Barack Obama: Old, Tired, Tone-Deaf Elitist

 

The Democrats are desperate, or so it seems, based on the aggressive campaigning despite the usual odds that the party out of party does well in the midterms. The betting markets suggest that Democrats are heading for a big win, but I think they should hedge their bets. For evidence that they are running on fumes, hoping to stay ahead of their worst-case scenario, they brought out the big guns (despite their relentless record on gun control) and rolled out former President Barack Obama to salvage their candidates.

Obama is the very elite whom the Democrats claim to be campaigning against. He lives in Martha’s Vineyard; he headlines all the big-name stars; and he focuses on himself when other people are in need. If there’s anyone who should be the Incredible Shrinking Ex-President, it’s this guy. Democrats have him to thank for losing power in the South—which is gaining more people while turning more Republican. Rust belt states suffered under Obama’s globalist, free-trade anti-industry agenda, and they looked elsewhere for relief. They have him to thank for giving us President Trump, since the New York real estate mogul turned greatest President of my lifetime brought the real hope and change to hurting Americans.

Trump took advantage of Obama’s political arrogance and incompetence, restored Republican power in Washington, gave the party a broader vision, and possibly political dominance for years to come.

Obama arrogance is so off-putting that Laura Ingraham rightly called him out on it recently during a campaign stop in Michigan. Ingraham mocked Obama for claiming that the country has become so bitterly divided and hateful. Why does it have to be this way? He opines to the crowd, acting like some saint. His nasty remarks about Cheesecake Factory didn’t help, either!

Obama campaigned on hope and change, but he gave this country nothing but division and dissolution. He's the reason for the division! He was Cloward Piven personified, committed to reducing this country to a one-among-many second-place also-ran. From his apology tour to the Arab nations to his insistence that the United States is not a Christian nation, Obama had one mission: make America no longer great.

Conservative commentator and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza exposed the communist roots of this neophyte constitutional professor, useless state senator, and weak US Senator who, out of nowhere, became the next President of the United States. For his due diligence in exposing one of the biggest frauds in American history, Obama’s DOJ persecuted him with maxim severity over a flimsy campaign contribution violation. The modern era of politicians’ siccing the Department of Justice on political opponents started with Obama, too. How’s that for rancor?

The current, long-running falsehood that the United States is a racist country suffused with hatred started with Obama. The Black Lives Matter hate movement, masquerading as an extension of the Civil Rights movement, started under Obama, from Trayvon Martin to Ferguson, Missouri, going up in flames. The saturation of LGBT propaganda, from the normalization of same-sex “marriage,” obscene, pornographic sex-ed curriculum, and transgenderism as another civil right, including confused men in women’s sports, spaces, and very selves, all started under Obama.

Obama opened up the borders by defying federal law, refusing to deport illegal aliens. He allowed “the kids” to stay under DACA, and then tried to protect their parents through DAPA. The Supreme Court struck down both orders. And the pre-eminence of Islam on the political sphere via refugee programs and mass legal immigration started under Obama, too.

For his signature act, he forced through a massive government boondoggle to take over our healthcare system, Obamacare, which Democrats today have admitted has been a big failure. Healthcare is more expensive than ever.  Exploiting a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority in the U.S. Senate, he disregarded the will of the voters and the interests of the opposing party. He didn’t govern. He campaigned like an everyday American, but he governed like an Alinskyite organizer seeking his own ends with no regard or respect for anyone. People can hate FDR or Bill Clinton, and there’s plenty to dislike, but at least those two Presidents loved America.

Obama didn’t. He cared for himself, and a middle finger to anyone who complained.

He mocked his opponents with unserious glee; he went out of his way to bury Republican compromises in Congress; then, when he faced opposition in Congress, he lied to Republicans to their face, stating, “I am not an ideologue.”

Sure, Barack.

Obama has been an elitist fraud from the beginning, an aggressive leftist who deceived millions into thinking he cared about the country, desiring to unite and unify a fractious public frustrated with extended wars in the Middle East, and outrage over Wall Street bailouts.

For me, the most notorious example of this out-of-touch, tone-deaf elitist arrogance manifested during his 2010 town hall, when he was desperate to save his Democratic Party from the much-needed shellacking it deserved during that midterm election. One of the ladies in the audience, a big supporter of his, Velma Hart, told President Obama, “I am tired." She feared that her family would end up barely making it, eating beans and wieners just to get through the day. Her situation was not improving, despite all the big talk.

Obama’s answer was all about himself, and he dismissed her concerns. His first sentence said it all: “Now, as I said before, times are tough for everybody right now, so I understand your frustration.”

The only frustration he heard was his having to rebuff people’s complaints about the terrible economy under his watch, because of his policies.

Then he talked about his kids (all about himself, right?), then he championed his overregulation of the credit card companies as well as his disastrous plan to take over the healthcare industry via Obamacare. Towards the end of his disdainful diatribe, he wrapped up with this ridiculous phrase: “But what I am saying is that we’re moving in the right direction.”

Nope! Middle-class Americans still struggled under Obama’s crushing failure of a Presidency, but it was all part of the plan. This country went in the right direction when President Trump got elected in 2016 and re-elected in 2024.

As expected, Barack Obama still doesn’t get it, or rather, he hopes to avoid the stark realization that he helped create the mess the country has slogged through, which President Trump is reversing with great speed. The fact that a Democratic former President has to campaign in a state, Michigan, which had gone solidly for the Democratic Party for thirty years but switched because the voters weren’t getting results, says it all.

British Columbia’s Conservative Earthquake Shakes Canada’s Political Landscape

 

Canada went tropical last week (October 24, 2026).

