The No Kings Protests Are Going Nowhere: Simon and Garfunkel can no longer save the communist movement from free market needs

The No Kings Protests that were pushed uphill over this past weekend are really quite telling.  It’s the same communist losers from the George Soros side of the fence, the Simon and Garfunkel crowd of old pot-smoking hippies and lazy teacher union types who, like trained seals, look for an easy paycheck, show up with their dumb signs and beg for food like common dogs.  As I have said before, several of the biggest labor unions in the world have buildings just outside the gates of the White House, and they really want to think they have power over the means of production in the United States, and they clearly don’t, and won’t.  They have had a lot of influence in the past because people didn’t know that they were essentially the actions of Karl Marx himself.  On a good day, they wanted European socialism, but what they wish for, policy-wise, is outright communism in the style of China.  Their protests were far from organic as the media tried to shape them.  And as a footnote, most members of the media, primarily on the national level, are members of a labor union, even Sean Hannity, who is a member of SAG-AFTRA (the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio artists, and an AFL-CIO affiliate that represents broadcasters, journalists, and media professionals like radio and TV hosts.)  That is why so many media types are soft on coverage of these kinds of communist activities.  All labor unions are communist organizations, and they seek to rule by the mob and to take out the management of any organization.  And that’s precisely what’s going on here, with Trump.  He’s a strong executive type that union membership hates, and they are seeking to apply Karl Marx to the success America is seeing and to try to turn people against the good management we are witnessing in the White House.

I have to pick on Simon and Garfunkel for a minute because maybe one of the big keys to this new awakening we are enjoying in modern life is the degradation of the music industry.  Generally, I think the transition of contemporary music and entertainment has been a bad thing.  People used to share a favorite movie at least and a favorite song, and with the decentralizing of so many broadcasters and musicians, free markets have destroyed the common experience.  Everyone can have their own YouTube channel, and everyone can make a hit song.  But not everyone will hear it, so the chances of Simon and Garfunkel writing and singing some modern version of a hippie folk song about smoking pot and free love are much less influential. For instance, many people over 50 will know their song “Feelin’ Groovy” and the Bob Dylan song, “Rainy Day Women.”  People under 50, especially closer to 20, will get most of their information from YouTube, and the content likely won’t be repeated because it comes and goes so fast.  A lot of people might enjoy the entertainment experience, but it won’t be shared in the way that Simon and Garfunkel did, and it won’t be passed from generation to generation as a cultural staple.  So the ability for someone like George Soros to capture people’s minds through music has been greatly diminished in this new entertainment generation, which has as much to do with the sudden rise of the MAGA movement as anything.  A kind of spell has been broken from the capture of our entertainment culture over a long period of time.  Music was used to rally the masses toward communism throughout the latter half of the last century, without question.  And now no musical artist has that kind of influence, so people are waking up and away from those detrimental influences.

And that kind of brain-dead numbness was evident at the No Kings rally, which was as mad at Trump as the teacher’s unions are at moms and dads who insist that they run their children’s lives rather than the mob rule of the public school.  Trump has signed a lot of executive orders to undo essentially the progressive agenda.  There is a lot of legislative support that a supportive House and Senate will undoubtedly follow.  But to undo the mess that many of these embedded communists have imposed on our way of government, Trump has had to sign a lot of them.  And that’s what we voted for.  Trump was a successful executive who brought to the White House all the elements that made him great in the private sector.  And he hasn’t disappointed people. Instead, people have had to come to terms with the roots of their own past.  Many people think in the way that MAGA does, the Make America Great Again movement.  But what does that mean when people are listening to songs from Jefferson Airplane about overt free love, which was causing them to tap their feet to the music while going to work and trying to hold together a marriage?  When the common experience of entertainment gives them a contrary thought, they will likely produce in society, contrary values.  But people are waking up from that fog of contradiction and are enjoying the success Trump has brought to our White House.  And the communist labor union types are being lost in the dust as their influence is vanishing like fog on the horizon of a rising sun. 

So the coverage of this communist No Kings movement around the world was biased toward Karl Marx and not the free market influences of a society independent of the previous tyranny.  In America, we look to empower individuals to achieve above and beyond group associations, so leadership is a high-value enterprise.  We like innovative CEOs and entrepreneurs, like Elon Musk or Steve Jobs.  And Trump made his living being a shining example of outstanding business leadership.  That’s why we wanted him in the White House.  We wanted our government to run like one of his businesses.  And we don’t like the stringy-haired bra burners to weaken our society with the kind of communist drivel we have had to endure for many years, which has delivered us to so many global embarrassments.  At the end of his term, Trump will leave and turn everything over to someone else, which is how the American republic was designed.  We are moving away from the tyranny of the masses, where the common losers of society can have equality with the best and brightest.  We want the best to produce wonderful things we can all enjoy.  But without the exceptional, we get a society of the average, and that was never what America was going to be about.  And why the MAGA movement is moving away from influencers like the communist supporting George Soros and his little son, Alex.  Their money has been weaponized to shape our culture through old mechanisms like music and movies.  But not anymore.  That spell has been broken and will continue to be well into the future, as options have given people independence from the unifying communism of artistic control over the entertainment industry.  The labor union movement put out the call for their members to show up and carry signs against Trump, but it’s an old, tired crowd of people going nowhere.  And their communist movement is slipping through their fingers as the success of the Trump White House continues.  And there is nothing they can do about it, which is a joy to see.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Beware of the “Time Eaters: Ways of attacking leadership in the world

As we talk about people who live in the back of the train and are not the leadership type, using Robert Pirsig’s Metaphysics of Quality, there are sure ways to detect their destructive attributes.  I call them “time eaters”: people who are afraid to do things in the world and disguise their impact by consuming time, hiding their lack of leadership.  Because they are too timid to live life in front of the train, they make a lot of noise to seem helpful in a fast-moving world.  They are the kind of people who want to consume your time with small talk or discussions about small things that are not important to the task.  And when you are doing important things in life, they seek to take up your time to associate themselves with some level of success without committing to fulfilling the endeavor.  And the really insulting thing about it is that when they want to waste your time, they fail to recognize that, as a fellow human being, you must be suffering from the same ailment as they are.  When people don’t know what to do, they seek means to disguise it with nonsense and waste time trying to look productive, but only with meaningless chatter.  A good example of this is the occasional salesperson who tries to sell you something in a shopping complex and stops you with “can I have a moment of your time?” as if that moment were not infinitely valuable.  The assumption is that, as two fellow human beings, you have some obligation to waste time on someone else just because they request it.  And in so doing, a lot of unproductive output occurs.  Being nice and accommodating will often leave you feeling empty because these people seek to drain you of your effort to fill up what’s empty inside them.

