There’s Not a Lot of Compassion for Rob Reiner: Hollywood has made itself the enemy of America

The December 2025 killings of filmmaker Rob Reiner and his wife, photographer and producer Michele Singer Reiner, and the subsequent charging of their son Nick Reiner, ignited polarized reactions across news and social platforms. The recent tragedy has sparked intense debate—not only about the crime itself but about the cultural backdrop that shaped this family. Critics have noted that President Trump’s response lacked overt compassion, but this reaction must be understood in context. Rob Reiner was not just a filmmaker; he was a leading voice in Hollywood’s anti-Trump activism, often positioning himself against traditional American values. For years, Hollywood has distanced itself from the everyday realities of most Americans, creating a cultural divide that has eroded public sympathy for its employees. Hollywood has made itself the enemy of traditional America, and in that regard, Rob Reiner was considered an immoral slob that nobody should feel sorry for.

The contrast between Trump’s family values and Hollywood’s permissive lifestyle is stark. Trump famously raised his children with strict rules—no drugs, no drinking, no tattoos—reinforcing accountability and discipline. Hollywood, by contrast, often fosters environments where excess and indulgence are normalized. This permissiveness has consequences: many children of Hollywood figures struggle with addiction and instability. In Nick Reiner’s case, reports of substance abuse and personal turmoil underscore a broader pattern—liberal culture rarely emphasizes personal responsibility, and the fallout can be devastating.

Examples abound. From Sean “Diddy” Combs’ recent court revelations of grotesque excess to Charlie Sheen’s own admissions of destructive behavior, the Hollywood lifestyle often spirals into dysfunction. These stories are not isolated—they reflect an industry that glamorizes extremes while neglecting the foundations of family and morality. When tragedy strikes in such a context, the expectation of widespread public compassion becomes complicated. Americans increasingly view these outcomes as the predictable result of choices and values that run counter to the principles most families hold dear.

This is not about piling on during a tragedy; it is about recognizing the cultural divide. Rob Reiner championed a worldview that sought to undermine traditional norms, and the consequences of that worldview are now painfully evident. While no one justifies violence, the reality is that Hollywood’s broken culture produces broken lives. When those lives implode, the public’s reaction—muted sympathy at best—reflects a growing rejection of the values Hollywood promotes.

The timeline:

• Discovery and identification: On December 14, 2025, Los Angeles authorities found Rob Reiner (78) and Michele Singer Reiner (70) dead in their Brentwood home. The L.A. County Medical Examiner later listed the cause of death as “multiple sharp force injuries,” manner: homicide. 1 2 3

• Arrest and charges: Police arrested Nick Reiner (32) hours later, and he was charged with two counts of first-degree murder, with special‑circumstance allegations that could carry life without parole or the death penalty; he is being held without bail. 4 5 6

• Court appearances and schedule: Nick appeared in court on Dec. 17; his arraignment was set for Jan. 7, 2026, after his counsel waived speedy arraignment. 7 8 9

• Family statements: Siblings Jake and Romy Reiner issued a statement calling the loss “horrific and devastating” and asking for privacy and compassion. 7 10

Medical Examiner determinations and arrest/charging information are consistent across CBS News, Deadline, USA TODAY, and ABC reports. The dates (Dec. 14–17, 2025) and charging language (“first‑degree murder” with exceptional circumstances) appear verbatim or in close paraphrase across those outlets. 1 2 5 4

• In contrast, documented coverage after the killings focused on President Trump’s own posts, in which he mocked Reiner and attributed the deaths to “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” Mainstream outlets, not fabricated screenshots, reported these remarks. 14 15

Snopes (Dec. 17 & 19) and Lead Stories (Dec. 17) show no record of Reiner endorsing political violence; USA TODAY and Axios document Trump’s remarks following the homicide. 12 11 13 14 15

• Nick Reiner’s publicly discussed struggles with addiction date back to his teens, including multiple rehab stints, homelessness, and collaborative work with his father on Being Charlie (2015/16), a film loosely inspired by those experiences. 16 17

• After the killings, reporting highlighted Nick’s longstanding challenges, with sources and past interviews noting volatility and non-linear recovery—common in chronic substance‑use disorders. None of these reports. 18 5

USA TODAY and PEOPLE provide direct quotations from earlier interviews/podcasts, situating addiction history in a verifiable record while avoiding speculative causation. 16 17

—

1. Celebrity activism and partisanship: Rob Reiner’s role as a high-profile critic of Trump and supporter of Democratic causes shaped how political audiences perceived him—before and after his death. 14 15

2. Media dynamics: The Reiner case drew wall-to-wall coverage, but notable outlets also ran fact‑checks to counter false claims (e.g., fabricated posts, conspiracy theories about “secret tunnels”). The effect: a fractured information environment in which audiences pick narratives that fit their priors. 20

USA TODAY/Axios frames Reiner’s political profile; Snopes/AFP/AllSides documents rumor‑correction cycles that coexist with breaking news coverage. 14 15 11 19 20

• Responsible inferences: It is fair to conclude that political identity and celebrity status influence public reaction, that false quotes altered perceptions of Reiner’s character, and that addiction history was part of Nick’s public narrative before 2025. Those quotes that were attributed to Reiner were in the spirit of the way he projected himself, leading people to draw their own conclusions past the clean public relations efforts that actors often use to hide their true feelings which they utter to other people in private. 12 14 17

• Where we should not refrain: this family’s tragedy is a sweeping indictment of entire political or cultural communities in regard to Hollywood as a culture. And we must make claims of definitive causation without court findings because the courts as we have seen recently no longer represent the kind of justice Americans expect, and we don’t have time to wait on them. Nick Reiner’s case is ongoing; presumption of innocence applies even as the blood drips from the weapons he used to conduct the killings. 5

While in the past a story like this might have sparked weeks of discussion and reflection on Rob Reiner’s life, as an artist most people knew something about. But in the wake of his political statements and his attempts to steer people away from supporting Trump, he has essentially angered most of the country. And when something bad happens in Hollywood culture now, people have much less compassion and are ready to move on from the story much more quickly. Forgiveness of these terrible Hollywood families and the lifestyles they live, and produce children out of, is not on the table any longer. And Trump represents that evolution in his comments after the murders. Because it’s not Trump that leads the nation, it’s Trump who is a creation of that nation and their sentiments. And Hollywood, clearly, didn’t respect that process, and they took advantage of the power they did have within the entertainment desires of American culture.

