Buchanan pitching for Islamic blasphemy law?

Why Pat Buchanan Became The Grand Old Man of the "Christian Nationalism" Op Against America by Diana W

Avoiding election news ostrich-like, I decided to puzzle out a new messaging mystery

Read on Substack

DIANA WEST: we have Pam Bondi, the former Qatari registered [lobbying] agent.

Listen here--> https://t.co/BITHXtIxN8 https://t.co/eomwjTzFC7

— @realDianaWest (@realDianaWest) October 10, 2025

His advisors are at fault, but Trump is at fault for picking his advisors.  

Qatari/Saudi cabinet family surrounding Donald Trump.  What I mean by that is we have Pam Bondi, the former Qatari registered [lobbying] agent. 

We have Suzie Wiles, Chief of Staff, also involved in the PR world with her Qatar and previous profession. 

We have Jared Kushner, son-in-law with the $2 billion dollars Saudi loan or investment in his company shortly before the election.  

We have Tiffany's [Tiffany Trump] husband, Bulous, very involved in Islamic politics through his father's family in Lebanon.

We have the Trump boys now developing a massive Trump business, golf course, luxury site IN QATAR.  I think it is so unseemly.  It's a conflict of interest, and if the rest of the Republicans and Democrats weren't similarly bought off, you would be hearing about it because it is not right for the President's son to be profiting and making business deals while the President is in office.  I mean Lesson #1 about anything.  So you have all of this going on.  Remember that trip through the Middle East, through the Gulf trip that Donald Trump took?  This was a charm offensive that has gotten him into this place where if he had one good advisor on Islam, such as Major Stephen Coughlin, for example, or former Special FBI Agent, John Guandolo, [Twitter acct.], and I could keep listing, so any of these people, who would have explained to him that Islamic jihad groups, like Hamas, and it is not them alone, it's in the panoply of Muslim Brotherhood, constellations, it's a branch . . .  if they enter into any sort of "peace negotiations," it's because they are in a period of weakness, which we can see, 

Peace mentioned in the Quran only one time

“And do not ask for Peace when you’re stronger” Quran 47:35

There is no peace in Islam, all the infidels must be eliminated or become slaves to the Muslims

There is only HUDNA, temporary treaty when Muslims in a weak position until… pic.twitter.com/4fXFbTqBFn

— Bob (@Shariakill) July 19, 2025

Why is peace not possible and between Israel and fundamentalist Muslims?

From the Islamic point, peace means when Islam has taken over the world, established its imperialistic caliphate and Sharia is implemented the Islamic law is implemented throughout the world, then we have peace.  Peace in Islam means you surrender and you submit the word Islam means surrender when they shout Allahu Akbar and you become Muslim it means you just surrendered to an Islamic Army.  That is their understanding of peace as Muslims from your perspective as a Christian it is cute pretty much that you want peace they don't they want you to surrender they want you to page which is the latest revelation of the self-diagnosed profit of Islam it says that you fight them till they surrender chapter 9 verse 28, 29, and 30.  Those are the verses, I gave you those, these are all about Christians and Jews.  You fight them until they surrender.  You want peace with them; they don't, and the Islamic regime of Iran has proven that over and over.  Israel wanted to be left alone.  They wanted to live their lives, but the Iranian regime "Death to America!" "Death to Israel!"  They just kept provoking.  They just kept sending proxies, they sent missiles.  How long can you put up with it?  You want peace, that's understandable.  They don't.

1:41.  Muslims should not concede or compromise with people when we have the higher ground or we have the upper ground there's actually an amazing eye in the Quran.  Ia 139, to be honest with you Islam has the upper hand we're not going to give you that concession.

1:57.  Hudna.  It means when you're weak you make treaties until you get strong enough to disregard them.

There is only HUDNA, temporary treaty when Muslims are in a weak position until they get stronger and try to conquer you again.

RETURN TO DIANA WEST INTERVIEW

17:15.  See with our own eyes and they're entering into what Islamic lies called hudna.  This is a temporary truce that allows an Islamic fighting group to gain time in order to get strong and break the truce.  And this is not me talking.  This is Islam, and it goes back 1400 years.  This is elementary, and similarly we have the Islamic concept very important of taqiya, which is deception, and you have it from on high, on Islamic high that is, for Muslims to lie to advance Islam.  This is a holy writ.  There is no Thou shalt not lie as we have in the Ten Commandments and the religion judicial or legal organization known as Islam it doesn't exist so if you know those two basic things that anyone can grass because of course Islam was basically design for 9-year-old boys to grasp.  If you know those two things, you do not put out messages about how Hamas is ready for peace, P E A C E, has Donald Trump does and expect anything but rack and ruin.  To come of it and I'm very sorry to say that but this is just this kind of exercise that we've seen time and time again and it is so sad to see Donald Trump tragic to see Donald Trump sucked in by it but you know sucked in he is and this is kind of where we are but is this basic understanding of Islam that has been blocked out of anyone in authority in America certainly from 9/11 forward.

18:57.  It's a blind spot when that he has when it comes to business and making money.  And let's be honest, it if it were the Democrats doing this, we'd be screaming bloody murder.

19:10.  Right, with Hunter Biden.  Golf Club deal with Qatar while his father was yes exactly that is part of the genius of this in terms of the bad guys advancing their agendas because we are confused if it's Donald Trump we know that he loves America we know he wants the best for us but it's a blind spot or we don't know what it is we judge them by their actions as the Bible tells us right know them by their fruits we don't know what's going on in his head we never will and similarly for everyone involved and is frightening because we've seen this many times in cases of Israel fighting Islamic armies that the United States generally stops Israel before it finishes any sort of War decisively

ION MIHAI PACEPA: During the Cold War, more people in the Soviet bloc worked for the dezinformatsiya [disinformation] machine than for the Soviet army and defense industry put together.

If the Soviet penetration of Washington, D.C., was so wide and so deep that it functioned like an occupation …

If, as a result of that occupation, American statecraft became an extension of Soviet strategy …

If the people who caught on – investigators, politicians,…

— E Stanton (@EStanton625970) September 12, 2025

If the Soviet penetration of Washington, D.C., was so wide and so deep that it functioned like an occupation...

If, as a result of that occupation, American statecraft became an extension of Soviet strategy …

If the people who caught on – investigators, politicians, defectors – and tried to warn the American public were demonized, ridiculed and destroyed for the good of that occupation and to further that strategy …

And if the truth was suppressed by an increasingly complicit Uncle Sam …

Would you feel betrayed?

