To see leftist podcasters, comedians, and commentators laugh about political assassination as though it’s entertainment and the destruction of a human life is a punchline, is beyond disgusting. My husband, Charlie Kirk, was killed in an act of political violence, something our two children and I will live with every day for the rest of our lives. A culture that laughs at assassination is one of profound moral decay. It threatens the very foundation of our country and the principles that hold our democracy together. You do not have to agree with someone’s politics to recognize the value of their life. This should not be so hard. Political violence must never be something this country tolerates, excuses, or celebrates.

A Philly group is organizing a bike protest targeting six Jewish-owned businesses, insisting it’s because the owners support Israel, not because they’re Jewish. They just happened to choose the eve of Kristallnacht for the protest, you see. What a strange coincidence, isn’t it?

And now, my personal favorite: In an unreported piece from 2011, Abdul El-Sayed lamented the “extrajudicial assassination of an American citizen.” He just so happens to omit that the person in question was none other than Anwar al-Awlaki, the notorious Al-Qaeda terrorist leader

Yes. We know it's raining in Gaza. It's also raining in Israel. Difference is, in Israel we have the infrastructure to handle rain because we didn't start a stupid war and then lose the stupid war. Cry more.

Speaking of the Muslim Brotherhood, on January 28, 2011 — the very day the Brotherhood officially joined the Egyptian revolution — Abdul El-Sayed urged Obama to back the demonstrators, calling them “freedom fighters"

Breaking: I've uncovered an apparently unreported 2012 Al Jazeera article coauthored by Abdul El-Sayed that praises the Muslim Brotherhood's electoral success in Egypt and portrays the Islamist movement in remarkably flattering terms. At the time, the Brotherhood-led bloc had just won approximately 47% of Egypt's parliamentary seats, while the ultraconservative Salafist Al-Nour bloc secured another 24%. Together, Islamist parties controlled roughly 71% of the elected seats. Yet El-Sayed and his coauthor (a Harvard scholar, because of course) enthusiastically described Egypt's political transformation as looking "more promising than ever." They also argued that the Islamist parties' electoral successes reflected their domestic platforms and "histories of social justice" more than popular support for their Islamic ideologies. El-Sayed wasn't merely celebrating the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak. He was expressing optimism about Egypt's political future AFTER the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists had overwhelmingly won the parliamentary elections.

Ummmm, hmmmm. . . Listen dunno why Alex is going off on this but his entire business model was/is actually paying people to post stuff on behalf of clients but trying to make it look organic. Not a state secret. Been known for years. Just odd.

I don’t understand why Alex @alexbruesewitz is all of a sudden trying to pretend like he is so opposed to influencers, consultants and anyone with a business making money online. His company, X Strategies, is one of the firms most common for paying so called conservative influencers to tweet, and his company has been doing this for years. All day I have been inundated with messages from people telling me they were once paid by Alex’s company… yet he’s all of a sudden pretending like the business he participates in is unethical. He still operates X Strategies. I think the bigger question is, why is Alex all of a sudden changing his tune as he’s in litigation with his former business partner Derek Utley, and why did Alex wait till after the election to speak about this? It would be one thing if Alex was consistent, but his entire company is known in political circles for *paying influencers* and helping clients boost their social media following through paid posts and marketing… So what’s the story? Is he scared about something? Is he trying to distract attention away from himself? Is he afraid he’s going to be investigated by Democrats because of his proximity to 1789 Capital? Alex is very financially driven. Notice he says the influencer industry is now too financially driven. Anyone and everyone who knows Alex knows all he cares about is making money…. So since when is he not a fan of financially driven businesses? Don’t believe me? Just go type in X Strategies into the FEC records and see how much his company has been paid over the years. And to be honest, despite the fact that Alex is a massive hypocrite, I’m glad Alex has been paid. People deserve to be paid for their work, no matter how disingenuous and flippant they may be. This is America where we celebrate capitalism, not communism. Talk about hypocrisy though! If you feel this way Alex, when are you going to close down your business? By your own argument, your entire business model has “drifted from its roots.” I’m sure you make plenty of money in your advisory role (you know the one), so maybe you will give up your company out of principle since you’re all of a sudden so bothered by it.

Mario is a brainless Lebanese-Australian grifter who founded a blender business in 2013 that quickly found itself in legal troubles. He then launched a "crypto consulting" firm before deciding to transition into political media despite not knowing jack about politics. Now he spends his days running a show in which he sits slack-jawed listening to his guests spout unmitigated bullshit straight out of the IRGC press office. And sometimes, like in the tweet below, he spouts it himself.

I’ve been playing around with May’s Hamas fatality lists today, because what else are Saturdays for? Gaza’s recorded deaths are heavily concentrated among adult males. In the May 2026 dataset, which contains 72,835 deaths, men aged 18–45 account for 41.12% of those killed, whereas that age/gender group comprised 20.52% of the pre-war population. Their share of recorded deaths is almost exactly twice their population share. Widening the bracket to males aged 15–45 produces much the same result. They represent 24.39% of the population and 45.68% of listed deaths: 33,268 fatalities against approximately the 17,762 deaths we would expect if deaths had followed the population’s age and sex distribution. Among men aged 25–34, the death share reaches 2.18 times the population benchmark; among those aged 35–45, it reaches 2.35 times. The 14–18 age group also warrants examination because Hamas has a documented history of recruiting and training minors. The UN’s 2019 report verified the recruitment and use of a 17-year-old by Hamas’s al-Qassam Brigades. Its following annual report recorded Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad camps exposing children as young as 14 to military activities. Hamas itself has publicised children’s military training through its Telegram channel, including instruction in firearms and guerrilla warfare. This evidence requires us to consider under-18 combatants within the casualty figures. The list contains 5,551 males aged 14–18, against approximately 4,661 under the population-proportional benchmark, a difference of 19%. That disparity is considerably smaller than the adult-male concentration. Of course, it does not mean every teenage boy killed was a fighter, but we cannot pretend that Hamas’s recruitment of children has no bearing on the analysis. Across all ages, the Gaza list is 69.96% male and 30.04% female. In Gaza, Hamas’s conduct is central to that examination. In the Henry Jackson Society report I co-authored with @Aizenberg, Hamas’s Human Shield Strategy in Gaza, we documented military infrastructure embedded within civilian neighbourhoods, including tunnel entrances inside homes and weapons stored in residential buildings. The report also examines Hamas’s instructions to civilians to ignore evacuation warnings. These practices placed civilians around military objectives and exploited the restrictions their presence imposed on Israeli attacks. Any account of civilian deaths that removes Hamas’s battlefield organisation from the explanation discards a central cause of civilian exposure to harm. Israel’s civilian protection measures also form part of the record. OCHA estimated that approximately 50,000 people moved south through an Israeli military corridor on 8 November 2023 alone. It recorded danger and shelling around the route, as well as the extension of the corridor’s operating hours while people continued to leave. This establishes that organised evacuation operated on a substantial scale. The IDF has also published footage of strikes being aborted when civilians appeared. This evidence cannot be omitted from any judgement about Israeli intent. Even NAZA, a film constructed around allegations against Israel’s conduct, describes intelligence personnel identifying Hamas targets and calculating anticipated civilian casualties. Its most sensational claim, concerning approval for an attack anticipating 500 civilian deaths, comes without any corroborating evidence. The film provides neither a named target nor enough detail to verify its accounts of the alleged high-casualty strikes. Those allegations remain completely unsubstantiated. A collateral damage estimate belongs within a military targeting process. In its detailed response to the film, the IDF explains that preliminary estimates precede operational review, during which commanders can change the weapon, timing or scope of an attack, require further precautions, or refuse approval. An Israeli targeting source told me 50% of planned strikes in Gaza were aborted due to civilian presence by July 2024. The IDF also distinguishes thresholds requiring senior authorisation from permission to inflict a specified number of civilian deaths. By proving the existence of those calculations, NAZA establishes that anticipated civilian harm was being assessed. When considered alongside Hamas’s human shield strategy and the evidence of Israeli civilian protection measures, the casualty patterns do not indicate a genocidal campaign. The concentration of deaths among adult males is consistent with substantial combatant losses in a war fought through civilian neighbourhoods. Evacuation arrangements and decisions to withhold fire further undermine any claim of an intention to destroy Gaza’s population.

Thank you to the Washington Post for promoting my public affairs company and my opposition research firm today in an effort to demonize me for… *checks notes* being effective. Turns out it’s not illegal in America to make a living, and it’s not illegal to have a business doing public affairs and opposition research. Since when has it ever been a secret that I do oppo research and public affairs. People want to plant stories about me ahead of 2028 because many view me as a threat. They aren’t wrong, because when people look back at what I was capable of doing to previous campaigns, it’s work that even the most seasoned political consultants and opposition research firms are envious of. It’s work that has literally altered the course of history. It’s work that has been recognized by the most powerful people in the world. Some people want to plant stories about me because I suppose they worry that maybe they won’t be able to get me on their team ahead of 2028. 2028 is going to be a very busy year. The political landscape will be very contentious and fast moving, and as we like to say at @LoomeredStrat, “information is a weapon, and it’s time to get armed”. Whether you are a business owner, a candidate for office, a lawyer, a donor or even just a private citizen, information is your gateway to success in a modern world. Loomered Strategies is available to assist you with your opposition research needs, whether it be research into a prospective political opponent, a competitor, a business, or someone who you really just need and want more information about for whatever reason that may be. We won’t pry, and your confidentiality is always protected. I enjoy helping people with their research and communication needs, and there’s always a need for information in a world where data and information is now the most valuable resource in the world. WaPo claims in their smear article about me that I am a “nuclear bomb”. They are right. That’s why people hire me and that’s why some people fear me. As I said before, information is a weapon. Time to get armed. You can hire me, or your opposition will. Your choice.

And now, my personal favorite: In an unreported piece from 2011, Abdul El-Sayed lamented the “extrajudicial assassination of an American citizen.” He just so happens to omit that the person in question was none other than Anwar al-Awlaki, the notorious Al-Qaeda terrorist leader

Speaking of the Muslim Brotherhood, on January 28, 2011 — the very day the Brotherhood officially joined the Egyptian revolution — Abdul El-Sayed urged Obama to back the demonstrators, calling them “freedom fighters"