What did 9/11 reveal about Islam and did the West learn the wrong lesson? In today’s episode, I share a keynote address examining the Cross, the Quran, and a conflict of ideas that began long before September 11, 2001 that continues to shape the West today.

Two days ago I wrote about the trap this generation keeps falling into. 1.5M of you read it. The most common reply: "OK, but who builds the trap?" Fair question. Here's my answer. And let me be clear from the start: there is no secret room. No puppet master. What exists is far more banal and far more durable: a machine of incentives, where every person in the chain is paid to keep the same story alive. Nobody has to coordinate. The money does it for them. Let's start at the bottom of the machine, with the person nobody ever looks at. PART ONE: THE MACHINE, LINK BY LINK A. The NGO bureaucrat. His salary depends on the problem existing. He isn't paid to solve it. He's paid to document it, denounce it and campaign about it. An NGO that actually solved housing would have to lay itself off. So the incentive is never "fix." It's "mobilize." And nothing mobilizes like a villain. B. The program officer. The person who decides which NGO gets funded. He has to show "impact" to his board, and impact means reports, campaigns, reach, people in the street. A group that quietly builds 200 homes produces a boring report. A group that fills a square produces a great one. C. The fiscal sponsor. The plumbing. Many activist groups have no legal structure of their own, so their money flows through an umbrella nonprofit that receives and redistributes it. This is legal and common, and it makes the money nearly impossible to trace from donor to banner. D. The university administrator. Subsidized tuition didn't buy better teaching. It bought administration: entire offices whose job is to read every interaction between students as a power relation. Remove the lens and the office has no reason to exist. E. The academic. Careers run on grants and peer committees. Publish inside the dominant frame and you rise. Publish outside it and you're "problematic." Nobody has to forbid anything, because everyone can read the incentives. F. The subsidized artist. Film, theater and festivals are funded by committees that reward the "right" themes. The capitalist villain isn't a creative choice. It's a funding criterion nobody writes down. G. The public broadcaster. Paid by the taxpayer, never by the viewer. It never has to win you over. It has to please the people who renew its budget. Guess which villain it will never investigate. H. The teacher. Usually sincere, usually underpaid, trained in the same universities as everyone else. He passes on the lens he received, in good faith. That's what makes it so effective: the people transmitting it believe it. I. The international institution. Agencies and programs built around permanent crises. When a crisis ends, so does a budget. The narrative of eternal oppression becomes, quite literally, a business model. J. The politician. The last link, the one who cashes in. The machine produces anger. The politician harvests it and sells, as the cure, more of what caused the disease. Ten links, and not one of them needs to be evil. Each one just follows its interest. That's what makes the machine so hard to stop: you can't arrest an incentive. PART TWO: NOW THE REAL NAMES The European Commission. Between 2021 and 2023, more than €7.4 billion of EU money went to NGOs, in internal policy areas alone. In 2025 the EU's own Court of Auditors concluded that nobody, not even Brussels, has a reliable overview of where it all goes. When MEPs looked into the LIFE environmental program, the Commission itself admitted that some NGO work programmes it had funded contained "undue lobbying activities." In plain terms, public money paid activists to lobby the institutions that pay them. The auditors found nothing illegal, and that's exactly the point. It's all legal: the state paying people to ask the state for more state. Open Society Foundations. Less a puppet master than a patron. By its own records, it gave Jewish Voice for Peace $875,000 between 2017 and 2022, a group active in the Columbia protests, and it has funded the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights. Does it pay kids to pitch tents? There's no evidence of that. It does something more powerful. Year after year, it funds the organizations that produce the frames, the slogans, the trainings and the talking points. You don't need to pay the protester when you pay for the lens. The fiscal sponsorship networks. The money doesn't have to go to the group on the poster. It goes to an umbrella, which passes it on. That's how fact-checkers can honestly say "no direct grant to the student group" while the ecosystem around it is funded. Both statements are true. That's the design. The French state. €1,714 billion of public spending in 2025, 57.3% of GDP, the highest in Europe. Public debt hit €3,595 billion at the end of June, 119% of GDP, a record since INSEE started measuring. Interest alone runs around €79 billion this year. On top of the bill sit public universities, public broadcasting, a centralized curriculum and culture funded by committees. In France the machine isn't an ecosystem. It's an administration. New York City. In June, a Rent Guidelines Board with six of its nine members appointed by the mayor voted to freeze rents on about a million stabilized apartments. That included the first two-year freeze in the city's history. One board member resigned, saying the board had been rebuilt to deliver the freeze. The first leases under it took effect on October 1st. Watch what happens to maintenance, to new construction, to the vacancy rate. Every city that has run this experiment got the same result. And when it fails, the machine will already have its culprit ready: the landlord. THE LOOP Now put it together. The state funds demand and blocks supply, so prices explode. The young suffer. The state then funds the NGOs, universities, culture and media that explain to them why they suffer. Those institutions point at the market. The young vote for more state. More state funds more NGOs, and the loop closes. The flag on those kids' shoulders the other morning wasn't the start of anything. It was the output, the last screen of a machine that runs all day, every day, on your taxes. You can't arrest an incentive. But you can cut its funding, and you can teach people to see it. That's what this account is for.

