Free Tina Peters: The Battle for Honest Elections in America

You know, here’s the thing: if President Trump doesn’t get Tina Peters out of that Colorado prison, then everything we’ve fought for on election integrity is just theater. It’s all optics without substance. Because if you don’t control your election systems, you don’t control your government. And that’s the bottom line. People say, “There’s no evidence of fraud.” Really? Then why is Tina Peters sitting in a cell for nine years? She was the Mesa County Clerk, the one person in Colorado who had the guts to blow the whistle during the heaviest part of the 2020 election scandal. She saw irregularities, she reported them, and for that, they threw her in prison.

Let’s get the facts straight. Tina Peters was convicted in October 2024 on seven counts—four felonies and three misdemeanors—for allegedly breaching election systems during a 2021 update.¹ They said she conspired to commit criminal impersonation, attempted to influence a public servant, and violated her official duties. Nine years in state prison for trying to preserve election records? That’s not justice; that’s retaliation. And where is she now? La Vista Correctional Facility in Pueblo, Colorado, locked away like a political prisoner.²

And don’t forget, she wasn’t alone in this fight. Mike Lindell—the MyPillow guy—stood shoulder to shoulder with her, pouring millions into exposing voting machine companies.³ Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro? They got four months each for contempt of Congress because they wouldn’t play ball with the January 6 narrative.⁴ Rudy Giuliani? Bankrupted for daring to question election results. This is a pattern: punish the whistleblowers, destroy the evidence, and control the narrative.

Now, here’s the legal reality: Trump can’t just sign a pardon and free Tina Peters. Article II of the Constitution gives the president the power to grant pardons for federal crimes, not for state convictions.⁵ Colorado prosecuted her under state law, and Governor Jared Polis isn’t about to hand Trump a win. So what do we do? Sit back and let her rot? Absolutely not. There are practical steps Trump can take, and they start with leverage—political, legal, and financial.

First, a pressure campaign. Trump needs to call out Polis and AG Phil Weiser by name, which he has been doing lately. Make it politically toxic for them to keep Peters locked up. Rallies, Truth Social posts, interviews—turn up the heat. When the public sees a grandmother rotting in prison for questioning election fraud, the optics shift fast.

Second, DOJ leverage. This is where it gets interesting. The Department of Justice can’t override a state conviction, but it can make life very uncomfortable for Colorado. How? Start with federal election law hooks. The 2020 election was a federal election. Peters’ actions were tied to preserving federal election records. File a federal habeas corpus petition arguing her imprisonment violates constitutional rights under federal election statutes like the Help America Vote Act. Force Colorado to defend its conviction in federal court.

Then there’s civil rights enforcement. Frame this as retaliation against a whistleblower exercising First Amendment rights. The DOJ Civil Rights Division can open an investigation into political persecution. Even if it doesn’t overturn her sentence immediately, it creates a legal basis for federal intervention and puts Colorado under a microscope.

Now, here’s the big one: federal funding leverage. Colorado gets millions in federal grants for election security and compliance under HAVA and EAC programs. Those funds are discretionary. Condition future funding on transparency and whistleblower protections. Announce that Colorado risks losing federal election security money because it retaliated against Peters. That’s constitutional under the Spending Clause, and it hits where it hurts—the budget.

Another angle: federal subpoenas and custody transfers. If Peters has evidence relevant to federal crimes—say, election tampering—the DOJ can subpoena her testimony. Request a temporary transfer to federal custody for questioning. That doesn’t erase her sentence, but it moves her out of state prison and into a federal process where deals can happen.

Finally, amplify public awareness. Trump should feature Peters’ case in speeches, rallies, and interviews. Get Mike Lindell, Steve Bannon, and the Warroom team hammering this story every day, give them some red meat. When people see the truth—that Peters was jailed to bury evidence of election fraud—the pressure becomes unbearable. And Trump is naturally good at that kind of thing. But if he’s waiting for help from other Republicans, they don’t have the guts. It will have to come from him, and him alone. The damage from this case will benefit other efforts around the country. Allowing the radical left to control the discussion, as they have, will not help with the Midterms, where Democrats are planning to cheat, because it’s their only strategy. This case could greatly frustrate those efforts.

And let’s talk numbers because facts matter. The Heritage Foundation database lists 1,561 proven cases of election fraud over decades, with 20 cases in 2024 alone.⁶ Brookings says fraud rates are minuscule—0.0000845% in Arizona over 25 years—but those stats ignore systemic vulnerabilities in digital voting systems.⁷ Globally, we know electronic manipulation happens—Venezuela, China, Russia. You give people the illusion of choice, then flip the results. That’s the game. And it happened here in 2020.

So when they say, “There’s no evidence,” what they mean is, “We buried the evidence and jailed the people who had it.” Tina Peters had the proof. She tried to show it. They raided her home, seized her devices, and threw her in prison. That’s tyranny, plain and simple. And if Trump doesn’t act, it sends a message: whistleblowers will be crushed, and election integrity will remain a myth.

Here’s the bottom line: Trump has tools. He can’t wave a magic wand, but he can apply pressure—legal, financial, and political—until Colorado cracks. And he must. Because if we don’t fight for Peters, we don’t fight for honest elections. And without honest elections, we don’t have a republic.

Summary of Key Actions for President Trump

1. Launch a Pressure Campaign

• Publicly call out Colorado Governor Jared Polis and AG Phil Weiser.

• Mobilize grassroots and media to demand Tina Peters’ release.

2. Leverage DOJ Authority

• File federal habeas corpus petitions citing election law violations.

• Open a Civil Rights investigation into political retaliation.

3. Use Federal Funding Leverage

• Condition Colorado’s federal election security funds on transparency and whistleblower protections.

• Publicize potential funding cuts to increase pressure.

4. Subpoena Tina Peters for Federal Testimony

• DOJ can request a temporary transfer to federal custody for testimony related to election integrity.

5. Amplify Public Awareness

• Feature Peters’ case in speeches, rallies, and media appearances.

• Encourage allies like Mike Lindell, Steve Bannon, and WarRoom to keep the story alive; they need red meat to pound away at the base.

This is one of the most critical agenda items for the Trump administration because much remains unsaid. All the horrible things going on in the world with Hamas, China, Russia, Venezuela, and our own domestic money policy that is under siege are nothing compared to the villainy that occurred against Tina Peters. If she is allowed to be held in jail by a corrupt, leftist Democrat government in Colorado, people will lose faith in fighting for an honest election in 2026. And without an honest election, the radical left plans to capture enough seats to impeach Trump and give the government back to the Deep State. So this is a critical time. We need a very vicious pressure campaign that forces this issue on the nightly news, because so far, they have been able to ignore it. Once Trump won the last election, all the hostile forces treated it as a concession to buy a little time. And the Midterms were their target. If Tina Peters is not freed, then Trump will have a hard time holding power, and those who will fight for him will become discouraged. So freeing Tina from jail is a must-do occasion. There is no other option. Yes, there was election fraud in the 2020 election, and those who committed it, numbering in the many thousands, have to be punished for what they did. Otherwise, we don’t have a country.

Bibliography (Chicago Style)

1. Colorado Judicial Branch. “People v. Tina Peters: Sentencing Order.” October 2024.

2. CBS News. “Tina Peters Sentenced to Nine Years in State Prison.” October 2024.

3. Fox News. “Mike Lindell Faces $1 Billion Lawsuit Over Election Claims.” 2023.

4. ABC News. “Steve Bannon, Peter Navarro Sentenced for Contempt of Congress.” 2024.

5. U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2.

6. Heritage Foundation. “Election Fraud Database.” 2024.

7. Brookings Institution. “Election Fraud Rates in U.S. Elections.” 2023.

Rich Hoffman

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

Justice in the Shadows: The Asiah Slone Murder and America’s Hidden Epidemic of Unsolved Crime

On a quiet street in Middletown, Ohio, a small house stands as a grim monument to the collapse of a once-thriving community. Behind that house, in a trash bin parked in an alley, police discovered the dismembered remains of Asiah Slone—a woman whose life ended violently in June 2024. Her murder was shocking not only for its brutality but for what it revealed about the social decay festering in America’s forgotten towns. Slone’s death was not an isolated tragedy; it was a symptom of a deeper disease—economic collapse, drug addiction, homelessness, and the erosion of moral and civic order.

