The following is an edited transcript excerpt of The Michael Knowles Show. * * * A BLM chapter founder has just gone viral for getting into a brawl with his female colleague. Clyde McLemore, the executive director of BLM in Lake County, Illinois, got into a physical altercation with Nyesha Hill. It took place in a hallway, underneath the BLM banner. It’s like it was staged. According to reports, the pair — allegedly, reportedly — clashed after Hill walked into the office and demanded money from McLemore for cigarettes. You can’t make this up. If you turned this script into Hollywood, they’d say it’s too on the nose. She goes into the BLM office, which is supposed to be about social justice and defending the rights of oppressed black people, and she says: “Yeah, give me some of that BLM money. I want to go buy some menthols. I want to go buy some unfiltered Newports.” And he says he’s not going to give her the money. She says this is crazy — you’ve been blowing the BLM money not on social justice or helping people, but on gambling. Then they start punching each other. BREAKING: Black Lives Matter founder in IL, Clyde McLemore caught beating his female employee She accused him of embezzling grants pic.twitter.com/U2Tb8AN0DS — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 3, 2026 Source: @EndWokeness/X.com According to this woman’s report to police, she said, “I told him, ‘It’s not fair that I come here and I work and you running around taking care of other things that don’t got nothing to do with Black Lives Matter with Black Lives Matter money. I’m the one that make this joint work.” She says she makes it work, and he’s running around spending the money on things that have nothing to do with BLM. At least she wants to buy cigarettes. Plenty of black people smoke cigarettes. Come on — she says she makes it work. Now, I guess we’d have to define what “work” is. What work is actually being done here? What does BLM do? Even the national leaders and founders of BLM spent the money buying themselves beautiful homes in Southern California. What is the work here? The work is going out in the streets, protesting, agitating, rioting, in some cases, looting stores, stealing merchandise, and pressuring corporations and government institutions for money. Then the money ends up being used on things like cigarettes or gambling. And in this case, the argument from the woman was that at least the money should go to something like cigarettes rather than gambling. Then there’s the final twist: both of them ended up with lip injuries after punching each other, but neither wanted to press charges. Why? The woman told officers she didn’t want to see a black man go to jail. And people like Mitt Romney marched with these groups at one point. Some people posted black squares on social media or donated money, believing they were supporting a movement for justice. The smart BLM leaders used the money for personal purchases like homes, while local disputes like this one were happening inside chapters.

NASHVILLE—“You go into these positions understanding that your shelf life can be limited and you’re also always walking on eggs. We all work by the grace of somebody.”  That was the response from Errol, a law enforcement officer from New York, minutes after listening to outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem address law enforcement from around the country shortly after she was reassigned by President Donald Trump. At 1:41 p.m., Trump announced on Truth Social that he was moving Noem from head of the Department of Homeland Security to a special envoy for a new security initiative in the Western Hemisphere. He said Noem would be replaced by Oklahoma Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin.  Roughly 25 minutes later, Noem walked onto the stage in a conference room of the Grand Hyatt Hotel off Broadway to talk to law enforcement gathered for the Major Cities Conference organized by the Sergeants Benevolent Association.  During her speech to law enforcement gathered for the Major Cities Conference, Noem spoke for roughly 35 minutes about the administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration, efforts to work with local law enforcement, and support for the families of law enforcement officers. She did not discuss her new role or take questions about her replacement at DHS.  “Thank you for all that you do to keep people safe and to hold your oath, to be out in our communities, protecting people from public safety threats, but also being an example to our next generation of Americans,” Noem said. Noem touted the Trump administration’s efforts to crack down on crime in cities like Memphis and its partnership with local law enforcement agencies on immigration enforcement throughout her speech. Noem just left. No questions about Trump reassigning her from being DHS secretary pic.twitter.com/tDEDp7fZlt — Leif Le Mahieu (@leif_lemahieu) March 5, 2026 Noem took a few questions after her speech from several attendees in front of the crowd of attendees and a few who were lined up by the staff. None of those who asked questions mentioned her replacement at DHS. In the minutes leading up to the speech, attendees started buzzing as the news broke. One man walked by the section where the press was delegated to in the back and excitedly asked if reporters had seen Trump’s post.  