The Un-Campaign Blueprint: Run Different. Win Lean.

The Socialistas are taking over the Democrat Party and the establishment Democrats are so addicted to power and corruption that they just don’t care. They will say or do absolutely anything to save their seats (and stay out of prison.)

Their only strategy is to demonize President Trump and oppose everything he does, even when he helps their own constituents. If the Democrats win the midterms, the radical Socialistas will run the show.

Every two years people say “this is the most important election in history,” but for 2026, it couldn’t be more true.

First and foremost, election integrity is everything. Anyone who says fraud isn’t rampant is living on another planet. President Trump’s explosive revelations on Thursday night may finally force the RINO Senate to pass the SAVE Act and secure our ballots.

To win as many seats as possible, we have to pick America-First candidates in the remaining primaries and support them with everything we’ve got.

But the old way of running political campaigns is no longer effective.

Every election cycle, grassroots candidates for Congress, state house, and county seats are handed the same playbook by high-priced establishment consultants: “Raise hundreds of thousands of dollars, hand them over to a media firm, and generate polarizing TV ads and glossy mail pieces.”

Voters are completely sick of it. They don’t trust focus-grouped political ads, they change the channel, and they throw glossy campaign mail straight into the recycling. As one voter put it: “They send me flyers I will never read, asking for money I can’t afford, so they can send me more flyers I will never read.”

When candidates buy a polished, million-dollar ad campaign, they instantly signal to voters that they are part of the very establishment that has failed to fix their family’s critical pocketbook issues.

To win against well-funded incumbent machines and the liberal media, conservative candidates must change how they talk to the people.

The answer is a completely new approach: The Un-Campaign.

Grassroots candidates can flip the script on the establishment by using a strategy first mastered in the entertainment world. This is the approach that propelled Spencer Pratt to massive success in uberliberal California—before his second-place finish was stolen.

Pratt gave a masterclass on how to beat the system and talk directly to the people. He completely bypassed traditional media gatekeepers and rejected expensive, polished public relations campaigns. Instead, he used his cellphone to create raw, high-frequency, unscripted videos and encouraged his supporters to share his message. He didn’t spend a dime on paid advertising.

By using free, vertical-video platforms like TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts along with local digital channels, down-ballot candidates can get more reach, real authenticity, and deeper voter trust. They can replace fake, focus-group talking points with a raw look at real-world issues that matter to voters.

A successful low-cost, organic campaign doesn’t broadcast the same generic message to the whole district. Instead, the candidate uses daily, smartphone-shot videos to speak directly to the real-life pressure points of three specific voter groups we need for a conservative victory…

1. The Wary Conservative (“The Turnout Risk”)

Every midterm race has reliable, right-leaning voters who just stay home. They aren’t unpatriotic, their main frustration is watching their local and state government become a black hole for their hard-earned tax dollars. They feel that their vote will do nothing to end government waste and broken promises.

Candidates can reach these voters by acting as a citizen journalist pulling back the curtain on incompetent government taking their smartphone directly to local examples of government failure—like an abandoned municipal project or a wasteful county building. By exposing these failures in raw, unedited videos, the campaign converts voter frustration into a strong motivation to show up and vote.

2. The Disaffected Democrat (“The Defector”)

Across the country, millions of traditional working-class Democrats feel completely left behind by their party’s insane shift toward hyper-liberal policies and progressive social engineering. But they won’t vote for a conservative if they only see aggressive, multimillion-dollar partisan attack ads funded by national PACs.

To win them over, the Un-Campaign focuses on kitchen-table economic realities, the rising costs of basic survival at the grocery store, skyhigh utility bills, and the ever rising cost of local child care. Candidates can reach them with real empathy and clear, common-sense solutions. This gives lifelong Democrats the cultural permission they need to cross over and vote for a local conservative.

3. The Pure Independent (“The Outsider”)

Suburban independent voters are the fastest-growing and most unpredictable part of the electorate. They despise both major political parties and instantly tune out anything that sounds like standard political talking points.

