polecat news and views

Wednesday, April 29, 2026

This Is What Democracy Looks Like and Why Our Founding Fathers Didn’t Create One

This Is What Democracy Looks Like and Why Our Founding Fathers Didn’t Create One

Virginia voted, and the Democrats treated the Republicans and Independents in the state like Bill Clinton treated so many women over the years – forcing their will on everyone else. If southern and rural Virginians didn’t want to be overpowered into submission, they shouldn’t have worn such a short skirt.

In an election decided by three points after last year’s Governor’s race was won by the Democrat by more than 15 points, Democrats switched the state’s Congressional district map from six Democrats and five Republicans to 10 Democrats. Hitler would be proud.

This is why we are a Constitutionally Limited Republic and not a democracy. Despite what everyone with a nose ring and purple hair would say, our Founding Fathers were brilliant men. They didn’t do this by accident or even luck; they weighed all the options and chose the best.

Democrats in Virginia, and across the country, have been trying to undo their brilliance since they emerged from the womb. Virginia just did some.

Before then, New York did it. The Empire State was the first shot in the redistricting wars, despite what the liberal media and Democrats (but I repeat myself) would have you believe.

A guy named Matt Forney laid out the case on Twitter, writing, “The first mid-decade redistricting of the 2020s was when New York passed a gerrymandered map in 2024. This was after they had tried to cram all the state's Republicans into four out of 26 districts only to get sued for violating the state constitution and a special master was appointed to draw fair maps. In the 2022 midterms, the extreme unpopularity of both Joe Biden and Kathy Hochul saw the Republicans gain four of New York's seats (the net change was only +3 due to New York losing a Republican district in the Buffalo suburbs). This was the best result the GOP had in the state in decades. A year later, the Democratic state government sued to replace the fair map with a slightly-less gerrymandered map and the Republicans lost three seats in 2024 despite getting roughly the same percentage of the vote.”

You can, as they say, look it up for yourself.

It wasn’t Texas; it was Democrats. It’s always Democrats.

Our government was set up so there was a place for both the people and the states in the legislative process. The House was elected by the people, and the Senate was selected by the state governments. The 17th Amendment to the Constitution – the direct election of Senators by voters in the states – fundamentally transformed our government for the worse.

Thanks to that, there were now both sides of the Legislative Branch pandering to the public. The Senate used to protect the rights of the state against federal incursion; now it demands that incursion. The rights of states are irrelevant, as are the rights of individuals to leftists. Centralized power is all that matters, and “democracy” is the way to get that.

True democracy is majority rule, on anything. No sane person would accept their rights and liberties being subjected to the will and whims of 50 percent plus one of any group of people. Even Democrats, as crazy as they are, don’t do that. How many referendums have you seen win at the ballot box, only to be enjoined almost immediately in response to a liberal lawsuit filed the second they lost?

Democrats only support democracy when they win, which is to say they don’t support democracy at all. Their leadership is evil people, not stupid ones. (Their voters, on the other hand…)

Democracy is a horrible form of government that always leads to centralized power. That’s why Democrats use it; it’s a very effective weapon. But they don’t mean it, as evidenced by when it doesn’t go their way.

They won in Virginia, but just barely. The courts should toss the whole thing out over how it was done and a myriad of other legal issues. But even if they don’t, let this be a lesson to freedom-loving Americans across the country that the other half of the population is waiting to see an opening and pounce on them and their rights the second they get the chance.

