Thursday, September 17, 2026

Talarico Called NOT ‘Gender Transitioning’ Kids ‘Abusive,’ Possible Grounds to Lose Custody

Talarico Called NOT ‘Gender Transitioning’ Kids ‘Abusive,’ Possible Grounds to Lose Custody

AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson

James Talarico, professional heretic and Democrat Senate candidate in Texas, claimed that refusing to cross-dress and mutilate children in pursuit of transgender ideology was “abusive.” He even suggested authorities could officially label it child abuse, which would mean depriving parents of custody.

Fox News identified the newly resurfaced clip as coming from a 2019 committee hearing in the Texas legislature. Talarico obviously knew that what he was saying was crazy even for a Democrat, because he hedged his bets a little and didn’t explicitly say that he believed authorities should definitively classify opposition to transgender ideology as abuse meriting confiscation of children. But what he said was still incredibly concerning and promoted the idea that sticking with biological reality is abusive parenting.

The debate was over HB 1910, which said, “In determining whether to appoint a party as a sole or joint managing conservator of a child, the court may not consider evidence regarding whether the party demonstrates a history or pattern of acknowledging or declining to acknowledge the child’s gender identity or expression.” The legislation did not ultimately pass.

Talarico certainly opposed the legislation. “That would be, I think there are some folks, um, that would think that if you deny your child's gender identity, that that's incredibly harmful,” Talarico rambled. “And whether or not we can we label it with the term abuse, I mean, it's abusive, for sure. And so that's where I think some of us have concerns, and I don't want to speak for other members.”

Another member asked if Talarico was “suggesting that it ought to say that it should include a person's willingness [or] unwillingness to acknowledge a child’s gender, or should it be silent as to whether that is abuse?”

In the same incoherent style, Talarico answered, “My just — concern is ruling it out as not being abuse, I think, is dangerous and could certainly harm some of our most vulnerable kids in the state.” In other words, vulnerable children might not be pressured into making permanently disastrous decisions.

For Our VIPs: Parenting Fails: Children Are Growing Up Mocking Assassination and Loving Jihad

While the clip is from 2019, it is important because Talarico is now trying to modify his position without actually rejecting his previous extreme statements on radical LGBTQ ideology. For instance, he claimed to Fox that he saw legitimacy in the argument against biological men in women’s sports without being willing to say that such a phenomenon is outright wrong. He is also on record claiming that there are six biological sexes and that God is “non-binary,” among other ridiculous assertions. He made the claim about a non-binary God specifically while trying to justify mutilation of children for transgender ideology.

So Talarico has been an LGBTQ extremist for years and hasn’t really changed.

https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2026/09/14/talarico-called-not-gender-transitioning-kids-abusive-possible-ground-for-lost-custody-n4957223?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

Stop Forcing Americans to Flush Money at the Dealership

Stop Forcing Americans to Flush Money at the Dealership

Stop Forcing Americans to Flush Money at the Dealership
Scott Jacobs/Edmunds via AP

There’s an episode of 30 Rock from many years ago where Jack, played by Alec Baldwin, explains vertical integration to Liz, played by Tina Fey. He asks her to imagine if a corn chip manufacturer also sold diarrhea medication. When Liz quickly realizes there would be the temptation to put stuff in the corn chips to give you diarrhea, she gasps and says, “That should not be allowed to happen!”

Jack simply replies, “It's my job to make sure that it does happen.”

A little bit of vertical integration can be good for consumers, but too much and it becomes exploitative and monopolistic. A place where we have all seen this, whether we realize it or not, is with auto maintenance.

When your car breaks down, you should be able to decide who fixes it. When a farmer’s tractor stops working during harvest, that farmer should have the same choice. In the days before mass vertical integration, people just fixed their own car themselves.

But increasingly, Americans don’t have that choice and certainly can’t fix it themselves.

Repairing equipment and technology today often requires access to diagnostic data, software, computer codes, specialized tools, and replacement parts. When manufacturers restrict that access, the only option is an authorized dealer and their outrageous mark-ups.

It also means qualified, independent mechanics get shut out. Small-shop mechanics frequently have no choice but to send vehicles to dealerships for work they could otherwise do themselves. 

Farmers face the same basic problem, with even more at stake. If a tractor or combine breaks down in the middle of harvest – in the middle of nowhere – waiting for an authorized service dealer can cost time a farmer does not have. This is bad for the farmer and, incidentally, anyone who eats.

