Assessing the Fallout From the Patel, Bongino Interview

All in all, it was a riveting Q&A. 

By Leesa K. Donner | May 20, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Opinion, Politics

Say what you will about new FBI Director Kash Patel and his deputy Dan Bongino, but one thing is for certain: They are not boring. The second certainty is that they sure do know how to tease an audience. Both men fielded questions from Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on Sunday (May 18) and managed to infuriate some, please others, and leave everyone on both sides of the political aisle wondering what’s next.

In a wide-ranging interview, the FBI’s top cop and his wingman managed to touch on just about every political drama of the last eight years. They waxed about J6 events, Jeffrey Epstein, the two Trump assassination attempts, and the effort to rebuild public trust in America’s most powerful law enforcement agency.

Time to Take a Deep Breath

Conspiracy theories that mysterious forces silenced Jeffrey Epstein went down like a thud when FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino asserted that everything he’s seen shows that the fallen financier did indeed commit suicide. “He killed himself. I’ve seen the whole file. He killed himself,” Bongino interjected under pressure from Bartiromo. The backlash was swift, so much so that the former radio host felt the need to defend himself with a post on X, saying, “I was asked about some of the details surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein case. I have reviewed the case. Jeffrey Epstein killed himself. There’s no evidence in the case file indicating otherwise.”

Your News – How You Like It!

But that was only the beginning of the explosive topics. The events of Jan. 6 were also center stage, but this time it was Patel who piped up. He confirmed that 26 informants were in DC on that fateful day. However, none of them were directed to be there by the FBI. Patel also teased, “We just found a trove of information, and it’s on its way to Capitol Hill right now.” The only clear-cut point that Patel was willing to put on record was that soon a document dump would occur, the clouds would lift, the seas would part, and the events of Jan. 6 would finally be transparent to all.

Patel alluded to the coming clarity in this sound byte, often referred to as the money quote:

“Look, I can speak to the people who were in our seats, our predecessors, and they intentionally failed the American public by putting on the biggest DC deception game we’ve ever seen. They said the FBI was the most storied institution, and it was, and will be again very soon. But when the likes of [James] Comey, [Andrew] McCabe, [Peter] Strzok, and company came in here with the James Bakers of the world and intentionally lied to a federal court only to rig a presidential election by lying to the American public and using taxpayer dollars – likely illegally – to fund this entire operation and then withhold exculpatory information from a federal court … That’s what broke the FBI. And then when they were caught, they lied about it.”

Patel insisted the Crossfire Hurricane documents are being brought to Congress “fast and hard” and “unredacted” and will ultimately be used to “restore the credibility” of the bureau.

The Patel, Bongino Road Show

Still, Patel made sure to tell Bartiromo that Americans must remember that the Federal Bureau of Investigation works under the Department of Justice – doing its bidding. So the real enemy here wasn’t the bureau but rather the DOJ. This is a somewhat specious argument at this point because it remains to be seen who went first – the chicken or the egg?

In other words, was the FBI acting under the Justice Department, or was it a rogue agency? Or did all this corruption originate from the executive branch? Patel and Bongino claim everything will soon be crystal clear. However, these questions and more still need forthright answers before blame can be assessed on all the corruption that many believe was at the heart of the Biden administration.

Patel and Bongino are now at the pinnacle of their power, serving in high-level positions. And they’ve claimed the mantle of the cowboys in the white hats, ready to take down the bad guys: 

“It’s a good thing we’re here now to clean it up, and you’re about to see a wave of transparency… Just give us about a week or two,” Patel asserted.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

First 100 Days of Trump Upends the Left

With little more to do than shout, sing, and swear, the left finds itself in disarray.

By Leesa K. Donner | Apr 29, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Opinion, Politics

Disrupter, firebrand, or provocateur – call him what you will – but in the first 100 days of his second and last term, President Donald Trump has shaken and stirred American progressives to their core. His commanding presence is not for the faint of heart, as he proceeds at breakneck speed to fulfill his campaign promises. Today (April 29), which marks the 100th day of his presidency, is cause for reflection. And unsurprisingly, satisfaction with his priorities, projects, and plans has fallen along party lines.

Tariffs, immigration, and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) headline the start of Trump’s second time around as commander-in-chief, and all three have caused hysteria on the left – and that’s not an exaggeration. Progressives have been reduced to firebombing Tesla dealerships, keying cars, assaulting Tesla owners, and more.

 

The reason for this appears to be the leadership of billionaire Elon Musk, who stands at the helm of DOGE. The fact that Musk was a former darling of the left seems to be lost on them, as is the reality that their actions signal what — that they support government waste, fraud, and abuse?

At this writing, the website DOGE.gov reports $160 billion in savings from a “Combination of asset sales, contract/lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletion, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions.” According to DOGE calculations, the bottom line is a saving of almost a thousand dollars per taxpayer. That the left finds this reason to protest is unfathomable.

100 Days of Immigration Reform

The first few months of the Trump presidency have demonstrated – beyond any reasonable doubt – that the United States was never in need of additional immigration legislation to defend US borders, but rather a chief executive who had the courage to enforce the laws already on the books. Many Americans intuitively knew this, but somehow it got drowned out by all the Swamp noise. So how has the president performed thus far?

Liberty Nation depends on the support of our readers. Donate now!