While we’re still a republic, Republicans and Independents need to recognize the threat the left represents and work, act and vote accordingly.

https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2026/04/23/this-is-what-democracy-looks-like-and-why-our-founding-fathers-didnt-create-one-n2674916?utm_source=thdailyvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&utm_content=ncl-GBVZWhtw3Y&utm_term=&_nlid=GBVZWhtw3Y&_nhids=nc8vlsZgs1mvls

The 'No Kings' Movement Is Sheer Hypocrisy

The 'No Kings' Movement Is Sheer Hypocrisy

Mark Lewis

The 'No Kings' Movement Is Sheer Hypocrisy — *AP Photo/Jill Connelly*

I’m convinced that the majority of people who take part in the “No Kings” marches have absolutely no idea what they are doing. The Democratic masses are, sadly but inexcusably, nothing but ignorant, foolish sheep, being led to the slaughter by their “shepherds,” who are wolves in wool. The sheep are taught to hate Donald Trump, and so, like Pavlov’s dogs, when the bell rings, they slobber and shout “Nazi!” “No king!” etc. Many of them probably actually believe Donald Trump wants to be king. It will never happen, even if Trump wanted it. You and I wouldn’t allow it. That’s what we rebelled against, remember.

But while the Democratic masses are ignorant sheep, their “shepherds” know exactly what they are doing and what they want. And they do want a king, or a perfect facsimile thereof. Xi Jinping isn’t called the “king” of China, but he is a dictator—the same thing as an absolute monarch (which most monarchs in history were, until America came along and led the world away from that). And absolute monarchs, or “dictators,” run totalitarian governments, and that is certainly what the Democrats lust after. And they aren’t going to quit or give up until they get it.

And the “shepherds” must be laughing their heads off at the “useful idiots”—the masses in their movement—because the sheep really believe the rhetoric about their shepherds wanting “democracy.” Create a totalitarian government and call it “democracy.” That is exactly what China does. Go over there and ask the common people. Many of them (the “sheep” there) will tell you, “China is a democracy.” Well, the official title of the country is the “People’s Republic of China”—notice, it belongs to the “people.” That’s “democracy.” North Korea is even more cynical—the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.” I sometimes have to shake my head in wonder at the incredible…naivety of the Democratic Party “sheep.” Why can’t they see this? I mean, I’m far from a genius and I’ve learned it, so why can’t they?

The Democratic Party “sheep” honestly believe their Leftist “shepherds” in America want a “democracy,” when the Marxist Left, all around the world, has never produced a democracy, only totalitarian dictatorships that have murdered, oppressed, and impoverished people by the hundreds of millions. Why will the Left in America be any different? I mean, if I can see it, why can’t they?

The truth of the matter is, Leftist “shepherds” have actually said they want a totalitarian government. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA), a few months ago, publicly announced, directly contrary to America’s Declaration of Independence, that our rights do not come from God; they come from government. Folks, you cannot have a more perfect and purer definition of totalitarianism than to say our rights come from government. Such a system gives the government total power, because any rights the government gives us, it can take away. If all our rights come from the government, then they are the masters (“shepherds”) and we are the slaves (“sheep”) and we can only do what they allow us to do. The people don’t—a la the Declaration of Independence and Constitution—tell government what to do, government tells the people what to do! That is exactly the system the “People’s Republic of China” and the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” have, and it is exactly what Tim Kaine said, what the Democratic Party believes, and thus, what they want to give to the American people. And yet, their “sheep” believe Donald Trump wants to be “king.” Joseph Goebbels and the “Big Lie” definitely live in America today, and it’s in the socialist party as it was in Nazi Germany.

As noted, the Democratic Party “shepherds” know exactly what they are doing. Just for one example, they turn massive numbers of criminals and barbarians loose in the country for the sole purpose of creating chaos, destruction, and fear. They encourage licentiousness, irreligion, and promiscuity for the same reason, for people who cannot control themselves will need some outside force (government) to do it. Such chaos and fear will eventually cause the people to call for a strong hand (government) to create peace. The Left wants chaos because they want the “king,” the “police state,” the “Nazism” they claim Trump is trying to establish. They might even go along with Trump creating a “police state” as long as they can eventually control it. So, their call for “no king” is hypocritical to the nth degree. They crave an absolutist government that will give the people all their rights and cow them into submission.

