California Governor Gavin Newsom signed legislation on September 17, 2024, that effectively muzzles the First Amendment under the guise of curbing “deepfake” technology. The new law, touted as the nation’s most aggressive stance on AI-generated content, makes it illegal to use artificial intelligence to create parody images, videos, or audio impersonations of political candidates in the run-up to elections. While the law claims to address the growing concern of misinformation in political campaigns, it’s a direct assault on a core element of free speech: political satire.

The Move Against Free Speech

Governor Newsom’s decision comes after a public spat with Elon Musk, owner of the social media platform X. The conflict began when Musk shared an AI-altered video of Vice President Kamala Harris. Newsom rebuked Musk and swiftly vowed to push for legislation that would prevent such content from being shared in California. True to his word, the bill was signed into law and is set to take effect before the November 2024 elections.

The law allows courts to issue injunctions against the distribution of intentionally deceptive political content, including satirical deepfakes, during election season. Penalties can also be levied on individuals or entities that share such content. Newsom, in a conversation with Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff, dismissed the idea that the law was politically motivated, stating, “I could care less if it was Harris or Trump. It was just wrong on every level.”

However, the implication of this law is clear—it limits the ability of citizens, commentators, and even comedians to use AI for political satire, parody, and commentary. While Newsom and his allies frame the legislation as a safeguard against misinformation, this is a direct violation of the First Amendment, which has long protected satire as a form of political expression.

What’s Really at Stake?

At first glance, combating AI-generated misinformation might seem like a noble cause. With deepfakes becoming increasingly sophisticated, the potential for misleading voters is a legitimate concern. But the problem arises when the state begins to overreach, dictating the boundaries of acceptable speech. Political parody has always played a critical role in American democracy, serving as a tool to mock, criticize, and hold the powerful accountable. From the lampooning of Richard Nixon in “All in the Family” to “Saturday Night Live’s” biting satire of both Democratic and Republican politicians, parody has been a vital form of political expression.

This new California law threatens to blur the line between deceptive manipulation and political satire, chilling a form of speech that has been constitutionally protected for over two centuries. As Elon Musk pointed out, “Parody is legal in America.” But in Newsom’s California, it appears that may no longer be the case—at least when AI is involved.

The Broader Implications

The passage of this law is part of a broader, troubling trend in which powerful figures in government seek to control the flow of information under the guise of protecting “truth” and “democracy.” With this legislation, California now leads the charge in cracking down on AI-generated content, but this could easily set a dangerous precedent for other states to follow. If laws like this are allowed to proliferate, it would mark the beginning of a slippery slope, where freedom of expression becomes increasingly curtailed in the digital age.

Even more alarming is the timing. Newsom’s law takes effect before the 2024 elections, a critical moment in American politics. Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, who carried the bill, admitted the law was written with the explicit intent of targeting content in the 2024 cycle, referring to it as the nation’s “first AI election.” Under the pretext of shielding election officials and candidates from targeted misinformation, this law effectively curtails the ability of voters to engage with and criticize political figures in new and creative ways.

Political Satire or Misinformation?

The key issue here is defining what constitutes “misinformation.” While deepfakes that genuinely deceive voters are problematic, this law takes aim at all AI-generated content, even when it is clearly marked as parody or satire. Political figures, especially during campaigns, have always been subject to scrutiny, mockery, and impersonation. Satirical images and videos often draw attention to important issues, shaping public opinion through humor. By prohibiting AI-generated content in this realm, the law conflates misleading information with the use of humor and satire, undermining the spirit of the First Amendment.

The dangers of deepfake technology are real, but the solution to this issue cannot be the heavy hand of government dictating what kinds of content are permissible. As it stands, existing defamation laws are already sufficient to address cases where deepfakes cross the line from satire into malicious deception. Yet, the California law treats all AI-generated political content as a threat, removing the essential nuance that distinguishes satire from falsehood.

Newsom’s Long Battle with Elon Musk

This latest law also highlights the ongoing feud between Governor Newsom and Elon Musk. What began as a disagreement over COVID-19 lockdowns has escalated into a broader clash over free speech and the role of tech companies in moderating content. Musk has been a vocal critic of California’s regulatory environment, especially as the state continues to push for more control over tech platforms and the content they host.

In response to this law, it is not hard to imagine that Musk and others will challenge it in court, arguing that it oversteps the constitutional protections of free speech. Musk’s platform, X, could become a battleground for legal challenges, especially since the law allows users to flag content for removal, putting tech companies in the difficult position of adjudicating what constitutes “misleading” political content.

