“People need to be REMOVED, DEPORTED, denaturalized, and sent BACK to Somalia!“
– Congressman Chip Roy
“I’m convinced that Ukraine will win, recover even stronger, more prosperous. The future of Ukraine is the future of peace and freedom.“
– Giorgia Meloni Prime Minister of Italy
“The state does not create wealth; the state destroys it. The state can give you nothing because it produces nothing, and when it attempts it, it does so poorly.”
– Javier Milei President of Argentina
“The concept of ‘social justice’ has been the trojan horse through which totalitarianism has entered.”
– Friedrich Hayek
“People never lie so much as before an election, during a war, or after a hunt.”
– Otto von Bismarck
Happy New Year!: We wish you and your family a happy, healthy, and prosperous New Year!
Iran: We wish you peace, freedom, and liberty!
13,000,000 Seniors Engaged: In 2025, the 60 Plus Association, also known as the American Association of Senior Citizens, engaged with over 13 MILLION seniors across America who made calls, engaged via multiple social media vehicles, sent emails and letters to legislators, made contributions, and signed petitions… engaging with Members of Congress, State Legislators, and submitting comments to various regulatory bodies on issues that matter.
Seniors remain the most loyal voting class in American politics. When seniors talk, policymakers listen.
We are proud of our growth, efforts, and impact… and 2026 promises to be an even bigger year!
Why Election Integrity Matters: Every day, more and more evidence emerges that raises into question how our elections are held. Are they fair? Are they transparent? Is someone cheating? How much cheating is too much?
If the American people start to question the validity of the vote, our republic is at risk.
This should NOT be a partisan issue. We should bend over backwards to ensure elections are fair and honest… even if it means going back to the basics of photo IDs, paper ballots, hand-counting options etc.
You, we… every American deserves to know their vote counts… and matters.
Massive Fraud: Minnesota is just the start. The fraud across the country stealing taxpayers’ dollars is unbelievable. And what’s worse, Democrats seem to have turned a blind eye to that fraud… because it has benefited them politically.
This is unbelievable theft from taxpaying Americans. How can anyone excuse this kind of activity?
The fact that so many illegal immigrants seem to be engaging in this activity is even worse. No appreciation for the country and the taxpayers that welcomed them here.
We need to get to the bottom of this…. BILLIONS of dollars are involved. People need to be jailed, and the process has to be changed to make sure this never happens again.
Shameful.
Let’s Make Russia Great Again: Simple, just not very easy.
A rich country, with talented and committed citizens who need NEW leadership that will put Russia First.
Just imagine what Russia would look like if it would concentrate its resources, human and natural, toward building their country back to the greatness it deserves.
As a peaceful neighbor, an engaging international leader working with the rest of the world to make it a better place for all… would clearly Make Russia Great Again!
The Russian people need to throw aside the tyrannical, selfish leaders and elect a government for and of the people. They have the resources, they have the talent, they have the wealth, and should have the leadership to be Great Again!!!
P.S. That means get out of Ukraine and coexist with ALL your neighbors peacefully!!!
Ben Shapiro Has A Point: It’s too bad that so many on the right seem to be eager to fight one another more than point out the horrible policies of the left. But success oftentimes breeds this kind of reaction.
Shapiro set some standards that, unfortunately few necessarily abide by:
He laid out 5 duties and responsibilities people who speak or write about politics and the world have to their audience. (1) Truth. “Our first duty is truth. We owe you the truth. That means we should not mislead you; it means we shouldn’t hide the ball; we shouldn’t be deliberately obscure about what we are telling you. We have an obligation to clarity and to honesty.” (2) Principle, Not Personal Feeling. “Friendship with public figures who do or say evil things is not an excuse for silence on the matter… if you are willing to sacrifice basic truth and simple principle in favor of emotional solidarity, you have betrayed your fundamental duty…” (3) Responsibility. “if we offer a guest for your viewing, we owe it to you to ask the kinds of questions that get at the truth. If we agree with the guest, that’s fine—but we should own it.” (4) Evidence. “Emotive accusations, conspiracy theories, and ‘just asking questions’ is lazy and stupid and misleading. None of them are a substitute for truth.“ (5) Solutions. “If you truly come to believe that nothing in your life is in your control, you won’t take control of your life. You’ll despair of your ability to change your own circumstances. And then you’ll fail.”
