Matthew J. Bera, Editor

In August of 2021, the United States withdrew from Afghanistan, marking the end of a 20-year military presence. As U.S. troops withdrew, the Taliban rapidly seized territory, capturing Kabul on Aug. 15, 2021. The Afghan National Security Forces, despite $90 billion in U.S. training and equipment, collapsed within weeks.

A few months later, Biden’s dog Major was rehomed.

In October of 2023, Hamas-led terrorist groups launched an attack against Israel, killing 1,195 Israelis and taking hundreds of hostages. The assault, which included rocket barrages and ground infiltrations via trucks, motorcycles and paragliders, led Israel to declare war with objectives to rescue hostages and dismantle Hamas.

One month later, Biden’s dog Commander was “removed” due to “biting incidents.”

In June of 2021, President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in Geneva just prior to the ramping up of Russia’s military presence at Ukraine’s border. The brutal invasion of Ukraine, focusing on Kyiv, Kharkiv and regions in southern Ukraine, led to hundreds of thousands of deaths on both sides of the conflict.

Days later, Biden’s dog Champ “died peacefully” in Wilmington, Delaware.

For the past four years, every time a major crisis has unfolded – Afghanistan, Ukraine, Israel – a Biden dog “went away.”

What did the Biden dogs know?

Let’s look at the facts.

Major’s early warning system

Major – an excitable rescue dog who was prone to biting incidents. That’s been the White House soundbyte. But the timeline tells a different story.

Internal communications reviewed by this outlet suggest that Major’s removal occurred just weeks after an incident involving three agents assigned to what sources refer to as “inner perimeter proximity clearance.” In layman’s terms: agents allowed near the President during unscheduled hours. Each of these agents had reportedly accessed Situation Room logs within 72 hours of Major’s final incident.

One former White House staffer recalls an odd pattern. “Major would growl when certain officials approached,” he said. “Always the same people. Usually after hours.”

What was Major reacting to?

Champ’s “peaceful” death

The mainstream media wasted no time framing Champ’s sudden death as “peaceful.” But let’s dig deeper.

An anonymous Delaware veterinarian admitted that he was told not to conduct a full autopsy. “The dog was old,” officials claimed. But neighbors described a very different scene. Just days before Champ’s passing, several unmarked black SUVs were parked near the Biden residence. There were strange men carrying briefcases. Did the mainstream media report that? No. Only pre-approved talking points about “natural causes.”

One D.C.-based behaviorist, with ties to a former NSA contractor (name redacted), reviewed Champ’s final public appearances and had a chilling conclusion. “The dog was under duress. He [knew]… [something].”

Commander biting agents scheduled to testify

In late 2023, the White House claimed Commander was removed due to a pattern of “biting incidents.” Why not retrain him or restrict his access?

According to one former handler, who spoke to us anonymously, Commander had begun acting erratically around specific individuals — notably, a group of aides connected to Israeli-Palestinian policy briefings. At least one of the bitten agents was scheduled to testify to the House Intelligence Committee. After the bite? Testimony delayed.

Even stranger – there was never a follow-up. Champ just so happened to bite a high ranking intelligence agent, a high ranking intelligence agent who just so happened to be scheduled to testify before Congress. Days later, Champ is gone.

Are we being played?

The evidence doesn’t lie – let’s not be naive. Three major geopolitical disasters, three dogs, three disappearances. The implications are chilling.

Why were these dogs removed at the height of international crises? Why were they allowed so close to classified briefings? And why has no one — not the media, not Congress, not even Dr. Jill Biden — answered the only question that matters:

What did the dogs know, and who silenced them?

Matthew J. Bera, Editor

A federal judge has issued an emergency injunction to halt the Trump-brokered ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, citing concerns that Trump acted outside his constitutional authority. The court ordered the immediate resumption of hostilities in Ukraine, ensuring that the ongoing conflict remains “as volatile as ever.” The move follows a growing trend of judicial actions blocking Trump’s initiatives. Many experts are calling these rulings “patriotism at its finest.”

