Commentary Culture Investigations

Despite almost a year of oil blockades, tightened sanctions, and other economic pressures, Cuba’s communist regime doesn’t seem to budge. Last week’s spectacle at the UN general assembly in which the Cuban delegation abruptly interrupted a speech by U.S. Ambassador Mike Waltz, harassed Cuban dissidents brought in to expose human rights abuses, and slapped a cell phone from the hand of a U.S. diplomat because he was “invading my space” are clear signs that the island’s ruling cabal has no intention of giving up power peacefully.
“They are scared and desperate, many could face serious charges of mass torture and other crimes against humanity if they lose power and are left with nowhere to go,” a former senior State Department official told The American Spectator. Cuba’s deteriorating situation was brought home to its ruling nomenklatura last week when a 30-hour blackout hit its privileged gated district of Vedado. But events elsewhere in the hemisphere and apparent U.S. dithering about intervening militarily may be giving Castro family oligarchs and their communist apparatchiks renewed hope.
President Trump talked about the U.S. Navy “making a stop in Cuba on the way back from Iran” at a recent political rally, threatening to place a warship 50 yards from Cuba’s coast to make them all come out with their hands up. “They may interpret the remarks as indicative of a lack of serious planning for an invasion,” a high-level Cuban intelligence defector told The American Spectator.
They know that the U.S. Navy will likely be stuck in the Persian Gulf, conducting combat missions against Iran for some time yet, and a destroyer can’t steam fifty meters from any shore without running aground. They also know that the U.S. does not need to bring in aircraft carrier task forces to attack Cuba. There are more troops, warships and combat aircraft at bases around Cuba in the southeastern U.S., Florida, and Puerto Rico than in the Middle East. “If we really want to take out the regime we can do it with what’s in theater,” says former U.S. army special forces colonel Ron MacCammon.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s recent statements about a change of regime in Cuba happening sometime in the next two years, or before the end of Trump’s presidential term, may similarly give Cuba’s ruling thugs some relief, making them think that they have time in which to develop a survival strategy, taking advantage of certain new developments in the U.S. and elsewhere in the Western hemisphere that could work in their favor.
They may see a new Democrat majority in the U.S. Congress strongly influenced by SDA far leftists aligned with Havana as an opportunity to gain new leverage on Washington and further their long-running strategy of penetrating and destabilizing the U.S. Leftist President Lula da Silva’s election upset in Brazil (possibly using vote-altering electronic software developed in Cuba and previously tested in Venezuela) is also a boost for the regime. “Brazil is going to emerge as the biggest challenge to the U.S. in the Western Hemisphere,” says U.S. Army War College Latin America specialist Dr. Evan Ellis. “While there is little Lula may be able to do militarily, he could challenge the US blockade, sending shipments of oil, food, machinery and spare parts as well as providing diplomatic support to Cuba.”
Renewed instability in Venezuela as Maduro regime stalwarts resist U.S.-supported efforts to arrange free elections could also be fanned by thousands of Cuban agents who remain there and may retain influence among elements in the military and Colectivo militias still controlled by interior minister Diosdado Cabello, who is being carefully watched by the FBI. “The regime is going to go beyond Cuba to pressure the U.S. asymmetrically,” says Ellis. “It has people immersed throughout the Latin American left prepared to use terrorism and other disruptive tactics in response to U.S. moves.” He sees Colombia, where the U.S. has just sent 300 troops to assist the recently elected conservative President Abelardo de la Espriella to combat guerrilla groups and drug cartels, as a likely target for Cuba that has close links to the ELN terrorist organization.
The U.S. is trying to turn the tables. Secretary Rubio released a statement last week inviting Cubans to cooperate with the CIA to further political change on the island. Several experts consulted by The American Spectator say that its main purpose is psychological. “Rubio’s invitation puts pressure on the people who keep the regime functioning,” says former CIA official Rick de la Torre. Besides whatever useful information and assets the agency may acquire, the announcement is meant to sow distrust within the regime as security officials and communist party bosses become suspicious of each other in an already highly paranoid environment.
Carlos Calvo, a Cuban army officer who defected to the U.S. after serving in Raul Castro’s personal security team, believes that the CIA initiative is aimed at the military, in hopes of instigating a coup. But a generation of senior officers whose promotion has been largely based on loyalty to the Castro family and weaned on its GAESA company that controls over 50 percent of the Cuban economy are unlikely to possess the necessary initiative and mental fortitude to lead an uprising that would be very difficult to organize in Cuba.
The case was similar in Venezuela, where opposition politicians and many U.S. analysts believed for years that the military could be pushed into removing Nicolás Maduro until the Trump administration finally gave up on the idea and took him out with U.S. Special Forces who had to kill 32 Cuban bodyguards to extract him.
Cuba is an even less permissive environment. About a thousand highly armed and trained security officers protect Raul Castro as well as his sons and grandsons who hold key positions in the intelligence services. Even as the economy crumbles and people have to cook on open wood fires, sophisticated Chinese thermal surveillance cameras with digital facial recognition are being installed everywhere from the barracks to city streets to bolster the island’s totalitarian security system designed by the PLA. China has also built a network of electronic listening stations in Cuba targeting the U.S.
“The administration is following a strategy of long-term pressure in the regime,” says Dr. Ellis. But time may not necessarily play in its favor. China will seize upon the consolidation of a leftist authoritarian government in Brazil, which already has close ties with Beijing, to reinitiate geopolitical moves in Latin America that may involve reinforcing its Cuban outpost. The Cuban people, initially encouraged by president Trump’s hardline policy to rebel against the regime, could lose hope and be less inclined to mount an insurrection that could lay the groundwork for a U.S. military intervention. “Less sanctions and more actions” has become a common complaint among dissidents on the island, according to Cuban independent journalist Luis Leonel León.
The Trump administration will suffer politically among its key constituency in the Cuban exile community, 73 percent of whom favor a U.S. invasion, if it holds back much longer on implementing forceful measures to take out the hated regime. If it acts, strong reactions in Congress, organized street violence, and possibly terrorism can be expected from far-left cells that increasingly control the Democrat Party. But if Trump is serious about confronting U.S. radical socialists in the aftermath of his recent midterms defeat, taking out their command centers in Havana and fully exposing the communist regime’s ties to the American left may be a way forward.
READ MORE by Martin Arostegui:
Why Is Vlad the Impaler in a Negotiating Mood?
Reagan’s SDI Vision Is Today Affordable
Europe’s Hard Left at Its Most Dangerous

