuriating “dead pedal” delay you get in so many modern drive-by-wire cars. Hitting the gas in my Cayenne used to feel like mashing a soggy sponge; now, in Sport+ mode, it’s like flipping a switch — immediate torque surge without drama.

Merging onto highways? Effortless. Overtaking slowpokes? Pure grin-factor. I clocked a solid 0-60 improvement of about 0.8 seconds using a simple app timer, though your mileage will vary by vehicle.

On the flip side, it’s not adding actual horsepower — it’s just optimizing what your ECU already delivers by remapping throttle sensitivity. It gives a one-to-one pedal response. If you’re chasing dyno-proven gains, look elsewhere (like a tune). But for stock cars, this is a low-risk way to wake up your ride.

RELATED: This affordable dashcam may just pay for itself

Lauren Fix

Fuel economy boost: ECO mode delivers (mostly)

Here’s where it shines for efficiency chasers: Switch to ECO mode, and it smooths out aggressive throttle inputs, encouraging gentler acceleration that pays off at the pump. Over my test loop (mixed 60/40 city/highway), I saw MPG jump from 32 to 34 — that’s a legit fuel savings, especially noticeable in stop-and-go traffic. The app’s real-time data graphs helped me dial in habits, like easing off sooner for coasting.

That said, gains aren’t universal. If you’re a lead-foot who ignores the modes, don’t expect miracles — especially if you live in Sport mode. Pedal Commander’s no substitute for proper driving technique or maintenance.

Modes and customization: tailored to your drive

With eight modes (ECO, City, Sport, Sport+, and its plus variants) plus fine-tuned sensitivity sliders, it’s incredibly versatile. I toggled between ECO for commutes and Sport+ for fun runs via the app’s clean interface — think drag-and-drop sliders and mode presets.

The verdict — a must for pedal lag-haters

If throttle lag bugs you and you want snappier response plus bonus MPG without drilling holes or flashing your ECU, grab a Pedal Commander. It’s transformed my Cayenne from appliance to enthusiast tool, proving you can get more pep and efficiency stock. Perfect for hybrids, crossovers, diesel-powered, or any drive-by-wire daily.

Just drive responsibly — this thing makes power feel addictive. Highly recommended for anyone tired of waiting for their car to wake up.

The company profiles and product recommendations that Align publishes are meant solely to inform and edify our subscribers. Unless explicitly labeled as such, they are neither paid promotions nor endorsements.

​Pedal commander, Throttle lag, Lifestyle, Cars, Porsche cayenne, Mods, Align cars 

Meet Lydia and Heath Marvin.

The Marvins are Christian parents of three children. Compelled by their Christian faith, the couple have fostered eight young children since 2020. But they recently learned that they will no longer be able to provide foster children with a stable home after the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families revoked their license to foster.

Their story is yet another warning to every Christian who still thinks neutrality is an option.

The reason? Because they stood on their Christian values, refusing to sign the state’s “gender affirming policy” and “affirm the LGBTQIA+ identity” of foster children, according to WBZ-TV.

State officials officially revoked the Marvins’ foster license in April.

“We had asked: Is there any sort of accommodation, can you waive this at all? We will absolutely love and support and care for any child in our home, but we simply can’t agree to go against our Christian faith in this area. And we’re ultimately told no, you must sign the form as is or else you will be de-licensed,” Lydia explained.

The faithful Christian couple appealed the decision — but lost.

It’s no shock that Massachusetts, a state controlled by Democrats, believes that compelling loving parents to affirm LGBTQ ideology is a reasonable measure to “protect” children. But the Trump administration disagrees. The administration recently sent a letter to the DCF, according to WBZ, calling the policies “deeply troubling, clearly contrary to the purpose of child welfare programs, and in direct violation of First Amendment protections.”

Yes and amen.

But there is another aspect of this story that Christians should find alarming.

RELATED: How Christians can take back what Pride Month stole

A generation ago, Americans were told that embracing the LGBT movement was about tolerance, kindness, and freedom. Christians were promised that the cultural “progress” of the LGBT movement would not encroach on their own families, faith, or freedoms.

“All we want is the right to marry. How will my gay marriage hurt you?” we were told.

But as this Massachusetts case proves yet again, that was never true. It was never about tolerance. Instead, it was always a demand for affirmation and compliance — or else.

The promise — the progressive narrative that “acceptance” is not forced affirmation — was a lie.

When Christian parents — who are willing to sacrifice their resources to love and support young children in dire need — can lose their foster license not for mistreating children but for refusing to affirm an ideology that violates their conscience and faith, it’s clear we’ve moved from freedom of belief to a mandate for belief. The state is no longer neutral. Rather, it’s enforcing a new moral orthodoxy that treats biblical truth and conviction as disqualifying.

The result is as shocking as it is tragic: Children become victimized again.

Children in foster care are already victims of unfortunate and tragic circumstances. They need stability, love, and guidance. But Massachusetts officials have decided to victimize them further, reducing them to casualties of an ideological war. The state has decided to turn away good, compassionate, Christian parents simply because those parents refuse to recite the LGBTQ creed.

That’s not how you protect children. It’s cruelty disguised as compassion.

And it’s especially tragic when you consider the facts on the ground. From the Boston Globe:

There are only 5,500 licensed foster families in the state for the 8,000 to 9,000 kids in the foster system. When DCF can’t find foster parents for kids, they often end up in group homes instead.

The situation unfolding in Massachusetts is the result of a culture that trades truth for ideology. Once a society decides that personal identity outweighs objective reality, every person must bend the knee. Schools, businesses, institutions — and now even foster parents.

The godless progressive agenda demands that all must become temples of affirmation where any hint of dissent is treated as blasphemous heresy.

But Christians cannot — and must not — comply. Love does not require lying. Compassion does not require compromise. To affirm what is false is not mercy but betrayal. God bless Lydia and Heath for standing firm on the solid rock of Christ and His truth in the face of such pressure.

Their story is yet another warning to every Christian who still thinks neutrality is an option. In this cultural moment, there is no third way. Certain state actors have made belief in leftist creeds and ideologies a litmus test for orthodoxy — and biblical truth is deemed heretical.

Still, we should have hope. There has never been a better time to be a Christian than right now. We have always been called to stand apart from the world. We are salt and light.

And no matter how dark it sometimes feels, darkness cannot overcome the light.

​Massachusetts, Christianity, Christian, Trans ideology, Lgbtq ideology, Lydia marvin, Heath marvin, Free speech, Religious liberty, Faith 

There’s no link between antidepressant use and mass shootings, at least not according to a new study published in the journal Psychiatry Research.

Certainly good news for the pharmaceutical industry — but does one study really mean case closed?

The FDA’s own adverse event reporting system shows a consistent link between SSRIs and violence among adults.

It’s a controversial topic that has only become more so in recent years, especially now that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is the secretary of health and human services under President Trump.

Deplorable questions?

Kennedy has long maintained that antidepressants are causing mass shootings. In an interview with Elon Musk in 2023, for example, Kennedy said, “Prior to the introduction of Prozac [a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor], we had none of these events [mass shootings].”

In his confirmation hearings in February, he told the Senate that the link “should be studied, along with other possible culprits.”

He was asked to clarify his views about antidepressants and mass shootings by his Democrat interrogators, because they were intended to be discrediting just by being uttered aloud — just like his views on water fluoridation, vaccination, and the origins of COVID-19. A whole basket of deplorable ideas.

In short, we’re talking about yet another partisan political issue, even though, surely, we can all agree that mass shootings are terrible and we need to do everything we can to stop them.

Guns, not drugs?

And that includes, obviously, understanding what motivates the shooters.