Kamala Harris has now been installed as the Democratic candidate for the 2024 presidential election, effectively replacing Joe Biden without a single vote cast by the American people. In normal times, this usurp of democracy would send shockwaves through the political landscape, raising questions about the integrity of the democratic process and the lengths to which the deep state will go to maintain control.

The Quiet Removal of Biden

The signs were there for months, if not years. Joe Biden, already struggling under the weight of his responsibilities as president, had become an increasing liability for the Democratic Party. Whispers about his cognitive decline had grown louder, and public appearances that once showcased a capable leader had turned into fodder for criticism and doubt. But once the decline was presented in full view of the American public at the debate with Donald Trump, the power brokers knew that the people would not accept the delusion of another Biden victory … the gig was up. So the decision was made behind closed doors to remove Biden from the ballot.

The official story presented by the party is one of a natural and necessary transition—a passing of the torch to the next generation of leadership. But the reality is far more concerning. Biden’s removal from the 2024 ticket was not the result of a fair and open democratic process. Instead, it was orchestrated by party elites and deep state operatives who feared that a Biden campaign, in light of his declining health and public perception, would be an insurmountable obstacle to retaining power. Presenting a Trump victory would become more important than maintaining any perception of democracy.

Kamala Harris: The Deep State’s Choice

With Biden out of the picture, Kamala Harris was swiftly installed as the Democratic candidate. This decision was made for a variety of reasons, most importantly, money. They needed a pseudo-legitimate excuse to take the campaign money from Biden. Choosing Harris would make it an easier sell to the public. Harris, who has consistently polled lower than Biden among key demographics, was not chosen by the people but by a select group of power brokers who believe she is the key to continuing their control over the nation’s future.

Harris’s installation as the candidate was the result of months of careful planning and behind-the-scenes maneuvering. The deep state, recognizing the need for a candidate who could be more easily controlled and who would continue to advance its agenda, saw Harris as the perfect figurehead. While the Democrat party needed her to secure the money. With her in place, they could ensure that the policies and strategies implemented during Biden’s presidency would continue unchallenged.

Rigging the Input, Not the Machines

In past elections, they used the real-time analytics from the voting machines to determine the number of fraudulent ballots they would need to bring in. In 2024, they will no longer concern themselves with analytics or trying to beat Trump by a “plausible” number of votes, they will simply flood the system with as many fraudulent votes as they can muster … right from the start. The goal is to preclude the possibility of Trump ever being in the lead. By controlling the flow and distribution of ballots, those behind the scenes can achieve the desired outcome without ever touching a voting machine.

This strategy involves a complex web of tactics, including the use of mail-in ballots, drop boxes, and ballot harvesting. But at the core of this approach lies a critical component: building a vast pool of potential voters whose identities can be exploited to cast fraudulent ballots.

The deep state and its allies have embarked on an aggressive campaign to expand the pool of registered voters, from which they can later draw to manufacture the ballots needed to tip the scales in their favor. This effort is far-reaching, targeting various segments of the population through tailored strategies designed to maximize registration numbers—often without the individual’s full awareness of how their information might be used.

1. College Campuses: One of the prime targets for this voter registration drive is college campuses. With millions of students scattered across the country, many of whom are first-time voters, college campuses present a fertile ground for expanding the voter rolls. Registration drives on campuses are often presented as civic engagement initiatives, but behind the scenes, they serve a dual purpose. By registering students en masse, many of whom are transient and move frequently, the deep state creates a pool of voters who may be less likely to follow up on their ballots or even be aware that a ballot was cast in their name. When it’s all over, the media will report how remarkable, and exciting, that so many young people are choosing to engage in politics … but it’s all an illusion.
2. Healthcare Providers and Elderly Patients: Another key tactic involves enlisting the help of doctors and healthcare providers, particularly those who care for elderly patients. These patients, many of whom may be in assisted living facilities or suffering from cognitive decline, become prime targets for voter registration. The HHS now has specific codes that Doctors must use to note that they asked their patients if they wanted to register to vote. Doctors are now encouraged to assist their patients in registering to vote, often under the guise of ensuring their voices are heard. However, once these elderly individuals are registered, their ballots can be easily manipulated or even cast without their knowledge, especially if they are no longer mentally capable of voting on their own.
3. Targeting Youth Through Digital Platforms: Young people, who are more likely to engage with digital content than traditional forms of media, are another focus of the registration campaign. Through targeted ads on platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram, the deep state and its allies run campaigns that encourage young people to register to vote. These ads are often framed as non-partisan get-out-the-vote efforts, but the real goal is to flood the voter rolls with names that can later be used to generate fraudulent ballots. The transient nature of youth voters, many of whom may register in one state and move to another, creates opportunities for multiple ballots to be cast in their names across different states.
4. Mass Mailings and Door-to-Door Canvassing: In addition to digital and healthcare-focused efforts, there is a concerted push to register voters through mass mailings and door-to-door canvassing. These methods, while seemingly innocuous, have the potential to generate vast numbers of registrations that can later be exploited. Canvassers, often working for non-profit organizations with ties to the deep state, are trained to encourage individuals to register, sometimes using misleading or deceptive tactics. Once registered, these voters’ information is fed into a database that can be accessed to create the ballots needed to sway the election.

