Category: Update

The Virginia redistricting story got a new wrinkle on April 22: “Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) introduced legislation to repeal the 1840s retrocession that delivered the other side of the Potomac River to the Commonwealth of Virginia,” according to The Epoch Times.

“Influential conservatives who back the idea now include Kevin Roberts, president of The Heritage Foundation, and Mike Howell, president of The Oversight Project, a government watchdog group.” The report quotes Cato Institute’s Roger Pilon, who “has repeatedly testified to Congress on the issue of D.C. statehood, agreed with activists that Congress never had the authority to retrocede the Virginia portion of the district in the first place.

Rather than Congress doing this, an executive order from the president sure seems . . . easier. “Pilon sees Trump as the likeliest president to force the issue, despite the political risks of stripping thousands of Virginians of political power.” Since the move to re-incorporate very populated parts of Virginia would in effect disenfranchise its inhabitants, Pilon is not alone to question the “optics,” as The Epoch Times phrased it.

Paul Jacob last published on the Virginia redistricting brouhaha on April 23.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has been a deeply pernicious organization for a very long time. In 2017, Paul Jacob characterized one of the outfit’s key modi operandi as a scam, lumping “political opponents — conservatives and libertarians — in with Nazis and the KKK, in order to smear them.” That is, expand the enemies list the better to incite activist involvement.

It turns out that may not just be the judgment of SPLC critics like Paul.

The Department of Justice, last week, added another dimension to the story, bringing fraud and money laundering charges against the organization. What is the SPLC alleged to have done? A federal grand jury indicted the organization with “11 counts of wire fraud, false statements to a federally insured bank, and conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering.”

Substantively, the claim is that the SPLC funded and directed infiltrators into racist organizations, including the organizers of the infamous Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally, who — as leaders in those organizations — pushed radical, extremist tactics (including criminal acts) that the SPLC then used to gin up donor panic to increase the organization’s funding.

Whether the case succeeds in court, legally, remains to be seen, but already the revelations of the SPLC’s tactics show a twisted moral sense, a corrupt view of strategy and tactics, and a general ethical ickiness.

Journalist Tim Pool added more information, telling his video and podcasting audience of his own encounters with the SPLC — based on the “psy-op” run against him a few years ago, in which Biden’s egregious Attorney General Merrick Garland publicly proclaimed that the journalist had been funded by Russia. But Garland wasn’t the first to advance this accusation. The SPLC had done it earlier. Mr. Pool suspects that the CIA was involved in this, too, apparently trying to destroy him and some other non-woke alternative media voices. Pool says it did not work because there was nothing to it:

“Weird, isn’t it?” asks Mr. Pool.

Not-so-weird, once you know the history of the founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center, according to attorney Robert Barnes:

Barnes also notes an eerie CIA odor to the whole affair.

Speaking of the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA “whistleblower” who has been making the rounds on podcasts in the last few months does not dismiss the charges, noting that they are specific enough that whether or not the crimes have happened can indeed be determined in court:

“Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Scott Turner announced a new proposed rule on Thursday,” explains The Epoch Times, one “that seeks to end the use of ‘gender identity’ across all departmental programs, which is intended to ‘restore biological reality and protect women.’”

HUD plans to “remove radical definitions of gender identity, sexual orientation, and gender, replacing them with sex” an April 23 statement from HUD clarifies.

Common terminology — including mother, father, woman, man, girl, and boy — will return to a commonsense usage, relating to a person’s sex as understood universally until just a few years ago with the rise of “gender theory” and “queer theory” and transhumanism, transgenderism and other now evidently transient fads in ideology.

In February the HUD secretary claimed that the new standards are in line with the infamous executive order signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office.

“In its February 2025 statement,” the Epoch Times concludes, “HUD said that the 2016 rule allowed men to take advantage of department programs directed at women.”

Not mentioned in Wednesday’s report on withheld information about the Trump “telephone call” is an odd “coincidence”: just a day earlier, one of the main Russiagate-mongers in Washington, D.C., Rep. Eric Swallwell (D-Calif.), resigned from Congress.

His resignation was not about the Russiagate nonsense, of course. Or a telephone call. Or anything of direct relevance to the voters. It was about sex. Sexual misconduct. Rape even. Reaction has included some gallows humor:

I had to laugh when I read this headline from the Babylon Bee, the conservative satire site: “With Swalwell Resigning, Just 534 Perverts Left In Congress.”

It’s funny (and sad) because there is some truth to it. 

Ingrid Jacques, “Swalwell, Gonzales rightly resigned. Let’s elect better people,” USA Today (April 17, 2026).