I would have written “Hell freezes over in Canada,” but Canada is frozen most of the year, so that wouldn’t work. A political earthquake like nothing before has shaken the Great White North to its tundra core.

I’ve previously vented my disdain for our Frozen Banana Republic neighbor, which locks up Christians, dismisses citizens in need of health care, and treads upon the rights of the common man while claiming to be nice in the process.

The country has drifted, then rushed to the political left over the last ten years. Aside from ongoing Conservative wins in Alberta and Saskatchewan, Canada was turning into a Liberal graveyard. Even one prairie province, Manitoba, is governed by the New Democratic Party (NDP), which is further left than the national Liberal Party.

After last week, change looks like it’s coming, and for the better.

A miracle happened in British Columbia, one of the country's most liberal provinces: Conservatives have won, big time. Imagine Republicans taking over the state legislatures in California and New York. Far-fetched, right? Total fantasy, for sure.

Yet something similar just happened in British Columbia.

The BC Conservative Party swept the provincial election, winning a commanding majority. Premier-designate Lorne Doerkson campaigned on cutting red tape, cutting taxes, increasing energy and resource production, and making the province business-friendly.

Unlike other Conservative parties, the BC Conservative Party spent decades on the political margins. For years, anyone who wanted to get the NDP out of power generally had to vote for the BC Liberal Party, which served as the centrist/center-right alternative. The Liberals renamed themselves BC United in 2023, but the Conservative Party, reinvigorated when former BC Liberal MLA John Rustad joined it that year, rapidly gained ground. In 2024, BC United suspended its election campaign, leaving the Conservatives as the NDP’s principal opposition. Rustad and his team almost won the election, taking 44 seats to the NDP’s 47, with the Greens winning two. Premier David Eby’s NDP held on by a single-seat majority.

So close, and yet so far.

The diminished yet still majority NDP government doubled down on its rapacious left-wing policies. The BC Conservative Party ousted its leader, Rustad, then elected a more conservative fighter, Kerry-Lynne Findlay. A few months later, still dealing with a mix of more liberal members and staunch conservatives, party members feared Findlay’s approach would alienate swing voters, and she was forced to resign. Another round of infighting threatened the NDP’s main opposition, and the BC Conservatives settled on interim leader Lorne Doerkson, while other members became Independent MLAs or joined the more populist OneBC party.

The NDP smelled an easy win, which would have given it another four-year mandate, so Eby called a snap provincial election to beef up his one-seat majority. Eby’s arrogance got the better of him and worked in the Conservatives’ favor. Despite the infighting, the BC Conservatives united under Doerkson, set aside their disputes, and focused on defeating the NDP.

They succeeded, with preliminary results showing Conservatives leading in 63 of the province’s 93 seats, a commanding majority. Eby won his riding (what Canadians call their electoral districts), but announced his resignation as NDP leader the same night.

He should have known better. Thankfully, the voters did better.

British Columbians were desperate for a course correction. An October Ipsos poll found that the voters’ biggest concerns were the cost of living (57%), health care (39%), and housing affordability (30%). Under NDP mismanagement, British Columbians endured skyrocketing food and energy prices, unattainable housing costs, and a strained health care system, where long wait times, rural hospital service disruptions, and difficulty accessing medical care left many residents frustrated.

Other grievances included open-air drug use, mass immigration, rising crime, LGBT-dominated education, and a government whose regulatory policies discouraged private investment and resource development. The province's economic struggles and mounting costs of living gave voters plenty of reasons to demand change.

Not only that, but a novelty in left-wing governance reared its ugly head in the province: the undermining of private property rights under the guise of honoring Indigenous rights. British Columbia has become the center of a major legal controversy over Aboriginal land title and the security of privately owned property.

In 2025, a British Columbia Supreme Court ruling involving the Cowichan Tribes recognized Aboriginal title to approximately 732 acres of land in Richmond and held that Aboriginal title takes precedence over certain fee-simple property interests. The ruling did not simply order whole neighborhoods handed over to Indigenous owners, but it raised profound concerns about the reliability of private property titles. The City of Richmond and the provincial government appealed the decision.

The controversy extends beyond that single court ruling. The province’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA), intended to align provincial laws with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, has become a flashpoint in disputes over land use, resource development, and government authority. Critics argue that the law has increased legal uncertainty and complicated economic development, while supporters see it as an essential step toward reconciliation.

To their credit, OneBC pushed the BC Conservatives to take a stand on DRIPA. Premier-designate Doerkson has pledged to repeal DRIPA, while pursuing economic partnerships with First Nations. He has also promised changes to the province’s approach to education, including its LGBT curriculum. Doerkson has announced that his government will prioritize pipelines, resource development, and an audit of provincial finances. Local leaders are looking forward to growth instead of stagnation, declaring that the province cannot live on “coffee shops and whale-watching” alone.

Huge win!

I spoke with a friend in British Columbia, and she has nothing but optimism for her province. She has witnessed what she considers the worst evils perpetrated by the left-wing NDP government, and she celebrated the different conservative factions uniting to oust the NDP.

As expected, the NDP tried to tie President Trump to the BC Conservative Party, claiming that a BC Conservative government in Victoria would sell out the province and bring extreme right-wing tyranny and disaster to British Columbia.

The strategy failed. An early-October Angus Reid Institute poll found that only 10% of British Columbians considered Trump, U.S. tariffs, and related trade issues among their leading concerns in deciding how to vote. Cost of living, health care, jobs, and housing ranked far higher.

Canadians have not suddenly turned around and fallen in love with President Trump, either, but BC voters refused to be distracted by “Orange Man Bad” when their own homes, families, and communities were facing economic hardship and declining public services. The NDP’s Trump-bashing could not overcome dissatisfaction with its provincial record.

