A massive controversy has now broken out over a Democratic lawmaker in the House of Representatives who announced at a Pan-American Congress taking place in Mexico City that America was terrible.
Illinois Democratic Rep. Delia Ramirez — who was born in the United States, although her parents were illegal immigrants and her husband is also an illegal immigrant who is a DACA recipient — declared in Spanish that she was a proud Guatemalan before she was an American. She followed by suggesting that the United States prioritizes imperialism, militarization, conquest, and control in its attempt at domination.
The White House assistant press secretary, Liz Huston, said, “These Democrats’ comments are despicable and underscore their commitment to putting America last.”
That is exactly right.
Nobody is suggesting that if you are an immigrant to this country and your parents are Italian, for example, that you can&#8217;t have pride in your Italian heritage. But to say that you&#8217;re prouder to be Italian than American while living in America is a wild statement that goes to a deeper problem inside the Democratic Party, which suggests that they are not America First, but, in fact, America Last.
Why would you be prouder to be a Guatemalan than an American? Just on a raw level, the murder rate in Guatemala is 16.1 per 100,000 compared to the United States, where it&#8217;s 6.8 per 100,000. The GDP per capita in Guatemala is $6,100 per capita. Since 2019, some two million people have left the Northern Triangle; many of those are from Guatemala.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2254-the-america-last-left-cuts-loose-plus-new-epstein-subpoenas?elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=The+Ben+Shapiro+Show&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
This conference took place in Mexico City. Mexico is, of course, a disastrous hotbed of crime and corruption. It is partially run by the drug cartels. According to the 2023 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, Mexico ranks 126th in the world in terms of fighting corruption.
Mexico has a $14,000 GDP per capita, and the murder rate is 19.3 per 100,000, down from 24 per 100,000 in 2023. This entire conference is taking place in a country vastly inferior to the United States.
It wasn&#8217;t just Delia Ramirez; other people who showed up included Rep. Ilhan Omar, who came from Somalia and has suggested on “Democracy Now!” that America is one of the worst countries in the world, saying, “To be coming out of our country, I mean, I grew up in, in, in a dictatorship, and I don&#8217;t even remember ever witnessing anything like that. To have a democracy, a beacon of hope for the world, to now be turned into one of the worst countries where the military are in our streets, without any regard for people&#8217;s constitutional rights, while our president is spending millions of dollars, [propping] himself up, like a failed dictator with a military parade &#8230;”
Somalia, of course, has a GDP per capita of $636. It&#8217;s one of the worst places on planet Earth. And she says America is one of the worst places on planet Earth.
Don&#8217;t worry, it is not just the children of immigrants like Delia Ramirez or actual immigrants like Ilhan Omar who say nefarious stuff like this; it is also homegrown Americans like Ayanna Pressley, who believes that America is a terrible place. She also spoke at this Pan-American conference. You might remember not all that long ago when she voted against the formation of a tough-on-China committee, because she said that that would further anti-Asian hate in the United States.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib, the Democratic congresswoman from Michigan and a terrorist sympathizer who literally just last year refused to condemn chants of “Death to America,” showed up, too.
Pennsylvania Democrat Rep. Summer Lee, who has suggested in the past that requiring only American citizens to be allowed to vote is actually xenophobic, was there.
All these wonderful people showed up to a conference outside the United States to rip America and talk about how terrible America was.
In a TV interview before the event. David Adler, the general coordinator for the Progressive International organization that was in charge of this event and one of the summit&#8217;s main coordinators, said the intention of the summit was to “confront authoritarian and fascist threats and shift authority from Washington, D.C. to developing countries.”
This is the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, and they are going to be the next governing wave of the Democratic Party. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hides it a little bit better, but she is a fellow traveler with this caucus. Zohran Mamdani is much louder. He is not just a fellow traveler. He is one of the main spears at the tip of this caucus. The new mayoral candidate in Minnesota for the Democrats is a person who agrees with this sort of stuff. Bernie Sanders, of course, agrees with this take on America, this sort of Howard Zinn-hatred for the United States.
You can say this is TDS, that this is specifically about Donald Trump, but it clearly is not. It goes deeper than that. It goes to an oppressor/oppressed narrative whereby America is the great oppressor, America’s allies are the great oppressors, and everybody in the world who is unsuccessful, every failed country around the world, is simply oppressed by the First World, and that&#8217;s why they are in such dire circumstances right now.
This is a recipe for more chaos around the world. It is a matrix that you use for the world in which no one has personal responsibility, particularly if they fail. That matrix on both a personal level and a national level is horribly dark. It wrecks human beings; it wrecks nations, and it wrecks the planet overall.
Yet this is the growing movement inside the Democratic Party that shirks responsibility and presents the United States as the great aggressor in the world, despite the fact that the world is inestimably more wealthy, better off, healthier, living longer, and more democratic because of the presence of the United States on planet Earth.
A bizarre hatred for the United States is a driving force behind everything from the open borders immigration platform of the Democratic Party to their redistributionist view of free market economics, to their belief that the world is better off if the United States basically lays down its arms and allows all of its enemies to dominate the world situation.
If this is where the Democratic Party wants to go, I don’t think Americans will follow.
Question: Why are the American people running headlong away from these folks?
Answer: Why wouldn’t the American people run headlong away from these folks?

President Donald Trump Delivers Address To A Joint Session Of Congress

The ‘America Last’ Left Cuts Loose

The 'America Last' Left Cuts Loose

Ben Shapiro

Democrats

Guatemala

Ilhan Omar

Mexico

Opinion

President Trump

Rashida Tlaib

Republicans

Among his many promises along the campaign trail, President Trump vowed to take down what he and others have described as the “censorship industrial complex,” a global network of ideologically aligned governmental, nonprofit, media, tech, finance, and academic institutions that are colluding to censor vast swaths of legally protected speech by weaponizing terms like “hate” and “disinformation.”
From early in his presidency, President Trump’s actions have consistently aligned with his campaign promises. From Day One — beginning with executive orders that led to the dismantling of the Global Engagement Center, to Vice President JD Vance’s public condemnation of widespread censorship across the U.K. and Europe — restoring free speech has clearly been a top priority for the administration.
As Trump has landed a massive trade deal with the E.U., he has also taken multiple steps to combat global censorship. That includes zeroing in on the censorship regime in Brazil via a 50% <a href="https://x.com/SecRubio/status/1946349695221043669">tariff</a> and an <a href="https://x.com/secrubio/status/1946349695221043669?s=46">order</a> to revoke visas for Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexandre de Moraes and other members of the nation’s high court. In 2024, Moraes <a href="https://adfinternational.org/campaign/open-letter-x-brazil">ordered</a> X to block accounts of journalists and political figures under the pretext of “misinformation.” As Trump highlighted in his letter announcing the tariff, X still faces millions of dollars in fines and a permanent ban from the country.
Brazil’s disregard for free speech is paralleled in the E.U. by the “Digital Services Act.” Threatening what it designates as “Very Large Online Platforms” such as X, Meta, Amazon, and Google with crippling fines for noncompliance, the DSA weaponizes vague terms like “hate speech” and “disinformation” to purge the digital landscape of views they deem offensive, inconvenient, or a threat to their power. The DSA also formalizes the kind of public-private collusion exemplified by the censorship industrial complex, empowering private organizations as “trusted flaggers” whose censorship demands platforms are required to prioritize — or face penalties. 
Like Brazil’s Supreme Court, the DSA’s censorship directly impacts American citizens, whose accounts are subject to cancellation right along with our European cousins. We’ve already seen Americans censored under the DSA, as well as under the vague censorship policies that comprise it. These are the same policies at the heart of discriminatory debanking and financial surveillance that have targeted U.S.-based <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/banking/article-12417653/Debanking-row-breaks-Bank-America-shuts-account-ultra-conservative-Christian-charity-serves-impoverished-Ugandans.html">overseas missions</a> and <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/revealed-fed-govt-flagged-adf-domestic-terrorist-threat-target-surveillance-major/">conservative groups</a> like Alliance Defending Freedom, where I work.
They’re also the same policies that ruled the digital public square during Covid, when — often at the behest of the Biden administration and third party “flaggers” — major platforms censored and canceled users over views on public health, lab leak “theories” (since proven true), immigration, the Hunter Biden laptop <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/07/02/blowing-the-lid-off-the-coverup-of-hunter-bidens-cushy-plea-deal/">story</a>, gender ideology, and more. The DSA simply imposes this censorship regime on a global scale.
To the E.U. commissioners behind the DSA, the more governments work in lockstep to intimidate dissenting citizens into quiet compliance, the better. Just over a year ago, Canadian citizen “Billboard Chris” Elston <a href="https://adfinternational.org/news/free-speech-victory-in-australia-for-billboard-chris-as-x-post-censorship-overturned">posted</a> his objections to a controversial WHO appointee on X, linking to a UK Daily Mail article. The Australian government then demanded that X censor the post under its DSA-style “Online Safety Act,” using the law to classify Elston’s speech as “cyber abuse.”
With ADF International’s help, Billboard Chris took on the Australian government at the nation’s high court and won. But even that victory is unlikely to faze a technocratic cabal so committed to global censorship that it would enlist Australia to censor a Canadian speaking on an American platform and citing a British newspaper article.
Again, this multinational crackdown is a feature — not a bug — to those behind the DSA.
And that’s no surprise when you consider the actions and stated positions of DSA architects like Thierry Breton and Henna Virkkunen. It was Breton who, last summer, famously <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/eus-breton-says-musk-must-comply-with-eu-law-ahead-trump-interview-2024-08-12/">demanded</a> that Elon Musk censor then-candidate Donald J. Trump prior to the duo’s X live interview.
That incident apparently left Breton with enough egg on his face to <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/09/16/business/eu-official-thierry-breton-who-clashed-with-elon-musk-resigns/">resign</a> from his post as an E.U. Commissioner, but it wasn’t enough to change Virkkunen’s mind. Virkkunen recently <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-tech-tariffs-us-brussels-trade-commissioner-maros-sefovic/">defended</a> the DSA as “based on our European values” — a claim that evidently refers to the Brussels elites rather than the everyday Europeans who face <a href="https://www.deseret.com/u-s-world/2025/04/27/why-has-there-been-a-crack-down-on-free-speech-in-the-uk/">steep fines</a>, years-long <a href="https://adfinternational.org/cases/paivi">court proceedings</a>, and even <a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/europe-crackdown-free-speech-26d021b1">jail time</a> for their online speech.
Fittingly enough, Virkkunen made those comments when she was asked if the DSA was on the negotiating table in ongoing trade talks with the U.S. With the DSA off the table, Virkkunen’s comrades in Brussels may have been negotiating with one hand tied behind their backs.
If that’s the case, it was a high price to pay for censoring peaceable citizens across the world, including in the U.S.
* * *
Jeremy Tedesco (@Jeremy_Tedesco) is senior counsel, senior vice president of corporate engagement at <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/?utm_source=wallstreetjournal&amp;utm_medium=oped">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://twitter.com/ADFLegal">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Supporters Mobilize Following Bolsonaro Case

