Tag: Republicans

The Success of Operation Midway Blitz: Pushing communism under the door with illegal immigration

Happy to report that Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago has been very successful, with over 1500 arrests since the start of September.  The Department of Homeland Security has been targeting alleged criminals like pedophiles and gang members with some of the arrests spilling over outside of Illinois.  ICE agents have been very successful in removing the criminal elements that have been deliberately put in place by Democrats to serve progressive causes, and it has the radical left very upset, which is good.  That’s what happens when you start solving problems that want to exist so they can exert power over all society.  The high crime in Chicago was deliberately placed and left alone, and it’s time to clean up that city, even if the mayor, Brandon Johnson, and Governor J.B. Pritzker have been doing everything they can to facilitate the continuation of the high crime.  Why, because they know, as all Democrats do, that the key to their insurrection party is illegal immigration, who bring with it criminal elements to destabilize society in detrimental ways and convince people to turn to big government for safety and security.  Governor Pritzker has to have high crime to justify the kind of personal intrusions and government growth that the Democratic Party intends.  Otherwise, the whole premise of their existence falls apart. Trump pushing for Operation Midway Blitz exposed this strategy for what it was, and it has now been very successful.  Crime is down, and that started before the blitz because caution was in the air as criminals realized the game was up and their free roam of the city streets was at an end.  There is more going on with Chicago than just this latest issue; it was built to be a progressive invasion in America, and if we want that to stop, the city itself and its politics have to be attacked.  So this is more than a symbolic exercise; it’s a strategy that should have been implemented long ago.

Chicago is one of the great American cities, located in the heart of the Midwest.  I interact with Chicago a lot, and it has been part of my story for many years.  Not that I meant to, but I worked for several organized crime groups early in my life, who were centered out of Chicago, for one, the Chinese mob.  And the second was a money-laundering outfit that operated car dealerships to launder money.  I started in these enterprises through the usual application process: getting a job and earning money straight away.  But because of my personality, I was quickly sought out to do the things other people are scared to do, and I learned, up close and personal, how the life of crime worked, always in the background.  I did not become a criminal, but I did get into a lot of entanglements, some of which were very violent and dangerous.  But let’s just say I have first-hand knowledge of the kind of world Governor Pritzker is trying to protect and maintain.  I was so outraged by everything I learned that I have dedicated my life to eradicating that evil, which is why I do many of the things I do for free.  I don’t like evil, and I really don’t like crime that spawns from it.  And with all that said, I am thrilled Trump has declared war against this terrible tyranny always looming in the background.  Chicago wasn’t always the crime-ridden pit that it is today.  It was made that way on purpose, and we should all be insulted by the intention, which is now finally being corrected.

If you fly into O’Hara, you’ll see miles and miles of communist style apartment complexes where people have been stacked on top of each other for as far as the eye can see.  There is quite an attempt right now to show China as the example of what communism can bring, with its centrally planned efforts producing great architecture and technology, all the while in America using that same centralized management approach to depress Americans away from free markets and free enterprise.  Even the positive effects of a supposedly democratic system, where people pick their representatives in a republic-style government.  In both cases, centralized governments used their power to prop up one international standard over the other.  Globalist elites drove the push toward Chinese communism.  And it has been they who have shaped Chicago into the crime-ridden hell-hole that it is.  The downtown areas are not too bad —deliberately so —especially around McCormick Place and Soldier Field.  The northside isn’t too bad once you get well past the city.  But to the south and west of downtown, it’s pretty rough.  If you get gas anywhere in those zones, you can expect an engagement with crime, and all that is on purpose.  Crime doesn’t just happen; in this case, it was invited in with the purpose of illegal immigration.  And the Democrat party knows they need crime and illegal immigration to fulfill their communist plans of pushing people away from capitalism and into outright Chinese communism.  Chicago and its crime were always part of the plan of suppression.  To save the great American city, the push was for America to adopt more Chinese communism so we could be more like their shining example. 

The way that Chicago set up its neighborhoods tells the whole story of why they have crime now; it was always meant to.  Free enterprise was never part of how the modern city was put together; it was meant to bring in and hide illegal immigrants who would funnel the drug trade in behind the chaos and destabilize polite society from behind a political firewall.  While society was debating the proper pay for women in the workplace and abortion, criminals were undercutting one of the great American cities with grotesque violence occurring every day to the point where it was normalized, and people expected a suppressed environment.  It wasn’t just about Chicago; it was about pushing communism under the door of the Midwest and bringing down America from the inside out.  Poisoning the highway system to all the other big cities with crime, and those destabilizing attempts started with illegal immigration hidden in the apartment slums of west Chicago, to the point where the crime spilled over into the outside world to destroy the American dream like a Trojan Horse in the middle of the night, to slit all our throats while we slept.  That is why Democrats are so upset about Operation Midway Blitz.  And why it’s so good to see it succeed, no matter how long it continues.  Democrats need illegal immigration to pull off their communist scam.  And instead of just accepting that, as we have for many decades —essentially an entire century —we are fighting back and taking Chicago away from the criminal elements, which is leaving Democrats in a panic as to what to do next.  Pritzker, unable to shake Trump off the trail, turned to gambling to pump up his already deflated image.  But his political hopes are being cleaned away, too, in all this.  He took a stand to protect illegal immigration, and Trump is ripping that away, leaving Democrats helpless as a result.  And for the first time in many decades, the truth about Chicago is finally being seen.  And a lot of people will live, who usually would have been sacrificed to the need for crime by Democrats who have been cheerleading communism all along.

