Photo: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Image

Donald J. Trump has vanquished the Bushes, the Clintons, the Bidens, the Obamas — and the entire establishment of both parties.

Why it matters: Trump is stronger than ever, backed by a party wholly remade in his image and opposed by demoralized and defeated Democrats.

Make no mistake: Trump will come to power better organized, better staffed, and exponentially better positioned to dominate his party and the nation than he was last time.

• Trump promises to stretch the immense powers of the presidency, with historically wide latitude from a pliant, conservative Supreme Court.
• A new conservative media ecosystem — centered on Elon Musk’s X — will amplify Trump’s power and reshape America’s information wars.
• And efforts to prosecute him are likely to end.

By the numbers: Trump’s victory was astonishing in its sweep and scope. All but two states — Washington and Utah — went more heavily for Trump on Tuesday than in 2020 (Financial Times).

• Trump was backed by a remarkable 1 in 3 voters of color (NBC News exit poll).
• He improved over his 2020 performance among voters younger than 30, Black voters and Hispanic voters.
• President Biden won Latino men by 23 points in 2020, but Trump won them by 10 points in 2024. (CNN)

The big picture: The roughly half of America opposed to Trump is left with little solace, and even less federal power. Trump’s romp flipped the Senate to Republican control, and the GOP is on track to keep the House.

• Democrats are left without a leader or a clear ideological identity, after Vice President Harris ran a campaign light on ideas and heavy on emotion. She underperformed Biden’s 2020 showing across the map.

Trump can brag of a new coalition, brimming with record-high Hispanic support, working-class zeal and a surge in younger voters. And any restraints from anti-Trump Republicans in Congress or inside his White House are gone.

• He vowed to use that power to punish or even jail his critics.
• He has pledged to carry out “the largest deportation operation in American history.”
• He has threatened to fire thousands of government employees deemed disloyal.

What’s next: Trump sources tell us he’ll consolidate power by steering who runs the House and Senate and unleashing his agenda out of the gate, starting with an immigration crackdown.

• Watch for him to load his White House and cabinet with rich, accomplished men.

How it happened: How Trump won says a lot about how he’ll govern, Trump advisers tell us.

1. Trump will be Trump. He said and did whatever he wanted on the campaign trail — and will do more of this in office. He will surround himself with capable people — like he did with Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita on the campaign — to bring some method to the public madness.
2. Leverage his new base. Trump sees himself as the champion of toughness and the working class, which attracted a lot of Hispanic and Black men to his predominantly white, blue-collar base. It’s no accident that Stephen Miller — a top adviser on immigration policy adviser in the first Trump term, who’s expected to have a top White House job in the new administration — tweeted at 5:58 p.m. ET last night: “If you know any men who haven’t voted, get them to the polls.” And six minutes later: “Get every man you know to the polls.”
3. Destroy traditional media. He hates his media critics and witnessed the new power of X and Elon Musk, plus Joe Rogan and the other bro-tilted realms of the podcast world. Trump believes a weakened media is ready to collapse. Now he has a bigger, more powerful alternative to help replace it.
4. Pound the “woke.” Don’t underestimate the damage Democrats did to their brand by promoting political correctness. Democratic strategists told us it’s a huge problem for the image of the party, not just Harris. Trump saw this as vital to turning independents and apathetic voters into Republicans — or at least Trump Republicans. The campaign was only the beginning.

What to watch: Expect Trump to lure economic advisers who’ll be accepted by the corporate establishment. Based on his path back to power, he knows his presidency will hang partly on low inflation and robust growth.

Originally published November 7, 2024.

The National News Desk Jan Jeffcoat discusses an investigation by Peter Schweizer, President of the Government Accountability Institute and author of “The Invisible Coup“, which claims that the immigration surge is a deliberate strategy by high-level lawmakers.