Now available from St. Martin's Press, American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character

American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character, Diana West, 2013.

An excerpt from American Betrayal, Chapter 4 on censorship of totalitarianism both in the Soviet Union and the U.S.

What do I mean by "armies"?  Ion Mihai Pacepa, former Chief of intelligence in communist Romania, told me, "During the Cold War, more people in the Soviet bloc worked for the dezinformatsiya [disinformation] machine than for the Soviet army and defense industry put together.  The bloc's intelligence community alone had over one million officers (the KGB had over 700,000) and several million informants around the world.  All were involved in deceiving the West--and their own country--or in supporting the effort. 

Remember way back in 2022, how Biden installed one Nina Jankowicz to lead the Department of Homeland Security's Disinformation Governance Board?

I don't know how or what you think of communism, but you should know that violence and invasion are part and parcel of its  immoral ideology and destructive action.  Which is why Bolsheviks and internationalists slid underground into movements like the Environmental Movement, call it Global Warming, change the name to a more general and vacuous moniker, to suck more people into a fool's errand.  If you've forgotten about all the communist invasions, let me help.  As critical as I can be, even I underestimated the number of invasions, 

Estonia, 1918.

Latvia, 1918. Lithuania, 1918. Finland, 1918. Poland, 1918. Ukraine, 1918. Belarus, 1918. Moldova, 1918. Georgia, 1918. Azerbaijan, 1918. Central Asia, 1918. Tuva, 1918. Mongolia, 1921. Georgia, 1924. Estonia, 1924. China, 1929.  Japan, 1938. Poland, 1939-1956. Finland, 1939. Estonia, 1940. Latvia, 1940. Lithuania, 1940. Romania, 1940. Ukraine, 1942. Bulgaria, 1944. Hungary, 1944. Japan, 1945. Yugoslavia, 1944. China, 1944. Baltic States, 1944. Poland, 1944. Korea, 1950. East Germany, 1953, Hungary, 1956. Vietnam, 1960. Laos, 1960. Czechoslovakia, 1968. China, 1969. Israel, 1967.  Ethiopia, 1975.  Angola, 1975. Somalia, 1977. Afghanistan, 1979. Baltic States, 1990. Georgia, 1990. Azerbaijan, 1990. Moldova, 1992. Tajikistan, 1992. Northern caucuses, 1992. Georgia, 2008. Ukraine, 2014. Syria, 2015.

Poland, 1939-1956.  

Baltic States, 1940-1991.

Finnish territories, 1940.

Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, 1940.

Iran, 1941-1946.

Hungary, 1944-1991.

Romania, 1944-1958.

Bulgaria, 1944-1947.

Czechoslovakia, 1944-1947

Northern Norway, 1944-1946, and Bornholm Denmark, 1945-1946.

Eastern Germany, 1945-1949.

Austria, 1945-1955.

Manchuria, 1945-1946.

Korea, 1945-1948.

Kuril Islands, 1945.

COLD WAR

Hungarian Revolution of 1956.

Czechoslovakia, 1968-1989.

Afghanistan, 1979-1989.  

LINUXHIPPIE: When the Floyd Riots happened, both the GOPe & the Left oriented on the same language. "Peaceful Protest" Now we see the same thing with "civility" "tone down" "unity" & "gun violence" "both sides".

There has been an ongoing Marxist lead insurgency in the country since the 1960's. The Marxist made common cause (United Front) with Islam to destroy the United States, and they are winning.

We all know precisely what has happened, the "grand conspiracy" is staring you right in the face, it is these people demanding you accept their framing of events so they can continue to accelerate the dismantling of Constitution and Bill of Rights. --Linuxhippie

When the Floyd Riots happened, both the GOPe & the Left oriented on the same language. "Peaceful Protest"

Now we see the same thing with "civility" "tone down" "unity" & "gun violence" "both sides".

When these people use the word "dialogue" it doesn't mean what you think it… https://t.co/pGipTh1ui2 pic.twitter.com/mXwuioNPx5

— linuxhippie (Bring Back The Duel) (@linuxhippie) September 13, 2025

When the Floyd Riots happened, both the GOPe & the Left oriented on the same language. "Peaceful Protest" Now we see the same thing with "civility" "tone down" "unity" & "gun violence" "both sides". When these people use the word "dialogue" it doesn't mean what you think it means---- and they know you don't know it. A call for "Dialogue" turns what follows into a dialectical event. Which typically manifests into intersectional lines of attack, and has as it's object a target for negation. In this case there are likely several targets but make no mistake, they all are directed at YOU. I would like to point out, nobody rioted or burned down buildings. There wasn't massive protests, just vigils. So what are we exactly suppose to "tone down?" Our outrage at an innocent man being assassinated at a public speaking event on a college campus? Our complete and total frustration at the lack of any serious effort to address the ongoing Marxist / Islamic revolution that (IS) the "formal cause" of the assassination of Charlie Kirk and the murders of innocent American Citizens? Make no doubt, Lankford knows exactly what he's doing. He expects some outrage (which will be dismissed as fringe) but he's betting that if enough of his colleagues continue the "praxis" they'll achieve political acceptance. You cannot dismiss this man as being weak or a cuck. You cannot accept his rhetoric as being legitimate or you are consigning yourself to destruction. Final Cause is FIRST in the order of "intention" but last in the order of "execution". Said differently, he made the decision to say what he said based on a careful analysis of "their" objectives. This is the real enemy that must be defeated or anything we attempt is doomed from the outset. There has been an ongoing Marxist lead insurgency in the country since the 1960's. The Marxist made common cause (United Front) with Islam to destroy the United States, and they are winning. Lankford's words are based on a "dialectical" framing of events not in reality. There is simply zero evidence to substantiate his position. If you can find an event on the chart below, that (IS) what it (IS), it's not any more complicated than that. To deny that is to willfully support the actions of those who seek you totally destruction. We all know precisely what has happened, the "grand conspiracy" is staring you right in the face, it is these people demanding you accept their framing of events so they can continue to accelerate the dismantling of Constitution and Bill of Rights. Never debate the absurd.

ERIC DAUGHERTY: 🚨 HOLY CRAP! Stephen Miller reveals Democrats got 20 to 30 HOUSE SEATS from counting illegals in the Census.