I agree.
Read more below and follow me on X & GETTR – @sanuzis
–Saul Anuzis
The United States Captures Nicolás Maduro and his Wife
In an extraordinary military operation, the United States launched a large-scale military operation in Caracas, Venezuela with special forces seizing President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. There is a pending 2020 indictment of Maduro in the Southern District of New York where he is expected to be taken to face prosecution.
The operation comes not long after the 37th anniversary of the capture of Manuel Antonio Noriega on December 20, 1989. Noriega was convicted of drug and money laundering offenses and sentenced to 40 years in prison. He was tried in Miami, Florida.
He was indicted in a four-count superseding indictment with Diosdado Cabello Rondón, 56, head of Venezuela’s National Constituent Assembly; Hugo Armando Carvajal Barrios aka “El Pollo,” 59, former director of military intelligence; Clíver Antonio Alcalá Cordones, 58, former General in the Venezuelan armed forces; Luciano Marín Arango aka “Ivan Marquez,” 64, a member of the FARC’s Secretariat, which is the FARC’s highest leadership body; and Seuxis Paucis Hernández Solarte aka “Jesús Santrich,” 53, a member of the FARC’s Central High Command, which is the FARC’s second-highest leadership body.
This operation will be justified as executing the criminal warrant and responding to an international drug cartel, a very similar legal framework to the one used against Noriega. There is precedent supporting that earlier operation, which will now be used to defend the actions in Venezuela.
Ensuring Trust in Elections
The case for the SAVE Act and federal verification of voter citizenship.
Over recent years, trust in elections among the American electorate has been in decline. The Trump Administration has expressed a commitment to better secure the vote, and has taken an initial step in this direction with moves to prevent non-citizens from voting in federal elections.
In a time when the legitimacy of America’s elections has come under question for various reasons, citizenship verification is a crucial first step.
The President asked Congress earlier this year to pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which passed the house back in April. The SAVE Act would enshrine strict verification of voters’ citizenship into federal law. However, it still sits awaiting consideration by the Senate. With some 70 percent of Americans supporting such a measure, this should not be a hard decision.
While election legislation primarily rests with the states, there has long been a role for the federal government in protecting the rights of voters and ensuring trustworthy elections, including around who can vote. In the absence of the SAVE Act, the states will be left with a patchwork of procedures, some less effective than others, to keep non-citizens from voting. Thus, the time has come for the Senate to get in gear and pass the SAVE Act.
The SAVE Act if signed into law would require states to collect and document proof of citizenship from each voter, in the form of a birth certificate, passport, naturalization documentation, or other proof. In the case of a name change not reflected on these documents, such as due to marriage, the voter would have to document the name change.
Trump Stumps, Putting Affordability Crisis Blame Where It Belongs
The “Affordability Crisis,” as some are calling it, has seniors and others on fixed incomes spooked. Millennials are concerned they’ll never be able to afford a home, and the rest of us are getting walloped at the grocery store.
President Donald Trump is right to hit the stump and confront the problem head-on. Still, he and his advisers are wrong to accept blame for the problem as the motivation for fixing it. Like much of what ails us, the Affordability Crisis was caused by President Joe Biden. The sticker shock that nearly half the country says they experience when they shop is the morning-after hangover left over from the Biden subsidy and spending binge.
For four years under Biden, too much money coming out of Washington chased too few goods and services. That, as the late economist and former Newsweek columnist Milton Friedman made clear, is what causes inflation.
Here Are The Top Six Takeaways From Jack Smith’s Preposterous White-Hat Posturing
If Smith were truly committed to transparency, he would respond to Sen. Grassley’s request for information concerning the special counsel’s investigation.