Here are the key points from the discussion:

• Birthright Citizenship Exploitation: Schweizer will testify before a Senate committee about how China has exploited birthright citizenship on an “industrial scale” through “birth tourism.” Pregnant Chinese women fly to the U.S., give birth, and immediately return to China, where their U.S. citizen children are raised. He states that over 1 million U.S. citizens are living in China and will soon be eligible to vote in U.S. elections.
• National Security Concerns: Beyond voting, these individuals can donate to political campaigns and apply for sensitive government jobs. Schweizer notes that these children are raised under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) system, and their parents are often Chinese elites, military officers, or CCP officials, indicating a potential for infiltration rather than dissent.
• Surveillance and Subversion: The goal of this practice is surveillance and subversion. Schweizer points out that Hong Kong shut down similar “birth tourism” in 2010 due to concerns about subversion, and the same is happening in the U.S. on a larger scale. The Supreme Court will also be reviewing limitations on birthright citizenship this spring.
• Blind Spot for Lawmakers: Schweizer believes this is a huge national security blind spot for the U.S. He emphasizes that this is not about immigrants making a life in the U.S. but about individuals entering the country solely to give birth, then raising the child in an adversarial country. The CCP has even encouraged this practice through state media.

The fallout of this weaponized immigration surge is told by former congressman Joe Walsh who describes in the city of Los Angeles that of all outstanding warrants for murder, 95% are for illegal aliens.

The immigration surge excruciating cost to America, in particular California residents and taxpayers, is costing $30.3 billion dollars a year which constitutes 17.7% of the entire state budget.

According to Peter Schweizer in the video, birth tourism challenges U.S. sovereignty by creating a population of U.S. citizens who are raised and reside in an adversarial country, particularly China, but possess fundamental rights within the U.S.

Schweizer explains to The National News Desk’s Jeffcoat that birth tourism involves pregnant women flying to the United States to give birth, securing automatic U.S. citizenship for their child, and then immediately returning to their home country, often China, where the child is raised.

The implications of “birth tourism” via the immigration surge, as described by Peter Schweizer, include:

• Voting Rights: These children, even though raised in China, will be able to vote in U.S. elections when they turn 18. The speaker notes that China estimates over 1 million such U.S. citizens are living and being raised in China.
• Access to Sensitive Positions and Influence: As U.S. citizens, they can vote, donate to political campaigns, and apply for sensitive government jobs.
• Potential for Infiltration and Surveillance: The speaker states that these individuals are often raised under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) system, with parents who are overwhelmingly part of the Chinese elite, including military officers, CCP officials, and propagandists. This raises concerns about them potentially having a “goal” of surveillance when they come to the U.S. using the immigration surge loophole as a means to an end.
• National Security Blind Spot: The speaker views this practice as a “huge blind spot” for U.S. lawmakers and national security, especially since the Chinese Communist Party has actively encouraged it.

For all of the reasons listed above and more, on his first day in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order aimed at ending the unlawful immigration surge, birthright citizenship for babies of undocumented immigrants, and for people with temporary status in the U.S. via Executive Order 14160: Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.

Illegal immigrants and their children cost the State of California a net $30.29 billion per year.  This equates to $7,352 per illegal alien, or roughly 17.7 percent of California’s state budget.

While many of these costs are absorbed by the federal and local governments, the drain on the State of California remains significant.  Increasingly, the question is no longer whether California ought to give illegal immigrants sanctuary—it’s whether they can afford it.

How Many Illegal Immigrants are in the State of California?

No one really knows how many illegal aliens reside in California—by definition they’re undocumented.  However, we can generate reasonable estimates.

Let’s begin by answering what should be a straightforward question: how many illegal immigrants reside in America?  The estimates are wide-ranging.  On the low end, Pew Research estimates that the number of illegal immigrants who live in the U.S. is roughly 11.1 million.  Although this falls in line with figures from the Department of Homeland Security, many believe the true figure is much higher.

There are two reasons for this.  First, these “official” figures do not include the children of illegal immigrants who were born in America—the so-called “anchor babies”.  Although natural-born citizens, these individuals are only here because of their parent’s criminal activity.  Can we blame them for their parent’s actions?  No.  But there’s no denying that the addition of 6.5 million additional children is a burden on our welfare state—especially since their parents contributed nothing towards its creation, and little towards its operating costs.

Second, the official aggregate figures (suspiciously) plateau around 2007.  The explanation is that after 2008 the number of migrants fell and deportations rose to an equilibrium point.  However, there is little evidence that migration rates fell, and the reason deportations increased is because the Obama Administration simply changed the definition of “deportation” to inflate the numbers.

If the official figures are flawed, then just how many illegal aliens reside in America?