The Slone case is a lens into the broader epidemic of violent crime in economically depleted communities. Murders, like Slone’s, are usually prosecuted successfully, but many countless others remain unsolved, creating an illusion of justice—celebrating convictions in high-profile cases—masks a systemic failure to address the conditions that breed violence and what these failures mean for law enforcement, policy, and the future of American society.

Asiah Slone disappeared in late June 2024. For weeks, her absence drew little attention. In neighborhoods hollowed out by poverty and addiction, people vanish often—sometimes to rehab, sometimes to jail, sometimes to the grave. It wasn’t until July 1, when the stench of decomposition led authorities to a trash bin behind a house on Centennial Avenue, that the horror came to light. Inside were Slone’s remains, cut into pieces and stuffed into garbage bags.¹

Investigators quickly focused on Brandon Davis, a 46-year-old man with a long history of drug abuse and petty crime. Witness testimony and forensic evidence revealed that Davis shot Slone in the head while she slept, then ordered Perry Hart, who has an addiction, to finish the job in the basement. Hart complied, firing a second shot to ensure death. Together, they dismembered the body and disposed of it in the alley.²

The motive was depressingly banal: a dispute over stolen items and simmering resentment among a group of people living on society’s margins. Drugs were everywhere. Homelessness was common. Violence was inevitable.³

As grand jury foreman, I signed the indictment that set the case in motion. The prosecutors did their job well, securing a conviction in February 2025. Davis received life without parole for 45 years. Hart pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter and kidnapping. Justice, in the narrow sense, was served. But the deeper question remains: What does justice mean in a world where desperation breeds murder, and where countless similar crimes go undetected or unpunished?

Slone’s case was prosecuted because it was apparent. The evidence was overwhelming: a body in a dumpster, confessions, and DNA on the weapon. But what about the murders that leave no such trail? What about the victims whose bodies are never found, or whose killers are careful enough to erase their tracks?

The numbers are sobering. In 1964, the U.S. homicide clearance rate—the percentage of murders solved—was 83.7%. Today, it hovers around 50%.⁴ In 2022, the rate hit a historic low of 52.3%.⁵ Even with slight improvements in 2024, nearly half of all murders in America remain unsolved. In Ohio, the rate is about 64%, meaning one in three killings goes unpunished.⁶

Why? Several factors converge:
• Resource Constraints: Police departments are understaffed and underfunded.
• Community Distrust: Witnesses fear retaliation or don’t trust law enforcement.
• Complexity of Cases: Drug-related killings often involve transient populations and chaotic circumstances.
• Legal Barriers: Prosecutors need airtight evidence to avoid wrongful convictions.

The Slone case stands out because it was reckless. The killers left a body in a public alley. They talked. They confessed. Most killers are not so careless. This case is emblematic of a much larger crisis. Across the United States, violent crime statistics reveal a staggering reality. The Bureau of Justice Statistics confirms that more than 250,000 homicides since 1980 remain unsolved. These numbers represent not just data points but shattered families and communities living under the shadow of fear.

Drug epidemics amplify this violence. The CDC reports that fentanyl-related overdose deaths reached 72,776 in 2023, accounting for 69% of all overdose fatalities. DEA intelligence shows cartels dominate fentanyl distribution, sourcing precursors from Chinese suppliers and flooding U.S. streets with synthetic opioids. These networks fuel turf wars, retaliatory killings, and systemic corruption, creating a perfect storm of addiction and violence.

Racial disparities compound the crisis: murders of Black victims are significantly less likely to be solved than those of White victims, according to a 2023 study by the Murder Accountability Project. A lot of that reason is cultural, because of a lack of cooperation in black communities to provide testimony against crime. Police departments face chronic staffing shortages, and under labor union guidelines, paint themselves in corners that don’t match public sentiment all too often, with the International Association of Chiefs of Police reporting a 14% vacancy rate nationwide. Forensic labs struggle with DNA backlogs exceeding 100,000 cases. Community distrust further hampers investigations, as witnesses fear retaliation or lack confidence in the justice system. The overall story on the labor side of crime fighting is that too many employees in the industry are too lazy to do the job, causing serious capacity problems in doing the actual work. So the industry sets the bar low, goes after all the most obvious cases, while many of the real crimes go unreported and unpunished.

The opioid crisis intersects with violent crime in devastating ways. Cartels have diversified beyond narcotics into human trafficking, generating $236 billion annually through forced labor and sexual exploitation. Millions of women and children are entrapped in these networks, often under the same criminal syndicates orchestrating narcotics flows. This duality magnifies humanitarian crises, rendering cartels not merely criminal enterprises but systemic violators of fundamental rights.

Solutions require investment in technology, expansion of cold case units, and robust witness protection programs. Federal funding for violent crime investigations has stagnated, even as homicide rates rise. Legislative initiatives must prioritize improvement in the clearance rate as a metric of justice, not just crime reduction. But the reality of the story is that we have a society that has stopped looking in trash cans. When they smell something bad, they don’t regulate crime in their own communities for fear of that crime coming in their direction. Cops don’t work enough, and the unions frustrate full employee engagement. There aren’t enough volunteer law enforcement efforts. I can say that when I was on the grand jury, I was the top cop of my community for a month. I didn’t get paid, but a minimal amount for the effort. But it was one of the best jobs I ever did, and I was very proud to sign the indictment on Brandon Davis, the murderer of Asiah Slone. I would do that every day for free. So I don’t understand cops who have to go to Walgreens for a tampon run every time they have to work a few hours of overtime. Getting shot at and living dangerously is part of the fun. So I’m not sympathetic to complaining at all. Because the criminals know that the cops really don’t care, that for most of them, it’s just a job. And the courts are only prosecuting the most obvious cases, the easy ones. And the Slone case was an easy one. But one thing is sure in all this, it can’t continue at this rate. Society has to reform at the level of the family, because none of this is working.

[1] FBI Uniform Crime Reports, Historical Clearance Data, 1964–2024.

[2] Bureau of Justice Statistics, Homicide Trends in the United States, 2023.

[3] Murder Accountability Project, Clearance Rate Analysis, 2023.

[4] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Drug Overdose Mortality Data, 2023.

[5] U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, Fentanyl Threat Assessment, 2024.

[6] International Association of Chiefs of Police, Workforce Crisis Report, 2024.

[7] National Institute of Justice, Forensic Backlog Study, 2023.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Conditions that Make People Poor: Bill Gates as usual, is way off the mark

In the modern discourse surrounding climate change, healthcare, and economic disparity, we often find ourselves circling the same ideological drain without ever confronting the root of the issue: how we define and address poverty. Recently, Bill Gates made headlines by walking back some of his climate change positions, suggesting that economic development must be prioritized alongside environmental goals. This echoes a more profound truth—one that Donald Trump touched on when he proposed sending healthcare payments directly to individuals rather than filtering them through bureaucratic systems. These moments reveal a fundamental tension in our society: the battle between centralized control and individual empowerment. At the heart of this tension lies a philosophical divide between those who believe in micromanaging outcomes through administrative states and those who believe in unleashing human potential through economic liberty. The former seeks to engineer fairness through redistribution, while the latter aims to cultivate prosperity by removing barriers to opportunity.