The new study looked at over 800 mass-shooting incidents that took place between 1990 and 2023. The researchers used publicly available data — news reports, court records, and police statements — to see whether the perpetrators had any history of antidepressant or psychotropic drug use and whether there was a link between suicidality and mass shootings. Previous research had suggested there was such a link.

The researchers found evidence of lifetime antidepressant use in just 34 out of 852 cases and evidence of psychotropic drug use more broadly in 56 cases — just 6.6%. There was no unusual association between suicidality and mass shootings either. Suicide attempts were slightly more common among those with a history of medication use, but the difference was not statistically meaningful.

Population-level data also indicated that antidepressant use among mass shooters was lower than among the general public. If antidepressants were causing mass shootings, we’d expect levels of antidepressant use to be higher, not lower.

QED — or so the researchers believe.

“The vast majority of mass shootings have nothing to do with mental illness,” Ragy R. Girgis, one of the study authors, told medical news website PsyPost.

“The primary modifiable population-level risk factor for mass shootings is firearm availability.”

Prevent people from getting their hands on guns, prevent mass shootings. It’s that simple.

Or is it?

RELATED: Groomed for violence? The dark world of furries and transgenderism in America’s classrooms

Blaze Media illustration

Premature conclusions

There’s a glaring problem: The data simply isn’t good enough to allow any kind of firm conclusion to be reached. The writers at “PsyPost” do at least acknowledge there’s a serious problem, although it doesn’t stop them from trumpeting “new study finds no evidence” in their headline.

Here’s what “PsyPost” says about the reliability of the evidence on offer.

Data were collected from publicly available sources, such as news articles and online records. This approach may miss cases where medication use was not reported or was kept confidential. The study also could not determine whether medications were being taken as prescribed during the attack or whether the person had recently stopped taking them.

Data is often kept confidential, even in the most high-profile cases. Take the Columbine shooters, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. At the time of the massacre, which claimed the lives of 14 people and left another 20 wounded, it was widely reported that Harris had been on the powerful new SSRI Luvox, generic name fluvoxamine. The New York Times claimed Harris had been rejected by Marine recruiters just five days before the attack for taking the drug.

There were suggestions that he had tried to go cold turkey as a result and that this might have affected his actions on that dreadful, bloody day. The Times noted that “patients taking Luvox are warned that if combined with other drugs, including alcohol, the drug can cause extreme agitation progressing to delirium, coma and death. The package also carries a warning about suicide.”

While officials said neither shooter had drugs or alcohol in his system at time of death, the coroner refused to say whether they had been tested for antidepressants, including Luvox.

And so we still don’t know, 26 years later, whether antidepressants played a role in the Columbine killings.

Mandatory screenings

Thankfully, there are now some attempts to provide answers. Unsurprisingly, they’re coming from Republican politicians and red states.

Tennessee has become the first state in the U.S. to introduce mandatory screening for psychotropic drugs in mass killings, defined as incidents in which four or more people are killed. In every mass killing that takes place in Tennessee, a detailed toxicology report will be produced and made available to the public. Investigators will study drug interactions in the killer’s body — because drugs have different effects when used in combination, a fact that is poorly understood — and they’ll also consult with providers of mental health services if the killer was receiving treatment.

Here’s something we do know for sure. A clear, well-established link exists between SSRIs and all forms of violent behavior. A huge Swedish study from 2020 that looked at 250,000 people revealed a significant association between SSRI use and violent crime, especially among 15- to 24-year-olds and 25- to 35-year-olds. The study also showed that risk of violence remained elevated up to 12 weeks after discontinuation of the drugs. The FDA’s own adverse event reporting system shows a consistent link between SSRIs and violence among adults.

A tall order

Instead of dismissing the possibility of a link between antidepressant use and mass shootings, we actually need to do some proper research. Gather data and interpret it objectively — meaning dispassionately, without imposing an ideological agenda that fixes the conclusions in advance.

I know that’s a tall order, given how emotional a subject mass murder is — especially mass murder of children — and how unwilling we all are to talk across the growing political divide, but that’s the scientific ideal, and that’s the only way we’re ever going to get to the truth.

As every first-year history undergraduate knows — and I was one, once upon a time — absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Let’s not get twisted. Lives are at stake.

​Maha, School shootings, Ssri, Ssris, Antidepressants, Rfk jr, Big pharma, Columbine, Fda, Make america healthy again, Culture 

Protests are fashion statements.

In the 1960s, the hippie movement urged participants to wear their hair long and adorn themselves in bright colors that could be seen on color television newscasts. Today, the social media era has devolved into a new form of lunacy intended to be eye-catching for the sake of internet virality.

Communism has become the ultimate fashion statement.

The No Kings protests were a perfect example of how protests have become liberal runways.

Many attendees dressed in inflatable costumes while others sported the red cloaks from “A Handmaid’s Tale.” A quick internet search bears witness to countless other dramatic protest garbs, from Stormtroopers to Uncle Sam to circus clowns. Those who didn’t make a stop at a Spirit Halloween store before attending the protest wore their outrage on too-clever T-shirts or by swinging homemade signs.

These recent protests were, relatively speaking, more geriatric than other protests of recent past, but even BLM and Antifa protesters have their own distinct style. They can be easily identified by their piercings, dyed hair, and Pride pins. They stick to dark clothing like ripped jeans and scuffed Doc Martens, much like 1990s high schoolers who just discovered grunge music. They often use satanic imagery, like skulls or pentagrams, pretending that their relationship with demonic symbols is ironic and, therefore, “wholesome.”

Another symbol that these protestors cling to is the hammer and sickle. They wear it on T-shirts with a casual attitude. College students have it on their belt buckles, and grad students put stickers of it on their Apple computers.

If you knew nothing about the hammer and sickle, you might think it was a clothing brand. Removed from its context, it has morphed into something completely unrecognizable.

Communism has become the ultimate fashion statement. It’s subversive and feigns intelligence, allowing contrarians to morph their love of punk rock into disdain for “the system.” Their quirky personalities are not personal discrepancies but are instead indicators that they are victims of a normal, Christian society.

RELATED: ‘No Kings’ is the clown show covering for a coup

KEREM YUCEL/AFP via Getty Images

In the 1950s, the outcasts wore leather jackets and slicked their hair. In the 2000s, the outcasts wore choker necklaces and sneakers. In 2025, kids are wearing communism. It’s an absurd get-out-of-jail-free card that justifies the behavior of people who feel they don’t fit in.

The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, almost 35 years ago. For many young people, the fall of the USSR feels as distant as World War I or Napoleon. They didn’t see Mikhail Gorbachev lose control or witness the Berlin Wall fall. Older generations understand that communism is a failed system because they saw its ramifications on television. They knew that tens of millions of Russians were killed by it. They saw Cuba be utterly destroyed by it. They saw their family members deployed to Korea and Vietnam to stop it.

For the modern rebel, communism has no consequences. It’s a political theory, a thought experiment discussed in college safe spaces.

The Communist Party, unfortunately, is alive and growing in America.

The Revolutionary Communists of America are slated to host Marxist schools in Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York this year. Membership in the Communist Party USA has jumped from 15,000 in 2023 to 20,000 in 2024. Many of these clubs offer tools and resources to learn about communism on their websites, with one even having a “Marxism IQ” test.

Their cancerous ideology is preying on disenfranchised young people, baiting them with the deadly promises of “equity.”

Wearing a hammer and sickle pin or reading Lenin in public is a way for people to show just how much they care about the ‘oppressed classes.’

At one No Kings protest, the “Denver Communists” had a tent with a sign that read, “Charlie Kirk had it coming.” Workers at the tent posed beside it with thumbs-up, smiling and encouraging people to take photos. A slogan so utterly debauched is intended to get social media recognition. The Denver Communists are actively trying to be noticed for their inflammatory behavior.