Sending monitors to election polls does not sow distrust in elections—quite the contrary! Tonight on @60Minutes, I explained it is routine for @theJusticeDept to monitor election sites to repair the distrust already present in the system due to voting irregularities.

Just a few months ago, Islamic terrorists massacred an entire Christian community in Congo. Over 60 people slaughtered in an hour. Thousands of Christians are slaughtered in Congo and the world remains silent. Thousands more Christians are slaughtered in Nigeria, Ethiopia and other parts of North and Central Africa, and the media say nothing. The Pope continues to tell the world how Muslims are your friends and brothers while priests and community leaders cry over rivers of blood those “friends and brothers” leave in their path to wiping out non Muslims from existence. We’re living in dark times. Possibly the darkest in memory. Because it isn’t just that these atrocities are happening in such frequency, but that half the non Muslim world seems to defend those perpetrating the mass killings.

My fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, I am deeply broken and overwhelmed with pain. Sometimes, I feel as though I may be the next person to follow my brothers who have been taken away from us and buried in their graves. If God does not rise to fight for us, what are we going to do? I am sitting here helpless, wondering what else we can do. We have prayed, cried, and called for help, but it feels as though the government has turned its back on us. Had it been that we were the ones who invaded Ruga, I believe the military would have surrounded our homes and made mass arrests. Yet, when our people are killed, our communities attacked, and our homes destroyed, we continue to cry for justice. We Christians feel helpless. Even some people who call themselves Christians and serve in the military seem unable to stand with us. What, then, should we expect from others? My fellow brothers and sisters, even when the government knows what is happening, we continue to suffer. The authorities responsible for protecting our people must rise above religious and ethnic differences and do their jobs. Every Nigerian deserves protection, regardless of their religion or tribe. Why must innocent people continue to die while those responsible for protecting them struggle to provide the security they desperately need? Today, four more people have reportedly been killed. How many more lives must be lost before the world pays attention to our cries? Every day, families wake up not knowing whether their loved ones will return home alive. We say goodbye to our brothers and sisters without knowing whether we will ever see them again on this earth. That is the agony many Christians in Nigeria are facing. Sometimes, I wonder whether we will live to see tomorrow. If we do, we thank God for His mercy. If we do not, we pray that we will meet again in His heavenly kingdom. This is the painful reality of people who have been forced to live with fear, grief, and uncertainty. The government must not dismiss the suffering of our people or ignore allegations of religious persecution. Every killing must be investigated, and every victim deserves justice. We cannot continue to bury our loved ones while those responsible escape accountability. We need protection, justice, and leaders who will value every Nigerian life. My fellow Christians across Nigeria and around the world, I am calling on you to stand with us in prayer and speak out for the protection of innocent lives. We see how the Jewish people continue to fight for their survival, and we too must find the courage to stand together, defend our communities lawfully, and demand that our government fulfil its responsibility to protect us. Where are our youths? Where is our courage? Why must our people continue to flee while those who attack our communities seem to escape justice? Let us be courageous, united, and determined to seek justice through peaceful and lawful means. May the Almighty God give us the strength to endure these difficult times. Our farms have been taken over, our communities have been devastated, and our people are living in fear. We need our security forces to act decisively, protect vulnerable communities, investigate these attacks, and arrest those responsible. No innocent person should be arrested simply to create an impression that something is being done. Justice must be based on truth, not falsehood. If you have chosen to ignore our suffering, I pray that God will touch your heart and help you understand our pain. I do not pray for anyone's destruction, but I pray that every leader who has neglected the cries of innocent people will awaken to the responsibility God has placed upon them. Vengeance belongs to the Lord, but justice is also a responsibility that human beings must not abandon. As Romans 12:19 reminds us, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord

This is why you shouldn't listen to anyone that claimed Gaza was a genocide. It was all propaganda to play on your emotions to drive foreign policy. The goal was to get Israel to stop. This was Hamas' strategy from the beginning because the West is weak and easily manipulated. This is why Israel and the Trump administration rightly ignored the false cries and the fake indignation from the UN and the woke left and right.