Again, that is what the Chinese people suffer now. As long as you keep your head down and your mouth shut—in other words, do what the government tells you to do—then the CCP will…allow you to do whatever the CCP will allow you to do. Remember, I lived there for ten years. I know what I’m talking about.

So, the Left’s ploy in America is to create as many dumb, mindless sheep as possible and tell them every lie they can think of. Fill the streets with as many uncontrolled criminals, barbarians, and perverts as possible, maybe even have a civil war, until the decent people get weary and say “enough!” and give total power to the government. Or the Left takes it by force—which is what usually happens—and cowers the people into obedience. That’s the history in the USSR and China, and it could happen in America.

And the “sheep” refuse to see it. They will eventually be the first ones eaten.

https://townhall.com/columnists/marklewis/2026/04/26/the-no-kings-movement-is-sheer-hypocrisy-n2675051?utm_source=thdailypmvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

The United States of America v. John Roberts

The United States of America v. John Roberts

A.J. Christopher

The Supreme Court is under attack. It has been under attack for years, almost exclusively from the left. And by “under attack,” I don’t mean the peaceful criticism. I mean everything from challenges to its legitimacy to outright ignoring its rulings to death threats against conservative justices.

This began years ago. Chief Justice John Roberts initially responded by trying to stay apolitical and by trying to ignore the criticism. When President Barack Obama called him out during his 2010 State of the Union address, Roberts called the stunt “very troubling.” In the last two decades, that has been the entire extent of his pushback against the left.

In the last couple years, leftist district judges and leftist federal judges issue decrees and stays that directly contradict recent rulings from the Supreme Court itself. Last August, Justices Brett Kavanaugh Neil Gorsuch also publicly rebuked lower courts for having to reverse orders from lower courts regarding issues that the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) had already addressed. But not by Roberts.

Last September, a group of anonymous federal judges criticized recent emergency stays that SCOTUS granted. In interviews with NBC News, these judges said such rulings imply that the lower courts are doing shoddy work (yes, that’s the point). One judge quipped, “It’s inexcusable. They don’t have our backs.” Far be it from me to explain to this judge that the job of SCOTUS is not to “have their backs.” It’s John Roberts’ job to explain this to them. And yet, nary a peep.

District Judge Brian Murphy has twice openly flouted SCOTUS decisions. For his obstinacy, Justice Elena Kagan, of all people, publicly rebuked him. But still nothing from Roberts.

Then there is the internal drama.

It burst into the open with the Dobbs decision, which the liberal justices deliberately slow-rolled in an attempt to stave off the inevitable. The problem arises because no SCOTUS decision is binding until the justices’ opinions are finalized and publicized. If a justice happens to die in the interim, then that justice’s vote is nullified.

This rule applies even if a justice dies from assassination. Like, you know, what almost happened to Brett Kavanaugh in June 2022. An armed suspect showed up outside his home, and his presence was made known to the authorities only because the suspect got cold feet and called the police and turned himself in.

The would-be assassin was upset the upcoming (and, at that time, unreleased) Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade and helped decodify legalized infanticide. But how did he know about the upcoming Dobbs decision? Because one of the justices' staffers unprecedentedly leaked it to the press. This has never happened before on the Supreme Court. It happened on Roberts’ watch.

Who was the leaker? Who knows? Roberts refused to let the FBI investigate, and instead handed the investigation to federal marshals. There is speculation that Roberts did so to prevent the executive branch from encroaching on his turf. As a result, to this day we have no idea who the leaker was.

There is also the behavior of the three leftist judges, which is shockingly juvenile for persons occupying such prestigious positions. There is Justice Elena Kagan, who screamed “so loudly” at fellow liberal Justice Stephen Breyer that the “wall was shaking.” Why was she screaming? Because Breyer disapproved of Kagan’s tactic of slow-rolling the Dobbs decision because of the threats to the lives of his conservative friends on the bench. Breyer was that rare liberal that put the value of human life above his personal opinion, and he supported publishing the Dobbs dissent quickly to diffuse the threats. Kagan, on the other hand, was perfectly willing to risk the murder of her fellow justices in order to possibly skew the decision.

