October 12 ------ Mr. Constitution/Douglas V. Gibbs ------ 2026

Christopher Columbus: A Day Worth Celebrating

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Columbus Day used to be an American holiday everyone could agree on. It was a day to honor discovery and the courage to sail into the unknown. In 2026, it is a battlefield. Cities have renamed it.

Statues have come down. Schoolchildren are taught that the man at the center of the day was a monster. The indictment is long, and much of it rests on thin evidence and revisionist history dressed up as settled fact.

But the record tells a different story. It advises us that Christopher Columbus was an ordinary man whom God used to do extraordinary things.

Christopher Columbus began his life in poverty, with little to his name but a restless mind and a love of geography and the sea. As he matured, he read the Scriptures, which described a spherical earth long before the scholars of his day would concede it. From that conviction grew an idea: sail west, and you might reach the East. He believed it. And, more remarkably, the Spanish Crown believed him.

So he sailed out into a sea the civilized world knew only through rumor. He sailed past the stories of demons in the deep and a world’s edge that would swallow a ship whole. He faced the dragons, out-navigated the obstacles, and proved with his own keel that the earth is round. He discovered a place unknown to the civilized world, and he did it on nerve and navigation alone.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE

The Machine Didn’t Start with Jack Smith

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The Jack Smith documents reveal something more than the emergence of some rogue prosecutor. The whole scenario sheds light on the fact that a big government machine exists, and it’s been there since the beginning. It is, and it has been, a permanent machine that transcends political parties, and the people it has used as tools along the way. It’s a case that reveals that for the establishment, the Constitution is an obstacle rather than a boundary.

When a prosecutor names a target, the subpoenas are supposed to follow the target. That’s the promise of a criminal investigation: narrow, focused, aimed. What the documents released over the past several weeks actually show is something else entirely. The stated target was one man. The catch was the entire opposition ecosystem around him: members of Congress, thousands of small-dollar donors, journalists, campaign advisers, and the president’s own defense lawyers.

That gap between the stated target and the actual reach is the whole story. Everything else is evidence of it.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE

The Cornell 7 and the Oldest Wound

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Seven members of Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity, accused in a civil suit by a woman identified only as Jane Doe of drugging and sexually assaulting her in October 2024, is among the latest trending stories. It brings back memories of the Duke lacrosse rape hoax in 2006 that turned out to be a false accusation and criminal case in Durham, North Carolina. One might say it was the case the later MeToo era kept reaching for as its proof text, and the one that keeps showing what happens when belief outruns evidence. That said, I do not want to suggest that the woman in the Cornell 7 case is not being honest. I am only suggesting that in the past, dishonesty has been an issue. As for the Cornell 7 case, the events surrounding the case present their own confused dilemma. We have a district attorney who declined to prosecute, and now the case has been reopened. We have a governor who has appointed the attorney general, Letitia James (you may remember from the Trump Lawfare onslaught) as special prosecutor. And then we have a university and a congresswoman who are now trading accusations over who said what and who is lying about it.

The truth is not typically easy to figure out. There are always many ways of looking at things. I tend to live by the belief that usually there are three sides to every story: What he said, what she said, and what really happened. The interesting thing about the Cornell 7 case is that the facts themselves have taken a life of their own, and they have all sides of the issue scrambling around in political circles and on well-worn narrative trails. Blaze TV Host Jason Whitlock says the case exposes “feminism’s sexual freedom lie.” The left says it exposes patriarchy. Sunny Hostin, a host on The View, and a former sex-crimes prosecutor, has broken from her co-hosts to argue the legal question, while they argue their perception of the moral one. AOC tells the story with a confidence the underlying complaint doesn’t fully carry. 

Everyone has a thesis, and the frat house is the evidence.

Here’s what I want to suggest: this case isn’t ultimately about consent law, or Greek life, or even Cornell. It’s about the oldest wound there is. And if we’re honest, more than likely both sides are reading it through a text most of them have never cracked open on purpose.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE

Nationalism versus Federalism

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In today’s vernacular, it seems we have a problem with words. The enemies of liberty have a long history of playing with language usage, and this one definitely needs to be addressed. And it’s interesting, because the way our modern understanding of Nationalism and Federalism have landed, it turns out that today the two words actually mean the opposite of what everyone thinks.

The Founding Fathers debated over these words for a decade.

Nationalism seems to be in the news constantly, and we rarely hear “federalism,” and if we do, it is used in a context of federal supremacy. The words in question, here, as a result get used as insults, as banners, and as confusion often by the same people in the same sentence.

So let me illuminate the whole situation a little better by defining them the way the men who wrote the Constitution defined them, because the meaning is not a matter of opinion. It’s a matter of record. And the record is unambiguous.

Finish Reading at Political Pistachio

 "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

-- Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence

On Sale Now: Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances

For centuries, the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances was one of the most powerful tools of free people. It shaped English liberty, fueled colonial resistance, and helped launch the American Revolution. It once obligated Congress to receive, consider, and respond to the voice of the people.

Then it was silenced — and forgotten.

In Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances, Douglas V. Gibbs uncovers the lost history of the Petition Clause, exposes the constitutional betrayal that hollowed it out, and reveals how modern Americans can revive this natural, God‑given right. Blending historical depth with practical instruction, Gibbs shows how petitioning can once again become the engine of accountability, civic engagement, and the consent of the governed.

This book is not just history. It is a roadmap for restoring the people’s voice in American government — and reclaiming the power we were never meant to lose.

https://amzn.to/4ciocIO

The Saxon Layer As The Foundation Beneath the Foundation

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The American founding has two roots. The Saxons brought the first to Britain. Christianity completed it. And the Constitution is the child of both.

There is a popular way of talking about the American founding that traces it almost entirely to the Bible. It is a covenant that connects to Moses, the Ten Commandments, the pulpit, and the Great Awakening. That’s true as far as it goes, and it matters. But it’s only half the story, and the missing half is older than the printing press and deeper than the Reformation.

The other root is the Saxon. The Saxons brought a structure to Britain, a set of institutions and an instinct about law long before they met the Gospel. And when the two finally merged, the structure got its soul and the soul got its structure. Neither one alone produces America. Together, they do.

This is not a competition between the Bible and the Saxons. It’s a compliment. The Saxons supplied the skeleton. Christianity named the source of the rights the skeleton was built to secure.

Finish Reading at Political Pistachio