Nikki Haley stands with MAGA. Chris Christie stands with America

PLUS: What Jeffery Epstein and Donald Trump say about the decline of the United States

Mandel Ngan/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

Nikki Haley let the mask drop when she was asked what she believed was the cause of the Civil War at a town hall in New Hampshire. She must have been tired. The saccharine schtick fell apart, and revealed her appalling lack of character. Here’s what happened:

She first paused, and said, "Well, don't come at me with an easy question."

She then said: "I mean, I think the cause of the Civil War was basically how government was going to run, what you could and couldn't do, the freedoms in what people could and couldn't do."

Then, the man who asked the question responded: "In the year 2023, it's astonishing to me that you answer that question without mentioning the word 'slavery.'"

Chris Christie must remain in the Republican primary to the bitter end because, contrary to the conventional wisdom, he is the last opponent standing against Trump. Nikki Haley is an imitation of Trump, a hollow woman, but like her nemesis Vivek Ramaswamy, she stands firmly on Trump’s side of the field. She is an acolyte who has strayed, probably much to Trump’s amusement because he knows she will be back in the menagerie more loyal than ever. It is Chris Christie who stands alone against Trump. He is the minority side of a lopsided choice, but he is the only moral choice, and certainly the only American choice in the GOP primary. He cannot yield because he is driving the Abraham Lincoln position that can never be abandoned. It is this:

Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusations against us, nor frightened from it by menaces of destruction to the Government nor of dungeons to ourselves. LET US HAVE FAITH THAT RIGHT MAKES MIGHT, AND IN THAT FAITH, LET US, TO THE END, DARE TO DO OUR DUTY AS WE UNDERSTAND IT.

Chris Christie is telling a truth that must be spoken. What he is doing is noble, courageous and worthy. He must hold the line. He should embrace the defiance of an American general who could not be backed down.  

Seventy-nine years ago last month, on Christmas Eve, the 101st Airborne Division was completely surrounded in the town of Bastogne where the German Army had them zeroed in for destruction. The paratroopers were lacking winter uniforms, rations, ammunition, supplies and men. They were commanded by the assistant division commander General Anthony McAuliffe, who sent this message to his troops in one of the greatest acts of defiance and courage in American history. This magnificent letter came 168 years after Washington crossed the Delaware and saved the revolution after Thomas Paine’s “American Crisis” was published a day earlier. They weren’t called the “greatest generation” for nothing. 

MERRY CHRISTMAS

HEADQUARTERS 101ST AIRBORNE DIVISION
Office of the Division Commander

24 December 1944

What’s Merry about all this, you ask? We’re fighting — it’s cold, we aren’t home. All true but what has the proud Eagle Division accomplished with its worthy comrades the 10th Armored Division, the 705th Tank Destroyer Battalion and all the rest? Just this: We have stopped cold everything that has been thrown at us from the North, East, South and West. We have identifications from four German Panzer Divisions, two German Infantry Divisions and one German Parachute Division. These units, spearheading the last desperate German lunge, were headed straight west for key points when the Eagle Division was hurriedly ordered to stem the advance. How effectively this was done will be written in history; not alone in our Division’s glorious history but in World history. The Germans actually did surround us, their radios blared our doom. Their Commander demanded our surrender in the following imprudent arrogance:

December 22nd 1944

“To the U. S. A. Commander of the encircled town of Bastogne.

The fortune of war is changing. This time the U. S. A. forces in and near Bastogne have been encircled by strong German armored units. More German armored units have crossed the river Ourthe near Ortheuville, have taken Marche and reached St. Hubert by passing through Hompres-Sibret-Tillet. Libramont is in German hands.

There is only one possibility to save the encircled U. S. A. Troops from total annihilation: that is the honorable surrender of the encircled town. In order to think it over a term of two hours will be granted beginning with the presentation of this note.

If this proposal should be rejected the German Artillery Corps and six heavy A. A. Battalions are ready to annihilate the U. S. A. Troops in and near Bastogne. The order for firing will be given immediately after this two hour’s term.

All the serious civilian losses caused by this Artillery fire would not correspond with the well known American humanity.

The German Commander”

The German Commander received the following reply:

22 December 1944

“To the German Commander:

N U T S !

