Pinned Tweet
This is one of the THOUSANDS of street dogs that roamed Istanbul in the Turkey Ataturk built, waiting for the light to change. Local businesses and individuals kept food and water out for the dogs, the city had a program to catch and release them with rabies shots and neutering. During COVID the city put food and water stations everywhere. I shared many a dinner with wonderful dogs that would sit quietly next to my table on patios all over Beziktas.
As the Islamist Erdogan tightened his grip on Turkiyë, and deposed the Mayor of Istanbul, the city program changed. Now they catch them and kill them. Turkey is becoming Iran.
I’ll take dogs over radical Muslims any day. @RepFine was right.
Tern retweeted
DIVORCE AGREEMENT
THIS IS INCREDIBLY WELL-PUT, AND I CAN HARDLY BELIEVE IT'S WRITTEN BY A STUDENT!!! WHATEVER HE RUNS FOR, I'LL VOTE FOR HIM.
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, and Obama supporters, et al:
We have stuck together since the late 1950s for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is our separation agreement:
Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by land mass, each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets, since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
—We don't like redistributive taxes, so you can keep them.
--You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.
--Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military.
--We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and the coal mines, and you can go with wind, solar, and bio-diesel.
--You can keep Oprah, Whoopi, Bill Maher, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all five of them.
--We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street.
--You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies, and illegal aliens.
--We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEOs, and rednecks.
--We'll keep Bill O’Reilly and Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood.
--You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.
--You can have the peaceniks and war protesters.
--When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.
--We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.
--You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness, and Shirley McLaine. You can also have the UN., but we will no longer be paying the bill.
--We'll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Volt and Leaf you can find.
--You can give everyone health care if you can find any practicing doctors.
--We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "The National Anthem."
--I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine," "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing," "Kum Baya," or "We Are the World."
--We'll practice trickle-down economics and you can continue to give trickle-up poverty your best shot.
--Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name, and our flag.
Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you might think about which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P.S. Also, please take George Clooney, Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Short, Charlie Sheen, Barbra Streisand, and (Hanoi) Jane Fonda with you.
P.P.S. And you won't have to press 1 for English when you call our country.
Forward This Every Time You Get It !
Let's Keep This Going, Maybe Some Of It Will Start Sink in.
The 15% vote-change theory and what would be the ACTUAL vote if true: grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtMg_87…
Tern retweeted
In 1942, a drunk German officer sat at dinner and bragged about the Jewish woman he had selected from the brothel the Nazis had forced open in town. He said her name out loud. The Tunisian Arab sitting across from him stayed calm, smiled, poured more wine, and finished the meal. Then he drove the officer home, sped through the dark streets, and knocked on a door close to midnight. That night, he hid 25 people for four months. He never spoke about it again.
His name was Khaled Abdul-Wahab. He was 31 years old, a wealthy Muslim Tunisian who had studied art and architecture in New York and spoke fluent German. Nazi officers trusted him. They invited him to their dinners.
Tunisia was the only Arab country directly occupied by Nazi Germany during the war. Jewish families were pushed from their homes. More than 5,000 Jewish men were sent to forced labor camps. Yellow stars marked every chest.
That December night in the coastal town of Mahdia, Khaled listened as the officer boasted. The woman he named belonged to a family Khaled had known all his life.
He left immediately. He drove through the night. He knocked on their door at midnight.
Pack nothing. Come now.
He gathered 25 people — mothers, fathers, cousins, and children — and drove them nearly 20 miles to his family farm, hiding them inside the olive press, stables, and storage buildings.
This was not one brave act. It was four straight months of courage.
He fed them while supplies grew scarce. He kept babies quiet. He trusted his servants to stay silent. When German soldiers arrived to count Jewish families, the hidden people pinned yellow stars onto their clothes and stood motionless. When the soldiers left, the stars came off again.
One night, a drunken soldier wandered onto the farm and discovered them. An eleven-year-old girl hiding under a bed watched him laugh and threaten to kill everyone there. Then Khaled appeared. She remembered him her entire life as a guardian angel. He calmly walked the soldier outside, took away his weapon, and sent him off the property.
Nobody on that farm died.
In May 1943, British forces liberated Tunisia. All 25 people returned home alive.
Khaled went back to a quiet life. He married, raised daughters, painted, and worked in government service.
