Pope Leo XIV this week issued his first encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, in which he called for the limitation and control of artificial intelligence (AI) , which the Pope says threatens to normalize an anti-human vision, by concentrating immense digital power in the hands of a few private actors.  The Pope warns that AI represents “the industrial revolution of the modern age,” and poses challenges to human dignity, justice, and labor.

Dire warnings about the dangers of newfangled technology are nothing new.  All new technologies are met with fear by prophets of doom.  There were those who denounced those noisy, smelly horseless carriages as works of the Devil, which would put buggy whip manufacturers and horseshoeing businesses out of work.

I entitled this piece, Pope Luddite for that reason.  The Luddites were members of a 19th Century movement by textile workers who protested the use of automated machinery by the industry.  They have come to symbolize those who resist any technological advancement.

Some say that Pope Leo’s warning is more powerful because it comes from an American Pope.  Let’s put that argument to rest.  He may have been born in Chicago, but Pope Leo is more South American than North, having taken Peruvian citizenship when he was assigned to that country.  The Pope’s message isn’t coming from an American point of view, so much as a Progressive one.  This is unsurprising.

For those who think Popes only recently have begun spouting Progressive dogma, think again.  Pope Leo’s warning that AI is a modern day industrial revolution wasn’t original.  In fact, it is reminiscent of an encyclical of Leo XIV’s namesake, Leo XIII, who in 1891 issued Rerum Novarum, which warned that the industrial revolution was exploiting workers, denounced the concentration of wealth, and sought to improve living and working conditions for laborers.  Like Leo XIV’s  pronouncement, Leo XIII warned that new technology would cost workers their jobs.  Indeed, Leo XIV says that his choice of the papal name “Leo” was influenced by this 1891 encyclical.

The difference is that Leo XIII was advocating for the 19th Century entrepreneurs to establish now familiar social programs and advancements such as wage and hour laws, worker safety laws, and the protection of trade unions, while at the same time denouncing socialism and communism.  Leo XIV seems to be a dedicated socialist, bent on using AI technology to control State action.

At the heart of Leo’s argument is the notion that AI needs to be disarmed, and turned from an instrument of domination and death, to the service of the common good.  Leo says “technology is never neutral, because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it.”  He worries that AI makes war more feasible, and less subject to human control.

On one level, the Pope’s pronouncement may be seen as part of the ongoing dispute between he’s had with President Trump.  When he released his encyclical, Pope Leo had at his side Chris Olah, co-founder of the AI firm Anthropic.  Olah supports AI safety, a cause with which I cannot disagree.  But there’s more.

Anthropic is in an ongoing dispute with the Trump Administration.  Its AI program, Claude, is used by a number of government agencies, including defense agencies.  Because Anthropic seeks to limit the uses to which its technology may be put, such as being used to select and analyze military targets, the Trump Administration labeled it a supply chain threat to national security.  In essence, by controlling the permitted uses of AI, Anthropic or other tech companies could control the conduct of nation States.

Olah’s heart is in the right place, noting that AI companies have incentives that go against doing the right thing: commercial pressure, competition, pride and ambition.  He said there must be people outside those incentives, such as church leaders, who are willing to be thoughtful critics.

For his part, Pope Leo is calling for regulation of AI, to keep the technology from dehumanizing society.  He sees the challenge of AI about its design and about who gets to make choices as to its use.  I’m certainly not in favor of runaway AI programs which risk replacing human decision making with cold digital calculations.  People need to control the machines, not the other way around.  But who will be that guiding hand?

Magnifica Humanitas may be Pope Leo’s job application, but is he the best candidate?  Understand, I’m not bashing Pope Leo.  I think he’s striving for a more just and peaceful world, and that is a worthy goal.  However, the Pope, any Pope, isn’t merely some devout ascetic conscience of humanity, like the Dalai Lama.  He himself is a Chief of State, and the CEO of the conglomerate known as the Holy See.