Manipulating the Ballot Process

Once the pool of voters has been sufficiently expanded, the next step is sending out ballots in mass. Harvesters will then collect the ballots, fill them out, and then send them in. The result will be what appears to be an organic, legitimate set of ballots fed into the system. For the “dead people” vote, those ballots are likely to be printed and completed already, and sitting in a warehouse, ready to be fed into the system as early voting. On election night, Harris will immediately jump to the top of the results as the mail in ballots will be calculated first.

As the 2024 election approaches, the stakes could not be higher. A second Trump presidency would pose an existential threat to the deep state and its allies. With Trump back in office, the risk of exposure and dismantling of the deep state’s operations becomes all too real. For this reason, every possible measure is being taken to ensure that Kamala Harris not only wins the election but does so convincingly.

But the deep state faces a new challenge: how to secure a Harris victory in a way that doesn’t trigger widespread backlash or expose the methods used to achieve it. The removal of Biden from the ticket was a calculated risk, but it also opened the door to questions and doubts about the legitimacy of Harris’s candidacy. To counter this, the deep state is doubling down on its efforts to control the narrative and suppress any dissenting voices.

Democrats “Contingency Plan”

In the event that all attempts to manipulate the 2024 election fail and Donald Trump wins a second term, the Democrats have prepared a contingency plan that centers around invoking Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, also known as the “Insurrection Clause.” This clause disqualifies former government officials from holding office if they engaged in insurrection or rebellion after taking an oath to support the Constitution. Democrats argue that Trump’s alleged role in inciting the events of January 6, 2021, which they classify as an insurrection, makes him ineligible to serve as president again. This strategy is viewed as a last-resort effort to prevent Trump from assuming office on January 20, 2025, should he win the election.

Representative Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has been a vocal proponent of this plan, warning that the invocation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment on January 6, 2025, could potentially lead to civil unrest or even civil war. Raskin suggests that Trump’s actions on January 6, 2021, were a direct attempt to undermine democracy and that preventing him from returning to the White House is not only justified but necessary to protect the nation. In anticipation of the potential backlash, Raskin has called for Democratic members of Congress to be given bodyguards, highlighting the seriousness of the situation and the possible violent response from Trump supporters.

For Raskin’s plan to succeed, it would require the support of two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. This presents a significant challenge, as achieving such a majority would necessitate substantial bipartisan cooperation, particularly from Republican members of Congress. With the current composition of Congress—212 Democrats and 220 Republicans in the House, and 47 Democrats, 4 Independents voting with Democrats, and 49 Republicans in the Senate—Raskin’s plan hinges on whether enough Republicans, particularly those labeled as “RINOs” (Republicans In Name Only), would be willing to join Democrats in disqualifying Trump.

This contingency plan has reportedly been in the works for several years, reflecting a broader strategy by some within the Democratic Party to ensure that Trump does not return to the White House under any circumstances. This approach underscores the deep divisions within the country and the lengths to which some are willing to go to prevent Trump’s re-election.

The Implications for American Democracy

As the nation heads into the 2024 election, the American people must ask themselves whether they are willing to accept a candidate chosen for them by elites, or whether they will demand a return to a system where the people’s voice truly matters. The deep state has shown its hand, and now it is up to the citizens of this country to decide what kind of future they want for themselves and for generations to come.