Border Czar Tom Homan, not one to be trifled with, asserted yesterday, “Well, today as I’m standing here, we have the most secure border in the history of this nation and the numbers prove it.” 

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters in the White House briefing room yesterday that illegal immigration has been down 95% in March of this year compared to 2024. She also reported that more than 85 miles of a new “border barrier” is now in various stages of construction, with “75 additional miles of temporary barriers across the southern border.” Both Homan and Leavitt maintain this massive reduction in crossings has severely limited fentanyl distribution in the United States, and deaths of women and children trying to make their way across the southern border have been almost entirely eliminated.

The progressive response to the crackdown on illegal immigration has been the rabid defense of one suspected MS-13 gang member who lived in Maryland. This sparked a coalition of Democratic lawmakers to travel to El Salvador seeking the release of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Their chief aim was to return him to the United States. Yet another example of tone-deaf hysteria, considering roughly three-quarters of Americans support the removal of illegal gang members from US shores.

Tick-Tock, It’s Tariff Time

Perhaps the most controversial move in his first 100 days has been Trump’s ratcheting up US tariffs worldwide. It’s a policy in its early stages that needs time to play out. And this is what has many so jittery, especially on Wall Street. Still, the president is moving forward with renegotiating long-standing unfair trade deals one country at a time. Where this change in policy lands could be Trump’s most significant victory or his most agonizing defeat. However, it is a necessary move for the future of US economic stability and the one systemic economic problem that no other president has been able to rectify. The simple truth is that the United States is bathed in red ink, mired in an untenable situation that cannot last much longer.

The economy, immigration, and government spending make up the trifecta of Trump’s first 100 days in office. Changes are coming fast and furious, and the chaos of such large-scale shifts in US policy has reduced the left to ironic and, many maintain, laughable actions. The legacy media still stands athwart these presidential priorities, bashing them daily with front-page headlines and negative political analysis.

Remarkably, the president does not seem to care. He’s acting very much like a man on a mission who will not be diverted from what he believes is right for the United States and what he contends Americans voted for when they put him back into the Oval Office against all odds. But, above all, President Trump’s first 100 days have been a wild ride, and if the past is prologue, tough days lie ahead for the status quo and those who support it.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

 

Psych Out: Xi Jinping Ratcheting Up Tariff Head Games

The Chinese leader is betting Trump and the American people don’t have the mettle for a real trade war. 

By Leesa K. Donner Apr 15, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Opinion, Politics

Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. – Thomas Paine

Just before Christmas in 1776, Thomas Paine penned these words to raise the morale among American patriots. The 18th-century philosopher likely knew that hard times lay ahead, a war with the British was a long shot at best, and conflict was inevitable. Similarly, as the United States strives to end a lengthy and lopsided trade war with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the road ahead is fraught with economic skirmishes, and, for those invested in the stock market, it is most definitely gut-check time. So, what’s a Communist dictator to do? If you’re Xi Jinping, you hit the road and merrily travel to other trading partners to cajole, convince, or otherwise threaten them to join forces with the PRC.

Yesterday (April 14), Chinese President Xi Jinping began a tour of Southeast Asia, ostensibly to shore up the PRC’s trade agreements with Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia. While in Hanoi, he signed multiple deals designed to signal a cooperative relationship between the two Communist countries. Xi was quoted in Vietnam’s Communist Party newspaper as saying, “There are no winners in trade wars and tariff wars,” in an astonishing lack of self-awareness. As President Donald Trump has repeatedly pointed out – and economists of every stripe maintain – the Chinese cannot win this trade war. Yet their actions belie this simple truth as they continue to ratchet up the vitriol against the United States in general and Trump in specific.

The tariff wars that have commenced across the globe did not begin with Trump. They are a result of unfair Chinese trade, which over decades has been left unchecked and now must be recalibrated. Still, it seems that Xi is hellbent on making the United States the bully and projecting China as the aggrieved party. Such projection is typical of those who believe the best defense is to attribute their psychological impulses to others.

As Xi spreads his pixie dust throughout the region, one wonders if the Chinese leader’s travel schedule is designed to dish out more of this pride and false bravado in an effort to psych out the US president. However, Trump, whose middle name could be translated as “he-who-loves-to-negotiate,” has more than enough experience not to buy in to such head games. This is especially true because he holds the winning hand in this high-stakes poker game.

Xi Jinping and the Head Fake

So, what is the point of this psych play that Xi is enacting with such gusto? Certainly other countries are well aware of how the PRC rolls and have been putting up with it for years as well. Liberty Nation News Editor-in-Chief Mark Angelides, who spent a decade living and working in China, offered the following insight:

“While folks in the media love to deride the America First doctrine as isolationist and exclusionary, what has preserved China’s economic success and – even more so – its domestic peace is the China First attitude. This ‘PRC must win’ mentality comes with all the hallmarks of MAGA but without the inconvenience of an opposition party. Premier Xi has to look like the winner in all international endeavors, whether peaceful or antagonistic, to keep sway over a country in which ‘face’ is often considered more important than family (and only slightly behind money).

“If Donald Trump is doing trade deals with other nations, Xi has to do them too. If Trump applies tariffs, Xi has to add to the burden. The Chinese government has an image of itself as ‘above’ Western government in terms of strength, cunning, and intelligence. Trump’s latest moves have upset that fragile persona on the world stage, and Xi has no choice but to react. To the domestic audience, he needs to appear as the aggressor in the tariff war. No matter what the eventual cost.”