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Stephen Miller reveals Democrats got 20 to 30 HOUSE SEATS from counting illegals in the Census.

"20 to 30 of House Democrat seats wouldn't exist but for illegal aliens!"

But President Trump's starting a new Census NOW, with no illegals.

"Let's not forget:… pic.twitter.com/VYDRbHOlTB

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) August 7, 2025

3:13.  What this book asks the reader to do is to make connections to take a step back to have some perspective on what's happened to us over the past 50 years . . . .

3:23.  Make connections. Why do we need to do that?

3:26.  Because we don't understand what's going on I think people are so content to take the official narrative as it set in the mainstream media as it set by the politicians in the White House, in Hollywood, and our fate and I think that these sorts of connections that I tried to draw in The Death of the Grown-Up had to do with trying to understand where we were at the point which I wrote that book, which I do feel to this day is in a very disadvantageous position to confront these challenges from islamization, from infantilization of the culture and the politics.  So I was trying to figure out how it is that we arrived at this position of impotence.

4:14.  Talk about your upbringing in Hollywood what were the circumstances what were your father and mother like and what did they do?

4:22.  To preface my dad's career he did begin as a liberal his first vote was cast as a soldier in France somewhere in 1944 for FDR I think his next vote Henry Wallace in 1948 but he had moved right himself by the '60s when I was born.  I wasn't following these things at the time.  But he was a cold warrior in the sense that he was very fascinated and very driven to write stories about the changes that were going on in the post-war world, very fascinated by Europe, by the politics, and so he liked to try to bring those stories to light, and came up against a wall in Hollywood.  I could tell you a whole show's worth of stories in terms of the politics he encountered in the 1960s trying to discuss Germany communist infiltration Vietnam Etc all these kinds of stories that Hollywood did not want to sell one quick example he had a novel he was going to write that he sold two little brown I believe it was 1969/1970 about a former communist who'd become a professor at Berkeley.  His politics had changed.  This was the time of the big student rioting.  Long story short, there was a threat on the part of junior staff coming right out of the college campus world to resign en masse if that book went on the list.  And the publisher at the time, spine of jelly, caved.  So my dad actually never wrote that book.  He wrote another book that year.  But those were the kinds of times that we're living through.  So I did grow up quite aware of them, and again trying to put the pieces together 20-30 years later I guess.

6:13.  What did he do and how long did you live in Hollywood?

6:16.  I grew up there.  I was born there until I went away to college, so I grew up there, Laurel Canyon.  He was a novelist by choice and he wrote a lot of Television along the way and screenplay . . . 

6:27.  What was his name?

6:28.  Elliott West was his name and he published about five novels and wrote innumerable radio and television scripts through the years . . .

6:38.  Shows that we would know?

6:41.  Lou Grant would be one a lot of the old Alfred Hitchcock of the old danger shows a lot of the shows from Hollywood's televisions early days as well.

6:53.  How long had he lived in Hollywood?

6:55.  He came out there in the 1950s he was born in New York in Brooklyn my grandfather ran one of the movie palaces of the old days Lowe's Kings and I'd been in Vaudeville actually before that but so my dad grew up in the movies he grew up in a movie theater basically in the 1930s.

7:11.  What about Mom?

7:12.  My mother was an actress at the time she is Los Angeles born in bread she's with me right now and she grew up in California Los Angeles so at a certain point my folks moved back out there.

7:27.  What was her stage name or screen name?

7:28.   Barbara Belden she made one movie did a lot of theater and such she didn't stick with it I think by the time she was in her late twenties she left that behind but they did meet at an audition at some point.

7:41.  So what did you grow up thinking about politics?

7:45.  They were very loud and noisy we had a lot of dinner table discussions and primarily in terms of loud and noisy would be when my parents' friends would come over all liberals and there would be these discussions I mentioned in that little clip about Vietnam about Nixon about the campus riding all of these things that were very tendentious and I think I've spoken to some so-called Hollywood conservatives in more recent times and their feeling in the last decades was that the 60s was much worse it is much harder to be a conservative in Hollywood at that time they were much more Underground if they were there at all and it was difficult because it was hangover from the 1930s which is when the big infiltration came and the controls on the story gills and the agencies and so on it wasn't anyone's imagination which is what the revelations of the 1990s have told us we have learned who names dates places of concerted efforts to subvert our information Industries whether it was entertainment or Media or politics .

8:54.  You mentioned earlier Henry Wallace was a communist did he ever acknowledge being a communist?

8:58.  No no I don't believe he did very close like socialist also vegetarian and had all kinds of other . . .

9:07.  He wasn't a Russia supporting communist?

9:09.  He was a Russia supporting Democrat he was very pro-russia a very active apologist he made a very shameful famous trip to the Soviet Union during World War II I and actually went to one of the Google log camps that had been dressed up and he bought every little Shred of lie that he was served which he later did regret and actually publicly recanted.

9:33.  Several weeks ago we had a young lady on here Michelle Fields who was a journalist video journalist with the Daily Caller and I just want to run just a little bit of this to connect it to you . . .

He was a man of faith of great values and when he went to Los Angeles he became this big time writer he never changed I mean he never drove a luxury car he was still the same guy from Kentucky if he donated money when he donated he did so in anonymously he taught us that money meant nothing and he told us that we should be who we are and stay true to ourselves and he led by example he showed us that it's possible even in a world like Hollywood that you can still remain yourself and I think that's had a tremendous impact on me.

10:25.  She's a conservative.  She survived Hollywood.  When you were there and in school, did you, were you vocal about how you felt about the issues, or did you feel conservative about the issues back then?

10:42.  

 

people don't know what's going on.  We're content with accepting the mainstream narrative as it is set int he mainstream media.

DIANA WEST: Women in combat erodes the male protective instinct as well as those old-fashioned strength and speed requirements

Such conditioning erodes the male protective instinct -- which, surely, is what war is supposed to arise from -- and the female nurturing instinct, which surely is what a civilization depends on.  --Diana West.

@ 8:39, Admiral James "Ace" Lyons states it directly, "Women in combat.  All the studies tell you everything you want to know.  It's wrong. There are many viable roles for women in the military.  Combat is not one of them."

And the latest mandate on transgenders . . . .  You know Dr. [Paul] McHugh, the former lead psychologist at John Hopkins University said, "This is not a physical problem.  That's the first I'd heard somebody couldn't hear me.  He said this is not a physical problem.  This is a mental disorder.  It requires understanding and treatment.  It is not a civil rights issue.  And when the rest of you see Bruce Jenner again, tell him to get a new psychiatrist."

from Diana West's "When Women Fight, Civilization Loses," Galesburg.com, January 31, 2013.  

