Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Christopher Rufo

What the Left Did to Me and My Family

Published

5 minute read

For the past five years, I have been fighting to defeat critical race theory and DEI.

This is a historic moment. For the past five years, I have been fighting to defeat critical race theory, gender cultism, and DEI. Now, President Trump has taken decisive action and instructed his administration to rip out these malicious ideologies root and branch, not just from the federal government but from all institutions that receive federal funding—universities, schools, corporations. All of it.

It has been a long road. The Left will try to memory-hole the recent past, but we must not forget a simple historical truth: the Left put America through a reign of terror after 2020. I have long hesitated to tell my personal story—I did not want to give my enemies the satisfaction—but now it’s time to lay out the facts. This is some of what the Left’s activists did to me and my family as they sought to intimidate me and shut me up.

When I lived in Seattle, they put up posters around my neighborhood with my home address, telling insane lies about me and instructing activists to show up at my door. Later, they sent letters to a few hundred of my neighbors, claiming I was a Nazi white supremacist. Death threats, references to my family, the whole deal. A few times, we had to pack up the kids and leave town.

One of these activists found one of my children at a park with the babysitter and yelled at him until he started crying. My son came home terrified. I figured out who this person was—a software developer who lived in the neighborhood—got his number, called him, delivered some “persuasive” words, and forced him to apologize to my son over the phone. I made sure he was much more frightened than my son had been.

Leftist activists organized employees within Microsoft to email-bomb my wife’s boss, claiming that she was a white supremacist. Thankfully, he thought it strange for her to be an Asian white supremacist and knew it was all a fabrication. I tracked down the ringleader and, “coincidentally,” he was fired a few months later. He overestimated his position and underestimated mine.

Then there were the calls and texts to our private numbers. Threats to rape my wife and murder my children. At one point, I reached out to the FBI about it, but the perpetrators had used number-cloaking apps and there was nothing law enforcement could do. I thought we had a lead in St. Louis and hired a private investigator to look into it, but the trail went cold. We fortified our home and studied up on the law. I was prepared to kill anyone who crossed the threshold to harm my family.

The institutions got in on it, too: organized campaigns to ruin my reputation, manipulate my Wikipedia page, cancel my speaking engagements, and list me on the websites of the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti-Defamation League, in an attempt to get me banned from social media. The censorship apparatus put a target on my back, and the federal government egged it on. They all failed.

My experience is hardly unique. Many other conservatives have faced similar circumstances. Yes, our fight has been about CRT, DEI, and other ideological issues—but more than anything, it has been about safeguarding America’s free society from threats, violence, intimidation, and madness. That is why I fight. And, by the grace of God, why we are winning.


I have been able to continue this work, in part, because of my readers on Substack, who have provided an independent source of income for us. This is high-risk, high-reward work and my readers make it all possible. If you’re able, I encourage you to become a paid subscriber now.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Automotive

Trump Must Act to Halt the Tesla Terror Campaign

Published on

Christopher F. Rufo

The Left’s splintering violence threatens a veto over democratic power.

Elon Musk finds himself at the fulcrum of American life. His companies are leading the field across the automotive, space, robotics, and AI industries. His ownership of the social platform X gives him significant influence over political discourse. And his DOGE initiative represents the single greatest threat to the permanent administrative state. Musk is arguably the most powerful man in the United States, including President Trump.

The Left has taken notice. Left-wing activists have long practiced a tactic called “power mapping,” which entails diagramming the opposing political movement and identifying “chokepoints.” They have designated Musk as one such chokepoint. This month, activists claimed to have organized 500 protests against Elon Musk’s Tesla—dubbed the “Tesla Takedown”—with demonstrations outside sales lots and a series of incidents of vandalism, property destruction, and fire bombings. A pattern has also emerged of individuals scratching or spray-painting parked Teslas, looking to intimidate owners and potential owners or just to express hatred of Musk.

Precedents exist for this kind of escalation. In the 1970s, following the frustrations of the civil rights era, left-wing splinter groups launched targeted terror campaigns and symbolic acts of violence. They bombed the U.S. Capitol, assassinated police officers, and even self-immolated in imitation of Buddhist monks. We may be entering a similar phase today, as the collapse of the Black Lives Matter movement gives rise to radicalized left-wing factions willing to embrace violence. If so, Musk’s Tesla may be the Number One target.

What, exactly, motivates this campaign? At its core, the Left appears to be shifting from an “antiracist” narrative to an anti-wealth one—from a racial frame to an economic one. The sentiment driving the Tesla Takedown is rooted in economic resentment and a desire for leveling. Musk has become a symbol of everything progressives oppose: oligarchy, capitalism, wealth, and innovation. These, in their view, are marks of the oppressor. They scorn the futuristic Cybertruck, SpaceX rockets, and Optimus robots, believing that such creations should be dismantled and repurposed into chassis for public buses or I-beams for public housing.

A certain element of left-wing Luddism is at work here, but the greater part of these activists’ motives is resentment. Musk represents the triumph of the great man of industry, something the Left believes should not exist.

Unfortunately, the Tesla Takedown may succeed. The Left has likely identified Tesla as a chokepoint because it’s easier to dissuade consumers from buying a car they associate with a malevolent political cause—or fear might be vandalized—than it is to persuade them to buy one in support of Musk and DOGE. When it comes to purchasing a Tesla, fear among the average American is a more powerful motivator than enthusiasm among the MAGA base.

