Yesterday, the Atlantic ran an op-ed by Hillary Clinton titled “MAGA’s War on Empathy,” in which the former Secretary of State accused the MAGA movement of twisting bedrock Christian values and embracing a worldview where “compassion is weak and cruelty is strong,” connecting specifically “hard-right Christian influencers” to the violence we’ve seen in Minneapolis.

One of the people in Clinton’s crosshairs is Blaze Media’s own Allie Beth Stuckey, host of the Christian podcast “Relatable.”

Among many grievances, the twice-defeated Democrat took issue with Stuckey’s critical analysis of the sermon delivered on January 21 last year by Episcopal Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde during a post-inauguration interfaith Service of Prayer for the Nation. Budde’s preaching was interpreted by many conservatives, including Stuckey, as a politicization of faith to push progressive views on immigration and LGBTQ+ issues.

“The right-wing Christian podcaster Allie Beth Stuckey called the sermon ‘toxic empathy that is in complete opposition to God’s Word and in support of the most satanic, destructive ideas ever conjured up.’ Toxic empathy! What an oxymoron. I don’t know if the phrase reflects moral blindness or moral bankruptcy, but either way it’s appalling,” Clinton wrote, explicitly describing herself as a Christian.

Now Stuckey fires back at the self-proclaimed devout Mrs. Clinton. In this special “Relatable” episode, she dismisses the hit piece as proof progressives are losing their grip, doubles down on biblical truth over “toxic empathy,” and celebrates the attack as a backhanded compliment.

“First, I just want to make an announcement. I want to announce that I love my life. I love living. I’m happy to be here. That is an important declaration to make anytime you get in the crosshairs of the Clintons, which, to my astonishment, I am,” Stuckey quips, alluding to widely circulated conspiracy narratives tying the Clintons to mysterious deaths.

Though character assassinations like Clinton’s are never ideal, Stuckey celebrates them as proof her message is hitting its mark.

“This article might mention me by name, but it is not actually about me,” she says, “because the truth is, if it weren’t for all of you, Hillary Clinton would not care about me. It is because of your presence, because of your courage, because of your resolve, your influence over this and future generations that Clinton is writing this article.”

And she’s not the first to shoot an arrow at Stuckey. Since her book “Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion” hit the New York Times bestseller list in October 2024, left-wing outlets have been running hit piece after hit piece accusing Stuckey of politically weaponizing the Christian faith.

“The deeper reason [for these attacks] is so incredibly clear to me,” she says, “and that is that we are over the target.”

“We have gotten to the heart of progressive manipulation. We looked at their lies straight in the face that abortion is health care, that trans women are women, that no human being is illegal, and we said, ‘No, I see what you’re doing,’” she continues.

“And now they’re afraid,” she declares.

From 2020 until now, this movement that refuses to allow “emotion to paralyze … critical thinking” has continued to grow, and progressives, realizing that they’re rapidly losing their “monopoly on female compassion,” are in full panic mode, she argues.

“They don’t trot out former Secretary of State, former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, unless they are really worried.”

To Clinton — who seemed to reduce Christianity to mere neighborly love — Stuckey sets the record straight on the faith’s highest virtue: “[Love] is inextricably intertwined with the truth.”

“God is love — 1 John 4:8. He gets to define it. And He tells us what it is in 1 Corinthians 13, and in verse 6, we read that love ‘never rejoices in wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth,’” she quotes. “So you cannot have in Christianity love without truth.”

But toxic empathy throws genuine love to the wolves.

“You are so deeply in one person’s feelings that you no longer can think objectively. You no longer consider the person on the other side of the equation, and then you make decisions based on how much you feel for one person rather than on what is true and moral and just,” Stuckey illustrates, giving the example of pro-choicers who, in the name of empathy for the mother, neglect to consider “the existence, the rights, and the pain of the baby inside the womb.”

Love and truth: “This is the dichotomy that Jesus represented. Not unconditional empathy toward every purported victim group,” she clarifies.

Ultimately, Stuckey is grateful for Clinton’s polemic.

“She’s put more eyes on [“Toxic Empathy”],” she says.

But for her, it’s never been about selling books.

“It is about getting Christian women to see what is logically and factually and, most importantly, biblically true about some of the biggest issues of our day and to be able to stand confidently in that,” she says.

She concludes by encouraging Christians to take heart when the Enemy assaults them, reading from Luke 6:22: “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and when they revile you and spurn your name as evil on account of the Son of Man!”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Relatable, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Allie beth stuckey, Hillary clinton, The atlantic, Toxic empathy, Maga’s war on empathy, Blazetv, Blaze media 

When Donald Trump addressed the World Economic Forum last week, he was draped in the tricolor semiotics of American mythology: a bright red tie blazing against a navy suit and a brilliant white shirt, the azure backdrop proclaiming “World Economic Forum” in relentless repetition.