Independents are laser-focused on real local infrastructure and immediate public safety. They worry about suburban property crime, regional drug trafficking, and whether their local water lines and power grids are going to hold up. The candidates must be seen as a practical, common-sense outsiders who don’t care about national culture wars and share their no-holds-barred message through hyper-local digital communities.

The Un-Campaign must generate video content on a daily basis and commit to a strict schedule, putting out raw, real-time local observations every single day.

Candidates must deploy distinct content strategies tailored directly to where each voter group hangs out online. For Wary Conservatives, the candidate will focus on government incompetence and waste by broadcasting unedited, on-site project analyses directly into closed civic groups and localized online forums. To reach Disaffected Democrats, the message shifts toward the everyday cost of living and basic survival, utilizing high-empathy, kitchen-table economic discussions shared in non-political community spaces. Finally, to win over Pure Independents, the content will highlight physical safety and local infrastructure through practical structural breakdowns, distributed across hyper-local social media networks.

Because this approach relies on free social media algorithms and raw authenticity, the absolutely best weapon is surprise. Traditional campaigns are slow, bureaucratic, and restricted by rigid ad schedules. When a conservative candidate deploys a high-frequency, unscripted Un-Campaign, the opposition’s highly paid consultants literally do not know how to respond. They are trained to fight traditional TV ads, not a fast-moving, organic network powered by real people.

To keep this advantage, the exact operational tactics, targets of exposés, specific video scripts, and local distribution channels must be kept completely confidential.

If the opposition finds out about this methodology early in the race, they will change their own media buys or coordinate counter-narratives to block the candidate’s organic reach. By keeping strict operational security about how content is built and where it is posted, a down-ballot Un-Campaign ensures that by the time the establishment realizes they are losing, the bond with the voters is already unbreakable.

Run Different. Win Lean.

The era of winning local elections through expensive, out-of-touch consulting firms is over. Voters are starving for something real, and they care about the immediate, practical pressures of daily life.

By using the Un-Campaign approach, conservative candidates can reduce the financial barriers to running for public office. By turning themselves into an unscripted, high-frequency media channel using a smartphone, they can build an unshakeable bond with voters without wasting money on traditional political agencies.

This approach simply requires a candidate who is willing to show up, film the truth, and deploy a hyper-targeted, confidential digital strategy.

The broad strategies outlined in this article are only the tip of the spear. If you are running for the House of Representatives, or are a candidate at the state or local level, I would be happy to discuss this approach. All of my services are 100% free for legitimate candidates and available as time permits.

Jack Gleason is a conservative, common-sense, political consultant at the municipal, state, House, Senate and presidential level since 2009. His email is JackGleason9@protonmail.com and his always-free Substack is jackgleason.substack.com 

The post How to Win By Adopting the “Un-Campaign” Blueprint: Run Different. Win Lean. appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

President Trump’s Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin is under heavy fire for reportedly cozying up to the American Business Immigration Coalition, a powerful lobby representing approximately 1,700 employers who rely on illegal alien labor.

The controversy comes as some House Republicans are already under fire from conservatives for backing legislation critics say would amount to de facto amnesty for certain illegal alien farm workers, raising concerns among the MAGA base that Washington is beginning to soften on President Trump’s mass deportation agenda.

According to a report by The Washington Post, DHS officials recently met with the American Business Immigration Coalition (ABIC), a bipartisan organization that says it represents approximately 1,700 employers.

The report also said DHS has held discussions with other business coalitions seeking regular dialogue over the impact of immigration enforcement on employers.

The Washington Post reported:

The Department of Homeland Security under Secretary Markwayne Mullin is cultivating a relationship with business groups whose concerns about losing workers to aggressive immigration enforcement had been rebuffed by former secretary Kristi L. Noem.

Earlier this month, DHS officials met at the agency’s Washington headquarters with the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, which represents the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and major trade associations that depend on immigrant labor, according to several people with knowledge of the meeting, which has not been previously reported.

It was the first such meeting to be reported since President Donald Trump reentered the White House. Business groups say they have been trying to gain a foothold at the agency since Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests began to spike last year.