A relatively recent study conducted by Dr. Mohammad Fazel Zarandi of the Yale School of Management estimates that some 22.8 million illegal immigrants live in America.  This figure draws upon more recent data and a variety of (sometimes-ignored) sources, and is likely more accurate than estimates from Pew or the DHS.  Reasonable though it is, some believe the number is still higher.

Upper-range estimates suggest that over 30 million illegal aliens live in America.  This number has been proposed most vociferously by conservative author Ann Coulter in her book Adios America.  She based her figure on banking and remittance payment records, government service demand, and migration projections from the U.S. Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

While I am inclined to accept the higher estimates—and at the very least Dr. Zarandi’s eminently reasonable figure—I will proceed with this article using the number of illegal immigrants estimated by Pew Research and the DHS (11.1 million).  This way my conclusions cannot be attacked for using “inflated” statistics.

The next question is how many of these illegal aliens live in California?

According to the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), there are 3,019,000 adult illegal immigrants living in the state of California.  On top of this are 1.1 million children of illegal immigrants (975,000 of whom would be considered anchor babies).  Therefore, in total there are 4.12 million illegal immigrants, and their children living in California.  Again, the real number is probably significantly higher, but I will proceed using the lowest reasonable estimate.

A few topical observations regarding the illegal population.  First, they use government services.  I’ll get into the details later, but note that some 806,000 undocumented migrants had California drivers licenses in 2016.  Clearly they’re interacting with the government in a meaningful way.

Second, most are relatively unskilled and uneducated, and many have poor language skills.  The MPI estimates that 54 percent of illegals immigrants speak English either “not well” or speak it “not at all”.  This is why they tend to work in low level service sector jobs (restaurants and hospitality) or manual labor (agriculture, construction).  In any event, it must be noted that illegal immigrants aren’t adding anything unique to the labor market—machines or teenagers could replace them, were wages high enough.

To sum up: there are at least 4.12 million illegal immigrants residing in the State of California, they interact with the government, and they generally work low-end jobs.

Calculating the Cost of Illegal Immigration in California

Education for Illegal Immigrants & Anchor Babies: $15.63 Billion

There are 975,000 anchor babies and 130,000 undocumented children living in California.  This totals 1.105 million children—most of whom are educated at state expense.

Although the California Department of Education doesn’t include undocumented children as a separate statistical group in terms of costs, we know that the total enrollment in California’s public schools was 6,226,737 in 2016.  A further 573,000 attended private charter schools.

Given that the vast majority of illegal immigrants attend public schools, this means that roughly 18 percent of California’s public student population is comprised of children here illegally, or the children of illegal immigrants.

This inflated student population costs a lot, and adds huge burdens on California’s education system.

According to California’s state budget $88.3 billion is allocated for California’s K-12 students ($51.6 billion from California, the rest from local and federal initiatives).  Given their proportion of the student population, illegal immigrants and their children may absorb up to $15.63 billion in educational costs.  While the costs are not necessarily distributed on a pro rata basis (there will always be fixed capital costs), labor remains the largest single budgetary expense.  Frankly, fewer students means fewer teachers and administrators—and thus a smaller budget.  Either way, it’s clear that illegal aliens, and their children, are a large burden on California’s public education system.

Furthermore, the deluge of students reduces the quality of education for American citizens.  Consider that California’s student-teacher ratio is 35 percent above the national average.  This is directly the result of illegal immigration—it’s the kids that suffer.

Healthcare For Illegal Immigrants: $4.02 Billion

Providing healthcare for illegal immigrants in California imposes significant costs, while also increasing wait-times and decreasing the overall quality of care (by lowering the physician-patient ratio).

Illegal immigrants withdraw roughly $2.28 billion from Medicaid in California, and cost roughly $1.3 billion in emergency services (they are treated, but do not pay).  Together, these hard costs equate to $4.02 billion per year.

However, these numbers don’t necessarily reflect the true costs of illegal aliens on the healthcare system, because they don’t quantify opportunity costs (we could be investing in better technology, or more doctors, rather than treating illegal immigrants) or damage caused by the burdened system (pain and suffering caused by long wait times, lost productivity etc.).

Remittance Payments: $3.86 Billion

A remittance is a transfer of money from someone in the U.S. to their family back home.  They are usually given by recent immigrants, and particularly by illegal immigrants and visa card holders (who come to America to work in order to support their family abroad).  Basically, a remittance is money lost from the economy: it vanishes, never to be spent domestically.

