45,000 new recruits and 108 COVID-mandate discharges reversed, as merit replaces social justice agendas.

Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Daryl Caudle and Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy John Perryman just released some great news for the Navy. The U.S. Navy met its recruitment numbers three months ahead of its target date, even with higher goals than 2025. The Navy's 2026 recruitment numbers stand at 45,000 sailors, 5,000 more than 2025.

Navy leaders also announced the return of 108 sailors wrongly separated under President Biden over the COVID shot mandate.

Under the Trump administration, Americans are eager to serve their nation again.

Stand by for a message from Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle and Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy John Perryman. pic.twitter.com/kOOqZjiv0o

— Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (@USNavyCNO) July 30, 2026

How We Got Here

• Under the Biden administration, the military couldn't meet recruiting numbers even after they lowered goals.

• Biden decimated the military with Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion agendas that demoralized troops, pitting them against one another. The Biden administration embedded racial goals in recruitment practices. Plus, over 8,000 service members were involuntarily separated from the military for COVID vaccine refusal.

• President Trump got to work to undo Biden's disastrous policies. He directed reinstatement of service members wrongly discharged and directed merit as the standard for recruitment rather than immutable characteristics.

Why It Matters

• America relies on a strong military to defend against its enemies. For decades, countries like Iran have chanted "Death to America." Our nation must take those threats seriously.

• If the world views America as weak, it creates global destabilization. While the U.S. shouldn't be the world's police force, deterrence is achieved by speaking softly and carrying a big stick.

• Biden weakened the nation's defense forces, but Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has turned them back into strong warriors, not social justice activists.

The Bottom Line

The Navy's recruiting surge and the reinstatement of wrongly separated sailors mark a clear turnaround from the demoralization and dysfunction of the Biden years. By prioritizing merit over politics, the Trump administration is rebuilding a Navy that Americans are proud to join and that adversaries have reason to respect. A strong, focused military isn't optional in a dangerous world—it's the surest path to peace through strength.

Victoria Manning is a Senior Investigative Researcher for Restoration News specializing in education freedom, immigration, and military issues. She is the author of Behind the Wall of Government Schools. Victoria served 8 years as an elected school board member and has a master’s degree in law. She also brings the perspective of a military spouse to her reporting.

Republished with permission from Restoration News.

They stubbornly support the man who ushered in some of the most egregious violation of civil rights in American history. They refuse to engage in self-reflection and admit that the measures governors imposed on their citizens were wrong, dangerous and the result of Fauci’s daily dissembling.

Here’s Dick Durbin, boo-hooing for the megalomaniac doctor.

It is a sad day indeed when leaders use their authority in ways that cause harm, feed ego, or damage individuals who have spent their lives in service to others.

Dr. Fauci deserves better.

— Senator Dick Durbin (@SenatorDurbin) August 6, 2026

Durbin couldn’t be more wrong.

WE deserved better. American children deserved better.

Not only does Fauci deserve everything that Congress can throw at him, but he ought to be in prison for crimes against humanity.

He’ll never see the inside of a cell, so what needs to happen to this pathetic 85-year-old narcissist is that he is bombarded with subpeona after subpeana that dog him right to the gates of Hell.

He should spend his last days in his attorney’s offices, buried in civil lawsuits. And he should spend every cent of his ill-gotten gains on legal fees. He should watch as the money he won from prizes that federal workers pursued at his behest while the pandemic raged evaporates.

Fauci should die broke and disgraced.

And America must make sure that unrepentant Democrats never again gain control of the federal government. They learned nothing from the lessons of covid. They would do it all over again, exalting a man like Fauci who worked tirelessly to frighten the populace into obedience to government.

Covid was a warning. Woe to America if we don’t heed its lessons.

Photo taken yesterday of voters casting ballots in Dearborn, Michigan: pic.twitter.com/52N6LOrFIE

— TheBlaze (@theblaze) August 5, 2026

This photo was reportedly taken at a Dearborn, Michigan polling place on Tuesday.

No American voter should be allowed to cast a ballot with her (assuming these are women) face hidden.

Of course, Michigan doesn’t require ID to vote, so there’s no way to be certain these are even American citizens in these medieval shrouds.

The SAVE America Act, which would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and a photo ID to cast a ballot, would put an end to facial coverings at polling places.

Show your face or stay home.

Lesbians, non-binaries and straight morons tore their basketball jerseys, gnashed their teeth and denounced the player who simply doesn't want to share a locker room with “girls’ with penises or lose her teeth when a man - wearing a weave and fake eyelashes - elbows her in the mouth.

Sophie’s a bigot, they wailed. She hates trans people.

Sheesh.

Cunningham’s own coach, Stephanie White, when asked about the controversy, said she wasn’t “educated” enough to offer an opinion but that she didn’t believe “exclusion” was the answer.

What a coward.

And teammate Caitlin Clark left her out to dry too, playing coy when asked about Cunningham’s “controversial” take on women’s sports.

An opposing coach, Minnesota Lynx coach Cheryl Reeves, taunted Cunningham by showing up for a game against the Fever sporting a T-shirt that read “ “Trans Kids Belong”

Not in women’s sports, Cheryl. And there’s no such thing as a “trans kid.” Leave the children alone.

It ought to be an absolute scandal that women who coach women’s sports would even entertain the notion that men pretending to be women should be on their teams.

Sophie Cunningham is a brave woman. It’s one thing to denounce men invading women’s sports after an athlete is out of the game as Martina Navratilova and Riley Gaines have done. But Cunningham is an active player and so far not a single woman in the ironically named WOMEN’S National Basketball Association has come to her defense.

To her credit, tennis phenom Aryna Sabalenka made a similar statement, without all the blowback.

Number 1-ranked female tennis player in the world, Aryna Sabalenka, finishes press conference by saying men shouldn't be in women's sports.

"It's obvious that biologically the men are way stronger than women."

Crazy that the ‘trust the science’ crowd finds this controversial. pic.twitter.com/7PsGREMLut

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) August 4, 2026

So far, there are no men in the WNBA. It’s coming. Some mediocre college player who doesn’t have a shot at the NBA will Soon realize that if he says he’s female and slaps on some lipstick he can become the high scorer on a women’s team.

Someone like Julie Tetart in France. Tetart is a man who announced he was trans in 2021. He joined a women’s league and is dominating the sport. Take a look at this “woman.” Is it any wonder?

Julie Tetart (biological male, transitioned in his 30s after years in men’s basketball) is currently dominating France’s women’s second division.

20+ points and 20+ rebounds on the regular. Best scorer. Best rebounder. Multiple MVPs. Physically overpowering the female athletes… pic.twitter.com/a7YQm0GBP6

— The Pale Truth (@ThePaleTruth) August 4, 2026

This is what will happen to the WNBA in five years if Sophie Cunningham can’t infuse the league with common sense.

Here’s something even more controversial than Cunningham’s statement: Men can’t become women. And women can’t become men. Oh they can lop off body parts and chug hormones, but a man is a man and a woman is a woman.

No, “trans women” are not women.

These men need to stay OUT of women’s sports.

The city council candidate accused police of bias against black-oriented events—despite a violent history at "College Beach Weekend."

Former Virginia Beach City Councilman Chris Taylor is attempting a political comeback. Emails obtained by Restoration News show he repeatedly made unsubstantiated claims that the city's police department engaged in racial profiling.

The emails, sent while Taylor sat on the council in 2024, claimed a large police presence at the Virginia Beach oceanfront made locals and visitors feel unwelcome. Taylor said, "as the only African American male on city council, I'm starting to believe we have a [sic] issue and clearly some bias when it comes to concerts/events that cater to a certain demographic."

He was referring to the weekend of April 26-28, 2024. At the time, organizers had planned concerts "geared toward college students" that featured "hip-hop and R&B music."

Taylor then demanded the police chief provide data regarding police presence for the R&B event compared to other events.

In Taylor's email confrontation he claimed, "College Beach weekend is a farce. No one is coming to VB two weeks before classes get out. That was 1989! Prove me wrong." His 1989 reference related to massive riots that vandalized and looted over 100 businesses at the oceanfront that required assistance from the National Guard.

City manager Patrick Duhaney, a black man, responded with the reasons for the large police presence during the weekend event locals refer to as "college beach weekend (CBW)." He highlighted chaotic events over multiple years during this type of event.

In 2013 there were "two shootings, two stabbings, and two robberies simultaneously in the oceanfront" during CBW, said Duhaney.

The 2018 event saw three shootings and 139 arrests; in 2021 a mass shooting broke out involving eight victims, a separate homicide, and a fatal officer involved shooting.

Taylor's emails call to question his current party affiliation. In the 2022 election, Taylor served as a member of the Republican Party of Virginia Beach and appeared on their Republican sample ballot. While later running for mayor in 2024, the Republican sample ballot did not list Taylor. Restoration News confirmed with the Republican Party of Virginia Beach that he is no longer a member of their committee. The Commonwealth of Virginia does not record the party affiliation of voters in its registration rolls.

Taylor received $10,130 in campaign donations from the Virginian Republican Party in 2022. As he once again eyes a seat on the city council, voters should know he now aligns himself with Democrats. One of his largest contributors in this election, Gary McCollum, previously ran as a Democratic candidate for state senate.