In 2021, the head of the UN World Food Programme said $6 billion from Elon Musk could solve world hunger. Elon replied: publish the plan, right here, publicly, and I'll sell Tesla stock on the spot. The plan came out. And when you read it, it wasn't a plan to solve hunger. It was one year of food for 42 million people. A twelve-month subscription. And the year after? Start over. A few months later, Elon summed up his view: if you care about the reality of goodness rather than the perception of it, philanthropy is extremely difficult. "Reality of goodness over perception of goodness." That line stuck with me for weeks. Does philanthropy actually work? Gates-style philanthropy is first and foremost institutional capture. Foundations funding NGOs, funding governments, funding programs, producing reports, producing photos. Everyone's happy, and the aid machine keeps itself alive. Sixty years and hundreds of billions later, much of Africa is still dependent on aid. Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo laid it out in Dead Aid: aid breeds dependency, feeds corruption, and short-circuits the only mechanism that has ever lifted a country out of poverty. So what actually works? It's been tested. In Kenya, Berkeley researchers working with GiveDirectly randomly selected villages and gave every poor household about $1,000 in cash. No program. No training. No conditions. Just cash. The result: people bought metal roofs, livestock, started small businesses. Barely any inflation. And every dollar injected generated around $2.50 of economic activity locally, including for neighbors who received nothing. Why? Because you didn't give them charity. You gave them capital. You primed the pump. And that's where everything hinges: ownership. Hernando de Soto showed that the world's poor hold trillions of dollars in assets, but without recognized property titles, it's dead capital. You can't borrow against it, pass it on, or grow it. Where property rights are respected, the system starts running. Where they aren't, no amount of aid will ever be enough. Now reread Elon's post. "Next year, I will give one of my SpaceX shares to every kid in America. This will be the first of many." That's not a meal. That's not a handout. That's a property title. A piece of the company building the infrastructure of a multiplanetary civilization, owned directly by millions of kids. A kid who gets a handout depends on the state. A kid who owns a share of SpaceX owns a piece of the future. He learns what an asset is, he has a stake in the economy working, and one day he'll vote as an owner, not as a client of the state. Gates buys perception. Musk distributes ownership. The reality of goodness versus its perception. And it's absolutely brilliant.

🧵🚨 MAJOR BREAKING: International actors are involved in the State Department led color revolution 🚨🚨 This is not speculation; it’s straight from a recorded call. Ex-USAID employees describe how, before January 20, they moved internal groups off government systems and into encrypted Signal chats, then quickly linked with foreign partners and NGOs after the inauguration. This attempt at creating a color revolution isn't new news; this part was already reported in NOTUS earlier this year. But what's not reported is the international aspect. One participant explicitly frames it as "a global anti-authoritarian movement," connecting U.S. officials with "colleagues from around the world who have dealt with this directly." They reference coordination with Johns Hopkins, "international democracy and conflict mitigation spaces," and efforts to mobilize across borders against what they perceive as domestic authoritarianism. At what point does this become treason? As always, patience as I pull together this thread. 👇

We knew it was happening. This is how. Repost and share! The world needs to see it!