It’s the violent progression of a teenager swearing to make his parents angry.

There is a maturity problem in America. Young people are trying to extend their youth in a desperate attempt to circumvent responsibility. The length of time that Gen Z will hold onto one job has sharply declined. Marriage rates have been in a free fall for years. Less than 20% of young people are saving for retirement. College attendance has become the normalized experience of young adulthood, extending the length of schooling while sacrificing years meant for maturity.

This generation has been convinced that their success doesn’t depend on their own work, but on the work of others. To them, communism is the solution they’ve been looking for.

Being a communist is the cool, empathetic thing for young people to support. Wearing a hammer and sickle pin or reading Lenin in public is a way for people to show just how much they care about the “oppressed classes.” It’s a new depth of virtue signaling.

No longer is it enough for radical leftists to support gay marriage or abortion — they must now object to the entire constitutional republic. It’s all for the sake of being rebellious and relevant.

Some people buy expensive handbags. Some people buy rare watches. And today, some people join the Communist Party. After all, it’s just about having the right look.

​Communism, Leftists, Progressivism, Gen z, Protests, Fashion statement, Status symbols 

No drug is as sacrosanct in today’s sexually “liberated” culture as oral contraceptives. But the proliferation of the birth control pill since the 1960s has fostered a number of grave consequences for our society: hook-up culture, delayed marriage, and the destruction of the nuclear family.

None of this would surprise Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. In the early 20th century, she promoted contraception as the mechanism for female emancipation. “Birth control is the first important step a woman must take toward the goal of her freedom,” she wrote. “It is the first step she must take to be man’s equal. It is the first step they must both take toward human emancipation.”

Though the perceived benefits of birth control pills are loudly and publicly celebrated, their costs need to be fully exposed.

Feminist author Betty Friedan agreed, asserting that the pill gave women “the legal and constitutional right to decide whether or not or when to bear children” and established the basis for true equality with men.

Because oral contraception has been touted as a cornerstone of women’s equality and freedom, its health repercussions are rarely called into question. Even Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who regularly wades into controversy by calling for investigations into seed oils and food dyes, remains relatively silent on oral contraceptives.

This is to the detriment of women across the country. As Dr. Sarah Hill demonstrates in “This Is Your Brain on Birth Control: How the Pill Changes Everything,” birth control has had numerous repercussions on women, relationships, and society. She shows that women at the peak of their cycle feel sexier, more outgoing, and more confident with the natural increase in estrogen. And men find them more attractive at that time, too.

More than mere ‘birth control’

As Hill points out, birth control pills do more than just prevent pregnancy: They affect a woman’s hormones more generally — hormones that affect everything from her brain to her fingertips and her overall emotional, mental, and physical health. Many of the women Hill interviewed described feeling emotionally blunted, or as if they were moving through life in a fog, while on the pill.

A woman’s menstrual cycle is often known as the fifth vital sign, and a disruption signals a concern to be addressed, not to be masked.

Birth control is, in fact, “medicated menopause.” While it can be a difficult reality for many to face, studies show that women who no longer menstruate are not as attractive to men, which is why trying to find a mate in the latter years of life can be challenging. The drive to partner up and reproduce is diminished, making marriage less of a necessity and mere companionship more of the goal.

Studies comparing women who use contraception with those who do not reveal that the pill lowers libido, can lead to mood swings or depression, disrupts natural cycles, can cause infertility after discontinuation, interferes with the endocrine system, and can lead to bloating and a gain of nearly five pounds on average. Other studies have found that estrogen-containing pills raise the risk of venous thromboembolism and, to a smaller extent, strokes and heart attacks.

America lags behind

European countries have conducted many tests that demonstrate such effects. A nationwide Danish cohort study of over one million women found higher rates of first antidepressant use and first depression diagnosis among users of contraceptives than nonusers. Another large Danish study found that women who were currently or recently on hormonal contraception were more likely to attempt suicide or die by suicide than women who had never used it.

A Finnish study and a Swedish one produced similar results. A British database shows that the first couple of years of being on the pill brought an increased risk of depression and that women who began using the pill in their teens sometimes had a lasting higher risk.

Few, if any, comprehensive American studies have been conducted, even though about 15% of American women between 15 and 49 use oral contraceptives.

Environmental havoc

Potential problems are not limited to those who ingest the hormones. Synthetic estrogen, an endocrine-disrupting compound used in oral contraceptives, makes its way from America’s toilets to the water supply. Wastewater treatments can reduce, but never fully remove, such psychoactive drugs from drinking water.

U.S. regulators and scientists treat these as “contaminants of emerging concern.” The Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Geological Survey publish methods for measuring the prevalence of such hormones in wastewater and waters used for our drinking supply.

RELATED: Women’s infertility is Big Pharma’s cash cow

simarik via iStock/Getty Images

Male fish begin growing female genitals, and fish populations collapse in water containing the synthetic estrogen from birth control, according to some studies. As RFK Jr. has mentioned, boys are “swimming through a soup of toxic chemicals today, and many of those are endocrine disruptors.”

Though some studies show that typical concentrations of synthetic estrogen in drinking water pose negligible risks to women, perhaps the cumulative exposure to endocrine disruptors affects the sexual development of young males.

Long overdue accountability

RFK Jr. promised to “follow the law regarding access to birth control” during his confirmation process. That could include commissioning the National Institutes of Health to conduct “gold standard science” on oral contraception, as he has sworn to do for other food additives and pharmaceuticals, studies that many European countries have already done.

While calling for restrictions on birth control pills would likely cause a frenzy among many, informed consent is a paramount health priority. Though the perceived benefits of birth control pills are loudly and publicly celebrated (women, you too can have sex like a man!), their costs need to be fully exposed if we are going to restore human health and flourishing among both sexes.

Editor’s note: This article was published originally at the American Mind.

​Opinion & analysis, Robert f. kennedy jr., Rfk jr., Health and human services, Margaret sanger, Planned parenthood, Birth control, Hormonal birth control, Side effects, Danger, Risk, Science, Contraception, Hhs, Seed oils, Food dyes, Toxins, Hormones, Sarah hill, Brain, Depression, Sexual reproductive organs, Strokes, Heart attacks, Environmental protection agency, Regulations, Gold standard, Pregnancy, Big pharma 

Data compiled by the Financial Times reveals birth rates among progressives and conservatives over the past nearly 50 years — and it’s not looking good for the left.

Conservative birth rates have fallen, but conservatives are still reproducing at replacement rates, while progressives are barely reproducing at all.

“What we need is … a turning point, if you will, where we are not just going the same rate of speed as the doctrines of demons, but we are going in the opposite direction,” BlazeTV host Steve Deace says on the “Steve Deace Show.”

“And I think the enemy feared that leaders like Charlie were putting us on such a trend line, especially with their effectiveness towards the youth, and that’s why ‘they’ — demons like to call themselves that — that’s why they murdered him,” he continues.

“And now our hope is that like we’ve seen in the past with martyrs, strike one down and an entire movement comes up behind them,” he adds.

While the left, Deace says, has jumped on the “highway to hell and it’s ‘YOLO,’” conservatives are simply in the slow lane, still heading down the same road.

“We’re traveling the exact same direction. That has to stop. And I think in the younger generations, they sense that. The younger generations on our side. … The hope is we can last long enough to hand it off to them to prove it to us one way or the other,” he tells producer Todd Erzen.

“I mean, if you will not have babies and consecrate them to the Lord, we’re just not serious about the faith we claim to have. This is my lament about the people on the cul de sac and you really just can’t tell in any way a difference between, quite frankly, the families that are happy with the grooming going on and those who claim to believe otherwise,” Erzen says.