The increasingly mobilized right to repair movement offers a straightforward solution: Give owners and independent shops reasonable access to the same diagnostic tools and equipment available to authorized dealers.

That does not mean manufacturers must give away proprietary technology. It just means consumers should not be locked into one repair option simply because they bought a particular brand of car or tractor.

There are signs that manufacturers and policymakers can find a workable solution. A recent agreement involving John Deere expands access to tools needed to repair farm equipment while preserving protections for the company’s IP. Deere has led on this issue for the past few years, going so far as to successfully ask the Environmental Protection Agency to clarify the regulatory landscape so that equipment owners can have more rights. 

While no single right to repair arrangement will fit every industry, owners should have meaningful repair choices, even while manufacturers protect their genuinely proprietary information.

This is not only a consumer issue. It is a small business issue, too.

Independent mechanics and service technicians invest years learning their trades and thousands of dollars in equipment. They should not be shut out of routine work because a manufacturer has locked access to fix a simple problem behind a computer code that only an official dealership has access to.

No one should be forced to go to a dealer. On average, they charge 34 percent more than independent shops. If this kind of predatory vertical integration continues, that will just get worse and worse.

If we’re going to use old NBC Must See TV sitcoms as a precedent, let’s remember the Seinfeld episode The Dealership where George says, “Yeah, right. I’m gonna get my car repaired at a dealership. Why don’t I just flush my money down the toilet?”

As we have discussed elsewhere here, the Democratic Socialists of America (i.e., the communist-jihadists) are trying to make affordability their No. 1 issue heading into the 2026 midterms. Of course, we know their policies will make the affordability crisis even worse, but we need to present counter-solutions to stem any success they might have at the polls this year. Something as simple as right to repair shows the American people that Trump Republicans are the party of the working class.

If you buy something, you should own it. You should be able to decide who fixes it. You shouldn’t be extorted by the company you bought it from into an outrageously expensive contract for life. We need the right to repair.

https://townhall.com/columnists/jaredwhitley/2026/09/13/stop-forcing-americans-to-flush-money-at-the-dealership-n2682866?utm_source=thdailypmvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Wednesday, September 16, 2026

Declassified 1998 CIA Document Shows Bin Laden Hijacking Plan Known

Declassified 1998 CIA Document Shows Bin Laden Hijacking Plan Known

AP Photo/Gene Boyars, File

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was aware at least two years before the 9/11 attacks that al-Qaida founder Osama bin Laden hoped to commit a hijacking plane attack. Yet on Sept. 11, 2001, when al-Qaida did just that, both the government and military seemed utterly unprepared.

The Trump administration has repeatedly highlighted the corruption of the intelligence community, but that corruption goes back much further than the Biden administration. For a very long time, America’s intelligence agencies have been too focused on enforcing unconstitutional surveillance operations and not nearly enough focused on addressing very real threats like Islamic terrorism. That was apparently as true in 1998, as in 2022. And Bill Clinton was nearly as eager to whitewash Islamic terrorists as Joe Biden was.

It is especially ironic that the document’s date is September 10, almost exactly two years before the 9/11 attacks, although there was another document warning about the same possibility from December, which you can see below.

The September 1998 partially-redacted document begins by noting that bin Laden (spelled Bin Ladin in the document) was moving around Afghanistan, but then comes the part particularly interesting in retrospect. “Intelligence provides no conclusive information on Bin Ladin’s intentions for future attacks. Based on his past action, he and his allies may focus on places they have surveilled in the past, where their operatives can work relatively freely, and where security at US facilities is less stringent.” The CIA had an idea what that could involve, too, and it had to do with flying.

For Our VIPs: Mamdani and AOC Chuckle at 9/11 Memorial Because They Don't Find Jihad a Tragedy

“Bin Ladin late last month said his preferred option is to strike the US on its own soil in Washington,” the CIA document adds. The “same group responsible for the bombings in Africa may fly an explosive-packed airplane into a US city.”

