polecat news and views

Wednesday, April 22, 2026

As genocidal Islamic terror group Hamas is once again consolidating power in Gaza, some Gazans are breaking their silence on how abusive Hamas jihadis are even of their own people.

A quote attributed to the late Israeli politician Golda Meir is, "We will only have peace with [the Arabs] when they love their children more than they hate us." But since Islamic sacred texts explicitly endorse and approve jihad, sex slavery, pedophilia, domestic abuse, and polygamy, it's not exactly shocking that many of the conglomerate of Muslim Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians continue to use and abuse their own women and children. The Daily Mail has a new report of Hamas sex abuse of Gazan women, as companion to the reports of horrific Hamas abuse of Israeli captives.

As of Oct. 2025, 80% of Palestinians supported jihad against Israel, and 70% opposed Hamas disarmament, but there is a minority of Gazans who are tired of being always the sex slaves and human shields of Hamas. Hamas co-founder's son Mosab Hassan Yousef has repeatedly emphasized how Palestinian jihadis will willingly sacrifice even their own children to the cause of jihad and how different factions in Gaza will fight and exploit each other when not actively fighting Israel. This is all the backdrop of the sad stories published on the Daily Mail.

There has been a rise in child marriages and adolescent pregnancies in Gaza, the Daily Mail noted, and a common trend of sex exploitation partly fuels the pregnancies. The Gazans who spoke to Jusoor News, which then passed the stories on to the Daily Mail, spoke in anonymity. One Gazan man said he was asked to locate a widow who had requested aid from a commander in Hamas's terrorist Qassam or al-Qassam Brigades, "but he took advantage of her." The Gazan man called it "disgraceful," and said he found the widow "in a tent in the Gharabli area where a bunch of Qassam members were taking advantage of her. We informed the leadership, but we were told we had to keep silent about it."

Another Gazan man said a female neighbor of his ended up in the same situation. In that case, "one of Hamas's charity organizations" blackmailed the woman. They "wanted her to wh*re herself in exchange for a food parcel, or an aid voucher, or 100 shekels," he said. The interviewers even spoke with a Qassam Brigade jihadi who affirmed that he told his leadership the "wives of the Martyrs," i.e., the widows of dead terrorists, were being exploited in Gharabli. He was angry when the leadership told him to shut up, so he tore down the tent where the women were held in protest.

For Our VIPs: Pope Leo’s Predecessor Built Vatican Walls After Islamic Sack

The rape accounts come after even more horrifying stories from Israeli captives such as Arbel Yehoud, who said her captors raped and abused her daily, the Daily Mail acknowledged.

A Jusoor News journalist, who used the pseudonym Abdullah, noted how endemic sex abuse is in Gaza. “Unfortunately, there are many cases — very widespread. In every area, many women are exploited, especially widows and divorced women, because they have no support and no income. Their vulnerability is taken advantage of, and the situation is getting worse day by day,” he said.

A divorced mother of four from Gaza whispered her story into a phone to the Daily Mail. “I am displaced because of the war …I went to an Islamic charity that distributes aid to displaced and needy people in Gaza,” she said. “I was welcomed by a man who looked religious, like a sheikh. He said he would stand by me and help me. I told him I was separated from my husband. He said: 'Oh, separated? A woman as beautiful as you?’ From the beginning, the way he spoke to me felt like harassment. I am much younger than him. I trusted him because he was an older man; I saw him like a father. He is the age of my father, but he harassed me directly. I was afraid, of course. He was pursuing me… I told him I would expose him. He said: ‘You cannot expose me, I am the government here.’”

An elderly Gazan woman talked about one charity in Gaza, which she didn't name, from "its chairman all the way down to its doorman, [exploitation is] being done by all their employees and members." This also highlights why Hamas so often steals the aid always flowing into Gaza courtesy of Western taxpayers. If Hamas controls the food and resources, it can manipulate Gazans how it likes, turning rice into a bribe for prostitution.

https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2026/04/18/gazans-describe-hamass-habitual-sex-abuse-of-their-own-people-n4951940?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

Shock Horror: ‘Islamophobia’ Outbreak in Simi Valley!

Shock Horror: ‘Islamophobia’ Outbreak in Simi Valley!

Robert Spencer

Police in the hitherto sleepy, bucolic hamlet of Simi Valley, California have had their hands full recently, ever since the Islamic Society of Simi Valley phoned in the terrible news that it had been the victim of an outbreak of “Islamophobia.” The more one looks at the incident, however, the less there is to see.

