Trump celebrates 6 months with bold MAGA victory video featuring Charlie Kirk



Since President Trump took office on January 20, 2025, his administration has been working nonstop to fulfill his campaign promises. To celebrate the six-month milestone of his administration, the White House posted a video boasting the progress of the Make America Great Again movement.

The video showed Trump's work with world leaders, foreign policy, tariffs, spending, immigration, and border enforcement. In many ways, he has made headway in reversing the policies of previous administrations: "President Trump comes in and immediately begins taking action to fix each and every one of these fires that the Democrats started."

'This movement that President Trump has started for America is only getting bigger.'

The video, entitled "6 months of Power: President Trump's Comeback. America's Revival," showcases a laundry list of Trump's accomplishments. One voice on the video can be heard saying, "Promises made, promises kept."

The caption underneath the video reads: "Six months in, President Trump took command — launched an all-out offensive to crush the left’s mess and bring American power roaring back. The border is fortified. The economy is unleashed. The One Big Beautiful Bill is law. This is unapologetic, America-first leadership."

RELATED: Read it and weep: Tariffs work, and the numbers prove it

  

 

The president recently celebrated the signing of his historic legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on Independence Day earlier this month. This is just one of his major accomplishments. "Donald Trump immediately getting to work with a remarkable show of the use of executive power," one voice on the video says.

Charlie Kirk can be heard saying, "This movement that President Trump has started for America is only getting bigger. [It] has more energy, more enthusiasm."

"The days of ripping off America and Americans are officially over," says Sean Hannity of Fox News.

"Trump could resign tomorrow and still point to an enduring legacy," adds another voice.

"You're watching history. So buckle up, because the next three and a half years will probably be just as busy."

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

Trump gave Americans a choice, not an echo



The American Enterprise Institute is an unlikely place to be reminded of why Donald Trump was necessary 10 years ago and is no less needed now. But a comment by Yuval Levin on a recent AEI panel succinctly brought out the difference Trump has made. Criticizing today’s populist, Trump-led Republican Party, Levin said, “The right has to ground its approach to the public in a more conservative message, in a sense that this country is awesome. It is not a festering, burning garbage pile — that is a strange way to talk to the next generation, and it’s not true, even a little bit.”

Trump has never used the words “festering, burning garbage pile,” but he’s used similarly strong language to describe America’s condition in this century under administrations other than his own. Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” implies that America hasn’t been great lately, although he and his voters can change that. Whenever Trump alludes to what Levin calls “a festering, burning garbage pile,” he’s referring to the poor leadership our country has suffered from in the not-too-distant past and the results of its misgovernance.

Trump’s task is clear: Restore the people’s power over the elite. Only then will the elite feel compelled to reform.

But that’s not what Levin or other AEI types hear. To them, Trump’s criticisms of the ruling class sound like criticisms of the country.

He upended the system

It would be unfair to guess that Levin simply believes the nation’s elite and the institutions they run are what count as the country itself, but there are precedents for such a view. In traditional monarchies and aristocracies, the rulers are the embodiment of the realm. Our Declaration of Independence was quite radical in breaking away from that understanding, asserting that the people are the realm and that all its institutions are answerable to them, not the other way around.

Levin and other intelligent non-populist conservatives know this, and they’re well aware of the failings of the pre-Trump Republican Party and the country’s political establishment as a whole. But knowing and feeling are different things.

Much of what survives of the pre-Trump conservative movement even now feels that the virtues rather than the vices of the old elite (and the institutions with which they are almost synonymous) ought to be emphasized.

For reasons that are easy to understand, many temperamental conservatives have an abiding fear of demagogues and an irreverent public. However corrupt or incompetent Ivy League-educated leaders may be, they should not be criticized too harshly — likened to flaming rubbish, for example — lest Ivy League education itself be stripped of its mystique. That mystique is part of the decent drapery of republican life, instilling a proper attitude of deference among the public toward those who have the education and lifestyle preparation to lead them.

From the moment he came down the escalator a decade ago, Trump upended this system. He pays no heed to the norms that distinguish America’s leadership class from the rabble the way noble bloodlines distinguished leadership in traditional hierarchical societies.

Elite confusion

Trump draws strength from the weakness of America’s elites and the widening public awareness of their vices. This is why, again and again, he has been rewarded for violating the very norms the elites consider sacrosanct, even to the point of winning the Republican nomination and then the White House last year despite a slew of criminal convictions and many more pending charges.

In three consecutive elections, Trump has not offered voters only a choice of leaders but a choice between systems of government. The capaciousness of our republican Constitution is such that within its framework, more than one kind of regime is possible. The “informal regime” can be considered the regime of society as well as government, or a regime that in operation reflects the real dispensation of authority within the country.