So there you have it. The CIA was aware of the possibility that the terrorists would hijack a plane in an American city, and that Washington in particular would be a target. Ultimately, one of the 9/11 planes hit the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and another plane would have gone into the U.S. Capitol had not the heroic passengers crashed it in a field in Pennsylvania. Naturally, eyesight is always perfect in retrospect, but on the other hand, the fact that our military did not seem to have any response prepared for such an eventuality when it did occur is particularly puzzling.

https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2026/09/12/declassified-1998-cia-document-showed-bin-laden-hijacking-plan-known-n4957160?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

(Will Blogger/readers tolerate criticism of Islam?) Ex-Muslim Warns Islam’s Threat Is Much More Than Terrorism

Ex-Muslim Warns Islam’s Threat Is Much More Than Terrorism

AP Photo/Adam Gray

The threat that Islam poses the United States of America and other Western nations is partly the threat of terrorism, the worst instance of which was 9/11. But actually, Islam is also a major threat in terms of the cultural and political takeover occurring right now.

Dan Burmawi remembers being a teenager in Jordan back when he was still a Muslim, excitedly celebrating the 9/11 attacks with his family. Muslims around the world did the same. After all, Islam is not just a religion; it is essentially a political state with ever-shifting borders, and while the different nations and factions of Islam will fight with each other, they still perceive any successful Muslim attack on Western civilization as a victory for all of them. Now Burmawi is Christian, but he is watching the same ideology from which he broke free take over Western nations.

Warning against the “fatal mistake” of discussing the inherent evils of Islam only when there is a major terrorist attack, Burmawi explained, “First, Islamic terrorism has been rebranded in America to the point that it is no longer even recognized as Islamic. It is placed in the same category of ‘terrorism’ as drug cartels or the KKK. Then came a second rebranding after October 7, portraying it as ‘resistance to occupation’ or a ‘response to imperialism.’”

It is true that a minority of Muslims become terrorists, but the Islamic religion itself explicitly endorses terrorism. Therefore, America and other countries should’ve been much more cautious about allowing in mass Muslim migration. “The Islamic threat is not primarily about violence. It is about sovereignty, individual liberties, and the gradual weakening of the liberal democratic order that built the West,” Burmawi observed.

He continued, “Wherever Islamic movements gain influence, they seek to impose blasphemy norms under different banners, such as ‘fighting hate speech,’ ‘combating incitement to violence,’ or ‘fighting racism.’” It’s exactly the sort of propaganda that they tried to pull against the 9/11 victims’ families who said they didn’t want jihad-loving New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani at the memorial.

Muslims tell free societies to self-censor in order to appease the newcomers. “These restrictions, along with the accommodations they demand from the host society, gradually become the norm, while equal application of the law becomes the exception. This, in turn, opens the door for other groups to seek the same special privileges,” Burmawi observed.

Soon, he argued, “this culture of self-censorship spreads beyond Islam. Like a contagious disease, it expands into other areas of public life.” And that’s not all. “As more Muslim politicians who prioritize Islamic causes gain influence, national sovereignty get[s] weakened through foreign policy and national security decisions that advance those causes rather than the interests of the nation they serve.” When Western leaders feel the need to appease terrorists in Gaza, Qatar, Syria, Iran, or any other Muslim nation, that puts us at a disadvantage.

Related: 25 Years After 9/11, Hung Cao and Bibi Netanyahu Promise United Anti-Terror Front

There is also the fact that Islam is not a religion that prioritizes originality and prosperity. It cannot build up, it can only steal or tear down. “Excellence also suffers. Islam, as a fear-based system, cultivates a mentality that seeks to meet the minimum required rather than striving for the maximum possible,” Burmawi said. “That mindset ultimately weakens innovation, ambition, and excellence within society.”

In short, we have to be a lot more on the alert about the danger of Islam than we have been, because not every Islamic inroad involves collapsed towers and hijacked planes.

https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2026/09/12/ex-muslim-warns-islams-threat-is-much-more-than-terrorism-n4957152?utm_source=twdailyamvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Victor Davis Hanson: Canadians Feel Real Pain in Stage Four of Trade War

Victor Davis Hanson: Canadians Feel Real Pain in Stage Four of Trade War


Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for the Daily Signal. 

I’d like to offer an update on the Canadian-American trade spat. 

Earlier, I had staged it. I said stage one was surprise on both sides of the border that two neighbors who spoke the same language, had the same civilizational origins in Britain, were close neighbors, and had the largest undefended border in the world were at a point of very angry disagreement. 

The second stage was that Prime Minister Mark Carney started to suggest that the United States was solely culpable, was a bully, and had forced him to cancel the agreement at the 11th hour late on a Friday afternoon without warning. 