The American Commander”

Allied Troops are counterattacking in force. We continue to hold Bastogne. By holding Bastogne we assure the success of the Allied Armies. We know that our Division Commander, General Taylor, will say: “Well Done!”

We are giving our country and our loved ones at home a worthy Christmas present and being privileged to take part in this gallant feat of arms are truly making for ourselves a Merry Christmas.

/s/ A. C. McAULIFFE
/t/ McAULIFFE
Commanding

A presidential campaign is a character test. In fact, it is the greatest non-lethal competition on Earth. The process destroys the weak and brittle. It exposes dilettantism in the most brutal manner possible. The process is a journey and most people don’t make it to the end because they fail the test. Chris Christie is passing the test. His journey has been noble and worthy, and it is far from done. Nikki Haley has failed the test, and it is why the calls for there to be a consolidation around Haley that demand Christie drop out are obscene. His answer should be as direct as that of McAuliffe. 

It is important to be clear about something: Nikki Haley’s omission was neither accidental or the product of Trumpian ignorance and historic illiteracy. Her fellow South Carolinian Lee Atwater explained what she was doing perfectly in recordings unearthed after his death:

What I have come to understand as a student of American history and culture is that Nikki Haley could have been any small town southern segregationist mayor or sheriff gaslighting the northern press about how good and peaceful everything was — never mind the lynchings, cross burnings, injustice, corruption and violence terrorizing Black people. Her answer about the Civil War was a choice and a declaration. It was a deliberate and calculated evasion that places her firmly in a line with every racist politician who has ever tried to surf the toxic wave of race to political power. 

Yet, as abominable as the exchange was it is even worse on closer inspection. 

The Civil War was the bloodiest in American history. The death and suffering caused by it are almost incomprehensible. It killed between 650,000 and 850,000 Americans. If those numbers were adjusted to reflect today’s population, the total would reach as high as 8.5 million people. There is no event in American history that approximates the trauma and horror of the sectional war that began in Charleston, South Carolina, in March 1861, and ended in Appomattox in April of 1865. It defined America through the lifetimes of every person who fought, lost, was emancipated and suffered through the cataclysm. It utterly redefined the country. Ignorance about it is disqualifying before any consideration is given to the deliberate and willful display put on by Haley. 

The Civil War was caused by slavery. Period. 

Frederick Douglass explained the matter clearly in 1852 on July 4th in an incendiary speech that is as patriotic as any ever delivered. He denounces the 4th of July, and asks what meaning it could have for a slave. He would watch his sons march off to war with the 54th Massachusetts to fight for freedom in South Carolina 11 years after he said this:

But, such is not the state of the case. I say it with a sad sense of the disparity between us. I am not included within the pale of this glorious anniversary! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us. The blessings in which you, this day, rejoice, are not enjoyed in common. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me. The sunlight that brought life and healing to you, has brought stripes and death to me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me to speak to-day? If so, there is a parallel to your conduct. And let me warn you that it is dangerous to copy the example of a nation whose crimes, lowering up to heaven, were thrown down by the breath of the Almighty, burying that nation in irrecoverable ruin! I can to-day take up the plaintive lament of a peeled and woe-smitten people!