It (civilization) has been struggling there for decades, as social engineers and radical feminists -- all heirs to Marx -- have been cutting away at elemental human instinct, social grace, language and thought itself. This overhaul of manners and mores, the family structure and marriage -- even private aspects of the relationship between men and women -- has been successful to a point where the cultural argument against women in combat (women in the military being a lost cause) is rarely voiced, not even on the right. (I watched Fox News on women-in-combat announcement day, listening in vain for just one culture warrior.) 

We are left to make only the utilitarian arguments -- body strength and speed, unit cohesion, even urinary tract infections and other hazards that front-line deployment pose to females. These are compellingly logical points, but they are unlikely to reverse an ideological juggernaut. When the secretary of defense says putting women in combat is about "making our military ... and America stronger" and no one says he's lying to further a Marxian ideal via social engineering, the cultural argument is lost, and the culture it comes from is bound and gagged, hostage to what we know as "political correctness."

I still see threads of the cultural argument in emails and some blog responses to the Pentagon's latest whack at creating "gender neutrality." It erupts like a reflex against the conditioning to deny differences defined, at their essence, by muscle mass and womb. Such conditioning erodes the male protective instinct -- which, surely, is what war is supposed to arise from -- and the female nurturing instinct, which surely is what a civilization depends on. 

No more. Women with wombs and without manly muscle mass now count as Pentagon-approved "warriors," modern-day knights in Kevlar, soon to be humping 80-pound packs over mountain and desert. 

So women in combat erodes the male protective instinct and drops "some of the those old-fashioned strength and speed standards."

Or maybe not. Didn't Gen. Dempsey indicate that dropping some of those old-fashioned strength and speed requirements might be in order? "If we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn't make it," Dempsey said last week, "the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the Secretary, why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high?" Of course not! Why train Navy SEALs when Navy OTTERs will do as well?

-Diana West, Author of The Red Thread, American Betrayal and Death of the Grownup -Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Executive Chairman of the Center for Security Policy -Chris Farrell, Director for Investigations and Research at Judicial Watch -Rich Higgins, Former Pentagon Official Who Served in the NSC Strategic-Planning Office About The Red Thread: The first investigation into why a ring of senior Washington officials went rogue to derail the election and the presidency of Donald Trump. There was nothing normal about the 2016 presidential election, not when senior U.S. officials were turning the surveillance powers of the federal government -- designed to stop terrorist attacks -- against the Republican presidential team. These were the ruthless tactics of a Soviet-style police state, not a democratic republic. The Red Thread asks the simple question: Why? What is it that motivated these anti-Trump conspirators from inside and around the Obama administration and Clinton networks to depart so drastically from “politics as usual” to participate in a seditious effort to overturn an election? Finding clues in an array of sources, Diana West uses her trademark investigative skills, honed in her dazzling work, American Betrayal, to construct a fascinating series of ideological profiles of well-known but little understood anti-Trump actors, from James Comey to Christopher Steele to Nellie Ohr, and the rest of the Fusion GPS team; from John Brennan to the numerous Clintonistas still patrolling the Washington Swamp after all these years, and more. Once, we knew these officials by august titles and reputation; after The Red Thread, readers will recognize their multi-generational and inter-connecting communist and socialist pedigrees, and see them for what they really are: foot-soldiers of the Left, deployed to take down America’s first “America First” and most anti-Communist president. If we just give it a pull, the “red thread” is very long and very deep.

Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hilary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump, Gregg Jarrett, 2018.

Judicial Watch. federal attack on our election and on the presidency.

The Red Thread: A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy, Diana West, 2019. Why did these senior officials at the Justice Department and the FBI, elsewhere in the Obama Administration, why did they decide to engage in so many lawless acts to undermine an election and sabotage a presidency. In other words, we have a famous, wonderful system whereby the transition from one party to another every 2 to 4 years is peaceful. It's common in Washington whereby the out party does something else for a couple of years and waits to take political revenge in the next election cycle. In this case, we've seen something so foreign to our understanding of how our democracy is supposed to work that I decided to try to find out if we could find out why it is that what we're looking at is so familiar to us from totalitarian systems. And that is a very serious undertaking and it begins with the fusion GPS team of Nellie Orr and her husband at the Justice Department. This was sort of the beginning of the Red Thread. It looks at James Comey's ideological roots. It looks at John Brennan. It tries to build out ideological profiles that may help us understand why we have public servants who've sworn to uphold the Constitution who are actually operating under the very Marxist paradigm of "the ends justify the means."

5:45 James Comey, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations, previously the #2 man at the Department of Justice, seems like an unlikely character given that personal record to have Leftist or Marxist leanings. Walk us through how they're there.

6:12 Yes, he's a very fine subject of study because he's been so open about his own philosophical influences on his entire career. When he was a senior at William and Mary, he graduated in 1982, he did a paper on the Christian and Politics and he looked at Jerry Falwell at the time, a very important figure on the right, and he looked at the man who is considered to be his own ideological mentor, Reinhold Niebuhr, 1892-1971. Most people don't know too much about Reinhold Niebuhr except that he is "liberal, protestant theologian." His writings however have shaped James Comey's outlook, not just as a student but as recently as 2018 when the New York Times interviewed him on the occasion of him publishing his memoir, A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership, 2018. He was asked about the most important books that influenced his life, and he selected two Niebuhr titles from 1930-something and 1940, which is the period in which Niebuhr was well known as a member of the Socialist Party in the United States, and a very militant Marxist, who in the early 30s was literally calling for the overthrow of the American social order. This is something quite staggering when you realize that James Comey used his name, Reinhold Niebuhr, as his Twitter handle until he was discovered. This was when he was incognito. This becomes someone to really investigate, to look at on James Comey's view of justice. This is what he studied as a student when he considered himself to be a communist. He was very open about this in an interview that Comey gave in 2003 with New York Magazine where he talked about being a communist in college. He "wasn't quite sure what he was now," this is what he told us as he was preparing to enter the Bush 43 Administration as the #2 at the Justice Department, but he had moved into a Republican style, you might say. It becomes evident when you look at the things that he highlighted as a young man from Niebuhr's readings, and we can go into it; I have some quotations.

