Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Joe Biden’

Trump focused on campaigning, as Dems are ‘in disarray’ amid Biden chaos


Brooke Singman By Brooke Singman Fox News | Published July 8, 2024 2:16pm EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-focused-campaigning-dems-in-disarray-amid-biden-chaos

EXCLUSIVE: The Trump campaign doesn’t want to “get in the way” of Democrats “shooting at each other” over President Biden’s re-election chances, with a source telling Fox News Digital that the former president prefers to focus on campaigning and the upcoming Republican National Convention instead of on his rival’s implosion.

Other than challenging Biden to a second debate – one that he proposes occur without any moderators – former President Trump has been measured in his attacks on Biden. When asked about the strategy, a Trump campaign source said Trump is, instead, focused on his campaign and winning. 

“Democrats are in disarray,” the Trump campaign source told Fox News Digital. “Why get in the way of them shooting at each other?” 

The Trump campaign has its sights set on the GOP nominating convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, which begins July 15 and runs through July 18, the source told Fox News Digital. Trump is expected to be formally nominated during the convention as the 2024 Republican presidential nominee. 

EX-OBAMA ADVISER SAYS BIDEN CAN’T BEAT ‘FATHER TIME’ AND IS ‘NOT WINNING THIS RACE’

Trump Biden debate collage
President Biden and former President Trump squared off in their high-stakes 2024 election debate rematch on Thursday. (Getty Images)

COMER REVEALS WHITE HOUSE PHYSICIAN WAS INVOLVED IN BIDEN FAMILY BUSINESS DEALS, DEMANDS HE TESTIFY

“We have the convention coming up, we have two rallies coming up, and we have the VP announcement coming up,” the source said. “We are focused on what we have to do and the big news coming from us.” 

The Trump campaign source added: “We’ll let the Democrats shoot at each other all day long.”

Biden has been reeling amid mounting pressure to step aside and suspend his 2024 campaign, including calls to quit the race from many within the Democratic Party. The concerns began to manifest after Biden’s disastrous performance at the first presidential debate against Trump last month. 

BIDEN’S ‘DISASTER’ DEBATE PERFORMANCE SPARKS MEDIA MELTDOWN, CALLS FOR HIM TO WITHDRAW FROM 2024 RACE

Top Biden campaign aides and White House officials have been engaged in damage control ever since, with the president himself sending a letter to Democrats in Congress on Monday morning. In the letter, Biden stressed his commitment to staying in the race and beating Trump in November. 

Trump is expected to sit down for his first interview since the debate on Monday with Sean Hannity on “Hannity” at 9 p.m. ET on Fox News. Trump is set to hold a rally at his golf club in Doral, Florida, near Miami on Tuesday night. On Saturday, Trump is expected to travel to Pennsylvania for another rally at the Butler Farm Show. 

Trump at Virginia rally
Former President Trump speaks during a rally at Greenbrier Farms on June 28, 2024, in Chesapeake, Virginia. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Meanwhile, Biden, in his Monday letter to Democratic members of Congress, urged them to stop questioning whether he should end his re-election bid and “move forward as a unified party.” Biden wrote that he is “firmly committed to staying in this race” and argued that any further questioning of his candidacy “only helps Trump and hurts us.”

TRUMP APPROVAL RATING TOPS 50% AS HE LEADS BIDEN ON VOTERS’ TOP TWO ISSUES: POLL

The 81-year-old Biden is the oldest president in the nation’s history. His halting delivery and stumbling answers at the debate in Atlanta sparked widespread panic in the Democratic Party and a rising tide of public and private calls from within his own party for him to step aside. 

Trump’s approval rating has surpassed 50%, and the presumptive Republican nominee leads Biden on voters’ top two issues, the economy and immigration, according to a new poll. 

Joe Biden gives a speech
President Biden proclaimed at a Wisconsin rally that he will beat Trump “again in 2020,” then corrected himself after a long pause. (Fox News)

The poll by USA Today/Suffolk University was conducted on a sample of 1,000 registered voters between June 28 and 30, after Biden’s debate debacle sent shock waves through the Democratic Party. It shows 51% of respondents said they approve of Trump’s job performance as president from 2017 to 2021, compared to 41% who said they approve of Biden’s current job performance. Regarding two of the top issues of the 2024 campaign, the economy and immigration, more registered voters said they believed Trump would do a better job than Biden. 

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

Brooke Singman is a political correspondent and reporter for Fox News Digital, Fox News Channel and FOX Business.

They Lied to You


By: Josh Hammer | July 05, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/07/05/they-lied-to-you/

President Joe Biden departs after speaking to the media at the White House on July 1 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Lying is certainly nothing new in politics. It is said that prostitution is the world’s oldest profession, but politics is assuredly the dirtiest — filthier even than garbageman, mortician or, well, the world’s oldest profession itself.

Former President Bill Clinton (while we’re on the topic of sexual promiscuity) perjured himself, leading to his impeachment. Former President Barack Obama, in what PolitiFact called its 2013 “Lie of the Year,” promised that “if you like your health care plan, you can keep it.” And on and on it goes.

The corporate media, whose 21st-century raison d’etre is propping up the Regime Party (Democrats) and punishing the Deplorable Party (Republicans), often joins the fray. The Russia-collusion delusion disinformation operation was laundered by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign to seedy “intelligence” firm Fusion GPS and law firm Perkins Coie LLP. For years, the corporate media then dutifully pushed the false narrative. Indeed, it is unclear to this day whether MSNBC has ever read the Mueller report.

But after last Thursday’s CNN presidential debate in Atlanta, in which President Joe Biden delivered a catastrophic performance for the ages, there is only one conclusion: The yearslong effort by Biden administration flunkies, Democratic Party poohbahs and pro-Regime media stenographers to forcefully deny Biden’s obvious physical and mental decline will go down as the single greatest lie in American history.

And what an assiduous effort it was. For years, Democrats and the corporate media lied through their teeth about the blatant decline of the president’s physical and mental faculties. When Biden fell off a stationary bicycle in 2022, handlers brushed it off as no big deal. When Biden started wearing funny-looking tennis sneakers instead of dress shoes, presumably in order to stabilize his gait and prevent debilitating falls, aides informed us that Biden was just embracing a certain sartorial savviness. When former Special Counsel Robert Hur declined to pursue charges against Biden due to the fact he “would likely present himself to a jury … as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” media apparatchiks denounced Hur as a “Trump plant” in the Justice Department. (Where is Hur’s apology?)

After multiple videos emerged of Biden freezing, staring and wandering off, The New York Times called them “misleading”; the Biden White House dismissed them as “cheap fakes.” The Wall Street Journal’s recent story in which reporters interviewed 45 officials who expressed concern about Biden’s senescence was excoriated as a “hit job.”

All along the way, costly “gaffes” — such as Biden inadvertently calling for regime change in Moscow during a March 2022 visit to Warsaw — were simply chalked up to Uncle Joe being Uncle Joe. How dare you question hardscrabble Joe from Scranton: nothing to see here!

Anything — anything — to prevent the American people from learning the truth. Axios reported last Friday how “close aides have carefully shielded (Biden) from people inside and outside the White House since the beginning of his presidency.” For Democrats and their media enablers, there can be no stone left unturned to protect their precious. The ends always justify the means, after all, just as Saul Alinsky taught.

The media’s hubris in thinking it could get away with this is astounding. Biden is the president of the United States. His decline wasn’t exactly a state secret, at least for anyone with functioning eyes and ears. This column two years ago, in lamenting Biden’s “indications of a palpable senility,” concluded that “[t]here is something very, very clearly wrong with the president of the United States.”

Really, just how stupid do Democrats and the corporate media think we are? How long did they think they could get away with this gaslighting operation?

A Gallup poll last October revealed that 32% of Americans trust the corporate media either “a great deal” or “a fair amount.” That seems far too high. These hacks deserve nothing but disgust and contempt.

Nor has the persistent media gaslighting for the past two to three years been a victimless crime. The collective victim is us: all of us. America is wildly insecure under the “leadership” of Biden. Xi Jinping is sure to move on Taiwan before year’s end. Who knows what Xi’s friends, from Pyongyang to Moscow to Tehran, might do. Who will stop them, after all?

The ultimate irony of it all? The massive lie and disinformation operation to obfuscate the president’s decline has been perpetrated in the name of — you guessed it — “our democracy.” The chutzpah!

“Democracy Dies in Darkness,” reads The Washington Post’s masthead slogan, conveniently adopted mere weeks after former President Donald Trump took office in 2017. Come again? We don’t actually know who is running the country right now. It certainly isn’t Uncle Joe. Now that is some serious “darkness.”

Never forgive, and never forget, what these lying miscreants have done to us — and to the republic.

COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM

Biden’s bad week just got worse after he said he was the ‘first Black woman to serve with a Black president’


Story by insider@insider.com (Hannah Abraham)

Read more at https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/bidens-bad-week-just-got-worse-after-saying-hes-proud-to-be-the-first-black-woman-to-serve-in-the-white-house/ar-BB1pt6eG?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Joe Biden is facing increasing pressure to drop out of the presidential race. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Joe Biden is facing increasing pressure to drop out of the presidential race. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images© Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
  • Joe Biden said in an interview he was “proud” to be the “first Black woman to serve with a Black president.”
  • It comes just days after Biden’s disastrous debate with former President Donald Trump.
  • Biden has said he needs to get more sleep and stop holding events after 8 p.m., reports say.

Joe Biden‘s argument that his disastrous debate performance last week was a one-off is seemingly falling apart. In his latest verbal slipup, the president said he was “proud” to be the “first Black woman to serve with a Black president.”

The 81-year-old president mixed up his words during an interview with Philadelphia’s Wurd radio station when referring to his vice president, Kamala Harris, and former President Barack Obama.

“By the way, I’m proud to be, as I said, the first vice president, first Black woman, to serve with a Black president,” he said.

Biden likely jumbled the sentence because he’d earlier spoken about being the first vice president to serve under a Black president.

Earlier in the interview, he also spoke about how he was the first president to have a Black woman as vice president and had appointed Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court.

It comes just days after Biden’s debate with former US president Donald Trump, which was marked by verbal gaffes and confusing statements.

Biden is now facing increasing pressure to drop out of the presidential race. In a poll by Reuters and Ipsos, one in three Democrats said Biden should quit. The Biden camp has offered multiple explanations for the president’s slurred words, nonsensical phrases, and vacant stares, including jet lag, a cold, and incompetent aides.

But donors have publicly voiced their concerns with what they say are Biden’s age-related problems. On Thursday, the millionaire heiress Abigail Disney announced she’d stop donations to the Democratic Party until they “replace Biden at the top of the ticket.” Her statement echoed that of the Netflix cofounder Reed Hastings, who told The New York Times, “Biden needs to step aside to allow a vigorous Democratic leader to beat Trump and keep us safe and prosperous.”

Biden has told supporters he doesn’t speak as “smoothly” or “debate as well” as he used to but has publicly vowed to fight on.

Axios, citing people close to the president, said Biden worked best between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. and struggled to function outside that window.

His press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, said to reporters that “he’s a little slower than he used to be.”

Biden told governors he needed to get more sleep and stop holding events after 8 p.m., CNN and The New York Times reported.

Biden’s campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider about the reports.

On Friday, Biden’s mental acuity is set to be scrutinized when he sits for an interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, who used to be head of communications at the White House during Bill Clinton’s presidency.

Biden’s previous interactions with Stephanopoulos include a rare sit-down appearance in 2021, during which he defended the US’s decision to pull its troops from Afghanistan.

After Sexual Assault and Murder Of 12-Year-Old Girl, NYT Reporter Blames Republicans for Noticing the Alleged Killers Are Illegals


BY: MONROE HARLESS | JULY 03, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/03/after-sexual-assault-and-murder-of-12-year-old-girl-nyt-reporter-blames-republicans-for-noticing-the-alleged-killers-are-illegals/

jocelyn nungaray funeral

Author Monroe Harless profile

MONROE HARLESS

VISIT ON TWITTER@MONROEHARLESS

MORE ARTICLES

New York Times reporter J. David Goodman in a recent report accused Republicans of having “seized on” the brutal murder of Jocelyn Nungaray in order to politicize border security. Goodman included quotes that framed Nungaray’s alleged killers as “remorseful” and criticized Texas Gov. Greg Abbott for supposedly not caring that young women “were raped.”

The June 25 report comes after two illegal aliens from Venezuela allegedly lured 12-year-old Nungaray under a bridge, stripped her naked to the waist, bound her, sexually assaulted her for two hours, strangled her to death, and dumped her body into shallow water nearby, according to the Houston Police Department and local news reports. The accused killers, Jose Pena Ramos, 26, and Johan Jose Martinez-Rangel, 21, were caught and released by Border Patrol agents after illegally crossing the southern border this year. They are both charged with capital murder.

Goodman referred to the alleged killers as “migrants” and inexplicably included the detail that Pena regretted sexually assaulting and killing a child. 

“Daniel Werlinger, one of two defense lawyers appointed to represent Mr. Pena, described his client as ‘remorseful,’ saying that he ‘understands the gravity of the situation’ that he is in,” Goodman wrote. Goodman went on to criticize Republicans’ focus on the multiple child rapes and murders that have taken place as a result of the Biden administration’s open border policies

The Times report centered Democrat political operative Matt Angle’s claim that Abbott is not sincerely concerned over child rape but is instead using the issue for political gain.

“It’s all a performance for them,” Angle told the Times regarding Abbott’s call for law and order. “These guys don’t care about this 12-year-old or any 12-year-old.” Angle also claimed that Texans are “not threatened” by the border crisis. His comments stood in stark contrast to the reaction from Nungaray’s family.

“She was amazing, I still see her face in the back of my head every day, all day. I keep getting little signs about her throughout the days, and it’s been a very, very hard time for me and my family,” Nungaray’s mother said in a news conference.

Goodman, still, neglected to acknowledge that even one preventable child murder is too many.

“[D]espite a number of high-profile cases, studies have found that migrants commit fewer crimes than legal residents,” Goodman wrote. But the report contains no information regarding the “studies” cited, and Goodman did not return a request for comment.

previous report from the Times cited data from 1970 to 2010 that made no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. A report from the Cato Institute reveals Goodman’s claim is misleading, stating, “[T]here is little data available about illegal immigrant criminality to answer this question. Most state governments do not record the immigration statuses of those who are convicted of crimes and federal census data on the incarcerated population do not identify illegal immigrants.”

Goodman’s focus on the overall crime rate failed to address concern over specific crimes committed by individuals whose entry into the United States was illegal in the first place. Republicans continue to argue these crimes are inherently preventable and Nungaray would not be dead if her killers had been detained by Border Patrol.

“Every single crime committed by an illegal alien invader is preventable,” former Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Ken Cuccinelli said in a recent statement to Congress. “Crime rates do not matter. Only the raw number of crimes and the harm caused by those crimes matter. Over 10 million illegal alien invaders have entered America since Joe Biden became our President and opened our borders.”

Cuccinelli continued, “[I]t is the individual human cost that remains most alarming. The ever-growing number of American victims of illegal immigration, including Brandon MichaelKate SteinleMollie TibbettsSarah RootBrandon MendozaRonald da SilvaKayla Hamilton, and, of course, Laken Riley. … These are the human casualties that are preventable with a secure border.”