The Pope may speak out against the dangers of commercialism and capitalism, but he’s got his own business interests to look after.  He has his own bank, the Vatican Bank, and the Holy See owns the Banco di Roma.  It has gold reserves, owns some 5,000 properties, making it a huge real estate company, it owns two insurance companies, and holds positions in Black Rock, J.P. Morgan, GE, IBM, and Bethlehem Steel.  Yet I’ve never heard the Pope lecture these companies about aiding in weapons production.

Despite the fact that the Pope regularly has audiences with tech billionaires, who come to Rome to kiss his ring, and pledge to advance Greenhouse Gas Emissions programs, the Vatican invests in Gulf Oil, and its ownership of a natural gas company, Italgas, may make its focus on Greenhouse Gas emissions seem a tad hypocritical.

Moreover, although the Vatican takes pains to criticize Western industrialists over pollution, CO2 emissions, and the like, it focuses little effort on the true despoilers of the environment in China, Russia, and India.  This may be due to the lack of Catholics in those places, but that’s the point.

Even if the Holy See could influence AI use, limiting it to peaceful uses which advance the health and safety of mankind in the West, it hasn’t a prayer of keeping the Chinese and others from making aggressive, warlike use of AI.

Leo’s encyclical condemns the servitude created by the technological revolution, including laborers in rare-earth element mines.  I guess he means in China, where most of these elements are being mined, but he doesn’t specify.  It also decries young people being exploited by online criminal networks.

No one is for that, of course, but he shouldn’t blame these problems on the fact that the technology exists.  Any technology or institution may be perverted for criminal purposes.  Even the Church, which is trying to extricate itself from the devastation sown by decades of sexual abuse of minors by its priests.  The San Diego Archdiocese had to file for bankruptcy protection due to judgments from abused victims.  These things didn’t happen because the Church exists, but because its stewards failed to prevent it.

I suppose we can agree that, regardless of whether he can bring about the regulation and limitation of AI that he advocates for, the Pope said what needed to be said.  Far be it from me to question a Pope’s motives, but the AI warnings in this encyclical may be as much about protecting a healthy bottom line as about protecting humanity.

The Holy See gets much of its revenue from a donation program called Peter’s Pence.  And we’re not talking about just pence.  The program brings in over $60 million a year, but donations have been going down of late.  Pope Leo XIII’s prediction that the industrial revolution would cost jobs, making the poor workers even poorer, turned out not to be true.  The Industrial Revolution led to higher wages, the emergence of the middle class, and vastly greater giving to the Church.

Leo XIV’s warning that AI will cost jobs mimics a common theme these days, but there’s no telling whether Leo XIV will be just as wrong about that as was Leo XIII.  I can understand Leo XIV’s concern, however.  People contribute to Peter’s Pence, computers and robots do not.  Food for thought.

As we gear up for the midterm elections, the political predictions are all over the map.  Democrats are ecstatic, expecting big gains in Congressional elections.  They are banking on President Trump’s supposed unpopularity to carry them to victory.  It might not be so easy, however.

First of all, you have to ask, “Unpopularity as compared to what?”  The groups betting on Trump’s unpopularity are viewing the field through a distorted lens.  Because they only interact with other Leftists, their estimation of the level of the President’s  unpopularity can’t be trusted.  Since they only speak to other Trump haters, they’ve concluded he’s highly unpopular. Moreover, whatever Trump’s approval rating is, the Democrats, as a group, have a lower rating.

The Democrats are suffering from their own unpopularity problem, due to their loony policies.  The increasingly scarce moderate elements in the Democrat Party have been sounding the alarm, trying to convince the Democrat powers that be that the Party has strayed too far to the Left.

The group, Third Way, a haven for moderate Democrats and Never Trumpers, is warning Democrats that if they move too far to the Left, even if they succeed in 2026, their Party will be unable to elect a president in 2028.  The advice Third Way is giving to Democrats shows how far from the mainstream Democrats have wandered over the years.  “Be plainspoken, not lofty or academic. Don’t live online, but be authentic on social media.  Loosen up, and be patriotic without fear that something like the American flag or Pledge of Allegiance has been co-opted by conservatives.”

