There has been a lot of uneducated debate on the legitimacy of President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the effort headed by Elon Musk. As those who see their seats at the taxpayer-funded government feedthrough threatened and panic about having to do without out, the idea that the new entity is illegitimate needs to be laid to rest. It is.

Recently, 14 state attorneys general were denied their request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to obstruct Musk’s DOGE efforts, claiming that eliminating waste and fraudulent spending in the many federal agencies and departments would cause “harm” to their states. Ironically, it was US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, the same judge who presided over the criminal investigation into Trump’s alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, who ruled against them.

As FOX News' Breanne Deppisch reported:

“Plaintiffs argued that the leadership role held by Musk, a private citizen, represents an ‘unlawful delegation of executive power’ and threatened what they described as ‘widespread disruption’ to employees working across various federal agencies and government contractors.

“‘There is no greater threat to democracy than the accumulation of state power in the hands of a single, unelected individual,’ said the lawsuit, filed by New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez.

“Attorneys general from Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington also joined him in the request.”

Chunkin was correct in denying the attorney generals their TRO, but not for the reasons she stated, which centered on proving “irreparable harm.” Instead, the denial—which should have been dismissed with prejudice—should have centered on the fact that DOGE exists as a re-purposed department already codified by Congress.

The DOGE effort under the Trump administration is, indeed, a re-purposed version of an initiative initially established during the Obama administration.

The Obama administration created the United States Digital Service (USDS) in 2014 to improve government technology and address issues like the HealthCare.gov rollout. The Trump administration rebranded and expanded this effort into what is now known as the DOGE, which focuses on government efficiency, cutting waste, and modernizing federal technology.

DOGE, like other government initiatives, has a legal basis for operating with that basis rooted in executive authority and existing budgetary approval through discretionary spending.

The President has the constitutional authority to issue Executive Orders to establish or direct the operations of initiatives such as those tasked to Musk through DOGE. Executive orders do not require congressional approval and can be used to set policy and/or reorganize federal agencies or offices.

Further, the Constitution grants the President broad executive authority to reorganize and manage the Executive Branch as deemed necessary for the efficient operation of the government. This includes creating, rebranding, or repurposing offices or initiatives like DOGE.

Regarding funding sources, DOGE service falls under the Executive Office of the Presidental Budget, and its fiscal year 2025 budget is available for DOGE activities. This budget typically covers staff salaries, technology, and advisory initiatives. Further, agencies hosting DOGE teams can redirect portions of their discretionary funds (Departmental Expenditure Limits, or DELs) to support embedded personnel or system upgrades, as suggested by the framework for efficiency initiatives.

Therefore, DOGE does not require new legislation for its operations. It operates under the existing legal framework that supported its predecessor, the US Digital Service, codified by executive actions and legislation pertaining to government efficiency and technology.

For DOGE operations to be considered unconstitutional, several scenarios or arguments would have to be satisfied before judicial interference would be constitutionally appropriate:

* If DOGE were to execute functions explicitly reserved for Congress or the judiciary, like making laws or adjudicating disputes, it might be seen as an overreach, violating the Separation of Powers principle. However, as DOGE is narrowly tasked with seeking out waste, fraud, and spendthrift expenditures, neither of these lines in the sand has been crossed.

* If DOGE were to spend money that has not been appropriated by Congress, it could violate the Appropriations Clause of the US Constitution, which states that “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law.” As DOGE operates exclusively under the fiscal umbrella of discretionary spending, this red line has not been approached.

* If DOGE's actions led to the deprivation of rights without due process (e.g. if it implemented policies or technology that affected individuals’ constitutional rights without providing a fair hearing or legal recourse, this could be challenged under the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments. Since DOGE is tasked with ferreting out waste and fraud that exists as an abuse of taxpayer dollars (i.e., abuse of power), no encroachment into federal employee rights can be recognized. As federal employees under the Executive Branch serve at the “pleasure of the President,” redundancy terminations and employment separations for an employee's lack of fidelity to presidential directives fall well within the President’s purview.

* If DOGE were to engage in surveillance or data collection practices that infringed upon citizens' privacy without proper legal justification or oversight, this could be seen as violating the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Since DOGE is simply claiming its right to existing data, there is no “surveillance” or “data collection,” making this point moot.

* If DOGE's operations included censorship or content control in a way that impinged on free speech, this would be a significant constitutional concern. With DOGE being a “transparency effort,” this issue is also moot.

* Should DOGE implement policies or use technology in a discriminatory manner, this could be challenged under the Equal Protection Clause, suggesting that individuals are not being treated equally under the law based on race, religion, gender, or other protected classes. Again, because the DOGE effort is to root out waste, spendthrift monetary practices, and grift, the effort is not identity-driven, rendering this go-to favorite of the radical Left nothing more than a hollow claim.

* Lastly, if the initiative were seen as an attempt by the Executive Branch to bypass legislative processes or create de facto laws or regulations without congressional approval, it could be argued that this was an unconstitutional expansion of executive power. Yet, because the DOGE effort is rooted in eliminating existing waste, fraud, and corruption, the actions that result are not legislative or regulatory. They are operational and fall squarely within the executive purview.

For any of these scenarios to lead to a finding of unconstitutionality, DOGE would need to take specific actions or create specific policies that clearly violate constitutional principles. No argument has been levied to make any of these charges. Any legal challenge requires evidence that DOGE's actions go beyond the Executive Branch's constitutional authority or infringe upon individual constitutional rights. That threshold isn’t even in the room.

So, yes, Virginia, there is a legal and constitutional basis for DOGE to both exist and operate, much to the chagrin of the Deep State spendthrift swampateers in Washington, DC, and beyond.

Carry on, Elon. You are providing an incredible service to your adopted country, and I, for one, am thankful.

Funny. In the end, landing a man on Mars may prove easier for Musk than expunging corruption and fraud from the federal government. Who would have thought?!

Then, when we return, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida.

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

The Ideological Left’s Deep State ‘Sleeper Cells’

I wanted to touch on why it is so critically important to maintain the hunt for the ideological “sleeper cells” embedded in federal agencies and departments in pursuit of reform.

Two recent stories validate my contention that every agency and department under the Executive Branch—including the lesser White House and Executive Office staff—must be rid of any previously appointed careerists and especially any “holdovers” from Democratic administrations. Anyone who received their positions during the Clinton, Obama, or Biden administrations must be released from service.

The first example comes in the removal of Michelle King, who was serving as acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration, right up until it was discovered that she was stonewalling a DOGE investigation into massive fraud within the agency. King spent several decades at the agency before being named its acting commissioner last month.

This comes as reports surface that $71.8 billion in improper Social Security payments were made between 2015 and 2022 alone.

And the second example comes in the resignation of senior US prosecutor Denise Cheung, who quit after being ordered to issue grand jury subpoenas to determine whether “a contract had been unlawfully awarded.” Cheung’s refusal to execute a prosecutorial order from her superiors—who determined the need for the action—exists as a usurpation of acting DC US attorney Ed Martin’s legitimate authority.

The grand jury sought by Martin was to determine criminal culpability in the Biden administration’s awarding of billions in environmental grants immediately before President Trump re-entered the White House.

The Deep State uniparty rot permeates the Executive Branch agencies and departments, requiring a massive culling of the herd to ensure that the shadow governments of the past don’t simply “run out the clock” on the Trump administration while providing operation life support to the elements of corruption that the American people mandated Mr. Trump eliminate.

Quite frankly, an exact replica of the DOGE effort currently underway in the Executive Branch must be executed in the Legislative and Judicial Branches of our federal government if we are to fully exterminate the roach operative of the status quo Deep State. The obstacle to that becoming a reality is the lack of will to do so. Finding a set of balls where reformative action is concerned on Capitol Hill or across the street at the US Supreme Court—rhetorically speaking, of course—is like finding a drinking fountain on the face of the Sun.

Before I go, I wanted to address the cultural Stockholm Syndrome emerging in people’s almost pre-programmed criticism of Elon Musk and the job he is doing with DOGE.

Recently, a few usually reasonable people have floated the propaganda that Elon Musk is executing his efforts with DOGE to benefit himself personally. A more ridiculous statement is seldom heard.

A person who is manipulating his or her position to benefit themselves wouldn’t stand silently next to a United States President while he bashed the very products and industry that you own and that brings you the wealth you’ve earned. This is the case with Musk: He stood silently as Trump brutally bashed the EV industry.

Further, it is not self-beneficial when politically motivated prosecutorial misconduct in the form of investigations and tax probes is ceased in the name of lawfulness, which is also the case. The DoJ has terminated investigations started under the Biden administration after Musk aligned with Trump because they were both politically motivated and illegitimate.

The fact of the matter is this. The long knives are out for Musk because he is exposing the corruption and graft perpetrated by the Deep State uniparty, and they are going to do everything in their power to stop him, to destroy him. That’s what’s playing out there.

Those attacking Elon Musk for exposing the sickening level of corruption in our federal government are suffering from a cultural Stockholm Syndrome, fomented by years of corrupt politicians and the K Street-backed media telling you, “that’s just how government works.” No, it’s not. And it doesn’t need to be this way. That’s what Musk is exposing.