Monroe Harless is a summer intern at The Federalist. She is a recent graduate of the University of Georgia with degrees in journalism and political science.

No, President Biden, the Supreme Court Did Not Remove All Limits on the Presidency


By: Jonathan Turley | July 2, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/07/02/no-president-biden-the-supreme-court-did-not-remove-any-limits-on-the-presidency/

Joe Biden in a suit with a tie

President Joe Biden delivered an address from the White House last night on the presidential immunity decision by the Supreme Court. While pledging that he will defend the rule of law, President Biden misrepresented what that law is in the aftermath of Trump v. United States. While we have often discussed false constitutional claims by the President as well as other false statements, an address of this kind is particularly concerning in misleading citizens on the meaning of one of the most important decisions in history.

As I have previously written, I am not someone who has favored expansive presidential powers. As a Madisonian scholar, I favor Congress in most disputes with presidents. However, I saw good-faith arguments on both sides of this case and the Court adopted a middle road on immunity — rejecting the extreme positions of both the Trump team and the lower court.

One of the most glaring moments in the address came when President Biden declared that “for all…for all practical purposes, today’s decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits on what a president can do.”

That is not true.

The Court found that there was absolute immunity for actions that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” while they enjoy presumptive immunity for other official acts. They do not enjoy immunity for unofficial, or private, actions.

The Court has often adopted tiered approaches in balancing the powers of the branches. For example, in his famous concurrence to Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), Justice Robert Jackson broke down the line of authority between Congress and the White House into three groups where the President is acting with express or implied authority from Congress; where Congress is silent (“the zone of twilight” area); and where the President is acting in defiance of Congress.

Here the Court separated cases into actions taken in core areas of executive authority, official actions taken outside those core areas, and unofficial actions.  Actions deemed personal or unofficial are not protected under this ruling.

It is certainly true that the case affords considerable immunity, including for conversations with subordinates. However, this did not spring suddenly from the head Zeus. As Chief Justice John Roberts lays out in the majority opinion, there has long been robust protections afforded to presidents.

There are also a host of checks and balances on executive authority in our constitutional system. This includes judicial intervention to prevent violations of the law as well as impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors.

President Biden’s hyper-ventilated response is crushingly ironic. He was vice president when President Barack Obama killed an American citizen without a trial or a charge. When former Attorney General Eric Holder announced the “kill list” policy (that included the right to kill any American citizen), he was met with applause, not condemnation.

The Obama-Biden administration then fought every effort by the family to sue the government. President Biden would have been outraged by any attempt of a Republican district attorney to charge him or President Obama with murder. He would also be outraged by prosecutors pursuing criminal charges for the deaths associated with the deluge of undocumented persons over the Southern border.

In his address, President Biden also claimed that “the law would no longer” define “the limits of the presidency.” That is also untrue. This case was remanded for the purpose of defining what of these functions would be deemed private as opposed to official. Even on official actions, former president Donald Trump could be prosecuted if the presumptive immunity is rebutted by prosecutors.

What was most glaring for many civil libertarians was President Biden’s portrayal of himself as a paragon of constitutional fealty.  He declared that “I know I will respect the limits of the presidential powers as I have for the last three-and-a-half years.” That was also untrue. President Biden has racked up an impressive array of losses in federal courts where he was found to have violated the constitution. This includes rulings that his administration has exceeded his authority and engaged in racial discrimination in federal programs. Indeed, Biden has often displayed a cavalier attitude toward such violations.

For example, the Biden administration was found to have violated the Constitution in its imposition of a nationwide eviction moratorium through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  Biden admitted that his White House counsel and most legal experts told him the move was unconstitutional. But he ignored their advice and went with that of Harvard University Professor Laurence Tribe, the one person who would tell him what he wanted to hear. It was, of course, then quickly found to be unconstitutional.

Biden showed the same disregard over the unconstitutionality of his effort to unilaterally forgive roughly half a trillion dollars in student debt. Courts have already enjoined that effort as presumptively unconstitutional (though an appellate court in one of those cases relaxed aspects of the injunction).

The address was used to reinforce his “democracy is on the ballot” campaign theme. Pundits have repeated the mantra, claiming that if Biden is not elected, American democracy will perish.

While some of us have challenged these predictions, the other presidential candidates are missing a far more compelling argument going into this election. While democracy is not on the ballot this election, free speech is.

For many of us in the free speech community, President Biden has become the most anti-free speech president since John Adams. As discussed in my new book,  “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” the Biden Administration has helped fund and maintain an unprecedented censorship system in the United States.

That record is hardly supportive for a president claiming to be the defender, if not the savior, of the Constitution.

CNN ANALYST DESTROYS BIDEN’S FALSE CLAIMS


By: American Patriot |

Read more at https://libertyonenews.com/cnn-analyst-destroys-bidens-false-claims/


Following the presidential debate last night, CNN’s Daniel Dale meticulously fact-checked the many inaccurate statements made by President Joe Biden during his exchange with former President Donald Trump. In a thorough analysis, the CNN employee scrutinized Biden’s remarks and exposed a multitude of falsehoods without hesitation.

“He said he’s the only president in a while who didn’t have any troops dying anywhere in the world. Troops have of course died on his watch,” Dale stated, highlighting Biden’s inaccurate claim about military casualties during his presidency.

Dale also pointed out Biden’s misrepresentation of his insulin pricing policy.:

“He said he’s put in a $15 per shot cap on insulin and Medicare. It’s a $35 a month cap. He said it’s a $200 cap on overall drug spending and Medicare, it’s $2000 a year,” Dale clarified, correcting the President’s misleading statements.

Furthermore, Dale challenged Biden’s claims about border crossings and unemployment rates:

“He said the border now has fewer crossings than when Trump was in office. That’s generally not true,” Dale said, presenting data that contradicted Biden’s assertion. He also corrected Biden’s claim about the unemployment rate at the start of his presidency, stating, “He said or at least strongly suggested unemployment was at 15% when he took office. It was actually 6.4%.”

Dale also addressed Biden’s statements about Trump’s policy proposals and endorsements:

“He said Trump wants to get rid of social security. Trump doesn’t. He said billionaires pay 8.2% in taxes, it’s much higher. He said Trump told Americans to inject bleach amid COVID,” he explained.

“We know Trump made foolish comments about scientists studying disinfectant injection but didn’t frame it as advice to people. Biden said the border patrol endorsed him. No, it’s union supported the border bill he supported, never endorsed him himself,” Dale explained, providing a comprehensive fact-check of Biden’s claims.

CNN’s thorough fact-checking of Biden’s remarks in the debate revealed a consistent pattern of inaccuracies and misrepresentation, emphasizing the significance of evidence-based reporting in political discussions.

ICYMI: Hearing Granted on Trump’s Attorney-Client Privilege Breach

WATCH: BP FACT CHECKED LIAR BIDEN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DEBATE!


By: Daphne Moon | June 28, 2024

Read more at https://thepatriotchronicles.com/news-for-you/watch-bp-fact-checked-liar-biden-in-the-middle-of-the-debate/

At the presidential debate, Biden made a bold claim that the official union of the U.S. Border Patrol had endorsed him. However, the National Border Patrol Council wasted no time in setting the record straight, tweeting that they have never and will never endorse Biden. This statement came as a humiliation for Biden, who is trying to justify his handling of border issues. In fact, his executive order on the border has been criticized by many as being pro-illegal immigration and for making the situation even worse.

Biden’s claim of endorsement by the Border Patrol Council is simply not true. In fact, the Council did endorse a Senate bill in February that aimed to strengthen border security. However, this is a far cry from endorsing Biden himself. The Council’s president, Brandon Judd, made it clear at the time that the bill was better than the current situation, but it did not mean an endorsement for Biden. This distinction is important, as Biden is trying to use this false endorsement to bolster his image on border issues.

Biden’s executive order, issued earlier this month, has also come under fire for being ineffective and even counterproductive. The order sets limits on the number of migrants who can cross illegally into the country, but it only applies to crossings between ports of entry. This means that when illegal crossings average 2,500 per day, the border will be shut down. This measure is not only arbitrary, but it also does not address the root causes of the border crisis. It only serves to make the situation worse, as it does nothing to stop the large number of illegal crossings happening at ports of entry.

It is clear that Biden’s policies on the border have been a failure. In the fiscal year 2021, there were a record 2.48 million total encounters at the southern border, a significant increase compared to the previous years. In fact, during Trump’s presidency, the highest number of illegal crossings was approximately 852,000 in 2019. The numbers for the other three years ranged between 300,000 and 400,000. This shows that Biden’s policies have led to a massive increase in illegal crossings and have failed to address the issue effectively.

Moreover, these numbers do not even include the estimated 1.6 million “gotaways” – migrants who were able to evade apprehension at the border. This is a serious concern, as it shows that not only are the number of illegal crossings increasing, but there are also many who are able to slip through undetected. Biden’s policies have created a chaotic and uncontrollable situation at the border, and this has serious implications for national security.

Biden’s claim of endorsement by the Border Patrol Council is false and has been refuted by the Council itself. His executive order on the border is ineffective and has been criticized as pro-illegal immigration.

The record number of illegal crossings under Biden’s presidency only highlights his failed policies and inability to control the border. As the situation continues to spiral out of control, it is clear that Biden’s handling of border issues has been a major disaster.

Body language expert’s brutal take on Biden’s debate against Trump: ‘Like a dead man walking’


By Michael Dorgan Fox News | Published June 28, 2024 11:36am EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/body-language-experts-brutal-take-bidens-debate-against-trump-like-dead-man-walking

Body language expert Susan Constantine weighs in on the debate performance by President Biden and former President Trump.

President Biden and former President Donald Trump squared off in their high-stakes 2024 election debate rematch on Thursday and the contrast between the pair could not have been starker, body language expert Susan Constantine tells Fox News.

Constantine says the physical difference between the candidates was noticeable from the moment they both took the stage in Atlanta, and that set the tone for the rest of the evening, with Trump purveying strength and confidence in his mannerisms, while Biden showed a tired and slow demeanor, made worse by his raspy voice, mumbled answers and oftentimes dazed looks.

“I was really concerned because the minute [Biden] walked out on that stage, I felt he [was] not feeling good,” Constantine said. “His skin was pale, it was pasty, and he literally looked like a dead man walking.”

BIDEN’S ‘DISASTER’ DEBATE PERFORMANCE SPARKS MEDIA MELTDOWN, CALLS FOR HIM TO WITHDRAW FROM 2024 RACE

Biden looking dazed
Biden looks on as he participates in the first presidential debate of the 2024 elections with former President Trump on June 27, 2024. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)

“It was as if everything were in slow motion,” she continued. “His fingers and his lack of illustrators when he was talking, he was like a frozen statue up there on the stage. It really was painful to watch. [Trump] had a more serious demeanor. He didn’t make a lot of facial gestures as we normally see him do. He didn’t flash his great big smile at anybody. He was very serious when he walked out on the stage, and it really didn’t change at all through the entire debate.”

Constantine added, “It made Biden look exceptionally weak, and made Donald Trump exceptionally powerful.”

Biden’s campaign blamed the raspy voice on a cold, but the president’s uneven debate performance grabbed the vast majority of headlines from the debate, sparking a new round of calls from political pundits and some Democrats for the president to consider stepping aside as the party’s standard-bearer. But top Biden allies pushed back against such talk as they defended the president and targeted Trump for lying throughout the debate. 

Constantine says that it was clear that Biden had rehearsed many of his answers and went through his scripted answers very fast so as not to forget his lines. But when he did fail to recollect lines, it tripped him up, resulting in him giving long stares, oftentimes without blinking, which she describes as a “stalker stare.” 

“And the minute he forgot a couple of words, it was all over with, right, and then you could see that dropped mouth, and it was that dumbfounded look,” she explained. “His eyes would become very open and almost zombie-like. So he had that very flat stare in his eyes.”

MEDIA CALLS FOR BIDEN TO WITHDRAW FROM 2024 RACE AFTER ‘DISASTER’ CNN DEBATE PERFORMANCE: ‘IT’S OVER’

Joe Biden, Donald Trump
Biden and Trump debated in a high-stakes debate Thursday night and a body expert says their gestures told a lot about them. (Getty Images)

She also said Biden had too many cosmetic injections which physically prevented him from making proper expressions.

“He was really way too botoxed out, and that is a real problem because it can create some cognitive issues because when you shut down those emotions through facial effects, it can affect your brain,” Constantine explained. “It really almost felt abusive in my opinion, to literally allow him … [to] go through that kind of pressure knowing that he is in this high cognitive decline was to me, almost abusive.”

“And it was sad to watch. My heart broke,” she added. “I mean, literally, I could have cried watching him try to force these words out the best he could and it was just super hard to watch. The emotion that I felt, of sympathy, of empathy, because he just truly looked pathetic.”

Trump, on the other hand, showed discipline and commanded his stage space, Constantine said, adding that the lack of an audience played to Trump’s advantage as it kept him focused on the debate and not distracted.

She said Trump also used his hand movements to convey his messaging. He also expressed his emotions in his face, and said that when he is hurt or attacked, it is noticeable as his face droops downward in a sad gesture.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

President Trump speaking and hands showing
Trump used his hands to convey his point in the debate. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)

“He’s a big guy with big hands, right? And he captures the attention,” Constantine said. “He’s very big, and wide and open, and so everything in his gestures and in his movements are big and boisterous. His hands are no more than additional communicators of what he’s saying.”

Constantine said Trump used a chopping motion when he was serious and used an “okay” sign when he was concentrating on something that was really important. He also gave an “L” sign at ear level which she terms as “listen and learn” while he also moved his hands towards his chest as if he is playing an accordion. 

“[Trump’s gestures] are much more rapid and much more commanding, much more intense. But that goes along with his personality, so it is in sync with his personality,” Constantine said. “We’ve seen politicians where their gestures are so synchronized and they’re so on point that it loses its authenticity. He left that window open so that he was able to gesture, stay within that balance, stay within the frame, connect with the audience, or on camera and not over gesture but just gesture enough to get his point across.” 

“Very powerful,” she added. 

Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.  

Michael Dorgan is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business.

You can send tips to michael.dorgan@fox.com and follow him on Twitter @M_Dorgan.

Robert Hur Emerges as the Clear Winner in the Presidential Debate


By: Jonathan Turley | June 28, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/28/robert-hur-emerges-as-the-clear-winner-in-the-presidential-debate/

The presidential debate last night was chilling to watch as President Joe Biden clearly struggled to retain his focus and, at points, seemed hopelessly confused. The winner was clear: Special Counsel Robert Hur. For months, Democrats in Congress and the media have attacked Hur for his report that the president came across as an “elderly man with a poor memory.” Hur concluded that prosecuting Biden would be difficult because a jury would view him as a sympathetic figure of a man with declining mental capabilities. That was evident last night, and the question is whether a man who was too diminished to be a criminal defendant can still be a president for four more years.

Hur laid out evidence that President Biden had unlawfully retained and mishandled classified evidence for decades. However, he also concluded that “at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” He found that “it would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him—by then a former president well into his eighties—of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

What has followed is the usual pile-on in the media with legal analysts, press, and pundits denouncing Hur for his findings.

Hur likely does not anticipate any apologies even as commentators on CNN and MSNBC admit that there are now unavoidable questions of Biden’s ability to be the nominee.