Taylor's anti-police rhetoric certainly does not match the values of the Republican-majority District 8 Taylor seeks to represent.

In 2026, Chris Taylor seeks to regain the same position he abandoned after only serving two of his four-year term. Then he leveled charges of racial bias against the police department without evidence to back them up. The city manager directly contradicted those charges.

Now Taylor wants the voters of District 8 to return him to the council in a very red Virginia Beach district with a cloud over his head, and anti-police rhetoric in his wake.

Bronson Winslow is an Investigative Researcher for Restoration News specializing in gun rights and criminal justice policy. He graduated from Virginia Military Institute and previously wrote for the Daily Caller. He publishes regularly at American Greatness. 

Republished with permission from Restoration News.

If lefties can’t keep non-citizens on the rolls, they want to pad the voter rolls with felons.

There is absolutely no incentive for these newly released criminals to vote for measures that will make the commonwealth a safer place to live. Just the opposite, in fact.

For years, Virginia restored the rights of felons - and please don’t call them “former” felons, there’s no such thing - on a case by case basis. For years, they had to actually ASK the governor for the restoration of their rights.

Lefties found this onerous. They pointed to blue states that not only allow freshly released convicts to head straight to the polls, but also allow inmates to vote.

In D.C., Vermont and Maine, a criminal never loses his or her voting rights. Rape an infant? Here’s your ballot! Shoot up a school? Thank goodness for mail-in voting. Torture the elderly in a nursing home? Democrats want your vote, too!

Virginia's current law permanently disenfranchises individuals convicted of a felony, leaving civil rights restoration - voting, serving on a jury, holding public office and becoming a notary public - entirely to the governor’s sole discretion.

Clearly, Spanberger has never met a criminal she doesn’t like.

Why not at least disqualify a felon from voting while on parole? Once that’s complete, let them vote.

Nah, too restrictive for Dems.

There is a referendum on this November’s ballot that would automatically restore civil rights to all criminals, no matter the depravity of their crime or their lack of remorse upon release from prison.

Vote no.

by James A. Bacon

The Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (VMFA) is displaying an extraordinary exhibition of 200 paintings, manuscripts, textiles, furniture, and works of artisanship from the Mughal dynasty, which ruled the northern Indian subcontinent from 1526 to 1857. It is an impressive collection, and it sheds light on a remarkable civilization of which most Americans know little to nothing.

The VMFA is gushing in its description of the artistic achievements of three of the most celebrated Mughal emperors: Akbar, Jahangir, and Shah Jahan.

From the tiniest jeweled objects to the monumental wonder of the Taj Mahal, this highly sophisticated and globally connected empire produced treasures of unparalleled splendor and magnificence.  

The extraordinary creative output of the imperial ateliers conveyed the Mughals’ great wealth and power. In addition to glorifying the emperors, these diverse artistic productions also signaled worldliness. Descendants of a Central Asian prince, these cosmopolitan emperors presided over a multicultural court that fused Indian and Iranian cultures and regarded the empire’s array of languages and religions with great interest. 

Splendor. Magnificence. Sophistication. Worldliness. Cosmopolitan. Diverse. Multicultural. These are the words the VMFA uses to describe the dynasty.

To anchor the Mughal timeline in a historical context with which most visitors are familiar, placards in the exhibit take note of events taking place in Europe and the Americas. Thus, we are informed that in 1607, the Virginia Company established Jamestown, and two years later an Englishman arrived in the court of Emperor Jahangir to negotiate an agreement for the East India Company.

I found the comparative information to be useful. But then there was this: In 1619, the placard states:

The first enslaved Africans forcibly brought to Virginia arrive in Port Comfort. The brutal transatlantic slave system is fueled, in part, by Indian textiles. Along with other valuable goods, goods originating in the Mughal Empire are used to bankroll the violent capture and mass enslavement of African people.

Now, let us acknowledge that the first enslaved Africans were brought to Virginia in 1619, and that the transatlantic slave system was horribly brutal.

I’m not sure that Mughal cotton textiles could be said to have “bankrolled” the transatlantic slave trade. Rather they were used as trade goods, which European traders purchased from the Mughals (or intermediaries) and bartered with African kingdoms to acquire slaves. Whatever the case, the exhibit implicates Indian textiles in the slave trade, not the Mughals.

The point worth making is that the VMFA curators could not refrain themselves from dragging Virginia’s involvement in the transatlantic slave trade into the exhibition about the Mughal Empire — while studiously ignoring the Mughals’ own involvement in a different slave trade.

The historical reality is that Mughal magnificence was built upon warfare, plunder, enslavement, a caste system, and exploitation of the rural servile class every bit as brutal and cruel as any system of oppression concocted in Western Civilization. I don’t hold out the Mughals for special condemnation — exploitation of the weak by the strong was the near-universal condition of mankind. Rather, I condemn the VMFA curators for noting the cruelties of Western Civilization while giving uncritical praise to a non-Western civilization guilty of the very same abuses.

Islamic Mughals routinely enslaved the peoples of the territories they conquered. Emperor Akbar curtailed the practice of using slavery as an instrument of warfare, but the institution persisted. To feed demand in the Islamic kingdoms, Arab slavers raided populations across eastern Africa and marched their captives hundreds of miles overland to ports on the Mediterranean Sea and Indian Ocean. The death rate was just as appalling as in the transatlantic trade. Slaves were purchased by the Ottomans, the Mughals, and other Islamic potentates as concubines, domestic servants, eunuchs, and palace attendants.

The VMFA exhibit has nothing to say about this.

In the Western Hemisphere, the producers of agricultural products (sugar, rice, indigo, tobacco, cotton, coffee) imported a servile population from Africa to work the plantations. The Mughals didn’t need slaves. They had a vast servile population readily at hand. Peasants paid a large portion of their produce — typically one-third to one-half — to landlords, moneylenders, and the Mughal state. Most lived at a subsistence level. Some became bonded laborers due to unpaid debts. When exploitation became unbearable, they rebelled. The Mughals experienced — and suppressed — numerous agrarian uprisings.

The VMFA exhibit has nothing to say about this.

While the Mughals did indeed rule over a “diverse” and “multicultural” empire, a distinctive aspect of that diversity was the caste system. The Islamic Mughals reinforced traditional Hindu caste hierarchies, recruiting high-caste Brahmins and Rajputs as allies. Although the Mughals admitted some lower castes into administrative ranks and the military, allowing for a modicum of social mobility, the rural caste system affecting the vast majority of subjects became more rigid, and the marginalization of the so-called untouchables deepened.

The VMFA exhibit has nothing to say about this.

Like the VMFA, every art museum I’ve visited in recent years seems eager to draw connections between Western Civilization’s artistic achievements and colonization and/or the slave trade. The glory of the Mughals, by contrast, is depicted as being created by a wave of the scepter, not the exploitation of the population.

I urge everyone to visit the exhibit. The craftsmanship created for the Mughal courts is every bit as worthy of admiration as the art of Venice, the Dutch republic, or the court of Louis XIV. Just beware the curators’ subtle yet tiresome ideological bias.

by Ken Reid

Don Beyer is a desperate man – so desperate to keep his House seat (VA-8th), the former two-term lieutenant governor, ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein under Obama, and Falls Church Volvo dealer has been taking votes and making moves to avoid becoming the next Democrat Party Old Bull to bite the dust in a primary to a more-Leftist challenger.

Beyer has denounced President Trump’s proposed “arch” on land in Arlington, has legislation (backed by Sen. Tim Kaine lately) to rename the Robert E. Lee Mansion at Arlington Cemetery “Arlington House,” and was among the 103 House Democrats to vote to cut off all military aid to Israel. The other Virginia rep who did that was Bobby Scott (D-3rd).

These Beyer legislative moves are designed to mollify the growing far Left base in his district, which includes the ultra-liberal communities of Arlington, Alexandria, Falls Church and inside the Beltway in Fairfax County.

Beyer lost to Jim Gilmore for Virginia governor in 1997 and left politics, but after serving an ambassadorship under Obama, he came back in 2014, winning retiring Rep. Jim Moran’s (D) U.S. House seat.

Beyer, who turned 76 in June, faces four opponents in the Aug. 4 Democratic Party primary but only two seem to have an outside chance of knocking him off and continuing the trend this year of Leftist Democratic Socialists unseating establishment Democrats in low-turnout primaries in Deep Blue cities.

One candidate is Michael Duffin, a former federal employee who was DOGE’d, and Mo Seifeldein, who served two years on the Alexandria City Council and worked as a federal government attorney before going into private practice.

According to the Virginia Public Access Project, both challengers have about the same amount of campaign cash -– roughly $28,000. Beyer, who serves on the House Ways & Means Committee and gets gobs of donations from special interests, had about $750,000 in his campaign war chest, according to VPAP.  Seifeldein’s web site states he is not accepting business PAC donations. 

I envision Seifeldein being the biggest threat to Beyer getting renominated for a seventh term. I am resident of the district and ran for state Senate in many of the 8th’s precincts in 2023, so I know the demographics well.

First, Seifeldein has a voter base in Alexandria because his name has already been on a ballot for city council. Second, he is a Sudanese Muslim and the 8th District has a big Muslim voter base. Current Lt. Governor Ghazala Hashmi, an Indian Muslim, milked that constituent group to edge out five Democratic primary challengers in June 2025. Seifeldein has been heavily courting the mosques.