Mullin did not attend the early July meeting — which included officials from ICE and Customs and Border Protection, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly — and the gathering did not produce an immediate change in policies. But two of the people said DHS officials said they want to meet regularly with the group to assess the impact of Trump’s mass deportation campaign and business needs.

[…]

A DHS spokesperson declined to comment on the meeting; coalition members declined to comment publicly.

Conservative commentator Tomi Lahren didn’t hold back, taking to X to rip into the reported meetings and call out sellout politicians pushing for covert amnesty schemes:

“Again, I am very concerned to hear that our new DHS secretary Markwayne is reportedly meeting with big labor groups who are afraid of losing their cheap illegal alien labor and meanwhile some republicans in congress are simultaneously pushing amnesty. WTF? I thought this administration stood for America first, and the American worker? As a Trump voter, I know I personally don’t give one shit if big corps are pissy they risk losing their serf labor class to rightful deportations. This is downright infuriating.”

Former Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino, who was called by Mullin as “irrelevant,” responded, “Those big labor groups working with deep state government end up screwing the taxpayer. Enough!”

Those big labor groups working with deep state government end up screwing the taxpayer. Enough!!!!! @TomiLahren they haven’t yet got the message I guess!!!!!!! @BreannaMorello

— Gregory K Bovino (@GregoryKBovino) July 21, 2026

The National Police Association responded to Lahren’s comment, stating, “He met with the American Business Immigration Coalition, which represents approximately 1,700 employers of illegals. His job is to meet with the 1700 employers of illegals directly. And arrest them.”

Sadly, I don’t think he plans to do that.

You gotta hand it to Democrats, they opened the floodgates for the Third World by the millions and now we’re supposed to be impressed with around 350,000 deportations. https://t.co/zjsE2TyA4D

— Tomi Lahren (@TomiLahren) July 21, 2026

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, this isn’t the first time Secretary Mullin has found himself in hot water with the America First crowd. Just days ago, Mullin was scrambling for damage control after reports he went around President Trump to suspend certain ICE traffic stops.

The post Markwayne Mullin Faces Fresh Backlash After DHS Officials Reportedly Meet with Business Lobby Pushing Cheap Illegal Alien Labor: “This Is Downright Infuriating” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

On Monday, The Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft and Patty McMurray discussed the massive Muskegon ballot registration scandal with Steve Bannon on The War Room.

President Trump on Thursday night mentioned the illicit Democrat-aligned voter registration group that was caught dumping nearly 10,000 ballot registrations in Muskegon, Michigan prior to the 2020 election.

Muskegon is a county with 30,000 eligible voters so the voter registration dump in October 2020 was highly suspect.

The Gateway Pundit was first to publish information on this massive Democratic-funded scandal. We ran several reports on the criminal actions that were at the center of this massive voter registration scandal.

@POTUS Promises to get to the bottom of the GBI Strategies statewide voter registration scheme in Michigan that I broke in August 2023 on the @gatewaypundit. The article was 100% based on Michigan State Police & Muskegon Police reports.https://t.co/H8qR6ZSNC1

“We’re releasing… pic.twitter.com/WqFGSYKglS

— PattyMI (@PattyLovesTruth) July 17, 2026

President Trump also released documents that revealed that 13 of 20 sampled ballot registrations were fraudulent, or 65%, in the stack of registrations delivered to the Muskegon clerk prior to the 2020 presidential election. Thousands of ballots were fraudulent and yet no one was ever charged in the scandal.

No one was ever charged for this scandal. The FBI and Biden’s DOJ swept it under the rug in what appears to be a favor to the Democrat Party.

Before the investigation into GBI Strategies was turned over to the FBI where it went to die, the MI State Police investigator assigned to the case spoke with a female suspect, who explained that she was being paid $1150/week “to find unregistered voters and provide them with a form so they can get registered to vote or obtain their absentee ballot.” The only problem is that the handwriting on several voter registrations was identical, and many of the addresses were nonexistent or fake.