NBC Los Angeles reported on April 8 that the local cops were “investigating a possible ‘hate incident’ at an Islamic Society of Simi Valley building.” The intrepid journalists, however, showed no apparent curiosity about exactly what kind of “hate incident” had been perpetrated.

Why is the public not allowed to learn the specifics? Law enforcement authorities and/or media outlets (it’s not clear who made the actual decision in this case) seem to assume that their readers are too immature to be able to handle hearing the details of a “hate incident” at the local mosque without grabbing their tiki torches and heading over to the mosque to join in the hate. It’s either that, or authorities think that the public’s sensibilities are so fragile that they simply wouldn’t be able to handle the news.

One possible clue about the nature of the “hate” involved here might come from the fact that a local church was the target of a recent “hate incident” as well. The Ventura County Star reported Friday that “a Lutheran church in Simi Valley was vandalized with a hate message on April 16, over a week after an Islamic mosque in the city reported a potential hate crime, authorities said. Officers with the Simi Valley Police Department arrived at the Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran Church at 4191 E. Cochran St. around 12:42 p.m. in regard to a vandalism report, according to authorities.”

There may, of course, be no connection at all between that and what happened at the Islamic Society of Simi Valley. All the Ventura County Star had to say about that incident was that “officers found several handwritten messages on business card-sized papers shoved through the front door of the building, said police Sgt. Rick Morton.” However, like NBC Los Angeles, it said nary a word about what those business cards actually said.

From Santa Barbara’s KEYT we learn that “a still-unidentified person dropped off business cards with anti-Islamic messages at the front door of the non-profit’s building.” Simi Valley Today, meanwhile, ran a curious and unexplained photo of a scrap of paper on which was written “Hauk tnee,” with this caption: “A disturbing reminder of the persistent threat of hate and bias that some faith communities continue to face.”

Was this a placeholder that was supposed to be corrected later, like leaving “Lorem ipsum” in a published article? Or was “hauk tnee” an intentional stand-in for the “hate material” we are not allowed to see?

Whatever “hauk tnee” may mean, or not mean, it enraged that most easily enrageable of organizations, Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). In a fine froth, CAIR-Los Angeles top dog Hussam Ayloush declared: “The targeting of the Islamic Society of Simi Valley, alongside reports of hate incidents targeting two other local mosques, is deeply alarming and comes at a time when Muslims across the nation are facing an unprecedented wave of hate.”

Nobody appears to be commensurately upset about the “hate incident” at Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran Church, and that’s the way these things go. The Lutherans don’t have a national organization capitalizing upon alleged “hate incidents” to gain political capital among leftists, and so no one was particularly concerned about what happened at the church.

Nor did the outrageous disproportionality of the incident at the Islamic Society of Simi Valley seem to trouble anyone. Ayloush raged about how “deeply alarming” it was that Muslims were supposedly “facing an unprecedented wave of hate” just weeks after there were four violent jihad attacks in the U.S. in the space of just two weeks.

They took place during the first half of March 2026. A Muslim migrant on March 1 walked into a bar in Austin, Texas and opened fire, murdering three people and injuring 13 others. Six days after that, two pro-ISIS Muslims screaming “Allahu akbar” lobbed a homemade shrapnel bomb at a crowd of pro-freedom protesters in New York City. To their disappointment, it didn’t go off.

Then on March 12 came two jihad attacks in one day. In one, a Muslim crashed his car into a Michigan synagogue and opened fire. Meanwhile, another Muslim, also screaming “Allahu akbar,” started shooting at Old Dominion University, murdering one person and injuring two others.

Hussam Ayloush and Hamas-linked CAIR had nothing to say about any of that, or about the ongoing jihad against the U.S. But when someone writes something “hateful” to a mosque, it’s all over the news. All in all, however, the victims of those March jihad attacks would likely, if they had been given the choice, have preferred to be insulted than to be murdered.

https://pjmedia.com/robert-spencer/2026/04/18/shock-horror-islamophobia-outbreak-in-simi-valley-n4951936?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

My Ancestor Fought for Islam at the Battle of the Alamo?

My Ancestor Fought for Islam at the Battle of the Alamo?