This is a historic win. Trump-bashing no longer appears to be the political left’s guaranteed winning strategy. The whole conservative ecosystem, from the United States to Latin America and throughout Europe, should recognize this victory as a possible sign of a conservative resurgence against left-wing agitprop and increasingly intrusive government.

Is this a sign that we can stop hating Canada now? Time will tell. My contact told me that there will always be room for improvement. Canada’s conservative parties nationally and provincially have failed and succeeded on some fronts, but things are looking better with the British Columbia group.

The most important message from this massive political upset in the most unlikely of places is this: if the pain is bad enough, if the voters get tired enough, if independent media and political organizations are brave enough, an oppressed populace can oust the awful tyrants in their midst and restore goodwill and proper rule in their communities and country.

With glowing hearts we see thee rise,

The True North strong and free!

From far and wide,

O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

God keep our land glorious and free!

Election 2026: A Dem to GOP Realignment in Michigan?

 

Election 2026 was supposed to be the year the Democratic Party struck back at Trump 2.0. They expected to win with easy, glee-filled pickup opportunities across the country and in Congress. Yet no matter how frustrated the voters may be with Republicans, Democratic Party operatives pushed extreme or failed candidates to their party’s detriment. They have turned off working people with their racist and socialist rhetoric, and voters are increasingly likely to hold their noses and support the tough reality of Republicans rather than tyrannical Democrats who have lost touch with reality entirely. 

Republicans made this mistake four years ago. They thought they had the upper hand so strongly after two years of Joe Biden’s failed, miserable, and extremely unpopular leadership that unvetted MAGA types of all sorts--with little government experience or credibility or proper connection to their constituents—ran for office. Republicans' chances went from a red tsunami to a red trickle in Election 2022. 

Democrats are having this problem now. They never learn! The Democratic Socialists of America, the growing fringe of the DNC, still burned over what happened to Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020, are on a revenge tour against the Establishment Democrats. They want the radical socialist agenda that party leaders have promised but never delivered. They’re building on major victories in New York City with the mayor's race as well as removing three democratic incumbents in the Congressional races. Chuck Schumer probably won't be in Congress much longer once AOC decides to challenge him for the US Senate seat in 2028. 

With the rise of the DSA, legacy Democratic voters are starting to have second thoughts about their party.

There is no better proof of a disturbing realignment on the horizon than the radical reversals revealing themselves in the Wolverine State. Since 2016, this state has witnessed Republican pushback like never before. Who would have predicted that a Republican presidential candidate would win Michigan? Not since George Herbert Walker Bush have Republicans carried this or other major Rust Belt states besides Ohio. 

Trump has won Michigan twice, and this year a Republican will likely win the US Senate as well, in part because of a growing wave of defecting Michigan Democrats disgusted with their US Senate standard-bearer. Republican Mike Rogers, the former congressman and chairman House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, lost his previous bid for US Senate by less than a percentage point in 2024. Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin squeaked by for the win, but has done nothing but put her foot in her mouth while pretending to be some kind of common-sense moderate. Her latest fascist scheme: go after conservatives if Democrats take the majority in Congress, which has exposed her embrace of the extreme fringes of her party. 

She’s not helping her potential colleague Abdul El-Sayed. He was a controversial candidate during the primary, and he has not moved toward the center since. El-Sayed’s family has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and he has openly fraternized with abusive anti-American communist podcaster Hasan Piker, who has declared that "America deserved 9-11." An ardent opponent of Israel, alienating Jewish voters, El-Sayed has advertised himself as a medical doctor, when he’s not a licensed physician at all. Rather than recovering from mistakes and moderating his message and platform, this Democratic nominee is doubling down on socialist extremism. 

The Michigan Democratic debacle has become a welcome turn of events for the Republican Party and the conservative movement. For years, Republican candidates had to push away the charges of extremism, radicalism, and fascism from a hostile media and unscrupulous progressive operatives. Over and over, conservatives had to overcome Democratic attacks linking Republicans to QAnon or anti-Semitic podcasters. Now the tables have turned, and now Democrats are struggling to shake off the extreme fringes of their Left flank, or face further losses in elections to come. 

Speaker emerita and retiring Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi has bashed Abdul. US Senator John Fetterman has joined the pile-on, distancing himself from this radical who puts Palestine ahead of General Motors. Democrats realize that Islamic fascist radicalism is hurting their brand in otherwise safe areas, further dividing the Democratic grassroots between pro-Zionist Jewish Democrats and their allies versus pro-Palestinian activists and their violent activist allies. 

The Democratic Party cannot afford this breach right now, especially having lost the last presidential election by large numbers, while enduring unprecedented Republican and conservative victories from the Congressional Republican majorities. Hoping to stem the worst outcomes, Michigan Democrats in the legislature and throughout the state have pulled their support for El-Sayed. The longtime Democratic Saginaw County sheriff switched to independent and announced his support for Mike Rogers. Former Democratic Congressman Hansen Clarke has also announced his support for the Republican.

The biggest proof of Michigan realignment from Democrat to Republican can when Michigan Congresswoman Haley Stevens (and El-Sayed’s primary challenger) endorsed Mike Rogers. This is a calculated move, surely, as she admitted in a November 1st, 2026, press conference/announcement that she is still a proud Democrat. The Michigan Democratic Party apparatus is not showing any favor or restraint. They have officially announced that she is no longer a Democrat; they have taken away her access to Democratic voter rolls; and they have stripped her name and picture from the Michigan Democratic Party website. 