In trying to avoid shame through false pride, Xi is extending the tariff battle but is unable to change its outcome. Perhaps he is convinced that while Trump talks a big game, the people of the United States are not up to the challenge and will ultimately capitulate. Other countries have long held that Americans are microwave creatures who don’t have the courage to hang tough.

“These are the times that try men’s souls,” Paine wrote in the first line of his pamphlet The American Crisis. At that time, most Americans knew they were outnumbered, outgunned, and outfinanced. But none of that stopped their quest to become their own masters. They forged ahead against all odds and triumphed over the world’s superpower at the time. Xi Jinping would do well to recognize the bravery and resilience of the American people and not make the fatal mistake of underestimating them.

Dig Deeper into the Themes Discussed in this Article! Liberty Vault: Declaration of Independence

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

Extra! Extra! Changes Coming to The Washington Post Opinion Page

Jeff Bezos’ Damascene conversion is ruffling feathers. 

By Leesa K. Donner | Feb 27, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Media, Opinion

Just try to wrap your brain around what’s happened this week in the left-wing media: MSNBC canceled Joy Reid’s show and laid off a number of people working on the Rachel Maddow program for good measure. Just yesterday (Feb. 26), the owner of The Washington Post, Jeff Bezos, announced a change in the direction of the newspaper’s opinion page. Henceforth, the most influential newspaper in the nation’s capital will write “in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets,” according to Bezos. Opposing views “will be left to be published by others.”

The billionaire owner of the historic newspaper that defines the term “legacy media” and boasts the dystopian message “Democracy Dies in Darkness” on its masthead went on to say, “I am of America and for America, and proud to be so.”

The new edict, along with such rah-rah language, sent readers’ heads spinning: “Bezos has hired a new opinion editor, and we can expect more tripe in days to come. His explanation is such a transparent attempt at trying to save face under the banners of defending personal freedom and the free markets — or some such rubbish,” remarked one WaPo regular amid a bevy of unsubscribers. “Free market? I honestly thought I could hold out another couple of months with my subscription, silly me,” wrote another.

But that’s the nice thing about billionaires owning a newspaper. They can do what they want with it. The Post already lost an estimated 250,000 subscribers when it failed to endorse Kamala Harris for president – a controversial decision, to say the least. What’s a few more to Bezos? The Post has been drowning in red ink anyway.

Washington Post – Darkness on the Horizon?

It didn’t take long for The New York Times to dance on the grave of its archrival: “The new direction envisioned for The Post’s opinion section appears to be a rightward shift for the paper. Mr. Bezos’ new focus echoes what has long been the informal tagline of The Wall Street Journal’s conservative opinion pages: ‘Free markets, free people.’”

Kick Back and Ditch the Matrix

As Washington Post Opinion Editor David Shipley exits stage left, Chief Executive Will Lewis made an effort to stanch the bleeding. He wrote in a memo that The Post was “not about siding with any political party.” Other Post staffers took to Bluesky, the leftist alternative to X, to say they would be carefully watching whether Bezos sticks his nose into their respective fiefdoms.

There is no doubt the leftist media and its legacy partners are under siege. This week, a federal judge refused to force the White House to restore The Associated Press’ access to presidential events. The White House Correspondents’ Association has had a lengthy stranglehold on which news outlets are permitted access to the chief executive and a coveted seat in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room. Their salad days are over as the White House communications team took the reins of power and opened the venue to new media outlets. Still, the AP says it will continue its fight. Another hearing on the matter is scheduled for March 20.

As American news consumers continue to broaden their information consumption to the many offerings on the web, it becomes more difficult for the old guard to maintain its once lofty perch. And as they flee to other sources, the left-wing media must either adapt or wither away to insignificance. This move by Bezos signals he believes the best course of action for The Washington Post is to adapt. And he just may be right.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

Maxine & Co. – Why the Shouting, Singing, and Swearing Is Not Working

Another day, another silly protest.

By Leesa K. Donner Feb 16, 2025  @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Opinion, Politics

Even James Carville is flummoxed. As President Donald Trump moves at a breakneck speed to change the course of America, prominent Democrats have taken to the streets in small numbers to express their displeasure. Protesting, of course, is their right as US citizens. But why the loyal opposition believes trotting out the elderly likes of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will be effective is anyone’s guess. More and more, their vitriol – replete with fussing and fuming – appears to be, in the words of Shakespeare, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” As Trump rips through the bureaucratic maze of misused funds and the holy mess of an administrative state gone rogue, progressives find themselves standing out in the cold – literally – lamenting their opposition in song and words that would make a sailor blush.

Maxine: Unhinged Optics

Television is a deceptive and shrewd liar. Zoom into a tight shot, and it looks like there is a big crowd. However, the tell comes through the audio. Even with the best sound equipment, audio techs can’t make a couple of dozen people sound like the roar of a large crowd unless they sweeten the track, which is generally a no-no in the news business. As well, someone should tell Ms. Waters that shouting into a microphone overmodulates it, and the sound becomes distorted. There is, in fact, never a reason to scream into a microphone because its purpose is to amplify sound.

Simply put, if she stopped shouting, people might actually understand what she has to say. But perhaps that’s not the point. It may be that her words are meaningless, and the real message is her anger.