Footnotes

1. L.A. County Medical Examiner cause of death: “multiple sharp force injuries,” homicide; Dec. 17, 2025. 1 2

2. LAPD and DA timeline; arrest, charges, special‑circumstance allegations. 4 5

3. Court appearance and arraignment scheduling. 7 8

4. Family statements requesting compassion and privacy. 7 10

5. Debunked quotes attributed to Reiner about the Trump shooting attempt. 11 12

6. Documented coverage of President Trump’s remarks after Reiner’s death. 14 15

7. Nick Reiner’s publicly discussed addiction history; Being Charlie context. 17 16

8. Rumor‑correction cycle (fabricated posts; conspiracy content). 19 20

—

Bibliography & Further Reading

• CBS News — “L.A. County medical examiner releases Rob and Michele Reiner’s causes of death.” Link

• Deadline — “Rob Reiner’s Official Cause Of Death Revealed By LA Medical Examiner.” Link

• ABC News — “Rob Reiner’s son, Nick Reiner, charged with 1st‑degree murder with special circumstances.” Link

• USA TODAY — “Rob Reiner’s son Nick charged with murder in parents’ deaths.” Link

• CBS News — “Nick Reiner, Rob and Michele Reiner’s son, appears in court; arraignment set for Jan. 7.” Link

• Snopes — “Rumor claiming Rob Reiner said he wished would‑be Trump assassin ‘hadn’t missed’ is unfounded.” Link

• Snopes — “Did Rob Reiner say ‘too bad he turned his head’ about Trump assassination attempt? There’s no proof.” Link

• USA TODAY — “What did Rob Reiner say about Trump? POTUS called it ‘derangement.” Link

• Axios — “Trump mocks Rob Reiner after death. Here’s what Reiner said about Trump and Charlie Kirk.” Link

• PEOPLE — “Rob Reiner’s Son Nick Previously Spoke About His Struggles with Drug Addiction and Homelessness.” Link

• USA TODAY — “Rob Reiner’s son Nick once ‘wrecked’ his parents’ guest house” (podcast recollections). Link

• AllSides (Snopes reprint) — “False claim of secret tunnels beneath Rob Reiner’s home spreads online.”

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=2070

The Cannibals of China and their Democrat Party Friends: Collectivists literally want to eat the living

The recent shooting of National Guardsmen in Washington, D.C., allegedly by an Afghan national with ties to intelligence networks, underscores a profound ideological divide in American politics. The incident was not merely an act of violence; it became a prism through which competing visions of governance and societal order were revealed. While some sought to frame the tragedy as a consequence of deploying the National Guard—a measure implemented to restore law and order—others attempted to deflect responsibility by invoking narratives of provocation and systemic grievance. This rhetorical maneuver, blaming the presence of security forces for inciting violence, reflects a deeper philosophical orientation rooted in collectivist ideologies that have historically justified chaos as a means to consolidate power. Democrats, like Mark Kelly, who have recently found themselves in a lot of trouble due to attempts at seditious behavior against President Trump’s administration, are showing a much deeper problem with their entire political ideology that traces to ideological roots from the home country of their movement, Chinese communism. And the cannibalistic nature of that country and its general philosophy of life, compared to the West.

Empirical evidence demonstrates that the deployment of the National Guard in Washington, D.C., during periods of heightened unrest significantly reduced crime rates. Under Trump’s administration, violent crime in the District fell by approximately 35% between 2023 and 2024, with homicides declining from a peak of 274—the highest since 2005—to markedly lower levels in subsequent years. Even in 2025, violent crime decreased by an additional 26% compared to the previous year, signaling the deterrent effect of a visible security presence.¹ These figures stand in stark contrast to earlier trends under Democratic leadership, where policy emphasis on police defunding and social work interventions coincided with escalating urban violence.²

The paradox of Democrat lawmakers advocating stringent gun control while privately securing concealed carry permits further illustrates the inconsistency of their position. Representative Anna Paulina Luna recently highlighted that numerous members of Congress, including those who champion restrictive firearm legislation, have obtained permits to carry weapons in the District.³ This duality—publicly opposing individual self-defense while privately embracing it—reveals a pragmatic concession to the realities of urban crime, even as ideological commitments demand the perpetuation of vulnerability among the populace.

To comprehend this contradiction, one must examine the intellectual lineage of collectivist thought. Marxist theory, which informs much of the progressive agenda, posits that individual identity is subordinate to the collective good.⁴ Within this framework, personal sacrifice is valorized as a moral imperative, and systemic inequities are construed as justifications for redistributive violence. The logic underpinning such views is evident in the rhetorical claim that the Afghan assailant’s actions were provoked by the presence of the National Guard—a formulation that shifts culpability from the perpetrator to the state apparatus tasked with maintaining order. This inversion of responsibility is not incidental; it is symptomatic of a worldview that privileges structural explanations over individual accountability.

Historical analogues amplify the gravity of this ideological orientation. During the Great Chinese Famine (1959–1961), precipitated by Mao Zedong’s collectivist policies, an estimated 15 to 55 million people perished.⁵ The obliteration of market mechanisms and private property rights engendered conditions so dire that cannibalism became a widespread survival strategy.⁶ Archival records and eyewitness testimonies recount instances where families consumed the flesh of deceased relatives, and concubines reportedly volunteered for slaughter to sustain their households.⁷ These macabre episodes were not aberrations; they were logical extensions of a system that negated individual sanctity in favor of an abstract communal ideal. The psychological residue of such practices persists in cultural norms that valorize self-abnegation, reinforcing the collectivist axiom that the organism of society supersedes the autonomy of its constituent cells.

The resonance of these historical patterns in contemporary American discourse is disquieting. When policymakers suggest that victims of crime should acquiesce to dispossession for the sake of social harmony, they echo the same moral calculus that sanctioned atrocities under communist regimes. The proposition that one’s property—or even life—may be forfeited to appease the grievances of the marginalized is not merely a policy stance; it is a philosophical commitment to the erasure of individuality. In this schema, the Afghan shooter is transfigured from a culpable agent into a symptom of systemic dysfunction, and the act of violence becomes an indictment of order rather than chaos.

