Politics

Divided and Deadly: When Political Hatred Turns Fatal

Published

3 months ago

October 7, 2025

America’s political divide is no longer just a metaphor—it’s now a measurable, chilling reality. In recent weeks, a relentless barrage of violence has brought headline after headline: the assassination of Charlie Kirk on September 10th, bomb threats and failed attempts targeting news crews, shootings at public gatherings, attacks on federal agents, and online mobs openly glorifying the carnage. What once seemed fringe or exceptional is now undeniably mainstream. The unthinkable is becoming all too routine.

Consider this: within days of Kirk’s assassination, a Fox News van parked at the crime scene in Utah was targeted by a bomb that narrowly failed to detonate, followed by bomb threats at the home of presidential candidate RFK Jr. Shootings tied to political slogans erupted at a New Hampshire country club and inside a news station, with attackers leaving manifestos and warning that “Trump officials would be next.” Meanwhile, federal ICE agents were ambushed in Chicago by carloads of heavily armed assailants—another event spun by legacy media as if it was government aggression, rather than a defensive response to an act of terror.

This surge in violence is not happening in a vacuum. It emanates from decades of tolerated, even celebrated, dehumanization across the political spectrum. But, in Brett Cooper’s telling—and in the disturbing texts and rhetoric unearthed in the wake of these tragedies—the epicenter appears to be one party’s willingness to excuse, justify, or even cheer political assassination. Cooper highlights not just one-off outbursts, but prominent Democratic politicians openly wishing death and horror on their opponents, their families, and even their children. The infamous leaked texts from Virginia’s Jay Jones—expressing desire to see innocent children die “so that their father would change his opinions”—read like a dystopian novel come to life. Yet, defenders line up, brushing it off as “mistakes” and framing any criticism as partisan smears.

How did this become the new normal? The left, argues Cooper, has marinated in a protest culture that sanctifies violence as a substitute for persuasion. Losing an election, a court case, or a policy fight now justifies open calls for revenge. Online, the rhetoric is as gruesome as the reality, with political adversaries not simply derided, but declared subhuman and unworthy of life—a chilling echo of history’s darkest chapters.

Of course, political violence can never be blamed on rhetoric or ideology alone. But words have consequences. Leaders who flirt with calls for violence set the tone for every zealot and unstable mind. The celebration of real-world killings by online mobs only entrenches a cycle where each incident of bloodshed is either weaponized or excused, not universally condemned.

Perhaps most dangerous is the media’s shifting lens—the effort to muddy attacks with claims of ambiguity about motive or to frame self-defense by government officers as wanton aggression. The danger isn’t just physical, but moral and cultural: when outrage at assassination gives way to tribal excuses, a nation chips away at its own foundation.

In a world this divided and deadly, Cooper’s advice feels both practical and poignant: focus on the real, the local, the communal. Sit down with family. Turn down the temperature wherever possible. Call out inhumanity—no matter who it comes from.

America’s most urgent debate is not just about policy, but about whether political disagreement must now also mean existential threat. If ever there was a time for collective soul-searching, it is now—when headlines show, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that political hatred can, and does, turn fatal.

News

US May Completely Cut Income Tax Due to Tariff Revenue

Published

4 weeks ago

November 30, 2025

Bolanle Media Staff

President Donald Trump says the United States might one day get rid of federal income tax because of money the government collects from tariffs on imported goods. Tariffs are extra taxes the U.S. puts on products that come from other countries.

What Trump Is Saying

Trump has said that tariff money could become so large that it might allow the government to cut income taxes “almost completely.” He has also talked about possibly phasing out income tax over the next few years if tariff money keeps going up.

How Taxes Work Now

Right now, the federal government gets much more money from income taxes than from tariffs. Income taxes bring in trillions of dollars each year, while tariffs bring in only a small part of that total. Because of this gap, experts say tariffs would need to grow by many times to replace income tax money.

Questions From Experts

Many economists and tax experts doubt that tariffs alone could pay for the whole federal budget. They warn that very high tariffs could make many imported goods more expensive for shoppers in the United States. This could hit lower- and middle‑income families hardest, because they spend a big share of their money on everyday items.

What Congress Must Do

The president can change some tariffs, but only Congress can change or end the federal income tax. That means any real plan to remove income tax would need new laws passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate. So far, there is no detailed law or full budget plan on this idea.