That brings one to question why Maxine & Co. are so exasperated. Is it because billions of taxpayer dollars are being saved? As Ruy Teixeira, writing for the Liberal Patriot, averred, “[O]ddly, Democrats seem to have decided that hitching their wagon to government bureaucracies is just the ticket they need to storm back against Trump and GOP.” Thus, they rail in favor of the profligate spending of USAID, but one must wonder if this is an effective rallying cry. Teixeira points out: “[U]nsurprisingly, anti-foreign aid sentiment runs highest among working-class voters, precisely the people who have been defecting from the Democrats to Trump, and without whose votes the Party cannot recover.”

In running for office for a third time, Donald Trump astutely claimed the mantle of the change candidate, and thus far, he’s more than kept that promise. In the run-up to Nov. 5, an article in The New York Times postulated:

“Running on change is often smart politics. Voters are perennially unhappy with the country’s trajectory, and the pandemic made it worse. According to Gallup, it has been two decades since a majority of Americans said they were satisfied with the direction of the nation. No wonder politicians cater to them with promises of new beginnings.”

Democratic strategist James Carville has made no bones about the fact that he believes his party has turned off the working-class voter with its far-left progressive policies on gender, etc. “And it’s like, there’s a, a plant somewhere in quote, progressive, unquote America, that just to seize how many jacka–, stupid things that they can embrace, it’s stunningly stupid.”

Skip the Scrolling – Head to Roku!

One wonders if pitching a tent with Maxine & Co. is really helping the Democratic Party’s cause. Is it bringing more people into the fold? Is it a valuable fundraising mechanism?  Or is the ranting and raving just something to do because they have lost their seat at the table?

Less than a month into the second and final Trump era, old-guard Democrats appear to be sitting shiva over the remnants of a party in tatters. Perhaps they will rise again like the Phoenix from the ashes, but that doesn’t appear likely anytime soon.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

The Trump Shake-Up Has Washington Scared Stiff

And we’re only two weeks in.

By Leesa K. Donner | Feb 4, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Opinion, Politics

Donald Trump (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

At age 78 and in his final term as commander-in-chief, President Donald Trump appears to be moving his agenda ahead at a breakneck pace. From the northern border to the southern and everywhere in between, all the president’s men (and women) are shaking up the status quo. This shift from the 46th to the 47th chief executive is a study in contrasts, effectuating head-spinning changes. As the president works overtime to fulfill his campaign promises, the minions who run Washington, DC, and have existed in a fishbowl of unchallenged power don’t appear to be taking the blows to their authority well. And the shake-up is just getting started.

In the words of the New York Post’s Miranda Devine, “Heads are spinning in Washington at the shock-and-awe tactics of Trump 2.0. You can hear the panic in the high pitch of Deep State voices as they run squealing to CNN and MSNBC.” Indeed, the left-wing media is struggling to keep up with this unique force of nature called Trump, who is a man on a mission.

Just last week, the ladies on The View took a swing at Democratic Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), who refused to kowtow to their anti-Trump rhetoric and barked back at them. Over at NBC, Chuck Todd announced he is bowing out, and CNN’s Jim Acosta was given the microphone and camera one last time to say farewell. It’s challenging, but we shall resist the overwhelming urge to make ad hominem remarks about Todd and Acosta. Let’s just say they are no friends of Trump and leave it at that.

The Trump Shake-Up — Time to Clean House

However, as the leftist media crumbles, the bureaucrats in the nation’s capital are on the hot seat and seemingly unprepared for the shake-up. Over at the Department of Justice – yes, those friendly folks who couldn’t resist rifling through Melania’s underwear drawer – were given their comeuppance. Six high-level FBI officials who oversaw the Mar-a-Lago raid and who directed SWAT raids on J6 protesters were given the choice to resign or be fired. This move came on the heels of an email blast informing 2 million federal workers that they had the option to show up for work in person or resign. Their exit package reveals the president would prefer to give them their walking papers.

Skip the Scrolling – Head to Roku!

To punctuate his point, the president had his Department of Justice request thousands of FBI agents fill out a survey that detailed their involvement in the J6 debacle. It’s assumed the questionnaire is not for the purpose of handing out participation trophies.

Meanwhile, much whining could be heard when Trump removed the security clearances of the so-called “Dirty 51,” the intelligence officials who falsely claimed the Hunter Biden laptop was nothing more than a Russian disinformation campaign. Former CIA Director John Brennan howled on MSNBC, “[T]his was just, you know, his effort to try to get back at those individuals who have criticized him openly and publicly in the past, and I think very legitimately.”

Money, Money, Money, Maaa-nee!

As Trump works to exact a price for myriad shameful and unconstitutional acts perpetrated against him, his supporters, and associates, the adage “He who has the gold rules” came into sharp focus. Leave it to a man who knows how to sign the front of a check – Elon Musk – to begin slashing billions across the federal government stratosphere. In a post on his X platform, the wealthiest man in the world revealed, “The DOGE team discovered among others that the payment approval officers at Treasury were known to always approve payments even to known fraudulent or terrorist groups.”

The Department of Government Efficiency also has plans to either shut down the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which spent $50 billion – with a “b” – in taxpayer funding, or roll it into the State Department with a much-reduced budget. An explanatory video outlining the purpose and mission of AID featured Foundation for Freedom Online founder Mike Benz, who clarified the purpose of this mammoth agency, which is not aid-oriented but instead acts as an arm of the State Department and is, in essence, an extension of the Central Intelligence Agency.

