The Heart to Take Away Hearts: Taking a stand against mediocrity in Ohio

The 2025 redistricting process in Ohio has emerged as a pivotal moment in the broader national battle over congressional control, with implications that stretch far beyond the Buckeye State. On October 31, the Ohio Redistricting Commission unanimously approved a new congressional map that shifts the balance of power decisively toward Republicans, giving them a projected 12-3 advantage across the state’s 15 districts. This outcome was the result of a tense, behind-the-scenes negotiation between Republican and Democratic leaders, including Governor Mike DeWine, Secretary of State Frank LaRose, Auditor Keith Faber, and legislative appointees like Rep. Brian Stewart and Sen. Jane Timken. Democrats on the commission—Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio and House Minority Leader Dani Isaacsohn—reluctantly supported the map, citing the threat of a more extreme 13-2 GOP-dominated map if negotiations failed. The new map redraws key battlegrounds: Rep. Greg Landsman’s OH-1 district now leans Republican (54%-47%), Marcy Kaptur’s OH-9 shifts to a 54.5%-45.5% GOP tilt, while Emilia Sykes’ OH-13 becomes slightly more Democratic at 52%-48%. These changes reflect a broader national trend, where Republican-led states, such as Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina, have aggressively redrawn maps to consolidate power, often under direct encouragement from President Donald Trump. Ohio’s redistricting, however, was not entirely unilateral; constitutional reforms passed in 2015 and 2018 required bipartisan approval for maps to remain valid for a full decade. The compromise avoided a costly referendum that could have frozen the existing 10-5 map and delayed the 2026 primaries, potentially costing taxpayers $50 million.

The political personalities behind Ohio’s redistricting drama reflect the ideological fault lines within the Republican Party itself. Senator Bernie Moreno, a staunch Trump ally, predicted early on that Ohio Republicans would push for a map that reduced Democrats to just two seats. His comments echoed the sentiments of Rep. Warren Davidson and State Senator George Lang, both of whom have expressed frustration with what they perceive as excessive compromise with Democrats. Davidson’s own district, OH-8, has long been a textbook case of gerrymandering, stretching from Troy to majority-minority communities in Hamilton County, effectively diluting Democratic votes. Lang, known for his “business-first” approach, has remained relatively quiet on the specifics of redistricting but is widely seen as aligned with the GOP’s strategic goals. Secretary of State Frank LaRose, meanwhile, played a key role in supporting the bipartisan map, arguing that it reflected Ohio’s political geography and avoided a chaotic referendum fight backed by “dark money special interests”. His stance, however, has drawn criticism from grassroots activists and legal watchdogs, many of whom argue that the map remains a gerrymandered artifact of one-party rule. Former Attorney General Eric Holder, chair of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, called the map “a gerrymander placed on top of another gerrymander,” though he acknowledged it preserved Democratic incumbents’ ability to compete.  And when you get a compliment from Eric Holder, you are doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons.

Nationally, Ohio’s redistricting fits into a broader pattern of mid-decade map manipulation driven by Trump’s directive to Republican governors and legislatures. Texas led the charge, redrawing its map to flip five Democratic seats, followed by Missouri and North Carolina, each adding one GOP-leaning district. Ohio’s shift adds two more Republican-leaning districts to the national tally, bringing the potential GOP gain to nine seats before the 2026 midterms. Democrats have responded in kind: California passed Proposition 50, a ballot measure allowing the legislature to redraw its map to add five Democratic seats, countering Texas’s move. Virginia and Illinois are also considering redistricting maneuvers, while states like Indiana and Florida have begun legislative discussions under pressure from Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance. The redistricting arms race has triggered lawsuits, referendums, and constitutional amendments across the country, with the Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling on the Voting Rights Act poised to reshape the landscape further. In this context, Ohio’s 12-3 map is seen by many Republicans as a strategic win, while Democrats view it as a defensive maneuver to preserve viability in key districts. The bipartisan nature of Ohio’s deal, although rare, underscores the high stakes and complex trade-offs involved in redistricting under the Trump-era political landscape, which is a good thing.  The Trump White House understands the situation.