Black Democratic voters in Michigan are fed up with a party that doesn't support their interests. They have endorsed Rogers. Jewish Democrats feel increasingly isolated and alienated by a political apparatus which panders to Palestinian terrorism and activist tyranny. They are voting for Rogers. These two ethnic voting blocs have been reliable Democratic voters for generations. And a Republican former congressman is about to capitalize on their disillusionment with the party of their youth and win a US Senate seat. 

This was unthinkable even after Trump's victories, since Michigan Republicans have stumbled at the state level in the state elections. But the Wolverine State going Republican at the federal level could highlight an unprecedented political realignment, which will have implications for years to come. 

Democrats have much to fear in this election cycle, and it was supposed to be a walk for them!

 

DO NOT TALK with Charlee Simons: Fighting the Left

In this interview, I explore effective conservatives taking down hostile interviewers

 

The Real Horrors of Socialized Medicine

 

James Preston Allen slams President Trump for calling Democrats “communists” and anyone who supports "universal healthcare" un-American.

The latest crop of Democratic leaders, like Mayors Karen Bass and Zohran Mamdani, are celebrating collectivism over individual liberty. Bass literally visited Cuba to praise Communist leader Fidel Castro!

Where in the United States Constitution does it say that American citizens have a right to healthcare?

The United States is a great country because We the People put limits on the federal government instead of looking to the federal government to give us everything.

If you want to complain about skyrocketing healthcare costs, blame Big Business, Big Pharma, and Big Healthcare, all of whom lined up in support of your favorite progressive President Barack Obama's signature healthcare failure legislation, i.e., Obamacare.

Skyrocketing unaffordable premiums, liability insurance claims that never end, and healthcare professionals who don't receive proper compensation are now the norm.

Allen thinks that socialized medicine will help? Ask the Canadians or the Brits if they are getting their money's worth. They are taxed far more than we are; they still wait in long lines to get care; and oftentimes government medical boards delay or refuse to provide them healthcare because they deem the procedure "elective."

If you want a really scary story, ask any citizen in a single-payer country what it's like being stuck on a waitlist while you suffer, or hoping that the local radio station draws your number so that you can see a family physician for the month!

The Latest Math Problems that AI Has Solved in the Last Month (Google Gemini)

What are the latest math problems that AI has solved in the last month?

In the past month, the landscape of AI-driven mathematics experienced a landmark shift. On October 6, 2026, OpenAI publicly released a massive collection of 722 manuscripts—totaling over 700 pages of proof attempts, solutions, and partial progress for 372 open problems.

Rather than tackling benchmark textbook problems, an unreleased advanced model was tasked with attacking long-standing open conjectures across pure and applied mathematics. The mathematical community has spent the past few weeks analyzing, formalizing, and verifying these generated papers.

The notable mathematical problems, conjectures, and breakthroughs produced or verified by AI systems over the past month include:

1. The Quadratic Sensitivity Conjecture (Disproved)

• Field: Theoretical Computer Science / Combinatorics
• The Breakthrough: For decades, a major open question regarding Boolean functions was whether block sensitivity was bounded tightly by the square of sensitivity , specifically . The model constructed an explicit counterexample establishing , settling the strong polynomial relationship conjecture that had stood unresolved since 1994.

2. Free Group Factor Isomorphism Problem (Positive Solution)

• Field: Operator Algebras / Functional Analysis
• The Breakthrough: First explicitly posed by Richard Kadison, this was one of the premier open problems in the theory of von Neumann algebras. The AI generated a proof establishing the isomorphism conditions for free group factors, a result that researchers are actively translating into formal proof languages like Lean.

Wikipedia

3. Open Progress Across 372 Open Problems

• Field: Multi-Disciplinary (Number Theory, Topology, Graph Theory)
• The Scope: The October 6 release covered over 4,000 targeted open problems. Beyond headline proofs, mathematicians verified scores of preliminary results, including counterexamples in algebraic geometry, explicit bounds in spectral graph theory, and new combinatorial structures.

Wikipedia

The Verification Dynamic

The rapid influx of AI-generated mathematics has fundamentally altered academic workflow:

• Reversed Process: Traditionally, mathematicians develop intuition, construct a proof, and publish. Now, AI systems generate hundreds of pages of candidates first, leaving human mathematicians to act as peer-reviewers and formalizers.
• Formal Verification via Lean: To rule out subtle hallucinations, consortia of top mathematicians (such as the First Proof project) are running the AI outputs through interactive theorem provers to verify every single step mechanically.

 

Canadian pro-family activist Bill Whatcott is now in the US – held in an ICE prison facility!

Fled Canada after phony "hate speech" conviction to seek US political asylum with “help” from US immigration lawyers.

An unbelievable story of dishonesty and incompetence that got him in this situation.

Also: Canada is seeking extradition of Bill!

October 27, 2026

Bill Whatcott is currently being held in the Northwest ICE Detention Center in Tacoma, WA.

This story is so absurd and disturbing that we almost don’t know where to start.

Over the years, Canadian pro-family Christian activist Bill Whatcott has been the target of a breathtaking amount of vicious “lawfare” by the government in that country - for “crimes” (i.e. writing politically incorrect things) that would never be crimes in the US or most countries in the world.

We last reported that Bill was ruled “guilty” of hate speech by a judge in Toronto, but was free awaiting his sentencing, set for December 16.

Bill’s “crime”, his first trial and acquittal, then the government’s “double jeopardy” appeal

As we’ve documented, ten years ago in July 2016, Bill and some masked friends paid $100 to march in the Toronto Gay Pride Parade. As they marched, they passed out hundreds of flyers. The flyers included gospel messages, graphic descriptions of some medical results of homosexual behavior, and criticism of pro-LGBT politicians.

Bill Whatcott and his friends dressed up as "Gay Zombies" and handed out flyer packets as their group marched in the 2016 Toronto Gay Pride parade.

The homosexual community was livid. They held a press conference at the Canadian Parliament. The Deputy Premier of Ontario was there with other prominent politicians. Their lawsuit suing Bill (which named the Prime Minister of Canada and Prime Minister of Ontario as “victims”) eventually fizzled out.

Two years after the parade, in 2018, Bill was arrested and formally charged with “wilfull promotion of hatred.” After an intense eight-day trial in 2121, the judge acquitted Bill.

Bill Whatcott (center) and friends outside the courthouse during his trial in 2021.

But the government was obsessed with going after him. “Double jeopardy” is legal in Canada, so they appealed the “not guilty” ruling, dragging Bill and his lawyers through a successful appeals process in Canada’s leftist court system. Then came a series of hearings to schedule the re-trial.

Working with pro-family legal group PJI

When Bill was first arrested in 2018, he contacted the California-based pro-family legal aid group Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) about possibly seeking political asylum in the US. When he was acquitted, he dropped that idea. But in 2024 after the Canadian government was granted its appeal to retry him, Bill called PJI to begin working with them again on possible asylum.

Bill’s special permission to visit the US

While waiting for his re-trial, Bill wanted to visit friends in the US. But because of his legal situation, he needed a special waiver from the US State Department. In his application, he enclosed his Toronto flyer. The Biden Admin. State Department had no problem with it, and in 2023 granted him a full five-year waiver to travel in the U.S. In late 2023, Bill traveled through the US, and even visited MassResistance activists.

The re-trial and guilty verdict. Then Bill quickly crosses the border to the US, considering political asylum.

Bill’s re-trial took place during May 2026. It was a very hostile five-day ordeal before a pro-LGBT judge. When the trial ended, the judge said that the verdict would be announced on September 16. Before and after the re-trial, Bill often drive through the US, often visiting friends. (It was actually the quickest and least expensive route between his home in Alberta and the courthouse in Toronto.)

On September 16, the judge announced a “guilty” verdict. Bill’s sentencing was scheduled for December 16, and Bill was free until then. He was given 24 hours to turn in his passport.

Instead, Bill immediately got into his car and drove to the US. At that point the 24-hour period to turn in his passport had not ended. Nor was there any warrant for his arrest. Within hours of crossing the border, he signed a contract with PJI to represent him, and to put together the paperwork to formally seek political asylum.

Bill spent a few weeks with friends in Wisconsin, then drove to North Dakota to stay with other friends.

Bill’s belongings detained and impounded at the US border facility

Back at his home in Alberta, Bill had packed his belongings into a trailer. Bill’s good friend in North Dakota, Jonathan, offered to drive his truck to Alberta and tow Bill’s trailer and belongings to him in the US.

On September 30 Jonathan reached the US border crossing at Sweetgrass, MT with Bill’s trailer. Because Jonathan was bringing a Canadian’s belongings into the US, the customs officers required him to stop and catalogue every item, which took several hours.

They also questioned Jonathan about who the items belonged to. He explained that Bill had come to the US, was seeking political asylum, and needed his belongings. He got Bill on the phone to speak with customs officers about it. Bill also quickly contacted his PJI lawyer, who emailed the customs office with the following message:

I am an attorney with Pacific Justice Institute and represent William “Bill” Whatcott in connection with seeking asylum in the United States. To clarify his situation, Bill is seeking asylum. He has not been granted asylum or admitted to the United States as a refugee.

Please also forward any written request from the [customs] officers or let me know precisely what documentation they require. I can confirm our representation and accurately explain the status of Bill’s asylum matter. The officers will determine whether that confirmation satisfies their requirements for admitting his belongings.

Jonathan continued to catalogue Bill’s belongings. Then he heard the customs supervisor say to his subordinates, “This seems fraudulent. I’ve decided I’m not going to allow these to be brought in.”

Jonathan argued that it was not fraudulent. But he was told to take Bill’s items back to Canada. Jonathan said he wasn’t comfortable doing that, given Bill’s legal situation in Canada. So the customs supervisor called a Canadian towing company and had the trailer towed to the towing company’s lot in Canada. Jonathan left and prepared to drive back to North Dakota the next day.

Bad PJI advice gets Bill thrown into the border facility’s jail cell!

The next morning, Bill telephoned the Sweetgrass border facility and asked about how his belongings might be allowed in the US. The officer was very pleasant. He said that if Bill personally came to claim them, there would be no problem. He should just have Jonathan get the trailer to the facility, and Bill could be there to officially identify it, then leave with it. It would be an easy process.

Bill phoned Jonathan and said that he was going to the border facility, and that Jonathan should get the trailer and meet him there. Bill said he was driving there from North Dakota.

Jonathan was alarmed. He said, “Don’t go. It’s a trap.” Several of Jonathan’s friends also strongly advised Bill not to go there.

Bill called his PJI lawyer. The lawyer repeatedly advised Bill to go. He said there was a “near-zero chance” that there would be any problems; he could trust the customs officers. So Bill told Jonathan, “I’m listening to my lawyer, not you and your friends.”

Jonathan got Bill’s trailer from the towing company. But he decided to wait until Bill called him from the border facility to acknowledge he was all right before bringing it there.

On October 2, Bill arrived at the Sweetgrass border facility. The Border Supervisor told him everything would be fine, just step into this office. There were two other border officers there. They asked Bill to put his hands against the wall, but then he’d be free to go. Then they handcuffed Bill, told him he was under arrest, and put him in a jail cell. Jonathan received a garbled text from Bill that indicated bad news, before the officers took his phone.

Apparently, the supervisor immediately revoked Bill’s State Department passport waiver and charged him with being in the country illegally.

Bill was in the cell at the Sweetgrass facility for several days. It was miserable. He had to sleep on a concrete floor. There was just one meal each day – of terrible food. He could not clean himself. He could not take the medicine he needed. He was not allowed to talk to his lawyer or anyone else.

The Sweetgrass border crossing facililty is the largest and busiest in Montana.

Transferred to ICE detention facility in Tacoma, WA

On October 7, Bill was transferred to the ICE detention facility in Tacoma, WA, where he remains at this time. Conditions there are slightly better than in the border cell, Bill told us. He has a bed, meals, and gets the medicine he needs. He’s among hardened criminals, he said, but he’s dealing with it. No one, even Bill’s lawyer, could call him. Bill must attempt to phone them. At certain times of the day, for 35 cents per minute, he can make calls out.

Canada files with US State Dept. to extradite Bill to Canada!

Bill’s lawyer managed to find out that Canada has filed a formal Extradition Request with the US to extradite Bill back to Canada! Apparently, he called the State Department and confirmed it.

Extradition is only done for serious crimes like murder, kidnapping, etc. – not for passing out a politically incorrect flyer ten years ago. The document itself is not available to the public. But on its face, since Bill’s “crimes” in Canada would not be considered crimes in the US, extradition in this case would appear to violate the US/Canada Extradition Treaty.

However, it’s still very serious, though not connected to Bill’s current Immigration Hearing situation. We will report more on this – and what people can do about it – in an upcoming post.

PJI lawyer drops Bill as a client – says he’s too busy with other clients.

After about a week at the ICE detention center, Bill was informed that his first Immigration Hearing would be on Monday, October 14 at a courthouse in Tacoma. He had not been able to reach his lawyer by phone, and his lawyer had not been able to reach him. But a few of Bill’s friends (including MassResistance) did speak to the lawyer.

When the PJI lawyer was finally contacted by Bill’s friends, he admitted to them that he had not yet done any of the paperwork for Bill’s asylum filings. Bill was pretty shocked to hear that.

Moreover, the lawyer said that the effort needed for this was substantial, and his client load is so big that he cannot continue to represent Bill. And he won’t participate at the October 14 hearing.

He said PJI has tried to find another immigration lawyer for Bill, but without success. So it’s up to his friends to find one for him. He said this hearing is just for scheduling purposes, and Bill just needs to say he needs more time to find a lawyer.

Bill attends his initial Immigration court hearing - without a lawyer!

On October 14, Bill attended the hearing alone. The judge was not sympathetic. She said he has 2½  weeks to find another lawyer. She scheduled Bill’s next hearing for November 4. If Bill doesn’t have a lawyer by then, she’ll assume he is representing himself and will proceed that way. The fact that he’s stuck in a detention center where no one can call him clearly doesn’t matter to her.

Next Immigration hearing is Nov. 4 - Bill really needs a lawyer for that one!

At this writing, Bill’s friends are working hard to find a good immigration attorney to represent him on Nov. 4. That is critical. There is a sense that the judge is looking for an excuse to simply send Bill back to the Canadian authorities. A skilled immigration lawyer could easily keep that from happening. If anyone can help, by all means contact us!

People can also donate for Bill’s legal defense HERE.

Final thoughts

As we said at the beginning, it’s hard to know how to address these many injustices. Canada’s obsession with punishing politically incorrect speech is beyond belief. And the overzealous behavior of the US border officials is hard to fathom.

It’s an understatement to say that we are disappointed with Pacific Justice Institute. Let’s be honest: They basically got Bill into this terrible situation, then chillingly abandoned him. They didn’t prepare any paperwork. At one point we called their main office and spoke to the person overseeing this case. We were simply told that they can’t comment on it. MassResistance has worked with PJI in the past and had no problems. So this is upsetting. There’s no acceptable explanation or excuse.

The US border officers blatantly lied to Bill. In the US, federal law is very clear: It’s a felony to lie to any federal official (or even conceal facts). But it’s perfectly legal (and, in fact, considered meritorious) for federal officials to lie to everyone else. One reason that Bill seemed gullible is that even in Canada, he told us, government officials might stretch the truth a bit, but they’ve never outright lied to him. This struck us as a disturbing and painful lesson for all Americans about never trusting federal officials in any situation where it may affect you.

Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!

Our successes depend on people like you.

Donate to MassResistance

Your support will make the difference!

DO NOT TALK with Charlee Simons: Videos Confronting Maxine Waters and No Kings Protesters

Mogg Mogged Tucker (And What the Commentariat Are Still Missing)

 

On October 2^nd, 2026, Tucker Carlson released his hostile interview with former United Kingdom Conservative MP Jacon Rees-Mogg. That was a bad move for the fired Fox News host.

A wide array of opinions has celebrated Mogg for holding his own against the abusive detours, the unwelcome interventions, and unjustified non sequiturs that Tucker Carlson has become famous for throwing out.

Views tired of Tucker’s pro-Islam, anti-Zionist schtick have praised Mogg for keeping his cool and turning the tables on the former MSNBC-CNN host throughout the entire.

The wide bevy of commentators declared that Carlson finally met his match. Most of the public should have expected as much. The posh UK conservative was one of the few who expertly rebuffed Sasha Baron Cohen’s obnoxious alter ego Ali G nearly thirty years ago. He mocked the liberal comedian without batting an eyelash or breaking a sweat. Remarking on the mockery, Mogg undermined Cohen’s subversive credibility by sharing that he enjoyed the interview. Calm, cool, and collected is the approach, and Mogg took the time to develop clarity of speech under duress.

