Democrats Now Claim They Are The "Real" American Patriots

Leftists have never understood the phrase "If you can't beat em', join em'".  Instead, they believe that if they can't defeat their political opponents in terms of logic, reason, morals, facts or the law, then their next best bet is to co-opt the enemy's message and image without actually adopting their values..

Voters witnessed the first tinges of this strategy in 2024 when Kamala Harris claimed her campaign wasn't woke (after years of saying Americans needed to be more woke) and Tim Walz pretended to be manly by talking about football and masculinity without knowing anything about either subject.  

In 2025 going into 2026, however, the Democrats are taking their Talented Mr. Ripley routine to the next level. They don't just want to compete with conservative messages, they are trying to steal the conservative identity by proclaiming themselves to be the "real" American patriots.

The new activist narrative (largely organized and funded by NGOs) runs with 1776 symbolism, claims that the US military is really on their side, argues that they are the true guardians of the constitution and that their revolution is one that the Founding Fathers would applaud.  

In tandem with the "No Kings" protests, Dems like Jasmine Crockett argued that MAGA is "unpatriotic" and anti-constitution.  She believes Democrats are the true patriots and that they are the barrier protecting Americans from "fascism."    

This theme has led to a number of protests which have abandoned woke symbols in favor of a carefully crafted "pro-America" costume. The theatrics often revolve around mass deportations of illegal aliens and lead to hilariously misguided grandstanding.

NEW: Anti-ICE activists used the 252nd anniversary of the Boston Tea Party to protest ICE and deportations.

Led by transgender and immigrant activists, they compared themselves to the United States’ Founding Fathers. After calling for ICE to leave Boston, they dumped chunks of… pic.twitter.com/EL6xuooq5p

— FRONTLINES TPUSA (@FrontlinesTPUSA) December 18, 2025

In a bizarre twist, leftists are proclaiming their patriotism by actively aiding a foreign invasion of the US. Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries co-opted the words of Republican President Ulysses S. Grant as a strange justification for Democrat driven civil unrest, noting that "There are but two parties in America right now, patriots and traitors..." (conservatives, in his version of reality, being the traitors).  

Hakeem Jeffries: "There are but two parties in America right now, patriots and traitors."pic.twitter.com/oz5C7qSDVr

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) December 16, 2025

Keep in mind, Democrat activists are the same people who have been celebrating the deconstruction of western culture for years and assert that the constitution is meaningless because it was "written by slave owners."

In 2022 at the height of their pandemic frenzy, Democrats in blue states and blue cities widely supported a flurry of freedom crushing mandates and pushed hard for the creation of a vaccine passport system which would effectively destroy the Bill of Rights by taking away citizen access to the economy if they refused to be injected with an experimental jab.

That same year, a Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey found that 48% of voters favored President Joe Biden’s plan to impose a COVID-19 vaccine mandate on the employees of large companies and government agencies.  The same survey showed that a disturbing number of Democrats also supported "Chinese-style" punishments for people who refused to take the jab.

Around 55% of Democrat voters were in favor of government enforced fines for the unvaccinated.  Nearly 60% supported forced home confinement for the unvaccinated.  48% of Democrats were in favor of fines and prison time for anyone who publicly questioned the efficacy of the vaccines.  Around 45% of Democrats supported the idea of confining the unvaccinated to "designated facilities" (covid camps) until they complied.  47% of Democrats favored the use of digital tracking for the unvaccinated.

Around 30% of progressive voters suggested taking children away from parents who refused to vaccinate.  The Biden Administration and Democrats were exposed for violating constitutional law in their efforts to pressure social media companies to silence and censor conservative critics of covid policies (among other things). 

Anyone who stood against the mandates was accused of being a threat to democracy and a potential terrorist.  The Democrats initiated a propaganda war against US patriots; a war which they ultimately lost.  Now, they want you to forget all about their many trespasses and accept their new image as "freedom fighters" saving the country from Trump's tyrannical policies...which the majority of Americans voted for.   

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 11:05

Maduro And His Wife Indicted In US Federal Court; To "Finally... Face Justice For His Crimes"

Authored by T.J.Muscaro via The Epoch Times,

Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were indicted in the Southern District of New York, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced early on Jan. 3.