Mark Lewis

My Ancestor Fought for Islam at the Battle of the Alamo? — *AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein*

Or, at least, that’s the nonsense some people are trying to propagate in Texas. Not even a semi-literate Texan would ever believe this, but airheads do exist (I’m ashamed to say) even in my native Lone Star State. I mean, Jasmine Crockett is from Texas (so was Lyndon B. Johnson, and I do cringe at that thought). But fortunately, there are some Texans who are fighting this idiocy, and I am proud of them for it. Here is some information about the story.

An article from Gateway Pundit entitled “WHAT!? Texans being told the Alamo actually is … ISLAMIC!” reported, "'It has come to our attention that an extensive lobbying effort is underway to have the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) alter curriculum standards in a way that would diminish American and Texas history,' Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, and other Texas Republicans wrote to education officials. Gill, et al, continued, 'The petitioners' efforts claim that Islam influenced our founding, culture, and way of life. For instance, the (board) recently responded to public testimony asserting that the Alamo is an Islamic building.'"

This is as ridiculous as any historical claim could be. The Alamo was originally a Spanish mission established by Catholics as one of the early attempts in the region to convert Indians to Catholicism. There probably wasn’t a Muslim within…well, how many miles is it from San Antonio to Saudi Arabia? But blind people will grope for any black marble they can find in the dark attic they deliberately try to drag others into.

Islamic apologists have long been insisting that America start portraying their religion as positively as possible. It’s been a difficult road for them, given 9/11, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, Iraq, Iran, the Palestinian suicide bombers, etc., etc., etc. This is the radical element of Islam, and it is strong, but I don’t know exactly what percentage of Muslims accept it. I’ve met quite a few Muslims in my travels, and most of them are very nice people, probably just wanting to live a decent, peaceful, comfortable life and serve their god, without being pinned with the radicalism that plagues the more savage elements within their religion. I recoil at the barbarism that has also plagued the history of Christianity, and I fight it as hard as I can. What is done in the name of Jesus doesn’t always have His blessing, and that may be true of Allah, too. But there has been, and is, too much sin in both religions.

Wanting a positive image, as Islamic apologists claim they want, demands being truthful; liars are not viewed with favor (except by Democrats), and lying about the Alamo doesn’t help Islam’s “image” at all. There have been Muslim defenders who also claim that Islam had a vital and integral role in the founding of America. Again, this is wholly fictitious and doesn’t help their cause in the least. This isn’t the route, my Islamic friend, to win the hearts of Americans and prove the veracity of your religion, if that is what you wish to do.

Islam is based upon the Koran and the teachings and life of Mohammed (who was a warrior), and that is what Islam should try to defend and teach, not lies about Texas and American history. If the Koran and Mohammed wouldn’t approve of 9/11, Hamas, Palestinian suicide bombers, etc., then demonstrate that from the teachings of the Koran. The “Inquisition” happened in Catholic history, but I would never defend it as part of the teachings of Jesus; indeed, I would condemn it as strongly as I would any religious barbarity. Muslim apologists need to quit lying and should make their case based on the true teachings of Islam. Maybe they don’t want to do that (like jihads), but the source of Islam is where its teachings are found, just like Jesus and His apostles—the New Testament—is the source and ideal of Christianity. Christians should never defend anything that contradicts the teachings of Jesus and His apostles, and I would hope Muslims would do the same with Mohammed and the Koran. Lying about the Alamo isn’t a good start.

So, U.S. Republican Rep. Gill (TX-26) and other true Texans are trying to nip the “Alamo is an Islamic building” in the bud before some group of brainless educators tries to work it, somehow, into Texas history textbooks. And with profuse apologies, and undying and profound respect for those of you who are good, honest teachers, I want to say that teachers and educators, as a class, are probably the dumbest people I’ve ever met in my life. And I have a right to say that because I’ve been one all my adult life. The pseudo-“intellectual,” Ivory-tower class, who have never in their lives gotten their hands dirty on a farm or small business, has taken over American education over the last few generations, and has done more to destroy the nation than any other group of people, save possibly politicians. But even those politicians were educated by that godless, bubble-headed intellectual class, and because of it, “the Alamo is Islamic” nonsense needs decent people to waste their time writing letters to a state Board of Education, hoping that Board of Education has the sense to flush the preposterous idea down the toilet where it belongs with the other refuse promoted by people who hate America and Christianity. I’m hopeful, but I have no clue what the Texas Board of Education will do. And the fact that I don’t know says volumes about the condition of education in America today.

