In 2017, on the same day that Donald Trump was first sworn in as president, the Washington Post ran a story with the headline “The Campaign to Impeach President Trump has begun.”

FLASHBACK: 19 minutes after Trump was inaugurated this was the headline in the Washington Post… pic.twitter.com/vl9KVBVqXh

— @amuse (@amuse) January 5, 2025

That’s right, the people on the left who have been telling all of us for years that Trump doesn’t respect our democracy or accept election results are dealing purely in projection. That headline, coupled with their behavior ever since proves it.

Now, they might prove it to us all over again in California.

A columnist for the Los Angeles Times named Steve Lopez is promising that if a Republican wins the race for governor in California (GASP), that an effort to recall that person will begin immediately.

These people are not even waiting to lose elections anymore. They’re just telling us that they will never, ever accept Republican leaders, even if the voters choose them.

From the Los Angeles Times:

Yes, a Republican could be California’s next governor. And a recall would begin immediately

Once upon a time in California, I went to the Orange County fairgrounds to watch Arnold Schwarzenegger give the signal for a wrecking ball to drop onto a vehicle.

The audience went wild, and Schwarzenegger went on to become governor and deliver on his promise to roll back a car tax increase, thereby blowing a $4-billion hole in the state budget.

I think it’s fair to say that in the current gubernatorial campaign season, the excitement level is several decibels below what we experienced in 2003. But once again, it’s fair to say we’ve not seen anything quite like this year’s derby…

To break that down, eight Democrats and two Republicans are running in the primary, and here’s the craziest thing about that:

The two Republicans could be the top two vote-getters because the Democrats have arranged themselves into a circular firing squad. While the Dems scramble for votes in the June 2 primary, the two Republicans lead in the polls because they’re splitting the GOP vote, and under the rules of the top-two primary, they could face off in the November election.

Lopez fantasizes about how the recall effort would take shape, should a Republican win:

A wealthy Democratic donor could bankroll the recall campaign, Stutzman said. Or public employee unions might put up the money, given that a Republican winner is likely to create a state version of Elon Musk’s ham-handed attempt to fire nearly everyone on the federal payroll.

“The pitch,” Stutzman said of the recall strategy in an email, would be that “Trump still looms and CA must resist, and a GOP gov is a fluke of weird election law. Difficult to imagine it wouldn’t succeed.”

The most amazing thing about this column is that it barely even touches on why a Republican could win the election. California is losing population for the first time in history. The state has the highest taxes in the country. People are still struggling to rebuild their homes from wildfires that happened more than a year ago. Even the entertainment industry is deserting California.

Instead of focusing on this, the columnist’s entire premise boils down to: Here’s how we can make sure a Democrat wins and how we can sabotage the winning Republican if it comes down to that.

Doesn’t California have bigger problems than the idea that a Republican might win the election?

The post Los Angeles Times Columnist Says if a Republican Wins the Race for Governor of California, ‘A Recall Would Begin Immediately’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Last fall, when the utterly pointless ‘No Kings’ protests were first happening, a New York psychotherapist named Jonathan Alpert criticized them by noting that they were mostly made up of ‘educated white women.’ Whether or not he knew it at the time, he was referring to AWFLs (Affluent White Female Liberals.)

This weekend, the ‘No Kings’ folks are coming back for another bite at the apple. No one knows exactly what they expect to accomplish, other than continuing their years-long temper tantrum over the presidency of Donald Trump, but they will be in public spaces all over the country tomorrow, waving signs and screaming dumb, meaningless slogans.

In anticipation of this, psychotherapist named Jonathan Alpert has returned, and has written a column about these protests, which he calls ‘bad group therapy.’ It’s just perfect.

He writes at the Wall Street Journal:

‘No Kings’: Politics as Bad Group Therapy

After a “No Kings” rally last October, I was walking through the area and paused to read the signs. A woman asked me, “Aren’t these great?”

“I don’t know,” I replied. “I kind of like some of Trump’s policies.”

“Well, f— you then.”

The No Kings rallies are set to return Saturday—the third such round in the past year—built around a slogan that suggests Americans are living under something closer to tyranny than democracy. It’s a striking claim for a country that fought a revolution to overthrow a king and hasn’t had one since. Still, it’s revealing. It reflects a broader shift in how political disagreement is understood—not as a clash of views, but as a struggle between victims and villains.

The U.S. remains what it has long been: a contentious, often frustrating democracy shaped by competing interests and imperfect leadership. But describing it in more dramatic terms raises the emotional stakes. It transforms ordinary political conflict into something more absolute—and more psychologically satisfying.

In my work as a psychotherapist, I’ve seen a parallel change in how people interpret their personal lives. Feelings are increasingly treated not as signals to examine but as conclusions to affirm. Discomfort is no longer something to work through but something to explain—often by projecting blame onto an external source. This mindset doesn’t stay in the therapy room. It has begun to shape political life, and the No Kings rallies offer a framework that favors affirmation over scrutiny: a clean moral narrative in which there are those who are wronged, and those responsible for the wrongdoing.

That is a perfect summation of what is happening.

In the last few years, you may have heard people describe shows like Colbert and Kimmel as ‘late night group therapy for libs.’

The ‘No Kings’ protests are merely an extension of that same premise. These people feel like they just have to ‘do something’ in order to make themselves feel better about the fact that Trump’s 2024 victory means they are actually in the minority and that no one is listening to them.