How Trump’s Tariffs Can Strike A Major Blow To Global Censorship

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Brazil

Censorship

European Union

Jair Bolsonaro

Marco Rubio

Social Media Censorship

Twitter

A lot of folks have tried to figure out exactly why the Donald Trump phenomenon happened.
Donald Trump has been the most transformative political figure of the 21st century. Without a doubt, it was going to be Barack Obama. And then Trump came in and completely remade American politics in global geopolitics.
But what led to the Trump phenomenon in the first place? There have been a lot of attempts to philosophize about Trump. Maybe it was all about economic grievances in the Midwest? Maybe it was all about offshoring? Maybe it was all about tariffs or about immigration?
The reality is the biggest thing that drove Donald Trump to victory in 2016 and again in 2024 is the fact that the Left went culturally insane.
The backlash against the Left has been less about tax rates than about a generalized feeling that the Left was trying to dissolve the culture of the United States on traditional, basic issues such as “men are not women.” Or “There is such a thing as America, and America is good.” Or, “Christianity ought to be held with a high level of esteem.”
These are certain things Americans took for granted. Things like church, apple pie, baseball, the flag, all the stuff people used to think was corny.
And then the Left decided, they weren’t just corny, they were bad.
But it turns out most Americans don&#8217;t think like that.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2253-the-ben-shapiro-show?elementPosition=3&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Why do I bring this up? Because you&#8217;re seeing all of this crystallized in what I would term a culture division between the Sydney Sweeney Americans and the Cynthia Erivo Americans.
Cynthia Erivo, whom I’ve praised before, is a terrific actress from Great Britain, a great singer, and unbelievably talented. But Cynthia Erivo has also become emblematic of a leftist social value belief system.
This became a hot issue online over the course of the last 48 hours, because she was the star of a production of Jesus Christ Superstar, a musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber, at the Hollywood Bowl in Los Angeles.
Jesus Christ Superstar, as a musical, is quite respectful to Christian traditions. It is not meant to make fun of Christian traditions.
But at the Hollywood Bowl, they decided they were going to cast Cynthia Erivo as Jesus Christ.
There are a few problems with this: Cynthia Erivo is a woman; Jesus Christ was a man. Cynthia Erivo is black; Jesus Christ was a Middle-Eastern Jew. Cynthia Erivo describes herself as queer and bisexual. Jesus Christ was not, to say the least, any of that.
So they took all the things that Jesus Christ was not, and morphed them into what the Left wishes Jesus Christ were. The whole goal of this production at the Hollywood Bowl was to be completely subversive of Christianity, and to supplant traditional values with the values of the far-Left social sphere.
Theater critic Charles McNulty&#8217;s <a href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2025-08-04/jesus-christ-superstar-review-hollywood-bowl-cynthia-erivo">gushing review</a> in the L.A. Times stated:
<blockquote>Cynthia Erivo, a noted theatrical divinity, redeemed the title of “Jesus Christ Superstar” at the Hollywood Bowl last weekend in a magnetic, heaven-sent performance that established God the Savior as a queer Black woman, as many of us suspected might be the case all along. Divine dispensation allowed me to catch the final performance of this revival of Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice’s 1971 breakout musical. I returned from vacation just in time to join the pilgrimaging hordes carting cumbersome picnic baskets and enough wine for a few dozen Sicilian weddings. The vast number of attendees caused bottlenecks at entry points, prompting one wag to crack, “What is this, the Second Coming?</blockquote>
Notice all of the extraordinarily seething comments of hatred for Christianity just in the first two paragraphs. “God the Savior as a queer Black woman, as many of us suspected might be the case all along.” That everyone suspected all along that God the Savior was a “queer black woman.” Erivo is a “theatrical divinity.” It was only “divine dispensation” and the favor of God that caused him to catch this performance of Cynthia Erivo.
“The headliners, Erivo as Jesus and Adam Lambert as Judas, certainly have sizable fan bases,” he continued. “But so too does the subject of this Greatest Story Ever Told, a messiah whose following has few equals in the history of the world. Suffice it to say, it was a supercharged evening, comparable more to a rock concert than one of the Bowl’s forays into the musical theater past.”
He goes on to talk about Cynthia Erivo and the magic of a queer black woman playing Jesus and Adam Lambert, who is openly gay, playing Judas, adding, “Phillipa Soo’s Mary Magdalene brought a probing, tentative and profound intimacy in her adoration of Erivo’s Jesus. In her exquisite rendition of ‘I Don’t Know How to Love Him,’ the tenderness between Mary Magdalene and Jesus, at once earthy and ethereal, deepened the expressive range of the love between them.”
The whole idea from the Left is that the entire story of Christianity must be flipped on its head. The imagery that emerges from this performance of JC Superstar is astonishingly hedonistic, truly subversive. That is the entire goal of the enterprise.
I&#8217;m not a Christian, but I have great respect for Christianity. I&#8217;ve encouraged tens of thousands of people to go back to church and many, many people to move back toward their belief system.
Do these performances sound like Jesus and Judas to you, or do they sound like a queer, bisexual black woman and a very, very gay man cosplaying as Jesus and Judas?
The reason that&#8217;s important is because the backlash is one of the things driving America&#8217;s politics right now. The backlash to the left-wing view that everything must be subverted; the church must be subverted; Christianity must be subverted; heterosexuality must be subverted; whiteness must be subverted. All of these things  “must be subverted because they are all emblematic of an evil system of power.”
That is why when Donald Trump said “Make America Great Again,” all he really meant by that was “Stop this stuff. Stop this crap.”
Donald Trump represented a giant, pulsating orange middle finger to all of this nonsense.
On the one side, you have Jesus Christ played by Cynthia Erivo, and on the other side, you have the cultural controversy surrounding Sydney Sweeney.
Sydney Sweeney is all-American, and a throwback to every cheesecake star of the 1940s. She&#8217;s the kind of woman who was painted on the front of World War II bombers, and so she looks like a pinup girl from 1944. She grew up in rural areas like Spokane, Washington, and her values reflect that. When she moved to Florida, she registered as a Republican.
There&#8217;s nothing in Hollywood that gets people&#8217;s goat more than being a registered Republican.
But Sydney Sweeney being a Republican shouldn&#8217;t be that big a deal, right? In a country that is at least 50% Republican at this point, why shouldn&#8217;t Sydney Sweeney, who is now a popular actress and advertising icon, be a registered Republican?
When you look at Sydney Sweeney, obviously, she&#8217;s a beautiful woman. But there are lots of beautiful young women in Hollywood. What is it about Sydney Sweeney that drove the Left insane?
Sydney Sweeney is not one of them.
It&#8217;s not just that the Left wishes to uphold the values and rights of the marginalized. They wish to recenter the marginalized and to turn the mainstream, the “normies,” into the marginalized. 
Thus, they must attack anyone who is not one of them.
This is why, for years, every couple of weeks on Twitter, Chris Pratt would randomly trend. That was because Chris Pratt is not of the Left. It doesn&#8217;t mean that he&#8217;s a rabid Right-winger, but because Chris Pratt was not openly saying all of the idiotic nostrums of the Left, from BLM to LGBTQ+-, that made him verboten.
The same thing happened to Sydney Sweeney.
But it&#8217;s now backfiring because Americans have had enough of this crap.
The backlash against Sweeney says that the actual realities of life must be Cynthia Erivo as Jesus Christ and Sydney Sweeney as a Nazi. But the backlash against Sydney Sweeney for being a pretty blonde white girl with blue eyes who can shoot a gun and isn&#8217;t a registered Democrat is the reason that Donald Trump is president.
If that&#8217;s going to be the juxtaposition Democrats and the Left make, they will lose until the end of time.
And they will deserve it.