STEPHEN MILLER: Biden Judge Jennifer Thurston just ruled that Border Patrol cannot arrest illegals without individualized warrants. Judicial Coup

The scale of the judicial coup now underway is breathtaking. All designed to make America a third world nation. https://t.co/pCg2GLk9Ub

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) April 30, 2025

Jennifer Leigh Thurston is an American judge who is a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. She previously served as the Chief United States magistrate judge of the same court.  

Thank you to Diana West.

TOM HOMAN ON MORNING JOE -- Not one person was vetted coming into America, now Democrats want to vet everyone we deport.

Translation: The Communist destroyers who wield power treasonously to destroy us will not relinquish their armies imported to destroy us.

Find this Tom Homan quote at the 7:45 mark. 

SADIE: only way for the Western part of Canada to get oil to the Eastern part of Canada is to send it through America.

Thank you to realDianaWest.   

It would've been helpful to attach the video pic.twitter.com/bbqPhMGzuL

— DaRay🇺🇲❤️🤍💙🇺🇲 (@DaRay38) February 3, 2025

Just love how uneducated both Americans and Canadians truly are.

Here are just some historic tariffs Canada hits America with.

Milk: 270%
Cheese: 245%
Butter: 298%
Chicken: 238%
Sausages: 69.9%
Barley seed: 57.8%
Bovine/meat: 26.5%
Cars: 25%
HVAC: 45%
Vacuums: 35%
Cable boxes:…

— Tony Seruga (@TonySeruga) February 2, 2025

TIM WALZ’s CONNECTIONS TO CHINA with Diana West and Dave Collum

Diana West and Dave Collum- TIM WALZ’s CONNECTIONS TO CHINA

Part II: We discuss Diana’s book The Red Thread. the feminist movement, Trump, Kamala, Russia/Ukraine, elections 2024, and more.@realDianaWest @DavidBCollum @Matt_Bracken48

FULL SHOW: https://t.co/NObz5bO0SJ pic.twitter.com/3QPtVXpg9X

— Michael Farris (@CoffeeandaMike) September 19, 2024

Complete interview. 

 

3:26. There was a certain skill set that I took to the problem of the anti-Trump conspiracy but for example, it is also the case and I've done some further research since that some of these players did all seem to run through Moscow before the fall of the Soviet Union or its early days.  That would be Nellie Ohr. 

Bruce Ohr.  Not sure of Bruce Ohr, but Nellie was there.

Nellie was the Russian fusion, Russian expert, kind of Christopher Steele opposite . . . Christopher Steele was there. Fiona Hill was there.  She's in the Post Red Thread research.  David the McCain Aid [David Foster Wallace?] he was there.  

Nina Jankowicz was there. 

4:24. Recently I was very shocked by this I found that Victoria Nuland has a thin Red Thread I wrote a piece on Substack yeah darling girl but she literally went to work after college I believe she went to Brown she left Brown and this would have been in the mid 80s she went to work on a Soviet fish processing trawler as her first job.  And it's very strange because of that that's not a very safe thing to do; you're going to have a dossier opened up on you.  I mean this was the '80s.

Yeah, that should keep you out of top-secret security clearance, right?

One would wonder about that.  You know, and I was very shocked.  I did not expect to find that but I did.  

5:06. Yeah, Tim Waltz who has huge Chinese connections.  Holy moly!  How did that happen?  

But think about how, where we are in terms of the country, its institutions, including the Democratic Party, which is supposed to be an American political party, in terms of thinking that's okay.  Not that long ago someone with his credentials would have been just, you know, "I'm sorry, dude, you're not going to make it into the big time."  It's amazing to me that there's no longer the survival reflex.  It's the survival reflex along with everything else that's been beaten out of us . . . 

5:48. Or they have taken over, or they have won. 

5:51. Yes I would say that is, that is the other part of the sentence . . .  

5:57.  So it's not just oblivion.  They have won.  You know, the campuses are 98% left leaning [I would say Bolshevik] right? They won that.  I don't know how you undo that.  People say, "How do you fix that?  With 98% left wing?  There's no obvious mechanism.

6:11. But that even goes down to the lower education system, elementary, middle school . . .

6:15. Daycare.  Daycare.  We are getting the kids freshman year. People say oh you guys are really screwing up the kids I got no the kids are arriving freshman year damaged they are one nudge away from being a Marxist.

6:30. And they were selected by the admissions offices.

6:34. Oh, I can't imagine what essays are being written to get in to Cornell now.  I cannot fathom.

6:39. You could select a different class if your admissions office chose to. I often think of what goes on in the admissions officer choosing these classes they've been taken over for sure and this predates the Frankfurt School I mean we didn't have to wait for Marcus to have this happen and the rest this is something that the Communists communist teachers organizations unions and so on you may have heard of Bella Dodd she was a very famous official, a Communist Party, teacher's union official out of New York who defected, went back to the Catholic Church, became very instrumental witness in probably the 1950s late 40s, 50s, explaining how these things are done.  The schools were already riddled with communist teachers.  There's a really interesting little moment when the Soviet Union . . . Interesting little moment of alliance between the Soviet Union and Nancy Germany before Nazi Germany attacked the Soviet Union 1941 so 1939 to summer '40, '41.  New York legislature did an investigation into authoritarian impulses what not in the schools and ended up with a report on the Communist infiltration in New York's Public Schools and colleges that is mind-blowing.  And this is 1941, so you've already got CCNY and the different colleges and high schools.  You've already got massive communist teacher infiltration going on, so it was already quite dense.

8:47. Communist is a strong word.  Would Marxists be more accurate?

8:50.  I think what they were looking at were Communist party members if I'm not mistaken.  I think they literally were looking at something very defined and remember back in the day it wasn't as a big deal to have a card being part of a Communist party it hadn't gone through all the other decades yet.  They used to get cards that had numbers, and I think that actually stopped when the House on Un-American Activities Committee began identifying Communist party members by their membership cards, and so they stopped issuing them.  I think that was a result of that.  

9:31  I'm going to guess your brief mention of McCarthy through unbelievable fire.  So you talk about McCarthy early in your first book, . . . 

9:37 The late great McCarthy

9:45  and I thought it was going to go seriously into McCharthy, and it didn't hardly touch on him, didn't even mention Roy Cohn, any of these guys, right, so it was in passing that McCarthy had it right, right?

9:52  Yeah, yeah, definitely. 