According to Pew Research America lost $133.6 billion in remittances in 2015.  Of this, $24 billion went to Mexico (the biggest recipient).  Other important destinations, for our purposes, are Guatemala ($5.9 billion), El Salvador ($3.98 billion), the Dominican Republic ($3.83 billion), and Honduras ($3.2 billion).  All totaled, $40.9 billion was sent from the U.S. to Mexico and Central America.

Now, we can’t assume that only illegal immigrants send remittances, so I will estimate that first generation immigrants and illegal immigrants send remittances at the same frequency.  This will provide us with an (intentionally) low estimate for remittances paid by illegal immigrants to Mexico and Central America alone.

Given that there are 11.7 million legal immigrants from Mexico, and 3.1 million from Central America living in the U.S.A., this gives as a pool of 14.8 million legal immigrants contributing to the remittance figures.  We also know that 74 percent of illegal immigrants are from Mexico or Central America, or 8.14 million.  This means that of the total Hispanic population assuming to be paying remittances, 35 percent are likely illegal immigrants.  This works out to illegals paying out $14.31 billion to the region annually.

If we narrow this down to California, where 27 percent of total illegal immigrants live, then we can determine that Californian illegal immigrants remit $3.86 billion every year to Mexico and Central America.  This is to say nothing of the other nearly 1 million illegal immigrants, most of whom overstayed their visas, which would add significantly to this figure.

Crimes Committed By Illegal Immigrants: $4.4 Billion

The additional costs imposed by crimes committed by illegal immigrants, which include policing, court, and incarceration costs, add up to $4.4 billion, according to the study done by the Federation for American Immigration Reform.  This includes an additional $1.85 billion for policing, $1.12 billion for court services, and $1.54 billion for prisons.

As significant as this is, it doesn’t begin to approach the true costs of crime, which should rightly factor in lost productivity and wages, and intangible costs such as pain and suffering, long-term social costs (such as a reduction in community cohesion etc.).  The list goes on and on.

These intangible costs (which are never included in such studies because of their vagueness) are likely significantly higher than the tangible costs.  For example, a study from the National Institutes of Health estimates the average intangible cost of crimes in California (2008 dollars), and shows that the real cost of crime is much higher than the “face value” cost—especially for violent and sexual crimes.

The intangible costs are estimated based on special damages awarded by court proceedings.  Here they are summarized:

Were we to include intangible costs, even doubling the stated figure of $4.4 billion would probably understate the situation.

Frankly, I think the number’s probably higher in terms of tangible costs, given that the proportional percent of crimes committed by illegal immigrants is high.  For example, almost 75 percent federal drug possession sentences were given to illegal immigrants, and 40 percent of all federal crimes were committed in jurisdictions neighboring the Mexican border—meaning they were likely due to gang and drug trafficking committed by illegal immigrants.

Simply put, the statistics show that illegal immigrants dramatically increase crime rates.

Beyond that, illegal immigrants are highly over-represented in murder charges, committing 38 percent of all murders in California, Texas, Arizona, Florida and New York.  We’ll stick with $4.4 billion as our ballpark, but it’s probably at least double that.

Government Administration & Services: $1.6 Billion

Added strain caused by the illegal immigrant population costs California $1.6 billion a year.  Included in this number are things like the upkeep of parks, public recreation areas, libraries, roads, fire departments, and $792 million in state welfare handouts.

This number doesn’t include intangible costs of systemic strain, such as longer lines, busier parks etc.  This contributes to the quality of life, but can’t easily be measured.  It also doesn’t include the spillover impact on American citizens who need public assistance but can’t get it, because illegal immigrants are milking the system.

For example, roughly 1.5 million citizens spend over half their income on shelter in California—housing is expensive because illegal immigrants compete in the property market, inflating costs.  You never hear about this, but the cost of living is increased due to illegal immigration.

Tax Revenue: $3.5 Billion

Illegal immigrants do pay taxes, including sales taxes and (sometimes) payroll taxes.  It’s estimated that they contribute $3.5 billion in taxes to California’s state revenue.  This isn’t even close to what they withdraw in terms of services.

Annual Cost Of Illegal Immigration To California: $30.29 Billion

Illegal aliens cost California $30.29 billion every single year—this includes their contribution in terms of taxes.  This works out to $7,352 per migrant.

