Trump’s second inaugural: A roaring rejection of elitist priorities



When Donald Trump takes the oath of office a second time on Monday, it will symbolize more than the return of a former president. It will mark the renewed triumph of millions of Americans who rose up once again to declare that they refuse to be ignored.

For decades, the Democratic Party — once a champion of the working class and middle America — has moved away from its roots in favor of elitist priorities. This election, much like the one in 2016, was a turning point not just for the Republican Party, but for all Americans who feel left behind. The upcoming inauguration serves as a powerful reminder that the people’s voice still matters.

Trump’s 2025 inauguration marks more than the start of another presidency — it signals a cultural shift, a rallying cry for forgotten Americans to reclaim their country.

There was a time when the Democratic Party embodied the values of hard work, family, faith, and community. It stood with the “little guy,” earning the loyalty of working-class families across the country. Like many others, I once proudly supported Democratic candidates because they promised to fight for us.

Over the past decade, however, the party has strayed from those ideals, prioritizing the agendas of coastal elites, multinational corporations, and global bureaucrats over the needs of small-town America.

As Ronald Reagan famously said, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party left me.” Today, that sentiment resonates more than ever. Millions of Americans who once considered the Democratic Party their political home feel abandoned.

We did not change our beliefs in patriotism, hard work, and family values — the party did. And once again, we have turned to a leader who listens.

Trump’s resurgence as a political force in 2024 was more than just a campaign; it was a movement — a continuation of his mission to put America first. He drew on the same frustrations that propelled him to the presidency the first time, reminding Americans that their struggles and sacrifices would not be ignored. From factory workers in the Midwest to farmers in the South and miners in Appalachia, Trump reignited hope among people dismissed as irrelevant by the political elite.

His platform challenged the status quo, asking why Washington, D.C., seems more concerned with serving foreign interests than meeting the needs of its own citizens. Why are American jobs still going overseas? Why are our borders not secure? Why are children being taught to feel ashamed of their country and heritage? The Democratic Party refuses to answer those questions — questions Trump has never been afraid to pose. In doing so, he has shown millions of Americans that their voices count.

The 2024 election was not just about policy differences; it was a referendum on the Democratic Party’s direction. For years, Democrats have touted globalism as the future, insisting that the decline of American industries and communities is the price of progress. But Americans are no longer buying it. Trump’s victory represents a clear rejection of the notion that we must sacrifice our prosperity and security to appease a global elite.

The Democratic Party of today is unrecognizable compared to the one that once championed working Americans. It has become the party of Silicon Valley billionaires, Hollywood celebrities, and ivory-tower academics. Meanwhile, families across the country struggle to make ends meet as inflation eats away at their savings, opioid addiction devastates communities, and small businesses are choked by overregulation. Rather than addressing these urgent problems, Democratic leaders focus on divisive social agendas, identity politics, and performative climate policies that disregard the human toll.

Reagan’s observation that the Democratic Party left its people behind has evolved from a poignant historical quote into an undeniable reality. Millions of Americans have watched the party betray their values, leaving them politically homeless. Trump’s victory shows that they have found a new home in a movement that puts America first.

The contrast between Trump’s vision and the Democratic agenda is stark. Trump speaks of restoring American greatness, bringing jobs back to our shores, and putting citizens first. He promotes unity, pride, and the belief that every American matters. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party increasingly portrays America as irredeemable, preoccupied with rewriting history instead of securing the future.

Trump’s 2025 inauguration marks more than the start of another presidency — it signals a cultural shift, a rallying cry for forgotten Americans to reclaim their country. It is a reminder that power in this nation still lies with the people, not with bureaucrats or elites. It also shows that Americans will no longer tolerate being dismissed, ignored, or lectured to by those who fail to understand their struggles.

This moment, much like Trump’s first inauguration, reflects more than one man or one election — it embodies a movement. It is a movement of Americans determined to fight for a future that honors the values they hold dear, grounded in the belief that America’s best days remain ahead if we stand up for them.

Trump’s return to the presidency proves we are not alone in this conviction. Together, we can reclaim the promise of America. Let this inauguration serve as a reminder that democracy thrives when people demand to be heard, and let it celebrate the nation we know and love. We are building a future where no American is left behind.

After Running On ‘Protect Democracy’ Platform, Tim Walz Is Silent As State House Dems Refuse To Let GOP Take Control

'It's outrageous'

Larry Elder’s unvarnished truth: Stop letting woke voters off the hook



Listening to the reactions to the devastating conflagration in Southern California from Republican media sources, I am amazed at what they have persistently omitted. Why isn’t the electoral majority that chose Gov. Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass not held responsible for the disaster that so far has killed 24 people and destroyed more than 12,000 structures?