MixCollage-05-Aug-2025-02-38-PM-7926

Jesus Christ Erivo Vs. MAGA Sweeney

Celebrities

Leftists

LGBTQ

musical

Sydney Sweeney

Economists have long predicted that Trump’s tariff and trade policies would cause an economic disaster. But in reality, it now seems Trump’s plans could lead to spectacular success. So economists are trying to learn from this experience and find out: What is this thing called reality, and why does it keep getting everything so terribly wrong?
To find the answers, the Daily Wire used the latest technology to actually shrink our crack team of investigative reporters until they were so small they could fit inside the worldview of an academic. We then injected them, one by one, into the minds of America’s top economists — except for reporter Spencer Lindquist, who seems to have dripped out somewhere, so watch your step as you’re walking around and if you hear a crunching noise, call a very small ambulance.
Our first interview was with Princeton economist Dr. Herkimer Fudd, who was awarded the 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics for the most creative use of the word “unexpectedly” in explaining why all his financial predictions turned out to be wrong. Dr. Fudd told one of our tiny reporters, “Economics is a science, and as with any science, we first formulate a theory, then test the theory against the facts, and if the facts disprove the theory, then we simply declare that anyone who disagrees with the theory is threatening to cause another Great Depression. In fact, in a little while it’ll be the centennial of the Great Depression, and Economics Departments across the nation will be celebrating a hundred years of not having to change our minds about anything.”
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2241-a-fantastic-four-america?contentProgram=The%20Andrew%20Klavan%20Show&amp;contentType=ShowEpisode&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;location=Home%20Tab&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Home%20Featured%20Carousel">WATCH: The Andrew Klavan Show</a></h3>
Another economist interviewed by our microscopic reporters was Harvard Professor Theodolphus Querulous who won the Pulitzer Prize for a series of videos for the Wall Street Journal in which he simply shrieked the word “Tariffs” over and over in a high-pitched voice and then dissolved into a puddle of tears. Dr. Querulous explained, “Tariffs are an absolute disaster. Yes, they incentivize American manufacturing and open up new markets for American products, thus freeing us from the Chinese-dominated supply chain that was threatening to leave us defenseless against a rapidly growing Communist war machine, but they’re going to make it impossible for me to afford a new Mercedes and if I have to drive around Cambridge in some crappy Chevy like a shmuck, it will threaten to cause another Great Depression and I can’t afford the Zoloft either.”
We also spoke with Yale Economics Professor Dr. Claperton Drivel, who was recently awarded the Nemmers Prize in Economics for proving that a penny saved is not actually a penny earned but really just a worthless anachronistic coin that will probably sit forgotten in a jar with a lot of other pennies until your children have to figure out what to do with them after you die. Dr. Drivel told our micro-reporter, “Donald Trump is playing fast and loose with the international trading system, whereas we were playing a game called I’m an American Idiot So Please Punch Me Repeatedly in the Face Until a Few European Oligarchs Escape to Switzerland with their Fortunes and Everyone Else has to Learn to Speak Mandarin. Trump’s reckless approach could cause the entire world financial system to come crashing suddenly down around our ears, instead of slowly, slowly draining the nation of its life’s blood, which would at least give me time to cash out my portfolio and retire to Thailand where you can marry a 15-year-old and live like a king for $60,000 a year.”
To demonstrate that Trump’s real world successes could have disastrous theoretical ramifications, an international team of economists has come together to build a model demonstrating how a stack of billions of dollars in Tariff revenues could tip over, knocking a swinging boot into a bucket that would then release a marble down a zig-zagging staircase until it strikes a pole with a ball on top that will drop through a bathtub onto a seesaw, flipping a diver into a barrel that dislodges a cage balanced on another pole so that the cage shimmies down on top of a plastic mouse.
This doesn’t really prove anything, but at least it’ll keep the economists entertained while Trump saves the country.
* * *
This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>.”
Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. Klavan is the bestselling author of numerous books, including the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fourth installment, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1613165536?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_thcv_3&amp;storeType=ebooks" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A Woman Underground.</a>” His most recent nonfiction release is “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Kingdom-Cain-Finding-Literature-Darkness/dp/0310368340/?_encoding=UTF8&amp;pd_rd_w=nMYjR&amp;content-id=amzn1.sym.bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_p=bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_r=133-8344803-2786917&amp;pd_rd_wg=7a8J3&amp;pd_rd_r=5791ea0f-6d96-4732-9d6a-3a4e6b348bb5&amp;ref_=aufs_ap_sc_dsk" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Kingdom of Cain: Finding God in the Literature of Darkness.</a>” (May 2025, Zondervan/HarperCollins). Follow him on X: <a href="https://x.com/andrewklavan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@andrewklavan</a>
The views expressed in this satirical article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

TOPSHOT-US-POLITICS-CONGRESS-BUDGET

Economists Say Trump’s Real World Success Could Have Disastrous Theoretical Ramifications

Economists Say Trump's Real World Success Could Have Disastrous Theoretical Ramifications