Fellow-citizens; above your national, tumultuous joy, I hear the mournful wail of millions! whose chains, heavy and grievous yesterday, are, to-day, rendered more intolerable by the jubilee shouts that reach them. If I do forget, if I do not faithfully remember those bleeding children of sorrow this day, “may my right hand forget her cunning, and may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth!” To forget them, to pass lightly over their wrongs, and to chime in with the popular theme, would be treason most scandalous and shocking, and would make me a reproach before God and the world. My subject, then fellow-citizens, is American slavery. I shall see, this day, and its popular characteristics, from the slave’s point of view. Standing, there, identified with the American bondman, making his wrongs mine, I do not hesitate to declare, with all my soul, that the character and conduct of this nation never looked blacker to me than on this 4th of July! Whether we turn to the declarations of the past, or to the professions of the present, the conduct of the nation seems equally hideous and revolting. America is false to the past, false to the present, and solemnly binds herself to be false to the future. Standing with God and the crushed and bleeding slave on this occasion, I will, in the name of humanity which is outraged, in the name of liberty which is fettered, in the name of the constitution and the Bible, which are disregarded and trampled upon, dare to call in question and to denounce, with all the emphasis I can command, everything that serves to perpetuate slavery—the great sin and shame of America! “I will not equivocate; I will not excuse;” I will use the severest language I can command; and yet not one word shall escape me that any man, whose judgment is not blinded by prejudice, or who is not at heart a slaveholder, shall not confess to be fight and just. But I fancy I hear some one of my audience say, it is just in this circumstance that you and your brother abolitionists fail to make a favorable impression on the public mind. Would you argue more, and denounce less, would you persuade more, and rebuke less, your cause would be much more likely to succeed. But, I submit, where all is plain there is nothing to be argued. What point in the anti-slavery creed would you have me argue? On what branch of the subject do the people of this country need light? Must I undertake to prove that the slave is a man? That point is conceded already. Nobody doubts it. The slaveholders themselves acknowledge it in the enactment of laws for their government. They acknowledge it when they punish disobedience on the part of the slave. There are seventy-two crimes in the State of Virginia, which, if committed by a black man, (no matter how ignorant he be), subject him to the punishment of death; while only two of the same crimes will subject a white man to the like punishment. What is this but the acknowledgement that the slave is a moral, intellectual and responsible being? The manhood of the slave is conceded. It is admitted in the fact that Southern statute books are covered with enactments forbidding, under severe fines and penalties, the teaching of the slave to read or to write. When you can point to any such laws, in reference to the beasts of the field, then I may consent to argue the manhood of the slave. When the dogs in your streets, when the fowls of the air, when the cattle on your hills, when the fish of the sea, and the reptiles that crawl, shall be unable to distinguish the slave from a brute, their will I argue with you that the slave is a man!

The US Civil War forged modern America and a “new birth of freedom.” Abraham Lincoln reconsecrated the American Revolution and the purpose of America, the war and the massive sacrifices being made to win it with an address in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, written by his own hand. It reads: 

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Who is Nikki Haley? She was the “good” MAGA, anointed as such by no less an authority than The New York Times editorial board.  It is important to always remember the political media’s narratives are mostly nonsense. 

Tim Alberta is one of America’s best political reporters. His profile of Nikki Haley in Politico is as fine a profile of a political candidate for the American presidency that has ever been written.

In fact, it astonishes with regards to its revelations of Haley’s cynicism and self-delusion. Alberta’s character dissection of Haley reveals a hollowness that perfectly explains the ease of Trump’s conquering of the Republican Party. She believes in nothing except winning elected office and being liked. Her ambitions and an instinct for calculated risk, which she exercised with discipline helped her climb the greasy Republican pole to become the governor of South Carolina.

During her tenure, she took “old Dixie” down after a white supremacist murdered nine black worshippers at Mother Emanual AME Church after he prayed with them. The decision was heralded in the moment as a brave act. Was it? Or was it as easy a decision that a governor would ever face?

Certainly, removing a symbol of hate, extremism and prejudice that was the battle flag of treason that killed 600,000 American soldiers and the banner of Jim Crow from the state house was the right thing to do. Why was doing the right thing imbued with qualities of heroism and courage, when none was required? The act was symbolic and the price was nil. What did Haley apparently take away from the experience? Obviously it was the idea that courage is performative, not substantive, and that what is real is entirely subjective. It helps explain her collapse as a Trump resistor to her rebirth as one of his great shills and useful idiots. 

There was never any substance around the idea that Nikki Haley was the “adult in the room” or the view pushed by The New York Times editorial page that Haley was one of the few figures to leave the Trump administration with “her dignity largely intact.”

The simple truth has always been that the maintenance of dignity and proximity to Trump are an impossibility. She wears the burden of Trump’s rancidity and legacy because she advanced it. Haley was at the top of the Trumpian foreign policy debacle that saw him extort Ukraine, fellate Saudi Arabia, undermine NATO, and kowtow to Russia. She bears the burden of his racism, extremism and divisions because she profited from them personally and professionally. She rose on the tidal wave of Trump sewage, and it will drown her. 