Swallwell resigned in tandem with Tony Gonzalez (R-Tex.), actually. But the focus of most articles has been on Swallwell. Maybe it’s the name, maybe it’s his prominence as a Trump critic.

While the House investigations against him have ceased, other inquiries are ongoing, “including one announced Saturday by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office,” reports an article in the San Francisco Chronicle. “The office plans to look into an alleged sexual assault reported by the Chronicle, which the former Swalwell staffer said took place after a charity gala in New York City in April 2024.”

Meanwhile, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the main banana concocting and promoting the Russiagate psy-op, says he is “sickened” and “aghast” at the charges against Swallwell:

Had Schiff known what he now knows, why — he insists — he would not got near Swallwell “with a ten-foot pole.” His and AOC’s comments about partisanship are . . . interesting, if not quite believable.

The War on Drugs made another retreat this week, as the Washington Post covered the story early in its development:

President Donald Trump is planning to sign an executive order on Saturday to boost research into psychedelics and potentially make the drugs available in controlled therapeutic environments, according to three people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the administration’s plans.

Trump’s planned order will direct new steps from the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates drug safety. The agency would issue new guidance to researchers on how to design clinical trials for drugs such as psilocybin, ibogaine and other serotonin receptors. Those drugs, which also include LSD and MDMA, can cause hallucinogenic effects and are illegal in the United States.

Dan Diamond, “Trump plans to ease access to psychedelics like psilocybin, ibogaine,” Washington Post (April 18, 2026).

But a later report in the Washington Examiner shows that the deed’s already been done:

President Donald Trump signed an executive order allowing the use of some psychedelic drugs to treat post-traumatic stress disorder.

Flanked by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., podcaster Joe Rogan, and other cabinet officials, Trump said his new executive order “directs the FDA to expedite their review of certain psychedelics already designated as breakthrough therapy drugs.”

Brady Knox, “Trump signs order boosting psychedelic drugs for PTSD with Rogan looking on,” Washington Examiner (April 18, 2026).

According to the New York Post, the signing was today, Saturday. “The drug is currently classified as a Schedule I controlled substance in the United States.” Specifically, the “order will remove legal restrictions that have prevented extensive studies into the medicine and how it works.”

Of course, there exist many hallucinogenic compounds — enough to make the phrase “the medicine” seem a little odd — and the federal government’s stance on its usage has not just been of suppression: consult Stephen Kinzer’s Poisoner in Chief: Sidney Gottlieb and the CIA Search for Mind Control (2019) for some real mind-blowing information.

But the current executive order is astounding enough to blow some minds:

Individuals suffering from major depressive disorder and substance abuse disorder, among other serious mental illnesses, can relapse or not fully respond to standard medical and psychiatric therapies.  Despite massive Federal investment into researching potential advancements in mental health care and treatment, our medical research system has yet to produce approved therapies that promote enduring improvements in the mental health condition of these most complex patients.  Innovative methods are needed to find long-term solutions for these Americans beyond existing prescription medications.

Psychedelic drugs, including ibogaine compounds, show potential in clinical studies to address serious mental illnesses for patients whose conditions persist after completing standard therapy.  Indeed, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted Breakthrough Therapy designation to specific psychedelic drugs, and there are numerous products currently in the clinical trial pipeline for review of safety and efficacy.  It is the policy of my Administration to accelerate innovative research models and appropriate drug approvals to increase access to psychedelic drugs that could save lives and reverse the crisis of serious mental illness in America.

Donald J. Trump, Executive Order: “Accelerating Medical Treatments for Serious Mental Illness” (April 18, 2026).

During the late coronavirus epidemic, we were told to “lock down” and “mitigate” the spread of the infection by extreme “social distancing” for 15 days, to “flatten the curve” and thereby save the medical system. But most governors kept the lockdowns going for months and months longer.

Foreshadowing this, years before the leader of the Cuban Revolution dictated a 15-month emergency “democratic lockdown” that stretched on and on and on.

Initial Promise: After overthrowing Batista on January 1, 1959, Fidel Castro initially pledged “free elections” within a year.

Delays: On April 9, 1959, Castro announced a 15-month postponement, arguing that immediate elections could allow the old oligarchy to regain control. He later reassured the public that elections would be held within four years.

What Actually Transpired: Consolidating power, the new revolutionary government outlawed opposition parties, and instituted a single-party system. No competitive, multi-party elections occurred as originally promised.

Later Elections: In the 1976 constitutional referendum, followed by the 1978 election of the National Assembly of People’s Power, voting did occur. However, these elections were conducted with pre-approved Communist Party candidate lists rather than the free, competitive elections initially promised.