@BarackObama found a principle. He says the government can't target people for "what they say." In 2010, his Justice Department got a judge to sign a warrant for a Fox News reporter's email and called him a possible co-conspirator. For asking questions. I graded all of it. His screenshot is attached with my red pen in the margins. This is the long version, because a man who carried the nuclear football for eight years can handle a long version. Grab a coffee, Barry. Grab two. You're going to be here a while. — LINE ONE: "A BASIC PRINCIPLE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY" — Barry. You taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago. The word "democracy" appears in the Constitution exactly zero times. Article IV, Section 4 guarantees every state "a Republican Form of Government." Slight oversight! Somewhere a law school wants its lecture notes back. But fine. Let's grade the principle itself: the government can't selectively target people because of their political beliefs or what they say. Agreed. Now open your own transcript. May 2010. Your Justice Department applied for a warrant to search the personal email of James Rosen, Fox News' chief Washington correspondent. The FBI affidavit claimed probable cause that he broke the Espionage Act "as an aider and abettor and/or co-conspirator." His offense? Asking a State Department source for information. That is called journalism. A magistrate signed it. NBC reported Eric Holder signed off. Rosen was never charged. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Nobody handed me a list of which Americans it covered. The First Amendment doesn't come with a footnote that says "except Fox." You swore to preserve, protect and defend that same Constitution. Twice. Apparently your copy came with an asterisk. May 2013. The Associated Press learned your Justice Department had secretly pulled the records of 20 of its phone lines covering April and May of 2012. Same month, the Treasury Inspector General reported your IRS had used inappropriate criteria to flag tax-exempt applications with words like "Tea Party" and "Patriot" in the name. Lois Lerner took the Fifth in front of Congress. Nine months later you sat across from Bill O'Reilly and said there wasn't "even a smidgen of corruption." In October 2017 the IRS settled with those groups and formally apologized. To be fair, a later review found some progressive keywords got flagged too. The conservative list still did the heavy lifting. A smidgen, you said. You've got a leak in the think tank, sir, and the whole library is flooding. There's an old word for a shrewd, unprincipled politician who preaches what he never practiced. Snollygoster. Look it up. Your picture should be next to it. — LINE TWO: "IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THE FACTS" — He actually wrote that. The man who told 300 million Americans "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan," which PolitiFact named its Lie of the Year in 2013. Facts matter to Barack Obama about as much as a seat belt matters to a crash-test dummy. They're strapped in for the photo, and they go flying the second the car hits something. I was a paramedic for twenty years. I know what it looks like when somebody presents with one story and the vitals tell another. Keep talking, Barry. I'm diagnosing your condition. It's called selective memory, and it's chronic. His facts: Omar arrived at 12. Five years later her father naturalized. She was 17, so she became a citizen automatically. Here are the facts he left on the cutting-room floor. The Minnesota Legislative Reference Library listed her birth year as 1981. It said 1981 for her entire time in the state House. In May 2019, months into her first term in Congress, her staff asked the library to change it to 1982. The library's own director put that request in writing. Born in 1981, she's 18 or 19 when her father naturalized in 2000, and an 18-year-old has to apply on her own. Born in 1982, she's 17 and rides in on Dad's paperwork. One digit. That is the entire citizenship. I teach physics. One digit is the difference between a bridge that holds and a bridge that drops a school bus into the river. Nobody in my classroom gets to say "close enough" about a decimal, and nobody in Congress gets to say it about a birth year. She says the old year was a mistake. Possible. Refugees from war zones often don't have clean birth records, and immigration lawyers say so. So produce the records, Congresswoman. The father's certificate. The file. A former congressional candidate, AJ Kern, requested his naturalization records and posted the reply from USCIS: no matching index reference under the name variants she gave. A failed records search is not proof he never naturalized. It IS a reason not to announce it as settled fact to 6.9 million people, Mr. President. — LINE THREE: "AN UNSUBSTANTIATED THEORY" — Here's what substantiated looks like. A federal judge read an affidavit and found probable cause before agents walked through her door on October 12. The Justice Department confirmed the warrant was "judicially authorized." AP reports more than a dozen grand jury subpoenas, some to her own relatives, for a grand jury in Minnesota. Tom Homan said on Fox he's been told it's a "strong case." Jonathan Turley pointed out the civil denaturalization track has no statute of limitations. Unsubstantiated theories don't get a judge's signature, a grand jury, and a stack of subpoenas. Calling that "unsubstantiated" is like calling the Titanic a little damp. You're muddying the water to make it look deep, and the whole country can see the bottom. To be fair, her lawyers say agents ignored limits a judge put on the search, and they want her property back. If agents broke the judge's rules, that's a real problem and I'll say so out loud. Notice what that complaint admits, though. A judge was in charge of this the whole time. And that same night, her campaign sent a fundraising email asking supporters to "chip in." Persecuted all the way to the bank. — LINE FOUR: "A NONEXISTENT SMOKING GUN FROM 20 YEARS AGO" — Two errors in one sentence. I'm a teacher. I circle both. Nonexistent? You don't know that. You haven't read the affidavit. Neither have I. The difference is I'm not the one who typed "nonexistent" in front of 6.9 million people. Twenty years ago? Her father naturalized in 2000. It's 2026. That's twenty-six years. President of the Harvard Law Review, and the arithmetic still came out like a gas station receipt in the rain. My freshmen get partial credit for showing their work. You didn't show any. Somewhere a calculator is producing correct answers