Republican Matt Van Epps fended off a challenge from far-Left Democrat Aftyn Behn on Tuesday during a special election for Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District. With 95% of the vote in, DecisionDeskHQ has called the race for Van Epps 53.9% to 45%. Other outlets followed shortly after. Van Epps’ victory allows Republicans to breathe a sigh of relief after Democrats surged money and resources into the race, hoping to capitalize on typically low Republican turnout in special elections. A win for Behn in the deep red district would have sent shockwaves throughout the nation. The self-described “radical” community organizer had previously voiced support for burning down police stations and supported transgender surgeries on young children. The race was scheduled after former Rep. Mark Green announced his resignation earlier this year. Green won the district, which stretches from Tennessee’s borders with Kentucky and Alabama and includes parts of Nashville, by over 20 points. In recent weeks, money poured into the race as Behn campaigned with Democrat favorites Al Gore and New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. House Speaker Mike Johnson traveled to Tennessee on Monday to rally support for Van Epps. Van Epps’ win bolsters Johnson’s slim majority in the House, which currently sits at 219-213. Behn had a fundraising advantage over Van Epps, raising over $1 million between October 1 and November 12 while Van Epps took in $591,000 during that same timeframe. At the same time, the Trump-aligned MAGA Inc spent over $1 million backing Van Epps, while the Democrat-aligned House Majority PAC and Your Community PAC have spent a combined $950,000 supporting Behn. Behn won a crowded Democratic primary in August despite a history of leftist advocacy out of touch with much of the Volunteer State’s conservative leaning. She once claimed that men can give birth. Behn also said that the murder of six children by a transgender-identifying gunman at the Covenant School in Tennessee made her more sympathetic to “trans communities.” That apparent sympathy inspired her to “fight the far-right narrative that is being emanated by Matt Walsh and The Daily Wire.” Behn also backs transgender procedures on children, draping a trans flag on her back during “Pride” month and writing on social media: “THESE COLORS DON’T BLEED. Remember, you come for my trans community, I come for you.” 50% off DailyWire+ annual memberships will not return for another year, so don’t miss this deal! Join now at DailyWire.com/cyberweek. In a May 2022 podcast appearance, Behn said she supported the mailing of abortion pills into Tennessee by outside groups. Medication abortions are illegal under Tennessee law. “We’ll continue to figure out how to get abortion pills to people. So the organizing does not stop just because Roe is overturned,” Behn said. Last month, Behn went viral for comments she made about her hatred of country music and the city of Nashville. Van Epps also won a crowded Republican primary after earning an endorsement from President Donald Trump. Trump called into a rally for Van Epps featuring Tennessee GOP heavyweights and held a tele-rally on Monday night for the Republican on the eve of the election.

We all remember the moment from “Anchorman” when Ron Burgundy, played by Will Ferrell, read the words, “Go F*** Yourself, San Diego,” to end a live news broadcast. Even though he was just blindly reading the words from the Teleprompter, which had been sabotaged, it didn’t matter. Rioters threatened to kill Ron Burgundy. He was fired. Everything changed after that moment, and everyone in the theater understood why. You see, the anchorman had just said something highly profane about the residents of his own city, on camera. It’s the kind of thing that you simply cannot come back from — unless, like Ron Burgundy, you manage to redeem yourself by saving a woman from being mauled by a bear. Which is the kind of thing that would get anyone out of the doghouse. Back in 2004, no one would need to have this joke explained to them. The humor was pretty self-evident. But just twenty years later, it’s not remotely clear that this scene would land. For one thing, we don’t really have comedy movies anymore. That’s not just a thing people say. It’s true. Hollywood stopped making comedies right around 2012 to 2013. Now the genre essentially doesn’t exist. But more importantly, in 2025, recent events have demonstrated that it’s actually very possible for a prominent person to tell an entire city to go f*** itself, in no uncertain terms, and then remain popular in that same city — popular enough to potentially win a congressional race. In fact, it’s now a viable campaign strategy to look the voters in the eye and pull a Ron Burgundy because, as it turns out, insulting the voters can somehow make you more popular than you were before. If that sounds hyperbolic to you in any way, then you probably haven’t been following the rise of a Democrat congressional candidate named Aftyn Behn, who’s running