DISCOURAGING: Assertions without evidence still linger to damage Jefferson’s reputation.

Wednesday, September 30, 2026

History by hair
Brion McClanahan
Sep 29, 2026, 2:36 PM

*** begin quote ***

The attacks on Thomas Jefferson continue.

When I wrote my The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Founding Fathers in 2009, I included a section on the Jefferson/Hemings myth.

I still call it that. I concluded that Jefferson could have fathered a child with Hemings. After all, DNA evidence proved that a male in the Jefferson line fathered at least one child with Sally Hemings.

In other words, it is probable, but I would argue not probable.

The historical evidence lines up against it.

But a new “study” titled History By a Hair has been hailed as “conclusive” proof that Jefferson was the father of at least two of Hemings’ children, Madison and Eston.

Except it isn’t. In fact, it doesn’t change anything. DNA evidence is traced through maternal lineage, meaning that Randolph Jefferson could still be the father of Sally’s children.

And the hair sample that the study used had to be “reconstructed.”

In other words, this study does not answer the questions nor does it “prove” anything. But it provides sensational headlines.

Of course, it has the desired effect: running Jefferson’s reputation through the mud.

This is the gateway to attacking the founding generation and all of traditional American history.

The left wants American history to begin in 1975, or it needs the proposition nation to be true.

The Jefferson/Hemings myth would solidify the proposition nation. This is all political.

Both M. Andrew Holowchak and William Hyland take apart the new “evidence.”

I also discuss it on Episode 1330 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

You can watch it here.

OR

You can listen to it here.

*** end quote ***

I think this is just YET ANOTHER example of the “LEFT”, which really should be labeled the “COMMUNISTS” trying to destroy an American icon.  Like every person, every one has some flaws.  To accuse a dead man of what today would be disgraceful conduct, and maybe it was even disgraceful then, without solid indisputable evidence, is the epitome of “character assassination”.

— 30 —