9:56  I'll bet you that your detractors used that for headline attacks, is that correct? 

10:03  Well, it is correct, I, and I am quite proud of this, I was called "McCarthy on Steroids."

10:12  You probably had three sentences in the book on McCarthy.  I mean it was really not a big part of the book.

10:21  It's a grounding place.  This is what I meant about Stan Evans' book about McCarthy [Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies, M. Stanton Evans, 2007.], which I really recommend; it will, I mean that really flipped my, I didn't really know anything Joseph McCarthy except what you might pick up from the vapors and the noxious references but I'd never made any kind of study of McCarthy, and then I read, I don't know how, I picked up M. Stanton Evans' book which in some ways should never have been written or published at that point and time, I mean it was over and done.  McCarthy was the demon child of American history.  He writes this book and it's amazing.  It's an amazing piece of detective work.  I mean he was a shoe-leather journalist.  Fantastic.  Basically, I thought that if you can do that with McCarthy, what else has been completely misrepresented, lie upon lie upon lie.  The other thing that also drew me in was at the time I was writing, I was a syndicated columnist, appeared on shows, and so on and this was post-9/11 times, and if you brought up Islam, and if you brought up Islam and if you  were critical of Islam, you got slammed as an islamophobe I used to write about this all the time many many columns devoted to Islam and Jihad and Dhimmitude, Islamic Law, all these things Europe I did a lot of reporting in Europe on islamization I was just wondering why can't we have a grown up conversation about Islam in this country and that book took a bit of shape from that debate believe it or not I was on the old Lou Dobbs show on CNN and it was right before Barack Obama was elected president the first time and I had some fairly mild comment I'd written about Obama's socialist policies in my column but I hadn't gotten it out on CNN and there was like this weight it's very hard to get the s word out I said I'm going to say it I'm going to say it so I'm sitting there the sound booth in Washington and it rolls around to me and I just well Lou will just have to wait and see if Senator Obama his if his policies would take the United States in his into a socialist Direction and you get the round Robin's on the pundits in this Hillary person comes on and he says Diana red beating went out a long time ago and blah blah blah and I thought red baiting I did have a chance to rebut and I did have a much better presentation on why I would think he could be socialist but the point is I didn't quite I knew red baiting vaguely but I had to go look it up and I had to figure it out and I realized that there's this correlation between Islamophobe to cut off debate, and red-baiting to cut off debate.  And then I was reading Stan Evans book about that time and that's when I started going back and ask when did this happen that we can't talk about Islam can't talk about communism and then I figured out it's before McCarthy and that was kind of the Genesis of the investigation

DIANA WEST: How Communist Ideology Infiltrated America’s Security Agencies & Fueled Spygate

American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character, Diana West, 2013.

The Red Thread: A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy, Diana West, 2019.

They're not there upholding their constitutional oath in fact they're trashing them.  And when you actually look at some of the very cold, I would say Marxist, beliefs behind these people that seem to animate them, they are deceiving us as to who they really are and they are trying to enact their own visions of what the quality should be irrespective of these oaths and irrespective of the people's will.

Is it possible that communist ideology has infiltrated America's intelligence agencies? After looking into key figures involved the Spygate Scandal, what information did Diana West uncover about their beliefs?  And how is Donald Trump a counter-revolutionary president in West's view?

THE SEARCH FOR IDEOLOGICAL DRIVERS IN THE ANTI-TRUMP CONSPIRACY

The actions on the part of senior officials in Washington that certainly it may be argued that some of them are seditious I mean really serious actions against the rule of law in their efforts to take down this presidency.  The campaign undermined the transition and it's gone on and on and I was trying to get a sense of why are they so angry, why were they resorting to these measures when America is known for peaceful transition of power.

Nelly Ohr was an academic she had been a professor in the 1990s and that meant they were going to publicly available writings, book reviews, for example, a PhD thesis, that I could at least look at to try to get a better sense of who she was, and, indeed, she turns out she is a Russian expert.  She speaks the language.  She taught the subject.  She got a PhD in history at Stanford after Harvard, and she studied in the Soviet Union when it was still the Soviet Union.  I ended up putting together in The Red Thread kind of an ideological profile of Nellie Ohr.  She's my first case in which I learned that she did have a very soft spot for the regime of Joseph Stalin.

Fascinating.

Terrifying!  She would talk about the terror and the excitement of the Stalin era.  She was talking about the frustration in a book review of trying to teach about this era to her students at Vassar in the 1990s. Terror I can understand.  Excitement?  If you look a little further, you can find similarly that she applauded Stalin for trying to build a legal structure, "the agonizing paradox of Stalin era," trying to build a legal structure on the one hand, and yet executing innocent civilians on the other hand.  This is the kind of moral equivalent attitude when you're looking at this bloodthirsty regime that killed millions and millions of people.  The legal structure was a sham if you're killing and executing innocent civilians.  This was very clearly a theme of her writings and indeed including in her PhD thesis that I learned that she follows a school of history in American academia known as revisionism, one that came about in the '60s and '70s that was essentially promoted by straight-up Marxist and the New Left what we used to call the new left in this country which really wasn't much different from the old left it was usually their children but they took over the departments on college campuses and they are at school that writes about itself and has its stars and so on and she clearly followed in the school and the people here are people who she essentially considered her mentors and study Network at Harvard and so on.  So it became pretty clear that there was a red thread, if you will hear in terms of an openness to communist ideology as it was, put into practice.  So she was case number one.  Gives you a flavor of what I was finding with Nellie Ohr.  What intrigued me is that she does have CIA credentials.  She worked for their open-source shop, so she had a CIA connection.  Interesting. We also know she took out a ham radio operator's license in the spring of 2016.  Who is she talking to? 

WWII could have ended earlier in 1943, but the communists in high ranking positions in DC blocked an effort from German high command to prevent Communists from taking over Eastern and Central Europe

.@ehret_matthew: "Diana West's pedigree as a Kristol mainstream Yale narrative controller"

Whatever "mainstream" status @diana_west_ may have had once, it was taken from her after she wrote AMERICAN BETRAYAL (2013).   https://t.co/Cas3RJf6l4 pic.twitter.com/sJBXI7sKSa

— Richard Poe 🇺🇸 (@RealRichardPoe) December 30, 2023

from Amazon, 

American Betrayal is America's lost history, a chronicle that pits Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight David Eisenhower, and other American icons who shielded overlapping Communist conspiracies against the investigators, politicians, defectors, and others (including Senator Joseph McCarthy) who tried to tell the American people the truth.