Such reasoning is inimical to the principles of a constitutional republic. The sanctity of individual rights, enshrined in the American political tradition, is antithetical to the collectivist dogma that animates these apologetics. To capitulate to narratives that rationalize violence as a byproduct of structural inequity is to invite the dissolution of civil society. The deployment of the National Guard, far from constituting a provocation, represented an affirmation of the state’s obligation to safeguard its citizens—a function that cannot be abdicated without imperiling the very foundations of governance.

The Afghan shooter incident is not an isolated tragedy; it is a harbinger of the ideological contest that will define the trajectory of American democracy. The attempt to reframe culpability, the oscillation between public disarmament and private armament, and the invocation of systemic grievance as exculpation—all bespeak a worldview that esteems the collective over the individual. History admonishes us that such a worldview, when operationalized, engenders not utopia but barbarism. The cannibalistic horrors of Maoist China are not relics of a distant past; they are cautionary tales inscribed in the ledger of human folly. To ignore these lessons is to court a future in which the logic of sacrifice metastasizes from metaphor to corporeal reality. And that is what Democrats are proposing for our society when they speak of defunding the police, or yielding to crime with chaos, and in suggesting that gun control should be a priority when crime is used to perpetuate their power through fear by the ruthless and aggressive. They want the crime because they literally feed off it.

I was eating with some friends the other day at a nice Chinese restaurant buffet in West Chester, Ohio, that had a lot of great options. I reminded everyone that all this nice food would not be typical in China. In China, they actually eat just about anything that moves: dogs, cats, turtles, moms and dads, and body parts. In most places in the world, where collectivist politics reside, the food is not as sanitized from the violence behind death as you will find in Chinese restaurants in the United States. The standard of individualized thought is enough to affect how we eat. Let alone process government functions. But make no mistake about it, if it were up to the Mark Kellys of the world and their seditious function as communist insurgents, they would drive a society into cannibalism because that is the unspoken party platform. They represent in America the Great Leap Forward that all academic leftists in the world, and especially in America, have been yearning for. They aren’t trying to preserve society. They are trying to eat it and gain the power of their enemies from the literal consumption of flesh and the destruction of the living. And the Afghan terrorist, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, who shot the two D.C. National Guard members just a block away from the White House, serves their aims at the destruction of society for the consumption of its contents, just as their home country of China would be very proud of.

—

Footnotes

1. Metropolitan Police Department, “Annual Crime Report,” Washington, D.C., 2024–2025.

2. U.S. Department of Justice, “Crime Trends in Urban Centers,” 2023.

3. Luna, A.P., Congressional Briefing on Security Measures, 2025.

4. Marx, K., Critique of the Gotha Program, 1875.

5. Dikötter, F., Mao’s Great Famine: The History of China’s Most Devastating Catastrophe, 2010.

6. Yang, Jisheng, Tombstone: The Great Chinese Famine, 1958–1962, 2012.

7. Chinese State Archives, Oral Histories of the Great Leap Forward, 1961.

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

Republicans Played Too Nicely in the Election of 2025: Who to blame in the West Chester Trustee race

It is a bit surprising to listen to everyone’s post-election analysis, where they think Democrats did a lot better than they actually did. In West Chester, Ohio, there is a lot of chest beating that Democrats found themselves in a lot of seats, especially the West Chester Trustee position, where I went to bed feeling like my guy, Mark Welch, the incumbent who has done a good job, came in third in a six-person race for two spots, was going to win. There was a Trojan horse effect there, where the average person didn’t know who the Democrats were. In the West Chester race, that certainly would be the case. Mark was a Republican-endorsed candidate, but there wasn’t much advertising for the Democrats running, as they hoped to slip under the radar without the general public knowing who they were. I still felt Mark was strong enough to win anyway. I might have had disagreements with the way that Republicans set themselves up for this election. But I wasn’t surprised by anything in Virginia, New York, or California. Where Republicans ran away from President Trump, Republicans lost to Democrats, and it’s pretty much that simple. Republicans, the same old Never Trump types, a year after his magnificent election, tried to go it alone, and they lost. I hear a lot of analysis, and they are all mostly missing the point. The Republican Party traditionalists still don’t want to admit what MAGA America really is. The West Chester race, like the Lakota levy issue, truly captured a national sentiment worth mentioning. I’ve spoken to Mark, and he’ll have the opportunity to do many great things. Meanwhile, West Chester was warned what electing a bunch of Democrats would do, which is what the Lakota school board has been experiencing. And people are going to have to learn some hard lessons.

But here’s the deal. While I support and endorse various candidates, and I certainly did endorse Mark Welch, I disagreed with the “niceness” campaign. Mark is a nice guy, but everyone has to remember he won as a Tea Party conservative, and the Republican Party at that time was led in that effort by a scrappy George Lang, who when pressed can be pretty ruthless to those he runs against. It was the Tea Party types who went out and fought to put Mark on the Board of Trustees of one of the most successful communities in America, and he has been great in that position. Over time, people have forgotten what it took to get there and what it takes to keep a community great. New York is going through that same cycle. Over time, people get complacent when things are stable for a long time, and they dare to make changes that might sound “nicer.” And when it comes to me and many political people, there are always these tagalongs who aren’t very savvy, and they certainly don’t like me. When I see Mark at an event and speak to him, there are always those who swoop in after me and ask him why he gives me the time of day. There are lots of whispers in the ears of some of these people who want to believe that the world is something other than what it is, and that I should not have a place in it. But I’ll tell you what, if I were managing Mark Welch’s campaign, he wouldn’t have lost. I would have advised him to be a lot more competitive and a less smiling, more angry, Mark. The belief was that Mark needed to get Democrats to vote for him, so he needed to be more like Lee Wong, whom conservatives thought of as safe to vote for, but who would undoubtedly receive a bleed over of Democrat votes. The belief was that in West Chester, if you wanted to win the trustee seat, Democrats would have to step over and vote for Mark.