Because they aren’t.

The post Psychotherapist Who Criticized ‘No Kings’ Protests Last Fall Writes in Anticipation of This Weekend’s Protests, Calling Them ‘Bad Group Therapy’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Democrat Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington State wants American citizens to pay reparations to illegal aliens in the country over the supposed ‘trauma’ they have suffered because of ICE. She also wants everyone involved in the deportations to be ‘held accountable’ by which she means prosecuted and possibly jailed.

Has everyone on the political left lost their ever-loving minds?

Less than a decade ago, Obama’s sycophants in the media called him the ‘deporter in chief,’ a nickname that was supposed to signify how tough and practical he was. Democrats back then had no problems with ICE, deportations or our immigration laws because one of theirs was in charge.

Today, we get this madness.

Townhall reports:

Progressive Congresswoman and member of The Squad, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), called for “some form of reparation” to be paid to illegal immigrants for the alleged “trauma” inflicted by ICE agents during President Trump’s nationwide deportation campaign.

It remains astonishing that Democrats label funding the Department of Homeland Security and its agencies as a waste of taxpayer dollars, yet have no issue using public funds to provide reparations to individuals who broke the law by entering the country illegally.

“We need real accountability, because at the end of the day, the people that have been inflicting this harm need to be prosecuted,” Jayapal said. “They need to be brought before us, and they need to be held account for the trauma that they have created, and we are going to have to have some form of reparation.”

See the video below:

Rep Pramila Jayapal is now calling for taxpayer funded reparations for illegals

It’s not enough that Democrats already gave them taxpayer funded housing, health insurance, SNAP, education, and debit cards.

They now also want to pay them for invading us pic.twitter.com/QAMjF18dG7

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) March 27, 2026

It is important to remember that so many moments like this from Jayapal and others in her party are merely performative. They have a constant need to show the Democrat base that they are even further to the left than the Democrat sitting next to them.

It is still damaging however, to the country and our politics because it sets a precedent. Now, everyone who comes after Jayapal will have to go even further, suggesting something even more outlandish in order to prove their true progressive values.

In the meantime, the best solution is ridicule, which is exactly what Jayapal deserves for even suggesting this incredibly stupid and insulting idea.

The post Far Left Rep. Pramila Jayapal Wants Americans to Pay Reparations to Illegal Aliens Who Have Been ‘Traumatized’ by ICE (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio might be the United States’ top diplomat, but there was nothing diplomatic in his language on Friday.

During a meeting with reporters at the end of a foreign ministers summit in France, Rubio was asked about a statement by Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy describing security guarantees the U.S. has offered in talks to end the Russian war in Ukraine.

Rubio’s response was blunt to the point of insult.

REPORTER: Did the US tell Zelensky that security guarantees depend on withdrawing from Donbas?

SECRETARY RUBIO: That’s a lie, and I saw him say that, and it’s unfortunate he would say that because he knows that’s not true. That’s not what he was told. pic.twitter.com/9SygxeFXWA

— Dylan Johnson (@ASDylanJohnson) March 27, 2026

A reporter had asked Rubio to comment on Zelenskyy statements reported Thursday by Reuters, in which the Ukrainian president said U.S. security guarantees depended on Ukraine withdrawing its forces from the Donbas region in Ukraine’s east — the scene of heavy fighting between Russian invaders and Ukrainian defenders.

In effect, Zelenskyy said the U.S. was pressuring Ukraine to surrender its territory in exchange for American support against future Russian aggression.

“That’s a lie,” Rubio said. “And I saw him say that, and it’s unfortunate he would say that, ’cause he knows that’s not true, and it’s not what he was told.

“What he was told is the obvious: Security guarantees are not going to kick in until there’s an end to a war. Because, otherwise, you’re getting yourself involved in a war …

“What he was told very clearly, and he should have understood it, is that the security guarantees come only after there is an end to the war.

“That was not attached to, ‘unless he gives up territory.’ I don’t know why he says these things. They’re just not true.”

The blowup is the latest battle between Zelenskyy and the Trump administration. That relationship has experienced some rocky moments since President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025.

At that point, the war in Ukraine, which started in February 2022, had been raging for almost three years.

The friction came to a head a year ago, with a televised White House clash between Zelenskyy, Trump, and Vice President J.D. Vance that saw Zelenskyy actually booted from the White House.

Since then, the two sides have worked together. However, with the Trump White House now occupied with military action against Iran, Ukraine-Russia talks might well have a lower priority than they did when Trump took office.

“The Middle East definitely has an impact on President Trump, and I think on his next steps. President Trump, unfortunately, in my opinion, still chooses a strategy of putting more pressure on the Ukrainian side,” Zelenskyy told Reuters.

In his remarks Friday, Rubio made it clear that the U.S. isn’t making Ukraine’s decisions for it.

“We’ve told the Ukrainian side what the Russians are insisting on,” he said, according to The Associated Press.

“We’re not advocating for it. We’ve explained it to them. It’s their choice to make. It’s not for us to make for them. We’ve never told them they have to take it or leave it.

“The role we have played is to try to figure out what both sides want, and see if we can bridge the middle ground.”

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Rubio Accuses Zelenskyy of Telling a Significant Lie About US Security Guarantees: ‘He Knows That’s Not True’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.