Andrew Klavan

Economy

Humor

Satire

Despite all of the suggestions that President Trump is a wild man who&#8217;s going to destroy the American economy, on Wednesday, the second quarter GDP numbers came in at 3%, well beyond expectations.
That&#8217;s a very solid number.
Democrats are freaking out over all of this.
Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warns that the economy better stay strong because on the other side, you&#8217;ve got a bunch of rampant socialists ready to go, saying, “Why are we on the verge of Caracas-on-the-Hudson in New York? Why is this guy getting traction? Because young people are disillusioned with the system. So when you do this, you make everyone a shareholder. You make everyone a stakeholder. People who are part of the system do not want to bring down the system.”
This means it&#8217;s very important that the Trump economy stay on track. And here&#8217;s where you have a lot of crosswinds in the Trump economy; there are some very, very salutary signs for the Trump administration, and there are also some kind of strange things about this GDP report that could signal choppy waters in the future.
As The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/opinion/gdp-report-economy-consumers-donald-trump-tariffs-d9879d98?gaa_at=eafs&amp;gaa_n=ASWzDAjoBZ-3soVj3PoiK6aZTxcWr-FB49jxMVLYmga1eVzqoEE8IiSRvnAbg7mu4Rk%3D&amp;gaa_ts=688bb106&amp;gaa_sig=cOBkFdPHgQNhwQQJhynsChDmYEuJk6LXrV3C3ncI070tCEl4mrbYY15Uv98Aq05eUHNcd-o0f1M9esecfFfJ5A%3D%3D">pointed out</a>:
<blockquote>Most striking are the second quarter report’s wild internal details. Net exports (exports minus imports) added a remarkable 4.99% to GDP as imports fell 30.3%. Imports subtract from growth in the national accounts because GDP measures domestic production. Imports are produced overseas. But imports are still crucial to U.S. economic well-being because consumers buy them and businesses use them as inputs for what they produce—and often export. The crazy swing in imports shows how much Mr. Trump’s up-and-down trade policies have disrupted business decisions and left companies scrambling to adapt. This seems to have had a negative effect on private domestic investment, which fell 15.6% in the second quarter after a surge in the first. 
Nonresidential business investment contributed only 0.27% to GDP, as businesses rapidly drew down their inventories. Chalk this up as another result of the uncertainty caused by on-again, off-again, on-again tariffs. The doughty U.S. consumer was less affected, contributing 0.98% to GDP—decent if hardly bullish. But it’s notable that final sales to private domestic purchasers, a key measure of demand, rose only 1.2%. That’s the lowest since the fourth quarter of 2022.</blockquote>
Prices continue to remain steady, which is why you&#8217;re not seeing inflation right now. So what does all of this mean?
The answer is nobody knows. The Wall Street Journal is saying this openly. The second quarter was all but over before the passage of the one “big, beautiful bill.” It&#8217;s going to have new incentives for business investment. It could save the Trump economy. Trade, on the other hand, is pushing back against that. So you have a bunch of these cross-cutting effects.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2250-the-ben-shapiro-show?elementPosition=3&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
The bottom line is that the economy must remain strong in order to prevent the insane Democrats from winning races. And they have lost their ever-loving minds. If you thought that they were going to turn around after being defeated by President Trump and the Republicans and perhaps turn toward sanity, there is zero evidence that this is the case.
They continue to swing out to the more and more insane Left in the hopes that President Trump will collapse and basically hand them the presidency and the Congress.
This is the prime reason the economy has to be the top priority.

TOPSHOT-US-POLITICS

Crosswinds In A Strong Economy: Analyzing Trump’s 3% GDP Surge

Wall Street Journal

President Trump&#8217;s push to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/22/republicans-free-market-energy-00465122">boost energy</a> affordability by slashing green regulations and climate lawfare has been a powerful yet undercovered plank of his second term. Drastically changing course from the energy-restrictive policies of “Bidenomics” is a key factor that propelled Trump back to the White House. To keep pace with MAGA on energy independence, Congress is launching a fresh <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-investigates-bloomberg-philanthropies-for-partisan-activism-with-state-attorneys-general/">probe</a> into the complex network and funding of lawsuits aimed at undermining affordable energy projects.
It’s a move that could finally reset climate and energy policies to benefit the American consumer above lawyers.
For the last decade, state attorneys general&#8217;s offices across the country have waged lawfare against energy producers and suppliers, using state statutes to <a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/state-ags-rebuked-for-soliciting-billionaires-in-climate-cases/">issue lawsuits</a> seeking maximum financial penalties for climate liability, including <a href="https://stateline.org/2024/04/04/after-a-long-slog-climate-change-lawsuits-will-finally-put-big-oil-on-trial/">high-profile cases</a> in Hawaii and Minnesota against oil and gas giants.
Many lawyers and staff in these offices have been trained by ideological climate change university <a href="https://stateimpactcenter.org/ag-work/ag-actions">programs</a> like the State Energy &amp; Environmental Impact Center at NYU, funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies, the giving arm of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s financial empire.
In the probe announced <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-investigates-bloomberg-philanthropies-for-partisan-activism-with-state-attorneys-general/">in July</a>, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer is putting the congressional microscope on these shady programs, revealing how harmful they have been to keeping energy costs low. They’ve already demonstrated the significant influence these programs had within President Biden’s administration.
“The Bloomberg-NYU partisan agenda will likely hurt working-class Americans in the name of the partisan globalist climate-agenda,” said Comer, adding that the partisan climate law agenda “undermines faith” in the impartial justice system.
It’s no coincidence that David Hayes, the former executive director of NYU’s climate litigation program, was a <a href="https://www.law.nyu.edu/news/david-hayes-biden-special-assistant-president-climate">top climate advisor</a> to Biden in his single term.
It’s the right moment to seek <a href="https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2025/07/22/house-gop-takes-aim-at-dcs-climate-lawsuit-eed-00465782">accountability</a> for the failed energy policies of the Biden Administration and the well-funded law school networks that sustain and push petty climate litigation, and both the legislative and executive branches are right to do so.
Our judicial system has been captured by ideological interests that seek to force consumers to live with fewer and costlier options when it comes to powering their homes and businesses.
The climate lawfare brigade purports to care about climate change and the environment, but their only goal so far has been to try to extract high-dollar settlements from energy suppliers. These symbolic wins for climate activists serve to drive up energy and electricity prices for consumers, as energy companies divert more resources to legal fees than to innovation and investment in new solutions.
Who is the winner in this scenario? Not everyday Americans.
Although consumers read headlines about “<a href="https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2018/03/case-questions-climate-change-culpability">climate culpability</a>&#8221; and <a href="https://stateimpactcenter.org/ag-work/pro-environment-federal-litigation">settlements</a> with energy companies brokered by blue-state AGs, these are cases about money and ideological points more than proving wrongdoing.
There is no attention paid to actual climate solutions that would benefit society at large. As we’ve seen from climate lawsuits <a href="https://www.newsobserver.com/news/business/article296546349.html">filed</a> against nuclear energy providers, a power source that is close to the most renewable and <a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R48480/R48480.2.pdf">sustainable</a> energy source on the planet, it’s really not about finding cleaner power sources either.
This is the same movement that notched a big win <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/07/1165475">last week</a> with the International Court of Justice issuing a ruling to mandate all countries curb their emissions or be held economically and legally liable in international law, a laughable case that the US will rightly <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/24/rubio-eliminates-climate-office-00308505">ignore</a>.
Ultimately, radical activists must reconcile with the fact that no one entity or person will ever be found to be the singular cause of climate change, because we’ve all been clients and willing customers. That&#8217;s why the Environmental Protection Agency is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/winning-trumps-epa-wrecks-the-radical-green-agenda">now moving to scrap</a> the 2009 &#8220;endangerment finding&#8221; for greenhouse gas emissions. A lawless administrative state has created a set of policies that incentivize the petty lawsuits being funded by fringe climate activists.
This makes the Comer investigation even more critical to all Americans concerned about the cost of living, and further underscores why we should consider federal lawfare liability reforms that would put most of these frivolous cases to rest. <a href="https://consumerchoicecenter.org/floridas-liability-lawfare-reform/">Some states,</a> such as Florida and Georgia, have already done this.
The Trump Administration and Congress have to stay laser-focused on this issue, as well as other kitchen-table concerns that drove Americans to the polls last November. Affordability, particularly when it comes to keeping consumers’ lights on, should always be top of mind.
* * *
Yaël Ossowski writes about energy policy and is deputy director of the Consumer Choice Center in Washington, D.C.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