Most Americans have sadly little familiarity with even the letter of the written Constitution, and even most educated Americans have never entertained the thought of an informal regime. Much of the country’s elite (think about the typical writer for the Atlantic, for example) suffers paroxysms of panic over Trump’s words and actions because its members conceive of the informal regime under which they’ve lived their whole lives — and under which people like themselves flourish — as being the only natural outcome of the written Constitution.

RELATED: Trump isn’t hiding a client list — he’s too busy saving the country

  Bonnie Cash/UPI/Bloomberg via Getty Images

To violate the “norms” of this regime is to violate the Constitution itself, as far as their understanding can conceive.

It’s rare that voters get to make a choice not just between candidates but between regimes. The greater and lesser George Bush, the male and female Clinton, Bob Dole, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Al Gore, John Kerry, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris all represented the same regime and norms. Trump differs from them all not only in policy but in the relationships he represents between the people, elected power, and institutional elites (both inside and outside government).

They delegitimized themselves

Trump at last gave the American people a choice of regimes, with one regime — represented by his enemies, not just in the general election but in the Republican Party, too — operating on aristocratic presumptions and the other being a reassertion of popular self-government, including its characteristic parrhesiaand even vulgarity.

Crude materialists who understand power only in terms of wealth struggle to interpret Trump, because he and many of his associates obviously belong to the same affluent class as his enemies. Yet just as Christ said the poor will always be with us, so too does every regime, formal or informal, have its rich men. The regime is not defined by the existence of a wealthy group; it’s rather about relationships and authority, and that is what Trump has changed.

This change was necessary because the old regime had already destroyed its own legitimacy. It performed poorly for millions of ordinary Americans, but beyond that, it had also grown arrogant. Its norms were not a limitation on its power or abuses but rather a gag stifling criticism from within or below.

The new regime that’s in the making will have its own defects and will need various corrections, but the test of a regime lies precisely in its ability to correct itself. The old elite had lost that ability and would hardly have had the will to exercise the capability even if it had still been there.

Trump is not a revolutionary who has overthrown a healthy order. Rather, he, like the American revolutionaries of 250 years ago, has given the people a chance to be healthy again by ridding themselves of a debilitating regime. Americans had been tricked into living under an aristocracy within the form of a democracy.

Against the phony aristocracy

Thomas Jefferson hoped that voters would freely choose natural aristocrats — leaders of wisdom, virtue, and ability. But in recent decades, the country fell under the rule of an aristocracy against nature: a self-perpetuating elite that governed through institutions immune to the ballot box. Universities, nonprofits, media outlets, the permanent bureaucracy, judges, and political operatives in both parties — each aligned ideologically, broadly liberal — formed a web of power that shut down any real challenge.

Until Trump.

He offered the people a radical choice, and they took it. They rejected the aristocracy.

If America’s ruling class had actually resembled the natural aristocrats Jefferson envisioned, the people might not have turned to Trump. But the elite they faced was an aristocracy of privilege: smug mediocrities, not public-spirited heroes or genuine geniuses. Swapping one set of insiders for another would have changed nothing. Trump gave them a worthwhile alternative.

Even conservatives like Yuval Levin — who value the role of a well-formed elite in a healthy republic — should recognize this moment. America can only return to true aristocracy, the kind America’s founders hoped for, by becoming more democratic and more populist. The people must want an elite — and they will only want one that serves them faithfully, competently, and without arrogance.

Trump’s task is clear: Restore the people’s power over the elite. Only then will the elite feel compelled to reform.

That path won’t destroy American institutions. It will save them.

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

The GOP establishment lost to Trump — now it's rebranding as ‘neo-MAGA’



From the moment Donald Trump announced his run for president, the Republican establishment hated his guts. In 2016, the brash New York billionaire was treated like a joke — an embarrassment degrading the political process. But as Trump gained momentum, establishment figures faced a choice: Throw in with “NeverTrump” or pretend they’d seen the light.

Some bolted to NeverTrump outfits like the Bulwark or the Lincoln Project. Others stuck around, biding their time, waiting for a chance to reclaim the party from the populists. Now that Trump defines the GOP, they’ve shifted strategies. If you can’t beat MAGA, co-opt it.

MAGA has never been a cult, despite what the detractors may say. Supporters have stood by him because he fought for the things they care about.

Trump’s first term resembled an awkward arranged marriage. He won the heart of the base and created a movement mostly detached from the GOP machine. But he lacked the institutional infrastructure necessary to govern. Running the executive branch requires armies of staffers, bureaucrats, and loyal operatives — none of which MAGA had.