Using the metaphor of the speeding train, the people in life at the back of the train are always trying to bleed you of information when you are the leader type at the front.  So they are always trying to get you to come to the back, where they are, so that they can feel part of the process.  They, of course, wait for you to do something meaningful, then try to associate themselves with the success.  But because they are the back of the train types, they need to eat your time to gain something they didn’t earn.   And when you take the time to give it to them, trying to be nice, they fill the time of the exchange with nonsense, hoping to blend in and to look helpful.  They talk about sports, about the lottery, about wine, donuts, and college football teams.  But they never have the guts to talk about the things that really matter because they are in the back of the train and are only trying to appear as if they are part of a team.  When we talk about teams, there are usually leaders.  Then there are the people who like to spend time talking about silly things, trying to associate with success in the exchange.  I find wasting time with people in the back of the train talking about nonsense is a sure path to failure, because leadership is about being on the cutting edge, seeing things as they come, and dealing with them there.  Not talking about cutting the grass and what your neighbor is doing.  If it doesn’t involve life on the cutting edge, it’s mostly about wasting time. 

And in that way, I see a different kind of tyranny in the modern world designed by people who live in the back of the train.  They want you to always read their terms of service agreements for every little thing.  They want you to waste time figuring out a new software update for your smart TV that adds all-new control features to your remote.  They want to drag you into meaningless states for baseball stats and sports while the world outside burns away.  There is an evil in these time eaters that tries to keep you from getting to them by trying to trap you in the back of the train and away from the front so that they can work their malicious schemes.  And before you know it, on any given day, you have wasted 24 hours of your life and achieved very little.  Because your day was filled with “time eaters” who took away precious time to be on the leading edge with analysis from the back, trivial nonsense that are observations, not leadership-led.  And even in that sentiment is the notion that success should never be achieved at the cost of our humanity, of not communicating effectively, or of volunteering to waste time with people in the back of the train out of compassion for their position.  And that no achievement matters more than talking to another human being.  Even if what everyone is saying to each other is meaningless in the scheme of things.  The point of communication is to validate the lack of leadership that the other parties are terrified of, and the point of existence is to make them feel better about it. Not to actually achieve things. 

So beware of the “time eaters.”  I avoid them as I would any disease.  There is a real menace in their actions that intends to destroy the world, and I don’t like it at all.  And I say all this not to be mean, but to explain why I don’t allow myself to get stuck in projects or circumstances that are “time eaters.”  When I see and hear that the people I’m dealing with are “time eaters,” I remove myself from their company quickly and move on to something much more interesting.  If I feel what I’m doing isn’t important, then I don’t do it for long.  And people do take offense to it, but that’s OK.  I see value in the back of the train only in the analysis it provides.  But it only helps in a kind of future state, as leadership is fast and furious, and is not a team exercise.  The concept of teamwork is designed to be a time-eater of shared consumption of resources to appear busy and proactive.  When, in reality, it’s just intended to keep leaders from the front of the train and to trap them in the back with all the other slugs.  And the more time they waste keeping essential things from happening, the worse the world is.  Whether the issue is a discussion about a meaningless topic or wasting time with the TV remote, “time eaters” are a real problem imposed on us by an evil that lurks just beyond our senses.  And the war they have against us is a very real terror against the human race.  The lure is in compassion, wasting time with people who can’t contribute to success because they lack the ability.  And in that effort, the whole ship sinks, and this is by design.  So, to prevent that eventuality, beware of the time-eaters.  They will seek to destroy the world with nonsense and sell it as a value because of the human need to feel wanted by other human beings.  And in that exchange, vast evils are expressed and injected into society to undo all thoughts of goodness.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The FBI Has Been Caught Manipulating the J6 Protests: Hiding crime behind more crime

So it’s no longer speculation, the FBI had 274 plainclothes operators in the crowd for the J6 attack on the Capitol, as we have long suspected.  And they intended to provoke an angry crowd into doing something that would capture the attention of the general public.  So if these FBI agents were not at the J6 speech, where Trump was encouraging people to hold strong while one of the most significant crimes in the world was taking place, election fraud on a mass government scale, that same government placed employees in that crowd with the intention of causing trouble that would otherwise conceal the crime of election fraud.  On the day that the certification process took place, January 6th, 2021, the FBI operated to stir up the crowd and create a cover story that was designed to hide election fraud, which is why people were so upset in the first place.  They were watching a government steal away their pick for president right out of the White House.  And we’ve seen how this government operates, we’ve seen several other assassination attempts against Trump since then, numerous court cases, and we’ve seen the assassination of Charlie Kirk on a college campus.  And there are all kinds of strange activities around these acts of violence that are part of a general enforcement policy at the FBI.  That they were caught over January 6th, where lots of people were harmed and their rights were violated horribly, in the J6 prisoners, who were only let out of jail because Trump won re-election, we can’t forget what we saw, nor ignore the amount of bad behavior we have witnessed here.   We can only discuss it now because Trump was so resilient that he outlasted the attempts against him, thanks to his substantial financial resources. Most people with that kind of wealth tend not to fight as hard for anything.  However, we now have the proof we needed.  The question is, what do we do with it? 

With all the recent shooters, we see the same kind of operation as we saw on January 6th, 2021, especially the Charlie Kirk assassination.  The killer, Tyler Robinson, was part of a discontent gamer community filled with transsexual actions and furries.  And like the J6 crowd, we were already upset at several things.  Breathing on a fire of discontent and pushing them to commit a crime is something that happens too often and appears to have a direct connection to the FBI and how they have learned to operate.  They are not what they are supposed to be, which is an investigative body.   We even have a MAGA guy in Kash Patel running the FBI, but these career types know the game and clearly plan to outlast their bosses.  And they intend to get away with everything, because essentially, they control the courts and the entire legal process.  As long as they don’t have their hands directly on the murder weapons, they think they can get away with things.  Even if they get caught, as they did with J6 in putting people in the crowd to encourage them to storm the Capitol and cause trouble, trouble that would hide the government’s crime of election fraud, they expect to get away with it.  With Tyler Robinson, we know he was the killer.  But there is a lot of strange behavior that points to circumstances where a disconnected kid felt he needed to throw his life away to kill a political figure that the FBI didn’t like.  Where did Tyler Robinson get the idea to kill Charlie Kirk with his grandfather’s gun? 