“We are the hottest country in the world,” he declared, as actual temperatures prepared to plummet to record lows. Yet this apparent contradiction reveals not cynicism but rather a profound understanding of politics and human nature. Trump operates in the order of symbolic truth, where the sign serves not to deceive but to reveal deeper patterns of meaning.

Trump represents the possibility of postmodern politics with a human face. He understands that all communication is mediated by signs, but refuses to let that understanding descend into cynicism or nihilism.

His appearance in Switzerland, swimming in the red, white, and blue of the American flag while surrounded by the gray neutrality of European technocracy, was no accident. It was a deliberate act of semiotic resistance, a refusal to surrender national identity to the homogenizing forces of globalist abstraction. Trump understands intuitively what others labor to learn: In an age of mass communication, the skillful deployment of signs can restore meaning to a world threatened by semantic collapse. His color palette functioned as a vital reminder that symbols still possess power, that representation can serve truth rather than obscure it.

Trump’s brilliance lies in his mastery of semiotic confrontation, the ability to use signs to liberate rather than manipulate consciousness. Consider his campaign trail theatrics. At McDonald’s, adorned with the golden arches apron, Trump still wore a shirt and tie beneath. Sitting in the cab of a garbage truck, Trump sported the municipal worker’s vest over his customary business attire. These are not cynical photo opportunities but rather sophisticated acts of cultural translation that bridge the seemingly unbridgeable divide between elite and populist semiotics.

What emerges is an authentic synthesis of noblesse oblige fused with genuine populist connection, a reconciliation of contradictory class signifiers that reflects the complexity of American identity itself. The suit signals achievement, ambition, the American dream realized; the apron and vest signal respect for work, acknowledgment of service, solidarity with labor.

Worn simultaneously, they create something genuinely new: the sign of a leader who refuses the false choice between solidarity and excellence, who demonstrates that one can honor both hierarchy and equality, and who proves that American success need not require abandoning American roots.

Trump’s authenticity derives from his refusal of pretense. He does not condescend to workers by pretending to be one; instead, he honors them by acknowledging both his difference in standing and his connection. This is transparency in the service of truth, semiotics deployed not to obscure reality but to illuminate it.

Consider the counterexample. Tim Walz, who appeared before cameras in a hoodie and camouflage hat to play video games during the run-up to the 2024 election, reveals the peril of semiotic incoherence. The hoodie is part of the trappings of urban youth culture; the camo hat invokes rural sporting traditions.

These signs do not synthesize but clash. Walz’s campaign costume changes — T-shirts, flannel, the performative hunting expedition where he fumbled with his shotgun — revealed a man attempting to mirror his audience rather than lead it, to reflect rather than project, to follow the focus groups rather than trust his own symbolic integrity.

Trump, conversely, evokes what I have elsewhere argued is the archetypal American cowboy: the figure who mediates between civilization and wilderness, between order and freedom, and who brings justice through strength tempered by wisdom. Like the heroes of John Ford’s Westerns, Trump embodies the necessary tension between competing American values.

While he channels the gangster’s aesthetic — the gilded maximalism reproduced in the Oval Office itself, all gold and grandeur — he transforms this signifier. Whereas Tony Montana’s opulence signified corruption and moral decay, Trump’s aesthetic announces the democratic right to success, the vindication of ambition, and the refusal of WASP austerity that once policed the boundaries of acceptable aspiration.

RELATED: Trump’s space order shows why the Outer Space Treaty must go

Photo by Manuel Mazzanti/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Here we approach the crucial innovation. Unlike the gangster narrative’s tragic arc, Trump has demonstrated that the American story need not end in inevitable decline. He exists not in perpetual limbo but in perpetual possibility, proving that narrative structure itself can be transcended through will and symbolic mastery.

This may be his most profound contribution: the demonstration that we need not accept predetermined endings, that the script can be rewritten, that American optimism can triumph over European fatalism.

We may inhabit a world where most signs are detached from their referents. But Trump demonstrates something more hopeful — that skilled semioticians can reattach meaning to symbols and make signs serve human purposes once again. He produces images that acknowledge their constructed nature while simultaneously insisting on their genuine significance.

Trump’s is not the demagogue’s manipulation — the false sign pretending to be spontaneous truth — but rather the showman’s honest performance that announces its own artistry while delivering authentic emotion and connection.