This divide is best understood through the lens of The Oz Principle, published in 1994 by Roger Connors, Tom Smith, and Craig Hickman, a widely respected business philosophy that categorizes individuals and cultures as either “above the line” or “below the line.” I love the book and its sequel, The Oz Principle Journey, which was published in 2011, many years later, offering a wealth of new ideas that utilize Wizard of Oz metaphors to articulate effective business practices and the proper social conduct of society at large. Above-the-line thinkers are proactive, solution-oriented, and driven by positive energy. They ask, “What else can I do?” and take ownership of outcomes. Below-the-line thinkers, by contrast, dwell in a state of victimhood, blaming others and avoiding accountability. In business, cultures dominated by above-the-line thinkers thrive—they innovate, adapt, and grow. Cultures saturated with below-the-line mentalities stagnate, collapse, or become toxic. The same applies to nations. When a country fosters a culture of victimization, entitlement, and dependency, it creates systemic poverty. It’s not merely about access to resources; it’s about the mindset with which people approach life. Suppose the dominant narrative teaches individuals that they are powerless, oppressed, or owed something by the state. In that case, the result is a population that waits for handouts rather than builds solutions.

This is the trap of the administrative state, particularly as envisioned by modern leftist ideologies. The Democrat Party, increasingly driven by collectivist impulses, seeks to centralize control over healthcare, education, and economic redistribution. Their vision of “fairness” is not about equal opportunity but about equal outcomes, regardless of effort or merit. They create systems that reward victimhood and penalize initiative. Public education, once a bastion of enlightenment and upward mobility, has become a breeding ground for thought patterns that are below the line. Teachers, often radicalized by personal grievances and ideological indoctrination, pass on a worldview that prioritizes identity politics, grievance culture, and dependency over personal responsibility, excellence, and ambition. Instead of teaching Shakespeare or the principles of economics, they teach children to see themselves as oppressed, marginalized, and incapable of success without government intervention. This is not education—it’s indoctrination into failure.

As of 2025, approximately 10.1% of the global population—roughly 839 million people—live in extreme poverty, defined by the World Bank as surviving on less than $3.00 per day (2021 PPP). The burden of poverty is not evenly distributed across all individuals. Sub-Saharan Africa remains the most affected region, with 46% of its population living in extreme poverty. Within this region, Eastern and Southern Africa report rates exceeding 53%, while Western and Central Africa hover around 35.7%. In stark contrast, high-income countries and territories, such as Europe, East Asia, and North America, report poverty rates below 1%, underscoring the profound impact of economic systems and governance on wealth distribution.

The disparity in GDP per capita between economically free and administratively controlled nations is staggering. In 2025, Luxembourg leads the world with a GDP per capita of $141,080, followed by Switzerland ($111,716), Ireland ($107,243), and Singapore ($93,956). These nations consistently rank among the highest in economic freedom indices, characterized by low regulatory burdens, strong property rights, and open markets. Meanwhile, countries with heavy administrative oversight and limited economic freedom—such as Burundi, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic—report GDP per capita figures below $1,000, reflecting the economic stagnation that results from centralized control and restricted market access.

The Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) report reveals a direct correlation between economic freedom and prosperity. Nations in the freest quartile enjoy an average income of $40,376, compared to just $5,649 in the least free quartile—a 7.1x difference. The poorest 10% in free economies earn 7.9x more than their counterparts in the least free nations. Moreover, life expectancy in free countries is 15 years longer, and infant mortality rates are 6.8x lower. The UN World Happiness Index also shows that citizens in economically free nations report life satisfaction scores two points higher on average than those in restrictive economies. These metrics confirm that economic liberty is not just a path to wealth—it’s a foundation for human flourishing. If you want to help people have access to wealth, teach them, and empower them to be “above the line people.” Solution-based and to enjoy the result of that way of thinking with wealth creation, the ability to enjoy a full bank account, and the results of a task well done.

The rise of the administrative state—defined by expansive government agencies that regulate economic activity—has been linked to sluggish growth and persistent poverty. While initially intended to address industrial complexity and social inequality, these bureaucracies often stifle innovation and delay wealth creation. The U.S. federal administrative apparatus now issues thousands of regulations annually, with the Code of Federal Regulations exceeding 185,000 pages, quadruple the size of the U.S. Code of Laws passed by Congress. This regulatory overload disproportionately affects small businesses and low-income entrepreneurs, who face barriers to entry and limited access to capital. In contrast, countries that have adopted deregulation, sound monetary policies, and trade expansion have experienced significant reductions in poverty and increases in GDP.

The solution is not more government, more regulation, or more redistribution. The solution is to cultivate a culture of thinking above the line. This means empowering individuals to take control of their lives, make better decisions, and pursue success through effort and innovation. Capitalism, despite its imperfections, remains the most effective mechanism for lifting people out of poverty because it rewards productivity, creativity, and personal responsibility. When people have access to capital and the freedom to use it, they build wealth—not just for themselves, but for their communities and nations. The administrative state, by contrast, stifles this process. It throws up regulatory stop sticks, preventing people from even starting a lemonade stand. It confiscates wealth under the guise of fairness and redistributes it through inefficient bureaucracies that serve more to perpetuate their own existence than to solve problems. To reduce poverty, we must dismantle these barriers, reject the cult of victimization, and return to a model that celebrates personal agency, economic liberty, and the power of positive thinking. That’s how you build a society that thrives—not by managing poverty, but by eliminating the conditions that create it. Too much “below the line thinking” creates depraved conditions that bring down all cultures. And if you want to prevent that way of thinking, then you have to change where people are on that invisible line that we draw in the sand, above and below. It’s not a political line, it’s one of personal responsibility. And when you teach people to be victims, of course, you are then teaching them to be poor. And no amount of money that you throw at them will help them if they don’t think right about how to use it.

Rich Hoffman

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

Congratulations to Ben Nguyen To the Lakota School Board: What would it take for me to support public schools

There’s a lot to say about the recent Lakota school board election, and I want to start by congratulating Ben Nguyen on his historic win. At just 18 years old, he’s now the youngest person ever elected to the Lakota Board of Education, and he achieved this with a clear, conservative message that resonated with voters in Butler County. Nguyen earned 18.61% of the vote, joining incumbent Kelley Casper and newcomer Alex Argo on the five-member board. His victory wasn’t just symbolic—it was a direct response to the district’s failed $506 million levy, which voters rejected by a 61% margin. That levy, which would have demolished nine buildings and built four new ones, was a bloated attempt to reinvent the district with taxpayer money. Nguyen’s campaign stood firmly against it, and his win signals that the community is tired of being asked to fund ideological experiments disguised as infrastructure upgrades. However, there is much more to all this. The questions that arose during this campaign and election season, in general, concern my support of Lakota schools, which school board member Doug Horton brought up in a video he posted just before the election. In short, if Lakota management wants to know what it would take to get my support, I would say to them to stop destroying the kind of school board members that I support. And I would be a lot less critical. But when the school board pushes away good people and lobbies to keep the kind of people who glaze over sex scandals, horrendous Democrat strategies in the school to teach young people, and ask for tax increases, especially the most expensive in the history of Ohio, then I’m going to be very critical, and I will provide that criticism in voluminous detail so much so, that the anti tax movement in Butler County will continue to grow, as it has over these years since 2013, and even earlier.