After the speech, The Daily Wire spoke with multiple attendees from coast to coast. They all praised the Trump administration’s strong support for law enforcement and said they appreciated Noem’s speech.  Joel, a police officer from Milwaukee, said he thought the speech was “very good” and said he thought Noem did a “great job” as head of DHS.  “He’s [Trump] done this with other people. I don’t necessarily think that it means that she didn’t do a good job. I just think Trump likes to shake things up,” he said. “Maybe with everything that’s going on, he just wants someone to get a different voice. I saw that he’s going to move her to another position, so it’s not like he’s firing her like people want to put out there and say, because they want to make her look bad.”  He added that he had a “lot of respect” for Noem and that she still gave the speech despite the news breaking minutes before.  Stephen, from Central California, said he saw the news break and was wondering if Noem would show up for the speech.  “I thought she was doing a good job. You get politics at that highest level, which is kind of the nature of it,” adding that it was “pretty rare” for a cabinet secretary to make it the entire presidency.  Errol from New York said he thought Noem’s speech was “excellent” and said it was nice to hear her speak.  Noem’s tenure as head of DHS comes to an end after a heated Senate hearing, in which Noem blamed Trump for approving questionable contracts worth over $200 million for deportation ads, which raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.

The other day, we eulogized the political career of the great Jasmine Crockett of Texas. She lost her bid to be the Democrats’ nominee in the Senate primary — a race she felt compelled to join because Republicans gerrymandered her congressional district away. In other words, because Republicans redrew the congressional map, Jasmine Crockett had to choose between running for a totally new congressional seat or running for the Senate. (You can’t run for both seats at the same time.) She chose the Senate and lost. And as a result, her political career is likely over. As tragic as Jasmine’s defeat is, she was by far the most entertaining member of Congress who can barely speak English. But there’s a bigger story here. Jasmine Crockett’s defeat is part of a major shift in American politics, and it really doesn’t get enough attention. For decades since the Civil Rights Era, Democrats have been allowed to draw — and re-draw — congressional maps in order to boost black representation in Congress. So if a district was 80% white, Democrats could redraw the district, in absurd ways, so that more black people — who overwhelmingly vote Democrat — were included. That’s what happened in Louisiana, to give just one example.  Source: Democracy Docket A federal court forced Louisiana to draw a district across the entire length of the state, solely to include more black people. This is what happens in many different states. Essentially, Democrats have been allowed to dilute the white vote, knowing full well that non-white voters tend to side with Democrats. This is cheating, of course. But under the guise of “racial equity,” courts have allowed it. But that’s ending now. All over the country, because of federal court decisions and Supreme Court rulings, Republicans are being allowed to redraw congressional districts that have been rigged for years. This is called gerrymandering — and yes, Republicans are explicitly drawing the districts in order to maximize their political advantage. There’s nothing unusual about that. Both parties do it. The difference is that, for the first time in 50 years, Democrats don’t get to scream “racism” and stop Republicans from gerrymandering. A bigger Supreme Court ruling on this issue is pending, and if it goes the way we think it will, Democrats stand to lose around two dozen seats in Congress. It’s a very big deal. But already, the impact is being felt. Jasmine Crockett is done. And the man who defeated her in the Democrat U.S. Senate primary, James Talarico, is now being doubted as a “moderate” Democrat who has a real chance of flipping the state of Texas. No Democrat has won a Senate race in Texas in nearly 50 years, but according to Stephen Colbert and the DNC and MSNBC and everyone else in the mainstream Left, Talarico can do it. And that’s because, as NBC reminded us yesterday, Talarico is supposedly a moderate candidate who will win over “independents” and non-political voters. He’s so sane and normal and moderate that he’s a “big tent” candidate, we’re told. Watch:  Source: NBC NEWS/YouTube.com This idea — that Talarico is a down-the-middle politician with broad appeal — is everywhere. Leslie Marshall, who’s on Fox News all the time as a political strategist, called Talarico a “more moderate” option. Newsweek describes Talarico as a “rising Democrat and a moderate focused on economic populism and broad voter appeal.” This is how they sold