American Betrayal shatters the approved histories of an era that begins with FDR's first inauguration, when "happy days" are supposed to be here again, and ends when we "win" the Cold War. It is here, amid the rubble, where Diana West focuses on the World War II--Cold War deal with the devil in which America surrendered her principles in exchange for a series of Big Lies whose preservation soon became the basis of our leaders' own self-preservation. It was this moral surrender to deception and self-deception, West argues, that sent us down the long road to moral relativism, "political correctness," and other cultural ills that have left us unable to ask the hard questions: Does our silence on the crimes of Communism explain our silence on the totalitarianism of Islam? Is Uncle Sam once again betraying America?

In American Betrayal, Diana West shakes the historical record to bring down a new understanding of our past, our present, and how we have become a nation unable to know truth from lies. 

You can find speeches and interviews given by Diana West all over the internet.  I found this one on YouTube, where she reviews her 2014 book, American Betrayal.  

At the 9-minute mark, she talks about the communist occupation of Washington, D.C. strategy-making chain, and how that chain worked to extend WWII for two more years past 1943.  

We had hundreds of communist agents in very influential positions in Washington, D.C. by 1943.  One of the things that they were able to do was block . . . a very significant anti-Nazi German resistance.  They had one problem: they were very highly placed.  It included the Intelligence Chief, Admiral Wilhelm Franz Canaris, ; it included church members, it included generals, it included all manner of people from different kinds of groups.  They were anti-communist.  Every plan that they submitted to either the British or the Americans over this period, beginning around 1942, 1943, they would present to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi high command, to the Americans and the British, and in return, they wanted help to keep the Red Army in Russia out of Eastern and Central Europe, and this was always the basic plan.  Because we had so many communists in positions of authority, this would be blocked.  For example, there was an AP bureau chief, named Lochner, an American, who came back in 1942 with communications from Prince Louis Ferdinand of Germany.  They wanted to establish secret communications with Roosevelt.  Prince Louis Ferdinand knew President Roosevelt . . . .   

11:17  The man who blocked Lochner at the White House was Lauchlin Currie, 1902-1993, one of Roosevelt's top assistants, dead-to-rights, confirmed Soviet agent.  So you had Lochner dissuaded, not to call anymore, told it was getting embarrassing hearing from this AP bureau chief from Berlin with special messages from German resistance during the war.  Extraordinary.  The War could have ended earlier.   

15:05.  So I went back into this very dirty intelligence or that really the Soviet Union embarked upon beginning the moment it came into existence in 1917.  But in 1917, it did so in American isolation.  Four presidents and six Secretaries of State refused to recognize the Soviet Union.  It was a revolutionary entity that declared war on everyone, and these presidents and secretaries of state saw no reason to normalize relations with such a critter.  Until FDR came along, and on November 16th, 1933, he normalized relations with the Soviet Union.  I actually think of this date now as America's fall. 

Months earlier in the Soviet Union, what we know now as the terror famine, the famine of Ukraine, the state-engineered starvation, forced starvation of some 5 or 6 million, maybe more, people, had come to an end.  And if several months later, the United States normalizes relations . . . this was not even a term; it's not even discussed in the notes that were exchanged.  There was nothing.  It was as if it didn't happen.  Imagine, you have to scramble histories some, but imagine if after Hitler killed 6 million of his own people, 6 million Jews, a nation decided after that to normalize relations.  We would, you know, be tearing our hair out.  But this was a relationship that always based on this kind of self-delusion, lies; even the agreement itself, it's a very brief exchange of notes, it's kind of surprising when you go back to it.  One of the pages, really the only real page of stipulations, is a series of promises that the Soviet Union had to sign that basically said, "We promise we won't support agents in your country to try to overthrow your Constitution."  This was already going on; it only ramped up after normalization.  And the government, the US government, all the institutions at this point, had to pretend, had to pretend that they were keeping their bargain.  This was a big sea change for the United States.  It was absolute . . . you can see the rise of a double standard in US policies, really double standards everywhere but in terms of the nuts and bolts of it we would end up in this New Deal Administration of Roosevelt in 1930s literally hundreds, hundreds of Americans working for the Kremlin that means not one Aldridge James, not five Cambridge spies led by Kim Philby but hundreds, and they were in place by the 1940s when we entered the war.  [17:40]  They were doing things right here in Washington, so at extremely the highest levels possible.  It struck me that there comes a point with infiltration when it's so dense and so strategic that you have to start thinking of it as an occupation.  It kind of helps . . . when you look at it that way, and I think when you look back and you think of Washington as having been de facto Soviet-occupied in this period, things start making a little more sense.  I mentioned Lauchlin Currie at the White House, you had a man named Duncan Lee [a double agent assigned to spy on General Patton] advising the Wild Bill Donovan of the OSS, many others at the OSS, Franz Neumann, 1900-1954, on the German desk, for example.  Alger Hiss very famously at the State Department.  And, of course, there was also FDR's top advisor, Harry Hopkins, 1890-1946, who remains a very controversial figure.  But I do a lot with Harry Hopkins in terms of pulling a dossier together.  I did study it very deeply and for various, with various evidence in mind.  I think he was a conscious agent but he certainly acted as if he were and effectively promoted the Soviet line to such a point that we had essentially a Soviet occupation even inside the White House because he lived there.  He lived with Roosevelt for 3 and 1/2 years--breakfast, lunch, and dinner, in on everything, particularly in this intense war period.  We still have this disconnect between what we now know that we were penetrated; we know these agents were there; we've had this archival confirmation of much of this, and we still think and we look back at the "Red Scare" and we snicker.  Or we look back, "Oh, you saw commies under every bed," that kind of thing.  I mean that's what automatically comes into everyone's head after this period, really decades, of this conditioning to look the other way, not to probe.  "Red Baiter!" stop thinking about it.  I mean it's really kind of an amazing information-op that has been, we've all sort of lived through.  But when you go back and start reading the memoirs of the people who were experiencing at the time, the bitterness of what they were living through comes through . . . and I just like to mention Robert Stripling, the lead investigator on the House on Un-American Activities Committee when it opened its doors in 1938 under Representative Martin Dies, Democrat of Texas.  Stanton Evans, who wrote the monumental work on Joseph McCarthy in recent years, Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Joseph McCarthy and his Fight Against America's Enemies, 2007.  