TOPSHOT-US-POLITICS-TRUMP

Trump’s Energy Reset: Dismantling Biden’s Climate Lawfare Legacy

Biden Administration

Climate Change

Congress

Energy

James Comer

President Trump showed European allies the ‘art of the deal’ this week as his own luxury resort in Scotland played host to negotiations for one of the largest trade deals in history.
Accompanied by bagpipes, the President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/europe-laughed-at-trump-now-theyre-going-to-cut-a-big-energy-check">shook hands</a> with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, and U.K. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, and heralded a major new US-EU trade pact — encompassing a 15% tariff rate on European imports.
But while Scotland was hosting talks on open markets, its own government continues to close off a core tenet of liberal democracy: the freedom to speak — even, in some cases, to silently pray.
In April 2024, Scotland enacted the Hate Crime and Public Order Act, which criminalizes words that amount to subjectively “stirring up hatred” based on a wide range of characteristics, such as someone’s “gender identity.” One may be found guilty of using the wrong words even if offence was only taken, but not intended. The consequences include up to seven years in prison.
Legal scholars, writers, and civil liberties groups have raised serious concerns. The law invites the state to police not just conduct but private expression — even within a family home. What was once a proud tradition of robust, even unpopular debate, is being eroded in favor of subjective standards of offense.
Meanwhile, new legislation in Scotland has imposed “buffer zones” around hospitals, vaguely criminalizing “influence” on the matter of abortion within 200 meters of the building. That radius can encompass private homes. <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/26/praying-at-home-a-crime-depending-on-who-is-passing-window/">According</a> to the law’s own architect, Gillian Mackay MSP, a person praying silently near a window in their home could be guilty of a crime, “depending on who’s passing the window.”
One recent case under a similar “buffer zones” law across the English border drew international attention: Livia Tossici-Bolt, aged 62-years-old, was arrested simply for standing with a sign reading “Here to talk, if you want.” She was not disruptive. She was not loud. She simply offered consensual conversation to other adults.
The U.S. State Department <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2025/03/31/free-speech-row-threatens-starmers-us-trade-deal/">took notice</a>. A senior official confirmed “concern” about the state of free speech in the UK, adding, “It is important that the UK respect and protect freedom of expression.”
Vice President JD Vance raised similar concerns in his landmark speech at the Munich Security Conference earlier this year, even highlighting Scotland’ notorious prayer problem, noting, “free speech, I fear, is in retreat.” Who can blame him? In the UK, police are <a href="https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/05/15/britains-police-are-restricting-speech-in-worrying-ways">arresting</a> over 30 people per day for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/meet-the-people-around-the-world-on-trial-for-a-tweet?author=Lois+McLatchie+Miller&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Meet+The+People+Around+The+World+On+Trial+For+A+Tweet%C2%A0">online posts</a> deemed offensive.
Such statements reflect a growing discomfort with what appears to be a widening values gap between the U.K. and its allies. Free societies are built not just on GDP and diplomatic summits, but on the intangible infrastructure of liberty — the right to live and speak freely, according to one’s own conscience. Trade flows best when rooted in mutual trust, shared principles, and the confidence that citizens on both sides of the Atlantic are protected by the same basic freedoms.
The U.K. cannot credibly advocate for open markets while tolerating closed discourse. A nation cannot speak loudly on the world stage while silencing its citizens at home. If Britain wishes to remain a trusted partner in the transatlantic alliance — not just economically but morally — it must reaffirm its commitment to the freedoms that define liberal democracy.
No ally is perfect. But the U.K. must meet the standards it helped to set. Free trade among free nations requires more than signed agreements. It requires trust in mutual political courage to protect liberty where it is most easily lost: quietly, at home.
 * * * 
Lois McLatchie Miller is a Scottish commentator on free speech, and a senior legal communications officer for ADF International.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer Visits US President Donald Trump in Scotland

The U.K. Can’t Champion Free Trade While Abandoning Free Speech

Abortion

Free Speech

Prayer

Pro-Life Movement

Scotland

United Kingdom

Flashback to September 2018.
That’s when President Donald Trump stood before the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/united-nations">United Nations</a> and warned Germany about the dangers of becoming addicted to Russian energy.
In response, the <a href="https://www.c-span.org/clip/white-house-event/germans-laugh-after-trump-warns-of-reliance-on-foreign-oil/5029974">German delegation laughed</a> in his face. They scoffed. The global press rolled their eyes. Trump, they said, didn’t understand how the world worked.
Fast forward to 2025: those same European leaders are preparing to cut a <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/energy/eu-ditch-russia-agrees-purchase-750b-american-energy-supplies">$750 billion check</a> for American energy – as a result of President Trump’s deal-making.
Who’s laughing now?
The energy investment is a centerpiece of <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/07/fact-sheet-the-united-states-and-european-union-reach-massive-trade-deal/">the trade agreement</a> reached between Washington and Brussels on Sunday. The deal isn’t just a seismic shift in European policy — it’s a vindication of Trump’s America First vision. It is also a humiliating rebuke of the Biden administration’s energy failures. While Biden spent four years kneecapping American producers and begging hostile foreign actors for help, Trump was laying the groundwork for energy dominance.
Now, the world is willing to pay for it — literally.
<h3>Biden Begged For Foreign Oil</h3>
Let’s not forget the image that defined Biden’s energy policy: the President of the United States traveling to Saudi Arabia, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jul/18/oil-price-rises-joe-biden-saudi-output-petrol-diesel-prices">fist-bumping the crown prince</a>, and pleading for more oil. Not only did the Saudis say no, they mocked him by cutting production just months later.
Even worse, Biden’s administration reportedly <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/13/biden-admin-asked-saudi-arabia-to-postpone-opec-cut-by-a-month-saudis-say.html">begged the Saudis</a> to delay that production cut until after the 2022 midterms — because keeping gas prices low wasn’t about helping Americans, it was about helping Democrats stay in power.
All Biden had to do was unleash American energy. But he couldn’t. His green agenda wouldn’t allow it. He blocked drilling, shut down pipelines, and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/biden-pauses-approval-new-lng-export-projects-win-climate-activists-2024-01-26/">froze LNG exports</a>. He made it harder to produce energy here, so we had to buy it from over there.
President Trump’s deal flips the script. Instead of American dollars flowing to foreign regimes, European money is now flowing to the U.S. This isn’t diplomacy through weakness — it’s dominance through strength. President Trump didn’t have to beg because he knows how to lead.
<h3>A Boon To The American Economy</h3>
This $750 billion deal is more than just a geopolitical win — it’s rocket fuel for the American economy. More domestic energy production means more high-paying jobs, more local prosperity, and more opportunities in towns that the Biden economy left behind.
While Biden shut down LNG export projects, Trump is cranking the valves wide open. American energy workers aren’t waiting for a government subsidy — they’re producing real energy the world needs.
Let’s also not ignore Europe’s glaring hypocrisy. In 2024, the European Union spent nearly <a href="https://energyandcleanair.org/publication/eu-imports-of-russian-fossil-fuels-in-third-year-of-invasion-surpass-financial-aid-sent-to-ukraine/">€22 billion on Russian energy</a> — more than the €18.7 billion they gave Ukraine in aid. So, while they waved Ukrainian flags and tried to shame America, they were still funding Putin’s war machine. Now, thanks to President Trump, those Euros will come to American producers instead of Moscow’s war chest. It&#8217;s not just an energy shift — it&#8217;s a moral one.
<h3>Fueling The Fight Against The Deficit</h3>
There’s another upside Biden’s team never understood: when America produces energy, America generates revenue. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the federal government <a href="https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-103676">took in over $16 billion</a> in <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-federal-energy-revenue-falls-10-2024-still-among-biggest-years-ever-2024-11-08/">just one year</a> from oil and gas leases and royalties.
Trump’s deal promises to supercharge those numbers. More production means more revenue — without raising taxes on a single American family. It’s simple math: energy made here, sold abroad, grows our economy and shrinks our deficit. No gimmicks. No IRS expansion. Just common sense.
Perhaps the most staggering contrast between Biden and President Trump’s EU deal comes down to this: where the money is going.
Under Biden, the federal government <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/08/11/biden-regrets-calling-spending-bill-inflation-reduction-act/">dumped $369 billion </a>of your tax dollars into green energy pipe dreams — Chinese solar panels, offshore wind disasters, and EV charger projects that never got built.
Under Trump? He just secured more than double that amount — $750 billion — in foreign investment in American energy. No taxpayer gimmicks. No dependence on Beijing. Just American energy, made by American workers, powering the world again.
Yes, it’s safe to say the German delegation isn’t laughing anymore. But thanks to Donald Trump, they’ll have plenty of American natural gas to keep them warm through the winter.
* * *
Larry Behrens is an energy expert and the Communications Director for Power The Future. He has appeared on Fox News, ZeroHedge, and NewsMax speaking in defense of American energy workers. You can follow him on X/Twitter @larrybehrens.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

U.S. President Donald Trump Visits Scotland For Golfing Getaway

Europe Laughed At Trump. Now They’re Going To Cut A Big Energy Check.