Incidentally, I did have an ancestor fight and die in the Alamo—a distant cousin. He was fighting, not for Islam, but to free Texas from another barbaric military dictatorship. God rest his soul.

https://townhall.com/columnists/marklewis/2026/04/18/my-ancestor-fought-for-islam-at-the-battle-of-the-alamo-n2674672?utm_source=thdailypmvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Tuesday, April 21, 2026

PRedictions, PRojections, PRaise, and PRedators: The Iran War Is Just Like the Federal Debt Because…

PRedictions, PRojections, PRaise, and PRedators: The Iran War Is Just Like the Federal Debt Because…

Scott Pinsker

I’ll betcha a Diet Coke that if we polled the American people and asked ‘em if the federal debt was a big, serious problem, a sizable majority would say yes, it is. (Because… of course!)

In fact, if we posed a follow-up question and asked ‘em if it would be immoral to leave an enormous debt for our children and grandchildren to pay off, another huge majority would agree. (Probably by a 3-1 ratio. Maybe even higher.)

Same goes if you asked a third question — “Should the government prioritize paying down the debt?” Almost everyone would answer affirmatively. (It’d be yet another landslide!)

But if you tried to cut spending, those same voters would scream, cry, yell, complain, and vote your arse out of office.

That’s the best way to understand the PR fallout from the Iran War, because the polling has revealed a very similar dichotomy: As my colleague Matt Margolis — the hardest working man in conservative media — noted last week, the “Iran War Polling Makes No Sense”:

According to a new CBS News poll on the Iran war, Americans say they're worried, stressed, and angry about the conflict. That’s fair enough. But what really struck me about the poll is that it found that most Americans support the war's key goals, but not the war itself. The poll found that 60% disapprove of U.S. military action in Iran, and only 40% approve.
That’s pretty conclusive opposition. However, there are huge bipartisan majorities saying several outcomes are important for the U.S. to achieve: opening the Strait of Hormuz for oil access, 87%; ensuring the Iranian people are free, 81%; stopping Iran from threatening other countries, 76%; permanently ending Iran’s nuclear program, 76%. Those aren't abstract foreign-policy preferences; they literally are the objectives of the military campaign currently underway. The one Americans claim to oppose.

I call it the fat-guy-on-a-couch syndrome: If you asked your 350-pound friend if he’d like to be thin, healthy, and attractive, he’d take the deal in a nanosecond — but if you told him it would require hard work on his part, he’d shrug his shoulders and pop open another can of Pringles.

(Pro Tip: If you don’t want your wife to know how many beers you’re drinking, you can hide two of ‘em in an empty Pringles container. Maybe three if you crunch ‘em a bit. Shh, it’ll be our little secret.)

The American people want the federal debt to go away because they know it’s a big problem. If you could wave a magic wand and make it vanish, they’d throw you a ticker-tape parade and serenade you with Mariah Carey songs.

But that doesn’t mean they’re willing to sacrifice to solve it!

In a recent CNN poll, 89% of Americans view Iran as unfriendly or an enemy. We KNOW the mullahs hate us. We KNOW they can’t have nuclear weapons. We KNOW the world would be a better, safer, more prosperous place if the Iran threat was solved.

But if it requires an iota of sacrifice, we don’t want to be the ones who’ll do it.

The American people want all the benefit — and none of the pain. (Fair enough: Who likes pain?)

So I’m not going to bash the voters for being selfish. Or demanding instant gratification. Or having the attention span of a hyperactive goldfish. It is what it is.

If our goal is winning hearts and minds, we must meet the voters where they actually are — not where we wish they’d be.

And therein lies the smartest PR strategy for President Donald Trump: Get us to the finish line ASAP.

Right now, the Iran War is all pain and no benefit. From the stock market to gas prices, we’re bearing the burden of the war without enjoying any of the rewards.

But the good news is, Election Day isn’t ‘til November. That’s more than half a year away.

If we’re still haggling about ceasefires and/or Schrödinger’s Strait in November, the GOP will be massacred in the midterms. I’m talking a 40+ seat flip in the House, plus losing the Senate.

Nobody likes getting bad press. Nobody likes it when the stock market tanks on their watch. And holy moley, being on the receiving end of a full month of bad press?!

That’s horrible!

But we won’t lose the midterms with a month of bad press in April or May. That’s not how the political game is played.