As far as I can figure out, these incompetent and ideologically crazed public officials didn’t just appear one day in their offices. Elections took place that put Newsom, Bass, and other woke officeholders in the Golden State in high positions while ostentatiously ignoring wise counsels about protecting forests against wildfires and prioritizing LGBTQ criteria in picking fire chiefs and other vital public servants.

Why can’t Republican news interpreters be more forthcoming and tell the majority of California’s electorate that they brought this curse on themselves?

California voters gave impressive majorities to the mischievous politicians who failed to take the proper measures to avoid the present crisis. Los Angeles voters who elected Bass knew her racialist and culturally radical positions when they chose her as mayor in 2022. That she chose to be in Ghana celebrating the inauguration of an African leader after signs of the wildfire had already presented themselves, or that her lesbian fire commissioner didn’t take proper measures to keep hydrants filled with water, should not have been a surprise to her constituents. She certainly gave evidence of her flakiness before ascending to her present office.

Newsom, who has long embraced leftist positions, crushed conservative talk show host Larry Elder, who is black, in the 2021 recall election. Elder offered a clear alternative to the oleaginous Newsom on social, economic, and environmental policies. Had he won, this raging catastrophe might not be afflicting Los Angeles today. However, voters — including a large majority of California’s black residents — endorsed Newsom enthusiastically. Many even embraced a Los Angeles Times columnist’s description of Elder as “the black face of white supremacy.”

It was, in fact, Elder who distinguished himself from the usual Republican blah-blah artists by telling voters the unvarnished truth. Last week, he blamed California voters and what he called the “lying mainstream media” for the devastating fires, arguing the media has shielded politicians like Newsom and Bass for years. Rather than simply targeting Democrats and a handful of public officials, Elder said the majority who voted against him — and the slavish media outlets that, in his view, slandered him to protect Democratic dominance — are now enduring the predictable results of their political conceits.

It is hard for me to shed too many tears over the rich wokesters in Pacific Palisades, who have seen their pleasure domes destroyed. These pompous parvenus contributed heavily to the disastrous government ruining California with their votes, donations, and political campaigning. Although there’s nothing wrong with discussing the extent of the damage and the losses suffered by perfectly decent people, at least some of the victims should be held to account for their stupid, perverse political actions. I’m sorry that Eugene Levy, who is my favorite comedian but also a wacko leftist, saw his Palisades spread burn down. But I’m afraid that his politics and those of his friends had something to do with this tragic outcome.

I was also disappointed to hear the mollycoddling treatment accorded to Patrick Soon-Shiong, owner of the Los Angeles Times, in a recent Fox News interview. Soon-Shiong claimed he and his paper care about “competence, not party” in their assessment of Los Angeles leaders. But his paper until last week was the slobbering handmaiden of Bass and other nutty leftist California politicians. Soon-Shiong bears major blame for what happened over the last week.

My friend John Zmirak in a recent column for the Stream compared the fate of California to the firebombing of Dresden and other German cities during World War II. Although terrible things happened then to hapless civilians, historians always remind us that the Nazi government had something to do with this destruction. We are also usually told that lots of Germans voted for Hitler’s party, although, as Zmirak observes, the Nazis never came even close to winning a majority of German voters in a fair election.

The flaky maniacs and demagogues who run California won with vast majorities. Yet, our Republican politicians and their obliging “conservative” media can’t bring themselves to point out this inconvenient fact. This is the same nonsense they give us when they pretend that other leftist ideologues like Alvin Bragg, Larry Krasner, and Fani Willis are just the Frankenstein creations of George Soros. The last time I checked, these lunatics were democratically elected.

Why is Larry Elder almost isolated on the right in assigning proper blame for what is happening in California? Why can’t Republican news interpreters be more forthcoming and tell the majority of California’s electorate that they brought this curse on themselves — by their freely given political choices?

How Democrats really defended democracy



A year ago, Democrats claimed their campaign was all about “defending democracy.” Instead, they sabotaged it. Repeatedly. No party has done more to contradict its own stated mission.

Speaking on Jan. 5, 2024, in Pennsylvania, Joe Biden asked, “Is democracy still America’s sacred cause? ... This is not rhetorical, academic, or hypothetical. Whether democracy is still America’s sacred cause is the most urgent question of our time, and it’s what the 2024 election is all about.”

In the end, Democrats pushed Biden aside, despite his uncontested path to the nomination. They argued their coup was necessary to save democracy.

Democrats would soon answer that question, but in the wrong way.

Their sabotage of democracy began long before 2024. In 2019, they launched investigations into President Donald Trump and continued even after they knew the charges were false. Never mind. They would defend democracy later.