Third, Seifeldein is the total opposite of Beyer. His family emigrated to the D.C. area when he was young and claims they all worked at McDonald’s. Beyer is from wealth and went to the elite Gonzaga Catholic high school in D.C. and Williams College. His car dealerships made him wealthy.

Seifeldein was endorsed by the New American Leaders Action Fund, which states on its Instagram site “actively seeks to appoint New Americans to local boards, commissions, and advisory roles to ensure the leadership in District 8 reflects the diversity of the community.” Beyer is endorsed by a bevy of establishment local and state Democrat politicians.

The Democratic Socialists of America have not endorsed anyone in this race.  Seidelfein, however, has adopted many DSA-supported positions, notably Medicare for All and opposition to military aid to Israel.

Beyer may think introducing legislation to erase Virginia Confederate history, cancel the “Arc d’Trump” or voting against aid to Israel will help him with the District’s far-Leftist base, but he’s dead wrong.

Looking like a worn-out old man at a recent debate before Arlington Democrats, Beyer Beyer was heckled. He touted the fact he is high enough in seniority to become chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee if Democrats regain control of the House in the November midterms.

Wide-eyed leftists who believe in identity politics care nothing about that. They get tear-jerky over electing “immigrant success stories” like Mo Seidelfein, or Bangladesh-born Saddam Salim (whom I challenged for state Senate) over establishment pragmatist Chap Petersen. Plus, many 8th district voters salivate over Virginia electing its first Muslim and third black congress member. In addition, both Duffin and Seidelfein are young and come across being more vigorous.  

The district is 72-28 Democrat so the Republican nominee, Tony Sabio (who ran for Fairfax County School Board in 2023, and lost), has very little chance of winning Nov. 4.

Two years ago, Beyer squashed a far-left challenger in the June 2024 primary, but turnout will be even lower in this year’s August 4 primary, and with four challengers, the vote could be splintered. If Seifeldein gets the mosques to get out the vote for him, he could pull off a major upset.

If the “Mighty Mo” beats the “Desperate Don,” you will be hearing about Seifeldein on the 24-hour networks for weeks, but readers of Bacon’s readers can say they learned about it HERE first!

Ken Reid, a resident of the Tysons/Falls Church area in Fairfax County, served 10 years in local elected office in Loudoun County and in recent months has been fighting antisemitism in the D.C. region as DC/MD/VA chapter leader for the group, EndJewHatred.com.

Republished with permission from Bacon’s Rebellion.

Here’s a question for the tightlipped Virginia Beach Police Department: Just how many perverts are wandering around the oceanfront, peeping in windows and fondling their man parts?

If the guy they arrested for public masturbation and peeping at 6:40 a.m. on 24th Street Sunday was the same man suspected of terrorizing the Cavalier Shores neighborhood for months, surely the cops would have mentioned that to the worried residents who packed a Cavalier Shores Civic League meeting on Tuesday night.

They didn’t. I was there.

Instead, the three uniformed members of the Second Precinct offered only a vague description of the suspect, said they were stepping up patrols in the neighborhood and refused to say how many complaints they’d received.

Odd. All of it.

According to the witness who reported a naked man masturbating outside an apartment building off 24th Street at 6:40 a.m. Sunday morning, cops told her they believed this was the very same man who had been terrorizing Cavalier Shores since March.

Police did not return our calls or emails on Thursday.

The witness who called police asked us not to use her name. She has a summons, which we’ve seen, to appear at 31-year-old Julian Michael Green’s court appearance September 15 at 11 a.m. in General District Court.

For months, women in Virginia Beach's Cavalier Shores neighborhood, just north of The Cavalier Hotel, shared unsettling stories: a man slipping through yards, climbing onto enclosed porches and pressing his face against windows. In one incident, a resident believed she caught the suspect urinating against her home.

After Sunday's arrest, some neighbors now wonder whether she witnessed something else.

Many assumed it was a problem confined to their neighborhood.

It wasn't.

Court records show Sunday's arrest was far from Green's first encounter with law enforcement.

Green is a frequent flyer in Virginia Beach General District Court for lewd behavior. He was previously arrested on Dec. 18, 2022, June 6, 2023, July 10, 2023; August 26, 2023, and found guilty on charges that included trespassing, indecent exposure and peeping-related offenses.

He’s also facing additional charges from three other separate incidents this year once in May and twice in June which include trespassing, indecent exposure and peeping into a dwelling.

Meanwhile, Green insists police have it all wrong.

In a jailhouse interview with WAVY-TV 10, Green called Sunday's arrest "a big misunderstanding." He denied peeping into windows, saying he rides his bicycle through neighborhoods looking for landscaping work and only looks into yards for potential customers.

Green said he’s “not a bad person” but just has “a little problem” and insists he isn’t dangerous.

“People like me we’re not violent toward women we’re just weird in our own way.”

I’ll say.

Green also claimed that on the morning of his arrest he’d removed his clothing after walking through spider webs and denied any sexual misconduct.

Spider webs.

Good one.

Contempt of Congress charges are coming.

Some believe that Fauci’s lawyers are concerned that the autopen pardon is not valid or enforceable and advised Fauci to shut up just in case it doesn’t hold.

At one point in the hearing one of Fauci‘s belligerent lawyers repeatedly interrupted the proceedings and was escorted from the room by security at the direction of committee chair Rand Paul.

The senators wanted to hear from Fauci, not his mouthpiece.

Here are some of the highlights.

Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri was magnificent, portraying Fauci as a money-grubbing award seeker who used federal workers and federal resources to solicit cash prizes during covid to satisfy Fauci’s hunger for accolades and loot.

Josh Hawley Finally SNAPS on Fauci for Using His Fame to PROFIT During COVID: 'A Million People DEAD, You're Getting RICH'

"During the pandemic you got rich. you got rich while Americans were dying"

"Your net worth is over $12 M. You got over ONE MILLION Dollars in cash awards… pic.twitter.com/q7DqOd6JqX

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) July 29, 2026

Democrat Maggie Hassan thought she was making a terrific point when she blamed the current measles outbreak on the Trump administration.

We are in the middle of a measles outbreak. A cyclospora outbreak. RFK is dismantling our public health system & scientific research. Millions have lost their health care. And Senate Republicans spent today attacking Dr. Fauci. pic.twitter.com/nmGeQsQQej

— Sen. Maggie Hassan (@SenatorHassan) July 29, 2026

But then came Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma who used Fauci’s own diary to point out that millions of children were not vaccinated against measles during Covid and that Fauci himself predicted measles outbreaks to come because of the covid protocols that ended routine medical appointments.

RNCResearch: .@SenatorLankford: “Did you ever have an opportunity to bring up the potential of measles deaths among children...because of the shutdown?”

FAUCI: "I respectfully decline to answer." pic.twitter.com/jHReljkRQg

— Republican Women of Mercer County 💪🇺🇸 (@RWOMC) July 29, 2026

The day really belonged to Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a medical doctor. Paul opposed Fauci’s draconian edicts during covid and was incensed when Fauci repeatedly lied while under oath during testimony before Congress. His determination to expose the lying doctor led to Wednesday’s hearing.

Kudos to Paul for releasing the Fauci diary over the weekend so all of America could see that Fauci was an attention-seeking whore with a medical degree who became drunk with power during covid.

A pardon may protect you legally, but it won't change how history views you.
pic.twitter.com/vY101gRcHN

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) July 29, 2026

“When you question me, you’re questioning science.”

Ugh.

In case you were wondering, as I was, how the diaries were discovered, it was through relentless forensic work by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and his team. Apparently Fauci created his diary on a government computer (not improper) transferred the files to his personal computer and thought the originals were deleted.

Nothing is ever deleted. By using government systems, Fauci left a recoverable digital trail. Backups, archived data, or secondary systems retained them. Those records were eventually recovered through sustained efforts by the new HHS leadership. Fauci was not nearly as smart as he thought he was.

This was not a “personal” diary, by the way. It was written on a government computer, by a government employee on government time. It belongs to the American people.

Now the world can read the demented diary of a man who cared more about fame than science, who lied to Congress, the president and the American people. A man who claimed to be an expert in infectious disease but was really an expert in infecting a population with fear.

A man who stole the childhoods from millions of kids, blithely allowed the sick and aging to be kept in solitary confinement and forced masking - something he acknowledges had little or no value - on virtually all Americans. Oh, and let’s not forget the attempts to force a vaccine into the arms of everyone in the country even while he KNEW it neither prevented transmission or reduced the likelihood of hospitalization.

Don’t believe me? READ THE DAMN DIARIES.

Oh, and this man who took the vaccine himself and six boosters caught covid three times and suffered a blood clot in his lung shortly after one of his boosters - a likely vaccine injury - which he covered up at the time.

God bless RFK Jr. for unmasking this fraud.

And no, we should never “move on” from what the government did during covid. From closing the churches to separation of families. (Odd, some of the same people moaning about illegal aliens being separated from their families were cheerleaders for Fauci who made it his mission to separate families from the sick and dying.)

Once you’ve read the musings of this malignant narcissist and you’re aware of his appalling lies, read the responses to this X post.