Below is an amazing exchange between Alberta and Haley related to Trump’s claims about the election. Here is what Haley said:

“I understand the president. I understand that genuinely, to his core, he believes he was wronged,” Haley told me. “This is not him making it up.”

But Trump was making it up. To date, there had been no discovery of material voting fraud. The president’s legal team had lost 55 court cases and won just one. All 50 states had certified their results and sent a single slate of electors to the Electoral College. Despite all this—despite that politically, legally and constitutionally, it was game over—Trump was inciting threats against judges and elections officials and urging Americans to take matters into their own hands.

You have the president of the United States telling everyone that he was cheated, that the voting systems are corrupt, that we’re living in a banana republic where the deep state has rigged this election against him,” I told her. 

“Isn’t that dangerous?”

He believes it,” she smiled.

There’s nothing that you’re ever going to do that’s going to make him feel like he legitimately lost the election,” Haley said. “He’s got a big bully pulpit. He should be responsible with it.”

“Is he being responsible with it?” I asked.

“He believes it,” she replied.

Haley would only allow that Trump’s lawyers had “done a disservice to him.” But there was no accountability for his actions. When I pressed her—why couldn’t she answer the basic question of whether the president was acting responsibly?—Haley cut me off, pointing out the window toward an emerald-tinted putting green.

That would be like you saying that grass is blue and you genuinely believing it. Is it irresponsible that you’re colorblind and you truly believe that?” she said.

“But he swore an oath,” I said, incredulous at her analogy. “This is the president.”

“He believes he’s following that oath,” she shot back. “This would be different if he was being deceptive.”

But what about the president broadcasting a loop of lies that had been thoroughly debunked? Isn’t that being deceptive?

“He deserves the truth. Is he hearing the truth?” Haley told me. “I don’t think certain people around him are telling him the truth.”

Regarding her comments, there can only be three possibilities.

First, it means she believes what is real is what Donald Trump believes is real.

Second, she believes in nothing whatsoever. She is an American Albert Speer. She conned Alberta with claptrap about what Trump believes, which really shows her deep indifference towards the peaceful transition of power and the US Constitution —since Trump tried to murder one, and then kill the other.  

Third, she believes her audience is profoundly stupid, while she is exceptionally clever. 

Whether her state of cynicism and delusion is thin or thick is besides the point. What it reveals is a broken character that makes her call for “generational change” into a depressing continuation of the corrupt status quo.  The Haley candidacy has been a gender-powered call for more diverse and younger liars in the Republican Party. She stands in the middle ground between a George Santos, who is a complete fantasy, and Donald Trump, who simply believes in them, as a neutral arbiter with the cynical talent to declare “who cares?” After all, if it’s not about Nikki Haley and her ambitions, it isn’t really that important.

Consider her take on January 6, which she despicably lacked the courage to watch, afraid no doubt of the tinge of guilt that must have momentarily welled up inside of her. She told Alberta she was “triggered.”

What triggered her? Was it the mob beating and bludgeoning police? Was it their deaths? Was it the confederate flag that was carried through the rotunda? Was it the mob who defecated and urinated on the floors of the US House and US Senate? It was none of those things. 

The true travesty, according to Haley, was Trump’s disloyalty to the most servile and obsequious politician in American history: Mike Pence. 

Whatever malfunction that exists in Haley’s spine, and whatever shortage of character and deficiency of patriotism she carries, it is important to understand this about her. She feels she was courageous and entitled to something really swell for going along with the flow so well, just like her friend Mike Pence. 

They both share something in common. Neither of them had any idea about Trump’s disdain for democracy and the sedition in his heart until the very end. Before then, according to them, there were no signs of instability, insanity,  malice, cruelty, outrageous corruption and stunning dishonesty. All was well until the election and then, well, kaboom!

It isn’t just disgracefully dishonest. It is spectacularly and brazenly so. Donald Trump isn’t difficult to figure out. If he was such a challenge for Haley, the office of president of the United States is the wrong job for her.

Donald Trump believed he won, and therefore, according to Nikki Haley, his sedition was excusable because his belief lies above the truth, where it floats in a state of perpetual delusion. Haley, unable to abase and debase herself within the same rigid framework of her gelatinous-spined male peers, has made up an alternate reality where she didn’t know that Trump was an unfit sociopath and congenital liar. According to Haley, he simply snapped at the end of four golden years, during which America stood tall, and Niki Haley steered the great ship of state at the United Nations. 

The truth is that she played the role of a lesser Ivanka on Jared Kushner’s diplomatic team. She was Rick Grenell in heels, fronting Steve Bannon’s foreign policy. What is it exactly that she accomplished? For what achievement can she claim credit — besides being a MAGA lieutenant who nearly helped topple American democracy? Nikki Haley is a pedestrian figure, and has long been overhyped in the speculative parlors where the DC access game plays out. She is bland and uninteresting, except for one thing, and that is her assertion of shock at discovering who Trump really was. She is a latter day Scarlett O’Hara, who was victimized by a rapacious man. That man “triggered” her by betraying his most trusting acolyte Mike Pence, who he tried to hang during his attempt to overthrow the government and burn the US Constitution. 

Haley has a rare talent for generating sympathy from fierce critics of Trump for somehow being “apart” from what she was so deeply involved in. It is as if she was selected by the American political media to be the designated survivor. Perhaps though it is because she is so skilled at playing the double game — winking and dancing away from the extremism, while simultaneously fanning and supporting it. Maybe because she was always ready with a background story for the nearest Trump-era access reporter to share a story of behind the scenes heroism in which she alone stood up to Trump. Like all of her cowed colleagues, Haley would denounce Trump in private and tell anyone who would listen how crazy he was, but her effect with the routine landed differently. Many in the access media actually believed she meant it. They bought into the fallacy that her presence tempered Trump and restrained him, and was therefore necessary, vital and important.

The instinct to find goodness out of rottenness, and find a person to exculpate and hold apart from a cabal — no matter how venal — as somehow different, better, sympathetic and understandable is a powerful force. There is no better example of such a person in the 20th century than the Nazi war criminal Albert Speer.

He was among the 20 Nazi defendants at the Nuremberg Trials that were conducted by the four victorious powers. The associate justice of the United States Supreme Court Robert Jackson, who ultimately became chief justice, served as the chief American prosecutor. Francis Biddle had served as attorney general under FDR throughout the Second World War, and was the American judge on the presiding panel. His notes on the proceedings were part of a chapter titled “Nuremberg: The Fall of the Supermen” that was part of his autobiography, “In Brief Authority.” The account details the animosity between Speer and Herman Goering, and begins with a description of Goering from a fellow defendant, Dr. Horace Greeley Hjalmar Schacht, Hitler’s minister of economics. The connection between extremism, totalitarianism and corruption is inexorable. Goering was the most corrupt person of a corrupt movement. He was a figure of preposterous excess and insatiable greed that offers few comparable examples over the last 80 years of history. Trump is one of them. 

Schacht hated Goering with a scornful, jealous bitterness, for it was Goering who had forced him out of power. About Goering in an interrogatory, Schacht said:

Endowed by nature with a certain geniality which he managed to exploit for his own popularity, he was the most egocentric being imaginable. The assumption of political power was for him only a means to personal enrichment and good living. The success of others filled him with envy. His greed knew no bounds. His predilection for jewels, gold, and finery was unimaginable. He knew no comradeships… In his personal appearance … one could only compare him to Nero, [appearing at tea once in a sort of Roman toga and sandals studded with jewels, his fingers bedecked with innumerable jeweled rings … his lace painted and his lips rouged.

Biddle observed the fallen Nazis day after day, and observed their succumbing to the most base and basic human behaviors. Yet his writings also indicate that Biddle, too, was easily seduced. He was taken in by the idea that one among them had to be more decent than the rest. That man was Albert Speer. 

We watched the defendants day after day, these drab men once great, most of them now turning on the Führer, who had led them to their brief spasm of violent triumph. A few were still loyal. Some felt that it was not “correct” to attack a dead man who had been head of the state. Others transferred their guilt to the man who, they said, was alone responsible, from whom, they pleaded, orders came that had to be obeyed; theirs but to do or die, they argued; how could there be a conspiracy, a meeting of the minds, as the prosecutors claimed, when one man’s mind commanded all the others?

Before long there developed, among the twenty-one accused, two groups under different leaders. The majority, particularly at first, before the worst of the testimony came out, followed Goering, from whom still emanated something of the old charm, the compelling ruffian power. Goering sustained the vanishing legend of the Reich, the intoxicating dream of a superior race that in the early days had clouded their minds and swollen their hearts with the excitement of the primitive, the barbaric romance of lawless men.

Hermann Goering was the prime exhibit of Nazi evil. Albert Speer was the most humane and decent of the defendants. His straightforwardness and honesty, his calm and reasonable bearing, his awareness of the moral issues involved, impressed the members of the Tribunal. Speer, who was 41 when he was tried, must have been a highly impressionable young German, idealistic and prone to hero worship, when he joined the party in 1932. Soon, he became Hitler’s personal confidante, and lavished a passionate admiration on his chief — if one can judge by the bitterness of his ultimate disillusion.

A man of striking ability, Speer took charge of all war production. He was one of the few men trusted by Hitler. It was not until the last days that Speer began to question the character of his leader. Said Biddle about Speer:

Doubts had of course begun to cross his mind; but, working continually at his immense production job, aloof from the chicaneries and plots that eddied around the seat of power, he seemed, like so many other idealists, to have been unwilling to face a reality which was bound to destroy the faith that had meant everything to him.

Albert Speer escaped the hangman’s noose, and was sentenced to spend 20 years in Spandau prison. He served every day of that sentence, and was released from prison in 1965. He would live for another 16 years, and he would continue to impress scores of people as the “good Nazi.” During the Nuremberg Trials, a survivor of the Mauthausen concentration camp was asked if he recognized any of the defendants. He pointed directly at Albert Speer and said, “Speer.”  Speer denied that he had any knowledge of the Holocaust and the murder of the Jews, even though, as the Nazi in charge of war production, he had 14 million slaves provided by the SS working in his armaments factories. When his fellow defendants heard his denials during the trial they laughed out loud. Speer invented the “Sergeant Schultz defense.” 

Albert Speer wrote his best selling accounts of the Thousand-Year Reich, “Inside the Third Reich,” and “Spandau: The Secret Diaries.” 

What happened next seems astonishing, but it is true. Hollywood came calling, and a meeting was set about turning Speer’s story into a movie. There is a documentary that tells the incredible story. It is called “Speer Goes to Hollywood,” and is built around a re-creation of the taped conversations between an ambitious young screen writer atop the Paramount project and the Nazi criminal. In the end, the film is never made, and though Speer died a wealthy and rehabilitated man in 1981 London, all of his efforts were in vain. What he proved was the naïveté of his observers and interlocutors, as well as the human compulsion to find the good in even the darkest places. Speer lived as a Nazi and died as a Nazi. He was a war criminal and a slave master. He couldn’t outrun history or reality in the end. 

Speers was much smoother, more clever and better at manipulating people and the truth than Nikki Haley, who knew nothing, saw nothing and heard nothing — but cared enough about her friend the president to check in on him because she was “worried.” Certainly, it has a chance to be compelling to the most simple-minded and conspiratorially-disposed among us, but it isn’t real. Even though there are too many people who have a delusional relationship to reality who are involved in our politics, there aren’t enough of them for Nikki Haley to win the Republican primary. 

The GOP/MAGA voters aren’t in the mood for sweet tea and sugary banalities. They want red meat. They want the main event. They want Trump vs Biden. Nikki Haley has already lost. The tragedy is that she doesn’t seem to know it. She seems lost, befuddled and bewildered.

Shameful people can go far in American life, but they always run out of rail. That’s where the Nikki Haley train is headed — right off the tracks and over the cliff. The past always catches up. She’s the same thing as Trump and Ramaswamy only different because, like DeSantis, she prefers heels. 

Chis Christie is the only choice for a Republican who wants to end MAGA. His giving that choice is about as honorable a thing as I’ve seen in my political career. 

---

---

What Jeffery Epstein & Donald Trump say about the decline of the United States

I react to the unveiled court documents in the Jeffery Epstein case. The power class, like Epstein and Donald Trump, don't play by the rules as normal Americans, which leads to distrust in our country:

---