This is the Roberts’ court.

Then there is the “wise” Latina, who thinks that colorblind, impartial justice requires one to consider race and upbringing while trying to excuse why the law should be applied unequally upon the citizenry. Regarding a disagreement on a recent immigration ruling, Sotomayor told the Lawrence Journal-World that her colleague Brett Kavanaugh is “a man whose parents were professionals. And probably doesn’t really know any person who works by the hour.”

Continuing, she quipped that "There are some people who can’t understand our experiences, even when you tell them.” I’m confident that Sotomayor wouldn’t understand the “experiences” of Laken Riley, Rachel Morin, or Sheridan Gorman, even if they told her. But they can’t tell her. Because the very illegals for whom Sotomayor so passionately fights murdered them.

If this is the left’s definition of what it means to be “wise,” then I’m glad they consider me “deplorable.” Sotomayor issued a hand-in-the-cookie-jar apology, but the fact remains is that this sort of backstabbing culture is being allowed to fester within the hallowed walls of SCOTUS.

This is the Roberts’ court.

And finally, we have that morbid disaster of a flaming clown car, more commonly known as Ketanji Brown Jackson. In a recent speech at Yale, she called the judicial rulings of her conservative colleagues “utterly irrational.” This from the person who couldn’t give a definition of a woman. Back in August, she blasted her colleagues for “lawmaking” from the bench, impervious to the fact that this is exactly what the lower courts have been doing since Jan. 20, 2025.

This is the Roberts court.

So let’s recap. With increasing frequency, we have leaks from the world’s previously most leak-proof institution. We have SCOTUS justices using delaying tactics, even if those tactics put the lives of their colleagues in danger. We have mobs protesting outside the homes of justices. We have lower courts outright ignoring SCOTUS decisions. And we have SCOTUS justices publicly taking personal jabs at their fellow colleagues.

And how does Roberts respond? By criticizing calls from President Trump and other Republicans for the impeachment of district court judges who abuse their power. Roberts was responding specifically for Trump’s call for the impeachment of district judge James Boasberg. Roberts may disagree with grounds for impeaching Boasberg, but the means to impeach judges is clearly enshrined in the Constitution. Judges have no more special protection against impeachment than do presidents, even if those impeachment efforts are corrupt and frivolous (the two of which were attempted against Trump received absolutely zero criticism from Roberts).

Roberts still thinks he’s living in an Ivy League, Skull & Bones, secret meeting lodge where treason is punished on pain of death. In reality, he’s living in a glass house whose interns and clerks are Deep State insurrectionists who can’t wait to spill the latest juicy gossip to whatever likeminded fourth estate hack will listen.

If he chooses to live in denial, that’s his prerogative. But if he’s upset about the drastic loss of support for the American judiciary as a transcendent vessel of apolitical justice, he’s barking up the wrong tree. It isn’t Trump who sapped this support, it is the behavior of the courts themselves.

But for now, it appears that Roberts will continue to insist that the court system is flawless, respected, and dispassionate to the only person who believes him, the man in the mirror. He’ll continue to watch his beloved institution crumble, because he refuses to realistically delineate friend from foe. He’ll continue lashing out at those who truly care about the preservation of the Western legal system, and he’ll continue to run cover for those hellbent on destroying it. He’s making for one awful chief justice.

On the other hand, he’d make a great pope.

https://pjmedia.com/aj-christopher/2026/04/25/the-united-states-of-america-v-john-roberts-n4952167?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

GOP Defections Spark Lawmaker's Push to End Temporary Protected Status

GOP Defections Spark Lawmaker's Push to End Temporary Protected Status

By Becky Noble

*Jason Andrew/The New York Times via AP, Pool*

After years of the immigration system being abused in a variety of ways, Americans have had enough and want it to end. But Democrats are fighting for those illegals to stay in the country in every way they can. Now, one House Republican wants to do away with a program that has become one of those abuses, and he was inspired by his GOP colleagues. Only not the way you might think.