Ultimately, Ohio’s redistricting saga reveals the tension between political pragmatism and ideological purity. Democrats like Dani Isaacsohn and Nickie Antonio have defended their votes as necessary to preserve competitive districts and avoid a worse outcome, even as activists accuse them of capitulation. Republicans, meanwhile, remain divided between hardliners like Moreno and Davidson, who favor aggressive gerrymandering, and institutionalists like DeWine and LaRose, who prioritize stability and legal defensibility. The map itself, while favoring Republicans, does not guarantee outcomes; Democrats have won in GOP-leaning districts before, and the 2026 midterms will test the durability of these new boundaries. What’s clear is that redistricting has become a central battlefield in the fight for congressional control, with Ohio playing a critical role in shaping the national narrative. As Trump’s second term unfolds, and as Democrats mobilize to counteract GOP gains, the redistricting wars will continue to define the contours of American democracy. Whether Ohio’s compromise map proves to be a tactical success or a strategic misstep remains to be seen—but it has already become a case study in the politics of power, representation, and the enduring struggle between exceptionalism and mediocrity.

The fundamental flaw in compromising with Democrats during redistricting—especially under the guise of fairness—is that it inadvertently empowers the very mediocrity that exceptional societies must resist. While it may appear noble or politically sophisticated to preserve all viewpoints and accommodate ideological diversity, the reality is that mediocrity, when institutionalized, becomes a corrosive force. It stifles innovation, suppresses excellence, and erodes the competitive spirit that drives societal advancement. Democrats, often aligned with collectivist ideologies like socialism and Marxism, have historically championed policies that prioritize equality of outcome over merit-based achievement. In doing so, they mask mediocrity as compassion, and fairness becomes a Trojan horse for cultural stagnation. When Republicans yield ground in the name of bipartisanship, they risk legitimizing this mediocrity and weakening the foundations of a high-performing society. Authentic leadership demands the courage to elevate exceptionalism—not dilute it. Redistricting is not merely a cartographic exercise; it is a strategic opportunity to shape the future. If Republicans fail to assert dominance when the political terrain allows it, they may find themselves governed by the very forces they sought to contain. The Ohio map, while a tactical win, reflects a deeper philosophical hesitation—a reluctance to confront mediocrity head-on. And in that hesitation lies the danger of losing the war for cultural and political excellence.  So, while many think it was good to play nice with Democrats, the danger lies in compromise when standards are set and social norms are established.  A failure to take away the heart of mediocrity in a society advancing for greatness might appear to have a merit of its own.  However, in the context of achievement, it undermines the very foundation of excellence we strive for.  And in going forward with these mechanisms of government strategy, when you get a chance to put your foot on the throat of the enemy and put them out of existence, we should do it. Playing fair with Democrats if it brings down your entire society is not a good thing.  It might make those lunches with colleagues more approachable, less tense.  However, by letting mediocrity prevail over logic, nobody is enjoying a better life under the influence of compromise.

Rich Hoffman

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

Bill Gates Walks Back Climate Alarmism: A Reckoning Years in the Making

Even if Trump is playing nice with Bill Gates these days, I’m still firmly in the camp where the Microsoft founder needs to be in jail for all that he did.  I remember it well, and I reported it here in a way that no other news outlet in the world did at the time, as it was happening.  Even Rush Limbaugh was slow to see what was happening.  But I said that it was a scam the day that Bill Gates and Dr. Fauci walked into the Oval Office and told President Trump to shut down the economy in the United States, which he did for a few weeks.  But by then, the damage had been done, and lots of very liberal governors of states had taken the sucker bait and followed, and it was really terrible.  Bill Gates needs to pay for his very active role in creating that crisis.  Created I say because we know that Covid was created by gain of function research to jump to hosts in ways that nature does not provide, so it was a bioweapon that had roots running into the DOD that Dr. Fauci knew all about and a lot of people died as a result of this virus that was created in a Chinese lab and let loose in the world on purpose, not by accident.  All the evidence points in that direction, and Bill Gates was one of the key insiders involved in the whole tragedy.  Few figures have polarized public opinion in the 21st century like Bill Gates. Once hailed as a visionary technologist and philanthropist, Gates’ role during the COVID-19 pandemic and his aggressive climate activism have drawn intense scrutiny. However, politics have changed significantly over the last five years, and now Gates realizes he has been excluded from almost everything, and he wants to get back in.  So he has been groveling to President Trump and is starting to walk back his ridiculous climate change proposals, which is quite extraordinary considering his level of tyrannical commitment.  He tried to rearrange our entire society.  So any walk back from him is astonishing, and very telling.  Now, in late 2025, Gates has released a memo that marks a significant shift in his stance on climate change—one that critics argue is a strategic retreat rather than a genuine change of heart.