Talarico to Left-wing Democrats in Texas. Talarico, Democrats were told, was the sane and rational alternative to Jasmine Crockett. So white liberal women cast their votes for Talarico, even as they openly wept about the fact that they were oppressing a strong, independent woman of color. Watch: Texas voter starts crying after voting for James Talarico over Jasmine Crockett: “Because we need somebody who can win.” pic.twitter.com/5Ofo82ttnl — Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) February 23, 2026 Source: @WesternLensman/X.com It’s easy for conservatives to be pessimistic right now, as the midterm election season begins. Midterm elections generally don’t go well for the party that controls Congress and the White House. Historically, the incumbent party loses a lot of seats. We all know that. And although the polling looks pretty good for Republicans right now, the expectation is that things will shift towards the Democrats as we get closer to November. But despite all of that pessimism, I’ll make a prediction: Now that the Democrat Party establishment is seriously trying to run candidates like James Talarico — with the messaging that they’re “normal” and “moderate” and appeal to a “big tent” — it’s very likely that Democrats will not know what hit them in November. If this is the guy that the Democrats’ political operation is going to rally behind, on the theory that he’s totally relatable to the average person in Texas of all places, then this party is probably toast in the midterms.  James Talarico is not simply a far-Left-wing activist who’s never worked a real job in his life. He’s not simply a creepy-looking heretic and fake “pastor” who pathologically lies to Christians, over and over again, about what the scripture says. James Talarico is all of those things, as we’ll discuss in a moment. But he’s also completely insane. He genuinely makes Jasmine Crockett out to be totally normal. Talarico’s rise as a “moderate” was such a con job, and such a flagrant bait-and-switch, that even now, it’s likely that most Democrats don’t realize what just transpired. So let’s fill them in. We’ll start with this post from James Talarico on May 8, 2020. This is what he tweeted in the context of complaining about alleged cases of police brutality, which were not in fact police brutality. He says that these non-brutality cases are symptoms of the “virus of racism.” And adds this:  “White skin gives me and every white American immunity from the virus. But we spread it wherever we go—through our words, our actions, and our systems. We don’t have to be showing symptoms—like a white hood or a Confederate flag—to be contagious.” And then he says: The only cure is diagnosing the virus within ourselves and taking dramatic actions to contain the spread. The first small step is proclaiming loudly and unequivocally that #BlackLivesMatter.” We’ve all become accustomed to hyperbolic and deranged rhetoric from the Left. We all know how often these people will beclown themselves in the service of their ideology. But even with that in mind — this is something special. The Democrat nominee for U.S. Senate in Texas, just a few years ago, declared that white people — simply by virtue of their genetics — spread racism wherever they go, in everything they do. He declared that we are all carriers of a “virus.” He’s saying that white people, in every case, are a plague on society because they are white. And by the same token, he’s saying that it’s impossible for a white person to be victimized because of the color of his skin. White people, according to James Talarico, cannot be discriminated against. They cannot be the victims of hate crimes. It’s not unjust to punish whites for being white, because in his worldview, being white is, itself, a crime against nature. Put mildly, this is *not* going to play well in Texas. Nor should it. In a sane Democrat Party, these posts alone would be disqualifying. The African warlords who chant “Kill the Boer” would find James Talarico to be a little too on-the-nose. They’d tell him to tone it down a little. But for Democrats, James Talarico is apparently the best they have to offer. So they’re going to present him as a “moderate,” even though he thinks that tens of millions of Texans have a “virus” because they’re white. To be clear, this is a much bigger problem for Talarico than just one post. He’s also on the record declaring that “prison is violence” and that we should imagine a world where prisons don’t exist at all. Watch: Texas Democrat Senate candidate James Talarico: “Prison is violence.” “It’s hard to imagine a world without prisons. Just because it’s hard to imagine doesn’t mean you shouldn’t.” pic.twitter.com/3d4pzVriaA — Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) March 5, 2026 Source: @WesternLensman/X.com “Prison is violence. … It’s hard to imagine a world without prisons. Just because it’s hard to imagine doesn’t mean you shouldn’t.”  