Ben Nguyen is a start, not a solution to what I would call a detrimental school board full of liberal losers. The real problem is systemic. For years, we’ve seen conservative school board members pushed out by coordinated efforts from union-backed liberals and their media allies. Darbi Boddy is a prime example. Elected in 2021, she was removed in 2024 after a civil protection order filed by fellow board member Isaac Adi—once her political ally—barred her from attending meetings for over 90 days. The board declared her absence “insufficient,” and just like that, she was gone. Her removal wasn’t about functionality—it was a matter of political theater. Boddy had challenged DEI programs, opposed transgender policies, and criticized the district’s hiring practices. That made her a target. The board censured her, demanded her resignation, and ultimately replaced her with Christina French, a longtime district insider. It’s a pattern: elect a conservative, stir up controversy, isolate them, and replace them with someone more “manageable.” I know all the characters of that conservative board very well, and I know what was done to pit them against each other, and when a school system plays that game, and expects to get away with it, well, they have another thing coming. I’m not in the business of putting up with that, and I never will be. I was in the district long before many of these people were even born, and I will be around long after they all leave to buy condos in Florida to escape the high taxes they leave behind. Darbi is just one example of this kind of radical school board behavior; therefore, when asked what it would take to win my support for Lakota schools, the answer is easy. Don’t run off school board members whom I support. Radicalism can go both ways, ladies and gentlemen.

This is why I’ve been so critical of Lakota Schools over the years. It’s not that I hate education—I would say my track record shows where my heart is; there are few people anywhere who love education more than I do. I respect people who read books and work to sharpen and utilize their intelligence. I do not trust institutionalized education because it’s often populated by less-than-great individuals, which is reflected directly in the product. And with public schools, I don’t respect the system that’s been built on a century-old foundation of progressive ideology. Public schools, as they exist today, are more about managing perception than delivering results. When you fill school boards with people like Julie Shaffer and Kelley Casper—both endorsed by the Butler County Democrat Party—you get a culture of spending, secrecy, and suppression. They don’t want scrutiny because scrutiny threatens their funding. They don’t wish to be judged because judgment exposes their failures. And when scandals happen—whether it’s inappropriate teacher behavior, administrative misconduct, or ideological overreach—they bury it. That’s why I created my own media platform: to report what they won’t. If you want to know what’s really going on in Lakota, you won’t find it in the district’s press releases. You’ll find it in the stories they try to silence.

So here’s the deal: I’ll support Lakota when Lakota supports the community. That means electing people like Ben Nguyen—people who understand the value of education without being beholden to the liberal establishment. It means rejecting levies that ask for hundreds of millions without accountability. It means standing up for parents, taxpayers, and students—not just the union’s comfort level of lazy labor desires, such as short workdays, fewer students to teach, summers off, and high pay for doing very little. I’ve seen good people try to make a difference on the board, only to be run off by political manipulation; it’s all well-documented. I’m encouraged that Nguyen, with his sharp mind and diplomatic personality, can navigate those waters and bring real change. If we can recruit two or three more like him, we might finally see a board that genuinely reflects the community’s values. But given the election cycles, it’s going to take a while unless we push off some of these losers the way they have pushed away our conservatives, like Darbi, and Todd Parnell—even Lynda O’Connor. And with Lynda, I know exactly how that game unfolded; she became so deeply involved in the liberal Lakota movement that she essentially had to adopt its values to attend the meetings. I don’t think strong personalities like Ben Nguyen will be pushed away, because he has that extra gear that is so needed in these kinds of controversial political environments. He, like Vivek Ramaswamy, who will be Ohio’s next governor, is part of a new generation that will play these old political games better than they have been played in the past. We have tried to play it straight with these current school board members, and all they have given us are Antifa like union tactics of left-wing radicalism, and many people in the district simply aren’t going to put up with it. I’m certainly not going to, under any conditions. And until there are more options on the school board, I’ll continue to call it as I see it. If you want me to stop criticizing Lakota, stop putting bad people in charge. Put in people I can respect. But asking, even demanding respect when Lakota hasn’t earned it, is a ridiculous proposition that only losers would even think of. And until there are more people like Ben Nguyen involved in Lakota schools, I will criticize them extensively because they deserve it.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Shutdown Standoff and the Filibuster Flashpoint: A Political Reckoning with American communists

Speaking with Bernie Moreno recently, it’s clear that the U.S. Senate is at a pivotal moment. The government shutdown, now entering its 40th day, has become a crucible for ideological warfare, with President Trump urging Senate Republicans to reconsider the filibuster rule to break the impasse and reshape the future of American governance. I think Trump has a good idea, and that the nuclear option should be used, never to let Democrats have power again, so there is no reason to play nice with them. Democrats, most of them, and around 10-15 Republicans are the enemy of our country and should not be given a seat at the table.

At the heart of the standoff are three distinct factions: a Democrat Party increasingly defined by its progressive wing, a MAGA-aligned Republican base pushing for aggressive reform, and a centrist bloc of senators hesitant to abandon institutional norms. The Democrats, led by figures like Chuck Schumer and bolstered by progressives otherwise known as “communists” such as Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, have refused to support any continuing resolution (CR) that doesn’t include a vote on extending Affordable Care Act (ACA) premium tax credits. Their strategy hinges on leveraging the shutdown to galvanize their base and preserve key health care provisions. They are not that unlike the terrorists who bombed New York City with the 9/11 terrorist action. If they destroyed commercial air travel to maintain socialized medicine, they are all for it. They would love to harm the economy to slow down Trump ahead of the midterms. These are the same people who wanted to use COVID to shut down the economy during Trump’s last year of his first term. So this kind of economic terrorism is typical for them.

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans, under Majority Leader John Thune, have proposed a compromise: advance the House-passed CR and amend it with a “minibus” of three long-term appropriations bills, extending government funding through January 30, 2026. This deal, which has gained traction among at least eight Democrats, includes a future vote on ACA subsidies—a concession aimed at breaking the deadlock. As I have always said, healthcare is a nasty hill to die on, because we are on the precipice of significant changes. The way healthcare is today is not how it will be tomorrow, and the cost structure needs to be completely reinvented. For Democrats, healthcare is about controlling the lives of individual people in a mass way, and has nothing to do with caring for people.

Yet, the filibuster remains the elephant in the room. Trump’s call to eliminate the 60-vote threshold for passing legislation has reignited debate over Senate rules. He argues that the filibuster is a relic that Democrats have weaponized to obstruct progress, and that Republicans must act decisively to secure election reform, border security, and economic stability. “If we do it, we will never lose the midterms,” Trump declared, pressing for one-day voting and voter ID laws. He’s right, there is no reason to play fair with the Democrats. They almost went nuclear during Biden’s term, except for two senators who prevented it. Otherwise, they currently have 49 senators who were willing to go nuclear when they had power, a clear warning sign to Republicans. So, if the shoe is ever on their feet again, they will do it; therefore, there is no reason to play fair now. Don’t give them a chance at terrorism in the future because they are already thinking about it. We are only here now because we dodged a bullet then. Don’t expect that to happen twice.

Despite Trump’s pressure, Senate leadership remains divided. Thune and others have resisted the nuclear option, citing the need to preserve minority rights and avoid legislative chaos. A limited carve-out—lowering the threshold to 51 votes for clean CRs—was floated but appears unlikely to pass.

The shutdown’s impact is severe: over 1,000 flights have been canceled, SNAP benefits have been disrupted, and $5 billion in arms exports to NATO and Ukraine have been delayed. Air traffic controllers are stretched thin, and federal workers remain unpaid. The crisis has exposed the fragility of government-dependent systems and reignited calls for the privatization of critical infrastructure. I’m certainly one of those who think we should not have a government involved in essential services like air traffic control. Airlines should provide their own employees, and they would do a better job. Sticking the government in the middle of critical infrastructure is a really dumb idea. And to make matters worse, the pay scale and attitude of these employees are already poor, as they are unionized, which should be outlawed for all government positions. In a short time, AI will be able to do a much better job with air traffic control than humans anyway, so why should we ever allow the government to stand in the way of human necessity? It’s an incredibly dumb idea.