Our tactical objective is reaching maximum strength — peaking — on the first Tuesday of November. (Or maybe a few weeks earlier, if early voting is gonna be a thing.)

April and May are like training camp: It’s where we shake off our ring-rust. This is when we should be putting in the grueling work that’ll pay dividends on Fight Night.

We don’t want to be the prizefighter who peaked too early in training camp.

As president, Trump has thousands of competing interests: the economy, international diplomacy, 401Ks, media coverage, polling numbers, military commitments. I strongly suspect he’s been waging war with one eye on all those other interests, because he wants to minimize the negative fallout. It’s why he strategically times announcements to protect the financial markets. It’s why he keeps dithering around with the mullahs.

That’s a mistake: Get us to the finish line ASAP.

We’re still in the pain phase. We need to get to the benefit phase.

And we need to get there well before Election Day, so the American people can enjoy the victory dividend — and their short attention span will then work in the GOP’s favor.

If we achieve victory at least 90 days before Election Day, all the uproar over the Iran War will be a distant memory. The pain will be long forgotten — and only the benefit top of mind.

Screw April and May! (Which, I just realized, are common girls’ names; apologies to any readers named April or May.) Sacrificing today to win tomorrow is the president’s smartest play.

Get us to the finish line ASAP.

Like Winston Churchill used to say, “If you’re going through hell, keep going.”

And don’t stop ‘til you reach heaven.

PRediction: The most curious unanswered question is why President Trump hasn’t prodded the Iranian people to rebel against the mullahs already. Not only would it pressure the regime to capitulate to the U.S. so it could refocus on the internal threat, but the only real long-term solution to the Iranian problem is regime change.

But it’s probably just a matter of time.

Because it’s a low-cost gamble for the Americans: If the rebellion succeeds, we win. And if it doesn’t succeed, Iran murdering its own people in broad daylight has PR value in the ongoing propaganda war.

Clearly, it’s a pressure point that President Trump could exploit in negotiations. And whatever you wanna say about Trump, he certainly values negotiating leverage.

It’s as close to a no-brainer as possible.

I can understand why we didn’t want Iranian civilians taking to the streets when the bombs were dropping; I don’t understand why we’re not “greasing the wheels” of an uprising during the ceasefire. It doesn’t make sense.

The answer, I think/hope, is that the “wheel-greasing” is going on behind the scenes — and the rebellion will be given the green light ASAP.

PRojection: Either way, thousands upon thousands of Iranian civilians are almost certainly going to die. A rebellion, it seems, will be coming one way or another.

Barring a black swan event — and the regime collapsing under its own hubris — an Iranian civil war now seems inevitable. The mullahs will be incentivized to demonstrate that they’re still in full control — which means slaughtering civilians is a means to an end. Iran lacks the weaponry to break a blockade or stop the Americans, so reestablishing its fear factor by murdering its own people is low-hanging fruit.

And it’s something they’ve done plenty of times before.

Meanwhile, if the Iranian people hate the regime as much as we’re hearing, they’ll be highly incentivized to seize freedom for themselves and their children. Opportunities like this don’t come around every day.

From Trump’s point of view, it’d be FAR better if the rebellion began while our warships were still nearby. This would prevent the mullahs from using airpower to mow down civilians — a fate that befell thousands of Iraqis in the aftermath of the first Gulf War. Because, when the Iranian people rebel, we want to maximize their chances for success.

It’s not a question of if; it’s a question of when.

All I’m saying is, it’s in our interest to speed up the timetable. Let’s get the ball rolling — like, perhaps, this week.

Truthfully, it should’ve already happened.

Because the worst outcome of all would be a delayed rebellion — one that starts long after we’ve left the Middle East — and hundreds of thousands of brave Iranians dying for naught, because the mullahs had a free hand to kill them all.

https://pjmedia.com/scott-pinsker/2026/04/19/predictions-projections-praise-and-predators-the-iran-war-is-just-like-the-federal-debt-because-n4951957?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

The Youngest Republican in Congress Asked One Question Democrats Couldn’t Answer

The Youngest Republican in Congress Asked One Question Democrats Couldn’t Answer

David Manney

Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) represents Texas' 26th District and stands as the youngest Republican in Congress. During a recent House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on temporary protected status, Gill questioned Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who serves as ranking member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement.

Jayapal claimed that Somali immigrants helped build the United States.

Right, and if pigs lived in my, ah, back pocket, I'd never have to buy bacon again.