The GBI Strategies key suspect was interviewed by AG Investigator Stephen Morse, where he literally tells her, “crimes were committed!”

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s analyst, Corey Ames, was a key part of the GBI Investigation. Ames clearly stated in the Michigan State Police report that “a quantity of the forms” they found in their investigation “are clearly fraudulent.”

Although Ms. Benson, who is currently running as the Democratic candidate for governor of Michigan, was privy to this information, she chose to hide the investigation from the public and deliberately lied when she assured them there was no widespread voter fraud in Michigan.

Investigators found that GBI Strategies was paid $188,000 by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in 2018.

The Biden Campaign also funded the organization.

On Monday, Jim Hoft and Patty McMurray went on The War Room to discuss this massive scandal that President Trump singled out in his address to the nation on Thursday night.

Enjoy.

The post The Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft and Patty McMurray Discuss the Massive Muskegon Ballot Registration Scandal with Steve Bannon after President Trump’s Address to Nation (Video) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Guest Post by Zachary Rehl

In the wake of presidential pardons, commutations, and recent federal court dismissals with prejudice of key criminal cases tied to January 6, 2021, one major civil lawsuit continues its slow, grinding march through the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Smith et al. v. Trump et al. (Case No. 1:21-cv-02265-APM) was filed on August 26, 2021—nearly five years ago. It remains far from trial, mired in protracted discovery disputes that have financially strained defendants and their counsel, while plaintiffs’ counsel, awash in cash from far-left mega donors, pursues intrusive and unprecedented discovery.

This is not a conventional lawsuit seeking straightforward compensation for injured parties. It is a high-stakes fishing expedition that defense attorneys argue has little to do with traditional notions of victim redress and everything to do with keeping the January 6 narrative alive for political purposes. Radical far-left elements opposed to any robust defense of J6 participants are engaged in a relentless enterprise to destroy attorneys representing J6 defendants, simply because these attorneys stepped up to defend J6 defendants.

Far-left radicals determined to destroy these attorneys are engaged in targeted campaigns of online and telephone harassment to force clients of these attorneys to terminate longstanding attorney-client relationships. The left is intent on making so-called deplorable persons legally unrepresentable, but it is you who they claim is the fascist.

The Professional Rescue Doctrine: A Longstanding Barrier Ignored

J6 defendants who had their cases pardoned or dismissed with prejudice are currently fighting a frivolous action in the District of Columbia that was brought by Capitol Police Officers, who claimed they were injured while performing their professional duties on January 6, 2021. This case should never have been brought because it is well established that professional rescuers, e.g., cops, firefighters, who claim they were injured while performing their professional duties are prohibited by the Professional Rescuers Doctrine from suing the persons who they claim caused their alleged on-the-job injuries.

A routine pre-suit investigation would have informed plaintiffs’ counsel that the claims are frivolous, however, the normal conventions of civil litigation were thrown out the window, because, plaintiffs are represented by the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a far-left NGO that is well funded by Soros’ Open Society Foundation and others of its ilk, who are consumed with TDS, and a seething hatred for White Working Class Christians, whom they view as President Trump’s most ardent supporters.

The D.C. Court of Appeals adopted the Professional Rescuers Doctrine in Gillespie v. Washington, 395 A.2d 18 (D.C. 1978), and has reaffirmed it in subsequent cases. The rationale is straightforward: police officers and firefighters are trained, equipped, and compensated by the public precisely to handle dangerous situations like riots, breaches, and civil unrest.

They assume those risks. Exceptions exist for truly hidden or independent acts of negligence unrelated to the emergency that necessitated the response, but the core principle protects against using civil courts to impose additional liability on citizens for events where responders were doing their sworn duty.

Defense attorneys contend that the Professional Rescuers Doctrine mandates dismissal and that plaintiffs’ counsel be sanctioned for bringing this frivolous lawsuit. The case has advanced under foreign-born Federal Judge Amit P. Mehta (an Obama appointee confirmed in 2014), who was born in Gujarat, India, a place where, for decades, Christians have been violently persecuted, attacked, and killed.