Don’t turn away. Read about people who watched helplessly as their loved ones were held hostage in hospitals and nursing homes without visitors. How cancer patients stayed home, untreated, rather than venture into a hospital where they would have been forcibly separated from their families. Read about sons giving eulogies for their beloved mothers via Zoom.

All while Fauci and Jake Tapper dined together on their “friendship building” mission.

My God. The replies…

This is Anthony Fauci’s legacy.

Never forget. pic.twitter.com/wcqzpFKxER

— Dustin Grage (@GrageDustin) July 27, 2026

What is clear after reading a chunk of his diary, is that he willfully misled the president and the American people, not just about the origins of the virus, but its lethality and the measures that would be prudent to stay safe. In the process, this dissembler destroyed much of America’s trust in public health institutions.

Commentator Victor Davis Hanson had this reaction after reading the Fauci diaries:

The Fauci files reveal not just a sociopathic narcissist, but also a pathological schizophrenic.

For years, Fauci was assuring the public of Covid narratives that he either knew were untrue, or knew little about.

He posed as a non-partisan, even as he collaborated with the leftwing cable news grandees and liberal columnists to hound his enemies and magnify his godhead.

From the virus’s origins and effects of the lockdowns, to the efficacy of the mRNA vaccinations to the always changing 0/1/2 masks wearing protocols, Fauci used his massive government agency, and sycophantic media, to promote his always fluid narratives by punishing enemies and rewarding friends—on the basis of their loyalty to Dr. “I represent science”.

Senator Paul no doubt rattled the 84-year-old Fauci this weekend when he released his private diaries from the covid years.

How did the senator obtain them? Unclear, although Paul did subpoena work materials from Fauci and the offices where he worked.

Dr. Fauci's own diary, in his own words, shows he knew the lab leak theory was credible from the very first weeks of the pandemic. 10 of 12 scientists on his call believed deliberate insertion was possible. He wrote that the wet market was never the real source. Then he spent the…

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) July 27, 2026

There are countless discrepancies between what Fauci told the public and what he admitted in his diaries. For instance, early on Fauci knew that covid had between .02 and .03 percent fatality rate. Yet under oath and before Congress, he testified it was 10 times higher.

DAMN. In early 2020, Fauci recorded in his diary how much he was able to make the stock market drop with his lie that covid was 10x more deadly than the flu.

At the same time, in the same diary, he wrote that covid wasn't any more deadly than the seasonal flu.

While he was… pic.twitter.com/a049NU3TZ2

— Tara Servatius (@TaraServatius) July 27, 2026

Why would he do this? Because the more he frightened Americans, the more willing they were to agree to Draconian measures such as lockdowns and closures. Actions that made this little weasel of a man feel powerful.

From the start, Fauci knew that the virus likely emerged as a result of a lab leak. Worse it probably originated in the exact lab he’d been funding for the gain-of-function research. Yet Fauci continued to try to sell the preposterous “wet market” theory, while scorning scientists who disagreed. Medical experts at Stanford and Harvard lost their jobs because they disputed Fauci’s arrogant proclamations.

The most cringe-inducing entires are Fauci’s masturbatory scribblings about his fawning press clippings. His treacly accounts of encounters with adoring celebrities and adulation from the public are repulsive. His obsession with himself is nauseating.

In several entries, he lobbies shamelessly to be nominated for science awards.

Fauci's private diary. March 2020.

March 21 — "deaths 9800":

"Big front page article about me appeared in the Washington Post. Very flattering."

"my national and international fame is explosive and really unimaginable"

"It is not hyperbole to say that today I am the most… pic.twitter.com/6kbU5Mjq9G

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) July 26, 2026

If you're wondering why Fauci was always so eager to go on TV, this supercut might be a helpful refresher pic.twitter.com/pvjAc86rNn

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) July 26, 2026

By April of 2020, President Trump had had enough of this megalomaniac. But to fire Fauci at that point was impossible. The press was in love with him and Fauci and his lieutenants were doing their best to make Trump look like a Luddite. By October, when the vaccine was ready, Fauci worked behind the scenes to slow-roll FDA approval, so that Trump couldn’t take credit for Operation Warp Speed before Election Day.

Fauci’s diary more than documents his mind-boggling incompetence—it also reveals that he is a narcissistic sociopath.

Trump was on to him. But he didn’t realize how bad he was until it was too late. https://t.co/n4tVaCITI0

— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) July 27, 2026

The diary highlights so much of what Fauci got wrong, what he lied about, and his obsession with fame.

In interview after interview, Fauci has insisted that HE didn’t close a single school. That’s a lie. His diary shows that he called New York City Mayor DeBlasio and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, urging them to close schools and keep them closed.

Covid was hell. Not the disease itself. For most of us, it was a cold.

It was hellish for the country. People lost their jobs, children lost valuable years in school, the elderly died alone, women wearing masks gave birth alone, nursing home residents were deprived of visitors, social isolation contributed to mental problems. Many small businesses didn’t survive.

On top of that, the vaccine didn’t work as advertised. The virus continued to spread amongst the vaccinated. Meanwhile, devastating side effects struck those who needed vaccinations the least: young, healthy males.

Those were dark years. The great architect of Americas foolish reaction to a novel virus should pay for his crimes. Sadly, Fauci will not be indicted.

At the very least, Wednesday’s appearance on Capitol Hill should humiliate the man who cared more about his public image than public health.

That’s something.

by Beth Brelje

Feckless old Democrats continue to enable socialists who hate them.

Like tapeworms latched onto the Democratic Party's bowels, the parasitic Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is destroying its host party from within, and traditional Democrats are just letting it happen.

For the many party-line voters who are not paying attention, the word "Democratic" is enough to earn their vote; they will support any Democrat who wins the primary. But everyone must understand the Democratic Party has been hijacked by communists borrowing the word "Democratic" to soft-sell socialism.

While Democrats have all moved further left, DSA candidates hate America, and they hate traditional Democrats—or as they call them, "Establishment Democrats" (EDs)—who built the infrastructure DSA exploits to win races. Socialists can't win without the support of the Democratic apparatus. If they could, they would drop traditional EDs—they have said so.

DSA Opposes Democrats

Instead of Democrats operating as one big-tent party with the EDs leading the way, DSA holds independent meetings that EDs don't attend. DSA puts up its own candidates, battles against Democrats in the primary, and complains about EDs in DSA meetings.

"We don't agree with the way the Democratic Party establishment organizes or runs its party apparatus, and so we try to build independence by focusing on volunteer-led movement," DSA Co-Chair Gustavo Gordillo told Spectrum News in a June interview.

"I think in terms of the agenda, there's a problem in the Democratic Party where they are funded by billionaire donors, and at the same time they're trying to represent a working class," Gordillo said. "And in our opinion, you have to choose between the billionaire class and the working class. It's just impossible to satisfy all of them."

That is not true. President Donald Trump, who ended taxes on tips for workers, manages to bolster business with his policies. An intelligent leader can do both.

DSA Cannot Survive on Its Own

DSA National Political Committee member Katie Sims says DSA is intentionally changing the direction of politics in the United States in a way that is "building durable power" for the socialist/communist movement.

People often ask if DSA is a member of the Democratic Party, Sims said in a video training call.

"We often run in the Democratic Party primaries because the voters in Democratic primaries like socialism," Sims said. "We're going to a voter base that is hungry for the kind of change we are proposing, and we are filling that niche that the Democrat party is not.

"The United States has got a really weird party system," she continued. "The truth is that it's really hard to have a third party in the U.S. right now, and so we act like a party, we govern like a party, we drive conflict in the Democratic Party. In many ways, we just are a political party."

Sims added that DSA is more than an electoral machine. It intentionally infiltrates labor unions and chooses candidates within labor union leadership. And, Sims said, DSA engages in legislative advocacy, coordinating with all members elected to public office on what policies to push.

DSA Candidates Don't Intend to Represent Voters

Once a socialist is elected, they stop listening to voters. All DSA members take their marching orders from leadership. Candidates are carefully selected and told what agenda to pursue. This is why we see similar, radical policies popping up everywhere, like taxpayer-funded "free" childcare—and it's about to get worse.

During a recent online training, the group announced the launch of its Federal Socialists in Office Committee. "This is going to be a committee that is able to engage with the people that we have sent to office and have deliberations around how DSA wants to carry out our political goals," said Sydney Carlson White, a New York-based member of DSA's Marxist Unity Group and its National Electoral Commission.

"We are going to have ways to relate to the wonderful people we are sending to office," White said, adding, "It's on us as DSA to give them direction, to give them ideas, to give them the power to stand up to the capitalist class and carry out our political vision."

That is not representative government for the people; it is a small group of radicals deciding the direction of government policy.

"What exactly someone is supposed to do as just one member of a legislative body is one of the oldest questions in socialism," White said. "The Germans struggled with it; Lenin struggled with it. Now we are going to struggle with it in the 21st century, and we're going to look to the people that came before us—the previous socialist movements—to understand how we are going to carry out these goals. We have many more endorsements, more campaigns, and more discussions about the role electoral politics play coming in the future."

White aims for America to mirror Vladimir Lenin's communist Russia. That should terrify everyone who values freedom.

DSA Intends to Fundamentally Change the US

Until recent years, political parties have generally lived within the framework of the Constitution, focusing on individual policy issues. The DSA wants to fully restructure the Constitution written by "workers fighting to transform society . . . and create a democratic socialist republic," says Delaney Vandergrift, a member of the DSA's Marxist Unity Group.