for you, sir. You owe it an apology. — LINE FIVE: "BECAUSE SHE HAS DARED TO CRITICIZE THE PRESIDENT" — What's next, Barry, you'll tell me Biden's own people looked at her first... wait, I'm being told. The Wall Street Journal reported Homeland Security Investigations examined a similar allegation under Biden's Autopen and dropped it for lack of evidence. The New York Times reported Biden's Justice Department opened a separate probe in June 2024 into her finances, her campaign spending, and her contact with a foreign national. It stalled. Even CNN's Elie Honig said the Biden-era start hurts her "selective and vindictive" argument. So which president was she criticizing in June 2024 that scared his own Justice Department? Your old vice president? Take your time. You've got a presidential library with no presidential library in it. Plenty of quiet. Unless your name is Google, stop acting like you know everything about a case you've never read. Let me propose the Obama Rule, since you seem to want one. Any American who criticizes the sitting president is immune from federal investigation. Criticize the president, skip the IRS. Criticize the president, skip the grand jury. Half of cable news and every member of the Squad, untouchable forever. This is not a radical idea. It's just common sense. — LINE SIX: "DISMISSED FOR HAVING NO BASIS IN LAW" — He offers the New York attorney general and the former FBI director as proof that Trump's Justice Department only brings junk cases. On November 24, 2025, Judge Cameron Currie threw out the Comey and Letitia James indictments because Lindsey Halligan's appointment as U.S. attorney was unlawful. Without prejudice. That ruling was about who signed the indictment, not about what Comey or James did. To be fair, grand juries twice declined to re-indict James after that. That is a real point for your side. "No basis in law" is still your spin, not the judge's finding. And since we're grading consistency: prosecutors in Manhattan, Georgia, and Biden's Autopen Justice Department indicted a former president four times in 2023, while he was running. Let me find the 400-word post where you warned that this could become the new normal. Looking... Looking... Oh. It's this one. Three years late and aimed the other way. Quinn's Law Number Seven: it's different when you're a Democrat. — THE PART HE REALLY DOESN'T WANT GRADED — July 2016. Your FBI opened Crossfire Hurricane. It used Christopher Steele's dossier, paid for through the Clinton campaign and the DNC, to get four FISA warrants on Carter Page, an American citizen. December 2019. The DOJ Inspector General found 17 significant errors and omissions in those applications. The Justice Department later conceded the last two lacked probable cause. An FBI lawyer altered an email and pleaded guilty. Steele's own primary sub-source told the FBI in January 2017 that much of it was hearsay and talk over beers. The IG didn't find documented bias in the opening. He also told the Senate his findings didn't vindicate anybody who touched it. December 9, 2016. Per documents DNI Tulsi Gabbard declassified in July 2025, your top national security officials met at the White House, and a new intelligence assessment was ordered "per the President's request." To be fair, a bipartisan 2020 Senate Intelligence report still backed that assessment's finding that Russia interfered. Nobody disputes who requested it. The email subject line names you. May 2020. A recording of your private call leaked. You said there was "no precedent" for someone charged with perjury getting off scot-free, talking about Michael Flynn. Flynn was never charged with perjury. He was charged with making false statements. Different statute. You taught this. A law professor who can't tell perjury from a false statement is like a fire chief who can't tell smoke from steam. The lights are on, Barry, but the power bill is overdue. Matthew 7:5, LSB: "You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye." Jesus said that to people who loved pointing at specks. You don't have a log, Mr. President. You have a lumberyard. — THE GRADE — o "Basic principle of American democracy." We're a republic, and your own Justice Department named a reporter a co-conspirator for asking questions. o "Important to know the facts." Left out the 1981 birth year, the 2019 change request, and the Biden-era probes. o "Unsubstantiated theory." Judge-approved warrant, Minnesota grand jury, a dozen-plus subpoenas. o "20 years ago." Twenty-six. Show your work. o "Because she dared to criticize the president." Biden's own people looked first. o "No basis in law." Thrown out over an appointment, not the merits. Final grade: F. Not an F for effort. An F for memory. You end by warning that if this becomes the new normal, future presidents of either party will do the same. Sir, that isn't a warning about a precedent. That's your résumé read out loud. Here's what actually makes me angry, and it isn't you. It's the kids. I teach in a district the system gave up on. My students watch this stuff. They hear a former president of the United States say a judge-signed warrant is persecution, and they learn that the rules only count when your team loses. Then I'm the one who has to stand in front of them and explain that the law is supposed to work the same for a congresswoman, a Fox reporter, and a kid from my classroom. You made my job harder today. Thanks for that. You campaign like a rock star and govern like a wet paper bag. You're all hat and no cattle on the rule of law. You're the hood ornament on the clown car, and the car's on fire. And you've got miles to go before you reach mediocre on consistency, Barry. — THE CHALLENGE — @BarackObama, I'm not asking you to agree with me. I'm asking you to grade me back. Pick any line in this post. One. Show me where I got a fact wrong, with a source, and I will post the correction myself with your name on it. No spin, no excuses. That's what a teacher does when he's wrong. And while you're at it, answer one question for the people who still listen to you: if a judge-signed warrant on Ilhan Omar is persecution, what was a judge-signed warrant on James Rosen's email? Better yet, come defend your post in front of my students. Third period. I'll even let you use notes. They're teenagers, and I promise they'll go easier on you than the facts did. I'll wait. I've got grading. So, Obama fans: if Trump's Justice Department had called a CNN reporter a possible co-conspirator for asking questions, what would you be calling it right now? But what do I know, I'm only a science teacher who reads the affidavit before he grades the press release.