That vacuum was filled by GOP establishment swamp creatures, many of whom actively opposed the president and his agenda. Key officials undermined him. Military leaders lied to his face. Despite some major victories, Trump’s presidency was defined by a constant war against a hostile ruling class.

The great Republican hope?

With outrageous legal attacks from the Biden administration raising doubts about Trump’s electability, Ron DeSantis was encouraged to step in. I like DeSantis — he’s my governor, and he has done an outstanding job, especially standing up to the COVID-19 insanity. But the truth is that DeSantis has never been a gifted campaigner. He barely scraped by in 2018 against a man later found doing meth in a hotel with a male prostitute.

Trump, whatever his flaws, is a force of nature on the campaign trail. Anyone paying attention could see that DeSantis was walking into a meat grinder.

Still, many Republicans who hadn’t declared themselves NeverTrump saw DeSantis as their chance to strike. He had a solid record and stuck closer to the establishment line. He was more disciplined, less prone to off-script rhetoric, and — most important — not under indictment.

So the donor class and the consultant class threw their weight behind him. The money flowed, the media declared him the future, and the campaign ... flopped. Hard.

After DeSantis’ inevitable loss, anti-Trump Republicans were left stunned, tending to their bruised egos and looking for a new angle. Trump had survived an assassination attempt and beaten Kamala Harris. It was clear: He was the party. The idea that he could be swapped out for a more polished Republican was delusional.

Strain on the base

MAGA wasn’t going to be defeated by recycled talk about small government and lower taxes. The only remaining play was to redefine the movement from within.

Trump’s second term began with a burst of action: government agencies were shuttered, birthright citizenship was challenged, and deportations resumed. MAGA supporters were elated. Progressives were stunned. But the GOP establishment was left wondering how to reinsert itself into power.

Then came the cracks.

Trump ordered a strike on Iran at Israel’s request — only for Benjamin Netanyahu to blow off the president’s social media appeals to honor a ceasefire. Trump floated amnesty for illegal aliens working in agriculture and hospitality. The Justice Department and FBI dismissed any suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein had blackmailed elites, was murdered, or left behind a client list.

This was especially disturbing given that Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel had built their MAGA reputations by promising to expose Epstein’s secrets. Suddenly, the story changed. The fabled “client list” did not exist after all. The “truckload” of evidence amounted to nothing. Cover-up? What cover-up?

The strain on Trump’s relationship with his base was real — and that was the opening establishment Republicans needed.

RELATED: Progressive castoffs don’t get to define the right

  Blaze Media illustration

Enter ‘neo-MAGA’

Out of nowhere, a new class of Trump supporter emerged: neo-MAGA. Most of these operatives were DeSantis die-hards last year. Now they claim to be Trump’s most loyal defenders. They spend their time lecturing actual Trump supporters for lacking faith in a man they previously ridiculed.

In their telling, MAGA never meant ending regime-change wars — it meant launching new ones in Iran. MAGA never meant deporting illegal aliens — it was just about gang members and drug traffickers. MAGA never cared about Epstein’s client list, so don’t worry about it. Just trust the process. Trust the staff. Trust the people who said the files were real and now insist they were imaginary.

The “trust the staff” line is especially rich, considering that many of these same influencers trashed Trump’s appointment of Steve Witkoff as a negotiator for not being sufficiently pro-Israel. Now they demand blind loyalty to the very people they attacked last week.

This isn’t about loyalty to Trump. MAGA has never been a cult, despite what the detractors may say. Supporters have stood by him because he fought for the things they care about: economic populism, national sovereignty, immigration, and a restrained foreign policy. When he delivers, they cheer. When he falters, they push back.

Neo-MAGA wants to replace that dynamic with a new one — one where dissent is heresy and the old GOP agenda returns under a different label. These operatives see a chance to ride the MAGA brand back into power, reshaping it into something safer, softer, and friendlier to the donor class.

But the base haven't forgotten. They remember who bolted. They remember who mocked them. They remember who told them DeSantis was the future. And they know that the same people now preaching unity were, until five minutes ago, rooting for Trump to fail.

Whatever disagreement exists between Trump and his base, both should beware of the interlopers trying to turn this moment into a reset for the GOP establishment. MAGA wasn’t built on loyalty to staffers or influencers. It was built on promises, and those promises still matter.

YUGE WIN: Trump breaks America's mineral dependence on China



President Donald Trump has scored yet another win against China — as the U.S. government has successfully negotiated a mineral deal using American companies rather than relying on China for our rare earth minerals.

In 2023, the country banned exports of its own IP regarding rare earth extraction methods, waste separation methods, rare earth magnet production technology — which is used by companies like Apple, as well as for electric motors for EVs, drones, missiles, and radar.

