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.

Let me get this straight. A main argument against letting Florida-based NextEra Energy buy Virginia-based Dominion Energy is that the giant and rich new company might be so politically powerful that it will corrupt Virginia’s governance processes. That was the big argument from this fellow on the Richmond Times-Dispatch website.

Shall I tell him or would you like to? What he writes about Florida Power and Light’s behavior pretty much parallels my 20 years of close observations, interactions and occasional outright conflicts with Dominion right here in Richmond. FPL and Dominion are peas in a pod.

I remain skeptical that the size of the pod will matter to the average residential or business consumer. The new corporate holding company executives will likely be little different from the ones we have now, who are going to get very, very rich off this transaction and scoot to their retirement. But the wild west, anything goes environment has to disappear, and fast.

The proper and intelligent reaction to what is coming is to make it far more difficult for either Dominion, or NextEra after swallowing Dominion, to keep getting away with it. Virginia must fight the corruption across the board. There must be:

• Strict campaign donation limits at all levels of politics, ending the ability of anybody – including the tech giants or rent-seeking renewable companies who also now hold great sway over our legislature – to buy friendly legislative or executive decisions.  

• Strict limits, perhaps a prohibition even, on the corporate charitable activities which are so often clearly designed to curry favor with this politician or that special interest group.

• A removal of the consumer protection function from the Office of the Attorney General, creating instead an independent and judicially appointed Consumer Counsel to join the lists at the State Corporation Commission. Our last Attorney General took too much money from Dominion, and this new one took too much from renewable energy corporations. Nobody active at the SCC should be giving big bucks to the Attorney General while the AG is key player in cases. 

• A massive change in attitude at the State Corporation Commission toward claims that key data in case files must be held confidential and proprietary and thus invisible to the public. Corporate claims of harm to their business interests are usually bogus, but the SCC goes along far too easily. That must stop. It shouldn’t take legislation to stop it, but absent any progress, the Assembly should intervene. An independent consumer counsel could lead this charge.

• Far stronger lobbyist disclosure laws, diving deeper into efforts to influence regulatory matters and executive branch appointments. Our lobbying disclosure law has been a laughingstock my whole career. To compare it to Swiss cheese insults the cheese because the law is largely all holes.

Those six reforms pass at the 2027 General Assembly, with some real teeth and a bipartisan commitment behind them, and many of the dangers – the political dangers anyway – rising from the sale of Dominion will diminish. There are many other possible reforms, some equally effective, but listing those six makes the point. 

Dominion and NextEra should not be the only ones covered by these new rules. The campaign finance limits and lobbyist disclosure changes should cover everybody.  are hardly the only regulated entities giving money in the campaigns to pick the official “consumer counsel.”

NextEra or Dominion? I really don’t think the average consumer is going to care in the long run or pay that much more or less whatever happens with this sale. The cost of energy is rising for a host of reasons, many out of the state’s control. The cost drivers which the state does control are beloved by the party in power, thus are not changing any time soon. By the end of Governor Spanberger’s term, the cost of your power bill will be way higher than it is today. It will be inflating many other costs in your family budgets. Virginia’s cost of energy will rise relative to competing states. 

My tenure as a “senior fellow” at the now-closed Thomas Jefferson Institute is over, so my speaking on behalf of that platform is done. Any formal role with the Jefferson Forum that seeks to replace it will await the appointment of a new president, who may have little interest in the energy front or may disagree with my basic positions. The right-wing nonsense grates on me just as much as the left-wing nonsense. (No more coal, thank you). 

So why listen to me? I started watching state politics closely 50 years ago last month, when I started at The Roanoke Times, started playing politics 40 years ago this month when I joined the Republican Party of Virginia staff as policy director and press secretary, was working inside the Office of Attorney General 25 years ago with my eyes open, and then 20 years ago started my deep dive into energy regulation on behalf of Newport News Shipbuilding. 

My concerns that our lax ethics laws invite corruption are fully based on that 50 years of experience and are totally bipartisan. Both parties need the handcuffs and spotlights. Perhaps the high stakes of this pending sale of our dominant utility will finally wake up the voters. It is a perfect chance to try again. Perhaps this message may fade away (again), but he who has ears, let him hear.

Republished with permission from Bacon’s Rebellion.

Actually, SOMEONE wrote a book and put Biden’s name on it. There’s no way Slurry McTurnip - who was incapable of signing his own pardons in January 2025 and who could barely string a sentence together in a June 2024 debate - was able to pen a memoir.

In order to write a memoir, you need to have a functioning memory.

The release of the book, called “Promise Me, America” is set for two weeks AFTER the mid-term elections.

That is not an accident.

The last thing Democrats want to do is to remind voters of the four failed years of this dementia patient as they’re about to vote in the mid-terms. The New York Times reports that when Biden blurted out a September release date last month, it caused Dem operatives to experience “much consternation.” (That’s Times newspeak for “livid.”)

The date was quickly changed at their behest.

In order to pump up advance sales of the ghost-written book, Biden cut a two-minute promo.

It should come with a warning for those prone to seizures: It’s a festival of jump cuts. This clearly took the feeble 83-year-old hours to record. With time for naps, of course.

Here it is. Play the Joe Biden parlor game this weekend and count the cuts for yourself.

Some get 13. I got 33.

Jesus. Joe Biden sounds TERRIBLE here... and this is what HIS PEOPLE thought was his best presentation.
They use "office knick-knacks" and "bookshelf panoramas" to hide jump-cuts (ie, hiding that he can only string 4 or 5 words together).
Even then, he's slurring. https://t.co/VFYA0jWTcy

— Tripp Whitbeck (@trippwhitbeck) July 15, 2026

Biden may or may not have been the worst president in history, but I think we can all agree that his wife - “Dr.” Jill Biden - was the most rapacious First Lady to ever inhabit the White House. She actively tried to conceal Joe’s deterioration in order to keep the Biden grift going for another four years.

I won’t be buying the book. You?

We all know that your sudden about-face on insider trading by members of Congress isn’t because of Trump. Or because you suddenly developed a moral compass.

Clearly, you’ve seen polls that show Americans are disgusted with corrupt politicians who use their elected offices to get rich.

Fraud is going to be a campaign issue this fall and Luria is vulnerable.

Who knows. She still has to get through the August 4th Democrat primary. Luria’s affection for insider trading might have hurt her in the August 4th Democrat primary. Unlikely, though. Luria’s ability to raise campaign bucks is second only to her ability to trade stocks.