Rich Hoffman

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

Big Tish James Needs to Do Big Time in the Big House: Destroying the communists in our courts

Don’t forget how Big Tish James, the New York Attorney General, looked at President Trump every day in court when she was purposely trying to bankrupt him over some evaluation prosecution in his company, the Trump Organization.  Big Tish went for blood—and then some—eventually fining over $ 515 million in penalties against Trump, which, through the appeals process, was just relieved this past month as excessive.  But for a grueling several years, the case dragged on, and if Trump had not been a billionaire, too big to drain financially like she was trying to do, he would not have survived the process.  Lucky for him, during this year of 2024 Truth Social went public and Trump essentially made back all the money he had lost in these court cases, in fees and legal costs, and it essentially put the case James was trying to form out of reach and it was a miserable loss for her and the corrupt New York judge Arthur Engoron, on all fronts.  But don’t forget what she tried to do, because this happens way too often.  The communists of our culture feel they have control of the courts, and essentially, they do.  We have trusted the courts too much without oversight, and the situation has gotten out of control.  We had been wondering about it, but this case against Trump by Tish James made it clear to everyone, and she really thought she was going to get away with it.  So it was more than a little satisfying that with all the charges she was trying to impose against Trump, like most Democrats who conduct social policy where they try to deflect from things they are actually guilty of, we learned that the Attorney General was guilty of far worse.  And now that we know, there can’t be any mercy for her.  She has to be made an example of.

So in that context, I think we can all root for the worst possible to happen to that corrupt communist, Big Tish James, and that she will do big time in the big house for her audacious crimes.  Audacious because she had tried to blame Trump for manipulating the values of his properties for better bank interest rates, which she indicated was a form of fraud.  She set the bar where it is now, and from which she is now judged.  Because now she is being prosecuted for much more obvious fraud, which she undoubtedly knew.  It’s so audacious that mistakes are impossible; she knew what she was doing, and that was to deceive the public and lenders to get benefits on real estate she owned.  As the Attorney General of New York, she can’t say she was ignorant of the law.  She had just tried to prosecute the President of the United States using the same logic.  She clearly knew where to look because she was guilty of the same thing, so this is an easy case being led by prosecutor Lindsey Halligan, one of Trump’s personal lawyers, formally.  Big Tish is being prosecuted for bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1344: knowingly misrepresenting the property’s use to obtain a favorable loan and making false statements to a financial institution.  Specifically, James signed a “second home rider” on a Fannie Mae-backed mortgage, certifying that a three-bedroom house would serve as her second residence and qualifying her for a lower fixed interest rate of 3%.  The loan terms, which she openly violated, prohibited renting it out as an investment.  And according to the court documents, Big Tish was clearly trying to save $18,933 over the life of the loan. 

These people were always communists, these kinds of Democrats, so it’s appropriate to indicate who they really are and what the movement intends.  Just as is reflected in this mayor race in New York, all this communist sentiment has snuck up on many people, biting them now that it’s too late.  Big Tish was elected by people who called themselves Democrats in an America that doesn’t like communists.  So they just changed their name so that people would vote for them.   But ideologically, they are all capitalist-hating communists, and they meant to gain control over our institutions, which has obviously happened in our court system, at all levels.  Most lawyers, even though they might not identify as communists by name, have beliefs about the world that are very much from the pages of Karl Marx.  And with the strength of that assumption, Leticia James thought she would get away with destroying the financial life of one of New York City’s most famous people and richest, and make an example of him with a different kind of execution.  It might have left him alive, but the case intended to destroy the Trump Organization so that the President wouldn’t have any wealth to defend himself.  She meant to personally bankrupt a former and future president of the United States, and enough people in New York who identify as communists supported her in that effort of destruction.  So let’s not kid ourselves here.  The communists who linger in this country in the background are looking for blood and to advance their party more deeply into power with fear.  Big Tish was showing the world that she controlled the courts and could destroy anyone in the legal process.  And she put everything she had into the effort regarding state power.  Trump was not supposed to survive. 