Some evidence suggests that the campaign has made an economic impact. Tesla stock peaked around the time of President Trump’s inauguration and since then has lost approximately 40 percent of its value. Musk has accumulated more power than any other American, but that means that he has more points of vulnerability. His wealth and power are tied to his companies—most importantly, his consumer car company, which depends on individual purchases rather than institutional contracts (like SpaceX).

Trump has signaled that he understands this dilemma. He appeared at the White House in a Tesla and has voiced support for Musk’s firms. Justice Department prosecutors—and their allies in state government—must translate this support into policy by identifying and punishing those who destroy property as a means of political intimidation.

The administration needs to make clear that radical left-wing factions cannot use violence to wield a veto over democratic governance. If the partnership between Trump and Musk is to produce meaningful results, it must be backed by the full protection of the law.

Continue Reading

Business

The NSA’s Secret Sex Chats

Published on

 

Intelligence officials maintained a chatroom to discuss polyamory and transgender surgeries, internal documents reveal.

The “intelligence community” is one of the most powerful parts of the American national security apparatus. In theory, it works tirelessly to keep the nation safe. But according to internal documents that we obtained, some intelligence agency employees have another on-the-job priority: sex chats.

We have cultivated sources within the National Security Agency—one current employee and one former employee—who have provided chat logs from the NSA’s Intelink messaging program. According to an NSA press official, “All NSA employees sign agreements stating that publishing non-mission related material on Intelink is a usage violation and will result in disciplinary action.” Nonetheless, these logs, dating back two years, are lurid, featuring wide-ranging discussions of sex, kink, polyamory, and castration.

One popular chat topic was male-to-female transgender surgery, which involves surgically removing the penis and turning it into an artificial vagina. “[M]ine is everything,” said one male who claimed to have had gender reconstruction surgery. “[I]’ve found that i like being penetrated (never liked it before GRS), but all the rest is just as important as well.” Another intelligence official boasted that genital surgery allowed him “to wear leggings or bikinis without having to wear a gaff under it.”

These employees discussed hair removal, estrogen injections, and the experience of sexual pleasure post-castration. “[G]etting my butthole zapped by a laser was . . . shocking,” said one transgender-identifying intel employee who spent thousands on hair removal. “Look, I just enjoy helping other people experience boobs,” said another about estrogen treatments. “[O]ne of the weirdest things that gives me euphoria is when i pee, i don’t have to push anything down to make sure it aims right,” a Defense Intelligence Agency employee added.

These revelations come at a moment of heightened scrutiny for the intelligence community. President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have each made the case that the intelligence agencies have gone “woke,” prioritizing left-wing activism over national security. These chat logs confirm their suspicions and raise fundamental questions about competence and professionalism.

According to our sources, the sex chats were legitimized as part of the NSA’s commitment to “diversity, equity and inclusion.” Activists within the agency used LGBTQ+ “employee resource groups” to turn their kinks and pathologies into official work duties. According to the current NSA employee, these groups “spent all day” recruiting activists and holding meetings with titles such as “Privilege,” “Ally Awareness,” “Pride,” and “Transgender Community Inclusion.” And they did so with the full support of NSA leadership, which declared that DEI was “not only mission critical, but mission imperative.”

In this case, “diversity” was not a byword for racialism, but rather a euphemism for sex talk. Last January, chatroom members discussed their practice of polyamory, or “ethical non-monogamy.” “[A] polycule is a polyamorous group,” one employee explained. “A is my [girlfriend], and B-G are her partners. . . . then B&C are dating but not C&D, nor E, F, or G with any of the others, though there are several MWB (metas-with-benefits) connections.” Another employee claimed to be part of a nine-member “polycule,” adding that “some of our friends are practically poly-mers, with all the connected compounds.”

At other times, the conversations became explicit. The active source at the NSA claimed to have witnessed hundreds of sexually provocative discussions, which, he added, occurred mostly on taxpayer time. The former NSA source who was familiar with the chats recalled being “disgusted” by a particularly shocking thread discussing weekend “gangbangs.”

The NSA sources also raised the question of some staffers’ mental fitness for the job. In one chat, an NSA employee insists on using “it” pronouns in lieu of the human “he” or “she” pronouns. “[I]t/its user here. While I understand we can make some people uncomfortable, keep in mind that the dehumanizing aspect either a) doesn’t apply or b) is a positive effect when we’re requesting it.” A commenter who disagreed was quickly dismissed by employees of the NSA and CIA, who claimed that refusing to use “it/its” pronouns amounted to “erasing” a transgender identity.

“These are folks with top secret clearances believing they are an IT!” said the NSA source.

With the Trump administration taking over, we may see changes. The NSA source said that staffers involved in employee resource groups fear the end of DEI. “[T]here are legal restrictions in place, but this admin has shown they don’t give a f**k about legality,” a staffer in space intelligence remarked about DEI staffers being placed on leave. Others have expressed opposition to Trump’s cabinet nominees.

A conflict is coming. These NSA chat logs suggest the presence of at least hundreds of gender activists within the intelligence services who cannot distinguish between male and female, and who believe that discussing castration, polyamory, and “gangbangs” is an appropriate use of public resources. For psychological and ideological reasons, these kinds of people will not be easily sidelined. The Trump administration should not only dismantle the structure of DEI but also terminate the employees who use it to advance gender activism at the expense of national security.

A guest post by
Hannah Grossman
Hannah is a Member of the World Jewish Congress Diplomatic Corps where she focuses on Holocaust research and education.

Subscribe to Christopher F. Rufo.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X