The ruling mandates that all Ukrainian artillery units resume shelling positions “no later than 48 hours after this order” and increase artillery fire by at least 300% before the end of the week. The executive branch was also barred from using any verbs like “negotiate” or “de-escalate” in an effort to prevent premature conflict resolution.

Representative Rashida Tlaib praised the court’s decision, stating, “With so many others, like Chuck Schumer, bowing and kissing the ring, it’s refreshing to see patriots on the bench standing up for the rule of law.”

Retired General Mark Milley concurred, “Not only is Donald Trump a danger to this country, but now it’s clear he’s a danger to both Europe and the world. This judge stepped up just in time to prevent irreversible damage from being done.”

“What we’re seeing here is a soft form of fascism,” said Tim Walz, former vice presidential candidate and governor of Minnesota. “Thankfully, the courts are protecting democracy and reaffirming the importance of checks and balances in government.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren weighed in: “Donald Trump doesn’t care about a sustainable victory, this is a president who only cares about crowd sizes and immature name-calling. He’s undermining years of foreign policy consensus and taking unprecedented action to make us all less safe.”

“Trump’s impulsive ceasefire negotiation was nothing short of reckless,” asserted Representative Ilhan Omar. “The court’s decision to annul this ‘deal’ is a victory for global stability. Had the ceasefire gone through, the geopolitical consequences could have been disastrous.”

This latest ruling joins a growing list of widely celebrated legal reversals on Trump’s actions:

Deportation of Venezuelan Immigrants Blocked – A federal judge halted the deportation of Venezuelan undocumented guests under the Alien Enemies Act, which President Trump had invoked in an unprecedented move. In a scathing dissent, Trump accused the judge of “playing politics with national security.”

Reinstatement of Obsolete Technologies in Government Offices – After Trump’s unprecedented push to modernize government operations, a federal judge struck down the initiative. The court’s ruling mandates the reinstatement of equipment, such as fax machines and dial-up internet, along with immediate reinstallation of Windows 95 on government computers.

Immediate Resumption of Government Inefficiency – After President Trump appointed the highly controversial Elon Musk to lead the Department of Government Efficiency, aiming to streamline federal operations, a federal judge intervened. Citing concerns over “disruption of traditional red tape,” the judge ordered all agencies to revert to previous levels of inefficiency.
DJ Daniel, 13, Stripped of Honorary Police and Secret Service Titles – A federal judge has ordered that DJ Daniel, the 13-year-old boy battling cancer who was granted honorary police and Secret Service titles by President Trump, must immediately relinquish his titles. The judge argued that the decision to grant the titles was an alarming overstep of executive power.

Matthew J. Bera, Editor

A newly leaked internal memo from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has revealed an ongoing sophisticated psychological operation designed to drive a wedge between President Donald Trump and billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk. Experts say the precision of the operation bears all the hallmarks of a classic Langley maneuver: divide, disorient and allow the targets to destroy each other.

One unnamed intelligence insider described the operation as “one of the most advanced and complicated psychological warfare campaigns ever executed on American soil.”

The operation appears to rely on framing Musk as the de facto president through coordinated efforts via social media, liberal pundits and Democratic operatives. According to intelligence sources, this framing seeks to elevate Musk’s public image while subtly undermining his allegiance to Trump.

“The sophistication of this campaign puts Operation Mockingbird to shame,” one source added, referencing the infamous Cold War-era CIA project that covertly manipulated news media to spread government-approved narratives. “Until this revelation, the operation went completely unnoticed.”

Experts have noted a striking resemblance to strategies outlined in Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War,” pointing to several dictums from the ancient Chinese military treatise that have been observed in the plot: “All warfare is based on deception.”

The leaked memo goes on to outline the intricate psychological profiling conducted on both Trump and Musk. Trump’s well-documented ego and desire for validation are being exploited, while Musk’s relentless pursuit of innovation and attention is being turned against him.

Through carefully curated narratives and a masterclass in nuance, the memo suggests that both figures are being pushed to question their respective allegiances and leadership styles.