So when we talk about the grace of God in this case, I say let him do what he wants with her eternal soul.   I would recommend her destruction and to make it as public as possible.  Show absolutely no compassion for her in any way.  I would like to see her publicly humiliated to the utmost extent that the law will allow, and to see her permanently ruined for her efforts.  Because this is more than just a war of ideas, this is a communist invasion that has resided behind a kind of curtain that the Democrat Party put up to let these people gain hold of important public offices.  And their purpose was the destruction of the American way of life.  And they meant to control all of us by scaring people with what they did to popular people with a lot of money, like Trump.  The case with Trump, as I said in the very early days, was never going to stick.  Big Tish thought the courts were corrupt enough to make anything stick.  But legally, they had all kinds of problems.  But when that same prosecution by the New York Attorney General gets caught actually committing the crimes she was trying to paint on Trump, well, you have to throw the book at her.  And the kitchen sink as well.  She deserves destruction and no mercy.  For what she and her supporters tried to do to Trump and this country, we have to view it as treasonous, and nothing less.  This was no accident or a meaningless banking transaction.  No, this is the intent to gain control of a legal system to destroy political opponents personally.  And now the shoe is on the other foot, and Trump has a chance to take action that will be meaningful for centuries.  And I’m thrilled to see him do it.  There are many people who need to be punished for what they did.  And Big Tish James is just the start of it.

Rich Hoffman

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

Defending Erika Kirk: Democrats make themselves victims over everything, conservatives don’t

There is a lot to talk about regarding Erika Kirk and the reaction that many left-leaning people have had about her during the memorial for her husband, Charlie, who was recently murdered.  This is part of a larger study that we need to conduct to determine whether we can all coexist in the same world.  What people think and why is often very dangerous, and we have to start thinking about those types of things realistically.  Having personal freedom does not mean the same thing to all people, so it’s nearly impossible to have a meaningful and structured society when everyone doesn’t agree on what “good” is.  And that was never more apparent than in how people from the political left viewed the way that Erika Kirk dealt with her husband’s death, which was a very public enterprise.  Turning Point USA is a group of young people who have fully committed to the pursuit of conservative freedom and spiritual alignment. As such, nothing was shocking about their memorial service, especially for those who attend church on Sunday, a common occurrence, especially at large mega churches.  The Turning Point memorial for Charlie Kirk was held in a stadium in Arizona, which filled to an overflow crowd outside.  So it was an experience that godless heathens from the Marxist left could not understand.  And they certainly didn’t understand Erika Kirk’s approach to life in the wake of her husband’s death.  Because Erika was able to speak to people and contain her emotions, wear makeup, and dress well, people are suspicious of her and are talking about it extensively.  Those types of people would understand Erika better if she fell off the fence and went on a drunken binge, as other left-leaning people do.  But because she was able to hold it all together, people are very suspicious, even conspiratorial. 

This raises an essential point about society in general: conservatives tend to be above-the-line thinkers, meaning they take responsibility for their actions and are always looking for ways to improve things.  Where Democrats are often perceived as perpetual victims who look to society to fill in the gaps, they are below-the-line thinkers, as we call them in business – people who prioritize their own needs over others’ positive efforts, seeking to live off the positive efforts of others for their basic sustenance.  So when faced with a crisis, and a deeply emotional circumstance, Erika Kirk did as conservative women tend to, she looked for proactive measures to accommodate her very negative feelings on the murder of her husband, and the loss of the father of her very young children, with proactive positions.  And that came out in her various speeches.  Now Charlie would be very proud of Erika, including her walking out onto the stage to give a speech on behalf of her husband, accompanied by rock concert-like pyrotechnic effects that juiced things up for the audience.  Democrats in that same situation would be looking for excuses to fall apart, because that is their natural state of existence.  They would want to become intoxicated, to dress all in black, and to cry instantly, drawing attention to themselves so that people would feel sorry for them.  That is what all Democrats do; it’s what separates them from the rest of the world.  It is what makes them broken people and social menaces to themselves and others.  They could not understand a person like Erika Kirk, who had the personal strength to speak to the public so soon after Charlie’s murder and would even go to the trouble to put on some makeup to make herself presentable.  

Again, Turning Point USA excels at the entertainment aspect of their political efforts, and it should come as no surprise that they leveraged the memorial service to amplify their efforts.  Charlie Kirk would certainly approve, as he poured his life into the conservative movement and would undoubtedly appreciate how his memorial service was handled, including the way President Trump spoke during it.  It might be hard for Democrats to understand, but that doesn’t make it a vast conspiracy.  I’m sure Erika Kirk had to do a lot of acting to get through those few weeks, where she felt like shutting the world out while she grieved.  But she married a very public husband who had been very publicly assassinated. So to do him justice, she had to address that public in a very public way.  So she had to dig deep to get there, and what she did was conducive to the way that above-the-line people approach life in general.  People derive the strength they need from compelling leadership personalities.  Don’t cry about things that you can solve for yourself.  And don’t go out of your way for pity from a public that should never be in a position to give it to you.  That is, in general, the way that conservatives approach their business, and it’s very different than those who are attracted to social management in the form of Marxism, where the down and out want to stay that way so they have an excuse for all their bad decisions in life.  They don’t want people like Erika Kirk to put pressure on them to be better than they otherwise dare to be.  They want to be victims in life and cannot imagine taking charge as a reaction to tragedy. 