As the first step to recovering from this cultural Stockholm Syndrome, ask yourself this question: How do elected officials making a six-figure salary, who have to pay exorbitant rent for living quarters in the nation’s capital, exit office as multimillionaires, sometimes amassing wealth in the eight- and nine-figure range?

Then, with an open mind, consider what Musk is exposing.

It’s interesting how the mainstream media useful idiots wail about a “politicized” Department of Justice after spending four years during the Biden administration running interference for some of the most egregious acts of political persecution our country has ever had to endure.

In reporting on reformative moves made by Attorney General Pam Bondi at the DoJ—reformative actions mandated by the American people in the landslide re-election of Donald Trump to the presidency, the Associated Press’s Eric Tucker and Alanna Durkin Richer had the unmitigated gall to report:

“Even for a department that has endured its share of scandals, the moves have produced upheaval not seen in decades, tested its independence, and rattled the foundations of an institution that has long prided itself on being driven solely by facts, evidence, and the law. As firings and resignations mount, the unrest raises the question of whether a president who raged against his own Justice Department during his first term can succeed in bending it to his will in his second.”

Tucker and Richer completely ignore this inarguable fact: When a government agency or department has been corrupted, sometimes a complete reformation is needed. Wrongs must be righted for that department or agency to be reclaimed for the nation's service.

Where Tucker, Richer, and the AP see a radical deviation from the politically motivated corrupt practices of the Obama and Biden administrations (not to mention the Clinton tenure), that deviation isn’t one that goes from legitimacy to corruption. Rather, it is a course correction that moves from “swampateer” corruption and opportunism to legitimacy, a return to constitutional law—to the rule of law—and the rejection and termination of the lawfare that the Deep State status quo seeks; that the Deep State status quo is and has been perpetrating on their political opposition.

The irony here is that the Fourth Estate, which is supposed to be bound to a quest for objectivity and truth, an entity that speaks truth to power, exists now as a blinded entity the public cannot trust, an entity that exists in Jerry Seinfeld’s “bizarro world” where everything is the opposite of what it should be. Today’s mainstream media speaks the language of power and opportunism to truth and fact.

As the Trump administration and its newly seated cabinet and agency heads expose corruption executed for decades by the Deep State uniparty insiders, media organizations like the AP, New York Times, Washington Post, and the like, so used to the status quo of the swamp, can’t differentiate between legitimate moves to return the federal government to the people and the criminally opportunistic moves that moved it away from the people in the first place.

In a statement made about the termination of what appeared to be a case of political retribution against New York’s Democrat Mayor, Eric Adams, Bondi’s spokesman, Chad Mizelle, said:

“The decision to dismiss the indictment of Eric Adams is yet another indication that this DOJ will return to its core function of prosecuting dangerous criminals, not pursuing politically motivated witch hunts.”

He went on to accuse the prosecutors of acting without evidence and executing their offices with “disordered and ulterior motives.”

And isn’t that what the Department of Justice is supposed to be, a department of the federal government that serves the people through the application of the letter of the law and the facts—the facts—of any investigation that leads them to a move to a prosecution?

Did the mainstream media players get so used to writing and hearing their own ideologically motivated false narratives championing corrupt political persecutions of retribution that they have come to believe their own falsehoods? That indicting your political rivals without true justifiable cause and for the sole purpose of ending careers and political movements is a legitimate role for our US Justice Department? That it is good government and the legitimate use of law enforcement to jail and hold non-violent protesters who executed their First Amendment Rights to redress government and in defiance of their Sixth Amendment Rights to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury?

The winds of change–a legitimate change meant to restore us to the US Constitution—have come to the Deep State swamp that is the Washingtonian inside-the-beltway world. For the swampateers and political status quo bottomfeeders of that world, change will be difficult, like kicking a heroin addiction. But in the end, our Republic will be healthier for it, and our federal government will be returned to a state where it serves the people, not the swamps' pocket-filling reprobates.

Alinsky wrote about this concept in his book Rules for Radicals. When pushing for reform, change often requires a degree of chaos, pain, and disruption to challenge the status quo. Alinsky may have been ideologically evil, but damn if he wasn’t right about that.

Then, when we return, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida.

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Clusterfuck Nation

I rarely do this (I think I did it once for my good friend Judson Carroll, who hosts the Southern Appalachian Herbs podcast on iHeart, a great resource if you’re looking to get more natural with your health); anyway, before I go, I wanted to share with you a column I am thoroughly enjoying.

It’s called Clusterfuck Nation, and it is written and sometimes produced (he has an associated podcast) by James Howard Kuntsler, who, over his career, has written for Rolling Stone, The Atlantic, and the New York Times Magazine. Now, you would think that with bona fides like those, he would be an unwashed left-winger. But he’s not.

Either he realized the Kool-Aid was mixed from a blend of arsenic and bullshit, or he just saw the light, Kuntsler’s take on what is happening today is spot on, especially his take on the Deep State, what he calls “The Blob.”

You can read his stuff for free, just as you can with Underground USA, but if you appreciate the work and the insight, it never hurts to help the cause financially. Now that substack allows monthly remittance, it’s easier than ever, and, as the woman in the commercial says, it costs less than a cup of coffee at a Starbucks once a month.

So, check out Cklusterfuck Nation after you finish here at Underground USA. I don’t believe you will be disappointed…

In the face of what many see as an egregious judicial overreach into the Trump administration's policy implementation, Vice President JD Vance recently challenged the courts' encroachment on the Executive Branch's constitutional prerogatives. It is undoubtedly time to re-establish the Separation of Powers based on the US Constitution.

Vance’s arguments center on an accurate reading and understanding of the fundamental principle of the Separation of Powers. His interpretation—which has been validated over the years in various US Supreme Court Rulings—highlights how anti-Trump judicial actions have repeatedly attempted to usurp the Executive Branch's rightful authority over key functions like military command and prosecutorial discretion, not to mention its exclusive purview of branch organizational operations.

The Separation of Powers doctrine, codified in the Articles of the US Constitution that establishes the three branches of government, is meant to ensure that each branch of government checks the others to prevent any one from becoming too powerful. However, judicial activism, such as what we see in the politically motivated actions of today’s courts against Trump’s executive actions, can upset this balance by allowing the judiciary to encroach on the powers of the legislative or executive branches.

Robert Bork, in his book The Tempting of America, critiques judicial activism as “a political enterprise masquerading as law.” And the late Justice Antonin Scalia, in his book, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts, frequently argued against judicial activism, advocating for originalism, where judges interpret the Constitution based on its text and the original understanding of its terms.

The current controversy ignited when a federal judge brazenly blocked the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, from accessing critical Treasury Department systems. This act blatantly infringes on the Executive's operational autonomy.

This judicial intervention is but one example of how the courts have systematically challenged President Trump's executive orders to restructure and optimize federal government operations. These orders included significant policies that would reorganize and streamline operations, eliminate the wasting of taxpayer dollars, and, specifically, dismantle the Deep State monetary feed-trough that was the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

With over two dozen lawsuits filed directly opposing the President’s executive directives, Deep Staters and Democrat judicial appointees have undertaken an alarming trend in lawfare where judicial blocks have become political tools to thwart the administration's reformative agenda. This politically motivated lawfare obstructs the people’s mandate given to Trump in his 2024 landslide victory.

Critics like the disgraced Liz Cheney and US Senator Adam “Boy Do I Have A Problem With Telling The Truth” Schiff (D-CA) have ignorantly painted Vance's defense of executive authority as “advocacy for lawlessness.” However, when presented with examples of how former Presidents Biden and Obama abused Executive authority for purely political purposes—in particular, Biden’s repeated orders to ignore the US Supreme Court in his advancement of student loan forgiveness, these two political numpties were notably silent.

This obstructionist view starkly contrasts with the insights offered by legal scholars like Yale Law's Jed Rubenfeld, who supports Vance's stance that certain Executive Branch functions are inherently outside the judiciary's scope and purview, and Harvard Law Professor Adrian Vermeule, who also argued that such judicial blocks violate the Separation of Powers, saying, "Judicial interference with legitimate acts of state, especially the internal functioning of a co-equal branch, is a violation of the Separation of Powers.”

Vance himself put it this way:

“If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal. Judges aren't allowed to control the Executive's legitimate power.”

As the administration navigates these legal challenges through what is rightfully recognized as politically weaponized and biased lower courts, the expectation is that these cases will reach the Supreme Court, where a more constitutionally minded review will restore balance.

But, Mr. Trump, his advisors, and legal minds would be wise to borrow from Andrew Jackson's attitude. The 7th president viewed the US Constitution from an originalist viewpoint (as all federally elected and appointed officials should) and often had a contentious relationship with the Judicial Branch.

Jackson often emphasized the sovereignty of states and the limited role of the federal government as mandated by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This viewpoint extended to opposing and sometimes ignoring judicial review when their decisions could be argued to be extra-constitutional and/or unconstitutionally expansive in their purview. Some key examples come in his veto of the re-chartering of the Second Bank of the United States and his handling of South Carolina's nullification of federal tariffs in 1832-1833, in which he used his executive power to counter what he saw as judicial overreach.