Luckily for the pigs and my pants, Gill was there and responded with one direct question, asking Jayapal to name a single Somali political philosopher who influenced the American system of government.

Jayapal had no answer.

No answer, of course, unless we consider one intellectual heavyweight, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who presented us with these old chestnuts:

“It's all about the Benjamins, baby . . .”

“Some people did something. . . “

“Israel has hypnotized the world. . .”

I can see where Jayapal's comments may be misunderstood.

The exchange cut through a familiar tactic, where Jayapal leaned on broad praise and emotional framing, while Gill stayed grounded and asked for evidence.

The difference in strategy immediately showed Jayapal's ignorance.

The American system of government grew from the Founding Fathers and Western traditions rooted in limited government, individual liberty, and Enlightenment thinking. Those influences are well documented, whereas no Somali political philosopher played any role in shaping the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.

As expected, Jayapal's claim fell apart once it faced a fundamental question.

President Donald Trump leads on immigration with a focus on enforcement and results. His policies center on border security, lawful entry, and stability for American communities. That approach contrasts with messaging that leans on broad claims about contributions without defining them.

Gill's question reflected that same focus on clarity, forcing a distinction between general praise and specific historical fact.

Jayapal has built her position within the progressive wing of Congress on expanding immigration protections and promoting inclusive policy. Her remarks during the hearing followed that pattern as she spoke in sweeping terms about influence without tying those claims to the actual development of American institutions.

Gill's question brought the discussion back to the obvious timeline that Somali influence in American history wasn't as robust as Jayapal suggested while highlighting a broader issue in policy debates. When claims rely on general statements without specifics, direct questioning is the antidote, showing just how fast a narrative loses strength when it's pulled out of somebody's … ah, when it lacks evidence.

The hearing also underscored a larger divide in how leaders approach immigration. One side emphasizes assimilation, sharing values, and measurable impact on American life. The other often focuses on broad ideals and emotional appeal without addressing long-term integration challenges.

That difference shapes how policies are written and enforced.

Gill serves on the House Judiciary Committee and has made immigration integrity a key factor of his work. His approach during the hearing reflected that priority; he didn't raise his voice or expand the argument, he asked a single question and allowed the silence to carry the point.

That silence spoke volumes.

Voters tend to recognize when arguments rely more on sentiment than substance. We also notice when leaders avoid direct answers, and moments like this one don't need extended debate. They reveal the gap between rhetoric and reality in a matter of seconds.

Trump continues to draw support because he addresses immigration in direct terms and follows through with policy, an approach that connects with voters expecting clear answers and consistent enforcement.

Gill's exchange in the hearing mirrored that expectation.

The hearing offered a simple outcome: a claim was made, a question followed, yet no answer came back.

A result that speaks for itself.

https://pjmedia.com/david-manney/2026/04/19/the-youngest-republican-in-congress-asked-one-question-democrats-couldnt-answer-n4951967?utm_source=rsmorningbriefingvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Watch CNBC's Joe Kernen Wreck Hakeem Jeffries' Anti-Trump Talking Points Over the Economy

Watch CNBC's Joe Kernen Wreck Hakeem Jeffries' Anti-Trump Talking Points Over the Economy

Matt Vespa

Watch CNBC's Joe Kernen Wreck Hakeem Jeffries' Anti-Trump Talking Points Over the Economy — *AP Photo/Rod Lamkey, Jr.*

He’s just not the right choice, and there’s a reason why many Democrats reportedly say in private that they’re unsure about supporting Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) for leader next session. Jeffries comes off as stiff and struggles to adjust when opposing opinions challenge his talking points. The result is either a robotic demeanor or a deer in headlights—either way, it’s not good. Then again, he’s a Democrat, so I couldn't care less. On Tax Day, the New York Democrats appeared on CNBC, where they tried to sell a bleak economic story, blaming Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, host Joe Kernen messed up, noting that the Nasdaq and S&P 500 are booming. Jeffries stayed on script, which looked ridiculous given the many green-market indicators visible in the background that day.

It’s also not the first time Kernen has dropped a nuke on shoddy Democrat talking points.