In a Washington Post story headlined “In Reversal, Luria Backs Congressional Stock-Trading Ban In House Comeback Bid; Luria’s support for the stock-trading ban marks the starkest policy shift that the former Navy commander released in a platform Wednesday” the former mermaid maker was exposed for the transactional politician she is:

Elaine Luria, a former House Democrat mounting a comeback bid for a battleground Virginia district, once derided a congressional stock ban as “bulls---.”

But as she looks to win back her former seat from Rep. Jen Kiggans (R), Luria now says she supports the measure.

“In light of the blatant corruption coming out of this White House, it’s incumbent on members of Congress to set an example,” she said in an interview.

During her two terms in congress Luria loved the notion of getting rich on information her constituents didn’t have. Now that her internal polls are likely showing her losing to Rep. Jen Kiggans - especially on issues of integrity - she’s trying to blame the Trump administration for her stance on Congressional corruption.

The campaign arm for House Republicans labeled Luria a “prolific stock trader” as it blasted her for attending a fundraiser in Washington on Monday hosted by former House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California).

In fact, townhall.com reported on Monday’s fundraiser with this headline: “Congress' Most Prolific Stock Traders Are Holding a Ritzy Fundraiser for Democrat Elaine Luria Tonight”

That fundraiser was held at a private, undisclosed residence. Hosts paid $5,000 to attend and co-hosts got to rub elbows with Pelosi and Luria for just $1,500.

In addition to their Democratic politics, Luria and Pelosi also share their love of stock trading. While a member of Congress, Luria traded hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of stocks. During her time in office, Luria was the largest trader of Chinese stocks. Luria also objected to a ban on such trades by members of Congress, calling any attempt to prevent such trades 'bulls**t.'

Elaine Luria wants voters to believe that when it comes to insider stock trading, Trump made her switch sides.

Bullshit.

by Victoria Manning

From Virginia Tech to the University of Wisconsin, separate but equal is still illegal.

It's 2026, yet colleges and universities across the nation still push racial segregation on campus. Higher education institutions have spent the last decade building racially segregated dormitories under a friendlier name—"black living learning communities."

Now President Trump's Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is ordering them to end housing segregation or face the consequences.

On June 23, Craig Trainor, Assistant Secretary for HUD's Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, issued a Dear Colleague letter with a clear warning to higher education institutions. "Racial segregation was a moral abomination when it was demanded by the majority in certain regions of the United States many decades past. It is no less morally outrageous when it is demanded by other racial groups today."

Trainor points out that the 1968 Fair Housing Act prohibits segregating dwellings based on race. He warns that HUD "will ensure maximum accountability for . . . violating the Act." HUD encourages whistleblowers to report these racist practices so they can be investigated.

Colleges across the nation have used living learning communities (LLCs) to openly segregate student dormitories by race without consequences for at least the past decade. In 2018, Virginia Tech started a university sanctioned segregated dormitory for black students called the Ujima LLC.

After the Trump administration's executive order banning divisive diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, Virginia Tech eliminated the Ujima segregated dorms at the end of the 2025-26 academic year. That decision didn't sit well with the far-left Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which organized a protest to reinstate racial segregation on campus.

Virginia Tech made the right decision to end its segregated housing, at least for now. Other schools across the nation continue to push these racist practices, thumbing their nose at the Constitution and the federal government.

The University of Wisconsin–Madison has the Essence Learning Community, advertised as a way for students to learn about the "Black diaspora and impacted peoples." Photos and videos reveal only black students living in these dorms. One student told a local news outlet, "Coming back to Essence – after being in classes [that are] predominantly white – was really comforting to have people that look like me."

While Marquette University in Milwaukee is a private school, it receives federal grant funding and is subject to federal laws. Marquette has a black LLC called Umoja where students "participate in events such as retreats and programming designed to support their identity."

The University of New Mexico also has a black LLC that claims to be a "welcoming and inclusive living space where black students can share their experience of navigating academia while establishing community." Just next door, the University of Arizona also has a black LLC.

Cal State in Los Angeles has a black LLC called Halisi. While the school advertises that anyone can apply to live in Halisi, social media shows it's just black students that live there. One black student said he wanted to join Halisi because he wanted to be around people who look like him.

Thanks to HUD leadership and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act, these unlawful practices will come to an end. That's a promise from Assistant Secretary Trainor:

No euphemism, woke rationalization, or appeal to "safe spaces," "affinity housing," or "cultural celebration" will shield universities from liability where intentional unlawful discrimination is found. We will pursue every available remedy to bring discriminatory institutions into compliance, including, without limitation, compensatory and punitive damages, civil penalties, and injunctive relief.

Imagine an American university allowing an exclusively white LLC for students—there would rightly be outrage. Segregating by race at water fountains was wrong, segregating by race in dorms is also wrong. As Chief Justice Roberts put it in a Supreme Court opinion, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

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 member of the Virginia Beach School Board 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.

As the tributes began pouring in Sunday for Senator Lindsey Graham who died suddenly on Saturday from a ruptured aorta, we learned that his favorite drinks were Diet Coke and Reisling. Hopefully, not mixed. 

Quirky, like the 71-year-old statesman from South Carolina. 

Many didn’t know that Graham’s parents died when he was in college and that he adopted his 13-year-old sister and cared for her while attending school and during his service in the Air Force.

It was no surprise to those of us who admired Graham that he lived modestly and didn’t amass enormous wealth during his four terms in the U.S. Senate and his four in the House. He continued to live in the South Carolina house that he bought in 1993 for $165,000.

One of the first to announce Graham’s shocking death on X was President Trump:

President Donald J. Trump on the passing of Senator Lindsey Graham: pic.twitter.com/m2Mb5m1EKz

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) July 12, 2026

Hundreds of others followed.

Those who knew him well, confirmed what many of us believed from watching Graham from a distance: He was a one-man powerhouse in the Senate and after initially opposing Donald Trump in 2016, turned into one of the president’s trusted advisors. He was a good-natured politician, with strongly held beliefs who managed to win over friends on the opposite side of the aisle

That wasn’t a total surprise, given the he was one of the Senate’s famous “Three Amigos” along with the late John McCain and Joe Lieberman. 

In fact, one clip of Graham making the rounds yesterday was of his eulogy at Lieberman’s funeral in 2002.

It’s long, but worth watching. On display is his deep love of his friend and his self-deprecating sense of humor. 