That said, the ongoing legal battles have not only spotlighted the judiciary's contemporary penchant for grotesque overreach—and this is especially true of the lower courts of the federal judiciary at the hands of Democrat appointees—but they also raise alarms about the possibility of a budding constitutional crisis based on the Separation of Powers, establishing the political and ideological Left as the genesis of any potential constitutional crisis.

Vance's bold, wholly constitutional-based rhetoric has escalated the debate on this matter. However, it has also highlighted critical inconsistencies, such as the aforementioned Supreme Court decision on President Biden's student loan forgiveness plan, which reflects a selective acceptance of applicable Judicial Branch power.

With President Trump's re-election, these confrontations are not just legal skirmishes but pivotal moments calling out the need to re-establish the boundaries—based on the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights—of presidential authority versus judicial oversight and review in the American governance framework. In fact, these confrontations make it clear that the Deep State, the usurpers of authority, must recognize and accept a complete re-understanding of the federal government’s constitutionally established limitations.

This underscores the urgent need for a national dialogue on our nation’s constitutional illiteracy—and especially our elected officials' constitutional apathy—and the need to uphold the Separation of Powers and the limitations set forth for the federal government under the US Constitution.

We urgently need this to ensure that each branch of government operates within its constitutional confines, free from undue interference by the other co-equal branches of government, and so that “We the People” start to understand that politics is not government.

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Are You In Or Are You Out?

We were due a brief celebration after the 2024 General Election. Far from the usual rhetoric surrounding our every-four-year event, this past election was historical. It was historical for the re-election of a non-incumbent president. But it was also historical for the grand re-direction for which the American people voted.

In the short time that Trump has been back in office, we have seen the seating of a full cabinet of Washingtonian outsiders. This is unprecedented. Yes, some of them have been in the federal sphere before, but never in a conglomeration like this, each with a commitment to radical reformative change.

But it’s one monumental thing to win an election and then seat the cabinet you want. It’s quite another to defeat the Deep State uniparty machine in the quest to fulfill campaign promises and the commitment to return the US federal government to the people; to serving the people.

The Deep State swamp is thick and full of obstacles. As I mentioned earlier, the labyrinth of lawfare is not just something that can be brushed aside with a narrative campaign. The radical Deep Staters of the Left—like Marc Elias, the Soros’s, and the Clintonian creatures of the past who still feed off the rot with the bottom-feeders—they have been planning for this very moment for at least two years, amassing armies of orc-like lawyers and researching which courts and judges to bring their lawfare in front of, all to diminish the extent to which Mr. Trump can harm their machine; their spendthrift, globalist, New World Order status quo, the Deep State.

In addition to the usual suspects of the radical transformative Left, we have their accomplices in the establishment and elitist Republican Party. Mitch McConnell, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and the rest of the fill-up-the-pockets, go-along-to-get-along Republicans who have conned their way to the halls of power are all against the winds of reformative change. They would rather see things remain the way they are because that allows them to maintain the con, and they get rich off of that. The USAID scam proves this beyond doubt.

This is why we—you and I and everyone we know who is sick and tired of the grift that has been executed on us, on our country—must keep the pressure on. That means not falling for or advancing untruthful memes and social media posts, jettisoning the opinions and only consuming the facts, and maintaining pressure on those elected to represent us (and perhaps some who don’t) to constantly remind them that there will be consequences for the abdication of commitment to return the country to the people from the control of the Deep State “swampateers.”

The battle is clear: It’s reformative change vs. transformative change. Today, the Deep Staters—the globalists, the elites, the US oligarchs—are on the side of transformative change (interesting how “trans” is in there), and the people, who want to be free to make their own decisions and live their own lives without some busy-body annoying Karen from some swamp agency telling us what we can and can’t do and then how we can do what they are letting us do, on the other. It’s we, you and I, vs. the elitist, oligarchic Deep State.

So, my friends, we are at the beginning of the fight, not the middle, and certainly not the end. The question you must ask yourself is this: Are you in, or are you out?

There comes a time when, after being sucker-punched by someone you considered a friend and ally, you have to exact a comeuppance: establish a definitive understanding of a realignment in the relationship. Just such a time has come for US Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Yes, it’s common knowledge that McConnell and Donald Trump have a deeply-seated dislike for each other, although, by all accounts, Trump has been more adult about their differences than McConnell. But, it is not McConnell’s prerogative or political station to not only put himself above the President’s agenda but also to usurp the mandate of the American people.

He is and has done both. His vote against Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence (DNI) is the latest example. His vote was vindictive and shallow, and it should have significant consequences, most of which the Deep Staters will be reluctant to pursue.

This week, the US Senate voted to confirm Gabbard as the DNI, The New York Post reporting:

“The US Senate confirmed former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard as President Trump’s spy chief Wednesday, elevating the ex-Democrat and privacy hawk to a cabinet-level position in the Republican administration.

“The upper chamber voted 52-48 to confirm Gabbard, with Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) joining all 47 Democrats in opposition.”

In his descent, McConnell stated that Gabbard was “unworthy of the highest public trust” and that he feared that future intelligence assessments could be “tainted” given her “history of alarming lapses in judgment.”

What are those lapses that McConnell is so troubled by? Well, those lapses included not condemning National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden’s “treasonous betrayal” of the US and refusing to condemn Vladimir Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine, as well as not acknowledging that the growing threat of the communist Chinese on the world stage is not a result of “threat inflation” by the West.

“Entrusting the coordination of the intelligence community to someone who struggles to acknowledge these facts is an unnecessary risk,” McConnell said.

It should be noted here that McConnell voted for these Biden cabinet nominees:

* Antony Blinken for Secretary of State

* Janet Yellen for Secretary of the Treasury

* Lloyd Austin for Secretary of Defense

* Alejandro Mayorkas for Secretary of Homeland Security

* Avril Haines for Director of National Intelligence

* Jennifer Granholm for Secretary of Energy

* Pete Buttigieg for Secretary of Transportation

* Deb Haaland for Secretary of the Interior

* Gina Raimondo for Secretary of Commerce

* Merrick Garland for Attorney General

* Tom Vilsack for Secretary of Agriculture

* Xavier Becerra for Secretary of Health & Human Services

* Marty Walsh for Secretary of Labor

* Marcia Fudge for Secretary of Housing & Urban Development

In fact, McConnell only voted against one of Biden’s cabinet nominees, Neera Tanden, for Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), who withdrew her nomination after it became clear she did not have enough support for confirmation.

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Additionally, McConnell voted for these Obama cabinet nominees:

* Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State

* Eric Holder for Attorney General

* Janet Napolitano for Secretary of Homeland Security

* Kathleen Sebelius for Secretary of Health & Human Services

As an aside, McConnell is married to Elaine Chao, who, while serving as the US Secretary of Transportation in President Trump’s first administration, elicited concerns about potential conflicts of interest due to her family's business connections with China.

Chao's family founded Foremost Group, a shipping company with significant business dealings in communist China. Foremost Group has constructed ships in Chinese state-owned shipyards, and some of these ships were even financed by the Chinese government. From January 2018 to April 2019, 72% of the company's cargo was shipped to and from China.

In 2004, McConnell's net worth exploded from approximately $3.1 million to between $9.2 million and $36.5 million by 2014. This was partly due to gifts from the communist-Chinese affiliated Chao family. Additionally, members of the Chao family, including those associated with Foremost Group, have donated over $1 million to McConnell's political campaigns over the years.

All of that should have been enough to have ended anyone else’s political career, if not at least see him/her under investigation for any possible illegal relationship with the communist Chinese. But McConnell? He was elevated to Majority Leader in the US Senate by the go-along-to-get-along Deep Staters in the Republican hierarchy.

Today, McConnell, having descended from his throne of leadership after doing all the damage he could to the Trump 2024 campaign and the campaigns of those running for US Senate under the GOP banner, exists as the proverbial thorn in the side of a desperately needed reformist agenda being spearheaded by Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency at Donald Trump's order.

So, after all this, some serious questions remain. Why do Republicans put up with McConnell? Why hasn’t this political traitor been made to pay a severe penalty for his party disloyalty and his self-elevation above the rank-and-file Republican voters, not to mention the plurality of voters who voted Donald Trump a mandate for absolute reformative change?

The RNC chair should call for an emergency executive committee vote to a) excommunicate McConnell from the National Republican Party and b) forbid any RNC-affiliated organization from facilitating any funding or fundraising mechanism for McConnell, his campaigns, or any campaign that McConnell supports. Kentucky’s GOP should follow suit on both measures.

With the Senate voting 52-48 to confirm Tulsi Gabbard as DNI and McConnell joining all 47 Democrats in opposition, we should all confidently assume that McConnell will always vote with Democrats on key votes, especially when that vote will hurt Donald Trump.

Honestly, with the beautiful winds of reformative change in the air and the Deep State concerned about the longevity of their grift, isn’t it time to make an example out of one of the biggest grifters in Republican Party history?

It’s time to be done with this jagoff!

As details of the USAID scandal continue to emerge, Wikileaks has added fuel to the fire with a recent information drop on February 7, 2025. This sometimes controversial nonprofit revealed a disturbing but verifiable link between the USAID slush fund and an organization that seeks to gain control of the international narrative by co-opting the mainstream media.