“Nicolás Maduro has been charged with Narco-Terrorism Conspiracy, Cocaine Importation Conspiracy, Possession of Machineguns and Destructive Devices, and Conspiracy to Possess Machineguns and Destructive Devices against the United States,” Bondi said on X.

“They will soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts.”

Bondi issued the statement hours after Maduro and Flores were captured and extracted by U.S. armed forces in Caracas in the early hours of Jan. 3.

“On behalf of the entire U.S. DOJ, I would like to thank President [Donald] Trump for having the courage to demand accountability on behalf of the American People, and a huge thank you to our brave military who conducted the incredible and highly successful mission to capture these two alleged international narco traffickers.”

Bondi’s announcement follows statements made by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) who said he was told by Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the strike on Venezuela’s capital was a means to protect law enforcement as they carried out an arrest warrant for Maduro.

Lee added that Rubio also told him that Maduro was “arrested by U.S. personnel to stand trial on criminal charges in the United States.”

Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau also emphasized that Maduro was expected to face legal action.

“The tyrant is gone,” Landau said on social media.

“He will now—finally—face justice for his crimes.”

In 2020, Maduro and 14 other Venezuelan officials were charged with narco-terrorism, corruption, drug trafficking and other charges in New York City, Miami, and Washington, D.C.

“The scope and magnitude of the drug trafficking alleged was made possible only because Maduro and others corrupted the institutions of Venezuela and provided political and military protection for the rampant narco-terrorism crimes described in our charges,” U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said in the 2020 press release.

“As alleged, Maduro and the other defendants expressly intended to flood the United States with cocaine in order to undermine the health and wellbeing of our nation. Maduro very deliberately deployed cocaine as a weapon.”

The Epoch Times reached out to the Department of Justice to clarify whether Bondi was referring to this 2020 indictment or not.

As Jonathan Turley reports, this operation will be justified as executing the criminal warrant and responding to an international drug cartel, a very similar legal framework to the one used against Noriega in 1989. There is precedent supporting that earlier operation, which will now be used to defend the actions in Venezuela.

Here is part of the earlier description from the Justice Department of the indicted conduct:

“Maduro helped manage and ultimately lead the Cartel of the Suns, a Venezuelan drug-trafficking organization comprised of high-ranking Venezuelan officials. As he gained power in Venezuela, Maduro participated in a corrupt and violent narco-terrorism conspiracy with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.  Maduro negotiated multi-ton shipments of FARC-produced cocaine; directed the Cartel of the Suns to provide military-grade weapons to the FARC; coordinated with narcotics traffickers in Honduras and other countries to facilitate large-scale drug trafficking; and solicited assistance from FARC leadership in training an unsanctioned militia group that functioned, in essence, as an armed forces unit for the Cartel of the Suns. In March 2020, Maduro was charged in the Southern District of New York for narco-terrorism, conspiracy to import cocaine, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices.”

Ordinarily, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and other international agreements require the United States to notify the embassy of a foreign national arrested and held in the United States. Notice seems a tad superfluous in this case.

In his appeal, Noriega argued that his arrest violated international law under the head-of-state immunity doctrine.  The district court rejected Noriega’s head-of-state immunity claim because the United States government never recognized Noriega as Panama’s legitimate ruler — an argument that will be made in the Maduro prosecution.

The United States for the Eleventh Circuit also rejected the immunity claim.

Noriega also argued that his capture violated the Treaty Providing for the Extradition of Criminals, May 25, 1904, United States of America-Republic of Panama, 34 Stat. 2851 (“U.S.-Panama Extradition Treaty”). The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992), however, was found to bar this argument. The issue was whether he was abducted to the United States with a superseding extradition treaty. The Eleventh Circuit held:

The article of the U.S.-Panama Extradition Treaty upon which Noriega relies for his extradition treaty claim contains almost the same language as the provision of the U.S.-Mexico Extradition Treaty at issue in Alvarez-Machain. See U.S.-Panama Extradition Treaty, art. 5 (“Neither of the contracting parties shall be bound to deliver up its own citizen or subject ․”)…

Under Alvarez-Machain, to prevail on an extradition treaty claim, a defendant must demonstrate, by reference to the express language of a treaty and/or the established practice thereunder, that the United States affirmatively agreed not to seize foreign nationals from the territory of its treaty partner. Noriega has not carried this burden, and therefore, his claim fails.

The Noriega case offers ample support for the Trump Administration, which has had an outstanding arrest warrant for over five years. He is not viewed as the duly elected leader of Venezuela and has been tied to a criminal drug cartel.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 10:30

America's Low-Wage Workers Aren't All High-School Dropouts

Despite a strong labor market and rising nominal wages, there are still millions of people taking home less than $20 per hour on average.

Education plays a major role in determining earnings, but it does not guarantee high wages—or even employment.

This chart, via Visual Capitalist's Niccolo Conte, shows the share and number of U.S. low-wage workers earning less than $20 per hour by education level, using data from the Economic Policy Institute as of July 2025.

Low-Wage Work Is Concentrated Among Less-Educated Workers

Workers without a high school diploma face the greatest exposure to low wages. Roughly two-thirds of this group—about 6.9 million people—earn less than $20 per hour, reflecting limited access to higher-paying occupations and fewer opportunities for advancement.

The table below breaks down low-wage workers by education level:

Among workers whose highest education is a high school diploma, 43% earn under $20 per hour. This group represents the largest number of low-wage workers overall, totaling nearly 15.9 million people.

Even some college education offers only partial protection. More than one-third of workers with some college (but no completed degree) earn below the $20 threshold, amounting to 12.9 million workers.

College Degrees Don’t Eliminate Low Wages

Higher education significantly lowers the likelihood of earning under $20 per hour, but it does not eliminate it. About 12% of workers with a college or advanced degree, roughly 7.2 million people, still fall below this pay level.

Overall, while education remains one of the strongest determinants of earnings, income outcomes depend on various factors, including industry mix, regional costs of living, and labor market conditions.

If you found this interesting, explore more labor market and income visuals on Voronoi, including U.S. States With the Most Low-Wage Workers.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 09:55

How Global Economic Power Has Shifted Over The Past 45 Years

Over the past four decades, the global economic hierarchy has undergone profound change.

Some economies have grown steadily, others have surged, and a few have slipped down the rankings as new players emerged.

In the following visualization, Visual Capitalist's Niccolo Conte charts the world’s top economies from 1980 to 2025.

The data for this visualization comes from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook (October 2025). GDP figures are measured in current U.S. dollars and are not adjusted for inflation.

The United States Remains on Top

Since 1980, the United States has consistently ranked as the world’s largest economy. Its GDP rose from about $2.9 trillion in 1980 to more than $30.6 trillion by 2025. While its global share has fluctuated, the U.S. has maintained its lead due to a large domestic market, deep capital markets, and sustained productivity growth.

China represents the most dramatic structural change in the global economy over the past 45 years.

In 1980, it ranked outside the top five, with GDP just over $300 billion. By 2010, China had already surpassed Germany and Japan, and by 2025 it stands firmly as the world’s second-largest economy at nearly $19.4 trillion.

Japan dominated the global economy in the late 1980s and early 1990s, briefly narrowing the gap with the United States. However, slower growth and demographic headwinds caused it to lose ground, falling to fourth place by 2025.

Europe’s largest economies—Germany, the United Kingdom, and France—have remained among the top 10.

Emerging Markets Gain Ground

Beyond China, several emerging economies climbed into the top ranks. India’s GDP expanded from under $200 billion in 1980 to more than $4.1 trillion in 2025, placing it among the world’s five largest economies.

Outside of the top 10, countries such as Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, and Türkiye have also moved up the rankings, reflecting faster growth than many advanced economies over the long run.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Global GDP Growth Projections in 2025 on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 08:45

Germany's Family Businesses Warn: Taxes, Energy Costs, And Bureaucracy Are Killing Competitiveness

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

At the turn of the year, the Foundation for Family Businesses, together with the ifo Institute, presented a corporate survey on tax policy and location attractiveness. The result is unequivocal: Germany is too expensive and no longer competitive as a business location.

There is nothing new under the sun. In their year-end Annual Monitor, the Foundation for Family Businesses and the ifo Institute once again went straight to the heart of the matter. A total of 1,705 companies across all sectors and size categories were surveyed on their assessment of current tax policy and Germany’s attractiveness as a business location. The evaluation of this corporate panel—1,358 of which were traditional family-owned businesses—turned out to be devastating, as expected.

Overburdened Labor Factor

More than 80 percent of companies perceive the overall tax and contribution burden—particularly in the area of personnel costs, i.e., wage taxes and social security contributions—as far too high. The heavy burden on the employee side is especially criticized by smaller family-owned businesses. It has become increasingly difficult to grant wage increases when the fiscal authorities take the lion’s share and key performers are bled ever more heavily with each pay raise due to the continuous increase in social security contribution ceilings.

This assessment is shared by Professor Rainer Kirchdörfer, member of the Foundation’s executive board, who comments on the study:
“Our new Annual Monitor shows just how much employers and employees are pulling in the same direction. It is precisely the high taxes on labor that paralyze both sides and drain the joy from performance. High-tax Germany has also lost ground here.”

Two-thirds of surveyed executives complain about excessive income tax rates. Income tax is particularly relevant for partnerships—and by international standards it is clearly too high. A recurring grievance is also the complexity of Germany’s tax system. The familiar quip holds that roughly two-thirds of global tax law literature originates in the Federal Republic. Even if exaggerated, the message is clear: Germany is a bureaucrat’s paradise.

Currently, 5.4 million people work in the public sector—around half a million more than five years ago. This despite technological progress, artificial intelligence, and increasing automation of internal processes.

The Bureaucracy Reduction Classic

A tangible reduction in bureaucracy, including tax law, has been overdue for decades. Yet no federal government dares to tackle this hot potato. German bureaucracy has grown too powerful, evolving at all levels into a state within the state. At the same time, policymakers view the public sector as a kind of buffer for a labor market that has slowly but steadily tipped.

As a reminder: over the past three years, German companies have been forced to create 325,000 additional jobs merely to cope with the ever-expanding bureaucratic workload. The state is effectively outsourcing its ballooning documentation, archiving, and compliance requirements to the private sector.

Ranked second and third among entrepreneurs’ main points of criticism are rising local business taxes (Gewerbesteuer) and energy-related levies. Both factors are likely to play a significant role in 2026. Municipal budgets, paralyzed by a cumulative deficit of €35 billion last year, are virtually screaming for sharp increases in local business tax rates.

This threatens to trigger a tax-driven recessionary spiral initiated by local governments seeking short-term relief—particularly in regions hard hit by the industrial downturn, such as the automotive hubs of Stuttgart, Ingolstadt, and Wolfsburg.

Additional Pressure from Energy Levies

As of January 1, 2026, under the Fuel Emissions Trading Act (BEHG), the CO₂ price corridor will rise to between €55 and €65 per ton. This represents another substantial erosion of Germany’s economic substance, as it struggles to keep energy-intensive production in the country amid intensifying competition with China and the United States.

Entrepreneurs’ demands are clear: a reduction in the electricity tax is long overdue as a first step toward restoring the competitiveness of German industry. The abolition of the solidarity surcharge, alongside an accelerated reduction in corporate taxes, also ranks high on the business community’s wish list for the coming year.

Germany is too expensive as a business location by OECD standards. Since 2018, this has also become evident in overall economic productivity, which has stagnated and even declined slightly in recent quarters.

Valid Criticism, But the Root Problem Remains Untouched

There is no question that entrepreneurs are correct in their assessment of fiscal overburdening on companies and private households. The German state has expanded excessively and—given steadily rising public debt—is increasingly living at the expense of future generations.

What is striking, however, is what the study fails to address. Neither the billion-euro follow-up costs of migration into Germany’s welfare system nor the fiscal and real-economic consequences of centrally planned climate policy are included in the assessment. Yet both factors significantly contribute to rising tax burdens and have sustainably weakened Germany’s industrial base.

What has materialized in energy costs—burdens sometimes three times higher than those in competing locations such as France or the United States—must become the subject of a broad public debate if a return to rational economic policy is ever to be possible.

Under the current federal government led by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, this appears fundamentally out of reach.

If not Germany’s economic middle class, who should initiate such a debate openly and courageously? We are still waiting for the icebreaker capable of overcoming the dogma of the alleged lack of alternatives in climate policy in a practical, rational, and unresentful manner. And it remains all too easy for policymakers, operating in an entrenched mode of accelerated debt accumulation, to align incentive structures and a lavishly funded subsidy machine in such a way that any critical voice from the business sector is ultimately silenced.

In the end, the study delivers a rapid situational assessment from which the familiar criticism emerges—criticism that, at all costs, seeks to avoid a collision with an ideologically hardened climate-socialist policy.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 07:00