This is the message that national Democrats have just committed to. This is what they view as “moderate.” They’re trying to suggest that abolishing prisons is a “big tent” policy. Everyone can really get on board with that one. Needless to say, of course, if we abolish the prisons, which is what James wants us to do, James himself will not be living in the neighborhoods where the freed convicts will be settling. And he has a lot of other big ideas — including the notion that there are “six biological sexes.” Watch: James Talarico won the Texas Senate Democratic Primary. I’d like to remind people that he’s opposed to protecting women’s and girls’ sports, and absurdly stated that “modern science obviously recognizes there are many more than two biological sexes. In fact, there are six.” pic.twitter.com/KLmkKf8wMR — Colin Wright (@SwipeWright) March 4, 2026 Source: @SwipeWright/X.com He says it’s “obvious” that there are six biological sexes, according to “modern science.” So there’s the arrogance we’re all familiar with from these people. And then he suggests that “modern science” is infallible, so we all need to agree that, effective immediately, there are six biological sexes. Unfortunately, he doesn’t provide the names for those “six biological sexes.” But as best I can tell, he’s referring to people with chromosomal disorders, like Turner Syndrome, where children are born without the typical XX or XY chromosomes. A child might be born with a single X chromosome, for example. But this doesn’t mean that the child belongs to a new biological sex. What it means is that the child has a developmental abnormality that exists within the established sex binary. And we know that because these developmental abnormalities do not lead to the creation of new reproductive cells or reproductive pathways, which is the definition of a biological sex. If you’re a member of a distinct biological sex, it means your body creates distinct reproductive cells that, when combined with other reproductive cells from another biological sex, create a new organism. Put another way, someone with a developmental disorder might produce eggs, or sperm, or neither (in which case they’d be infertile). But they don’t produce a third type of cell that enables the creation of a new organism. And it’s absurd to suggest otherwise. What’s important to understand about Talarico — and this might be why some Democrats were fooled into thinking he was a “moderate” — is that he will deliver complete falsehoods with total sincerity. He’ll look you in the eye, very calmly, and lie with impunity. The more you listen, the more unsettling it becomes. For example, watch how he voiced his opposition to a bill that would prevent boys from competing in girl’s sports. Let’s see exactly why Talarico wants men to compete against women. Here it is: “The bill author said: ‘If one [cis] girl loses a game, then this bill is worth it.’ I guess we just have a different moral yardstick. Because I say: ‘If one trans child dies to protect someone’s damn trophy, then this bill is grotesque.’” pic.twitter.com/jg7lrtGVkn — James Talarico (@jamestalarico) October 15, 2021 @jamestalarico/X.com TEXAS SENATE RACE: The Gay Democrat preacher running for Senate thinks Jesus is nonbinary. Choose your fighter Texas. pic.twitter.com/cQjmK6IIkx — @amuse (@amuse) March 4, 2026 Source: @amuse/X.com TALARICO: “Trans children are God’s children….There’s nothing wrong with them, nothing at all. They are perfect. They are beautiful, and they are sacred.”pic.twitter.com/3c1GZOfgdK — Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) March 4, 2026 Source: @realDailyWire/X.com Well, there it is. If you don’t let a boy play in girl’s sports, then you’re responsible if the boy decides to kill himself over it. And “trans children” are perfect and sacred, which is why we need to pump their bodies full of hormones that sterilize them, and cut apart their bodies. Oh, and by the way, if you’re not onboard with gender ideology, then you’re not a real Christian because “god is non-binary.”  If you actually care about the well-being of children, or Christianity — which most Texans do — then both of these statements are not simply wrong. They are appalling. They make normal people react with disgust and revulsion. If you think a child is going to kill himself because he can’t join the girl’s team, the appropriate solution to that problem is not to let him join the girl’s team. It’s to address the profound mental instability that would cause a boy to believe he’s a girl — and to want to die in service of that delusion. And that’s not even getting into the fact that the ACLU’s very own trans-identifying attorney, “Chase Strangio,” has admitted before the Supreme Court that there’s no evidence, anywhere, that “affirming” a child’s subjective sense of “gender” actually reduces suicide rates. So logic, basic morality, and the data all contradict what James Talarico is saying. And then you get to the part where he calls God “non-binary,” which has to rank pretty high in terms of heresy. Even for James Talarico, he outdid himself here. Imagine taking an incoherent, meaningless, and made-up concept that was created on Tumblr a few years ago for the benefit of delusional narcissists, and saying that God fell for the same propaganda.  