Donald Trump’s return to the White House in 2025 promised a seismic shift in the federal government—a long-overdue reckoning for the bloated, inefficient, overreaching, and corrupt bureaucracy that has choked American liberty for decades. But his agenda, rooted in deregulation, fiscal restraint, and a reassertion of national sovereignty, although nothing short of revolutionary, is in trouble.
To deliver on these promises—and to capitalize on the mandate he received from the American people, Trump will need more than a slim Republican majority in the US House and Senate. He needs a commanding, unassailable supermajority. Why? Because the twin forces of an activist judiciary and the relentlessly obstructive Democrat Party in Congress stand poised to derail every move he makes.
These entrenched enemies of reform wield their power not to govern, but to obstruct, subvert, preserve, and expand a centralized governmental status quo; a Deep State status quo, corrupt and entangled, that serves their unattainable ideological fantasies over the will of the American people.
Trump’s vision is clear: Slash the federal government’s sprawling footprint, dismantle—to an acceptable level—the regulatory state that strangles businesses, and restore transparency and accountability to a system that has grown fat on taxpayer dollars while delivering little in return.
He’s promised to gut agencies like the Department of Education—which has achieved next to nothing throughout its existence but to facilitate power to the teacher’s unions, rein in the Environmental Protection Agency’s overreach—which is now recognized a loyal arm of the transformative global elite, and impose fiscal discipline on a bought-and-paid-for Congress addicted to reckless spending. These aren’t modest tweaks—they’re radical reforms that strike at the heart of the Progressive neo-Marxian leviathan.
But such an agenda requires legislative muscle. Bills must pass both chambers of Congress with enough votes to override inevitable Democrat filibusters in the Senate and survive the gauntlet of partisan gridlock in the House. Even then, the real battle begins when these reforms collide with the courts—where activist judges, cloaked in black robes, eagerly await to twist the Constitution into a weapon against Trump’s reformative policies. Without a significant Republican majority, this vision lays squarely behind the eight ball.
Let’s start with the courts, the most insidious obstacle to Trump’s reforms.
The activist judiciary—stacked with liberal ideologues and spineless moderates—has spent decades unconstitutionally expanding its purview and usurping the role of elected lawmakers. These unelected black-robed tyrants don’t just interpret laws; they invent them, striking down duly enacted legislation with smug pronouncements that reek of elitism. Look no further than their track record during Trump’s first term: the travel ban on people coming into our country from nations that routinely gather at weekly prayers to chant “Death to America”—gutted by judges who fancied themselves arbiters of morality; tax reforms that boosted the economy and wealth for all demographics across the board—endlessly litigated by partisan hacks; and regulatory rollbacks that allowed small businesses to thrive—stalled by injunctions from district courts in deep-blue strongholds like California and New York.
A perfect example comes in a ruling by US District Court Judge William Alsup in San Francisco—a Clinton appointee—who recently ordered President Trump’s OPM director to re-hire probationary workers at six different agencies including Defense, Agriculture, Energy, Interior, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, executing the bidding of the government-sector labor unions. How can a president reform and streamline a bloated bureaucracy when the judiciary consistently interferes with the culling of the payroll?
Judges like Alsup aren’t guardians of justice—they’re saboteurs of democracy. They hide behind vague notions of “equity,” “precedent,” and “standing” to impose their Progressive dogma, overriding the will of voters and their elected representatives.
Trump’s plan to streamline the federal government by abolishing redundant agencies, eliminating corruption, redundancy, and waste, and slashing funding for the special interest projects of the far-Left will face an avalanche of lawsuits from activist groups, cheered on by these judicial autocrats. A slim Republican majority might pass a bill, but it takes only one rogue judge to issue a nationwide injunction, halting progress indefinitely.
A supermajority in Congress is Trump’s only shield against this judicial overreach. With enough votes, Republicans can codify reformative legislation so airtight—crafted with explicit language and overwhelming legislative intent—that even the most brazen activist judge will hesitate to strike them down.
Better yet, a dominant majority could expedite judicial appointments, flooding the courts with constitutionalists who respect the Separation of Powers, or impeach activist federal judges rather than treating the bench as a super-legislature. Without this, Trump’s reforms will drown in a sea of litigation, courtesy of a judiciary that answers to no one.
And if the courts are the long-term threat, Democrats in Congress are the immediate poison. This is a party that thrives on gridlock, weaponizing every procedural trick to stall any attempt at a reformative agenda. From downsizing the government and eliminating waste, fraud, and corruption in the Deep State bureaucracy to deregulation, tax cuts, and strengthening our defenses, today’s Democrats hate all of it.
During his first term, Democrats turned the House into a circus of endless investigations—think Russia hoaxes and impeachment charades—while refusing to cooperate on even the most common-sense reforms. Now, with Trump back in power, we are seeing the beginnings of the same playbook, amplified. Senate Democrats, led by Chuck Schumer, are set to filibuster anything that smells of Trumpism, from tariffs to border security. In the House, Nancy Pelosi’s gaggle of minion successors will rally their caucus to vote in lockstep against any bill that threatens their sacred cows—entitlements, climate boondoggles, and the maintenance of the administrative state.