Without question, there is a lot wrong with the Charlie Kirk murder that should be a lot more forthcoming.  With Kash Patel, a friend of Charlie Kirk, in charge of the FBI, many people expect better, proactive answers.  However, we are dealing with a deep and elusive evil that operates in the background in a manner that is very difficult for people to confront.  So I don’t know that Turning Point USA and Erika Kirk are willing to just move on from the motivations of Charlie’s killer and to take the surface investigations all too quickly.  But part of the way that evil hides in the background, and into the lives of below-the-line Democrats, is in the notion that putting trust in Christ will rid them of the burden of carrying the cross, so to speak.  And when Erika said she forgave the murderer of her husband, she was also putting the burden of that anger aside, which is a consistent Christian means of dealing with stress.  And I attribute that to the Turning Point USA position in general, with Charlie Kirk, who wants to get back to the business of what Charlie stood for, rather than spending a lot of time crying over his loss.  For conservatives, the goal is to get out the message uninterrupted.  Not being encumbered with grief and misery.  Democrats don’t and will never understand a proactive approach to misery, so to fill their void, they will resort to conspiracy theories.   When in truth, they don’t have it in them to think in any other way than to be broken people.  Democrats are broken people who seek attention in times of crises because they feed off pity and emotional distress, which is why they are dangerous to society in general.  We can’t have all these different people working toward the exact same social necessities when they are so far apart.  And that has been grotesquely obvious in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s murder.  We’ve learned many hard truths in the wake of it that will require real action in the future.

Rich Hoffman

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

What Women Hate The Most: Nobody wants to see a slug too lazy to work

There is a recent survey where women have indicated that the periods where they experience the most stress are when their men, the people they pick to share a life with, raise a family, and build something, are lying on the couch doing nothing but watching TV or playing video games.  Now I say all this after years of experience in employing people, many thousands of them, and after raising two daughters and being married for 38 years to the same woman.  What I’m going to say is politically incorrect in lots of ways, but it’s the result of terrible things that we have taught our society when we tried to implement feminism into a biological experiment that has essentially destroyed people at a very foundational level.  We have a laziness problem, and it came from people who wanted to socially re-engineer society by attacking men and toxic masculinity, to empower women to play a larger role in the workplace, and in spending less time raising families, because the idea of a family was under attack by radical leftist ideas.  So most of what men have come to believe about what they should be doing in the world has come from people trying to destroy them, purposefully by rotting their minds with social fashions that were never healthy for them or society.  But that doesn’t change the biology of people, where women expect a man to be strong and to take care of them so they can raise a nice family.  No matter what society has said about the subject, when a woman sees a man lying on the couch not doing anything, it brings her great stress.  It doesn’t matter who the woman is; it just doesn’t sit well with them because it makes it evident to the woman that her man is useless. 

Oh, the man might be good at something here and there, but if he won’t work, it makes him pretty much a slug, a detriment to the creation of the family.  And women were told by that same society that they could replace all those emotions with a career of their own and their own paycheck.  And that the public schools would teach their children everything they needed to know, so they shouldn’t worry about any of it.  But for women, there is always something going on, a bill that needs to be paid, oil that needs to be changed, grass that needs to be cut.  The grim reality for a woman when she sees that her man wants to sleep on the couch all the time without doing the work it takes to build a family is that she is doomed to a life of misery.  Once a woman trades sexual favors to a man to launch a family, which all women experience, like trout returning to the spring of their birth, if a woman fails to get a guy in her life who will help her build a family, the disappointment starts to really eat away at her, and everything starts to fall apart.  She may raise her kids in a somewhat reasonable way, but what she is left with in the aftermath is major disappointment and resentment.  Kids don’t stay young very long.  What is a couple supposed to do together once they have come together and raised kids?  Especially if the men are lying around sleeping while there is a lot of work to be done?  Chances are their marriage will end, or the woman will grow very resentful and start hating the man for all the disappointments he brought her during that key time in her life.  If a family isn’t working together towards a common goal, everything falls apart. 

I’m not joking when I talk about AI being more reliable than people.  I love the idea of being productive with AI because, based on my experience, people are often unreliable.  They have too much emotional baggage from the numerous decisions they’ve made over the years, which have led to personal destruction.  As I have watched many people grow up and go through this cycle, I have always thought of it as an artificial problem created by social values that were all wrong.  A lot of men were taught that hard work led to heart attacks and an unhealthy life.  So they think that eating potato chips all day while earning new merits in a video game environment will satisfy them.  All it really does is entertain them until the next revision comes out and they have to start all over again.  The idea of buying a house, keeping the cars running, and caring for their children with strong emotional foundations is someone else’s problem, doesn’t excite them as it should.  Someone will eventually pick up the slack.  They have been taught that the excuse for their lack of work is to maintain stress so they don’t die from being overworked.  But in that process, their wives secretly hope they’ll die and free them of the misery and embarrassment that so many men these days bring to their marriages.  People have been taught that hard work is bad for them, and that not working at a job and spending their leisure time trying to do less work is somehow beneficial.  And it is at that source that all the problems start.  I’m thrilled that we’re at a time when AI can begin to do what many young men won’t do: work in a productive environment. 