“The brilliance here,” says one analyst, “is that no one had a clue this was happening.”

“Remember, Musk doesn’t need to be turned against Trump in any overt way,” added one source. “It’s more about making Musk think he’s too good for Trump or that his brand of genius transcends the president’s rhetoric.”

In a particularly chilling prediction, the memo warns that the only ones who knew what was happening were the operatives behind the scenes.

“The fact that we’ve been blind to this for so long proves just how perfectly executed it was,” said an anonymous high-ranking intelligence officer. “We simply haven’t dealt with a plot of this caliber since the days of the Cold War—when entire nations were manipulated.”

As the memo makes its rounds, it leaves behind an unnerving question: how did this carefully crafted rift escape the eyes of experts for so long? The public, intelligence officials and even the targets themselves were all blissfully unaware of the secret plot until the curtain was pulled back—a testament to its remarkable subtlety and precision.

Matthew J. Bera, Editor

In his farewell address, President Joe Biden issued a grave warning about the newly emerging grip of oligarchy in America.

At no point in history has this reality been more apparent than today, as figures like Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos wield unprecedented control over public discourse and policy.

As the former president rightly underscored the dangers posed by a powerful few, a select group of influential voices remains steadfast in its mission to safeguard democracy.

“The key to a strong democracy is ensuring that power remains in the hands of the people,” said George Soros, a well-known philanthropist who emphasized the importance of protecting democratic institutions. “That’s why I’ve been dedicating so many of my resources to groups that ensure the right people are elected—because when the right people guide progress, everyone benefits.”

Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz echoed the sentiment. “It’s critical that we safeguard democracy from undue influence,” he said, warning of the dangers of unchecked oligarchic power. “We need to hold these billionaires accountable.”

“Frankly, I think billionaires should not be allowed to run for office—it’s downright dangerous,” said Michael Bloomberg, former mayor and longtime advocate for civic engagement. “We have to put an end to this sorry chapter in American history where people buy their way to the White House.”

Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft and global philanthropist, added his voice to the discussion.

“Trump showed us what happens when a billionaire’s self-interest outweighs the good of the people,” he remarked. “We must remain cautious of the dangers posed by unchecked wealth and monopolistic influence.”

Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings also weighed in with characteristic bluntness. “I’m just shocked Trump would be so brazen about it,” he said during an interview conducted from his California estate. “At least try to hide the fact that your entire campaign was funded by the ultra-wealthy.”

“The super-rich need to stop meddling in democracy,” Disney heiress and philanthropist Abigail Disney said, warning of the dangers posed when politicians succumb to the influence of their wealthy donors. “Oligarchy cannot be born from the political fear of upsetting the super-rich.”

In a time of much uncertainty and blatant misuses of justice, these guardians of democracy are unwavering in their commitment to protect the nation from kleptocracy. Biden’s message to the American people about the encroaching oligarchic dominance looming over America remains more important than ever with this new administration.

Jessica Perez-Salinas, Staff Writer

I am sure by now everyone is ready to enjoy their holiday and take a break from reality. November hit everyone hard. Whether it was the endless mountain of assignments, the fun political arguments that arose during Thanksgiving dinner or long hours spent watching every episode of Exploring Politics on La Salle TV, it wasn’t an easy month. Regardless, we can all agree that we need to take a step back and enjoy some light and fun readings that have absolutely nothing to do with politics.

So, grab a cup of coffee and enjoy yourself with one or all these fun reads.

The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood

If your favorite book in high school was the Canterbury Tales, you will love my first recommendation. Taking place in a future utopia, the Handmaid’s Tale is a thrilling novel following this young woman as she embraces the new world around her. In this novel you will find a secret romance, mysteries to uncover and a nice message about women’s role in our society. My only qualm would be the outfit choices which could use a bit more embellishment and color. If you prefer visual entertainment, it has also been adapted into an award-winning series by Hulu. 

