The Future of Welding Jobs in the United States: An Evolution, Not an Extinction

 

The Future of Welding Jobs in the United States: An Evolution, Not an Extinction

The image of a welder, masked and surrounded by a shower of sparks, is one of America’s most enduring industrial icons. For decades, this skilled trade has been the bedrock of construction, manufacturing, and infrastructure, building everything from skyscrapers and bridges to cars and ships. However, in an era defined by automation, artificial intelligence, and the rise of the service economy, many wonder what lies ahead for this foundational profession. The future of welding jobs in the United States is not one of obsolescence but of profound transformation. It is a story of technological integration, a pressing skills gap, and a redefinition of the welder’s role from a manual laborer to a highly skilled technologist.

The Demand Driver: An Infrastructure on the Brink

Contrary to perceptions of decline, the fundamental demand for welding is robust and, in many sectors, growing. The primary catalyst is the aging American infrastructure. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) consistently gives the nation’s infrastructure a mediocre grade, highlighting the critical need for repair and modernization. From rebuilding crumbling bridges and water systems to modernizing the energy grid and expanding public transit, these massive projects are welded together. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, with its historic investments, is injecting billions into these sectors, guaranteeing a steady pipeline of large-scale construction projects that will require thousands of skilled welders for years to come.

Beyond infrastructure, other key industries continue to drive demand. The aerospace sector demands welders capable of working with exotic alloys and tolerances thinner than a human hair for spacecraft and advanced aircraft. The energy sector, both traditional and renewable, is a major employer. While oil and gas pipeline projects fluctuate, the boom in liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facilities creates a need for highly specialized welders. Simultaneously, the renewable energy revolution depends on welders to construct the massive steel towers for wind turbines and the frameworks for solar farms. Even in automotive manufacturing, while robotic welding dominates assembly lines, human welders remain essential for prototyping, custom fabrication, and repair.

The Technological Transformation: Robotics, Automation, and Augmentation

The most significant force reshaping the welding profession is technology. The fear that robots will completely replace human welders is an oversimplification. The reality is more nuanced: automation is changing the nature of welding work.

Robotic welding arms are now commonplace in factories, performing repetitive, high-volume welds with unparalleled speed and consistency. This has undoubtedly reduced the number of manual welders on certain production lines. However, this automation creates new, often higher-skilled, jobs. These robots need to be programmed, maintained, calibrated, and supervised. This gives rise to roles like welding robot programmers and technicians—individuals who must understand both the principles of welding metallurgy and the complexities of robotics and computer programming.

Furthermore, technology is augmenting the capabilities of human welders themselves. Advanced processes like Friction Stir Welding and Laser Hybrid Welding offer greater strength and efficiency but require sophisticated setup and monitoring. Welders are increasingly using technology to enhance precision and quality. Augmented Reality (AR) helmets can project digital blueprints or welding parameters directly onto the welder’s visor, eliminating errors and reducing setup time. Real-time monitoring systems use sensors to track arc characteristics and seam tracking, providing instant feedback and creating data logs for quality assurance.

The welder of the future will not just hold a torch; they will operate a complex digital-physical system. Their value will shift from pure manual dexterity to a blend of hands-on skill, technical problem-solving, and digital literacy.

The Human Factor: The Crippling Skills Gap and Demographic Shift

Paradoxically, even as technology advances, the single greatest challenge facing the industry is a human one: a severe and worsening skills gap. A large wave of experienced welders, part of the Baby Boomer generation, is retiring, taking decades of irreplaceable knowledge with them. The Manufacturing Institute estimates that millions of manufacturing jobs, including a significant portion of welding positions, could go unfilled in the coming years due to this skills gap.

This crisis presents an immense opportunity for the next generation. The narrative that pushed students exclusively toward four-year college degrees has begun to shift. There is a growing recognition of the value, stability, and high earning potential of skilled trades. Welding, in particular, offers a career path that is both hands-on and intellectually demanding, with salaries for certified welders, especially in specialized fields like underwater welding or nuclear pipe welding, often reaching well into six figures.

The challenge and the opportunity lie in attracting and training new talent. This requires a multi-pronged approach:

1. Enhanced Vocational Training: High schools and technical colleges must revitalize their welding programs, integrating lessons on robotics and automation alongside traditional stick, MIG, and TIG welding.

2. Industry-Education Partnerships: Companies must actively partner with training institutions to ensure curricula are aligned with real-world needs, offering apprenticeships and on-the-job training.