New Year’s Eve day saw House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, release of the transcript of the Committee’s deposition of Jack Smith, the former special counsel who charged Donald Trump in two separate criminal cases in the run-up to the 2024 election. As the committee explained at the beginning of the deposition, it sought Smith’s testimony as part of its “oversight of the Biden-Harris administration’s weaponization of the Justice Department and its misuse of Federal law enforcement resources for partisan political purposes.”
While Smith spent the next several hours portraying himself and his special counsel team as apolitical, dedicated civil servants merely seeking the truth, Smith’s testimony cannot be squared with reality. Here are six times Smith proved duplicitous.
FBI knew Mar-a-Lago raid was illegal, but Biden DOJ made them do it
Senate documents reveal Washington Field Office agents questioned legal basis for Trump property search
President Trump has faced unprecedented lawfare, including four indictments, two impeachments, and countless lawsuits aimed at keeping him from power, confiscating his wealth and even putting him in prison for life. The most stark example? The FBI’s August 2022 raid of his Mar-a-Lago property. Recently, we learned that even FBI agents did not believe there was probable cause for the sham raid.
The Fourth Amendment is fundamental to our Republic. The government cannot search or seize one’s home, office, papers, or person without probable cause. Usually, authorities must obtain a search warrant prior to searching or seizing.
When the raid of Mar-a-Lago became public, lawfare opponents were horrified, for we had crossed the Rubicon. FBI agents rummaged through Trump’s personal effects and took his passport. They staged photos of folders supposedly containing classified information haphazardly strewn about and the Justice Department under then-President Biden released them to the media to cast Trump in a negative light.
“Second or Even Third Hand” Evidence: Former Special Counsel Jack Smith Debunks Key J6 Committee Witness
We previously discussed how the J6 Committee and many in the media played up the “bombshell” testimony of former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson despite glaring contradictions that were hidden from the public. The J6 Committee denied reports of those contradictions and then delayed the release of directly conflicting testimony as the press played up who Trump allegedly tried to seize control of the Presidential limo to go to Capitol Hill. In his deposition before Congress, former special counsel Jack Smith dismissed Hutchinson’s testimony as unreliable, unsupported, and unusable in any trial. Smith appears to have finally presented a conclusive indictment . . . of the J6 Committee.
Smith said that the much-reported account was legal chum as based on a “second or even thirdhand witness” and directly contradicted by those who had firsthand knowledge. He added:
“If I were a defense attorney and Ms. Hutchinson were a witness, the first thing I would do was seek to preclude some of her testimony because it was hearsay, and I don’t have the full range of her testimony in front of me right now, but I do remember that that was a decent part of it.”
The former Mark Meadows was made the star of the J6 hearings despite Democrats knowing that she was directly contradicted in her claims. Smith said that they found no support for the claims:
“We interviewed, I think, the people she talked to, and we also interviewed, if my recollection is correct, officers who were there, including the officer who was in the car. And that officer, if my recollection is correct, and I want to make sure I’m right about this, said that President Trump was very angry and wanted to go to the Capitol, but the version of events that he explained was not the same as what Cassidy Hutchinson said she heard from somebody secondhand…. a number of the things that she gave evidence on were secondhand hearsay, were things that she had heard from other people and, as a result, that testimony may or may not be admissible, and it certainly wouldn’t be as powerful as firsthand testimony.”
Like so many other debunked viral stories, the media seemed to just shrug and move on after the testimony. After playing up the account in wall-to-wall coverage and cover pages, the press has again moved on with little self-awareness or circumspection.
Jan. 6 panel’s ‘star witness’ Cassidy Hutchinson provided ‘secondhand hearsay’ on Capitol riot: Jack Smith
The House Select January 6th Committee’s “star” Cassidy Hutchinson provided “second hearsay” about the 2021 Capitol riot and wasn’t considered as a witness in the election interference case brought against President Trump, according to former special counsel Jack Smith.
Smith told the House Judiciary Committee in a closed-door deposition on Dec. 17 that Hutchinson — who testified at the Jan. 6 select panel’s made-for-TV hearings in June 2022 — “certainly” wouldn’t have made a “powerful” witness because she couldn’t provide “firsthand” testimony.