The problem, of course, is that when humans declare that they’re “non-binary,” they aren’t actually changing the fact that they’re human beings with a biological sex. They’re simply declaring, out loud, that they don’t “identify” with their biological sex, and that everyone needs to give them as much attention as possible. That’s what being “non-binary” means, in the Left’s framework. It means absolutely nothing. God, on the other hand, is not a disgruntled, unemployed teenager on Tumblr. The thing about nonbinary is that, if it were a real thing, which it definitely isn’t, it would be a part of the biological system that God created. God transcends the system that he creates. Talarico is basically arguing that God transcends the system by being part of it and subject to it. Which makes no sense. But anyway, non-binary is not part of the system anyway. It’s a made-up concept. Made up by humans, not God. Not the God who created us male and female, and thought that was so important to get across that it’s one of the very first things we’re told in the Bible. What James Talarico is doing — and he’s not being very subtle about it — is bringing Gnostic heresy to the mainstream. He wants to convince Democrats that they can still consider themselves to be Christians, even as they support the murder, sterilization, and castration of children. He wants to convince Democrats that they can still consider themselves to be Christians, even as they deliberately unleash violent criminals on innocent men, women, and children. He wants to convince Democrats that they can still consider themselves to be Christians, even as they reject every core tenet of Christianity. The Gnostic element is important to emphasize. Gnostics are heretics who believe that the physical world is evil. They don’t believe that Jesus’ resurrection changed anything. They believe in the total separation of the soul and the body. It’s a heresy that underlies a lot of trans ideology. And it’s what Talarico promotes in his fake sermons. Watch: Texas Senate hopeful James Talarico says that “being Christian and being pro-choice are absolutely consistent because Christianity is a feminist religion” before explaing that “Jesus was a radical feminist” and probably pro-choice. pic.twitter.com/NqdjuKz71k — Protestia (@Protestia) March 4, 2026 Source: @Protestia/X.com Texas senate hopeful James Talarico uses the gnostic ‘Gospel of Thomas’ to prove that Jesus was a feminist, offering that men must not be male, but must be female, and vice versa. pic.twitter.com/QjGOMPympG — Protestia (@Protestia) March 4, 2026 Source: @Protestia/X.com It’s hard to know where to begin with this. The so-called “Gospel of Thomas” — which wasn’t written until the mid-second century, and which wasn’t actually written by Thomas, or anyone who knew Thomas — is a collection of Gnostic heresy. Really, it’s a collection of disconnected and incoherent statements that contradict the actual gospels. And in particular, it stands for the proposition that women can’t enter the kingdom of heaven. That’s the point of the passage he’s quoting. So he’s citing a text that explicitly denies that women can enter the kingdom of heaven in a favorable way. He’s saying we should give credence to this text because he can twist the language around to make it sound like an endorsement of 21st-century gender ideology. There’s also the incredibly dumb argument that “the Bible never mentions abortion,” as a way of arguing that abortion is somehow compatible with Christianity. I guess there’s supposed to be an appendix to the Bible, where it explicitly lists all of the twenty-million ways you could kill someone. And under James Talarico’s understanding of theology, if your specific method of murder isn’t on the list, then you’re good to go. Because the Bible is silent on the topic of whether or not you’re allowed to drop a piano on someone’s head to kill them, therefore you can drop a piano on someone’s head. That’s the logic. Meanwhile, the Bible does explicitly forbid murder, which covers abortion. And it explicitly states that unborn children are humans created in the womb by God. Not to mention the fact that Jesus Christ Himself began his life on Earth as an unborn child in the womb. So abortion is not only incompatible with the Bible but is in many ways the most incompatible thing you could possibly imagine.  Just pick up the Bible and read it sometime. Psalm 139 states that God “knitted me together in my mother’s womb.” Luke states that when Mary arrives, Elizabeth’s unborn child “leaped in my womb for joy.” And I could go on. Talarico uses the same argument to justify his support for same-sex marriage, by the way. He says that the Bible doesn’t talk about same-sex marriage; therefore, it’s permissible.  