What It Means Right Now

For now, Trump’s comments are a proposal, not a change in the law. People and businesses still have to pay federal income tax under the current rules. The debate over using tariffs instead of income taxes is likely to continue among lawmakers, experts, and voters.

News

Candace Owens Says Macrons Funded Plot to Kill Her

Published

1 month ago

November 24, 2025

Bolanle Media Staff

Conservative commentator Candace Owens has made explosive allegations that French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron orchestrated and financed a plot to assassinate her. Owens alleges that she was alerted by a high-ranking source within the French government who revealed that the assassination was to be carried out by an elite French police unit, the National Gendarmerie Intervention Group (GIGN), along with the involvement of at least one Israeli operative. According to Owens, this “joint state operation” was motivated by her outspoken coverage and conspiratorial claims about Brigitte Macron, including controversial statements questioning the First Lady’s gender identity.

Owens further claims the payments for the assassination were funneled through a secret French elite club called Club des Cent, suggesting a sophisticated and well-financed scheme. She also links this alleged plot to the assassination of her late friend Charlie Kirk in 2025, suggesting that his killer received training from France’s 13th Foreign Legion Brigade and that these events are part of a larger multi-state conspiracy.

Despite these serious accusations, Owens has not publicly shared concrete evidence, and French, Israeli, and American authorities have not confirmed any part of the story. The Macron family has previously filed defamation lawsuits against Owens over her unfounded assertions about them, highlighting a tense and ongoing feud.

Owens has vowed to provide further details, including identities and financial proof, if given the opportunity, and has called on the public and patriotic investigators to examine the matter closely. While her claims have stirred widespread attention and heated debate across social media and conservative circles, they currently remain unsubstantiated allegations amid a highly charged political and media environment.

This controversy adds a new and dramatic layer to Owens’ volatile relationship with the Macrons, marking perhaps the most sensational claim so far in her ongoing public disputes with the French presidential couple.

News

Fugees Rapper Pras Michel Sentenced to 14 Years in Campaign Scandal

Published

1 month ago

November 21, 2025

Bolanle Media Staff

Pras Michel, Grammy-winning rapper and founding member of the iconic group the Fugees, has been sentenced to 14 years in federal prison for his role in a sprawling illegal campaign finance and foreign influence scheme. The sentencing was handed down on November 20, 2025, by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington, D.C., following Michel’s conviction in April 2023 on charges including conspiracy, money laundering, acting as an unregistered foreign agent, and witness tampering.

At the heart of the scandal was Michel’s involvement in funneling over $120 million from fugitive Malaysian financier Low Taek Jho—known as Jho Low—into the 2012 reelection campaign of former President Barack Obama. Prosecutors detailed how Michel helped hide the origin of foreign donations through shell companies and straw donors, violating U.S. campaign finance laws that prohibit foreign contributions. Beyond the Obama campaign, Michel also engaged in illegal lobbying efforts during the Trump administration to obstruct investigations into Low’s role in the notorious 1MDB scandal, a massive Malaysian sovereign wealth fund corruption case.

Prosecutors described Michel as having “betrayed his country for financial gain,” persistently lying and manipulating government entities over nearly a decade. They advocated for a life sentence, emphasizing the severity of his offenses and the threat posed to U.S. national security. Testimonies during the high-profile trial included notable figures such as Hollywood actor Leonardo DiCaprio and former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Michel’s defense team condemned the harsh sentence as “entirely disproportionate,” arguing that similar cases resulted in lighter penalties, and pointed out that Michel received no espionage charges—a key consideration in foreign agent prosecutions. They announced plans to appeal the verdict and sentence. Following the prison term, Michel faces three years of supervised release and forfeiture of more than $64 million tied to the illegal campaign finance activity.

Michel, who shot to fame in the 1990s as part of the Fugees alongside Lauryn Hill and Wyclef Jean, now confronts a dramatic fall from grace that underscores the extensive consequences of illicit foreign influence in American politics. Despite this setback, his representatives remain grateful for the support received, stating that this chapter does not mark the end of his journey.

This landmark case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of safeguarding U.S. elections from covert foreign interference and the serious repercussions for those who betray democratic principles for financial gain.bbc+4