And he said that the United States tried to impugn or intercede or limit, prune back, whatever term you use, Canadian sovereignty, both by telling Canada that it couldn’t import cheap Chinese EV vehicles or that it could not import cheap steel and aluminum from China that were really, to be fair, dumped below the cost of production as a way of getting around American tariffs via being used for assembling autos or vehicles in Canada and then shipped into the United States at a cheap price. 

And he accused us of trying to squelch Canadian and indigenous Canadian expression. In other words, our digital media companies were so successful in bringing the news and social media accounts to Canada that people who wanted to get the indigenous voice out and the French voice out couldn’t, and therefore he was going to unilaterally tax us 5% on top of corporate income tax, which nobody else does. 

We don’t tell Canadian broadcasters or Canadian newspapers we’re gonna tax you so you include the particular culture of the San Joaquin Valley of California. We feel that you don’t know anything about it, and so you’re gonna have to pay a tax to operate in our country. It’s absurd. 

So then the second stage was this war on the United States. The third was a recalibration. People said Carney hasn’t really digested the actual details of why he walked out. He’s been mysterious. He’s been murky. He won’t tell us exactly. 

And why would he side with a totalitarian communist government with Maoist roots that has a million Uyghurs in camps, destroys international trading protocols with dumping products below the cost of production, maintains asymmetrical mercantile trade surpluses, manipulates money and currency, and copyright and patent violations?  

Why would he want to side with them over the largest, the longest democracy in the world, its neighbor, its English-speaking neighbor? It doesn’t make any sense. Why would he do that? 

And I also suggested in stage three that one of the reasons he was doing that is Canada has not utilized its treasure house of natural resources. I’m talking about precious metals, potash, timber, oil, gas, you name it.  

It’s a socialist, ossified, calcified European-style economy plagued with 45% of the population was not born in Canada or their parents were not born in Canada, and they have enormous social welfare needs that the ossified European socialist economy cannot meet. 

And so, because it is failing, it has to have trade surpluses with the United States, and it has to have the United States protect it, and it resents the United States, thinking that we caused its problems. We didn’t cause its problems. 

Alberta can’t make a pipeline to British Columbia because of us. It can make a pipeline into Washington. It can make a pipeline into the United States in the Midwest to sell its oil, but it can’t do it between provinces. 

So if you want fossil fuel products into Quebec or Ontario from Alberta, then they’re gonna come through the United States’ pipeline system. We didn’t do that. 

We had nothing to do with their insane immigration policies. We had nothing to do with their net-zero, insane Green New Deal solar and wind policies. We experienced all that, but we stopped it, and we told them to stop it. 

So that was stage three, a second look at Carney’s narratives. 

Stage four is more serious for Canada. The jobs report came out. They’ve lost 41,000 jobs just in one week of the tariff war. We created 160,000 in August. It’s gonna get worse for Canada. 

We have, as I said, nine times the population, 13 times the nominal GDP, and Canada is entirely reliant. Seventy-five percent of it is reliant. I don’t say that out of triumphalism or boasting, but in sadness for Canada. I don’t know what they’re doing. 

Mr. Carney, who had three passports before he was prime minister, a Canadian, a British, and an Irish. He was the epitome of a globalist, and he wasn’t a nationalist. So his immigration, his energy, his defense policy, and his trade policy were all globalist. They were all European-style, and they didn’t realize or properly exploit the natural gifts of Canada. 

So now we’re in stage four, and the Americans are starting to notice something. The Canadians are booing us at sports events between Canadian and American teams. They keep bragging about elbows up, i.e., we’re gonna be like hockey players and defend ourselves from aggressors like you, violent aggressors.  

And they are waging anti-American propaganda. Carney is. He’s whipped this up because he did not want, as I said in stage three, he didn’t want an autonomous Alberta and an autonomous Quebec, and those referenda are coming up. 

More importantly, he’s now interfering in U.S. internal midterm politics. He’s got left-wing governors and senators deliberately taking the Canadian side, trashing their own president, with Gavin Newsom cutting videos in support of Canada, not us, and then targeting these tariffs at red and purple states along the border to get Trump supporters financially endangered, and therefore they won’t vote for Republican congressional candidates. 

And now we have the reaction. He doesn’t know what he’s doing. He does not know what he’s doing. He’s living in a fantasy house.  

So far, the Americans have not noticed this. It’s just water off a duck’s back. But when you show on media day after day people booing us, and you hear him talk about war and battle, and you think that the whole world’s against us, they’re not. He’s all alone. 