“My recollection with Ms. Hutchinson, at least one of the issues was a number of the things that she gave evidence on were secondhand hearsay, were things that she had heard from other people,” the ex-Trump prosecutor testified to the Judiciary lawmakers and staff, the deposition’s transcript shows.
“As a result, that testimony may or may not be admissible, and it certainly wouldn’t be as powerful as firsthand testimony,” Smith said.
That included “sensational” allegations that the 45th president lunged toward the wheel of his Secret Service SUV, known as “the Beast,” in an attempt to commandeer it from his driver as a mob of his supporters were seeking to halt the certification of the 2020 election on Capitol Hill.
“I’m the f—ing president! Take me up to the Capitol now!” Trump allegedly screamed at the Secret Service agent, according to Hutchinson’s testimony in a live-broadcasted House hearing on June 28, 2022.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations Anthony Ornato, who by Hutchinson’s own admission relayed the startling incident to her, immediately claimed her account was false.
The agent and the driver of the vehicle also separately refuted Hutchinson’s testimony as well, with the president’s chauffeur telling committee members in a non-televised interview that Trump “never grabbed the steering wheel” or “lunge[d] to try to get into the front seat at all.”
DC is LITERALLY spending your tax dollars on monkey business, cocaine puppies and $1.2 trillion in interest
Sen. Rand Paul’s annual Festivus Report — an “airing of grievances” against ridiculously wasteful government spending — reveals a jaw-dropping $1.63 trillion torching of taxpayer money in the last fiscal year.
That includes an eye-popping $1.22 trillion just to cover interest on the national debt. (Consider that a stack of 1.22 trillion dollar bills would reach nearly 83,000 miles high — roughly one-third of the way to the Moon.)
Mind-blowing outlays went for an endless string of absolutely nutty projects:
$14.6 million for monkeys playing a Plinko-style video game.
$40 million to influencers urging minority groups to get COVID vaccines — years after the pandemic ended.
$2.1 million for drug-use surveys at NYC dance clubs.
$1.5 million for “TikTok therapy” campaigns.
Nearly $2.5 million for the National Science Foundation to promote insects as “food for humans.”
$5.2 million for cocaine puppies and $1 million to get ferrets drunk.
Russia’s losses in Ukraine rise faster than ever as US pushes for peace deal
Over the past 10 months, Russian losses in the war with Ukraine have been growing faster than any time since the start of the full-scale invasion in 2022, BBC analysis suggests.
As peace efforts intensified in 2025 under pressure from US President Donald Trump’s administration, 40% more obituaries of soldiers were published in Russian sources compared with the previous year.
Overall, the BBC has confirmed the names of almost 160,000 people killed fighting on Russia’s side in Ukraine.
BBC News Russian has been counting Russian war losses together with independent outlet Mediazona and a group of volunteers since February 2022. We keep a list of named individuals whose deaths we were able to confirm using official reports, newspapers, social media, and new memorials and graves.
The real death toll is believed to be much higher, and military experts we have consulted believe our analysis of cemeteries, war memorials and obituaries might represent 45-65% of the total.
That would put the number of Russian deaths at between 243,000 and 352,000.
Stop Blaming Reagan
The real sources of conservative fracture — and why talking still matters.
As a longtime professor of government, advisor to presidential candidates, a Republican nominee for political office, and a conservative generally, the number one question I get these days from ordinary citizens is: Why are right-of-center groups all fighting with one another, and how should they engage the other side?
My first response is, this is nothing new. My first major campaign role was for a conservative activist who became president — Ronald Reagan, who challenged a sitting moderate Republican president, Gerald Ford. And Republican factions have been fighting ever since.
Since that time, the locus of the fight has been moving left, with every Republican nominee for president since Reagan coming from the more centrist or neoconservative moderate wings. That, of course, came to a halt with the repeated elections of Donald Trump, who came from a populist faction, sometimes named the New Right, to distinguish itself from both Reagan Conservatives and Neoconservative Centrists. New Right populists especially separate themselves from Reagan’s libertarian/traditionalist synthesis in order to emphasize how they differ from traditionalist conservatives, who they claim got us into the present calamity.