Throughout history, the information sphere has been a coveted acquisition for ideological and political power players. It is said that if you control the narrative, you control the discourse, and if you control the discourse, you control the minds that direct the future. Enter Internews, a USAID-connected nonprofit that claims to champion independent media. In reality, Internews is a government-funded narrative-control globalist information war machine of an insidious force.

Internews boasts of training over 100,000 “journalists” in over 100 countries. That sounds noble, doesn’t it? But the fact of the matter is this. Internews is an ipso facto globalist-aligned media cartel that manipulates narratives to facilitate and advance far-Left ideologies while undermining populist and conservative movements—and even the sovereignty of nations—worldwide.

Internews promotes a neo-Marxist progressive orthodoxy while pretending to uphold the credibility of a free press and journalistic integrity. At the same time, it silences dissent through censorship and the deliberate omission of critical information.

The organization has indoctrinated over 38,000 media educators, reporters, and fact-checkers under the guise of combating "misinformation," a term increasingly deployed to delegitimize viewpoints that deviate from the preferred and anointed Left-wing narratives. In reality, their efforts constitute a targeted effort to advance select ideological perspectives while delegitimizing opposing viewpoints.

Internews’s funding sources betray its true objectives. As reported by Wikileaks:

“USAID has pushed nearly half a billion dollars ($472.6m) through a secretive US government financed NGO, ‘Internews Network’ (Interworks), which has ‘worked with’ 4,291 media outlets, producing in one year 4,799 hours of broadcasts reaching up to 778 million people…[Internews] has also supported social media censorship initiatives.

“The operation claims ‘offices’ in over 30 countries, including main offices in the US, London, Paris, and regional HQs in Kiev, Bangkok, and Nairobi. It is headed up by Jeanne Bourgault, who pays herself $451k annually. Bourgault worked out of the US embassy in Moscow during the early 1990s, where she was in charge of a $250m budget and other revolts or conflicts at critical times before formally rotating out of six years at USAID to [Internews].

“Bourgault’s [Internews] bio and those of its other key people and board members have been recently scrubbed from its website but remain accessible at http://archive.org.

“Records show the board being co-chaired by Democrat securocrat Richard J. Kessler and Simone Otus Coxe, wife of NVIDIA billionaire Trench Coxe, both major Democrat donors. In 2023, supported by Hillary Clinton, Bourgault launched a $10m [Internews] fund at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI). The [Internews] page showing a picture of Bourgault at the CGI has also been deleted.

“[Internews] has at least six captive subsidiaries under unrelated names, including one based out of the Cayman Islands. Since 2008, when electronic records began, more than 95% of [Internews]'s budget has been supplied by the US government.”

USAID's historical entanglement with regime-change operations and its promotion of neo-Marxian New World Order social engineering policies should alone raise suspicions about the kind of "independent media" that Internews claims to support.

To add credence to the idea that Internews is nothing but an oligarchical neo-Marxian propaganda front serving the whims of the globalist class is the revelation of financial backing from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

As reported by Amuse on X:

“Internews has played a direct role in creating political instability and chaos in Venezuela, Kazakhstan, Myanmar, and Afghanistan, where clandestine organizations and USAID foreign policy interests have leveraged Internews to foster dissent, support opposition movements, and ultimately engineer instability. By flooding these regions with Internews-trained journalists and media networks, the organization has been instrumental in shaping narratives that align with US geopolitical objectives, undermining sovereign governments in favor of pro-Western factions.

“Former high-ranking US officials, including Victoria Nuland and Samantha Power, have been key figures in overseeing agencies that fund Internews, reinforcing its ties to globalist foreign policy objectives. Nuland, in particular, played a pivotal role in utilizing Internews to control Ukrainian media. Under her direction, Internews and USAID effectively took control of 9 out of 10 major media companies in Ukraine, ensuring that local reporting adhered to a strict pro-Western and anti-Russian agenda. These media outlets became entirely dependent on Internews and USAID funding, with their reporters trained and guided by Internews operatives. It is no coincidence that Internews-backed journalists were instrumental in organizing the Maidan protests and the broader color revolution that ultimately led to regime change in Ukraine.”

A deeper look into Internews’s role in narrative control uncovers a truly repugnant operation, where the organization cynically labels legitimate news outlets that challenge the neo-Marxian orthodoxy as peddlers of "misinformation." Far from merely flagging content for review, Internews aggressively coerces advertisers to pull financial support from these outlets until they capitulate to its narrative or are effectively silenced. This financial blackmail is a blatant assault on free speech, designed to systematically mute conservative, nationalist, and libertarian voices, ensuring they are de-platformed and silenced.

One of the most egregious acts of manipulation by Internews is its zealous endorsement of the climate alarmist agenda. It actively suppresses any open debate on climate science and policy, enforcing a relentless campaign of climate hysteria. Skepticism towards draconian environmental policies is not just dismissed but vilified as misinformation or disinformation. Through its "training" programs, Internews brainwashes "journalists" to treat any form of dissent against climate alarmism as heresy, thereby discarding the fundamental journalistic tenets of objectivity, balance, and inquiry for pure advocacy under the guise of journalism.

Internews does not "train" journalists; it breeds ideological drones who infiltrate the global mainstream media infrastructures. It functions more like a "Ministry of Truth," dictating permissible discourse, who is allowed to speak, and what narratives the public is allowed to consume.

This is not an exercise in media freedom but rather media vassalage by an elite oligarchy, a direct assault on free speech and constitutional representation, funded, ironically, by your tax dollars.

Now, do you see the urgent need to dismantle the Deep State and understand the contemptible nature of those who protest against Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s efforts to expose this systemic corruption?

If you’re not pissed off, you should be!

Then, when we return, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida.

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Well, Well, Well…The 4th Quarter Puppet Master

Before we go, a few words on just who was pulling the strings during the four years of the Biden administration.

We all know that for the overwhelming majority of the time the holdover Obama 2.0 contingent was executing its will. But now comes word about the waning days of the administration that can only be described as chilling.

As reported by PJ Media:

"According to Lindy Li, a former Democrat National Committee (DNC) insider, fundraiser, and confidant of the Bidens, Joe Biden, already staggering from public scrutiny, effectively lost control of the White House after that fateful debate. The event reportedly prompted an audacious power shuffle at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue—one spearheaded by none other than Hunter Biden..."

The scandals just keep on coming.

Now, the question is this. Since Hunter Biden's pre-emptive pardon only covered a particular date set, will his actions in meetings where classified and Top Secret information was discussed be actionable?

Those complaining about Elon Musk's influence in the Oval Office today might want to just zip it, given the puppet mastery of Joe Biden during his tenure and especially because of who those puppet masters were (sniff, sniff).

Recently, I wrote about the increasing scrutiny facing nonprofit and NGO organizations that receive substantial amounts of taxpayer money to carry out partisan and politically motivated activities, all presented under the guise of philanthropy. Despite the outcry from the connected Left over the withdrawal of their funding, the rationale for denying them taxpayer dollars is becoming clearer every day.

President Trump has embarked on what he describes as a mission to dismantle the Deep State, with his latest focus being the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Radical Leftist and Obama holdover Samantha Power, the wife of Cass Sunstein, the co-author of the political book on transformative activism, Nudge, lead the USAID until January 20, 2025.

Elon Musk, the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in the Trump administration, has criticized USAID, calling it a "ball of worms. " This indicates a network of corruption that permeates the organization far beyond mere individual cases of misconduct.

Musk emphasized in a recording shared on X:

“As we dug into USAID, it became clear that this isn’t just an apple with a worm in it; we are dealing with a ball of worms. If you find a worm in an apple, you can remove it. But with a ball of worms, there’s no saving it. USAID is unfixable. There’s no apple left; it's just worms. It needs to be completely eradicated. It's beyond any repair.”

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) outlined how the USAID has been “stonewalling” her office for years as she sought documents to audit and account for taxpayer dollars wasted at the agency:

“USAID’s spending shows a blatant disregard for the wishes of American taxpayers, and it is time to disrupt the system. The agency has been wasting millions of tax dollars on things like tourism in Lebanon, Sesame Street in Iraq, sending Ukrainians to Paris Fashion Week and so much more…No more stonewalling,. We need to scrutinize every last dollar being spent by this rogue agency.”

The involvement of Bill Kristol, a known anti-Trump figure who has received millions from USAID, casts serious doubt on the agency's neutrality and suggests it might be driven by political vendettas. Mike Benz has highlighted how USAID has allegedly funded prosecutors targeting Trump, like Alvin Bragg, through entities such as Fair & Just Prosecution (FJP), which is significantly funded by both USAID and the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).

FJP, which operates under the fiscal sponsorship of the Tides Center, is supported not only by USAID but also benefits significantly from the Open Society Foundations (OSF) led by George Soros. "They're more than just Soros prosecutors; they're prosecutors linked to USAID," Benz emphasizes, highlighting the substantial impact these organizations exert on American legal proceedings.