He never told anyone what he had done. Not his wife. Not his children. No one.
He died on September 4, 1997, at the age of 86. His story was buried with him.
Ten years later, his daughter Faiza was sitting in a café in Paris reading a Sunday newspaper when she came across an interview with an American historian describing a Tunisian Arab who had hidden 25 Jews in 1942.
The historian mentioned her father by name.
She was 45 years old and had never heard the story before.
She contacted the historian. One of the children saved on the farm had left behind 83 pages of testimony before her death. Every detail matched.
“I rediscovered my father,” Faiza later said.
Khaled was nominated for Israel’s highest honor given to non-Jews who saved Jewish lives. He would have been the first Arab to receive it.
The committee declined, saying he had not risked his own life enough.
Faiza answered with a line history should never forget:
“My father opened his home to Jews. They did not open theirs to us.”
Today, the 25 people Khaled saved have hundreds of descendants living across Israel, France, America, and Tunisia. The little girl hidden beneath the bed grew up, moved to Paris, and built a family of her own. None of them would exist if Khaled had stayed silent that night.
He had everything to lose. He acted anyway. Then he spent the rest of his life saying nothing about it.
The world nearly forgot him twice. Now you know his name.
Tern retweeted
Of all the dumb talking points I encounter, and I encounter a lot of them, the New Right (Woke Right) talking point that Iran has been "close to a nuclear weapon for 20 years," implying that's a false pretext and Trump lied, is perhaps the dumbest. Just astronomically fake.
I can't believe Buck Sexton, ex-CIA genius, trotted it out last night, among so many others. There's no way he's this dumb as an analyst, so he must have other motivations for saying it.
Let's explain how stupid it is, though.
Iran wants a nuclear weapon because they're a lunatic terrorist-theocratic regime that's also a threat to everyone around them. That means they're trying to build one, and when they encounter setbacks and obstacles, they will keep trying to build one.
So, if they wanted one 20 years ago and got close and got set back, say by Israeli or American or other intervention, that would be a setback, not a permanent end to the program. After a period of time, they would regroup and get close to a nuclear weapon again. If that gets stopped again, it starts over again too.
This keeps happening until the IRGC is out of power because they can always dig another hole and start again, especially with a little help from their bad-guy friends in Russia, China, and North Korea. So, periodically, as long as the IRGC lasts, it will once again be close to a nuclear weapon and have to be stopped.
It got especially close this time significantly because of a little bit of help from another one of their friends: Barack Obama.
If this is too abstract and complicated for you, consider an analogy.
You really want something, like new shoes or something. You work to get the money to get them, but then when you're close to having enough, something comes up, and you have to spend some of your money. That's a setback, but you keep working because you really want those shoes. Soon, you get close again, but your phone broke, so you have to spend your money to fix it and have to get back to working toward your shoes again later.
Each time, you almost have enough money for your shoes. So, you keep almost having your shoes even though you don't have them yet. But you ain't quit, so you'll keep working to get them, and before you know it, you're close again.
It works just like that. The IRGC really wants nuclear weapons. Israel and America keep stopping them from getting them, and they face setbacks like having their centrifuges blown up. So they get new centrifuges as soon as they can, put them somewhere new, and get back to it. Before long, they're close again because they want it.
Let me try another analogous explanation for the cooked brains out there. Imagine you have an illegal immigrant jihadi cell that wants to do a terrorist attack in New York. They put together a plan, but the cops foil it and arrest some of them. But their parent organization really wants to do it, so they get some more guys and a new plan. The cops foil that too. As long as the parent organization, Muslim Brotherhood or whatever, still operates, the cops keep having to stop imminent terrorist attacks as they find out about them because the organization really wants to do one whether this plan or that plan gets busted or not.
See, they got really close to doing a terror attack but faced a setback, so they regrouped and tried again. Then they got set back again, so they regrouped again. It's just like this. Exactly like this. Not at all different than this.
I can't believe I have to explain this.
I can't believe how fried people's brains are, including smart ex-CIA brains, that they either can't understand this or are willing to pretend they don't understand it for other reasons, publicly, in front of people.
President Trump has never once changed his tune on why he struck Iran, either in June of 2025 or in February of 2026, starting the war: "Iran will never have a nuclear weapon."