I’ve always worked a lot, at least 60 to 80 hours a week.  And I fix all kinds of things, all the time.  Growing up, most of the people I knew were farmers, who always worked hard.  And when people worked hard, they were happier people.  And that is certainly true of me, I’m a happy person.  What makes me unhappy is witnessing laziness, people who work hard to avoid working hard.  My experience suggests that they are bringing misery upon themselves in a rebellion against logic.  And they aren’t even curious about the poison they have been given through their learning, from people obviously trying to sink America by destroying its workforce.  After World War II, America demonstrated its industrial capacity through the hard work of its free people. Many people around the world then sought to undermine the American work ethic for various malicious reasons.  And as we look around today, they have been all too successful.  Many men, young and old, are wasting their lives lying around doing nothing, then complaining when they are expected to pull their own weight.   And the women who match up with them are miserable, because they only get a few short years in their lives to get it right, when their flowers bloom, and they can pick whoever they want in the world through sexuality, to build a family with.  And if they get a dud, it brings misery to them for the rest of their life.  They might raise their families and make the best of things.  However, nothing makes them more stressed out than learning that their men don’t want to work while the bills pile up and the family’s needs are not being met.  And the young girls turn into bitter women as their windows close.  Sure, they could get a divorce, but for what purpose?  To find a harder-working man?  There aren’t many out there; chances are, the next one will be a dud too.  And as women raise their families and are stuck with an uninteresting slug sleeping on the couch every day and won’t keep the cars running, or the bills paid, women slowly die inside with the grim reality that it’s all over way too fast.  And if only hard work had been at the core of their marriage, life would have been a lot better for everyone.  Life is about hard work, and the more you put into it, the happier you will be.  The definition of a happy life never comes from leisure.  We are meant to work, and to work a lot.  The last thing a woman wants in her life is a slug that is like another child she has to feed and change all the time, who doesn’t help her have a happy life because he is too lazy to work.  The woman wants to work to raise her family, and if he is just another parasite in her life, taking from her instead of her having to give everything to the creation of a family, of course, she’s not going to be very happy when he’s sleeping on the couch.

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

Violent Video Games and Furry Culture: Why so many trans kids are becoming killers

I would probably never know about this “furry” culture of sexual deviants if it weren’t for my grandchildren.  My oldest grandson came across them online while researching video game information.  Furries, as they are called, are people who like to dress up in animal costumes in public.  And that’s important because the killers of Charlie Kirk and his boyfriend were participants in this culture, as they would dress up for conventions and play video games that involved anthropomorphic animals having sex.  And of course, as the furry condition is a tremendous psychological concern for public health, we are dealing with a homosexual relationship with a couple of guys who had built up so much hate for the godly purity of Charlie Kirk that they made a move to murder him on a college campus.  And we are seeing a trend among many killers who are going through the same problem, killing people, as video games have desensitized them to killing without any genuine concept of consequences.  If you have read the text messages between Tyler Robinson and his boyfriend, Lance Twiggs, who is in the process of trying to convert to a woman, you will find that they were bizarrely out of touch.  So much so that people naturally think it was a fake narrative created by the deep state to hide the real killers, because it seems so outlandishly coherent, considering this kid just committed one of the most memorable assassinations the world has ever seen.  So a transsexual element is at play yet again, in addition to the furry culture obsession.  The killer of the Minneapolis church attack was a trans kid, and we know now that the assassination threat against Bret Kavanaugh of the Supreme Court was a man trying to become a girl.  So what’s going on here, and how is the gaming culture producing all these young killers?  It’s a question that goes way beyond free speech. 

I’m far from a person trying to reform the video game industry, but we’re no longer talking about Pac-Man here when we talk about video games and how they try to stand out from a very harsh crowd in the marketplace.  I saw the recent Wolverine preview for an upcoming video game, and it’s really very violent.  I have been alarmed at the level of violence in video games as developers have gotten away with more and more violence; there is no question of a desensitizing effect.  The popular game of Fortnite has more cartoon violence, but Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, and now this Disney-owned Marvel game, Wolverine, are very violent, where bones are ripped from the bodies of victims ruthlessly.  It is not a stretch to think that a small percentage of the population that plays these games is being desensitized to violence and is losing touch with reality.  I’ll repeat it, I used to write screenplays and I would submit them to studios and agents in the 1990s.  And I had a lot of mainstream people tell me that my screenplays were too violent for a mainstream audience, which Hollywood was a part of at that time.  They had a responsibility to the public good, that’s what they told me.  They would say to me I was a talented writer, but that resorting to so much violence took away from that talent, and they had a responsibility to the public not to be so graphic.  Then I saw Kill Bill and other Tarantino movies, and I mentioned to them that my work wasn’t any more violent than Tarantino’s.  And there really wasn’t an answer except that they said Tarentino’s violence was more comic book, and not as realistic as mine.  So, a line was being drawn, and watching that preview for Wolverine certainly was the result.  The self-censorship in the entertainment industry was ending about the time I mentioned, and it has devolved into what we see today, which is a very violent entertainment culture. 