Animal Farm by George Orwell

If you’re a fan of Charlotte’s Web or the Winnie the Pooh Series, you will adore Animal Farm. It is a cute story that follows various farm animals and their hijinks against the farmer. With lovable characters such as Snowball and Napoleon, it is a fun read for the entire family. Most importantly, it serves as a powerful message about equality and teaches kindness and compassion to our young ones. 

Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi

Delving away from novels, Persepolis is the lively autobiography of Marjane Satrapi told through the format of a graphic novel. We grow up with her as she moves between Iran and Europe in the late 20^th century. She experiences romance, wonder, loss and hardships that culminate in a passionate tale about a girl finding herself in turbulent moments. It has also been adapted into the Oscar nominated film of the same name that will have you laughing or crying with every scene.

Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card

This book is for the people that enjoy playing the Sea Battle game on their iPhone or were too passionate and aggressive when it came to playing games in high school gym class. It’s an exhilarating novel about a young boy that is really good at playing virtual reality games. Despite his young age, he excels above all, and we come to see the friendships he forms. It is filled with action, aliens and advanced technology that cements it as one of the best science fiction novels in recent times. This novel really makes sure you never have to think while reading. 

Yellowface by R.F. Kuang

If you love books, this is just the book for you. This fun comedy gives you an inside look into the secret world of book publishing. We follow the quirky and lovable June Hayward as she explores, writes her new novel and experiences her rise to fame. It explores various topics such as history and culture.

Babel: Or the Necessity of Violence: An Arcane History of the Oxford Translators’ Revolution by R.F. Kuang

If you have a Pinterest board that is titled “Dark Academia,” this is the book for you. I love R.F. Kuang so much that she gets a double feature. Babel follows our young protagonist, Robin, who is a young Chinese boy who gets accepted into the prestigious Oxford University. We follow him and his diverse group of friends as they learn magic, create fond memories and become essential tools for the government. Set in the 1830s, this novel will enamor you with its beautiful writing, strong characters and its message of the magic of friendship.

Wicked by Gregory Maguire

For my final recommendation, we have a title many of you will recognize. This book has been adapted into a musical and recent film-musical adaptation. This tale follows the life of the Wicked Witch from the original Wizard of Oz novel. We get to reunite with many of the lovable characters from the original such as Glinda and the Wizard. Maguire puts his own twist on the land of Oz and brings a new life to the setting and characters. It is fun, light-hearted and not political in any way. Actually, no version of the Wizard of Oz is political.

And there you have it. These are just some nice novels to decompress with and to have a more lovely holiday break.

Matthew J. Bera, Editor

In a shocking turn of events, President-elect Donald J. Trump has announced that he officially identifies as a woman, shattering the glass ceiling and becoming the first female president of the United States.

“I’ve always been a tremendous supporter of women,” the soon-to-be forty-seventh president said in an interview. “Now, I am one – I’m a woman now. Everybody’s talking about how great, historic really, it is to have a woman in office for the first time.”

Trump’s unprecedented and extraordinary move to come out as transgender sent shockwaves through the political sphere, though many left-leaning pundits have reportedly questioned the president-elect’s gender identity switch.

Donald Trump, now Donna Trump, stated that she would be “the best thing to happen to women since Susan B. Anthony” in an interview at Mar-a-Lago. “It’s what they wanted – they wanted a woman to be president, they want women to be great again, really.” Trump also assured the public that her office transition, as well as her gender transition, would be a huge win for advancing women’s rights.

“There’s something wrong with Donald Trump,” said co-panelist on “The View,” Whoopi Goldberg. Goldberg refused to use Trump’s new gender pronouns, stating bluntly that it’s “time for him to go.”

Moments after her announcement, Trump posted on Truth Social that she would create a new “Department of Government Femininity” (DOGF), and that she would appoint conservative commentator Matt Walsh to spearhead the department.

“We need to feminize the White House,” Trump added, announcing plans to redecorate it in pink marble to make it more inclusive.

Melania Trump will also be celebrated as one of the few first ladies of the United States to be officially considered LGBTQ+.