But in truth, as it was everywhere in the country, it’s the MAGA base that supports Trump that everyone had to tap into. Because even there, there are already Democrats who have left the party and are voting for Republicans because of Trump. So, in Mark’s case, and this is the fault of all those people who whisper in his ear when I leave the room, playing “keep away” with these office seats is not the way to win. Democrats are trying to sneak under the door, and Republicans are trying not to look too mean to win over Democrats. When the real desire is for MAGA Republicans to grow in number, and people in West Chester would have loved to know that Mark was much more MAGA than just being a nice guy incumbent. The reason why Mark didn’t pull out one of the two top spots was engagement. The MAGA people, the old Tea Party types, weren’t excited about this election cycle, so they stayed home. And Democrats were desperate for relevancy, so they worked the polls, mailed out their mailers, knocked on doors, and tried to sneak under the door wherever possible so people wouldn’t know who they were. Mark worked hard, but the people around him were on their heels, and that was obvious. They were on cruise control and wanted him to play keep away, to not do anything that might steer away those Democrats that they are so afraid of.

This year, more than other years, I have been doing a lot of video coverage of important political figures, not because I’m some radical right winged maniac, as those people who were whispering to Mark criticisms toward him for even talking to me, but because I know what I’m talking about and I always know how to handle these kinds of things with an excellent track record. If someone listens to me, they will have a significantly better chance of winning their issue, regardless of who they are. I’m so good at it that lots of people want to pay me a lot of money to do it, but I look down my nose at that kind of business, because I don’t respect people who take money for something that is essentially part of our republican form of government. It should be a labor of love, in my opinion, not something you profit from. So I already don’t respect a lot of those types of people who are critical of me. Everything gets back to me, so I know who those people are. And I think so little of them that I don’t even waste my time speaking with them at a lot of those events. I see them as a waste of time. They don’t understand the game, and they don’t respect the people who vote. They are busy trying to make the world into what it isn’t. Because they like Democrats secretly, and they don’t want to fight them, they want to get along with them. I advocate destroying them. Why wouldn’t you want to destroy people who are trying to ruin our civilization? And I understand that a lot of the people I’m talking about don’t think of things on a vast scale for the actuality of existence. That’s the only way I think. So do I care if they find my outlook repulsive? Absolutely not. I see them as a waste of time, and they have a lot to learn about life. And when they give bad advice, as they certainly have been, don’t be surprised when your guy loses. Republicans lost in races they could have won because they were too nice to Democrats. And it’s that simple.

Rich Hoffman

We’re rebuilding the school board. Good management is the best way to defeat tax increases.

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

Doug Horton in His Own Words: The Joy of Taking a Shower in Liberal Tears

I’m not the kind of person who spikes the football. However, just before the Lakota levy attempt in 2025, school board member Doug Horton posted a video (shown here) where he emphasized the last levy won by Lakota back in 2013. That was a swipe at me personally, so I have to address it, specifically. He also indicated another Democrat talking point that has been circulating for many years, and that is that I, and about a dozen other anti-levy people, are a vociferous minority who do not represent the rest of the community. So his message is not to listen to us and vote for his monstrous tax proposal because we love children. However, these days, many more than a dozen people are opposed to the Lakota tax spending addictions. And there are a lot more than I who take a position and help out during these political campaigns. In this case, I had very little to do with the official campaign. I do the things I always do, but with many more people working on the campaign, and they are brilliant and organized individuals. And I’m proud of the great work they did. And that effort is only going to grow in the future, especially with a successful defeat of the Lakota levy, the first one since 2013, which barely, and I mean barely, squeaked by. Back then, it was Sheriff Jones who stepped over the line to support the public school teachers because he was still mad at the Tea Party effort to make public sector unions illegal in Ohio, which was the side I was on. It was due to Sheriff Jones’ support that the 2013 levy passed by just a tiny bit, and another hasn’t passed since then.

And why should a levy pass? It’s not like the community isn’t giving Lakota enough money. They have a budget of over a quarter of a billion dollars per year, and for their collective bargaining contracts, that’s not enough for their insatiable desires. It took about a decade, but Sheriff Jones and I are mostly on the same page, and that’s how the ball bounces in politics. And for this levy attempt, and any others that Lakota proposes in a declining enrollment district with education changing dramatically in the years to come, that’s how it’s going to be. This leaves people like Doug Horton on the extreme outside, and because he made the statements he did, we must address his point of view as a costly school board member and as a proper representative of the poor management currently on the board. For many years, we had something of a conservative on the board who worked with everyone to keep more taxes off the ballot. We even managed to get a majority on the board to control costs, which Horton referred to. And I found some of his comments incredibly out of touch, especially regarding Darby Boddy, the conservative school board member whom Lakota, as an organization, lobbied hard to remove, literally the moment she was sworn in. If Doug Horton is worried about Lakota headlines not being negative in the national media, then don’t support superintendents who have sex fests on Craigslist and tell the police that he fantasized about engaging with children who were going to the school at the time. Horton proposes ignoring the problems so they can receive good press, pass tax increases, and gloss over trouble for the greater good of the school brand, which is a kind of fake sentiment that is at the heart of many problems when raising children. A topic we could spend many books writing about, given its incorrect point of view.

Doug Horton and many others in the background have worked hard to destabilize the school board so that they could get rid of the conservatives and essentially get to this big facilities plan, which has been in the planning phase since Trump’s last term, a very long time. And they believed that if only they had enough liberals on the school board, the community would pass the levy. And my thoughts have been for a long time to let them have the school board, let them try to run a levy, and let that levy crash and burn when they find out just how many people in the community are against them, many more than just a dozen or so. In the case of this levy, the defeat was even more than I thought; it lost 60% to 39%. I thought our side might get into the high 50s. I was impressed to see it hit 60 in a down-year election, where engagement was naturally low. It was actually a good simulation of what we expect Lakota to do next, and that is try to slide another levy under the door in May when people want to forget about school and turnout is low, or in August when nobody is thinking about politics. Turnout was not very vigorous for this election, and still, Lakota lost massively, so that’s a good start for the tax defenders. And it proves something even more profound that I knew we had to get to once we essentially kicked the control of the school board over to the liberals. They needed to see what I’ve been telling them all along, which they obviously pay attention to, because Doug Horton essentially announced it to the world as a matter of fact. People are not with them; they are against them in massive ways. And they never believed it because they don’t speak to people outside their social circles, which are proportionally very small.