Furthermore, these estimates are likely low because they do not include any intangible costs associated with crime or increased systemic strain, they low-ball remittance estimates, and the number of illegal aliens in California is probably double the figures used.

The situation in California is increasingly dire.  Soon even the State’s most “progressive” voters will be faced with a choice: aliens or themselves?  Us or them?  Necessity has a way of simplifying things.

Trump’s former attorney general, Bill Barr, argues that Trump “lacks the qualities essential to achieving the kind of unity and broad election victory in 2024 so necessary if we are to right our listing republic.” His own vice president, Mike Pence, even though he acknowledges that the American people know Trump “is as good as his word,” believes that there are “better choices” for the party in 2024. Salena Zito, the reporter who probably understands the appeal of Trump better than any other analyst, now contends “the conservative populist movement is moving beyond Trump.”

Just a few days after Trump became a declared candidate, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the former president was the target of a special counsel’s investigation into possible crimes in connection with his possession of purportedly classified documents at his residence in Mar-a-Lago, and in connection with his communications at the time of the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

These are, you’ll forgive the expression, trumped-up charges that likely will eventually fail.

Indeed, since Trump took possession of the documents in question, he had the plenary authority to declassify them, and since anyone who reads his remarks on January 6 will learn that he expressly cautioned his supporters to act peacefully, it will not be easy to sustain a conviction for insurrectionary activity. An individual guilty of insurrection is barred by law from running for public office, so one could reasonably infer that the reason for the special counsel is to neutralize a feared opponent from running against Biden.

What do Trump’s enemies fear, and could this be an indication that Trump may still be the best candidate for the Republicans in 2024?

Donald Trump is the only prominent Republican who has acknowledged the extraordinary level of corruption in the United States, and it is the beneficiaries of that corruption who may fear him the most.

Those of us who supported Trump in 2016 did so for a variety of reasons, but it is undeniable that he actually performed as we had hoped, and that objective historians will credit him with extraordinary success in his first term—he transformed the Supreme Court by the addition of three justices committed to interpreting the Constitution according to its original understanding; he succeeded in reducing unemployment for all Americans, particularly minorities; he made the country energy independent; he reduced the flow of illegal immigration; he eased the regulatory and tax burden on American businesses; he renegotiated trade agreements on a favorable basis; and he avoided additional military entanglements. These were all goals traditional conservatives had advocated for years, accomplished by Trump.

But the Biden Administration and its fellow travelers in Congress fear something different.

Donald Trump is the only prominent Republican who has acknowledged the extraordinary level of corruption in the United States, and it is the beneficiaries of that corruption who may fear him the most.

Corruption—the turning of the government from a servant of the people to a kleptocracy involving a favored class of officials, bureaucrats and cronies—was what our framers feared most, and what they believed to be the too frequent and perhaps unavoidable fate of republics. The original constitutional structure, one where power checked power, and where no one branch of government could run amok unchallenged by the others, has all but disappeared in the last generation as real power in our government has come to rest in the federal administrative agencies, and in the executive branch agencies, in particular. Trump understood this, and his railing against the “deep state” was his way of suggesting that the federal Leviathan was now running things for its own benefit rather than for the benefit of the people.

As we have learned from works like those of Peter Schweizer, powerful American politicians such as the Clintons, Joe Biden, Mitch McConnell, and many others are masters at the art of growing rich using their connections and political influence. Small wonder, then, that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was the ultimate source of the infamous Steele dossier, which resulted in the first independent counsel to investigate President Trump; that Joe Biden’s Justice Department now torments Trump; and that Mitch McConnell denied essential campaign funds to Trump-endorsed candidates for the Senate.

As a man of independent wealth, Trump is uniquely positioned to resist corruption, and rather than being the criminal and grifter his opponents would like us to believe him to be, he is a genuine patriot who loves his country and genuinely seeks to tame a federal government which has become the framers’ nightmare. Those who attend his rallies instinctively understand that and see in him a leader capable of keeping his campaign promises and returning the presidency to a role of serving and not betraying the American people.

There are those who say that Trump’s time has passed, and that his ability through unrestrained and boorish behavior to alienate Americans such as single women and suburban voters renders him unelectable—and it remains true that powerful forces in the media, in the academy, and in many of the state governments are arrayed against him. Nevertheless, Trump does learn from his mistakes, and his lately more subdued tone, his real record of accomplishment, and his innate political talent still make him the most formidable Republican contender.