As Robert Gagnon (at the Wesley Biblical Seminary) has pointed out in response to Talarico, this is a very superficial and idiotic way to read the scripture. Here is a snippet of his post:  The reason why Jesus and biblical writers didn’t talk about “gay marriage” was the same reason why they didn’t talk about marriage with your mother or sibling or child: Any sexual behavior of the sort, whether in a one-time act or in an attempt at a committed relationship was prohibited as an extreme sexual sin abhorrent and detestable to God. … Jesus thought that a male-female prerequisite for marriage was so important that he used it as the foundation for rejecting any sexual bond involving more than two persons (whether concurrent or serial). According to Jesus, the twoness of the sexes, the sexual binary, God’s intentional design of two and only two sexual counterparts, is the basis for limiting the number of persons in a marriage to two. That’s Jesus’ moral logic behind his citation of “male and female he (God) made them.” What heretics do, in every case, is disregard the teachings of the Bible in favor of grotesque misrepresentations. It’s like a compulsion. And that’s why Talarico keeps doing it. Watch: Texas Senate hopeful James Talarico says the only person to ever beat Jesus in a debate was a woman. “Think about that, The only person to teach Jesus something was a woman.” pic.twitter.com/4QsD10oMBz — Protestia (@Protestia) March 4, 2026 Source: @Protestia/X.com This is another ridiculous lie. There’s no “debate” that takes place in the Bible, where a woman outwits Jesus in some kind of intellectual argument. There’s a test of faith, where Jesus suggests to his disciples that a Canaanite woman, as a Gentile, wouldn’t benefit from his teachings. And the woman states that she would, in fact, benefit, using a clever turn of phrase in context. And Jesus is happy with her response. It’s a way of demonstrating that his teachings aren’t just for Jews. But to Talarico, this is a sign that Jesus was “totally owned” by the woman, and it’s a sign that the Bible is really a piece of third-wave feminist literature. He has reduced the Scripture, mangled and perverted it, all for the sake of propping up the modern girlboss fantasy.  He constantly makes many other misrepresentations along these lines. Here’s another. This is James Talarico using the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary to justify abortion. Watch: James Talarico, the “Christian” who just won the Democrat nomination for the U.S. Senate in Texas, used the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary to justify abortion: “Creation has to be done with consent. You cannot force someone to create.” pic.twitter.com/RaWTzuW7UZ — Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) March 4, 2026 Source: @realDailyWire/X.com Again, where do you begin with this? Even if his reading of Luke was correct — which it’s not — it still doesn’t help make his case. Women, in the vast majority of cases, consent to the sexual activity that leads to the conception of their child. So women are providing “consent,” just as he’s claiming Mary did. But Talarico supports abortion at any time, for any reason. He’s not simply advocating for abortion in cases of rape. He’s advocating for abortion on demand. But the bigger problem, as I’ve already pointed out, is that Talarico is simply making all of this up. The word “consent” does not appear in the Gospel of Luke. The archangel, Gabriel, appears and tells her that, according to God’s will, she’s going to bear God’s son. He doesn’t say, “do you consent?” He tells her what’s happening. And Mary replies, “Let it be to me according to your word.” She’s enthusiastic about bringing a new life — Jesus’ life — into the world. For James Talarico to twist this passage into a biblical endorsement of child murder — up to and including the moment of birth — is nothing short of demonic. The demonic wing of the Democrat Party isn’t a “wing” anymore. It’s the whole organization. This is nothing less than Satanism.  The problem Talarico has is that, for an alleged “moderate,” he’s no longer capable of talking like a normal human being. And if you listen to enough of his sermons, that liability becomes very obvious. Watch: “Our trans community needs abortion care too…so when I use the word ‘woman’ it should not be understood as an exhaustive term, but rather as a lens through which to understand, examine and interrogate patriarchy.” Texas Senate hopeful James Talarico preaching at his church. pic.twitter.com/Ss9R2tOzGM — Protestia (@Protestia) March 4, 2026 Source: @Protestia/X.com “Our neighbors with a uterus became the property of the state . … When I use the word woman, it should not be understood as an exhaustive term, but rather as a lens through which to understand, examine, and interrogate patriarchy.”  It’s like Chat GPT in a human skin suit. Nothing he’s saying makes sense. In a matter of seconds, he managed to find several dehumanizing ways to refer to “women.” They’re “neighbors with a uterus.” They’re not really women — they’re a “lens.”  What “big tent” is going to show up and vote for this guy, exactly? How many “neighbors with penises” and “neighbors with uteruses” will go to the polls to elect this? Nothing about James Talarico comes across as human. That includes this tweet, where he pretends to be happy about receiving the single worst Christmas gift that anyone has ever received (although of course, he didn’t really receive it; he bought it for himself.) I got the coolest action figure for Christmas! Thank you to all the health care superheroes working today. Let’s help by getting vaxxed and boosted!

Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma told reporters on Thursday that he called his wife and his dad after President Donald Trump asked him to take over at the Department of Homeland Security. Trump announced on Truth Social that Mullin would take over for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem beginning on March 31, pending Mullin’s Senate confirmation. The Oklahoma senator told reporters on Capitol Hill that he received the call from Trump just minutes before Trump released his statement. Mullin described the opportunity as exciting and humbling, adding, “I had to call my dad because, I mean, it happened quick, so I had to call my wife and call my dad both. It’s just really humbling when you stop and think about it. A little kid from Westville, Oklahoma, gets to serve in the president’s Cabinet. That’s pretty neat.” Trump’s major Cabinet shakeup comes after Noem has faced criticism over the Homeland Security Department’s response to the shooting deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis. Noem was also grilled by lawmakers in a Senate hearing earlier this week and said that Trump approved questionable contracts for advertisements starring the DHS secretary worth over $200 million. The president said on Thursday that Noem will be reassigned to help lead a new security initiative that is set to be announced on Saturday. In his announcement, Trump said that Noem had served the administration “well and has had numerous and spectacular results (especially on the Border!).” The president added, “I thank Kristi for her service at ‘Homeland.'” Mullin, a close friend of Noem’s, told reporters that he hadn’t yet spoken to the ousted DHS secretary, but would soon. “Our families are very close, and this happened very quick, so we’re going to go have a conversation with her in just a second,” he said. Trump called Mullin a “warrior” and said the Oklahoman “will work tirelessly to Keep our Border Secure, Stop Migrant Crime, Murderers, and other Criminals from illegally entering our Country, End the Scourge of Illegal Drugs and, MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN.” Mullin has served in the Senate since 2023 and was a member of the House for 10 years before that. He currently serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee; the Appropriations Committee; the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee; and the Indian Affairs Committee. Mullin is also a former wrestler and professional mixed martial arts fighter who posted a 5-0 career record in MMA.