The filibuster is their ace in the hole. With a 60-vote threshold in the Senate, Democrats can block legislation even if Republicans hold a narrow majority. Trump’s most ambitious reforms—say, a complete overhaul of federal spending or a transition away from the income tax—require not just passage, but passage with enough force to break through this wall of obstruction. A slim majority leaves Trump vulnerable to a handful of defectors or moderates buckling under pressure from the media and neo-Jacobin left-wing activists. A supermajority, however, flips the script: 60-plus Republican senators could steamroll the filibuster, while a commanding House majority ensures bills reach Trump’s desk without endless haggling.
Democrats don’t just obstruct for sport—they’re ideologically wedded to the very system Trump aims to dismantle. They worship at the altar of big government, viewing every agency, every regulation, every dollar of pork as a sacrament. Streamlining the federal government threatens their power base: the unions, the bureaucrats, the special interests, and the financial regurgitative network of shadow NGOs that bankroll their campaigns. They’ll fight tooth and nail to preserve this monstrosity, even if it means paralyzing Congress and leaving the American people to suffer under a broken system. Only a Republican supermajority can crush this “resistance” to deliver the reformative legislation mandated by the American voters in the 2024 General Election.
History proves the point.
In Trump’s first term, Republicans held the House and Senate from 2017 to 2019, but their majorities were razor-thin—52-48 in the Senate, 241-194 in the House. The result? Constant infighting, defections, and a legislative agenda that stalled despite unified control. The Tax Cuts & Jobs Act squeaked through, but broader reforms—like infrastructure or healthcare—crumbled under the weight of internal dissent and Democrat stonewalling. Even with a Republican trifecta, the margins were too tight to overcome the combined forces of judicial activism and congressional obstruction.
Fast forward to 2025. The stakes are higher, and the opposition is more consolidated. A narrow majority—53-45-2 in the Senate and a 3-seat 218-215 edge in the House—invites the same chaos. A single RINO (Republican In Name Only) like Mitt Romney or Lisa Murkowski can tank a bill in the Senate, while a few squishy House moderates can doom it in the lower chamber. Meanwhile, Democrats exploit every crack, rallying their base and their allies in the media to portray Trump as a dictator while quietly suffocating his desperately needed reformative agenda in committee rooms and courtrooms.
A supermajority changes the calculus. Imagine 60 or more Republican senators, backed by a 50-seat cushion in the House. Suddenly, the filibuster becomes irrelevant, defectors can be ignored, and legislation codifying Trump's reformative Executive Orders can move at warp speed. Trump could sign laws reforming government within months—restructuring entire agencies, slashing budgets, and rewriting the rules of the administrative state—before the courts or Democrats have time to regroup. This isn’t just about winning; it’s about winning decisively to render the obstructionist opposition impotent.
Trump’s election in 2024 was a mandate from the voters—a roar from the American heartland against a government that’s grown too big, too corrupt, too globalist, and too disconnected. But mandates mean nothing if they can’t be enacted. The activist judiciary and obstructive Democrats don’t care about the voters; they serve a “higher” calling—their own warped vision of an unachievable pseudo-utopia, enforced through injunctions, filibusters, and the regulatory Deep State. These elites sneer at the working-class Americans who put Trump in office, preferring to dictate policy from ivory towers and marble chambers.
A supermajority is the only way to translate that mandate into action. It’s the battering ram Trump needs to smash through the walls of resistance, delivering the reforms he promised and reforms the voters mandated: a leaner government, lower taxes, secure borders, and an end to the overreaching nanny state. Anything less, and the saboteurs win—leaving the American people with a hollow victory and a federal government that continues to suffocate them.
Donald Trump’s second term is a chance to remake America, but it’s a chance that hinges on raw political power. Only a supermajority in the House and Senate can give Trump the tools to overcome the black-robbed tyrants of the activist judiciary and the neo-Jacobins of the Democrat Party. The stakes are too high for half-measures. America demands boldness—and that starts with giving Trump the numbers to win. That’s why there is no rest; no time for “celebration.” We must keep the pressure on!
Then, when we return, our segment on America’s Third Watch, broadcast nationally from our flagship station WGUL AM930 & FM93.7 in Tampa, Florida.
The Bloody Obama-Biden Legacy in Syria
Over the weekend of March 8th and 9th, the world watched in stunned horror as reports trickled out of Syria: Christians, Alawites, and other religious minorities were being systematically slaughtered under the iron fist of Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, the radical Islamist now posing as a statesman.
According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and local sources cited by Newsweek, more than 1,000 people—many of them Christians and Alawites, the sect of the recently ousted Bashar al-Assad—have been butchered since Thursday, March 6. Women and children lie among the dead, entire families erased in a wave of sectarian vengeance led by al-Jolani’s Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. This is no isolated tragedy; it’s the predictable outcome of an Obama and Biden administration foreign policy so obsessed with toppling Assad that it paved the way for a jihadist nightmare.