Meanwhile, I hope you all have a great weekend. It was an awesome week for America:

Monday, April 20, 2026

The Despicable Democrat Tactic Being Deployed in a GOP House Primary in Missouri

The Despicable Democrat Tactic Being Deployed in a GOP House Primary in Missouri

Larry O'Connor

The Despicable Democrat Tactic Being Deployed in a GOP House Primary in Missouri — *Photo: Business Wire*

There’s a Republican primary underway in Missouri, and if you want a case study in how modern political hit jobs work, look no further than what’s being done to my colleague, radio talk show host turned candidate Chris Stigall.

Stigall is now running for Congress, and instead of a debate over ideas, records, or vision, his opponent has chosen a different route. A slickly produced video built on selectively edited clips, designed to make it sound like Stigall is saying things he never actually said.

You’ve seen this before. You know exactly how it works.

Before we go any further, watch the video they’re pushing:

Now that you’ve seen it, let’s talk about what’s actually happening.

And if it feels familiar, it should. This is the exact same playbook used against Donald Trump with the Charlottesville “very fine people” hoax. Take a real quote, strip away the surrounding context, remove the clarifying language, and repeat the edited version until it becomes “truth” to people who never saw the original.

Now let’s break down the six key examples being used against Stigall.

First: “I don’t want Trump to be the nominee.” Clean. Damaging. Totally misleading. In the full exchange, Stigall is responding to a caller and describing a portion of his audience that feels that way. He literally says the caller “articulated exactly” what many listeners are thinking. That’s not a declaration. That’s a radio host doing his job.

Second, the claim: “We’re going to have an indicted nominee running against Joe Biden.” The video presents this as Stigall predicting doom. In reality, he’s carefully walking through competing views inside the Republican base. He even says he’s trying not to upset supporters of different candidates and acknowledges he could be wrong. It’s analysis, not advocacy.

Third, the quote: “A lot of you are over it… tired of defending him.” In isolation, it sounds like he’s dismissing Trump supporters. In context, it’s the opposite. He’s acknowledging fatigue and then immediately pivoting to defend Trump’s enduring bond with working-class voters, arguing that no one should underestimate him. The second half, naturally, is cut out.

Fourth, the line: “Let’s go with a proven leader that’s not being threatened with jail.” That’s being used to suggest Stigall is backing Trump’s rivals. But he explicitly says he is not endorsing anyone. He’s describing what many Republican voters are thinking and even says he respects that perspective. That’s not an endorsement. That’s an observation.

Fifth, the supposed smoking gun: “I will not support Donald Trump.” That clip sounds devastating until you realize it’s his position from 2016. Stigall is recounting his past support for Ted Cruz and his skepticism of Trump before Trump became president. He’s using it to illustrate how his views evolved and how the base saw something he didn’t at the time. It’s reflection, not a current position.

And sixth, the swipe about “Trump people who misbehave and act like jacka**es on social media.” The video frames this as an attack on Trump supporters. In reality, Stigall is doing something refreshingly honest. He calls out bad behavior while also defending Trump supporters from being labeled as cultists. He explicitly says he leans Trump and is not anti-DeSantis. It’s balance. It’s nuance. And it’s exactly what gets cut.

That’s the pattern. Six examples. Same tactic every time.

The words are real. The meaning is fabricated.

Every clip is surgically edited to remove the part where Stigall explains himself, adds context, or acknowledges competing viewpoints. What remains is a caricature designed to mislead.

And here’s the part that should bother you, no matter where you stand politically.

If his opponent had a stronger argument, they’d make it. If they had a better vision, they’d present it. Instead, they’re relying on the same dishonest editing tricks that have eroded trust in media and politics for years.

This is manipulation.

Chris Stigall built his career by talking with his audience, not at them. He respects them enough to acknowledge disagreement, to explore complexity, and to say out loud what many are thinking. That’s how he established credibility.

But credibility is hard to attack directly. So instead, they manufacture something easier to knock down.

We’ve seen how this ends when it goes unchallenged. We lived through years of selectively edited clips shaping national narratives while the full truth sat ignored, just one click away.

Now it’s happening in a Republican primary.

And the question is simple. Are voters going to fall for it again, or are they going to demand the full context before making up their minds?

Because once you see the trick, you can’t unsee it.

https://townhall.com/columnists/larryoconnor/2026/04/17/the-despicable-democrat-tactic-being-deployed-in-a-gop-house-primary-in-missouri-n2674670?utm_source=thdailyvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&utm_content=ncl-KfZNFHVx8D&utm_term=&_nlid=KfZNFHVx8D&_nhids=nc40pC6Gsp4qls