Then in 2023, Democratic prosecutors unleashed four indictments against Trump. The timing, so close to an election, was surely a coincidence. But that was OK because they promised to defend democracy again soon.

Meanwhile, Democrats campaigned to protect democracy by concealing Joe Biden’s cognitive decline. They had done so for four years, but in 2024 they failed, especially after some allies admitted the cover-up. It was necessary, they insisted, to defend democracy.

Democrats also shut down their 2024 nomination process to protect Biden. Any would-be challengers, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., were discredited. That, they claimed, was how to defend democracy.

For six months, Democrats kept Joe Biden out of sight and denied any obvious signs of his impairment — even when they were glaring.

When Biden stumbled in his debate with Donald Trump before a national audience — no worse than what attentive viewers had already seen — they orchestrated a media pile-on to force him out of the race. One by one, party figures turned against him. In the end, Democrats pushed Biden aside, despite his uncontested path to the nomination. They argued their coup was necessary to save democracy.

Democrats then handed the nomination to Kamala Harris without a campaign or contest — just a rubber stamp. They deemed a traditional convention vote too risky, arguing it would slow their larger defense of democracy.

Democrats shielded Harris from serious press engagement during the contest they appointed her to lead. Rather than provide answers that could inform the public about a candidate nobody voted for, she focused on “defending democracy.”

Instead of appearing before the people, Harris appeared before her people: the elite. By their account, defending democracy meant letting self-proclaimed leaders instruct the public on what to do, what to think, and how to vote. In a true democracy, they argued, the “demos” must follow guidance from its leaders.

Later, reports revealed that many of Harris’ elite endorsers were paid to appear with her. Like a child wearing a pork chop to draw the attention of a dog, this tactic was just fine. Passing money among elites, they reasoned, merely fortified democracy.

Harris had plenty of money to buy friends if necessary. She outspent Trump, insisting that defending democracy doesn’t come cheap.

Democrats also pushed for third-party candidates to undermine Republicans in various races. They refused to remove RFK Jr. from the ballot, even though he had withdrawn and endorsed Trump. Apparently, ballot integrity mattered less than protecting democracy.

Democrats fought voter ID laws, despite broad public support. That’s what it takes to protect democracy.

They took a similar approach to counting ballots. In Pennsylvania, Democratic leaders allowed invalid ballots when they deemed it vital to defending democracy.

Democratic officials vow to oppose the new Trump administration, even though he won both the Electoral College and the popular vote. They insist they are still defending democracy and can’t help themselves.

In a single year, Americans learned much about how Democrats “defend” democracy. They revealed that democracy is too important to be practiced without limits — sometimes it must be protected from itself. We also learned that when Democrats say “democracy,” they really mean “power.”

How To Save Taiwan From Chinese Aggression

In the book 'The Boiling Moat,' defense and foreign policy experts put forth a number of sound ideas to enhance American readiness and stop the Chinese military conquest of Taiwan.

Two reminders we all need after the election: We are NOT a democracy, and the Electoral College is good



We heard a lot about democracy during the election season. The left circulated the narrative that Trump would be the end of democracy while the right called him the savior who would rescue it from the undemocratic Biden regime.

Mark Levin, however, says we need to be reminded of something: “[Our Founding Fathers] didn't support democracy; they supported republicanism.”

“Democracy means factions can take over or a majority can be tyrannical,” he says, adding that our Founders saw this in other countries and “didn’t want anything to do with it.”

“They wanted republicanism; they wanted checks in power,” he explains.

That’s why they enshrined certain principles in our Constitution.

That way, “you can't have people vote away your rights,” says Levin. If “90% of them don't think you should have the right to bear arms, that's too damn bad.”

The fact that our forefathers foresaw the inevitable issues with a true democracy and created our brilliant system proves that “they were geniuses.”

Their installation of the Electoral College was equally brilliant.

Even though we see people like Tim Walz advocating for the demolition of it, Levin knows the truth: It’s for our nation’s protection.

“You choose a president not through a direct election” but rather via an “Electoral College. Why?” asks Levin. “One person is the head of an entire branch; we can't just leave it up to a popular vote” because then “the cities will choose the president.”

“In order to have a union and in order to make sure every aspect of the society was represented, they came up with this brilliant Electoral College,” he explains.

Because of this brilliant system of balance, “California doesn't get to drown out Montana, Wyoming, [or] Idaho.”

“If you had a national popular vote, that’s what [California] would do,” says Levin.

A system in which “the president [is] chosen by the people through the Electoral College but not chosen by the legislature” was “unheard of” at the time. So was the idea of “staggered terms” and a “bicameral congress.”

“So the accumulation of power, the centralization of government is limited,” Levin explains.