3. Rebranding the Trade: The perception of welding as a "dirty" and low-tech job must be overhauled. Marketing it as a "advanced manufacturing career" or "materials joining technology" can help attract digitally-native youth who might be interested in the tech aspects of the job.

The Future Job Market: Specialization and Diversification

The welding job market of the future will be increasingly stratified and specialized. The era of the generic welder is fading. Employers will seek candidates with specific certifications and competencies.

High-Skill Specialists The highest demand and wages will be for welders who can work on complex projects. This includes pipe welders for power plants, welder-fitters for custom metal fabrication, and those certified in advanced aerospace standards. Their work involves reading complex blueprints, understanding metallurgy, and adhering to strict quality control protocols.

Technician-Hybrids: As discussed, roles that blend welding knowledge with other skills will proliferate. A welding technician may be responsible for maintaining automated cells, while a welding inspector might use ultrasonic or x-ray technology to certify welds.

The Resilience of Custom and Repair Work: Certain domains are inherently resistant to full automation. Artistic metalworking, custom automotive fabrication, and critical repair work (e.g., on heavy equipment or in remote locations) require the adaptability, problem-solving skills, and artistic touch of a human welder. These niche areas will remain strongholds for skilled artisans.

Conclusion: A Bright, But Different, Future

The future of welding in the United States is not a dim one. The sparks will continue to fly, but they will often be guided by code, monitored by sensors, and executed by professionals who are as comfortable with a tablet as they are with a torch. The profession is evolving from a purely manual trade into a technology-integrated craft.

The demand driven by infrastructure renewal and advanced manufacturing is undeniable. The threat of automation is real but is better understood as a shift in job requirements rather than pure job elimination. The most pressing issue is the human capital pipeline. The success of this transition hinges on the nation's ability to attract, train, and certify a new generation of welders—individuals who see themselves not as relics of a bygone industrial age, but as critical technologists building the physical framework of America’s future. For those with the skill and adaptability to embrace this new reality, a rewarding and prosperous career awaits, ensuring that the vital art of joining metal remains a cornerstone of American strength for decades to come.

 #Jobs #Welding

Trump Is Possibly About To End A War Biden Ignored and Fueled With Our Money

 

Biden sent Ukraine BILLIONS. He didn't talk to Putin the last 3.5 years of his Administration and 6K to 7K young Men were being slautered weekly. However, in less than one year Trump is on the verge of getting a peace deal out of this mess. If Kamala Harris had won we would still be sending BILLIONS to Ukraine and NOT talking to Russia, nor shut down Iran.

"Stop listening to the noise"... ~ Mike Gallagher

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine stands as one of the most tragic and consequential geopolitical crises of the 21st century. A sober analysis of the approaches taken by the Biden and Trump administrations reveals starkly different philosophies on international engagement and conflict resolution. While the previous administration pursued a path of financial commitment and diplomatic isolation, the current administration is demonstrating that a strategy of direct dialogue and strategic leverage can yield tangible progress toward peace.

For over three years, the Biden administration’s policy was defined by two parallel tracks: substantial financial and military aid to Ukraine and a near-total diplomatic freeze with Russia. The United States committed billions of taxpayer dollars to support the Ukrainian war effort, a policy framed as necessary to check aggression and uphold a rules-based international order. However, this approach coincided with a period of horrific stalemate. As reports indicated, thousands of young men were being slaughtered weekly in a brutal war of attrition, with neither side able to secure a decisive victory. The human cost was catastrophic, and the prospect of a negotiated peace seemed distant.

Concurrently, the decision to eschew direct, high-level communication with Moscow represented a significant strategic choice. The logic was to isolate Vladimir Putin and deny his regime the legitimacy of dialogue. Yet, critics argued that this absence of communication created a dangerous vacuum. Without open channels, the risk of miscalculation escalated, and opportunities to de-escalate or explore potential diplomatic off-ramps were lost. The policy effectively became one of managing a protracted conflict rather than actively pursuing its conclusion. A hypothetical continuation of this strategy under a different leadership would have likely seen this status quo persist: continued billions in aid flowing to Ukraine, no substantive talks with Russia, and a continuing, devastating loss of life.

The shift in approach under the Trump administration has been dramatic and instructive. From the outset, President Trump prioritized re-opening direct lines of communication with the Kremlin. This was not an act of capitulation, but a pragmatic recognition that you cannot end a war without talking to the party you are fighting. By engaging Putin directly, Trump has been able to establish a baseline of dialogue, however contentious, that was previously nonexistent. This communication is the essential first step toward any potential negotiation.