Democrats have repeatedly insisted that Hur did not find Biden diminished and that he actually was impressed by his memory and mental acuity. Hur contradicted that in his own testimony before Congress.

Indeed, the denial campaign took on a bizarre character, particularly when Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D., Wash.) insisted that Hur “exonerated” Biden. Hur pushed back: “I need to go back and make sure that I take note of a word that you used, ‘exoneration.’ That is not a word that is used in my report and that is not a part of my task as a prosecutor.”

Jayapal shot back, “You exonerated him.”

Hur responded, “I did not exonerate him. That word does not appear in the report.”

The debate also further undermines the ridiculous effort of the Biden Administration to continue to withhold the audiotape of the Hur interview as privileged (despite saying that the transcript is not privileged).

The debate showed not only what Hur saw but why the Justice Department is making a clearly laughable privilege claim to delay any release of the audiotape until after the election.

Chip Roy Calls on Kamala Harris to ‘Immediately’ Invoke 25th Amendment and Replace Biden


By: Tyler O’Neil | June 28, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/28/chip-roy-files-resolution-urging-kamala-harris-invoke-25th-amendment/

Chip Roy in a suit with a white goatee
Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

leading House Republican filed a resolution in Congress urging Vice President Kamala Harris to invoke the 25th Amendment in the wake of President Joe Biden’s performance Thursday night in the first debate with former President Donald Trump. Even Democrats and Biden supporters described the president’s performance as poor, though few have suggested a need to invoke the 25th Amendment.

“I intend to put forth a resolution calling upon the [vice president] to immediately use her powers under section 4 of the 25th Amendment to convene & mobilize the principal officers of the Cabinet to declare the [president of the United States] is unable to successfully discharge the duties and powers of his office,” Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, wrote on X on Friday morning.

The 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967, sets up a process by which the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet can notify the president pro tempore of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office, enabling the vice president to become acting president. Under the amendment, the president can submit a written declaration that no inability exists, at which time he would resume his office.

Throughout the debate, Biden spoke with a raspy voice and made numerous verbal stumbles, including instances of rambling.

RELATED: Fact-Checking 16 Claims in First Biden-Trump Debate

The resolution directly calls upon Harris to take office as acting president.

“Whereas President Joseph R. Biden has repeatedly and publicly demonstrated his inability to discharge the powers and duties of the presidency, including, among others, the powers and duties of the commander-in-chief: Now, therefore, be it resolved that the House of Representatives calls upon Vice President Kamala D. Harris to immediately use her powers under section 4 of the 25th Amendment to convene and mobilize the principal officers of the executive departments in the Cabinet to declare that President Joseph R. Biden is unable to discharge the duties and powers of the office; and to transmit to the president pro tempore of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives that she will be immediately assuming the powers and duties of the office as acting president.”

25th-Amendment-Resolution-TextDownload

If Harris and the Cabinet invoked the 25th Amendment and Biden did not stop them, Harris would become acting president.

But Harris dismissed concerns about Biden’s performance in the debate.

“A lot of people who are fans and supporters of President Biden or who are Democrats or who are just worried about the prospect of Donald Trump returning to the presidency feel like this was not a strong performance tonight from President Biden,” MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow told Harris. “I want to hear your assessment and how you respond to those critics.”

“Well, it was a slow start, there’s no question about that, but I thought it was a strong finish,” the vice president responded. “What we know is that when you look at the two sides of the ledger, what we had in Joe Biden is someone who wanted to have a debate based on facts, based on truth, and in Donald Trump we have what we have come to expect, which is someone who will push lies and distract from the reality of the damage he has created and continues to create in our country.”

Harris said that Biden has done “historic work” and did not mention the 25th Amendment.

Yet former Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said Biden failed to demonstrate that he was up to the job.

“Joe Biden had one thing he had to do tonight, and he didn’t do it,” McCaskill said. “He had one thing he had to accomplish, and that was reassure America that he was up to the job at his age, and he failed at that tonight.”

Two Republican senators also suggested Biden’s performance suggested an inability to carry out his duties.

“We’ve definitely entered 25th Amendment territory,” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, wrote on X.

“If you think Democrats in Washington and across the country aren’t talking about the 25th Amendment right now, you’re crazy,” Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., wrote. “It’s not a question of whether he should be on the ballot. That ship has sailed. It’s a question of whether he can serve as president right now.”

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., said Biden’s debate performance will strengthen her calls for Attorney General Merrick Garland to release the tapes of Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

“Every member of Congress has a constitutional duty to ensure we have a coherent President,” she wrote on X. “We MUST hear the Hur tapes. A lawsuit can take years. I will be calling up the vote to hold Garland in inherent contempt this morning. This is a national security issue.”

Can Democrats Just Dump Biden And Move On? It’s Not That Simple


BY: SEAN DAVIS | JUNE 28, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/28/can-democrats-just-dump-biden-and-move-on-its-not-that-simple/

Joe Biden in debate

Will Democrats replace Joe Biden as their presidential nominee?

It’s not that simple, logistically or politically, as long he’s still alive. States have pretty strict rules on last-second ballot changes, but Democrats have always found ways to get courts to rewrite laws for them at the last second. Just look at what they did for Frank Lautenberg and Robert Torricelli in New Jersey. It would be a heavy lift but not an impossible one.

The real problem for Democrats is political: Removing Biden as nominee requires them to deny and reject the election results of their voters in all 50 states after they spent four years accusing everyone else of being “election deniers.” They also will have a very hard time removing Biden as nominee but leaving him in as president. If he’s not mentally fit to be on the campaign trail or debate stage, how on Earth can he be fit enough to remain as president? The downsides of that strategy are immense, with little upside.

And that brings us to the real problem for Democrats: Kamala Harris. They know she’s political kryptonite because she’s both incredibly stupid and extremely unlikeable. Democrat voters can’t even stand her. So, if they manage to get rid of Biden both as nominee and as president, they end up stuck with her, which might even be worse than doing nothing. Do they really want to be in the position of preventing the first female president from running as an incumbent? And can they sideline her while promoting another white dude like Gavin Newsom when their entire party is built around identity politics?

So, the predicament for Democrats right now is they have to somehow find out how to get rid of Biden as the nominee, keep him as president, and prevent the black woman who is currently vice president from being the nominee. I don’t think it’s a needle they’ll be able to thread without resorting to violence and republic-destroying tactics.

Now, they could just reap what they’ve sown, accept the consequences of their choices, and accept losing an election for once — but I’m not holding my breath.


Sean Davis is CEO and co-founder of The Federalist. He previously worked as an economic policy adviser to Gov. Rick Perry, as CFO of Daily Caller, and as chief investigator for Sen. Tom Coburn. He was named by The Hill as one of the top congressional staffers under the age of 35 for his role in spearheading the enactment of the law that created USASpending.gov. Sean received a BBA in finance from Texas Tech University and an MBA in finance and entrepreneurial management from the Wharton School. He can be reached via e-mail at sean@thefederalist.com.

Author Sean Davis profile

SEAN DAVIS

VISIT ON TWITTER@SEANMDAV

MORE ARTICLES

If Democrats Want to Drop Biden, They Might Have to Contend with These State Laws


By: Fred Lucas | June 25, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/25/if-democrats-want-to-drop-biden-they-might-have-to-contend-with-these-state-laws/

President Joe Biden meets June 17 with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in the Oval Office. (Photo: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

If Democrats seek to swap out President Joe Biden for another candidate on the Nov. 5 ballot, they’ll face legal challenges, according to an analysis by The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. 

That’s because a patchwork of state laws determines what a political party must do to substitute someone else as a presidential nominee. 

“If there is a freezing moment or something very consequential that happens at the debate, the likelihood goes up,” Mike Howell, executive director of the Oversight Project, told reporters Tuesday. 

CNN will host a 90-minute debate Thursday night between Biden and former President Donald Trump

“There is not a political exception that if you’ve been trying to cover up the fact that your candidate has been declining rapidly to the extent that you are even invoking executive privilege to hide an audio tape … you just get to supersede all of the election integrity rules that exist in the various states,” Howell told reporters. 

Special counsel Rober Hur’s report on Biden’s possession of classified documents from his years as vice president and senator characterized him as “elderly” and “struggling” with memory loss. The Biden administration invoked executive privilege to block release of audio recordings of his two interviews last fall with the special counsel. The Oversight Project is part of a multiparty lawsuit by CNN and other news outlets, as well as watchdog groups, to access the audio recordings of the Biden interviews. 

More recently, Biden had a wandering incident at the G7 summit in Italy and also appeared to freeze onstage at the end of a Los Angeles fundraiser and be physically guided away by former President Barack Obama (who Biden served as vice president for eight years). 

If delegates to the Democratic National Convention were to nominate another candidate for president in August, it might not affect relevant state laws, said Sam Dewey, counsel for Heritage’s Oversight Project. 

“There are two separate questions. One is who gets the party’s nomination. The second is ballot access,” Dewey told reporters. “You can be nominated by a party and not necessarily have access to a ballot. We are seeing that right now with attempts by the DNC to keep Robert Kennedy, RFK Jr., off the ballot. It’s separate. Just being nominated by a party doesn’t get you on a ballot.”

Dewey continued: 

Even if at the convention, superdelegates and a bunch of [other] delegates get together and said, ‘We’re not doing this, we’re subbing in the vice president [for Biden], we’re subbing in Hillary Clinton,’ pick whomever, that wouldn’t at all speak to what [our] memo was addressing, which was access to ballots. That’s an entirely different question. If someone drops out, that frequently is litigated.  

The Oversight Project sent a memo on substituting candidates to top election officials in all 50 states for their review. 

Battleground states such as Georgia and Nevada have procedures under which a presidential candidate may withdraw from the ballot. Wisconsin allows it to occur only in case of death, according to the memo. 

“Important caveats include the timeline and triggering events,” the Oversight Project’s memo says, adding:

For example, some states allow withdrawal before the 74th day before an election, and failure to adhere to these timelines can result in the candidate’s name remaining on the ballot (which provides its own corollary of post-election litigation).  Likewise, the rationale for withdrawal (death, medical, or other) can be outcome determinative. Some states, like South Carolina, do not allow withdrawal for political reasons.

Limited case law exists on swapping out political candidates on a ballot, the memo notes. And at least 31 states defer to state or national party rules and nominating committees in the event of a candidate’s withdrawal.

“These states circumvent the substitution process highlighted above,” the Oversight Project’s memo says. “There may be some avenues for challenges to these laws on improper delegation grounds, however, these may be marginally beneficial.”

For its part, the Biden White House has denied that the president has had any mental or physical problems barring his seeking a second four-year term. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre argued that recent videos unflattering to Biden were “cheap fakes.” First lady Jill Biden has said her husband is a great president “because” of his age.

Biden DHS Board Painted Trump Supporters, Military, and Religious People as Potential Terror Risk, Docs Show


By: Ailan Evans | June 24, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/24/biden-dhs-board-painted-trump-supporters-military-and-religious-people-as-potential-terror-risk-docs-show/

Supporters of former President Donald Trump cheer as he arrives to speak at a campaign event in Racine, Wisconsin, on June 18, 2024. (Photo: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images)

Department of Homeland Security advisory board characterized supporters of former President Donald Trump, as well as those who are in the military and religious people, as posing potential domestic terrorism risks, according to internal documents obtained by America First Legal.

The board, called the Homeland Intelligence Experts Group, was created in September 2023 to provide DHS with “expert” analysis on subjects such as terrorism and fentanyl trafficking. The panel included former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, and former CIA Operations Officer Paul Kolbe, all of whom signed an October 2020 letter casting doubt on the legitimacy of the Hunter Biden laptop and suggesting its release was a Russian disinformation ploy.

Internal documents obtained by America First Legal show the board characterizing “supporters of the former president” as constituting “most of the Domestic Terrorism threat” in the United States. The documents also classified traits such as having served “in the military” and being “religious” as “indicators of extremists and terrorism,” citing unnamed research.

Military personnel are less likely to be supporters of radical political causes than other Americans, according to a 2023 RAND Corp. study. Nevertheless, suspicions of extremism in the military were popular among Democrats in the wake of the Jan. 6 riots, as 15 Democrat lawmakers signed a letter in 2021 urging Inspector General Sean O’Donnell to “take action on this wave of violent extremism” in the military.

America First Legal on Thursday released the first collection of documents that detailed the committee’s desire to increase information collection on Americans, including getting “mothers” and “teachers” to report on children suspected of extremism under the pretext of “public health.” The committee cited the model of the “See Something, Say Something” campaign after 9/11, which was an initiative by the DHS to encourage American citizens to report potential terror threats.

The DHS panel was shut down following a lawsuit from America First Legal in conjunction with former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell. The lawsuit alleged the group violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which governs how federal advisory committees can legally operate.

Brennan and Clapper were also signatories of the 2020 letter that alleged the Hunter Biden laptop contents may have been part of a Russian disinformation campaign. The contents of the laptop were verified by the Daily Caller News Foundation along with other media outlets.

The DHS did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Tick Tocking Away

A.F. BRANCO | on June 23, 2024 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-tick-tocking-away/

The Minnesota Fraud Clock
A Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon—Minnesota has an ever-growing fraud problem. The Feeding Our Future estimate is the one provided by the U.S. Department of Justice almost two years ago. Despite adding two dozen more defendants over the years, the original estimate has not been updated. My own estimate places the final figure at double that amount.

Tracking Minnesota’s growing fraud problem

By Bill Glahn – June 22, 2024

There are many examples of Minnesotans defrauding the federal government directly (PPP, small business loans, etc.). These cases are not included.
The Feeding Our Future estimate is the one provided by the U.S. Department of Justice almost two years ago. Despite the addition of two dozen more defendants over the years, the original estimate has not been updated. My own estimate places the final figure at double that amount.
The child care (CCAP) fraud estimate is one provided by a whistleblower in the case. About the estimate, the legislative auditor wrote the following back in 2019: READ MORE…

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Good vs Evil

A.F. BRANCO | on June 24, 2024 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-good-vs-evil/

Ten Commandments in Classrooms
A Political Cartoon by A. F. Branco 2024

Facebook Twitter Pinteres Flipboard

A.F. Branco Cartoon – On Wednesday, Republican Gov. Jeff Landry of Louisiana ignited leftist outrage by signing a bill that requires all the state’s public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments.

Leftists Cry ‘Separation of Church and State’ Over New Ten Commandments Law – Here’s a History Lesson for Them

By Michael Schwarz – June 21, 2024

Rarely have seven innocuous words, misinterpreted and then amplified, caused so much mischief.
On Wednesday, Republican Gov. Jeff Landry of Louisiana ignited leftist outrage by signing a bill that requires all the state’s public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments.
Predictably, opponents of the bill cited a paraphrased version of a line that appeared in an 1802 letter written by President Thomas Jefferson: “wall of separation between church and state.”

As we shall see, the use of that “separation” phrase to attack Louisiana’s law amounts to an act of sophistry.

No doubt anticipating such objections, Louisiana earmarked no state money for the mandate’s implementation, relying instead on private funds.
Likewise, to affirm that the mandated display constitutes an acknowledgement of the Ten Commandments’ historical significance, not an endorsement of a particular religious creed, the law also requires a four-paragraph context statement tying the Ten Commandments to American foundational documents. READ MORE…

DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.