Donate to GiveSendGo.com/help-defend-against-the-j6lawfare or CLICK HERE

A Fishing Expedition for Concocted Allegations That Criminal Investigations Never Found

The complaint alleges conspiracy claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(1) the infamous Ku Klux Klan Act, and related statutes, plus D.C. bias-related crimes and common-law torts, asserting that defendants—including President Trump, his campaign entities, Proud Boys leaders (Enrique Tarrio, Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, and others), Oath Keepers, and additional individuals—conspired to overthrow “our democracy.” It’s an absurd allegation whereby the plaintiffs alleged the President of the United States conspired with unarmed Gen-Xers to overthrow our democracy

Critically, exhaustive criminal investigations and trials conducted by the prior administration’s Department of Justice never established a direct operational conspiracy linking the Proud Boys (or similar groups) to President Trump directing or coordinating the breach in the manner alleged. Those criminal cases against Proud Boys leaders have now seen seditious conspiracy convictions vacated and dismissed with prejudice in 2026 following DOJ motions and appellate action amid broader clemency actions.

Despite this, nearly five years after the case was filed, it persists with aggressive, protracted discovery still ahead. Plaintiffs have been granted the highly unusual benefit of an open-ended discovery period without an established termination date. They have used it to serve broad and intrusive requests for production of communications, including private family communications, emails, and text messages. Further, Defendants are requesting that the court grant them permission to conduct an oral deposition of one hundred (100) persons, which is ten times the maximum limit for oral depositions permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Court records show ongoing disputes, motions to compel (including attempts to obtain materials from criminal defense counsel in related matters), sanctions motions, and orders addressing discovery responses. This is classic lawfare: using civil process to conduct a fishing expedition for any tenuous link after criminal probes came up empty on the central conspiracy narrative.

Moreover, defendants’ motions for summary judgment were submitted to the court on August 24, 2024, and despite the Professional Rescuer Doctrine’s obvious prohibition of this action, as we approach the two-year anniversary, there is no indication that Judge Mehta will rule anytime soon.

TO HELP WITH THEIR LEGAL BATTLE CLICK HERE

With the 2026 midterms approaching, some observers argue this case serves a broader political function: keeping January 6 in the headlines and generating potential material that could be weaponized in campaigns or congressional oversight should Democrats regain majorities. Whether or not that is the primary driver, the effect is the same — prolonging litigation that drains resources from defendants and their counsel long after the criminal cases have largely collapsed.

The cost extends beyond legal fees. Defense advocates report that attorneys taking these cases encounter coordinated online harassment, doxxing of clients, and professional sabotage from radical left agitators. Far-left radicals engage in targeted online campaigns against clients of the attorneys representing J6 defendants to cause these clients to terminate longstanding attorney-client relationships.

This pattern of threats and harassment is intended to deter capable counsel from representing defendants disliked on the left and punishes lawyers who prove zealous representation to unpopular clients. Justice Coney Barrett recently testified about the detrimental impact of these violent campaigns. Clients lose representation options, and attorneys lose other business as the harassment campaign chills their practices.

TO VIEW THE CASE DETAILS, CLICK HERE

The defendants—many already financially devastated by years of criminal proceedings, incarceration, and related consequences—are now facing a parallel civil track designed to drain remaining resources. Average attorneys and individual defendants are pitted against institutional plaintiffs’ counsel with foundation backing and a judicial process that has permitted expansive discovery even as the criminal foundation for the core allegations erodes.

This Is the Last Major Legal Front—And It Matters

With criminal cases largely resolved through dismissals and clemency, Smith v. Trump stands as one of the final active battlegrounds where the events of January 6 are still being litigated in earnest. Proponents of the suit frame it as accountability. Critics see a politically motivated effort to sustain a narrative useful for fundraising, media framing, and potential future political attacks—even as the underlying criminal foundation for the core allegations erodes.

The professional rescue doctrine, the absence of proven Trump-Proud Boys operational conspiracy in years of DOJ work, the endless discovery, and the personal toll that has become untethered from ordinary notions of justice and fairness.