According to The Daily Caller, Republican Rep. Andrew Clyde (GA-09) has introduced the Territorial Protection and Sovereignty (TPS) Act. It would eliminate temporary protected status (TPS) by repealing the entire program and terminating all existing designations. The bill would require current TPS holders to leave the country within 60 days of enactment. If they remain in the country after the 60-day window, they would no longer be considered in the country lawfully and would be subject to deportation.

In a statement to The Daily Caller, Clyde wrote:

“Unfortunately, there has never been anything temporary about Temporary Protected Status. TPS has been weaponized and abused for decades, turning a so-called ‘temporary’ protection into permanent amnesty. It’s time for Congress to close this amnesty loophole once and for all by fully repealing TPS and sending all TPS holders out of the country."

Clyde was inspired to introduce the bill, not by any Democrat shenanigans, but by members of his own party. Recently, 10 Republicans, including Rep. Maria Salazar (FL-27) and Rep. Mike Lawler (NY-17), sided with Democrats on a resolution introduced by Democrat Rep. Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) to extend TPS protection for Haitian immigrants.

Haitians were first granted TPS in January of 2010 after a devastating 7.0-magnitude earthquake hit the island nation. The "temporary" status was then extended several times in 2013, 2014, 2016, and 2017, which continued through 2018. The program was terminated in 2019. Under the Biden administration, the program was restarted again in May and August of 2021, citing "security concerns," political unrest that included the assassination of Haiti's president, another earthquake, and COVID. Eligibility requirements also expanded as almost 54,000 Haitians crossed the U.S. southern border in fiscal year (FY) 2022, and more than 76,000 in FY 2023.

TPS for Haitian immigrants was reinstated and extended through the beginning of August 2024, and then again through February 2026.

Rep. Clyde argues that TPS is billed as compassionate and economically necessary when it really is nothing more than putting American citizens last when U.S. immigration policy should be an America First policy.

ALSO READ: Vichy Republicans Vote With Democrats to Keep 330,000 Temporary Haitians Here Permanently

The push to extend Haitian TPS came a week after Republicans, some of whom backed the Haitian TPS extension, attempted to revive the DIGNIDAD (Dignity Act), which is nothing more than thinly veiled mass amnesty.

The current status of TPS for Haitians is in no way surprising. In late 2025, the Trump administration tried to end it, which would have affected roughly 350,000 people. But a federal judge in Washington, D.C., blocked it in February of 2026, and an appeals court upheld that decision, meaning Haitians are free to keep living and working in the U.S. until the Supreme Court issues a ruling (following oral argument on the matter next week). Does that mean it is now a race to see who will act first, Congress or the Supreme Court? That is not something that instills confidence that TPS will go away for anyone.

Tuesday, April 28, 2026

The Politics of Political Violence: How the GOP Should Respond to the ‘Both Sides Are Guilty’ Nonsense

The Politics of Political Violence: How the GOP Should Respond to the ‘Both Sides Are Guilty’ Nonsense

Scott Pinsker

If you’re an absent-minded married shlub, you’ve probably played the “golly gee, both sides were wrong, let’s move on” card, too. It goes like this:

Wife: Scott, why haven’t you taken out the garbage yet? I asked you two days ago. It’s starting to stink.
Me: But that was in the past! We need to look to the future. Let’s not dwell on the blame-game, honey — we’re better than that.
Wife: What are you talking about? Just take the garbage out, please.
Me: Look, we both contributed to the garbage. You threw away plenty of stuff, too. Probably more than me.
Wife: I can hear the garbage truck coming! Take it out to the street before it’s too late!
Me: Really, we’re both at fault: You asked me to do something — and somewhere along the way, there was a communication breakdown. So instead of pointing fingers, let’s be grownups and admit we were both wrong. Mistakes were made, but life goes on. That’s why pencils have erasers. Right?
Wife: [sighs] Never mind, I’ll do it.
Me: Thanks, honey. While you’re up, can you grab me a beer?