This will be one of my last politics-centric articles for a while, at least well into next year, when the 2028 presidential race begins in earnest. Until then, I’ll strictly focus on the Culture War, which also went badly this past Tuesday. I’ll be watching very little news, especially the diminished Fox News. But the horror of what happened on Election Day merits my commentary. 
In his classic chiller, Dracula, Bram Stoker introduced a fascinating rule for vampires. For all their dark supernatural powers, they cannot enter a home for the first time unless invited in by a resident. Their evil can be kept out just by not opening the door. Thus, they must use guile, seduction, and lies to gain admission. Which is exactly what the Democratic vampires have done for the past two years, aided by their media slaves: present themselves as empathic beings who don’t want to destroy you. Last Tuesday night, many Americans opened the door to them. And we will all pay a heavy, bloody price.
We warned the people — I and other wiser, more eminent figures. We wrote, we spoke, we pleaded, we described the true nature of the menace. We were dismissed, not only by the general population but by the anemic feckless leaders we elected to protect us, even the religious leaders.
So, when the Democratic Senate candidate for Texas profaned Scripture to champion perversion and child murder, most literally remained unmoved. In consequence, a man who said the Virgin Mary’s consent to bear Christ meant God was pro-abortion will be the next senator from Texas. Joined by the next governor, another advocate for the abomination. Thus, a once noble patriotic state will soon be a sanctuary for darkness and incompetence maintained, like California, by the votes of illegals.
The man who initially repelled these forces, driving them, ah, batty, squandered his support. For all the good he did over two years, such as a sealed border, illegal-alien expulsion, a lower crime rate, a stronger military — he astonishingly went down the path that destroyed so many of his predecessors: a prolonged war. As his vice president tweeted, “The reason we lost is the war.”
It wasn’t the precision missile strike to bury Iran’s nuclear capability that hurt Trump. It wasn’t the decisive destruction of the Islamic Republic’s leadership and military. It was the vortex Trump inexplicably entered right afterward — the quest for a deal, from fanatics willing to die before surrendering to the Great Satan.
Even a cursory knowledge of modern history rejects the concept. Every similar effort ended in disaster for the president who pursued it: Vietnam for LBJ and Nixon, the Iraq War for George Bush, the War on Terror for George (“Islam is a religion of peace”) W. Bush, Afghanistan for Joe Biden. I’m no military historian, but I’ve read one of the best, Michael Walsh. In the introduction to his excellent book, A Rage to Conquer: Twelve Battles That Changed the Course of Western History, Walsh brilliantly expressed the obvious lesson the Trump team seemed not to have learned.
“The battlefield is not the place for negotiation,” Walsh wrote. “It is the place for extreme, dispositive violence… Wars are not ended at the bargaining table; all the great confrontations of history have ended violently. It is only when wars temporarily have been halted via ‘negotiated settlements’ that they inevitably continue.”
Just once in my lifetime, I wanted to see an American war end like World War II did, in unconditional surrender by the enemy, not a worthless peace agreement. Yet here was Donald Trump seizing defeat from the jaws of victory, plunging the country into an endless conflict that sapped his support and divided the Right. Which led directly to the Election Night catastrophe.
True, not voting against the people that hate you, believing you can go about your life independent of them, was madness. Abstainers forgot what happened the last time Democrats were in charge. The COVID school and church closings, the fabricated remedies, the social media banning for politically incorrect statements like calling a “transwoman” a man, the persecution of peaceful election protesters, the targeting of traditional parents and Christians, and the sky-high prices.
And those Democrats were Boy-Girl Scouts compared to the communist breed about to take control. Who will do everything legal or illegal to never relinquish it. And they understand one thing about us that they deem a weakness. Unlike them, we won’t go crazy when we lose. We won’t threaten, attack, or shoot any of them. We won’t do a dance or write a poem when tragedy befalls them. In fact, some of us prayed for the loathsome Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy after he suffered a stroke last weekend.
Because it’s not a weakness, the belief in something higher and deeper than statist power. Something they’ll probably never know, and would balk at the idea. Something Florida Republican Governor-Elect Bryan Donalds expressed at the start of his victory speech Tuesday. “Before I say anything, I want to thank my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
Florida actually held the GOP line against the Democrat tsunami, the largest state to do this. Thanks to the firm conservative stewardship of one leader, Donalds’ predecessor Ron DeSantis. And with Trump’s vice president now tied to a sunk administration, DeSantis will soon likely become the Republican frontrunner. And I’ll be here to cover it, after my long respite from politics.
For a fictional (or is it?) take on what went wrong in this week’s midterm election, check out my exciting new political thriller mystery, The Camelot Trail, about an Islamist-communist-feminist—and British—conspiracy to cripple the current Administration. Available in two weeks (November 17th).
As a Christmas gift for the special lady in your life, get my sweet yet haunting romantasy novel, The Christmas Spirit. She’ll thank you for it (if she’s not a shrieking girlboss harridan.) 

MS NOW via SnapStream

On Wednesday’s Money, Power, Politics, MS NOW host Stephanie Ruhle and her panel struggled to move past the familiar narrative that American democracy and voting rights are under threat, suggesting fears of voter suppression helped drive Democratic turnout.MS NOW’s political director, Shawna Thomas, declared that Democrats shouldn’t dismiss cultural issues, claiming voters were motivated by concerns that both their votes and democracy were at risk. “…Part of the reason so many people showed up and voted yesterday, and over the course of these last few weeks of early voting, was because they felt democracy was at risk. Their vote was at risk,” said Thomas.Ruthle went on to raise the question of black voter turnout in the South, and put words into voters’ mouths, claiming “Voter suppression isn’t going to keep us down. Gerrymandering isn’t going to keep us down. If I have to drive farther to vote, wait longer, I’m still going to do it.But rather than examine the reasons behind the black voter turnout, Thomas continued to argue that Democrats couldn’t take those voters “for granted.”  Former George W. Bush and John McCain Advisor Mark McKinnon also fed into the broader democracy narrative by calling Democratic voters as “Prisoners of hope” who “just got a get out of jail free card,” and framed the election results as a reason for younger Americans to regain faith in the political system.McKinnon’s comments on how he was happy for his daughters who he claimed “became so frustrated. They said that politics doesn’t work. We can’t affect change” reinforced the conversations’ theme that the election was more about presenting a certain preferred outcome than the restoration of an apparently corrupted political system full of voter suppression even when the results prove that there was no suppression.But this wasn’t a new argument from Democrats. For years, the party has leaned on claims of voter suppression to portray Republican election policies as threats to voting rights and democracy. The accusation has become a familiar part of the Democratic playbook, and resurfaces whenever voting laws and election rules become political flashpoints in order to motivate voters with fear. MS NOW seems more than happy to help keep it alive.The transcript is below. Click “expand” to read:MS NOW’s Money, Power, Politics with Stephanie RuhleNovember 4, 202610:55:53 a.m. Eastern(…)RON INSANA (MS NOW BUSINESS ANALYST): So, Ro Khanna tweeted last night “D.E.I. is back.” And I responded to him on Twitter, “No, affordability needs to be back. Accountability needs to be back. Integrity needs to be back. Responsibility needs to be back.”If they waste any time on cultural issues and start talking about pronouns and things like that, they’re going to get swept out just as they got swept in. So, I think the Democratic Party needs to have an agenda that directly addresses the concerns of the American people, without getting bogged down in culture wars over the next two years. That will just take us back to where we were a couple years ago.STEAPHANIE RUHLE: And to be clear, I don’t think you’re saying D.E.I. is a problem–INSANA: Of course not.RUHLE: But it’s not a priority, given the state of things for the American people.INSANA: Correct. And equal rights for everyone. No ifs, ands, or buts.SHAWNA THOMAS (MS NOW POLITICAL DIRECTOR): But.ISANA: Yes?THOMAS: Depending on how you look at the phrase ‘culture wars,’ they can’t ignore the fact that part of the reason so many people showed up and voted yesterday, and over the course of these last few weeks of early voting, was because they felt democracy was at risk. Their vote was at risk. The Callais decision from the Supreme Court was an inspiring rallying cry, I think for a lot of people, especially in the Sun Belt. And they have to remember these people showed up because they wanted to have their voices heard, and they are still going to want to have their voices heard. And those measures of shoring up how we vote in this country and strengthening that are going to have to be protected. And that’s not just by Democrats. That’s also by Republicans. They showed all of them that.RUHLE: Does the black vote in the South–is that one of the biggest takeaways from this election? Voter suppression isn’t going to keep us down. Gerrymandering isn’t going to keep us down. If I have to drive farther to vote, wait longer, I’m still going to do it.THOMAS: Yes, but don’t take it for granted. Don’t take it for granted. Like, next week, we should be seeing information about Democratic groups still organizing in the South. South Carolina is a real opportunity. It’s now the first state, right? It’s now the first state for the Democrats when it comes to the primary season. We thought that was just a primary thing. Maybe it should be a general thing. Mississippi, there’s something real going on there. They need to put their money where their mouth is.MARK MCKINNON (FORMER W. BUSH AND MCCAIN WH ADVISER): Prisoners of hope just got a get out of jail free card.RUHLE: Wow!THOMAS: Did you write ads for a living?RUHLE: Exactly.MCKINNON: What I’m most excited about is just that it was such a mandate that shows that change can happen. And I’m happy for my daughters, who over the last decade or so, became so frustrated. They said that politics doesn’t work. We can’t affect change. And it was so depressing for the younger generation. And so much of this was fueled by younger voters, so I’m happy for them.(…)

PBS surely knows that Democrat majorities in the House and Senate will lunge to restore taxpayer funding for “public” broadcasting. They never stopped promoting the Democrats even as President Trump and the Republicans moved to defund them. They didn’t change their partisan approach at all. The same was true of PBS coverage on Tuesday.Even on an election night that would eventually delight its liberal audience, PBS News Hour was still looking for a “democracy in danger” spin in its opening seconds, turning to Plutocrats United author Rich Hasen for the doomspeak: BIAS in the first minute of PBS tonight: Amna Nawaz: “The Department of Justice took unprecedented steps heading into this election. A look at its effort to change voter rolls and even block some results.” “Plutocrats United” author Rick Hasen, on Alaska: “Even if there is not an attempt to interfere with actually how the election is run, there could be further potential criminal liability or at least attempted criminal liability down the line, and that in itself is dangerous to democracy.”— Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) November 4, 2026 A little later, Amna Nawaz warmly greeted outgoing Rep. Nancy Pelosi, but wondered if Abdul El-Sayed would be hurt by the late-breaking endorsement of Mike Rogers by Rep. Haley Stevens. Pelosi projected a “landslide” in Michigan, but Abdul won by seven points. PBS could stand for the Pelosi Broadcasting Service. (Recall PBS anchor Geoff Bennett slobbering over her in California.) Pelosi: “By all reports I have from Michigan, and we have House races there too…it’s going to be a LANDSLIDE in Michigan. We will win that Senate seat in Michigan. Unfortunately, and with all the respect of the world that I have for my FORMER colleague Haley Stevens, this distraction from what we should be talking about is what are the Democrats going to do when they win….The Democrats will win big in Michigan!”— Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) November 4, 2026 David Brooks, who now identifies himself as the rightward tendency of the Democrat Party (like there is such a thing?), expressed delight at how the Democrats are presenting themselves as religious folks, and never mind their actual hardline on abortion and the LGBTQ agenda:  David Brooks doing Happy Talk: “Over the past couple of years or cycles, the Democrats have done a better job of being religious. Raphael Warnock in Georgia led the way, but now we see Talarico in Texas. El-Sayed talked about his faith. I got to know Adam Hamilton 10 or 15 years ago when he invited me to his church, which looks like a big basketball arena…. He has “a great story to tell” of finding faith, and he’s done great things, like getting his flock to write thank-you notes to local teachers, great “civic action.”— Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) November 4, 2026 In the 10pm Eastern hour, Geoff Bennett was pleased that the danger of embracing the word “socialism” is fading with the young voters: PBS host Geoff Bennett: “it was not that long ago to be called a socialist in this country was a political death sentence. Now you have a younger generation of Democrats who are embracing this Democrat socialist title. It does not make sense to a lot of people who have come up through the traditional ranks of politics and have covered politics for the last 20, 30 years.” Kimberly Atkins Stohr: “You are putting your finger on it. You have young people who don’t have these kinds of associations but what they are seeing is the people, some of the candidated were calling themselves socialists are talking about the things they want to hear. They are talking about ensuring that people can afford to live. They are talking about housing costs. They are talking about the things they want to hear so that is on a dirty word to them.”— Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) November 4, 2026 These were but a few of the partisan moments on Election Night on PBS. They’re an ideologically reliable source for the Left. They deserved defunding, but they’re obviously gearing up for a re-funding. 

Screenshot via CBS/Snapstream

For some reason, Wednesday’s CBS Mornings was live for an intolerable five hours to celebrate their party’s sweep in the midterm elections, airing from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Eastern, with plenty of interviews drooling over their new friends, celebrating other victories, and showing us they’re unconcerned about appearing any different than the show has for years.Our Nicholas Spinnato took a look at the first two and a half hours, which you can check out here. There, he dove into their absurdist interviews with Democrats Keisha Lance Bottoms of Georgia and James Talarico of Texas.Airing at 10:30 a.m. Eastern for the West Coast CBS Mornings and nationally on CBS News 24/7, their interview with Democratic Senator-elect Adam Hamilton of Kansas rivaled the Lance Bottoms and Talarico kiss-ups.Co-hosts Nate Burleson, Gayle King, and Norah O’Donnell illuminated open support for Hamilton as “a vessel for the Lord, and also…a bridge for the people” given his desire “to bring the biblical Gold Rule to D.C.,” and ensure a Democrat-controlled Congress exhibits “decency and kindness” to thwart “crassness” and “vulgarity” (which was implied to define the GOP).O’Donnell started with a predictable softball to get Hamilton warmed up: “You look at the $110 million that was spent on this race in Kansas. You are now the first Democrat elected in 94 years. What did you hear from voters that made them want to toss out a Republican, Senator-elect?”
The ‘CBS Mornings’ interview with Kansas Democrat Adam Hamilton was ridiculously embarrassing. It gave off serious fanboy and fangirl vibes….Here were the so-called questions Nate Burleson, Gayle King, and Norah O’Donnell asked…O’Donnell: “You look at the $110 million… pic.twitter.com/eLweBvkL0J— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 5, 2026

The ‘CBS Mornings’ interview with Kansas Democrat Adam Hamilton was ridiculously embarrassing. It gave off serious fanboy and fangirl vibes….Here were the so-called questions Nate Burleson, Gayle King, and Norah O’Donnell asked…O’Donnell: “You look at the $110 million… pic.twitter.com/eLweBvkL0J— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 5, 2026

An anecdote and series of bipartisan talking points later, O’Donnell enthused, “I know you have promised to bring the biblical Golden Rule to D.C., as you have said, ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’ Have you been to Washington? That place is pretty cutthroat. How are you going to do that?”Hamilton responded with a lengthy answer about the need to become “best friend[s]” with Kansas’s senior Senator, Jerry Moran, and “restore a sense of decency and bipartisanship in Washington,” which they sure ate up off-camera.King delivered the clear-cut voice of support: “[S]o many people are really happy to hear you talk about decency and kindness, Pastor, because when we were talking to people, they said they’re sick of…the vulgarity, the crassness, and you said that — people were very touched to hear yesterday that you start your day on your knees and you’re in prayer.”Hamilton’s answer sounded unifying and familiar to Christians, but it eventually took a partisan turn that drew positive interjections from the CBS crew as he implied congressional Republicans who claim to be Christ followers aren’t truly in good standing with the Lord (click “expand”):HAMILTON: Well, thanks for asking. So, I did it again this morning in my hotel. I’ll do it in Washington. I get on my knees. I lift up my hands. I just say, “Here I am.” I thank God for the day and for my life, and I consider all of life as a gift. And I’m like, thank you for everything. I thank God for my family. But then I offer myself to Christ. I’m like, “Here I am. Help me to follow you well. Help me to — I invite the Holy Spirit to lead me to see the people that need somebody to care for them, to guide and, you know, direct my path, and so I’m going to be praying that every day, when I’m in the United States Senate, I start my day reading scripture. I have my pocket Testament with me in my back pocket, and I start reading scripture at the Gospels and the Psalms, usually. And so, when I get to Washington, you know, — so, I see a lot of people claim to be Christians. And I wonder, what Gospels are you reading?KING: Mmmm!BURLESON: Mmmm!O’DONNELL: Mmmm!HAMILTON: Because what you do doesn’t reflect Jesus in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and, you know, I’m not going up there to be the chaplain of the Senate. I’m not even going up to be America’s pastor. I’m just going to be a senator who’s going to try to be decent, try to bring people together, and try to practice what’s at the center of my life, and that’s —BURLESON: Yeah!HAMILTON: — the defining story of loving your neighbor as you love yourself, and being compassionate and kind. And yeah. So anyway, yeah.Burleson was moved, saying as much before asking the next question that drew chuckles from Hamilton and O’Donnell:Senator-elect, that was beautiful — being a vessel for the Lord and also being a bridge for the people. Well, let’s talk about it because it’s time to get to work. So, I guess I’ll ask you about the genesis of your work and then what the revelations will be later. [HAMILTON AND O’DONNELL LAUGH] Are you open to investigations and then also maybe even impeachments moving forward?Once Hamilton said he “do[es] not want to spend the next two years in trials” and instead rattled off a host of policy views, King asked the penultimate question of whether he’d support Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) return to Majority Leader. Hamilton reiterated his campaign promise he wouldn’t support him, which left Burleson to close by giving thanks: “Well, Senator-elect, thank you so much for joining us. I can tell you’re a blessing to your friends, your family, and your church. We are looking forward to you being a blessing to this country. Adam Hamilton, thank you.”For her part, King made sure to tell him that it was “nice to meet you.”Going back to 8:30 a.m. Eastern, co-host Norah O’Donnell attributed the blue wave in Texas in part to data centers, alluding to what was a September 20 piece for 60 Minutes: “I was in Red Oak, Texas, interviewed a mother of five, Marine veteran, should be right in the Republican base, and she was angry about these data centers that were going to be in her backyard and was leaning Democrat because of that issue.”Showing again why they’re the network that acts like it’s been taken over by Bari Weiss (instead of CBS), NBC’s Today brought up data centers as well, but they correctly noted most projects are negotiated at the local level and often are far enough along that the public has little recourse. But O’Donnell left that out as she had a narrative to peddle.Thankfully, the only extended balance in the entire two and a half hours came next from the great Erin McGuire:
.@Erinmaguire on @CBSMornings: “The lessons learned — I think that will be the biggest thing. I think the numbers still need to completely shake out before we do a full post-mortem as a party, but I think Republicans have learned the coalition we believed we had built was not our… pic.twitter.com/FtwEsBP9iE— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 4, 2026

.@Erinmaguire on @CBSMornings: “The lessons learned — I think that will be the biggest thing. I think the numbers still need to completely shake out before we do a full post-mortem as a party, but I think Republicans have learned the coalition we believed we had built was not our… pic.twitter.com/FtwEsBP9iE— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 4, 2026

The next block was pathetic, with a classic liberal, elitist media celebration of Democratic DEI, showing full well how journalists do, in fact, take sides and loathe (or hate) the other:
A half-hour before this, ‘CBS Mornings’ delivered the classic liberal, elitist media celebration of Democratic DEI, showing full well how journalists do, in fact, take sides and loathe (or hate) the other.After co-host Norah O’Donnell ran through all the winning candidates that… pic.twitter.com/cMnfGYXQKt— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 5, 2026

A half-hour before this, ‘CBS Mornings’ delivered the classic liberal, elitist media celebration of Democratic DEI, showing full well how journalists do, in fact, take sides and loathe (or hate) the other.After co-host Norah O’Donnell ran through all the winning candidates that… pic.twitter.com/cMnfGYXQKt— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 5, 2026

After running through all the winning candidates that checked boxes, O’Donnell touted her own book We the Women, and expressed “hope” that more women “will change” politics for the better.“It’s one of those days I say: I love being a girl. We will continue with that — who run the world? — girls,” replied co-host, Democrat donor, and Obama family friend Gayle King.At the top of the 9:00 a.m. Eastern hour, O’Donnell and fellow co-host Nate Burleson touted the “severe setback” and “repudiation of President Trump’s agenda.”Moments later, the co-hosts delivered a pathetically soft interview of New York Congresswoman-elect Cait Conley, who defeated moderate Republican Mike Lawler, proving again that there’s no such thing as a truly acceptable Republican to these people.O’Donnell was hardcore fangirling. After asking what made the difference in her race, the co-host called her by her first name as though she were a personal hero: “Cait, I wanted to talk to you because you served 16 years as an active-duty Army officer, then served in special ops leadership. You deployed over six times — right — to combat zones, including Iraq and Afghanistan. What inspired you to get into politics?”
Proving again that there’s no such thing as a truly acceptable Republican to the liberal, elitist media, ‘CBS Mornings’ was in love with Cait Conley, the Democrat who defeated Mike Lawler.Co-host Norah O’Donnell was even calling Conley by her first name as others egged on her… pic.twitter.com/7z2OKq5bma— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 5, 2026

Proving again that there’s no such thing as a truly acceptable Republican to the liberal, elitist media, ‘CBS Mornings’ was in love with Cait Conley, the Democrat who defeated Mike Lawler.Co-host Norah O’Donnell was even calling Conley by her first name as others egged on her… pic.twitter.com/7z2OKq5bma— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 5, 2026

Following a robotic answer, O’Donnell had enough open-ended softball: “And as a combat veteran, if you were to push for a seat on the House Armed Services Committee, what kind of changes would you like to see at the Pentagon?”Burleson and featured co-host Vladimir Duthiers had the next three. In Burleson’s case, he cued her up to show she’s not entirely focused on the well-being of Americans, but rather impeaching Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (click “expand”):DUTHIERS: Congresswoman-elect, congratulations on a historic win for Democrats. But I want to ask you, there’s a big difference between voters rejecting Donald Trump and embracing the Democratic Party writ large, so what are you prepared to do? Day one, your first day in Congress, and what does your party need to do to earn the trust of perhaps people who might have voted for President Trump in 2024 and already have their eye on 2028, and they’re going to judge that by what you do in Congress, with Democrats in Congress.(….)BURLESON: Congresswoman-elect, it’s one thing to capture the House and the Senate. It’s another thing to find proper alignment within your own party. Where do you stand when it comes to investigations? And also impeachments moving forward?(….)BURLESON: Congresswoman-elect, you mentioned his name, Pete Hegseth. Is there a message you want to send to him right now?O’Donnell returned to deliver the final valentine: “And Cait, I know you have three Bronze Stars, top two percent of your class at West Point, an MBA from MIT, and I mentioned those combat tours. What are you hearing from fellow veterans about — about what’s happening at the Pentagon?”A few segments later, there was supposed to be a panel with outgoing Congresswomen Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) and Elise Stefanik (R-NY), but the co-hosts almost ignored the latter entirely.It began with another mask-slipping moment as Crockett discussed with O’Donnell the hope of Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa (D) working to expand “access to the ballot box for Democratic-leaning voters” so that the “strategic realignment of Texas” remains indefinite, with Republicans kept from winning there again:
WATCH: CBS’s Norah O’Donnell and Democratic Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett speculate Texas Democrat Governor-elect Hinojosa and the Democrat legislature will expand “access to the ballot box for Democratic-leaning voters,” so that Republicans will not be able to ever win again in… pic.twitter.com/3CbEGer36S— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 4, 2026

WATCH: CBS’s Norah O’Donnell and Democratic Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett speculate Texas Democrat Governor-elect Hinojosa and the Democrat legislature will expand “access to the ballot box for Democratic-leaning voters,” so that Republicans will not be able to ever win again in… pic.twitter.com/3CbEGer36S— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) November 4, 2026

Stefanik made her only comment count when she argued Republicans’ message of “common sense versus crazy” was “a theme,” “not a policy agenda” to “address the affordability issues” or show that you’ve “deliver[ed] results.”Duthiers then took the rest of the time to strategize with Crockett, inviting her to “break…down” the Mississippi Senate race, and then whether the “incredibly intriguing” Senate campaign of Florida socialist Angie Nixon could have been victorious with more national money.Saturday co-host Kelly O’Grady had a look at the initial reactions from markets of the results. After noting markets generally accept divided government, oil prices and stocks of AI companies, SpaceX, Tesla, and the defense industry have cratered over fears of Democratic probes and pushback.She noted that “clean energy stocks are having a fantastic day,” but when it came to the falling bond yields and if mortgage rates could go down, O’Grady delivered a reality check: “I don’t think so, because traditionally, Democrats don’t rein in government spending. Neither party does.”Going to the final hour, King celebrated her party’s “smashing victory — and smashing is the right word — in Tuesday’s midterm elections,” and O’Donnell boasted of the “remarkable projection — rejection, I should say, of President Trump and GOP.”Chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes gave the game away when she said “a top Senate Democrat” told her the top agenda items will involve Medicaid, defunding the military (for the Iran war), and “launch investigations into [Trump’s] administration and his business ventures.”None of those things seemed to directly relate to the economy! Having at least in part helped kick off the mid-decade redistricting push by planting the idea in Trump’s mind during a press Q&A, White House and campaign correspondent Ed O’Keefe touted the success of far-left California’s gerrymandering (click “expand”):O’KEEFE: And then, remember, we talked throughout the night about redistricting and how it was a failure for Republicans, but it appears to have been a success for Democrats.O’DONNELL: Interesting.O’KEEFE: Because remember, they put the measure up to a statewide referendum. The voters said they wanted to do it. And this is a good example of the kind of redrawn seat designed to benefit Democrats that may pay off. Randy Villegas is set to defeat Congressman David Valadao. This is someone Democrats have been after for several cycles. They redrew his lines, and they said, “This is our way to do it.” When I interviewed him last year about the fact that he was being drawn into a new district, I said, “You know, Donald Trump started this. What do you say to Democrats who now want to do it in your state?” He said, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” Either way, it looks like he’s going to lose. And it’s a good example of how a Democratic redraw works. They’re going to net four more seats out in California based on the way they redrew the lines.Speaking of O’Keefe, he and chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett warned in the following block that Democrats could indeed overreach if they went all-out on putting impeachments and investigations of Trump on the front burner instead of the economy (click “expand”):O’KEEFE: Look, in my conversations this year with James Talarico in Texas, Annie Andrews in South Carolina, Josh Turek in Iowa, and Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, they said, “Oh, here’s what I’m going to do when I get to Congress: We’re going to repeal the tariffs. We’re going to end the war with Iran. That’s how we fix things.” Guess who doesn’t necessarily want to do that? The President. So, Democrats are going to want to hold those votes — up-or-down votes — and at least demonstrate, “We tried. The President may have stood in our way,” or maybe they’ll find a way to break through with him and cut a deal. But there will be pressure on these new Democrats, to Norah’s point, to demonstrate quickly that they’re doing whatever it is they promised to do to drive down costs.BURLESON: And then what happens when the whispers of investigations and impeachments start coming up?O’KEEFE: That’s a good question, because that’s going to be one of the biggest struggles for Democrats: To what extent do we try to do something affirmative, something new to help people, but also, what do we do to make sure that the check and balance of Congress actually kicks in and the investigations happen, and the potential for criminal referrals or impeachment kick in for Cabinet secretaries or for the President?GARRETT: I mean, I think one way to look at this election, because statistically it doesn’t make sense — it’s so much more blue than even the most optimistic Democrat thought it might be 24 hours ago. So, that makes this election feel, to me at least, like a little bit of a primal scream. People are really hurting, and they are desperate for someone to take heed of what they’re asking for. Democrats are going to be in a tough position if they spend too much time congratulating themselves, thinking about 2028. They have to create these contrasts, see if they can get some Republican buy-in on them, force the White House to move in their direction. And, if they can, they can be responsive. If they can’t, this primal scream may shift in another direction come 2028.To see the relevant CBS transcript from November 4 (including even more biased moments from their marathon show), click here.

The Republican Party’s next phase can’t come soon enough.

The midterms happened and it wasn’t pretty. Some people came out on top, while others may never recover after enduring a ritualistic humiliation of near-biblical proportions. Here’s your definitive guide to the winners and losers of the 2026 election.
WINNER: The letter D. Practically everyone whose name was printed on a ballot next to it won their election. Dan Osborn, the Democrat pretending to be an independent in the Nebraska Senate race, probably would have too if he’d been more honest.
HONORABLE MENTION: The letter X. It’s bound to make a comeback after Tuesday’s results. Don’t believe me? A man wearing a dress won a seat in the state legislature—in Alabama. That sound you hear is Pete Buttigieg restoring the pronouns to his social media bios.
WINNER: The Republican Party. Nothing will rouse their base more or boost their popularity with independents faster than having no real power and nothing to do but watch Democrats remind voters why no one likes them either.
LOSER: The Democratic Party. Their candidates won everywhere, but the party’s policies couldn’t even win support in blue states. California’s wealth tax went down in flames, while Washington State and Colorado are projected to approve ballot measures that would impose restrictions on sex-change operations for minors as well as transgender participation in sports.
WINNER: Hakeem Jeffries. He’s in line to become the first black speaker of the House and would enjoy a comfortable majority.
LOSER: Hakeem Jeffries. Unless you’re a stock-trading savant like Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House is a terrible job. An emboldened “Squad” and the incoming class of left-wing radicals are going to make his life miserable.
WINNER: Mohamed Morsi. The Muslim Brotherhood strongman led Egypt for barely a year before being ousted in a 2013 coup. Years later, he suffered a fatal heart attack while awaiting trial on espionage charges. Nevertheless, he persisted and conquered Michigan from the grave.
LOSER: The happiness of people in Dearborn. At some point, the socially conservative Muslims who supported Abdul El-Sayed are going to find out about his stance on male dongs in women’s locker rooms.
WINNER: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Frontrunner status: unlocked.
LOSER: Every other Democrat running for president in 2028. Gavin Newsom peaked too early, is covered in grease, and has no ideas or principles. Ossoff and Shapiro are too moderate, too Jewish. Pete Buttigieg is washed up—a poor man’s James Talarico. If AOC decides to run, who’s going to stop her? Kamala Harris? [Cackles drunkenly].
WINNER: Robin DiAngelo. “DEI is back,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Calif.) declared triumphantly. Few are better positioned to cash in on the vibe shift than DiAngelo, the best-selling author of White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism and Nice Racism: How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm.
LOSER: Ro Khanna. See above. He won reelection, but he’ll always be a loser. There is nothing more obnoxious than a cocky dork.
WINNER: Insufferable white guys. Democrats finally ousted Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine), which is great news for Morris Katz and Daniel Moraff. The trust-fund wunderkinds who originally recruited Graham Platner, an unemployed accused rapist with a Nazi tattoo, will face no recriminations for their shenanigans.
LOSER: Graham Platner. He clearly loved that Nazi tat. They made him replace it with what looks like a deformed chihuahua begging to be put out of its misery. After watching his replacement, Troy Jackson, win by 7 percentage points, Platner surely regrets dropping out over a measly rape allegation. Tough break.
WINNER: Graham Platner. The comeback tour starts now. Why not Eric Swalwell while we’re at it?
LOSER: Jasmine Crockett. Even she could have beaten Ken Paxton in this environment. Crockett didn’t get the chance because a different insufferable white guy, James Talarico, beat her in the Democratic primary.
WINNER: Jasmine Crockett. Given Talarico’s expressed commitment to decolonizing white supremacy, it’s not unreasonable to demand that he resign immediately upon taking office so that the incoming Democratic governor (of Texas!) can nominate Crockett as his replacement.
HONORABLE MENTION: The age-old Democratic tradition of bedding female staffers. Let the big dog eat. As he ponders whether to resign in solidarity with black and brown communities, Talarico will need to “interview” plenty of candidates for positions in his Senate office. It’s unclear whether Brianna Menard, his current girlfriend and former chief of staff, is planning to join him in Washington. Not that it would make a difference to a stud like Jimmy T.
LOSER: The Lincoln Project. Do they still exist? If so, why bother? For the art of the grift, sure, but surely there will come a point when these “former Republicans” begin to feel a bit undignified about the prospect of endorsing Medicare for All or the Hasan Piker Senate campaign. Right?
WINNER: Jon Husted. He lost the Ohio Senate race, but he’ll make a lot more money as a thirst-trap poster. He’s sitting on a gold mine.
The post Out of the Wreckage: Winners and Losers of the Midterm Landslide appeared first on .

The vice president’s take calls to mind Milton’s description of Eden, and the terrible folly by which mankind forfeited Paradise.

Tuesday night’s election results were the culmination of many months of hard work put in by the left wing media, who pushed the leftist agenda, provided cover for radical leftist candidates, and tossed softballs to many of those candidates during ‘interviews’, which were more like campaign events. As results came in, many in the media celebrated, and perhaps no one more than CNN’s Van Jones, who also made an outrageous analogy. During the 10pm hour of CNN’s Election Night In America, Anderson Cooper asked Senior Political Commentator Jones, “is this bigger than you hoped for?” Jones could hardly contain himself.

JONES: I’m happy, happy, happy. I’m so happy. Listen, this is way bigger, this is like Christmas and a birthday and the Easter Bunny and Halloween. He then quickly revealed precisely why he was so ecstatic.JONES: Like this is the repudiation of Trumpism that people have been hoping for, seeing American democracy stand up. Sometimes you have kleptocratic rulers that get in power and they ensconce themselves for decades. In America, 24 months later, knock it off, you don’t want it.And then came his insane analogy.JONES: And, by the way, if you join a cult, at some point the cult leader takes you to Jonestown and tries to get you to drink the Kool-Aid. This is Jonestown for the Republican Party. They drank the Kool-Aid, and they have candidates that are dropping like flies across the country because they did not stand up to this guy when he was doing things that were wrong, when he was violating the law, when he was running over our system. They didn’t stand up to him and they’re paying the price.It’s Jonestown tonight. You join a cult, at some point, you go to Jonestown. That’s where you are tonight, Republicans.After Cooper jokingly suggested that Scott Jennings might want to check what’s in his glass cup, he gave him the floor to respond to Jones. He showed great restraint in letting Jones analogize Republicans to people who drank poison and killed themselves. JENNINGS: You realize I’m sitting right here. I can hear everything you’re saying. I’ve been here the entire time.Well, look, I’m not going to sugarcoat it. There’s a political science term for what’s happening. It’s called a country ass-whooping. That’s what’s happening right now….Look, you know, there’s a lot of reasons for what’s happening right now. The most immediate issue is cost of living and gas prices, and that is the bottom line. You could read into a lot of other things. You can be jubilant about this, that or the other. But at the end of the day, the American people have here and now concerns, and that’s really the lesson you got to take away from this.Jennings then put some much needed perspective on the results.JENNINGS: I could only, to pick out a silver lining, look back at 2010. The Democrats in the White House, where Axe (David Axelrod) was, took a bit of a shellacking, I think President Obama called it, and he turned right around and learned from it and ended up getting reelected in 2012. There’s a way to learn from nights like this. That’s what the Republicans are going to have to do. Democrats are going to celebrate tonight. But Republicans have to wake up tomorrow and realize that, you know, the great thing about America is there’s always another election, and the work starts tomorrow.Jennings could have gone further. During Obama’s first midterm election in 2010, Republicans gained 63 seats in the House and 6 in the Senate.Soon after Jennings finished, Jones wanted back in and he got his wish.

JONES: But can I be happy right now for my party? I don’t want to talk about Donald Trump anymore….I’m not going to — you’re not going to steal my joy. I’m happy. We got the first gay man in the Senate Chris Pappas from New Hampshire. We got a black female senator for the first time out of Illinois, Juleanna Stratton. We got three black governors serving at the same time in America. We got the — we’re going to have a black speaker of the House. I’m happy. Donald Trump is miserable, and I’m happy tonight.Ten years ago on the CNN set, Jones was remarkably unhappy over Trump winning: “This was a ‘white-lash’ against a changing country. It was a ‘white-lash’ against a black president, in part.””whitelash against a black president.”

YouTube Screenshot

The  returns from the 2026 midterm elections had hardly finished being reported when Politico’s senior political columnist, Jonathan Martin, let loose with an orgiastic burst of joy over what he considers to be the very favorable prospects of a Democratic being elected to the White House in 2028. The gloating title: “Republicans’ 2028 Presidential Map Just Blew Up.”The Democratic landslide Tuesday was not just a rebuke of President Donald Trump but a political earthquake that could fundamentally transform the country’s electoral map.Suddenly, the Republican path to 270 electoral votes appears considerably narrower. But that’s not all. The red-and-blue presidential map as we know it is crumbling.Finally, Democrats win! Party time at Politico! Martin wasn’t shy, starting with:  “The transition starts in Texas, where after more than a decade of rosy predictions of blue, the GOP Alamo finally fell.”On the heels of much joyful doom and gloom analysis about GOP prospects Martin tosses away any semblance of attempting to appear unbiased by wishcasting his transparent desire for which party he openly prefers elected to the White House in two years:This doesn’t necessarily mean 2028 will be a repeat of 2008, but to move east and south is to find only more devastation for Republicans. Their only real footholds in the Northeast are the governorships of New Hampshire and Vermont — and Pennsylvania Sen. David McCormick, who may be a presidential candidate perhaps sooner than planned. With Sen. Susan Collins’s defeat in Maine, Republicans have no senators in New England for the first time since the founding of the GOP….Just six reliably blue states — New York, New Jersey, Illinois and the three West Coast states — hand Democrats 135 electoral votes, getting them halfway there.If the Sun Belt, including Texas and Florida, is up for grabs there is no obvious path for Republicans even in a slightly better political environment — one where Gov. Greg Abbott loses by, say, four rather than seven.It seems dire in the wake of day for the GOP….Put more directly, would Vice-President JD Vance fare better than Tuesday’s GOP candidates in Georgia, Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan and Nevada? It’s hard to see.Now, he, or whoever the nominee is, won’t be running against a generic Democrat. And presidential races are different from statewide campaigns.That’s right, Jonathan. The 2028 Republican presidential candidate won’t be running against a generic faceless Democrat but a very real person, with very real policy positions. Martin declined to mention any of them. Due to embarrassment? It’s close to inevitable that the Democrats take their newfound power and underline they are not a party of moderates. They have moved decisively to the left to keep the “Democratic Socialists” faction in the tent. What did Jonathan Martin write after the Democrats lost to Trump in 2024? First, they must recognize that they unwittingly seeded the ground for Trump’s revival. Their leftward acceleration under his presidency handed him the fodder he needed to portray the opposition as radical.Like this can’t happen again? Getting out your crystal ball before all the election returns are even complete is risky business.