Furthermore, the administration has wielded a more complex and, arguably, more effective form of leverage. While maintaining support for Ukraine’s ability to defend itself, the Trump administration has simultaneously applied intense diplomatic and economic pressure on the regimes that enable Russian aggression, most notably Iran. By taking a harder line and implementing crippling sanctions on Iran, the administration has sought to strangle the flow of drones and military technology that have been vital to Russia's war effort. This multi-front pressure campaign aims to alter the cost-benefit analysis for the Kremlin in a way that simply funding one side of the conflict does not.

The results of this strategic pivot are now becoming visible. In less than a year, the administration is reportedly on the verge of brokering a framework for peace talks. This is a monumental achievement that seemed impossible just twelve months ago. It suggests that a strategy combining unwavering strength with pragmatic diplomacy can create the conditions for conflict resolution. The contrast is clear: one approach funded a war; the other is actively, and demonstrably, working to end it.

This divergence in outcomes stems from a fundamental philosophical difference in how to wield American power. The previous strategy was rooted in a post-Cold War idealism that often prioritizes ideological confrontation over pragmatic problem-solving. It operated on the assumption that isolating an adversary and supporting its opponents militarily would eventually force capitulation. The tragic reality in Ukraine has shown the limits of this theory, as it led to a bloody stalemate with no clear path to victory for either side.

The current strategy, by contrast, is a return to a more realist school of foreign policy. It understands that international relations are driven by interests and leverage. It recognizes that talking to an adversary is not a reward; it is a tool. By engaging directly with Russia while simultaneously constraining its resources, the administration is creating a scenario where a negotiated settlement becomes the most attractive option for all parties involved, however imperfect that settlement may be. This is not peace at any price, but peace through strength and strategic negotiation.

The human toll of the conflict makes this diplomatic progress not just a political victory, but a moral imperative. The weekly slaughter of thousands of young men is an unbearable tragedy. Any policy that prolongs this suffering without a realistic plan for ending it must be re-evaluated. The current administration’s push for a peace deal, however nascent, is fundamentally aimed at stopping the bleeding and saving lives. It acknowledges the grim reality that while principles are vital, the preservation of human life is paramount.

In conclusion, the evolving situation in Ukraine offers a critical lesson in statecraft. The policy of open-ended financial support coupled with diplomatic silence failed to produce a peaceful resolution and coincided with a period of immense human suffering. The alternative approach—prioritizing direct dialogue, applying multi-faceted pressure, and leveraging American influence to broker a deal—is now demonstrating its efficacy. As the world watches, the United States under President Trump appears to be steering a once-intractable conflict away from the battlefield and toward the negotiating table. This is a testament to the power of a strategy that combines strength with diplomacy, and a sobering reminder that sometimes, to end a war, you must be willing to talk to your enemies. 

#Peace #Ukraine #Russia #Zelensky #Putin #Trump

Former congressional staffer accused of faking politically motivated attack

Natalie Greene faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted.

#CongressionalStaffer #FakeAttack #NatalieGreene #JusseSmollet 

The 2008 Housing Crisis and The Credit Default Swap

 

 

The 2008 Housing Crisis and The Credit Default Swap

The Credit Default Swap was a financial product that gave financial leverage to support the Sub Prime Loans. They knew the default rate would be higher than other types of loans. They were high risk since the buyer only had to basically have a SSN. No income had to be proved, and buyers didn't have to be 'qualified'. This financial product involved taking VA, Conventional, FHA, Freddy MAC, etc and combined Sub Prime Loans, as if they were put into a shredder and distributed the 'payments/paper to different banks like confetti. Those payments were spread out to cover the possible and inevitable losses from the default rate of the Sub Prime loans. When the default rate went to an unsustainable level the 'confetti' turned to 'sand' the crash followed. Ironically only 9% of mortgages at the time of the crash were Sub Prime Loans. The 'Perception' of the housing crash hit the entire system.

THE CREDIT DEFAULT SWAP

The housing crisis is one of the most significant financial disasters to hit the United States in recent years. It had far-reaching consequences, including millions of families losing their homes, a sharp decline in the housing market, and a global economic recession. This crisis was caused by a variety of factors, including the actions of political leaders such as Bill Clinton and George Bush, as well as corporate entities like AIG.

During the Clinton administration, the government began to take steps to increase homeownership rates, particularly among minority groups. The Clinton administration implemented a series of policies aimed at expanding access to credit for those who may not have otherwise qualified for traditional mortgages. These policies included the Community Reinvestment Act, which required banks to make loans in the communities they served, regardless of the borrower's creditworthiness. This policy incentivized banks to offer subprime mortgages, which are mortgages given to people with poor credit.