In October 2025, Gates published a 17-page memo ahead of the COP30 climate summit in Brazil. In it, he argued that climate change, while profound, is not the apocalyptic threat many activists claim. He emphasized that:

• Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise.”

• The focus should shift from temperature targets to improving human welfare.

• Investments should prioritize poverty, disease, and economic development over emissions reduction

This pivot was immediately seized upon by climate skeptics and political figures, including President Donald Trump, who declared on Truth Social:

“I (WE!) just won the War on the Climate Change Hoax. Bill Gates has finally admitted that he was completely WRONG on the issue.”

Despite the celebratory tone from skeptics, Gates pushed back, calling Trump’s interpretation a “gigantic misreading.” He reaffirmed his belief that climate change is a serious issue, but argued that the “doomsday outlook” has led to the misallocation of resources.

“Every tenth of a degree of heating that we prevent is hugely beneficial because a stable climate makes it easier to improve people’s lives.”

Gates’ reputation suffered a significant blow during the COVID-19 pandemic. His advocacy for lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and digital surveillance tools, such as Microsoft Teams, was seen by many as overreach. Critics argue that Gates, alongside Dr. Anthony Fauci, played a central role in shaping a global response that devastated economies and civil liberties.

• Gates was accused of using the pandemic to push a technocratic agenda.

• His ties to gain-of-function research and vaccine monopolies raised ethical concerns.

• Public trust in Gates plummeted, with many calling for accountability and even criminal charges.

Climate Change: From Alarmism to Adaptation

Gates’ climate activism has long centered on achieving net-zero emissions. His 2021 book How to Avoid a Climate Disaster laid out a roadmap for decarbonization. But in 2025, Gates now argues that:

• The worst-case scenarios are no longer plausible.

• Technological innovation has already begun reducing emissions.

• Economic growth and health infrastructure are better defenses against climate impacts.

This shift aligns more closely with Elon Musk’s pragmatic approach to climate and energy—focusing on innovation rather than regulation.

Gates’ recent dinner with President Trump lasted over three hours and reportedly focused on global health, innovation, and pandemic preparedness.  While Gates has criticized Trump’s cuts to USAID, he appears to be recalibrating his public posture to remain relevant in a political landscape increasingly dominated by populist skepticism of climate alarmism.

One of the most striking elements of Gates’ memo is his implicit endorsement of adaptation over mitigation. He suggests that humanity has the tools to thrive—even in a warming world. This echoes broader conversations about terraforming Mars and using technology to reshape environments, rather than surrendering to climate fatalism.

Critics argue that Gates’ technocratic worldview—where unelected billionaires shape global policy—poses a threat to democracy. The COVID response and climate mandates are seen as examples of how centralized control can override individual freedoms.

“You can’t let tyrants rule. You have to have market pressures and competitive elections to check power.” Rich Hoffman

Bill Gates’ pivot on climate change is not just a policy shift—it’s a reckoning. It reflects the limits of technocratic influence and the resilience of democratic accountability. Whether Gates is genuinely rethinking his views or simply repositioning himself politically, the public response underscores a broader demand for transparency, humility, and checks on power.  If we had not elected Trump and put him back in office, people like Bill Gates would be running the world right now.  A lot of hard lessons were learned, and we are a lot better off now than we were. Trump is the kind of person who can keep everyone close, allowing him to negotiate effectively with them.  I think it’s very appropriate that President Trump is taking credit for this issue with Gates.  He could do a lot more to embarrass the techno geek.  However, this is a powerful position for Gates and the Climate Change hoax in general.  The world is not coming to an end because of artificial intelligence.  We could terraform the entire planet if we want to, as we are planning to do in other places around the solar system as we speak.  For Gates, it was always about control.  He wanted to control the management of the human race through techno tyranny, and he played President Trump as a sucker who trusted him during his first term.  So Gates has a lot of embarrassment coming.  And I would argue that there would be a lot of jail time.  However, his admission is a significant development and a major shift in the world toward a much stronger economy.  The walls on this ridiculous control mechanism are coming down, and people like Gates have lost power because of our free elections in America.  That’s why managing elections is so important; you can’t trust anybody to do anything right.  And if you don’t have secure polls or a way to elect someone like Trump to office, and Bill Gates clearly didn’t think that such a thing was possible, and that he’d get away with everything because he had enough money to insulate himself from that grim discovery, then these people will always threaten the entire human race.  In this case, due to the Trump election, we dodged a major catastrophe, and we should feel pretty good about Bill Gates walking back his previous statements.