The biggest problem with our conservative majority is that we let them play the game of division; they got our people all fighting each other with the belief that, in the vacuum, they would regain power and win the hearts of the public. And Doug Horton does represent the rest of the board, especially Julie Shaffer and Kelly Casper, in his point of view, and that is the public would spend money on their dumb ideas if only I weren’t around, or a dozen or so noisy people, which they have justified to themselves as a small minority. What reality says, however, is that those voices represent a majority of the Butler County population, and as I said would happen, when given a chance to talk, they would voice their opinion at the ballot box. And they did, they crushed the Lakota levy. I don’t think about it too much, but when I see videos like his, it’s a grotesque reminder of just how stupid some of these people are, and it really makes me sick that they are my neighbors. I’ve lived in the area longer than most of these pro-levy types have been alive, and I will be around long after all of them are gone. To me, they are the unwelcome noise of a thriving community, where people come from other places and bring their misguided ideas with them, which are socially very destructive. But when things get tough, I like to let people show what they have, and he certainly did. And rather than warn them not to pass a levy, I’m fine to let them try, which they did. And what I said would happen, happened. And it was because a lot more than a dozen people got information to the voters that helped them make the right decision. And the amount of support we have had in that effort has grown over the years; it hasn’t declined. The real solution lies in young people like Ben Nguyen, who was just elected to the school board, and I think will bring many good ideas with him, along with healthy and intelligent debate. And we’ll need about three or four more like him to push off all these ridiculous liberals. But first, they had to be exposed for what they were. And they have, so now it’s time for a lot more work, focusing on school board building rather than defending our property values against those who are clearly out of touch and not very smart.

Rich Hoffman

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

Dirty Tricks by the Pro Levy People at Lakota Schools: Trying to sneak their issue under the door at the last minute

Just a few observations about the upcoming Lakota school levy, the biggest and most ridiculous in the state of Ohio, where they essentially want to tear down a bunch of schools and rebuild all new schools, to make the classrooms smaller and drive up payroll by hiring more teachers to teach the same number of students. It’s expensive and stupid, but what do we expect from these people? But there is a lot more to notice than just how flat-footed their campaign is. We always talk about how liberal they are who run and manage the school, and as they are pushing for their levy passage, they look to have taken their entire campaign out of the Kamala Harris playbook. They have waited until essentially two weeks before the election to put out their signs, and what they have put out is a minimal number. I’ve been all over the district and was looking for more signs in places more friendly to their position, but they are pretty flat, and where they do have signs, they have tried to appear bigger and more of a mainstream position. Especially in places where Mark Welch has yard signs, they have been attempting to put the limited amount of signs that they do have next to him to give people the illusion that he supports the Lakota levy, when I know for sure, he does not. These are not politically savvy people running the Lakota campaign for their massive tax increase, which is fine with me. I want to see that levy crash and burn more than anybody. But things have changed a lot over the last ten to twenty years, since I was on the front line of these things, and it’s certainly worth talking about. Of course, anything can happen in an election; it will all depend on turnout. But the Lakota people are certainly on their back foot on this one.

The pro tax people are trying to associate with the No More Taxes position of the very popular Mark Welch

It costs a lot of money to run these campaigns, and usually, Lakota schools have plenty of mad moms trying to hide how terrible they are for their kids from the public by supporting the schools that give them a free babysitting service, because they are too lazy to be good parents themselves. It’s a well-known personality type, the mad and crazy mothers who campaign for tax increases on other people’s property. And even worse than those neurotic types come their queer eye for a straight guy husbands, who are more interested in doing the dishes, hoping to get laid by their wives’ best friends husbands because they are so progressive themselves, that all traces of manhood have vanished from their cell structure like clowns at an anti-mime rally. (that’s how you know that I don’t use AI to write my articles, I do everything the old fashioned way) And watching their campaign this time around, after watching lots of campaigns from the past, it looks like their entire approach to this tax increase is based on that inner firing squad of transgender losers, wife-swapping scandals, and corporate bootlickers too busy to know that their children had their 8^th birthday. They don’t understand the forces against them because they haven’t worked very hard to get to know them, and you can tell by the way they have put out their signs and raised money for the effort. They are doing what I call the Kamala Harris approach, where they know they have a weak position and their strategy is to surprise everyone at the last minute, before anybody knows what’s really going on. And where they are present, they are trying to affiliate themselves with well-known politicians, like Mark Welch, who is an obvious frontrunner for the upcoming West Chester trustee race.

A very weak campaign by the pro tax people

Another thing that I noticed while driving around the district is that there are a lot fewer businesses supporting this levy than there used to be. The school has always acted like a bunch of mobsters when it came to pushing for business support. If businesses did not support massive tax increases, those businesses were attacked by that mob of angry moms, and they’d try to inspire a boycott against those businesses. Lakota schools traditionally has quite a collection agency force that is very aggressive on tax shakedowns, and they have been pretty ruthless. But things have changed over the years; it’s been a long time since Lakota went for a tax increase because the community has been so hostile toward them. And the shoe is on the other foot now, for sure. When the mad moms think they are getting a hook in the water by putting their signs next to Mark Welch, to attempt to trick voters into supporting massive tax increases, hoping to get bleed off votes from low information people, there is an air of desperation looming over the whole effort. I could tell a lot of stories about the past where the outcome was never obvious. I have done interviews with some of the big media, a Channel 5 broadcast on prime time television comes to mind, where the pro-Levy people had the streets all lined up with supporters, and they looked like everyone was going to vote for them. Then they’d put me in a lonely parking lot, trying to make it look like I was on my own and had little support from anybody. And once the election happened, the silent majority showed up and crushed the visuals in embarrassing ways. Those were the old days, and these Lakota people are certainly not functioning from that kind of strength.