The intelligence suggested that they were getting close to it, along with long-range ballistic missiles. The claim was they were close to final enrichment for enough material for up to eleven warheads, and they might have them within two weeks.
Just after Trump struck, they launched some long-range ballistic missiles at Diego Garcia and proved they had those and that intelligence was correct. For some reason, nobody who is "against the war" is willing to believe that the nuclear material claim, which would arm the missiles, which could hit European capitals, was also true.
President Trump has never wavered and is even still doubling down on his reasoning here, which is clear, simple, and to the point. He said it again today, in fact. In all likelihood, it is true, and he did the right thing.
That means he did not start the war. Iran did.
That means the war was not pointless. It was to prevent the successful completion of nuclear weapons.
That means the war that ensued was not pointless either. It is what followed because Iran wasn't happy about it.
That means it wasn't Israel's war. It was humanity's war, and America's war too. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.
That means Israel didn't drag America into the war. Israel shared intelligence that our own services used and agreed with to inform the strikes.
That means the war is America First, if you must use that insufferable, tainted brand to get your brain to do anything.
That means the right reaction isn't punishing Trump or adopting more New Right crap. It is to say thank you and to be proud to be an American because your country provided an important service.
My frustration with how many people are swallowing this absolutely idiotic New Right, Iranian, Russian propaganda nonsense could not possibly be higher. I cannot believe this has to be explained to people.
Tern retweeted
2026 MIDTERMS DEBRIEF
The last 48 hrs have been insane, but if you think the big story here is a big Dem victory, you don't know the half of it. I'll walk you through:
- What happened (w/add'l background)
- What's planned for the future
- What we need to do next
1. What Has Happened So Far
As you probably know already, the midterms were a bloodbath for Republicans. We went from a majority in the US House and Senate, AND state governors to Democrat majorities in all three. As if that's not bad enough, 10 state legislative chambers flipped from Republican to Democrat including 7 House chambers and 3 Senates.
The cherry on top for the Dems is Texas, my home state. Texas has been red for over 30 years, but in this midterm election all state-wide offices were won by Democrats (US Senate, Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, etc.) and the State House also flipped to the Dems. Thankfully, the Republicans maintain a strong majority in the State Senate, and a narrow majority in the State Supreme Court, which at least provides a good defense against new laws from our new, Democrat overlords, but otherwise leaves us in a pretty bad position.
The Texas outcome has massive implications for the nation. Without Texas, no Republican can win the Presidency full stop. Did Texas turn blue long-term, or was this a one-time-thing? More on that later.
1b. What Led to What Happened So Far
I've seen all kinds of theories about why there was such a bloodbath for this midterm. Some of them are just wild guesses. Some are good-faith assessments based on decent (but incomplete) analysis. But many are straight-up propaganda and disinformation meant to distract you from the truth, and my friend, you need to know the truth.
I don't claim to be perfect or all-knowing, but I pay a lot of attention to politics on the macro, and have made some decent predictions in my time. In 2024 I predicted a landslide for Trump. In the Summer of 2021 I predicted that Russia would invade Ukraine within six months (I ended up being off by 32 days because it was an abnormally warm winter). If you've followed me here for a while, you've seen the quality of my takes, and I'll leave it to your judgement to believe what I'm saying here or not, but I want you to know I'm sincere, and that this is based on thoughtful analysis of my own and others who I trust.
Ok, so here's what happened: Going back to the 2024 Presidential Election, there was a new ingredient in the mix. Sure, Kamala Harris was one of the worst Presidential Candidates in history. That certainly helped. But that wasn't the only thing. X (formerly known as Twitter) was the marketplace of ideas. It was somewhat flat, meaning that there were few-if-any "ivory towers." People were sharing ideas, and in many cases, the good ideas were winning. While conservatives were getting suppressed on Facebook, Instagram, and all the other big social media platforms, they could actually talk freely on X, and gone was the feeling that you were the only one who noticed that the Emperor was wearing no clothes. It created a massive groundswell of support for Trump. There was no uncertainty. We knew he was the best candidate, and we knew by a wide margin, and we could no longer be gaslit into believing we were some kind of weirdos for thinking so just because every other platform and media outlet was working 24/7 to convince us of that.
