Right-wing billionaires are barking up the wrong tree



Democrats are currently on track to take the House of Representatives in the 2026 midterms. If this happens, they will empower resistance bureaucrats to slow down all Trump administration initiatives. Of course, they’ll not only impeach Trump, but will also pursue impeachment proceedings against many Trump officials. This will substantially drain momentum from the administration and increase it for Democrats heading into the crucial 2028 presidential election.

The Democrats are already putting together plans, formulating a narrative, and accumulating evidence, which they will use against Republicans should they retake power. We’ve seen this movie before.

Since the billionaires do not know how to wield their potential power, they have become targets.

The Marxist machine has had time to learn from its mistakes during 2020-2024. The Democrats will likely pursue criminal prosecution against key targets in the MAGA orbit, including big donors like Elon Musk, the DOGE bros, and even junior Trump staffers. We’ve already seen in Arctic Frost an effort to spy on sitting Republican United States senators — they’ll be on the target list, too.

This is power. Force is power. Politics is the management of force. For his tech-oriented publication Pirate Wires, Mike Solana recently published “Theory of Power,” which outlines how the left will replicate California’s wealth tax to target billionaires nationwide. He believes that the left is targeting billionaires because wealth is power. He’s half right.

Wealth itself is not power — it is the means to power. The left seeks to redistribute the wealth of the billionaire class to the people living in America in exchange for power. Leftists are not targeting the billionaires because their wealth poses a threat to the left’s power — they want to seize the power of that wealth for themselves. Since the billionaires do not know how to wield their potential power, they have become targets. If they did, the California wealth tax wouldn’t even be an issue.

Wealth cannot protect its holder from force. If politics is the management of force, then political influence is power. There are plenty of people with political influence and no wealth who have more power than billionaires. There are 20-something political staffers who have more political power than billionaires. There is a legion of bureaucrats with more political power than billionaires. Who has more power, a billionaire or the IRS lawyer investigating him? Of course, it’s the IRS lawyer, because the IRS lawyer is backed by regime power.

The billionaire class has largely abdicated regime power — the question of who is in charge — with a few notable exceptions, such as Elon Musk’s 2024 election engagement and purchase of Twitter. The wealthy are quite good at influencing politics for their discreet business interests, with one analysis finding that they receive a 220-times return on investment through their lobbying efforts (other analyses attribute the rise in corporate profits to lobbying).

However, regime politics is not fundamentally about lobbying for an appropriation or a carve-out in the tax code, which puts generating wealth above gaining political power. Machiavelli warned against this in “The Prince”:

And, on the contrary, it is seen that when princes have thought more of ease than of arms, they have lost their states. And the first cause of your losing it is to neglect this art.

Wielding political influence for higher corporate profits to buy another jet or a fifth vacation home is thinking of ease more than of arms.

If politics is the management of force, then political influence is the “arms.” The billionaires are on track to lose their “state,” because they’ve neglected the art of influencing regime politics.

RELATED: The case against ‘principled conservatism’

wenjin chen/Getty Images

For all its faults, the left understands regime politics. Billionaire wealth extraction is just one part of its plan to sustain and deepen its regime-level power. If its only opposition, the MAGA political class, is destroyed by regime politics, the left’s wealth extraction scheme is not only inevitable, but it will also be the least of the billionaires’ worries.

All of this means that right-aligned billionaires should move immediately to gain regime-level political influence. To be clear, wealth can be a strong amplifier of political influence. Still, political influence has a simple recipe: It requires access, credibility, leverage, and the ability to change behavior. In other words, donating to campaigns is not enough. Elected officials must be lobbied to act in the interest of those who support them, or someone else will lobby them for their own interests.

Before a politician is elected, the benefactor has the leverage. But once the politician has regime-level power, the benefactor is subject to the beneficiary’s power. If right-wing billionaires want to survive what’s coming, they must have a well-run machine to influence politicians after they are elected. Solana makes this point — with which I fully agree: They must “respond as if [their lives depend] on it, because my reading of what these people are saying, casually, cheerfully, and increasingly out loud, is…it does.”

But power is fickle. Any billionaires who wield political influence strictly for their own benefit rather than on behalf of the people will find themselves burdened with all the paranoia and stress of a tyrant. To that end, Xenophon’s “On Tyranny” provides relevant advice: “Consider the fatherland to be your estate, the citizens your comrades, friends your own children, your sons the same as your life, and try to surpass all these in benefactions. For if you prove superior to your friends in beneficence, your enemies will be utterly unable to resist you.”

Editor’s note: This article appeared originally at the American Mind.

The case against ‘principled conservatism’



Frank Meyer’s fusionism combined free-market libertarianism and religion-friendly traditionalism to create the modern conservative movement. As a political alliance against the threat of communism, the movement served its purpose. But the principles that undergirded Meyer’s synthesis were not an adequate basis for attaining and sustaining national power.