In the end, the 2024 election will not just be a contest between two candidates but a battle between good vs evil. The choice before the American people is not just about who will occupy the White House but whether they are willing to stand up against a system that seeks to control and manipulate them. Kamala Harris may have been installed as the candidate, but the power to determine the future still lies in the hands of the people—if they are willing to take it. The concept of being “too big to rig” is now more critical than ever. By overwhelming the system with a massive turnout of freedom-loving MAGA supporters, the American people can push back against the deep state’s efforts, ensuring that no amount of manipulation or rigging can silence their collective voice. The future of the republic depends on it.

In the world of political journalism, where every detail is scrutinized and every claim dissected, it’s easy to be swept up by sensational stories—especially when they involve political figures whose policies you fundamentally oppose. Recently, I came across a bizarre and troubling article that claimed Tim Walz, Kamala Harris’ newly announced running mate, had been involved in a disturbing incident back in 1995. The story, which alleged that Walz was hospitalized after ingesting horse semen, seemed too strange to be true. And as it turns out, it was.

I’ll admit, at first glance, the details of the story seemed plausible enough to warrant further investigation. The article was purportedly from a 1995 issue of the West Point Daily News, and it claimed that Walz had been treated at “West Point General Hospital” by a “Dr. Amanda Thompson.” Given Walz’s track record and my own disdain for his destructive policies, I wanted to believe that this story would reveal yet another example of his poor judgment. But as a journalist committed to the truth, I knew I had to verify the information before passing it on to my readers.

The Hoax Unveiled

As I dug deeper into the story, it quickly became clear that something was amiss. There is no record of a West Point Daily News ever existing, nor is there any hospital named “West Point General” in West Point, Nebraska. The supposed physician, “Dr. Amanda Thompson,” is also a complete fabrication with no medical credentials or history in the area. The more I looked into the details, the more the entire story began to fall apart.

The image of the newspaper article circulating online was revealed to be a poorly executed forgery. The photo of Walz included in the piece was desaturated, an effect that would not have been possible in a black-and-white newspaper from 1995. Further inspection showed that the layout of the newspaper used a digital background commonly found on the website Scribed, strongly indicating that the article was a modern creation rather than an authentic piece of journalism from the past.

Adding to the absurdity, the fake newspaper also featured a real article titled “International Moose Count Underway” by Bob O’bobston—an actual story that was published on September 16, 2020. The presence of a 2020 article in a supposedly 1995 newspaper was the final nail in the coffin, confirming that the entire scandal was nothing more than a hoax designed to deceive.

A Commitment to the Truth

Despite my personal and political disdain for Tim Walz and everything he stands for, I am a conservative journalist first and foremost. My commitment to the truth outweighs any desire to see my ideological opponents discredited by any means necessary. We conservatives pride ourselves on being better than the leftist journalists who often resort to fabricating stories or bending the truth to suit their agenda. Our opinions may be strong, but they must be grounded in facts. This is the foundation of credible journalism.

This incident underscores the importance of verification in journalism. It would have been easy to take the fabricated story at face value and use it as fodder to criticize Walz further. But doing so would have compromised my integrity and the trust my readers place in me. Our role as journalists is not to regurgitate sensational stories without evidence but to dig deeper, to uncover the truth, and to report it—no matter how inconvenient it may be to our own beliefs.

The Danger of Fake News

The rapid spread of this false story on social media highlights the dangers of fake news. In today’s digital age, misinformation can travel faster than ever, and once a lie takes hold, it can be difficult to undo the damage. For a brief moment, even I was nearly taken in by this hoax, which serves as a reminder that none of us are immune to the allure of a sensational headline.

However, as conservative journalists, we must hold ourselves to a higher standard. We can’t afford to make up stories or spread unverified information like some of our counterparts on the left. Our opinions are powerful tools for shaping public discourse, but they must always be supported by verifiable facts. When we stray from this principle, we undermine our credibility and weaken our position in the ongoing battle for truth.

A Lesson in Integrity

The exposure of this hoax should be a wake-up call to everyone involved in political journalism. For those of us who consider ourselves conservative journalists, it’s a reminder of our duty to maintain the highest standards of accuracy and integrity. We can—and should—express our opinions within the context of our reporting, but those opinions must be grounded in reality. When we allow ourselves to be swayed by falsehoods, we become no better than the very people we criticize.

This incident has reinforced my resolve to remain steadfast in my commitment to the truth. No matter how much I disagree with Tim Walz and his policies, I will not stoop to the level of spreading lies to score political points. We must be better than that. We must be vigilant, skeptical, and above all, honest in our reporting.

The truth matters. It is the foundation of a free and informed society. And as long as I have a platform to write from, I will continue to fight for it, even if the left doesn’t.