Joe Biden

Oil and Gas

The following excerpt is taken from &#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Preventive-State-Preempting-Cataclysmic-Preserving/dp/1641774401/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.EwYIZf0ARxwXjihNEAVurqOj_KuaDi1Nt-0DQX0nufJfh9kmaSx4otDskpQnN57lHj0dZWFI_RmUGu0cJPTLedRfLl7N6M-nJd56sP6w6C6da0GbxelDZPS2zE65jH3aCDUigadzpSMXkA252nt9Q06I5xw0MMSWEKrcMRdMWQY.RTvUDiVC9eJQmh-a3qAPRR8n2ni44pG6I_Eobznn194&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;hvadid=716170842428&amp;hvdev=c&amp;hvexpln=67&amp;hvlocphy=9010927&amp;hvnetw=g&amp;hvocijid=8876619063180178686--&amp;hvqmt=e&amp;hvrand=8876619063180178686&amp;hvtargid=kwd-2424739000475&amp;hydadcr=4601_13415321&amp;keywords=the+preventive+state+dershowitz&amp;mcid=e95ebf25385f3b8f97b53c139b72347d&amp;qid=1753724973&amp;sr=8-1">The Preventive State: The Challenge of Preventing Serious Harms While Preserving Essential Liberties,</a>&#8221; by Alan Dershowitz (Encounter Books).
* * *
The Secret Service should have five basic responsibilities: (1) short- and medium-term intelligence operations designed to predict and prevent in advance any threats; (2) securing of all venues at which protectees may appear; (3) identifying and preventing immediate threats by suspicious persons at or near the venues; (4) halting the event and the appearance of the protectee if there is any perceived threat; and (5) immediately responding to attacks by protecting the target from further attacks and neutralizing the attacker or attackers.
The first of these responsibilities — predicting and preventing future attacks — is the most difficult (and the most relevant to my book). It will necessarily require many false positives to prevent even one false negative, because attempted assassinations are such rare events over time. Many individuals and groups threaten — either explicitly or implicitly — presidents and other protectees, but very few actually act on these threats. All such threats should obviously be investigated, but not all suspects should be detained. It is a crime to threaten the president — an inchoate crime designed to reduce threats of future harms. But few potential assassins openly threaten and thus violate the statute. Some say and do things that increase the likelihood that they will actually try to attack. But even among those, only a small fraction will cross the line into action. It is the difficult — perhaps nearly impossible — job of the Secret Service to distinguish between true and false positives, while reducing false negatives to zero. It is unlikely that Crooks or Routh could have been identified before the days in question based on their words and deeds — without also identifying many individuals with similar predictive profiles who would never pose a real threat.
<div id="attachment_953155" style="width: 394px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-953155" class="size-large wp-image-953155" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/MixCollage-28-Jul-2025-01-24-PM-3258-384x576.jpg" alt="Credit: Encounter Books" width="384" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/MixCollage-28-Jul-2025-01-24-PM-3258-384x576.jpg 384w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/MixCollage-28-Jul-2025-01-24-PM-3258-200x300.jpg 200w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/MixCollage-28-Jul-2025-01-24-PM-3258-768x1152.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/MixCollage-28-Jul-2025-01-24-PM-3258-1024x1536.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/MixCollage-28-Jul-2025-01-24-PM-3258-1365x2048.jpg 1365w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/MixCollage-28-Jul-2025-01-24-PM-3258-1360x2040.jpg 1360w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/MixCollage-28-Jul-2025-01-24-PM-3258-scaled.jpg 1707w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 384px) 100vw, 384px" />Credit: Encounter Books</div>
When I began to research the issues associated with predicting and preventing violence, including assassinations, I came across a category of detainees known as “White House Cases.” These cases involved individuals who sought entry to the government buildings, especially the White House, in order to talk to officials. If they appeared to be mentally ill or “disturbed,” they were referred to the Secret Service, which then sought their commitment to locked wards of mental hospitals. I studied one case that seemed to typify this category.
Bong Yol Yang, an American of Korean origin, appeared at the White House gate asking to see the president about people who were following him and “revealing his subconscious thoughts.” He also wondered whether his talents as an artist could be put to some use by the government. The gate officer called the Secret Service, which then had him committed to a mental hospital. Yang demanded a jury trial, at which a psychiatrist testified that he was mentally ill — a paranoid schizophrenic — and that although there was no “evidence of his ever attacking anyone so far,” there was always a possibility that “if his frustrations . . . became great enough, he may potentially attack someone.” On the basis of this diagnosis and prediction, the judge permitted a jury to commit Yang to a mental hospital until he was no longer mentally ill and likely to cause injury.
This was almost certainly an example of a false positive, who was confined in an effort to avoid even the slightest possibility that if released he would become a false negative — that is, an actual assassin whose deadly act was falsely not predicted and thus not prevented. The calculus for “White House Cases” was that it is better that one hundred or more non-assassins be erroneously detained than even one potential assassin be erroneously released.
The issue of false positives and false negatives also arose in the moments preceding the wounding of Donald Trump. According to reports, a Secret Service sniper aimed at Crooks and could have killed him before he fired at Trump, rather than immediately after. But what if Crooks had turned out to be an innocent twenty-year-old who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. His death would have been a terrible false positive. So the sniper erred on the side of not shooting, with the result that it was a near-lethal false negative.
All of this could easily have been prevented if the Secret Service had secured the building, even with its slanted roof, before the shooter got near it. A false positive in unnecessarily securing a building that would not have been used to shoot is no big deal. A false negative in not securing a building that was then used to shoot is an enormous deal. So better one hundred buildings that would not be used be unnecessarily secured than even one building that would be used be falsely not secured.
Another example of how the desire to avoid a trivial false positive resulted in a disastrous false negative was the decision — or nondecision — by the Secret Service not to delay Trump’s appearance on stage until all doubts concerning the person deemed “suspicious” were resolved. There were several people who were deemed suspicious before the Trump shooting, as there apparently are at many events. Each such person should be investigated as soon as practical. Had Trump’s appearance been delayed or even canceled and the suspicious person had turned out to be harmless, that would have been a false positive that caused inconvenience. But failure to delay caused a near-fatal false negative.
Trump has said that “nobody mentioned” the presence of a suspicious person. “Nobody said there was a problem.” He went on: “And I could have waited fifteen—they could have said, ‘let’s wait for fifteen minutes, two minutes, five minutes, something.’”
This raises a related and complex issue. Under current law and practice, the protectee has the power to overrule the Secret Service and make the ultimate decision whether to delay or cancel an event deemed dangerous by Secret Service agents. And history shows that protectees have ignored the expert opinions of the Secret Service in several instances, placing themselves in danger. It must be recognized that when a protectee’s life is endangered by a possible assassin, more is at stake than the life of the protectee. The entire nation — indeed the entire world — is affected by a successful assassination, especially of a president or presidential candidate.
Perhaps the law ought to be changed to reflect this reality. The Secret Service should have more power to delay or even cancel events that in its view pose too great a danger to the nation. This will not be easy to implement in practice, but it could have an impact on the acceptance by the protectee of the more expert opinions of the Secret Service.
To summarize, the preventive intelligence aspect of the Secret Service’s role should favor many false positives — investigative leads that turn up empty — over even one false negative as in not pursuing a lead that could have prevented an assassination. The same is true of securing venues, questioning subjects, delaying the appearance of protectees, and surrounding a protectee. Detaining a suspect for more than a brief period should require some degree of probable or at least plausible cause. Shooting a suspected assassin requires a far different calculation, because it pits life against life.
These are the kinds of judgments that must be made by all preventive law enforcement agencies. The Secret Service has a mixed history in regard to this critical mission. To be sure, we do not know how many potential assassinations were prevented by the Secret Service. Neither do they. It is certainly possible that some of those arrested or detained might have gone on to try to kill a protectee. We know about attempts that were thwarted, as was the attempted shooting of President Ford by Squeaky Fromme, or the attempt on the life of President Truman by a Puerto Rican liberation group. But potential assassins who were deterred, or even those who were prevented by early interventions, are difficult to identify and quantify. The utter failure of the Secret Service to prevent or thwart the shooting of Donald Trump should be evident to all. The resignation of the then director was an important first step in the implementation of significant changes in approach to predicting, preventing, and responding to threats to protectees. These changes should reflect the costs of different types of errors — false positives versus false negatives in differing, but always crucial, contexts.
* * *
This excerpt taken from &#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Preventive-State-Preempting-Cataclysmic-Preserving/dp/1641774401/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.EwYIZf0ARxwXjihNEAVurqOj_KuaDi1Nt-0DQX0nufJfh9kmaSx4otDskpQnN57lHj0dZWFI_RmUGu0cJPTLedRfLl7N6M-nJd56sP6w6C6da0GbxelDZPS2zE65jH3aCDUigadzpSMXkA252nt9Q06I5xw0MMSWEKrcMRdMWQY.RTvUDiVC9eJQmh-a3qAPRR8n2ni44pG6I_Eobznn194&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;hvadid=716170842428&amp;hvdev=c&amp;hvexpln=67&amp;hvlocphy=9010927&amp;hvnetw=g&amp;hvocijid=8876619063180178686--&amp;hvqmt=e&amp;hvrand=8876619063180178686&amp;hvtargid=kwd-2424739000475&amp;hydadcr=4601_13415321&amp;keywords=the+preventive+state+dershowitz&amp;mcid=e95ebf25385f3b8f97b53c139b72347d&amp;qid=1753724973&amp;sr=8-1">The Preventive State</a>&#8221; is published by permission from Encounter Books.
Alan Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard University. Mr. Dershowitz has been litigating, teaching, and writing about law and policy for more than 60 years. He has written 55 books and more than 1,000 articles. Many of today’s world leaders are among the 10,000 students he has taught. He has represented and advised presidents, prime ministers, and business leaders. Called “the world’s best-known lawyer” and its most prominent defender of civil liberties, he has litigated and won hundreds of cases in multiple countries. He taught at Harvard for 50 years, where he offered courses on issues ranging from criminal, constitutional, family, and Jewish laws to psychiatry, neurobiology, mathematics, literature, philosophy, and even baseball. His primary academic interest has been on prediction and prevention of harmful conduct, which he developed into a course and taught during most of his career.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