The country transitioned to a single-party socialist state under Communist Party control.

Now, as negotiations between the U.S. Government and Cuba continue, if rockily — after deposing Venezuela’s dictator, the U.S. prevented the island nation from receiving oil shipments, putting extreme pressure on an already-embargoed economy — it’s a perfect time to reflect on the failure that is the 66-year-old Revolution:

Alina Fernández Revuelta, daughter of former Cuban leader Fidel Castro, premiered a documentary on April 10 at the Miami Film Festival, bringing together personal testimony from generations of exiles grappling with displacement, shared trauma, and a search for freedom.

“Revolution’s Daughter” showcased several leading voices against the Cuban regime, including exiles, refugees, and former political prisoners, who all, like Castro’s daughter, said regime change in Cuba is overdue. It’s a sentiment shared by top U.S. officials.

“We are in circumstances in which there can be a change,” Revuelta said about Cuba on the red carpet prior to the premiere of the documentary for which she is also credited as an executive producer.

Troy Myers, “Fidel Castro’s Daughter Releases Documentary on Generational Impacts From Communist Cuba,” The Epoch Times (April 10, 2026).

The timing of the documentary was coincidental, the filmmakers said. “This came in a special moment. It wasn’t on purpose,” Fidel Castro’s daughter explained. “It’s just that the circumstances are helping the spread of the message.”

Paul Jacob explained the “Madman Theory” of “diplomacy” and warcraft on Wednesday:

Buried in his book about being a wheeler-dealer, Mr. Trump notoriously advances a notion eerily similar to Nixon’s Madman strategy. Trump likes to keep those with whom he is negotiating “guessing.”

He says this often. We cannot be shocked, then, if we’re all kept guessing about his Iran strategy.

But if President Trump has explained it, and confessed it — can it really work?

In The Washington Monthly we read a negative answer: “Our data pool may be small, but the available evidence suggests that presidential adherents of Madman Theory are more mad than great theorists.”

Robert Tait’s op-ed in The Guardian, on the same date, quoted the same H.R. Haldeman-Nixon explanation, and — after further history lessons — noted that as “victories go, it look distinctly pyrrhic — shades of Nixon and North Vietnam in 1972.”

Newsweek’s editorial worries that the madman ploy “by design, compresses time. It can produce rapid breakthroughs, but it leaves little room for prolonged stalemate.” And that, it appears, is what Iranians are prepared to play: the long game.

Liz Peek at The Hill, published two days later, expresses some incredulity at the critics’ negative reactions. “Amazingly, after a decade or more of dealing with the blustery businessman, Democrats are still clueless about how Trump operates. Have they not read The Art of the Deal? Do they not understand that the president always leads with maximalist demands and then, having shaken his adversary, withdraws to a more moderate and desired goal? Apparently not.

Democrats howling for the president’s head are also appallingly ignorant of history. Trump is not the first commander in chief to use dire threats to end a war. “Madman” Richard Nixon and former President Dwight Eisenhower forged that diplomatic path years ago.  

As it happens, Trump’s apocalyptic threats may have pushed the regime in Tehran — or what’s left of it — to agree to a ceasefire. His warning that “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again” was meant to terrify. It was, admittedly, excessive, as was his crude demand that the mullahs “Open the F—in’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell — JUST WATCH!” Those demands, directed at officials in Tehran and posted to Truth Social, proved effective.

No one should be surprised that the mullahs, or the remaining heads of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, took Trump’s threats seriously. He has purposefully cultivated an aura of unpredictability. . . .

Ms. Peek concludes confidently: “Democrats’ sensibilities may be offended, but future generations will be grateful.”

Yesterday’s update was about what we are now supposed to call the “UAP” question, but which in times past was known popularly as “UFO” for “Unidentified Flying Object.” The coiner of the term, Air Force Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, wanted it pronounced “you-foe,” not “you eff oh,” but that stalled at lift-off.

And it wasn’t the only term that had trouble at the beginning. Its replacement term, “UAP,” started life as “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena,” but because no small part of UFO lore had objects going into and out of bodies of water, the term was expanded to mean “Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena.” Not a few people who are known as “ufologists” suspect that the name change wasn’t for accuracy but as part of some propagandistic effort to hoodwink the masses, to pretend that the phenomena are new, not very, very old.

And one of the problems with all the disclosure talk in Congress is they never seem to ask pertinent historical questions, say about the infamous “Twining Memo.”