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

I Have Written Over 8.1 Million Words Dedicated to Justice: Jack Smith needs more than jail

In the early 2010s, I found myself at a crossroads. I had spent years immersed in creative pursuits — writing screenplays, attending film festivals, and building a career in the entertainment industry. But something wasn’t sitting right. The characters I wrote about were fighting for justice, standing up against corruption, and defending the values of liberty and freedom. I realized that fiction wasn’t enough. The world needed real people to stand up and fight — not just stories. That realization led me to the Liberty Township Tea Party in Butler County, Ohio, where I began applying my skills to political activism.

I produced short videos on the 10th Amendment and illegal immigration — modest productions with a simple camera, aimed at educating and inspiring local citizens. These weren’t viral hits or high-budget documentaries. They were grassroots efforts aimed at sparking conversation and defending constitutional principles. But even these small acts of civic engagement drew the attention of powerful forces. The IRS, under Lois Lerner’s direction, targeted our Tea Party group, and I was swept into a campaign of intimidation and scrutiny. That moment changed everything. I abandoned my entertainment ambitions and committed myself fully to political writing and activism.  And looming in the background of the Lois Lerner activism was Jack Smith.

Since that turning point, I’ve written over 1200 words a day — every day — for more than 15 years. That’s millions of words, thousands of articles, and countless hours spent documenting, analyzing, and challenging the misuse of government power. My blog, Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom, became a platform for truth-telling, and my voice joined a chorus of others who refused to be silenced. I didn’t just write about politics — I lived it. I used my media connections to amplify the message, appearing on the radio and television, and producing daily videos to keep the conversation alive.  Since 2010, I’ve written more than 6.9 million words from daily writing alone. Additionally, I’ve authored three full-length books, contributing an additional 210,000 words, and published hundreds of periodical articles, totaling nearly 1 million more. Altogether, my body of work exceeds 8.1 million words, a testament to the discipline, passion, and relentless drive that fuel my efforts to challenge government overreach and defend the principles of representative government.  And when you do that much work, that’s why I’m able these days to speak on so many topics differently than anybody else does, anywhere in media, on any network, radio show, or podcast.

The catalyst for this relentless output was the abuse I experienced at the hands of the IRS and the Department of Justice — specifically under the influence of prosecutor Jack Smith. Smith, who later became a central figure in high-profile investigations, had long been part of a system that weaponized law enforcement against political dissent. His role in the IRS scandal, along with his broader pattern of targeting conservative voices, revealed a disturbing trend: the rise of a fourth branch of government, unaccountable to voters and hostile to the representative efforts of self-government.

Jack Smith’s actions weren’t isolated. They were part of a larger ecosystem of government overreach, where agencies like the FBI and DOJ operated with impunity. From spying on senators to leveraging investigations for political gain, these institutions strayed far from their constitutional mandates. The goal wasn’t justice — it was control. Figures like Letitia James in New York and James Clapper in the intelligence community, among others, followed similar paths, using their offices to suppress opposition and manipulate public perception.

This isn’t just about Donald Trump. It’s about every citizen who dares to speak out, organize, or challenge the status quo. Trump’s rise in 2015 and 2016 wasn’t a fluke — it was a response to years of systemic abuse. Americans saw the infection beneath the surface, and Trump pulled the scab off. What followed was a reckoning. The prosecutions, the media attacks, the relentless investigations — all of it was designed to punish dissent and preserve the power of entrenched elites. But it backfired. It awakened a movement that refuses to back down.

I’ve never been one to seek conflict, but I’ve always stood my ground. Whether facing bullies on the playground or bureaucrats in Washington, I don’t tolerate intimidation. Jack Smith and Lois Lerner made the mistake of targeting me — and I’ve spent the last decade making sure their actions don’t go unanswered. I’m not alone. Millions of Americans have joined this fight, demanding accountability, transparency, and a return to constitutional governance.