Really?  Don’t fear the flag or the Pledge of Allegiance has been co-opted by conservatives?  Here’s a bulletin.  The flag and the Pledge don’t belong only to conservatives.  They belong to all Americans.  If Democrats actually fear their own flag, what does that tell you about them?

The problem for Democrats isn’t that conservatives have co-opted the Pledge, it’s that Democrats don’t believe a word of it.  The Pledge of Allegiance was written by a Baptist minister in 1892, to commemorate the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’ arrival in the New World.  You can stop right there.  Democrats hate Columbus because they blame him for bringing capitalism to the New World.

Then there are the words of the Pledge, which is a promise of loyalty to the United States.  “One nation under God?”  Democrats don’t believe in God.  “Indivisible?”  The Democrats exist solely to divide the entire country.  “With liberty and justice for all?”  Hardly.  Democrats seek to cancel liberty, and they confuse justice with revenge.

Rather than embrace the Pledge of Allegiance, Democrats instead would rewrite it.  “We pledge contempt for the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic which we despise, without reference to God, divisible into preferred identity groups, with tyranny and injustice for all who dare to dissent.”

Third Way tells the Democrats to be authentic.  “Voters in general are just crying out for authenticity.”  But it’s like that old joke, “Just be yourself.  Okay, but what if you’re an asshole?”  The Democrats’ problem is they have proven themselves to be authentic – authentic crazed socialists.

But don’t take my word for it.

CNN’s data analyst Harry Enten presented data recently that show a whopping 58% of voters say the Democrat Party is too liberal.  At the same time, a third of all Democrats think of themselves as Democrat socialists.  And that number rises to 42% for Democrats under 35.

The percentage of Democrats who say they are “very liberal” has quadrupled over the past 25 years.  According to a recent CNN poll, one in three Democrats surveyed now identifies as a Democrat “socialist.” That number rises to 42 percent among Democrats who are younger than 35. Meanwhile, the percent of Democrats who say they are “very liberal” has quadrupled over the past 25 years.

The nonprofit group, Welcome, consulted hundreds of thousands of voters over six months and found that 70% of voters think the Democrat Party is “out of touch.” Most voters, the group found, believe the party over-prioritizes issues like “protecting the rights of LGBTQ+ Americans,” and “fighting climate change” while not caring about “securing the border” or “lowering the rate of crime.”

Need more proof?  Let’s hear from an authentic card carrying ultra-liberal.  Retired House member Barney Frank is one of the Democrats who’s concerned with the sharp leftward turn of his Party.  In Frank’s estimation, his and other Democrats efforts to focus the Party on the noble goal of opposing inequality enabled its extreme far-Left members to use the Party as a platform for social change the public wasn’t ready for, such as transgender politics and defunding the police.

Make no mistake.  Barney Frank hasn’t become more conservative.  His only objection is that the current crop of Democrats may prove themselves to be too crazy to get elected.  Frank isn’t calling on Democrats to be authentic.  The last thing he wants is for Democrats actually to tell the voters what they believe.  His prescription is from the same old Democrat playbook.  Pretend to be moderate and patriotic just long enough to fool enough voters to get elected.

And Barney Frank isn’t against all the crazy shit his Party has been pushing of late.  He just says the public “isn’t ready” for such changes.  This sounds a lot like the Communist Party line, which for years, has claimed America wasn’t “ready” for the revolution.  The problem is the Squad members, and their socialist fellow travelers are ready right now.  They’re only complaint is that the far Left crap hasn’t gone as far Left as they would like.

The wild card in this scenario is the influence of a biased media.  If the media outlets actually told the public the truth, Democrats would be roundly rejected in November.  But they avoid the truth in favor of spewing the far-Left Party line.

The other night, I had dinner with a group of people in a restaurant that had a TV, playing MS Now in the background.  The story was about the IRS making a 7 figure settlement with President Trump for the agency’s deliberate release of Trump family tax records, and Trump’s announcement that the money would be used to compensate the hundreds of people who’s lives Democrats ruined with lawfare weaponization of the justice system.