His ongoing persecution by corrupt state and federal officials can actually be turned into a powerful endorsement through carefully crafted anti-corruption messaging. He will have to convince his fellow Republicans through the primary campaign, but he has done it before, and he still represents the best chance we have to reclaim a government committed to the restoration of the rule of law and the sovereignty of the American people.

Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The Gallup Poll found only 16% of adults surveyed said they are satisfied with the way things are going in the country at this time, 83% are dissatisfied with the remaining 1% having no opinion.

The foul mood of Americans is an ominous sign for President Biden and Democrats as the congressional midterm elections approach, according to the poll.

The low confidence rate in the state of the nation represents a considerable 6 point decline from last month and is the worst measure since the U.S. Capitol riot in January 2021.

Democrats’ satisfaction plummeted 14 points since April to just 24%, accounting for most of the overall drop. Now, only about one-quarter of Democrats are content with U.S. affairs — the lowest point of Biden’s presidency.

Meanwhile, only 18% of independents and 4% of Republicans are happy with the status quo.

The survey of 1,007 adults was conducted from May 2 to 22 as inflation remained at its highest point in 40 years, amid skyrocketing gas and food prices, a baby formula shortage and a racially motivated shooting in Buffalo that killed 10 people, Gallup analysts said.

Republicans have criticized President Joe Biden for allowing record high inflation. JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images

Biden’s job approval rating is underwater with 54% giving him a thumbs down and just 41% approving of the job he is doing — about the same as last month.

“The president’s job approval has not risen above 43%, nor fallen below 40%, since last August. He has not enjoyed majority-level approval since last June,” Gallup noted in its analysis of the results.

Meanwhile, Congress remains very unpopular with the public — with 77% of respondents disapproving of the job it is doing and 18% approving.

That spells trouble for Democrats, who hold a razor-thin majority of both the Senate and House and could get wiped out in a Republican wave election this fall.

Supermarkets remain low on baby formula supplies during the nationwide shortage. AP Photo/Eric Gay, File

“With less than six months to go before the midterm elections, the public’s mood is sour, with few Americans satisfied with the direction of the country and approving of Congress, making the Democratic congressional majority extremely vulnerable,” Gallup said.

“Biden’s approval rating is particularly weak among independents and is nowhere near the high level required (typically above 60%) for a president to stave off significant midterm losses in Congress.”

The pollsters concluded, “The likelihood of a dramatic economic turnaround before November’s congressional elections appears slim, which puts pressure on Democrats to persuade voters to keep them in power despite the nation’s current struggles.”

The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Musk is registered as an independent, and has said that Twitter has a “very far-left bias.” He claims to be “neither Republican nor Democrat.”

This was during the same interview where he said that whoever “controls the teleprompter” is “the real president.”

I do feel like if somebody were to accidentally lean on the teleprompter, it’s going to be like Anchorman,” said Musk, referring to the 2004 Will Ferrell Comedy where the main character, news anchor Ron Burgundy, reads anything that is written on the teleprompter.

This administration doesn’t seem to get a lot done,” Musk continued. “The Trump administration, leaving Trump aside, there were a lot of people in the administration who were effective at getting things done.”

He also said that the reason for inflation was “obvious,” saying that “a zillion” dollars have been printed.

I mean, the obvious reason for inflation is that the government printed a zillion amount of more money than it had, obviously,” he said when asked about Amazon founder Jeff Bezos’s claim that the White House was using misdirection to “muddy the topic” of inflation.

So it’s like the government can’t just, you know, issue checks far in excess of revenue without there being inflation, you know, velocity of money held constant,” Musk continued.

If the federal government writes checks, they never bounce. So that is effectively creation of more dollars. And if there are more dollars created, then the increase in the goods and services across the economy, then you have inflation, again, velocity of money held constant.”

If the government could just issue massive amounts of money and deficits didn’t matter, then, well, why don’t we just make the deficit 100 times bigger? The answer is, you can’t because it will basically turn the dollar into something that is worthless,” he continued.

Various countries have tried this experiment multiple times,” Musk said. “Have you seen Venezuela? Like the poor, poor people of Venezuela are, you know, have been just run roughshod by their government.”