"Draft a new constitution and create a Democratic Socialist Republic."

Delaney Vandergrift, a leader of DSA’s Marxist Unity Group and self-proclaimed "cultural worker," makes it clear what the organization stands for.

DSA is not a "big tent", it's an anti-American movement. pic.twitter.com/KwqczNx9wK

— Canary Mission (@canarymission) July 14, 2026

In other words, the United States that immigrants are clamoring to settle in is not good enough. The soldiers who died on battlefields to earn and preserve our liberty, and the families who mourn them, would disagree.

DSA also wants to abolish the Senate.

DSA Co-Chair Ashik Siddique: "We just don’t see the point of the Senate, historically it was meant to serve very wealthy people..."

HOST: "Would you like to abolish the senate?"

SIDDIQUE: "That's part of our platform, and we don't think that's extreme." pic.twitter.com/ppQVeM1noq

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) July 14, 2026

Voters must understand that these are not typical candidates who intend to work on single issues. The DSA is unafraid to say it out loud: Given the chance, they will implement communism—first, in every jurisdiction and labor union that allows them to take positions of power, and soon, everywhere else in the United States. A vote for any socialist—a declared DSA member, or a stealth socialist (SS) candidate who believes it's safer not to label themselves—is a vote to give up your local representation. Any socialist candidate will follow orders from the radical, national DSA committee.

Democrats Should Give DSA the Boot

Establishment Democrats have an opportunity to save the United States from communism. They should kick the DSA leeches out of their party and immediately stop sharing their funds and vast party infrastructure with people who want to erase them. DSA describes itself as a party that cannot survive without its host, so stop hosting them.

If Democrats cut the group off now, they may lose some elections, but they would earn the respect of America-loving patriots and the grateful relief of disenfranchised Democrat voters.

Has DSA already fundamentally changed the Democratic Party the way it wants to change the United States? Is it too far gone for Democrats to save their party?

Men of strength and conviction, if there are any left in the Democratic Party, must stand up now. Until DSA is eradicated from the party, Democrat voters should withhold their votes from the party and consider supporting Republicans to defeat communism.

Beth Brelje is a Senior Political Investigator for Restoration News, focusing on state and federal elections, laws, legislation and the effects policies have on us all. She has nearly 40 years of media experience. 

Republished with permission from Restoration News.

Well, in New York City, Zohran Mamdani’s vilification of landlords was the cornerstone of his mayoral campaign. One of his first actions in office was to pressure the city’s Rent Guideline Board to freeze the rent on about 1 million properties beginning October 1.

Did they also freeze the utility bills on these frozen rentals? The city taxes? Insurance?

Of course not.

The evil landlord is expected to eat those skyrocketing costs because as everyone knows, all landlords are heartless fat cats who sit around at night, counting their money.

What Mamdani doesn’t seem to know is that the best way to ensure that there is a shortage of rental units is to create an environment where there is no return on investments for the owners.

NYC-style landlord targeting is beginning in Virginia where Democrats are crowing about the tenants’ rights measures they passed in the last session.

As of July 1, tenants in Virginia now have 14 days - up from the current 5 - to squat in a rental unit before a landlord can begin eviction measures for non-payment.

I checked and can’t find that the law also gives landlords 14 days to replace a refrigerator if a non-paying tenant’s breaks down. Or 14 days to unclog a deadbeat’s toilet.

I also couldn’t find any provisions for property taxes to be prorated when a landlord is not collecting rent. Remember, eviction is a time-consuming process. The fortnight that Virginia just handed tenants delays the START of that legal action. It takes about four months before a non-paying tenant is out of the property.

In the meantime, the landlord is the big loser.

Look, there are bad landlords. Lord knows, there are terrible tenants. Why is Virginia putting its thumb on the scales to help tenants squat in properties when they aren’t paying rent while landlords are just expected to suck their thumbs before evicting non-paying tenants?

There’s more: Beginning July 1, 2027, many Virginia landlords will be forced to give tenants 90-days notice if they are raising rents.

Why is the state sticking its big nose into contractual affairs between tenants and landlords, always with the advantage gong to the renter?

The answer is simple. The radicals in Richmond are Marxists. These are just baby steps. Watch, as over the next few years they continue to expand tenants’ “rights” while subjecting landlords to more and more government meddling.

It’s worth noting that this mindset was fortified by Karl Marx. He viewed landlords as a parasitical class that exploited the working class. Marx believe landlords did not perform labor, instead profiting off of the necessities of others.

What we’re seeing in Virginia is Marxist mission creep.

You’ve been warned.

by Shaun Kenney

The VCU Wilder Center released its post mortem poll results for Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger and the results are not good for Democrats heading into the midterm elections.

Not only do 47% believe the Commonwealth is headed in the wrong direction (as opposed to the 39% who believe everything is on the right track), Spanberger’s approval ratings are 44-46% with a massive 35% of Virginians strongly disapproving of her tenure thus far — that’s 1 in 3. Only one in five Virginians strongly support.

Read the full VCU Wilder School poll here.

Making matters worse, 31% of Virginians are concerned about inflation and the cost of living — the marquee issue Spanberger ran upon before delivering a 300% pay increase to the Democratic-controlled General Assembly. Another 11% are concerned about housing affordability. While campaigning on such things in 2025 sounds politically smart, governing on such issues in 2026 uncovers all sorts of landmines — not just the fact that state governors can only make the problem worse and not better in terms of fees and taxes, but that until Virginia gets serious about the disconnect between local land use, state transportation dollars, regional economic development, and above all else energy infrastructure. Things are only set to become more — and not less — expensive when it comes to the things under Richmond’s control.

Affordability cometh for Virginia’s colleges and universities as well, with 50% of respondents saying the average cost to tuition is “much too high” and a whopping 79% overall indicating that it is too high. Only 17% found that the cost was priced right with only four respondents indicating that the price was low or an outright steal.

Pro tip: Defending the unpopular makes you unpopular

Bob Holsworth offers his own take of the VCU numbers vis a vis Spanberger and the manifest of forced errors her team has racked up over the last six months:

[T]he Spanberger team over-read how personal the 2025 election results were. Democrats everywhere were overperforming by large numbers and Virginia was experiencing the brunt of federal employee and contracting cutbacks and Elon Musk’s DOGE chainsaw.

While the Spanberger campaign has focused on her commitment to ”lowering costs, it is very difficult for the Governor of a single state to lower costs when the national economy is inflating. In addition, that affordability agenda that Spanberger touts is relatively thin gruel, more nerdy than populist and doesn’t contain a signature priority that most Virginians could identify today.

The near catastrophe with the state budget in an unprecedented game of political chicken over data centers and social justice programs cannot be understated.

Not only is Wall Street watching from afar, but changing the rules of the game regarding the MOUs on data centers impacts every memoranda of understanding ever signed in Virginia. Energy prices are spiraling north — not due to data centers, but certainly due to an aggregate of failed policies championed by so-called “green” initiatives — and the decision to include Virginia back into RGGI only makes those matters worse.

Then there’s the redistricting fiasco. Apologists for Spanberger will argue that she was forced into supporting the gerrymandering effort, yet not only was Spanberger a full-throated supporter of the $80 million effort, not only did Virginia spend $11 million to have the vote in the first place, not only did it fail in front of the Supreme Court of Virginia, and not only are voices such as State Senator Dan Helmer (D-Fairfax) threatening to pack SCOVA so as to get correct opinions rather than legal ones, but Virginia Democrats are about to foist three equally repugnant and constitutionally problematic state amendments that are so far beyond the pale even Democrats are privately cringing about their impact on congressional races in November.

Spanberger’s conundrum is that she had the opportunity to be the centrist and the moderate. Not only did she break her word, Spanberger’s early governance has turned her back on the core campaign pledge of affordability in favor of highly divisive social issues — including transgenderism and gender ideology in the state constitution under the guise of an abortion amendment, redefining marriage as opposed to an outright repeal of the marriage amendment, and actually restoring the rights of pedophiles so as to allow felons to serve on local school boards.

Spanberger’s approval ratings are emblematic of the same environment Virginia Republicans walked into back in 2021, where the public was angry and demanding change and Virginia Democrats remained at sixes-and-sevens.

Which brings us to the four races Virginians should keep their eyes upon.

Virginia 2026: Three defending, one golden opportunity

We should start with Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA) in VA-01, where he faces a strong challenge from Henrico County Commonwealth’s Attorney Shannon Taylor — whose fundraising will be enough to focus attentions. Wittman remains a ranking and well-liked member of both Congress and Virginia Republicans, known for his principled conservativism in the very best of its traditions. Wittman will have to defend his seat, but there are few in Virginia who campaign as hard or as well.

The real contest is in VA-02, where Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA) will square off against former Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA). Both candidates are known, both candidates are well liked by their own base. Yet Luria — like most Democratic candidates — will have to contend with a base whose fascination with the Democratic Socialists of America will ultimately require their pound of flesh. What will Luria promise? Whatever it is, don’t expect it to be popular with mainstream Virginians.