“You see all the time: Christian families talk about how expensive kids are. Well, all these families, if you’re paying attention, they’re going on vacation. They have their hobbies. They’re certainly not working, you know, three jobs, man. It’s a choice,” he continues.

“Our excuse-making factories for why our comfort as Christians is going to come before having children and having that be our primary legacy. Giving to the Lord human beings who will worship Him and carry the next generation forward in His name. I mean, it’s a choice,” he adds, “but good luck with that.”

Want more from Steve Deace?

To enjoy more of Steve’s take on national politics, Christian worldview, and principled conservatism with a snarky twist, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Sharing, Upload, Free, Video, Video phone, Camera phone, Youtube.com, Steve deace show, Steve deace, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Todd erzen, Birth rates, Left wing birth rates, Right wing birth rates, Christian conservatives, Population collapse, Birth rate decline 

The New York Knicks evidently want nothing to do with Zohran Mamdani, the front-runner in next month’s mayoral election who defended the extremist slogan “globalize the intifada” earlier this year and has repeatedly been accused of anti-Semitism.

The NBA team sent a legal warning to the socialist assemblyman after he used the team’s iconic branding in a campaign advertisement that not only was published on social media but aired during the Knicks’ season opener on Wednesday night.

The team’s blue and orange basketball logo was featured prominently in the ad — but instead of saying “Knicks,” it said “Zohran.” On social media, the ad was captioned, “This is our year. This is our time.”

In its cease-and-desist letter to Mamdani, obtained by the New York Post, the NBA team suggested that the ad was “likely to mislead the public into believing that the Campaign is affiliated with, sponsored or endorsed by, or in some way connected with the Knicks.”

Per the team’s demand, Mamdani’s campaign removed all of the offending ads as of Friday afternoon.

“The NY Knicks have sent NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani a cease-and-desist letter for using the NY Knicks logo to promote his candidacy,” a team spokesperson told the Post. “The Knicks want to make it clear that we do not endorse Mr. Mamdani for mayor, and we object to his use of our copyrighted logo. We will pursue all legal remedies to enforce our rights.”

‘Am I angry that I’m not the one taking down Zohran the socialist and the communist?’

Dora Pekec, Mamdani’s campaign spokeswoman, said in statement obtained by Bloomberg, “Adjustments are being made to the ad, and while the Knicks might not be able to publicly support our campaign, we’re proud to publicly support our NY Knicks.”

RELATED: Democrats face their ‘David Duke moment’ in New York City

Photo by Michael M. Santiago / Staff via Getty Images

The latest Victory Insights poll suggests that Mamdani is poised to become New York City’s next mayor, leading disgraced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) by over 18 percentage points, 46.7%-28.6%. The poll shows that the Republican candidate, Guardian Angels founder Curtis Sliwa, in trailing in third place with 16.2% support.

In hopes of giving Cuomo a boost over Mamdani, Mayor Eric Adams (D) announced on Thursday that he was endorsing the former governor and did so while wearing a Knicks hat.

“Am I angry that I’m not the one taking down Zohran the socialist and the communist? You’re darn right I am,” said Adams. “But you know what? This city means more to me than anything. And it is time for us as a family to come together.”

“New York can’t be Europe, folks,” continued the mayor. “I don’t know what is wrong with people. You see what’s playing out in other countries because of Islamic extremism.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Sports, New york, New york city, New york knicks, Knicks, Zohran mamdani, Democrat, Leftism, Progressive, Intifada, Politics 

Health experts suggested in years past that mothers with familial predispositions to developing allergies should avoid peanut consumption during pregnancy and breastfeeding and that parents should avoid giving their children peanut products and other common allergens before the age of 3.

According to a National Institutes of Health-backed study published on Monday in the American Academy of Pediatrics’ medical journal, Pediatrics, the strategy of avoidance appears to have been the wrong approach.

Background

After observing the prevalence of peanut allergy among children in Western countries double over the course of a decade, an international team of researchers evaluated studies of peanut consumption and avoidance to figure out which was the better approach.

‘There are less kids with food allergy today than there would have been if we hadn’t implemented this public health effort.’

The researchers, whose work was partly funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, conducted a randomized trial of peanut consumption in infants at risk for peanut allergy and found that “early introduction of peanuts significantly decreased the frequency of the development of peanut allergy among children at high risk for this allergy and modulated immune responses to peanuts.”

Following the 2015 publication of the trial results in the New England Journal of Medicine, numerous health organizations issued consensus-based interim guidance recommending early allergen introduction.

Years later, the NIAID, leaning on the trial data in the 2015 study, released guidelines recommending early introduction for all infants facing low risk of developing a peanut allergy and for high-risk infants where appropriate.

RELATED: The hidden hospital scam driving up drug prices, coming to a state near you

Photo by Amy Brothers/ The Denver Post

Exposure therapy

The new study in Pediatrics indicates that the exposure strategy was worthwhile and has resulted in a 27.2% reduction in the cumulative incidence of peanut allergy among children in the post-guidelines cohort versus the pre-guidelines cohort, and a reduction of over 40% when comparing the pre-guidelines cohort with the cohort situated after the 2017 release of the updated NIAID guidelines.

After analyzing health records from nearly 50 pediatric practices altogether tracking over 120,000 kids, the researchers behind the new study found that overall food allergy rates in kids under 3 dropped from 1.46% between 2012 and 2015 to 0.93% between 2017 and 2020.

The researchers noted further that a Canadian study found that the implementation of early peanut introduction guidelines “was associated with a significant decrease in new-onset anaphylaxis in children aged 2 years or younger.”

“I can actually come to you today and say there are less kids with food allergy today than there would have been if we hadn’t implemented this public health effort,” Dr. David Hill, an allergist at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and author of the study, told the Associated Press.

While about 60,000 kids have reportedly dodged food allergies since 2015, including 40,000 children who would have otherwise developed peanut allergies, 8% of children remain affected by food allergies. One reason the number remains high may be that only a minority of pediatricians — roughly 29% — indicated they followed the expanded guidance released in 2017.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Science, Health, Allergy, Allergies, Allergen, Peanut, Peanuts, Nut, Nut allergy, Medical, Healthy, Politics 

Over the past decade, smartphones have taken over the lives of people across the world. People no longer work, play, or even leave the house without them — and at this point, many essentially live through them.

And the consequences, Richard Ryan, co-founder of Black Rifle Coffee Company, says, may be disastrous in more ways than one.

Those who live through their phones, often as content creators, base their worth off of the feedback from others through some distant screen. But your worth is then contingent on whether or not the platform you use to post agrees with your content.

“You’re getting hundreds of millions of views, and then all of a sudden a social platform, because they disagree with you on the type of content you create, turns that off,” Ryan tells BlazeTV host Nicole Shanahan on “Back to the People.”

“Your distribution is completely shut off and then all of a sudden your self-worth feels like, ‘Oh, OK,’ and you take this kind of psychological hit,” he says, noting that the youth largely makes up the content-creating portion of the population.

“I think about how many younger people work on creating content for these platforms, and there’s something to be said for when you have a large audience and you lose it in any capacity. You’re trying to chase the dragon in that it’s kind of tragic and when that social capital goes away,” he explains.

“Yeah, you hear of these really sad stories of social media TikTokers that have serious mental health issues. Some commit suicide, and they’re very young. And if you think about how much of their lives they’ve spent creating content,” Shanahan agrees solemnly.

And it’s not just that their content is subject to censorship or criticism that can prove dangerous to their psyche, but “being present in the moment.”

“You look at how many people have their phones out at every aspect of their life to record this thing,” Ryan says, noting that there “are a few studies” that broke down the way the brain stores memories.

“The event of you recording something, your brain is logging it as the phone recording the thing, not the thing itself,” he says.