The MS Now story – “Trump launches a thug fund, proving that he doesn’t support the police.”  Any American who relies on this Shit Show network for news is having his, or more likely, her mind warped, if it wasn’t warped already.

Republicans will have to work hard to get their message out.  And that message should be, “We may not be perfect, but those bastards are bat shit crazy.”

The title of this week’s offering is a variation on one of the slogans of the Jacobins in France, who were responsible for the Reign of Terror, which saw the mass killings of tens of thousands during the French Revolution.  What they actually chanted was, “The Nation is Sacred.”

This seemingly obscure and arcane fact comes from a recent Oped piece written by historian Victor David Hanson, entitled Return of the Jacobins. In it, professor Hanson draws parallels between the 18th Century Jacobins and today’s Democrat Party.

Hanson notes that, for most of the the 20th Century, the Democrats focused on the concerns of working class Americans by supporting programs such as trade unions, the 40-hour work week, and Social Security, which they advanced by growing government and raising taxes.  All the time, however, the previous Democrats had a strong conservative faction, they supported a strong defense, fiscal prudence, and opposed antisemitism.

But now, they champion such things as illegal immigration, trans athletes, cashless bail, and racial reparations.  As Hanson points out, the Democrat Party no longer is democratic, more closely resembling the Jacobins of the French Revolution.  The similarities between them is uncanny.  The Jacobins were a political club in France, whose name was The Society of Friends of the Constitution.  Today’s Democrats constantly claim to be protecting the Constitution, which they really regard as no more than an obstacle to their plans.

The most powerful Jacobins were wealthy, well educated professionals.  Prominent Democrat-Progressives likewise are well to do college educated radicals.  As Professor Hanson pointed out, Commie Mamdani was a rich Ugandan.  You could add to that list expensive Prep School and Ivy League educated Il Duce Obama, as well as all the other Ivy League educated Democrat radicals.

Jacobins and Democrats also tend to be hypocrites.  Jacobins promised justice, but resorted to mass killings in the name of liberty.  “No justice, no peace!”  Sound familiar?  Tom Steyer, a California gubernatorial candidate, is a billionaire who preaches about climate change, yet made his billions investing in coal plants.  George Soros’ Tides Foundation seeks to destroy capitalism after capitalism made it possible for Soros to amass his billions.  And, Hanson reminds us that, when Socialist AOC and Bernie Sanders roamed the country supporting sedition, they traveled in a private jet.

The parallels between Jacobins and Democrats are alarming as well as uncanny.  The Jacobins relied on terror to crush any resistance.  Remember the George Floyd riots that burned parts of New York, Chicago, Portland, and other cities?  Jacobins said, “The Nation must be rebuilt from its foundations.”  Who was it who famously promised to “fundamentally transform” the United States?  That’s right, it was Robespierre Hussein Obama.

Jacobins said, “Freedom can only exist where equality replaces privilege.”  Democrats preach equality and equity, and decry what they call White Privilege.

Jacobins, like Democrats, opposed free speech, teaching that, “Dissent is treason.”  Democrats, you may remember, constantly call “disinformation” anything they disagree with.  They try to stamp out free speech on the internet, in academia, and in public spaces, teaching that, “Speech is violence.”

Much like the Jacobin Committee on Public Safety, Democrats preach about liberty, but try to restrict personal freedoms.  And too much like the Jacobins, today’s Democrats are perfectly comfortable using violence to get what they want.  The Jacobins – “Liberty will collapse unless the enemies of he revolution are identified and eliminated.”  The Democrats – “Trump must be eliminated by any means necessary.”  They must mean it, because they keep trying to kill him.  Many Democrats are only sorry they weren’t successful.