The move shook up Washington, with the Democratic Party swiftly convening in an emergency meeting to discuss their platform on gender identity. Many were reportedly confused how to respond, but others were more blunt in their views.

“You don’t get to be ‘one of us’ just because you say so,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez posted on X, although the tweet was later deleted.

Reporters tried to find Vice President Kamala Harris, who notably already made history in 2020 as the first female, Black and South Asian American vice president, but she reportedly could not be found and has not weighed in on the situation. Hillary Clinton similarly has not answered calls from the press since Trump’s announcement.

Current President Joe Biden was asked in a rare press appearance about his thoughts on the president-elect’s coming out as transgender.

“I have supported Trump throughout this election,” the president plainly said, though reporters were left confused by his response. Before he could continue, a White House official was seen speaking to Biden before the conference was ended and the president left the room.

This historic moment comes 175 years after the women’s rights convention at Seneca Falls, where early suffragists could have never imagined a female ascent to the presidency would become reality.

In any case, most agree that this will be just one more page in the vast history books of Donna J. Trump, the soon-to-be forty-seventh president of the United States.

Matthew J. Bera, Editor

As Donald Trump took office this week, he immediately issued an executive order packing the Supreme Court of the United States, adding five conservative justices to the court.

“It’s a move that both sides wanted,” says White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt. “There’s been a lot of talk from the left about adding justices to the court. Donald Trump thought his first act as president should be a signal to all Americans that he seeks to be a unifier, not a divider.”

The move came after the Biden administration had previously endorsed “reforms” to the Supreme Court, claiming it had been “undermining democracy.”

President Trump declared the expansion a “tremendous victory for democracy,” explaining that the new 14-member court would better represent “all Americans.” The newly appointed justices, including Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, were sworn in during a ceremony at Mar-a-Lago. Elon Musk reportedly gave the justices Trump-branded power suits, the replacement for the traditional judicial robes worn by Supreme Court Justices.

“Nobody’s done more for the Supreme Court than Trump,” Trump posted on Truth Social during the swearing-in ceremony. “We’re making the Supreme Court GREAT AGAIN! Everybody’s talking about it.”

Following the move, Donald Trump spoke to the press in the Oval Office, now adorned with Trump’s gold curtains and a newly installed Diet Coke button.

“I’m the most bipartisan president in history, maybe ever,” the 45th and 47th President said. “Some people say – and these are very smart people, you understand, the best people – they say I’ve united the country like nobody else. The Democrats wanted to expand the court, and I did it. We did it better than anyone thought possible.”

The new justices have already begun their work. In a historic 11-3 decision, the Supreme Court held that all Trump properties should be ruled as tax-exempt “presidential heritage sites.” In his concurring opinion, Justice Lindell cited the previously undiscovered “Mar-a-Lago Clause” of the Constitution, hidden away by “frivolous lawyers.” 

This was just one of many groundbreaking decisions of the court at the onset of Trump’s presidency. In another 11-3 decision, the expanded court mandated that all federal judges must now conclude guilty verdicts by pointing at the defendant and declaring “You’re Fired!” – a clever nod to Donald Trump’s hit reality TV show, The Apprentice.

The expanded court has also announced plans to relocate their chambers to Trump Tower in New York, citing “tremendous room-service” and “the best justice money can buy.”

Matthew J. Bera, Editor

In a nearly unprecedented political experiment, the Republican and Democratic parties quietly switched platforms last Wednesday. To the apparent surprise of many in Washington, voters couldn’t even tell the difference.

Politicians could be seen last Wednesday robotically repeating the policy positions they were told to advocate for by donors, lobbyists and super PACs – it just so happened that those policy positions happened to be from the opposite side.

The switch led to various peculiar policy positions. Republicans reportedly advocated for sweeping environmental policies, while Democrats championed deregulation and tax cuts. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez even tweeted, “A robust free market is the cornerstone of American prosperity. #capitalism,” receiving thousands of likes on X.