‘We’re Not Stupid’: Tulsi Gabbard Slams ‘Propaganda’ Media for Parroting White House ‘Cheap Fakes’ Rhetoric


By: Mary Margaret Olohan | June 21, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/21/were-not-stupid-tulsi-gabbard-slams-propaganda-media-parroting-white-house-cheap-fakes-rhetoric/

Tulsi Gabbard at Fox News Channel Studios on September 13, 2023 in New York City. (Photo: Steven Ferdman/Getty Images)
Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii (Photo: Steven Ferdman/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard accused corporate media outlets of parroting “propaganda” talking points from the White House regarding controversial videos of President Joe Biden.

Gabbard, who ran as a candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, spoke with The Daily Signal on Friday at the Road to Majority conference in Washington, D.C., where she addressed the Biden White House dismissing videos highlighting Biden’s declining mental acuity as “cheap fakes.”

“It made me laugh, because I’m obviously familiar with how the mainstream propaganda media works,” said Gabbard, who served four terms in the House as a Democrat, but has since become an independent. “And when you look at the montage of all of these different people, on many cable networks or broadcast networks, and they’re literally all using the same talking point. They warn misinformation, disinformation—[but] they are doing it right now.”

“We are not stupid, and I think that’s the thing that is most fascinating to me. They really think that we are that stupid, to buy their spin on the unfortunate reality of what we’re seeing, which is President Biden’s deteriorating condition.”

A number of recent videos of Biden at various public events show the president looking confused, freezing up, or wandering away from the location where he’s supposed to speaking or standing. At a D-Day anniversary event in France, for example, videos show him turning away from a group of other world leaders. Another video, at a campaign fundraiser, shows former President Barack Obama leading him off stage.

The White House has repeatedly claimed that such videos are edited.

“It’s also very insulting to the folks, the viewers who are watching it,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told MSNBC on Tuesday. “And so, we believe we have to call that out. We’ve been calling it ‘cheap fakes.’ That is something that came directly from the media outlets in calling it that, the fact-checkers … calling it that. And so, we’re certainly going to be really, really clear about that as well. And calling it out from where we are, from where we stand.”

White House spokesman Andrew Bates similarly told Fox New Digital that the videos are the products of “discredited right-wing critics” of the president.

“Their panicked reaction to mainstream reporters, including at The Washington Post, NBC News, and PolitiFact, citing misinformation experts taking anti-Biden cheap fakes apart says more than we ever could,” Bates told Fox News Digital.

Biden’s ‘Amnesty’ Plan Could Turn 500,000 Illegal Aliens into Future Voters


BY: BRIANNA LYMAN | JUNE 19, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/19/bidens-amnesty-plan-could-turn-500000-illegal-aliens-into-future-voters/

Vote box

Author Brianna Lyman profile

BRIANNA LYMAN

VISIT ON TWITTER@BRIANNALYMAN2

MORE ARTICLES

President Joe Biden announced an executive order (EO) Tuesday that awards amnesty to illegal immigrants married to U.S. citizens. And while he dubbed his overreach as keeping “families together,” it is nothing more than another step in Democrats’ plan to expand their future electorate.

The EO makes it easier for illegal immigrants who married U.S. citizens — and their children — to apply for lawful permanent residence status without leaving the country, and after that, U.S. citizenship. An approximate 500,000 illegal immigrants who married a U.S. citizen will benefit from this order along with 50,000 children, according to the White House.

Without providing any explanation as to how, Biden claims this will “strengthen” the U.S. economy. Notably, recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) shows foreign-born workers gained 637,000 jobs year-over-year while native-born workers lost roughly 299,000. The BLS acknowledges foreign-born workers likely include illegal immigrants. As economist E.J. Antoni recently explained to The Federalist, the drain illegal migrants place on the economy offsets their production value.

[READ: Foreign-Born Workers Dominate U.S. Job Gains While Native-Born Americans Struggle]

What Does This EO Mean for Democrats?

By federal law, “non-citizens, including permanent legal residents,” are not allowed to “vote in federal, state, and most local elections,” according to USA.gov. But lawful permanent residents are “eligible to become a U.S. citizen after five years of becoming a lawful permanent resident, or three years if you are married to a U.S. citizen,” according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Unless there are specific carveouts in Biden’s executive order prohibiting individuals who came into this country illegally before receiving amnesty from registering to vote, then Biden just gifted Democrats with hundreds of thousands of potential future voters.

Former President Donald Trump warned that under Biden’s election-year order, “a deluge of illegals will be given immediate green cards and put on the fast track to rapid citizenship so they can vote.”

“Couple this with [Biden’s] previous voter registration EO and it is clear that Biden is attempting to win the upcoming election, not by winning over legitimate American voters, but by attempting to legitimize illegal immigrants,” said Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen. “He won’t stop with this EO. He will keep attempting to dilute the power of the vote of legal Americans.”

Of course, Biden and Democrats, as my colleague Shawn Fleetwood explained, “want Americans to believe they aren’t interested in handing out U.S. citizenship and voting rights to foreign nationals like it’s candy on Halloween.” Yet their actions, including this EO, suggest otherwise.

In fact, Biden’s EO sends the same message that a trio of Democratic witnesses sent during a Senate Judiciary Hearing in March. Not a single Democrat witness could resolutely say they believe only citizens should be able to vote in a federal election. And it’s the same message being sent by Democrats nationwide who oppose legislation to ensure only citizens vote in federal elections. As of right now, anyone registering to vote in federal elections must simply check a box affirming he is a U.S. citizen. Individuals — legal or not — can simply lie on their registration forms. In other words, our elections hinge on the honor system. It’s a loophole Republicans are working to close via the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which would amend current law to require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote.

Democrats have insisted the SAVE Act is unreasonable and unnecessary since, according to federal law, it’s illegal to vote in an election if you’re not a U.S. citizen. It’s also illegal to bum-rush border agents and break into the country.

Only one state, Arizona, requires voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in state elections. As a result of the federal government’s attempt to weaken Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship law, individuals who cannot prove their citizenship can register as federal-only voters.

During the 2020 election in Arizona, 11,600 voters voted using a federal-only ballot, according to AZ Free News. Biden won that state by 10,457 votes.


Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist.

Hunter Biden revealed top CCP leader wanted him to visit China to ‘discuss business opportunities’: emails


By Cameron Cawthorne , Andrew Mark Miller , Jessica Chasmar Fox News | Published June 18, 2024 1:35pm EDT | Updated June 18, 2024 1:36pm EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-revealed-top-ccp-leader-wanted-him-visit-china-discuss-business-opportunities-emails

FIRST ON FOX: Hunter Biden informed his business associates in late 2013 that a top Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader allegedly asked him to travel to China to talk about future “business opportunities,” according to an email obtained and verified by Fox News Digital.

In December 2013, Biden accompanied his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden, on a six-day trip around Asia that included China, South Korea and Japan. While in Beijing, Biden introduced his father to one of his Chinese business associates, who was accompanied by another associate, in the lobby of the hotel they were staying in.

During the China leg of the trip, Biden attended multiple events with his dad, including a lunch that featured some of the most powerful CCP leaders in China. On Dec. 5, Jonathan Li, the business associate who Vice President Biden was introduced to, emailed Biden asking him how his China trip was going, prompting Biden to email later that day that everything “went very well.”

“Do you know former Governor of Hong Kong- C.H. Troung (sp?),” Hunter asked. “He wants me to come to HK to visit to discuss business opportunities. He sat next to Dad at lunch w/ Premiere and implied we knew each other- but I don’t remember him.”

NEW TEXT MESSAGE ALLEGEDLY REVEALS HUNTER BIDEN PROPOSED MEETING FOR DAD, UNCLE AND CHINESE EXEC IN NYC

The CPPCC's Tung Chee-hwa
Tung Chee-hwa, vice chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. (YouTube/Screenshot)

“Very good, I can go with you to find out what he can do for us,” Li said to Hunter.

“Troung” refers to C.H. Tung, a former governor of Hong Kong and billionaire who served as the vice chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) between 2005 and 2023, a former business associate of Biden confirmed to Fox News Digital. The CPPCC is the “key mechanism for multi-party cooperation and political consultation” under the leadership of the CCP, according to the CPPCC website.

In December 2013, Hunter Biden asked his business associates whether they knew C.H. Tung, or Tung Chee-hwa, a former governor of Hong Kong and billionaire who served as the vice chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.

In December 2013, Hunter Biden asked his business associates whether they knew C.H. Tung, or Tung Chee-hwa, a former governor of Hong Kong and billionaire who served as the vice chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. (Fox News)

Fox News Digital could not confirm whether Biden took Tung up on his alleged offer to visit Hong Kong to discuss “business opportunities.”

Biden’s email about Tung would not be the last time that his name was mentioned in his emails. In July 2014, James Bulger, who goes by “Jimmy,” and served as the chairman of Boston-based Thornton Group LLC — a firm that joined forces with Hunter’s now-defunct Rosemont Seneca to launch its joint-venture with Chinese investment firm Bohai Capital to create BHR Partners— emailed Biden about introducing their Chinese business associates to Tung.

Mr. Tung

In July 2014, Hunter Biden said he would be “happy” to help introduce BHR CEO Jonathan Li and BHR committee person Andy Lu to “Mr. Tung,” who refers to Tung Chee-hwa, the vice chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference at the time. (Fox News)

In the July 2014 email, Bulger asked Biden to introduce Li and Andy Lu, who was a BHR committee member, to “Mr. Tung” to discuss “BHR investment targets” and “fundraising,” alleging Biden sat next to Tung at a 2013 dinner welcoming Vice President Biden to Beijing, according to previous Fox News Digital reporting.

“It is my understanding that during the trip to Beijing that you made with your father, President Xi hosted a welcome dinner,” Bulger wrote. “[A]t that dinner, you were seated right next to Mr Tung, therefore J and Andy believe it would be very helpful if you could please send a brief email to Mr Tung laying out that you are a partner and Board Member of BHR and that You would be grateful to Mr Tung if he could meet your local partners to discuss the Fund.”

FLASHBACK: BIDEN MADE REVEALING COMMENT ABOUT NIECE’S OBAMA ADMIN ROLE WHILE PRAISING ‘RISING CHINA’

Hunter Biden and Joe Biden
Corporate media organizations spent years dismissing negative information pertaining to Hunter Biden and his father, President Biden, right. (Photo by Paul Morigi/Getty Images for World Food Program USA)

“Please let me know if you can introduce these two to Mr Tung by email it is very important to our BHR initiative [sic] at this moment,” Bulger stressed.

Biden responded that he was “happy” to fulfill the request but said he could not recall the names of the gentlemen who sat next to him at the dinner.

“Happy to do this,” he wrote, “but I have no email address for Mr. Tung and he very well may have sat next to me, but I don’t recall the two gentlemen’s names to my left and right. Regardless, I would suggest the team draft an email in Mandarin and English for my approval ASAP.”

“Let me reach out to Lin and J will revert ASAP,” Bulger replied later that day.

Multiple inquiries from Fox News Digital to Biden’s lawyer, Bulger, Li, Lu and Tung previously went unreturned about whether Biden ended up introducing Tung to his associates.

In addition to the 2013 dinner in Beijing, Tung was on the “expected attendees” guest list for at least two state dinners at the White House during the Obama-Biden administration. Tung’s bio on the Obama administration archives website for the January 2011 dinner says he was “Vice Chairman, CPPCC, former Hong Kong Chief Executive.”

In another press release for the September 2015 state dinner, Tung’s bio lists him as “Vice Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference.”

Biden china xi
Chinese President Xi Jinping, right, shakes hands with then-Vice President Joe Biden inside the Great Hall of the People on Dec. 4, 2013 in Beijing. (Photo by Lintao Zhang/Getty Images)

According to a 2018 report by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a U.S. government agency, the CPPCC is a “central part” of China’s United Front system, which works to “co-opt and neutralize sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority of its ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP).”

According to a 2021 report by The Diplomat, the CPPCC is “designed to liaise with non-Communist Party members – and ultimately see them work with the CCP to advance its interests.” While serving as vice chairman of the CPPCC, Tung also founded the China-U.S. Exchange Foundation (CUSEF) in 2008. 

Tung has many powerful contacts in Washington, D.C., including President Biden’s top climate diplomat, John Podesta. Fox News Digital previously reported that Podesta referred to Tung as his “friend” and took several phone calls from him between 2015 and 2016 while serving as the chairman for Hillary Clinton’s failed campaign.

In May 2013, Tung and Podesta spoke at a luncheon hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which included Chinese Ambassador to the United States Cui Tiankai.

“For the last four years though, Center for American Progress and China-U.S. Exchange Foundation have co-hosted a US.-China track II dialogue and we continue to host these dialogues on an annual basis,” Podesta said. “I have the highest regard for C.H. Tung’s tireless efforts to bring our two nations closer together. He is always looking ahead to anticipate emerging challenges in the U.S.-China relations and to figure out what he can do to make those challenges more manageable.”

John Podesta, Founder and Director, Center for American Progress
John Podesta, founder and director of the Center for American Progress, speaks at The Center for American Progress CAP 2019 Ideas Conference in Washington, D.C., on May 22, 2019. (Photo by Michael Brochstein/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital also previously reported on Tung being instrumental in CUSEF’s targeting of Historically Black Colleges and Universities by visiting the office of a Black public relations consultant’s office across the street from the White House in 2009 to learn more about Black Americans.

“In 2009, the former chief executive of Hong Kong visited me in my office with his staff from the China-United States Exchange Foundation, and they wanted to know how we got a Black president,” Julia Wilson told the University of Arkansas Pine Bluff students during a 2017 presentation. “They were saying, ‘We don’t know anything about Black people. So can you write us a white paper and share it with us. How did Black people get enough power to vote a Black man into office?’ So they really needed an overview of our history. Who are we? Who are African Americans?”

Tung’s organization would go on to pay out over $1M to Wilson’s firm, Wilson Global Communications, between 2017 and December 2023.

Biden’s attorney, Li, and the White House did not respond to Fox News Digital’s requests for comment.

Cameron Cawthorne is a politics editor for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to Cameron.Cawthorne@Fox.com and on Twitter: @cam_cawthorne

Sen. James Lankford to Newsmax: Biden’s Border Policy Backward


By Brian Freeman    |   Tuesday, 18 June 2024 12:48 PM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/james-lankford-border-law/2024/06/18/id/1169176/

Vicious lawbreakers are able to enter the United States illegally because the Biden administration has a border policy by which criminal checks are done at the end of the process rather than at the beginning, Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., told Newsmax on Tuesday. Lankford made the comments after a El Salvador man, who had been in prison in his own country for murder, and illegally fled to the U.S. was arrested over the weekend for the killing last year of a Maryland mother.

The White House announced Tuesday the Biden administration will soon permit certain spouses of U.S. citizens without legal status to apply for permanent residency and eventually, citizenship, a move that could affect some half a million people here illegally.

Lankford called the new policy “out of touch” telling “Wake Up America,” “this is something I have said all along.

“For years I’ve said we don’t know if people are fleeing from the law or if they are fleeing from poverty: We don’t know because [this administration is] not checking it, they are not evaluating it,” Lankford added.

“Any criminal checks they are doing for individuals are actually at the end of the process, years after they have been in the country rather than at the very beginning. This is one of the things I have fought for, to have a criminal check at the very beginning and turn people around immediately rather than release them into the country.”