Without X, can you imagine the story about the assassination attempt against Trump in Butler? You don't have to imagine. The media did everything possible to play it down. But there was no such downplaying on X. We all saw the footage. We all knew exactly what happened. There was no denying it.
Trump did win, and for once the "little guy" had a shot. You didn't have to be part of a big establishment to have a voice, and some of the best ideas were actually winning.
But that changed fast.
Big players realized they needed to figure out this X thing or it was game over. Russia, China, Iran and deep-state entities started pouring money into bot proliferation to spread lies, disinformation, and propaganda like wildfire. It was meant to sow confusion and chaos within the Republican Party, and begin splitting what had become a powerful political juggernaut into many smaller factions. They propped up the extant groyper movement, pushing antisemitism, white supremacy, Catholic integralism, isolationism, and anti-war narratives. The bots served to attack and bash anyone over the head who expressed differing opinions, while also propping up a small army of talking heads/influencers who were willing to embrace the propaganda and spread it themselves (folks like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Mike Cernovich, Nick Fuentes, Megyn Kelly, Matt Walsh, Brett Cooper, etc.) Some of these influencers may have been paid directly, but with monetization and massive bot armies, that may not have been necessary.
Some folks just realized that if they jumped on board the groyper train, they had no shortage of followers, likes, shares, positive comments, and so on, all reflecting in their bi-weekly payouts, and that was enough.
Pretty soon, almost all of the "space" for discussing politics was filled with anti-Trump rhetoric. Sure, there were still a number of good people out there with integrity, who were saying the right things, but their voices were suppressed by negative comments, and organized reporting from the bot armies, and instead of focusing on the Left, they were locked into never-ending fights with this propaganda movement, aka the Woke Right.
Today it is the Woke Right that claims that Republicans lost the election because of things like the Iran War, and our relationship with Israel. But that's simply not true. Republican voters didn't show up, and the reason they didn't show up is NOT because of these policies, but because of the way the army of influencers and bots criticized and attacked said policies non-stop for the last 1.5 years.
The War in Iran was necessary. Iran was close to getting nukes. This is an unacceptable outcome for the security of the United States and the Free World. Someone had to stop them. We did it. When Iran then took the Straits of Hormuz hostage, it prolonged the conflict. Mature, intelligent adults with integrity would have made this case calmly, but that's not what the Woke Right talking heads did. They just criticized and attacked, and over time it worked.
Bottom Line: This election was lost due to overwhelming loads of propaganda from folks who pretend to be on our side, but are definitely not.
2. What's Planned for the Future
Why lose an election?
Well, the truth is, for the Woke Right it's not really a loss. At the end of the day, they don't really consider themselves a true part of the Republican Party. In their own words, they want to gut the Republican Party along with conservative institutions, and wear it like a skin suit. Before you gut something, you typically kill it, but in order to kill something, especially when that thing is strong, you need to make it weak. Thus the midterms.
Enter JD Vance.
JD Vance is part of the woke right. He's great friends with Tucker Carlson (as he has reiterated again and again). For a long time he was a "Never Trumper," even comparing Trump to Hitler. He is a self-described distributist, who wants to give the government more, not less power, and he is solidly within the post-liberal camp, which seeks to eliminate significant, Constitutional liberties in favor of a stronger government so we can finally "get things done."
To add to the list, Vance has always been against the Iran conflict, has made multiple passing anti-Israel remarks, and his big post right after the midterm was quite the reveal, as he essentially through President Trump under the bus for the midterm loss. Remember, JD Vance is the Vice President. Of anyone and everyone, he should be loyal to the President, but his whole post smacked of disloyalty, especially in the context of his repeated, vocal opposition to Trump's policies.
The result of the midterms is that the Democrats will obviously be able to impeach Trump in the House. But they lack 10ish votes in the Senate.
I would not be surprised to find out that there are 10 Republicans in the Senate willing to backstab Trump for one reason or another, which would make JD Vance the President.
Remember what I said: The Woke Right isn't really part of the Republican Party. They just want to gut it and wear it like a skin suit. If I'm correct that Vance is truly a part of the Woke Right, then making him President would be the ultimate expression of their plan.
Since this movement is post-liberal, their goal is to accumulate maximum power, and use it to maximum impact, regardless of Constitutionality. Many people (falsely) call Trump a dictator, but he remains solidly within the bounds of the US Constitution, because at the end of the day he is a good actor, and not a tyrant.
The Woke Right is not made up of good actors. They will absolutely do everything they can to get outside the bounds of the Constitution, and seize power. I'll be honest - I don't know exactly what that looks like, but many of them have talked about it incessantly enough, that I know that's what they want, and that's what they'll do if they have the chance.
A Vance Presidency is not an option.
But a Democrat Presidency is also not an option. It's not enough for us to keep President Trump in the White House for the next two years. We also need to make sure Republicans (the right Republicans can win again in 2028).
3. What We Need to Do Next
The imminent threat is a Trump impeachment in the House that leads to a Trump conviction in the Senate, which leads to President JD Vance.
Several things need to be done with urgency: The Trump administration needs to work tirelessly to figure out which, if any, Senate Republicans might stab Trump in the back, and get them onto their side by whatever legal means necessary. If they remain threats, then they need to be exposed, and the public of loyal Republicans should put massive pressure on them to support, and not betray, the President.
Secondly, Trump should ask Vance to resign, and Republicans should put pressure on him to do so. If Trump will not be removed from office, and it's made clear that Vance has not future running for President in 2028, then that might be enough to get him to leave. Once he's off the table, he no longer presents an imminent threat, and we can look at the long-term threats.
Republicans must win the White House in 2028.
The fight to pick the best candidate begins now. Some of the very best options, in my opinion, include:
@marcorubio
@RonDeSantis
@PeteHegseth
The truth is, and I don't know how Hegseth would feel about this, but I believe he should continue being @SecWar. If he's willing to do that, I would keep him there if at all possible. I also think that, while he'd be a great President, I don't know if he's as electable as Rubio or DeSantis.
This leaves Rubio and DeSantis. I don't know which one of them should be President, but it should be one of them, and the other should be VP. If they can figure that out sooner rather than later, I would be grateful, and I think it would be what's best for our Party and our Nation.
Having a good candidate, who hopefully runs an outstanding campaign will be central to getting other Republican wins on the board in 2028. We need to work hard to develop good policy that doesn't patronize or cater to the whims of foolish people, but also takes into account what people are going through. We need strong orators who can make a real, solid case for conservative policies.
And we need an outstanding ground game in every single state. That means we need good people to stand up, ready to run for office, and they need armies of volunteers to blockwalk, make phone calls, poll watch, and so on.
Additional resources should be spent on Texas.
If we don't win Texas back in 2028, then it's basically game over from a political perspective.
Conclusion
As long as this is, I feel like I've left a lot out, but it's probably already too long for many. I've quoted this often, but when asked what kind of government we had, Benjamin Franklin famously replied, "A Republic, madam, if you can keep it."
We do have a Republic. It is up to us to keep it. People who hate America and hate Freedom wish to destroy our Republic. We're going to have to work hard to defend it. This midterm election was a massive blow, but we're not dead yet. In the famous words of Donald Trump, we need to "Fight, fight, fight!"
Lastly, don't lose hope. Don't despair. Remember that God is in control, and that He is good, and you can have eternal life with him if you believe in His Son, Jesus Christ.
SOLI DEO GLORIA
PAX AMERICANA 🇺🇸
Tern retweeted
On April 11, Vance arrived in Islamabad to negotiate directly with Iranian officials and Reuters was already reporting Iranian officials had specifically wanted Vance involved, “viewing him as one of Trump's most anti-war advisers and therefore potentially more receptive to a deal.”
At that point it had been six weeks of American and Israeli strikes which by the way had killed senior Iranian leaders, including Ayatollah Khamenei, and severely damaged Iranian military infrastructure. At that point, they were still driving up the cost of energy. Iran was demanding sanctions relief, frozen assets, an end to attacks in Lebanon and recognition of its authority over Hormuz.
The AP reported that at the time the joint operation had struck over 13,000 targets, 90% of the navy was sunk, 90% of weapons factories were attacked and 80% of their air defenses were destroyed.
The Carnegie Endowment's April assessment confirmed that American and Israeli forces had achieved air superiority in important parts of Iran and could continue conducting strikes without Iran stopping their air operations.
Iran needed relief, and America had the power to demand substantial concessions yet for some reason Vance helped negotiate a June memorandum of understanding that began lifting the blockade, permitted Iranian oil sales, contemplated access to frozen assets, and deferred the most important nuclear restrictions to future negotiations. Why would he do that? It was May/June. We had time to resolve this from a position of strength? Even more astonishing though was that agreement limited Washington’s ability to impose additional sanctions or deploy more forces while negotiations continued.
The CIA warned against the agreement. People were in an uproar about it. We totally squandered away any leverage we had. Then Vance championed the agreement again and then publicly insisted Iran would receive nothing without changing its behavior. Iran exported billions of dollars’ worth of oil during the temporary opening, while no comprehensive nuclear settlement was ever finalized. The MOU collapsed in July, and by October, Reuters reported that Iranian officials were deliberately prolonging negotiations to deny Trump a political victory before the midterms.
That was what went wrong with the war. I find it absolutely unbelievable that people have the audacity to champion him as some hero in this whole thing.
We could have done something in April, May, June before the midterms, but no, instead this ridiculous memorandum of understanding that never materialized cost us so much time.
On June 25, reporting cited an interview with postliberal extraordinaire Ahmari who conducted it with Vance aboard Air Force Two returning from Switzerland. Vance discussed establishing a direct communication channel between the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and U.S. Central Comm. How did that work out?
Ahmari described Vance as the leading figure in the administration's foreign-policy restraint faction. He portrayed the Iran negotiations as an opportunity to establish a new relationship with Tehran rather than continue military confrontation.
Again, how did that work out?
Tern retweeted
🚨 WOW! While everyone else ran away yesterday, a Marine Corps veteran security officer at a Citibank office in Florida ran STRAIGHT toward the gunshots and TOOK DOWN the would-be mass shooter right there
"This is going to end right NOW"
The Marine, John Fraley, took a tactical position in the men's restroom, engaged the armed suspect, and struck him five times in a gunfight.
The shooter is dead. 1 victim also lost her life. But 3,200 other employees on that campus are alive, thanks to this HERO.
Tern retweeted
Hi JD, since you're explaining why Republicans lost the midterms, there's something I'd really like you to explain.
Just recently, you publicly defended your friendship with Tucker Carlson and confirmed that the two of you still speak.
Then, days before the election, Tucker told 100 million people that Trump is considering a nuclear strike on Iran, supposedly based on inside sources in the administration. He even claims to know what you're personally advising the president.
And you haven't said a word about it.
Now, I'm not suggesting you're Tucker's source. But the fact that you've publicly acknowledged your friendship and ongoing communication with him puts a pretty enormous spotlight on you.
Tucker Carlson is a habitual liar. He lies constantly, contradicts himself, and has spent the past few years telling Americans how wonderful Russia and Qatar are while painting the most miserable picture imaginable of America. His entire operation is dedicated to convincing Americans that their country is hopeless and their enemies are somehow more admirable.
Now he's spreading panic about an impending nuclear war just days before an election, and people who ordinarily despise him are suddenly treating him as a credible journalist. (Even Christiane Amanpour amplified him!)
And you're telling us that the war is why Republicans lost, without so much as acknowledging what your own friend was telling tens of millions of Americans right before they voted.
If you know Tucker is lying, why haven't you publicly called him out? And why would you want to remain friends with someone who is knowingly spreading such an outrageous lie about the administration you serve in?
And there's another thing about your post that doesn't make sense to me. If you still believe that preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is vital to American national security, then shouldn't you be apologizing to Americans for failing to make that case?
I understand that Americans are frustrated with the war and the price they're paying at the pump. But if you genuinely believe we're dealing with a threat of this magnitude, surely your responsibility as vice president is to explain why confronting it is necessary, including why Americans might have to endure some economic pain in the process.
Instead, you're now treating public frustration as though it settles the question of whether the war was justified in the first place.
If you believe the threat can be dealt with later, explain how. If you believe diplomacy can still work (as Tucker claims), explain what happens when Iran refuses to abandon its nuclear ambitions. Are we supposed to accept a nuclear Iran because gas is expensive? What happens if Iran starts charging tolls in the Strait of Hormuz after America leaves?
And if you never believed this war was necessary in the first place, then I think you owe Americans an explanation for a number of your own public statements defending the administration's position. I understand that a vice president has obligations to the president, but that doesn't explain away your own words or your role in shaping policy.
You were personally involved in these negotiations. You had an enormous platform to explain the stakes to Americans. If you believe this was necessary for our national security and Americans rejected it because they didn't understand why, then that is also a failure of leadership, including yours.
And I'm tired of watching anyone who questions you immediately accused of being an Israeli operative, Israel First, or secretly paid by Israel.
If you think I'm wrong, address what I'm saying.
I don't think anyone being intellectually honest can look at this situation and pretend there aren't some very serious questions about Vance's conduct here.
One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was "composition"—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up.
So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we're going to shock the world? "No," he told me. "We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us."
Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.
There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true.
But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone.
Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were:
1) End the war
2) Focus on cost of living/inflation
3) Put America First
4) Change our relationship to Israel
Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.)
In the next few months, there's going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I'm open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you.
The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night.
If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest.
But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there.
I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.
Tern retweeted
The more you take time to review the actual midterm numbers across the country, especially Texas, the more the numbers don't add up.
At 6pm, there were 10 million mail-in ballots that were counted as Democrat votes?
There were 30 million ballots cast in person for Republicans!
Republicans out voted Democrats 3 to 1, then Fox News was calling races for Democrats when maps were solid Red!
How did the Republicans out vote Democrats at 6pm by 3-1, then Dems came back and won?
Where did the votes come from?
The only way possible in reality is if machines were programmed to flip ballots to the opposite candidate, because we already had the numbers showing Republicans out voting the Democrats 3-1!
The math isn't mathing! Could it be that fraud was too big to prove it was rigged, meaning it was overwhelming?
Tern retweeted
Dear @JDVance,
You warned on Wednesday that the next few months would bring a lot of gaslighting. Then you wrote the first draft.
Your post says any honest conversation must start with the war. Great. Since April you have been the administration’s lead negotiator, which makes you the owner of the track that turned a seven-week bombing campaign into an eight-month stalemate. Every week of ceasefire that was not a peace kept the Strait a question mark and kept diesel where eighty-seven percent of voters said they could feel it. Had you spent the spring arguing for the one hour the President says it would take instead of extending the stalemate, the war would have been over by summer, the pump would have said so, and you would be writing a different post. You promised no forever war. You then built a ceasefire with no exit, and sat on it for seven months. Tell voters what settlement you believed was achievable, what deadlines mattered, and what the administration planned to do if negotiations failed.
You say you know a great many of the smartest people in politics, but not one of them has a name. (Tucker?) At least one of them cannot count (also Tucker?), because on your list of four things, items one and two are the same item, and item three is a bumper sticker. Item four is the only entry that names a country, and it is not the country we are at war with.
(BTW I can guess where item four came from. Days ago @TuckerCarlson wrote that the administration was considering striking Pickaxe Mountain under pressure from Netanyahu, on the strength of Israeli intelligence. That is your fourth item, written out in full. No one had to poll for it. It was posted.)
The poll itself. “Change our relationship to Israel” is broad enough to mean several incompatible things. What did those voters actually say? Did they spontaneously mention Israel? Were they offered a list? What percentage selected that answer? Were they objecting to this war, particular Israeli policies, American assistance, or the alliance itself? Why not publish the questionnaire, the sample, the percentages, and the crosstabs.
By contrast, the networks published their exit polls. The issues voters were asked about were the economy, democracy, immigration, corruption, the Iran war and artificial intelligence. Israel did not need a column, because voters were not voting about Israel. The sole evidence that the American electorate rendered a verdict on Israel is a phone call between you and a man you will not identify.
Contrast your response with @realDonaldTrump’s. Asked about your post, he acknowledged the war’s electoral cost and said he would make the decision again because long term it's the only answer. Agree or disagree, he defended his decision.
In July, you yourself said America would have fought this war without Israeli influence. You explained that the president independently opposed an Iranian nuclear weapon—and that you agreed.
Now your post finds room for an unnamed pollster’s undefined grievance against Israel, but none for an accounting of your own decisions as the administration’s lead negotiator.
Name the pollster. Publish the questions and the results. Tell voters which decisions you supported, which you opposed, and which you would reverse.
The President answered for his decision. That is leadership. If you want to be a leader, you need to be able to answer for yours.
One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was "composition"—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up.
So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we're going to shock the world? "No," he told me. "We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us."
Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.
There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true.
But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone.
Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were:
1) End the war
2) Focus on cost of living/inflation
3) Put America First
4) Change our relationship to Israel
Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.)
In the next few months, there's going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I'm open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you.
The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night.
If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest.
But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there.
I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.
Tern retweeted
Texas and Oregon statistics show massive voter fraud.
2,900,357 new voters were registered without verification of U.S. citizenship in Texas from 2022 to 2024.
56.5% were considered "valid registrations" even without any verification of U.S. citizenship.
Proof of U.S. citizenship is allegedly not required when registering to vote in Texas. This information can be found on page 193 in the Official Election Administration and Voting Comprehensive Report.
On top of this, since 2020, Oregon's population saw an increase of 36,530, which are ALL immigrants from around the world.
BUT, somehow, new registered voters in Oregon saw a gain of 263,459 voters. Which is a 700% gain. What is going on here?
Look at the graph for international immigration that says +56,700.
Then look at the birth to death statistics at -19,500, with a 36,530 population gain. The 36,530 is all, 100% immigrants.
So how does it go from 2020 with 36,000 new immigrants with a total of 263,459 new voters registrations within the same period, while also taking into consideration all the other graphs including death to birth ratios?
Just wait until more states get exposed. None of the numbers, votes, or new registrations, make any sense. I believe they went to big on cheating which made it extremely obvious and exposed their rigged system.
Tern retweeted
WOW 🚨 I just verified this and these election results are real. I ran the numbers through artificial intelligence:
The likelihood of these election results are 0.00001%, effectively 1 in trillions
Again, THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE MIDTERM RESULTS NOT BEING FRAUD IS “1 IN TRILLIONS”
Tern retweeted
So let's ask a few simple questions. If bluest states in America - California, NY, NJ, CT, Rhode Island, Mass, Illinois, Maryland, DC, Oregon, Washington- suddenly ALL turned RED...would it seem realistic? If every county in Oregon went red, would anyone believe it?
If Mass voted red by 1 million votes, would media question it?
If NYC went red would anyone accept it was "poor candidates, bad president, wrong war, high prices?" Really?
What if LA, San Francisco, Palo Alto and Napa all went red?
What if Muslim communities went all red? Dearborn? Detroit? How about inner city Baltimore? Would Democrats believe it wasn't fraud? The media would not question?
White Republicans voting for communists & radical Muslims to punish Trump is like a sudden shift by every black voter in NYC, LA, Detroit, Baltimore & Chicago voting red. You'd believe that?
Sorry, what happened Tuesday night is not possible. Texas? Kansas? Mississippi? Ohio? All of them changed everything 2 years after a Trump landslide because of a war with 20 US deaths? More Americans are shot on a Saturday in Chicago!
Trump secured the border and deported 3 million illegals. Result? Lowest murder & crime rates in 100 years.
High Prices? High gas? Much higher prices under Biden. Higher gas prices under Biden w/out a war or tariffs.
Bad economy? Obama produced worst economy since Great Depression. Businesses closed by millions, half of Vegas boarded up, all-time record Americans on welfare, food stamps & disability. But he won re-election.
In Michigan white Republicans voted for a Muslim Brotherhood radical who wants Sharia Law to protest high prices caused 90% by Biden?
Red rural districts in Texas's voted for an effeminate radical weirdo who believes "God is non-binary?" Gave him more votes in midterm election than Kamala in Presidential year. Really?
Something smells rotten. This is "Twilight Zone." This is not possible. Someone thinks we're all idiots.
President Trump, are you listening? We are being played.
Tern retweeted
It’s becoming very clear over the past 24 hours that this election was definitely rigged and not just mildly, but so blatantly and over-the-top that you’d have to be willfully blind not to see what happened.
This appears to be the first step: making the problems so obvious that the public finally wakes up to the fact that we do not have free and fair elections. We’re seeing the kind of elections associated with third-world countries, complete with foreign interference.
I’m waiting to see what the next step will be. How about you?
Tern retweeted
I’m a Texan. Lived in Houston majority of my life, and I’m telling you right now..there’s no way this is possible. I can understand a handful of districts swinging, but every single district? For Talarico? Someone who disappeared from the campaign trail for two weeks? They’re making this obvious on purpose. Buckle up.