TOPSHOT-US-POLITICS-VOTE

On Preventing Presidential Assassinations

Alan Dershowitz

assassination

assassination attempt

Books

Secret Service

Legacy media are aligned with the Democratic Party. They would like you to ignore the fact that the Democratic Party has never been less popular than it is now.
A new poll from <a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/democratic-party-poll-voter-confidence-july-2025-9db38021?st=YbBBWg&amp;reflink=article_copyURL_share">The Wall Street Journal</a> found that Democrats’ popularity is at its lowest point in three decades. Whatever the media keep telling you about the unpopularity of President Trump, Democrats remain far more unpopular. People may not like certain aspects of what President Trump is doing, but they do trust that Trump is going to be responsive to reality in a way that Democrats simply are not.
Democrats are in serious trouble. And the reason is because they are totally and completely out of touch.
Trump is winning an outsized share of Latinos, blacks, and Asian Americans. Why? Because the Democratic Party, as it took over all of America&#8217;s institutions, disconnected itself from normal Americans.
The Democratic Party made a couple of major mistakes. They decided to implement the most radical social values you could possibly imagine. The radical LGBTQ+-¸ wing of the Democratic Party alienated a number of minorities, many of whom are still very much ensconced in church and family. If the price of moving along with the Democrats is that you have to believe boys can become girls, that is a major issue for a huge number of Americans. And yet, Democrats seem preternaturally obsessed with that issue.
Another mistake: The elite members of the Democratic Party remain upper-crust white liberals and fellow travelers like Barack Obama, who made common cause with those upper-crust elite white liberals and felt very safe and comfortable in those particular circles.
There is a tendency among those elites to believe that all minorities feel the same way; there&#8217;s a flattening of all minority racial groups into one giant blob: “people of color.”
But that&#8217;s not the way anyone thinks of themselves. Nobody thinks of themselves that way. If you ask a white voter, they could be of Polish extraction or Italian extraction or Jewish extraction or German extraction or Irish extraction, among others. Each voter has their own agenda.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2247-the-ben-shapiro-show?elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=The+Ben+Shapiro+Show&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
There&#8217;s been an attempt in America to flatten all of these distinctions out. But those distinctions are very real in terms of how people see themselves in terms of identity.
So when you tell an Asian American that their interests are identical to those of a black American or tell a black American that his interests are identical to those of a Latino American, in some cases, the answer is yes, because we&#8217;re all individuals. But in some cases, the answer is very much no.
Optimism and hope for the future come from the Right, not the Left, for whom the racial identity is still the core of their political beliefs.
Appealing to disaffected voters of color on their racial identity alone has rung hollow.
President Trump has pointed the spear at one of the things that Americans hate most, which is this belief that if you say something outside of the purview of the Left, you ought to be canceled.
One of the effects of this has been a massive backlash. President Trump is the symptom and cause of this backlash against political correctness, wokeness, and cancel culture.
Someone being criticized is not cancel culture. Cancellation is when you lose a job or are removed from a platform.
The problem for the Left is that they decreased the so-called Overton Window — the window of acceptable discourse — to be so narrow that virtually everybody ended up being in danger of cancellation. And then President Trump blew the window wide open.
The era of the censorious Left, the upper-crust Harvard liberal who speaks down and patronizes minorities and then shuts the Overton window so nobody can speak differently, is ending.
Democrats don&#8217;t know what to do about it. So now they simply rage against the machine.
The Democratic Party is on the ropes — but there is an incipient danger. That danger comes in the form of the splintering that is happening on the Right.
With the destruction of the institutions by the Left, there are no replacements for the institutions. But there are people on the Right who believe the institutions need to be completely torn down.
It is a good thing that people look at institutions hollowed out by the left-wing with radical skepticism, and look to build new institutions or restore those institutions by kicking the Left out of those institutions and actually regaining credibility.
However, if the substitute for this is an atomized society in which you go to TikTok for your information or X.com for information, you&#8217;re going to end up with some pretty bad information.
And this is why conspiratorialism has soared on every side of the political aisle. Conspiratorial thinking speculates that there is an unnamed group of people who you can&#8217;t put a finger on, but you know they exist behind closed doors. They must be doing something nefarious and terrible, and therefore, you are not in control of your own life, and you then get to be very angry at someone.
That is not good for society or good politically. It is bad for you as a human to engage in that sort of thinking, because it means that you are essentially saying that you are not in control of your own future, you&#8217;re not in control of your own life, and there&#8217;s no prospect that you will be, because the shadowy forces control everything.
The Right has its work cut out for it; not to become the Left, but to champion the very ideas that distinguish it from the Left: strengthening traditional institutions with traditional principles, relying on facts rather than narratives that spring from conspiratorial thinking, and treating every human being as an individual with their own thoughts and feelings — without lumping them all together as one monolithic group.