What makes the new Biden policy even worse is he announced recently that “he is going to close down the border,” Lankford said, “but doesn’t do it, as it was just a public show [and he] is actually not enforcing that.

“And then he announces, Oh, we are also going to allow half a million people that are in the country illegally to now get a path to citizenship, which is just a big flag to everyone internationally to say, Get into the country as fast as you can, because we are going to give you citizenship.”

Biden just get worse with every move, according to Lankford.

“This has been a challenge of Biden all along,” he continued. “He has done 94, now 95 executive orders opening the border up and inviting more people to come and then announces that he is going to close the border down and actually does not.”

“Day after day they have said [in regards to illegal immigration] that basically what [former President Donald] Trump did was mean, and so now we’re going to open the border up. What I have said over and over again to this administration is following the law is not mean.”

“We are a nation of the rule of law,” he concluded, “so as crimes increase, as murders increase, as all these problems that happen are a direct result of a president saying, Well I’m going to try to do something fair for these individuals. Instead, let’s do something fair for the American people.”

About NEWSMAX TV:

NEWSMAX is the fastest-growing cable news channel in America!

  • Find Newsmax channel in your home via cable and satellite systems – More Info Here
  • Watch Newsmax+ on your home TV app or smartphone and watch it anywhere! Try it for FREE – See More Here: NewsmaxPlus.com

Brian Freeman 

Brian Freeman, a Newsmax writer based in Israel, has more than three decades writing and editing about culture and politics for newspapers, online and television.

Trump within striking distance of Biden in competitive blue-leaning state: poll


Paul Steinhauser By Paul Steinhauser Fox News | Published June 11, 2024 1:02pm EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-within-striking-distance-biden-competitive-blue-leaning-state-poll

A Republican hasn’t carried Minnesota in a presidential election since President Richard Nixon’s 1972 landslide re-election, over a half-century ago. But a new poll in Minnesota shows a competitive race between President Biden and former President Trump in their 2024 election rematch.

The president stands at 45% support among likely voters in Minnesota, with Trump at 41% in a poll conducted June 3-5 for the Star Tribune, MPR News and KARE 11.

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST FOX NEWS POLLING IN THE 2024 ELECTION 

a new poll indicates Trump down only four points to Biden in longtime blue-leaning Minnesota
Former President Trump headlines the Minnesota GOP’s annual Lincoln Reagan fundraising dinner, on May 17, 2024, in St. Paul.  (AP)

Democrat turned independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. stood at 6% support in the survey, with 2% backing “someone else” if the election were held today.

Trump was narrowly edged in Minnesota in the 2016 election by 1.5 points by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. But four years later, Biden carried the state by seven points as he defeated Trump and won the White House.

“We’re going to win this state,” Trump predicted last month in a speech as he headlined the state GOP’s annual Lincoln Reagan fundraising dinner in St. Paul, Minnesota’s capital city.

The poll pointed to a significant enthusiasm gap, with 63% of Trump supporters saying they were “very enthusiastic” about casting a ballot for their candidate, compared to 31% of voters backing the president.

Eight hundred registered voters in Minnesota were surveyed in the poll, with an overall sampling error of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

TRUMP SWING THROUGH BLUE BASTION PAYS OFF AS HE TAPS POLITICAL ATM

Seven crucial swing states that decided the 2020 election (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, which were narrowly won by Biden, and North Carolina, which Trump carried by a razor-thin margin) will likely once again in the 2024 rematch. But both campaigns see opportunities to expand the map.

At a closed-door Republican National Committee retreat for top-dollar donors earlier this spring at a resort in Palm Beach, Florida, senior Trump campaign advisers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita and veteran pollster Tony Fabrizio spotlighted internal surveys that suggested both “Minnesota & Virginia are clearly in play.”

“In both states, Donald Trump finds himself in positions to flip key electoral votes in his favor,” the survey, which was shared with Fox News, emphasizes. 

And both states have sizable populations of rural White voters without college degrees who disproportionately support the former president.

Biden
President Biden delivers remarks at the Kempsville Recreation Center on Feb. 28, 2023, in Virginia Beach, Virginia. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Biden’s campaign disagrees that either Minnesota or Virginia are up for grabs.

While noting that they are “not taking any state or any vote for granted,” Biden campaign battleground states director Dan Kanninen told reporters last month that “we don’t see polls that are six or seven months out from a general election, head-to-head numbers certainly, as any more predictive than a weather report is six or seven months out.”

Kanninen highlighted that the campaign has teams on the ground in both states engaging voters.

WHAT THE LATEST FOX NEWS BIDEN-TRJMP POLL IN VIRGINIA SHOWS 

“We feel strongly the Biden-Harris coalition in both Minnesota and Virginia, which has been strong in the midterms and off-year elections, will continue to be strong for us in the fall of 2024,” he added.

And Biden campaign spokesperson Lauren Hitt, pointing to the president’s current fundraising dominance and ground-game advantage in the key battlegrounds, argued that “Trump’s team has so little campaign or infrastructure to speak of they’re resorting to leaking memos that say ‘the polls we paid for show us winning.'” 

But the latest Fox News poll in Virginia indicated Biden and Trump are deadlocked in Virginia. 

(Fox News)

The survey, conducted June 1-4, showed the Democratic president and his Republican predecessor in the White House each with 48% support in a head-to-head match.

In a multi-candidate race, Biden stands at 42% and Trump at 41%, with Democrat-turned-independent Kennedy at 9% and Green Party candidate Jill Stein and independent Cornel West each at 2%.

It’s been two decades since a Republican carried Virginia in the race for the White House. You have to go back to President George W. Bush, who won the commonwealth in his 2004 re-election victory.

“Let’s just begin by remembering where we were in 2020 when Joe Biden won Virginia by 10 points, and the fact that we’re having this discussion is a huge turn of events,” Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin said last week in a Fox News Digital interview in New Orleans, as he attended a Republican Governors Association (RGA) conference.

Youngkin emphasized that “we’re here in June and there’s still a lot of water to go under the bridge, but Virginia looks like it’s in play and that’s pretty exciting.”

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

Paul Steinhauser is a politics reporter based in New Hampshire. 

Sponsored Stories You May Like

Trump Campaign: Hunter Trial ‘Distraction’ From Father


By Sandy Fitzgerald    |   Tuesday, 11 June 2024 01:29 PM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/hunter-biden-guilty-donald-trump/2024/06/11/id/1168326/

Former President Donald Trump’s campaign Tuesday, after a Delaware jury convicted Hunter Biden of all three felony charges in his federal gun trial, slammed the proceedings as being a “distraction” from the activities of President Joe Biden and his family members.

“This trial has been nothing more than a distraction from the real crimes of the Biden Crime Family, which has raked in tens of millions of dollars from China, Russia and Ukraine,” Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign’s national press secretary, said in a statement about the conviction of the president’s son.

She added that “crooked Joe Biden’s reign over the Biden Family Criminal Empire is all coming to an end on November 5th, and never again will a Biden sell government access for personal profit.”

Hunter Biden’s charges are in connection to the purchase of a handgun in 2018. He was charged with lying on a form while buying the weapon, by saying that he was neither addicted to drugs nor illegally using them.

The verdict was returned in Wilmington, Delaware, after the jury deliberated for about three hours over a two-day time period.

He still faces a trial this September, just two months before the November general election on charges that he failed to pay $1.4 million in taxes, and Republicans in Congress have said they will continue to pursue information about him as part of their impeachment inquiry against his father.

Sandy Fitzgerald 

Sandy Fitzgerald has more than three decades in journalism and serves as a general assignment writer for Newsmax covering news, media, and politics. 

Life Hack: If You Don’t Want To Be Killed, Don’t Take Hostages


BY: DAVID HARSANYI | JUNE 10, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/10/life-hack-if-you-dont-want-to-be-killed-dont-take-hostages/

#FAFO

Author David Harsanyi profile

DAVID HARSANYI

VISIT ON TWITTER@DAVIDHARSANYI

MORE ARTICLES

The reaction to the rescue of four Israeli hostages from Gaza is a microcosm of the past 70 years of this conflict. Every time Palestinians pay the price for acting out in some horrific, irrational, self-destructive, violent way, their defenders want to rewind history to a more convenient moment — this time to Oct. 6, 2023.

Sorry, that’s not how life works. Hamas, the chosen political entity of Gaza — the overwhelming choice of Palestinian civilians, in fact — launched this round of the conflict by massacring, sexually torturing, and kidnapping Israelis whose only sin was attending a music festival. Palestinians took hundreds of these hostages back to the Gaza Strip — a place Arabs have political autonomy over for nearly 20 years — and held them in the middle of densely populated areas hoping to dissuade Israel from liberating them, or, if it did, to create as many martyrs as possible.

Critics of Israel now ask the usual dishonest question: Are four lives worth the alleged 200-plus Arabs that were lost rescuing them?

Israel is the only nation on earth that is tasked with protecting its own people and its enemies. Every innocent lost life is, of course, a tragedy. But if you don’t want to be placed in harm’s way, don’t hold hostages in your homes and neighborhoods, and don’t cheer and support a government that puts your life in constant danger for a lost cause. This is the reality of the world.

Now, if reports are correct, Hamas — and perhaps “civilians” (it’s difficult to tell because terrorists are often dressed as noncombatants) — opened fire on the rescuers. The Israelis, who do not indiscriminately target civilians, fired back, as they should. Whatever the specifics, every lost life is Hamas’ fault.

But, as always, it also needs to be stressed that the casualty numbers that are endlessly repeated by the establishment media are fiction — as everyone in those newsrooms is surely aware. So, we must assume outlets like The Washington Post and CNN — which also detestably contends that the hostages had been “released” — are fellow travelers. One BBC interviewer even asked an IDF spokesman if Israel had warned Palestinians of their sting operation.

Then again, even if there were over 200 dead, it is also surely the case that many of the dead were members of Hamas or holding hostages of their own volition or helping those holding hostages. Avoid doing so if you value your life.

The “Health Ministry” makes no distinction between terrorists and civilians, and in this case there might be little difference. Among those holding the Israelis hostage in their homes in Nuseirat, for instance, were a “journalist” (who apparently worked for Al Jazeera and the U.S.-based Palestine Chronicle, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit) and a “doctor.” The entire neighborhood was ostensibly under UN control. We already know that UN workers had likely participated in the Oct. 7 kidnappings and UNRWA schools are used by Hamas bases of operation.

Even now, there’s a (terrible) ceasefire deal on the table being pushed by Joe Biden (still chumming for antisemitic votes) that Hamas continues to reject. Would we not expect the United States to act the same way as Israel if some homicidal cult had our people?

In the end, of course, this could all end today if the hostages were returned and Hamas would unconditionally surrender. Israel haters, who fashion themselves peaceniks, will blame everyone — Netanyahu, Biden, colonialism, racism, etc., etc. — but the Islamists who are the cause of this war.

Then again, the entire conflict could end if the Palestinians would stop turning to nihilistic theocrats to lead them and accept Israel’s existence.  


David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist, a nationally syndicated columnist, a Happy Warrior columnist at National Review, and author of five books—the most recent, Eurotrash: Why America Must Reject the Failed Ideas of a Dying Continent. Follow him on Twitter, @davidharsanyi.

Polls: Biden Approval Sinks to New Low, 37.4%


By Fran Beyer    |   Monday, 10 June 2024 02:57 PM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/joe-biden-approval-538/2024/06/10/id/1168177/

President Joe Biden’s approval rating has sunk to its lowest-ever — a dismal 37.4% — with disapproval at a troubling 56.6, according to tracker and opinion poll analyzer Five Thirty Eight. The polling shows signs of dwindling support among nonwhite voters, while progressives have also hammered the White House over its response to Israel’s handling of the war in Gaza in the aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack, Business Insider reported.

Biden’s approval began the slide after the United States’ tumultuous withdrawal from Afghanistan and has never recovered. As the Taliban moved swiftly Aug. 15, 2021, into the capital city of Kabul, taking control of the country in a weekend after U.S. forces pulled out, Biden was sitting on a 49% approval rating, according to Gallup. He was just seven months into his presidency. A month later, his approval fell to 43%.

In comparison, former President Donald Trump’s approval rating has ticked up since he left office in the wake of the Capitol riot. According to FiveThirtyEight’s weighted average, Trump has a 41.6% approval rating as he faces a potentially dangerous time after becoming the first-ever former president to be convicted of a felony.

In 2016, Gallup found Trump and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were the least popular presidential candidates dating back to when they began measuring such popularity in 1956, Business Insider reported.

Gallup found in Biden’s most recent quarter in office, which ended April 18, he was at the lowest approval rating in that span in decades. Four other modern presidents had an average sub-50% approval rating at this same point in time. Only one, President Barack Obama, won reelection in November.

Trump, whose Gallup average was 46.8% at this time in 2020, lost to Biden that November.

Fran Beyer 

Fran Beyer is a writer with Newsmax and covers national politics.

Victor Davis Hanson Op-ed: The Myth That Biden Had Nothing to Do With the Prosecutions of Trump


Victor Davis Hanson | June 07, 2024

Read More At https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/06/07/the-myth-that-biden-had-nothing-to-do-with-the-prosecutions-of-trump/

Joe Biden wears a navy-blue suit and speaks at a podium in front of American flags.
While Democrats deny President Joe Biden and Democrat operatives had a role in any of Donald Trump’s five criminal and civil prosecutions, their behavior suggests otherwise. Pictured: Biden delivers remarks at the White House on June 4, 2024. (Photo: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

The five criminal and civil prosecutions of former President Donald Trump all prompt heated denials from Democrats that President Joe Biden and Democrat operatives had a role in any of them. But Biden has long let it be known that he was frustrated with his own Department of Justice’s federal prosecutors for their tardiness in indicting Trump. Biden was upset because any delay might mean that his rival Trump would not be in federal court during the 2024 election cycle. And that would mean he could not be tagged as a “convicted felon” by the November election while being kept off the campaign trail.

Politico has long prided itself on its supposed insider knowledge of the workings of the Biden administration. Note that it was reported earlier this February that a frustrated Joe Biden “has grumbled to aides and advisers that had (Attorney General Merrick) Garland moved sooner in his investigation into former President Donald Trump’s election interference, a trial may already be underway or even have concluded…”

If there was any doubt about the Biden administration’s effort to force Trump into court before November, Politico further dispelled it—even as it blamed Trump for Biden’s anger at Garland: “That trial still could take place before the election and much of the delay is owed not to Garland but to deliberate resistance put up by the former president and his team.”

Note in passing how a presidential candidate’s legal right to oppose a politicized indictment months before an election by his opponent’s federal attorneys is smeared by Politico as “deliberate resistance.”

Given Politico was publicly reporting six months ago about Biden’s anger at the pace of his DOJ’s prosecution of Trump, does anyone believe his special counsel, Jack Smith, was not aware of such presidential displeasure and pressure?

Note Smith had petitioned and was denied an unusual request to the court to speed up the course of his Trump indictment.

And why would Biden’s own attorney general, Garland, select such an obvious partisan as Smith? Remember, in his last tenure as special counsel, Smith had previously gone after popular Republican and conservative Virginia governor Bob McDonnell.

Yet Smith’s politicized persecution of the innocent McDonnell was reversed by a unanimous verdict of the U.S. Supreme Court. That rare court unanimity normally should have raised a red flag to the Biden DOJ about both Smith’s partiality and his incompetence.