For young people without strong father figures or good family structures, video games can distort reality.  And this Tyler Robinson supposedly came from a loving family.  Once he developed a sexual relationship with another young man, and they started crossing lines that society would judge them harshly over, they retreated into the violent world of video games, and we know that because those traits were marked on the shell casings from the gun used to murder Charlie Kirk.  We should be all over these traits because they keep repeating, the mode of operation for many of these killers is that they are involved in transexual practices and spend their free time on violent video games.  And when you spend many hours playing violent video games like Lance Twiggs did, there is a desensitization toward violence that ultimately becomes a psychological problem.   When kids delve into this rabbit hole, a trait emerges from this furry culture: the idea that people can be anything they want if only they wish it.  It’s consistent to make mistakes in a video game, where, if you wish, you can change the avatar of your character into anything you want to be.  And that is without question happening in these trans cases, where people make mistakes their families might look down on them for, and they turn to furries or trans sex to change their public image from mistakes they are ashamed of.  When society has opinions about those mistakes, they retreat into the world of video games, where you can be anything you want, you can change your name, and you can hide from society behind mass violence.  Given the frequency of these occurrences, this is a significant problem. 

This is one of those cases where treacherously evil acts are hiding behind conservative values, such as limited government oversight of the video game industry, allowing market forces to work out the problems.  Or to have a libertarian approach to sexuality.  We are told by those creating vile content that more oversight of these industry norms is intrusive.  Therefore, the attacks are occurring behind the values we advocate as businesspeople and conservative, market-driven economic values.  We’re not supposed to have an opinion on this topic because we support free markets, and in the free market, people want violence.  Just as we are supposed to accept that people want to smoke dope, or do other detrimental behaviors, that do not suit healthy mass psychology.  But that’s the thing, and it goes back to my days of writing scripts, when I was told that something was too violent, the standard was to go back and make the scenes less so, but just as impactful.  Violence is often used to make a point forcefully.  It can be necessary, but it can also serve as a creative crutch to avoid the details of actual artistic integrity.  Just like grotesque sex, violence is lazy in trying to appeal to our animal instincts.  And killing is a primal instinct we all have.  But we are expected to overcome that violent trait for something better.  And when we have artistic expression that feeds the fears and anxieties of a young generation with various insecurities, bad things can and do happen.  This video game culture is feeding them in a very negative way, and some of them are turning to actual killings.  And they are becoming desensitized to the world, especially once they start really embarrassing themselves with sexual practices they could never get their families to accept, and changing their public image like a video game avatar never solves their insecurities.  And before they turn to suicide, they are turning to mass social violence, which video games helped fuel their fantasies.  And we are now seeing a whole generation turning to violence and perversion to hide their mistakes, which they have never learned to deal with.  And it’s a really big problem that won’t go away on its own.

Rich Hoffman

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

Carrying the Weight of the World: Trump’s UN Speech and earning the right to be blunt about escalators

Who wouldn’t love the UN speech of 2025 that President Trump gave, as the escalator broke as soon as he and Melania put their feet on it?  That’s the world we are living in, and obviously, the escalator incident was no accident.  Employees joked about the escalators’ malfunctioning leading up to that speech as a radical means of protest, hoping to garner more funding for the United Nations, as if additional resources would solve all the problems.  Instead, Trump and his wife walked up the escalator without a whole lot of drama and gave a speech that essentially wiped the smile off the face of a very radical world that has failed dramatically since the creation of the UN after World War II.  It wasn’t the usual speech of placation that often accompanies these kinds of things, with calls for unity, peace, and all that kind of rhetoric.  No, Trump had earned the right to call out everyone, right in front of their faces, and tell them what a bunch of low-life characters they all were.  And that is what earning the right by carrying the weight of the world earns you.  And why Trump changing positions on Russia is so important, because only by earning that trust, by enduring the weight of the world, can a person like Trump say the things he does in public.  The UN speech was a remarkable statement by a world that the United States was clearly leading.  All nations were not there equally.  Running the world by committee has turned out to be a disaster, and it took someone like Trump to point it out.  Not through the media with some passive-aggressive protest, but live, to their faces.  And while everyone was on their heels from what he was saying, they complained that the UN doesn’t work, and neither do its escalators or its teleprompters.  Technical sabotage was meant to throw Trump off his game, but it ultimately played to his advantage.

But to earn that right to be as blunt as Trump has been, carrying the weight of the world comes first, and when people wonder why people like Melania Trump and her husband would want to trade in their life of the rich and famous for this demanding job of being President of the United States, the answer comes from speeches like the one Trump gave.  Watching their faces on the 9/11 ceremony this year, the day after Charlie Kirk, a former friend of theirs, was assassinated in cold blood, was obviously hard for them.  And on the day of the speech, the would-be progressive assassin Ryan Wesley Routh was convicted on all counts in trying to plot the murder of Trump at his golf course, just a few months after the attempted assassination of the President at Butler, Pennsylvania, that drew blood, but had only clipped his ear.  Charlie Kirk wasn’t so lucky, and that was obviously weighing on Trump as he and his wife went through the rituals of 9/11 ceremonies to pay tribute to the most significant act of terrorism that ever occurred on American soil.  More terrorism on a larger scale than the escalator sabotage at the UN, but the same in principle.  And the knowledge that after someone of good character had just been killed on a college campus, many on the Democrat side of politics cheered about it, and to discover that so many of our public school teachers were happy that Kirk was dead, and were gloating about it.   The weight of all that evil when you are in a job like the one in the White House can really make you not want to get up out of bed in the morning.