These actions – and others not mentioned – go to the heart of righting the wrongs that were committed by the administration of Joe Biden, who weaponized powerful government agencies for the purpose of destroying a political opponent. And they demonstrate to the American people that those who participated in this ideological pogrom that tarnished democracy must be held accountable for their conduct. Above all, this shake-up by the Trump administration illustrates how such actions must have consequences.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

How the good old boys handle the new Trump administration will tell us a lot.

How the good old boys handle the new Trump administration will tell us a lot.

By Leesa K. Donner Jan 16, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News,Tags: Articles, Media, Opinion

 

In 1965, Barry McGuire recorded and released the iconic protest song “Eve of Destruction.” It shot up the charts and quickly became an anthem that marked the tumultuous decade. It put the issues of the day into sharp relief: The draft, the possibility of nuclear war, the March in Selma, the Watts riots, and the John F. Kennedy assassination were but a few of the references outlined in the popular tune. Quite simply, the lyrics gave a voice to a younger generation at odds with the establishment.

Today, as we sit on the precipice of a second Donald Trump administration, another division appears to be taking place – not a generational one between young and old, but rather a battle between the new media and the establishment media.

It is a time of crossroads, and the late, great legacy media elites now have a choice to make: Will they go with the winds of change, or will they stand guard over their once powerful – now waning – influence over American culture and politics? Put another way, one wonders if they will choose to survive or if they are determined to preside over their own destruction.

Legacy Media Hanging by a Thread

By every measure, the legacy media appear to be hanging on a thread of vivid color. The slips employees are getting are pink, and the bottom line that chief executive officers are looking at is red. It’s just a holy mess from all angles – especially for news businesses that must pay attention to their bottom lines.

Still, and astonishingly, it doesn’t seem like the good old boys have seen enough light to change their ways. A few examples of how they have covered the incoming Trump administration is indicative of their mindset. For example, when former special counsel Jack Smith dumped a 137-page report that endeavored to prove Trump tried to obstruct justice in the aftermath of the 2020 election, Washington’s most well-known legacy paper – once proudly owned by the Graham family and now by tech magnate Jeff Bezos – covered it as if Trump had been tried and convicted. The newspaper’s standard 5,000-word hyperbole article was more of a one-sided defense of Smith than a paper giving both angles of the story. But it is hardly alone.

The New York Times covered the Smith story in much the same manner:

“The report amounted to an extraordinary rebuke of a president-elect, capping a momentous legal saga that saw the man now poised to regain the powers of the nation’s highest office charged with crimes that struck at the heart of American democracy.”

Instead of balanced reporting, The Times’ coverage waffled between sounding like sour grapes and an epistle of lamentations.

In yet another example, both newspapers are covering the confirmation hearings of Pete Hegseth for secretary of defense as if he were a convicted criminal. The sheer column inches of negativity about the decorated veteran are staggering. Clearly, his checkered personal past is an issue, but it’s not as if womanizing and imbibing too much alcohol are novel topics in Washington. A better way to tackle the Hegseth process would have been to point out he has a few skeletons in his closet, but he also comes to the table with a stellar service background.

It’s News, Captain – But Different!

Others in the old guard network appear to be lining up as part of the loyal opposition. The New Republic recently ran a piece on Trump’s hyperbolic assertion that he will end the Ukraine-Russia war on “day one.” Taking him literally rather than seriously (a standard head-fake used by the legacy media), TNR came out swinging, “Donald Trump is backtracking on his big campaign promise to end the Ukraine war in 24 hours, according to his special envoy to Ukraine.” The article droned on about a 100-day timeline offered by a Fox News TV guest and President Trump’s day-one remark. Such coverage has caused a mass exodus from the legacy media to smaller outlets where Americans feel they can hear either the facts, more balanced coverage, or – wonder of wonders – both.

It’s worth taking a moment to juxtapose the social media platforms’ response to the new administration and that of the legacy media. Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg may not be genuine in turning over a new leaf, but at least he’s trying to take a less aggressive stance and promises that he has learned his lesson. X, of course, had its come-to-Trump moment when Elon Musk purchased Twitter. And even Bezos has managed to tamp down the rebellion between Amazon and the incoming president, though one wonders if Bezos will eventually try to right the ship at Washington’s flagship newspaper, which has been bleeding red for a while now.

There are two ways to look at this: Either those in the legacy media can’t stop themselves from engaging in a constant drumbeat of left-wing coverage, or they don’t care what will happen should they continue on such a trajectory. Either way, they are participating in a near-certain death spiral. Standing on the eve of destruction, they may want to rethink their descent into the abyss.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

New Poll Clarifies Where the Two Big Parties Stand

Political strategists are bound to have fun with this one.

by Leesa K. Donner | Jan 9, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Opinion, Politics

 Now that the dust has settled, and Vice President Kamala Harris has certified the 2024 election, Democrats and Republicans are taking a deep breath and looking to chart a course ahead. As the two parties take stock of the voters’ decision to hand the legislative and executive branches of government to the Grand Old Party, a new poll reveals that it may have an easier time figuring out its future than the Democratic Party.

The well-known barb “[W]inning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing” certainly applies to the hard-fought election, and a decisive win by President Donald Trump and the Republican Party has left the Democrats in a state of confusion. A poll conducted by the Napolitan News Service reveals the conundrum.