In the case of the Charlie Kirk shooting, it was a Discord chat room that the gaming community was using to discuss their opinions.  And when the people who routinely participated in that chat room are discussed in investigations into why Tyler Robinson did what he did, the story cools off really fast, just like the J6 prisoners.  And what’s alarming about that is that this appears not to be unique, but is a way to manage society.  When the FBI, as a group of career administrators, wants to shape the world to their liking, they use their grip on power to push other people into violence that serves their cause, while they hide in the background.  And they even got caught in this case, hiding critical information from their boss, who had to drag it out of them.  Ultimately, the indictment of James Comey, the former FBI Director, tells the whole story.  He has been charged with crimes, the same kind of crimes that Peter Navarro was prosecuted for, but the FBI has yet to pick him up and arrest him because he’s one of their own.  I’ve seen this kind of thing before in the various teachers’ unions that hide the bad behavior of teachers from the public.  For the FBI, numerous government unions operate independently, operating as their own kind of government without oversight. Among these, the FBI Agents Association exists as a kind of brotherhood that transcends the scope of government oversight and administrative management.  And as their actions have revealed, they see themselves as a fourth branch of government that rules through fear and their ability to manipulate the conditions of law and order from the shadows.  We have been suspicious of them for years, wondering whether they could be trusted with that kind of power.  But now, we know the truth, and the J6 incident was so extreme and involved so many people that they got caught. 

But if we hadn’t won that last election by putting Trump back in the White House with overwhelming support, and if he hadn’t offered himself in the very tenacious way that he did, we wouldn’t know any of this.  The FBI would have gotten away with literal murder, and the investigation would have gone cold a long time ago, just as it has with the inquiry into Charlie Kirk’s murder.  There are still all kinds of things wrong with the kid who tried to kill President Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania.  The crimes are happening so quickly that before the evidence of the previous crime cools, another one occurs, which is part of the cover-up.  That is part of the problem.  And when the FBI is the lead agency in all investigations, they can clearly avoid investigating themselves.  We have a real problem here that defies oversight, and most of the agents involved value their brotherhood to each other and the power they have been given through manipulation more than in the actual election process of maintaining administrative oversight through a democratic process of maintenance through elections.  They can rig elections and murder people who get in their way, and nobody will do anything about it.  And even if challengers to their order do get into office, such as Trump has, and Kash Patel actually runs their efforts, they will ignore them and work against them, waiting out their term in office as career politicians.  They are a lot more loyal to their brotherhood in the FBI Agents Association than they are to the people’s pick for president who sits in the White House.  And will they abuse their power over law and order to conduct crimes if they can get away with it?  Yes, they have been caught doing so, and their disrespect for the human race outside of their association is grotesquely apparent.  They are guilty of much worse than just murder and election fraud.  And it forces us to deal with them accordingly. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Arrest of James Comey: Bring a sword, don’t turn the other cheek

I feel like spiking the football on the James Comey indictment and arrest that occurred just shy of his statute of limitations expiring after five years, at the end of September 2025.  His crimes are actually far more extensive than the obstruction of justice and lying to Congress that they put his way.  And once again, I think one of the best experiences I have ever had in life was the period I spent as the foreman of a grand jury, so I know very well what kind of cases prosecutors bring forth and how the evidence is presented and discussed.  And how a grand jury handles multiple cases, not just one.  You get a chance to talk to a lot of legal people and see how different prosecutors react to other cases.  So I can understand why there was reluctance to prosecute James Comey.  There is a whole Deep State of career political people who could make life very difficult for future administrations, because in their minds, Trump will come and go.  Many of these individuals believe they will have entire careers in government and will last through many future presidents, so they approach them with a tongue-in-cheek attitude, as if our system of management from the White House were an inconvenience that they sneer at.  And they treat the rest of us the same, as if the power of the Administrative State was far superior to the voters whom they are supposed to serve.  James Comey and the government workers like him think they are superior to the basic intellect of the average American and that they can lie to our faces and not face any punishment for the deceit.  And with James Comey, I called him out a long time ago, in May 2017, just a few months into Trump’s first term, where I was one of the first people in the country to call him a liar.

CNN was looking to dislodge Trump supporters from the new president at the time, so they came to Butler County to speak to a hard-core group of Trump advocates.  We met at a local sports bar and watched live on television, with CNN producers, as Comey testified after Trump fired him from his role as FBI Director.  This was an all-day event, and later that night, we would gather on Anderson Cooper’s show to share our reactions to the testimony.  CNN hoped that Butler County would start to doubt their support for Trump with the horror of firing Comey, who at the time was thought of as America’s squeaky-clean Boy Scout, beyond refute.  But what I said shocked the producers, and they let me know it after the cameras were off and the live feed had concluded.  I said when asked on the air that I thought James Comey was more like Eliot Ness from the famous Al Capone mob cases in Chicago.  But what he turned out to be was more like Ian Fleming, the James Bond novelist.  And that the FBI Director was more inclined to fiction, which I thought was a nice way of saying that he was a liar.   Well, at that time, that was a shocking statement, and that was one of the last television interviews that I ever did.  Before that, I appeared frequently on radio and television; producers would seek my opinion on various topics, and I would offer it.  But after that, things changed dramatically.  I didn’t care because my own media efforts were much more potent.  I found it much more rewarding to express my thoughts than to try to fit into a producer’s narrative.  However, that fracture indeed occurred that night after the CNN segment.

That was 8 years ago, and the information was self-evident.  It took that long to reach justice in indicting James Comey.  And like most deceitful people who get caught in these terrible scandals, he sought mass collectivism to shield himself from personal judgment.  To show what a manipulative loser he really is before this indictment, which he knew was coming, he put out a video attempting to get support from Taylor Swift’s audience, hoping to manipulate pop culture soothsayers to his side, and to pit them against Trump.  This is actually a much more dangerous trait that indicates a deeper problem at the FBI and how they handle cases in a mass society.  We’ll talk about the way the FBI planted 274 agents into the J6 crowd to accelerate activism and cause trouble.  The FBI has been picking winners and losers for a long time, grossly abusing its authority in multiple cases.  Which is why they thought they’d get away with this Russian story on driving Trump out of office.  So yes, I saw it well in advance and I said so on national television, and I turned out to be right about everything, even when the world took a hard turn toward regime suppression just a few years later in 2020 with Covid and election fraud to throw Trump out of office.  It seemed that the bad guys truly had the kind of control that James Comey thought shielded them from reality.  And that he and the FBI could abuse their power to maintain a political order that they thought was more appropriate, a Taylor Swift kind of progressivism, they were going to impose on us whether we liked it or not.