Dear Secretary Bessent @SecScottBessent, On October 14th I wrote to you about Bank of America @BankofAmerica. You did not answer. 3.6 million Americans did. I want to tell you what that looked like from where I sit, because I do not think Washington understands it yet. The messages did not come from one side. They came from Republicans and Democrats, from veterans and nurses and small business owners, from people who have not agreed with each other about anything in a decade. They all said a version of the same sentence. We have had enough. That is what a national security issue looks like when it finally breaks through. It does not pick a party. It belongs to everyone who has a kid, a bank account, or a flag on the porch. So let me be plain about my concern. I am worried that nothing is going to happen. The fine has been announced. The press cycle is already turning. In a few weeks the number will be forgotten and the bank will be back to business. I have watched this exact sequence play out before, and I am writing to you now, while there is still a window, because once that window closes it does not reopen. I am also widening this letter, because Treasury does not act alone. To the Department of Justice @TheJusticeDept and to FBI Director Kash Patel @FBIDirectorKash: Director Patel, you were not in the chair when this happened, so I want you to hear it from me directly. In 2011 I walked into the FBI with everything I had on HSBC. Not a tip. Boxes. Names, account numbers, transaction records, internal emails. Agents worked that evidence for over a year. I trusted them, and I still believe they wanted to do their jobs. Then the settlement was announced. $1.9 billion. I called the agents and asked the only question that mattered. When do you raid the building and when are the arrests? Their answer was four words. Our hands are tied. I have thought about those four words every day since. Not because the agents failed me. Because somebody above them decided that a bank was too important to treat like a defendant. That decision was made quietly, by people whose names I will never know, and it has been made again every time since. Director Patel, you now have the authority to make a different one. I remember the words carved into the stone outside the federal building in Philadelphia the day I walked in to report @HSBC: justice is the defense of our liberty. I believed that. I still want to. But a justice system that handcuffs a dealer on the corner and sends a bank a bill is not defending anyone’s liberty. It is choosing whose liberty counts. To Brian Moynihan, Chief Executive Officer of Bank of America @BankofAmerica: Mr. Moynihan, your bank just agreed to pay $1.2 billion for failures that regulators called willful. I have a few questions, and the 3.6 million people reading this would like the answers too. Who was fired? Not reassigned. Not retired early with a package. Fired, by name, for the conduct the government described. What has actually changed in your anti money laundering program? Not the budget line. Not the consultant’s slide deck. What is different today about how an alert gets cleared and who is allowed to say stop? Were there any consequences inside the building at all? Or did this land the way it landed at HSBC bank, as a line item? And how much is your bonus this year? I ask because I know what it costs a compliance officer to raise his hand inside a bank like yours. I would like to know what it cost anyone at the top. Do you even care? I am asking sincerely. I would like to be wrong. Here is what I did about all of this, and why it matters to this letter. After the government declined to help me or any of the whistleblowers I have met since, I built the thing I wished had existed. Tactical Rabbit is a private intelligence agency. We find the truth, we prove it, and we put it in the hands of people who will act on it. I made a decision a long time ago that if the government would not stop the next HSBC, I would. So to anyone inside a bank reading this who is looking at something they know is wrong: if your bank will not act, and the government will not act, come to me. I will get the truth to the public. That is not a threat. It is a promise I have already kept once. Mr. Secretary, Director Patel, the Department of Justice, and Mr. Moynihan: four addresses, one question. Will anyone be held accountable? Not fined. Not suspended. Not asked to attend training. Accountable. Please end the cycle of too big to jail. I will not stop until there is change, and neither will the millions of Americans standing behind this letter. Answer them. We need a banker in jail. Everett A. Stern HSBC Whistleblower Founder, Tactical Rabbit