in today’s special election to fill a seat in Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District. This is a district that includes downtown Nashville and most of Nashville’s black population — along with several Republican-dominated suburbs like Franklin, plus several rural counties. Back in 2020, as we’ve discussed, Behn openly attacked the city she intends to represent in Congress. She stated that she hates Nashville, and then she went on to name several specific features of the city that she despises. But the really remarkable part of this story is that, having trashed her own potential voters in this resurfaced clip, Aftyn Behn has made the conscious decision to stand by her remarks. And, in doing so, she appears to have strengthened her political position. She’s running in a district that went for Donald Trump by more than 20 points in the last election. And yet, according to a recent Emerson College poll, Behn is within 2% points — within the margin of error — of winning this race. The Republican, Matt Van Epps, is barely holding onto the lead. Before we get into the implications of this race for the Republican Party — and there are many implications — there are some recent videos you need to see. Without context, you might assume these clips are coming from some kind of satirical film about U.S. politics, like a modern-day take on “Anchorman.”  They’re darkly hilarious, in many ways. But they’re very real.  Watch: CNN: “Do you think it was a mistake to say you hated Nashville?” AFTYN BEHN: “I was a private citizen.” So yes, she still hates Nashville and people will still vote for her pic.twitter.com/Lrg8jwsNXt — Sara Rose ??? (@saras76) November 30, 2025 Credit: @saras76/X.com She can’t even muster up a single word of praise for Nashville — not a single positive thing — even when it’s teed up for her. The best she can do is utter a non sequitur about how she made the previous remarks bashing Nashville as a “private citizen,” as if that’s relevant in any way. But if anything, that makes it worse, because it means it’s what she actually believes. It’s something she said before she had an obvious incentive to lie, as a politician. Of course, this woman knows what just happened in Virginia, where a Democrat sociopath — someone who says he wants conservatives and their children to die — just won the race for attorney general. She understands that Democrat voters are motivated, above all else, by hatred. And she’s made the calculation, at this point, that the only viable path forward is to appeal to Democrats’ profound disdain for the world they live in (or, in this case, the city they live in). To be clear, if she had just said that she hates the bachelorette parties in Nashville or whatever, that wouldn’t really be an issue. If she had said she just hates the pedal taverns and wants to abolish them and imprison everyone involved, I would wholeheartedly agree. But she explicitly stated that she also hates the entire city as a whole. And now she’s banking on the possibility that most people living in Nashville also hate the entire city — hate themselves, essentially. And frankly, she might be right. In recent days, across various interviews with friendly outlets, Behn has used the same script when she’s been asked about her many, many other deranged comments. Here’s another example: NEW: CNN’s Kasie Hunt gives up and moves on after far-left congressional candidate Aftyn Behn of Tennessee refused to admit that funding the police is a good thing. Hunt: Would you like more money for more cops on the streets in your district? Behn: So those um, past comments… pic.twitter.com/DScvVKZQYt — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) December 2, 2025 Credit: @CollinRugg/X.com Notice that, in this case, CNN attempts to do her a favor. They don’t show any of the “old posts” that they’re asking about. They think they’re teeing up a softball question — where she can safely say, without any pushback, that yes, she wants police departments to exist. This is one of those issues that, especially now that the George Floyd hysteria has subsided, is something you’d hope 100% of Americans would agree on. But still, even with this very generous setup, she doesn’t give the answer that a well-adjusted, sane human being would give. Instead, she once again states that she was a “private citizen” when she made those “old posts,” which remain unmentioned. And then, when she’s pressed on her non-answer, she strongly suggests that, indeed, she still wants to defund the police, in the year 2025. She states that she’s going to defer to her “community,” rather than take any position of her own. And then she proceeds to say that her “community” wants “mental health services.” She never says her “community” wants to have a police department. Again, it’s the kind of answer that will only appeal to you, as a voter, if you’re a deeply disturbed individual. And the more this woman rises in the polls, the more we have to ask ourselves if that’s a fair way to describe the entire Democrat