He and the Chinese are the only two countries that issued counter tariffs. People in Europe love what he’s doing, but not one of them would follow his example. He’s got his neck out, and the fate of 41 million Canadians depends on him being successful, and he’s gonna fail because the United States is saying, “This is a new world. We’re not gonna subsidize everybody’s defense and run up $200 billion deficits with one neighbor, Mexico, and $50 billion to $60 billion with our northern neighbor and call it a free trade zone.” 

It’s not. It’s a mercantile effort, and we are at our wit’s end, and it’s gonna be a new world. We’re not the wealthy powerhouse we always were. We have $31 trillion, maybe $40 trillion, depending on how you calculate it, in debt, and it’s a new world. 

We want symmetry, and we want gratitude, and this man wants to wage an economic war and gin up world opinion against the United States in alliance with the most pernicious, deadly government in history, as a direct descendant of Mao Zedong, who killed 70 million people, and he’s championing Chinese interests by trying to get around our leverage. 

What he doesn’t understand, to conclude, is this: Canada has key interests in the Arctic. Given warming temperatures, the Northwest Passage may be used to navigate from east to west and west to east. We’re in a dangerous world where an increasing number of countries like North Korea have intercontinental ballistic missiles that have nuclear tips on the missiles. 

What am I getting at? Canada has 79 jets, and they’re 45 years old. Seventy-nine. Seventy-nine. I think California’s National Guard has almost as many. It has about 30 large, considerable ships rather than speedboats, but 30, 35 maybe. It has no military. It hasn’t kept its promises. It has welched. 

It depends on the United States to protect it from incoming aircraft or missiles, to protect it when Russian or Chinese ships decide that they’re going to claim areas of the Arctic that Canada thinks it has possession of or when they want to transit the Northwest Passage.  

In other words, we are subsidizing their defense like we just subsidized Europe’s defense. 

We are subsidizing their economy by allowing them to run up a $50 billion annual surplus. There are one million Canadians in the United States. There’s only a quarter of a million Americans in Canada. You’d think there’d be more since we’re so big, 360 million versus just 40 million. But a little tiny country of 40 million has a million in the United States. 

And you know what the final irony is? Two of Mr. Carney’s four children, his daughters, went to Harvard and Yale and live in the United States, and 95% of his globalist investments are in America. 

So when he tells Canadian small businesses to tough it up, we’re going to war economically against the United States, and your little businesses might have to go broke, but my investments are American because I’m betting on America over Canada because I would not dare put my capital into Canadian financial investments. He’s not. And my children prefer to live where? Not in socialist Canada with socialist medicine, with 45% of the population being immigrants or first- or second-generation Canadians, with a bankrupt economy. They want to live in the United States. 

And so the whole thing is absurd. And I would just caution Mr. Carney: The one thing you do not want to do is so gin up this war that you get on the wrong side of the American people. But all that invective, all that cheap booing, all that grandstanding, all of your flirtation with this communist, lethal government are not going down well. 

And for the first time, people are starting to notice. And your entire economy is in peril because when these reciprocal tariffs start to go back, they were aimed at lowering your $50 billion surplus, our deficit, to a manageable level. But now it’s going to go beyond that. 

And your economy cannot withstand it, not what you’ve done to it, not what you and Mr. Justin Trudeau did to it. You took a vibrant economy and a vibrant defense sector, and you turned them into a calcified, aging European economy and culture, and you’re not up to it. 

And don’t get on the wrong side of the American people with your cheap rhetoric. It won’t end well.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2026/09/11/hanson-canadians-pain-trade-war/

Tuesday, September 15, 2026

Tucker Carlson’s Anti-Neocon Obsession Just Led Him to Endorse and Excuse El-Sayed’s 9/11 Rhetoric

Tucker Carlson’s Anti-Neocon Obsession Just Led Him to Endorse and Excuse El-Sayed’s 9/11 Rhetoric

Tucker Carlson’s Anti-Neocon Obsession Just Led Him to Endorse and Excuse El-Sayed’s 9/11 Rhetoric
AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

While today’s headlines will rightly focus on Democrats across the country, from New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani to progressive streamer Hasan Piker, who have spent the time leading up to the 25th anniversary of 9/11 disrespecting the country and sanitizing anti-American rhetoric, the most shameful betrayal comes from someone who once sat at the very center of the conservative movement.

Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson used his Friday newsletter to provide cover for Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, defending the Democrat amid scrutiny over his past 9/11 remarks while demanding that Michiganders keep Republican Mike Rogers away from Washington. That is about as close to an official endorsement as Carlson is likely to give, even after his comments just last week.