To hear more of his explanation on the brilliant and effective system of government designed by our forefathers, watch the clip above.

Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The Best Thing For America Would Be A Donald Trump Blowout

The best outcome for justice, democracy, and Americans' everyday living would be not just a Trump win but an absolute landslide.

Trimming the opposition, one election at a time



I’ve often reflected on Donald Trump’s charge that massive fraud occurred during the 2020 presidential election. While I’m not convinced the opposition cheated enough to change the outcome, I do agree with J.R. Dunn at American Thinker, who argues, “We’re not going to debate whether cheating in fact occurred in 2020 — the only ones who dispute that at this point are the bought, the braindead, and the comatose.”

My acceptance of this view stems largely from the behavior of Democratic Party operatives since 2020. They have used highly questionable tactics to influence election outcomes, including flooding the country with millions of illegal immigrants brought here as potential Democratic voters. In fact, Democrats have already started registering some of these new arrivals, who, grateful for benefits like living expenses, medical care, food, and shelter, are likely to vote in their favor.

The ruling left’s ideal outcome would involve the complete elimination of genuine opposition, leaving only allies or powerless coalition partners.

In states controlled by Democrats or those they are close to controlling, such as my home state of Pennsylvania, voter ID requirements are being removed. This change aims to enable individuals who shouldn’t have voting rights to cast ballots. Similarly, in 2020, ballots were widely mailed to addresses where registered voters once lived but may no longer reside. Democratic operatives likely visited these addresses to fill out ballots, while unguarded drop boxes in Democratic areas were reportedly filled with pro-Biden ballots late at night.

Recently, the Department of Justice has attempted to prevent Republican governors from removing noncitizens from voter rolls, as seen in a widely publicized case in Virginia. Congressional Democrats also strongly oppose limiting voting to only citizens, aligning with the party’s support for massive illegal immigration — essentially importing future Democratic voters.

These practices recall the “salami tactics” communist operatives used in Eastern Europe after World War II, which allowed them to gain power through seemingly constitutional means. Instead of the deep state and corporate media, as in today’s context, communists like Matyas Rakosi in Hungary and Klement Gottwald in Czechoslovakia relied on the Red Army to break up their democratic opposition.

Some of these gradualist tactics, pioneered by communist takeover strategists, echo what our Democratic Party and similar woke leftist parties in Europe are already doing. Much like today’s Democrats, the communists worked relentlessly to delegitimize any party to their right, including agrarian groups, nationalists, and even social democrats, labeling them as fascists and Nazis.

Much like slicing a salami, the political spectrum was gradually narrowed to the communists and their willing collaborators. These collaborators bear a striking resemblance to today's neoconservatives, who now seek favor with Kamala Harris and Tim Walz while denouncing Trump and MAGA Republicans as neo-Nazis.

The totalitarian left has long perfected the art of marginalizing opposition. During their rise to power, the communists welcomed bourgeois progressives, the Eastern and Central European equivalents of figures like George Will, Ken Adelman, John Bolton, Robert Kagan, and Dick and Liz Cheney. Applying “salami tactics,” they outlawed noncompliant parties and, where possible, jailed their leaders as “fascists.” This approach mirrors how today’s media and Democrats treat MAGA Republicans, whom President Biden recently denounced as “garbage.” The ruling left’s ideal outcome would involve the complete elimination of genuine opposition, leaving only allies or powerless coalition partners.

A future Democratic administration led by Harris and Walz could closely resemble the old communist model. The Democrats have already proposed measures like packing the Supreme Court with loyalists, granting statehood to the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico to secure additional Senate seats, and federalizing elections while removing voter ID requirements — all under the guise of “saving our democracy.”

Meanwhile, Harris, Walz, and sympathetic media outlets express concern about allowing “disinformation” to circulate without government oversight. The totalitarian left, whether in the modern West or the former Soviet bloc, has always sought to throttle unwanted dissent.

That said, our homegrown version of leftist totalitarianism looks a lot kinkier than what the communists established. Unlike puritanical communist rule, our post-democratic regime is already abolishing gender distinctions, pushing gender-altering surgery for minors, and glorifying homosexual relations. This new form of the totalitarian left would be less about government ownership of resources than reconstructing social and moral behavior and rewarding parasitic capitalists who support those in power.

Although history never repeats itself exactly, troubling trends often have an unfortunate tendency to rhyme.

Kamala Harris’ Unity Speech Was Riddled With Division, Delusion

As Harris again and again painted Trump as a tyrant, she insisted that it was 'time to stop pointing fingers ... and start locking arms.'

New York Voter Delivers Two-Word Response When MSNBC Asks If ‘Threat To Democracy’ Attack On Trump Resonates

'It feels political to me'