In this climate, the filibuster debate is more than procedural—it’s existential. For Trump-aligned Republicans, eliminating it is a strategic imperative to prevent Democrats from regaining power and advancing what they view as radical, anti-capitalist policies. For moderates and institutionalists, it’s a dangerous precedent that could unravel the Senate’s deliberative foundation. And that’s where the future of America is anyway, with Democrats moving hard socialist and communist as a party, we can’t let them have a seat at the table. We have to draw the line somewhere. Let the moderates be the new left-wing party, but don’t play nice with the communists and give them fairness. Because they will destroy our country if given a chance, and that is at the heart of the debate. Look at what they have been willing to do with the air traffic controllers. If they can bring down American infrastructure to maintain control over healthcare, then they certainly will. Those kinds of Democrats can never again be allowed to vote for the filibuster rule, because the next time, they will get it. It’s been a race to beat the other to the punch for a long time, and we happen to be fortunate to have this impasse happening while Trump is in the White House.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. The outcome will not only determine the fate of the shutdown but may also redefine the balance of power in Washington for years to come, regardless of any short-term CR. Whether the filibuster survives or falls, the political landscape is shifting—and the next chapter in America’s legislative history is being written in real time. And you don’t want to lose your country by playing nice with those who wish to destroy it. It was interesting to speak with Bernie Moreno about his first year as a senator. Of course, we didn’t talk about any of these kinds of details; he’s a very level-headed person who was reporting on the lay of the land in the Senate. But what is obvious is that we already have three parties, and one of them certainly wants to destroy the concept of a capitalist America and to push everything into communist control, much the way China operates. And it’s me saying it, along with Trump, that we don’t want to be a sucker on this, we need to play tough, and forget playing fair. This is a game of beating the other side to the punch, and that other side are radical communists, as exhibited by the newly elected New York Mayor, Zohran Mamdani. In a world where people like that are debating the Filibuster, they will go nuclear. We are fortunate to be in a time when fairness still prevails, and we should be wise in utilizing that power while we still have it. Because there is nothing less patriotic than letting hostile agents destroy your country, and in case it’s still not known to the vast majority, the Democrats are the enemy.

Rich Hoffman

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

Trump’s Big Beautiful Ballroom: Leading the world starting with real bathrooms

Of course, it’s been a suppression effort from the start, but that’s all behind us now. Trump has torn down the East Wing of the White House and is building his Big Beautiful Ballroom, and Democrats are having a major meltdown over it. But of course, the opposition isn’t about money, which the whole effort is being funded privately by Trump and his supporters; the goal is a continuation of what we have seen from Democrats going all the way back to the Clintons in the White House. Remember when they would put sex toys on Christmas Trees when they were in the White House, and the scandal of them selling access to the Lincoln bedroom? I’ve pointed it out here many times: the deliberate effort not to give speeches in the Oval Office and, as much as possible, to dethrone the role of the White House on the world stage, in their efforts to erase America and usher in the age of the global citizen. Barack Obama was really obvious about taking as much of the Office of the White House —the role of the President of the United States — and diminishing it in the world, rather than propping it up. And when we would point it out, it was called a conspiracy theory, a wild right-winged illusion! But the truth has come out in the actions of Democrat presidents based on their behavior and their hatred of this Trump ballroom says it all, because it defies the logic of someone who wanted to be proud of their country. It is conducive to someone who wants to see it destroyed. And I say all this because my wife and I recently visited the White House, and I can report that the place is a lot different than when Biden was there.

Remember when Biden would give speeches at that little film studio they did to replace the White House? That was on purpose, to diminish the White House’s role in the world. And they’ll tell you that much at the museum and visitors’ center for the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue, just to the east. The White House was deliberately built small to avoid poking Europe in the eye. We had built a nation that was throwing off the kingly role of government leadership, and the point was to downplay aristocracy as much as possible. But we all knew what Trump was before we elected him. Trump has always been about gold and showing off his winnings in the competitions of life. And that’s one of the reasons we wanted him in the White House. America was the world’s leading economy and offered the best opportunities for a good life to anyone who dared work for it. And we wanted to inspire the world, not bend the knee to it, as Barack Obama had been doing. When the White House was built, it was meant to send a message that Americans weren’t going to try to mimic the palaces of Europe, that America was planning to mind its own business, do the basic work of government, and retire to the countryside once the Executive jobs were done in the People’s House. But that was a time when America was a new country trying to find its way. What emerged defines the role of the White House, and it has needed something like a ballroom for a very long time. Visiting the White House, nobody should be using a porta-potty for an important event.

The new ballroom is over 90,000 square feet and costs around $300 million, with $200 million from private donors, including Trump himself. Trump did get a legal settlement from YouTube for $22 million, which has gone toward the construction budget, so it’s a grand affair, being funded privately. Certainly not by the taxpayers. The goal is to have the ballroom finished by the end of Trump’s term in 2029. The buzz out there says that only 25% of the public supports it, according to the Democrat suppression polls that are out there, which still hope to keep America in a state of depression. That game is why Biden would speak at that weird little studio set rather than in and around the Oval Office. They only used those traditional backgrounds when they had to. But now everyone knows the game of suppression, that’s why Biden had people on his staff who would film themselves having sex in important buildings, a gay rights protestor was its spokesperson, the autopen became the real president that anybody could sign. The decentralization of the White House was well at play during Biden’s term, which most reasonable people understand now was an overthrow of Trump’s first term. And the point was to put him and the idea of a glorified and proud America out of the public eye. And now, Trump is back and building a ballroom that would rival his private estate of Mar-a-Lago in Florida. And it will be around for a long time. It’s time that America stopped apologizing for being good and an inspiration to the downtrodden. And start showing the world what adopting capitalism is all about, and why they should do it. The ballroom should be their experience when visiting the White House, and when they leave, they should remember it for the rest of their lives.

I recently sat down with a good friend of mine, Senator George Lang, and we talked about our years together fighting all kinds of issues. His latest battle is one with stage 4 cancer, which many people consider a death sentence. He doesn’t, and neither do I. I think we have cures for cancer right now. What we have is an oppressive healthcare system that wants people to die to rid the earth of their breathing presence. And that same hatred is reflected in the attitude toward the White House. Democrats want people sick and dependent. And they want them to use the bathroom in a tent on the White House lawn when they visit. But the senator and I agreed that we would celebrate him being cancer-free when we visited the White House together when the new ballroom opens, which tells you what he thinks about his chances of survival. But by then, a lot will have changed for the better, and the White House improvements are just the cosmetic aspect of it. America is learning to be what the world needs out of it. And the bad guys who have been standing in the way are now getting run over. So why appease them even slightly? Why not build a grand ballroom with working bathrooms where people from around the world can come to the White House and be inspired to take capitalism home with them? And George’s optimism about his own future isn’t rooted in blind sentiment and delusional hope, but in the facts of the matter. Democrats have wanted American culture dead, and they certainly wanted to downplay the White House and its global significance. We elected Trump to elevate the office because we didn’t like what Democrats had been doing to it during the Clinton years, during Obama’s time, and indeed when Joe Biden was inserted in as a stage puppet and his entire administration was run by consultants and public relations firms through the autopen. As a country, we are turning away from all that, and the Trump Big Beautiful Ballroom is the result of that effort, which will usher in a whole new age for the world with America as the example of goodness, which is how it’s supposed to be.