While the goal of these policies was to increase homeownership rates, the unintended consequences were severe. Banks began to offer subprime mortgages to people who were unlikely to be able to repay them, leading to a massive increase in risky lending practices. Additionally, financial institutions began bundling these risky mortgages together and selling them as securities, further exacerbating the problem.

The Bush administration also played a significantly role in the housing crisis. In 2002, President Bush signed the American Dream Downpayment Act, which provided down payment assistance to low-income homebuyers. This policy encouraged more people to take on mortgages that they couldn't afford. Additionally, the Bush administration pushed for deregulation of the financial industry, which allowed banks and other financial institutions to take on more risk and engage in more risky lending practices.

AIG, one of the world's largest insurance companies, also played a role in the housing crisis. AIG sold credit default swaps, which are essentially insurance policies that protect investors from losses due to defaults on mortgage-backed securities. However, when the housing market collapsed, many of these securities defaulted, and AIG was left on the hook for billions of dollars in losses. The government ultimately had to bail out AIG, which cost taxpayers over $180 billion.

In conclusion, the housing crisis was caused by a variety of factors, including government policies aimed at increasing homeownership rates, deregulation of the financial industry, and risky lending practices by banks and other financial institutions. The actions of political leaders like Bill Clinton and George Bush, as well as corporate entities like AIG, all played a role in the crisis. It is essential to learn from these mistakes and take steps to ensure that a similar crisis does not happen again in the future.

A credit default swap (CDS) is a financial instrument that is used to hedge against the risk of default on a debt security. Essentially, a CDS is a type of insurance policy that pays out if the underlying security defaults.

The way a CDS works is that two parties enter into a contract. The buyer of the CDS agrees to make periodic payments to the seller of the CDS, in exchange for the seller agreeing to pay out in the event of a default on the underlying security. The buyer of the CDS is essentially taking out insurance on the security, hoping to protect themselves against the risk of default.

The underlying security in a CDS can be a bond, a mortgage-backed security, or any other type of debt instrument. If the issuer of the underlying security defaults, the buyer of the CDS can receive a payment from the seller of the CDS, typically equal to the face value of the security.

CDSs became popular in the early 2000s as a way for investors to hedge against the risk of default on mortgage-backed securities. Mortgage-backed securities are pools of mortgages that are packaged together and sold to investors. If enough of the mortgages in the pool default, the value of the security can plummet, leading to significant losses for investors.

Investors who held mortgage-backed securities could use CDSs to hedge against this risk. By buying a CDS on the mortgage-backed security, they could protect themselves against the risk of default, even if the mortgages in the pool started to go bad.

However, the use of CDSs also contributed to the financial crisis of 2008. Many financial institutions had sold CDSs on mortgage-backed securities, essentially taking on the risk of default themselves. When the housing market collapsed and many of the mortgages in the pools began to default, the sellers of the CDSs were left on the hook for massive losses. This led to the collapse of some of the largest financial institutions, including AIG, which had sold billions of dollars worth of CDSs.

In summary, a credit default swap is a financial instrument used to hedge against the risk of default on a debt security. While they can be useful for investors looking to protect themselves against default risk, the use of CDSs also contributed to the financial crisis of 2008.

#housingcrisis #BillClinton #AIG #creditdefaultswap #creditcrunch #2008financialcrisis #GeorgeWBush

Foods For Healthy, Supple Skin

 

Foods for Healthy, Supple Skin

#Healthcare #Skincare #Fitness #Health

OKLAHOMA COLD CASES: Marylyn Teresa Theriault

  

OKLAHOMA COLD CASES

Marylyn Teresa Theriault was found murdered in Sayre, Oklahoma on August 7, 1982. She was twenty-two years old. 

Marylyn, born July 16th, 1960, was from Nashua, New Hampshire. Reports indicate that she had last been seen alive at an Amarillo, Texas truck stop the night before she was found. She had no known ties to Oklahoma. 

The circumstances of how Marylyn was found are unknown, however what we do know is that her death was brutal. She was found in the Red River, under a bridge on I-40, at mile #23, about a mile southeast of Sayre.  Marylyn was unclothed and had either had intercourse or been sexually assaulted shortly before her death. She was found with duct tape wrapped around her face, up to the bridge of her nose, and her ankles were bound by the same tape. Marylyn had duct tape around her left wrist, indicating that she had either been bound at one point by the wrists, or that her killer attempted to do so. She had multiple contusions and abrasions on her face and body. Her cause of death was two-fold, asphyxiation by the duct tape wrapped around her face and she had also been strangled via ligature. All indications are that Marylyn fought her killer for her life. 