When asked, “Do you consider yourself a progressive Democrat or a traditional Democrat?” 43% of those between the ages of 35-44 say they are progressive, while 44% call themselves traditional Democrats. The age grouping just above that, 45-54, showed a bit more of a spread, with 42% saying they identify as progressive to 51% traditional. Where things get weird is in the 55-64 age group, which has flipped to 50% progressive and 40% traditional.

What does this tell Democratic operatives? It’s pretty clear their membership is split, and this is likely to muddle future party plans. Whether they should go back to the center or keep moving left is unclear. Some could argue that the youngest group – 18-34 – which came in at 62% progressive and only 25% traditional should carry the most weight because they represent the future of the party. However, historical voting patterns demonstrate that older voters tend to be more conservative and exercise their franchise in higher numbers.

Poll: GOP Less Conflicted

Meanwhile, over on the Republican side, the clouds have parted, and the sun is peeking through the horizon, sparkling between hues of red, white, and blue. When asked, “Do you consider yourself a Reagan Republican or a Trump Republican?” 64% in the 35-44 bracket aligned with Trump and only 27% with Reagan; however, the youngest age category (18-34) came out even more decisively for Trump at 73%. In fact, for every age group polled, Trump came out ahead by more than 20 points, save the 65+ demographic, but even that category revealed a 19% advantage for the Trumpists.

It’s News, Captain – But Different!

This is not to denigrate the 40th president in any way but does illustrate the power that Trump exerts over the Republican Party. “Even among those who were old enough to remember the Reagan era, 54% now consider themselves a Trump Republican,” according to the Napolitan News Service survey.

What makes this survey so fascinating is that it demonstrates Trump’s sheer power over the Grand Old Party despite the incessant raging of anti-Trump Reagan Republicans nicknamed Never-Trumpers, who vehemently opposed the former and soon-to-be next president.  It appears such vociferous opposition to Trump backfired just as the lawfare game played against him only served to make Americans dig in their heels in support of the beleaguered president, who was not able to serve two consecutive terms. The funny thing about this is that skipping a term put Trump in a sturdier position to upset the Swamp applecart in his upcoming administration.

In The Atlantic, as recently as September 2024, Never-Trumper Max Boot articulated “How the GOP Went From Reagan to Trump” and admitted, “ridding the Republican Party of his [Trump’s] influence won’t be easy.” He continued:

“The question for the Republican Party now is: What comes next? Will the party continue moving ever further to the right, toward a Viktor Orbán-style authoritarian movement that would presumably have Reagan (an avid believer in democracy) doing more spinning in his grave? Or will it revert to being a more center-right party in the Reagan mold? In the 1980s, ‘Reaganism’ represented a right turn for the GOP. Today, it would represent a left turn — a restoration of a more moderate, if still conservative, outlook. That may still happen. But only if Trump loses decisively in November — and even then, it won’t be easy.

As everyone knows, Trump did not “lose decisively in November,” which means that Boot and his fellow Trump-deranged travelers are not likely to get their wish. Like it or not, they have no choice but to accept that Donald Trump now owns the Republican Party lock, stock, and barrel.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

The Political Pitfalls of Disbanding the Department of Education

It will be a full-on cage match for Linda McMahon. 

By Leesa K. Donner | Nov 25, 2024 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Education, Opinion

Most schools are either already out for the Thanksgiving holiday or headed for a break later this week. As the education system nationwide hits the pause button, it’s worth taking a moment to consider what lies ahead for the US Department of Education (ED) and its promised demise at the hands of the incoming Trump administration.

The last time the Department of Education faced the chopping block was in 1982, when President Ronald Reagan attempted to dismantle the entity. Obviously, he was not successful, and one wonders if President Trump will be able to accomplish what The Gipper could not. The answer lies in the details. Here are a few things that might help flesh out why Reagan’s effort failed and what could stand in the way once again:

Much of what the ED does is mandated by legislation that has been passed into law since its inception in 1980. Some of it even existed before the department’s founding. For example, the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 instituted federal engagement in vocational education that created a national board of oversight to develop curricula. In 1944, the G.I. Bill was passed, which provides funds for the college education of veterans.  Then, the federal student loan program came on the scene under the Higher Education Act of 1965. The Basic Educational Opportunity Grant program arrived in 1972, and in 1975, Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act. More recently, in 2015, funding for schools that serve low-income students became law in the name of the Every Student Succeeds Act. This list goes on and on, but you get the picture.

Wiping out the ED will not end all these programs. They will simply have to shift to another federal agency. So where would they go? Good question. According to US News & World Report, a great deal of shuffling would have to take place. They suggest the disabilities act could be turned over to the Department of Health & Human Services. The vocational program could be run by the Department of Labor, and some of the grant programs could be sent off to the Treasury. Thus, the central question becomes, is the Trump initiative really thinning out a morbidly obese federal government by shuttering the Department of Education? The answer is a definitive no.

Education and Forking Over Federal Funds to the States

It sounds like a good idea to give federal education dollars to the states. However, one must ask what the bright blue territories would do with all this new cash. Might it be used to pioneer a fresh golden age of American education, or to double down on what many see as cultural indoctrination?