Musk is currently in the middle of acquisition negotiations for Twitter. He and the board agreed to a purchase price of $44 billion. That deal is currently on hold the number of bots on the platform is under investigation.

“TikTok is owned by ByteDance, a Chinese company. And Chinese companies are vulnerable to the whims and the will of the Chinese government,” Times’ columnist Ezra Klein wrote.

He added, “There is no possible ambiguity on this point: The Chinese Communist Party spent much of the last year cracking down on its tech sector. They made a particular example out of Jack Ma, the high-flying founder of Alibaba. The message was unmistakable: Chief executives will act in accordance with party wishes or see their lives upended and their companies dismembered.”

Klein, who founded the left-wing site Vox, notes the widespread use of TikTok, and argues this underscores the threat it poses to American security.

“TikTok, as we know it today, is only a few years old. But its growth is like nothing we’ve seen before. In 2021, it had more active users than Twitter, more U.S. watch minutes than YouTube, more app downloads than Facebook, more site visits than Google,” he wrote.

In 2020, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to begin the process of banning TikTok.

In the order, the White House warned that China can weaponize Americans’ data using the app, and that the PRC can weaponize TikTok to spread propaganda.

“TikTok automatically captures vast swaths of information from its users, including Internet and other network activity information such as location data and browsing and search histories.  This data collection threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans’ personal and proprietary information — potentially allowing China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage,” the executive order stated.

Additionally, the executive order concluded that the social media company censored content that the Chinese Communist Party considered politically sensitive like the protests in Hong Kong and the treatment of Uyghurs.

President Joe Biden delivers remarks during an event at the White House, Oct. 4, 2021. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Upon taking office, President Biden replaced Trump’s executive order with his own. According to Klein, while Biden’s new order regulates data collection, “it does not address the other ways that China could weaponize the platform”, like TikTok’s manipulation problem.

“TikTok’s real power isn’t over our data. It’s over what users watch and create. It’s over the opaque algorithm that governs what gets seen and what doesn’t,” Klein wrote.

Klein argues that the fact that China sees a free and open internet as a threat to its government is just another indicator that they will use it to sow division and spread pro-CCP propaganda in the United States.

“China has long seen these platforms as potential weapons. As China’s authoritarian turn continues, and as relations between our countries worsen, it is not far-fetched to suspect they might do unto us what they have always feared we would do unto them,” he wrote.

Klein compares China’s influence on Americans via TikTok with the prospect of the Soviet Union having bought out local television stations throughout the country during the Cold War. He says the Soviet propaganda would actually be less dangerous because Americans would know they are viewing Russian-owned TV, whereas the lines are more blurred with TikTok.

Chinese President Xi Jinping and former President Donald Trump (Getty | AP)

“The social media platforms that hold and shape our attention need to be governed in the public interest. That means knowing who’s truly running them and how they’re running them,” Klein wrote. “On this, Donald Trump was right, and the Biden administration should finish what he started.”

The move is in part retaliation for Disney’s criticism of a new law that bans instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity from kindergarten through third grade; the law also mandates that education on these topics in any grade be “age appropriate.” Even though the law doesn’t mention gays, critics claim it will have an overall chilling effect on gay educators. Disney, under pressure from its gay and transgender employees, has vowed to seek the bill’s repeal.

In the end, it’s likely that “the House of Mouse” and the Florida legislature will work out a compromise renewal of the company’s special status before it is set to expire in June 2023.

But the controversy has shone a spotlight on just how much Disney has changed since it was founded 99 years ago as a cartoon studio. For decades it has represented wholesome entertainment for children and catered to the tastes of the middlebrow American.

Now Disney’s critics rebuke it for thanking Chinese officials involved in genocide in Xinjiang, shoehorning sexual ideas and transgender ideology into children’s entertainment, and eliminating all mention of “ladies,” “gentlemen,” “boys,” and “girls” in its theme parks.

There’s no doubt that “Woke Disney” has come a long way from the values of its founder. Two months before the 1964 election, Walt Disney wore a Barry Goldwater button while accepting the Medal of Freedom from President Lyndon Johnson, Goldwater’s opponent. Walt Disney was also a key supporter of Ronald Reagan for governor of California in 1966, just before Disney’s untimely death.