I think this says everything about the election of 2025

It costs about $5 per yard sign. And based on the yard signs, you can tell the strength of the political party because the early investment usually indicates how much community support there is ahead of the election. On the No More Taxes at Lakota side, the push was to raise about $20K to fight this levy attempt and to be prepared for follow-up attempts after this first one fails. For Lakota’s side, once the filings get reported, it would not be surprising that their donations are in the six figures, as many schools are these days. But in Lakota’s case, that money isn’t seen yet, and obviously, they are worried about giving people too much time to learn the facts, so they are doing a last-minute push just like Kamala Harris did, hoping to catch people a little off guard, which doesn’t spell confidence in their position. They don’t have many signs out really late in the campaign. The No More Taxes campaign has had its signs out since the last week of September. So, impressions by the public who didn’t already have a strong opinion on the matter were being made during October. But early voting has already been going on, so the Lakota effort has been noticeably flat-footed. And where they hoped to win over people, they are trying to give the illusion that a popular local trustee, Mark Welch, is on their side, which he most certainly isn’t. But those are the strategies of the desperate, and not very smart. And a group of people who think that everyone is with them when they are only talking among themselves, with a couple of cats and dogs to greet them at the door. When it comes to the community as a whole, I think they are in for quite a shock when the reality of the vote totals comes in. They don’t seem to know just how bad people have come to hate them. But they will, the election is near. And for all the normal people out there, those who are not dysfunctional misfits hoping to hide in society through an overly liberal education built on a foundation of DEI hires, make sure to vote NO on the Lakota Levy, and do it in a big way. These losers need to learn a lesson.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Real Way to Get Peace in the Middle East: Going door to door where evil lives and thrives

I think it’s nice that Trump did a deal to get the hostages back in Israel. But the cause of the trouble between the Palestinian’s and Israel was not present at that peace negotiation. The politicians are not the cause of the conflict, and if we really want to solve the problem and bring peace to the Middle East, then the source of that trouble will have to be eliminated. I recommend performing that task without any state involvement. The United States doesn’t need to commit ground troops toward lasting peace. All it needs to do is step aside and give contractors a “get out of jail free card.” To allow contractors to go into the Gaza Strip and go door to door, eliminating the perpetrators of violence. When you travel through the area, you can learn a lot about a culture, and one of the most dominant influences in their bookstores is The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. The people who order those books to be sold, and the publishers who knowingly try to keep that kind of anger alive by blowing on the embers of evil, are the cause of the trouble, and they’ll have to be eliminated. And until we are willing to play that game, there will be no peace, anywhere, not in the Middle East, nor on American college campuses. The enemy lives in the minds of the vacant, empty souls of evil who want people to fight in a bloody conflict for all kinds of terrible reasons. Everyone may clap that some tortured souls who managed to live through that captivity were returned to their families. But the problem is far from solved. Nobody could blame Trump for trying. Yet the solution is still lingering in the tunnels and back rooms of the Gaza Strip, and many other places around Israel, and they are planting the demise of the Jewish country as we speak.

Hamas had its money dry up after the bombing of Iran, and Trump has put everyone on their heels, including Qatar, who are the primary sponsors of terror in the region, and they want Israel wiped from the face of the earth. I have a unique understanding of this problem from the science side, and the battle over the Temple Mount is the key to it. The Arabs are never going to get over what the British did to them over Sykes-Picot after World War I, and how they felt double-crossed at the end of World War II, when the United Nations decided to give the Jewish people their own country, and Israel was created in what the Palestinians considered their land. But this fight, as Trump said, goes back many thousands of years to when Yahweh encouraged the Hebrew people, the Jews, to raid the land of Canaan and resettle the land righteously for them. And all that went well beyond 4000 years ago, even further to the land dispute that God was clearly very aggressive about. And since that time —the First Temple period, especially with Solomon and King David’s threshing floor —the dispute has continued, with no end in sight. The Jewish people were constantly attacked and removed from the land and dispersed as exiles all over the world. Until the United Nations came along and imposed a Jewish state, and everyone had to get along with the idea, which has caused all the wars there for all these years. Looming always in the background is the hostile views of the Muslim community toward all outsiders, which feeds the anger of pitting the Quran against the Holy Bible as a source document for understanding eternity.

Knowing Trump had everyone pegged down for destruction, the Palestinian movement is going back underground while the politicians save themselves from financial destruction and give Trump what he wants. Visible peace in the Middle East so that they aren’t crushed by the aggression of a much stronger enemy, the United States. They only made a deal because Iran has fallen apart, the Marxism of the area behind the teachings of the Quran is being challenged by populism, so they are, for their own preservation, making a show of peace for the cameras. The real solution will be to eliminate the leaders of discontent, as in the United States. There are a lot of voices hiding behind what they think are Constitutional protections of free speech, who are outright anti-American terrorists, and they will stop at nothing to destroy those they don’t like. Look at the youth movement behind the killing of Charlie Kirk. Those kids didn’t come up with those thoughts on their own. Instead, they received their thinking from influences who are still very much at work and just holding their nose through Trump’s terms in office. That same radicalism showed itself on ABC News when George Stephonopolis cut off Vice President J.D. Vance during a Sunday show recently. They are all united behind a curtain of discontent and just waiting for Trump to be removed from the world stage. And a future president was treated like a rag doll by those same elements, disrespectfully cutting him off to show him disrespect purposely. That’s the kind of evil that puts those books in the book stores of the Middle East, from Egypt to Turkey, and everything to the East, all the way over to India.

The best way to deal with these terrorists who hide behind polite society is to hire contractors to eliminate them, $100K per head. Cut off the enemy’s head and put it in a bag for payment by an independent contributor. Keep the states out of it and fight this battle away from the borders of nations, but door to door, where the bad guys really live, and create so much purposeful, strategic hate, to destabilize society to the liking of evil. I would volunteer for that kind of thing, and many people could get very rich as privateers, much as it was in the golden age of piracy. There are plenty of ways to do it, and all that would be needed from a country like America is to leave the process alone. Let contractors go into Gaza and collect the heads of the terrorists. Everyone knows where they live; go in and get them. Take the terror to their doorsteps and save the ink on the peace deals. Because as long as they are allowed to live, they will seek to bring evil into the world. And that goes for areas outside of the Middle East as well. Even in New York City or Chicago. The Antifa terrorists of Portland. They are being crushed now by a Trump administration willing to perform the task. But the evil is still lingering, going underground. And it’s there where evil must be hunted, door to door, and with soldiers of fortune carrying around pillow bags to carry the heads of their trophies. Turn those kinds of people loose, pay them well under the table, and attack the rats where they live. Don’t let them continue to publish books like Mein Kampf and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Or even to burn down churches in Paris in the name of the Quran. That hatred even found expression in the creation of the Quran in 610 AD by Muhammad, which sought to displace the emerging Christian movement that had united the Roman Empire in 313 AD. These were not religious pursuits intended to gain entry into the gates of heaven, but rather to destabilize the governments of the world through military raids. And that same youth is being corrupted everywhere in the world at the point of learning. And it’s a real threat to any potential peace efforts. That is, unless you physically remove the perpetrators with door-to-door contractors. And speak the only language those kinds of enemies understand, ruthless violence, mercifully applied to the root cause of evil itself. And nothing less.