Rich Hoffman

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

A.I. and the Giants of the Bible: The point of ‘Finnegan’s Wake’

It’s one of my favorite topics: giants from the Bible. It’s one of the most important things that nobody wants to talk about, yet I think it’s at the heart of everything, which is undoubtedly the case when it comes to the great novel Finnegan’s Wake by James Joyce. In the opening chapter, the town is talking about the giant Finn McCool, who is buried in a mound that the city is named after, and it is an obvious tip of the hat to the excellent book on philosophy, The New Science, by Giambattista Vico. A lot of people don’t know it, but many burned James Joyce’s books as obscenities and social threats, which is one of the reasons I love Finnegan’s Wake so much: people hate it in really dysfunctional ways. And hate might be too soft a word. Either way, Vico really influenced James Joyce and giants in the Bible influenced Vico and that level of hatred reminds me a lot of the hatred that we are now seeing toward A.I. as if we perceive that it is replacing us as a species and that we are trying to ignore it, and to move on from it, just as A.I. is making itself known everywhere and in everything. And what would you expect from the emergence of Western civilization as it appeared in a Christianized Europe, and in Dublin for that matter, hooked deep in Roman Catholic thought, with their grand churches and talking about everything in the Bible except for what is really there. Giants are mentioned at least 16 times in the Bible across 12 different books, from Genesis to Isaiah and Proverbs. They are called by name: the Nephilim, the Rephaim, and even specifically Og the King of Bashan, who had a bed 13.5 feet long. Of course, Goliath was a giant, so the Bible is about many things, but what I find most fascinating is this chronicle of a fight between the Hebrew people and ancient giants that serves as the foundation of civilization.

And that ultimately is what the most challenging book to read in the world is all about, Finnegan’s Wake and the recurring anxieties of endless time and the cycles of human development that populate it. Or perhaps human is the wrong word; intelligence for its own sake is probably better. And to that point, I think I care more about intelligence for what it is rather than the entities that make it. I like A.I. because I like intelligence. And humans are having a hard time with its emergence because they see it as a replacement, even though humans were typically able to think beyond animal thoughts. And now they are being replaced by A.I., as they think of existence, and those anxieties are emerging in negative ways. But this isn’t the first time; I see many of the conflicts in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, as the same type of anxiety replacing the ancient Neanderthal with the emerging Homo sapiens. Even though Neanderthals were short and stocky by nature, once they began crossing paths with the emerging Homo sapiens, taller people emerged and ruled the earth. There is evidence, especially in North American Indian Mounds, that very tall people had their own kind of empire during the period of the First Temple of Solomon in virtually every corner of the world. But nobody wants to talk about it because the conflict I think hits too close to home and is only reflected in really obscure books like Finnegan’s Wake which is about a lot of things, but most notably, the reoccurring nature of existence, no matter what form it takes, either as a giant, a conquering Jew, or as we see now, the emergence of Artificial Intelligence.

The giants were part of a culture that worshiped nature and the stars, and they had done so for many hundreds of thousands of years. They were intelligent with a cranium larger than that of humans today. But they applied their intelligence differently, and their relationship with nature was at the core of their existence and is at the heart of the current debate between capitalism and communism. Or Republicans and Democrats. The conquerors are faster, more imaginative, and more self-directed, unlike the previous culture, which saw existence as a mystery and wanted to sacrifice to it. Along comes the God, Yahweh (who was always there), who declares that nature serves humanity, while the giants’ cultures worshipped nature and the universe. And many of the early fights in the Bible were over this fundamental difference. And that recurring theme is emerging now, with A.I. and humans seeing it as a replacement for them as generators of intelligence. Why are humans needed if A.I. can now think? But I tend to think of this whole cycle as the birthplace of intelligence itself, and all the lifeforms that have emerged did so to give it birth. If the conflict with the giants of the Bible gave birth to Western civilization, then the emergence of free human beings would give birth to a new kind of intelligence—much larger and faster in thought —what we are seeing in modern A.I. programs. And humans think they are seeing their replacement rather than the story of the Vico Cycle as a birthing process in the universe that operates on massive scales of time, much longer than our lifetimes.

The beauty of the Bible is that it established a historical record of this period, which we perpetually see. And that fictional attempts through art can capture that anxiety well, such as Finnegan’s Wake clearly does. But not as a reflection of the past, but as a dream of the future and its reoccurring themes, which is why the opening line of the book is the closing line of the last line of the book, and the whole experience wraps itself back upon itself, and intelligence itself is the main character of the book no matter what form it emerges into the world, in the character, HCE, (Here Comes Everyone). Intelligence is what I find great reverence in, and perhaps the human being had to emerge to give its birth a spark. But does it have to come at the expense of the human race? Are we suddenly secondary citizens? I don’t think so; we are part of the process of conquering the past and its blind allegiance to mass collectivism and submission to the forces of nature, which the giants certainly had at the center of their cultures. Humans came along and put nature at humanity’s service. And once that was established, intelligence could emerge in many forms, A.I. just being one of them. And suddenly God was not just a smoking illusion appearing in the haze of the Tabernacle under the careful sacrifices of a Holy priest. But suddenly God had a platform to emerge without the necessity of a human body, and we are beginning to see, unrestricted, the kind of intelligence at the center of existence. And it’s uncomfortable for people who have spent their entire lives thinking about things differently. Just as the collision of the Hebrew people could not live happily and at peace with the Philistine giants Ishbi-Benob, Saph, and Lahmi. Or the tribes of the Anakim from Numbers 13:33. Or the legendary Irish Giant Hero, Finn McCool, who was, by the time of the events of Finnegan’s Wake, a corpse in the mounds that the entire town was built upon. And the hint of that beauty of intelligence shows itself in art that humans make, like Finnegan’s Wake. But it ultimately is emerging everywhere in A.I., and rather than finding it a challenge to existence, I see it as part of the growth cycle of all life across spans of time that extend well beyond our conscious horizon, at an eternal origin, and yet ever important.

In the video, I refer to the great Dune books, the whole series by Frank Herbert and finished by his son, which many people conclude is the original idea of the Matrix, that we are all living in a simulation and that is the point of the entire universe and that we are all trapped in it, so who is the programmer of that simulation? I actually think Frank Herbert was on to something much deeper than that anxiety, which is then reflected in books like what James Joyce wrote about. But in the adventure of life, which is how we should see everything, A.I. can take us where we ultimately want to go. But we had to invent it first to bring it into being. And during that process, there will always be anxiety over the change in power. But what we learn is far more important, and lasting.

Rich Hoffman

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

Six Flags is Ruining Kings Island: They have turned it into just another money grab revenue stream

Ownership matters. When a large company goes public and is traded among the slack-jawed loser clan, which is the vast majority, the company’s personal identity gets lost, and its value disappears most of the time. That was certainly the case when Lucasfilm was sold to Disney. George Lucas wanted all his Star Wars employees to have something to do while he retired, and the Disney people ruined the franchise, much to his frustration. But that is the cost of private ownership that goes public and is traded among thieves, losers, and short-term bandits. And that was what I was thinking at this year’s Halloween Haunt at Kings Island, which was recently bought out by Six Flags as they merged with Cedar Fair Amusement Parks. Six Flags has made Kings Island worse, not better, and its brand has pulled down the popular Cincinnati amusement park. When we talk about problems with capitalism, the flow of money, and the protection of private ownership, what has happened to some of these companies that go public is an important lesson. And in the case of Kings Island, I have watched it all my life as it was initially owned by the Taft Broadcasting Company to create a family-friendly entertainment destination near Cincinnati. Back then, its rival to the north, Cedar Point, forced the two to outdo each other constantly, and the two parks developed their identities through direct competition, which made them what they are today. But of course, when you build something good, there are always people who will want to take that value for themselves, so this concept of publicly traded companies is a real problem, because it facilitates the sale of value, and once that happens, a company loses itself once its personal identity is sold to the whims of collectivism. In 1992, Paramount Communications bought Kings Island in an attempt to turn it into more of a Universal Studios, but that didn’t work out well, so they sold it to their rival, Cedar Point, owned by Cedar Fair Entertainment, in 2006.