Party — as in, every single voter they have. Over at MSNBC — a.k.a. “MS NOW”  — the damage control went even worse for Aftyn Behn. That’s because, in this interview, the anchor actually put some of her tweets up on the screen, to great comedic effect. Watch: Democrat Aftyn Behn refuses THREE TIMES to walk back her previous calls to defund the police: MSNBC: “Do you still stand by those comments?” BEHN: “I’m not going to give cable news talking points…. MSNBC: “What is your position today?” BEHN: “I’m gonna talk about my race.” pic.twitter.com/92YRm2KMOk — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) November 24, 2025 Credit: @RNCResearch/X.com Yeah, she’s not going to get into “cable news talking points” — like addressing the question of whether she supports burning down police stations. That’s just a “talking point” — as in, it’s something that she explicitly stated that she supports, just a few years ago. And to this day, she won’t renounce it. To be clear, Aftyn Behn is indeed a real person. This is a real candidate that the Democrat Party is running for a House seat. And they’re not disavowing her, or even criticizing her, in any way. Why would they? Behn represents the mainstream Democrat Party. That’s the important point here. If someone says he’s a Democrat, this is what he’s supporting. And just to emphasize that point, the Democrat Party has come out and announced that they strongly support everything this woman is saying. This is a post from Ken Martin, the chair of the Democrat Party, just a couple of days ago. Democrats are building momentum. We’re all gas, no brakes. Let’s do everything we can to chip away at the GOP’s House majority. This Tuesday, get out and vote for Aftyn Behn if you live in TN-7! So there it is. The highest levels of the Democrat Party have endorsed one of the most demented candidates to run for office in the modern history of this country. They’ve also endorsed all of this. Watch:  The Democrat Party is backing a candidate who wants to abolish police and thinks burning down police stations is justified.pic.twitter.com/rzLjel5I5F https://t.co/KVbtPprrJR — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) December 1, 2025 Credit: @RNCResearch/X.com ? Democrat nominee for the upcoming TN07 special election Aftyn Behn condemns women who get married and start families– saying it’s the product of “deeply patriarchal structures”: “My therapist always asks me to transcribe my dreams and the recurring dream I’ve had is standing… pic.twitter.com/LTsYj0im7Q — Greg Price (@greg_price11) November 24, 2025 Credit: @greg_price11/X.com She says, “My therapist always asks me to transcribe my dreams, and the recurring dream I’ve had is standing up in a Cafeteria full of women and saying ‘I don’t want children. I want power!'” Just by itself, 15 years ago, that statement would’ve been disqualifying, regardless of your politics. For one thing, she’s going around admitting that she’s in therapy — which obviously isn’t something you should brag about. There’s no reason to be proud of the fact that you’re paying someone with a master’s degree who has a vested interest in making sure you’re never “cured” of whatever disorder he’s diagnosed you with. That’s a point of shame, not pride. In fact, in a sane country, going to therapy would be disqualifying for any political candidate. If you need therapy, you are not mentally strong enough to hold political office, or any other position of importance. But that clip gets even worse when she goes on to explain that marriage punishes women, and forces them into “patriarchal structures,” whatever that means. Maybe she’s talking about no-fault divorce laws, where women can cheat on their husbands, and then take half their assets. Who knows — she didn’t really elaborate, as far as I can tell. What I do know is that there are many, many more clips that illustrate how unhinged this woman is. She also admitted that she follows around ICE vehicles, and harasses ICE officers and state troops, for example. She says she’s uncomfortable with Christian influence in government. And so on. But we’ll end with this clip — which we’ve played before — because it really underscores the extent of the threat that this woman, and the Democrat Party in general, pose to our country. This was how Aftyn Behn responded to the massacre of Christian men, women and children at the Covenant School in Nashville. In the aftermath of the shooting, she didn’t say she was worried about the safety of Christians, who had just been massacred because of their faith by a trans-identifying terrorist. Instead, she said the so-called “trans community” was under attack — and that, as a politician, one of her primary goals would be to go after me, and The Daily Wire.  