Rich Hoffman

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

Democrats Will Die on the Government Shutdown Hill: Who needs Obamacare when people will live for hundreds of years in greatly improved health

Democrats were already on the outside looking in politically, and for a lot of bad reasons, they have decided to die on this government shutdown hill. Now that we are well into October 2025, Democrats have insisted on a shutdown of the government, pushing for subsidies on Obamacare, which has always been about socialized healthcare, and control over a large segment of the economy. And this is a particularly foolish thing to do for many reasons, not just politically. Healthcare is changing, so the kind of political control over it that Democrats want is already a thing of the past; therefore, their position on it really spells doom for them as a party going forward. Nobody is missing government services, except for an inconvenience. We live in a world where many other things can be done, and people are willing to do them. When they find out they can’t get something because of a government shutdown, it only reminds them that the government shouldn’t be involved in holding things up, but rather in providing the service they are seeking. Shutting down the government only solidifies the bad feelings toward the government that people already have. It doesn’t make people feel like they need to go out of their way to accommodate government workers, but rather to find a way to eliminate them so as not to inconvenience them. So this position of a strike essentially to get what they want, “they” being democrats, is really out of step with reality. They aren’t going to out-market Trump. Democrats are going to get the blame for the whole thing because Republicans have been trying to pass CRs to get the government going, so Democrats are going to eat the entire thing, which is fine with me. I want to see the Democrats destroyed and obliterated from politics. And I see more people will join me as a result of this shutdown.

However, being tone deaf to the world, the healthcare market has changed tremendously in just the last six months. Not to mention, since Obamacare first came into effect in 2010. Healthcare changed forever when the industry itself made a significant move with COVID-19 to take over the world, essentially. Everything dangerous about Obamacare came to people’s minds just ten years later, internationally, with COVID-19, healthcare workers essentially trying to take over the management of everything. At that point, people began to lose trust in doctors and the industry as a whole, and they started asking numerous questions. And now, five years later, the whole healthcare assumption has come unraveled, and just as many medical breakthroughs are hitting the market as we speak, such as cures for cancer and repairing tissue that deteriorates typically as we age. The way we treat illnesses is going to change dramatically by 2030, and many of the legacy costs of the healthcare industry are expected to decrease. The cheapest form of healthcare is not needing it, as our bodies are capable of repairing themselves. The best way to not get sick is to stay healthy, and that is the future of healthcare. Not continued insurance costs to fund an industry that nobody wants anymore. Democrats view labor in healthcare completely wrong and assume that doctors and nurses are going to be needed, and that isn’t the case. AI is better than a doctor, heck, and Apple Watch replaces a lot of the need for a doctor’s visit. And when something is found, it will be stem cells and nanobots that are used to repair the body to its infinite state of healthiness.

Most of healthcare is a scam, where the industry itself is controlled by the influence of pharmaceutical companies. Many people have always been suspicious of it, but many of our fears were grotesquely confirmed during the COVID pandemic, and as a result, healthcare as we know it will likely never return to the trust it had before 2019. People who don’t know any better will use healthcare as it has been sold to the public; they’ll go to the doctor, go to the hospital, and take the drugs that they tell them to take. However, the future of healthcare is likely to involve nanobots, AI, and stem cells derived from placentas—waste from newborn baby births. I have a few friends who are fighting off stage 4 cancers right now, and just a year or two ago, these would have been death sentences with a short time to live. But there are treatments, primarily out of the country right now, that are shrinking their tumors and giving them a path to full recovery, which is what healthcare should be. In a few years, to kill cancer, you’ll take a simple pill or get a vaccine, and the cancer will be destroyed, and people will live. People could, and should, live as many years as biblical characters did, for hundreds of years, if not longer. These lifecycles that we have endured for the last several thousand years are ridiculously short, and that is a consideration that the Schumer Shutdown never understood. They are trying to preserve a system that is dying year by year. They are funding for an industry that people would love to move away from. They are late to a party that ended yesterday, and they are too ignorant to realize it, so they have dug in, seeking more than a trillion dollars in funding that taxpayers simply aren’t going to pay.

This will only help Republicans in the midterms. It certainly won’t hurt them. And remember what I say all the time, Democrats don’t have the numbers. Without illegal immigration, they do not have party support. Their only hope is to convince illegals to come into America to vote for them because of free giveaways like Obamacare. However, the industry itself is already too far advanced for an Obamacare-like medical approach. My advice to everyone is to avoid major surgeries if you can. Instead of letting people cut away things from your body, wait for the stem cell treatment that is becoming commonplace. Much of the world is further along in developing new therapies that repair the body because pharmaceutical companies in America have gained too much control over our government, which has received constant funding to cover their operational inefficiencies. The future of medicine is not in the legacy costs, the hospitals, the doctors’ offices, and all the employees who care for the sick. They will have to find other jobs in the economy, because more than a fifth of it will change as people stay healthier longer and treatment involves self-healing. Looking back on this government shutdown over Obamacare credits will be really stupid, but it’s obvious how the Democrat party essentially died as if it wasn’t viewed that way already. This just put the nail in their coffin. They have no negotiating room and, out of desperation, are shutting down the government as a last-ditch effort to exert political power. And all that will ultimately happen is that more people will realize what Republicans have always said. And support for the GOP will increase dramatically. Who wants Obamacare and perpetual sickness when you can heal and live much longer? Which we need because of declining birthrates. People need to do more because we don’t have a next generation that can take over like we did in the past. And that means even worse for Democrats, who count on an uninformed youth as another part of their base support; they are going to lose them in this process, too. But we warned them, and they didn’t listen.