In 1991, an operative associated with the Defense Intelligence Agency, who will remain nameless due to the sensitive nature of this information, indicated that Teresa Heinz Kerry (the wife of former US Secretary of State and failed Democrat presidential candidate John Kerry) was deeply connected then and likely still is through the dark money channels that rule the Deep State funding machine.

“One of the heads of this multi-headed hydra was Soros' Open Society Foundation, which funded drug legalization NGOs in Europe, all web-connected, leading directly into Colombia. These efforts supported the 'cocalero' movements (the coca leaf growers of Peru and Bolivia) and then legal lawfare support to the FARC (the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia). That is where the term 'lawfare' started.”

“Having served in and around five US Embassies from Panama to Kabul, nothing about the conduct of DoS or USAID surprises me.

“But the corruption and abuse of USAID funds going to left-wing media in the US and Britain, such as Politico and BBC and who knows yet who else beyond them, must be criminal; it must be seen as political money laundering, especially dark money funding.”

The Vera Institute of Justice, another recipient of OSF funds, further entangles this web, getting millions to ostensibly promote "fairness and equity" in the justice system. However, this funding raises questions about whether these financial ties steer legal outcomes to serve particular political and ideological ends.

From 2018 to 2022, USAID and HHS provided substantial funding to the Tides Center, which in turn has supported numerous far-left initiatives, including Black Lives Matter, movements to defund the police, pro-abortion advocacy, and aggressive climate change activism, all under the guise of social justice.

Moreover, USAID has been accused of spending $20 million on what critics label as "hit piece journalism" against Rudy Giuliani. This money was strategically used to support the 2019 impeachment efforts against President Trump. This misuse of taxpayer money for what appears to be partisan political gain starkly illustrates the potential abuse of power by these government entities.

The funding pattern from USAID and HHS to organizations like Tides Center and FJP reveals a troubling integration of government resources (read: taxpayer dollars) into political activism, activism that compromises the impartiality of government agencies and the integrity of the American justice system. This scenario paints a disturbing picture of a government apparatus more engaged in political warfare than in serving the public's interest.

So, instead of lending credence and legitimacy to the anti-deportation movement that waves nation-state flags in defiant conquest while existing in our Republic illegally—a movement fueled by federal tax dollars—perhaps it is right to question the use of taxpayer dollars to fund such organizations and initiatives.

And that’s just what the Trump administration and Elon Musk are doing: questioning the legitimacy of spending taxpayer dollars on partisan activism.

Personally, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Then, when we return, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida.

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

The Hypocrisies Of The Islamic World

Before we go, a few words on the Arab world’s flat-out refusal to take Palestinians into their lands and the hypocrisy of elitist Islam.

Earlier this week, President Trump proposed relocating Palestinians to neighboring countries during a reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. Shrieks of rejection of the idea and a determined voice for a two-state solution rang out from the usual suspect Middle Eastern players, including Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, with Jordan threatening war with Israel should any Palestinians be forcibly relocated onto their sovereign soil.

As I wrote in April of 2024, in a piece titled, The Palestinian Genesis & Their False Claim To Israeli Land:

“The so-called Palestinian people are not from a nation-state origin. Historically, there was no "Palestine". Instead, they were a demographic designation bestowed upon “lesser-thans” and former prisoners and slaves by the Romans; Philistines who originally emanated from Crete and other Aegean origins…”

So, if history is to matter, the creation of a two-state solution, as lusted for by the Arab world, would be to create a nation out of thin air, something that wasn’t even done when the UN mandated the creation of Israel after World War II.

A little bit of history to back up that statement, again from my April 2024 piece:

“Two hundred years after the life of Jesus, the geopolitical landscape of Judea was mainly shaped by the consequences of the Jewish-Roman Wars. These wars…left Judea in ruins, with its population significantly reduced and its culture transformed. The Romans, led by Emperor Hadrian, responded not only with military force but also with symbolic gestures aimed at erasing the identity of the rebellious Jewish province.

“To suppress any further nationalistic fervor and wipe out the memory of the Jewish revolts, Emperor Hadrian renamed Judea ‘Syria Palaestina.’ This renaming was both a political and cultural attempt to diminish Jewish ties to the land.

“The term ‘Palaestina’ was derived from the Philistines, the ancient enemies of the Israelites, adding an additional layer of insult to the injury. This change marked a significant turning point in the region's history, as it was an early example of the use of cultural and psychological warfare, as well as a form of cultural genocide, in imperial politics.”

So, when history is recounted accurately, there never was a Palestine, and there should be no “right of return.” Additionally, if the so-called Palestinian people really wanted to return to their homeland, they would be seeking to return to Crete and the Aegean origin, where they actually have ancestral roots.

To enrich those truths, we turn to the words of the Quran, which, to a devout Muslim, are the literal words of Allah and are not open to interpretation.

In Surah Al-Hujurat, the 49th chapter (surah) of the Quran, it clearly states, “The believers are but brothers, so make settlement between your brothers. And fear Allah that you may receive mercy.” This verse defines the relationship between Muslims as one of brotherhood, implying the duty of care and reconciliation.

So, by the commandment of their god, Allah, all nation-states calling themselves Muslim or Islamic must accept their brethren, for it is the word and will of their god. Yet Islamic-based nations like Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia—the land of Mecca and Medina, the holiest sites in Islam, who pontificate about their fidelity to Islam refuse to come to the aid of their Muslim brothers by absorbing them into their lands.

So, we have two hypocrisies.

On the one hand, the Arab world rejects the nation-state of Israel, claiming it is nothing more than a political creation even as they champion the creation of a nation-state for the so-called Palestinians.

On the other hand, we have a predominantly Muslim Arab world that claims to hold Islam as the only legitimate religion in the world even as they blatantly ignore the edicts in their holy scriptures that mandate they care for their own.

While there’s a lot of talk about sympathy and/or solidarity with the Palestinian cause, the policies of many, if not all, of the Middle Eastern governments reflect a more realistic approach to national security and stability.

There is a fear among Arab states that accepting Palestinian refugees could mean importing militant groups like Hamas, which is seen as a destabilizing force.

Previous experiences have been fraught with challenges. Jordan encountered significant issues with Palestinian groups in the late 1960s and early 1970s, leading to the conflict known as “Black September,” and Lebanon's civil war, from 1975 to 1990, was significantly exacerbated by the presence of Palestinian factions, which turned parts of Lebanon into bases for attacks on Israel, contributing to the country's instability.

The bottom line is that the Arab world—the Islamic Arab world—doesn’t want to take in any Palestinians because the Palestinians are a violent and uncooperative people who see conflict resolution only in the use of guns, bombs, and terrorism.

When history is recounted correctly, today's aggression by the Palestinian people—and their sympathetic Islamic terror organizations Hamas and Hezbollah—will be understood to be nothing more than an Islamofascist desire to establish the global Caliphate, as mandated by the Quran, starting with Israel, a Caliphate under which the nations and people of the world would be required to bow down in subservience to Islam.

Now, wouldn’t it be better to send a strong message to the Palestinians and the Islamic world that we, the free people of the world, are not on board with this totalitarian bullshit? Wouldn’t it be better to stop placating the unhinged notion that somehow the aggressors (read: Palestinians) are somehow the victims?

The fact that the Islamic nations of the Middle East refuse to absorb their Palestinian brethren in their time of self-created need speaks volumes about the Palestinian people.

These days, you can’t broach a subject without hearing someone say, “I have a right to…” Whether the subjects are mainstream, like healthcare, education, or abortion, or more axillary, like employment or access to exclusive venues and groups. But the fact of the matter is this: Our rights are enumerated, and we do not have rights that extend to everything within our purview.

We have the right to freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and the petitioning of government, although some would argue that was infringed upon during and after the events of January 6th.

We have the right to keep and bear arms, to be protected against unreasonable searches and seizures, and the right to due process, as well as protection against self-incrimination and double jeopardy.

We have the right to a speedy and public trial, an impartial jury, the right to confront witnesses, and the right to counsel, although, again, some would argue those rights were usurped during and after the events of January 6th.

We have the right to exist outside the bonds of slavery and are guaranteed equal protection and due process under the law regardless of race, gender, or religion.

Over the years, these enumerated rights have been extended to axillary but related issues in rulings by the US Supreme Court. Nevertheless, these core rights belong to all men and women who are created equal in the eyes of our Creator.

The 9th and 10th Amendments reserve to the states what is not specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights and the amendments to the US Constitution.

One right not included in these enumerated rights is the right to a job in the federal government. This brings me to my point: the recent purging of Department of Justice federal prosecutors and the review of the employment of FBI agents who participated in the political persecution of the nonviolent January 6th protesters.

As Victor Nava of The New York Post reported:

“The Justice Department fired dozens of federal prosecutors involved in January 6th cases on Friday and informed the FBI that it would initiate a ‘review process’ to determine if thousands of agents that worked Capitol riot investigations should also be terminated…

“Interim DC US Attorney Ed Martin told the 30 or so fired federal prosecutors that they were being removed as a direct result of their role in the prosecution of some of the more than 1,500 individuals who [took part in the events at ] the US Capitol on January 6th, 2021…

“The Supreme Court ruled last June that the charge of “obstructing an official proceeding of Congress”–-used on more than 300 riot defendants—was too broadly applied.”