But then again, Smith’s wife had donated to the 2020 Biden campaign fund. And she was previously known for producing a hagiographic 2020 documentary (“Becoming”) about Michelle Obama.

Selecting a special counsel with a successful record of prior nonpartisan convictions was clearly not why the DOJ appointed Smith.

The White House’s involvement is not limited to the Smith federal indictments.

Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis’s paramour and erstwhile lead prosecutor in her indictment of Trump, Nathan Wade, met twice with the White House counsel’s office. On one occasion, Wade met inside the Biden White House.

Subpoenaed records reveal that the brazen Wade actually billed the federal government for his time spent with the White House counsel’s staff—although so far no one has disclosed under oath the nature of such meetings.

Of the tens of thousands of local prosecutions each year, in how many instances does a county prosecutor consult with the White House counsel’s office—and then bill it for his knowledge?

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s just-completed felony convictions of Trump were spearheaded by former prominent federal prosecutor Matthew Colangelo. He is not just a well-known Democratic partisan who served as a political consultant to the Democratic National Committee.

Colangelo had also just left his prior position in the Biden Justice Department—reputedly as Garland’s third-ranking prosecutor—to join the local Bragg team. Again, among all the multitudes of annual municipal indictments nationwide, how many local prosecutors manage to enlist one of the nation’s three top federal attorneys to head their case?

So, apparently, it was not enough for the shameless Bragg to campaign flagrantly on promises to go after Trump. In addition, Bragg brashly drafted a top Democratic operative and political appointee from inside Joe Biden’s DOJ to head his prosecution.

Not surprisingly, it took only a few hours after the Colangelo-Bragg conviction of Trump for Biden on spec to start blasting his rival as a “convicted felon.” Biden is delighted that his own former prosecutor, a left-wing judge, and a Manhattan jury may well keep Trump off the campaign trail.

So, it is past time for the media and Democrats to drop this ridiculous ruse of Biden’s White House “neutrality.” Instead, they should admit that they are terrified of the will of the people in November and so are conniving to silence them.

(C) 2024 Tribune Content Agency LLC

Here’s Everything You Need to Know About Hunter Biden’s Criminal Gun Trial


BY: STEVE ROBERTS, JONATHAN FAHEY, AND ANDREW PARDUE | JUNE 04, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/04/heres-everything-you-need-to-know-about-hunter-bidens-criminal-gun-trial/

Hunter Biden

Author Steve Roberts, Jonathan Fahey, and Andrew Pardue profile

STEVE ROBERTS, JONATHAN FAHEY, AND ANDREW PARDUE

MORE ARTICLES

Jury selection for Hunter Biden’s first federal criminal trial began Monday in Delaware. The Biden son is facing trial on three charges: two counts of false statements and one count of unlawful firearm possession, all related to a Colt Cobra 38SPL revolver he allegedly purchased and possessed in Delaware in October 2018. Biden faces up to 25 years imprisonment if convicted of these offenses. 

The case the prosecution intends to prove is relatively straightforward. Biden has struggled with addiction to various narcotics for years and was even discharged from the U.S. Navy Reserve after failing a mandatory drug test in June 2013. In his 2021 book, Beautiful Things, he openly discussed the fact that during the period that is relevant in this case, “[a]ll my energy revolved around smoking drugs and making arrangements to buy drugs — feeding the beast.” Then, amid this addiction, Hunter Biden purchased a handgun.

Every gun owner will be familiar with ATF Form 4473, a document that asks all prospective firearms purchasers a series of questions to ensure they are legally authorized to own a firearm before completing a sale. One of these questions asks whether the purchaser is “an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?”

The prosecution will attempt to prove that Biden answered “no” to this question on his Form 4473 when the truthful answer should have been “yes,” and he therefore obtained a gun that he was not legally authorized to possess. In other words, Hunter Biden is not being prosecuted for being an addict; he is being prosecuted for lying about his addiction to unlawfully obtain a firearm and then possessing that firearm as an unlawful user of illegal drugs.

For years, it appeared as if Hunter Biden would avoid accountability for his conduct entirely. After significant public pressure, however, a plea agreement was reached between Biden and the government that would allow him to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax offenses — despite allegedly failing to pay over $1.4 million in taxes by understating his income and inflating his expenses, offenses that themselves carry a maximum of 17 years in prison — and avoid responsibility almost entirely for his gun offenses by entering into a deferred prosecution agreement. Such agreements are almost entirely unheard of for firearms offenses.

To make the deal even sweeter for Biden, the agreement did not even require him to cooperate with the government, which is often a requirement with plea agreements, particularly in cases where extreme leniency is being offered.

But then something happened in the spring of 2023 that threw a wrench into the deal being worked out between Biden and the government and changed the landscape. Two IRS whistleblowers came forward alleging political interference in their investigation of Hunter Biden’s taxes by officials in the Department of Justice who repeatedly limited the scope of the investigation. A New York Times investigation revealed that the U.S. attorney’s posture on whether to require Hunter Biden to plead guilty to misdemeanor tax offenses as a condition of any deal changed shortly after the IRS whistleblowers came forward.

Then Biden’s team demanded that the plea deal include immunity for “any other federal crimes” he may have committed, even beyond the gun and tax-related matters that were the subject of this investigation. Because this broad immunity request went farther than the prosecution was willing to go, the plea deal fell apart and was ultimately rejected by the federal judge.

The case has also raised interesting questions about the scope of the Second Amendment after Hunter Biden’s lawyers argued that the federal law under which he was charged infringes upon his constitutional right to own a firearm. Relying on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, Biden’s attorneys argued that the charges should be dismissed because there is no “historical tradition” in the United States of prohibiting users of illicit substances from obtaining firearms simply upon the basis of their addiction (as opposed to a prior criminal conviction for drug charges, for example).

Federal courts are divided on the constitutionality of this law, and while the argument was not successful in preventing Biden’s case from moving forward to trial, it could still be relevant in an appeal. If Biden’s argument succeeds, that would effectively expand Second Amendment rights to a class of people whose right to own a firearm is not currently protected under federal law.

Hunter Biden’s legal troubles will not end with the conclusion of his Delaware trial. His indictment for failure to pay taxes from 2016 through 2019 is pending. And a congressional investigation into Hunter Biden’s foreign business deals and lobbying is also ongoing. Of course, his legal troubles may all go away after the November election, when, if reelected, President Biden would have the ability to pardon him, likely without serious political ramifications. 


Steve Roberts and Jonathan Fahey are partners at Holtzman Vogel, and Andrew Pardue is a Holtzman Vogel associate.

Merrick Garland Shouldn’t Be Praised. He Should Be Impeached


BY: DAVID HARSANYI | JUNE 04, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/04/merrick-garland-shouldnt-be-praised-he-should-be-impeached/

Merrick Garland

Author David Harsanyi profile

DAVID HARSANYI

VISIT ON TWITTER@DAVIDHARSANYI

MORE ARTICLES

It’s no accident that The Wall Street Journal ran an “exclusive” hagiographic piece on Merrick Garland’s “by-the-book, play-no-favorites approach” the day the attorney general is set to be grilled by Congress. The administration wants to paint the AG as a fair-minded dispenser of justice.

In truth, while Garland might occasionally — only when faced with no real options — put the Biden administration in an uncomfortable political position, he has regularly weaponized the agency to target the president’s political enemies, from pro-life protesters to concerned parents to presidential candidates.

Even as I write this, Garland is refusing to hand over audio recordings of Joe Biden’s interviews with former Special Counsel Robert Hur, despite a congressional subpoena. Even as the DOJ stonewalls Congress, it is prosecuting the Republican Party’s presidential candidate for crimes for which the Hur tape supposedly “exonerates” Biden.

Garland’s claims of executive privilege are risible. If Biden’s audio can be withheld from the public simply because someone somewhere might manipulate the tape using AI, then any audio of any president can be denied the public.

Also, why is this DOJ’s concern? Considering the Hur transcript has already been released — and we know that Biden lied about it — there is even less justification for withholding the audio. And considering the DOJ has apparently cleaned up all the “uhs” and “ohs” and garbled words in the transcript, the tape would likely further cement the president as an “elderly man with a poor memory.”

So, the real problem here isn’t the deep fake; it’s the unedited tape. Withholding the audio is obviously politically motivated. Which is unsurprising, since Garland has been one of the most partisan AGs in memory.

While Garland was raiding the home of the former president over a classified document dispute, he was letting the statute of limitations on the foreign influence-peddling by the president’s family run out.

While left-wing pro-Hamas protesters were rioting and targeting Jews, Garland was still fearmongering over the coming MAGA extremist revolution, inflating the threat with bogus statistics.

While Garland did nothing about those (likely) illegally picketing the homes of federal judges and attempting to intimidate them and influence cases — even after an assassin tried to kill Brett Kavanaugh — the DOJ was deploying armed teams to raid the homes of pro-life families and prosecuting elderly anti-abortion protesters for praying in front of “clinics.”

Even as Democrats are yammering about saving democracy, the DOJ has been working to undermine the electoral choices of voters in red states like Texas. Abortion is not a (pretend) constitutional right anymore. The DOJ does not care.

The DOJ is restarting censorship efforts under the guise of stopping foreign interference, and also targeting X owner Elon Musk, who has opened his platform to more neutral speech. It’s quite the happenstance, right?

Not only did Garland form a “task force” to investigate local parents who were protesting authoritarian Covid restrictions and racist curriculums, but he refused to dissolve the effort even after the National School Boards Association apologized for the letter that sparked it.

Of course, it was the Biden administration that prompted the organization to use the term “domestic terrorism” to give the DOJ justification to get involved in the first place. Even The New York Times acknowledged that “Garland did not detail any specific threats of violence or offer reasons for the increase in harassment and threats.” The only reason to get involved was to chill speech and intimidate parents.

No matter.

Even the case against Hunter Biden, used most often by the left to brandish Garland’s alleged Solomonic credentials, is a farce.

Let’s not forget if the Justice Department had its way, the case would have disappeared. To begin with, Garland ignored the law and appointed a counsel from within the government. David Weiss, whose office was filled with Biden allies, was prepared to give Hunter an astonishing immunity deal, not only on felony gun and tax charges, but for a slew of unrelated serious potential offenses, including failure to register as a foreign agent, bribery, and corruption.

It was only because of the whistleblower testimony of Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler that Weiss was forced to ask Hunter to plead guilty to two piddling misdemeanor counts. And the immunity deal was only quashed because Judge Maryellen Noreika, who pointed out there was not a single precedent in which immunity was offered for “crimes in a different case,” rejected it.

In his remarks to Congress today, Garland promised that he “will not back down from defending our democracy,” despite the “repeated attacks” and “conspiracy theor[ies]” regarding the DOJ. Some conspiracy theories exist, no doubt, but most criticisms of Garland’s work are legitimate. Treating criticism of his corrupt tenure as an attack on the “judicial process itself” has it backward.  Demanding no one question the actions of state institutions is authoritarian. If the system were working properly, Garland would be impeached.

But in their efforts to save “democracy” — a concept that’s been stripped of any meaning — Democrats have justified deploying the state to punish and destroy political enemies. For many progressives, the legal system isn’t merely a tool for criminal justice but a way to exact political justice.

Garland is one of the leaders in this fight. Whether it’s because he is a weak man willing to do what’s expected of him or because he is corrupt makes little difference. 


David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist, a nationally syndicated columnist, a Happy Warrior columnist at National Review, and author of five books—the most recent, Eurotrash: Why America Must Reject the Failed Ideas of a Dying Continent. Follow him on Twitter, @davidharsanyi.

Joe Biden’s Fingerprints Are All Over the Criminal Prosecutions of Donald Trump


BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | JUNE 03, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/03/joe-bidens-fingerprints-are-all-over-the-criminal-prosecutions-of-trump/

Joe Biden

Author Margot Cleveland profile

MARGOT CLEVELAND

VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

MORE ARTICLES

In response to Americans’ outcry over the political prosecutions of Donald Trump and a Manhattan jury convicting the former president on 34 felony counts, President Joe Biden declared, “It’s irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged, just because they don’t like the verdict.” Coming from the Commander-in-Rigging, this proclamation means nothing.

Biden and those seeking to ensure his re-election have their hands all over Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s prosecution of the former president. A lead prosecutor for Bragg during the trial was Matthew Colangelo. In December 2022, Colangelo left the Biden Department of Justice to “jump start” the criminal case against Trump. Biden had previously named Colangelo his acting associate attorney general—the third highest-ranking official in the DOJ.

There’s Plenty More Where That Came From

Colangelo’s role in prosecuting his former boss’s political opponent provides the most obvious evidence of the Biden administration’s involvement in the Manhattan D.A.’s criminal targeting of Trump, but the rigging started much earlier. As I previously reported, the incestuous relationship between the Manhattan D.A.’s office and Team Biden began as early as mid-February 2021. Then, “Bragg’s predecessor, District Attorney Cyrus Vance, arranged for private criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Mark Pomerantz to be a special assistant district attorney for the Manhattan D.A.’s office.”

As The New York Times reported at the time, Pomerantz was to work “solely on the Trump investigation” during a temporary leave of absence from his law firm, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton, and Garrison. “But even before being sworn in as a special assistant to the Manhattan D.A., Pomerantz had reportedly ‘been helping with the case informally for months.’” Even Democrats’ most reliable Old Grey Lady (of the evening) acknowledged, “the hiring of an outsider is a highly unusual move for a prosecutor’s office.”

Soon after the Manhattan D.A. hired Pomerantz, two of his colleagues, Elyssa Abuhoff and Caroline Williamson, also took leaves of absence from Paul, Weiss to serve as special assistant district attorneys on the Trump investigation. “For a law firm to lend not one but three lawyers to the Manhattan D.A.’s office seems rather magnanimous, until you consider Paul, Weiss’s previous generosity to Joe Biden.”

As I previously reported, during Biden’s first run for the White House, “the law firm hosted a $2,800-per-plate fundraiser for about 100 guests.” Brad Karp, the chair of Paul, Weiss, also topped the list of Biden fundraisers, bundling at least $100,000 for the then-candidate. At the time, Karp wrote in an email: “As someone who cares passionately about preserving the rule of law, safeguarding our democracy and protecting fundamental liberties, I’ve been delighted to do everything I possibly can to support the Joe Biden/Kamala Harris ticket.”

Biden’s relationship with Karp continued after his election, with the president including Karp and his wife at a state dinner with the Australian prime minister. Karp and his fellow Paul, Weiss lawyers continue to fund Biden’s re-election campaign. In fact, Biden’s connection to the firm is so strong Bloomberg branded Paul, Weiss the “Biden-Era N.Y. Power Center.”

But for Paul, Weiss lending Pomerantz to the Manhattan D.A.’s office to control the Trump investigation, the former president likely never would have been charged. According to Pomerantz, Bragg had decided “not to go forward with the grand jury presentation and not to seek criminal charges,” indefinitely suspending the investigation.

Pomerantz made those claims in the resignation letter he tendered to Bragg in early 2022, which was deliberately leaked to The New York Times. “Pomerantz’s letter and his claims that Bragg had suspended the Trump probe triggered a political firestorm, which the Manhattan D.A. sought to quell by telling the public the investigation was ongoing.” Soon after, Bragg capitulated, hiring Biden’s high-ranking DOJ lawyer, Colangelo, who proceeded to indict and convict Trump.