However, it is alarming, and revealing. Just as progressivism, and Trump-Derangement Syndrom can become an all-consuming disease, so can a blind, raging hatred of neoconservatism.

"Everyone agrees that the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, was the worst crime ever committed on U.S. soil. Thousands of innocents died, skyscrapers crashed to the ground, and untold numbers of first responders continue to endure the long-term health consequences of inhaling toxic air at Ground Zero. But that is not the whole story," Carlson wrote.

Carlson goes on to blast George W. Bush for invading Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 terror attacks. That claim is true. But then Carlson climbs onto his moral high horse, arguing that Bush got “hundreds of thousands of innocents killed, had tens of thousands of American military casualties, and catalyzed the creation of ISIS.” When El-Sayed is accused of disrespecting 9/11, Carlson insists that, in reality, he merely “understands the basic concept that murdering hundreds of thousands of people is bad.” 

Carlson then turns his attention to Republican Mike Rogers, who correctly pointed out that El-Sayed’s position is disqualifying: “It is disqualifying for a U.S. Senate Candidate to believe that Americans should ‘center’ their grief from 9/11” on those killed in the wars that followed, rather than first on the nearly 3,000 Americans murdered by al-Qaeda that day. Rogers called El-Sayed’s attitude toward “the worst tragedy in American history” disgusting and said it made him unfit for public office.

"Disgusting?" Carlson asks. "Understanding that the Bush administration was wrong to kill hundreds of thousands of people and waste trillions of dollars in Iraq, even though, again, Iraq did not do 9/11, is disgusting?"

"Slaughtering thousands of innocent people is atrocious no matter who is responsible. If Rogers is deranged enough to think that Jihadis are evil for murdering enough Americans to fill a Division III hockey arena, but that the Pentagon deserves two thumbs up for killing enough to pack Ohio State’s football stadium multiple times, then he cannot possibly have the judgment necessary to adequately serve the needs of American voters," he wrote, before adding:

"We hope the good people of Michigan keep this man far away from Washington."

This is the disease of anti-neoconservatism. Yes, the Iraq invasion was a mistake, innocent people died unnecessarily, and America made serious errors in the wars that followed. But acknowledging that does not require placing the Americans murdered on 9/11 on equal moral footing with every death that followed. 

The argument assumes America alone is responsible for every consequence of those wars, as if the Taliban, al-Qaeda, Iran, Iraq, and countless other actors had no agency. And it is the same logic used to explain away 9/11 by anti-neocon types, especially libertarians. Bin Laden opposed U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, sure, but those forces were there at the invitation of the Saudi government after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. An individual's anger about a foreign-policy decision of their own country, does not grant anyone the right to murder 2,977 innocent Americans. Although Tucker might disagree.

Even worse, this disease puts Americans in greater danger. It's adherents advocate a kind of isolationism that assumes America can freeze its global position in place simply by refusing to engage, as if our adversaries will politely pause their ambitions because Washington has. China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea do not see a retreating America as peaceful. They see an exposed underbelly. 

These Carlson-types insist America is uniquely responsible for the world’s evils, and would wait to confront threats until it is already too late, refuse to defend allies, and confuse abandoning commitments with avoiding war. At their core, they proclaim peace while rationalizing weakness.

And that is what Carlson’s newsletter ultimately boils down to, the rationalization of weakness: A weak mind; a weak will; a weak conception of history; a weak hope for the future, and a weak faith in the greatest country on Earth. 

Carlson’s disease is not unique, which is exactly why conservatives must recognize it wherever it infects our politics. On 9/11, my sympathy, even as someone who was not alive to witness it, is with the 2,977 innocent Americans murdered by al-Qaeda. Their deaths are not moral props for an argument about Iraq, nor are they an opportunity to lecture America about the sins of its foreign policy. They were murdered by fanatics. America did not deserve it. And no amount of revisionism, moral equivalence, or anti-American grievance will ever make me feel sympathy for anyone but the Americans who died that day.

https://townhall.com/news/dmitri-bolt/2026/09/11/tucker-carlson-defends-abdul-el-sayeds-911-comments-endorses-him-for-congress-n2682846?utm_source=thdailyvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&utm_content=ncl-VF4RFmE32E&utm_term=&_nlid=VF4RFmE32E&_nhids=ncgMnckDTDQnls