No one has ever been charged with the murder of Marylyn Teresa Theriault. 

If you have any information regarding the murder of Marylyn, please contact the OSBI at 800-522-8017. You can remain anonymous.

MORE ON THE STORY

A More Indepth Look

Of all the places in the world, what was Marylyn Teresa Theriault doing in Sayre, Oklahoma? It is a question that has hung in the dusty, hot air for over four decades, unanswered and haunting. Marylyn, a twenty-two-year-old woman from Nashua, New Hampshire, was a stranger in that landscape. Her life was brutally severed on August 7, 1982, her body discovered in the Red River, under a bridge on I-40, a mile southeast of a town to which she had no known ties. Her story is not just a cold case file gathering dust; it is a stark portrait of a life interrupted, a family’s enduring grief, and a stark reminder that justice delayed is a weight carried across generations.

Born on July 16, 1960, Marylyn was a daughter of the Northeast, a world away from the arid plains of Western Oklahoma. The last confirmed sighting of her alive was at a truck stop in Amarillo, Texas, the night before she was found. That image—a young woman at a crossroads of the nation, the humming, transient world of the interstate—is the last clear picture we have. Everything after descends into a darkness punctuated by violence. How did she travel the nearly 200 miles from Amarillo to that lonely stretch of I-40? Who did she meet? The highway, a ribbon of concrete connecting lives and livelihoods, became for her a pathway to a predator.

The crime scene reveals a horror that time cannot diminish. Marylyn was found unclothed, discarded in the river. The evidence suggests a savage and personal attack. She had duct tape wrapped around her face, up to the bridge of her nose, a cruel gag that also became the instrument of her asphyxiation. Her ankles were bound by the same tape, and a strip around her left wrist indicated she had been restrained or that her killer had attempted to bind her hands. She was also strangled with a ligature, a chilling redundancy of violence that speaks to a killer’s determination. The multiple contusions and abrasions on her face and body are not just clinical details; they are the silent testimony of a fierce struggle. Marylyn did not go quietly. She fought her killer for her life, scratching, kicking, and resisting with every ounce of her strength against an overwhelming and brutal force.

This is a crucial part of her story. She was not a passive victim but a young woman who confronted her murderer with courage. In those final, terrifying moments, her will to live was etched onto her own body. Yet, her fight was not enough. Her life was stolen, and her body was left under a bridge, a place meant for passing through, not for endings.

For over forty years, the case of Marylyn Theriault has remained in the ledger of the unsolved. No arrest has been made. No one has been held accountable for snuffing out her future—a future that might have held a career, a family, a lifetime of moments both ordinary and extraordinary. The solitude of that crime scene has been replaced by the solitude of a forgotten file, a tragedy known only to a dwindling circle of family, dedicated investigators, and those who stumble upon her story online.

The pain of an unsolved murder is a unique and enduring torment for a family. It is a wound that never closes, a question mark that follows them through holidays, birthdays, and anniversaries. There is no closure, no finality, only the agonizing void of the unknown. The family of Marylyn Theriault has carried this burden since 1982. They have lived with the knowledge that the person who did this to their daughter, their sister, their friend, has walked free, their secret buried, their conscience—if they have one—untroubled by the scales of justice.

But the passage of time does not have to mean the erosion of hope. In fact, it can be an ally. Alliances shift, loyalties fracture, and the heavy weight of a terrible secret can become too much for a conscience to bear, even after decades. The person who committed this crime may have confided in someone. They may have exhibited suspicious behavior in the days following August 7, 1982. They may have left a clue, a fragment of a story, that seemed insignificant at the time but now, viewed through the lens of a determined investigation, could be the key that unlocks the truth.

This is where the collective conscience of the public becomes vital. Someone, somewhere, knows something. It might be a memory of a conversation overheard, a recollection of a person boasting or acting strangely, a detail about a vehicle, or a piece of clothing. It might be a story passed down in whispers, a "skeleton in the closet" of an acquaintance or even a family member. That piece of information, no matter how small it may seem, is the thread that could unravel this entire mystery.

The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) continues to seek information. Their plea is a direct line to justice. By calling 800-522-8017, a person can provide that crucial thread. They can do so anonymously, without fear of exposure or repercussion. This is not an act of betrayal; it is an act of profound courage and moral clarity. It is a stand for a young woman who was denied the chance to stand for herself.