His excellent takedown of a fake news propagandist masquerading as a journalist is not a first, either, but he capitalized on prior wins to deflate the most obnoxious of the bunch.

Canadian psychologist and intellectual Jordan Peterson’s revealed (and reveled in) his own masterclass on dealing with hostile interviews when he took down Cathy Newman of Channel 4 News in 2018. She repeatedly tried to put words in Peterson’s mouth (as Tucker did with Mogg), but he would gently correct her and set the record straight. At one point, he even laughed at her silly questions.

Elon Musk has also shut down arrogant liberals pushing their agenda under the guise of journalism.  At Twitter's San Francisco headquarters on April 11, 2023, Musk slammed a BBC reporter outright for lying about a supposed increase in hate speech or racist commentary on Twitter (now X) shortly after Musk took over. On July 23, 2026, in Musk’s long and contentious interview with the Economist, he rebuked the reporter’s suggestion that people loathe him for taking on more conservative political views. He retorted (correctly) that more people loathe corporate media talking heads like herself for mischaracterizing people and not reporting the truth. He also pushed back on the empty smear that he was supporting “extreme right” or “far right” policies when he provided a solid list of Democratic politicians in America who had supported secure borders, protection of children, and a rejection of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

It’s worth building on Musk and Peterson to appreciate Mogg’s approach to biased interviewers who insist on putting words in their guests’ mouths all while contorting their remarks and undermining their arguments.

These aggressive, liberal interviews want to enrage their guests, cause them to lose their cool, then take advantage of their flustered state as if to say: “See! You’re wrong about your stance! You are getting angry with me because all I’m doing is just asking questions.”

As if!

Like Peterson and Musk, Jacob Rees-Mogg was prepared, and the audience recognizes that he was comfortable with his views and his answers because he had pondered them for a long time. He spoke cogently, responded calmly without sudden alarm, and he had no problem correcting Tucker’s misunderstanding—or disregard—of history.

How have the pundits responded, and what are they missing?

Triggernometry podcaster Konstantin Kisin rebuffed these celebrations, lamenting that Tucker’s take was not particularly dark or disconcerting. He found Tucker to be unintelligent, and the whole discussion disappointing.

I could not disagree more.

Mogg’s masterful class on mogging (urban slang meaning to outshine, outclass, or dominate someone else—most commonly in physical appearance, physique, height, or presence, making them look inferior or smaller by comparison, cf. Merriam-Webster) Tucker and his insufferable post-liberal arrogance are a clinic for dealing with these fake news propagandists masquerading as journalists.

British conservative Peter Hitchens remarked that Tucker shouldn’t be treated seriously. He faulted Tucker’s lack of knowledge of history, his broad folly about Russia’s GDP vs. the UK, but he didn’t go after Trump’s deprecating self-contradictions. More conservatives need to point out this disturbing habit, then rest on that point to dismiss further discussions with him.

Andrew Klavan sounded off on Mogg mogging Tucker, too. He pointed out that war is justified when an aggressive power attacks, murders, and slaughters innocent civilians. He dismissed their influence because they may have many followers and views, but so what?

Klavan focuses on Tucker’s repartee that the UK should not have entered World War II. He slams the litany of falsehoods that flooded out of Tucker’s mouth. He criticizes the notion that WWII caused the decline of the UK. Klavan correctly points out that European allied nations are collapsing because they have lost the will and the interest in keeping their culture alive.

I would go one step further, though, and this analysis is still missing from the Carlson-Mogg reactions. Why has the West stopped fighting for its values? Because Christian faith has fallen into decline as universities have embraced secular leftist and globalist ideas. I also welcomed his attack on the false dichotomy of having to choose between Nazi rule and Islamic rule. He put Nazi and Islam together vs. Western glory based on Judeo-Christian values, Greek reason, and Roman courage.

Klavan also jumped on Tucker’s naïve argument that the UK is arresting more people for speech than Russia. Mogg mocked Tucker’s brazen ignorance (his confident dumbness), reminding Tucker that Putin routinely jails dissidents, or they suddenly find themselves falling from windows or getting poisoned.

I would add that since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russian citizens have never enjoyed a culture of robust freedom of speech. While that natural right is under attack in the United Kingdom because of a hostile Labour government and local bureaucrats, Russian citizens have learned to keep their mouths shut, knowing all too well the consequences if they speak out and criticize the regime.

Furthermore, Russia does not respect freedom of religion either. The general public is unaware of this, but as far back as 2016, Russia has heavily restricted proselytizing. Individuals cannot share their faith publicly, yet not a whimper from the Pro-Putin crowd. Mogg should have capitalized on that.

Last of all, many of the chatterati have ignored one of the best parts of the Tucker-Mogg moggery, which occurred when Mogg intimated that Tucker was defending Hitler, and the former MP advised his interviewer that he probably didn’t want to give that impression. Most people commenting on the exchange are not giving Rees-Mogg enough credit: he didn’t resort to direct character assassination, but slyly suggested it, just as Tucker makes snide assumptions about his guests under the guise of “just asking questions.”

Trying to defend himself, Tucker said, “OK, I’m a secret Nazi. Actually, I’m not …”

From Mogg’s reflection on his debate/discussion to the latest comments on the exchange, it’s frustrating that no one has seized on this grating, fundamental problem with Tucker, especially in connection with that Nazi-Not a Nazi remark: Tucker says unserious things, then disavows saying them. If he doesn’t take his own words seriously, why should anyone else?

Run and Hide from "Run, Hide, Fight: Infidels" (Tough Love for Conservative Media)

 

I do not have a Daily Wire subscription, so I miss their movie productions. A friend of mine hosted a group viewing of the conservative media company’s latest movie Run, Hide, Fight: Infidels (RHFI), so that I could see what all the fuss was about.