🇺🇸✡️ -- Lindsey Graham at the funeral of his friend Joe Lieberman

"He was religious to the point of enough already..." pic.twitter.com/yz2qa2Pp8S

— Belaaz News (@TheBelaaz) July 12, 2026

It was Graham’s political opponents who were among the first to offer full-throated sorrow at his passing. A reminder that there are still some Washington politicians who can put aside their differences and form deep friendships. 

Sen. Amy Klobucher of Minnesota, for instance. She offered this gracious and unreserved tribute to her former colleague.

It was a shock this morning to find out that my friend Lindsey Graham has died. He was a man who loved his work, his country, and his family. He didn’t have an easy life growing up and to me that explained a lot about him as well as his devotion to his remaining family members including his sister. It also explained his almost kid-like exuberance about his job and the responsibilities he was given (even in his sixties he would get off a plane in a foreign land with a twinkle in his eye and look at me as if to say, can you believe we are actually here and doing this?).

Lindsey was loyal to friends and causes. He was willing to work on gnarly issues and take on (at times) political risks for the right reasons. It is fitting that he died shortly after visiting Ukraine, one of those causes he would stand up for through thick and thin.

Much will be said in the coming days about his relationships with others—President Trump and John McCain for instance—but what can’t be forgotten is the reason why so many people he worked with—from senators to staff—will mourn his loss: Lindsey had a zest for life and the Senate that made you want to get to work on a bill with him or at least debate him. He brought joy to his job.

Lindsey Graham was the one who was willing to work with me (when so few would) on helping the Afghan refugees. I remember standing outside of a little phone booth in the Republican cloakroom last year as he spoke with the Vice President, holding up a sign that said “Save the Afghans” and he put the phone on hold and said “OK OK I will go on your bill even if it gets me in trouble.” Or his early willingness to lead on big tech bills, including repealing the provision that protects them from consumer suits.

But mostly my fond memories of spending time with Lindsey (and we travelled the world with John McCain) was not about the ups and downs of his policy positions. It was about his love for the world, his loyalty to hard causes and his friends, and the pure joy he brought to life. I will miss him.

My favorite memory of the senator will always be his blistering defense of Judge Brett Kavanaugh during Kavanaugh’s bruising confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court.

The Kavanaugh Confirmation- Lindsey Graham's finest hour. Requiescat in Pace pic.twitter.com/trEtnF8Y7Y

— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 12, 2026

Lindsey Graham will be missed. The U.S. Senate without the powerful man from South Carolina will be lacking the sort of moral clarity that Graham brought to nearly every issue.

Virginia Beach school director used taxpayer resources to recruit volunteers for Democrat congressional candidate Elaine Luria.

On June 23, Melissa Disher, Director of the First Colonial High School (FCHS) Legal Studies Academy in Virginia Beach, sent out a notification to parents. She called it a volunteer opportunity for a "Campaign Fellows Program." The email and attached flyer, provided to Restoration News by a parent, was a push to get student volunteers for Democrat Elaine Luria's congressional campaign.

School board policies prohibit using taxpayer resources for partisan political activity.

The description for the "fellows program" sent out to families by Ms. Disher would have student volunteers promote the campaign on social media, assist with virtual campaign events including phone banks, "serve as a campus ambassador at [their] high school," and "spread the word about the campaign and fellowship through [their] networks."

Elaine Luria, a former congresswoman who lost her seat to Rep. Jen Kiggans (R) in 2022, is running in the Virginia Second Congressional District Democratic primary against three other candidates on August 4.

Other candidates—including Rep. Kiggans—were not afforded the same opportunity as Luria for volunteer recruitment at First Colonial High School.

"We need to keep a level playing field for candidates, including in the primary. Government resources shouldn't be used to benefit one candidate over the other," Democratic candidate Patrick Mosolf told Restoration News.

Joe Link, spokesperson for the Kiggans campaign, called the situation "concerning" in a statement to Restoration News:

It is very concerning and disappointing that Virginia Beach City Public Schools would allow direct access for a Democrat candidate's campaign to solicit students using taxpayer resources in clear violation of their own policy. We find it equally troubling that they are refusing to allow equal access and instead seem to be using the same policy that was violated as the rationale to disenfranchise students and keep our campaign from offering alternative options to students. The perception of VBCPS [Virginia Beach City Public Schools] endorsing certain candidates for office is damaging to the core principles that should focus on the education of students and not political persuasion by school administrators.

The Policy is Clear

Virginia Beach School Board policy prohibits political advertising and promotion:

School facilities, school resources, email or other web-based services, or equipment may not be used as a means of producing or disseminating to the community any material that advertises or promotes a political party, a political cause, or the candidacy of an individual for public office.

Other regulations state "school property and school time, paid for by the citizens of the City, should not be used for partisan political purposes." The regulations further emphasize that employees may not "use institutional privileges, School Division resources, or working time to promote political candidates or partisan political activities."

Restoration News reached out to the Virginia Beach school administration with questions, including how many people received Disher's message. On July 6 a district spokesperson told Restoration News that "this matter was brought to the School Administration's attention today and is currently being investigated."

School Board Vice Chair Carolyn Weems told Restoration News she was just made aware of the message sent by Disher and is looking into it. "I just learned about this incident, so I can't comment on the specifics but speaking generally I will say that our schools must focus on providing the best academic programs for Virginia Beach students. We have policies governing partisan political activities that must be enforced."

School Board member David Culpepper said, "I don't know specifics about the situation yet, but in general, it would be grossly inappropriate for a public-school employee to exploit their position to promote partisan political campaigns using school resources."

Not the First Scandal

First Colonial High School has been at the center of a lot of political controversy. In September 2025, school board member Melinda Rogers participated in a student protest at the school while wearing a t-shirt promoting the anti-gun activist group Moms Demand Action.

In January 2026, activists fought to prohibit Turning Point USA from establishing a chapter at First Colonial High School. Yet they had no concerns with the previously active Gay Straight Alliance that held meetings during the school day.

When school leaders break the rules in such an egregious way, they must be held accountable for their actions. Public schools should be laser focused on reversing declining achievement, not serving as a recruitment pipeline for partisan political campaigns.

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.

The Democrats’ budget will cost every Virginia adult an extra $3,880.

Virginia’s state motto, “Sic Semper Tyrannis,” or “Thus Always to Tyrants,” declares that virtue and just governance always defeat tyranny. Yet Virginia Democrat leaders have become the tyrants.

Led by Gov. Abigail Spanberger, they ignore the Constitution and use the budget to pass sweeping marijuana laws, give themselves a hefty raise, and waste hard-earned taxpayer dollars on DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) pork.

On July 1, some of the most extreme legislation in Virginia’s history takes effect. Democrats have solidified their long-standing goal of disarming law-abiding citizens by adopting broad anti-Second Amendment laws to tighten control over Virginians. They also used budget negotiations to implement dangerous marijuana laws that failed to pass in the regular legislative session.

The final pork-laden biennial budget totals $207 billion, a staggering $24 billion increase from 2024. With roughly 6.7 million people aged 18 and older in the state, that amounts to $3,880 more per adult compared to former Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s budget.

Thomas Jefferson must be turning over in his grave.

Sen. Louise Lucas’ Pot Shops

For weeks, Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee Chair Louise Lucas claimed she wouldn’t approve the budget unless it included an elimination of tax breaks for data centers. Lucas even went on a “data center listening tour” across the state, referring to Spanberger as a “data center diva.” Yet when the final, agreed-upon bill was released, the tax exemption remained—alongside 149 new pages of legislation authorizing retail marijuana.

Lucas owns a pot shop in Portsmouth and has been pushing the legalization of marijuana for years. After the marijuana legalization language was included in the budget bill, she miraculously changed her tune on data center tax exemptions.

Under the new budget, data centers statewide will continue receiving a roughly $1.9 billion tax break. A new, lower tax was added on data center energy consumption, but nothing close to what Lucas initially wanted. She’s happy, though, because she’ll be able to legally push pot in her retail store.

Lucas got her pot shop, but Virginians got the bill—and the consequences.

Democrat Pork Projects

Not only did Virginia Democrats give themselves a hefty raise in the budget, but they also spent hundreds of millions of dollars on pet projects and social justice agendas.

Over $40 million is earmarked in the amended budget for implementing Lucas’ marijuana legislation.

Members of the part-time legislature voted themselves a 178 percent raise from $18,000 per year to $50,000—a $2.1 million added expense for Virginia taxpayers. This is on top of the travel per diem, staff expenses, and other extras they receive.

At least 64 additional employees were added to the already bloated state government at a cost of over $18.5 million. Plus, a $3.5 million per year salary increase for lawyers in Attorney General Jay Jones’ office—the guy who fantasized about shooting his political opponent and wished his children dead.

$77.1 million will be spent to restore the Virginia Medicaid FAMIS Prenatal Coverage for Pregnant and Post Partum Immigrant Persons program. This program provides taxpayer funding for illegal immigrants’ medical coverage, according to the website.

Some of the taxpayer dollars doled out have race-based qualifications, including $3 million over two years to “attract out of state visitors from Black, Indigenous, and Hispanic communities.” Also, $1 million to support the private entity Museum of Black Women Innovators in Portsmouth—Lucas’ home.

Virginia is allocating $3.6 million over two years for scholarships limited to students at institutions where at least 25 percent of undergraduates are Hispanic-identifying and hold a specific accreditation.

$60 million will be spent to provide childcare for state employees, including $35 million allocated to continue progress on a “new state agency building and a state employee childcare center.”

Here are just a few more examples of added items in the amended budget:

Social Services

• An additional $11,500,000 (totaling $322,662,101) for the "Virginia Eviction Reduction Program" that covers "expenses for households facing eviction."

• Increases the Virginia Housing Trust Fund by an additional $60 million up to a biennial total of $215 million to "address housing affordability, supply issues, and homelessness.” $20 million of that money will fund "loan origination and servicing activities for mixed income housing."

• An additional $14,000,000, for a total of $325,162,101, to "serve the growing population of Virginians at risk of or experiencing homelessness." This includes $7 million to the City of Charlottesville for "development of a transitional housing and life skills training facility."

• $5 million for Prince William County's "Affordable Housing Fund."

• SNAP programs will cost Virginians over $135 million, up $4 million in this year’s budget.

• $4 million in block grants for needy families to access "long-acting reversible contraceptives and other contraceptives."

• $8.6 million more each year to pay for school breakfasts.

• No additional cost but increases staff-to-child ratios for licensed child daycare centers.

• $1.5 million for Fairfax and Prince William counties to enhance workforce development and create new training spaces "for members of the immigrant community."

• $100,000 to "provide services and legal support to the immigrant and refugee population in South Richmond and North Chesterfield."

Energy and Environment

• $300,000 over two years for training resources for Virginia's offshore wind workforce.

• $10 million over two years for creating the "Clean Energy Innovation Bank."

• $100 million "to fund improvements in environmental monitoring in the Commonwealth."

Education

• $5.1 million for a statewide learning management system through the Department of Education.

• An additional $950,000 per year for PBS Appalachia.

Civic and Government Administration

• $10,000 for the creation of a website for the Commission on Civic Engagement to promote an annual Civic Education Summit.

• $247,500 over two years to fund third-party voter registration data exchanges, including the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC).

• $1.8 million to relocate three monuments and memorials of Gen. Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, Gov. William Smith, and Dr. Hunter Holmes McGuire.

• $3.3 million "to reflect the impact of the increase in the state minimum wage."

• $38 million "to support the implementation of the retail cannabis market."

Local Projects

• $3.5 million for two golf tournaments, including the 2027 LIV tournament in Gainesville, Virginia.

• $1.4 million for the City of Petersburg to "support the development of an aquaponics food production, education, and research facility."

Sic Semper Tyrannis was meant as a warning that unchecked power will eventually be used against the very people it claims to serve. Rather than providing relief to Virginians, Democrats are raiding their wallets and forcing through sweeping changes that couldn’t survive the regular legislative session.

Democrats have chosen a socialist agenda over fiscal restraint and have used the budget process for lawmaking rather than appropriations. Is that what Virginians thought they were voting for last November?

Queen Spanberger’s reign will be a costly one.

Republished with permission from Restoration News.

🚨WATCH: The push for green energy is running head first into the push for data centers.

Spotsylvania County, Virginia is home to the largest solar panel development east of the Rockies.

But despite its large 6,300+ acre footprint, it doesn’t provide enough power for one… pic.twitter.com/PM9Uh65Kzv

— Nick Minock (@NickMinock) July 9, 2026

Oh, and it generates minuscule amounts of power.

“Despite its large 6,300+ acre footprint, it doesn’t provide enough power for one large data center complex in Loudoun County.”

SPOTSYLVANIA COUNTY, Va. (7News) — The largest solar farm on the East Coast and one of the largest solar projects east of the Rockies is located in Spotsylvania County, Virginia.

The AES-owned Spotsylvania Solar Energy Center contains more than 6,300 acres of solar panels.

According to the company’s website, the Spotsylvania solar energy farm is planned to produce 485 MW. Despite its massive size, the Spotsylvania solar farm wouldn’t produce enough electricity to power the 500 MW Digital Realty [IAD37] data center complex in Ashburn.

Right now, there are more than 200 data centers in Loudoun County, more than 50 in Prince William County. Fairfax County has around 20 data centers, and more are on the way in those three counties, along with Stafford, Spotsylvania, and Culpeper counties. Overall, there are more than 600 data centers in Virginia.

In 2020, Virginia lawmakers passed the Virginia Clean Economy Act, which requires Dominion Energy to deliver 100% carbon-free electricity by 2045 and Appalachian Power by 2050.

On Tuesday, State Sen. Danica Roem (D-Manassas) said Virginia's goal of reaching 100% carbon-free energy by 2045 is being derailed by data centers.

Uh-oh. Looks like the climate crazies have a dilemma. Even if they cover the entire commonwealth in solar panels and clutter the Atlantic horizon with whale-and-seabird killing windmills, they won’t be able to meet the energy demands of the booming data center industry.

And the little guys - me and you - with our houses that need a comparatively tiny amount of electricity to keep things running? We’ll be paying engorged electric bills to cover this anti-coal insanity.

Notice that the nutty Clean Economy Act was passed during the leftist Northam regime. The foolishness of those politicians was compounded this year once the lefties were back in control and immediately rejoined the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.

Residential electric bills are headed up sharply thanks to that meaningless virtue signaling.

Until we return sane politicians to Richmond who understand that electricity has to come from a variety of sources, coal being one and nuclear (small modular reactors) being another, we will continue to suffer at the hands of brainwashed leftists.

More information can be found here. Full story: https://t.co/j0ka3JHglC

— Nick Minock (@NickMinock) July 9, 2026

STATEMENT ON GOVERNOR SPANBERGER'S MARIJUANA BUDGET DEBACLE

I warned that rushing marijuana commercialization through Virginia would lead to reckless governing. This week, that warning came true in the worst possible way.

Governor Abigail Spanberger and the far-left majority in the General Assembly jammed their marijuana retail scheme into the state budget instead of allowing it to go through the normal legislative process, where it could have received the scrutiny it deserved. Now we know the cost of that shortcut: according to Williamsburg-James City Commonwealth's Attorney Nate Green, former president of the Virginia Association of Commonwealth's Attorneys, the drafting is so sloppy that Virginia's own prosecutors are warning the law banning marijuana distribution, and the law protecting Virginians under 21 from possessing marijuana, may have already been repealed a full year earlier than anyone intended.

Let that sink in.

Because far left Democrats chose to legislate drug policy through a budget bill instead of a real bill with real hearings, prosecutors across this Commonwealth are now uncertain whether they can even enforce the law against selling marijuana to a minor. Mr. Green himself said it plainly: courts resolve ambiguity against prosecutors, and defense attorneys already have grounds to argue these protections no longer exist.

This is not a minor technical glitch. This is what happens when ideology outruns competence. Governor Spanberger and legislative Democrats were so determined to deliver a marijuana retail market that they didn't take the time to make sure basic child-protection statutes stayed on the books in the meantime.

Virginia families deserve better than a government that can't be bothered to get the details right when the details involve protecting kids from drug dealers.

I am calling on Governor Spanberger and the General Assembly to: immediately acknowledge this drafting failure and call a special session without delay to close this gap and restore certainty that distributing marijuana to a minor remains a crime in Virginia;

Virginians were told this marketplace would be built "safely and responsibly." Instead, the first real-world test of this policy is a mess entirely of the majority's own making.

The people of Virginia deserve a government that gets this right, not one that has to be told by its own prosecutors that it may have accidentally legalized selling drugs to children.

Jason Miyares is the former Virginia Attorney General. We received his permission to print this.

by Bronson Winslow

After months of legal battle and Second Amendment uncertainty, a court order temporarily blocked Virginia from enforcing a ban on AR-15s.

Virginia gun owners secured their first major courtroom victory June 26 after a Lancaster County Circuit Court judge granted a temporary injunction against Gov. Abigail Spanberger's sweeping ban on the sale and transfer of AR-15s.

The injunction was secured by the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL), Gun Owners of America (GOA), and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF). Those groups argued that Virginia's newly enacted "assault firearm" ban violates both the Virginia Constitution and the Second Amendment. The ruling delivered a timely setback to one of the most extreme gun control laws in the nation.

“Article I, Section 13 is the commonwealth’s recognition of a pre-existing right with which Virginians were endowed by their creator, and it operates as a fixed limitation on the power of government to enact legislation affecting firearms,” the plaintiffs said in a motion.

For now, the court's order prevents the Virginia State Police from enforcing the law while the constitutional challenge proceeds. The law would have taken effect July 1.

Fighting Spanberger

“VCDL is pleased with the temporary injunction that came out of Lancaster County today against the ‘assault firearm’ ban and carry prohibition,” Virginia Citizens Defense League President Philip Van Cleave said in a statement.

If the injunction does not hold, the law will create a Class 1 misdemeanor for the importation, sale, purchase, manufacturing or transfer of so-called “assault weapons.” It will also impose the same penalty on magazines that hold more than 15 rounds.

After Gov. Spanberger signed SB 749—the "assault weapon ban"—into law, Second Amendment groups quickly filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the AR-15 ban.

The lawsuits alleged that the law not only violates the Virginia constitution but also conflicts with the 2022 landmark Supreme Court precedent set in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen.

The Bruen decision reinterpreted how courts can weigh the constitutionality of firearm laws and declared that all firearm laws must be rooted in the historical tradition of firearm regulation. Since the decision, courts have used Bruen to strike down decades-old firearm laws that fail to pass constitutional muster.

During the injunction hearing, the Commonwealth attempted to separate the state court’s analysis from the Supreme Court’s Bruen analysis. Since the decision was first handed down, numerous “progressive” lawyers have worked to sidestep precedent by citing outdated and racist gun laws from the 1800s.

Lancaster County Circuit Judge John Martin denied this attempt, calling the Supreme Court’s ruling instructive and necessary.

Trump Administration Fighting for the Constitution

In April, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon issued a warning to Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D), saying that unconstitutional firearm laws will result in lawsuits from the federal government. 

Dhillon’s warning is the latest move from the DOJ’s Second Amendment Civil Rights Division—a new office created by President Donald Trump in February to combat years of persistent government overreach on gun rights.

“This letter provides formal notice that the Civil Rights Division will commence litigation in the event the Commonwealth of Virginia enacts certain bills that unconstitutionally limit law-abiding Americans’ individual right to bear arms,” the letter reads. 

Dhillon’s statement followed a proposed amendment to the so-called “assault weapons” ban by Gov Spanberger. The amendment added the term “fixed” to the definition of an assault rifle and would broaden the number of firearms subject to the ban.

The amendment did not pass.

More than Just “Assault Weapons”

The injunction may have temporarily blocked the so-called “assault weapon” and magazine capacity ban, but numerous other firearm laws will soon take effect.

Companion bills SB 27 and HB 21 create what Democrat lawmakers call "responsible conduct" standards for the firearm industry. The bills will impose state-mandated "controls" over the industry and allow the attorney general, local attorneys, and private individuals to sue manufacturers.

These bills are direct attacks on the Second Amendment and open the door for anti-gun groups to sue manufacturers out of business.

Senate Bill 38 and House Bill 93 will expand Virginia's current prohibited person restrictions to include anyone who lives in the same household as a prohibited individual. This change would allow the state to strip a law-abiding individual of the right to carry simply because a family member or roommate received a court ruling of "prohibited."

Moving Forward

The injunction expires on December 31 or until the courts issue a final order. The Commonwealth is expected to appeal against the decision.

“We expect the commonwealth to appeal the decision, but we also expect to prevail,” Van Cleave continued.

The temporary injunction provides relief to Virginia gun owners for now, but the fate of the Second Amendment in Virginia still faces real threats.

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.

Geezus.

But an accusation of rape from a Democrat woman? At the same time he was plummeting in the polls?

A convenient kiss of death for a Democrat. Bye, bye Nazi guy.

Don’t believe the claptrap from Democrats about believing all women or Platner crossing a line. Polls were showing that Platner was going to lose to incumbent Sen. Susan Collins. That would hamper the Democrats’ wet dreams of impeaching Donald Trump.

THAT’S why the Democrat Party of Maine called on Platner to drop out yesterday and cut off funds to his campaign.

As of this writing, Platner has not withdrawn from the race. In a statement released on social media, Totenkopf man said he was “taking time to reflect.”

It’s just a matter of time. He has to exit by July 13th so Democrats can do what they love to do: pick a candidate without the mess of a primary.

Early on Monday it was reported that Platner had cancelled a rash of campaign appearances as rumors spread that yet another scandal was on its way. Politico broke the story that an ex-girlfriend - a Democrat this time - said Platner raped her five years ago.

A woman who dated Maine U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.

The woman, a 41-year-old Maine resident named Jenny Racicot, detailed the alleged incident to POLITICO in three interviews over the past two weeks. POLITICO also spoke with a man Racicot dated and confided in the years after the alleged incident, and reviewed documents, including emails between Racicot and her therapist and messages between Racicot and an acquaintance whom she warned against getting involved with Platner years before he ran for office.

Racicot previously described “reckless” and “unsettling” behavior by Platner to The New York Times, but says she didn’t go public with the specific assault claim because she didn’t want to be known as a rape victim.

Racicot said she later felt compelled to go public about her experience because the reaction to the Times story was dominated by controversy about another woman, Lyndsey Fifield, who alleged Platner mistreated her and faced attacks because of her ties to the Republican Party. (Contacted by POLITICO, Fifieldstood by the allegations she made to the Times and declined to comment further.)

“My part of the story was just a read-over,” Racicot said in an interview. “And the story was Lyndsey, and the accusations of her being politically motivated.”

Racicot says her revelations are definitely not politically motivated. She shares Platner’s radical politics.

By Monday evening, several of Platner’s prominent supporters had jumped ship.

The allegations against Graham Platner are troubling and deeply serious.

I am rescinding my endorsement.

— Ruben Gallego (@RubenGallego) July 6, 2026

I’ve been very clear that sexual assault or violence against women is a red line. These allegations are very serious and credible. Graham Platner should drop out from the race. I am withdrawing my endorsement.

— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) July 6, 2026

It’s worth remembering that for Democrats, a Nazi death camp tattoo was not a deal breaker. 

In a sane world, that alone would have ended Platner’s political aspirations. In the end, it was all about the polls.

"Members of the group Patriot Front ride the metro as a commuter looks on, during the 250th anniversary of U.S. independence in Washington, D.C., U.S., July 4, 2026. REUTERS/Cheney Orr" pic.twitter.com/pPu3W8mRkQ

— philip lewis (@Phil_Lewis_) July 4, 2026

Lemme get this straight: These white supremacists took the metro to a downtown D.C. march this weekend and a freelance photographer just happened to be in the same rail car where a lone black woman was also riding? Oh, and this is the only metro car in the world with no ads or signage?

Sorry. This looks staged. Prove me wrong.

Reuters published the photo and the left engaged in the usual theatrics.

Anyone else remember the last time the media told us to be frightened because the Patriot Front was out and about?

🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
So classic! During Glenn Youngkin campaign. Fake & paid “MAGA” (Charlottesville style??). Lore said paid by the Lincoln Group & Youngkin sent them flowers for the free publicity. 😂🤣😂 pic.twitter.com/3qc011XXUw

— Mary Ballard (@MaryBal05465980) July 5, 2026

Yep, difference is that in 2021 the actors forgot to wear their masks and foolishly included a black guy. It later turned out that the fake Patriot Front members holding tiki torches in front of a Glenn Youngkin campaign bus in Charlottesville were sent there by the Lincoln Project, a group of bitter, old guard Republicans who loathe Donald Trump and the MAGA movement.

They were trying to remind voters of the 2017 Charlottesville tiki torch rally and hoped that would hurt the Republican candidate for governor.

As it happens, the Department of Justice just indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center for wire and bank fraud, alleging one of its paid informants was an organizer of the infamous Charlottesville Unite the Right rally.

You couldn’t make this stuff up.

Anyone who isn’t skeptical about these alleged incidents of racism isn’t paying attention.

This isn’t to say that the Patriot Front doesn’t exist. It does. And some of its members marched around Washington this weekend waving American and Confederate Battle flags, like a bunch of idiots.

They have a right to their racist beliefs, just as pro-Hamas demonstrators have a right to protest their loathsome ideology.

And decent people have a right to condemn them.

Frankly, I don’t care about masked morons marching with the Confederate flag in DC because I have seen masked Islamist terrorists marching with the Hezbollah flag in New York, and none of the lefties who are wringing their hands over the Washington demonstration had a problem with that.

The left is attempting to use that photograph to tarnish the patriotic festival most Americans enjoyed this weekend. They want THAT to be the lasting image of America’s 250th birthday. They want to convince us that times have not changed since 1957 and the Little Rock Nine.

Given that the left spent the past week trying to tinkle all over America’s birthday party, it’s not outlandish to wonder if the photo they’re promoting is even genuine. Where are the interviews with the train passengers? With the lone woman? How did the Reuter’s photog happen to be in that car?

Was the woman attacked? Was she robbed or stabbed in the neck? Did they take her seat? Force her to stand? 

Legitimate questions.

Until then all we have is a photo of a black woman on a train car surrounded by white men. It appears the men were ignoring her and she got to her stop safely.

Is this all you’ve got lefties?

Of course there’s another way of looking at this:

Which picture disturbs you more?

Legacy media is going ballistic about the one on the left.

It was utterly silent about the one on the right. pic.twitter.com/jgEVGUfCNz

— Kevin Bass (@kevinnbass) July 5, 2026

A long time ago, I was a freshman at an elite New England college, just graduated from Fairfax High School. (“F-A-I-R-F-A-X-R-E! B-E-L-S, Oh yes! Those Rebels are best!”).

On a gorgeous fall morning in 1987, I was taking a class in Colonial American history, when the topic turned to the American Revolution. The professor asked the class whether it was truly a “revolution” or merely a reordering of the pre-Marxist power structure.

Of course, I fell for the bait. The American Revolution was different, I opined. It changed the world by basing government on democracy, not aristocracy.

The professor laughed and pulled a nickel out of his pocket. This is the home of Thomas Jefferson, he declaimed, the author of American liberty. He then passed it around the class, so everyone could examine Jefferson’s modest abode.

The point was clear: Jefferson was not a “democrat” in any modern sense. He was a gentleman planter, a slaveowner. The Revolution he spawned was a myth.

In the past five years, as I’ve done research for my upcoming book, I’ve confirmed what I had suspected that morning:

My learned Marxist professor was not just wrong — he was spectacularly wrong.

Because the American Revolution was transformational. First, it represented the first (and last) time a British colony would overthrow its master by force of arms. Second, it created the United States, the most powerful nation in the history of the world. Third, it ushered in a modern age in which merit, not birth, would determine the destiny of individuals.

Those were, and are, true revolutionary concepts that have survived long after “real revolutions” in France and Russia foundered on the crap-heap of history. To this day, the words in the Declaration of Independence (“We find these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal”) continue to inspire millions to come to the USA; indeed, our nation has been transformed by immigration in the last 50 years to be BETTER than it was before. And it was already pretty great.

Yes, the USA has had its skeptics dating back to …. July 5, 1776.

Europeans initially refused to believe that our democracy could survive. (Today, their descendants refuse to believe we can win the World Cup). Socialists and their academic sympathizers assumed that our free enterprise model would collapse.

Yet we persist.

Ironically, the greatest myth of the Revolution is that it was an effete affair between gentlemen. It was not. It was eight years of unremitting violence which spanned North America, from the fortress walls of Quebec where a ragtag army led by Benedict Arnold (!) came within a breath of conquering loyalist Canada to the Carolina Low Country, where the “Swamp Fox” Francis Marion organized a Viet Cong-like resistance.

The war with the British was paralleled by a civil war on the frontier with the Indian tribes and Tories. Pillage, rape and murder were common occurrences. Nobody was safe.

In so many ways, the revolution could have spun out of control (as happened in France) but for one man – George Washington – who held it all together. His Continental Army was originally the middle-class “Minutemen.” By the end, it was the laboring classes: Scots-Irish, German, Free Black. Regardless, they all followed Washington without question. And he, in turn, subordinated himself to the civil government.

The American Revolution truly was a revolution. It was far more important than any communist uprising, because it provided for individual FREEDOM.

And that was unique in 1776. In fact, it’s unique today.

Happy birthday, America!

Chap Petersen, a former state senator, practices law in Northern Virginia. This column has been republished from his newsletter The Virginia Attorney and with permission from Bacon’s Rebellion.

A bit of hard data as the Virginia and national media go into hysterics over a very typical Virginia heat wave and repeat endlessly the claim that this is becoming more frequent.  Uh, no, no it’s not. From the CO2 Coalition’s recent updated compilation on “climate stability” in Virginia, worth reading and sharing. While you are staying out of this heat, obviously. (Everything I know about heat safety I learned in kindergarten, at Edwards AFB in the Mohave).  — SDH

Republished with permission from Bacon’s Rebellion.

Leave it to NPR. Even when they get it wrong, their bias shows. In all his years on the bench, the only thing notable about Alito to the lefties in public broadcasting was that he penned the Dobbs decision. Abortion really is sacred to these leftists.

Minutes after her “scoop” went live, it became apparent that Totenberg’s got it wrong. Alito had NOT announced his retirement.

NPR took down the fake story without explanation, leaving it to the worst journalist in America to try to explain what happened.

Later, tail between her legs, Totenberg sent this implausible explanation to Alito:

"Dear Justice Alito, there are no words to adequately apologize for today's error in reporting your retirement. It was entirely my fault. I rushed out of the courtroom after the opinion announcements, and when I realized that the usual rush of folks after a few minutes had not happened, I asked somebody was going on inside, to which the answer was, 'retirement announcements.' I didn't hear the 's' on 'announcements,' and I assumed something no reporter should ever do, that you were retiring. It was the worst professional mistake of my more than 50 years in journalism. I could go on, but I don't know what else to say, except that I am so, so sorry."

This is the most bizarre, unbelievable excuse ever offered for a phony story. We’re supposed to believe that this Supreme Court reporter with a half century of experience overheard some randos talking and rushed to get it in print?

Sorry, Nina, not buying it. I think you’ve been way too chummy with some of the justices over the years and one of them leaked this to you prematurely.

Maybe, just maybe, Alito is still upset about the leak in the Dobbs case, which put all of the conservative justices lives at risk. I’d be willing to bet he planted this story with the person he suspected of leaking the news that Roe v Wade was about to be overturned in a brilliant canary trap.

Alito may now know who did the leaking at the court. Perhaps the rest of us will also know soon.

Later that day, in an appearance on “All Things Considered” Totenberg called her fake story “a rookie mistake.”

Absurd. Any rookie who peddled an entirely made up story would be fired on the spot and filing for unemployment the next day.

Look, there has been speculation for the past two years that Justice Alito, 76, wants to retire while Trump is in office to avoid being replaced on the court by another leftie midwit like Ketanji Brown Jackson should a Democrat win in 2028.

Many outlets have file stories written about all of the justices in the event one should die suddenly or retire. (Just as news outlets had Mitch McConnell’s obit ready in case he leaves us soon.)

Come to think of it, at 82 Nina Totenberg is the Mitch McConnell of journalism. Old, barely functioning with terrible judgment.

Birthright citizenship (jus soli) originates in the 17th-century English legal doctrine of perpetual allegiance . It stems from feudalism, where all individuals born within the monarch's domain were considered natural subjects—or personal property—of the Crown, owing permanent obedience in exchange for the king’s royal protection.

And my suggestion last week - that we stop issuing tourist visas to women who might be pregnant or become pregnant while they’re here - is not longer far-fetched. At the very least, one of the conditions of obtaining a visa should be that it will immediately become invalid if the holder becomes pregnant. Visitors should post a bond with that promise.

You are not understanding politics and patriotism.

The issue is not just about making sure pregnant women do not get visas. The bigger issue is to make it extremely difficult to come to the USA AND THEN pin that global compliance requirement on Chief Justice John Roberts,… https://t.co/qmTRdmtnD9

— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) June 30, 2026

Social media was full of suggestions to work around the court decision. Hey, that’s the American way. Remember how the left cheered when Joe Biden said the Court ruled that he couldn’t forgive student debt, but he was going to do it anyway?

The obvious solution is that if an illegal alien has kids in the U.S., you deport the parents and raise the kids in some sort of ultra-patriotic super-soldier program.

— Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) June 30, 2026

Indeed, there are workarounds. Here’s one that suggests making it onerous to get into the States and blaming it all on the Chief Justice.

Dear @SecRubio and @realDonaldTrump , as a pragmatic American I respectfully suggest and recommend the @StateDept immediately institute the "Roberts Requirement" following similar visa entry protocols previously used for COVID-19 tests prior to U.S. admittance.

The Roberts… pic.twitter.com/xC5RKFo7oL

— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) June 30, 2026

Yesterday the Department of Justice announced that it was directing federal prosecutors to prioritize rounding up those engaged in “birth tourism.”

Excellent.

It’s insane to think that a Chinese woman can come to the U.S., have a baby and immediately carry that Chinese infant back to communist China where he learns to hate America. Later, he’ll be allowed to vote (absentee if necessary) in our elections and travel on a U.S. passport. Heck, as a natural-born citizen, he could move to the U.S. and run for president.

Talk about a Manchurian candidate.

This is no small matter. The New York Times reports that perhaps as many as 39,000 babies are born each year through birth tourism.

The organizers of this citizenship chicanery need to be prosecuted and the practice needs to stop.

President Trump needs to exercise his authority to put a pause on all immigration from the third world for the next two years, while we wait for Congress to act.

Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz joined Megyn Kelly yesterday to discuss the implications of the 5-4 decision (or 6-3, depending on how you count Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion) and how it might be remedied.

The professor said the 14th Amendment, which conferred citizenship on former slaves, was never intended to make citizens out of people in the country illegally.

It’s estimated that about 260,000 babies are born every year to illegal aliens in the U.S. That’s 9% of all births. Instant citizens, based on the magical dirt theory that the Supreme Court supported yesterday.

In fact, Sen. Jacob M. Howard of Michigan, who in 1866 served as the chief Senate spokesman for the 14th Amendment, emphatically declared that the new amendment would not apply to aliens.

Dershowitz noted that the language of this Constitutional Amendment was poor, leaving “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” up for debate.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. 

The professor suggested that Congress pass carefully crafted legislation that makes clear that illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.

Expect Democrats to oppose any such move.

Pity, because there was a time, about 20 years ago, when Democrats also cherished the idea of American citizenship and didn’t want to see it abused.

1993. Dianne Feinstein: Should people be able to come to this country, get on Medicaid, give birth to a baby, and then go back to their home country? The answer is no.

Democrats used to be somewhat sane. Those days are long gone.pic.twitter.com/NHtzp7yhLL

— MAZE (@mazemoore) June 30, 2026

“They should scrape those up,” she muttered.

“Nah. Leave them,” I replied.

I hate to see the reminders of that dystopian time disappear. I want those idiotic, not-based-on-science signs demanding that we “social distance” to remain. They should serve as a warning about what happens when power-mad government factotums gain power.

They successfully stomped on our civil rights once. They’ll try again.

Remember the signs outside of businesses telling customers not to enter if they hadn’t taken the experimental vaccine or requiring patrons to show their vax papers for entry? How about the places that were taking forehead temperatures of everyone who entered? What about the gyms that turned off every other treadmill lest someone begin heavy breathing too close to another workout fanatic ? And let’s never forget the poor people who died alone in hospitals and nursing homes or the deceased loved ones buried with no mourners?

I don’t think I’m the only one who was profoundly and permanently changed during covid. I watched in stunned disbelief as compliant, unquestioning Americans allowed the government to gin up fear in order to nullify our constitutional rights.

Fauci and Deborah Birx have admitted that they pulled the social distancing rules out of their lily white derrières. We’ve seen transcripts of conversations in which they complained that Americans weren’t yet frightened enough of covid.

I wasn’t afraid of covid. I was more afraid of tyrannical government.

Sen. Rand Paul hasn’t forgotten. He is tenaciously chasing Anthony Fauci. He wants the evil doctor under oath and in prison. Given Fauci’s autopen pardon it’s unlikely he’ll ever be indicted. But it’s worth a try. Go for it, Rand.

Anthony Fauci funded dangerous gain-of-function research in Wuhan, lied to Congress about it, and helped orchestrate the biggest medical cover-up in modern history.

It’s time for accountability. pic.twitter.com/HOGsETpxE4

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) June 29, 2026

Let’s keep the fading Soviet-style signs. Just as Confederate monuments are reminders of a terrible time in American history, so too are these vestiges of Fauci’s reign of terror.

Save the signs, the one-way arrows in grocery stores. We should never forget what the tyrants did to our beloved country.