Marylyn Teresa Theriault was more than a victim. She was a person with a past and a future that was stolen. Her case is a solemn promise that every life matters and that no one is entitled to vanish into the anonymity of a cold case file. For her, and for the family that still waits for answers, we must not look away. We must remember her name, share her story, and urge anyone with even the slightest information to come forward. The bridge on I-40 may have been the end of her journey, but it does not have to be the end of the search for truth. Justice for Marylyn is four decades overdue. It is a debt that must be paid.

 #SilenceIsBetrayal #Oklahoma #Sayre #NewHampshire #Nashua #Unsolved #ColdCase #OklahomaColdCases

Crocket called out for connecting Lee Zeldin, GOP to wrong Jeffrey Epstein: Robby Soave | RISING

 

Democrats don't do the research before they RUN THEY 'MOUFFFS'!!! [Someone in Texas actually voted for her]

Crocket called out for connecting Lee Zeldin, GOP to wrong Jeffrey Epstein

The Smear Campaign Playbook: How the Left Tries to Tarnish Conservatives with Guilt by Fictional Association

In the high-stakes arena of modern politics, where narratives are weaponized and truth is often the first casualty, a familiar and pernicious tactic has once again reared its head. A recent incident involving Congressman Jasmine Crocket (D-TX) serves as a textbook case of the left’s preferred strategy: the political smear built on a foundation of hasty assumptions and guilt by association. As reported by Robby Soave, Crocket attempted to connect Republican Congressman Lee Zeldin to the notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. There was only one, rather significant, problem: she had the wrong Jeffrey Epstein.

This was not a minor clerical error. It was a deliberate, public attempt to tarnish a political opponent by linking him to the most heinous of criminals, an effort that collapsed under the slightest scrutiny. The incident is far more than a simple gaffe; it is a microcosm of the progressive left’s entire approach to political discourse. When you cannot win on the strength of your ideas, when your policies have failed and your leadership is found wanting, the fallback is always the same: destroy the character of your opponent with baseless insinuation and hope the mud sticks long enough to sway the uninformed.

The facts of the case are clear and damning for Congresswoman Crocket. In her zeal to attack Lee Zeldin, she cited a campaign donation from a “Jeffrey Epstein.” This Jeffrey Epstein, however, was a 70-year-old man from Santa Monica, California, with no connection to the deceased financier and convicted sex offender. The two individuals share nothing but a common name. This is the digital age equivalent of blaming every John Smith for the actions of a single criminal who shares his name. It is a reckless abandonment of due diligence, a failure of basic journalistic and congressional responsibility that would be unforgivable in any other context. Yet, in today’s political climate, it is a standard operating procedure for the left.

This episode is not an isolated incident. It is part of a well-funded, media-amplified ecosystem dedicated to smearing conservatives. We saw it with the debunked Steele Dossier, a piece of opposition research laundered through the FBI and the media to falsely allege collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. We see it in the constant, lazy attempts to label every conservative policy—from voter ID laws to border security—as inherently racist. The goal is never to engage in good-faith debate on the merits of school choice, energy independence, or economic deregulation. The goal is to short-circuit the debate entirely by branding one’s opponents as morally monstrous. By linking Lee Zeldin, even erroneously, to Jeffrey Epstein, the intended message was not about policy; it was to paint him as corrupt, depraved, and unfit for public office. It is character assassination, plain and simple.

This tactic is particularly grotesque given the very real and bipartisan connections between the *actual* Jeffrey Epstein and powerful figures, many of whom reside in liberal circles. The flight logs, the well-documented friendships with figures like Bill Clinton, the curious donations and associations—these are matters of public record that deserve intense scrutiny. Yet, the same media figures and politicians who fell over themselves to amplify Congresswoman Crocket’s error often display a curious lack of interest in pursuing these leads with the same vigor. The unspoken rule is clear: connections to elites on the left are downplayed or ignored, while any potential—or in this case, fabricated—connection to a conservative is amplified into a scandal of existential proportions.

This double standard is the engine of the smear campaign. It relies on a compliant media class that functions not as an impartial Fourth Estate, but as the public relations arm of the Democratic Party. A conservative’s misstatement is a “lie” that dominates the news cycle for days; a progressive’s factual error about a matter as serious as linking someone to a sex trafficker is dismissed as a simple mistake, a “nothingburger,” or is quickly memory-holed. The initial smear is blasted across headlines and social media, achieving the desired effect of poisoning the public well. The subsequent correction, if it comes at all, is buried on page A17. This creates an asymmetrical information war where conservatives are perpetually playing defense, forced to clear their names from baseless accusations while their accusers face zero accountability.

The conservative philosophy stands in stark opposition to this toxic model. It is a philosophy built on principles of individual responsibility, due process, and the rule of law. We believe that a person should be judged by their own character and actions, not by the actions of someone who shares their name, their ethnicity, or their political party. We believe in the foundational legal principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty, a concept that the modern left has utterly abandoned in the court of public opinion. The rush to judgment, the trial by Twitter, the destruction of reputations based on anonymous allegations—these are the tools of a mob, not a society dedicated to ordered liberty.

For the Republican Party and the conservative movement, the response to such smears must be twofold. First, we must continue to call them out with speed, force, and clarity. We cannot allow falsehoods to metastasize unchallenged. The work of journalists like Robby Soave in immediately fact-checking this claim is vital, and conservatives must amplify these corrections relentlessly. We must demand accountability and apologies, though they will rarely be offered.

Second, and more importantly, we must refuse to be drawn into the left’s game. Our focus must remain on articulating a positive, hopeful vision for America’s future. We must talk about the issues that truly matter to American families: an economy freed from the shackles of inflation and regulation, an education system that empowers parents and teaches children how to think—not what to think, a nation with secure borders and safe streets, and a foreign policy that projects strength and deters aggression. We win by offering a compelling alternative to the failure and cynicism of the progressive project, not by slinging mud in return.

The attempt to connect Lee Zeldin to the wrong Jeffrey Epstein is a small story in the grand scheme of things, but it is a telling one. It reveals the intellectual bankruptcy and moral vacuity of a political movement that has run out of ideas. It shows us that for our opponents, politics is not a battle of philosophies; it is a blood sport where truth is irrelevant and destruction is the goal. Conservatives must be better. We must fight back against the smears, but we must never become what we oppose. Our mission is to restore a nation where character counts, truth matters, and individuals are judged by their deeds, not by the malicious fictions of their political enemies.

#Crocket #Epstein #Hypocracy #JasmineCrocket 

Plaskett remains defiant over Epstein communications

 Rep. Stacey Plaskett, D-V.I.

Plaskett remains defiant over Epstein communications

She was texting Epstein during a congressional hearing in 2019, files showed.

The Virgin Islands delegate defended her contact with the convicted sex offender.

Can you imagine if a Republican was texting Jeffery Epstein seeking advice on what to ask Michael Cohen during a hearing?!?!

#Epstein #MichaelCohen #RepStaceyPlaskettDVI #StaceyPlaskett

The Senate had a Hearing today on ICE and Immigration Enforcement. Not a single Democrat showed up. I guess the truth hurts.

 

The Senate had a Hearing today on ICE and Immigration Enforcement. Not a single Democrat showed up. I guess the truth hurts.

The Empty Chairs: How Democratic Absenteeism Exposes a Reckless Agenda on Immigration

The theater of American governance often reveals its most profound truths not in the speeches that are given, but in the chairs that remain empty. This was the case at a recent Senate hearing on ICE and Immigration Enforcement, where a powerful and telling spectacle unfolded: not a single Democrat on the committee bothered to show up. The gavels fell, the witnesses testified, and the cameras rolled, but across the dais, a row of vacant seats spoke louder than any prepared statement ever could. As the post succinctly put it, “I guess the truth hurts.” This was not a scheduling conflict; it was a deliberate, calculated boycott. It was a physical manifestation of the modern Democratic Party’s platform on border security: a policy of willful ignorance, a refusal to engage with the catastrophic consequences of their own ideology, and a blatant contempt for the American citizens who are paying the price.

This boycott is not an isolated incident of political petulance. It is the logical endpoint of a years-long strategy to dismantle the very concept of immigration enforcement and national sovereignty. The Democratic Party has undergone a radical transformation on this issue. It was not long ago that leaders like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton spoke of the need for “secure borders” and referred to illegal immigration as a potentially “depressant on wages” for American workers. Today, that party is gone. It has been replaced by a movement that vilifies ICE agents as jackbooted thugs, advocates for the abolition of borders altogether, and labels any attempt to enforce existing law as inherently racist. Showing up to a hearing on immigration enforcement would force them to confront the real-world results of this agenda—results so devastating that they are politically inescapable. It is far easier to simply not show up than to explain why their policies have led to chaos, crisis, and death.