Then, to add to that, the deceit of Vladimir Putin of Russia, who has been saying one thing about peace all along, while turning around and killing many thousands of people on both sides, ruthlessly can really shake your faith in any kind of relationship.  Even Benjamin Netanyahu has been deceitful in his platitudes of peace, while turning around and acting contrary, being very aggressive, knowing that the United States would always bail him out of any trouble he got into.  So he was picking fights anyway, putting Trump in a terrible position.  The evil that people showed, and being in a position to see it so bluntly, was really wearing on the President, as it does most people who find themselves in that perspective.  Leadership is hard when you know so much truth that most people get to dance through without too much thought.  And that leads to the question of why anyone would want to be a leader of anything, whether it’s the President of the United States or the CEO of a company.  Why would anybody want to put themselves through the ordeal of all the trouble?  Especially when they are wealthy and could choose otherwise?  Knowing the worst in people, because your perspective reveals it to you, why would anybody want to do it?  To know too much and to carry around so much weight, knowing the level of hatred in the world around you.  Most people never encounter this kind of situation because their relationships maintain an illusion of civility.  But Trump is seeing the raw evil that can come from people, and he never gets a break from it.  It’s tough to use the Power of Positive Thinking to overcome such menacing negative thinking, and the Democrats are the party of negativity and below-the-line victimization.

Well, you do it so that you get a chance to go to the United Nations and tell them all what you think of them.  You endure the pain of life so that you can throw it in their faces.  And in doing so, you make the world a bit less crappy because of the people in it.  The United Nations was a failure from the start, but it was able to hide its poor performance behind the evils of humanity.  And as long as people kept the speeches nice, nobody talked about the tough stuff.  And everyone could party on the town, buying prostitutes while away from home, and go to fancy restaurants without any real cares in the world.  But to pull that off, everyone needs to be equally trashy and guilty of the crimes that the world enjoyed.  But by carrying the weight of the world the way that Trump does, from a leadership perspective, he can break protocol and tell people what he thinks of them, because everyone he’s talking to knows they can’t do the same.  Their guilt weighs heavily on their minds, burdening them with the truth of it all.  And that is why it’s worth being in a leadership position.  And without all the pain and the desire to carry it from the White House, nobody earns the right to talk about the real problems.  And this United Nations meeting would be just one more eventless charade.  But because Trump has suffered through some terrible weeks where the worst that people can do to each other was made evident, and he smiles his way through it like nothing in the world can bother him, he earns the right to be critical of escalators that don’t work, or global organizations that fail just as spectacularly.  And that he can broker peace with the biggest nations of the world, who are up to no good, because he has been willing to carry the burdens of knowledge that comes from really knowing the deceit that people are capable of.  And we are all better off for it.

Rich Hoffman

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rich Hoffman

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

Butler Tech Must Fire Brandi Robertson: The Murder of Charlie Kirk has changed the world forever

Look at all that pride. Problem is, it’s the wrong kind. Brandi is in the middle of all those prideful people

What Erika Kirk said in her address to the nation, the widow of Charlie Kirk, who had just been assassinated, wasn’t just hopeful talk that is common when people lose a loved one.  The political left needs to understand what has happened here.  I don’t like to use the word “martyr.”  But this was a John the Baptist moment at the very least.  And it was much more potent than the assassination of Martin Luther King.  After this funeral, there will be Charlie Kirk laws.  There will be Charlie Kirk buildings.  There will be lots and lots of Charlie Kirk boulevards.  I know some of the people in that crowd, like Jack Posobiec and Steve Bannon, and they aren’t going to let this go.  Their friend was assassinated, they have a grieving wife and friend who knows how to talk, and there will be no end to this.  So it should come as no surprise that there is a lot of discussion about firing and chastising bankers, teachers, and restaurant owners who were caught celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk.  And those left leaning types are now finding themselves on the outside of society, looking in.  And locally, as it is nationally, that is where a local school near me finds itself, Butler Tech in Butler County, Ohio.  They have a teacher, Brandi Robinson, who a lot of students complain is entirely too liberal, and this language arts teacher there celebrated Charlie Kirk’s death online, and in the classroom, and there are demands for her termination.  Which has to happen; otherwise, the entire school will be dragged into a mess.  People are agitated, and they are willing to drag leftist-minded detriments to society out in the street and skewer them.  So there is no redeeming factor for Brandi Robinson of Butler Tech.  I appreciate the school and its goals.  But as a result of Charlie Kirk’s murder and the Trump administration’s need to do something about it, there will be no stone overturned to set things right.  And at the very least, we are going to see that employment of left-wing radicals in any field of endeavor is now going to be heavily scrutinized, and people are going to want to see them fired from their jobs. 