Anyone who still doubts that lawfare will only get worse needs to listen to Elissa Slotkin. She sounds like a Soviet party apparatchik calmly explaining how she will use political prosecutions to terrorize political opponents and intimidate ordinary people away from participating in politics altogether. Except a Soviet apparatchik probably wouldn't have talked about it so openly. But Slotkin couldn't care less. The entire lawfare machine has become so emboldened by the total lack of accountability that they no longer bother hiding their plans.

DSA plans to use protests to provoke a Trump Insurrection Act invocation in 2027, They plan to delegitimize the federal government, and empower the DSA. VOTE. Please God let them see and understand this. VOTE RED. Not all Democrats are evil, but the people behind them are.

With the Slotkin comments fresh in everyone's mind, it's worth revisiting what Susan Rice warned about should Democrats take power. They've been very open about what they want to do. Rice promised in February that Democrats will punish people, companies and institutions who have “taken a knee to Trump.” “It’s not going to end well for them." “If these corporations think that the Democrats, when they come back in power, are going to play by the old rules…they’ve got another thing coming." “There will be an accountability agenda." “This is not going to be an instance of forgive and forget." So anyone that dared to be affiliated with the Trump admin will be targeted for political and legal reprisals, per Rice. They haven't hidden their plans. x.com/WesternLensman/status/…

A high school student on White Guilt: “Coming out of my junior year, during which we studied slavery, segregation, and our nation’s history as it pertained to race, many students felt as though we had ended the year with the failures of our country. “White Guilt, a documentary by Shelby and Eli Steele, offers an opportunity to examine these questions from a different perspective. Rather than simply revisiting the injustices of America’s past, the film explores the role of racial guilt in contemporary American society and challenges viewers to consider how our understanding of history shapes our present.” lifezette.com/2026/10/white-…

Mr. Obama, your own administration selectively targeted people for their political beliefs. Your IRS flagged Tea Party, Patriot, and 9/12 groups by name for years. Your IRS asked for prayer contents, membership lists, donor lists, backend access to websites, and more. Congressional testimony revealed Tea Party donors were 6 times more likely than the average taxpayer to be individually audited. Your actions chilled Tea Party groups, and many groups shut down rather than paying thousands to attorneys and accountants to answer the invasive, unconstitutional questions from your administration. At the same time, your FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Unit repeatedly contacted True the Vote, an organization that grew directly out of the Tea Party, and its founder Catherine Engelbrecht, seeking membership lists and information about attendees. Your office audited her business and personal taxes and subjected her to ATF and OSHA inspections, all beginning after she applied for nonprofit status. We know what selective targeting looks like because we lived it under your watch. Spare us the lecture.

The past few days, I got my hands on thousands of new transcripts and hundreds of recordings, thanks to leads from @SKDoubleDub33 and @iamlisalogan . You've heard that the DSA is proposing structural reforms to America, including abolishing the Senate and imposing term limits. What you not have heard is - there is an operational plan to put it all into action. If the Democratic Party sweeps 2026, then DSA will become "foot soldiers" in constant clashes with the administration to cross a "red line" or invoke a "doomsday scenario" - meaning, President Trump invokes the Insurrection Act, probably sometime in 2027. Then, a lot of coordinated responses kick off, including delegitimizing the federal government itself and handing that legitimacy to Democratic governors. 2028 then becomes a vote on whether to keep America governance as-is or to burn it all down to appease a "young and brown" demographic. The mysterious group who's been coordinating 50501, Indivisible, and coordinating the NoKings protests is called "United Democracy Alliance" and their intellectual leader is Erica Chenoweth who came up with the 3.5% rule of nonviolent regime change. Patience. I know I've hyped this more than anything else. It's genuinely the biggest discovery I've had. This is an enormous archive. This is only the beginning.