If you believe the legal system should not be weaponized to financially destroy defendants and deter their lawyers after criminal cases have been dismissed or commuted, now is the time to act. Help sustain this critical defense [Fundraiser Link].

This is not about relitigating January 6 in the court of public opinion. It is about ensuring that the civil justice system retains some connection to precedent, proportionality, and basic fairness—especially when one side has institutional power and the other is fighting for survival. Every contribution helps keep the defense viable for the battles still ahead.

The outcome here will echo far beyond one case. It will signal whether lawfare has limits or whether the last front of January 6 becomes a model for endless civil attrition against political opponents.

Stand with the defense today. Donate and share this with others who care about equal justice under law: https://www.givesendgo.com/help-defend-against-the-j6lawfare?utm_source=share

*** The Gateway Pundit does not receive any part of the donations collected from the GiveSendGo or fundraising site for this article. We are giving these politically persecuted patriots a platform to tell their stories and help them reclaim their lives. ***

The post The Last J6 Case Standing: A Frivolous Lawsuit Weaponized To Bleed Defendants Dry appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

In another slap in the face to law-abiding American citizens, federal court judges are once again shielding radical far-left politicians who put illegal aliens ahead of public safety!

In a stunning 56-page ruling issued Monday, Chief U.S. District Judge Eric C. Tostrud tossed the Trump administration’s lawsuit challenging Minnesota’s web of sanctuary laws and local ordinances that deliberately obstruct federal immigration enforcement.

The case, United States v. State of Minnesota et al., targeted the State of Minnesota, Attorney General Keith Ellison, the City of Minneapolis, the City of Saint Paul, Hennepin County, and Sheriff Dawanna S. Witt.

The DOJ argued that state constitutional interpretations, statutes restricting information-sharing with federal immigration authorities, limits on honoring ICE detainers, and local sanctuary ordinances unlawfully interfered with federal immigration enforcement.

Specifically, the DOJ alleged that:

• Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison’s interpretation of the state constitution unlawfully prevented local officials from honoring ICE detainers.
• State statutes improperly restricted the sharing of immigration-related information with federal authorities.
• Minneapolis and St. Paul ordinances prohibited local police from assisting federal immigration enforcement.
• Hennepin County’s sheriff unlawfully refused to hold illegal aliens solely on ICE detainers.

Judge Tostrud, a Trump appointee, disagreed. He granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss across the board.

According to the court order filed on Monday:

• Claims against Hennepin County and Sheriff Dawanna Witt were largely dismissed, with several claims thrown out without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and others dismissed with prejudice.
• Claims against the City of St. Paul met the same fate, with the court dismissing both jurisdictional and substantive claims.
• Claims against the State of Minnesota and Attorney General Keith Ellison were dismissed, including multiple claims dismissed with prejudice.
• Claims against the City of Minneapolis were likewise dismissed under the court’s order.

In his 56-page opinion, the judge concluded that while the federal government possesses broad authority over immigration, it cannot force states or local governments to use their own personnel or resources to carry out federal immigration enforcement.

He ruled that the DOJ’s preemption claims largely failed because the federal government’s interpretation of immigration law would violate the Tenth Amendment’s anti-commandeering doctrine, which prohibits Washington from compelling states to administer or enforce federal regulatory programs.

The court also dismissed the DOJ’s claims under the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity, finding that Minnesota’s laws and policies do not unlawfully discriminate against the federal government.

Tostrud’s decision does not prevent federal immigration authorities from enforcing federal immigration laws themselves. Instead, it holds that Minnesota and its local governments generally cannot be forced to assist those efforts through the challenged policies.

Minnesota’s leaders have made their choice. They will continue shielding illegal aliens and handicapping ICE. Judge Tostrud just made it easier for them.

The post OUTRAGEOUS: Trump-Appointed Judge DISMISSES Federal Lawsuit Against Minnesota’s Radical Sanctuary Policies — Upholds State’s Refusal to Help ICE appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.