Federalist Press | Defending Liberty — Informing America

Breaking News and Political Commentary

Who Took the FireAid $100 Million? Dem Front Groups

By Leave a Comment

Circling the News has looked into the disposition of the FireAid funds, and has discovered that most of the money has ended up in the hands of democratic party front organizations, absorbed to support many leftist causes, instead of helping victims of the L.A. fires.

FireAid, a two‑venue benefit concert held on January 30, 2025, at Inglewood’s Intuit Dome and Kia Forum, raised over $100 million for the victims of the Eaton and Palisades fires in Los Angeles. The event featured megastars like Billie Eilish, Lady Gaga, and U2—who even pledged $1 million—while Steve and Connie Ballmer matched donations dollar for dollar.

The Annenberg Foundation was designated to oversee distribution of the proceeds via a newly formed 501(c)(3) dubbed FireAid.

The missing money

  • By July 2025—six months post-concert—investigative reporter Sue Pascoe (editor of Circling the News), found no evidence that funds had gone directly to fire survivors.
  • When pressed, the Annenberg Foundation and Clippers’ spokesperson Chris Wallace stated that all funds were allocated to nonprofits serving impacted communities, but none were provided as direct cash grants to individuals.
  • The community council in Pacific Palisades pushed back: of the nearly 120 nonprofits awarded money, only three served Palisades directly—Kehillat Israel, Chabad of Palisades, and Palisades High School—with no transparency on grant sizes or outcomes.

Where has the money gone?

  • Phase 1 (February 2025): $50 million distributed across 120+ nonprofits—a wide range of leftist organizations and causes (food, housing, arts, mental health, animal welfare, etc.)—but with no indication of any impact in hard-hit neighborhoods like Palisades.
  • Phase 2 (early summer 2025): $25 million allocated to longer-term programs—mental health, environmental remediation, sustainable rebuilding—again routed entirely via leftist nonprofits.
  • Phase 3: Still open for nonprofit applications; no direct individual aid has been announced.

Voices from the frontlines

  • Pascoe quotes a distraught reader: “I’ve never seen any fire aid money… There’s 12,000 people… homes gone. Those people probably wanna know where the money is.”
  • The Pacific Palisades Community Council demanded a full accounting—grant-by-grant, dollar amounts, and whether any funds reached victims directly—pressuring Annenberg and FireAid for transparency.

What’s at stake?

  1. Transparency: Donors—including Ballmers and artists—gave believing relief would hit families’ pockets. Yet there’s no public record of distributions, amounts, or recipients.
  2. Accountability: The failure to track how leftist nonprofit partners used the money raises the risk of funds being diverted to general left-wing causes or bureaucratic overhead (CEO salaries, donations to DNC), instead of victims.
  3. Public trust: Allegations accuse that funds were simply “laundered through democratic party front organizations.” What is clear is the heavy reliance on nonprofits without visible community oversight.

The bottom line

Over $100 million was raised in good faith to aid Los Angeles fire victims. Yet by mid‑2025:

  • No direct cash support has been confirmed to individual victims of the fires.
  • A small number of left-leaning nonprofits in severely affected areas have been revealed to have received grants—with no breakdown of dollar amounts or reported impact.
  • The remainder of funds is funneled into broader democrat community and infrastructure projects, at the discretion of FireAid advisors.

What happens next?

  • The Pacific Palisades Community Council is demanding a full financial breakdown—including all grants, matched funds, and direct aid—as of May 2025.
  • More investigative pressure from reporters like Pascoe, community groups, and possibly legal scrutiny may force public disclosure.
  • If answers continue to stall, donors may call for independent audits or even legal action to ensure intended recipients aren’t forgotten.

James Thompson is an author and ghostwriter, and a political analyst.

Jamie Lee Curtis Wept Over Kanye’s Antisemitism—But Where Is Her Outrage Now?

By Leave a Comment

By James Thompson | June 4, 2025

Jamie Lee Curtis addresses her online response to Kanye West’s antisemitic posts on social media, saying West’s posts were “just abhorrent.”

In 2022, actress Jamie Lee Curtis became a viral symbol of righteous outrage after rapper Kanye West posted a now-infamous tweet threatening to go “death con 3 on JEWISH PEOPLE.” Although the ‘threat’ was a hollow, big-mouth pronouncement that West was going to expose unfair treatment by Jewish music industry people, the Oscar winner condemned the comment as “abhorrent,” linking it to the atrocities of the Holocaust, and even broke into tears during a televised interview. At the time, Curtis’s response was praised as a courageous stand against hate.

But today, amid a tsunami of antisemitic harassment and violence—largely coming from far-left movements cloaked in anti-Zionist rhetoric—Curtis has been notably silent.

Across America, Jewish students are being harassed, threatened, and even physically attacked on college campuses. At pro-Palestine/Hamas rallies chants like “death to the Jews” and “Hitler was right” have been caught on camera. Jewish students at schools like Columbia, NYU, and UC Berkeley have reported needing security escorts, hiding in libraries, and being locked out of their dorms—simply for being Jewish.

Yet, Jamie Lee Curtis, along with many other left-leaning celebrities who loudly denounced Kanye West, now says nothing.

“Silence isn’t neutrality—it’s complicity,” said Noah Silverman, a Jewish student at UCLA. “When celebrities speak out against antisemitism only when it comes from the right, it tells us that our safety is conditional. If the threat comes from the ‘wrong kind’ of oppressor, it doesn’t matter.”

This glaring double standard has not gone unnoticed. Critics accuse Curtis and others in Hollywood of moral grandstanding when it suits their left-leaning narrative—but failing to call out hate when it emerges from within their own ideological circles.

“The left has built an entire identity around inclusivity, tolerance, and human rights,” said Bari Weiss, founder of The Free Press. “But when Jewish lives are threatened by people waving socialist flags instead of Confederate ones, suddenly the moral clarity vanishes.”

Curtis has continued posting regularly on social media about various progressive causes—climate change, women’s rights (although nothing about men in women’s sports), LGBTQ+ advocacy—but has made no public comment about the surge in antisemitic incidents tied to recent pro-Palestinian protests. Her silence has sparked backlash, especially from Jewish activists who once applauded her principled stand against Kanye West.

“The hypocrisy is staggering,” said Jonathan Feldman, an analyst at the Jewish Policy Institute. “Jamie Lee Curtis cried on live television over a tweet. But when Jewish college students are hiding from mobs, she can’t spare even a sentence?”

To be clear, no one is suggesting that all criticism of the state of Israel is antisemitic. But when protests devolve into calls for genocide and physical violence against Jewish individuals—when Jewish identity itself becomes the target—celebrities who previously championed “never again” owe the public more than silence.

Selective outrage isn’t justice. It’s performance. It looks like tacit approval.

And for those like Curtis, whose voice carries influence, that silence speaks volumes.

James Thompson is an author and ghostwriter, and a political analyst.

Unmasked: Biden and Dems Lied about Border

By Leave a Comment

Over the past four years the United States experienced an unprecedented surge in illegal immigration across its southern border, as President Joe Biden’s administration dismantled many of the prior administration’s stringent border security measures. Despite repeated assurances to the American people that “the border is secure,” tens of millions of unvetted migrants entered the nation under Biden’s watch, or . . . invitation, straining resources and fueling a national debate about the rule of law, sovereignty, and public safety.

Shortly after taking office in January 2021, President Biden reversed key Trump-era policies that had effectively halted illegal immigration. Among these were killing the “Remain in Mexico” policy (officially known as the Migrant Protection Protocols), the halting of border wall construction, and the suspension of Title 42, a public health order that allowed for rapid expulsion of illegal entrants during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Biden signs dozens of Executive Orders overturning Trump’s border security efforts

At the same time, Biden and his top officials, including Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, publicly insisted that the southern border was “closed” and “secure.” In March 2021, Mayorkas stated, “The border is secure. The border is closed,” even as apprehension numbers surged to record highs.

President Biden himself echoed this sentiment. In January 2023, he declared, “I think the border is secure,” during remarks to the press, despite more than 2 million migrant encounters being reported in fiscal year 2022 alone. Of course, Democrats view illegal aliens as future Democrat voters, as Biden’s ‘Freudian slip’ referring to mass immigration influx of ‘Hispanic voters’ on May 9, 2024 indicated.

Prominent Democratic leaders rallied behind this narrative. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) emphasized in November 2022, “We need immigrants… We have a population that is not reproducing on its own with the same level that it used to. We need a path to citizenship.” Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) insisted, “There is no crisis at the southern border that Republicans would have you believe.”

Facing growing public concern, the Biden administration shifted its messaging, claiming that the only way to fix the “challenges” at the border was through new legislation. In February 2024, Biden stated during a speech, “We need Congress to act. We need a comprehensive immigration reform that will once and for all fix this broken system.”

However, critics pointed out that the proposed “fixes” in Democratic-sponsored legislation would essentially codify the mass influx of illegal aliens, providing expedited paths to citizenship and offering extensive protections for individuals who entered the country unlawfully.

The contrast with the Trump administration’s record could not be more stark. Upon entering office in 2017, President Donald Trump swiftly enacted executive orders to ramp up border security, reinstate and expand detention facilities, build hundreds of miles of new border wall, and negotiate agreements with Mexico and Central American countries to stem the flow of migrants.

President Trump visits border wall as it is being constructed

Illegal crossings plummeted during Trump’s tenure. By mid-2020, with policies like “Remain in Mexico” firmly in place and aggressive enforcement measures underway, the southern border saw some of the lowest levels of illegal migration in decades.

As Trump returned to the White House for his second term in 2025, he wasted no time reinstating his proven policies. Within weeks, construction on the border wall resumed at an accelerated pace, and diplomatic efforts reestablished cooperative security agreements with neighboring nations. The “catch and release” practices that had flourished under Biden were once again halted, and apprehended illegal immigrants were swiftly processed and removed.

Border Patrol data for early 2025 already shows a dramatic decrease in illegal crossings, able to be counted on fingers, demonstrating that decisive leadership and enforcement can reestablish control of the border quickly and effectively.

In short, the Biden administration’s policies opened the floodgates to millions of unvetted foreigners entering the United States, even as officials insisted the border was “secure.” In contrast, President Trump’s border policies – both in his first and second terms – demonstrated that a strong, lawful approach can effectively safeguard the nation’s sovereignty.

Now, as President Trump seeks to return all of those illegal aliens to their countries of origin, Democrats are fighting in the courts and in the streets to stop him.

James Thompson is an author and ghostwriter, and a political analyst.

Perhaps Biden was Right: Domestic Terrorism is the Greatest Threat

By Leave a Comment

President Joe Biden speaks outside Independence Hall, Thursday, Sept. 1, 2022, in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum)

Over the past decade, the United States has witnessed a surge in politically motivated violence and unrest from the Left, encompassing a range of incidents from mass protests to targeted violent attacks. These events have gravely raised concerns about the state of civil discourse, and the potential normalization of violence in political expression.

The 2020 George Floyd Protests and Subsequent Unrest

In the wake of serial criminal George Floyd’s death in May 2020, nationwide Democratic protests demanding ‘racial justice’ and police reform erupted. Several escalated into violence, resulting in significant property damage and confrontations with law enforcement. Cities like Minneapolis, Atlanta, and Washington, D.C., experienced extreme unrest and violence, with mass arson, looting, and clashes between rioters and police. Most media coverage during this period only emphasized the ‘peaceful’ nature of the protests, even while cities burned and numerous innocent citizens were hospitalized, or worse. Indeed, the “summer of love” was a massive scene of violence and destruction, gutting entire regions of cities, and costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.​

Legal Actions Against Former President Donald Trump and Supporters

Former President Donald Trump and his allies have faced numerous legal challenges, which have been nothing more than politically motivated “lawfare.” These include investigations and prosecutions related to classified documents, election interference, and other allegations, including overvaluing assets for commercial bank loans–something the banks testified was untrue. Some of Trump’s top advisers were cast into federal prisons, for refusing to break executive privilege. These actions have been obvious attempts to undermine Trump’s political influence, and deter his supporters.

Assassination Attempts on Former President Trump

Former President Trump has been the target of assassination attempts, notably:​

  • July 13, 2024 – Butler, Pennsylvania: During a campaign rally, a gunman opened fire, hitting Trump in the ear as he turned to look at a chart. Without that turn, Trump would have been instantly killed. Rapid fire shots killed one attendee, and injured two others. The assailant was neutralized by Secret Service agents.​
  • September 15, 2024 – West Palm Beach, Florida: An armed Democrat was apprehended near Trump’s golf course before he could carry out an attack. Authorities recovered weapons and a note detailing his intentions.​ He will be going to trial.

These incidents prompted increased security measures and investigations into potential lapses in protective protocols.​

Violence Against Tesla Dealerships and Vehicles

Tesla has become a focal point for protests and acts of vandalism, reportedly linked to opposition against CEO Elon Musk’s political affiliations and his involvement with the White House’s DOGE Office. Notable incidents include:​

  • Kansas City, Missouri (March 17, 2025): A 19-year-old college student, Owen McIntire, was charged with using a Molotov cocktail to set fire to Tesla Cybertrucks, causing over $214,000 in damages.​
  • Salem, Oregon (January 20, 2025): Molotov cocktails were thrown at a Tesla store, resulting in significant fire damage.​
  • Tigard, Oregon (March 6, 2025): A Tesla dealership was targeted in a shooting incident, with multiple shots fired at the building.​

These attacks have prompted federal investigations, with authorities labeling them as acts of domestic terrorism.​

Rising Antisemitism and Campus Unrest

Antisemitic incidents in the United States reached a record high in 2024, with 9,354 reported events, a 5% increase from the previous year. Notably, 58% of these incidents were tied to anger over Israel, marking the first time Israel-related antisemitism exceeded half of the total. University campuses have become hotspots for antisemitism, with Jewish students often facing hostility. For instance, at DePaul University in Chicago, two Jewish students were attacked during a pro-Israel demonstration. Additionally, Columbia University faced criticism for its handling of antisemitic incidents, leading to a lawsuit and subsequent settlement that included adopting the IHRA working definition of antisemitism and enhancing procedures for handling discrimination complaints.​

Pro-Hama Terrorist Protests and Associated Violence

Since October 2023, the United States has seen a surge in pro-Palestinian and pro-Hamas protests, particularly on college campuses. These demonstrations have often escalated into violence and antisemitic incidents. For example, at Columbia University, protesters barricaded themselves inside Hamilton Hall, leading to confrontations with law enforcement. Similarly, at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), clashes between pro-Palestinian demonstrators and counter-protesters resulted in arrests and injuries. These events have raised concerns about the safety of Jewish students and the potential for foreign conflicts to inflame domestic tensions.​

Public Opinion on Political Violence

Recent studies indicate a concerning trend in public attitudes toward political violence. A 2025 survey from 2 weeks ago revealed that over 50% of Democrats view violence, including the assassinations of top Republican figures, as a justifiable means to achieve political objectives. Of course, the brutal slaying of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson by progressive Luigi Mangione has been praised as an act of political self-sacrifice by Democrats and the Left, who have filled his defense coffers with nearly $1 million to get him off–much as they contributed to the bail and defense funds of the rioters discussed above, when urged by Vice President Kamala Harris.

Leftist assassin, Luigi Mangione guns down UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson

The escalation of politically motivated violence in the United States poses a significant challenge to democratic institutions and civil discourse. Addressing this issue requires a multifaceted approach, including allowing free speech, promoting respectful dialogue, ensuring accountability for violent actions, and reinforcing the principles of nonviolent political engagement.​ If the Left can become civil again, America can become great for all–again. If they insist of this course of domestic terror, violence can only beget violence, and this DOJ will not hesitate to fill our prisons with these domestic terrorists.

James Thompson is an author and ghostwriter, and a political analyst.

Dems Oppose Americans on Every Issue

By Leave a Comment

Out of Step: How the Democratic Party always chooses what hurts Americans

By James Thompson | April 18, 2025

In today’s hyper-partisan political climate, Americans of all stripes are seeking leaders who stand for common-sense values, personal freedom, and public safety. Yet again and again, the Democratic Party finds itself not just outside the mainstream, but in open opposition to it. On issue after issue, from border security to gender ideology, Democrats continue to champion extreme or minority viewpoints that alienate the average American.

What issues? Below are twenty-one areas where Democratic policies consistently conflict with the will of the people.

1. Transgender Athletes in Women’s Sports
While the majority of Americans believe biological males should not compete in women’s sports, the Democratic Party insists on pushing for full inclusion regardless of fairness or safety concerns. Even as female athletes speak out, they are dismissed or silenced by party leaders who equate disagreement with discrimination.

2. Drag Performances in Schools
Events featuring drag performers reading to children in schools and libraries have drawn nationwide backlash, yet Democratic politicians double down in support. Parents who voice concern are labeled intolerant, even as they advocate for age-appropriate environments.

3. School Choice
Despite overwhelming support across racial and socioeconomic lines for school choice and charter programs, Democrats have opposed these initiatives, often bowing to pressure from powerful teachers’ unions that fear losing influence over the public education system.

4. Gun Rights
While gun control remains a Democratic priority, most Americans continue to support the constitutional right to bear arms for self-defense and enforcement of constitutional rights. Instead of addressing crime at its roots, Democrats target law-abiding gun owners with restrictions that have little effect on actual violence. In fact, most gun violence is committed by those who support the Democratic Party–so perhaps the best answer is to limit their access to weapons.

5. Border Security
Vast swaths of the country support strong border enforcement. But Democrats have pushed back against nearly every effort to secure our borders—from opposing the border wall to undercutting ICE and defunding enforcement programs. They clearly want illegal aliens to flood our nation, most likely because a permanent underclass tends to keep their policies alive.

6. Sanctuary Cities
Democratic-run cities have declared themselves “sanctuaries” for illegal immigrants, openly flouting federal law. These policies have been directly linked to increased crime, yet the party continues to protect even criminal non-citizens from deportation.

7. Welfare for Illegal Immigrants
At a time when many American citizens struggle to access housing and healthcare, Democrats fight to expand welfare, education, and even housing benefits for those in the country illegally.

8. Voter ID Laws
Over 75% of Americans support requiring photo ID to vote. Democrats oppose such laws, claiming voter suppression, yet they cannot explain why something required for everyday life—banking, flying, buying alcohol—should be off-limits at the ballot box. They clearly believe that illegal votes are keeping them in office, and fight vigorously to keep them voting.

9. Radical Education Curricula
From critical race theory to gender ideology, Democratic-backed curricula have left many parents shocked at what their children are being taught by public schools. Rather than engaging parents, Democrats brand them as domestic threats, sicking the FBI on them as terrorists, when they push back.

10. Anti-Israel Sentiment
Support for Israel used to be bipartisan, but Democratic voices have grown increasingly critical—even sympathetic to terror groups like Hamas. While Israel defends its citizens, Democrats focus on condemning its military responses to attacks across its border. Large liberal universities are no longer subtle in their support of terror groups, and allow their Jewish students to be threatened and attacked daily

11. Defunding the Police
Major Democratic cities embraced defund-the-police rhetoric, only to experience spikes in violent crime. Despite public backlash, party activists and politicians continue to call for police abolition.

12. Abortion Funding
Even Americans who support abortion rights usually oppose using taxpayer dollars to fund it–especially late-term abortion. Democrats have pushed to remove long-standing restrictions like the Hyde Amendment, placing the burden on all taxpayers to fund abortions.

13. Court Packing
Rather than respecting the judiciary’s independence, Democrats propose expanding the Supreme Court when rulings don’t go their way—a move that most Americans view as a blatant power grab.

14. Anti-Free Speech Legislation
Democrats increasingly advocate for laws that criminalize what they term “hate speech,” raising alarms about First Amendment violations. Americans overwhelmingly value free speech, even when it’s offensive. This movement is nothing more than an attempt to silence any opinions that oppose Democrats’ neo-Marxist views and positions.

15. Transgender Policies in Schools
Mandating gender-neutral bathrooms, pronoun use, and juvenile transitions without parental consent has become a cornerstone of Democratic policy in schools—deeply concerning to parents whose rights are being stripped by the party at every turn.

16. Soft-on-Crime Policies
From eliminating cash bail to downgrading felonies, Democrats have supported criminal justice reforms that result in dangerous offenders being released back onto the streets, sometimes multiple times a week.

17. Immigration Enforcement
Democrats have fought to limit deportations and dismantle immigration enforcement, portraying even criminal deportees as ‘victims.’ This has led to numerous tragedies that could have been prevented through lawful enforcement. Yet, the party speaks out only for illegals, including criminals, gang members, and assassins, remaining silent about their victims.

18. Favoring Illegal Criminals Over Victims
Too often, Democrats appear more concerned with the treatment of illegal aliens who commit crimes than with the justice owed to their victims. Families devastated by crimes committed by illegal immigrants are left with no answers while Democratic politicians grandstand on protecting offenders.

19. Economic Nationalism
Democrats have uniformly rejected tariffs and other economic policies that aim to strengthen American industry, after they facilitated the death of American industry. Their policies left the U.S. overly dependent on foreign manufacturing, including steel, pharmaceutical, rare earth metals, and microcircuits, and vulnerable to global instability.

20. Attacks on Parental Rights
From education to healthcare, Democrats increasingly push policies that erode the role of parents in making decisions for their children, replacing them with state or bureaucratic oversight. Their ‘Great Society’ policies of the 1960s destroyed the American black family, and now they are trying to use the same tactics to destroy all traditional families ala Marxist techniques.

21. Rejection of Moderation
Polling shows even Democratic voters wish their party would adopt more moderate stances on these unpopular, and anti-American policies. Yet the leadership seems intent on appeasing radical activists rather than governing from the center.

Americans want safe neighborhoods, a good economy, fair elections, strong borders, and the freedom to raise their families according to their traditional American values. The Democratic Party, once the self-proclaimed voice of working-class Americans, has been exposed as the party of fringe ideologies, bureaucratic overreach, and misplaced priorities. Until the party realigns with the mainstream, it will continue to lose the trust of those it claims to represent.

James Thompson is an author and ghostwriter, and a political analyst.

Pro-Palestine-Anti-Israel Terrorist behind Attack on Penn. Gov. Shapiro

By Leave a Comment

Arson Attack on Pennsylvania Governor’s Residence Raises Concerns Over Leftist Antisemitism and Political Violence

By James Thompson | April 16, 2025

Admitted suspect is 38-year-old Cody Allen Balmer of Penbrook, Pennsylvania

In the early hours of April 13, 2025, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, his family, and guests were forced to evacuate their official residence in Harrisburg after an arson attack caused significant damage to the historic mansion. The incident occurred shortly after the family had celebrated the first night of Passover.

The suspect, 38-year-old Cody Allen Balmer of Penbrook, Pennsylvania, was apprehended and charged with multiple felonies, including attempted murder, aggravated arson, burglary, and terrorism. Balmer scaled the mansion’s fence, broke a window with a hammer, and threw Molotov cocktails into the residence, igniting fires in the dining and piano rooms. Governor Shapiro, his family, and their pets were awakened and rushed out of the mansion by state troopers, and escaped unharmed. ​

During police interviews, Balmer confessed to the attack, citing anger over Governor Shapiro’s support for Israel amid the ongoing Gaza conflict. He expressed a desire to physically harm the governor for his pro-Israel stance, stating he intended to beat Shapiro with his hammer if he had encountered him. A police search of Balmer’s living quarters revealed that he is enamored of the Leftist Argentine Marxist revolutionary, Che Guevara.

Pennsylvania governor’s mansion is left burnt and destroyed, looking like a Tesla dealership

Authorities are further investigating the motive behind the attack, including the stated antisemitic intent, given that Governor Shapiro is Jewish and the attack occurred during Passover. While no hate crime charges have been filed yet, Dauphin County District Attorney Fran Chardo indicated that Balmer’s statements about Palestine could be used as evidence that he targeted Shapiro because of his faith. ​

Balmer has a history of mental health issues and prior legal troubles, including domestic abuse charges from 2023. His mother reported that he struggled with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia and had gone off his medication. ​

Governor Shapiro condemned the attack, emphasizing his commitment to public service and his faith. He stated, “No one will deter me or my family or any Pennsylvanian from celebrating their faith openly and proudly.” ​

The incident has sparked discussions about the rise in political violence of the Left, and widespread antisemitic riots and harmful acts in the United States. It underscores the need for vigilance and a comprehensive approach to addressing leftist hate-fueled violence.​

Balmer remains in custody without bail, with a preliminary hearing scheduled for April 23. The investigation continues as authorities seek to understand the full scope and further motivation behind the attack.

James Thompson is an author and ghostwriter, and a political analyst.

Elon Musk: A Modern Renaissance Genius Under Siege by the Small-Minded Left

By Leave a Comment

By James Thompson

Throughout history, the rare individuals who lift civilization forward are rarely celebrated in their time. They are mocked, resisted, persecuted—not for their failures, but for their successes; for daring to expose what is broken, for solving the problems others refuse to admit exist. Elon Musk, perhaps the most brilliant technologist and entrepreneur of our time, is the latest figure to walk this path of visionary persecution.

From revolutionizing electric vehicles and private space travel to waging a new battle against the leviathan of government waste, Musk has achieved more in one lifetime than most nations do in a century. And yet, the very elites who claim to champion “progress” have turned against him with a ferocity that reeks not of principle—but of panic.

The Visionary Who Dares to Cut Fat

In 2024, Musk took on a new role: leading President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). This agency was formed with one goal—to shine a light on the darkest, most protected corners of federal waste, abuse, and corruption.

The results were staggering. In under two months, DOGE uncovered and dismantled nearly $150 billion in fraud and inefficiency. Entire layers of redundant bureaucracy were eliminated. Government projects that had ballooned into multi-billion-dollar money pits with no results were shuttered. Wasteful programs that had existed solely to enrich consultants, cronies, Democratic candidates, and special interest groups were shut down.

The response from the American taxpayer? Relief. Applause. Hope.

The response from the political left? Fury. Violence.

Why? Because the gravy train had been derailed. Musk and DOGE weren’t just exposing abstract numbers on a spreadsheet—they were uncovering corruption that benefited the very people now calling for his head.

The Left’s Hypocrisy Laid Bare

The Democratic party—once home to self-professed watchdogs of government spending—has now made it clear: the only “waste” they oppose is waste they don’t control. Figures like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi once thundered about fiscal responsibility, about ending pork-barrel spending and holding bureaucrats accountable.

Now? They scream fascism at Musk and Trump for doing exactly that.

They claim Musk is dangerous, that his audits and efficiency drives are “authoritarian.” But they were silent when trillions were flushed down the drain in foreign wars, DEI initiatives, “green” boondoggles, corporate bailouts, and failed social programs. They claim DOGE threatens democracy—yet it is they who seek to shut down the very man trying to protect the public trust.

This is not principled opposition. It’s fear. Fear that their decades-long scam has finally met its match.

The Galileo of Our Time

Let’s be clear: Elon Musk is no ordinary political appointee. He is not a career bureaucrat. He is not another figurehead who cashes checks and rubber-stamps reports. He doesn’t even get paid for his valuable services.

Musk is a modern Renaissance man—a polymath, an inventor, and a disruptor.

Just like Galileo, who was imprisoned for pointing a telescope at the heavens and speaking truth, Musk is being punished for using data and reason to reveal corruption here on Earth. Just like Leonardo da Vinci, whose mechanical sketches were centuries ahead of their time, Musk’s work in AI, rocketry, and sustainable energy is forcing humanity to catch up to his vision.

And just like Socrates, who was sentenced to death for “corrupting the youth” with free thought, Musk is now demonized for encouraging skepticism, science, and innovation outside the approved channels of the elite.

The Left does not fear Elon Musk because he is wrong—they fear him because he is right, and because he is effective.

Trump and Musk: Enemies of the Establishment

President Trump and Elon Musk, despite wildly different styles, share a dangerous trait in the eyes of the ruling class: they are uncontrolled. They do not owe the donor class. They do not bow to the media. They do not serve the bureaucratic machine. And worst of all—for their enemies—they deliver results.

Trump’s first term of presidency was defined by record-low unemployment, tax relief for the middle class, border enforcement, and deregulation. Musk’s DOGE tenure is now defined by billions in recovered taxpayer dollars and the exposure of massive systemic rot in government.

No wonder the same media and political operatives who tried to destroy Trump are now targeting Musk with the same smear campaigns. They call him a megalomaniac, a troll, a fascist, a Nazi—not because he is, but because he dares to operate outside of their control.

They want Musk silent because his voice carries truth. They want him gone because his existence threatens their grip on power.

The Backwardness of the Musk Detractors

Let’s not mince words: the people protesting Musk are not revolutionaries. They are not champions of the downtrodden. They are useful idiots, clinging to outdated ideologies and faux moral superiority while attacking the very man modernizing their world.

They drive Teslas to impact global climate change, and then vandalize Teslas, and Tesla dealerships and charging stations. They use Starlink internet to post hate toward the man who brought it to their rural communities. They call Musk greedy, while they beg the government to pay off their student loans. They decry authoritarianism, while demanding censorship of those they disagree with.

They are not brave. They are not enlightened. They are the inheritors of the mob that once burned books, silenced scientists, and jailed geniuses. They would have banned da Vinci from his workshops, smashed Galileo’s telescope, and mocked Edison for his “stupid little light bulb.”

They claim to be the future. In truth, they are the past—ignorant, loud, and increasingly irrelevant.

A Future Worth Fighting For

Elon Musk has not merely created companies. He has created paradigm shifts. His work has brought us closer to energy independence, multiplanetary existence, and government accountability. He is a one-man engine of the American Dream.

The establishment is terrified because Musk represents a future where the are free people ask questions. Where the truth is known. Where efficiency matters more than backroom deals. Where government is the servant of the people, and not the other way around. Where power is earned—not inherited.

Musk, like the giants before him, will be vindicated in the pages of history. But today, he needs defenders. Champions. Citizens who refuse to bow to the cowardly cancel mobs and political parasites who thrive in darkness and dysfunction.

Stand With the Visionaries

In every era, the Renaissance has had enemies. The people who push mankind forward must push against the forces of fear, ignorance, and control. Musk is one of those people. So is Trump. Their enemies are not fighting for justice or democracy—they’re fighting for their own survival in a world that no longer needs them.

The question is simple: will we side with the torchbearers of progress, or with those who would snuff that flame to stay in power just a little longer?

History is watching.

The future belongs to the brave. Musk and Trump have demonstrated extraordinary bravery as the Left continues to in their quest to destroy them.

James Thompson is an author and ghostwriter, and a political analyst.

Left-wing movie director Oliver Stone rips Democrats’ ‘lying’ Russiagate probe against Trump

By Leave a Comment

Stone: “I hate what they did with Russiagate, I really do”

Left-wing movie director Oliver Stone slammed Democrats for weaponizing federal law enforcement and “lying” in their attempts to charge the president with Russian collusion during the 2016 election.   

Stone, meanwhile, applauded President Donald Trump for taking steps to find out what really happened, adding that he is “absolutely” right that the federal government has been weaponized to attack political opponents.

Trump recently signed a new executive order directing the FBI to immediately declassify files concerning Crossfire Hurricane, the initial investigation launched in 2016 that sought information on whether members of the Trump campaign were colluding with the Russians to undermine the election. The president has also taken steps to go after the law firms involved in the scandal, including by suspending the security clearances for their attorneys and barring them from entering any federal buildings. 

Left-wing movie director Oliver Stone slammed Democrats for weaponizing federal law enforcement and “lying” in their attempts to charge the president with Russian collusion during the 2016 election.   

Stone, meanwhile, applauded President Donald Trump for taking steps to find out what really happened, adding that he is “absolutely” right that the federal government has been weaponized to attack political opponents.

Trump recently signed a new executive order directing the FBI to immediately declassify files concerning Crossfire Hurricane, the initial investigation launched in 2016 that sought information on whether members of the Trump campaign were colluding with the Russians to undermine the election. The president has also taken steps to go after the law firms involved in the scandal, including by suspending the security clearances for their attorneys and barring them from entering any federal buildings. 

“Russiagate – we paid for it,” Stone said. “I applaud [what Trump is doing], and I hate what they did with Russiagate, I really do. I think it’s – again, the lying, the lying, the lying, and selling that to the American people.”

When asked if he felt Trump was right about there being weaponization of the federal government against conservatives, Stone responded: “There was.”

Stone, who has produced several documentaries supporting Russian narratives about Ukraine, added that the underlying premise behind Russiagate – that Russia is a nefarious actor – is wrong and “un-American.”

“They are potentially our best partners, as are the Chinese. I mean, we have this mentality that they’re the enemy,” Stone said. “That’s all been inculcated by propaganda. If you go out there to China, and you go out to Russia, you don’t hear that kind of vituperative dialogue.”

Trump/Putin split

Russia President Putin and President Trump (Getty Images)

However, while Stone said he agreed with Trump’s approach to taking on those involved with Russiagate, he did lament the president’s attacks on pro-Palestinian protesters over alleged antisemitism.  

“I don’t like this new thing about censorship coming from Trump,” said Stone. “Against the anti – what he calls ‘antisemitic news’ – I mean, I don’t agree. I don’t know where he’s coming from, and it’s not what he promised.”

By Alec Schemmel

JONATHAN TURLEY: Biden DOJ behind even the Times in pursuing alleged Hunter corruption

By Leave a Comment

Biden DOJ was full of Sgt. Schultzes when it came to obvious corruption

By Jonathan Turley

For years, some of us have written about the Biden family’s multimillion-dollar influence-peddling operation and the Justice Department’s refusal to charge Hunter Biden with being an unregistered foreign agent. Now, years later, The New York Times has found evidence suggesting that the former president’s son was acting as a foreign agent as early as the Obama administration, when his father was vice president.

Last August, the New York Times ran a story about Hunter Biden seeking help from the government for his client, the Ukrainian energy company Burisma. A recent follow-up story had damaging new details:

Hunter Biden sought assistance from the U.S. government for a potentially lucrative energy project in Italy while his father was vice president, according to newly released records and interviews.

The records, which the Biden administration had withheld for years, indicate that Hunter Biden wrote at least one letter to the U.S. ambassador to Italy in 2016 seeking assistance for the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, where he was a board member…

The State Department did not release the actual text of the letter.

That is precisely what many of us have been writing about in asking why Hunter Biden was not charged with being an unregistered foreign agent, as Paul Manafort, Bob Menendez and others were under similar circumstances.

Hunter Biden NY Post laptop illustration

(Hunter Biden’s scandalous laptop was falsely dismissed as Russian disinformation.)

The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) covers anyone acting as “agent of a foreign principal,” including but not limited to (1) attempting to influence federal officials or the public on domestic or foreign policy or the political or public interests in favor of a foreign country; (2) collecting or disbursing money and or other things of value within the United States; or (3) representing the interests of the foreign principal before U.S. Government officials or agencies.

It is sweeping. So is the definition of what a “foreign principal” encompasses, including “a foreign government, a foreign political party, any person outside the United States (except U.S. citizens who are domiciled within the United States), and any entity organized under the laws of a foreign country or having its principal place of business in a foreign country.”

As I previously wrote, Special Counsel Robert Mueller seemed to charge by the gross under the act. He hit a line of Trump associates with such allegations from Manafort to Michael Flynn to George Papadopoulos to Rick Gates. The Justice Department used FARA to conduct searches on the homes and files of former Trump counsel Rudy Giuliani, Republican attorney Victoria Toensing and others.

Joe Biden, Hunter Biden

President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. (Getty Images)

However, the Justice Department and Special Counsel David Weiss seemed to tie themselves into knots to avoid tripping the wire on FARA even as it discussed Hunter Biden’s work for foreign clients.

The government also resisted FOIA requests from the Times and other media. More from the above article:

The request was initially filed under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, in June 2021. After nearly eight months, the State Department had not released any records, and The Times sued. About 18 months later, the department moved to close the case after releasing thousands of pages of records — none of which shed light on Hunter Biden’s outreach to the U.S. government.

The Times challenged the thoroughness of the search, noting that the department had failed to produce responsive records contained in a cache of files connected to a laptop that Mr. Biden had abandoned at a Delaware repair shop. The department resumed the search and periodic productions, but had produced few documents related to Mr. Biden until the week after his father ended his re-election campaign and endorsed Vice President Harris for the Democratic nomination.

Now we have a copy of a key letter from Hunter Biden that gives us an insight into the evidence buried for years:

The State Department last week released a letter he wrote while his father was serving as vice president in which he sought assistance from the U.S. government for the Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

In the previously unpublished June 2016 letter on Burisma letterhead to the U.S. ambassador to Italy, Mr. Biden requested “support and guidance” in arranging a meeting with an Italian official to resolve regulatory hurdles to geothermal energy projects Burisma was pursuing in the Tuscany region…

The letter requested help arranging a meeting between Burisma officials and Enrico Rossi, the president of the Tuscany regional government at the time, “to introduce geothermal projects led by Burisma Group, to highlight their social and economic benefits for local communities and develop a common action plan that would lead to further development of the Tuscany Region.”

How could any Justice Department official, let alone a special counsel, read that letter and not see the glaring disconnect between the handling of the case involving Joe Biden’s son and others like Manafort?

Paul Manafort, Donald Trump

Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Former President Donald Trump. (Getty Images)

The letter references a trip on which Hunter Biden, as was his pattern, used official travel with his father to make these business connections. The letter mentions meeting a key ambassador on Air Force Two as he seeks assistance for his client.

The ambassador then sent a follow-up letter saying he knew the president of Tuscany and identified a Commerce Department official working at the U.S. embassy who could help “see where our interests may overlap.”

It was another example of alleged influence peddling through his father and work for a foreign client in lobbying the government.

During this period, the Justice Department seemed to be on a hair-trigger for FARA charges. Yet, when it came to Hunter Biden, the entire department seemed composed of legal Sgt. Schultzes.

Many in the media attacked those of us who have been writing about this corruption stretching back to the Obama administration. Many simply insisted that there was no evidence, while taking no steps to find out. While the media was unrelenting in investigating Trump allegations of Russian collusion and business improprieties, it took a largely passive stance in pursuing this story.

Even The New York Times, which can be credited with pursuing this FOIA information, did comparably little with the ample evidence of corruption by the Bidens in securing millions through influence peddling.

What remains is a corruption scandal involving not only what the Bidens did but also what the Justice Department did not do over this extended period. It appears to heed the advice not of whistleblowers but politicians like former Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) that “everybody needs to back off” the influence-peddling story.

Of course, Joe Biden ultimately broke his repeated promise not to pardon his son. What was most notable, however, was that not only did he pardon him for any crimes from human trafficking to tax evasion but also for a period running from Jan. 1, 2014 to Dec. 1, 2024.

This letter explains why such a sweeping, extended pardon was needed. Yet, in the end, the greatest indictment from this scandal was of the Justice Department itself.

Jonathan Turley is a Fox News Media contributor and the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster, June 18, 2024).

Economy

Elections

Foreign

Crime

Science Tech

Reader Responses