The more interesting contest will be VA-05 where Rep. John McGuire (R-VA) will most likely square off against former Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA) in a district that has only grown since Perriello’s tenure in office and that growth being decidedly more in line with the values of Northern Virginia and the University of Virginia rather than Southside Virginia and the values of Liberty University. Yet much like VA-01 and VA-02, the “Fighting Fifth” is also looking to send a message to both Richmond and Washington.

Which brings us to my old stomping grounds in the Fredericksburg area — and most notably, Spanberger’s former district — in VA-07, where retired Lieutenant Colonel Doug Ollivant will most likely square off against retired Lieutenant Colonel Yevengy “Eugene” Vindman (D-VA).

Here is a race where Vindman narrowly defeated his erstwhile Republican opposition by less than 10,000 votes two years ago despite a massive $10 million cash advantage and outspending the GOP candidate nearly 6 to 1. This is a district with a heavy military and veteran presence on top of a solid rural core towards Culpeper, one that is well educated and intolerant of political chicanery. With an electorate looking to send a message to Spanberger in her own district and Vindman’s national profile, combined with a candidate that is clearly putting in the work, one expects the White House to make this a highly competitive race after the primary with an ideal candidate at the helm in Ollivant who can challenge Vindman line by line on national security.

The golden opportunity is definitely with Ollivant in VA-07. Not only that, but a DSA-backed independent is challenging Vindman on his left for not being socialist enough. Given the generic ballot about six points lower for the Democrats nationally than what it was in 2018 and that Vindman barely scraped by in a 51-48 contest, not only should Republicans hold across the board — Vindman is in deep trouble indeed. Should the present dynamic remain the case, the other three races will have all the energy they need to keep Republicans in place in Virginia.

Lest it be mentioned, this naturally ignores the U.S. Senate race with Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) most likely squaring off against retired General Bert Mizusawa. Warner remains the most popular politician in Virginia thanks to his “radical centrist” persona, but as his own consultants continue to have him screaming and swearing into the iPhone, Mizusawa is going to give Warner a run for his money. If one assumes that even in bad years that Virginia is 53-47 lean Democrat, the sagging congressional ballot numbers combined with agitation from the DSA wing of the political left means that Warner might have to cough up 4… 5… 6 points?

Then we get to the three sandbags.

Q. Will Virginia Democrats double down on crazy?

What might have made sense to the DSA types while Spanberger enjoyed a 15-point margin in November 2025 clearly doesn’t make sense now. As Holsworth and others continue to point out, Spanberger really did believe that her election results were an endorsement of her rather than a repudiation of Trump — the ambrosia of every politician.

Spanberger is realizing too late that the old Potomac Two Step — where every politician governs two steps to the left of how they campaign — doesn’t quite work in the muck and brine of the James River.

As opposition to the state amendments ramps up, there is a certain sobering effect of not having $80 million on hand to push crazy, making it far harder for the referenda to stand on their own two feet (which is very ableist of me — mea culpa).

The counterarguments to each are simple enough.

• “Bodily autonomy” is code for transgendering kids.

• Forcing pastors and priests to sign off on mock marriages against their deeply held religious belief is a First Amendment violation that will be struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

• Automatic restoration of rights means pedophiles can serve on school boards.

Gross. Outrageous. Wood chipper.

Combine the near universal disgust with Mamdani and the rise of democratic socialism as an actual option, the contaminant rise of anti-Semitism on the political left, the knife fighting within the General Assembly, the dysfunction in Richmond, and Spanberger’s volte face on the “radical centrism” that has served Virginia Democrats for a quarter century — and there is no denying a very simple fact.

Virginia Democrats are out of money, short on ideas, and very much in trouble for the 2026 midterms. Should this dynamic hold going into 2027, Virginia Republicans are just two state senate seats away from providing a sanity check against a political left held in thrall to either socialism or crazy.

Don’t forget — the loyal opposition is watching. Virginia Republicans can offer a sound and economically rational alternative in contrast with budget hysteria and off-the-wall social agendas of democratic socialism. Spanberger cashed out every ounce of political capital on the gerrymandering referendum and followed it up with a budget crisis that handed out 300% pay raises to lawmakers.

Now Virginians are in a mood to punish.

Shaun Kenney is senior editor of The Republican Standard. This column has been republished here with permission of Bacon’s Rebellion.

N.J. GOV. MIKIE SHERRILL

“Last week I learned that a serious software error in New Jersey’s Motor Vehicle System led to the registration of roughly 6,600 people who indicated that they were not U.S. citizens between June 2023 and June 2024, almost three years prior to my taking… pic.twitter.com/uRFpIRzVqm

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) July 21, 2026

Not to worry, though. “Fewer” than 400 of these foreigners actually voted.

So those 399 illegal voters effectively cancelled out the votes of New Jersey citizens who went to the polls and cast their ballots.

How often does this happen?

Not never, that’s for sure.

Oh, and the New York Post reports that several local NJ elections saw winners win by fewer than 400 votes.

Seems like it was just last week that America’s lefties were mocking President Trump’s speech in which he claimed thousands of non-citizens were on voter rolls. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security indicates that Sherrill may be drastically undercounting illegal voter registrations. The Feds claim they’ve found 35,152.

So far.

If that many illegals were on the NJ voter rolls, imagine how many are on California’s.

Or Virginia’s.

When obtaining a driver’s license in Virginia, a computer screen asks the applicant if they are a citizen. If they answer in the affirmative, they can register to vote.

No one checks to see if they are citizens. It’s on the honor system. Is it really unimaginable that someone squatting illegally in the country would hesitate to tick the “U.S. citizen” box when obtaining a driver’s license?

And if there’s one thing we’ve learned in the past year - from the Somali daycare fraud in Minnesota to the Russian and Armenian hospice fraud in California - is that migrants are SO honorable.

I’m sure none would ever claim to be citizens if they’re not.

Once registered to vote in Virginia, individuals need not show a picture ID to vote. (Contrary to what Sen. Mark Warner said on ABC’s This Morning show on Sunday.)

Just flash your fishing license and you’re good to go.

Then again, what difference would a picture ID make if a non-citizen is on the rolls, anyway?

America’s elections are a fraudster’s dream. And Democrats and a handful of GOP senators want to keep it that way.

Pass the SAVE America Act. Now.

We want proof of citizenship to register to vote. Photo IDs on Election Day. And mail-in ballots only for those with valid reasons to be unable to vote in-person on the appointed day.

This is not voter suppression. It’s ILLEGAL voter suppression.

🚨 OMG. Stunning moment as Sen. Mark Warner (D) even gets called out by ABC for LYING that Virginia requires voter ID

ABC: Should Democrats get behind photo ID? 71% of Dems favor it!

WARNER: In Virginia, we have photo ID!

ABC: —that's NOT the case, I'M a Virginia voter! 🤯… pic.twitter.com/tWe5wMMmdK

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 19, 2026

“You know what, in Virginia we have voter ID and photo ID,” the sanctimonious senator crowed. “I’ve gotta show my…”

“That’s actually not true,” interrupted Karl. “I’m a Virginia voter and you don’t need to show a photo ID in Virginia to vote.”

One of two things is true: Either Warner is unfamiliar with Virginia voting laws. Or he was lying on a nationally televised Sunday show.

I’m going with the latter. Fact is, both options render him unfit for office.

Like every Democrat senator, Warner is frightened to death of the Save America Act, which the majority of Americans in both parties support. The last thing these leftists want is to force every voter to provide a photo ID before voting.

I wonder why…

Thanks to Virginia Democrats, who changed voting laws in 2020, we live in a commonwealth that allows a person to cast a ballot if they simply cough up a utility bill. Or a fishing license. If they can’t dig up anything showing their name, the would-be voter can sign a piece of paper saying they are who they say they are.

In other words, we have no idea who’s voting in Virginia elections.

And Sen. Mark Warner wants to keep it that way.

They’re waving the white flag in Virginia Beach. After an almost 3-hour public hearing at which speaker after speaker begged their representatives not to impose an adult curfew at the Oceanfront for the next two weekends, city council members surrendered to the thugs and closed the place.

It was an embarrassing admission that these elected officials are incapable of doing their jobs.

The vote was 10-1 with only Jennifer Rouse voting no. Her reason was terrible: She prefers declaring the Oceanfront a “gun-free zone” because as we all know, a few “no guns” signs would cause all the gangbangers to leave their guns at home.



Frankly, I can’t think of a part of town where I’d want a gun MORE than at the Oceanfront on a Saturday night.


This is not a city run by Mensa members…

Yep, they’re punishing law-abiding tourists and locals who like to stay out past 9:30 to prevent thugs from shooting each other.

The courts stepped in and stopped the insanity, with a Circuit Court Judge ruling that the curfew was illegal. It lasted exactly one weekend.

Still, businesses lost plenty during the thug surrender and its aftermath.

Shamefaced city officials quickly announced that businesses that suffered economic loss were eligible for compensation.

Apparently, they were just joking.

The Virginian-Pilot reports that so far every claim has been denied on grounds of sovereign immunity.

Monica Kiraly and ali Abay say four businesses they own on Atlantic Avenue suffered financial losses from an all-ages Oceanfront curfew in April. Kiraly estimated their two pizza shops each lost roughly $13,000 from two weekend nights without customers. 

Their dessert restaurant and cafe also took a hit.

When they learned they could submit a claim to the city for financial compensation, they took time out of their busy schedules to draft letters and prepare reports.