Yeah: It doesn’t work when you’re married any better than it’ll work for the Democrats.

On the heels of yet another assassination attempt, the American people are beginning to recognize the media’s Political Violence Blame-Game Template. After all, it’s really not that complicated:

When there’s no political violence: Blame Donald Trump and the GOP for inciting this awful, terrible epidemic of violence that doesn’t exist (yet).

When a Democrat is the victim: Blame Donald Trump and the GOP for “extremist language” and racist/fascist “dog whistles” that are an “existential threat to democracy.” Demand greater civility in political discourse — while threatening to jail Republicans who appear “threatening” to liberals. (The only long-term solution to political violence, of course, is to remove Republicans from power.)

When a Republican is the victim: Blame both sides. (“It’s everyone’s fault! How the heck did things spiral out of control?”)

Neither party has a monopoly on unstable nutjobs, but according to opinion polls, one side is a helluva lot more likely to support political violence than the other. Spoiler alert: It’s not the GOP.

For the Babylon Bee, the parody writes itself:

The assassination attempt at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner will likely dominate the headlines for the next several days. Unlike most Black Swan events, this one will have extra-long legs because:

All the D.C. journalists who witnessed it are highly incentivized to continue talking about the most exciting moment of their careers. Like I wrote yesterday, if reporters like Brian Williams can’t resist bragging about fake bullets, you better believe they’re gonna be talking nonstop about the real thing.
There’s a legitimate mystery to investigate: Who, what, when, and how was Cole Allen, the (alleged) “Friendly Federal Assassin” radicalized? On the surface, he seems like your normal, typical, nondescript leftist. As far as we know, this wasn’t a kid who was in and out of mental hospitals. So, was he radicalized by TikTok and Reddit? By the Epstein conspiracy? A hate-merchant like Hasan Piker? What pushed him over the edge?

Which means, the mainstream media will play the “both sides are equally guilty” card, but its attention will be diverted: Journalists can’t investigate Allen, beat their chests and brag about their (remarkable) bravery, AND be laser-focused on blaming both sides.

Not enough oxygen in the room. Too many competing storylines to juggle.

And therein lies the GOP’s opportunity.

Because the media’s attention will be divided, the GOP will have a free hand to publicize its own message to the masses — and counterprogram the mainstream media. But we’ll have to be picky: With all the competing storylines, only one or two “talking points” will break through.

This means that we can’t say EVERYTHING we think about Cole Allen and left-wing political violence. We must be selective: It’s all about bang-for-the-buck.

So how should the GOP counterprogram the Dems?

Conservatives tend to favor intellectual, evidence-based arguments over raw emotions. It’s why we rely so heavily on statistics. Already on social media, we’re seeing swaths of posts about polling data — such as the one embedded above — that make a compelling mathematical argument about left-wing America’s sick tolerance of political violence.

But alas, that’s not the most effective way to win hearts and minds: Emotional arguments are far more persuasive than intellectual arguments. That’s why brands use them!

Sorry, we’re not going to persuade Joe or Jill Six Pack with polling statistics. We need something more shocking — and much more visceral.

Something that makes voters see for themselves how the Democratic Party is utterly unable to forsake extremism.

And I’ve got an idea that’ll get the ball rolling: Challenge the Democrats to go one lousy week without calling for political violence, comparing Trump to Hitler, or “joking” about Republican wives becoming widows.

Make it a one-week challenge. Draw a line in the sand and see if they can do it.

Because — spoiler alert — they won’t be able to. Too many Dems believe the president is an evil, fascist, rapist pedophile. Too many believe he’s WORSE than Hitler. Too many read Allen’s manifesto about traitors and murderers — and nodded in total agreement.