“So say you’re watching fireworks or whatever, which nobody ever rewatches their Fourth of July fireworks videos after they share them to social media, but your brain’s logging it as remembering recording the fireworks and not the fireworks themselves,” he explains.

An example he uses is driving to work via the same route every single day, which your brain will not separate into different experiences unless there is variability in your commute.

“It’s the same thing with your lived experience. If your phone is always the focus of this thing, you’re kind of losing the long-term effects of storing that memory,” he says, noting that the end result could spell disaster.

“The downstream effects I think we’ll find that a lot of this will have some type of implications for memory or cognitive decline, definitely emotional atrophy and different neurological processes for sure,” he says.

Want more from Nicole Shanahan?

To enjoy more of Nicole’s compelling blend of empathy, curiosity, and enlightenment, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Camera phone, Video phone, Free, Sharing, Video, Upload, Youtube.com, Back to the people with nicole shanahan, Back to the people, Nicole shanahan, Richard ryan, Black rifle coffee, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Censorship, Smartphones, Content creators, Iphone, Iphone addiction 

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), who survived a politically motivated assassination attempt, reacted to the murderous fantasies of a high-profile Democrat in an exclusive sit-down interview with Blaze News.

Scalise recounted his brush with death in 2017 when a leftist shooter opened fire during a Republican practice for the Congressional Baseball Game in Virginia. Scalise and three others were wounded in the politically motivated shooting, but all victims miraculously survived.

‘I know firsthand just what can happen.’

“I should not have made it through the day,” Scalise told Blaze News. “God was on that ball field, and there were miracles that were performed.”

“Turned out it was a left-wing nut who was motivated to go kill every Republican,” Scalise added. “He just wanted to do that. And again, we’ve seen this over and over again. … It’s insanity. But unfortunately, it’s become too prevalent.”

RELATED: Democrat Jay Jones’ scandals pile up: Criminal investigation emerges on the heels of violent texts

As Scalise noted, these ideologically motivated acts of violence have become commonplace in American political life. Just in the months leading up to the 2024 election, President Donald Trump survived two assassination attempts, with one would-be assassin getting within an inch of fatally shooting him.

Although these acts of violence sent shock waves across the country, these attacks are not limited to politicians.

In September, hundreds of students watched Charlie Kirk get assassinated on the Utah Valley University campus at the kickoff event of his college tour. In the days after the murder, law enforcement found bullet casings with various politically suggestive slogans written on them, including the phrase, “Hey, fascist! Catch!”

While these attacks were a sobering moment for many, some have insisted that political violence is a both-sides issue. Scalise knows “firsthand” this is not the case.

“Wherever it comes from, if somebody’s advocating for or committing violence, we should all call it out. Doesn’t matter where it’s coming from,” Scalise told Blaze News. “But it just seems like more and more we’re seeing it come from the left.”

“They just think if they tag you a Nazi, then that makes it okay to kill you,” Scalise added. “That is telling certain people — it’s like a dog whistle to say, ‘Go kill that person.’ And it’s just what they say about their political opponents. It’s insanity.”

RELATED: Vance points to the leaked texts Americans really should care about: ‘I refuse to join the pearl clutching’

Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images

“It’s alarming. It’s disturbing,” Scalise told Blaze News. “Because I know firsthand just what can happen when people say certain things.”

One of the most alarming instances of violent rhetoric coming from the left came when now-infamous texts from Jay Jones, the Democrat candidate for Virginia attorney general, were revealed earlier this month. In those texts, Jones fantasized about giving his political adversary “two bullets,” insinuated that the man was worse than Hitler, and even wished death upon his kids.

“Do you really want to elect that person as a law enforcement officer in your state?” Scalise asked in response to the texts. “Should other elected officials be accepting and condoning and endorsing that, or should they denounce it, which I did? Everybody should denounce it, and yet some won’t for political reasons.”

“I think it’s a gut-check for people’s integrity,” Scalise added. “If you’re willing to accept a call to violence because you’re more worried about a political party advancing than you are worried about civility in this country, that’s a real big concern for alarm.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Steve scalise, Jay jones, Donald trump, Charlie kirk, Trump assassination attempt, Kirk assassination, Nazi, Fascist, Political violence, Leftist violence, Politically motivated violvence, No kings, Scalise shooting, Politics 

“I’ve taught people a lot about China,” says President Donald Trump. “China and the threat it poses to America.”

The president is guiding me on a brief tour of his Palm Beach home, Mar-a-Lago.

“China has been ripping us off for many, many years, and nobody ever did anything about it,” says Trump. He went on:

Whether it was because they were intimidated, or whether it was for other reasons, China has taken advantage of us, and we, through corruption or incompetence, have allowed that to happen. We have been losing hundreds of billions and even trillions of dollars to China over a period of many years. A steady stream of $500 billion a year and more in the trade deficit alone. Our wealth has been shattered.

Secret Service agents follow the president as he checks in with aides. I meet one woman who unfurls a 30-yard-long printout of all the emails sent to Trump in the last 24 hours. “They’re all Americans writing President Trump to thank him for what he’s done,” she says.

Americans chose him, among other reasons, to defend them from China and a predatory U.S. ruling class whose ties to the Chinese Communist Party had become the source of its wealth, power, and prestige. Trump had identified the problem decades before his 2016 run for president.

“Though we have the upper hand, we’re way too eager to please the Chinese,” he wrote in his 2000 book “The America We Deserve.” The book continues:

We see them as a potential market, and we tend to curry favor with them even at the expense of our own national interests. Our China policy under Presidents Clinton and [George H. W.] Bush has been aimed at changing the Chinese regime by incentives both economic and political. The intention has been good, but it’s clear to me that the Chinese have been getting far too easy a ride.

What it looked like on the ground for working Americans was ruin and misery. But according to the men and women Americans elected to protect their peace and advance their prosperity, there was nothing to be done about it. Even the president of hope and change said he was helpless when it came to China.

President Barack Obama was referring to Trump when he said, “When somebody says […] that he’s going to bring all these jobs back, well, how exactly are you going to do that? What are you going to do? There’s no answer to it. He just says, well, I’m going to negotiate a better deal. Well, how exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have?”

Returning the jobs to America that the ruling class had exported to China was the core promise of Trump’s 2016 campaign.

The truth was plain to see: Beijing hadn’t outplayed the top lawyers that White House after White House sent out to negotiate against the Chinese; the U.S. establishment had just sold out America. It was to the advantage of the movers and shakers from Capitol Hill and Wall Street, Silicon Valley and Hollywood, media and the fashion industry, and they didn’t care how it hurt their countrymen and elevated foreigners.

So middle-class Americans hired an outsider who promised to take on China. Trump moved quickly. He invited Xi Jinping, the president of the People’s Republic of China and the general secretary of the CCP, to meet him here at Mar-a-Lago in April 2017.

“Until the China virus came, I liked and greatly respected Xi,” Trump says. “I got along with him very well. But they had this slogan, ‘China 2025,’ and I said to him that it’s a very unfriendly term. I said, ‘I really don’t like that term because you’re basically saying that you’re going to dominate us by 2025, and I don’t believe that’s going to happen.’”

Half a year after their U.S. meeting, Trump visited Xi in Beijing and described it in a speech he gave a few days later in Vietnam:

I recently had an excellent trip to China, where I spoke openly and directly with President Xi about China’s unfair trade practices and the enormous trade deficits they have produced with the United States. I expressed our strong desire to work with China to achieve a trading relationship that is conducted on a truly fair and equal basis.

He continued:

The current trade imbalance is not acceptable. I do not blame China or any other country — of which there are many — for taking advantage of the United States on trade. If their representatives are able to get away with it, they are just doing their jobs. I wish previous administrations in my country saw what was happening and did something about it. They did not, but I will.