In June, the city denied their claims along with multiple others, citing Virginia Beach’s sovereign immunity. No business claims for the curfew have been approved, according to city spokesperson Ali Weatherton.

“It was a waste of time,” Kiraly said. “We spent hours on that.”

Yep, looks like a big bait and switch by Virginia Beach. In order to tamp down anger by businesses, officials tossed them a bone of compensation that they never intended to honor.

According to documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, six business owners have requested compensation thus far. The businesses include restaurants, commercial parking lots and a nightclub.

Some listed loss of gross business revenue, employee wages and tips. The city redacted all of the monetary figures citing a law regarding investigations of a claim, according to a response to the FOIA request made by attorney Kevin Martingayle and provided to The Pilot.

“It’s shameful,” Martingayle said. “I don’t think they want the public to know what the total adds up to.”

You bet they don’t. That would only magnify the stupidity of what they did in April.

Yet, according to the story, the mayor still believes the curfew was a swell idea.

This is the guy - Bobby Dyer - who famously said this about his city:

“Before 10 p.m. you’re living in Mayberry. After 10 p.m. you’re living in Tombstone.”

Here’s an idea: Pay the businesses trying to stay alive in Tombstone.

You owe them.

by Shaun Kenney

I was looking forward to reading Peter Onuf and Francis Cogliano’s Thomas Jefferson Survives right up until page 12 of the Introduction.

Once upon a time, I had the pleasure of reading Jeffersonian Legacies in my younger days as a consumer of all things Virginia history, which was the result of a conference on Jefferson headed up by Onuf.

The late Daniel P. Jordan — whose long tenure with the Thomas Jefferson Foundation helped shape the Jeffersonian renaissance — capstoned the conference celebrating Mr. Jefferson’s 250th birthday with the following tribute:

While the conference and essays allow fresh voices to be heard on aspects of the Jefferson legacy, good and bad, at times they merely echo partisan arguments about Jefferson’s life and politics going back to his own era; in other ways they provide a 1990s standard of judgment. The centrality and complexity of Jefferson’s ideas and career, his extraordinary versatility, his gift of felicitous prose, and the exceptional corpus of letters he left behind will assure that Jefferson will remain a fascinating and compelling subject to examine and ponder for edification and inspiration, for admiration and admonishment, for generations to come.

For those interested in how profound the shift has been on Jefferson from paragon to parasite, Ken Burns is your answer. His 1997 Thomas Jefferson documentary treats Jefferson as a Founding Father, yet his 2026 documentary on The American Revolution only begrudgingly admits George Washington as the indispensable man. In fact, all of the accomplishments of the Founding Fathers are footnotes rather than pivotal moments in history — and if pivotal, then most certainly imperfect. From this treatment, Jefferson has provided a deep mine from which countless historians have delved and picked apart to exhibit and even invent the very worst of imperfections in an industry rewarding grievance. God forbid to see what a Ken Burns documentary on Jefferson would look like today.

What should fascinate and compel us presently at the 200th anniversary of Jefferson’s death and the 250th birthday of these States United is that Jordan’s commitment to pluralism and the collision of ideas has been eclipsed by a 2020-ish standard of judgment seeking to recapture Jefferson for the 21st century political left — or worse still, abandon Jefferson to a caricature and label it as “far right”, a tactic which has proven to be very useful to organizations such as the SPLC.

Jefferson’s legacy and false dichotomies

Of course, critiquing Peter Onuf is no small task, as he is perhaps at present the premier historian on the life of Thomas Jefferson and his legacy into the present day. This is no small boast, as not only is he the inheritor of the tradition laid down by such luminaries as Dumas Malone whose six-volume biography of Jefferson remains unparalleled, but who has been succeeded at the University of Virginia by the inestimable Alan Taylor whose books I cannot recommend more highly: Thomas Jefferson’s Education is a book I have thrust upon my daughters, and The Infernal Enemy which remains an excellent and insightful volume on the mindset of Virginians during the Federal era. I’m sure Dr. Onuf is a wonderful human being in person and would love to disagree with him (and others) without the contaminant of being disagreeable.

So goes the preface. Into the Onuf and Cogliano’s introduction, as they explain how Jefferson’s legacy has been borrowed, appropriated, and fostered over the last two centuries — most notably by Franklin D. Roosevelt who championed Jefferson’s reputation in service to 20th-century New Deal liberalism as an enlightened figure, only for the political left to take a more recent and socialist turn by which Jefferson was not progressive enough for 21st-century tastes:

In recent years the American political left has largely jettisoned Jefferson. For his critics, Jefferson is no longer seen as the man who articulated the “American creed” but rather as a plantation patriarch and enslaver who epitomizes the hypocrisy of the founders of the American republic.

Onuf and Cogliano include an endnote here. Their source? The 1619 Project — critics certainly, but by no means mainstream.

Yet Jefferson most certainly does have his mainstream critics, adjacent to the spirit of the so-called 1619 Project (and masterfully refuted by Peter Wood’s The 1620 Project and reshaped by far superior narratives such as Joseph Kelly’s Marooned) and sympathetic to the task of reducing the Great Men of History (TM) to constructivist assessments in the spirit of Michel Foucault.

Here’s where the heartburn begins:

As Jefferson’s stock declined on the left, he was taken up by the right — and embraced and repurposed as an avatar of white nationalism (sic). . .

Trump’s and DeSantis’s celebrations of Jefferson were reminiscent of Roosevelt’s in 1936. Indeed, their positive views of Jefferson sit nicely within the Apostle of Freedom version of Jefferson that was a mainstream view in the middle of the twentieth century. But unlike Roosevelt, Trump ascribed Jefferson’s beliefs to his supporters, not to all Americans, excoriating those who disagreed with his version of American history. . . .

For Trump and many of his followers, Jefferson is no longer a synecdoche for America or a spokesman for universal liberty. Jefferson is instead seen through the narrow, sectarian lens of reactionary populism. He has been reduced to a partisan talisman.

One of the best and imperceptible ways to detect the presence of bovine excrement is to make the argument in reverse. Jefferson has become a partisan talisman. Jefferson is the Apostle of Reactionary Populism. Jefferson is defended by Trump (egads!) and DeSantis (horror!) in the wake of the SPLC-driven 2017 riots.

For those who see the play coming, the insinuation remains. Jefferson’s flaws are by extension Trump’s virtues and the policy of a reactionary populism. Jefferson’s legacy — if swallowed whole — somehow implies an endorsement of his vices as well, and the intentional admixture of Roosevelt’s admiration with present day sentiments regarding the Founding Fathers as flawed men whose dreams and achievements rested upon the backs of an oppressed underclass. To vindicate Jefferson is to absolve his vices; to defend Jefferson’s memory is to repudiate the arc of history which the revisionists claim to be Jefferson’s cardinal virtue pulling him out of the mire of disgust and contempt.

Also — Orange Man bad, so Jefferson also bad. QED, guys.

Jefferson, casuistry, and special pleading

Would that such pedestrian casuistry merely amuse rather than offend. Yet Onuf and Cogliano attempt to create a grand unified theory regarding Jefferson’s legacy, namely his belief that each generation be allowed to enact a new constitution and not bind the previous ones — evidence that Jefferson’s “arc of history” is the true key to unlock and save Jefferson from the dustbin of history.

One could rightly raise the point on how Jefferson’s commitment to democracy and revolution while out of power discovered within itself a radical commitment to both tradition and reaction once the Jeffersonian Republicans obtained power — yet such realizations only interrupt Onuf and Cogliano’s attempt to midwife an alliance between democracy and tradition — one which will ultimately fall flat. What is ignored in the shotgun marriage is that democracy, in its purest form, is by nature ruthlessly both reactionary and populist, and readers were previously assured by both historians that this is very bad. Why observe property rights or any “intergenerational peace plan” — our euphemism for tradition — if the rules can change at the whim of a demagogue and whatever mob they inspire in the name of false gods? Or are we only concerned about their demagogues while our democracy must be preserved?

Or — and I am just spitballing here — perhaps the best intergenerational peace plan is the one crafted by James Madison? This in spite of Jefferson’s perhaps temporary and convenient admiration for the sans-coullets in revolutionary France?

Sadly, they save the best insinuations for last:

Each “living generation,” Jefferson insisted, must reconstitute itself as a people, responsible for sustaining “a more perfect union” across time. But Americans are not shirking that responsibility, taking their status as a people for granted and failing to recognize that republican self-government is a great and ongoing experiment. Rather than following the example of the revolutionaries who launched that experiment, many patriotic Americans imagine that a providentially sanctioned new nation miraculously emerged from the war in the nation-making worlds of the Declaration. They assume that the republic is fixed and permanent. Assuming an enduring collective identity, they look back to the founding and find strikingly familiar images of themselves in Jefferson and his fellow founders. (emphasis added)

Those who defend Thomas Jefferson’s legacy against his critics do so because they find “strikingly familiar images” in the Founders themselves. What are those images again? Onuf and Cogliano tell us up front what Jefferson’s defenders really intend for his legacy, not an honest defense of a Founding Father, but darkly hidden and barely whispered prejudice that is “embrace[s] and repurpose[s] [Jefferson] as an avatar of white nationalism.” Jefferson’s prejudices are modern-day GOP policies, don’t you see? The veil is torn, the true nature of those-who-disagree is exposed to the harshness of their daylight, and only from this place can we — and Onuf and Cogliano — declare that our discussion can truly begin.

This is where I close the book.

One wishes their argument include the courtesy of a steel man response from those who defend Jefferson’s legacy without the caricature of being crypto-fascists. Certainly such defenders exist, and the implication that those who defend a more robust interpretation Jefferson’s legacy are, in fact, apologists for white supremacy or tools of political hatchetmen in service to the Civitas Terrena is in its best light within the “the grip of anachronistic characterization and special pleading” — words which Onuf and Cogliano claim their argument seeks to escape, but only within the straitjacket they offer to the reader.

This is no olive branch, but a false dichotomy designed to identify an “us” at the expense of a “them” — good guys against terrible guys. In short, the very special pleading they put upon a mercurially crafted opposition.

America’s founding fathers and the great men of history

One supposes this passes for insight in certain quarters. After all, it is entirely avant garde for small thinkers to earn a name by tearing down great ones.

For instance, Winston Churchill continues to be the victim of both hagiography and pathography, starting with Churchill’s own hand (or the hands of his ghostwriters) in his history of the Second World War only for the shockingly unethical reveal and counter position by Lord Moran — Churchill’s own physician — in 1966, opening the floodgates to Churchill’s critics great and small.

Jefferson would never be immune to such attacks and re-evaluations. Fawn Brodie’s psychoanalysis in the 1970s has been largely superseded by reformers such as Andrew Burstein whose Being Thomas Jefferson begins as an attempt — and Burstein has the epistemic humility to see that the effort is indeed an exploration and attempt — to bridge Brodie’s psychoanalysis with Malone’s magisterial work. Yet Brodie’s work was not the first fusillade against the reputation of the Sage of Monticello. That honorific goes to none other than U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall whose five-volume The Life of George Washington excoriated the Jeffersonian Republicans against what Marshall would perhaps term the “reactionary populism” of what he saw as a Jacobin-inspired rejection of the hard-earned Federalist status quo — particularly with regards to the courts and the rule of law. Even in life, James Callander who once embellished the Jefferson reputation only to attempt to destroy it with his Jeffersoniad series after being refused key positions in the new order of things after Jefferson’s election to the presidency, who as late as fifty years after the publication of Callander’s screeds Jefferson’s own granddaughter Ellen Wayles Randolph Coolidge pronounced that there were such things as moral impossibilities.

By no means I am suggesting that Onuf and Cogliano are in the same school as James Callender. Yet one cannot help but extend a long and crooked finger at the spirit of the times, haunted by the specter of the 1619 Project and exemplified by the present-day excoriation of the Founding Fathers in general — and the attempt to dismantle the Great Men of History theory in principle.

For those unfamiliar with the argument, Great Men of History will argue that history is indeed moved by great individuals who — given the moral and extraordinary choice for leadership — choose to lead. By contrast is the “history from below” thesis, which will argue that Great Men only have the opportunity to lead not because they were great, but because of their times. Thus Churchill in May 1940 was the product of history and not exemplar. Thus the Founding Fathers were the product of socio-economic circumstance and not moral force.

The grounding goes deeper than this, I’m afraid, because if one buys the idea that Great Men and Founding Fathers are circumstances of time, environment, and economy, then who are truly responsible for the great moments of history? The answer is those who put the men in positions to become great — and in the American experience, that is going to be not just the men, women, slaves, “indigenous peoples” (and is there any more loathsome and condescending postmodern phrase than to call a people merely indigenous as if they were the victims of history without autonomy or power of their own? Anathema sit), economies, power structures, circumstances, and so forth. All agency is removed as if we were reviving the Soviet-era doctrine of scientific history, where all history magically bends towards progress and justice just because that’s just what economies and societies do.

Greatness doesn’t have to be perfect in order to be good

The problem with this is that the Great Men of History are indeed great, not because they had the opportunities to be great, but because they chose to be great in the moment. Churchill could have listened to Lord Halifax. Washington could have defended the British Crown. Jefferson felt the choice as well and put it in his own words:

“[W]hen I recollect that at 14. years of age, the whole care & direction of myself was thrown on myself entirely, without a relation or friend qualified to advise or guide me, and recollect the various sorts of bad company with which I associated from time to time, I am astonished I did not turn off with some of them, & become as worthless to society as they were. . . .

“[F]rom the circumstances of my position I was often thrown into the society of horse racers, cardplayers, foxhunters, scientific & professional men, and of dignified men; and many a time have I asked myself, in the enthusiastic moment of the death of a fox, the victory of a favorite horse, the issue of a question eloquently argued at the bar or in the great council of the nation, well, which of these kinds of reputation should I prefer? that of a horse jockey? a foxhunter? an Orator? or the honest advocate of my country’s rights?”

The entire letter is a repudiation of “history from the bottom” and well worth your time to read it in full. Jefferson knew what sort of person he wanted to become despite the temptation to satisfy his appetites and be as worthless as his peers — and he very well could have done so.

This is the distinction between greatness and mediocrity. It is near impossible to think of how the American War for Independence would have been successfully prosecuted without Washington. Does anyone truly see the British Empire standing alone without Churchill? Who among the Founding Fathers writes the Declaration of Independence other than Thomas Jefferson?

Perhaps we should consider more deeply the opportunities individuals receive to become great who decline the offer? Who choose leisure over their studies, appetites to happiness, put themselves over others, and choose disintegration over integrity?

How many Jeffersons have been lost? How many Washingtons? Perhaps more important to ask — who is at fault?

Only those whose time it is for choosing.

Even deeper than this is the question as to whether or not Jefferson or Washington or Churchill — knowing they would be reviled by those who demand synchronicity out of the perfect and the good — would have chosen to make moral choices knowing their lives and decisions would be tortured by historians? The hagiographers create marble men, yet the error committed is that neither Churchill nor Washington nor Jefferson needed to be perfect in order to be honored, nor were any of them perfect men — but they did achieve good in the world, and that is what matters.

The world is better for May 1940, for Yorktown, and for the Declaration of Independence, and we are better for those who chose to expand the sphere of human freedom despite the adolescent ingratitude of its inheritors. Perfect is not the standard. In fact, there is a great deal of good in the world that isn’t perfect but is only good because it is — even imperfectly — directed towards and striving for an end which is Good. So too are America’s Founding Fathers.

America doesn’t have to be perfect in order to be loved. Our Founding Fathers do not have to be perfect in order to be honored. Neither does Thomas Jefferson need to be turned into a demigod in order to be admired, appreciated, and respected.

Pace Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson prevails — and he prevails for many reasons. Onuf and Cogliano both remark that unlike Roosevelt who made Jefferson for all of us, present day defenders of Jefferson and by extension the U.S. Constitution, the Founding Fathers, and an antiquarian view of America which runs contrary to the present narrative of revisionist historians all do so perhaps not out of animus but most certainly out of a barely concealed prejudice based in racial superiority thinly veneered by an antiquated patriotism.

Such straw men are easy targets for the pyromaniacs, but hardly useful. In fact, one might even helpfully suggest that Roosevelt’s imagination of the Jeffersonian legacy is indeed the problem. Jefferson is not for all of us. Jefferson is not the common inheritance of every American. Rather, Jefferson’s legacy is for most of us — if at the very least some of us.

Former President Ronald Reagan put the question best:

It is time that we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers and if we will pass on to these young people the freedoms we knew in our youth, because freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. It has to be fought for and defended by each generation.

Jefferson’s legacy of self-government in the face of those who “know best” remains his contribution to the inheritance Americans receive from the Founding Fathers.

That Jefferson did not perfectly adhere to his own aspirations can be studied and considered, but that Jefferson articulated those aspirations and put them into words each American can recognize as the freedom to achieve freedom — that is remarkable and unprecedented in the history of the world.

Jefferson gave us a horizon line, not a utopia. Those who honor Jefferson’s memory and example are not the troglodytes or crypto-fascists their enemies — and they are enemies by their own admission — cage them as, but rather they are defending the promise and tradition of human freedom in the face of those who see in that promise either a mere accident of history or a zero-sum game.

Jefferson’s legacy will be assessed and debated as long as there is an America to defend. Yet it would be awfully nice if the appointed custodians of the legacy of Thomas Jefferson would not hold those whose opinions were perfectly mainstream in the 1990s in such utter contempt as to level the charge of malice and malfeasance against those who continue to hold such assessments today. Such pretensions may serve as a sop to blind political ideologues searching for footing in the dark, but it is contemptuously narrow and ironically at odds with the Jeffersonian spirit of free inquiry wherever the truth may lead.

Like Jefferson, we accept the imperfections of the present day pathographers, knowing that much like their subject, the good they contribute outshines the many flaws. Yet for those of us who do defend the Jeffersonian legacy — and dare we still call ourselves Jeffersonian conservatives? — it would serve us all to be treated on our own terms.

The present approach by Onuf and Cogliano served no other purpose but to ruin a good book. Which to be consistent with the Great Men of History thesis, was a personal and moral choice — not a victim of an unfortunate historic circumstance.

Shaun Kenney is the senior editor for The Republican Standard. This column has been republished here with permission from Bacon’s Rebellion.