Political scientists are trying to make sense of the situation. “We just haven’t seen something like this before,” says one expert who has read at least three articles on the subject of party-switchery. “The most likely conclusion is that the parties have been gradually switching platforms over the course of a long time and this is just the first time they did it without announcing or telling anyone in advance.”

Following the switch, we asked voters to weigh in on the situation. Party activists on both sides claimed that their parties’ new positions were “what [they’ve] always believed.” Only some unaware constituents and a small group of voters were slightly puzzled, noting indifferently that “it’s all the same anyway.”

Those who noticed the switch, or who were never completely complacent in toeing party lines, were quickly branded as “conspiracy theorists” by both parties and the media. Anyone who agreed with them was labeled as  “sheep.” However, most Americans who decidedly didn’t identify with either of the parties to begin with were not asked for their opinions.

Research shows these reactions aren’t at all surprising. One political psychologist noted, “90% of voters will simply adopt any position their party advocates for. We call this the ‘my party right or wrong’ effect, although another commonly used term is stupidity.”

The experiment ended at midnight, with both parties quietly reverting back to their normal platforms, though several congressional staffers were reportedly still confused about which talking points to use.

Both parties agreed never to try this again, though sources suggest they may have accidentally switched several times in the past century without anyone noticing, including that one weird Tuesday in 1986 that no one talks about.

Despite this promise, pundits believe this experiment could usher in a new era of “surprise politics” where the parties switch platforms every month. “It would be like Christmas every month,” says one analyst. “Except instead of Christmas presents, we get flip flopping politicians who don’t have the best interests of the American people in mind.”

Matthew J. Bera, Editor

On Jan. 20, 2084, I woke up at 11 a.m. – the global wake-up time, changed from 10 a.m. last summer due to reasons I wasn’t allowed to recall – and turned on the TV, as required for morning news consumption. This was of course the only way we could find out where to direct our emotional outbursts throughout the day.

“Good day,” the news anchor said.

“Good day,” I replied to my screen automatically. It was Friday, and I was permitted to be in a good mood.

“Today, the Global Safety Agency issued a new plan to combat visual discrimination,” the news anchor said. “The Global Safety Agency has determined that the most effective way to combat visual discrimination is to make everyone wear the same type of eyeglasses. Starting next month, all global citizens will be required to undergo a painless vision correction procedure and wear standardized eyewear.”

I felt a mix of emotions wash over me. On one hand, I was excited at the prospect of finally achieving true equality, and on the other hand, I felt obligatory outrage at the mere mention of visual discrimination.

The anchor continued: “This groundbreaking initiative will eliminate all visual distinctions related to eyewear. Global Citizens found attempting to alter or disguise their standardized glasses will face severe penalties.”

I was relieved. This was finally a solution to end visual discrimination once and for all. I decided that later in the day, during my 15-minute allotted period for social interaction, I would have to tell my neighbor. I wondered if he would be as excited as I was supposed to be.

The anchor moved on to the next story: “In related news, the Department of Acceptable Opinions has issued new guidelines on permissible thoughts regarding the standardized eyewear mandate. Citizens are encouraged to share their opinions during designated social interaction periods, but are reminded that expressing doubts about the procedure is strictly prohibited and may result in mandatory re-education.”

I nodded at the screen, making sure my enthusiasm was clearly visible to the monitoring cameras. I had no doubts whatsoever about this brilliant plan. I looked at my reflection on the screen, trying to imagine myself with the new standardized glasses.

The anchor’s voice brought me back to attention. “Specific assignments as to what type of standardized eyewear should be acquired in the procedure will be given to global citizens based on a variety of criteria, including but not limited to socioeconomic background, level of education and family history,” the anchor continued, before swearing servitude to the government and signing off for the day.

As the broadcast ended, I couldn’t help but be filled with joy. Joy at the fact that in our societal quest to end visual discrimination, we achieved something far greater. Joy at the prospect of a world where institutional discrimination was not only accepted, but celebrated. Joy that I would be able to live in a society in which I could finally judge people not by the content of their character, but by the type of glasses on their face. I walked to my door, eager to receive my food rations for the day.