From this day forward, we will compete on a fair and equal basis. We are not going to let the United States be taken advantage of any more. I am always going to put America first the same way that I expect all of you in this room to put your countries first.

“We had 164 million people working,” Trump tells me. He considers it one of his greatest achievements as president — to get Americans jobs.

“We had everybody from every segment doing well — poor, rich, middle class, it didn’t matter. African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, women, men, people with degrees from MIT and the Wharton School of Finance, people [who] didn’t have a high school diploma. There wasn’t one group that wasn’t doing great. Welfare was way down. Everything was going good. Food stamps were down because people had great jobs and they were happy; they were thrilled.”

It was evidence that Trump had kept his word. Returning the jobs to America that the ruling class had exported to China was the core promise of his 2016 campaign.

Kissinger and the globalist age

In office Trump and his aides came to understand that this meant taking on a vast network of American elites keen to protect their relations with China, a multigenerational matrix of public- and private-sector interests from the political, corporate, and cultural establishments that occupied the space carved out more than a half-century ago by Henry Kissinger when he served as President Richard Nixon’s national security adviser. With his secret trip in 1971 to prepare for Nixon’s historic visit, he opened China to the world again — Kissinger was the Marco Polo of the globalism era.

“Henry Kissinger was a smart man,” says Trump. In October 2017, he visited Trump in the Oval Office. “Mr. President, I didn’t expect this opportunity,” said Kissinger. “It’s always a great honor to be in this office, and I’m here at a moment when the opportunity to build a constructive, peaceful world order is very great.”

“He wasn’t helpful or unhelpful,” Trump says of Kissinger, who died in November 2023, revered as one of the “wise men” of Washington. “But he loved China. He loved China for a reason.”

Kissinger became the model for the new American establishment, a network of political, corporate, academic, cultural, and media elites that profited personally from the US-China relationship.

The opening to China was celebrated by the foreign policy elite as well as the cultural establishment, high and low, from sports to high art, including an opera called “Nixon in China” and a famous series of Andy Warhol paintings of Mao Zedong. Nixon later came to reconsider the wisdom of the opening to China. But for Kissinger, it became the cornerstone of his historical legacy as a statesman and then as a corporate leader.

His post-government career coincided with the rise of globalism, the new world order that saw national borders and even national sovereignty as hindrances to free trade. China, with an enormous pool of cheap labor, often slave labor, was seen as the centerpiece of the new system. And as the statesman who opened China to the West, Kissinger became the model for the new American establishment, a network of political, corporate, academic, cultural, and media elites that profited personally from the U.S.-China relationship.

RELATED: Chinese SIM farms are radicalizing Americans and destabilizing society, intel experts say

Photo by Bettmann/Getty Images

They made money by doing business with China, by opening doors for others to profit there, too, and by paving the way for China to enter what they euphemistically called the rules-based international system. The result, according to forecasts delivered by U.S. policymakers throughout the 1980s and 1990s, would be China’s eventual democratic evolution.

Instead, Beijing’s techno-autocracy rubbed off on American elites. Thus, what they meant by “international system” was just a series of political and economic arrangements through which communist elites became further entrenched, thanks to the money they and their U.S. partners accumulated on the back of Chinese labor and at the expense of the American workforce.

Kissinger became the role model for a networked U.S. elite regularly scrambling to hide China’s depredations from plain view and thereby protect their riches while avoiding blame themselves. Whether it was after the People’s Liberation Army air force brought down American planes in the South China Sea, or Trump declared a trade war with the PRC, or the PLA lied about its role in a pandemic that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, turned millions more into paupers, and left the U.S. economy in ruins, the former top diplomat stepped forward to make Beijing’s case.

He built communist China the biggest and costliest lobby in world history, consisting of the ruling establishment of the most powerful country in world history. Everyone on the inside was in on it. All they had to do was make sure China stayed open for business.

In the early 1980s, Kissinger started Kissinger Associates, a consultancy whose roster over the years included former secretaries of state, treasury, and energy, national security advisers, ambassadors, and CIA officers.

Kissinger managed to avoid having to register as a foreign agent because even though he lobbied openly on behalf of China for 40 years, he wasn’t paid directly by the Chinese. Rather, he drew his income from the major U.S. industries that he vouched for in Beijing, under the tacit agreement that in return for access to China, they would make the calls and demand the meetings with D.C. lawmakers and the White House to lobby for China. It’s a loophole that serving U.S. officials never dreamed of closing, since they saw it as a useful paradigm to pursue their own post-government ambitions.

The list of former officials from Democratic and Republican administrations who have run strategic advisory firms, managed think tanks, or otherwise emulated Kissinger to profit from promoting U.S. ties with China reads like a “Who’s Who” in Washington of the last half-century, comprising both Democrats and Republicans. The list includes President Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of State Alexander Haig, a former Kissinger aide; President George H.W. Bush’s national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, and Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger, also both former Kissinger aides and then employees; Bill Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeline Albright, his Defense Sec. William Cohen, and his national security adviser Sandy Berger; George W. Bush’s Treasury Sec. Henry Paulson and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick; and former President Barack Obama aide and President Joe Biden aide Kurt Campbell; as well as Biden’s Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, and CIA Director William Burns.

RELATED: China rules the resources we need to build the future. Now what?

Photo by liu mingzhu via Getty Images

To support the industry he built to advance the U.S.-China relationship, Kissinger curated the intellectual apparatus to ensure that his heroic version of the opening and all that came after dominated the narrative as the mainstream account. Centers and institutes were named after him, like the Wilson Center’s Kissinger Institute on China and the United States and the Henry A. Kissinger Center for Global Affairs at the Johns Hopkins University; chairs bear his name at the Library of Congress, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, as well as fellowships given at Johns Hopkins and Yale.

Kissinger’s central role as éminence grise of the U.S.-China relationship made him something like a dark-mirror version of Gandalf, the sage wizard in J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy, who guides a band of searchers on their quest. Except, where Gandalf’s charges were tasked with destroying a ring of absolute power that corrupted all who touched it, Kissinger’s charges — corporate titans, Wall Street bankers, leading politicians, university presidents, sports stars, and Hollywood moguls — wanted the ring of power forged in the Middle Kingdom for themselves.

Naturally, they became corrupted by it and brought devastation and ruin to their own country. Because Trump’s mission was to break the spell Kissinger had cast, the forces from every sector of the political and corporate establishment that over two generations had coalesced around it fought back. They joined China’s long war against America.

China class fights Trump

It’s not surprising that China turned its weapons on Americans immediately after the revolution. Washington had supported Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist forces against Mao, and Mao won. To contain the spread of communism, the U.S. fought PRC allies in Asia, where the Chinese killed and aided in the killing of 37,000 Americans during the Korean War and more than 58,000 in the Vietnam War.

The long war against America continues, through subtler means. The Chinese are responsible for the manufacture and distribution of fentanyl, which is illegally pushed across our southern and northern borders and typically kills as many as 75,000 Americans yearly. More than 1 million Americans died during the COVID-19 pandemic, which originated with a leak from a Chinese government lab in Wuhan, where the PLA runs biowarfare programs.

Leaders from the political, corporate, cultural, academic, and media establishments have gotten rich by making China rich.

Though no evidence confirms that the pathogen was leaked intentionally, China’s lies about COVID’s origins, lethality, and transmission are evidence that Beijing opportunistically used it as an instrument in an information warfare campaign to weaken its Western rivals, primarily America.

China’s depredations are typically ignored thanks to the efforts of a well-funded propaganda machine. Beijing pours money into various American intellectual institutions, including universities, think tanks, and media. It also pays U.S. academics directly, as well as social media influencers on all the major platforms, Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, to smear America and dismiss reports of China’s human rights abuses of its own population, particularly minority groups such as the Tibetans and Uyghurs. The CCP also cultivates ties with subnational actors, including American minorities, mostly but not exclusively African-American, as well as state and local governments, to undermine U.S. interests.

But far and away the most powerful asset deployed by the PRC is what I call the China class, leaders from the political, corporate, cultural, academic, and media establishments that have gotten rich by making China rich. Virtually all of what the PRC now makes, from state-of-the-art high tech to advanced military hardware, has either been stolen by them or transferred to them by American elites in exchange for future favors.

China’s leaders, from Mao to Xi Jinping, are typically credited with raising hundreds of millions of peasants out of poverty — an economic miracle like nothing before it, say admirers. But the reality is that it was the policies of the Chinese Communist Party that plunged the Chinese into misery and poverty in the first place.

RELATED: Trump’s tariffs are a tool, not a temper tantrum

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

It wasn’t Beijing that built China’s prosperous new middle class. The Chinese are hardworking and intelligent people, but the type of people who have risen to the top of the communist regime have crawled over corpses to get there — over 70 million Chinese killed under Mao alone. It was America’s political and corporate elite, the China class, who, largely through trade and financial instruments, made this murderous regime what it is today — a peer adversary of the country they call home. And they did it to augment their own wealth, power, and prestige at the expense of impoverishing the American middle class.

The China class appeared at first to be a random assortment of personalities from various industries and institutions who seemed to have little in common, outside the fact that the newly elected president excoriated them. But Trump’s resolve to take on China, and his relentless attacks on them, gave the elites collective self-awareness, or what Marxists call class “consciousness.” Together, they saw that they represented a nexus of public- and private-sector interests that shared not only the same prejudices and hatreds, cultural tastes, and consumer habits, but also the same center of gravity, the U.S.-China relationship.

Connections that might have once seemed tenuous or nonexistent became lucid under the light of Trump’s scorn and the reciprocal scorn of the elite who loathed him and the Americans who elected him to fight on their behalf.

A decade ago, for example, no one would have put NBA superstar LeBron James and Apple CEO Tim Cook in the same family album. But there they are, linked by their fantastic wealth owing to cheap Chinese manufacturing. Miramax Films and Harvard’s Kennedy School? They both produced propaganda that assisted the PRC’s rise to global primacy. The Black Panthers and Goldman Sachs? Both hitched their fortunes to Beijing’s ascendancy.

Some did warn about the dangers of China. Labor unions were against admitting China to the World Trade Organization. In 2000, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney called “the fevered rush to admit China to the WTO a grave mistake.” And four years later, the AFL-CIO submitted a petition, arguing that China’s labor practices, including the suppression of workers’ rights, were unfair trade practices that harmed American workers.

Human rights groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Freedom House, and pro-Tibet activists swam against the tide of pro-China sentiment. Sometimes they were joined by famous celebrities, like actor Richard Gere, and even U.S. policymakers, like former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who, as a young California congresswoman, attended a rally at Tiananmen Square two years after the 1989 massacre there and waved a banner in support of the victims of the PLA’s depredations.

The type of people who have risen to the top of the communist regime have crawled over corpses to get there — over 70 million Chinese killed under Mao alone.

U.S. Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), who ran for president in 1988 and 2004, opposed granting China permanent normal trade relations status, also known as most favored nation status, because it would hurt American workers, while ignoring China’s human rights abuses. “Only when there is real progress that addresses our concerns,” he said, “PNTR should be granted.”

One of the most vocal critics of U.S. trade policy was Ronald Reagan’s onetime deputy U.S. trade representative, Robert Lighthizer. “Giving China most-favored-nation treatment for trade,” Lighthizer said, “was a tragic mistake.” Lighthizer served as U.S. trade representative during Trump’s first term and provided perhaps the most critical piece in Trump’s China policy.

And there was Trump himself. “I think we need to take a much harder look at China,” he wrote in 2000. He was critical not only of China’s trade practices but also its human rights abuses — and he knew the corporate establishment was protecting China:

There are major problems that too many at the highest reaches of business want to overlook. There is, as I mentioned, the human-rights situation. Abuses included torture and mistreatment of prisoners, forced confessions, and arbitrary and lengthy incommunicado detention. Prison conditions remain harsh. The government continues severe restrictions on freedom of speech, the press, assembly, association, religion, privacy, and worker rights. All public dissent against the party and government was effectively silenced by intimidation, exile, the imposition of prison terms, administrative detention, or house arrest.

He had pinpointed the source of corruption in our elite, the reason for the impoverishment of the middle classes, and the threats to our peace. But even he was surprised to find how bad it was when he first came to office.

“They’re partners with China on virtually everything,” Trump tells me. “I mean, they just drop to their knees when China speaks. I’ve never seen anything like it. And they may be afraid of China. It’s not just business. It seems like they’re afraid of China.”

Among other things, they’re afraid of forfeiting the financial benefits. “I know one man who was very opposed to China,” Trump says. “All of a sudden, he comes in and he’s talking to me, and I said, ‘Whoa! What happened?’ He’s talking so positively about China. I said, ‘I’ve never seen anybody go from being so brilliantly against something to being so brilliantly in favor of it.’ I said, ‘They’re paying you, aren’t they?’ He said, ‘Yeah, they paid me a ton of money.’ They pay people a fortune.”

Even if it wanted to, the China class can’t cut itself off from its life source. “It’s like a fix,” says Trump. “And China knew that I was willing to get off the fix. It’s like drugs.”

So they fought Trump on China. They fought him on trade and the tariffs he imposed on Chinese goods during his first term and again when he tariffed China at the start of his second term. And they fought him on national security issues related to China. They fought him when he ordered restrictions on travel from China after a virus swept out of a city hosting a Chinese government lab funded by America’s biodefense czar, Anthony Fauci, in the fall of 2019.

America poisoned

COVID was the real-world manifestation of a decades-long truth; the metaphor employed to describe the relationship merging U.S. and Chinese elites had come to life: China’s communist party had poisoned America. The pandemic dramatized just how profoundly the relationship had transformed the country’s ruling class, now employing the same tactics as the CCP and mirroring its cruelty.

COVID became an instrument to demoralize Americans and imprison them in their homes; lay waste to small business; leave them vulnerable to rioters free to steal, burn, and kill; keep their children from school and the dying from the last embrace of their loved ones; desecrate American history, culture, and society; and defame the country as systemically racist in order to furnish the predicate for why ordinary Americans deserved the hell that the elite’s private-sector militias like Black Lives Matter and Antifa and the FBI and other intelligence services had prepared for them.

U.S. political and corporate elites used the pandemic to disintegrate American norms, including election laws that were unconstitutionally altered to favor a candidate whose financial ties to CCP elites were uncovered a month before the election. But like Communist Party censors, dozens of U.S. intelligence officers arranged with social media platforms and prestige press outfits to block reports of Joe and Hunter Biden’s corrupt relations with Chinese officials.

The election of Biden represented the hegemony of an American ruling class that sees its relationship with China as a shield and sword against its own countrymen. To those most dispirited and demoralized, it resembled the installation of an occupation government ruling on behalf of a hostile power. With Trump gone, there was nothing impeding the political and business establishment from restoring its cozy relations with Beijing and accelerating the betrayal of American sovereignty.

RELATED: China imposes COVID-like quarantine over new breakout of viral disease

Photo by Lang Bingbing/Xinhua via Getty Images

During a trip to Vietnam in September 2023, Biden explained: “I don’t want to contain China.” He continued: “I just want to make sure that we have a relationship with China that is on the up and up, squared away, everybody knows what it’s all about.”

It was a far cry from Trump’s Vietnam speech nearly six years earlier, when he asserted he would pursue the interests of the voters who made him president. Biden was most concerned to soothe Chinese anxieties — and U.S. donors with a portfolio staked to China’s success. “It’s not about isolating China. I want to see China succeed economically,” he said. “We’re not looking to hurt China. … We’re all better off if China does well. … We’re not looking to decouple from China.”

He immediately began rolling back Trump initiatives to keep China in check. For instance, he ended the Trump Justice Department’s China Initiative to root out CCP espionage. After the PRC’s foreign ministry complained that it was racist, Biden compliantly shut it down.

And he made Americans more vulnerable to China. When Biden reversed Trump’s border policy, among the millions who entered illegally were large numbers of PRC nationals who, according to a former U.S. intelligence official, are attached to a special PLA unit.

With America’s borders open, fatal overdoses of fentanyl peaked at over 112,000 deaths. Other drug problems got worse, too. Chinese gangs with ties to the PRC government are responsible for much of America’s illicit marijuana trade. Chinese organized crime, say Oklahoma law enforcement authorities, has “taken over marijuana in Oklahoma and the United States.” According to one report, Chinese mobsters “illegally [move] money overseas for the Communist Party elite and spy on and intimidate Chinese immigrant communities.”

And the Biden administration failed to secure the drugs that keep Americans alive. The pandemic showed how reliant America had become on Chinese-made pharmaceuticals, with the United States importing $2.1 billion in pharmaceutical products. After Biden had three years to reshore pharmaceuticals, by 2024 imports had more than tripled, with the U.S. spending more than $7.8 billion on drugs manufactured in China.

In the early winter of 2023, a PRC spy balloon entered U.S. territory over Alaska. After a week during which it traversed the continental United States, it was shot down off the South Carolina coast. The fact that it was carrying U.S.-made technology, including a satellite communication module, sensors, and other sophisticated surveillance equipment, only underscores how American corporations prioritize profits over national security. It also showed how China controlled an administration led by a president whose family had clear ties to Beijing.

America’s political and corporate elite, largely through trade and financial instruments, made this murderous regime what it is today — a peer adversary of the country they call home.

As president, Biden continued to make the Chinese richer and Americans poorer. He revoked tariffs worth $8.5 billion that Trump imposed on Chinese solar panel manufacturers. One study showed that Biden’s 2022 Inflation Reduction Act — legislation pushing the climate agenda — showed that Chinese manufacturers could earn up to $125 billion in tax credits. Further, by hiking energy prices to satisfy climate ideologues and lobbyists, Biden made the United States less competitive and China stronger by comparison.

On the national security front, Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan gave China Bagram Air Base, a listening post where the United States kept tabs on Beijing’s military activities. “We would have kept Bagram because of China, not because of Afghanistan,” says Trump. “This is one hour away from where China makes its nuclear weapons.” Biden, says Trump, damaged the U.S. alliance system to help China.

“Their stupidity with Saudi Arabia was unbelievable,” he says of his predecessor’s White House. Trump had defended the Saudis when he was pressured to relinquish the decades-long relationship with the world’s top oil producer. But he fought back: Saudi Arabia kept oil prices low, which is good for global markets, and invested in the United States, which is good for American workers.

“They treated Saudi terribly,” Trump says of the Biden team. “They pushed them right into the hands of China.”

While Riyadh flirted briefly with Beijing, Saudi Arabia did not realign with the Chinese — or else it would have risked not only the long-standing alliance but also one of the pillars of the post-World War II order that has made the United States the wealthiest, most powerful country in world history.

Undoing Kissinger’s spell

Because of the Biden administration’s recklessness, many began to wonder if the United States was on the verge of losing its dominant position. After all, the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency is owing among other things to the arrangement Washington policymakers made with the Saudis at the end of World War II: The world buys American bonds and invests in U.S. real estate because the United States is the chief guarantor of security around the world, a large component of which is making sure that Persian Gulf oil gets safely to market.

Among other dangers in that strategically vital region is the anti-U.S. terror regime in Iran, which has joined forces with China and Russia. “Biden forced China and Russia together, and now they have Iran,” Trump tells me. In March 2024, the three conducted joint naval exercises in the Gulf of Oman. “How could Biden have let so many things get so bad?”

From Trump’s perspective, the long line of American presidents dating back over half a century are all responsible for the carnage.

When Trump first took office in 2017, he was hopeful that his administration could force some distance between Beijing and Moscow, but Trump’s domestic opponents made that impossible. The Hillary Clinton campaign’s dirty trick, smearing the 2016 GOP candidate as a Russian agent, was retooled by Obama’s spy chiefs and turned into a weapon to undermine Trump’s presidency.

With false allegations of Trump’s ties to Moscow, the “Russia collusion” narrative had effectively become an instrument to redirect the public’s attention away from China, Trump’s priority. Russiagate protected China and its U.S. partners from scrutiny and prevented Trump from shaping a more comprehensive foreign policy to deal with the threat from Beijing. Instead, says Trump, Russiagate “put us into a hostile environment with a powerful country.”

Who knows if the Trump team would have succeeded in isolating China with a U.S.-Russia partnership, but the Russia collusion narrative obstructed the policy of the man elected to conduct U.S. foreign relations.

“We might have had a good relationship with Russia,” he says. “Russia has very valuable land with minerals and things that we could have used, and we have things that they were desperate to have. And I said to Putin, ‘You probably know.’ And he said, ‘I do know without you even saying it.’ He said, ‘It’s virtually impossible for you to do anything with us.’”

From Trump’s perspective, Russiagate was a geopolitical disaster with the final bill yet to come. “One of the things that I learned very early on from a lot of very smart people is don’t let Russia and China get together,” Trump says. But the Americans fighting Trump helped force them together. “They pushed Russia to China.”

That formula is an inversion of how the U.S.-China relationship began more than 50 years ago, with Kissinger’s secret July 1971 trip to Beijing to prepare the ground for Nixon’s state visit. Nixon and Kissinger set about leveraging China against the Soviet Union. They called it “playing the China card,” but it was among the worst bets American leaders ever made, for their strategic gambit evolved into the devastation that Trump was elected to repair.

From Trump’s perspective, the long line of American presidents dating back over half a century are all responsible for the carnage.

“They were all really bad,” Trump says of his predecessors’ records on China. “But Richard Nixon is the one who opened up China. It was a terrible mistake. A lot of people praise him for opening up China. But I think they’re stupid people, too. It was a very bad day for the United States. He let them in, and other people let China take advantage of us.” There were other presidents who followed and other presidents who allowed the rape of the United States to go on and on. But it was Nixon and Kissinger who initiated it.

“The worst thing Nixon did wasn’t Watergate,” says Trump. “It was allowing China to take advantage of this country. He and Kissinger are the ones who opened up China. And it was a terrible mistake. It didn’t have to be this way.”

This is the story of the U.S. ruling class’ deadly pact with China. It shows how the career of one man, Henry Kissinger, shaped the world as well as the country we live in today. And it’s the story of the man twice elected to undo Kissinger’s spell. Trump and Kissinger, antagonist and protagonist, are the two poles around which this epic account of the last 50 years of American politics, culture, and society revolves.

Editor’s note: This essay has been adapted from Lee Smith’s new book, “The China Matrix: The Epic Story of How Donald Trump Shattered a Deadly Pact” (Center Street).

​Opinion & analysis, Opinion, China, Chinese communist party, Chinese communists, Chinese concentration camps, Xi jinping, President xi, Mao, Mao zedong, China class, China spy balloon, Chinese espionage, Henry kissinger, Trump, Trump xi, Trump china, Trump china trade war, Richard nixon, Zhao enlai, Corruption, Sellouts, America first, Tariffs, Free trade myth, Weekend long read