Adam Ellwanger wrote an article in RealClearEducation outlining some of the current failures in the American education system:

“When these activist-teachers enter classrooms, they often abandon their duty to transmit America’s culture, knowledge, and values. Instead, they teach students to disdain their nation, its people, its past, and its way of life. This undermines social cohesion and deprives disadvantaged students of the tools they need to succeed.”

These issues aren’t likely to go away if progressive areas have more dollars to fuel their values because, as we know, politics is downstream from culture. Thus, giving these folks more money isn’t going to fix this problem: In fact, it may even exacerbate it. Perhaps federal funding could be doled out conditionally, but then there’s the issue of having to police the compliance necessary to ensure the money is used properly.

Progressive media outlet Vox brought up another reality that concerns those who seek to overhaul education. Quoting Jon Valant, director of the Brookings Institution’s Brown Center on Education Policy, they made the point: “[O]nly about 10 percent of federal public education funding flows to state boards of education, according to Valant. The rest comes primarily from tax sources, so states and local school districts are already controlling much of the funding structure of their specific public education systems.”

Politics Rules the Roost

Pure political machinations must be considered when effectuating the end of the Department of Education. The administration would need a 60-vote majority to make that happen, which it will not have in the 119th Congress. Trump’s Senate allies could also make an effort to end the filibuster, but that’s a game of Russian Roulette.

Like it or not, a lot of education policy is federal law, already baked in and not going away anytime soon. What concerns President Trump and those who support him are the social justice and woke elements of education currently impressed on America’s young people. It doesn’t seem like giving local education an extra 10% each year is going to fix that. Nor does it appear likely that blue states would take the extra dollars and use them wisely. And getting Congress to dump the entire ED isn’t going to happen, either. Without a doubt, this is a heavy lift, and Trump’s people will have to come up with a workable solution because the roadblocks that lie ahead are not surmountable with a pen and a phone.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner

Leftist Media on the Ropes

Double trouble for Mika, Joe, and friends.

 

By Leesa K. Donner | Nov 22, 2024 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags:  Articles, Media, Opinion

It has been a rough month for progressives. Not only did they take a drubbing at the ballot box, but now they must face the possibility that their favorite cable TV networks are hanging on by a thread. Lest one forget: The media outlets in America are primarily corporate entities. Except for very few instances, like the taxpayer-funded Public Broadcasting System, much of the left-wing media is owned and operated by corporations. As every red-blooded American capitalist knows, corporations are in business for one reason only – to make money. And that appears to be the crux of the problem for Comcast Corporation, which owns several leftist media outlets.

On November 20, the Philadelphia-based company announced a spinoff plan that will mean separating from many of its cable channels, such as MSNBC, USA, CNBC, Oxygen, E!, the Golf Channel, and Syfy. Those who escaped the chopping block are the NBC broadcast network, Bravo, and the Peacock streaming service. “The transaction, structured as a tax-free spinoff to Comcast shareholders, is expected to take around a year to complete,” according to The Wall Street Journal.

Aside from the business aspect of this move, one wonders what the upshot will be regarding some of America’s most prominent progressive media outlets. It is a relevant question in light of the recent election, which cannot be categorized as a landslide, as veteran pollster Scott Rasmussen astutely pointed out in the Napolitan News Service:

“[I]t’s important to avoid getting carried away by the hype. A realistic assessment of the results shows that it was not a landslide. While Trump won the popular vote, it was by the narrowest of margins (approximately one percentage point). Since 1888, only three winning candidates have had a smaller popular vote victory (1960, 2000, and 2016).”

“None of this is meant to diminish the significance of the incoming president’s victory,” he added. Indeed, it can be called a decisive win, and it appears that it was enough of a victory for the executives at Comcast to stanch the bleeding. After all, they have shareholders to satisfy.

Way back when – we’re talking 2011 here – cable outfits were plum assets. However, technology has moved at a rapid pace, and cable TV is swiftly becoming a dinosaur in the media business. Liberty Nation News Economics Editor Andrew Moran put it this way:

“As long as companies like Comcast maintain the antiquated cable TV model, they will continue to lose money like water through a faucet. At the very least, if brands want to keep yesterday’s model intact, they need to offer products consumers want and are willing to go through the hassle of subscribing to expensive cable television packages. Streaming will dominate the present and the future.”

As Americans seek to reduce their media costs, they are ditching cable and signing up for streaming alternatives like YouTube TV. There’s a name for this: cord cutting. According to Comparitech.com, it “is a fast-growing trend among US residents.” Other key points made by Comparitech reveal unsustainable revenue losses as well as paradigm-shifting realities in which the public gets its news:

• Major cable providers collectively lost 6 million pay-TV subscribers each year between 2019 and 2022.
• The average monthly cable TV bill is now $118 per month.
• Live TV services come in and out of style.

Such as it is, places like MSNBC are bathing in red ink. Joe Scarborough; his wife, Mika Brzezinski; and the other assorted satraps of Morning Joe have been burning the leftist torch for a while now. However, even they recognize that the jig may be up for their hard-left brand of “news.” Mr. Scarborough referred to the possible demise of his show – often referred to as “Morning Joke” – with some humor. It was one of those moments when the truth is in the joke: “I mean, I could be completely wrong; we could all be fired a year from now. Whenever this happens, you never know what’s going to happen.”