20:25. In Blacklisted by History, Evans writes that everything they said about Joseph McCarthy they said first about Martin Dies, which is something of a revelation again because I didn't know you had the same interest in exposing these networks, fascism and communism, in the late 1930s.  Stripling worked for Dies and then later chairman for at least 10 years.  He wrote a memoir, and he said the reason he wanted to write this memoir he said,

I wanted to tell in detail the price that men must pay for the dubious privilege of being reviled in print and on the air for their labors in what amounts to a necessary sewer project of communist investigations.  

He goes on to say,

that this book is his attempt to outline without conjecture the scope of the Communist conspiracy against the government and the people of the United States, even though to do so is to invite the charge of fascist, Red Baiter, witch hunter, and "smear artist."  To fail to do so is to capitulate to a resourceful enemy who can endure any counterattack except exposure."

21:37. Exposure.  This is really the mechanism of the book is exposure.  After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, people, of course, know that the archives opened in Moscow briefly, selectively.  At a certain point after Moscow archives begin to open, what we know as a Venona archives, open here 1995.  I always find it quite interesting when you see that progression as to why the American government was cow into releasing some of these same types of documents that late, 50 years after the fact, is an interesting question why they wanted to keep these secrets so long but what the Venona archive is in 1939 when the Nazis and the Soviets had their friendship pact, Western Union was sending the Soviet cables, Embassy cables back to Russia.  And the government ordered them to make copies.  This is sort of early NSA data collection, and they just piled up by the thousands, by the hundreds of thousands.  Really at a certain point in 1943 when we become allies during the war, the code breakers were told to start translating them in order for us to find a way to be better allies. This was actually the original intention.  The code breakers not too long after actually began discovering that these cables, these diplomatic cables were actually day and date discussions and cable traffic related directly to Soviet espionage here in the United States.  Coming to all of this information as a journalist and not as a historian, I told my editor at St Martin's that I've started a new genre called, investigative history, but he wasn't so sure we could go on with this.  It's pretty intense but what I discovered was that the general history, the regular books that you'll find in the bookstore here, not intelligence histories but biographies, books about the war books, about Yalta, and so on, Cold War, they have not as a rule Incorporated the findings of the intelligence historians.  It's as if all this work that has been done since the 1990s and the great scholars have gone into these archives and assembled them for us, they're around the store here somewhere, many of them their work is still off in a corner, almost like an academic boutique industry, it's over here, and the regular historians just keep on going without any correlation of this very important work.  And that's why I could come along after the thousands of books that have been written about World War II in this period, on the Cold War and Roosevelt, and write something that seems new.  This knitting together had not been done and I think that this vacuum is part of what I think of as an American betrayal, because at a certain point what we're looking at when you put this all together consciously or not, or consciously and not, because I think it's both, but Uncle Sam was actually covering up for the Russian bear.

24:42. Today we can ask his uncle Sam covering up for Islam as we support jihadists across the Middle East. It's hard not to wonder as we eradicate officially the study of Jihad from security agencies, the Pentagon, the military colleges and vacuum up everyone else's phone records, it's hard not to wonder, and I also wonder if ultimately we will find ourselves in some sort of cold war or hot war with Islam just as we did with the Soviet Union after World War II, and wonder how that ever happened?  This is sort of the result of the same suppression of narrative that has been going on for so long there were purges of anti-communist records during World War II.  There were purges of anti-communist personnel.  A Soviet foreign minister in 19 43 actually presented a list to the United States government of anti-communist officials at the state department.  I'm going to pause so that everybody can absorb anti-communist officials at the State Department they did exist until about this point when they were purged they were sent away they were sent to places like Iraq and Turkey which were not hot spots during World War II, and they were sent to Canada just to be out of the vicinity one of President Roosevelt's emissaries diplomatic emissaries during the war a man named George Earl, the former Pennsylvania Governor, he had come to the point where he realized that we weren't, that the Soviet Union was supplanting Nazi Germany with an even more totalitarian, more dangerous dictatorship.  And when he discussed this with Roosevelt and wanted to bring it to the public's attention, he was redeployed to Samoa for the duration.  So this is how, this is how things were done.  

26:26.  Flash forward to our time in 2011 we had similar pressures brought to bear by Muslim groups on the president's counterterrorism at the time advisor John Brennan the justice department Department of Homeland Security eradicate eliminate anti-islamic materials, "anti-islamic," the trainers.  It was kind of a parallel, strange parallel to be living through again.  Another parallel in the olden days, during World War II, officials were very worried about being offensive to Russians, offensive to Soviets.  We have a mirror image today and the fears of being offensive to Islam, offensive to Muslims.  But we called that victory we called that Victory back then and I just wondered as I was looking at all this material, what kind of victory for Liberty replaces one totalitarian monster with an even greater one?  This is what happened when the Soviet Union supplanted Nazi Germany with its evil empire in Europe, and it took about 40 years for a president [Reagan] even to say the words "Evil Empire," and it was like the world exploded with this extremely banal statement.  It should have been something almost in passing but it froze; it froze the debate because no one was supposed to notice.  Now we claim, or we used to claim, I don't even know if we remember, but we claimed victory in a Cold War after a communist century that left 100 million people dead under communist regimes, according to the Black Book of Communism, 1997, and today Republicans in Congress don't, they have the majority; they can't muster the votes to defund what comes down to socialized medicine.  So ideologically, who won?  Who won?  

In the Senate this week, sovereign borders are not even a point of debate. Citizenship is essentially worthless.  The Constitution is in tatters, and you start sort of seeing a resemblance more to the sort of dream of Marxism-Leninism than anything else.  So again but we call it victory, we're very happy, happy to call it victory, and you just wonder what it's all about.  

28:32.  General Wedemeyer would write in his 1958 memoir, "The irony of it all is that the Soviet Empire is largely one of our own creation."  I think he was right, and I would argue that a similar kind of Soviet Empire of the mind took place here, and the penetration and the relationship of lies have been very instrumental in shaping many of the cultural ills that people want to dissect, whether it's cultural relativism or non-judgmentalism, these --isms but basically these theories that depend on a very loose notion of facts, morality, very relativistic kinds of things that come right away from this same relationship ideological accommodation that our government has made for so many decades.  

American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character https://t.co/yr4kOpQOPQ via @amazon

— St. Michael, the Archangel (@aveng_angel) December 30, 2023