But blaming today’s problems on Ronald Reagan, as many New Rightists do, does not make sense. This old academic agrees that Republicans and many conservative organizations became part of the problem. But for Reagan himself, his prosperity lasted well beyond his two terms so that a following Democratic president conceded that the “era of big government was over.” This lasted 40 years, with Reagan-type conservative opposition remaining through this period. But it was not primarily by politicians but by popular media leaders like Rush Limbaugh and Robert Novak, in think tanks and activist organizations, and even by some intellectuals.
‘We are the free world now’ — Europe declares war on free speech in the US
“We are the free world now.” Those words from Raphael Glucksmann, a French socialist member of the European Parliament, captured the pearl-clutching outrage of Europeans after the Trump administration did what no prior administration has ever done — stand up to Europe to defend the freedom of speech.
This week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio barred five figures closely associated with European censorship efforts from traveling to the U.S. This includes Thierry Breton, the former European Union commissioner responsible for digital policy.
In a post on X, Rubio declared that the U.S. “will no longer tolerate these egregious acts of extraterritorial censorship” and will target “leading figures of the global censorship-industrial complex from entering the United States.”
Breton achieved infamy as one of the architects of the massive EU censorship system, which is now being globalized. Armed with the notorious Digital Service Act, Breton and others threatened American companies and officials that they would have to yield to European standards of free speech. After Breton learned that Musk was planning to interview Trump before the last presidential election, he even warned the X owner that he would be “monitored” and potentially subject to EU fines.
Hayek, Orwell, and “The End of Truth”
Even in free societies, “the most intelligent and independent people cannot entirely escape [the] influence” of state propaganda.
In 1942, after fighting in the Spanish Civil War (1936–1937), a disillusioned writer returned to London to write about his experience. It wasn’t just that the fascists in Spain had won and his side — a small, anti-Stalinist Marxist group — had lost. What frightened him was the ease with which truth itself had been erased and replaced by propaganda.
I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories…and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened.
The writer was George Orwell, and the quote appears in his book .
The disconnect between reality and narrative clearly made an impression on Orwell, who worried that “the very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world.” The theme of falsified history and the destruction of truth would resurface in his fictional masterpiece Nineteen Eighty‑Four, where “memory holes” swallowed inconvenient facts and the past was rewritten to suit the Party’s needs.
Orwell’s book would go on to sell 25 million copies worldwide, and he is today remembered as a prophet for foreseeing a future in which the state’s deliberate power could extinguish truth itself.
Yet few today remember that five years before the publication of , an Austrian economist, in his own magnum opus, explored how the state destroys truth.
Six lessons from the Austrian School of Economics
On 15 April, the IEA’s Editorial Director, Dr Kristian Niemietz, gave a talk entitled “Free-Market Schools of Thought” for the IEA’s current interns. This talk normally also covers the Chicago School, the Public Choice School and the Ordoliberal School, but in light of recent events, this time, Niemietz decided to dedicate his entire talk to the Austrian School alone.
The article below is a loose transcript of his talk. An abridged version of it was also published on CapX.
Last week, Renato Moicano, a professional martial artist who competes in the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), made a rather unusual announcement after a fight. He said:
“I love private property, and let me tell you something, if you care about your […] country, read Ludwig von Mises and the six lessons of the Austrian Economic School […]!”
I first thought this was an AI deepfake, some nerdy economics student’s idea of a “hilarious” joke. But one of my younger colleagues, who knows more about these things than I do, assures me that it’s real.
If so – good! I agree with Mr Moicano, and today, I’ll talk a little bit about the school of economic thought he mentions: the Austrian School of Economics.
The Austrian School emerged in Vienna in the 1870s. The name was given to them by their adversaries from the German Historical School, who meant it pejoratively, because for them, “Austrian” meant “provincial”. But there was nothing provincial about them, and in their prime, they had a profound impact on economics.
I am not sure what the “six lessons” that Mr Moicano refers to are (it may have been a refence to a book by the Mises Institute, which is composed of six lectures), but I will highlight six important contributions that this school made.
Final Thoughts