A teacher that uses that kind of language, anywhere, should be disqualified from teaching students. Not to mention context.

This didn’t happen overnight.  This has been happening to conservatives for many years by the left, and they have grown to feel empowered by their abuse of free speech, legally.  This isn’t a free speech debate.  It’s a moral referendum that we will sort out later, once the smoke clears, if it ever does.  Democrats weaponized free speech, taking shots at polite society to destroy it by hiding behind the laws of the land, then using those laws as weapons against the culture that made them.  And that is where Brandi Robinson finds herself at Butler Tech.  Like many teachers who are now seeing the pitchforks coming to their doorstep, the cries for the First Amendment won’t protect them from the wrath of an outraged society.  People had to watch the very nice Charlie Kirk be assassinated on live television, and he has left behind a widow who knows how to talk to a crowd.  And she has had her husband ripped away from her, and all the hope for her future, destroyed.  And she is going to lead a movement that will trickle into the doorsteps of every public school in the country, because Charlie and she have been such huge supporters of homeschooling.  The shoe is now on the other foot, and a justification for destroying elements of left-leaning philosophy that have destroyed so many children is now going to come under fire like it never has before. 

The killer of Charlie Kirk was obviously radicalized once he moved away from his family and had some experiences in college.  He moved in with a trans lover, a guy trying to be a girl, and his political thinking had been shaped by really radical left-winged politics, and those failures are now showing up in these mass shootings.  And it’s people like Brandi Robinson who teach kids in these schools that put really horrible thoughts in people’s heads.  And when there are significant social breakdowns, who is to blame?  Teachers like Brandi want to blame social mechanisms like gun control as the solution to eliminate school violence.  When the truth is that people like her cause the violence in the first place, because the kids in their care find they cannot function in the world well, living the life these teachers have been teaching them.  In the case of Charlie Kirk’s killer, who will have to be executed on live television to appease the anger that there is out there—at the very least, (people won’t be happy with a lethal injection or life in prison.  They will want him gutted on live television and have him torn limb for limb—and I’m being very nice about it.)  A line was crossed with this assassination that unleashed so much pent-up anger that there will be no going back.  Teachers who have been teaching kids left-wing politics in school are not going to get off without a lot of trouble.  Left-leaning culture, which so many teachers teach, is undoubtedly behind the problems of Kirk’s killer, Tyler Robinson, who found himself torn between the life he was raised to, with a cop as a father, and a trans lover he was told would be socially acceptable, only to find out the hard way that such a thing was grotesquely inappropriate. 

The students don’t have nice things to say about Brandi Robinson

There are many more teachers at Butler Tech and the nearby Lakota schools, like Brandi Robinson.  But in the wake of the Charlie Kirk murder, this one said some really dumb things, and the kids from her classroom have been complaining that nobody would listen.  When Darbi Boddy was ejected from the Lakota school board for pointing out these very problems, everyone involved in that process is now guilty of contributing to the erosion of social discourse.  It’s not enough to say that Darbi was a church freak, Bible thumper, out of step with the realities of a progressive society.  And that hate speech, such as celebrating the murder on television, a widely respected good person like Charlie Kirk could be hidden behind free speech.  Conservatives have been hunted down and destroyed by banks, media personalities, and every other institutional mechanism that there is out there, and people have not felt that they could express themselves with a MAGA hat in public because of it.  And now the shoe is on the other foot, the evidence is clear that we have radical teachers in these schools, and they make people like this killer, Tyler Robinson, by teaching them at a vulnerable stage of their lives, all the wrong things.  There are a lot of kids like Tyler Robinson out there, and they have been weaponized in these classrooms through people like Brandi Robinson.  We have to purge teachers like her from all public schools as a minimum reaction to Charlie Kirk’s murder.  And it doesn’t matter if staffing levels are challenging.  We can’t have people like that on the taxpayer payroll.  People should have listened when Darbi tried to point all this out.  She was a few years ahead of this very national issue.  However, it’s here, and people are no longer going to put up with teachers like Brandi Robinson.  Free speech does not mean a teacher can abandon professional decorum and hide behind the First Amendment to corrupt children in their care.  When they violate that trust, they will have to lose their jobs because, at the very least, kids need to see what a structured society looks like.  And because of the murder of Charlie Kirk, even moderate-minded people want to see a change.  And they are going to get it one way or another.  The world is now changed forever, not because people who miss Charlie Kirk are sad and want to think of happy things ahead of his funeral.  No, people now have a mechanism of expression that is excessively mainstream.  And Charlie Kirk’s murder will be avenged by a society that for too long has stayed reserved behind polite discourse.  And those days are now over.  Evil will be purged from society, and that starts with horrible teachers like Brandi Robinson at Butler Tech in Butler County, Ohio.

Rich Hoffman

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

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