Now, we can have a frank discussion about January 6th: the constitutionality of the prosecution against nonviolent attendees and the tactics used to hunt these people down and hold them. I, personally, believe several constitutional rights were blatantly violated, including the right to redress government, the right against unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to due process, the right to a speedy and public trial, to an impartial jury, the right to confront witnesses, and the right to counsel.

But that is not the point I want to highlight today. Today, I want to spotlight the pure, entitled narcissism of the federal employees affected by the Trump administration’s move to terminate them for actions they should have refused to execute, actions that were—and there is no other way to couch this—actions that were unlawfully orders.

In responding to the announced investigations toward the terminations of the offending FBI agents , the labor union representing over 1,400 FBI agents responded with indignant outrage.

Again, from The New York Post:

“‘If true, these outrageous actions by acting officials are fundamentally at odds with the law enforcement objectives outlined by President Trump and his support for FBI Agents,’ the FBI Agents Association said in a statement.

“‘Dismissing potentially hundreds of Agents would severely weaken the Bureau’s ability to protect the country from national security and criminal threats and will ultimately risk setting up the Bureau and its new leadership for failure,’ the union added. ‘These actions also contradict the commitments that Attorney General-nominee Pam Bondi and Director-nominee Kash Patel made during their nomination hearings before the United States Senate.’

“‘They also run counter to the commitment that Director-nominee Patel made to the FBI Agents Association, where during our meeting he said that Agents would be afforded appropriate process and review and not face retribution based solely on the cases to which they were assigned.’”

No federal employee has a right to their job. Each federal employee operating under the Executive Branch—as FBI agents and administrative staff do—serves at the pleasure of the President and can be dispatched from their station to any assignment commanded, even if that station and mission is to watch ice melt at the South Pole. This was evidenced in President Reagan’s termination of unionized air traffic controllers in 1981.

Further—and this is in direct response to the labor union spokesman’s inference that the agents in question would be denied “process and review.” The agents in question are going through the process of review. If any agent is determined to have acted within the boundaries of the law, their jobs are safe. However, if any agent was found to have been fueled by politics or ideology in the execution of their duties, they should be—deservedly—terminated and restricted from federal employment going forward.

An FBI agent's oath, like that of other federal law enforcement officers in the United States, is part of the oath required by law for all federal employees to support and defend the Constitution. Here's the oath that FBI agents take:

“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

This oath underscores the commitment of FBI agents to uphold the law, serve the nation, and protect its citizens while adhering to the constitutional principles of the United States.

Those principles and that service—empowered by the US Constitution as it pertains to the Executive Branch, have no exceptions for stepping outside their boundaries because a corrupt and politicized administrator or Executive Branch swamp creature wants to exact political persecution against perceived enemies. Regardless of any order, an FBI agent has a personal allegiance to his oath and doing what is right, legally and constitutionally.

The American people voted a mandate to Donald Trump to effect radical change in the Washington DC swamp. We are tired of the status quo bureaucratic bullshit that has morphed into a political apparatus that exerts complete centralized governmental control over our lives. There are too many “authorities,” too many “regulatory agencies,” and too many dictatorial bureaucratic powers that lord over our daily lives. This is the change we voted for. This is the change we expect.

Make no mistake. The Deep State will not go quietly. We are seeing that in the confirmation hearings where Deep Staters attempt to smear, discredit, and talk over the nominees even as they insisted during the Obama era that an elected president deserves the cabinet of his or her choosing.

We see it in BigPharma campaign finance beneficiaries like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren attacking Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose goal is to remove chemicals from our food and reduce our population’s dependence on pharmaceuticals.

We see it in how viciously they stand to protect the corrupted status quo in the face of the nominations of Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard, two individuals who have not only proved their devotion to the Constitution and our nation but who have taken a stand against the continuance of the Deep State grift.

We see it in how, almost immediately after recovering from the shock of getting their asses handed to them in a sweep of the 2024 General Election, the far-Left and caustic Deep Staters began their attacks on President Trump and started their quest to reclaim the narrative in the mainstream media.

This is why I beg you to keep the pressure on. We cannot let up. We must continue with the same energy that delivered the 2024 election cycle to us, and that means hounding our elected officials to heed the mandate. Heed the mandate! They need to know there will be career-ending consequences should they continue to ignore the will of the people.

We’re at a unique moment in American history. We must embrace it. And if that means taking time away from watching the latest episode of “Bubblegum for the Mind” on Showtime to maintain engagement in the governmental process, so be it. Sometimes, doing what’s essential isn’t doing what’s most fun. Then, fun should be a perk of success, not apathy.

Then, when we return, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida..

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Fat, Illiterate & Stupid Is No Way To Go Through Life

Before we go, a few words on the dismal report on the state of our K through 12 education performance, especially where literacy and specifically reading are concerned.

Tommy Schultz of The New York Post reported:

"The latest scores from National Assessment of Educational Progress are unsurprisingly catastrophic. A generation of painfully slow progress was swiftly wiped out...and reading scores for our lowest-performing students fell to the lowest levels in the NAEP assessment’s 30-year history — despite an additional $190 billion from the federal government for K-12 in the last few years, on top of its usual massive outlays..."

In 2023, the total spending on K-12 education in the United States was reported to be approximately $857 billion from all sources—federal, state, and local. So, only a fool would continue to believe that funding is the problem where the decline of the quality of American education is concerned.

K-12 education expenditures breakdown thusly:

* Administrative Salaries: 7.5%

* Teacher Salaries: 42.4%

* Employee Benefits: 37.6%

The average K-12 teacher (and I am not saying they don't earn it; they do, especially with the intellectual handcuffs they are made to wear by administrative and labor union edict) makes approximately $66,397 in salary and $19,919 in benefits annually, totaling $86,316.

The average K-12 administrator makes approximately $116,474 in salary and $101,186 in benefits, totaling $217,660 per year.

As an aside—and as an example, the annual budget for the Chicago Public School System for the fiscal year 2025 is approximately 9.9 billion dollars. For the 2023-2024 school year, the portion of the budget allocated to administrative costs was approximately $495 million. The Chicago Public School administrative offices employ approximately 4,200 employees. This is where to start if we are looking at where to make budgetary cuts based on eliminating bureaucracy and inefficiency.

So compensation is not the problem...at all.

The problem is with the quality of the curriculum. Our society has abandoned critical thinking skills, which teach children how to think and make decisions for themselves. Instead, our schools have become the playground for neo-Marxist indoctrinators, and our children are their lab monkeys.

If we are going to survive as a society, as a culture, and as a country, we must cleave the teacher's unions from any and all decision-making processes where curriculum is concerned. Further, we must cleanse the colleges of education of the far-Left transformative neo-Bolshevik ideologies so pervasive in those institutions.

Education has to be about the core subjects -- reading, writing, math, science, and core civics and history --devoid of socio-political ideology. Critical thinking skills must be the order of the day. Social engineering indoctrination through our education system should be considered a criminal act of child abuse.

With the arrival of Trump 2.0, the winds of change are being felt across the Washingtonian swamp. For the status quo, spendthrift Deep Staters, those winds have a sub-zero windchill. But the usual suspects on the political and ideological Left aren’t taking the freeze sitting down.

A cadre of those who routinely feed at the governmental taxpayer monetary feed trough, including the National Council of Nonprofits and other Non-Government Organization (NGO) entities, have taken legal action against the Office of Management & Budget and its Acting Director, Matthew Vaeth, following a directive that halted the disbursement of federal grant and loan funds.

This move by Democrat attorneys general from states like New York, California, New Jersey, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island to sue over the policy seems less about legality and more about protecting the flow of “free” taxpayer federal money into Leftist and Left-leaning politically aligned non-profits and NGOs. Attorney General Letitia James of New York—you remember her, she’s one of the Soros-installed AGs that went after Donald Trump over business practices that no one had a problem with—James branded the directive as “dangerous, reckless, illegal, and unconstitutional.” She’s undoubtedly more concerned with maintaining funding for organizations that align with her specific political agendas rather than addressing the broader implications of fiscal responsibility.

Vaeth's rationale for the funding pause—to ensure that federal dollars are spent in alignment with the President's policy goals—highlights much-needed (and long overdue) scrutiny of how taxpayer money is funneled into special interest groups and non-profit organizations. This review is crucial, considering the vast sums often allocated to these entities, which may not reflect the interests or needs of the general populace but serve radical niche political ideologies.

As reported by The Hill.com:

“Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) accused the Trump administration of ‘blatantly’ disobeying the law ‘by holding up virtually all vital funds that support programs in every community across the country.’

“‘Congress approved these investments, and they are not optional; they are the law,’ Schumer said. ‘These grants help people in red states and blue states, support families, help parents raise kids, and lead to stronger communities.’

“He said the move could jeopardize ‘billions upon billions of community grants and financial support that help millions of people across the country. It will mean missed payrolls and rent payments and everything in between: chaos for everything from universities to non-profit charities.’”

The plaintiffs' claim that the guidance will devastate non-profits dependent on government grants paints a picture of organizations addicted to federal funding. This presents a legitimate point: questioning their sustainability and true independence. If these groups are so reliant on federal funds to operate, one must ask how effective or necessary their missions truly are without such support.

Furthermore, the argument that this guidance breaches the Administrative Procedure Act by being “arbitrary and capricious” reveals how the far-Left manipulates the law to advance their transformative and spendthrift agendas. It evidences an overreach by these organizations to shield their financial interests under the guise of legal rights. The assertion that this could infringe on First Amendment rights, particularly for groups advocating for Left-leaning causes like LGBTQ rights, suggests a fear that funding might be more critically evaluated based on merit rather than political alignment.

Basically, this lawsuit is less about protecting the constitutional rights of non-profits and NGOs and more about defending a profligate system where federal funds—taxpayer dollars, and taxpayer dollars in an age of incredible national debt—are disproportionately directed towards far-Left special interest groups at the expense of broader, more equitable—and constitutional—public policy goals.

The reaction to this funding pause indicates how entrenched some non-profits and NGOs have become in relying on government support (read taxpayer dollars), raising questions about the efficiency and impartiality of the federal funding distribution qualifying process.

Bottom line: If a non-profit organization or a federal grant-eligible non-government organization is worthy of support, that support should come exclusively from the private sector, not through the extraction of tax dollars—under threat by the taxman—from the general public. If you want to support a non-profit or NGO, I applaud you; more power to you. But government shouldn’t force me to support auxiliary organizations outside the constitutionally required entities of the federal government.

That’s the very meaning of “unconstitutional.”

In the end, the temporary funding freeze to evaluate which initiatives were receiving taxpayer dollars was rescinded, but not until billions of dollars in funding for special interests and unconstitutional wealth disbursement were eliminated.

Quite frankly, I think that the $50 million spent on condoms for Palestinians in Gaza—which they filled with flammable materials to firebomb farms and local civilian populations in Israel— or free benefits for people who have broken the law to be here in the first place, could be better spent on Americans in need right here in the United States.

But hey, I’m not a federally elected or appointed spendthrift, so what do I know…

Then, when we return, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida..

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

If Information Is Power, Then Data Is The Fuel

Before we go, a few words on yet another communist Chinese initiative to collect data on foreign nationals and, specifically, Americans.

DeepSeek, the Chinese app that triggered a $1 trillion meltdown in the US markets this week, is not only storing its rapidly expanding pools of US user data on servers in China but is also suspected of having ulterior motives driven by the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) agenda. This situation echoes the national security concerns that led to Congress's crackdown on TikTok.

Despite its popularity—it topped the charts in both Apple’s App Store and Google’s Play Store on Tuesday, with over 2 million downloads since its international debut—DeepSeek raises red-flag alarms (no pun intended) about data privacy and national security. Unlike other AI chatbots like ChatGPT, which also gather extensive user data, DeepSeek's use of China-based servers marks a significant and concerning distinction, posing a direct privacy threat to American users.

Angela Zhang, a law professor at the University of Southern California specializing in Chinese tech regulations, said:

“What sets this context apart is that DeepSeek is not just a company but a tool potentially leveraged by the CCP for surveillance and influence…The collection of sensitive data like IP addresses and keystroke patterns could easily be exploited for espionage or to manipulate public opinion, posing a clear national security threat.”

DeepSeek’s terms of service openly admit that user data is stored on "secure servers located in the People’s Republic of China," automatically collecting personal details including “device model, operating system, keystroke patterns or rhythms, IP address, and system language.” This level of access to personal data under the control of the CCP, which has a notorious record of using technology for authoritarian control, is deeply troubling.

All companies based in China are legally obligated to comply with the CCP's cybersecurity laws. These laws require them to share data with the government upon request, essentially making DeepSeek a conduit for state surveillance.

The security risks associated with DeepSeek's close ties to Beijing have prompted exacting responses; for instance, the US Navy has explicitly ordered its members to steer clear of using this chatbot, highlighting the gravity of the situation. This move underscores a broader concern about the strategic use of technology by the CCP to undermine privacy, security, and democratic values in the West.

The mainstream populace has gotten so used to thinking of Chinese business ventures as sympatico with Western business initiatives that they completely ignore that the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese People's Liberation Army are at the core of everything they do; at the core of their Commu-Capitalist economic system.

To wit: I suppose if you didn't listen about the dangers of TikTok, you wouldn't care about the dangers of this AI data-collecting communist Chinese initiative.

But if you are short-sighted enough not to see the danger of the communist Chinese amassing data on you and your children through these apps, then you are naive to the goals they have set for themselves: to be the dominant force in the world. And I use the term “force” deliberately because communism, even in its hybrid form of Commu-Capitalism, cannot thrive without coercion.

In 1975, Ronald Reagan famously remarked, “The problem with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t true.” The truth of that statement couldn’t be more apparent than it is today.

The advent of social media and interactive internet platforms has validated Reagan’s statement and proved that this truth is even more prevalent than we suspected.

At every turn—on any given day and on any given subject, erroneously advanced inaccuracies and untruths can be found because someone “liked,” forwarded, and/or posted a meme, statement, or opinion on something without actually taking the time to validate the meme or statement or read the provided content.

This intellectual cancer isn’t just an attribute of “our liberal friends.” It exists just as prevalently on the ideological Right, and instances of this are getting more frequent.

Recently, I had an old acquaintance from high school—by all accounts, a solid guy; thoughtful and an engaged member of the community, completely out himself as someone who finds it more important to opine on what he thinks he knows rather than what he actually would have known if he had taken the time to read what he was opining on.

He is not alone. I have been guilty of this at one time or another, although today I make a conscious effort never to do it. We will read a headline and maybe the first paragraph of an article, and because we believe we understand the gist of what the author is saying, we feel confident that the opinion we’re about to craft for the consumption of others is valid; and based on a full knowledge of the subject at hand. Yet it’s not because we didn’t read the full article, white paper, research, or book or listen to the full podcast or presentation.

This is a dangerous practice because when a not-fully-informed opinion is advanced—and then re-advanced, again and again, and liked and quoted—it takes on the appearance of fully researched truth, and a non-truth co-opts the appearance of legitimacy.

Disingenuous actors, those who manipulate the public for ideological and opportunistic purposes, prey on those who engage in such acts—those who exist intellectually vulnerable because of their “excitability”—to seed statements that sound legitimate but aren’t. This allows them to create division and discontent while capturing the power of narrative control. Think of the Steele Dosier and the Trump-Russia scam, the Hunter Biden laptop denial, or, today, the Obama-Jennifer Aniston rumor.

This intellectual susceptibility in our society makes us incredibly vulnerable to maleficent actors—government agencies as well as political organizations and ideological NGOs—employing PsyOps.

Some of the more egregious PsyOp campaigns in recent years include:

* Trump's Business Dealings: Accusations of money laundering and illegal business practices at the Trump Organization, circulated often without substantial evidence

* Republican Voter Suppression: The claim that Republicans are actively suppressing minority votes, an allegation repeatedly disproved and lacking in both evidence and context

* Trump's Mental Health: Speculation during Trump’s first term about the President’s cognitive abilities and mental fitness, allegations completely baseless and without evidence

* Republican War on Women: The notion that Republicans are waging a war on women's rights, even as conservatives are on record as supporting policies that empower women.

* COVID Mask Use: During the COVID pandemic, it has now been proven that a purposeful PsyOps campaign was employed to encourage the widespread use of face masks. This operation aimed to instill fear and compliance among the population by exaggerating the effectiveness of masks and the ineffectiveness of natural herd immunity. Inconsistent messaging from health authorities, along with the constant bombardment of frightening statistics and images in the media, created a state of panic that made people more willing to accept unconstitutional restrictive measures like mask mandates and the closing of businesses, maintaining that the information on mask-wearing and social distancing was based on scientific evidence.

And the list goes on and on and on.

In each case, well-meaning individuals were duped into advancing these untruths on social media and interactive internet platforms, as well as directly into the public square. They were duped because they failed—they failed—to do their due diligence in ascertaining the facts of the matter, to any responsible extent, before they opined on the matter.

Now, I’m not advocating for the restriction of free speech in any way, shape, or form. I believe that the way to combat mis– and dis–information is by applying more free speech (which facilitates access to the truth), not less, and it certainly doesn’t facilitate the discovery of truth when the government (or any arrogantly self-important NGO) assumes the mantle of arbiter of the truth.

What I am saying is this—and I specifically urge this among those who consider themselves conservative and constitutionalist, although I beseech those on the Left as well as all those who feel the need to opine: Don’t just read the headline or the first paragraph and feel you have the intellectual authority to opine. Yes, you have the right to state your mind, but to feign an understanding of the information in an authoritative way is the height of deceptive irresponsibility. It is almost as egregious as the actions of those who seek to manipulate the people for opportunistically disingenuous gain. It’s insanely irresponsible and arrogant.

No one has the intellectual capacity—the clairvoyant ability—that allows them to divine whole swaths of content because they feel they understand the gist of an article, program, podcast, or presentation’s content. It cannot—cannot—be about the feeling that you get it. It can’t even be for your want to believe that you understand it. It has to be about acquiring the full context and content of the information.