“It is pretty significant because China produced 60% of the world’s rare earth minerals, nearly 90% of the world’s rare earth processing, and 99.9% of America’s rare earth processing,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales explains on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”

“And of course, they’re weaponizing that control of all of these rare earth minerals and semiconductors to hurt the United States,” she continues.

“It’s crazy to rely on China for things that we really need.”


“And then you had a half-dead president named Joe Biden who didn’t do s**t about any of this. And then enter President Trump,” she adds, noting that Trump signed an executive order in March with the goal of making the United States the leading producer and processor of non-fuel minerals, including rare earth minerals.

“I’d just like to say, more promises made, promises kept. Keep this one on the list. Check it off, okay, because last week the DOD spent $400 million of preferred stock in MP Materials, which operates the only rare earth minerals mine in the United States,” Gonzales explains.

“They are now the largest shareholder of the company that owns this,” she says.

Apple has also agreed to buy $500 million worth of rare earth magnets from the same company, MP Materials. Now, the company is going to expand operations and open a second domestic magnet manufacturing facility.

“President Trump successfully reducing our country’s dependence on China in just one more way. I think that’s a win,” Gonzales adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Neocons are back — and they’re botching Trump’s Latin America policy



A quiet but dangerous conflict is brewing within President Trump’s foreign policy team — a battle between the true red America First voices who made his first term successful and the same old neoconservative ideologues who have derailed U.S. diplomacy for decades.

Heightened by the bombing of Iran, this clash made headlines again earlier this month. This time, it was over botched negotiations over the return of Americans currently held by the socialist Venezuelan government.

Marco Rubio’s hatred of Latin American socialism is clear, but that shouldn’t come at a strategic cost to our country.

Trump’s special envoy Richard Grenell, a realist to his core, was on the verge of brokering a deal that would have secured the release of imprisoned Americans in exchange for Chevron’s continued operations in Venezuela. It was classic Trump diplomacy: bold, transactional, results-oriented.

But Secretary of State Marco Rubio intervened. The State Department made a much less attractive and watered-down proposal to repatriate 250 Venezuelan aliens in exchange for the American prisoners. The interests of the U.S. oil industry were completely ignored.

Wires were crossed, and the talks collapsed.

Two critical lessons

Two lessons are evident: The first and most obvious is that Grenell is responsible for talks with Venezuela and that he is the only U.S. figure Venezuela trusts — a point that shouldn’t be undermined.

The second is that Trump’s transactional diplomacy, represented by Grenell, works — when it’s allowed to. We’ve seen this with Steve Witkoff’s trips to the Middle East and the president’s own handling of NATO.

The Venezuelan government wants to negotiate with Grenell and Grenell alone — and for good reason. He speaks the language of leverage, not lectures. As special envoy, he has built a diplomatic channel that has delivered in the past. In January, for example, Grenell secured the release of six Americans, a great achievement.

RELATED: Biden did that? No, it’s Marco Rubio making gas prices skyrocket this time

  Photo by PEDRO MATTEY/AFP via Getty Images

In contrast, Venezuela all but refuses to communicate with Rubio. They see him as persona non grata. His methods, based on intervention and blunt force, are bound to fail.

This is particularly true now that we live in a world where U.S. dominance is not guaranteed. And as the United States has isolated Venezuela, the Latin American nation has been pushed deeper into Beijing’s orbit.

Oil exports to China, for example, have surged since Chevron’s license to operate was canceled in May. In turn, Venezuelan exports to the U.S. and its capitalist allies have cratered.

The strategic cost

Rubio’s hatred of Latin American socialism is clear, but that shouldn’t come at a strategic cost to our country. This isn’t a diplomatic blunder. It’s a threat to U.S. energy security and a betrayal of Trump’s promise to bring down prices at the pump.

We want Venezuelan oil and gas to head to the U.S. Gulf Coast, not Beijing. We need to protect the Monroe Doctrine, which says that no outside power should have a foothold in the Western Hemisphere.

The importance of energy security cannot be overstated. For an administration elected in large part on its promise to cut gas prices, it is a big mistake to turn our backs on Venezuela’s hydrocarbon reserves, the largest on earth.

Doing so increases American dependence on Canadian oil — not a smart move as we fight a trade war with Prime Minister Mark Carney — and on suppliers in a volatile Middle East, where Iran still looms large.

This is not to mention that the policy of isolation is damaging to Chevron, a champion of the American oil industry.

Under its former special license, Chevron was pumping out nearly a quarter of a million barrels of oil per day. This went straight to thirsty refiners on the U.S. Gulf Coast, which depend on Venezuela’s unique heavy crude oil. That lifeline has been cut, and it’s American consumers who will pay the price.

Grenell understood this and so wrapped Chevron’s status into his negotiations, a deal that put American interests first. Rubio, on the other hand, prioritized an ideological pursuit of regime change over American energy security.

President Trump should intervene.

He praised Grenell’s successful negotiations in January and should make clear that Venezuela policy is not for Rubio to decide. The goal is clear: Bring our citizens home, restart Chevron’s work, and reassert U.S. influence in our own hemisphere.

Renew Grenell’s leverage

Grenell, with renewed powers, should return the United States to a policy of strategic engagement. That’s what America First really looks like. That’s the approach to foreign policy promised to us in 2024. That’s the MAGA way.

It’s time to put the neocons back in the box and go back to the bold, pragmatic diplomacy that made Trump’s first term — and will make his second — a victory for everyday Americans and a triumphant return to common sense.

JD Vance: Rekindling statesmanship to secure America’s golden future



California generally and the Claremont Institute in particular have produced some of the most profound and revolutionary conservative thinkers of the last half-century.

And for a great many of them, it’s because they understood what’s at stake if we abandon our American identity.

This country is not a contradiction. It’s a nation of countless, extraordinary people across many generations, a land of profound ingenuity and tradition and beauty. But more importantly, it’s home.

And we’re lucky enough to have a few of them, like Michael Anton, now working in the administration with us.

Claremont Institute President Ryan Williams asked me to speak a little bit about statesmanship and, more to the point, about how to respond to some of the challenges our movement will need to confront in the years to come.

It’s an interesting question. And I think it’s useful to reflect on the state of the left in 2025 America.

Mamdani: A harrowing zeitgeist

On July 1, a 33-year-old communist running an insurgent campaign beat a multimillion-dollar establishment machine in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary.

I don’t want to harp on a municipal election, but there were two interesting threads that I wanted to highlight. The first is that it drives home how much the voters in each party have changed.

If our victory in 2024 was rooted in a broad, working- and middle-class coalition, Zohran Mamdani’s coalition is the inverse.

Look at his electoral performance, which the left is already talking about as a blueprint for future electoral success. The guy won high-income and college-educated New Yorkers — and especially both young and highly educated voters — but was weakest among black voters and those without a college degree. He did better in Bangladeshi areas of New York and worse in Chinese areas.

Mamdani’s strongest vote share was in New York’s gentrifying neighborhoods, like Ridgewood and Bushwick.

His victory was the product of a lot of young people who live reasonably comfortable lives but see that their elite degrees aren’t really delivering what they expected. And so their own prospects, with all the college debt, may not in fact be greater than those of their parents.

And I think in the results, we can start to see the future of the Democrats: as the party not of dispossession, but of elite disaffection.

RELATED: Exclusive: Vance on Mamdani: ‘Who the hell does he think that he is?’

  Photo by Adam Gray/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The party of highly educated but downwardly mobile elites who compose a highly energetic activist base — one, critically, supplemented by carefully selected ethnic blocs carved out of the electorate, using identity politics as the knife.

That, by the way, explains all of Mamdani’s bizarre appeals to foreign politics intended to signal to one diaspora community or another in New York.

Why is a mayoral candidate in our nation’s biggest city whining about banning Bibi Netanyahu from visiting and threatening to arrest him if he tries? Or attacking Narendra Modi as a “war criminal”? Why is he talking about “globalizing the intifada”? What the hell does that even mean in Manhattan?

But what might seem like a contradiction makes sense if you peel back the onion a bit. Consider: a movement that rails against the billionaire class despite the fact that the billionaire class remains firmly in its corner. It idolizes foreign religions even as it rejects the teachings of those faiths. It rails against white people even as many of its funders and grassroots activists are privileged whites.

America in 2025 is more diverse than it has ever been. And yet the institutions that form culture are also weaker.

I was once comforted by these contradictions. How could privileged whites march around decrying white privilege? How could progressives pretend to love Muslims despite their cultural views on gender and sexuality?

But the answer is obvious, isn’t it? The radicals of the far left don’t need a unifying ideology of what they’re for, because they know very well what they’re against.

What unites Islamists, gender studies majors, socially liberal white urbanites, and Big Pharma lobbyists? It isn’t the ideas of Thomas Jefferson or even Karl Marx. It’s hatred. They hate the people in this room, they hate the president of the United States, and most of all, they hate the people who voted for him.

This is the animating principle of the American far left. It isn’t true of most of the people who vote for Democrats, of course. Most of them are good people, even if they’re misguided in their politics. But pay attention to what their leadership says outside glossy campaign ads or general election-tested messaging, and it’s obvious that this is what animates the modern Democratic Party.

  FilippoBacci via iStock/Getty Images

Defining the modern left

The far left doesn’t care that Black Lives Matter led to a spike in violent crime in urban black neighborhoods, because it also led to anarchy in middle-class white neighborhoods.

The leftists don’t care that Islamism hates gays and subjugates women, because for now, it is a useful tool of death against Americans.

They don’t care that too many pharmaceutical companies are getting rich from experimental hormonal therapies, because it destroys the “gender binary” that has structured social relations between the genders for the whole of Western civilization.

They don’t care that deporting low-wage immigrants will raise the wages of the native-born, because they don’t mean to create higher living standards for those born and raised here — black, white, or any other skin color. They mean to replace them with people who will listen to their increasingly bizarre ethnic and religious appeals.

They are arsonists, and they will make common cause with anyone else willing to light the match. It’s why Mamdani himself is such an appealing instrument to the left. He captures so many of the movement’s apparent contradictions in a single human being: a guy who describes the Palestinian cause as “central” to his identity, yet holds views — abortion on demand and using taxpayer money to fund transgender surgeries for minors, for example — that would be incomprehensible on the streets of Gaza.

This politics doesn’t make sense as a positive political program. But it’s very effective at tearing down the things the left hates.

The right’s answer: Create

One task of statesmanship is to recognize what the left wishes to do to American society. But the most important thing is to be for something. And that’s the second thread I want to touch on today: If the left wishes to destroy, we must create.

The most obvious way to do that is to ensure that the people we serve have a better life in the country their grandparents built. This is why the president cares so much about tariffs — in a globalized economy, we must be willing to penalize those who would build outside our own nation.

And it’s why he worked so hard to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — if tariffs are the stick, then lower taxes and regulations are the carrots. We want to make it easy to save and invest in America, to build a business in America, and most of all to work a dignified job and earn the kind of wage that can support a family in comfort.

But this is not a purely material question, because we are not just producers and consumers. We are human beings, made in the image of God, who love our home not just because we earn a living here but because we discover our purpose and meaning here.

Every Western society has demographic problems. There is something about Western liberalism that is socially suicidal or parasitic — that tends to feed off a healthy host until there’s nothing left.

The radicals of the far left don’t need a unifying ideology of what they’re for, because they know very well what they’re against.

America in 2025 is more diverse than it has ever been. And yet the institutions that form culture are also weaker. We are confronted with a society that has less in common than ever and whose cultural leaders seem totally uninterested in fixing that.

Just four years ago, we had people promoting alternative national anthems at one of the few remaining national pastimes that transcend ethnic and cultural differences. Too many of our current crop of statesmen remain unable to break out of that moment, destined to erode the very thing that makes Americans put on a uniform and sacrifice their lives for something.

Part of the solution — the most important part of the solution — is to stop the bleeding. This is why President Trump’s immigration policies are so important. Social bonds form among people who have something in common. If you stop importing millions of foreigners, you allow social cohesion to form naturally.

But even so: If you were to ask yourself in 2025 what an American is, very few of our leaders would have a good answer. Is it purely agreement with the creedal principles of America?

That definition is overinclusive and underinclusive. It would include hundreds of millions, maybe billions, of foreigners. Must we admit them tomorrow? But at the same time, that answer would also reject a lot of people the Anti-Defamation League would label domestic extremists, even though their own ancestors were here at the time of the Revolutionary War.

  welcomia via iStock/Getty Images

What American citizenship means

So perhaps the most pressing thing to build now is the meaning of American citizenship in the 21st century.

The right needs to do a better job of articulating what that means. And while I don’t have a comprehensive answer for you, there are a few things I’d suggest off the top of my head.

For one, it means sovereignty. More precisely, American citizenship must mean belonging to a nation that guards the sovereignty of its people, especially from a modern world that’s hell-bent on dissolving borders and differences in national character.

That means having a government that vigorously defends the basic qualities of sovereignty — that secures the border from foreign invasion; that protects its citizens and their enterprises against unfair foreign tax schemes; that erects tariff walls and similar barriers to protect its people’s industry; that avoids needlessly entangling them in prolonged, distant wars.

It also means preserving the basic legal privileges of citizenship — things like voting, including in state and local elections, or access to public benefits like certain state-run health care programs — for citizens. When states start handing these out to illegal aliens, they cheapen the very meaning of citizenship. And a nation that refuses to make that distinction won’t stay a nation for very long.

I’d also say that citizenship in the 21st century necessarily means building.

America is not just an idea. We’re a particular place, with a particular people and a particular set of beliefs and way of life.

Our ancestors realized that to carve a successful nation from a new land meant creating new, tangible things. New homes, new towns, new infrastructure to tame a wild continent. That attitude enabled us to build the world’s greatest cities, its tallest skyscrapers, the most impressive dams and canals.

Over time, it expanded the horizons of what we even thought possible as human beings, with Americans taking our species into the air and, just a generation later, into Earth’s orbit. Our innovations revolutionized communications, medicine, and agriculture, extending human life spans decades at a time.

None of that would be possible if our citizens believed we lived in a postindustrial era. Or an era when our finest minds just went to what are essentially speculative trades or to writing software that makes us more efficient consumers.

We need to build. We need to make great things here, for the betterment of our fellow Americans but also for our posterity. We need to continue to invent groundbreaking innovations and to leave homes and libraries and factories that our descendants will look at someday and feel awe.

This country is not a contradiction. It’s a nation of countless extraordinary people across many generations, a land of profound ingenuity and tradition and beauty.

And we need to build together. Getting to the moon required a lot of brilliant scientists working on what were effectively pocket calculators. But it also required a national system of education that produced that level of genius and inspired young graduates to want to design new rockets on behalf of their nation. And it required a ton of phenomenally talented engineers and welders and custodians to manufacture cutting-edge engines and keep the facilities that housed them spotless. It was a national project in the truest sense of the phrase.

To be a citizen in the 21st century, I think, should mean seeking out similar projects. Citizenship should mean feeling pride in our heritage, of course. But it should also mean understanding milestones like the moon landings not only as the product of past national greatness but as an achievement we should surpass by aligning the goals and ambitions of Americans at all levels of society.

Lastly, I’d say citizenship must mean recognizing the unique relationship, and especially the unique obligations, you share with your fellow Americans.

You cannot swap 10 million people from anywhere else in the world and expect America to remain unchanged. In the same way, you can’t export our Constitution to a random country and expect it to take hold.

That’s not something to lament but to take pride in. The founders understood that our shared qualities — our heritage, our values, our manners and customs — confer a special and indispensable advantage. A decisive one, even, in rebellion against the world’s greatest military power at the time.

That means something today. Citizenship — true citizenship — is not just about rights. In a world of globalized commerce and communication, it’s also about obligations, including to your countrymen. It’s about recognizing that your fellow citizens are not interchangeable cogs in the global economy, nor, in law or commerce, should they be treated that way.

And I think it’s impossible to feel a sense of obligation to something without having gratitude for it. We should demand that our people, whether first- or 10th-generation Americans, have gratitude for this country. We should be skeptical of anyone who lacks it, especially if they purport to lead it.

And that brings me back to the likely next mayor of New York. Today is July 5, 2025, which means that yesterday we celebrated the 249th anniversary of the birth of our nation.

The person who wishes to lead our largest city had, according to media reports, never once publicly mentioned America’s Independence Day in earnest. But when he did so this year, this is what he said.

America is beautiful, contradictory, unfinished. I am proud of our country even as we constantly strive to make it better.

There is no gratitude here. No sense of owing something to this land and the people who turned its wilderness into the most powerful nation in the world.

Zohran Mamdani’s father fled Uganda when the tyrant Idi Amin decided to ethnically cleanse his nation’s Indian population. Mamdani’s family fled violent racial hatred only for him to come to this country — a country built by people he never knew, overflowing with generosity to his family, offering a haven from the kind of violent ethnic conflict that is commonplace in world history.

And he dares, on its 249th birthday, to congratulate it by paying homage to its incompleteness and to its, as he calls it, “contradiction.” Has he ever read the letters from boy soldiers in the Union Army to parents and sweethearts they’d never see again? Has he ever visited a gravesite of a loved one who gave his life to build the kind of society where his family could escape theft and violence? Has he ever looked in the mirror and recognized that he might not be alive were it not for the generosity of a country he dares to insult on its most sacred day?

Who the hell do these people think they are?

  Photo by Unsplash

Make America Great Again

Yesterday, I visited the construction site for the Teddy Roosevelt presidential library. We went hiking in the badlands of North Dakota. My 5-year-old so desperately wanted to see a buffalo, and he saw a dozen of them. My 8-year-old spotted a bald eagle perched on a low cliff. And my 3-year-old brought me a dandelion.

Her little lungs weren’t strong enough to send the dandelion seeds over the hillside, so she asked me to do it. Watching her face light up as she watched those seeds blow over the hills, I felt a profound sense of gratitude for this country. For its natural beauty, the settlers who carved a civilization out of the wilderness. For making the love story of that little girl’s mother and father possible. For the common yet profound joy of watching a 3-year-old’s beautiful eyes light up as she watches a dandelion’s seeds dance in the wind against an ancient rock formation.

This country is not a contradiction. It’s a nation of countless extraordinary people across many generations, a land of profound ingenuity and tradition and beauty. But more importantly, it’s home. For the vast bulk of Americans, it’s where we’re born, it’s where we will raise our children and grandchildren, and it’s where we ourselves will one day be buried. And when that day comes, I hope my kids can take solace in knowing that their inheritance as Americans is not some unfinished or contradictory project, but a home that provided their parents shelter, and sustenance, and endless amounts of love.

Thank you, and God bless you.

Editor’s note: This article was adapted from JD Vance’s address to the Claremont Institute on July 5, 2025, and published originally at the American Mind.

Trump doubles down on 'bulls**t' Epstein files: 'I don't want their support anymore!'



While the MAGA base continues to demand answers about the administration's botched handling of the Epstein files, President Donald Trump is not backing down.

In his latest Truth Social post, Trump likened the Epstein scandal to the "fully discredited" Russia hoax and the "Laptop from Hell," referring to Hunter Biden's laptop. The common thread according to Trump is that all of these scandals were manufactured by Democrats to threaten his presidency.

'The American people feel highly disappointed. They feel like they've been betrayed.'

"These Scams and Hoaxes are all the Democrats are good at - It's all they have - They are no good at governing, no good at policy, and no good at picking winning candidates," Trump said Wednesday.

Trump criticized the legacy media and even some of his supporters who think there's more to the Epstein story, calling them "weaklings" and saying he no longer wants their support.

RELATED: The White House will need to do plenty more to get past Epstein

  Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

"Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this 'bulls**t,' hook, line, and sinker," Trump said. "They haven't learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years."

"I have had more success in 6 months than perhaps any President in our Country's history, and all these people want to talk about, with strong prodding by the Fake News and the success starved Dems, is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax," Trump added. "Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats [sic] work, don't even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don't want their support anymore!"

RELATED: FBI, DOJ Epstein memo sparks right-wing outrage: 'Nobody is believing this'

  Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

Although Trump is urging Republicans to turn the page on Epstein, several lawmakers told Blaze News that they would be in favor of additional transparency.

"We've gotta address this thing. America is ticked off about it," Republican Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee told Blaze News. "But I think President Trump gets it."

"The American people feel highly disappointed. They feel like they've been betrayed," Republican Rep. Eric Burlison of Missouri told Blaze News. "This issue isn't going to go away."

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

New GOP-Backed Amnesty Bill Is A Gift To Dems And A Middle Finger To Republican Voters

The release — or lack thereof — of the Epstein Files has consumed most of MAGA’s attention in recent days. But there’s something far more dangerous that deserves the full force of MAGA’s attention: a cadre of so-called Republicans is working to foist a mass amnesty program on the American people. Florida Republican Rep. María […]

Charlie Kirk: We’re replacing the RINOs with real leaders



Shallow, performative politicians are the norm, but there’s a new wave of conservative leadership — embodied best by Vice President JD Vance — that does it for the love of the country rather than the money or accolades associated with it.

“When we’re constantly trying to be held captive by ideology, it would be prudence, which would be practical judgment, and I think JD Vance embodies that incredibly well,” Turning Point USA CEO Charlie Kirk tells BlazeTV host and Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson on “Blaze News: The Mandate.”

“When you’re in elected office, you have to be prisoner to the party dogma and the political expectations of the time. For example, when President Trump entered into the political space 10 years ago,” he continues, “you would never be able to talk about a border wall, let alone mass deportations.”

“So, a true statesman is able to identify the problems and then, with the proper amount of moral courage and with precision, rhetorically be able to address these things and then move the Overton window,” he adds.


This is what separates the likes of Trump and Vance from the rest of the Republican Party, as they are “unafraid to challenge their own political dogma if it’s actually benefiting the nation or the body politic.”

And while many RINO politicians only take action for the optics, statesmen like Vance do it out of real concern for the country and the people — and young people are among those making the difference.

“I feel as if a lot of these younger people are much more in tune with statesmanship in the sense that they actually want to make the country better, and they don’t care about the old prestige structure,” Peterson tells Kirk.

“If you’re young and you want to get involved in politics or being a statesmen, that means that you are likely forsaking making more money and more wealth in another field,” Kirk says. “The high-IQ, high-driven, virtuous people are now saying, ‘You know, okay, fine. I could go make $200 million at Goldman Sachs, but that’s not deep. That’s not fulfilling. Instead, I would rather go be a statesman.’”

“These are people that could go make a ton of money elsewhere, which means that just monetary gain is not the most important. It's not the driving factor or motivator of so many in this generation,” he continues.

“Imagine if all of a sudden the people that have a capacity and the wherewithal dedicated itself towards a national revival,” he adds.

Want more from 'Blaze News | The Mandate'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.