In contrast to the Biden-connected attorneys who secured Trump’s indictment and conviction, in late 2021, at least three career prosecutors in the Manhattan D.A.’s office asked to be removed from the investigation of Trump, reportedly “concerned that the investigation was moving too quickly, without clear evidence to support possible charges.”

Not Just Manhattan

The Biden connection to the political targeting of Trump is not limited to the Manhattan D.A.’s office. In August 2023, Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis charged Trump and 18 other Republicans in a sprawling 98-page criminal indictment.

Earlier this year, court filings and testimony in the case related to motions to disqualify Willis and her former lover, Nathan Wade, revealed the Fulton County D.A.’s office had met with White House counsel in May 2022. Then, just three days after Trump announced his 2024 candidacy for president, Wade traveled to D.C. for an interview with the “White House,” according to Fulton County records. The Biden administration’s White House counsel’s office also dispatched two letters to Willis, according to one of her prosecutors.

Biden and his Democrat-run administration also have their fingers all over the remaining two criminal cases targeting Trump, both brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. President Biden, according to an April 2, 2022, New York Times report, “As recently as late last year… confided to his inner circle that he believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted.”

The Times claimed Biden had expressed frustration with Garland’s “deliberative approach” and that the president believed Trump should be prosecuted. The president “has said privately that he wanted Mr. Garland to act less like a ponderous judge and more like a prosecutor who is willing to take decisive action over the events of Jan. 6.,” the legacy outlet reported.

Biden’s attorney general would eventually appoint Smith special counsel. Smith would later charge Trump in two separate indictments—one in Florida concerning documents the former president retained, and one in D.C. with various conspiracy to defraud and obstruction charges related to Trump’s challenging the outcome of the 2020 election.

Stretching the Law Past Its Breaking Point

With the D.C. indictment, the special counsel delivered to Biden just what he wanted—a prosecution of Trump “for his role in the events of Jan. 6.” To deliver for Biden, though, required Smith to stretch the federal criminal code to the point of breaking. In the case of two of the crimes charged, in the context of Jan. 6, 2021, defendants, the Supreme Court seems poised to limit the reach of the relevant statutes—a holding that could mean that Smith charged Trump with two non-crimes.

The final criminal case pending against Trump, Smith’s documents case, also connects back to the Biden administration. That case began when the DOJ launched an investigation prompted by a referral from the national archivist related to a dispute over presidential records—even though the same archivist declined to refer Hillary Clinton to the DOJ for mishandling classified documents. Later, a top aide to Smith, Jay Bratt, would meet with “White House officials multiple times, just weeks before Mr. Smith indicted former President Donald Trump.”

That case has been delayed after it was revealed the FBI agents who executed a search warrant obtained by the Biden administration had failed to keep the documents seized from Mar-a-Lago in the same condition they were found, with the order of the materials mixed up. At the same time, it was revealed that the “classified cover sheets” depicted in the photographs of the evidence seized during the August 2022 search of Trump had been placed there by federal agents. The leak of those photographs falsely portrayed the former president as in possession of documents bearing classified cover sheets.

Biden can continue to deny his responsibility for the criminal targeting of his political opponent all he wants, but the facts tell a different story. So did the president’s malevolent smile on Friday when he was asked to respond to Trump calling himself a political prisoner and blaming the president directly.


Margot Cleveland is an investigative journalist and legal analyst and serves as The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. Margot’s work has been published at The Wall Street Journal, The American Spectator, the New Criterion, National Review Online, Townhall.com, the Daily Signal, USA Today, and the Detroit Free Press. She is also a regular guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and on Fox News, Fox Business, and Newsmax. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. Cleveland is also of counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland where you can read more about her greatest accomplishments—her dear husband and dear son. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Democrats, Not Trump, Are The Real Crooked Record-Keepers


BY: JOSEPH LOBUE | MAY 29, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/29/democrats-not-trump-are-the-real-crooked-record-keepers/

Donald Trump speaking about manhattan trial

Author Joseph LoBue profile

JOSEPH LOBUE

MORE ARTICLES

President Trump is on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records because the bookkeepers in his organization recorded certain legal expenses — specifically, a legal settlement — as “legal expenses.” According to Democrat prosecutors, the bookkeepers should have recorded these payments as campaign contributions and expenditures because, they say, the payments were “intended” to “influence” the 2016 election “unlawfully” by concealing a purported sexual encounter with a pornographer.

Convoluted and bizarre enough for you yet? It should be. Because there is absolutely nothing “unlawful” about concealing a purported sexual encounter with a pornographer.

There is, nevertheless, a good deal of crooked record-keeping going on these days. But Democrats are the ones doing it.  

False Characterization of Record-Keeping Requirements

Federal campaign finance law actually prohibits candidates from characterizing the payments at issue in the Trump case as campaign contributions and expenditures.

Brad Smith, a leading expert on campaign finance law and former member of the Federal Election Commission, was set to testify to that very thing in open court in the Trump case. Except Juan Merchan, the partisan Democrat Biden-donor judge presiding over the case, barred him from doing so. 

To accept the prosecution’s case, one must conclude that New York law requires candidates to make business records that violate federal law. The supremacy clause of the Constitution does not allow that. So, it is Democrat prosecutors, not the Trump organization, that conspired to falsely characterize the record-keeping issues in the case.

Judge Merchan’s Manipulation of the Trial Record

Judge Merchan’s rationale for excluding Smith’s testimony is that judges traditionally instruct the jury on the law. The problem is that Merchan already allowed prosecution witnesses, and prosecutors themselves, to opine on their understanding of campaign finance laws. Once he allowed that, Merchan was constitutionally required to allow Trump to mount a defense on the same point.

Merchan also overlooked the fact that how people align their behavior with the law is based as much on the policies of the administrators who enforce the law as on the words of the statute itself. Smith, a former member of the regulatory body that enforces federal campaign law, was prepared to testify that the agency’s policy precludes candidates from treating payments like these as campaign contributions and expenditures.

This leads to the obvious conclusion that the Trump organization booked the payments in the manner that they did, not to “unlawfully” influence the 2016 election, but because they were (or at least thought they were) required to do so in that manner by federal law, completely negating the factual element of unlawful intent.

In fact, had Trump “intended” to “influence” the 2016 election by covering up the Stormy Daniels’ NDA payments, the easiest way to do so would have been to characterize the late October 2016 payments as campaign contributions and expenditures. This is because, under federal campaign finance law, contributions and expenditures made in late October of an election year do not need to be reported until after the election.

Unfortunately (and unjustly), the jurors in the New York case will not hear any of this exculpatory information because the partisan Democrat judge has excluded it from the record. Like I said, it’s the Democrats who have the record-keeping problem. 

Talk About Falsifying Business Records to Influence an Election

Joe Biden is old. As Bill Maher puts it, Joe Biden is “cadaver-like” old. Polls show that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe Biden does not possess the mental fitness to serve another term as president. Do you think that might incentivize the White House to alter records to mitigate the political effects of Biden’s mental deterioration?

The White House is doing just that. It recently released the official transcript of Biden’s May 19 speech to the NAACP in Detroit. It was official. Except it wasn’t a transcript. It was a political circular designed to clean up the incoherent mess left by a mentally diminished man selfishly trying to hold onto the most difficult, demanding, and consequential job in the world.

The so-called “transcript” substantively corrected numerous significant instances of mental lapses or gibberish uttered by Biden, including the claim that he was vice president during the Covid “pandemic,” and that President Obama told him to go to Detroit and “fix it.”

Records? We Don’t Have to Show You Any Stinking Records!

There’s no need to falsify records if you improperly refuse to let the public see them at all. That’s what the White House did last week by claiming “executive privilege” over the audio recordings of Biden’s interviews with the special counsel investigating Biden’s mishandling of classified documents.

That’s the case where Biden took highly classified documents from the government while he was a senator and vice president, “willfully” retained them openly in dilapidated boxes in his garage, and then “willfully” disclosed the classified information to his ghostwriter as part of a lucrative $8 million book deal. Biden’s Justice Department declined to prosecute Biden, concluding that he would present himself to a jury like he did in his interviews — “as a sympathetic elderly man with a poor memory” — making it difficult to prove a felony “that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

In an effort to control the damage from the special counsel’s report, the White House and its allies released redacted transcripts of Biden’s interviews with investigators, apparently hoping that presenting the cold, written version of Biden’s testimony might minimize public fears about his declining mental state. It did not. Yet, it did open the door for Congress to subpoena the audio tapes of the interviews.

Last week, the White House barred the Justice Department from releasing those audio tapes to Congress on the grounds of “executive privilege.” However, the White House has already voluntarily released the transcripts of the interviews, so any privilege that may have existed has been waived. It is a basic principle of law that a party waives confidentiality privileges once the party voluntarily discloses any significant portion of the information. In fact, in these circumstances, the White House’s claim of executive privilege is not merely wrong, it is ludicrous.    

The White House’s assertion of “executive privilege” is not really a legal one — it knows it has no chance of prevailing in court. Rather, the assertion of privilege is purely political. The White House believes it can conceal the audio tapes until after the election while the issue is litigated.

The audio tapes must be really, really bad for Biden. How do we know this?  Because not releasing the tapes is really bad for Biden. The special counsel essentially reported that Biden appeared mentally diminished in his interviews. By refusing to release the audio tapes, Biden just confirms that perception.

There were no good options for the White House on the audio tape issue. Because the White House chose a bad option (withholding the tapes), one can only assume that the other option (releasing the tapes) was substantially worse. 

Why Withhold Records if You Can Just Hide or Destroy Them Instead?

That, apparently, was the credo of one of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s top advisers — and possibly Fauci as well — during the Covid panic in relation to their dealings with EcoHealth Alliance and the now-admitted use of federal funding to perform gain-of-function research at the infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology.

This month, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released shocking emails sent from the private Gmail account of David Morens, an adviser to Fauci, detailing an apparent effort by administrators to evade public open records laws — commonly referred to as “FOIA” — by improperly performing government work through private Gmail accounts or by deleting records altogether.

In one such email, Morens tells Peter Daszak, president of EchoHealth Alliance, that “there is no worry about FOIAs. I can either send stuff to Tony on his private gmail, or hand it to him at work or at his home. He is too smart to let colleagues send him stuff that could cause trouble.”

In another email, Morens confesses, “I learned from our foia lady here how to make emails disappear after I am foia’d, but before the search starts, so i think we’re all safe. Plus, i deleted most of those earlier emails after sending them to gmail.”  

Wow, that’s bad. But you have to understand, to Democrats, booking legal expenses as “legal expenses” is the real threat to democracy.


Joseph LoBue is a retired Naval officer and attorney.

Yes, Democrats Want Aliens to Vote in U.S. Elections. Take Jamie Raskin’s Word for It


BY: M.D. KITTLE | MAY 24, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/24/yes-democrats-want-aliens-to-vote-in-u-s-elections-take-jamie-raskins-word-for-it/

Jamie raskin speaking

Author M.D. Kittle profile

M.D. KITTLE

MORE ARTICLES

As the House voted Thursday to bar foreign nationals from voting in local Washington, D.C. elections, Democrats and their public-relations team in the corporate media have rolled out the big guns in attacking such election integrity efforts. They’re painting the legislation that ensures noncitizens cannot vote in elections as the next so-called “Big Lie,” sticking to their well-worn narrative that noncitizens already are prohibited from voting in U.S. elections and that such violations “don’t exist.” 

But one of the fiercest opponents of the election integrity legislation has said the quiet part out loud, as Democrats are wont to do. 

‘Alien Suffrage’

As Fox News reported, U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., wrote a full-throated defense of “Alien Suffrage” in a 1993 paper for the American University Washington College of Law, where he serves as Professor of Law Emeritus. Raskin is ranking member of the House’s Oversight Committee, which, among other things, has constitutional oversight of the District of Columbia. 

“In this Article, I will argue that the current blanket exclusion of noncitizens from the ballot is neither constitutionally required nor historically normal,” Raskin wrote. “Moreover, the disenfranchisement of aliens at the local level is vulnerable to deep theoretical objections since resident aliens — who are governed, taxed, and often drafted just like citizens — have a strong democratic claim to being considered members, indeed citizens, of their local communities.”

Not surprisingly, Raskin was among 143 Democrats voting against the Republican-led bill blocking illegal immigrants and other foreign nationals from voting in elections in the district, over which Congress has ultimate authority. Interestingly, 52 Democrats joined Republicans in passing the measure — because the vast majority of Americans believe only U.S. citizens should be allowed to vote in local and U.S. elections. Taking the opposing view is not a smart reelection strategy for politically vulnerable liberals. 

Several cities in Raskin’s home state have allowed foreign nationals to vote in local elections for years. Takoma Park, Maryland in November celebrated its 30th anniversary “of the first non-US. Residents” voting in the Washington, D.C. suburb. 

“Even if it’s only a handful voting in elections—and it’s more than that—it’s a huge step forward for democracy,” said Seth Grimes, a leftist community organizer, in an official city press release. “Non-citizens have a stake in civic affairs, and everyone should have a voice in who governs them.” 

Polling shows an overwhelming number of Americans don’t share Grimes’ point of view, or the one expressed in Raskin’s law school report. A national poll conducted last year for Americans for Citizen Voting by RMG Research, Inc., found 75 percent of respondents were opposed to allowing foreign nationals to vote in their local elections. 

In his 1993 paper, Raskin argued that the “emergence of a global market and the corresponding dilution of national boundaries, would invite us to treat local governments as ‘polities of presence’ in which all community inhabitants, not just those who are citizens of the superordinate nation-state, form the electorate.” 

“Alien suffrage would thus become part of a basic human right to democracy,” the now-congressman wrote.

Does Raskin still feel that way? His office did not return The Federalist’s request for comment. 

Media: Alien Voting Doesn’t Happen and It’s Fine When It Does

After Thursday’s vote, it’s not a leap to suspect many of Raskin’s fellow Democrats support foreign nationals voting in local elections. If they were against it, they would have voted for the D.C. election integrity measure. 

Corporate media, of course, have been running interference for Democrats in the weeks since former President Donald Trump, the GOP’s presumed presidential nominee, and Speaker Mike Johnson announced the rollout of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act. The SAVE Act is aimed at shoring up glaring holes in the 30-year-old National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) passed during a simpler time, when politicians believed in borders. The bill would amend the 1993 “Motor Voter” law to require individuals to provide proof of citizenship before they are automatically registered to vote at state departments of motor vehicles and other agencies. It also requires states to remove foreign nationals from their voting rolls, something too many state election officials have been loath to do. The NVRA does not require direct proof of citizenship for voter registration. 

Republicans say the legislation is crucial in the wake of the millions of illegal immigrants that have poured through the U.S. southwest border since Joe Biden took the presidential oath of office in January 2021. 

“There is currently an unprecedented and a clear and present danger to the integrity of our election system, and that is the threat of noncitizens and illegal aliens voting in our elections,” Johnson said at a Capitol press conference earlier this month announcing the bill.

But the accomplice media, while conceding foreign nationals have been caught voting in federal elections, assert the act is extremely rare. Besides, the left’s messengers contend, what illegal alien in his right mind would risk committing a felony just to vote in a federal election? The New York Times accused Republicans of “Sowing [a] False Narrative.” The Associated Press asserts “Noncitizen voting isn’t an issue in federal elections,” while it acknowledges that it does happen. 