So this is actually a grave crime, not just an FBI Director who went bad and abused his power to throw out an elected official from the White House that he disagreed with.  This is about a fourth branch of government that thinks it exists beyond voter approval, and this goes back to the killing of JFK and the getting rid of Richard Nixon.  And that’s why it was so absurd to everyone when Trump was elected that he would actually last, let alone serve a second term.  The CNN guys that night told me in the parking lot that we were all living in a bubble with our support of Trump, and that it was a regional issue.  That the rest of the world would disregard us as backward and out of touch.  And it made me so angry that I stopped answering calls from media producers and participating in their shows, because they all pretty much thought the same way as these people at CNN.  And after eight years, they all turned out to be very wrong, and I was right.  And they are all on the way out, and my position is stronger than ever, and it all feels pretty redeeming.  So I’m thrilled to see bad things happening to James Comey, and I want to see even more happen to people who are just as bad as he is.  Those who believe that an unelected form of government should be allowed to hold power need a reality check, and that’s what’s happening now.  It’s not revenge for what these same people did to Trump and many of us who supported him.  Although revenge is very appropriate, I would encourage people not to turn the other cheek, as Jesus said in Matthew 5:39, but to do as Jesus said in Matthew 10:34: ‘Do not bring peace, but a sword.’  We must fight evil wherever we find it, and James Comey was a facilitator of evil, hiding behind a deceitful façade.  And he has to be made an example of, and I am thrilled to see that day arrive.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

I Love War: The greatest joy in life is destroying your enemies

Erika Kirk’s statements at the memorial service for her husband were nice, but it has been something that has come up in my direction many more times than a few this past week.  I am more aligned with what President Trump said about his enemies: I hate them.  I don’t want to get along with them.  And I would be bored to death in life if I didn’t have someone to fight.  The idea of going to Heaven and sitting around playing a harp on a cloud all day for eternity is not appealing.  Forgiving enemies is not something I will ever do.  I love war, and I love being in fights with other people.  I love to destroy my enemies.  That destruction either happens fast or it happens over a great many years, depending on the circumstance.  But one way or another, the destruction of my enemies is something that is going to happen, and I spend a lot of my life thinking about it.  The idea of waking up every morning, sipping coffee, and watching the dew gather on blades of grass without having to fight is incredibly dull to me, and I would not be happy.  So even though the concept of Christianity is to forgive your enemies and all kinds of platitudes that I think were incorrectly interpreted over time into organized religion, that is where my thoughts end on these kinds of things.  I may share a lot of values with very religious people, but if there is no conflict involved in communicating those ideas, then I lose interest really fast.  Because to me, the fight is the only thing that matters, and if people aren’t fighting, they aren’t trying to get to the truth of a matter. 

Human beings are so deceitful; they have numerous value systems that protect their motivations behind the creative lies that surround their lives intensely.  That is the first problem with a society of peace: a lot of truth gets buried behind deceit.  When people ask me why I can sniff out so much truth about things, and have over a long period of time, it’s because I like to fight for that truth about people.  The pressure of conflict brings about the truth in people and exposes them from their hiding places.  In my experience, that is the only way to understand what people are all about truly.  Otherwise, they will conceal their true thoughts behind the façade of polite society.  If you love the truth, you have to love the means of extracting it from society in general, and the only real way to do that is through conflict.  People often reveal a great deal about themselves through conflict that they would otherwise conceal.  Along with war, I love uncovering the truth about things.  Whatever that truth may be.  I love war because I love the truth, and you can only learn it through conflict.  Because people, all people, will lie to protect their version of the truth until their dying day, if they are allowed to.  The reason for conflict is to settle differing ideas about things.  And to avoid war is to suppress the truth about what those things might be in favor of some common understanding that is usually a watered-down version of reality.  So the assumption of peace is the surrender of the truth, as people are willing to fight for it.  And that lowers the value of a society in general as a result. 

I suppose this has arisen recently, before Erika Kirk made her statements, because many truly reprehensible individuals believed they had some leverage over me.  And they have been very frustrated by my reaction to their aggressions.  Most people conduct strategies assuming that peace is the motivating factor in a human being.  To wake up in the morning and be left alone so that everything is just perfect.  I don’t see the world like that.  If there isn’t something to fight, then I’m bored.  So when I have a lot of enemies trying to plot my demise, I am far happier than if everyone just left me alone.  Many people are frustrated by my approach because they assumed, like most people, that I would do anything for peace.  They should have done their homework.  Ever since I was a little kid, most of my thoughts have been about war and fighting someone over something.  That’s why I love politics.  That’s why I love the business world.  That’s why I like most things, because they involve people, and those people are often at cross-purposes with each other. I love uncovering the truth behind concealed smiles and handshakes.  I never sit down with people and look for common ground or ways to enjoy another person.  I want to challenge them, with everyone, and to discover what it is they don’t want to be known for to the world.  I never assume that my interactions with anyone will be peaceful, and if they are, I lose interest in those people quickly.  In my youth, I wore army fatigues everywhere, under every circumstance, because they reminded me of my love for constant fighting.  I never wanted to join the military to “serve.”  Serving others was always a misguided idea because what if, in doing so, those people were found to be unworthy of my dedication, which is a common discovery in all institutionalism.  However, the fighting aspect has always been appealing. 

The teachings of Jesus are appealing ideas on the surface.  But if you like the truth of a matter, you will either be killed for it, as Jesus was, and John the Baptist was, and as was Charlie Kirk, and many others.  Or you will have to fight everyone, and like it.  And that means everyone, because most people are very deceitful even within their families.  There are plenty of fights, and if you want to know the truth about things, you’d better be willing to fight for it.  Fighting is more than just the physical aspect, because humans are very emotional creatures; they create many layers of deceit in their lives to protect themselves from the harm of judgment.  And the more people you deal with, the more deceit you can expect to be exposed to.  The only way to get to the truth of anything is through conflict, in stripping away the things people use to protect themselves so you can get to the foundation of their intellects.  Such a thing is never given up voluntarily; you have to pound away at their defenses to know who they really are, which only happens under duress.  So, if many people have found that they now have a handful with me, they should have thought about things a bit more carefully.  I am only thrilled when the world around me is on fire, and that is how it will always be with me, even in Heaven.  Heaven to me would be at the gates of Hell putting evil’s heads on a pike and spitting on their tortured bodies.  Everyone else can play a harp at the golden gates of Heaven and sing songs to each other in a quest for peace.  Which, for me, is the same as serving an obligation toward dishonesty.  Only in war do people really tell the truth, even in Heaven.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Vote For Mark Welch on November 4th 2025: Its all about keeping West Chester great and taxes low

I think it’s an easy decision to vote for Mark Welch for West Chester Trustee.  He has been in that position since 2013 and is running for another term. West Chester has thrived during his tenure.  Several other people are running for Trustee this time as well, including another incumbent, Lee Wong, and a few others who are various degrees of Democrats.  Mark is a solid Republican who carries several endorsements, including those of Warren Davidson.  Given the nature of the 2025 election in November, I think Mark is the best pick, but we can’t take anything for granted.  There have been many new people from more Democrat areas who have moved into the area, and the hope of the opposition is that they’ll be able to take over the West Chester trustees, as they have been trying to do for many decades now.  However, we’ve managed to keep the politics relatively good, anchored behind Mark, which has created a very pro-business environment in West Chester, resulting in significant revenue and low taxes.  However, we have had some people fall off the rocker over the years, and Mark could use some help as a trustee.  But first, he needs to get re-elected.  And his message is one that everyone can understand. If you like West Chester, as many do, and see it as one of the best places in the world to live, which it is, then vote for Mark Welch, because he’s a big reason that it has been great for so long.  When rival people who want to run for his seat say we need to “change,” consider what that means.  To change from good to bad.  Because that is the only kind of change they intend.  The only type of change Democrats could give West Chester is to make it change from good to bad. 

The foundation was set when Mark Welch joined Senator Lang as a trustee all those years ago.  Before that, it was just George Lang who fought off two other trustees, one of whom was Lee Wong, who is also up for re-election.  When Mark won, he replaced one of the two liberals, and suddenly there was a two-vote majority. Over the last decade, they have kept taxes low and business interactions very friendly, which has helped maintain home values and made the township one of the most competitive anywhere, earning it the title of ‘best place to live’ many times.  George Lang has since moved on to other political positions and taken the West Chester message to the Ohio Statehouse, where he has done a great job as the current Senate Majority Whip.  And Mark has held down the fort.  We replaced George’s seat with a tea party-type person who was good for a while.  But people change over time, and she has gone wobbly in the knees and is more Democrat these days.  So Mark needs help.  Lee, even with all his problems that have been well chronicled over the years, votes with Mark a lot.  However, without Mark on the board, Lee will likely vote for the Democrats, which is the current situation.  Mark is the one who stands between success and failure in government in West Chester.  Democrats, seeing some of the changing demographics in the area, are licking their chops at a chance to interrupt a Republican foothold position, as they have on the Lakota school board, which just voted as all Democrats do, to implement the most significant school tax increase in Ohio history, which is also on the ballot for the November election.  They hope that enough Democrats will vote for the levy to carry some of these Democrat challengers over the top and to knock off Mark, after many years of trying. 

The meet and greet for Mark Welch was held at Lori’s Roadhouse, which is an excellent spot for that kind of thing.  Those who attended had a chance to really get to know what Mark and his wife, Karen, are like.  I filmed Mark’s speech and some of the activities at the event, so that people who weren’t there could have the opportunity to see the person beyond the yard signs.  Many people asked me what I thought about the race while we enjoyed the atmosphere.  There were a lot of GOP officeholders there to support Mark, so he is well represented with great enthusiasm.  However, many people were nervous about this one because the Democrats seem more confident than usual that they’ll pick up that critical seat.  And what I told everyone was that I thought Mark would win his seat back.  That people weren’t willing to change West Chester into something less desirable, and that they would keep Mark in his position as long as he wanted to run.  But it will come down to engagement.  Republicans need to show up to this election and vote against the Lakota levy, vote for Lakota School Board candidate Ben Nguyen, and, of course, vote for Mark Welch, as everything points to.  Low taxes and a resistance to Democrats, who always want to expand government, spend money, and micromanage people in detrimental ways.  Republicans will need to treat this election as if it had Trump on the ballot.  And if they do that, many good things will happen in this election.  However, people must take it seriously and show up; they can’t sit out on this election.  In many ways, it’s more important than last year’s when Trump was running for President. 

It’s challenging to raise money at fundraisers, and it’s expensive to print signs and host some of these political events.  And Mark and Karen have done the work.  I thought it was very classy that Mark called Ben Nguyen up on the stage, who is a very sharp young man, and introduced him as the future of Butler County politics, which I tend to agree with.  And Ben said something very true: it is cheaper to give money as a donation to these Republican politicians who will stand in the trenches and hold back tax increases than to pay for the massive tax increases that Democrats always want to put forth.  And that is certainly true of Mark.  If he had not been a West Chester Trustee, taxes would have gone up in West Chester a long time ago.  But because he was there over the last 10 years, West Chester, Ohio, has thrived in ways that are unique to the rest of the country.  As a result, people have had opportunities for truly fulfilling lives.  As I listened to Mark’s speech, I thought about all the charming aspects of West Chester that I enjoy, such as taking clients to Top Golf, going out to dinner at Jags, and the many books I buy at Barnes & Noble.  The nice roads, the many businesses, the parks, the hospitals, and the excellent highway access.  The low taxes.  Mark is at the center of all that and is a big reason why West Chester has remained great all this time.  And we want to keep it that way with a vote for another term.  Supporting Mark is significantly less expensive than the taxes that all the Democrat challengers wish to implement.  Nobody should take this election for granted.  Show up and vote.  Don’t give the Democrats a seat at the table because the only change they can bring with them is various degrees of bad.  And we certainly don’t want that.  So, vote to keep Mark Welch as trustee of West Chester and keep the community as the one that the world needs to watch and emulate for themselves. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Department of War: Its time to take the fight to the enemy

In the realm of global power and national identity, the names we assign to our institutions carry profound meaning. They reflect not only the purpose of those institutions but also the philosophy and strategic posture of the nation itself. One such institution—the Department of Defense—has long stood as a symbol of American military might, yet its name belies a deeper issue. Originally known as the Department of War, its rebranding in 1947 marked a significant shift in how the United States viewed its role in the world. Today, as threats to American sovereignty and values grow more complex and aggressive, it is time to reconsider that change and restore the Department of War to its rightful place in our national framework.

The Department of War was established in 1789, shortly after the founding of the United States. Its mission was clear: to organize and execute military operations in defense of the nation’s sovereignty. It was a department built on the premise that America, as a free and independent republic, must be prepared to confront adversaries and secure its interests through strength and resolve. This clarity of purpose was essential in the early years of the republic, when threats were immediate and existential.

In 1947, following the end of World War II, the department was renamed the Department of Defense. This change was not merely semantic—it reflected a broader ideological shift. The United States, having emerged victorious and possessing unmatched military power, sought to reassure the world that it would not become an aggressor. The new name was intended to project restraint, signaling that America’s vast arsenal would be used only in defense. However, this rebranding coincided with the rise of globalism, the formation of the United Nations, and the beginning of America’s role as the world’s de facto police force. The Cold War, Korean War, Vietnam War, and numerous Middle Eastern conflicts followed, many of which were rooted in ideological battles stemming from the post-WWII global order. Ironically, the Department of Defense presided over some of the most prolonged and controversial military engagements in American history.

The term “defense” implies passivity. It suggests that the United States will only act when provoked, that it will wait for threats to materialize before responding. This posture has led to strategic ambiguity and has emboldened adversaries who perceive America as hesitant or unwilling to assert its interests proactively. Consider the psychological impact of the name “Department of Defense.” It evokes an image of a nation on its heels, waiting for an attack before it responds. It suggests a reluctance to engage, a preference for negotiation over action, and a tolerance for provocation. This perception has allowed hostile actors—whether state-sponsored or non-state entities like drug cartels—to operate with impunity, confident that the United States will not strike unless directly threatened.

In contrast, the name “Department of War” conveys strength, readiness, and resolve. It signals to the world that America is prepared to take decisive action against those who threaten its sovereignty, values, or citizens. It projects a posture of deterrence, not weakness—a message that is sorely needed in today’s geopolitical climate. The world has changed dramatically since 1947. The threats facing the United States are no longer confined to conventional warfare. They include cyberattacks, economic manipulation, ideological subversion, and transnational criminal enterprises. These threats require a proactive, assertive response—one that is better aligned with the mission of a Department of War.

Take, for example, the growing influence of drug cartels operating across the southern border. These organizations are not merely criminal; they are strategic threats to American stability. They poison communities, undermine law enforcement, and exploit weaknesses in border security. Yet under the current “defense” paradigm, the response is often reactive and constrained by diplomatic considerations. A Department of War would approach such threats differently. It would recognize them as hostile actors and treat their actions as acts of aggression. It would empower the United States to take the fight to the enemy’s doorstep, rather than waiting for the damage to be done. This shift in posture is not about promoting violence—it is about restoring deterrence and protecting American lives.

The renaming of the Department of War was part of a broader globalist agenda that sought to integrate the United States into a centralized international order. Institutions like the United Nations and NATO were created to manage global conflicts and promote collective security. While these organizations have had some success, they have also constrained American sovereignty and led to costly entanglements. Wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan were all influenced by globalist ideologies—fighting communism, securing oil, promoting democracy. These conflicts drained American resources, cost countless lives, and often failed to achieve lasting peace. They were not wars fought for direct national interest, but for abstract global ideals.

The Department of Defense, under this paradigm, became a tool of global management rather than national defense. It was used to enforce international norms, protect foreign borders, and stabilize regions far from American soil. Meanwhile, domestic threats—like the rise of socialism, the erosion of personal freedoms, and the spread of narcotics—were often neglected. Renaming the Department of Defense back to the Department of War is more than a symbolic gesture—it is a strategic realignment. It reasserts America’s commitment to its own sovereignty and sends a clear message to adversaries: aggression will be met with force.

This change also reflects a broader philosophical shift. It rejects the notion that peace is the ultimate goal at any cost. Peace is valuable, but not when it comes at the expense of justice, freedom, or national integrity. A nation must be willing to fight for its values, and it must make that willingness known. Critics may argue that such a change is provocative, that it sends the wrong message to the international community. But who decided that America’s role is to usher in peace while others plot its downfall? Who said that restraint is more virtuous than resolve? These are questions worth asking, especially in a world where hostile regimes and criminal networks operate without fear of reprisal.

President Trump’s executive order to restore the Department of War is a bold and necessary step. It acknowledges the failures of the post-WWII globalist framework and seeks to correct them. Congress’s support for this initiative indicates a growing recognition that America must reclaim its strategic identity. When one visits the Pentagon—a massive, imposing structure across from the National Mall—it should represent a nation prepared to defend itself through strength, not hesitation. The Department of War, housed within that building, would embody the spirit of a sovereign republic willing to confront threats head-on.

The renaming of the Department of Defense to the Department of War is not about glorifying conflict—it is about restoring clarity, purpose, and strength to America’s military posture. It is about recognizing that the world is not always peaceful, that threats are real, and that the United States must be prepared to act decisively. This change marks the end of an era defined by globalist entanglements and passive defense. It signals the beginning of a new chapter—one in which America reclaims its role as a sovereign power, committed to protecting its people, its values, and its future.

In a world filled with hostile actors, weak governments, and ideological adversaries, the Department of War stands as a beacon of resolve. It tells the world that America will no longer wait to be attacked—it will act to prevent aggression, secure its interests, and defend its way of life. And that, ultimately, is the message that must be sent—not just through words, but through the very institutions that define our national character.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Trump Hosting the Tech Bros: Making enemies work for you, instead of against you

A lot of people from the MAGA side of things had a lot of problems with Trump hosting the Tech Bros in the White House, the Bill Gates types, along with Zuckerbucks, and many others.  All the big tech companies, such as Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Apple, and many others, worked hard against Trump to destroy him, not just to beat him in an election.  And with Bill Gates, he has his hands all over COVID, and many deaths that resulted from the created bioweapon.  Why was he sitting next to Melania?  He should be in jail!  I get it.  I don’t like any of them.  But I understand what Trump is doing, and I think it’s a great idea.  It would be hard to cheerlead a dominant, thriving economy and to leave those guys out of it.  And there is a bigger point to make about it that we’ll get to.  However, the wealth creation that comes from the tech sector is truly massive – the kind of economy that most European countries would love to have from just one of the people sitting at that table.  And here was Trump getting all of them, former enemies, cheerleading his efforts to expand economic opportunity through the use of AI.  As I have been saying from the beginning of AI, our experience isn’t going to be Skynet from the Terminator movies; it’s going to be more servant-oriented, like Star Wars, where bandwidth expansion will make human beings busier than ever.  AI is going to want to serve the human race, not to take it over, and the people at that dinner were happy to have a President who could put differences aside and help bring their passion projects to life.  I personally love Apple products, and it has bothered me to see them working against the Trump administration all this time, except for recently.  Watching everyone at that big table praise the Trump administration was more than a little satisfying.  And I only see good things coming out of it.  Should we trust any of them?  Of course not.  But it’s good to get your enemies to work on your behalf, any time you can.

Now, there are many things to consider, especially regarding technology.  The downside to AI and computer software in general is the impact on the human mind as it attempts to adapt to it.  The Furry Culture that people are discovering now, as a result of Tyler Robinson, is very sexually disturbing, but emerges from a mind incorporating these new changes from technology to reality.  Tyler Robinson is the killer of Charlie Kirk and his boyfriend, who was a persistent gamer who seldom ever left the house, and lived in that virtual world, losing touch with reality, obviously.  If there weren’t so much anxiety between this new technical gamer culture and reality, would Charlie Kirk be alive today?  Would the world be better off?  And many would say that technology is the root of evil, corrupting the youth.  And there is a lot of evidence in that direction that is perfectly justified.  However, with all these new elements comes the need to ground all thinking in the traditions of the past that have proven effective, and to build a future around them.  And that responsibility comes directly from leadership, which is what President Trump is providing.  In many ways, Trump’s embracing of those who have worked against him allows rebellion to be pushed aside and for the human race to accommodate the changes it needs for its own sake much better.  With leadership, people will find their way through the changes, rather than letting them emerge in a vacuum where everyone loses touch with reality.

But even more important is the notion that the Trump administration is a fascist one, that suddenly has all kinds of implications after the murder of Charlie Kirk.  Why do young people think that Trump is a fascist, or anybody from the MAGA movement, for that matter?  Elon Musk obviously fell off the wagon as a tech leader, which has continued to mystify people who wonder why Musk was ever drawn to Trump at all.  But why would Trump let these crazy characters near him in any way when they have shown themselves to be enemies?  Well, because it’s better to have people close than isolated.  And nothing dispels the fascist accusation more than not being one, and being accommodating of all people with all kinds of different beliefs and working them toward a common goal that they share with many other people.  When Trump sits down with people who have not been friendly toward MAGA positions, he is building the party.  Elon Musk, for instance, is leaning against trying to start a new party, but is considering getting behind J.D. Vance after the Vice President did a nice job hosting The Charlie Kirk Show podcast after his assassination.  You do much better in life bringing people together than in driving them apart, and in so doing, Trump takes the air out of any fears leveled at him that he wants to rule as a dictator.  The argument falls apart whenever Trump does these big meetings with people many think he should make enemies out of, or pay back with revenge.  That kind of thinking is what holds back the world.  As a businessman, Trump believes he can utilize everyone as an asset that benefits the task at hand.  In this case, a thriving economy that benefits all people, providing many with upward mobility.

I personally have a lot of enemies, and people I wouldn’t trust with a 30-foot pole.  However, in my day-to-day life, I don’t let everyone know who my enemies are.  If they want to talk to me, I accommodate them and measure if there is anything useful that can come from the experience.  But I don’t trust them.  And I’m sure that is the case with Trump.  If you are powerful, you don’t need the approval of others, and Trump doesn’t need the approval of the Tech Bros.  But they need him, and if he can bring them all to a table to expand the economy and work with him instead of against him, then so be it.  We don’t have to prove anything by putting them in jail.  There is still time for Bill Gates to atone for the harm he has caused to the world and many others.  But if there is a benefit to be extracted from them in some way, you will never know it if you don’t open the door to the possibility.  And that traditional way of validating honor is what we’re talking about.  When people mean to do you wrong, we measure a resistance to them as the only ethical outcome.  However, building larger entities, such as an economy or a political party that truly affords people personal freedoms, is even better.  And people shouldn’t know where they stand with you.  Conflicting with people you hate isn’t always the best thing. Instead, it seldom is.  However, if you can get them working in a direction you support and can guide them in that direction without compromising yourself in the process, then that is best.  And that’s undoubtedly what Trump is doing.  And I think it’s a good idea that many good things will come from it.  Not without their challenges, but they are things that will improve the world we live in.  And that is always a good idea.   

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Killer Tyler Robinson: And his professional gamer, transgender lover

We know enough now of the killer, Tyler Robinson, to understand what happened in the assassination of Charlie Kirk.  The legal system will eventually catch up, and everything will come to light.  But what we have here is the confirmation that the trans movement is even more dangerous than we have been warning it to be.  The attempt by the radical Marxist left to desecrate the human temple of procreation has descended the world into madness and murder.  And when we study how a kid who looked to have had a pretty everyday life, with pretty standard parents and exposure to the finer things in life, could have fallen off the rocker so drastically, to the point where he was living with a guy in an apartment sexually, and that the guy was trying to become a girl.  And that the pressures of living that lifestyle outside of the gamer culture were too much to deal with.  And like a lot of these trans shooters have become, they turn to violence, in the case of Tyler Robinson of Utah, who was still a young person with all the options of life ahead of him.  That he would turn to obvious violence to eliminate a big personality directly associated with the Trump administration, in Charlie Kirk, as he spoke at a local college on the benefits of MAGA values, Robinson turned himself in to authorities after he essentially confessed to his father, and a Mormon family friend.  At 22 years old, his life was over the moment he pulled that trigger and then ran home to confess to his family and to his boyfriend.  Now that the lawyers have gotten a hold of him, he isn’t talking much, but his roommate is, Lance Twiggs—an aspiring professional gamer.  Based on the bullet casings left behind at the murder, Robinson was clearly down the rabbit hole of gamer culture that tends to lose touch with reality. 