Watch: WATCH: This is how Democrat Aftyn Behn responded to the Covenant shooting, when a trans-identifying woman killed six at the Christian school. It inspired Behn’s first run for office…so she could fight to protect “trans communities” and against Daily Wire and @MattWalshBlog. pic.twitter.com/th13e1v6dW — Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) November 24, 2025 Credit: @realDailyWire/X.com The fact that a woman this deranged and evil even has the slightest possible chance to win the special election today — in a district that Trump carried by more than 20 points, in a deep-red state, in a race against a candidate who has been endorsed and heavily promoted by Donald Trump — is a very, very bad sign for the future of the Republican Party. Over the past few months, we’ve talked about some major built-in advantages that Republicans are probably going to have, in future elections. If the Voting Rights Act is gutted by the Supreme Court, which is the expected outcome, Democrats will lose several seats in the House. And as more illegal aliens are deported, and as more people leave failing states like California and New York for states like Florida and Texas, Democrats will lose even more representation in Congress. But these benefits only exist at the margins. They don’t protect the Republican Party against a complete and total collapse of popular support. And that appears to be where the party is headed, given that Democrats are running complete sociopaths — and winning, or coming very close to winning. If today’s election in Tennessee is indeed even somewhat close — if this woman isn’t completely blown out — then we are headed for the worst-case scenario, one year from now in the midterms. Democrats will sweep both houses of Congress, if this trend continues. And we shouldn’t be surprised by that outcome, if it should come to pass. Republicans in Congress have been so ineffective that they’ve failed to give voters a single reason to support them. This is the point where, as we talked about yesterday, the Trump administration has to step in, and take decisive action — any kind of decisive action — that actually improves the lives of American citizens in some tangible way. Denaturalize as many Somali fraudsters as you can. Bomb as many drug dealers as possible. Suspend all foreign migration. Do something, or else you’ll be replaced very quickly by lunatics and craven degenerates like Aftyn Behn. Today’s election is a massive warning sign. The polling alone makes that very clear. We can either heed that warning now, while we still have time, or we will lose so badly in 2026 that, as a country and as a movement, we may never recover.

President Donald Trump confirmed Tuesday during a Cabinet meeting that the Pentagon’s lethal strikes on narco-terrorists will soon move from the ocean to land. Trump said that narco-terrorists are responsible for drugs killing 200,000 Americans annually and announced plans to expand “Operation Southern Spear” from maritime interdictions to land strikes. “We’re going to start doing those strikes on land too,” the president said. “The land is much easier. It’s much easier. And we know the routes they take. We know everything about them. We know where they live. We know where bad ones live, and we’re going to start that very soon, too.” NEW: Trump says he will begin striking narco-terrorists by land. “We’re going to start doing those strikes on land too. You know, the land is much easier… we know where the bad ones live.” pic.twitter.com/Sb7W1DBnEn — Kassy Akiva (@KassyAkiva) December 2, 2025 Any country trafficking illegal narcotics is a possible target, Trump added, mentioning Colombia and Venezuela.  “Not just Venezuela. Venezuela has been very bad. Venezuela has been really bad in something else, probably worse than most, but a lot of other people do it too,” Trump said.  Trump said the administration’s efforts have already slashed drug trafficking through maritime routes by more than 90%, crediting naval strikes with saving “hundreds of thousands of lives” and warning narco-terrorist groups that “we’ve only just begun.” “We’re saving hundreds of thousands of lives with our pinpoint attacks,” Trump added. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said the administration has “only just begun” targeting narco-terrorists, vowing to put traffickers “at the bottom of the ocean” for “poisoning the American people.” NEW: Secretary Pete Hegseth says U.S. has “only just begun” sinking narco-terrorist vessels. pic.twitter.com/UYo7ffvzfF — Kassy Akiva (@KassyAkiva) December 2, 2025 The United States has been ramping up its military presence in the Caribbean as part of Operation Southern Spear, while continuing strikes on vessels tied to narco-terrorists. The USS Gerald R. Ford, the Navy’s most advanced aircraft carrier, deployed to the region last month to back the operation, which is disrupting drug trafficking networks. More than 15,000 troops and a dozen warships have reportedly amassed in the region. More than 80 people have been killed in strikes on alleged drug vessels, reported CNN. Trump issued a warning Sunday, declaring Venezuelan airspace effectively off-limits. “To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Trump posted to Truth Social. Despite that warning, both commercial and private aircraft have continued flying through Venezuelan airspace, flight-tracking services show. The Maduro regime responded, calling the president’s comments a “colonialist threat.” “No authority outside the Venezuelan institutional framework has the power to interfere with, block, or condition the use of international airspace,” the statement said. 50% off DailyWire+ annual memberships will not return for another year, so don’t miss this deal! Join now at DailyWire.com/cyberweek. Trump, who designated Nicolás Maduro as the leader of the Cartel de Los Soles, has been pressuring him to resign and flee the country. Trump confirmed he has spoken with Maduro but did not share the details of what was discussed.  