The difference between the defeated Barry Goldwater faction and the victorious Ronald Reagan coalition was the vote of white Catholic Democrats alienated from their former party by its anti-anti-Communism and embrace of the three A’s: amnesty (for draft evaders), acid, and abortion.

We need a clearer, more uncompromising articulation of a pure MAGA doctrine that distinguishes our agenda from the libertarians and so-called principled conservatives.

Those former Democrats did not want smaller government, so Reagan preserved, for them and the country, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, along with generating ever-larger deficits.

Meyer’s synthesis, however, was not as new as is often claimed: In important respects, it represented 19th-century Bourbon Democracy spruced up for the post-World War II era. What distinguished the Bourbons from the Republicans (and from the populist Democrats) was their commitment to smaller government, free trade, and cheap labor. That meant unfree labor in the 1850s and more-or-less free labor once the South was successfully “redeemed” from Republican rule and black civil rights enforcement after the Civil War.

What America needs today instead is fissionism. We need a clearer, more uncompromising articulation of a pure MAGA doctrine that distinguishes our agenda from the libertarians and so-called principled conservatives.

MAGA in foreign and security matters means using American power to secure American interests. Foreign policy is not the application of abstract principles, which are worse than useless in international relations. What were Franklin Roosevelt’s principles or Andrew Jackson’s or Teddy Roosevelt’s? Their guiding star in foreign policy was not principle but the ruthless pursuit of results.

As for draining the swamp, the trench warfare over DOGE and U.S. attorney appointments proves that deconstructing the administrative state requires a pro-Trump Senate. But the current Senate remains beholden to the uniparty. If you are happy with your “principled conservative” senator obstructing the president, then you are on the other side.

Against those screaming for lower taxes and less government at all costs, protective tariffs are core to MAGA — and for that matter, core to the Republican Party before it was taken over by Reagan, a former Democrat and fusionist. MAGA demands an economic policy geared toward national greatness. It means an end to regulations engineered to cripple the U.S. economy in the name of DEI, apocalyptic climate alarmism, or the latest elite neurosis.

Targeted regulations and tariffs to onshore our supply chains and rebuild the American industrial base? Absolutely. That has been Donald Trump’s consistent agenda since he first started commenting on public affairs in the 1980s. If the “principled conservatives” fail to recognize this, that exposes their own ideological blindness, not a flaw in the MAGA platform.

RELATED: Will Republicans fight for the SAVE Act — or fold again?

Photo by ROBERTO SCHMIDT / AFP via Getty Images

Fundamentally, “principled conservatives” don’t want America to be stronger and freer if it means traditional Republican governance. They prefer Bourbon Democracy: small government, cheap goods, cheap labor (citizens and noncitizens alike), and dependence on others — once Britain or the North, now China — for industry, including vital defense-related manufacturing. As for the world, China can do what it wants. Anything else would require the old guard conservatives to compromise their precious “principles.”

People who don’t want the United States to be reliant on China, as Mississippi was on Manchester in 1850, or Manchester, New Hampshire, in 1890, should see “principled conservatives” as political opponents — allies of the Democrats. They are helping to destroy Trump and everything the president stands for.

Does drawing clearer partisan lines mean shedding potential support required for electoral victory? That is a very real risk. The compensating benefit is that once we know what we want, we can accurately identify our allies and band together to address the crises of our time.

A “principled conservative” administration would have preferred Big Pharma to RFK Jr. and MAHA. A “principled conservative” administration would make no room for a Tulsi Gabbard, an Elon Musk, or any other heterodox defector who wants to restore American foreign and security policy and advance American power, national honor, and national freedom.

Fissionism means drawing clear battle lines, dividing what was once the “conservative movement.” The “principled conservatives” can keep their pristine — and currently useless — “principles.” I am on the side of America, which means the side of Trump.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally at the American Mind.

Bill Shines Faster Light On Federal Government Spending

'In a free society, you can't have accountability without visibility,' said John Hart, CEO of Open the Books.

Unhinged Minnesota DHS employee gets off easy after vandalizing Teslas



Last year, Minnesota state employee Dylan Adams was arrested for vandalizing six Tesla vehicles, reportedly causing $20,000 in damage.

Despite the damage, Adams was punished by the state with only a single-day, unpaid suspension, according to a letter from the state Department of Human Services.

'THAT’S IT. He’s not even being PROSECUTED.'

Dylan, an employee of the Minnesota Department of Human Services, was just one of several people arrested last year in connection with the destruction of Tesla vehicles in Minnesota.

The damage was in protest against Tesla CEO Elon Musk and his then-leadership role at the Department of Government Efficiency.

RELATED: Counter-protester lights explosive amid anti-Mamdani protest, utters 'Allahu Akbar' — but NYC mayor rips 'bigotry and racism

Photo by PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images

According to the investigative report, Adams claimed he was disturbed by Musk's hand gestures to a Trump crowd in 2025, perceiving it as a Nazi salute. He said he vandalized the Teslas "in hopes that the owners of the vehicles would disassociate themselves from Elon Musk and Tesla," the report said.

The suspension letter revealed Adams' official punishment and the details of the damage.

“This letter is to inform you of our intent to suspend you for one (1) working day," the letter read, for "the following facts": “Your behavior of vandalizing ('keying') multiple (six) Tesla vehicles in March of 2025 which made local and national headlines.”

Adams was told that he had the right to appeal the suspension, but it does not appear he has done so.

The letter was signed by Heidi Hamilton, Disability Services director.

Adams has never been charged with a crime in connect with the vandalism.

RELATED: Mamdani walks back popular progressive campaign promise to pedestrians

Photo by Lab Ky Mo/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty's office announced last year that prosecutors would opt for "diversion" instead, which officials said was typical in similar cases.

Daniel Borgertpoepping, spokesperson for Moriarty's office, said, "We offered diversion, as we often do with property damage cases when the person has no record. Mr. Adams will have to complete the requirements of the program. He will also have to pay every penny in restitution to the victims. If he does not meet those requirements, we will proceed through the criminal legal system process."

Critics noted the minimal consequences Adams is facing for his actions.

Nick Sortor wrote on X, “THAT’S IT. He’s not even being PROSECUTED. Minnesota is a FAILED STATE!”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Foreign Billionaire Hansjörg Wyss Funneled Millions to Activist Groups Behind ‘No Kings’ Protests and Anti-Trump Lawsuits, Tax Filings Show

Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss funneled millions of dollars to the left-wing organizations that are organizing the anti-Donald Trump "No Kings" protests and spearheading lawsuits targeting President Trump's immigration and energy policies, according to new tax filings obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. They reveal the extent to which Wyss, a foreign national, is central to anti-Trump resistance efforts.

The post Foreign Billionaire Hansjörg Wyss Funneled Millions to Activist Groups Behind ‘No Kings’ Protests and Anti-Trump Lawsuits, Tax Filings Show appeared first on .

DOJ demotes Trump's top weaponization lawyer loved by MAGA



President Donald Trump's pick to lead the charge against government weaponization has reportedly been demoted from his role within the Department of Justice.

Ed Martin was initially recruited to serve as U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C., but was later reassigned as the DOJ's weaponization chief. Now, after nine months on the job, several media outlets have reported that Martin's role has been narrowed but that he will continue serving as the U.S. pardon attorney.

His demotion may have been due to an ongoing feud with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.

“President Trump appointed Ed Martin as pardon attorney, and Ed continues to a great job in that role," a DOJ spokesperson said in a statement.

Martin's claim to fame came after the 2020 election, when he became a vocal defender of Trump and the January 6 protesters, many of whom he represented as an attorney.

RELATED: Trump's Justice Dept. releases millions of pages from Jeffrey Epstein files

Photo by Valerie Plesch/Washington Post/Getty Images

Martin's brief time serving as interim U.S. attorney was focused on forwarding Trump's agenda, kneecapping prosecutors who harshly punished January 6 protesters, and advocating for the Department of Government Efficiency.

Although Martin was popular with the MAGA base, he was a tough sell for the Senate. President Trump eventually pulled his nomination in May 2025.

RELATED: Trump offers hilarious rebuttal to Tim Walz's absurd Civil War analogy

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

In the midst of Martin's role change, reports suggested that his demotion may have been due to an ongoing feud with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, clashing with his staff over his "lack of productivity" and his "controversial social media posts," according to CBS News.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Appropriations talk, executive orders walk: The great MAGA budget betrayal



Money talks. Everything else is just BS. That is true in all areas of life, but it’s especially true in politics.

Trump is now repeating the modus operandi of his first term, in which he proclaims bold cuts, reforms, and changes to federal policies, programs, and agency spending levels in the form of executive orders. He summarily ignores his own policies by lobbying Republicans in Congress to pass annual appropriations bills that fund pretty much every spending level and most policies of his predecessor — so much so that most of these bills garner support from all but the most radical Democrats in Congress.

This bill is the crown jewel budget bill of the GOP trifecta at the peak of Trump’s power, and yet Democrats have no concerns voting for it.

Unfortunately, it is the government funding that matters when attempting to secure permanent change to federal agencies, not ephemeral executive orders or press releases.

On Friday, House Republicans passed a minibus bill with all but the 64 most progressive of the 213 Democrats voting yes. The fact that the 24 most conservative Republicans opposed it despite pressure from the administration should tell you that it does not reflect Trump’s campaign promises.

This minibus included Defense, Homeland Security, Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development. Trump has proposed hundreds of policies throughout those departments that are extremely offensive to Democrats, yet they had no problem supporting the budget bill. Why?

They feel they dodged a bullet in this funding bill, especially while being out of power. The statement from Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, says it all:

These bills invest in working people across the country and utterly reject President Trump’s plan to defund our kids’ education, evict millions of families, and slash lifesaving medical research nearly in half. The message to President Trump is: America will continue to fund cancer research, we are going to keep investing in affordable housing and tackling homelessness, Congress will not abolish the Department of Education, and the people’s representatives will have the final say on how taxpayer dollars get spent.

...

While there’s a whole lot more I wish these bills would have addressed, these compromise bills protect critical investments in the American people, reject truly heartless cuts that would have undone decades of progress — and they are a significantly better outcome than another yearlong CR. I look forward to ensuring they get signed into law.

This bill is the crown jewel budget bill of the GOP trifecta at the peak of Trump’s power, and yet Democrats not only have no concerns voting for it but enthusiastically support it. What gives?

The DOGE appears to be a fossil from a hundred years ago. The $1.25 trillion “minibus” bill reversed all the DOGE cuts to agencies like the NIH and CDC. Overall, spending will increase slightly over Biden’s final year — a year that was notorious for biblical levels of spending.

Here are some of the top concerns with the FY 2026 budget bill.

  • It fully funds the Department of Education. Even as Trump “abolished” the entire department, this bill funds the department at Biden’s level of $78.7 billion. Worse, Democrats secured a provision prohibiting the administration from transferring Education Department funds to other agencies, which had been a point of contention in negotiations. Once again, appropriations talk, executive orders walk.
  • According to a Democrat summary of the bill, the total funding for the Labor-HHS-Education portion of the bill is $224 billion, a slight increase in current levels. This is simply astounding given that Republicans never believed in even having these departments at the federal level. If we can’t cut from these agencies, then where will we cut?
  • Section 8 galore! Well, what’s worse than locking in Biden’s education and health spending? Increasing Biden’s HUD spending by nearly $8 billion! If there was ever a department conservatives wanted to abolish, it was always HUD. This is something that should be determined at the local level. Once again, Trump promised to cut the department in half, yet increased spending for every program he planned to trim or eliminate.

The bill provides $38.4 billion in tenant-based Section 8 vouchers and a $2.4 billion increase from fiscal 2025. It also provides $18.5 billion for project-based rental assistance, a $1.7 billion increase from last year.

The bill also provides $1.25 billion for HUD’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program, after the Trump administration budget request and the original Republican House Transportation-HUD appropriations bill promised to eliminate the program. These programs provide grants to state and local governments and local NGOs to essentially seed red states with liberal voters and ruin the character of rural communities.

RELATED: Trump’s primary endorsements are sabotaging his own agenda

Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

The bill also provides nearly $7 billion for the Community Development Block Grant Program and the Economic Development Initiatives for housing-related activities and $86 million for fair housing programs. Trump promised for years to eliminate the program altogether.

The only point of contention in the bill is the DHS portion, which Democrats are now threatening to oppose. But let’s be clear: Before the fatal shooting in Minneapolis, they were even willing to pass Trump’s DHS bill and did not perceive it as much of a threat.

At the time the bill was released, Senator Murray boasted that Democrats “defeated Republicans’ hard-fought push to give ICE an even bigger annual budget, successfully cut ICE’s detention budget and capacity, cut CBP’s budget by over $1 billion, and secured important, although still insufficient, new constraints on DHS.” She also lauded the rejection of "all Republican poison pill riders,” such as defunding sanctuary cities.

Democrats are, of course, forced to play to their base. However, on the specifics, this bill contains some horrendous provisions.

  • Cheap foreign labor: It allows the secretary to double H-2B visas, going from 66,000 to 130,000 H-2B visas.
  • Prohibits ICE from deporting illegal aliens who sponsorunaccompanied minors based on any information provided by HHS. So HHS is supposed to vet the sponsors, but if it determines they are here illegally and tells ICE that, ICE is prohibited from deporting them.

Why would we double foreign worker visas and make it harder to remove those literally engaged in trafficking children over the border by hiring cartel smugglers?

Well, despite all the rhetoric, press releases, tweets, and executive orders, good ol’ Joe Biden had it right when he proclaimed, "Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value." Evidently, we are now valuing almost everything all that he funded in his budget when he made that comment.

What Separates Tim Walz From Other Democrats Is His Scam Got Caught

That Tim Walz is abandoning his reelection campaign for Minnesota governor amid a maddening multibillion-dollar welfare fraud scandal should serve as a big reminder: Democrats are robbing you every day and hardly even trying to hide it. Recall Walz as the stereotypical self-abasing Democrat white male, presumably heterosexual, who was inexplicably chosen to be Kamala […]