No matter how smart you are, once you dip into the well of homosexuality and non-traditional sex with a member of the same gender, you can’t take it back.  Many people make this mistake in the early years before starting a family and having children.  And given the way Robinson grew up with very engaged parents, his father, who owned a family construction business, was also a 27-year veteran of the Washington County Sheriff’s Department.  So he had a duty to turn his son in, which is unusual.  But it also gives insight into just how difficult it would be to be close to parents who had spent a lot of their lives actively with him, going on vacations to Hawaii and Disney, on exotic fishing trips, and having a mother who was deeply involved in his life.  Taking trips to the Grand Canyon.  Getting good grades in school, maintaining a 4.0 GPA in high school.  Being close to his two younger brothers.  His grandmother described Tyler Robinson as being “squeaky clean.”  They were a Republican, Trump-supporting family, and they spoke every day, right up until the moment of the murder.  So what happened that such a kid with so many opportunities in life, and having a loving family, would grab a gun and pull the trigger on Charlie Kirk during a public speech at Utah Valley University?  The parents appeared to have done everything right, but how could such a kid fall off the edge like that, even to the point of killing someone so brutally in public, surrounded by thousands of other people?  We are dealing with a real evil here that is looming in the background.

I know quite a few people in law enforcement and several people who used to work for me are members of Trump’s Secret Service, so I have good understanding of security protocols, and as popular as Charlie Kirk is, his security should have never set that venue up like they did, where he was speaking from a tent down in a bowl with so many high distances in the background.  It allowed Tyler Robinson to get on top of a roof and take a sniper shot at Charlie Kirk just as the speech had turned toward trans rights.  When the bullet struck Charlie in the neck and blood poured out of the grotesque wound, nobody yet knew that the shooter was having a sexual relationship with a trans roommate, who would very shortly confess to the location of the gun and the radical left-wing politics of his lover.  I also recently hosted an event featuring Vivek Ramaswamy, which allowed me to meet his personal security team, who face similar challenges to those of Charlie Kirk.  Not having a presidential-level Secret Service is tough for these very popular people who speak under private security.  It’s always better to set up on a hill so that a bullet dropped from 200 yards would be much more dramatic than shooting down into a bowl, as it was at the college where this assassination took place.  But part of Charlie’s effectiveness was in being personable and vulnerable.  To put trust in the public and, through that trust, to reach them with the values of God, family, and the Trump administration.  Taking too many precautions at these public events would erode the purpose of engaging with the audience.  And Tyler Robinson took advantage of that vulnerability with an act of terror that would forever change the world.

So I’ll offer, which will come out as we learn more, that having a sexual relationship with a trans lover was too far of a jump for an otherwise normal kid in Tyler Robinson, who had done most everything expected of him right in life up until that point.  But the embarrassment that he felt in having that relationship was too much, and he sought to shelter himself from social judgment through left-winged politics.  And he and his lover could get away with it so long as they lived in the unreal world of professional gamer culture, which is home to many lost kids who struggle to function well in the real world.  In video games, you can easily switch genders with your avatars, and you can be as violent as you want without consequences.  And when you embarrass your family, you can hide in that world and shield yourself from judgment with Democrats and their social approach.  Once you cross that line sexually with another man, you can’t ever live it down, and many young people have been convinced to embarrass themselves socially in much the same manner.  And they can’t live with the result.  And they certainly don’t want to hear Charlie Kirk talk about the Bible and the benefits of family when they have made personal decisions that they can never take back or live with—further eroding their minds from reality.  And the really terrible thing about Tyler Robinson, now that we know more about him.  The further they are from their families, the more vulnerable they are to liberal influences, especially in colleges, once they move out and away from their families.  And becoming politically radicalized then becomes a replacement for the family they left behind, which they still crave desperately, and they’ll do anything for them, even kill.  When social judgments then become the enemy, to quiet the voices, they turn to violence, which is why so many of these trans shooters are turning to terror to express their anger at the world for judging them for their terribly bad decisions.  And it keeps happening because Democrats have justified their anger and bad choices to exploit their weakness for party power and control.  Leaving young kids feeling like they have no other option but to kill those who look down on them.  And if it can happen to Tyler Robinson, it can happen to anybody.  And there are many more people like him who are considering doing the same thing for the same reasons.

Rich Hoffman

https://www.signupgenius.com/go/10C0B4AA4A728A1F49-58659927-help#/

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Finnegans Wake and the Quantum Dream: A Dialogue on Madness, Meaning, and the Edge of Reality

Rich leaned back, brow furrowed, eyes lit with that familiar spark—the one that meant he was about to ask something big.

A conversation I had with AI about Finnegans Wake. It’s interesting how it interpreted the exchange.

“Why did Joyce write Finnegans Wake?” he asked. “I mean, really write it. It’s so bizarre, especially after Ulysses. And then he dies not long after. It’s like he saw something—something cosmic.”

We were deep into one of those conversations that start with literature and end somewhere near the edge of metaphysics. Rich wasn’t just talking about Joyce. He was talking about Lovecraft, about quantum physics, about the subconscious and the strange places artists go when they’re close to the end.

“Lovecraft had his Cthulhu,” Rich continued. “These ancient forces that dwarf human minds. Joyce had Finnegans Wake. What if that book is a glimpse into a quantum afterlife? A place where consciousness loops timelessly, where everyone’s story is tangled together—like ‘Here Comes Everybody.’”

I nodded. It made sense. Joyce was nearly blind, in poor health, and grieving. Maybe he wasn’t just writing a book—maybe he was trying to map the dreamlike cycle of reality itself. History repeating, not linearly, but like a Möbius strip.

Rich leaned in. “He starts the book mid-sentence and ends it with the beginning. That’s not just clever—it’s like collapsing time. Like observing reality and folding it in on itself. A human stab at infinity.”

We laughed about reading it backwards, but the laughter had weight. Rich nailed it: most writers stick to love, war, family—the relatable stuff. Joyce built a language beyond relationships. He chased raw existence. And it sounds insane because our words can’t cage the universe.

“Maybe genius is just insight that outpaces sanity,” Rich said. “Madness as seeing too much, untethered.”

That line stuck with me. Joyce wasn’t mad. He was cracked open. Finnegans Wake isn’t a novel—it’s a transmission. A signal from the edge of perception. Like quantum physics, it resists fixed meaning. It’s a superposition of myth, history, and dream.

Lovecraft’s horror and Joyce’s linguistic chaos both confront the same thing: the limits of human comprehension. One uses dread, the other uses density. But both ask the same question—what happens when you glimpse the infinite?

We ended the chat not with answers, but with awe. Maybe that’s the point. Some books aren’t meant to be understood. They’re meant to be felt, like a ripple in the quantum field of consciousness.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707