Pope Leo encouraged the United States against invading Venezuela on Tuesday while speaking to reporters on the papal plane. “It seems there is the possibility that there be some activity, even an operation to invade Venezuelan territory,” Leo said. “I truly believe that it is better to look for ways of dialogue, maybe pressure, including economic pressure, but looking another way to change, if that is what they want to do in the United States.”

Democrats have hit upon a two-pronged strategy for 2028.  One of the strategies is to make members of the military truly uncomfortable about following their orders. The Democrats apparently believe that this will somehow create unrest and chaos. I don’t know how else to explain why Democrats are now suddenly coming out of the woodwork to suggest that a bunch of illegal orders are being issued from the Trump administration that members of the military must now consider. When Democrats such as Senator Mark Kelly or Senator Elissa Slotkin from Michigan say to soldiers, to airmen, to members of the Navy, “If you guys follow an illegal order, you will be punished,” but then don’t define “illegal order,” what they are doing is creating a Catch-22 situation. That’s because if people follow orders, they’re protected in the moment. But down the road, some Democrat may be elected and declare retroactively that those orders were illegal, members of the military should not have obeyed them, and they could end up court-martialed.  Thus, it’s a Catch-22 for members of the military. That is why it is so negative.  All of that is prong number one in the Democratic strategy; a chaos strategy with regard to military orders.  Prong number two is setting up an entire slate of possible Democratic nominees who appear to be moderate. One of the big questions in the aftermath of President Trump winning his second term was: Will Democrats shift over to the Zohran Mamdani Left, or are they going to move toward a more moderate middle? Are they going to jettison much of their culture war baggage or start talking about trans, or are they going to stop talking about trans?: Are they going to up the ante on DEI or move away from DEI? By all indicators, it appears the Democrats are not being morons. It appears that while people like Zohran Mamdani may be winning in places like New York and deep blue areas, what the Democrats are actually attempting to do is play moderate. It seems that more and more often, they’re playing dead on the trans issue. It’s seemingly disappeared from the Democratic lexicon. You don’t hear Democrats talking about “equity” in the same way that they were even a year and a half ago, when this was the be-all, end-all of American politics.  Even on immigration, Democrats have taken a more moderate middle line. They’re no longer arguing, along with AOC, that ICE ought to be disbanded. They’re not arguing anymore that the police ought to be defunded. Instead, what they seem to be doing is arguing that President Trump is largely right on the southern border. They say he’s being overzealous in the prosecution of illegal immigrants who they say have not committed crimes.  Democrats seem to be — at least in image — turning toward the middle. That’s part of what is going on with the controversy swirling around Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. To recap, last week, there was a report from The Washington Post. It argued that the White House had, via Hegseth, given a direct order to basically blow away members of narco-trafficking cartels in the water after they were already put out of commission. Supposedly, Hegseth ordered everyone to be killed, up to and including survivors who were in the water clinging to the wreckage of the burning boat. This raised some fairly significant legal issues because, as it turns out, under the laws of war, under the Geneva Conventions, and under American law, you are not supposed to kill people who are no longer in the fight. The 1949 Geneva Conventions, ratified by the United States, state: Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat (out of combat) by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction based on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above persons: violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment, and torture … In other words, you can’t take somebody as a P.O.W. and shoot them. Under the Geneva Conventions, there is no policy of “We take no prisoners.” There is the possibility that these people would not be considered hors de combat, depending on the condition of the boat; the boat may have been dead in the water, but at the same time, they could call their narco-trafficking friends. That is one possible defense. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt read this statement: President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have made it clear that presidentially-designated narco-terrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting in accordance with the laws of war. With respect to the strikes in question on September 2nd, Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes. Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law, directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.  The contention here is that there was a general order given to take out the boat, and that possibly Admiral Bradley is the person who actually gave the order to conduct a second strike, if, in fact, a second strike was conducted. The New York Times published a follow-up piece in which they seemed to admit that Hegseth did not give a general kill order, especially for people who were already hors de combat. All of this seems like a convenient way of simply providing support to the Democrats who released the video that told members of the military not to obey orders. This feels ginned up. It feels as though The Washington Post went ahead and reported a story on extraordinarily thin sourcing to create the possibility of an illegal order that, it turns out, may not have been illegal at all, in order to provide support for the Democratic narrative that this administration is lawless, and that only a moderate military veteran who might be running in 2028 can step into the breach. This feels like the predicate for a move by the Democratic Party to elevate somebody like Senator Mark Kelly, a former astronaut who tends to portray himself as a moderate, even though he voted with Joe Biden in the Senate almost all of the time. The Democrats are not going to burn themselves down by openly championing the leftist causes they truly believe in. They’ll wait until they gain power before they turn on that spigot.

At a Cabinet meeting Tuesday, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins delivered a sweeping update on the nation’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), revealing what she called “rampant fraud” and announcing a dramatic escalation in the administration’s effort to force state compliance with federal oversight. Rollins said that under the president’s tenure, “about 800,000” Americans have already moved off SNAP, a program serving 42 million people, and she argued the trend underscores the need to restore integrity to a system she said has been “abused for far too long.” Rollins detailed new findings from the department’s data-matching initiative — an effort she said was repeatedly obstructed by blue states. “We found 500,000 people receiving benefits more than twice,” she said. “We had a couple of people receiving benefits in six states.” She noted that in February, USDA asked all 50 states to submit their SNAP recipient data so the federal government could help identify fraud. Twenty-one states, including California, New York, and Minnesota, refused. As a result, Rollins announced the administration will withhold federal funds from those states beginning next week unless they provide the data and “allow us to partner with them to protect the American taxpayer.” The secretary also contrasted the current crackdown with the previous administration, stating that President Biden — “working to buy [the] election a year ago,” in her words — expanded the food-stamp budget by 40 percent. 50% off DailyWire+ annual memberships will not return for another year, so don’t miss this deal! Join now at DailyWire.com/cyberweek. The confrontation over state cooperation intensified in mid-November when Rollins disclosed an alarming figure: 186,000 deceased individuals were receiving SNAP benefits, a number she said far exceeded the initial estimate of 5,000 in a single month. Rollins explained that on her first day in office, she asked states to share basic personal data for all SNAP recipients — names, birth dates, Social Security numbers, addresses — asserting the information was needed both to identify fraud and to ensure benefits were not going to illegal immigrants. She claimed Democrats opposed data-sharing because, in her view, their political strategy “depends on protecting illegal aliens.” According to Rollins, 29 mostly red states complied, and the fraud numbers identified so far come only from those data sets. “Can you imagine when we get our hands on the blue-state data?” she said. She argued that full transparency will enable USDA to rebuild the program from the ground up, require every recipient to reapply, and make certain SNAP is reserved for Americans who “literally cannot survive without it.”