  After watching most of it, I have no intention of subscribing. 

To their credit, conservative companies are yearning to break into the mainstream entertainment marketplace. Rather than complaining, they are pushing back on the left-wing cultural rot defining American media.

Unfortunately, the Daily Wire’s latest feature fails. It’s contrived, empty, glorying in empty right-wing stereotypes about left-wing agitators, activists, and angry protesters without offering meaningful characters or a believable story. In short, it was not entertaining, and I am a conservative who respects The Daily Wire media vision.

Before excoriating RHFI film in detail, allow me to provide a summary of the movie:

The movie starts with American soldiers staking out a terrorist cell in Somalia. One of the soldiers rushes into the terrorist hideout because he sees a child, but he misses the Islamic militant in the background, and the militant murders the soldier.

Fast forward seven years later, and the soldier who survives the combat scene is now a spokesman and author warning the West about Islam, and he speaks at a university in Loudon County as part of his book tour.

In two other plot threads that take place at the same time, a college student falls in love with the girl in one of his college classes. He invites her to a drinking party in his dorm

At the same time as a budding love interest opens up, we witness one Islamic terrorist, presenting himself as a mere refugee looking for a new life in America, infiltrating the same University as a recent hire. This one terrorist has networked with the left-wing activists on campus (although the batty left-wingers don’t know that his final aim is an Islamic caliphate by force).

The young college undergrad chasing the girl was the most interesting part of the movie. That initial story arc presents the audience with real people attempting to form a real relationship. The roommates were funny too, because they engage in real dialogue in a natural situation. 

In contrast, however, the Islamic militants are crass stereotypes, so laughably unbelievable that they insult the audience and diminish the larger message of “Left-wing universities are useful idiots for terrorism, pandering to Islamic and militant left-wing protesters.” When the terrorist attack occurs, the mass slaughters are vivid and disturbing, but the nonchalant manner of some of the surviving characters does not come off as credible. They almost act like they’re playing in a video game instead of fighting to survive in a high-stakes violent scenario.

At the one-hour-and-20-minute mark of the movie (which was as long as I could stand the movie before tuning out), a former combat veteran suffering from PTSD takes a central role. Earlier in the movie, he spouts off bigoted remarks about Arabs and Islam, but suddenly he shakes off his military jitters and preps for war. Huh? Also, for a veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, he looks surprisingly—and thus incredibly—young for a college student!

The movie doesn’t even have a focused tone. From the outset to the Islamic terrorists launching their plot—complete with mass shootings—the film takes on a serious and bloody tone. As the movie progresses, there are blatant attempts at humor where the dialogue isn’t funny, and the movie becomes unwatchable.

When writing a movie review, you should watch the whole thing. I decided to take the movie title literally. I ran and hid, and I fought the urge to be polite and watch the whole thing. Siskel and Ebert said it’s OK to walk out before a movie ends as long as you admit it, so there.

RHFI’s set design was good, the premise is worthwhile, and the actors have potential (even though none of them are big names). However, none of it comes together to make it worth watching.

I don’t fault The Daily Wire for trying. Conservatives should produce alternative media, especially for movie theaters and television. You can pursue and promote meaningful themes with a political message, but the work must entertain as well as instruct. If it’s a blatant message of “college administrators bad, Islam bad, college students wake up to bad, fight the bad to do good,” the whole thing comes off as hollow and unengaging.

Conservatives have to focus on larger messages without the politics.

Or should their movies be more overtly conservative? One great underrated conservative movie is An American Carol, released in 2008. Created by David Zucker of Airplane! and Naked Gun fame, the movie is a brilliant pro-American parody of Charles Dickens’ Yuletide tale. The main character, Michael Malone (a lampoon of the insufferable Michael Moore), hates America and the Fourth of July. To break him out of his left-wing moral torpor, three ghosts of American History visit him and teach him to revere Independence Day and respect everything great about America.

Yes, the movie pushed clearly conservative talking points, but the movie wasn’t pretending to be neutral entertainment. In fact, the parody aspect, including a lot of great puns and slapstick, mocks itself in a self-referential fashion, much like the other Zucker comedies. The movie played in mainstream theaters, too … and it bombed, sadly.

Conservatives can’t catch a break!

If conservatives want to impact the culture and push meaningful, life-enhancing content, including entertainment, they need to explicitly avoid being political. They should learn from J.R.R. Tolkien’s incredible series The Lord of the Rings. The epic is saturated with Christian ideology and symbolism, but nothing overt. One of the most rewarding and enriching stories out there, the final movie in the franchise won all the Academy Awards that it was nominated for in 2004. Granted, Frodo and Samwise don’t tell the audience to vote Republican, but the refreshing eternal themes resonated with audiences then and now. These kinds of cultural enhancing experiences may

Politics is downwind from culture, but culture seeking to be political overshadows its cultural impact and undermines the political message. Turning something cultural into something political is just further downwind from politics, and people will be turned off by it. 

Conservatives have done well sharing the ideas through podcasts, radio talk shows, and articles. Fox News is still one of the highest-rated television stations, and they have an inevitably conservative bent because they allow both sides to be heard, and the conservative side reflects truth, reality, and common sense, while the liberal side tells the public how the world should work, and they better agree or else!

For entertainment to endure, it has to touch us in our hearts as well as our minds, and it has to move us with truthful, accurate portrayals of events and characters with a believable story that will engage us. 

Run, Hide, Fight: Infidels does none of those things. If you're going to do conservative entertainment, you need to focus on conserving eternal and transcendent values and themes, rather than pushing right-wing talking points under the guise of telling a story.