As Hanson points out, the old Democrat Party was embarrassed by their radicals, like the Weather Underground and Black Panthers.  LBJ used to call Hubert Humphrey a “bomb thrower” for his liberal positions.  Today’s Democrats are actual bomb throwers, who would consider Humphrey too conservative to be part of their Party.  Democrat millionaire, influencer Hasan Piker supports “social murder,” praising killer Luigi Mangione,  The arsonist who started the fire that burned the Pacific Palisades thought he simply was advancing “the revolution.”

The comparisons get even more alarmingly familiar.  The Jacobins led the charge to arrest King Louis XVI.  Democrats stage No Kings protests.  They have impeached Trump twice, and promise, if they win the House in November, they’ll do it again.

The Jacobins enacted The Law of Suspects, which allowed them to arrest anyone they accused of being hostile to their revolution.  The Law of Suspects required no proof of guilt in order to convict.  For them, ideology replaced law.  Democrats practice Lawfare, perverting the justice system to railroad Trump and all his supporters into jail.  They concocted the false Russiagate scandal out of whole cloth, falsified evidence, perverted the courts with false affidavits, carried out illegal wiretapping of American citizens, indicted Trump four times, and frustrated his first term.  At the end of the day, they proved no crimes.  And now, Democrat leaders promise to do it all over again when they regain power.  The Jacobins would be so proud.

Finally, much like the Jacobins, Democrats are anti-religious.  The Biden Administration had the FBI investigating citizens who frequented Christian churches.  And make no mistake, the murder of Charlie Kirk was as much about his religious values as his political views.  Our Founders said our rights came from God.  For Democrats, the government is their Supreme Being, and there’s no room for any higher authority.  You’ll take whatever rights the government gives you, and like it.

Professor Hanson writes that, “The Jacobin Democrats of today are systematically destroying the legacy of the Democratic Party.  And why not?  Their model is no the American Founding, but the radical mandated equality – and violence – of the French Revolution.”

Yes, it seems if you scratch a Democrat, you’ll find a Jacobin.  As far as I’m concerned they can all go scratch.

No, it’s not what you think.  This piece is not about States that provide life-ending drugs to people who have decided to end their lives.  That’s bad enough.  The subject of this offering is the increasing tendency of Blue States to pursue policies that are causing millions of their citizens to flee to States which offer them a better quality of life.  These State policies are self-inflicted wounds that are driving productive residents away, and pushing the States closer to bankruptcy.

The massive population shift away from Blue States truly has been amazing.  Since 2020, a flood of Blue State residents from States like California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Illinois have migrated to other States, principally, Texas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Nevada.  California leads the way in resident flight, with more than 1.3 million escapees since 2020.  New York has lost nearly 500,000, and the other States mentioned above smaller, yet significant, numbers of people.

And it’s not just residents who are fleeing.  Businesses are going elsewhere as well.  California has lost Chevron, Tesla, SpaceX, Oracle, and Hewlett Packard, to name just a few.  Many companies have relocated to Texas, notably from Wall Street.  Goldman Sachs has expanded operations in Texas, and J.P. Morgan now has more employees in Texas than in New York.  When companies and jobs are exported from a State, State revenues drop.  For instance, Wall Street employees pay half of the taxes collected by New York City.

In round numbers, the Blue State exodus has relocated more than 4 million people in the past 5 years alone.  Why are they leaving?  Remember that list of the  States most people are escaping from?  The one thing California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Illinois have in common is that they are, by far, the most Left leaning States, led by the most rabid of the kooks who like to call themselves progressives.

The reasons for the relocations can be summed up in three words.  Safety, money, and freedom.  You know how people say that Democrats are on the wrong side of so many 80-20 issues?  One of those issues is public safety.  The Blue States have a nasty habit of coddling criminals and persecuting law enforcement.

Chicago is a war zone, where you’re much more likely to be killed than in the war with Iran.  Chicago’s Mayor, and Illinois’ Governor are unconcerned.  To hear them tell it, everything is just fine.  In New York, the DA’s won’t even prosecute people who assault police officers, preferring to prosecute the cops instead.  Businesses are closing because the City permits unrestrained shoplifting, without consequences.  CVS is shutting 5 pharmacies in the City.  Community Activists, a/k/a rabble rousers, have denounced the company, accusing it of “a first degree social crime” for abandoning their neighborhoods. Mayor Commie Mamdani sees no problem there.  Is it any wonder people are getting out?

The safety issue includes Democrats’ continued resistance to the deportation of illegal immigrants, which has caused them to support the illegals to the detriment of their own citizens who elected them, and who are financing their nonsense.  People write the immigration issue off as merely an anti-Trump reaction, but it’s more than that.

Not so long ago, even Democrats opposed illegal immigration.  In 1996, Bill Clinton said, “We oppose welfare for illegals.”  Notice he called them “illegals.”  Clearly, this was before the Democrats decided that, “No one is illegal.”  In 2006, Senators Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden, Il Duce Obama, and 23 other Democrats, voted to build a wall on the Southern border.  Around this time, Biden said, “No great nation can have uncontrolled borders.”

Clearly something changed, and it changed long before Donald Trump came down the escalator.  Actually, it was two things that changed.  Democrats came to the realization that they needed to expand their base with new potential voters.  Luckily, there was a vast supply of needy, would-be immigrants nearby, so voter replacement began.  At the same time, the crazy Socialists gained more power in the Democrat Party, and now control it.  The Clintons, Obama, Biden, and Schumer didn’t suddenly change their minds about immigration.  Their Party changed, and being political hucksters, they just followed along.

Flight for freedom began during the Wuhan virus pandemic.  Blue States closed down schools, businesses and churches, pushed for “vaccine passports,” and generally stifled personal freedoms, all in the name of totally made up 6 foot distancing, and a vaccine that really didn’t work.

But by far the biggest impetus for flight from the Blue States is their tax policies.  The people who flee due to ruinous taxes, unsurprisingly are the most productive and prosperous citizens.  The ones who are paying the bulk of the taxes.  The Blue States largely have replaced these productive people with needy illegal aliens, who they insist must be counted in the census.

Not coincidentally, the States from which people are fleeing are also the States with the highest State and local tax rates.  California’s top rate is 14.4%, and that’s on top of the federal 37% top rate, meaning more than half the income of its top earning residents goes to income tax alone.  New Jersey isn’t much better, with a top rate of 10.75%.  Add to this the highest property taxes, the sales tax, and the gasoline, and other taxes, and Texas and Florida keep looking better and better.

Yet despite these confiscatory tax rates, Democrats are still singing their usual song, about the rich needing to pay their fair share.  Federally, the top 1% pay almost 40% of the taxes, and the top 10% pay 70% of the taxes.  The bottom 50% of taxpayers pay 3% of the taxes.  But according to Democrats, the rich still haven’t paid their “fair share.”  And the Blue States, faced with millions of  productive refugees fleeing high taxes, haven’t learned a thing.  They’re doubling down on their “tax the rich” mantra.

In New York, Commie Mamdani wants to raise all taxes, but promises to target “white areas” of the City.  He’s even proposed a pied a terre tax, on properties valued at over $5 million, whose owners don’t live full time in the City.  Picture this.  A $5 million property already pays property tax of about $200,000 a year.  So Mamdani wants to add a surcharge of nearly $40,000, to further tax people who don’t consume City services.  What could possibly go wrong?  Maybe they’ll dump their New York second homes for a $5 million property in Miami Beach, where the tax is $41,000 a year, with no surcharge.

Perhaps the best example of State taxes causing an exodus is in the State of Washington.  Until this year, Washington didn’t tax income.  They now have imposed a 9.9% tax on earnings over $1 million.  This already has caused Jeff Bezos and the Starbucks CEO to move away.  66 other businesses have fled the State, including Meta and Oracle, taking tens of thousands of jobs with them.

The 9.9% tax is on top of a Seattle sales tax of 10.5%, plus high property taxes.  Seattle’s Socialist Mayor is unconcerned, however, telling the fleeing billionaires, “Bye.”  When she tries to close the budget hole that the loss of these billionaires and companies will cause, she may be singing a different tune.

But all these taxes are still not enough for the Left, which is also touting a “wealth tax.”  What this is, is an annual tax on what the government decides a person’s property is worth, including unrealized gains.  In other words, you bought stock for $10,000.  The stock price tripled, but you haven’t sold the stock.  Leftists want to tax your $20,000 unrealized profit.  It gets worse.  Many people are living in homes bought for $200,000, that now are worth $1 million.  But, you say, “I don’t have that money in my hand.”  The wealth tax proponents don’t care.  Like Paulie from Goodfellas, their response is, “You had a bad week, fuck you, pay me.”

On the federal level, it’s likely such a tax is unconstitutional, based on a 1920 Supreme Court opinion that decided that unrealized increases in value are not income which can be taxed.  On the State level, they will cause only more flight from the Blue States.

The bottom line is, if the Blue States don’t wise up, they will lose more Congressional seats, and thus, electoral votes due to decreased population.  In 2030, it’s expected that 8 House seats will move to Red States.  Don’t bet on the Dems wising up.  I’m not convinced that the leftist fanatics will ever decide they were wrong.

Another week, and another attempt on the life of President Trump.

For how many years have I been saying on these pages that Democrats are brain damaged; caught in the throes of what I call delusions of rectitude, the unshakable belief that whatever they believe is right, and whoever disagrees with them is wrong.  This mental disorder is the reason why telling facts to a so-called Progressive is an exercise in futility.  Because they’re always right about everything, facts are meaningless to this crowd.

This week, I was pleased to see that somebody agrees with me.  Greg Gutfeld hit two points that I’ve been making for years.   Commenting on the most recent attempt on President Trump’s life, on The Five, Gutfeld noted that Democrats have been fomenting violence against the President by calling him fascist, Hitler, and an existential threat to democracy for 10 years.  Gutfeld said, “the Left thinks it’s always right.”  It’s what I call liberal answer Number One.  Tell them a fact and they say, “That’s not true.”

Gutfeld also had it out with the two, interchangeable and irrelevant, Democrats on the show, rejecting the Democrat talking point, that I’ve been calling for years, Liberal Answer Number Two.  “Both sides do it.”  More about that later.

Democrats have said Trump should be in a bullseye, Trump should be targeted, Trump is an fascist, Trump must be taken out by any means necessary, Trump will cancel the midterm elections, Trump is a puppet of the Russians, Trump is insane, Trump is dehumanizing people, Trump is putting people in concentration camps, Trump is a pedophile, Trump is a rapist, and a racist.  According to Democrats, Trump also is both a warmonger and a coward, apparently because he both uses too much force, and fails to use enough force.

Every one of the above charges against Trump is a lie.  But as President Harry Truman, a member of what used to be a sane Democrat Party once observed of an opponent, “He’ll never tell the truth when a simple lie will do.”  And what Democrats have going for them today is that they know, whatever lie they choose to tell, the lap dog media will swear to it, spreading it 24 hours a day into the ears of people who still are under the impression that the media tells them the truth.

The fact is, for years Democrats have all but begged their lunatic followers to use violence against the president.  In addition to all the networks, MSNow, CNN, countless left wing supposed news websites, and the heifers of The View, there’s a social media (or is it anti-social media) outlet called Bluesky that’s constantly stirring the pot.  Bluesky was started by Rasputin lookalike, Jack Dorsey, when he left Twitter.  Many celebrities and pseudo-celebrities went there when Elon Musk bought Twitter and named it X.

The celebrities migrated to Bluesky because they were upset by the fact that Musk was permitting differing opinions to be shared on X.  That was painful to the Left, who have no use for dissent, since they’ve already decided they’re right.  Who are some of the most followed entities and people on Bluesky?  AOC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, Brian Stelter, George Takei, Rachel Maddow, Steven King, George Conway, Il Duce Obama, The Lincoln Project, Adam Kinzinger, Bernie Sanders, Jasmine Crockett, and Mark Hamill, which is fitting, because this crowd could reenact the Bar Scene from Star Wars.

Once you’ve convinced your mindless followers that Trump is an insane second coming of Adolph Hitler, who’s to say it’s wrong to kill such an existential threat?  And we’ve seen the results.  In Butler, Pennsylvania, where an assassin shot Trump and three others.  In Palm Beach, Florida, where an armed kook lay in wait for Trump in a sniper’s nest.  At Mar a Lago, where another armed kook tried to breach the wall, carrying a can of gasoline.  And Saturday night, at the Washington Correspondents’ dinner.

Every time it’s happened, there’s been a call for Democrats to turn down the violence inciting rhetoric.  And every time, it’s fallen on deaf ears.  The response from Democrats always is, “Trump started it.”  Apparently, Democrats are content to “finish it” with rifles, pistols, knives, and arson.”

In the immediate aftermath of a crazed gunman, storming the Washington Hilton ballroom, shooting a Secret Service agent before being captured, forcing more than 2,000 people to take cover under tables, forcing Melania Trump to crawl to safety behind the dais, and forcing the evacuation of the room and cancellation of the event, it was hoped that, having shared such a harrowing experience, members of the media might moderate their coverage of the President.  You know, maybe cut back from 95% lies and attacks, to 50 or 60%.  No such luck.

They instead exhibited the same conduct I see day in and day out practicing criminal law.  In the excitement of the moment, they tell the truth, but then, when the excitement wears off, they revert to, “What crime?”  “I didn’t see anything.”  And the ever popular, “That’s not true, you’re making it up.”

The incident happened Saturday night.  By Sunday, Bluesky had the talking points ready to go.  “What crime?”  “The whole thing was staged,  just like that time in Butler.”  “It was a publicity stunt.”  “The Mossad did it.” And my personal favorite, “It was done just to distract from Epstein.” (They didn’t say if they meant Jeffrey Epstein or Juan Epstein from Welcome Back Kotter).  And the leftist nuts took this crap and began spreading it.  They even sobered up Rosie O’Donnell long enough to have her call it “a fake assassination attempt.”

As I keep telling you, it’s brain damage.  Even after having been subjected to the treatment the President’s been getting for years, the media still isn’t convinced.  And there’s no need for them to moderate their tone.  Jamie Raskin was asked about the Democrats’ “heated rhetoric” on Sunday.  His response, “What heated rhetoric did you have in mind?”

Well, how about these, from the likes of Hakeem Jeffries, Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, members of the Squad, and others? “We need maximum warfare against Trump;” “There should be uprisings all over the country;” “He’s an enemy of the State;” “We’re still gonna have to go out and put a bullet in Trump;” “He’s a domestic enemy;” “I will go and take out Trump tonight.”  Nah, that’s not heated.  After all, we’re always right and he’s always wrong.

Gutfeld also laid to rest the use of liberal answer Number Two, “Both sides do it.”  Gutfeld pointed out that violence is far more prevalent on the left than it is on the right.  Polling shows that more than 25% of those calling themselves, very liberal say that political violence is justified to get what you want.  And what they want is Trump gone.

But Jessica Tarlov and Harold Ford, Jr., the two unnecessary Democrats on The Five, tried the “both sides” excuse.  Gutfeld wasn’t having it. “DON’T PLAY THAT BULLSHIT WITH ME!” “We don’t care about your ‘both sides’ argument. That shit is DEAD!”  “On your side, your beliefs do not match reality so you’re coming up with these rationalizations.  What about this, what about that?  We are NOT doing that because we saw it happen.  We saw a young bright man ASSASSINATED and we know who did it.  The media is DEAD to us on this story.  They built this thing up.  We are dealing with it, we are going to act.  We don’t care what the what about is anymore, that SHIT is dead!”  Amen, brother.

It certainly looks like the calls for violence against the President are not going to stop.  Even when the leftist provocateurs themselves are put in harms way by their own rhetoric, the trauma can’t rouse them into a lucid interval.  Sadly, they’re still crazy after all these years.