Let’s not mince words: al-Jolani is a monster with a resume soaked in blood. He’s no “rebel” or “freedom fighter,” as the Obama and Biden administration cheerleaders in the mainstream media once styled him. This is the former emir of Al-Nusra Front—Al-Qaeda’s Syrian franchise—and now the head of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the Sunni Islamist coalition that toppled Assad in December 2024. His career is a grotesque litany of atrocities: razing Christian villages along the Khabur River, demolishing churches, and orchestrating kidnappings and massacres.
In 2015, his forces abducted over 200 Assyrians near Tell Tamer, demanding $100,000 ransoms and executing three on camera as a warning to Syria’s Christian remnant. Now, as Syria’s self-appointed ruler, he’s traded his blood-soaked turban for a suit, mouthing empty promises of “tolerance” while his jihadist allies butcher minorities in Latakia and Jableh. The Biden administration’s fingerprints are all over this catastrophe.
The body count is staggering. Since early March, Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reports confirm over 1,000 civilians—predominantly Christians and Alawites—have been killed in revenge attacks. Coastal regions, once safe havens for minorities under Assad, have become killing fields. Yet the usual suspect facilitators of the Obama-Biden administrations remain repugnantly silent, its once-vocal outrage over Assad’s crimes replaced by a shameful shrug as al-Jolani’s Hayat Tahrir al-Sham unleashes Hell.
This isn’t mere negligence—it’s complicity. The administration, alongside a feckless media and a spineless United Nations, has spent years whitewashing al-Jolani, casting him as a pragmatic reformer to justify their regime-change fetish. Now, as Christians die by the hundreds, they’re too invested in their narrative to admit the truth: they bet on a terrorist, and Syria’s minorities are paying the price.
The Obama and Biden administration’s role in this disaster cannot be overstated. For years, they funneled support—direct and indirect—to Syria’s “rebels,” a motley crew of factions that included Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. The globalist warhawks in Washington, ever eager to topple dictators without a plan for what follows, saw Assad as the ultimate prize. Bashar al-Assad was no saint—his regime tortured dissidents, gassed civilians, and ruled with brutal efficiency—but for Syria’s Christians, he was a shield against the Sunni Islamofascist tide. Under Assad, Christians, once 10% of Syria’s population, could worship openly, celebrate Christmas, and live without fear of jihadist mobs. His Alawite-led government positioned itself as a bulwark against groups like ISIS and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, and for all his sins, he delivered stability for minorities.
Contrast that with today. Since Assad’s fall, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has unleashed a sectarian bloodbath that makes his rule look like a lost Eden for Syria’s minorities. Al-Jolani, a wild card with a decades-long hatred of Christians, has turned Syria into a jihadist playground, and the Obama and Biden administration’s reckless gamble lit the fuse. They cheered Hayat Tahrir al-Sham as “moderates” fighting for “freedom,” ignoring the group’s Al-Qaeda roots and anti-Christian agenda. When Assad fell in December 2024, the Biden administration celebrated a “victory” without asking the critical question: What comes next? The answer is now clear—a genocide of Christians and Alawites—and the Obama and Biden teams are too arrogant to own it.
The media’s role is equally damning. Outlets like CNN, BBC, and The New York Times have barely whispered about the massacres, preferring to parrot al-Jolani’s hollow promises of moderation, framing the carnage as “clashes” between “security forces” and “Assad loyalists.” The United Nations, that perennial apologist for tyrants, has been no better.
On March 7, Secretary-General António Guterres issued a toothless call to “protect civilians” but refused to name Hayat Tahrir al-Sham or al-Jolani as the culprits. Why the cowardice? Because they all bought the Obama and Biden administrations’ lines: Assad was evil, so his enemies must be good. They hyped Hayat Tahrir al-Sham as liberators, downplaying their jihadist core, and now that the mask is off, they’d rather bury the story than admit their error.
This silence reeks of more than bias—it’s a tacit endorsement of the far-Left’s failed foreign policy. The media, long hostile to Christians, cheered Assad’s demise without a thought for the consequences. Meanwhile, al-Jolani’s rebranding has fooled no one but the West’s gullible elite—his “tolerance” a tactical sham to win approval, not a conversion. The blood of Syria’s minorities stains his hands—as well as Obama’s Biden’s, and everyone who crafted their pathetic transformative “color-revolution” foreign policy.
The Obama and Biden administrations’ legacies in Syria—and include in that cadre Hillary Clinton’s, Susan Rice’s, Samantha Power’s and Victoria Nuland’s—are grim ones: a dictator toppled, a terrorist empowered, and a minority population left to the slaughter. By backing Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and ignoring al-Jolani’s true nature, they’ve turned Syria into a jihadist dystopia. Christians and Alawites are dying not because of Assad’s tyranny, but because of the hubris possessed by the Obama and Biden administrations and the far-Left’s obsession with regime change, devoid of foresight or accountability.
Share this post