Many people are asking questions about what happens to Iran after the ayatollahs are gone. It will almost certainly be better than what it was. The only way America would be worse off would be if the regime in Tehran were replaced by a regime run by even worse ayatollahs with even faster access to nuclear materials, ballistic missile development, and terror funding. President Trump said: I guess the worst case would be, we do this and then somebody takes over who’s as bad as the previous person, right? That could happen. We don’t want that to happen. It would probably be worse if you go through this and then, in five years, you realize you put somebody in who was no better. So we’d like to see somebody in there that’s going to bring it back for the people. The president is correct. And you could see from his rather dismissive smile that he does not think the “worst thing” is going to happen. There are a ton of people out there on the Left and the horseshoe Right ignoring the simple fact that the ayatollahs are the worst possible regime. These people yell about the evils of regime change, about the dangers of long-standing occupation with boots on the ground, etc. Let’s cover all of that right now. Let’s start with regime change. We keep hearing about how regime change is dangerous, a failure. Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader and pathological liar, said, Americans spent the last two decades fighting and dying in the Middle East. Parents watch their kids shipped off to foreign lands. So many lives lost, so many billions wasted, so much suffering and anguish that scarred an entire generation. Why is Donald Trump hellbent on making history repeat itself? Why is he plunging America headfirst into a war that Americans do not want, and which he cannot even explain?” Schumer is a wildly dishonest player. He’s been yelling about the ayatollahs for years, but then apparently quietly supporting the JCPOA, which was Obama’s attempt to ship pallets of cash to the ayatollahs and give them a ten-year runway to a nuclear bomb. But the truth is, he only cares enough to yell a little bit. And then he turns around, and he yells at anyone who actually wants to do something about the ayatollahs. But let’s talk about that term, regime change. Regime change implies a long-standing commitment in which the United States engages in serious nation-building efforts. Sometimes that works. Germany, Japan, and South Korea are prime examples. Sometimes it doesn’t work. Afghanistan would be the prime example. Iraq is actually a checkered example. We forget about Iraq and what happened afterward; Iraq is indeed a functioning but fragile quasi-democracy with a nominal GDP roughly 10 to 15 times larger than it was under Saddam Hussein. The current regime has real problems and is associated with a wide variety of sectarian groups, but it is certainly better than Saddam’s, even if most Americans believe that the cost wasn’t worth it. That’s a fair argument against the war in Iraq, but not against the principle of regime change overall. In Iran, we’re not really talking about regime change in the technical sense, because regime change refers, generally, to an American-overseen process of government building where we put hundreds of thousands of troops on the ground, and then ensure every step of the governmental transition. What we’re talking about with Iran is regime destruction or replacement, where we knock over the regime and let it fall, but we don’t actually participate in long-term nation-building. Sometimes that works, and sometimes it doesn’t, because it turns out that history is complicated. There are many examples of regime replacement or regime destruction. Some of those are failures. For example, in Libya, we provided air support to rebels to take out Muammar Gaddafi, which was a huge mistake that I opposed at the time. And then we let the country take its own course. That led to a massive migration crisis and an all-out civil war that continues to this day. Why was that a mistake? Because Gaddafi was actually contained, and the people rebelling against him were a checkered group of sundry terrorists and others. And then there’s Iran itself, where the Carter administration essentially withdrew support from the Shah of Iran, and we have been suffering with the consequences ever since. But there are more positive examples. In Chile, we created the pressure that led to the coup against the Marxist Salvador Allende, who was replaced by General Augusto Pinochet, who was an anti-communist and also a human rights abuser, but who began instituting capitalist mechanisms that eventually led to prosperity and, under American pressure, democratization. In fact, we are the ones who pressured Pinochet out of power. He thought about another military coup when he lost an election, and we said, we will not support anything remotely like that. You’re giving up power. Or, for example, Panama, where we deposed Manuel Noriega. We then installed the winner of the prior election, and things have worked out pretty well. And, of course, that’s pretty much what we just did in Venezuela, where we destroyed the top of the regime and then left a second person in place. And now that person, Delcy Rodriguez, is basically being squeezed until she squeaks. She put out a statement yesterday saying, I thank President Trump for the willingness of his government to work together on an agenda that strengthens binational cooperation for the benefit of the peoples of the United States and Venezuela. In other words, not all “regime change” is alike. It’s not always Iraq. And pretending that it is, is ignorant. There’s a reason why Venezuela was handled one way and why Iran is being handled in another. And it’s not necessarily because Venezuela is in the Western Hemisphere. It’s because Iran is run by a fundamentalist Islamist death cult. In order to truly understand how evil the ayatollahs are, let Patrick Bet David, who has some experience in this area, explain. He said of the original Ayatollah Khomeini: You guys want to know what Khomeini once said about what to do to women in prison? He once said female prisoners who are virgins must be raped before execution to prevent them from entering heaven. Isn’t he an amazing guy to say something like that? That’s the guy that died — when he died, I was in Iran, June 3, 89 — I was there when the guy died. They didn’t kill him. He died. This guy who was supposed to be a hero for them? “Female prisoners who are virgins must be raped before execution.” … No human being – You would never write that. You would never subscribe to that. Not all regime change is the same.