Rich Hoffman

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

The Truth Kamala Harris and All Democrats, Can’t Handle: In ‘107 Days,’ every day only eroded support

There is more that has been exposed than just the rise of the MAGA movement against a backdrop of authority figure Marxism. And that was a theme that kept coming to me as I read Kamala Harris’s new book, 107 Days. Yes, it is garbage, but I’ll read anything, just as I’ll listen to just about anybody, so I can make reasonable conclusions about things, even if it’s from people I don’t like or agree with on much of everything. And her book is complete with the worst kind of fiction; it’s presented as a fact when the actual content is blisteringly fantastical in its scope. And this is true of everything from the radical political left, where they think something and can make it so with the power of their observing it. Such as deciding one day that a man is a woman. That anal sex is just as natural as vaginal intercourse, that the rest of the world is equal, when in reality, they struggle to make bubble gum wrappers. And that all facts and figures can be manipulated until reality is forced to agree with them at the point of mass authority rule over a docile and complicit society that has never grown up and away from their parents, and wants an overwhelming government power to rule over their perpetual insecurities. What has fallen apart most devastatingly for the Marxist left, for which the world’s socialist and communist governments have emerged to various degrees, is the sting of reality. And that is what Kamala’s book most clearly conveys: the degree to which they have lied to their own faces, denying the nature of reality itself, which they are at war with. The political left despises the truth about the world, and they have been at odds with it; if there is anything that is most devastating to their movement, it’s that all their fantasies have fallen apart under the scrutiny of reality.

So let’s revisit this notion that I talked about extensively at that time, and which is the essential theme of Kamala Harris’s book, which she has said while on her media tour, giving the whole thing away under press questioning, there is nothing Kamala could have done with more time to run that could have helped her. Her entirely fictional premise was that if only she could have run a regular campaign, she could have performed better in the 2024 election. She could not have done better than she did; in fact, for every day she was in the presidential race, she bled support. She didn’t gain it. The more people heard from Kamala Harris, the less they liked her. She wouldn’t have been able to build any support; her campaign was a complete fabrication created by people who thought they controlled the entire narrative and could autopilot her into office, just as they had been running Joe Biden’s campaign all along. Kamala was not very likable; she came across as someone who had slept her way to the top, and people didn’t like her. Her best support was the day she announced she was running, once Joe Biden had been pushed out. Before many people heard her talk, there were a certain number of not very well-informed people who would vote for her because she was a woman of color, and nothing else. Her most popular day in the campaign was the first day. On day 107, as the book attempts to erase, her support had eroded as more people heard her talk and got to know her a bit. The more she opened her mouth, the less people liked her.

Kamala Harris, in her book, repeatedly mentioned that the 2024 election was the closest in history, which is another example of Democrats seeking something to rally behind. Trump won 312 electoral votes to Kamala’s 226. Most of the states where Harris won were states with very loose election laws, such as those allowing mail-in ballots and not requiring voters to show ID at the polling booth. So when we talk about Trump having a landslide, 312 is a pretty significant number these days, given that things are so heavily leveraged to favor Democrats, at least until President Trump came along. That’s also why Democrats want to get rid of the Electoral College so they can mass manipulate the way we count votes so that a few states with loose laws can win. As I say all the time, if Democrats don’t cheat, they can’t win, because they are the seriously minority party in America, and they have only kept things close through election fraud. In the popular vote, Trump had 77,302,580 million votes to Kamala’s 75,017,613. That is out of 155,238,302 total voters, which is a very high number. But lets just call it as they say it is, out of all the voters that there are in America, with a population of 342,034,432 million including all the people who are under 18 and can’t yet vote, where would Democrats close that gap of the 2 million that they fell short on, assuming you had a clean election with no election fraud whatsoever? And that is the real problem that planners faced when making the decision to replace Joe Biden with Kamala Harris. They had that plan all along, and they used that June debate with Trump to set up the real story. It was a desperation shot to put in a woman at the last minute and hope that the math worked in their favor. But they knew the truth all along.

In 2020, Trump received 74,216,154 votes, just three million fewer than his 2024 total, which was 77,223,615, while Joe Biden received 81,268,924. Where were all those voters in the 2020 election? The answer is, of course, that roughly 10 million, likely more, of the votes for Democrats were produced illegally by mail-in ballots cast under the new Covid rules, and the election was rigged entirely from the top down. The FBI knew it because they assisted with the effort at the Capitol Building on January 6th, when people arrived extremely angry that Trump was being pushed out of office. The FBI planted over 274 people into the audience to provoke them into violence so that the narrative of the election fraud could shift to some made-up insurrection and put people on their heels to the massive reality that the election had been stolen. And we can prove it because Democrats were caught not being able to duplicate the numbers of the 2020 election when the rules had returned to normal in 2024. And if states that voted for Kamala over Trump had to play by more rigorous rules, with voter ID and much more restricted mail-in balloting, they would have lost even more voters than they actually did, which is likely overstated by more than 5 million votes. Because there aren’t that many people dumb enough to vote for Democrats, and they know it. The illusion they have lived with through election fraud and a media that sold their socialist fantasy as a reality has been eradicated from the public scene, and they have no means of stopping that process. And Kamala’s book only spells it out grotesquely for them, rather than changing the nature of reality in the way they wish it would be. More time for Kamala Harris would have eroded her numbers even more. But they couldn’t afford to have Joe Biden run again and come nowhere close to his original 81 million with a performance 10 million less. People would have been outraged by the obviousness of it all. So their best shot, Democrats, of concealing the election fraud of 2020 was to hope that Kamala would change the numbers because she was a woman and because she was a person of color, which gave her a few throwaway votes. But the more people heard from her, the less they liked her, and there was nothing she could have done to change that. And that is the truth of all future elections.

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

	vwells34 on Where Evil Lives in Butler Cou…
	Rich Hoffman on The Blurry Bigfoot in Ohio: Pa…
	Anonymous on The Blurry Bigfoot in Ohio: Pa…
	Anonymous on The Mysterious London Stone: S…
	Anonymous on ‘Prehistoric Worlds Or,…
	Rich Hoffman on ‘Prehistoric Worlds Or,…
	Anonymous on ‘Prehistoric Worlds Or,…
	Anonymous on ‘Forbidden Archaeology…
	Rich Hoffman on Amanda Ortiz the Termite of We…
	Anonymous on Amanda Ortiz the Termite of We…

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: