This is my neighborhood.

These are my streets.

And yet I did not learn about the terror unfolding practically in my own backyard from a news alert or a morning broadcast.

At 7:45 Saturday morning, my phone lit up with a text from my boss, John Catsimatidis, the owner of WABC Radio, the home of my Sunday 5:00pm radio show, “When You Know…You Know.” John asked if I was out in the Hamptons. By complete coincidence, I was staying out in Watermill with close friends to celebrate two milestone occasions.

Then John asked if I could step in and speak at his morning roundtable event at 75 Main Street in Southampton.

The scheduled speaker, Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch, had been forced to cancel her appearance to deal with the horrifying aftermath of what had happened at Central Synagogue.

Standing on the East End, far from the chaos of Manhattan, I found myself thinking about something that should be unthinkable in America:

What does it say about our city when people can no longer assume that a house of worship is a sanctuary?

That question should disturb every American, regardless of religion or political affiliation.

I believe in the absolute, sacrosanct right of every person to worship without fear, intimidation, or harassment. I don’t care whether you pray in a synagogue, a church, a mosque, or anywhere else.

Faith should never require a security detail.

A person should be able to walk through the doors of a house of worship, close their eyes, pray, and believe they are safe.

That isn’t a liberal value.

It isn’t a conservative value.

It is an American value.

It is one of the fundamental freedoms that makes this country exceptional.

And that is precisely why what happened at Central Synagogue should shake us to our core.

During Friday night’s Shabbat services, congregants gathered seeking peace, prayer, and community. Instead, they were plunged into panic.

According to the account of the incident, Larry Montes entered the sanctuary and initially sat quietly for roughly ten minutes. He then moved toward restricted areas. When confronted, he allegedly struck at two sacred silver candles used to welcome in the Jewish sabbath.

Then everything changed.

As security attempted to escort him out, chaos erupted.

Screams filled the sanctuary. Worshippers scrambled for safety after hearing a loud pop and fearing the absolute worst; that a gunman had entered their holy space.

A 63-year-old woman was physically attacked and suffered injuries, including a cut to her lip and injuries to her arm. Security officers who intervened were reportedly spat upon, headbutted, and subjected to racial slurs before they ultimately restrained him.

Think about that.

People went to synagogue to observe Shabbat.

They went there expecting peace.

Instead, they found themselves wondering whether they were about to become victims.

That is heartbreaking.

And it cannot become normal.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani was quick to condemn the incident, promising that his administration would use every available tool to protect Jewish New Yorkers.

I hope he means it; though I am exceptionally skeptical.

But here’s where I believe the conversation has to go deeper.

More police may be necessary. Better security may be necessary. Stronger protections may be necessary.

But if the answer is ultimately to transform synagogues into fortified compounds surrounded by barricades, armed guards, and layers of security, then we have treated the symptom while ignoring the disease.

A synagogue should be safe because society respects the people inside it; not because it resembles a military installation.

And leadership matters.

Words matter.

The political climate matters.

I am not suggesting that Mayor Mamdani personally caused what happened at Central Synagogue. That would be irresponsible and intellectually dishonest.

But elected officials have an obligation to understand that rhetoric has consequences. That his rhetoric has consequences.

When political language repeatedly crosses the line from legitimate criticism of a government into rhetoric that delegitimizes Israel, or makes Jewish New Yorkers feel as though they must answer for the actions of a foreign government, the consequences can be dangerous.

You cannot spend your political capital positioning yourself as an international activist and then ask New Yorkers to trust you as the mayor responsible for protecting their neighborhoods.

At some point, leadership requires remembering the job you were elected to do.

You are the mayor of New York City.

Not the president of the world.

Your responsibility is to every New Yorker.

And that brings me to what may be even more disturbing.

We are watching anti-Semitism creep into places where it once would have been socially and professionally radioactive.

The danger isn’t merely the extremist screaming on a street corner.

It is the gradual normalization of contempt.

It is the moment when people stop being shocked.

It is when prejudice becomes fashionable, excusable, or politically convenient.

Consider John Galliano.

In 2011, the legendary fashion designer was caught on video making a series of anti-Semitic and racist remarks. The fallout was immediate. Dior fired him. Galliano was convicted in France of making public racial and religious insults. His career, at least for a time, appeared finished.

But time passes.

Memories fade. People become numb to what appears to be a never ending barrage of anti Semitic and racist remarks.

And society has an extraordinary ability to rehabilitate people when doing so becomes convenient.

Galliano eventually returned to fashion. And now comes the part that should make every one of us stop and think.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, by and through AnnaWintour, the global editorial director of Vogue and Met Gala co-chair, has announced that its Spring 2027 Costume Institute exhibition will be devoted to Galliano. John Galliano: Horizons will examine his career, his extraordinary creative influence, and, according to the Met, the darker chapters of his story as well. The accompanying 2027 Met Gala will take its theme from the exhibition.

Maybe Wintour should finally take off those blacked-out sunglasses, assuming she can even find her face under all that studied indifference, and look at who she’s propping up.

This is not some minor fashion-world footnote.

The Met Gala is one of the most prestigious events on the cultural calendar, an extraordinary gathering of the fashion elite, celebrities, designers, and cultural power brokers. The Met has chosen Galliano to become only the third living designer to receive a solo Costume Institute exhibition, following Yves Saint Laurent and Rei Kawakubo.

And yes, Galliano has apologized. He has spoken publicly about his addiction, his recovery, and his remorse. Jewish organizations, including the Anti-Defamation League, have acknowledged his efforts at reconciliation. The Met says the exhibition will confront rather than erase his troubled history.

But I still have to ask the uncomfortable question:

What message does it send when someone whose own words once helped unleash anti-Semitic hatred is ultimately welcomed back into the highest circles of cultural prestige?

I am not arguing that people cannot repent.

I believe profoundly in redemption.

But redemption and remembrance are not the same thing.

Forgiveness does not require forgetting.

And accountability should not have an expiration date simply because the person involved happens to possess extraordinary talent.

That should make us uncomfortable.

Because prejudice doesn’t disappear simply because the headlines do.

And Jews know this lesson better than most.

History has taught us what happens when hatred becomes ordinary.

First comes the language.

Then comes the rationalization.

Then comes the indifference.

And eventually, people look around and ask how they allowed it to happen.

I refuse to wait for that question.

Friday night shattered the peace of Shabbat for the people inside Central Synagogue. But it also delivered a warning to the rest of us.

Rabbi Andrew Kaplan Mandel was right when he reminded us that we cannot allow anyone to steal our spirit.

I agree.

But courage isn’t pretending we aren’t afraid.

Courage is acknowledging what is happening and refusing to look away.

I am a proud Jew.

I am a proud New Yorker.

And I am a proud American.

I will defend the right of every person in this country to worship freely, without fear.

But I also believe we have reached a moment when our political leaders need to stop polishing statements for social media and start confronting the culture that allows hatred to become normalized.

Because when people are afraid to enter a synagogue, a church, or a mosque, something fundamental has already been lost.

And if we aren’t careful, the greatest danger won’t simply be the person who walks into the sanctuary.

It will be the society that slowly becomes accustomed to being afraid when he does.

____________________________________________________________________________

MAKE SURE TO JOIN ME TONIGHT AND EVERY SUNDAY AT 5:00PM EST ON 77WABC FOR ANOTHER RAW AND UNFILTERED EPISODE OF “WHEN YOU KNOW…YOU KNOW.” THERE IS NO OTHER SHOW LIKE IT!

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

I vehemently oppose the overturning of Roe v. Wade. I believe women should have the absolute right to make deeply personal decisions about their own bodies, their own health, and their own pregnancies. And as a girl dad, that position isn’t some abstract political talking point to me. I have a daughter. I understand exactly what it means to want them to have autonomy over their bodies, their futures, and their lives.

But supporting a woman’s right to choose does not require me to surrender my ability to question where the boundaries should be.

And what is happening in Massachusetts?

For me, this is a bridge way, way, way too far.

I began my interest in politics all the way back in 1987, when I was a junior in college and worked as an assistant legislative aide to then-sitting Congressman Joe Moakley; a genuine statesman. I watched firsthand what political leadership was supposed to look like. I learned that having principles didn’t mean shutting your brain off. It meant listening, debating, compromising when necessary, and recognizing that reasonable people could disagree.

This is not the Democratic Party Joe Moakley was so proud of.

The Massachusetts Legislature has advanced the so-called Prioritizing Patient Access to Care Act, legislation designed to remove the state’s existing statutory restrictions on abortions after 24 weeks and instead allow such procedures based on the professional judgment of a physician. The bill’s sponsors and supporters say the goal is to ensure that patients facing complicated or devastating pregnancies aren’t forced to leave Massachusetts to obtain care.

I understand that argument.

I really do.

Pregnancy can be unpredictable. Medical emergencies happen. Women can receive devastating fetal diagnoses. Complications can arise that nobody anticipated. There are circumstances in which a woman’s health or life can be placed in grave danger.

But here’s where I start asking some very uncomfortable questions.

Because I don’t care what politically sanitized name you give a bill. I care about what the law actually does.

And this legislation would eliminate the existing 24-week statutory framework and replace those specific conditions with a standard based on a physician’s professional judgment.

That’s an enormous change.

And it deserves an enormous debate.

Not a rushed debate.

Not a partisan debate.

Not a debate where anyone who raises an ethical question is immediately branded anti-woman.

A real debate.

Because I can simultaneously believe that Roe v. Wade should not have been overturned and believe that abortion policy can go too far.

Those positions are not contradictory.

They’re called nuance.

And somewhere along the way, my party forgot that nuance existed.

Supporters of the Massachusetts legislation argue that the existing 24-week restrictions can interfere with physicians’ ability to provide care in complicated circumstances. The Massachusetts Medical Society, for example, supports abortion access at any point in pregnancy when clinically indicated and says the existing statutory framework can create uncertainty for doctors and patients.

Fine.

Then let’s have that conversation.

Let’s talk about those specific cases.

Let’s talk about the women who have been forced to travel.

Let’s talk about the doctors who believe the existing law gets in their way.

Let’s talk about fetal anomalies, maternal health, medical emergencies and the agonizing decisions families sometimes face.

But let’s also talk about boundaries.

Because apparently asking whether there should be meaningful boundaries has become politically radioactive.

And that is where I have a problem.

I am not suggesting that politicians should be sitting in an examination room making medical decisions for women.

Quite the opposite.

But neither should politicians, and neither should political activists, demand that the public simply accept every expansion of abortion law without asking legitimate questions about where the line should be drawn.

There has to be room for conscience.

There has to be room for ethics.

There has to be room for disagreement.

And there has to be room for someone like me; a lifelong Democrat who strongly supports reproductive rights, to say:

Just wait a damn minute.

The Massachusetts Medical Society says existing restrictions can create uncertainty for physicians. Advocates for the legislation say the law would remove what they consider medically unnecessary barriers. Opponents argue that eliminating the statutory restrictions goes too far.

That’s precisely why this debate should not be reduced to slogans.

Because when the only acceptable position is “anything less than unrestricted access makes you anti-choice,” we’ve stopped having a serious political discussion.

And when the opposing side responds with “any abortion is murder,” we’ve stopped having one there, too.

I’m not interested in either extreme.

I’ve spent too much of my life in politics to believe that complicated issues can be solved by screaming louder than the other guy.

What concerns me is something much larger than one piece of Massachusetts legislation.

It’s the growing ideological rigidity inside the Democratic Party.

I’ve watched my party move further and further away from the political center while convincing itself that everyone else is the one who moved.

That is dangerous.

Not just politically.

Culturally.

Because ordinary Americans are not extremists.

Most people don’t live on Instagram, TikTok or X.

Most people aren’t attending political rallies every weekend.

Most people aren’t reading legislative language over their morning coffee.

They’re raising their families. They’re working. They’re paying mortgages and rent. They’re trying to get their kids through school. They’re dealing with real-life problems.

And they expect their elected officials to recognize that some questions are complicated.

Especially questions involving life, death, medicine, pregnancy and the human body.

As a father, I want my daughter to have control over her body.

I want her to have access to competent medical care.

I want her protected from politicians who think they should have the final say over every intimate decision she makes.

But I also want her, and every other American, to live in a society where we can acknowledge that difficult moral questions exist without immediately turning one another into political enemies.

That’s what I’m fighting for here.

Not the criminalization of abortion.

Not a return to the days before Roe.

Not government intrusion into a woman’s doctor’s office.

And certainly not the overturning of reproductive rights.

I’m saying something far less radical:

Rights can coexist with responsibility. Freedom can coexist with boundaries. And compassion does not require us to abandon our conscience.

That’s the conversation Democrats should be having.

Instead, too many Democrats seem determined to prove just how far left they can go before ordinary Americans finally say they’ve had enough. Ordinary Americans like myself.

And that’s how political parties lose elections.

Not because their opponents suddenly become brilliant.

Because their own party stops listening.

I began my political life working for Joe Moakley. I saw what Democratic leadership looked like when the objective wasn’t ideological purity, but getting things done for people.

You could be progressive without being radical.

You could be compassionate without being absolutist.

You could defend women’s rights without pretending that every ethical question had magically disappeared.

And you could be a Democrat without checking your conscience at the door.

That’s the Democratic Party I remember.

That’s the Democratic Party I used to believe in.

And when it comes to this Massachusetts law, I don’t care how many political consultants tell me I, and others, that we are supposed to fall in line.

I’m not going to.

Because there are moments when politics has to take a back seat to principle.

And this is one of those moments.

____________________________________________________________________________

Received this from a fan:

Since Cohen joined WABC: WABC 3.5 → 4.1 in the July Nielsen book.

The Apple Podcasts page for “When You Know You Know” currently displays 4.7/5 from about 1,920 ratings.

Nielsen’s July 2026 New York PPM results were released on August 10, and 77 WABC rose from a 3.5 share in June to a 4.1 share in July among persons 6+, Monday–Sunday, 6 a.m.–midnight. That is about a 17% month-over-month increase in audience share.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

In his seminal work Common Sense, Paine laid out a blueprint for civic representation that feels about as foreign to modern Washington as an honest politician. He believed elected representatives should periodically return to their normal lives, go home, and once again live among the people they represented. Why? Because the moment politicians become permanently separated from the communities that elected them, their interests begin to separate from ours.

Paine understood something that Washington has conveniently forgotten. He wrote that prudence demanded frequent elections so elected officials could return, mix with the people, and remain connected to the public they served.

Think about that for a moment.

Now fast-forward nearly 250 years, and look at what we have created.

We are living with the third-oldest Congress in American history. Walk through the marble halls of the Capitol and look at the faces staring back at you. Chuck Grassley is 92. Maxine Waters is 87. Nancy Pelosi is 86. James Clyburn is 86.

And before anyone accuses me of ageism, let me make something perfectly clear: I have enormous respect for age, experience, and wisdom. I believe there is tremendous value in the lessons that can only be learned by living through decades of triumph, failure, war, economic upheaval, cultural change, and personal sacrifice.

But experience is supposed to inform leadership; not become an excuse for permanent possession of power.

These politicians were elected to represent their constituents, not to become permanent fixtures of Washington’s political landscape. They were supposed to return home, live among ordinary Americans, shop in the same stores, drive the same roads, hear the same complaints, and experience the same economic pressures.

Instead, we have created a political class that can spend decades inside the Capitol while becoming increasingly disconnected from the country outside its doors.

And that disconnect matters.

I am old enough to remember when political experience actually meant something different. Today, however, the world moves at the absolute speed of the internet. Artificial intelligence is transforming entire industries. Global markets react in seconds. Social-media algorithms can reshape elections overnight. Cyberwarfare can cripple infrastructure without a single soldier crossing a border. Technology is changing how Americans work, communicate, learn, shop, invest, and even think.

That reality fundamentally changes the playing field.

Younger Americans have grown up inside this technological revolution. They understand platforms, algorithms, artificial intelligence, digital economies, and online communities because they have lived with them; not because someone briefed them before a congressional hearing.

So when a sitting senator has to ask a technology executive how a search engine makes money, I don’t see wisdom on display.

I see a dangerous disconnect between the people making the rules and the people living under them.

And that brings me to the real issue.

I believe it is time for many of our political elders to step aside, not because they are old, but because public service was never supposed to become permanent ownership of a government seat.

I want them to become what they should have been all along: wise counselors, mentors, institutional memory, and advisors to the next generation.

There is dignity in passing the torch.

There is no dignity in refusing to let go of it.

Because when older lawmakers refuse to make room for younger voices, they create a political vacuum. And nature, as politics has repeatedly taught us, abhors a vacuum.

Young Americans begin to feel ignored. They look at Washington and see people who seem to have been there forever. They hear politicians talk about their future while refusing to surrender the positions that would allow that future to have a voice.

And then we act surprised when younger voters become angry.

We shouldn’t be surprised at all.

Organizations like Voters of Tomorrow are emerging because an entire generation is demanding political representation that actually understands the world they inhabit.

But here’s where I believe the consequences become dangerous.

When traditional political institutions abandon younger Americans, the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA, are more than happy to fill the void.

The DSA understands something that much of the traditional political establishment apparently does not: young voters want to believe somebody is listening.

So the DSA offers them an intoxicating political menu; free groceries, free transportation, a house wherever they damn well please, at a price their wallets magically approve, sweeping government guarantees, and promises that sound wonderful when you’re angry, frustrated, economically squeezed, and convinced that the existing system has completely forgotten you.

The problem is that government promises are not the same thing as government solutions.

Someone ultimately has to pay the bill.

And when established political leaders refuse to address legitimate generational frustration, they shouldn’t be shocked when radical movements arrive offering simplistic answers to complicated problems.

That is the irony I cannot ignore.

The very people who believe they are preserving stability by clinging to power may actually be creating the conditions for instability.

When conservative and traditional political elders refuse to rotate out of office, they don’t necessarily protect the system Thomas Paine envisioned.

They undermine it.

They create resentment.

They create alienation.

They create an opening for political movements willing to promise everything to people who feel they have nothing; even if those promises are unrealistic.

And that is how radicalism grows.

If I truly want to preserve this republic, and I do, I don’t believe the answer is to abandon experience. I believe the answer is to combine experience with renewal.

I want the wisdom of our elders.

I want the energy of our young.

I want the institutional memory of people who have spent decades serving this country, but I also want lawmakers who understand the technological, economic, and cultural reality facing Americans today.

Most of all, I want to restore the idea of the citizen legislator.

Thomas Paine understood that government works best when representatives remain representatives; not rulers.

Serving your country should be a profound civic responsibility, not a lifetime career with a congressional office and insider trading rights attached to it.

Go to Washington.

Serve.

Fight for your constituents.

Make your mark.

Then go home.

Live among the people again.

And perhaps, in doing so, remember why they trusted you with their vote in the first place.

That isn’t radical.

That is the republic Thomas Paine imagined.

And frankly, I think America could use a little more of it.

____________________________________________________________________________

Received this from a fan:

Since Cohen joined WABC: WABC 3.5 → 4.1 in the July Nielsen book.

The Apple Podcasts page for “When You Know You Know” currently displays 4.7/5 from about 1,920 ratings.

Nielsen’s July 2026 New York PPM results were released on August 10, and 77 WABC rose from a 3.5 share in June to a 4.1 share in July among persons 6+, Monday–Sunday, 6 a.m.–midnight. That is about a 17% month-over-month increase in audience share.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

How the hell did this become a story that was allowed to be told in the first place?

Because this isn’t merely a story about Donald Trump.

It’s a story about how the United States protects its president from assassination, and whether we have become so addicted to immediate information that we are willing to expose the very methods designed to keep the president alive.

According to the account emerging from Ankara, Turkey, intelligence indicated a credible, high-level assassination threat against President Trump originating from Iran. What followed sounds like something ripped from a Cold War thriller.

Trump publicly boarded Air Force One, turned toward the cameras, and waved.

But that wasn’t the whole story.

Once inside, he was reportedly moved through a concealed exit, transferred using an airport catering vehicle, transported across the tarmac to a modified Boeing 757, and flown out under the call sign RCH18.

And then came the truly extraordinary part.

The traditional Air Force One continued operating under its official designation.

AF1.

A decoy.

The president was somewhere else.

Stop and think about that for a moment.

The aircraft that the world believed was carrying the president was deliberately separated from the aircraft actually carrying him. And aboard that decoy aircraft?

Journalists. White House personnel. Flight crew. Civilians.

People who, according to the account, were kept in the dark while their aircraft potentially became the most obvious target in the sky.

That is not a movie.

That is not political theater.

That is a presidential security operation.

And the fact that the details are now public should make every American pause.

Because now we know something our adversaries did not necessarily know before.

We know the method.

We know that when intelligence identifies a serious threat, the president may be quietly extracted from Air Force One.

We know an ordinary-looking airport vehicle can potentially become part of that extraction.

We know another aircraft can potentially be substituted.

We know the presidential aircraft can continue moving as a decoy.

We know an alternative call sign can be used.

We know the press pool can remain aboard the decoy aircraft.

And now, potentially, our enemies know it too.

That is the part of this story that bothers me, and should bother you, far more than whether a reporter was given a briefing.

Because intelligence isn’t simply about knowing what happened.

Intelligence is about learning how your adversary thinks.

Every operational detail revealed publicly gives someone on the other side another piece of the puzzle.

You don’t need the entire playbook.

You just need enough pieces to begin reconstructing it.

Imagine you’re an adversary trying to assassinate an American president.

You learn that the president may be removed from his aircraft after appearing publicly to board it.

You learn that a second aircraft may be involved.

You learn that the aircraft publicly associated with the president can potentially serve as a decoy.

You learn that movement across an airport can be concealed through ordinary logistics.

What do you do with that information?

You don’t necessarily focus exclusively on the aircraft.

You start watching everything around it.

The runway.

The hangars.

The alternate aircraft.

The motorcade.

The airport vehicles.

The catering trucks.

The cargo.

The security perimeter.

The personnel moving around the aircraft.

Everything.

And that is where this becomes genuinely frightening.

Because if an enemy knows the president might be moved through the very machinery of an airport, then the machinery itself becomes a potential target.

The catering truck that everyone ignores.

The cargo vehicle nobody notices.

The secondary aircraft nobody suspects.

The seemingly routine movement across the tarmac.

Suddenly, the ordinary becomes extraordinary.

And the more we explain publicly about how the United States moves its president during a crisis, the more we potentially teach our adversaries where to look.

That’s the danger.

Which brings me to the media.

I understand the First Amendment.

I spent years defending it and even had mine violated.

I understand that journalists have a responsibility to question government officials, challenge official narratives and demand accountability.

But there is a profound difference between the public’s right to know and the public’s right to know immediately while an assassination threat is actively unfolding.

Those are not the same thing.

A reporter’s deadline is not more important than a president’s life.

A television producer’s desire for a live shot is not more important than national security.

A journalist’s demand to know which aircraft the president is actually aboard is not more important than ensuring an enemy cannot determine where that aircraft is headed.

And transparency does not mean handing an adversary a tactical map.

There are moments when secrecy isn’t corruption.

Secrecy is protection.

There are moments when withholding information isn’t an attack on the press.

It is the job of the people responsible for keeping someone alive.

That’s why I find the outrage over being kept uninformed so difficult to understand.

The press corps reportedly became furious because they weren’t told what was happening in real time.

But consider the alternative.

What if someone had publicly reported:

“The president isn’t actually aboard Air Force One.”

What if someone identified the aircraft carrying him?

What if someone revealed the route?

What if someone described the movement across the tarmac?

What if someone identified the vehicle?

What if an enemy intelligence service was watching that broadcast?

That isn’t journalism operating in a vacuum.

That is information moving through a global communications network during an active security threat.

And once information leaves the building, you don’t get to decide who receives it.

That’s the uncomfortable reality.

Which brings me to the question I think deserves far more attention:

Who decided that these details should become public?

Who decided the American people needed to know the mechanics of a presidential extraction?

Who decided it was acceptable to disclose that the president could be moved from one aircraft to another?

Who decided that revealing the existence of a decoy strategy was worth whatever security consequences might follow?

And most importantly:

Did anyone think about the next president?

Because Donald Trump won’t be president forever.

Republicans won’t occupy the White House forever.

Democrats won’t occupy the White House forever.

Eventually, another person will sit behind that Resolute Desk.

Maybe someone you love.

Maybe someone you despise.

Maybe someone who represents everything you believe in.

Maybe someone who represents everything you oppose.

It doesn’t matter.

The presidency belongs to the American people.

And if we expose the methods used to protect one president, we potentially expose the next president as well.

This isn’t a Trump issue.

It’s an American issue.

Today the president happens to be Donald Trump.

Tomorrow it will be someone else.

And if our enemies learn that the American president can be extracted through a particular sequence of actions, they don’t forget that information when the administration changes.

They archive it.

They study it.

They build intelligence around it.

They wait.

That is how adversaries operate.

They don’t need to win every day.

They need to discover one vulnerability and exploit it at the right moment.

And that is why I believe we need to rethink what we consider newsworthy.

Not everything that can be reported should be reported immediately.

Not every secret is a scandal.

Not every withheld detail is evidence of government deception.

Sometimes the people who know the most are the people who are saying the least because they understand the consequences of saying too much.

The press doesn’t have to like that.

They don’t have to trust the administration.

They don’t have to stop investigating.

But there should be one line every responsible journalist understands:

When the president is under an active assassination threat, protecting the president comes before protecting the deadline.

Because the next time an enemy watches an American president board Air Force One, I don’t want that enemy thinking:

“Now we know what they do.”

I want them thinking:

“We have absolutely no idea where he is.”

That’s what secrecy is supposed to accomplish.

That’s what national security is supposed to protect.

And that’s why this story may be far more consequential than the people who reported it seem to understand.

Because sometimes the most dangerous thing you can publish isn’t a lie.

It isn’t propaganda.

It isn’t misinformation.

It’s the truth your enemy never needed to know.

____________________________________________________________________________

Received this from a fan:

Since Cohen joined WABC: WABC 3.5 → 4.1 in the July Nielsen book.

The Apple Podcasts page for “When You Know You Know” currently displays 4.7/5 from about 1,920 ratings.

Nielsen’s July 2026 New York PPM results were released on August 10, and 77 WABC rose from a 3.5 share in June to a 4.1 share in July among persons 6+, Monday–Sunday, 6 a.m.–midnight. That is about a 17% month-over-month increase in audience share.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

Francesca Hong danced toward that podium carrying something more powerful than a campaign speech: it’s called certainty.

The Democratic Socialists of America had every reason, at least inside its own echo chamber, to believe Wisconsin was next. Another win. Another headline. Another supposed milestone in the inevitable march of the Democratic Party toward the ideological left.

Then Wisconsin voters walked into their polling places and did something increasingly rare in American politics.

They interrupted the script.

What was supposed to be another celebratory victory lap for the party’s radical wing instead became something far more interesting: a Midwestern reality check.

David Crowley, the Milwaukee County executive who had briefly stepped away from the race before re-entering with the governor’s backing, pulled off a narrow but consequential upset. Hong, a former chef turned state assemblywoman, had offered voters a distinctly ideological vision. But Wisconsin voters apparently decided they weren’t shopping for a political revolution. They were looking for something that worked.

And that distinction matters.

Because politics can be incredibly seductive when you’re standing on a stage surrounded by people who already agree with you. You can convince yourself that the country is moving in your direction because everyone in the room is nodding.

Then comes Election Day.

That’s when theory meets reality.

Hong’s record and past positions, including controversial comments involving policing and traditional American holidays, gave Republicans plenty of ammunition. But the larger issue was bigger than one candidate or one primary.

It was whether Wisconsin voters wanted to become the next testing ground for a political ideology that has gained enormous traction in Democratic strongholds but remains considerably less popular when confronted with the practical concerns of ordinary voters.

Even some of the movement’s biggest stars seemed to recognize the political danger. Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stayed away from this particular contest, leaving Hong to carry the ideological banner herself.

And then the banner came crashing down.

She conceded.

Just like that, the supposed march forward hit a Midwestern speed bump.

I think the reason is fairly obvious.

You don’t have to live in Brooklyn, Madison, or inside the permanent political bubble of social media to understand that voters are watching what happens when ideology collides with reality.

Just look at my New York City.

I’ve watched DSA ideology turn political theory into governing policy while taxpayers, families, and businesses are left paying the price. How about the fact that more than 100 people are fleeing New York every single day, taking their income, businesses, and tax dollars with them. That means more than $1 million in taxable revenue is being lost every hour. And yet the political class keeps pretending this is somehow normal.

They can call it gentrification, capitalism, demographic change, or whatever fashionable excuse they want. I call it voting with your feet, and fleeing the consequences of Democratic Socialism.

People don’t care what you call it when they’re the ones packing the moving truck.

And that is the problem Democrats increasingly face nationally.

You can win applause by promising transformational government. You can generate enormous online enthusiasm by attacking moderates as insufficiently pure. You can raise money by declaring that capitalism itself is the problem.

But eventually someone asks the most inconvenient question in politics:

How much is this going to cost me?

That’s where slogans become math.

And math has a nasty habit of ruining political fantasies.

The Wisconsin result should therefore be viewed as something more consequential than one primary.

The Democratic Party’s ideological left has demonstrated that it can generate momentum. It has scored high-profile victories in Democratic strongholds. It has challenged establishment candidates, energized activists, and convinced many Democrats that the future belongs to a more confrontational, more ideological movement.

But there is an enormous difference between winning a primary in a deeply blue district and persuading the voters who actually determine control of Congress, governorships, and presidential elections.

Those voters are not necessarily interested in ideological purity.

They’re interested in whether they can afford their mortgage.

Whether their kids are safe.

Whether their taxes are going up.

Whether their neighborhood is functioning.

Whether their schools work.

Whether government can actually deliver something without turning every issue into a political crusade.

That is the battlefield we are heading into come November.

Crowley now moves toward a general-election showdown with Republican Congressman Tom Tiffany, backed by Donald Trump. Crowley will emphasize jobs, schools, affordability, and economic realities. Tiffany will campaign on lower taxes, farmers, healthcare, and a more conservative governing philosophy.

And notice what voters are being asked to decide.

Not which candidate can deliver the most spectacular ideological performance.

Which candidate can convince them that their lives will be better.

That distinction is going to matter enormously.

We’re seeing political currents shift all over the country. From Wisconsin to South Carolina and beyond, voters are confronting open questions about what their parties actually represent and where they want their states and country to go.

I will continue to scream this from the rooftop, despite so many who hate when I do it. The midterms won’t be decided by cable-news applause meters.

They won’t be decided by the loudest activists on social media.

And they certainly won’t be decided by whichever political faction has the most enthusiastic audience inside its own bubble; like here on .

They’ll be decided by voters sitting at kitchen tables doing the arithmetic of everyday life.

That’s why I think Wisconsin matters.

Political movements can manufacture excitement. They can create viral moments. They can fill rooms, dominate social media, generate fundraising emails, and convince themselves that history is moving inexorably in their direction.

But eventually the music stops.

The lights come on.

The campaign signs come down.

And voters get handed the bill.

That’s when ideology has to answer to reality.

Francesca Hong may have arrived expecting another democratic domino to fall.

Instead, Wisconsin voters reached for the political emergency brake.

And sometimes, one state has to yank the microphone away, kill the spotlight, and remind the ideological circus that America isn’t their echo chamber; it’s the audience, and it just booed.

____________________________________________________________________________

Received this from a fan:

Since Cohen joined WABC: WABC 3.5 → 4.1 in the July Nielsen book.

The Apple Podcasts page for “When You Know You Know” currently displays 4.7/5 from about 1,920 ratings.

Nielsen’s July 2026 New York PPM results were released on August 10, and 77 WABC rose from a 3.5 share in June to a 4.1 share in July among persons 6+, Monday–Sunday, 6 a.m.–midnight. That is about a 17% month-over-month increase in audience share.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

I find it remarkable, really. When I issue a stark warning about where I believe our political landscape is heading, the comment section erupts into a circus of outrage, insults, and emotional meltdowns. But when mainstream, high-ranking members of the opposition say essentially the same thing, suddenly those very same partisans become somber, concerned, and deeply appreciative.

The hypocrisy would almost be entertaining if the consequences weren’t so serious.

So let me speak plainly, without the glossy spin of political consultants and party operatives.

I believe the Democratic Socialists of America are systematically dismantling the traditional Democratic Party infrastructure from within. They are helping manufacture a political catastrophe that could turn what many Democrats assumed would be a comfortable midterm victory into something entirely different.

For months, party leaders have been counting their chickens, assuming the House was theirs for the taking and that they had a legitimate path to the Senate. I think those assumptions are beginning to evaporate.

And you don’t have to look much further than Wisconsin.

There, I’m watching the progressive wing push the Democratic Party toward the edge of a self-inflicted disaster. State Representative Francesca Hong, a favorite of the party’s far-left base, has surged forward in the gubernatorial primary, forcing the establishment into a frantic late-stage scramble to deal with the consequences.

Outgoing Governor Tony Evers and Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley have been traveling the state essentially making the same warning I have been making: nominate a candidate who cannot appeal beyond the ideological base, and you risk handing Republicans the election.

Think about how unusual that is.

A Democratic governor, Republican political organizations, and conservative activists can all look at the same candidate and reach the same tactical conclusion.

From a purely electoral standpoint, Hong becomes precisely the kind of opponent Republicans would love to face in November. Conservative PACs have reportedly been willing to spend millions to boost her candidacy, effectively helping Democrats choose the candidate Republicans believe would be easiest to defeat.

That should set off every alarm bell in the Democratic establishment.

Why?

Because I see Hong as representing some of the worst impulses of performative, unvetted left-wing politics. Her public record includes support for defunding law enforcement and controversial online comments, including remarks about Thanksgiving. When confronted about some of those positions, she offered explanations suggesting that she had evolved and recognized some of her earlier statements as mistakes.

That may satisfy voters inside an intensely progressive political bubble.

But Wisconsin is not that bubble.

It is a competitive battleground state, one Donald Trump won in 2024. And what plays beautifully in a heavily progressive district can become political poison when transported onto a statewide stage.

What concerns me even more is that I’m seeing Democrats themselves acknowledge the problem.

Voters understand that controversial statements about abolishing or defunding police can become devastating campaign ammunition in a general election. Democratic organizers understand that ideological enthusiasm is not the same thing as statewide electability. And Republicans certainly understand it.

Yet the base keeps choosing ideological purity over the practical question that matters most:

Can this person actually win in November?

And Wisconsin isn’t some isolated anomaly.

To me, it looks like a preview of a much broader national problem.

The most ideological elements of the Democratic coalition continue pushing sweeping policies, from restrictions on data-center construction to massive wage mandates, while too often failing to address the bread-and-butter concerns I hear from ordinary Americans: public safety, affordability, jobs, taxes, housing, and whether government can actually deliver what it promises.

Meanwhile, moderates such as Crowley are trying to make the argument for economic development, public safety, and political practicality.

But increasingly, that message is being drowned out by revolutionary rhetoric.

And when Democratic leaders have to beg their own voters to ask the most basic political question, “Can this candidate win?”, I believe the party has already lost the plot.

Even Governor Evers’ apparent reluctance to immediately commit to supporting Hong if she wins the nomination speaks volumes. When a sitting Democratic governor essentially wants to take a breath and see what happens before making that commitment, I think people should pay attention.

The warning signs are everywhere.

What I see happening is a vocal ideological minority gaining disproportionate influence over a party that still needs to win elections in places where that ideology simply does not command a majority.

That is not strategy.

That is political self-sabotage.

And if Democrats continue allowing ideological absolutism to dictate their candidates, their messaging, and their priorities, they may discover that the greatest threat to their midterm hopes isn’t the Republican Party at all.

It’s themselves.

I have been warning about this dynamic, and I’m going to keep warning about it whether people like hearing it or not.

Ignore me.

Ignore the numbers.

Ignore the warning signs.

But when November arrives, don’t tell me nobody saw it coming.

____________________________________________________________________________

Received this from a fan:

Since Cohen joined WABC: WABC 3.5 → 4.1 in the July Nielsen book.

The Apple Podcasts page for “When You Know You Know” currently displays 4.7/5 from about 1,920 ratings.

Nielsen’s July 2026 New York PPM results were released on August 10, and 77 WABC rose from a 3.5 share in June to a 4.1 share in July among persons 6+, Monday–Sunday, 6 a.m.–midnight. That is about a 17% month-over-month increase in audience share.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

And if Goethe were alive today and forced to sit through some of these podcast interviews with the current crop of political operators, I suspect he would reach for a stiff drink, shake his head, and conclude that humanity had learned absolutely nothing.

Because what I am watching from the Democratic Socialists of America and its leadership is not merely political radicalism. It is a masterclass in economic cluelessness. And frankly, the combination should scare the hell out of anyone who works for a living, owns a business, saves for retirement, or simply expects the government to have some idea what it is doing with their money.

Let me be very clear about something before anyone tries to twist my argument. I believe people should pay their fair share of taxes. I have no problem with the principle that those at the top of the economic ladder should not be allowed to manipulate the system to avoid contributing. Fairness matters.

But there is a gigantic difference between believing in progressive taxation and handing the keys to the treasury to people who cannot explain the basic mechanics of their own economic agenda.

And that brings me to something I find particularly disturbing.

If you are sitting comfortably right now thinking, “Well, this whole wealth-redistribution thing is aimed at billionaires. It has nothing to do with me,” I have a wake-up call for you.

When the people demanding sweeping economic redistribution cannot even tell you what “rich” means, cannot articulate the income threshold at which you become a target, and cannot explain precisely how much revenue their policies are supposed to generate, you should probably start paying attention.

Because eventually, somebody has to write the check.

Case in point: DSA co-chair Megan Romer recently appeared on The New Yorker Radio Hour, and what followed was, in my view, an absolute performance for the ages.

David Remnick pressed her on an incredibly basic question: How exactly does the organization intend to finance the sweeping economic agenda it is advocating by taxing the wealthy?

Her response?

“Uhhhh, yeah, you know, again, I don’t have like a solid answer.”

Then she chuckled.

I want you to think about that for a second.

This isn’t someone sitting around a dorm room arguing about political theory. This is a leader of a political organization advocating a fundamental restructuring of the American economic system.

And when asked how the hell she intends to pay for it, the answer is essentially: I don’t know.

Followed by a laugh.

I’ve been around politics long enough to know that when someone cannot answer a basic question, they frequently try to bury the deficiency beneath a mountain of words.

That’s essentially what happened next.

When Remnick pressed her on whether the co-chair of an organization advocating massive financial restructuring might want to offer something a little more concrete than slogans, Romer essentially responded, “That’s a good question.”

Well, yes. It is a good question.

It’s actually the question. The question I would be asking on my new 77WABC show “When You Know…You Know.”

She then pivoted into broad language about determining what we need to spend, focusing on billionaires who exploited working people, democracy, and establishing an interim tax base.

Fine.

But where are the numbers?

Where is the threshold?

Where is the actual definition?

Where is the economic model?

Where is the point at which someone goes from being a billionaire target to a millionaire target to a successful small-business owner who simply had the audacity to build something valuable?

This would be funny if the stakes weren’t becoming increasingly serious.

Because these people are no longer simply campus activists waving signs and shouting slogans at rallies. They are winning elections. None of this is partisan; it’s personal. Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike are being played, and sooner or later, every one of us gets the bill.

We’ve seen DSA-backed candidates make real gains in New York Democratic primaries. Candidates such as Darializa Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez have secured victories with the backing of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

That changes the equation.

When an ideological movement begins converting its rhetoric into political power, I stop laughing and start paying attention.

Because now these ideas aren’t confined to podcasts, protest rallies, or social media posts. They are moving toward legislative chambers where somebody eventually has to turn the slogans into actual policy.

And government policy has consequences.

Donald Trump, naturally, has seized on this spectacle because it feeds directly into his favorite political narrative. He has mocked Mamdani, celebrated the election of what he describes as communists, declared that “the game is on,” and warned that communism is a cancer that needs to be cut out.

Trump knows exactly what he is doing.

He takes the most extreme rhetoric coming from the left, puts it under a political spotlight, and turns it into an existential argument about the future of America.

But here’s the irony that I think the radical left consistently fails to understand:

Every time they demonstrate breathtaking incompetence, they make Trump’s argument for him.

When someone cannot explain how their economic program works, what the definition of “rich” is, Trump’s warnings suddenly sound less ridiculous to voters who are already worried about their jobs, taxes, mortgages, savings, and retirement.

And that’s the tragedy.

The real danger isn’t simply another predictable partisan food fight between Democrats and Republicans. I have lived through enough of those to know how this movie ends.

The real danger is an economic philosophy that treats public finance like a game of political pickup basketball.

You cannot simply announce, “We’re going to tax the rich,” and leave the definition of “rich” for later.

You cannot promise sweeping new spending while shrugging when someone asks how you’re going to pay for it.

And you certainly cannot laugh when asked to explain the arithmetic.

Because eventually the math comes due.

Today, it’s billionaires.

Tomorrow, maybe it’s millionaires.

Then perhaps it’s successful entrepreneurs, small-business owners, investors, professionals, or anyone whose income happens to exceed whatever new political threshold gets established.

And eventually, you can find yourself looking at the retirement account, home, or savings you spent decades building and wondering when exactly you became the “wealthy” person they promised they wouldn’t come after.

I’ve watched political movements throughout my life convince themselves that moral certainty is a substitute for competence.

It isn’t.

Good intentions don’t balance budgets.

Slogans don’t finance government.

And laughter isn’t an economic policy.

I believe in fairness. I believe the wealthy should contribute. I believe government has legitimate responsibilities to its citizens.

But I also believe that before politicians start reaching into my pocket, or yours, they damn well better be able to explain exactly how much they intend to take, from whom, why, and what we are getting in return.

That’s not radical.

That’s basic accountability.

And if the people demanding control over the economy cannot answer those elementary questions, I don’t want them anywhere near the controls.

Because when ideology replaces competence, arithmetic eventually wins.

And when arithmetic wins, guess whose wallet gets opened first?

Consider yourself warned.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

I know this city. I know its people. And I know the difference between genuine leadership and political theater. New Yorkers have a built-in, finely tuned, razor-sharp detector for bullshit, and right now, that alarm is screaming louder than an ambulance racing up Seventh Avenue.

If there is one political lightweight who has earned every decibel of the crowd fury coming his way for trying to play this city for fools, it is Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

New Yorkers asked for a mayor who could keep the lights on, keep the streets safe, and actually run the damn city. Instead, City Hall delivered what looks increasingly like a radical social-media production with a mayor attached to it.

And now, as New York approaches the solemn 25th anniversary of September 11, Mamdani apparently believes he deserves a prominent place at the podium to memorialize the thousands of innocent people murdered that day.

I have to ask: Seriously?

Talk about political delusion.

He has already endured two very public humiliations at events where his presence was about as welcome as another subway fare increase. So the question now being whispered all over this city is pretty simple:

Is he really foolish enough to go for a third strike at next month’s 9/11 ceremonies?

Look at what just happened.

Last week, Mamdani was booed off the stage at a National Night Out event on Staten Island. These events are supposed to be community celebrations, opportunities for law enforcement, first responders, and residents to build relationships with one another.

Then Mamdani walked onto that stage wearing the polished political smile we have all seen before.

And approximately 3,500 people answered him with something far less polished.

They booed.

And they kept booing.

The reaction was so intense that Mamdani reportedly cut his remarks down to roughly sixty seconds before getting the hell out of there.

What did he expect?

This was a pro-police crowd. And Mamdani has spent months antagonizing the NYPD and making statements that have infuriated many officers and their supporters. You cannot spend your political career throwing gasoline onto a relationship and then act shocked when the room smells like smoke.

And that embarrassment came right after another dose of political reality in Queens, at the funeral for Sergeant Angel Rampersad, who was killed in an Iranian missile and drone strike.

Mamdani arrived apparently expecting to speak.

The family said no.

Not one word.

Once again, he encountered something every politician eventually learns: the podium does not belong to you simply because you won an election.

A grieving family gets to decide who speaks at its own funeral.

That should not even be controversial.

And yet the larger political problem for Mamdani is impossible to ignore. His positions on foreign regimes, his history of controversial statements, and his approach to issues involving Israel, Iran, and American power have created enormous distrust among people who do not share his worldview.

So when he walks into a room mourning someone whose life was taken in an Iranian attack, he should understand that people are going to judge him not by whatever carefully polished remarks his communications team prepared, but by the political record he has spent years creating.

That is the brutal reality of politics.

And the fact that this happened in Queens, in a diverse community where Mamdani had performed well electorally, ought to send an even bigger warning signal.

Because the backlash he is facing is no longer confined to conservative critics or people who never supported him.

The honeymoon is over.

What Mamdani is discovering is that winning an election is one thing. Governing a city this complicated is something entirely different.

He benefited from a primary opponent in Andrew Cuomo who had become politically damaged beyond repair and then faced Curtis Sliwa in the general election. That is a pretty remarkable political runway for someone with such a narrow ideological base.

But governing New York City means dealing with millions of people who do not live on social media.

They are parents trying to get their children safely home.

They are cops walking into dangerous neighborhoods.

They are small-business owners trying to keep their doors open.

They are commuters squeezing onto filthy subway platforms.

They are immigrants, union workers, professionals, seniors, students and families who don’t give a damn about the latest online political fashion.

They simply want their city to work.

And that is where the social-media persona eventually meets reality.

You can curate an image online. You can manufacture viral moments. You can surround yourself with people who applaud everything you say.

But eventually, you have to walk into a room filled with people who disagree with you.

That is where leadership gets tested.

And now comes the ultimate test: September 11.

There is a massive political Catch-22 here.

A New York City mayor cannot casually disappear from the city’s most sacred civic commemoration, particularly on the 25th anniversary of the attacks.

But a mayor whose relationship with first responders and whose political history has generated enormous controversy also cannot pretend that everyone is going to welcome him with open arms.

More than 60,000 people have reportedly signed a petition demanding that he stay away.

Whether you agree with that demand or not, the political message behind it is impossible to miss.

And perhaps spending time with online personalities who have made grotesque statements about America and September 11 was not exactly the wisest political decision imaginable.

Fortunately, there is an important tradition at Ground Zero: politicians do not turn the ceremony into a campaign event.

The families come first.

The victims come first.

The firefighters, police officers, EMTs, office workers, passengers, rescuers and everyone else whose lives were stolen that morning come first.

Not the mayor.

Not the political party.

Not the campaign.

Not the social-media machine.

The victims.

If City Hall is smart, it will remember that.

Because September 11 is not a stage for political rehabilitation. It is not an opportunity to repair a damaged public image. It is not a backdrop for another carefully choreographed photograph.

It is a day of mourning.

And if Mamdani has learned anything from the boos on Staten Island and the rejection in Queens, it should be this:

New Yorkers are watching.

They are not stupid.

They are not impressed by political theater.

And they certainly are not going to forget what they believe a politician stood for simply because he suddenly wants to stand behind a podium on September 11.

In New York, you can fool some of the people some of the time.

But try fooling all of us?

Good luck with that.

____________________________________________________________________________

MAKE SURE TO TUNE IN THIS SUNDAY AT 5:00PM EST FOR ANOTHER HOUR OF “WHEN YOU KNOW…YOU KNOW” ON 77WABC.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

It cannot.

The East Wing is gone. Gone. Reduced to memory, rubble, dust, and a very expensive construction site. Where a piece of American history once stood, there is now a massive hole in the ground, surrounded by rebar and the skeletal beginnings of a multimillion-dollar structure in the backyard of the White House.

And now, after the demolition has happened, the earth has been moved, and the concrete has started going into the ground, Democrats and historic-preservation groups have suddenly discovered the emergency brake.

That is classic Washington political theater. But to me, it exposes something much more serious: the fundamental dysfunction of a government that increasingly confuses litigation with governing.

A divided federal appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump must halt construction of the roughly $400 million White House ballroom because Congress has not explicitly authorized the project. The White House has predictably blasted the decision as unjust and says it will take the fight directly to the Supreme Court.

Fine.

But I want to step away from the cable-news screaming for a moment and look at what is actually happening.

The two-to-one decision from the D.C. Circuit essentially says the president does not have unilateral authority to construct a roughly 90,000-square-foot venue where the historic East Wing once stood. The judges are saying that whether this massive project should exist is ultimately a question for Congress, not something the executive branch can simply decide on its own.

On paper, I understand the argument.

In fact, I agree with the underlying constitutional principle. Congress controls the purse. Executive power has limits. And conservatives should be extremely careful about cheering executive overreach simply because the person exercising that power happens to be Donald Trump.

But here is where the whole thing becomes almost comically absurd.

The East Wing was demolished last fall.

You cannot un-demolish a building with an injunction.

You cannot order a bulldozer to put the rubble back together. You cannot magically reconstruct historic architecture because a judge has issued an emergency stay. Once the wrecking ball has finished its work, history does not come back because Washington suddenly discovered a procedural objection.

So what exactly are we preserving?

There is no East Wing left to preserve.

What the opposition is effectively fighting over now is whether the White House should be left with an enormous, half-built crater sitting in one of the most recognizable locations on Earth.

That is not preservation. That is litigation after the fact.

Trump, unsurprisingly, reacted with fury. He has pointed to Judge Neomi Rao’s dissent and framed the project as a matter of national security, not merely another venue for lavish state dinners and diplomatic receptions.

And that distinction matters.

The administration argues that the project includes underground bomb shelters, specialized medical facilities, secure military communications infrastructure, and defensive systems designed to address modern threats ranging from ballistic missiles to biological hazards. The military and Secret Service apparently view the project stoppage as a potential security vulnerability.

The opposition sees a political opportunity.

And somewhere between those two positions sits the American taxpayer, who is ultimately going to pay for this mess.

This is where I think conservatives and constitutionalists need to be intellectually honest.

I am deeply uncomfortable with executive overreach. I have spent enough time around powerful people to know exactly how dangerous it becomes when someone starts believing that because they can do something, they are therefore entitled to do it.

The Constitution does not work that way.

If Congress has to authorize a massive federal construction project, then Congress should authorize it. Period.

And conservatives should not suddenly abandon that principle because the president happens to be someone they support.

Imagine, for a moment, a progressive president deciding that Congress was merely an inconvenient obstacle to his or her preferred $400 million project. Imagine that president announcing that legislative approval was unnecessary because the executive branch had found some clever way around the rules.

Republicans would be screaming bloody murder.

And they would be right to do so.

Constitutional guardrails are not supposed to protect us only from presidents we hate. They are supposed to protect us from every president.

But that brings me to the other side of this ridiculous spectacle.

There is something breathtakingly incompetent about using lawsuits as a substitute for governance after the demolition has already happened.

Democrats warned about funding. Historic-preservation groups sued. Judges issued stays and injunctions. Lawyers argued over jurisdiction and congressional authorization.

Meanwhile, the construction site kept changing.

At one point, Federal District Judge Richard Leon allowed underground national-security work to continue while stopping aboveground construction.

Read that again.

We have apparently reached the bureaucratic masterpiece where workers can continue constructing a secret bunker underneath the White House, but the government may be prohibited from completing the structure sitting above it.

What could possibly go wrong?

It is bureaucratic insanity.

And while everyone congratulates themselves on winning the latest procedural battle, the physical reality remains unchanged. The East Wing is still gone. The hole is still there. The money has still been spent. The construction materials are still sitting there. The security requirements have not disappeared.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation celebrated the ruling as a victory for the American people.

I understand why.

But I have to ask the obvious question: what exactly did the American people win?

Did we get the East Wing back?

No.

Did the demolition somehow reverse itself?

No.

Did the construction site disappear?

No.

Did the legal uncertainty disappear?

Absolutely not.

What we appear to have won is a prolonged legal stalemate that could leave the White House surrounded by a construction zone for months, perhaps years.

And that, to me, is the bigger story.

This is not simply about Donald Trump. It is not simply about a ballroom. It is not simply about historic preservation.

It is a warning about how dysfunctional our government has become.

One side uses executive power aggressively. The other side responds with lawsuits. Judges intervene. Politicians issue press releases. Everyone declares victory while the problem sitting in front of them gets worse.

That is not governing.

That is political trench warfare.

Power without restraint creates chaos. But opposition without a practical alternative creates paralysis. And when both sides become so obsessed with defeating the other that they lose sight of reality, the country gets stuck paying for the consequences.

As this case moves toward the Supreme Court, I think the lesson is pretty damn simple.

If you wait until the wrecking ball has finished the job before you start asking whether the wrecking ball was legally authorized, you are already too late.

At that point, you have neither historic preservation nor functional government.

You have an enormous hole in the ground, a mountain of legal bills, hundreds of millions of dollars already committed, and politicians on both sides congratulating themselves for accomplishing absolutely nothing.

Welcome to Washington.

____________________________________________________________________________

MAKE SURE TO TUNE IN THIS SUNDAY AT 5:00PM EST FOR ANOTHER HOUR OF “WHEN YOU KNOW…YOU KNOW” ON 77WABC.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

Apparently, Jefferson never met the modern Democratic Party.

Because whenever Donald Trump does anything, anything, the collective left doesn’t count to ten. They don’t count to a hundred. They don’t even take a breath.

They immediately reach for the fainting couch.

Trump signs an executive order? Fascism.

Trump changes an immigration policy? The Constitution is under attack.

Trump walks into a room and probably adjusts the thermostat? BREAKING NEWS: Democracy Has Been Murdered.

At this point, I’m convinced that if Trump signed an order declaring that gravity should continue functioning, MSNBC would convene a seven-person panel to determine whether Newton’s laws were being weaponized against minorities.

So when I watched the latest hysterical reaction to Trump’s executive actions targeting birth tourism and attempting to redefine the boundaries of birthright citizenship, my first thought wasn’t outrage.

It was: Here we go again.

Before everyone starts hyperventilating into paper bags, maybe, just maybe, we should actually look at what is being proposed.

Because the underlying issue isn’t nearly as complicated as the people screaming about it would like you to believe.

Imagine this.

You board a plane, fly comfortably to the United States, spend a few days at a luxury hotel, check into an expensive hospital, give birth, and suddenly your newborn has American citizenship.

Congratulations.

Here’s your baby.

Here’s your birth certificate.

And apparently, somewhere along the way, we’re supposed to hand you a little gift bag containing an American passport.

Thanks for visiting America. Please come again.

Only somehow, when I point out the absurdity of turning American citizenship into the ultimate travel souvenir, I’m the one supposedly being extreme.

That’s the brilliance of our political discourse.

The Constitution is treated like an infallible sacred text until someone suggests that perhaps a provision written in 1868 should be interpreted within the historical context in which it was actually written.

Let’s remember what America looked like in 1868.

The Civil War had just ended. Reconstruction was underway. The Fourteenth Amendment was written against the backdrop of slavery, emancipation and the desperate effort to establish citizenship and constitutional protections for millions of formerly enslaved people.

The Wright brothers wouldn’t make their first powered flight for another 35 years.

There were no commercial airlines.

There were no immigration consultants selling “birth tourism packages.”

There were no luxury hospital delivery suites marketed to wealthy foreigners looking to secure American citizenship for their children.

If somebody wanted to get to America in 1868, they didn’t click three buttons on Expedia and choose an aisle seat.

They endured a difficult, expensive and often dangerous journey across an ocean.

So when Trump argues that the people responsible for the Fourteenth Amendment could not possibly have envisioned wealthy foreigners treating American citizenship like a loophole-based acquisition strategy, I don’t immediately reach for my copy of the Constitution and start screaming that democracy is over.

I ask a much simpler question:

Is that really what the amendment was intended to accomplish?

And that question deserves an honest answer rather than another five-hour cable-news therapy session.

The administration’s current approach is also significant because it comes after the Supreme Court blocked an earlier attempt by Trump to restrict birthright citizenship. Rather than simply pretending the judiciary doesn’t exist, as his critics apparently assume he intends to do, the administration is pursuing other legal avenues.

Stephen Miller has argued that existing statutory authority can be used to restrict eligibility in specific circumstances, including certain categories of foreign nationals and individuals acting on behalf of foreign interests.

The administration is also invoking Section 215 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to target organized birth-tourism operations.

And let’s be honest about what we’re talking about here.

If there are companies, consultants, facilitators and networks whose business model is essentially “Pay us enough money and we’ll help you exploit America’s citizenship laws,” why exactly are we supposed to defend that business model?

Is that what immigration advocates mean when they talk about protecting the American Dream?

Because if so, apparently the American Dream now comes with a concierge, a hospital reservation and a nine-month itinerary.

Will Scharf has emphasized that the administration believes these measures operate within legally established boundaries. Trump, naturally, has expressed confidence that the policies will survive the inevitable legal challenges.

And there will be legal challenges.

Of course there will.

In modern Washington, someone could challenge the president for ordering more paper towels into the White House kitchen.

That’s not an argument against the policy. It’s simply the reality of governing in a country where every politically controversial action immediately becomes a lawsuit.

But here’s what I find most irritating about this entire debate.

I don’t believe that stopping birth tourism means America should stop welcoming legitimate immigrants.

It doesn’t.

Someone who comes here legally, follows the rules, works hard, raises a family, contributes to the country and wants to become an American should not be confused with someone exploiting a loophole for financial gain.

Those are two entirely different things.

Yet the Democratic response to virtually anything Trump does has become so Pavlovian that I sometimes wonder whether someone in the DNC has installed an emergency siren labeled “TRUMP DID SOMETHING.”

The siren goes off.

The talking points are distributed.

The MSNBC chyrons appear.

Someone says “constitutional crisis.”

Someone else says “authoritarian.”

And within approximately fourteen minutes, we’re apparently living in 1938.

Maybe, just once, we could skip the theatrics.

Maybe we could actually examine the policy.

Maybe we could acknowledge that Trump can propose something worth considering without simultaneously deciding that the Republic has collapsed.

That last part seems particularly difficult for Democrats.

Their hatred of Trump has become so consuming that they appear incapable of separating the man from the merits of an individual policy.

That’s not principled opposition.

That’s reflex.

And reflex is a terrible substitute for governing.

I have spent enough time around Washington to know that political people love pretending every disagreement is an existential battle for civilization. It makes fundraising easier. It makes television ratings better. It makes social media outrage incredibly profitable.

But America doesn’t need another manufactured apocalypse.

It needs an adult conversation about immigration, citizenship, sovereignty and the integrity of our laws.

If someone is legitimately immigrating to this country, working hard and becoming part of the American fabric, that’s one conversation.

If someone is deliberately exploiting the system to purchase citizenship for a child through a commercial birth-tourism operation, that’s another.

Pretending those things are identical doesn’t make you compassionate.

It makes you unserious.

So here’s my advice to the Democratic Party:

Count to ten.

Then count to a hundred.

And if Donald Trump’s name still makes you completely lose your mind, keep counting.

Count to a thousand.

Count to a million.

Because at some point, after you’ve finished hyperventilating, you might actually have enough oxygen left to read the policy.

And God forbid, you might discover that opposing something simply because Donald Trump proposed it isn’t a political philosophy.

It’s just another form of intellectual laziness.

And treating American citizenship as a commodity to be purchased by exploiting a legal loophole isn’t defending the Constitution.

It is making a mockery of it.

Calling that out isn’t tyranny.

It isn’t fascism.

And it certainly isn’t the end of democracy.

Sometimes, unbelievably, it’s just common sense.

____________________________________________________________________________

MAKE SURE TO TUNE IN THIS SUNDAY AT 5:00PM EST FOR ANOTHER HOUR OF “WHEN YOU KNOW…YOU KNOW” ON 77WABC.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

That is exactly what I see happening with Dr. Anthony Fauci.

As the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee prepares to vote on whether to hold the former public health chief in contempt of Congress, I don’t see a political witch hunt. I see a collision between years of institutional confidence and the simple reality that no one gets to avoid scrutiny forever. For decades, Fauci was treated as the indispensable expert. Politicians defended him. The media elevated him. Critics were dismissed before they could finish asking their questions. That kind of insulation changes people. It breeds certainty. Worse, it breeds the belief that accountability is optional.

Then came last week’s hearing.

Watching Fauci invoke the Fifth Amendment 111 times was remarkable; not simply because he refused to answer questions, but because of how he framed the moment. He portrayed himself as the victim. He accused Senator Rand Paul of having an obsession with him. He warned that the committee was trying to lure him into a perjury trap. He reminded everyone of his decades of public service and spoke respectfully about Congress before declining to answer Congress’s questions.

I’ve watched and been a part of enough congressional hearings to recognize when a witness is trying to change the subject. The story wasn’t Rand Paul. The story was Anthony Fauci deciding that silence served him better than transparency.

What makes this episode even more fascinating is that the legal terrain may have shifted because of something intended to protect him.

Joe Biden’s sweeping preemptive pardon was celebrated by Fauci’s defenders as the ultimate insurance policy. Maybe politically it was. Legally, it may have created an entirely different problem.

The Fifth Amendment exists to protect people from being forced to provide testimony that could expose them to criminal prosecution. That’s the foundation of the privilege against self-incrimination. But when criminal exposure disappears, many legal scholars argue that the privilege changes with it. That debate stretches back generations, including Supreme Court precedent like Brown v. Walker. Whether that principle ultimately governs every aspect of congressional testimony remains disputed, but it is hardly a fringe legal theory.

That’s what makes this entire situation so extraordinary.

Fauci never had to accept Biden’s pardon. He could have rejected it. He could have publicly declared that he had committed no wrongdoing and needed no presidential forgiveness. Instead, he accepted it. That decision gave his critics a legal argument they otherwise might never have had.

Rand Paul wasted no time making that point. If Fauci enjoys blanket protection for his past conduct, Paul argued, what exactly is he afraid to discuss? Whether courts eventually embrace that reasoning isn’t the only question. Politically, it puts Fauci in an extraordinarily uncomfortable position. He appears to want the certainty of executive clemency while preserving the ability to remain silent about the very conduct the pardon covers.

Government rarely allows people to have it both ways.

One thing, however, is beyond dispute. No pardon reaches into the future. If someone knowingly commits perjury today, that would be an entirely new offense. A presidential pardon issued years earlier offers no protection for testimony given after the fact. Every lawyer understands that. Every witness understands that. And every answer, or refusal to answer, takes on a different significance because of it.

Predictably, partisan lines hardened almost immediately. Some insist this is nothing more than revenge dressed up as congressional oversight. I think that misses the larger point entirely.

Accountability is not retaliation.

Congress exists to investigate matters of public importance. It asks uncomfortable questions because the public deserves uncomfortable answers. During the pandemic, Anthony Fauci became one of the most influential unelected officials in modern American history. His guidance shaped government policy, altered everyday life, affected businesses, schools, churches, travel, and personal freedoms. Whether one applauds those decisions or condemns them, their consequences were enormous. That alone makes congressional oversight appropriate.

For years, Fauci projected confidence, certainty, and authority. Behind every public figure, though, is a private decision-maker confronting uncertainty, conflicting information, and difficult choices. Congress is trying to understand those decisions. That’s not persecution. That’s oversight.

I’ve learned something the hard way over the course of my own life.

Power doesn’t disappear overnight. It fades in stages. First, people stop assuming you’re right simply because of your title. Then they start asking questions. Eventually, those questions demand answers.

Anthony Fauci spent years standing at the center of one of the most consequential chapters in modern American history. Now the spotlight has shifted. Instead of asking the questions, he’s being asked to answer them.

Whether this contempt vote succeeds or fails, the larger lesson remains the same. Public trust isn’t sustained by credentials, television appearances, or political allies. It survives only when those entrusted with immense authority are willing to explain how they exercised it.

No matter how powerful someone once seemed, accountability has a way of arriving eventually. In Washington, it often arrives later than it should. But sooner or later, it always knocks.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

Look, I have lived through the ugliest side of politics. I have watched powerful people manipulate public opinion, weaponize institutions, and sacrifice ordinary Americans for ideological gain. I know exactly what happens when political theater becomes more important than public safety. That’s why what is unfolding in New York City isn’t just another partisan fight. It is a dangerous failure of leadership, and innocent people are paying the price.

Last month, on Manhattan’s Upper West Side, a fifty-one-year-old man allegedly attacked a Jewish man and an Asian man in separate stabbings while reportedly shouting hateful slogans. Think about that. People simply walking through their own neighborhood became victims because hatred had boiled over into violence. At the same time, NYPD statistics continue to show that hate crimes against Jewish New Yorkers account for more than half of all reported bias incidents in the city. That should horrify every New Yorker regardless of political party. Regardless of your religious affiliation.

So where is the leadership?

Instead of bringing people together, Mayor Zohran Mamdani has repeatedly chosen rhetoric that fuels division. He has devoted enormous political energy to condemning Israel, accusing it of horrific crimes, demanding international prosecutions, and inserting himself into global ideological battles while the city he was elected to govern struggles with rising antisemitism at home.

Whether he intends it or not, words matter.

When you occupy the highest office in America’s largest city, every statement carries weight. Every speech, every interview, every social media post sends a message. Leaders establish the political climate, and unstable individuals often mistake inflammatory rhetoric for validation.

Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League highlighted one deeply troubling example after authorities reported that a suspect accused of attacking a Florida synagogue had shared Mayor Mamdani’s online content before carrying out the assault. Greenblatt’s warning could not have been clearer: words have consequences. Public officials cannot continually pour gasoline onto already-burning cultural fires and then express surprise when someone strikes the match.

That is why I believe the federal government’s intervention deserves serious attention.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who leads the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, recently met with Dov Hikind of Americans Against Antisemitism to discuss the alarming rise in antisemitic incidents throughout New York City. The Justice Department has reportedly demanded answers from City Hall regarding concerns over whether Jewish New Yorkers are receiving equal protection under the law. Federal officials have also made clear that hate crimes remain an enforcement priority nationwide, including in New York.

The response from City Hall has done little to inspire confidence. Budget announcements and carefully crafted talking points are no substitute for moral clarity. You cannot claim to oppose hate while continually embracing rhetoric that deepens division. You cannot promise public safety while creating an atmosphere where extremists feel increasingly emboldened.

Leadership is measured by results, not press releases.

I never imagined I would see the day when the federal government might have to scrutinize New York City’s response to antisemitism because of concerns surrounding the conduct of its own mayor. Yet here we are.

This should serve as a warning to every voter.

The first responsibility of any elected official is not to score ideological points or become a celebrity on the national political stage. It is to protect the people they serve. Every one of them. Every race. Every religion. Every neighborhood.

If a mayor cannot, or will not, meet that most basic obligation, then accountability is not political retaliation. It is an essential function of government.

New Yorkers deserve leaders who lower the temperature, reject hatred in all its forms, and unite the city rather than divide it. We need public servants who extinguish the flames of intolerance; not politicians who keep pouring fuel on the fire.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

For days, retiring Republican senators John Cornyn and Thom Tillis pretended they were prepared to take a principled stand against a proposed 1.8 billion dollar fund intended to compensate victims of political prosecutions. They pounded their chests before television cameras, expressed moral panic over the possibility that January 6 defendants could receive compensation, and insisted on written revisions before they would even consider supporting Blanche.

Then, almost on cue, Blanche issued a late night administrative order rescinding the payout structure. Just like that, the grand resistance evaporated. Cornyn and Tillis declared victory, Blanche got his confirmation runway cleared, and everyone involved congratulated themselves for saving the republic.

I have seen this movie before.

Let me cut through the nonsense. Anyone who believes this entire issue has been permanently resolved because an acting bureaucrat signed a piece of paper is fooling themselves.

I also think Democrats, along with more than a few soft headed Republicans, are making a serious mistake by dismissing this fund as nothing more than a slush fund or a cash grab for January 6 defendants. That argument ignores the far bigger story. It ignores what has happened to our justice system over the last several years.

I do not need a crystal ball to explain how weaponized lawfare works because I lived through it.

I became the poster child for what happens when the federal government turns its enormous power against an individual. I lost millions of dollars. I lost my livelihood. I lost my reputation. I lost my freedom. The Department of Justice became a weapon aimed directly at me, and I know firsthand what that kind of political prosecution costs.

I am hardly alone.

I know countless people whose lives have been financially destroyed by politically motivated investigations, crushing legal bills, and endless prosecutions simply because they found themselves on the wrong side of those in power. Government overreach is not an abstract academic debate for me. It is part of my life story.

That is why my own application seeking compensation for the devastating financial damage inflicted through political prosecution is real. The need for that relief is real. And it extends far beyond me. Anyone who has been financially and personally crushed by a weaponized government deserves an opportunity to be made whole.

Which brings me to people like Adam Schiff.

When Schiff confidently declares that this issue is dead because of one Department of Justice order, I cannot help but laugh. The idea that a single administrative memo permanently eliminates the possibility of restitution is naive. Donald Trump understands leverage better than almost anyone I have ever known. Whether people admire him or despise him, that is simply reality. If he believes victims of political prosecutions deserve compensation, I fully expect him to find another path, whether through the judgment fund, legislative action, or another legal mechanism.

That is not wishful thinking. It is my assessment after years of watching how he operates. It also happens to be my sincere hope because accountability should not run in only one direction. If the government can spend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars destroying innocent lives for political purposes, then the government should also bear financial responsibility when it gets it wrong.

Stepping back, the broader political landscape requires something that has become increasingly rare in Washington, an honest assessment of how we arrived here. The outrage from the left over Blanche’s confirmation rings hollow once you compare it with the constitutional reality of how our system actually functions.

I keep coming back to Alexis de Tocqueville’s famous observation that, in a democracy, people ultimately get the government they deserve.

That lesson applies directly to today’s battle over the Department of Justice. Democracies do not run on feelings. They run on constitutional authority. When one party wins the White House and controls the Senate, it earns the right to appoint executive officials, shape the Department of Justice, establish enforcement priorities, and put its own people in positions of power.

That is how elections work.

Democrats can object to Todd Blanche all they want, but elections have consequences. Republican control of the Senate gives them the votes necessary to confirm nominees who fit their agenda. The brief rebellion by Cornyn and Tillis ultimately proved what Washington always proves. Once the cameras stop rolling and the headlines fade away, majority power wins.

The system is moving exactly as it was designed to move. The American people made their choice, and with that choice comes the constitutional authority for the executive branch to reshape what many Americans believe has become a deeply broken and weaponized Department of Justice.

Politicians can delay the process. They can posture. They can negotiate temporary compromises. But none of that changes the larger reality. The demand for accountability, genuine justice, and restitution for those whose lives have been destroyed by politically motivated prosecutions is not disappearing. If anything, it is only beginning.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 625,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

That’s what drives my critics crazy.

It’s always easier to attack the guy holding the flashlight than to confront what’s hiding in the darkness.

The establishment wants everyone to believe this is nothing more than healthy debate. It’s not. Healthy debate produces stronger ideas. What we’re witnessing is something entirely different. It’s an ideological takeover that’s ripping apart the political center and replacing practical governance with ideological absolutism.

The cracks aren’t forming anymore. They’re widening by the day.

And here’s the part that should make every Democrat, and every independent who still believes in common sense, sit up and pay attention.

James Carville finally said the quiet part out loud.

This isn’t some political novice looking for airtime. This is one of the sharpest political operators of the last half-century. He’s won campaigns. He’s built coalitions. He understands something too many activists have forgotten: elections aren’t won on social media. Governments aren’t run through livestreams.

So when Carville says he can’t belong to a party shaped by people like Hasan Piker, that’s not a throwaway sound bite. That’s a distress flare.

He’s telling America that the party has reached a crossroads.

Either the adults regain control of the room, or the loudest ideological voices become the room.

I’ve been sounding that alarm for the past year.

I’ve watched the steady march from Bernie Sanders to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, to Zohran Mamdani, to Abdul El-Sayed, to Rasida Tlaib, and to an ever-growing ecosystem of influencers who seem far more interested in ideological purity than governing a country of 340 million people.

Every election cycle, the demands become more extreme.

Every compromise becomes a betrayal.

Every disagreement becomes heresy.

That’s not politics.

That’s dogma.

And history has never been kind to political movements built on dogma.

What concerns me isn’t that these voices exist. America has always had ideological extremes. That’s part of democracy. What concerns me is watching a major political party slowly convince itself that those extremes represent the future instead of recognizing them for what they are: a shrinking echo chamber that sounds much larger online than it does inside a voting booth.

Strip away the hashtags and the carefully crafted messaging, and you’re left with an agenda that asks Americans to embrace ideas that have consistently failed wherever they’ve been seriously attempted.

Dress it up however you like.

Call it reform.

Call it democratic socialism.

Call it economic justice.

The label doesn’t matter.

Reality does.

Carville understands something that professional activists refuse to accept.

Politics isn’t about making yourself feel morally superior.

Politics is about winning.

Because if you don’t win, you don’t govern.

If you don’t govern, you don’t accomplish anything.

Everything else is performance.

Bernie Sanders energized millions of people. Nobody disputes that. But enthusiasm alone doesn’t elect presidents. Passion alone doesn’t build governing coalitions. And hashtags don’t carry swing states.

Yet instead of asking why those campaigns ultimately fell short, too many people concluded the answer was to move even further left.

That’s not learning.

That’s doubling down.

Hasan Piker and others argue that Americans are demanding a complete rejection of the political establishment. They’re right about one thing.

Americans are frustrated.

The Tired Majority is exhausted.

They’re angry.

But frustration isn’t the same thing as embracing ideological revolution.

Most Americans still wake up worried about paying their mortgage, keeping their jobs, protecting their families, and giving their kids a better life than they had.

They aren’t spending their evenings debating revolutionary political theory.

They’re trying to survive.

That’s the America I know.

That’s the America politicians ignore at their own peril.

The Democratic Party now faces a choice that can’t be postponed much longer.

It can remain a coalition broad enough to win national elections.

Or it can become an ideological movement that feels righteous while losing the country it claims to represent.

It cannot be both.

I’ve drawn my own line. I' now identify as an Independent.

I won’t pretend that extremism somehow becomes acceptable simply because it wears a different political jersey.

I’ve lived through enough deception to recognize it when I see it.

And I have no intention of staying silent while another political establishment convinces itself that ideology matters more than reality.

Because reality always wins.

Eventually.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 600,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

Together, we’re diving headfirst into two of the biggest dumpster fires consuming American politics today: the explosion of online political betting markets and what I see as the Democratic Party’s self-inflicted identity crisis.

Let’s start with the betting madness.

Prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket have completely changed the political conversation. People are now betting real money on everything from election outcomes to foreign policy decisions and congressional votes. Think about that for a second. Politics has become another casino, except this one involves the future of the country.

And, naturally, the controversy isn’t far behind.

You’ve got Governor Kathy Hochul trying to crack down on Kalshi under New York’s gambling laws. To me, it’s classic Albany politics. Instead of focusing on the issues that are crushing New Yorkers every single day, politicians rush to score headlines by picking fights that make for good press conferences.

Then there’s George Santos.

Only George Santos found himself at the center of a federal investigation involving prediction market trades after allegedly betting against his own attendance at the State of the Union. You almost have to shake your head in disbelief. Betting against yourself may be the ultimate hedge, but it also exposes a much bigger problem.

When politicians can potentially profit from inside knowledge about their own actions, market integrity disappears. Public trust disappears. The entire system starts looking less like transparent investing and more like an insiders-only casino where the house always knows the next card.

I’m going to ask George directly how we reached a point where Washington increasingly feels less like the nation’s capital and more like a high-stakes betting parlor.

Then I’m going to pivot to another crisis that’s unfolding right before our eyes.

Hank Sheinkopf and I are going to take apart what I believe is one of the Democratic Party’s biggest strategic mistakes. While Republicans are wrestling with one set of problems, Democrats are allowing themselves to be pulled further and further away from the political center by the Democratic Socialists of America.

Look around the country.

DSA backed candidates are winning local primaries in deep-blue districts where turnout is low and ideological activists dominate the electorate. That’s one thing. Building a national governing coalition is something entirely different.

James Carville recently warned that victories inside ideological echo chambers don’t necessarily translate into success across America, and I think that’s an argument worth examining.

The overwhelming majority of Americans aren’t looking for ideological revolutions. They’re looking for safe neighborhoods, affordable groceries, secure jobs, stable schools, and a government that’s competent enough to fix what’s broken instead of constantly chasing the next political crusade.

When any political party allows its loudest ideological voices to define its public identity, it risks pushing away the voters who actually decide national elections.

To me, that’s not strategy.

That’s political malpractice.

When I step back and look at these two stories together, I see the same underlying problem.

On one side, politics is becoming entertainment, speculation, and personal enrichment. On the other, it’s becoming a laboratory for ideological purity tests that often collide with political reality.

Some people are treating public office like a financial opportunity. Others are treating government like a social experiment.

Meanwhile, the American people are left wondering who’s actually focused on governing.

That’s exactly what we’re going to unpack today.

So, join me today at 5:00 p.m. on 77WABC. George Santos will answer questions about the prediction market controversy. Hank Sheinkopf will break down what these ideological battles mean for the future of the Democratic Party. And I’ll be doing what I always do; asking the questions that too many people are afraid to ask and refusing to let anyone dodge the answers.

Trust me, this is one conversation you won’t want to miss.

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 600,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

I’ve watched politicians from both parties convince themselves they’re untouchable. I’ve seen arrogance replace common sense. And here’s what I’ve learned: the Founders got this one right. A divided Congress isn’t dysfunction; it’s a safeguard. It’s the guardrail that forces compromise, demands accountability, and reminds everyone that nobody gets to own the country.

When one party controls everything, somebody always overreaches. And when politicians overreach, it’s ordinary Americans who end up footing the bill.

Which brings me to what I’m watching unfold inside the Democratic Party.

If Democrats lose the advantage they should have in these midterms, they won’t have Donald Trump to blame. They’ll have to look in the mirror. Because they’re managing to do something that should be almost impossible: they’re handing Republicans a political gift.

Think about where we are. President Trump’s approval numbers have remained underwater for months. Historically, that’s exactly the environment where the opposition party should be building a commanding lead. Instead, polling shows Democrats holding only a narrow advantage; nothing close to the margins they enjoyed heading into the 2018 midterms.

That should set off alarm bells.

The reason isn’t hard to find.

A growing number of Democratic Socialists of America-backed candidates, and the rhetoric surrounding them, have become the loudest voices in the room. Whether they represent the majority of Democratic voters is almost beside the point. Politics isn’t just about what you believe. It’s about what voters believe you believe. And Republicans understand that better than anyone.

I’ve spent enough time in politics to know exactly how this works.

You don’t need every Democrat embracing the most controversial ideas. You only need a handful of highly visible candidates saying things that dominate the news cycle. The opposition will make sure every Democrat owns those positions whether they agree with them or not. That’s Politics 101.

Veteran Democratic strategists understand the danger. Many of the people who helped elect Bill Clinton and Barack Obama built winning coalitions by appealing to independents, suburban voters, union households, and moderate Democrats. Those are the voters who decide elections; not the loudest activists on social media.

Yet today, the party often seems more interested in satisfying its ideological base than persuading the political middle.

That’s a dangerous and stupid trade.

I live in New York, and I’ve watched the political transformation firsthand. Candidates backed by the Democratic Socialists of America aren’t simply challenging the establishment anymore; they’re replacing it. And whether that movement remains concentrated in cities like New York or expands into battleground states, Republicans couldn’t ask for a more effective campaign message.

Every controversial sound bite becomes another television commercial.

Every headline becomes another fundraising email.

Every viral interview becomes another reason for swing voters to ask themselves whether today’s Democratic Party still reflects their priorities. For me, it does not!

Politics is perception, and perception wins elections.

Republicans know they don’t have to convince voters that every Democrat supports the most progressive positions. They only have to convince enough independents that the party is moving too far, too fast. If Democrats don’t define themselves, Republicans will happily do it for them.

And, that’s exactly what’s happening.

Meanwhile, Democrats are leaving themselves vulnerable by allowing their internal fights to dominate the conversation instead of focusing on the economic issues that matter most to working families: inflation, affordability, public safety, fiscal responsibility, and the cost of simply living an ordinary life.

Those are the issues that move voters; not ideological litmus tests.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll keep saying it because I believe it.

America works best when nobody gets everything they want.

A divided government forces negotiation. It forces restraint. It forces both parties to answer to the voters instead of the activists. That’s not weakness. That’s exactly how our constitutional system was designed to function.

If Democrats continue allowing their most polarizing voices to define the party’s public image, Republicans won’t have to invent a winning midterm strategy.

The Democrats will have written it for them.

____________________________________________________________________________

CHECK OUT MY NEW 77WABC RADIO SHOW , “WHEN YOU KNOW…YOU KNOW” EVERY SUNDAY AT 5PM (EST).

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 600,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share

I believe in immigration.

I believe America became the greatest country in the world because generation after generation of people came here chasing something better. They worked. They sacrificed. They learned our language, embraced our values, raised families, started businesses, and became Americans. That’s the story of this country. That’s the American Dream. That’s my family story.

But there’s a world of difference between legal immigration and a government losing control of its borders.

Those aren’t the same conversation.

And if you can’t tell the difference anymore, then you’re not paying attention.

I’ve spent enough time watching institutions fail to recognize the warning signs before everything falls apart. It rarely happens all at once. First comes denial. Then excuses. Then the people in charge insist everything is under control while everyone else can plainly see it isn’t.

That’s exactly why what is unfolding in Spain caught my attention.

Most Americans probably couldn’t find Ceuta on a map. I don’t blame them. It’s a small Spanish territory sitting on the northern coast of Africa. But don’t let its size fool you. Sometimes the smallest places become the biggest warnings.

Reports describe an extraordinary surge of migrants attempting to reach the territory in an incredibly short period of time. Local authorities were suddenly dealing with numbers they simply weren’t equipped to handle. Security forces were deployed. Residents described fear, uncertainty, and neighborhoods transformed almost overnight.

Imagine waking up one morning and realizing your community has changed faster than your government can respond.

That’s not politics.

That’s reality.

From what has been reported, businesses shut their doors because owners feared they couldn’t protect their employees or property. Public spaces became overcrowded. Local resources were stretched to their breaking point. People who had spent their entire lives in those neighborhoods suddenly found themselves wondering whether anyone was actually in charge.

I’ve seen what happens when leadership refuses to confront a problem because admitting it exists is politically inconvenient.

The problem doesn’t disappear.

It gets bigger.

Critics argue that years of increasingly permissive immigration policies and court decisions limiting border enforcement created conditions that encouraged even larger waves of illegal migration. Whether you agree with every criticism or not, one fact is difficult to ignore: when people believe a border has become easier to cross, more people will try to cross it.

That’s human nature.

Word travels faster than governments react.

And once that momentum starts, it’s incredibly difficult to regain control.

What troubles me most isn’t simply the strain on border communities. It’s what happens afterward. Ordinary people are the ones forced to absorb the consequences. Small businesses struggle. Local governments scramble. Police are stretched thin. Citizens begin wondering whether the institutions they trusted are still capable of doing the most basic job of government; maintaining order.

That’s a dangerous place for any democracy to find itself.

I don’t say this because I’m against immigration.

Quite the opposite.

I support legal immigration. I support people who want to come here, contribute, build lives, and become part of this country.

But compassion without order isn’t a policy.

It’s chaos.

Every sovereign nation has both the right and the obligation to know who is entering its borders, enforce its laws fairly, and ensure that immigration happens in a way that protects both newcomers and the communities welcoming them.

Those ideas shouldn’t be controversial.

They’re common sense.

Spain’s experience may not be America’s future. Different countries face different circumstances. But ignoring what’s happening elsewhere because it’s politically uncomfortable isn’t wisdom; it’s wishful thinking.

History has a funny way of punishing people who refuse to learn from it.

I’d rather ask hard questions now than pretend there won’t be harder answers later.

____________________________________________________________________________

CHECK OUT MY NEW 77WABC RADIO SHOW , “WHEN YOU KNOW…YOU KNOW” EVERY SUNDAY AT 5PM (EST).

____________________________________________________________________________

MORE THAN 600,000 PEOPLE READ MY ARTICLES THIS WEEK ALONE.

SO, WHERE ARE YOU? I’LL ASK AGAIN…WHERE ARE YOU?

I AM ASKING EACH OF YOU TO RESTACK, LIKE AND SHARE.

IT’S REALLY THAT EASY.

HELP US TO REBUILD AND GROW OUR COMMUNITY!

Yeah, I know; you’re tired. This shit is exhausting.

Guess what? Me too.

But I’ve spent the last 8 years throwing punches in the dark so truth could get a little daylight. And now I’m asking you to step into the ring with me.

Because if you’re still reading this, you already get it:

This isn’t just a newsletter. It’s a rally cry. A war drum. A line in the sand.

We are not passive observers of the downfall. We are the resistance. We call out the liars. We drag corruption by the collar into the sunlight. We say the quiet parts out loud; and we don’t flinch.

But here’s the truth: I can’t do this solo. Not anymore.

The storm is already here. We are standing in it. And it’s wearing stars and stripes like camouflage, preaching “freedom” while it sells fascism at retail.

So let me ask you:

Are. You. In?

Because this is not a scroll-and-forget read. This is a living, breathing, fire-breathing movement; and movements don’t move unless you do.

We need to be louder than spin, tougher than propaganda, and impossible to gaslight.

That takes more than clicks. More than likes.

It takes skin in the game.

So if you believe truth matters; if you’re sick of the bullshit, if you’re ready to stop screaming into the algorithm and start pushing back with purpose, this is your next step.

HERE’S HOW YOU PUT YOUR FOOT ON THE GAS:

Become a paid subscriber. Fund fearless, unfiltered journalism that hits back.

Share this with the loudest people you know; the ones who never sit down and shut up.

Build the community. Amplify the message. Be the damn megaphone.

And yeah; Founding Members? The first 240 of you will get a signed, numbered, limited-edition Substack version of Revenge. That’s not just a collector’s item. That’s receipts. Proof you didn’t sit this one out.

But let’s be clear:

This isn’t about a book.

It’s about backbone.

It’s about calling out the gaslighters and refusing to be played.

It’s about locking arms and saying, “Not. On. Our. Watch.”

You want to make a difference?

Then make it; right now.

Because if we don’t fight for truth, no one will.

But if we fight together?

They can’t drown us out.

Let’s be so loud, they wish we were just angry tweets.

Let’s be unshakable.

Unignorable.

Un-fucking-breakable.

Let’s go!

Share