In this sense, Trump represents the possibility of postmodern politics with a human face. He understands that all communication is mediated by signs, but refuses to let that understanding descend into cynicism or nihilism. Trump is a symbol that remains tethered to the symbolized, a map that guides us toward the territory rather than replacing it, a simulation that points beyond itself toward genuine experience and real accomplishment.

We can celebrate this achievement and recognize that Trump has made explicit what democratic leadership has always required: that political power in the age of mass media must work skillfully with signs precisely to preserve authentic human connection, and that acknowledged performance can be more honest than claimed spontaneity.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published at the American Mind.

​Trump, Semiotics, Medium, Trump brand, Messaging, Wef, President trump, The american dream, Opinion & analysis 

QAnon — the right-wing conspiracy theory claiming that Donald Trump was secretly battling an evil elitist cabal that puppeteers the world — may be in history’s ash heap, but the kind of fanatical, evidence-light thinking that birthed it is still alive and well, says BlazeTV host John Doyle.

Now that cryptic Q messages are a relic of the past, those who hunger for hype and theatrics are sinking their teeth into another paranoia-driven fantasy, this time revolving around Peter Thiel and Palantir — a powerful data analytics and surveillance software company that helps governments and large corporations analyze massive datasets to detect patterns, predict threats, and make decisions.

“According to the people who tend to like this idea … Palantir is essentially part of a vast global conspiracy to deprive Americans, specifically American patriots, of their rights, and that is somehow supposed to benefit Israel,” says Doyle.

People who take this bait usually end up setting their crosshairs on Vice President JD Vance. Thiel hired Vance at his venture firm Mithril Capital after meeting him at Yale, financially backed Vance’s own venture capital firm, Narya Capital, and donated $15 million to his successful 2022 Ohio Senate campaign.

Many well-meaning fringe believers, hardened by years of being hated by America’s “most powerful and prestigious institutions,” says Doyle, hear this and denounce Vance as a controlled political figure installed by Thiel to advance a shadowy agenda of surveillance, authoritarian tech dominance, and anti-democratic control through Palantir’s government contracts.

“On paper, dude, I don’t know. It strikes me as a very sort of typical, like, mentor-mentee kind of relationship,” Doyle counters.

But more importantly, “look at the fruits of this [relationship], though,” he adds. “JD Vance is a senator in Ohio. JD Vance now is the vice president of the United States. He’s doing fantastic work. Things are going very well for us, due in large part to JD Vance.”

Doyle cautions against falling into the right’s anti-Palantir/Thiel conspiracism, as it is ultimately a tactic employed by “people who stumbled into right-wing politics but are themselves spiritually leftists” to sabotage JD Vance’s potential 2028 presidential run by painting him as tool tied to “Big Tech” overlords like Thiel.

Further, he rejects the superstition that Palantir — named after the seeing stones in J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings” — amounts to Thiel confessing plans to wield his AI-powered company as a real-world Sauron.

“I am gonna have to disappoint you a little bit by telling you that [Palantir] does not actually give you telepathic powers. Instead what it actually offers is a little bit more mundane, a little bit less romantic. It’s just, like, software platforms that allow clients to make sense of pre-existing data,” says Doyle.

That said, Palantir is indeed working with “intelligence agencies, militaries, some of the world’s largest corporations.”

“It’s pretty clear that Palantir, whatever it does, is operating at the highest levels of society. Much of the U.S. government is running on Palantir software. Maybe we should pay a little bit more attention to that. Fair enough,” Doyle acknowledges.

Even still, it’s unwise to join the anti-Palantir/Thiel crowd for the explicit reason that it was started by leftists who hate anyone and anything considered right-wing.

“Amusingly, it is the fact that several of Palantir’s founders are outspokenly right-wing that the anti-Palantir narratives were spread in the first place. This was not from some kind of principled opposition. … Literally just because Palantir is run by guys who are sympathetic and enthusiastic about right-wing ideas,” says Doyle.

“All [Palantir] does is give you the ability to make sense of your own data,” he declares. If it was doing anything more than that — say, “stealing its clients’ data” — then almost certainly we would know about it due to the sheer number of people on both the left and pseudo-right who are chomping at the bit to dismantle Palantir.

“If that’s happening, there’s no evidence for it,” Doyle asserts. “And by the way, if the federal government wanted to send your data to Mossad — which, for the record, I really don’t think that’s what’s going on — it doesn’t need Palantir to do that. It would just simply do that.”

To hear more of Doyle’s analysis, watch the full episode above.

Want more from John Doyle?

To enjoy more of the truth about America and join the fight to restore a country that has been betrayed by its own leaders, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​The john doyle show, John doyle, Qanon, Qanon conspiracy, Conspiracy theory, Blazetv, Blaze media, Peter thiel, Palantir