The pursuit of justice is finally catching up. Smith, James, Clapper — they’re all facing scrutiny, and rightly so. This isn’t about revenge. It’s about restoring trust in our institutions and sending a message that abuse of power will not be tolerated. I’ll continue writing, filming, and speaking out — not because I enjoy conflict, but because I believe in the promise of America. We are a nation of laws, not of men. And when those laws are twisted to serve political ends, it’s our duty to resist.  And in my case, it’s not just to lash back, but to hold the wrongdoers to unforgivable scrutiny and to destroy the lives of the perpetrators because of what they did.  I learned in those days of 2010 that you don’t fight people like this on turf they control, which is the courtrooms, with lawyers in their pocket, and judges they play golf with.  A system they built from the ground up to create terror among an unsuspecting population prone to blind trust.  I turned to writing because many of them are too dumb to have thoughts of their own, and they can’t defend an expanse of thoughtful debate.  At that point, their actions fall apart very quickly once people can scrutinize their efforts in relation to the discussion. 

So my method has been very effective.  Millions and millions of words are doing that work on my behalf all hours of the day, day in and day out, to all who care to contemplate questioning the system that people like Jack Smith have controlled for far too long.  And I am very proud of that role, with each of these prosecutions that have been released now that we are into the first year of Trump’s presidency.  I would have loved a more glorious and dramatic revenge for all that I have seen and experienced.  However, in whatever form justice may come, I have always been deeply committed to it.  I never forget or forgive anything, and I did all this essentially over just those two videos that the IRS scrutinized me over.  I have many other revenge plots working in the background over various issues that I will never get over, and I will see justice for all of them in due time.  Many tell me that I should forgive people, that all this hate hurts me.  I tell them that those thoughts are absolutely untrue.  I love getting revenge on bad people, and I think it is very healthy to express it, rather than suppressing it under some social expectation of forgiveness.  It is much better to express your hate than to be consumed by it.  And all these actions I have taken over the years toward the justice of people like Jack Smith are just the beginning.  But you can bet that I am happy to see people like him starting to fall from grace.  He deserves it.  And there are many more to come; either Trump will do it legally, or we’ll find some other means.  They should feel lucky that a system of law and order protects them, because what would otherwise be a lot harder on them, and much more spectacular, would be a ruthless act of revenge.  But regardless, justice is coming for them all, because it has to.

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

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

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

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

Fighting Back Against Lawfare: What happened to Peter Navarro is unforgivable

I knew it was going to make me mad, and it certainly did.  I took my time with Peter Navarro’s new book, I Went to Prison so You Wouldn’t Have To: A Love and Lawfare Story in Trump Land, and I read it a few times before commenting on it.  I’m a law-and-order kind of guy, but if it had been me, what happened to Peter wouldn’t have turned out so nicely for the FBI.  The way they humiliatingly arrested him in the loading armature, almost on the plane he and his fiancé were taking to Nashville to appear on the Mike Huckabee show there, I wouldn’t have done it.  There would have been a fight that would have really hurt people, because some things in life are more valuable than compliance.  A lot of things are.  I’m not a very compliant person, and things like what Peter went through are where you draw the line.  So Peter’s book really made me mad, so I had to read it a few times to take the edge off.  Because it was infuriating.  When you have a legal system that pirates and criminals have essentially hijacked, something has to give. Peter Navarro, one of the top economists in the White House and a top advisor to President Trump, made the best out of it, and putting myself in his shoes, I would have done things much differently.  But it’s nice that he did, because the story he came back to tell was really remarkable.  I was really mad that he and his friend Steve Bannon went to jail for claiming immunity from appearing for the January 6th Committee, which was a completely crooked court pushed forward by Nancy Pelosi.  No, we are not obligated to yield to terrible forces and comply with them even when they openly break the law.  When someone like Peter does it to prove a point and protests without violence, we can learn a lot.  And we did. But punishment for the vile conduct is required in this case, and for me, that would have happened during the attempted arrest.  You can only play nice for so long. 

Peter Navarro was nice about everything, and the book is essentially a day-by-day diary of his experience in a Miami prison, where he was sentenced to 4 months.  The way the FBI went about it was unforgivable.  The way Peter was treated while in prison was also inexcusable.  Four months isn’t very long, but I’m not a fan of this Gandhi defense, of peaceful protest.  I think bad guys should be eradicated from the face of the earth.  And that when bad people present themselves —when are we going to learn from history, whether it’s Jesus Christ or John the Baptist, we must punish them?  For all the things that a person means to other people, you can never let them know that the world has more power over the people they care about, and to let them down under the pressure of a vile system.  And that is what happened to Peter in prison.  Yes, he made his point in support of the exiled President Trump.  Yes, everyone lived to fight another day, and Peter is now back in the White House. 