Instead of telling the American people how extreme the Democrats are, it’s far more persuasive to trick the Dems into revealing it!

Last weekend, a left-wing lunatic tried to assassinate President Trump and most of his cabinet. If the Dems can’t even go the following week without comparing Trump to Hitler, excusing political violence, or snickering about Republican wives becoming widows, then something is seriously wrong.

It advances the current storyline: No longer is it just about when, what, and how Cole Allen was radicalized; now it’s about this radicalization being so all-encompassing that the Dems can’t even go a single week without doubling down on it.

Honestly? One week is probably overkill. I doubt they could last 48 hours.

When Republicans tell voters how extreme the Democrats are, it’s not perceived as credible. Everyone knows that Republicans and Democrats hate each other, so voters assume we’re lying.

But if we can trick the Dems into revealing it on their own, their ~~goose~~ donkey is cooked.

Challenge the “No Kings” party to go one week with “No Hitler,” no violence, and no snickering about GOP widows. And when they fail, make THAT the story.

It’s our smartest PR play.
https://pjmedia.com/scott-pinsker/2026/04/27/the-politics-of-political-violence-how-the-gop-should-respond-to-the-both-sides-are-guilty-nonsense-n4952245?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

This Isn’t Politics. It’s a Clinical Disorder

This Isn’t Politics. It’s a Clinical Disorder

Quote of the Day

The Democrat Party’s entire 2026 strategy is a single, malignant sentence:
“Promise revenge, and the base will crawl over broken glass to hand us the keys again.”
They’re not even hiding it anymore.
Impeachment?
Not for “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” as the Constitution demands, but as a routine English-style vote of no confidence…exactly what Jonathan Turley just torched on Fox.
They’ve pathologized the impeachment clause into a weaponized tantrum, turning the solemn constitutional mechanism designed to protect the Republic from tyrants into a partisan guillotine for anyone who dares win an election they lost.
This isn’t politics.
It’s a clinical disorder:
revenge addiction dressed up as “accountability,” rage dopamine substituted for governance, and the slow, deliberate poisoning of the very guardrails the Founders welded into place to prevent exactly this kind of unhinged circus.
They believe the American people are stupid enough, or broken enough, to reward the party that openly campaigns on retribution.
That the spectacle of endless investigations, show trials, and ritual humiliations will somehow translate into ballots.
They’re betting the farm that their voters’ limbic systems…flooded with righteous fury and the sweet, sweet promise of payback…will override every warning light flashing in the constitutional machinery.
And if it works?
Watch the fuck out.
Because once you normalize impeachment as electoral therapy, once you teach an entire generation that losing an election is justification for destroying norms, you don’t get the Republic back.
You get the death spiral.
You get tit-for-tat purges, politicized prosecutions as standard operating procedure, and a body politic so septic with mutual hatred that the next “no confidence” vote ends with blood on the floor instead of talking points on cable.
This isn’t hyperbole.
It’s the terminal pathology of a party that has mistaken vengeance for vision and power for purpose.
They’re not trying to save democracy.
They’re trying to own it.
And if the country is dumb enough to let them, the Constitution won’t be the only thing that dies screaming.
HGrey™️ @grey4626
Posted on X, April 20, 2026

I’ve become tired of the politically fighting. The Democrats are out of touch with reality and are stark raving, bat-shit, howling at the moon crazy. The Republicans have a better touch with reality but don’t seem to want to be the adults in the room and firmly tell the tantrum throwing toddlers to go to their rooms and stay there until they calm down. The recent news of DOJ charges Southern Poverty Law Center with fraud and the lawsuits against antigun states and cities are encouraging, but until I see large fines and people behind bars, I’m skeptical.

And if Democrats get political control of the country in the next election or two things are likely to get very spicy.

I’m glad my underground bunker in Idaho is ready for occupancy.

https://blog.joehuffman.org/2026/04/24/this-isnt-politics-its-a-clinical-disorder/