Voters tend not to turnout for midterms because historically the difference between the two parties has been functionally negligible--it's always been like choosing between Coke or Pepsi. This year it's like choosing between drinking a glass of Coke or a glass of Drano drain cleaner. Folks who don't stay up on politics simply are unaware that the Democrat Party has been absorbed by a Communist/Jihadist alliance bent on destroying the Constitution and the American way of life. You might not like Coca-Cola. But drinking Drano will end your life.

Totalitarianism has historically come in many flavors: monarchy, dictatorship, fascism, communism, theocracy, etc. However, the one thing that EVERY totalitarian regime in world history has had in common is the fact that one of their first official acts after achieving power is to outlaw dissent. I'm not sure how anyone cannot understand what is at stake with the upcoming midterms: liberty or totalitarianism. Choose.

I have argued that suicidal empathy is a flawed concept, and what is happening in France proves it. In the post below, Le Pogam gives a good articulation of @GadSaad's suicidal empathy. He argues that the West feels too much for the wrong people. In short, our compassion misfires, and we die of kindness. It is a comforting story in a sense, but it is false. The behavior he describes is real, and I have said so before. But what drives it is not empathy but fear. My father has long argued that white guilt is the diagnosis. People often say, "I have no white guilt," but it has nothing to do with personal feelings of guilt. You cannot feel guilt for what you have not done. White guilt is collective guilt, and the left has charged the entire West and all whites with the crimes of slavery, segregation, and colonialism. We live in a white guilt world, and that world rules by fear. The charge is racism, and the punishment is public ruin and ostracism. What moves us is fear, and far too many of us have lied to ourselves that this fear is empathy. Suicidal empathy has no origin story. In his book and countless podcasts, Saad offers up the explanations of misfiring emotions and the flawed hairworm analogy. But why would his biological explanation of empathy start misfiring during this time? Saad blames ideas spread from the universities, but that only moves the question. Why did the West let those ideas win after the 1960s? He never says. Le Pogam seems to understand this hole in Saad's reasoning, and that is why he points to Christianity as a possible explanation. But Christianity is 2,000 years old. The origin of white guilt has a date. In the 1960s, white America confessed to centuries of racial oppression. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were that confession. As my father puts it, "It was a confession that this nation made." Whites who had been on the top were now fallen. They lost their moral authority. Many whites sought to regain their innocence by turning against America and the West. They sought innocence by allying with the "oppressed." Europe followed a similar path with colonialism. In February 2017, Emmanuel Macron went to Algeria and called France's colonization "a crime against humanity." Three months later, he was elected president. France did not punish him for it. It rewarded him. Le Pogam describes empathy as the spotlight that lights up the face in front of you. But that spotlight passed over the injured police officers (nearly a thousand of them) and the looted shopkeepers. Fear is the truer explanation here. Standing with the police and the shopkeepers invites the racist charge. Standing with and excusing the rioters gives you a free pass. Le Pogam then describes how this works when he refers to the ideology that "sorts the world into oppressors and victims, then demands unlimited empathy for whoever ranks as the victim, whatever they do." But this is not empathy. You cannot empathize with a category. Empathy only works with a person. What Le Pogam is describing is the brute act of devaluing people into ideological pawns and then brutally assigning them to race boxes. That is what white guilt does. Whether he intended to or not, Le Pogam then explains white guilt perfectly when he says men went silent at the dinner table because they were told their protective instinct was toxic. Why would grown men believe that? Because borders, police and the word no had all been branded racist. Those men were afraid of being called racists. They calculated the cost. That fear is white guilt. So then the question becomes why have so many self-proclaimed free thinkers on the right swallowed suicidal empathy whole? Because it flatters us. If our only flaw is that we're too kind, that's a compliment. The problem is always someone else, and we get to feel innocent. That need to feel innocent is white guilt too. It is far easier to believe we are dying of kindness than to admit we have been afraid.