House Republican Hardliners Warn Of A Delay To Tax Vote

Devastating New Polling For Democrats

Conspiracy Theory

polling

You can’t say Stephen Colbert didn’t try.
“The Late Show” host spent years spreading every anti-Trump narrative in the media. The “Very Fine People” speech. Russian Collusion. The Ballad of Stormy Daniels. Pee-Pee tapes. If it was critical of the president, Colbert pounced and seized.
True? False? Fake News? No matter. Colbert was on the case, weaponizing his nightly broadcast as an in-kind contribution to the DNC.
Except it didn’t work. Trump returned to the Oval Office earlier this year. And, now, Colbert won’t be around the Ed Sullivan Theater in New York City to watch Trump complete his second term.
<div id="attachment_952651" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-952651" class="size-large wp-image-952651" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225461053-864x576.jpg" alt="People participate in a protest titled 'Colbert stays! Trump must go!' outside the Ed Sullivan Theater in New York City on July 21, 2025. &quot;The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,&quot; a staple of late-night US television, will end in 2026, the CBS network said, days after the comedian blasted parent company Paramount's $16 million settlement with President Donald Trump as &quot;a big fat bribe.&quot; (Photo by CHARLY TRIBALLEAU / AFP) (Photo by CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225461053-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225461053-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225461053-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225461053.jpg 1024w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP via Getty Images</div>
“The Late Show’s” cancellation sent shock waves through Hollywood. Supporters decry the decision, ignoring the cold, hard math behind the move. Reports say the show loses CBS $40 million (or more) a year.
Why would any business keep a show on the air for that price?
“The Late Show” became free therapy sessions for those who still can’t believe the country elected the real estate mogul – twice. They tuned in to hear their beliefs reflected back at them, aided and abetted by Colbert’s smug delivery.
It must have felt empowering to hear him call Trump Vladimir Putin’s [bleep] holster at the height of the Russian collusion scandal. Did it matter that it was all built upon a lie?
Apparently not. And Colbert never felt compelled to apologize for misleading his audience.
The Colbert we see today isn’t the one we were first introduced to on, where else, “The Daily Show.” His shtick at the time, expanded via “The Colbert Report,” was mocking a Bill O’Reilly-style commentator.
He excelled at the role, earning some respect even among right-leaning viewers. He put the funny first, much like he did as part of the “Strangers with Candy” sitcom years earlier.
<div id="attachment_952649" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-952649" class="size-large wp-image-952649" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-460161346-864x576.jpg" alt="WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 8: (AFP OUT) U.S. President Barack Obama (L) talks to television personality Stephen Colbert during a taping of Comedy Central's &quot;The Colbert Report&quot; in Lisner Auditorium at George Washington University on December 8, 2014 in Washington, DC. This is President Obama's third appearance on &quot;The Colbert Report&quot; that will broadcast its final show on Dec. 18. (Photo by Andrew Harrer-Pool/Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-460161346-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-460161346-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-460161346-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-460161346.jpg 1024w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Andrew Harrer-Pool/Getty Images</div>
He seemed a smart choice to succeed David Letterman on “The Late Show” in 2015, but he initially struggled in the ratings against “The Tonight Show” juggernaut. Then, Colbert found his inner Bernie Sanders and turned the showcase into a hard-Left platform.
The move paid dividends. “The Late Show” soon became the ratings leader before the rise of Fox News’ “Gutfeld!”
The shift didn’t help the show’s longevity. The bill has come due. Why?
He neglected to heed the Ghost of Johnny Carson. The late-night king knew well enough to mock both sides of the aisle and have fun doing so.
The joy seeped from Colbert’s performance. So did any sense of balance. Now, you’re as likely to see a “Pod Save America” host on his show as a Tom Cruise or Sydney Sweeney.
Progressive viewers may vote for Sen. Adam Schiff, but on a charisma scale of 1 to 10 he’s a 3, at best.
What happens next? Colbert vows to go down fighting, slamming President Trump with every sketch and monologue in his waning days. Oh, like he’s done the past nine or so years? The Legacy Media will <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2025/07/24/trump-epstein-files-late-night-hosts/85356533007/">amplify them all</a>, hoping to sway the public against Trump beyond their cartoonishly biased reportage.
Reporters will miss crafting headlines like this as much as they miss Colbert: &#8220;Late-night guys are giddy with Trump and Epstein jokes after latest developments.&#8221;
How can Colbert possibly do more to attack the Trump administration at this point? He can’t, unless he takes a page from “The View” playbook.
Unhinged conspiracies. Fear-mongering on steroids. Undisciplined rants that cause the studio audience to clap like seals and sane viewers to watch their jaws go slack. That’s all Colbert has left, and he risks losing whatever cultural heft he has remaining if he goes down that road.
Does he really want to start sharing “Legal Notes” like “The View” does to protect himself from lawsuits?
<div id="attachment_952655" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-952655" class="size-large wp-image-952655" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225551799-864x576.jpg" alt="NEW YORK CITY - JULY 21: The Late Show with Stephen Colbert during Monday's July 21, 2025 show. (Photo by Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225551799-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225551799-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225551799-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/GettyImages-2225551799.jpg 1024w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images</div>
Plus, he’s only 61. Surely, he wants to keep working in comedy once “The Late Show” expires. He’s a natural fit for video podcasting, where the modest budgetary requirements all but guarantee his success.
Sane progressives will see right through any “View”-sized transition, meaning he’ll peel off some of his base along the way. Maybe the show will lose more than $40 million over the next 10 months.
The upside for Colbert’s late-night competitors? With “The Late Show” out of the way, they’ll be more progressive viewers for them to attract, at least on paper. No Colbert? Let’s see how Jimmy Kimmel is attacking President Trump today.
It’ll be a sugar high, at best.
Late-night TV is dying. Blame YouTube, the rise of funny social media accounts or comedians who actively chased away more than half the country with their polemics. Colbert is far from alone on that front. Seth Meyers, John Oliver, Jimmy Fallon and Jimmy Kimmel all lean to the Left. And they kissed conservative viewers goodbye some time ago.
“<a href="https://www.foxnews.com/video/5612703584001">Not good riddance but riddance,”</a> as Kimmel infamously said about his shift to the hard Left.
The format likely would perish with or without Colbert’s handiwork. We stopped collecting 8-track tapes some time ago, too. His Trump obsession, and fueling insults like “Clapter” to the lexicon, a term for jokes meant to spark applause, not laughter, made matters worse.
The biggest irony? While audiences no longer find Colbert’s shtick funny, a certain two-term president is having the last laugh.
* * *
Christian Toto is an award-winning journalist, movie critic and editor of <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>. He previously served as associate editor with Breitbart News’ Big Hollywood. Follow him at <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

The Late Show with Stephen Colbert

Late Night Collapse: Colbert’s Fall And The Death Of Balanced Comedy

Late Night Collapse: Colbert’s Fall and the Death of Balanced Comedy

Comedy

David Letterman

Entertainment

Jon Stewart

Legacy Media

Stephen Colbert

As you know, I’m a simple man — not as simple as you obviously, but still, there are times when the issues of the day grow too complex for me to comprehend. And, in those moments when I feel lost and confused, then, just like you, I look for answers in the wisdom and moral insight of men like Hunter Biden.
For example, take the recent controversies over illegal immigration. In my charming, dimple-cheeked innocence, I always thought, hey, no one is above the law, illegal immigrants have broken the law, ICE is authorized to enforce the law, so what’s the problem? But then, I consult the wisdom of Hunter Biden, who recently said, (and this is a real quote) “People are really upset about illegal immigration? Eff you&#8230; How do you think you have food on your effing table? Who do you think washes your dishes? Who do you think does your effing garden?”
And, of course, when I realized it was illegal immigrants who put food on our tables and wash our dishes and tend our gardens, I immediately had my wife deported.
But Hunter Biden is not our only source of political wisdom in this crazy world. We can also turn to Hollywood actors. Because surely, if Hunter Biden’s life is an example of probity to us all, then Hollywood actors have many important ideas. Jeff Daniels, for instance, is an actor so talented, he can make even the most implausible characters seem vividly real, like when he played James Comey as an honest man. 
A shallow observer like myself, or even a shallower observer like yourself, might look at the second Trump administration and see massive tax cuts, secure borders so my wife can’t sneak back into the country, billions in tariff revenues, low inflation, no nuclear weapons for Islamists who believe the end of days will come just as soon as they get nuclear weapons, and you might think, wow, I’m sure glad I voted for Trump.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show">WATCH: The Andrew Klavan Show</a></h3>
But not Jeff Daniels. Jeff says — and once again I’m not making this up. In fact, I couldn’t make this up — he says, “I still think about Kamala, and how I think she would have been a good choice. Because she would have done what Lincoln did.” And how can anyone disagree when you remember Lincoln at Gettysburg, when he said, “At what point do we uplift and highlight the consumer’s right to expect that the innovation would also be weighted in terms of solving their everyday problems, which are beyond my craving for Doritos.” Which Lincoln followed with that unbearable high-pitched cackling laughter of his. Or that might have been Kamala. I get them confused because Jeff Daniels can’t tell the difference.
And finally, after you’ve consulted Hunter Biden, and after you’ve studied the political thought of Hollywood actors, you can always turn to the searing insights of corporate comedians like John Stewart, who responded to the cancellation of fellow corporate comedian Stephen Colbert by saying, and once again, these are Stewart’s exact words, “Go eff yourself. Go eff yourself. Eff eff eff yourself. Go eff yourself.” 
Now friends, that kind of witty commentary on the news of the day, demonstrates the wisdom of having every single comedian hosting a corporation’s television show hold the exact same political opinion as every other comedian hosting a corporation’s television show, because if comedians with left wing opinions are not entitled to monopolize every single corporate comedy job in show business, that would mean that corporations should hire comedians with a range of opinions wide enough to entertain an audience large enough that their corporate employers won’t have to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on network shows that get their asses kicked in the ratings by Greg Gutfeld on cable.
So in conclusion, if you ever find yourself lost on the winding road of life, remember, you only have to turn to an entitled, overpaid midwit spouting the received opinions of the Democrat party as if that were an act of daring or intelligence, and then you will truly know where our elites want the rest of us to go and what they want us to do to ourselves when we get there.
* * *
This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>.”
Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. Klavan is the bestselling author of numerous books, including the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fourth installment, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1613165536?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_thcv_3&amp;storeType=ebooks" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A Woman Underground.</a>” His most recent nonfiction release is “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Kingdom-Cain-Finding-Literature-Darkness/dp/0310368340/?_encoding=UTF8&amp;pd_rd_w=nMYjR&amp;content-id=amzn1.sym.bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_p=bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_r=133-8344803-2786917&amp;pd_rd_wg=7a8J3&amp;pd_rd_r=5791ea0f-6d96-4732-9d6a-3a4e6b348bb5&amp;ref_=aufs_ap_sc_dsk" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Kingdom of Cain: Finding God in the Literature of Darkness.</a>” (May 2025, Zondervan/HarperCollins). Follow him on X: <a href="https://x.com/andrewklavan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@andrewklavan</a>
The views expressed in this satirical article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Hunter Biden On Capitol Hill To Challenge House Republicans

When I Need Wisdom, I Consult With Hunter Biden

Hunter Biden

Menu