As yesterday’s update was published, a new story broke. Shane Galvin produced another article for the New York Post, “Congress demands Dept of War release 46 secret UFO videos: ‘You’re gonna see some weird f–king s–t’.”

“Those with knowledge of the long list of videos — which include titles like ‘Several UAP in vicinity of Columbus OH airport” and “UFOs in formation over Persian Gulf’ — said the clips are shocking,” Galvin’s article explained. “‘You’re gonna see some weird f–king s–t,’ a source who has viewed the videos told The Post.”

To ramp up to X-Files levels of paranoia, the article concluded that “Congress is not going into this request blind — with two sources telling The Post moles within the intelligence community have eyes on the files being requested and they’ll blow the whistle if the videos are moved, altered, or deleted by anyone.

“The Department of War is expected to hand over the clips by April 14, according to the letter.”

It may be worth noting that last year’s “drones” panic, while no longer making the news, continues. That is, mysterious drones continue to be seen on the eastern seaboard and over military bases, and the several debunking articles devoted to the “drones” subject, heavily promoted last year, seem to be quite off point. 

In February the President had instructed the Pentagon to prepare to release UFO files. We’ll see if that happens. President James Earl Carter, Jr., had promised UFO disclosure, and did next to nothing; Hillary Clinton ran on disclosure and somehow failed to be elected. UFOs have been subjected to official denials, curious silences, and contradictory psy-op affirmations over seven decades. Many people have no hope for government to come clean. Events, they think, must force a disclosure. 

But amidst all the contradictions, what of substance could be said? For most of us, it is all guesswork. But note: if this is all a big nothing, some folks behind the scenes have been cooking up a lot of something about nothing.

Veronique de Rugy, at Reason, asks a good question: who will pay for the war? Or, how will it be paid for?

The Pentagon has requested $200 billion to fund the campaign. While circumstances could change the price tag, interest payments on that much debt would add $87 billion over 10 years. So that’s roughly $300 billion.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, asked about this number, offered a memorable contribution to the fiscal debate: “Obviously, it takes money to kill bad guys.” That’s true. It’s also true that the money must come from somewhere.

Veronique de Rugy, “How Will Congress Fund a $300 Billion War With Iran?,” Reason (March 26, 2026).

De Rugy mentions two obvious tax-and-spend choices, a supplemental appropriations bill and a budget reconciliation bill. But she goes on to make an interesting point:

Congress used to offset its emergency spending. It doesn’t anymore. Research by Dominik Lett at the Cato Institute shows that since 1991, Congress has passed $12.5 trillion in emergency spending for wars, disasters, pandemics, financial crises, and in some cases things that were emergencies in name only, like $450 million for space exploration. Almost none of it was offset. If you add $2.5 trillion in interest to the spending, the total amounts to one-third of today’s debt.

Which brings to mind a recurring theme at ThisIsCommonSense.org: the federal debt. So here is a current update on the general government’s most obvious but least talked-about (elsewhere) problem:

Note that, as reported here in November, the Congressional Budget Office had predicted hitting the $39 trillion level of debt some time after mid-year. Hey, we are ahead of schedule! Let’s celebrate?

“A Christian politician in Finland has been convicted of a crime for publishing her views on marriage and sexual ethics 22 years ago,” CBN reports.

“The country’s Supreme Court found parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen guilty of ‘hate speech’ for publishing her biblical beliefs. In a 3–2 decision, the court upheld a criminal conviction against Räsänen and a Lutheran bishop for ‘making and keeping available to the public a text that insults a group.’”

She was fined €1,800.

That is about 2,080 in American dollars.

Paul Jacob has discussed the case in the recent past, in a more hopeful vein. That is, in the apparently vain hope that the highest court of “Suomen Tasavalta” (what Finns call their state) would find this mother of five, grandmother of ten, and wife of a Lutheran pastor innocent of the grotesque charges “of crimes against the humanity of gays and lesbians.”

Oh, that cannot be right. That is from the often-unreliable Wikipedia. The formal charge appears to be “incitement against an ethnic group” (kiihottaminen kansanryhmää vastaan) under Section 10 of Chapter 11 of the Finnish Criminal Code.

The country’s hate speech provision.

How do gays and lesbians constitute an ethnic group? Stay tuned for future updates.

It is noteworthy that not all the charges brought against her came to an ultimate guilty verdict.

What stuck in the court’s craw was that she had written that homosexuality is “a developmental disorder.” The reasoning the court went through to see such a statement as “an incitement to hate” has to be fascinating.

This is especially so after the assurances of Prosecutor General Ari-Pekka Koivisto that the case “is significant because the supreme court went through the fundamental rights assessment in detail.”