Disney’s crusade against the recent Florida law — a law that would have been uncontroversial until very recently — is an unusual risk for an entertainment giant. A March Public Opinion Strategies poll found the Florida bill backed by 61 percent to 26 percent. Even among people who “know someone LGBTQ,” the law is supported by 61 percent to 28 percent.

National Review’s Rich Lowry is surprised that Disney entered the fray “not to serve its shareholders, enhance its profitability, protect its intellectual property, or align itself with its vast and politically diverse customer base.” Rather, it appears that The Mouse became “woke” in order to cater to “a small number of vocal progressives” who work for it.

Executives chose to ignore the many thousands of its employees who either support the law or want the company to stay away from the issue. In March, a large number of conservative Disney employees wrote an open letter to their bosses saying that the internal culture at The Walt Disney Company (TWDC) is a hostile work environment for them.

Their letter, which has received little media coverage, noted:

Employees who want TWDC to make left-wing political statements are encouraged, while those of us who want the company to remain neutral can say so only in a whisper out of fear of professional retaliation. The company we love seems to think we don’t exist or don’t belong here. This politicization of our corporate culture is damaging morale and causing many of us to feel our days with TWDC might be numbered.

Furthermore, as this politicization makes its way into our content and public messaging, our more conservative customers will feel similarly unwanted. You can only preach at or vilify your audience for so long before they decide to spend their money elsewhere.

Nor do all gay Disney employees support the company’s crusade. Journalist Jack Posobiec received internal Disney message boards that included several comments such as this one:

I’m gay and I think any form of sexual education shouldn’t be taught until you’re older and able to understand it. Not when you’re young and influential to the people who are teaching you. . . . Children Kindergarten through 3rd grade are learning basic skills still. How to read, write, count, socialize. They don’t even start going through puberty until maybe 4th grade at the earliest. So leave the bill alone because it isn’t infringing on ANY member of the LGBT community nor is it to the heterosexual one.

Rob Long, who was executive producer of the beloved TV comedy Cheers, used to have a production office in Disney’s animation building and knows the company well. He thinks some of its movies such as Toy Story, Up, and Coco “represent the finest in storytelling.”

But he told me that the company is now forgetting that its stories should seek to reflect the culture it’s trying to entertain; instead Disney is trying to make its audience “better people.” “There is an old saying in Hollywood that nobody pays for homework, the preachy messaging that grates on many and turns customers away,” he said.

A recent company-wide Zoom staff meeting at Disney about the Florida bill provides clear evidence that executives are into giving audiences “homework.” Executive producer for Disney Television Animation Latoya Raveneau touted Disney’s new efforts to promote gay themes. “In my little pocket of Proud Family Disney TVA, the show runners were super welcoming . . . to my not-at-all-secret gay agenda,” Raveneau said in a leaked video obtained by journalist Christopher Rufo. “I was just, wherever I could, adding queerness. No one would stop me, and no one was trying to stop me.”

At the same time, Karey Burke, president of Disney’s General Entertainment Content, pledged in another company-wide Zoom call that at least 50 percent of its characters will be LGBTQ or racial minorities by the end of the year.

People who knew Walt Disney told me that were he alive today, he’d be broadly supportive of expanding civil rights to gays. But he would draw the line at his company being weaponized in favor of a cultural agenda steeped in “wokeness.” He would also be keenly aware of Disney’s fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders and employees. Disney stock is off 33 percent from a year ago and has fallen some 10 percent since it became clear that its special theme-park privileges were in jeopardy. More ominously, an April survey by the Trafalgar Group found that more than 69 percent of respondents said they were likely to support “family-friendly alternatives” to Disney.

Finally, Walt Disney hated hypocrisy. He would be stung by Governor DeSantis’s observation that the company he founded was pushing a “social warrior” agenda in the U.S. while at the same time remaining silent doing huge business in China with the blessing of the Chinese Communist Party, which is the enemy of human rights for the people of the Uyghur region, Hong Kong, and Tibet.

Walt Disney was a visionary who originally called his Orlando project Epcot, an experimental community of tomorrow. After his death, the company turned away from the Epcot vision and built Disney World and a series of now-overpriced theme parks.

For all the magic it makes, Disney has also developed a reputation as a conglomerate run by greed. Now add liberal guilt to that mix, and it’s a portrait of a company that old Walt would in many ways barely recognize.