Leftist Media on Pins and Needles

Should the left lose MSNBC, it would be a travesty for progressives. As a central mouthpiece for the political left, its lineup includes Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O’Donnell, Andrea Mitchell, Joy Reid, and Chris Hayes, among others. Should these cable outfits not be able to survive Comcast’s restructuring, this veritable who’s who of the left will have few places to pitch their tent.

Bored? Check This Out!

But don’t believe for a second that this is the end of the leftist airwaves. In September of this year, the Federal Communications Commission approved a bid by a company controlled by George Soros to acquire Audacy – the second-largest radio group in the USA. It was a bitter and contentious 3-2 vote, but Soros managed to come out on top.

So long as progressives have tons of money to throw around, those on the political right will have their hands full. Still, this latest move by Comcast does not bode well for the leftist cause, something they will have to reckon with as they lick their wounds from an election that most assuredly was a repudiation of their values.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Leesa K. Donner Executive Editor

Election 2024 — The Pollsters Are Wimping Out

Pollsters are talking loud and saying nothing. By Leesa K. Donner Oct 29, 2024 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags Articles, Opinion, Politics

It’s often been said that in the age of the internet, there is a lot less meaningful information available, and nowhere is this more evident than in the morass of Election 2024 polls. The closer the nation gets to Election Day, the more pollsters appear to be providing the American electorate with mountains of inconsequential data. Here is some hard evidence to back up this premise.

Beginning on Oct. 21 until yesterday, Oct. 28, 14 national polls were released by the supposed best and brightest polling firms in the United States. One can only imagine what it costs to find out so little. Of the nationwide surveys released in this short time, seven claim that only one point or less separates the presidential candidates:

• New York Times/Siena: TIE
• Emerson: TIE
• TIPP: TIE
• CNN: TIE
• CBS News: Harris +1
• Rasmussen: Harris +1
• USA TODAY/Suffolk: Harris +1

Four ties. Really? Could it be that some folks fear putting their stamp on something meaningful? Have pollsters come down with a severe case of the gun-shy flu? Meanwhile, the other seven results are not precisely earth-shattering but at least provide the reader with some information:

• CNBC: Trump +2
• Forbes: Trump +2
• WSJ: Trump +3
• Economist/YouGov national multi-candidate: Harris +3
• Reuters/Ipsos: Harris +3
• Morning Consult: Harris +4
• ABC News/Ipsos: Harris +4

Election 2024 – Is it Really That Close?

Anyone with a pulse remembers the giant mea culpa pollsters had to issue after Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016. However, in 2020, they mostly got it right, and then in 2022, they mostly got it right again. So why do the pollsters appear to be hedging their bets this time around?

One theory – and this is admittedly a supposition – is that they don’t feel comfortable going into the final days of Election 2024 with Trump leading. It’s almost as if they say it out loud, it might become reality. Another theory is that MAGA voters are extremely hard to poll. Could it be because they have been labeled everything from irredeemable to deplorable to not very intelligent followers of a fascist? That might cause some people to pause when expressing their intentions publicly.

Fear of the ‘L’ Word

It’s been a deluge of polls for months now, first with Joe Biden as the Democratic candidate and then with Kamala Harris. Ostensibly, it was the poll numbers that caused the historic last-minute major party candidate shift after Biden’s disastrous debate performance. Once Harris’ convention bump began to fade, the polls started to tighten, and this is where they primarily pitched their tent. However, signs too difficult to ignore now have many a political analyst willing to openly suggest the notion of a Trump landslide. One must wonder why the polls do not reflect that – at the very least – Trump is pulling away from Harris in this last crucial week.

Shockingly, Harry Enten, a CNN polling analyst of all things, was willing to posit the idea of a blowout this week on NJ.com. “So this time around, don’t be surprised at the swing state polls. When they underestimate one candidate, they underestimate all of them in the states, and that’s what leads to a relative Electoral College blowout, with one of the candidates winning at least 300 electoral votes.” In the same article, pollster Nate Silver was reported as making a similar prediction.

Both Kellyanne Conway, an expert pollster, and Tom Bevan, publisher of RealClearPolitics, are calling for something labeled a narrow landslide. Bevan postulates this could come about if the swing state dominoes begin to fall in Trump’s direction:

“’Trump is currently leading in the RealClearPolitics averages in all of these swing states, but by very slim margins,’ he explained. ‘His biggest leads are in Georgia (Trump +2.5%) and Arizona (Trump +1.8%). But this idea of a “Narrow Landslide” would be if he wins all of them, and ends up with 312 electoral votes, but it could happen by just a few thousand votes in some of these states.’”

Conway agreed and asserted, “Voters are looking for stability and results. Trump’s ability to tap into their concerns about the economy and national security is driving this projection.”

Ditch the Diatribe – Try This!

While denying the word “landslide” should be attributed to his remarks, political analyst Mark Halperin told podcaster Megyn Kelly, “But there’s a school of thought that says, Trump’s going to go to Albuquerque to try to win New Mexico. He’s going to go to St. Paul to try to win Minnesota. He’s going to go to, I don’t know, Richmond to try to win Virginia.” The question then becomes why waste a candidate’s precious time in a place he or she could not possibly win?

Many analysts appear to be suggesting that the former president is on the precipice of a major win in Election 2024, but don’t look to the polls to confirm this potential outcome. They are too busy covering their collective derrieres instead of informing the American public of anything meaningful. Either that or the voting public should just ignore national polls, something we’ve been saying all along.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

 

Read More From Leesa K. Donner