The “truth” that the post suggests is too painful for Democrats to hear is a multi-faceted catastrophe. It is the truth of the fentanyl crisis, a scourge that is now the leading cause of death for Americans aged 18 to 45. This poison is not arriving via postal mail; it is being smuggled in vast quantities across our catastrophically open southern border by cartels that operate with impunity. Every day that our borders remain unsecured is a day that these criminal empires grow richer and more powerful, and more American families are shattered by loss. A hearing on ICE would have to confront the heroic work of these agents in intercepting these deadly drugs, a narrative that directly contradicts the progressive fantasy that enforcement is the real evil.

It is the truth of the victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants who have been released into American communities. While the vast majority of those crossing seek a better life, the refusal to vet and properly detain arrivals has inevitably led to preventable tragedies. The stories of individuals like Kate Steinle, or the countless victims of repeat offenders who were released due to sanctuary city policies, are an indelible stain on the record of those who have engineered this crisis. To sit in that hearing would be to sit in judgment of a policy that has prioritized the rights of those who broke our laws over the safety of those who are here legally.

Furthermore, it is the truth of the historic, deliberate abuse of our asylum system. The current administration’s policies have effectively signaled to the world that anyone who arrives at the border and utters the magic word “asylum” will be released into the United States, often with a work permit, for years as their case languishes in a backlogged court system. This is not compassion; it is an orchestrated incentive program that has overwhelmed border communities, strained social services in cities across the nation, and created a humanitarian disaster that benefits no one except human traffickers and cartels. Democrats did not want to face questions about why they support a system that encourages parents to risk their children’s lives on a perilous journey, only to be often exploited and abused upon arrival.

The empty chairs also represent a profound disrespect for the rule of law. ICE and CBP agents are not rogue actors; they are public servants tasked with enforcing laws passed by Congress. By refusing to even participate in the oversight of these agencies, Senate Democrats are expressing their contempt for the laws they themselves are sworn to uphold. They have decided that if they do not like a law, they will not enforce it, and they will not even deign to oversee its enforcement. This is an attack on the very foundation of our constitutional order. It establishes a dangerous precedent where the executive and legislative branches can simply ignore their duties when they find them politically inconvenient, creating a system not of laws, but of men—and worse, of political activists.

This dereliction of duty is compounded by the stark contrast in leadership. The post makes a pointed comparison regarding economic investment, noting the paltry sum brought in by the current administration versus the historic investments secured by the previous one. This is not a separate issue; it is part of the same philosophical whole. A nation that cannot control its borders is a nation that cannot command respect on the world stage. The anarchy at the southern border projects weakness and incompetence, undermining our geopolitical standing and making us a less attractive partner for investment. The message from the previous administration was one of strength, sovereignty, and economic dynamism, which attracted capital and created prosperity. The message from the current one is one of chaos and open-ended dependency, which repels investment and fuels inflation.

The conservative vision for immigration stands in stark, principled opposition to this Democratic abdication. It is not, as its opponents maliciously claim, an anti-immigrant vision. It is a pro-legal-immigration, pro-rule-of-law, and pro-American-worker vision. It begins with a simple, non-negotiable premise: the border must be secured. This means completing the wall where it is effective, leveraging technology for full situational awareness, and empowering Border Patrol and ICE to do their jobs without political interference. It means ending the catch-and-release loophole and reinstating policies like Remain in Mexico to stop the flow of economic migrants fraudulently claiming asylum.

Secondly, we must fix our legal immigration system. The current, convoluted process incentivizes illegal entry. We should move to a merit-based system, like those in Canada and Australia, that prioritizes immigrants who have the skills, education, and drive to contribute to our economy and assimilate into our civic culture. This is fair to those waiting in line legally, and it is beneficial for the United States.

Finally, we must end the magnet of illegal employment by mandating the use of E-Verify for all businesses. When jobs dry up for those who are here illegally, the incentive to make the dangerous journey will plummet. This protects American workers from having their wages undercut and ensures that everyone playing by the rules has a fair shot.

The empty chairs in that Senate hearing room were a confession. They confessed that the Democratic Party has no answers for the crisis they helped create. They confessed that their policies cannot withstand public scrutiny. And they confessed that they have abandoned their constitutional duty to provide for the common defense and ensure domestic tranquility. The American people are not blind. They see the chaos, they feel the economic pain, and they mourn the victims. They understand that a party that refuses to even show up for the job has forfeited its right to lead. The truth doesn’t just hurt; it exposes. And it has exposed the modern Democratic Party as fundamentally unserious, dangerously ideological, and utterly unfit to steward the security and sovereignty of the United States of America.

#Democrats #ICE #Immigration