People can say that God was watching over Trump, Peter, Bannon, and a whole host of other people during a really evil process of lawfare, where an inserted president was put in charge of our country and had way too much power that wasn’t granted to him through a proper election.  People did not “consent” to be governed by the Biden people.  And what happened was essentially a coup of our entire government, and we tried to beat it with non-violent protest.  Peter Navarro allowed himself to be humiliated at that Miami airport, strip-searched, and treated like a rag doll in leg irons to be turned into an example of a police state that had power over the mass population.  And that is reprehensible in every way and cannot be tolerated.  We saw what they did to the J6 prisoners.  And this book says what they were willing to do to a top White House advisor.  And for me, individuality is more important than compliance with a hijacked legal system.  The FBI was way out of line.  The prison staff was terribly abusive to a person who deserved great respect.  And all that happened to Peter Navarro is, I think, a declaration of war.  So I think this punishment of all these people who worked against Trump and his supporters needs to go to jail themselves, or they need to be executed in a town square as a deterrent for all in the future who might try the same.  Sacrificing yourself to tyranny is never a good idea.  Fighting it is.  And Peter chose to fight it by exposing it.  But boy, it was a hard book to read, and to see just how bad that system truly is.  As I was reading that book, I kept thinking about what I know about prisons.  I have done stories on the Butler County Jail, which is a good one.  I have toured it and understand what those cell blocks are like.  I have met all the people involved from the top to the bottom, eaten the food, and I know what life is like in prison enough to put myself in Peter’s shoes as he reported his day-to-day circumstances.

I had friends in the audience who were there to meet Peter Navarro the day he was released, and he gave his famous speech at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee.  They asked me what pictures I wanted, and I told them the most important person at the convention, aside from Trump, who had just a few days before, almost been assassinated with a bullet to the head, was Peter Navarro.  What he went through was terrible, and I was wondering what damage it had caused him.  I could tell something was off about him as he spoke, and I was disappointed in his speech.  He put on a good face, but there was a broken element to him.  Four months of having your personal freedom ripped away for purely political theater just wasn’t forgivable.  We are better off for it, and everyone should read his book.  They’ll learn a lot from it. But we just can’t have a society that arrests former members of the White House who are the best economic minds in the world, and puts them in jail, and parades them around in leg irons, to show the world that the best people of our society can be arrested like dogs and have everything taken from them.  The movie Rambo makes much more sense to me, except for the ending, where he eventually gives up.  If you are a criminal, you should be punished, and I think public executions are excellent, especially for the kind of people who put Navarro in jail.  Who wants to pay a lot of tax money to keep people like that in jail, alive?  Just get rid of them, and save the money.  But when you are innocent and you know it, fighting back is the best deterrent.  And it would be better never to give them leverage over you, as they did, and to abuse Peter Navarro.  He might be living a decent life now, but to yield ever to those clowns, he can never undo that.  And that is simply unforgivable.  What the FBI did to Peter Navarro is not forgivable.  Law enforcement cannot be allowed to be weaponized, which it clearly was, and there are still a lot of people who have to be punished for what they did. 

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

George Lang Donated A Lot of Money to No More Taxes at Lakota: Fighting and beating stage 4 cancer

I’ve known George Lang for a long time, and I would say I know a fighting side of him that a lot of people don’t know about.  And we talked about all those fights as he gave an update on his stage 4 cancer treatment. And to let you know how well it’s going, after we concluded our interview, we made a promise to each other to attend the White House together once the new ballroom opens.  So he’s not planning to die, he expects to beat the cancer thoroughly, and he gave details on just how and what comes next during our discussion.  But speaking of cancers, there was a lot of controversy when his name appeared on a donation list for the pro-levy campaign for Lakota schools, for $2000.  When I first heard about that, I was skeptical, yet his name was there.  I happen to know that George gave at least $2000 to the No More Taxes group opposing Lakota.  So what was going on?  George explained that, too, as best he could.  In the end, he gave $4000 to the No Tax Levy Lakota group and asked the Pro Lakota Levy people for his money back, which they were in the process of doing as we spoke.  I’ve known George for well over two decades, and we’ve talked about that long history and the many fights we’ve both been in over the years.  So I thought it was weird that he would suddenly be for any tax increases.  As it turned out, he very much wanted me to know that it was an accident and that he wasn’t all of a sudden a supporter of higher taxes.  Tax rates are killers of communities, and for his entire life, George has fought high taxes.

No More Taxes!

So the next question everyone has is: how could his $2000 have been an accident?  Wouldn’t he notice a missing $2000?  Well, when I saw it, I thought George was trying to be supportive of Lakota schools because he works with them a lot as a legislator.  One thing in politics is that making enemies isn’t a great way to bring people together.  And as a politician, you are supposed to represent all people, not just your own point of view.  But then again, people vote for you based on your point of view, and they expect you to be authentic.  So right out of the gate, no matter what you do, someone is going to be mad at you.  George has told me for years that I have a lot of talent for politics and has tried to nudge me into several offices, but I have been very resistant, because I reserve the right to throw rocks.  In political theater, there needs to be lots of personalities to test the market of ideas, and we need rock throwers.  But we also need bridgebuilders.  George has always been a bridgebuilder, and I respect him for that.  I have always been a rock thrower.  And he respects me for that.  And we both like a good fight, which is what we have in common.  I figured that if he was donating money to the Lakota levy, there must be a strategic reason, and that he would explain it to me.  I couldn’t imagine what that good reason would be.  But I would be at least open to his explanation.  But as it turned out, he blamed it on his wife, Debbie.  And they get involved in several hundred thousand dollars a year in political donations, and in the amount of that, George didn’t notice the charge on his credit card, because there were so many transactions. 

She voted for the largest tax increase in Ohio’s history!

I’ve known Debbie for a long time too, and I know where her mind is.  She and George give everyone the benefit of the doubt.  I hold grudges forever, and most of the time when people do me wrong, I never forget it.  But Debbie is a loving person.  I could see her playing nice with the Lakota school board.  She and George want to work with the board to make things work well.  Lakota Schools is the largest employer in Butler County, so they aren’t the kind of people to draw lines that they can’t walk out of if they need to.  Knowing both of them, I can’t imagine a scenario in which they accidently voted for a tax increase.  But they give a lot of things, and when it involves that much money, it is possible to get the wires crossed.  George and Debbie have worked very hard for a very long time, and they are very successful.  They didn’t get that way because of politics.  But they have carried their business success into their interest in politics and their desire to make the world a little better through their political involvement.  A lot of us on this Lakota issue see the public school as a vile enemy, teaching children all kinds of terrible things, and wasting a lot of money while doing it.  I am in that camp.  But Debbie’s always hopeful and uses her vibrant personality to build relationships wherever possible.  The important thing to me is that, once they realized where the donation had gone, they worked to correct it, put their money where it counts, and donated against the Lakota levy of 2025. 

A lot of people can’t imagine writing a $2000 check once in their life, let alone writing so many of them that you don’t even notice it on a credit card statement.  And to make sure everyone is clear on the subject, to turn around and give $2000 more to the No Tax Lakota group, in addition to the previous amount.  I say it all the time, politics is a blood sport.  Sometimes you have to be brutal.  Sometimes you want to be nice.  Sometimes you have to be a combination of all kinds of approaches; no one thing works every time for everything.  But when you have been successful for a long time, and survived a lot of battles over the years, which stage 4 cancer is just the latest, resource management can give you all kinds of options.  And what matters is how those resources are managed.  And as soon as he could, George called me and wanted to set the record straight, because he cares about these things.  We spoke for over an hour, about a lot of topics.  And for everything anyone would want to know, the interview with George was great, full of fascinating details.  But even through the fog of politics, which can get hazy at times, I have seen George fight through some really tough moments with his wife, and they are a good team.  They certainly aren’t phonies, which I think makes them very unique, given that they have achieved a lot of success by anybody’s measure with a level of authenticity that many would think wouldn’t be possible.  But I know it’s true.  And we talked about it all.  And I am looking forward to George beating the cancer, to the Lakota levy going down in spectacular flames, and to Trump building that new ballroom.  I think by then we will all have earned a nice night out on the town to see it for the first time.  The White House is a special place, but only because there are special people who have fought in the trenches to make it so.  And George and Debbie Lang are among those who have.  And with their donation to the No More Tax group of Lakota, they are supporting the next generation of fighters, who have a lot of good work ahead of them.  And by the time the smoke clears, we’ll all be proud of the roles we played in that magnificent contest.

Somebody wasted a lot of money on this!

Rich Hoffman

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