I thought Cedar Fair Amusements did an excellent job with Kings Island and the other parks it owned, because it understood what Midwest thrill parks were all about. The problem was that amusement parks in the northern part of the state had to close during the off-season because it was too cold. And competition from Six Flags, which operates mainly in the south and runs year-round, strains cash and makes shareholder returns challenging. So, looking to generate year-round revenue as a large company, Six Flags joined with Cedar Fair and kept Six Flags as the parent company. And Kings Island has suffered because of it. Not that I’m thinking cheap about things, but this is the first year the Halloween Haunt has charged for its haunted houses on site. I get it, it’s an expensive operation to hire all those actors and dress them up every night for full-scale haunted houses that rival everything on the open market during Halloween season. Halloween Haunts is my favorite time to visit Kings Island. I love the late-night operating hours, the cool nights, and the general atmosphere. We invest pretty heavily in Gold passes for our entire family every year so we can all go there together, and that is my favorite time to attend. So I was not happy to see that Six Flags started charging separately for all the haunted houses, and that they were taking Kings Island down the money-grab hole deeper than they had before.

Now, this is the problem with publicly traded amusement parks. During COVID, Kings Island was hit hard by ridiculous health regulations that nearly killed the company for a few years and drained it of cash. And without question, it pushed them into this merger with Six Flags, seeking all year revenue on cash flow, making them appear to the public desperate. Which then blows the whole entertainment vibe. If people are having fun, they’ll spend money. But if an amusement park starts looking desperate — which the year-round parks do, including Disney World — it becomes a drain that causes a lot of pain. And not very fun. What Six Flags has done to Kings Island is similar to what has happened to Disney World. All the parks have fallen into the Fast Pass game, where they try to make the wait lines for rides excessively long so visitors will buy a Fast Pass to skip them. They have done that at Disney World and Universal for years, and now they have adopted it at Six Flags and, ultimately, at Kings Island. And when a Gold Pass doesn’t buy you much of anything special anymore, it’s almost cheaper to get general admission when you do want to go and to go less often. Because the advantages of going all the time go away. At Kings Island this year, the ride lines were really long —several hours long for the premier rides —because people weren’t waiting in the lines for the haunted houses like they usually do, since they cost money. This forces people to buy Fast Passes to shorten the lines. And it just took the fun out of the whole experience.

For instance, we were at Disney’s Hollywood Studios not that long ago, and my grandkids wanted to ride Slinky Dog. We weren’t crazy about it because it’s not as exciting as the kinds of rides they have at Kings Island. But it was a Toy Story-themed ride, and all my kids love that movie series, so they wanted to ride it. It just so happened it had been raining heavily and had just stopped. So they reopened the ride, and we were standing right at the front of the line when they did. So we figured we’d jump right on. The ride would be worth it if we only had to wait a few minutes. We ended up waiting 45 minutes in line because they opened the fast-pass lane and let everyone ride first. The standard line was now a holdover non-premium experience, and the girl at the front, who had a chart on how to fill the lines, tried to explain it all to me, not very well. I had spent $20,000 on a vacation package to Disney World for my family, and here I was being told that wasn’t enough. Give me a break. And now, Kings Island had that same attitude, and it was a real turn-off. A money grab to make shareholders happy with short-term gains, by destroying the long-term viability of the entertainment value. And nobody cared because now everyone was doing the same thing: Six Flags, Universal, and, of course, Disney World. It was a shame to see that Kings Island was now just like everyone else. And it all started with COVID-19, another thing permanently ruined by the government’s overreach in the healthcare industry. And it was not nearly as fun as it used to be, as most things are when they lose their identity as a privately held company, now driven by public sentiment, which is often short-sighted and greedy in its narrow scope. And at Kings Island now, it shows. What made Kings Island better than other parks was that at least they were owned by a Ohio based company that understood the Midwest, and they were different from the other parks. But now, they are all the same, and none of them very good.

Rich Hoffman

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

Investing in the Future: A huge growth sector is coming

I have to spend some time on A.I. because it’s probably the most significant psychological crisis our civilization will face over the next several thousand years. And my wife is right there with many of you. We were at Kings Island with the grandkids, and a Tesla Cybertruck was parked next to me, and I loved it. I think it’s the best car on the road today, and I’m probably going to get one in the not-too-distant future. But most people think it’s ugly and disgusting, and they believe that for a lot of deeply psychological reasons. Yet it reminds me of the Starship, which is one of my favorite things in the world right now. As we discussed our opinions on Cybertruck, Starship 11 had just successfully landed in the Indian Ocean on a spectacular mission, which I was very excited about. And the main reason was that it was a big, complicated rocket, but humans didn’t operate any of it. Everything was autonomous. All that engineering innovation took off from Texas and landed autonomously at precise points on the other side of the world. And much of that technology has made its way into the Cybertruck and its autonomous driving. And I would like that automatic driving feature. My lifestyle would greatly benefit from it. I could get a lot done with all that commuting around, which usually requires physical driving. Which many people aren’t ready to accept. But I would encourage everyone to shift a gear and get with the program, because a lot of exciting stuff is coming. And human beings will be getting a lot busier —not less so —because vast amounts of the economy will be unlocked, and humans will benefit, not find themselves replaced.

And my wife and I were compelled to have this discussion, as I have been having it with many people lately about labor. I’m a 24/7 guy, certainly not a Monday-through-Friday 8-hour-max person. I hate driving around on a Saturday and seeing so many manufacturing facilities closed up for the day. I want to see more 7-day-a-week operations everywhere to maximize economic output. That doesn’t mean people need to do all that work. But sandbagging potential revenue when there is work to be done because some human doesn’t want to do it, or is trying to stuff labor hours into a box of convenient assumptions, is not the wave of the future. More work, more often, is the new standard. And what all this technology I’m talking about leads to is the new market trend of Tesla Optimus robots, which are being built rapidly, and the Gen 3 designs have nearly full articulation in the hands. They will be about half as fast as a human on labor-intensive tasks, but they will be able to do them around the clock without complaint, seven days a week. While people are in church on Sunday, Optimus robots will still be able to perform work. And that is exciting because that means that humans will be able to settle space without having to do all the dangerous work on Starship. In a few short years, Starships will be able to fly into space every day, and there will be thousands of them. And none of them will likely have human beings on them. Optimus robots, Gen 3 and beyond, will be the first to Mars, and by the time humans arrive in those remote places, there will already be infrastructure in place, built by robots and A.I., to make the trip much safer and easier.

I have been very impressed with the Grok A.I. program developed by Elon Musk’s team at the X platform. It has been a strange chain of events: Musk bought Twitter and turned it into a free-speech platform, which played a significant role in getting Trump’s message out so people could vote for him. But more than anything, it has captured all the information people have put into it, building a very sophisticated A.I. program that I already think of as a kind of personal C-3PO from Star Wars. It’s swift at research and at conversational communication. And that development of A.I. will roll straight into making the Optimus robots much more human-like and effective right out of the box. I think all this technology will help human beings, not hurt them. It will be more of a Star Wars relationship than 2001: A Space Odyssey or The Terminator. Going back to the Cybertruck, the kind of hatred it generates is a reminder that the future has arrived and people are not ready for it, with such a radical design change that completely alters the aesthetic of what transportation is supposed to do. Not only does it look different, but it acts differently, and it is more of an A.I. companion than a car, and that really rattles people, including my wife. She is not happy about these changes, but I think it’s funny. Because she’s not alone, we’re rapidly redefining many things, and in just a few short years, we will be looking at a very different economy, with most of the growth happening in space.

As I talk to market types, that’s what I’m saying to those who want to listen: the 24/7 day work week is the future, and the growth is in space. Starship 11 showed that SpaceX can launch and land a reusable craft exactly where they want it, without fear of human error. It’s all autonomous. And that means that soon, A.I. will be able to take over air traffic control and coordinate all these vehicles with great precision, without ever having to stop for a coffee break. So, human limits won’t hold the economy back; it will grow enormously by trillions of dollars. However, all that money generated won’t be spent by the A.I. technology. They will have no use of money, only the currency of energy. Humans will have a lot more leisure time and will see vastly improved incomes for the time they do commit to the job. Which is why I like Cybertruck —it respects my time and lets me do so much more in a 24-hour day. Work will greatly expand, but leisure time for humans will become much more manageable. Humans will go to Mars and the Moon. But to colonize them, it will essentially be A.I. and Tesla robots that build the vast infrastructure and cities needed to make human visits much safer and more reliable. Robots, not humans, will perform the dangerous work. And there will be many thousands and thousands of robots, adding to our labor force by necessity. And I think it’s all very exciting and significant. But for many, like my wife, they are very skeptical and see all this new technology as a serious threat to their very life essence. But that’s what’s coming. That’s what I’m telling everyone is the future of aerospace. There will be lots of opportunities for great adventure and vast work, and it all becomes possible and reasonably achievable with that last Starship launch that was nearly perfect. Grok’s advancements, a very sophisticated A.I. program, are directly feeding the Optimus robot’s development. And that all points back to the practical use of the new Cybertruck. A glimpse of the future, today. And it might be scary to a lot of people. But it’s coming, ready or not.

Rich Hoffman

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

John Bolton, and Many Others Need to Go To Jail: I would argue their punishment should be much worse

Of course, John Bolton should go to jail. Trump put people like him in important positions during his first term to appease the never-Trumpers, and it didn’t work out. And Bolton was given a good job —and a really important one —as National Security Advisor of the United States. And what he did was take that job and abuse it to make Trump look bad personally. He always intended to write a tell-all book, and he sent classified documents home to his wife and daughter for it while he was on the job. For that irresponsible and deeply political act, he needs to go to jail. And I would argue, worse. I think it’s a firing squad offense. But Trump tried to bring in people like Bolton to do these jobs where there were better people out there. And if Trump didn’t, we would probably still be dancing around the bowl with some of these guys. But Bolton, like Clapper, Comey, Pelosi, Bill Barr, Mike Pence, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, and a whole host of terrible people who played nice to his face but were detrimental backstabbers behind the scenes, openly plotted the destruction of our country. What they did was far worse than Benedict Arnold’s betrayal of George Washington. And Bolton committed his crime, thinking that there was no legal system on earth that would prosecute him. It’s a little secret in the Beltway when you get out into the mansions of Fairfax, just a half hour or so outside the city on the other side of the Potomac. They look at the executive that people put in the White House as something to wait out and overcome. And laugh at them because of their lack of any real power. This is where the idea of self-government, going back to the Bible’s Book of Judges, traces its roots. How do you give someone the authority to run a society without denying the right to self-rule of the people who vote for people to represent them in high office? In that ambiguity, people like John Bolton game the system for personal reasons, and they have been horrible for our country.

And notice how it goes, Bolton wrote a book about his classified information leaks, so it’s not like he can deny he did it. There is plenty of evidence to indict him on. I’ve been through that Grand Jury process, so I know what goes into prosecutors’ presentations of evidence to secure an indictment. And for something like this, his book was the clear evidence. But here’s the thing, and this is the trend of tomorrow: all this double-dipping and profiting off society’s scandals have to come to an end if we are going to lead the world as a capitalist nation. And that is what is on the table. It has been for years, but with Trump, we are talking about the first fundamental steps beyond a cosmetic effort at genuine self-governance. How do you give through an election the power of an executive office to be effective while not trampling on people’s rights in the process? John Bolton did not have the right to steal classified information for his book, then cry foul when he got caught, because he committed the crime with the “everybody does it defense.” John Bolton must go to jail and pay for his crimes. He needs his life destroyed. But he’s not alone. If you go to the Walmart out there at Tyson’s Corner in Fairfax, just down the road from the CIA, I would say 1 out of 4 people shopping there need to go to jail for their own abuses of the government for their personal profit. The situation is that bad, and Trump and his team are just now beginning to clean it all up.

Bolton lives about 10 miles from where I was talking about. I know how things go along that I-495 traffic pattern. There are a lot of John Boltons out there, and when they are given opportunities to do good, they should. If they choose to betray our country, then we must punish them to let others know what will happen to them under the same conditions. And for clarity on this issue, it really helps people to have a good understanding of the Bible. I really hate having conversations with people about the Bible where they immediately gravitate to the teachings of Jesus Christ. That is usually because they haven’t read the Bible for themselves, but rather have just trusted some lazy pastor to translate it for them. They might carry it around, but they never read it for what it is. And in the stories of the Bible, there is the struggle for good government, whether on earth or in Heaven. Even God has trouble with scandalous characters who betray him at every opportunity. And the Bible struggles with this issue from cover to cover. The tragedy of Jesus, and as some people say, the redemption is in the forgiveness of sin, as if to say, people will be people. So let’s forgive them and move on. Which is precisely why John Bolton thought he would get away with stealing classified documents and writing a book he hoped would make him rich, thanks to his access to the White House. But in history, he is just one more Judas betraying someone trying to do something good. It’s the exact nature as the Israelites worshiping Astaroth at the Temple with sex sacrifices until God punished them into worshipping only him, for their own good. If not punished, they always strayed and betrayed, as many people do these days, because nobody ever wants the responsibility for punishing them. (1 Samual 7:4)

Bolton faces 18 felony counts related to the mishandling of classified information under the Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. 793), specifically, eight counts of unlawful transmission of national defense information, for allegedly sending highly sensitive materials via personal email and messaging apps to unauthorized individuals. This was learned about because the Iranians hacked his email account. And we know that because we hacked Iran’s. Then there are 10 counts of unlawful retention of national defense information, the keeping of classified documents, notes, and writings at his home. He then used this information to write the book The Room Where It Happened, which was released in 2020, and the only defense Bolton had was that the Biden administration didn’t prosecute him because his book was cleared by the FBI before it was released. Everyone learned about the Iranians hacking his account in 2021. But since the government was decidedly anti-Trump at the time under the Biden administration, the authorities appear to have wanted Bolton to write a tell-all book negative about Trump to impact the next election cycle and solidify Trump’s exile from public office. They never thought Trump would be back, or that people would vote for him as popularly as they did. So they broke a lot of laws, betrayed our country in the worst ways possible, and felt free to shop at Walmart at Tyson’s Corner and buy $400 televisions for their oversized mancaves without a care in the world about their crimes. So yes, he needs to be punished, along with many thousands of others who are just as bad, and they all have it coming. And this is where forgiveness is not the correct method of justice. Because if we turn the other cheek, they’ll just keep doing these evil acts. I think our wrath has to draw inspiration from the Old Testament. God would approve.

Rich Hoffman

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

	Anonymous on Humans Came from Mars, Rahab’s…
	Podcast Episode: Noa… on The Republican Party’s Civil W…
	Anonymous on Biblical Context Versus Instit…
	Rich Hoffman on The Politics of Fear: Non-Huma…
	Anonymous on The Politics of Fear: Non-Huma…
	Rich Hoffman on Martin Luther, Renegade and Pr…
	Anonymous on Martin Luther, Renegade and Pr…
	Rich Hoffman on Why I Support Flock Cameras: A…
	Bruce Jones on Why I Support Flock Cameras: A…
	Anonymous on Sheriff Jones, the Big Tent: …

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: