Of all the transitions to majority rule in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Africa’s was probably the most successful, with the Apartheid regime coming to a negotiated end rather than a violent bloodbath.
But thirty years of African National Congress rule, either solo or in coalition, find South Africa undergoing a gradual collapse toward Sub-Saharan standards, as seen in this France 24 video on the decline of Johannesburg.
“Johannesburg, once the economic powerhouse of all of Africa. But over the last 20 years the city, has fallen into decay, the inner city streets are lined with trash, potholes, and degraded footpaths. And broken infrastructure has led to contaminated rivers and wasted drinking water.”
“Adele is part of a resident crisis committee. She says her complaints to the council about broken pipes often go unheard.” “Now we just have rivers of excrement and trash.”
These an upstream river trash catch facility that’s been broken for two years.
“Johannesburg restricted access to tap water for residents in November, but more than a third of available drinking water is wasted from broken infrastructure.”
“The African National Congress has been bleeding support in Johannesburg since 2016, leading to chaotic coalitions. Infighting and opportunism which has seen the city ruled by ten different mayors over the last five years. With each change of mayor, infrastructure contracts are often abandoned and administration staff are fired. On top of that, corruption has plagued the mayoral committee during the tender process.”
There’s some high-minded blather about separating the bidding process from politics. Good luck with that.
“The decay of Johannesburg goes beyond broken pipes and sink holes. In the city center, entire 15-story buildings are hijacked by criminal syndicates or squatters who refuse to pay for services or rent.” Gangs will just dump bodies in the building to let them rot in place.
When competent government and dedication to the rule of law gives way to a spoils system, decay inevitably follows, either in Johannesburg or in America’s deep blue inner cities…
In the midst of debate in America and Europe over European adequately funding their NATO defense obligations, historian and YouTuber Mark Felton has put up a couple of videos that question the United Kingdom’s commitment to fielding an adequate military.
First up: The Navy with more Admirals than Warships
“New US president Donald Trump has made it very clear that America’s NATO allies must increase their defense spending to 5% of GDP in order to shoulder more of the burden of their own defense.”
“This is particularly pertinent in my country, Great Britain, which has seen defense spending decline massively over the past three decades, from 4.1% in 1990 to only 2.3% today, reflected in 30 plus years of shrinkage and reductions, but plenty of fresh conflicts to manage with less equipment, less investment and less personnel.”
“The Royal Navy is a brilliant example of the managed decline of Britain’s Armed Forces…presenting a hollowed out shadow of the force that, even in 1982, at the height of the Cold War, still managed, on its own, a brilliant Naval campaign in the Faulklands those days are well and truly over.”
“In 2025, the Royal Navy has 62 commissioned ships, but only 25 of those vessels are real warships designed to fight battles at sea. The rest are lightly armed patrol vessels, transport ships, and survey vessels and so on.”
“Breaking this figure of 25 warships down, the Royal Navy currently has two aircraft carriers, six guided missile destroyers, eight frigates and a grand total of just two classes of submarine totaling nine vessels.”
“But the Royal Navy also has 40 serving officers at the rank of Rear Admiral and above.”
“The personnel strength of the Royal Navy in 2025 is, including reserves, only 32,225 men and women. This means that there is an admiral for every 805 sailors.”
“Britain can no longer deploy large numbers of warships to sea, as we simply don’t have large numbers of warships. What we do have are a small number of warships, with quite a number of them currently in refit, mothball or lacking sufficient crew due to the dire state of Royal Navy recruitment.” Sounds similar to U.S. armed forces recruitment woes under Biden.
Only two destroyers are currently ready for active duty.
“How would our Royal Navy cope in the event of another Falklands crisis? For example, in 1982, the Falkland’s task force consisted of two aircraft carriers, eight destroyers, 16 frigates, and six submarines, plus many other Royal Navy vessels and auxiliaries, and still the Navy maintained its presence around the rest of the world.”
“[With] the current number of ships and their readiness, I think we’d struggle to put together a task force even half as big, and even then we’d have to send virtually every surface asset we have stripping vessels from all other tasks globally.”
Next up: The Army with more Horses than Tanks.
“2012. Number of main battle tanks: 334. Number of horses: 501. 2015. Number of MBTs: 227. Number of horses 494. 2024. Number of MBTs: 213. Number of horses: 497.”
“The number of main battle tanks in, this case the Challenger 2, has been steadily reduced over the past decade while the number of horses in the Army has remained constant at slightly under 500 animals.”
In 1991, Britain had 1,200 MBTs.
“In 2025 investigations by journalists and the Ministry of Defence’s own figures revealed that, despite the conflict in Ukraine, a very tank heavy war, Britain’s armored backbone is consistently decreasing year on year. We currently have 213 Challenger 2s, but only about 157 actually combat ready, or able to be activated within 30 days for combat deployment.”
Naturally the horses are used extensively in ceremonial duties, the details of which I’m skipping over.
“The British Army is the smallest it’s been for centuries, reduced by endless amalgamations and cuts numbering today only 78,500 personnel, plus just over 25,000 in the volunteer reserves.” That’s half the size of Japan’s armed forces.
“The British army is now too small to effectively perform its tasks.”
By the way, the U.S. army now has 176 horses…and 4,650 Abrams tanks.
Tune in next week, when Felton will no doubt note that the Royal Air Force has more tubas than aircraft…
The amount of unbelievable partisan graft DOGE is uncovering at USAID and elsewhere is so staggering even Joe Rogan and Bret Weinstein are gobsmacked by its massive scope.
Joe Rogan: “I don’t think I really grasped it until Elon’s six wizards, he brought in some young wizards to go in there and go over the books, and they are just finding crazy shit.”
Rogan listened to a leftwing podcast, and “they weren’t even talking about all of this corruption and all this obvious buying of influence. Instead, they were talking about aid overseas and how people are going to starve and—”
Bret Weinstein: “It’s mindboggling. I’m just I’m upset at the general pattern of a failure to recognize how right those of us who hypothesized that there was a racket that had overtaken our entire governance structure. We turned out to be absolutely right about this and no one’s going to mention it.”
JR: “It’s very strange that the media is ignoring it especially the leftwing media. It’s just too big of a win for the right, and so they’re just ignoring it.”
BW: “This was a mechanism used to funnel money to all sorts of things that we didn’t vote on that don’t make sense in light of our constitutional structure….I obviously have concerns like everybody else about where this train takes us, but seeing that structure broken up is it’s a huge relief.”
JR: “They gave $27 million to the George Soros prosecutor fund. So our own government is funding this left-wing lunatic who is hiring the most insane prosecutors, who are letting people out of jail who commit violent crimes.”
BW: “And that’s that’s exactly how this racket worked, is that the ability to tax the American public and then effectively get us to pay for being propagandized, for being surveilled, that’s the game.”
BW: “I don’t think any reasonable person could be unhappy that we are exiting that era.”
JR: “I’m going to read off some of the things that this guy Kenna Coda the Great on Twitter uh listed. This is off the Jesse Waters show: $20 million for Iraqi Sesame Street, $2 million for Moroccan pottery classes, $1 million to tell Vietnam to stop burning trash, $27 million to give gift bags to illegals. $27 million. $330 million to help Afghanis grow crops. Wonder what those crops are.”
JR: “$200 million on an unused Afghani dam, $250 million on an unused Afghani road. This is wild. I mean some of this stuff is really, really crazy.”
BW: “And you know USAID is of course riddled through whatever international madness it is that caused us to open our Southern border and facilitate an invasion through the Darian Gap.”
BW: “It almost feels like it can’t be real, like it can’t have been this close to the surface, and yet here are.”
JR: “I think the number that I’ve read was $600 million every two months to ship been illegals.”
BW: “Basically we had a shadow apparatus functioning, and it involves all kinds of things. It involves payoffs to people who didn’t deserve them. It involves contracting to, uh, entities. that were necessary to get the work done.”
JR: “We were always wondering like why is our debt so high, why is the national debt so high. Like, why is our deficit so insane? Well, this is.”
JR: “$40 billion for electric car ports eight ports have been built.”
BW: “I think it was apparent that whatever had taken over our system wasn’t interested in the well-being of average people, that it was interested in the power of the state to take people’s resources and redistribute them, and that really is what’s been going on for most of our adult lives.”
JR: “And it’s also important to note that this progressive, left-leaning, radical left arm of the government, of the country, was manufactured. Yes, it’s all manufactured, it’s all manufactured and supported. It’s not organic.”
BW: “The cover story that what we were up to was righting past wrongs was so pernicious and pervasive, that it was hard to get our footing to challenge it. But it it shouldn’t really be surprising that that movement wasn’t organic. Of course, it was induced. It was a cover story for theft, and and we’re going to be waking up to the magnitude of that theft for quite some time. I think this is going to take years.”
JR: “When you get to the bottom of all this, it’s going to be insane, because they haven’t even got to the Medicaid yet, they haven’t even got to the medical stuff. There’s so much they haven’t even tapped into, where they think the real motherload of fraud is.”
Rogan mentions that Elizabeth Warren swore up and down that she never got money from pharmaceutical companies or PACs, and community notes proved she received millions. “She’s a fucking liar.”
BW: “I don’t think the Democrats understand that it’s over, and that there was a vast infrastructure that made their feeble arguments viable. And that infrastructure is now collapsing. People are far more aware, and their lives aren’t going to function anymore.”
JR: “It was really about control and money. It had nothing to do with helping people, making people better.”
Rogan notes that there were more than 55,000 NGOs used to launder payouts to Democratic Party causes.
Here’s a heartwarming story of a mass shooting that wasn’t thanks to quick thinking by four band dads.
PASADENA, Texas – A group of four tactically-trained band dads jumped into action Saturday and apprehended an active shooter at a band competition at Pasadena Memorial High school.
Pasadena ISD officials said a man in his 80s with a gun entered the school between 5-6 p.m. and fired two shots. One hit a door and another struck a 26-year-old victim in the shoulder, who the Angelton ISD says is a percussion technical consultant for Angleton High School.
Later on it says “Pasadena Police identified the suspect as 83-year-old Dennis Brandl of Spring.” It’s extremely unusual for an active shooter to be that old.
Officials say the victim was flown to a nearby hospital and is expected to be okay.
After the shots rang out, the band dads jumped in.
The four are 13-year Air Force vet Abram Trevino, 13-year Army vet Adam Curow, 4-year Marine vet Efrain (Polo) Castillo and 32-year Houston Police Sergeant Joe Sanchez.
“As soon as everyone was screaming and yelling, gunshots fired, Joe and myself looked at each other and ran straight to the door. By the time we got inside, Polo and Abram were right behind us as a band dad team,” said Curow.
The four say they and two other men took the suspect down to the ground and restrained him.
“I grabbed his arms while Adam took the gun out. Once the gun was removed from his hands, we had no handcuffs, so I took my belt off and made a handcuff,” said Sgt. Sanchez.
The four worked together to keep the suspect restrained until law enforcement arrived.
Sometimes all it takes is being in the right place at the right time with the right mindset.
The MSM loves to report on successful mass shootings to further their gun control agenda of mass civilian disarmament, but pays far less attention when one is thwarted. Civil society needs sheepdogs to protect against the wolves. Parents and students alike were very lucky they had sheepdogs among them ready and willing to act.
Texas natives Matthew McConaughey, Woody Harrelson, Dennis Quaid, Billy Bob Thornton, and Renée Zellweger (plus True Detective producer/director Nic Pizzolatto) are pushing for the Texas legislature to pony up incentives for Hollywood to shift movie production to Texas.
“You don’t like what Hollywood has been dishing? It’s time to take over the kitchen.”
(Aside: Since when did Billy Bob Thorton start looking like Kid Rock by way of Father Guido Sarducci?)
A few quick points:
Following the LA fires, it’s probably the perfect time to make this pitch. California’s insane tax and regulatory environment under one-party Democrat rule has already been pushing production out of Hollywood for a long time, but the fires have made collapse in basic governing competence when it comes to crime, homelessness, infrastructure, water, land management and about a dozen other basic government functions painfully clear to even the most blinkered Hollywood functionary.
When McConaughey declares that targeted business incentives are not corporate welfare, he’s engaged in the time-honored rhetorical device known as “lying.” It is corporate welfare, but it’s not exactly new, as the Texas Enterprise Fund already provide similar incentives for non-film business, and the Texas Moving Image Industry Incentive Program offers industry-specific incentives. It is corporate welfare, but most in the form of tax rebates, though there is a grant program rolled in there as well.
There appear to be two identical movies subsidies bills filed in the Texas House, one from Rep. Ben Bumgarner, the other from Giovanni Capriglione. Given Capriglione’s longtime support of the Straus/Bonnin/Phalen/Burrows axis, I’m inclined to oppose the bill on that basis alone, much less the subsidy angle.
Even without subsidies and tax breaks, from Hollywood‘s perspective, getting the hell out of California makes a lot of sense. High taxes, high crime, homeless camps everywhere, and dysfunctional Democratic politics means that even basic urban competence is off the table for the foreseeable future. Texas, by contrast, most look like a low-cost, low-tax paradise (albeit a really hot one) by comparison. Certainly Texas has no end of competition for movie and TV production, but a lot of the things that make it attractive to business relocation apply here as well.
There’s also a Texas residency requirement. “You can’t carpetbag.”
“I think this is it for Hollywood being the hub of movie production.”
Direct grants and subsidies are a bad idea, targeted tax credits slightly less so. But Texas, unlike California, has taken care of basic governance so much better that it can afford to throw around subsidies without impacting basic services or tax rates. But that doesn’t mean it should.
But having Hollywood move movie production to Texas will likely benefit the nation as a whole, simply by getting production out of that stifling far-left monoculture and injecting a dose of reality and diversity of thought, the precise kind of diversity that Democrats hate.
And if Hollywood does want to move to Texas, they’re going to have to leave all their DEI, social justice and transsexual madness behind in California. Not only do Texans not cotton to that sort of thing, but race and transsexual quotas are actually against Texas law.
How long has it been since we did a post bashing communism? Well that’s too long!
Here Michael Malice talks with Yaron Brook and Lex Fridman about writing his book The White Pill: A Tale of Good and Evil (which I guess I should track down now) about the evils of communism and how western intellectuals covered up for them so long.
The clip starts with Malice describing Ayn Rand testifying before the House Committee on Unamerican Activities about the horrors of communism she witnessed before escaping the Soviet Union, and them simply not getting it.
Michael Malice: “The broader point in the book is how ignorant many people are in the west about the horrors of Stalinism and Communism, but also how many people in the west were complicit in saying to Americans ‘Go home, everything’s fine, this is great.'”
MM: “They really made a point to downplay, really gratuitously, some of the unimaginable atrocities of communism.”
MM: “Many people I’m friends with who are historians, who are interested in the space, this isn’t common knowledge to them, then we can assume that almost no one knows about it.” Conservatives knew about in the in the 1980s, thanks to coverage of Robert Conquest’s The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine and a 1985 documentary on the subject that I remember being played on PBS a few years later.
MM: “American exceptionalism has a positive context, but also has a negative context, where you think we’re invincible. All these horrible things happen to these other countries that can’t possibly happen here. We’re America, we’re special, and it’s completely an absurdity.”
Malice and Brook talk about the film Mr. Jones, which i still need to track down, and how New York Times reporter Walter Duranty. MM: “He was talking about how great it was, how if you hear about this famine in Ukraine this is just propaganda. “I went to the villages, you know everyone’s happy and fed.’ A lot of it was explicit lies.”
MM: “Anne Applebaum, who’s just a phenomenal, phenomenal writer [Or was before the TDS got her. -LP], she wrote a book called Red Famine: Stalin’s War in Ukraine, and she talks about how what people in America don’t appreciate is how clever in their sadism the Soviets were. And what they knew to do to Ukraine is, everyone is starving, so they knew if you got some meat on your bones, you’re hiding food. So they come back at night, take your hand, put in the door jam, keep slamming the door, ransack your house. They didn’t have to find the food, they burn down your house, take all your clothes, goodbye and good luck.”
Yaron Brook: “The view of the intelligencia: [Communism] is a great idea, it just was badly implemented. And no, it’s a rotten idea, it’s an evil idea, and it was implemented exactly, it was implemented exactly how it has to be implemented. There’s no alternative.”
As I’ve mentioned before, I don’t have a use case for owning a Cybertruck (or any electric car or truck), but for a supposedly unpopular vehicle, I actually see a lot of them on the road. (Of course, I’m only a mile from a Tesla sales office, so your mileage may vary.) But one of the the Cybertruck’s selling features is that it’s bulletproof. Well, Brandon Herrera (who owns a Cybertruck) decided to see how bullet-proof, though he’s using a detached Cybertruck door rather than his own vehicle.
Spoilers: It seems pretty bulletproof to handgun ammo up the .45 ACP, but once he stepped up to the .44 Magnum Desert Eagle (“the Cybertruck’s only known natural predator”) and the bigger rifle rounds (including 5.5.6 NATO and even, for grins, a .50 BMG round out of his very own AK-50), it was bulletproof no more.
Here’s a heart-warming, feel good story about a bunch of Greenpeace hippies that thought it was a swell idea to land on a United States Navy submarine, and the submariners who quickly taught them the errors of their ways.
I’m not going to excerpt this, because it’s reasonably short, and the way it unfolds is a lot of fun…
Eric Weinstein sat down with the Triggernometry guys (Konstantin Kisin and Francis Foster) to talk about the 2024 election and the Democrat Party’s radical diversion from “Democracy.”
Eric Weinstein: “A certain kind of base reality is too difficult to deny.”
Konstantin Kisin: “Well, if you keep losing elections, it’s too difficult to deny.”
EW: “They’ve lost one just now, but this is going to be a very consequential one. First of all, it puts JD Vance, who I consider a friend, on deck. Man is that guy smart and good, combines all sorts of aspects of progressivism. I think he ran a campaign with Donald Trump as a loyal number two, but JD is a powerhouse in and of himself.”
EW: “I think he could run a campaign that would just be irresistible to all sorts of people.”
EW: “I would like to just point out that you could easily have 12 years coming off of this election, and you could have a Supreme Court that was completely dominated by Donald Trump and JD Vance, and it will transform the country. So this is a very consequential election to have screwed up.”
EW: “Obama doesn’t matter.”
EW: “The Clintons are highly degraded.” I think he means as a political force, but the other way works as well.
EW: “This was such a bad story that no one knew how to defend it, and I also think that Kamla Harris’s apparent drop in IQ is due to the fact that nobody can explain the Democratic Party. It’s a series of horse trades and intellectual half measures. It doesn’t have any coherence.”
EW: “Are you the party of sweetness and light? Are you the party of the working class? Or are you really the party of the transgendered and financial billionaires worried about the carried interest exemption? It just didn’t make any sense, and there was no way to defend it and still got close to 50% of the popular [vote] because so many people are dependent on these narratives.”
Francis Foster: “To me the Democrat Party [is] divorced from reality in so many different ways. They talk about being Democratic, but Kamala Harris didn’t go through any primary. They just appointed her.”
EW: “You can’t say democracy is on the ballot. There’s no primary.”
EW: “The thing that inspires us, that gets us to put our right hand over our heart, is the idea of a government by, of, and for the people not perishing from this Earth.”
EW: [The idea] “it’s perfectly legal, perfectly permissible, to just select a candidate [is] an abomination.”
EW: “You’ve installed a candidate who was the worst candidate available, until she became America’s sweetheart, and the whiplash from that period of time just forced the Machinery to to reveal itself.”
FF: “And it seems like that’s one of the logical fallacies within the Democrat Party, but it’s just one after another after another.”
EW: “We’ve been through, like, a North Korean brainwashing experiment, and we can’t believe that this happened. It’s just so bad, and every single person of any kind of originality of thought or independence of mind rejects it.”
Weinstein notes that creative people in the trades (electricians, truckers, etc.) were never sucked into the woke mindset, because their jobs require them to be based in unforgiving reality. It was only among academics, PhDs and corporate workplaces that the woke virus spread. “That’s what’s going to have to collapse.”
As when Elon Musk dismantled the censorship apparatus at Twitter, leftists are bemoaning Meta/Facebook head Mark Zuckerberg ending “fact checking” at Facebook as though it was the end of some sort of golden age. What they are actually bemoaning is that they will no longer be able to suppress political opinions they disagree with.
Zuckerberg went on Joe Rogan to spell out just how the Biden Administration’s censorship regime worked.
I don’t necessarily trust Zuckerberg’s assertions that Facebook’s original intentions were pure as the driven snow when he started putting fact checkers in place (and that’s one reason I’m not editing out things like “um,” “like,” and “you knows,” as these may be verbal tells when he’s glossing over or eliding information rather than just verbal throat clearing), but I think his depiction of how government pressure for censorship came down is probably accurate.
Mark Zuckerberg: “We’re just going to have the system where these these third party fact checkers and they can check the worst of the worst stuff right, so, um, things that are very clear hoaxes…so so that was sort of the original intent we put in place the system, and it just sort of veered from
there.”
MZ: “I think to some degree it’s because some of the people whose job is to do factchecking, a lot of their industry is focused on political factchecking so they’re just kind of veered in that direction.” Left unsaid is that everywhere in the MSM, that “fact checking” is slanted to the left and has been for a long time.
MZ: “I think people just felt like the fact checkers were too biased. Not necessarily even so much in what they ruled, although sometimes I think people would disagree with that a lot of the time, it was just what types of things they chose to even go in fact check in the first time, in the first place.”
MZ: “After having gone through that whole exercise, it, um, I don’t know, it’s something out of, like, you know, Nineteen Eighty-Four. One of these books where it’s just, like, it really is a slippery slope, and it just got to a point where it’s just ‘OK, this is destroying so much trust, especially in the United States, to have this program.” Maybe it’s just me, but I kind of feel that when the guy forced to institute the censorship regime compares the censorship regime instituted under his watch to Nineteen Eighty-Four, maybe we ought to consider taking him at his word and not automatically write it off as hyperbole.
MZ: “Covid was the other big one, where that was, that was also very tricky, because you know at the beginning it was, you know, it’s like a legitimate public health crisis.”
MZ: “We didn’t know at the time how dangerous it was going to be, so at the beginning it kind of seemed like, OK, we should give a little bit of deference to the government and the health authorities on how we should play this.”
MZ: “But when it went from, you know, two weeks to flatten the curve to, um, you know, in…like in the beginning, it was, like, OK, there aren’t enough masks, masks aren’t that important to then it’s like oh no you have to wear a mask and, you know, all, the like, everything was shifting around.”
MZ: “It just become very difficult to kind of follow, and this really hit the most extreme, I’d say, during the Biden Administration, when they were trying to roll out um the vaccine program.”
MZ: “I’m generally pretty pro rolling out vaccines. I think, on balance, the vaccines are more positive than negative. But I think that while they’re trying to push that program, they also tried to censor anyone who was basically arguing against it, and they pushed us super hard, um, to take down things that were honestly were true.”
MZ: “They basically pushed us and said, you know, anything that says that vaccines might have side effects you basically need to take down.”
Joe Rogan: “Who’s ‘they?’ Who’s telling you to take down things that talk about vaccine side effects?”
MZ: “It was people in the in the Biden Administration.”
Rogan talks about the difficulty of moderating at scale. Zuckerberg says one-third to one-half of the planet use one of Meta’s services on a daily basis.
MZ: “They wanted us to take down this meme of Leonardo DiCaprio looking at a TV, talking about how 10 years from now or something, um, you know, you’re going to see an ad that says OK, if you took a Covid vaccine, you’re eligible [for] this kind of payment, like this sort of like class
action lawsuit type meme. And they’re like ‘No you have to take that down.’ We just said no, we’re not we’re not going to take down humor and satire. We’re not going to take down things that are that are true.”
MZ: “It flipped a bit. Biden, when he was, he gave some statement at some point, I don’t know if it was a press conference or to some journalist, where he basically was like these guys are killing people and, and um, and I don’t know. Then, like, all these different agencies and branches of government basically just like started investigating and coming after our company it was it was brutal it was brutal.”
Rogan slamming government supressing basic disease recovery mechanisms to boost the vaccine snipped. That “red-pilled a lot of people.”
MZ: “Trust in media has fallen off a cliff.”
Should we trust Zuckerberg? To quote Omar Little from The Wire, “I trust his fear.” As I noted in Friday’s LinkSwarm, the MAGA winds must be blowing very strong indeed for Zuckerberg to flip so quickly and completely. Zuckerberg probably had misgivings while these things were going on, but unlike Musk, would never have voiced them so openly had Trump not won.
Also, as Tim Pool noted, “Facebook built a portal for Feds to log into their system to flag ‘misinformation.’ For more than a decade, the federal government, the FBI, the CIA, I think the NSA, had backdoor access to Facebook as well as other companies.”
Time for an update to this old classic
The Jim Jordan report Zuckerberg references is the final committee report on the weaponization of the American government to censor opposing political viewpoints. The report is not only hard to find online (it’s not in the first page of Google results), it is so large (17,014 pages) that it seems to be literally unreadabe in Firefox, as whatever Acrobat window thing they have wants to jump back when you scroll to the second page. As a partial remedy, I have (with a bit of difficulty) captured the introduction and posted it here, though the paragraph breaks may not be exact.
The founding documents of the United States articulate the ideals of the American republic and guarantee to all American citizens fundamental rights and liberties. For too long, however, the American people have faced a two-tiered system of government—one of favorable treatment for the politically-favored class, and one of intimidation and unfairness for the rest of American citizens. Under the Biden-Harris Administration, the contrast between these two tiers has become even more stark.
To stand up for the American people, the House of Representatives authorized the creation of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government within the Committee on the Judiciary. During the 118th Congress, the Select Subcommittee worked to “bring abuses by the Federal Government into the light for the American people and ensure that Congress, as their elected representatives, can take appropriate action to remedy them.”2 The mission of the Select Subcommittee has been to protect and strengthen the fundamental rights of the American people.
By investigating, uncovering, and documenting executive branch misconduct, the Select Subcommittee has taken important steps to ensure that the federal government no longer works against the American people. This work is not complete, but it is a necessary first step to stop the weaponization of the federal government. From its inception, the Select Subcommittee sought to protect free speech and expand upon the constitutional protections of the First Amendment. Throughout the Biden-Harris Administration, multiple federal agencies, including the White House, have engaged in a vast censorship campaign against so-called mis-, dis-, or malinformation.
The Select Subcommittee revealed the extent of the “censorship-industrial complex,” detailing how the federal government and law enforcement coordinated with academics, nonprofits, and other private entities to censor speech online. The Select Subcommittee also revealed how the Stanford Internet Observatory’s Election Integrity Partnership—created “at the request of” the Department of Homeland Security3—urged Big Tech to censor Americans online.
The Select Subcommittee’s oversight has had a real effect in expanding the First Amendment. In a Supreme Court dissent, three justices noted how the Select Subcommittee’s investigation revealed “that valuable speech was . . . suppressed.”4 In a letter to the Committee and Select Subcommittee, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted that the Biden-Harris Administration “pressured” Facebook to censor Americans.5 Facebook gave in to this pressure, demoting posts and content that was highly relevant to political discourse in the United States. In response to the Select Subcommittee’s oversight, universities and other groups shut down their “disinformation” research and federal agencies slowed their communications with Big Tech.
Pursuant to its mission, the Select Subcommittee also examined the weaponization of federal law-enforcement resources. Many FBI whistleblowers have disclosed to the Select Subcommittee examples of waste, fraud, and abuse at the FBI. When these whistleblowers came forward, the Bureau brutally retaliated against many of them for breaking ranks—suspending them without pay, preventing them for seeking outside employment, and even purging suspected disloyal employees. Through its oversight, the Select Subcommittee revealed how the FBI abused its security clearance adjudication process to target whistleblowers, with the FBI even admitting its error and reinstating the security clearance of one decorated FBI employee.
The Select Subcommittee also investigated the executive branch’s actions in intruding on and interfering with Americans’ constitutionally protected activity. The Select Subcommittee revealed and stopped the FBI’s effort to target Catholic Americans because of their religious views, detailed the Justice Department’s directives to target parents at school board meetings, stopped the Internal Revenue Service from making unannounced visits to American taxpayers’ homes, caused the Justice Department to change its internal policies to respect the separation of powers and limit subpoenas for Legislative Branch employees, and highlighted the vast warrantless financial surveillance of Americans by federal law enforcement.
The Select Subcommittee has examined the federal government’s efforts to interfere in our elections, highlighting the FBI’s fervent efforts to “prebunk” a story about the Biden family’s influence peddling scheme in the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election. The Select Subcommittee’s work also demonstrated how the Biden campaign colluded with the intelligence community to falsely discredit this story as “Russian disinformation.”
This report accumulates and presents the findings of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government during the 118th Congress. The federal government must work for all Americans, not just the favored few. As the country moves forward from the disastrous policies of the Biden-Harris Administration, it is important that policymakers ensure that the federal government can no longer be weaponized against American citizens. “Freedom is fragile thing,” Ronald Reagan warned in 1967, “it’s never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people.”6 The Select Subcommittee’s work in the 118th Congress has been a start to a long and difficult process to better protect Americans’ fundamental freedoms. But our work is not the end. More must be done to ensure that our fundamental liberties and cherished rights continue for Americans to come.
1 THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE para.
2 (U.S. 1776). 2169 CONG. REC. H130 (daily ed. Jan. 10, 2023) (statement of Rep. Tom Cole).
3 STAFF OF SELECT SUBCOMM. ON THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE FED. GOV’T OF THE H. COMM. ON THE JUDICIARY, 118TH CONG., THE WEAPONIZATION OF ‘DISINFORMATION’ PSEUDO-EXPERTS AND BUREAUCRATS: HOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PARTNERED WITH UNIVERSITIES TO CENSOR AMERICANS’ POLITICAL SPEECH (Comm. Print Nov. 6, 2023) [hereinafter “NOV. 6 REPORT”].
4 Murthy v. Missouri, 603 U.S. 43, 78 (2024) (Alito, J., dissenting).
5 Letter from Mark Zuckerberg, Chief Exec. Officer, Meta, to Rep. Jim Jordan, Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (Aug. 26, 2024).
6 Governor Ronald Reagan, Inaugural Address (Jan. 5, 1967).
And remember this was all part of a coordinated international censorship regime. The recently shut down Center for Global Engagement, started under Obama, was a a key proponent of this censorship regime.
When lefties bemoan the change in Facebook, this is what they’re lamenting: The ability to censor the free speech of fellow Americans under the direct mandate of federal government agencies working on behalf of the Democrat Party to suppress the speech of their ideological opponents.