For that to happen, as the Blues Brothers said (and I paraphrase) you, me, everybody—everybody—we need to be responsible. We have to gather the information first and opine and make statements afterward. We must advance information that is based on fact and truth, not feelings or the want for the appearance of authoritative knowledge without having first earned that station.

Bottom line: If you have the time and compunction to advance information, then you have time to consume that whole of the information on which you feel the need to opine first so you know the information you are advancing isn’t complete bullshit; so you don’t make a complete ass of yourself by exposing your intellectual laziness; so you don’t come off looking the fool for your ignorance.

If we all do this—all of us—imagine how Teflon we will be against the manipulation of the Deep State manipulators and dividers.

Then, when we return, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida..

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

A Few Words On The Left’s ‘Stupidity Games’

As reported in a variety of mainstream media news outlets—both on the Left and the Right, the United States Air Force, arguably the wokest of the military branches as far as its hierarchy is concerned, has ordered the removal of some training courses focusing on the Tuskegee Airmen and Women Airforce Service Pilots who served during World War II.

The order comes, they argue, to “comply” with President Trump’s crackdown on DEI initiatives throughout our government institutions, including the military. And while the problem may not be with the course content itself, the subject matter was co-opted by radical ideologues and incorporated into DEI coursework.

There is a stark difference between DEI policy, advocacy instruction, and actual history. In fact, removing historical teachings from the USAF curriculum goes against the very spirit of Trump's Executive Order. This move is, itself, discriminatory.

Trump's order is extremely clear: Demographic preferences, i.e., race, gender, religion, sexual preferences, etc., are not to be employed in any way, shape, or form in any training curriculum or promotion-based decision-making. Instead, merit and ability are to be the basis for everything, regardless of demographic. Certainly, the Tuskegee Airmen and the Women of WWII proved their merit, both making history.

The Tuskegee Airmen were part of the 332nd Fighter Group and the 477th Bombardment Group of the US Army Air Corps, the precursor to the US Air Force. Despite facing racial segregation and discrimination, they proved their skill and valor in the skies over Europe, North Africa, and the Mediterranean.

The Women Airforce Service Pilots, often referred to as WASPs, were a remarkable group of women who served during World War II. These brave ladies—over a thousand women— took to the skies flying aircraft of all kinds, including bombers, transports, and even the iconic fighter planes. They ferried aircraft from factories to military bases, towed targets for live-ammunition training, and even tested newly repaired planes. But, despite their invaluable contributions, the WASPs weren’t granted military status until 1977.

So, whoever in the US Air Force hierarchy made the shallow-brained—or purposely deceitful—decision to remove the history lessons on these two prestigious groups, wrongfully identifying their history as only that of a DEI issue (and I would like to know the name of the charlatan who made the call to do this), doesn't deserve to be in a position of authority and should be relieved of command immediately, for they possess no common sense.

We have to refuse to play these stupidity games. As Dan Bongino is fond of saying, "Cutesy time is over."

Most of the nation—and the free world—is breathing a sigh of relief at the exit of Joe Biden and Obama 2.0 from power. We see this as the beginning of the end of neo-Marxist wokeism. But while we celebrate the probable return to constitutionality and the downsizing of our federal government, some well-funded far-Left disruptors see an opportunity to create chaos.

A small group that played a role in the effort to disqualify Donald Trump from ballots before the 2024 General Election is already propagandizing for impeachment proceedings against the 47th president. The Free Speech for People nonprofit organization is spearheading the call for impeachment, insisting:

“Trump has refused to sell his ownership stake in companies through which he is assured to receive substantial payments from foreign governments in violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. At least five foreign governments pay a combined $2 million per month in fees for their units in Trump World Tower; and because all five of these foreign governments are currently paying Trump these monthly fees, Trump is in violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause from the moment he took the oath of office.”

The group is pursuing this ridiculousness even though CBS News and myriad other news outlets reported in January 2017 that Trump “resigned from all positions of authority and management within the Trump Organization and its affiliates” and that “his sons, Don and Eric, are fully in charge of the company.”

Expecting Trump to sell his shares in the Trump Organization while he is not in an official capacity decision-making role is similar to requiring members of Congress to sell stocks in companies and organizations that could be impacted by the legislation they are considering. So, the expectation exposes the gross hypocrisy of the hyper-partisan Trump-hating Left at the Free Speech for People organization.

The real issue is not so much the Free Speech for People non-profit itself but rather the typical neo-Marxist progressive donors and philanthropic organizations (using the term “philanthropic” very loosely) that finance groups like this one. It’s the dark money of the far-Left transformative Deep State oligarchy and their neverending financial commitment to undermine the will of the American people that is the problem; that is the cancer in the system that needs to be exposed and then expunged.

Two main groups behind the new effort to divide our nation, purely for opportunistic partisan, transformative, and power-play purposes, are The Tides Foundation and Arabella Advisors.

According to the Independent Journal Review:

“The Tides Foundation — a key cog in the wider left-wing Tides philanthropic network, which combined to shell out $850 million in 2022 — is a major financial backer of Free Speech For People. The Tides Foundation gave grants exceeding $250,000 to the legal nonprofit in 2020, 2022 and 2023, and a combined $925,816 since 2019.”

Underground USA is reader-supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

The article’s author, Nick Pope, goes on to say that the Hopewell Fund granted the Free Speech for People anti-Trump efforts $20,000 in 2023. The Hopewell Fund is one of several nonprofits boosting transformative neo-Marxist causes under the management of liberal dark money juggernaut Arabella Advisors, a major for-profit consultancy established by Clinton administration veteran Eric Kessler and funded by some of the worst anti-freedom advocates around the globe, including:

* Bill Gates: Through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, he has been one of the largest donors to the Arabella network, focusing on various globalist policy advocacy issues.

* George Soros: He has provided multi-million dollar donations to the network, with affiliations noted through his funding to groups like the Sixteen Thirty Fund.

* Mark Zuckerberg: Specifically, his philanthropy through the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative has committed significant funds, particularly noted for social justice issues.

* Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund: This organization has been identified as the largest institutional donor to almost all of Arabella's nonprofit entities, providing donor-advised funds to wealthy individuals.

* Hansjorg Wyss: A foreign national billionaire, he has donated substantial amounts, notably $500 million, to the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which has been used for various Leftist political initiatives.

Incidentally, the same cast of characters—and more of the usual suspect far-Left advocate cabal (Google, Soro’s Open Society Foundations, the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, and Pierre Omidyar and Warren Buffett)—financially supports The Tides Foundation.

These are the kinds of organizations that cause the divide in our country. It's less about the radicals they dupe into subservience, who constitute the far-Left ideologue voting public, and more about the agitators in organizations like these that stoke partisanship by advocating for destructive and baseless actions like the impeachments of presidents from the first days of their administrations, regardless of political party or political party affiliation.

These are the transformative neo-Marxist opportunists and agitators. These are the people and organizations that comprise the Deep State cabal that must be marginalized and expunged from influence on Capitol Hill. This is the anti-freedom and anti-American influence that the American people mandated President Trump to eradicate from the halls of power.

Because we have free speech rights in the United States, we can't go after the cabal’s message—or the message trumpeted by the Free Speech for People nonprofit, as imbecilic as it may be. But we can expose them as disingenuous and opportunistic political partisan assassins and pressure their donors and donor corporations to shun them financially.

Bleeding these organizations (The Tides Foundation, Arabella, The Ford Foundation, etc.) so that they have to draw their finances from an evermore limited pool of ideological zealots marginalizes their ability to attack the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as they routinely do.

It also sends a message that ‘We the People’ disapprove of impeachment as a partisan political tactic and believe it should be reserved for only the most extreme circumstances.

And lastly, it sledgehammers them between the eyes with the unmistakable message that “We the People” are done with this far-Left Alinskyite tactical bullshit and that if they continue to act so childishly, they will suffer consequences, consequences that will result in their being dropped from the elitist class for their personal and institutional poverty.

Let’s face it: we punished Disney, Anheuser-Busch, and several other organizations into subservience after their woke activism, bringing them to their knees. We can do it to these “philanthropic” organizations and their benefactors as well.

Striking their wallets to punish their intellectual infantilism is the only way to get the message across to them.

Then, when we come back, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida.

Before we go, a quick point.

It’s beautiful that President Trump is enacting a flurry of much-needed Executive Orders meant to reverse the institutionalized wokeism and neo-Marxism that has been implemented by the Obama-Biden Era. But without legislative action to codify those EOs into law, they can all simply be reversed with any incoming Leftist administration in the future. Then, we are back to square one.

We must keep the pressure on our elected Congress creatures to craft and institute constitutionally sound law that codifies the Trump doctrine into law, including his moves to end DEI, secure the border, and unleash our energy sector.

Without those pieces of legislation, it’s all just an exercise in short-term gratification and long-term ideological masturbation. We have to be smart this time around.

And I’d like to give a quick shout-out to Bobby D. and Sheila S., who have—ever since the days of The New Media Journal and the non-profit BasicsProject.org, have been steadfast supporters. Please know you are appreciated now as you were appreciated then.