“To be clear, there have been cases of noncitizens casting ballots, but they are extremely rare. Those who have looked into these cases say they often involve legal immigrants who mistakenly believe they have the right to vote,” AP admits

So much for the idea that any illegal vote dilutes the validity of an election. Again, the corporate media like to put qualifiers on fraud, forced by the facts to acknowledge its existence but insisting it isn’t “widespread.” 

“They’ve used ‘widespread’ for years as a way of downplaying any concern about it,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission and Senior Legal Fellow in the Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. “We don’t have ‘widespread’ bank robberies but we have enough of them that we take very detailed security precautions to prevent them. Election fraud is exactly the same.”

Where Democrats Stand

Raskin isn’t the only Democrat who has defended foreign nationals voting in elections. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a Brooklyn Democrat, has been very vocal in his support for aliens voting in New York local elections. His New York congressional colleague, leftist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has suggested the Republican-controlled House’s bill to bar foreign nationals from voting in D.C. is reminiscent of the days of slavery. 

“They’re singling out the residents of the District of Columbia and expanding in the history of disenfranchisement that goes all the way back to the legacy of slavery,” she said last year. 

James Comer, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, said the bill aims to rectify the D.C. City Council’s decision to “recklessly allowed non-citizens to participate in elections in our nation’s capital.”

“This move by the Council was irresponsible and subverts the voices of American citizens,” Comer said in a statement. “Today, Congress took action and I applaud the passage of legislation that will now prohibit non-citizens from voting in District of Columbia elections.”

The House bill pertaining to D.C. elections and the SAVE Act aren’t going anywhere this year with a Democrat-controlled Senate and a president who appears to be running a Democrat Party future recruitment drive. But Americans, many of whom don’t support illegal aliens and other foreign nationals voting in U.S. elections, know where the party stands heading into the November election. 

“Rep. Raskin is okay with the ‘dilution of national boundaries.’ I am not. And neither are the majority of United States citizens,” said Jack Tomczak, national field director for Americans for Citizen Voting, which is leading a growing national effort to amend state constitutions to include citizen-only voting language. 


Matt Kittle is a senior elections correspondent for The Federalist. An award-winning investigative reporter and 30-year veteran of print, broadcast, and online journalism, Kittle previously served as the executive director of Empower Wisconsin.

Trump’s Multiracial Working-Man Optimism Beats Biden’s Corrosive Anger and Resentment


BY: MOLLIE HEMINGWAY | MAY 24, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/24/trumps-multiracial-working-man-optimism-beats-bidens-corrosive-anger-and-resentment/

Trump looking at American flag in the background

Author Mollie Hemingway profile

MOLLIE HEMINGWAY

VISIT ON TWITTER@MZHEMINGWAY

MORE ARTICLES

Former President Donald Trump managed to pull off a campaign miracle with a wildly successful rally in South Bronx on Thursday night.

The Bronx is the poorest borough in New York City, and South Bronx is the poorest area. Most residents are black or brown, and they vote overwhelmingly Democrat. No Republican presidential candidate has gone anywhere near the area in decades.

On Thursday morning, heavy rains flooded the park where the rally was to be held. Bronx-based Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted “God is good” upon seeing the weather, believing it would keep Trump crowds away. She also taunted Trump for being the victim of Democrat lawfare, saying he had to rally in the Bronx because he was in the “legal version of an ankle bracelet.”

God is good regardless of political outcomes, of course. In this case, He dried Crotona Park in the Bronx before a raucous crowd of thousands poured in to hear one of Trump’s best campaign speeches yet.

“Certainly, a bigger crowd than I think Democrats would like to see, particularly given this is one of the bluest counties in the entire country,” one CNN reporter conceded upon seeing the crowds.

Trump barely mentioned the NYC show trial he’s being subjected to and mixed campaign staples with a declaration of love for New York City and the country at large. He seemed truly happy and at home.

“I was thrilled to be back in the city I grew up in, the city I spent my life in, the city I HELPED BUILD, and the city WE ALL LOVE — THANK YOU!” Trump said on Truth Social. Trump grew up in Queens but officially moved to Florida in 2019. His effusive praise for New York shows a remarkably positive attitude from the former president, given that the city and state are currently part of a Democrat campaign plot to bankrupt and imprison him.

Trump reflected on lessons from his success in New York City real estate, doling out career advice along the way, during his hour-and-a-half speech. A parade of local politicians and activists announced endorsements and support of Trump. When he discussed his economic and immigration policy proposals for getting the country back on track, he argued that his policies would help everyone in the country. It’s part of a concerted effort by the Trump campaign to drive up votes from black and Hispanic voters who traditionally vote Democrat.

“It doesn’t matter whether you’re black or brown or white or whatever the hell color you are — it doesn’t matter. We are all Americans, and we are going to pull together as Americans!” Trump said.

The contrast with President Joe Biden couldn’t be starker. In three decidedly non-raucous speeches within the last week or so, Biden leaned into racial grievance politics. At a speech at the National Museum of African American History and Culture last Friday, Biden claimed America was beset by “forces trying to deny freedom of opportunity for all Americans.” He claimed there was an “insidious” resistance and an “extreme movement” led by his political opponent to hurt black people. In another disaster of a speech to the NAACP, the White House later had to make 10 corrections to it.

The same day as the NAACP speech, Biden gave the commencement address at Morehouse College, a historically black men’s school in Georgia. In a self-centered speech riddled with some of his familiar falsehoods about his life and family, Biden painted a picture of a racist and evil country. He said the country was under the “poison of white supremacy” and falsely claimed Americans were trying to put forth a national book ban to harm black people.

It’s “natural to wonder if democracy” actually works, he said. “What is democracy if black men are being killed in the street? What is democracy if a trail of broken promises still leave black — black communities behind? What is democracy if you have to be 10 times better than anyone else to get a fair shot?”

Biden also falsely claimed Georgia doesn’t allow anyone to drink water in voting lines and that black election workers are being constantly attacked. Biden’s message is that the country is evil, racist, and full of hatred and that he will fix it by emptying the Treasury to buy votes.

Trump, who has the benefit of having already had one very successful term as president, acknowledges the very real economic, social, and foreign policies the country faces. But unlike Biden, his optimistic campaign speeches show a man who seems to love the country, love its cities, love its people, and want the country to return to health.

Whether Biden’s race-baiting rhetoric or Trump’s unbridled multi-ethnic optimism will win the day remains to be seen. The speech in South Bronx showed how successful the latter can be.


Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is the Editor-in-Chief of The Federalist. She is Senior Journalism Fellow at Hillsdale College and a Fox News contributor. She is the co-author of Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court. She is the author of “Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections.” Reach her at mzhemingway@thefederalist.com

WATCH: Biden Gets BOOED OFF THE STAGE


By Staff Writer | May 23, 2024

Read more at https://thebeltwayreport.com/2024/05/watch-biden-gets-booed-off-the-stage%e2%9a%a0%ef%b8%8f/

Joe Biden has been criticized for his policies and statements throughout the course of his long political career, but these criticisms have never been expressed as loudly or with such angst as they were yesterday in Lake Tahoe.

It appears that many people who attended the event were not impressed by what Biden had to say (not to mention how he has been flying the nation into a blackhole since day one) and felt it necessary to voice their displeasure with him publicly.

This isn’t the first time that Biden has faced criticism from ‘We, The People’.  He was harshly criticized for supporting certain trade agreements during his time as Vice President under Barack Obama’s administration and for backing certain foreign policy initiatives in Iraq and Afghanistan while he was in office. But yesterday’s boos seemed louder than any other criticism that he has received before.

It is possible that some of the attendees were members of President Trump’s base or supporters of Donald Trump Jr., both of whom have made no secret of their dislike for Joe Biden. However, I believe there may have been more to it than just political differences between Biden and some members of the crowd.

After all, there is no denying that Joe Biden has made some controversial decisions during his tenure in government over the past several decades.  The average American is living with the consequences of Joe’s terrible policies every day we roll out of bed.  Quite frankly, we are PISSED!

Hey Joe, if you don’t want to be booed stop trying to end the United States as we know it.  Get inflation under control, stop letting people secularize children, respect science … you get the idea.

WATCH:

It sure looks like America is now WIDE awake to the train wreck that is our 46th president.  If Joe runs again and the media tries to tell us that he got more legal votes than Obama did during his two elections for POTUS or Trump did … remember these clips, factor in how many people you have met who support Biden and you’ll realize something does not compute …

Election Analyst Nate Silver: Biden May Have to Step Aside


By Fran Beyer    |   Thursday, 23 May 2024 04:18 PM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/politics/nate-silver-joe-biden-presidential-debates/2024/05/23/id/1165926/

Political commentator and elections analyst Nate Silver suggested President Joe Biden consider “stepping aside” for November’s White House election if he’s still “struggling” by August. In a “Risky Business” podcast, Silver said Biden’s pulling out of the Commission on Presidential Debates and agreeing separately to two debates with former President Donald Trump —one in June and one in September — signals trouble for the president’s campaign.

“Basically, Biden traded three debates after Labor Day for one debate after Labor Day and then one on CNN, the cable network, that will happen in the middle of June that probably everyone will forget about by the time the conventions happen in July and August,” Silver said.

He also pointed out Biden’s team knows “their candidate is too old” and remarked it may trigger Democrats to “fold for a better hand.”

Silver also weighed in with a post on X, formerly Twitter, doubling down down on a recommendation that Biden step aside before the Democratic Party’s convention if he’s still “struggling” in polls.

A recent New York Times/Siena College survey and a Bloomberg/Morning Consult found Trump leading Biden in most swing states. Biden also faced a protest movement within his own party over his support of Israel in its pursuit to wipe out the terror group Hamas. In some swing states, activists voted “uncommitted” in primary elections to protest Biden’s Israel policy. 

Ben Carson, a retired neurosurgeon who was a member of former President Donald Trump’s Cabinet, told Newsmax in April that Biden’s mental and physical condition “puts the entire country at risk.”

“If Biden is still struggling in August he needs to consider stepping aside,” Silver wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “It’s not a great situation for Ds either way, but you have to do due diligence on the question. It’s an important election, obviously. It shouldn’t be taboo to talk about.

“They know their candidate is too old,” Silver said on the podcast. “You have to fold for a better hand.”

Related Stories:

© 2024 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Pelosi, Biden, and Other Democrat Elites Anoint Themselves to Make Decisions for the Rest of Us


BY: DAVID HOGBERG | MAY 22, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/22/pelosi-biden-and-other-democrat-elites-anoint-themselves-to-make-decisions-for-the-rest-of-us/

Nancy Pelosi

Author David Hogberg profile

DAVID HOGBERG

MORE ARTICLES

Last week Rep. Nancy Pelosi made the mistake of engaging in a debate about populism at Oxford Union. Without scripted talking points and a friendly press corps, it was a setting in which Pelosi was likely to tell the world what she really thinks. She didn’t disappoint.

About halfway through the debate, Pelosi uttered the following:

We’ve seen demagogues come down the pike [and] destroy the press. What is it that Republicans say? Fake news. So, they’re diminishing [the press] in the eyes of these poor souls who are looking for some answers. We’ve given them [answers], but they’re blocked by some of their views on guns. They have the three Gs, guns, gays, God. And the cultural issues cloud some of their reception, reception [to] an argument that really is in their interest.

Perhaps realizing how damaging those remarks were, Pelosi claimed, “We don’t accuse people of not knowing what they’re doing. They know what their personal interest is. We respect that.” But if you state that certain people hold views that block them from seeing what is in their best interest, then you are saying that they don’t know what they are doing. And using the “three Gs” the way Pelosi did is not a sign of respect.

Noted economist Thomas Sowell examined at length the attitude displayed by the likes of Pelosi in his book The Vision of the Anointed. That vision is the notion among many in politics, academia, and the media “who believe that third parties can make better decisions than people can make for themselves.” The Anointed exist on a higher moral plane, exemplified by, among other things, their compassion for the poor, support of the oppressed, and concern for the environment. Those who do not share the vision are not just wrong, but they are mean-spirited, and “the ‘real reasons’ behind their arguments and actions must be exposed.” If they continue to prove recalcitrant, then they must be “nullified and superseded by the views of the anointed, imposed via the power of government,” Sowell wrote.

A populist like Donald Trump doesn’t merely have different ideas about what is best for society. He is, Pelosi claimed, a “snake-oil salesman” who sells the vulnerable “a bill of goods.” His real aim was to pass “a tax bill that [gave] 83 percent of the benefits to the top 1 percent.” That benefited his “big, dark, rich, billionaire donors who don’t want to pay taxes.”

More of Pelosi’s Accusations

Pelosi also accused populists of cruelty. They want to suppress “the vote in our country,” “take away … health care,” and let the fossil fuel industry “suffocate the airways,” she said.

This is not the first time Pelosi has expressed this attitude. During the fight over Obamacare, she said, “You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill … I don’t know if you have heard that it is a legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America … but we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it. Away from the fog of the controversy.”

Pelosi was, in effect, saying: “The arguments against Obamacare are just a distraction. And for those that oppose Obamacare, you can trust us to do what’s best for you because we are smarter and more moral.”

Biden Administration as Anointed

Most politicians, whatever their stripe, possess the Vision of the Anointed to some degree. But some are more possessed than others. From student loans to health insurance subsidies to massive spending bills, the Biden administration has shown no compunction about substituting its judgment for those of ordinary Americans. The problem is that the Anointed like Biden and Pelosi do not suffer the direct consequences of their decisions. Those tend to fall on the people for whom the decisions are being made.

Biden’s Green New Deal is perhaps the harshest example of that. Part of Biden’s green agenda included shutting down new oil drilling on federal land. Taxpayers have picked up the tab for the higher gasoline prices and heating costs required to keep the presidential limousine moving and the White House cozy in the winter. Those same taxpayers will have to fund their higher gas prices and heating bills on their own.

Adults are best suited to make their own decisions. They pay the cost if they are wrong, and that gives them much greater incentive to make good decisions than the Anointed. Come November, it is crucial to remember that many politicians have no respect for that.


David Hogberg is a writer living in Washington, D.C. He is author of the book Medicare’s Victims: How the U.S. Government’s Largest Health Care Program Harms Patients and Impairs Physicians.

Liz Peek Op-ed: Another surprising reason Joe Biden should now step aside


Liz Peek  By Liz Peek Fox News | Published May 21, 2024 5:00am EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/another-surprising-reason-joe-biden-should-step-aside

Joe Biden is running out of excuses. While many Democrats have urged him to end his re-election bid, including friendly columnists like the New York Times’ Ezra Klein and Washington Post’s David Ignatius, it has been the conventional wisdom that Biden could not do so, fearful that an even less popular Kamala Harris would replace him as the 2024 Democratic candidate for president.

That is changing. Vice President Harris has been out on the stump, performing the kind of all-out energetic campaigning that the president cannot manage. She meets almost daily with women’s groups talking about abortion and Black groups talking about racial justice. 

She travels incessantly to swing states to hand out money and programs, crediting the Biden-Harris White House – emphasis on Harris – with passing the enormous spending bills at the heart of the administration’s campaign. 

She also frequently entertains important Democrats at her home in Washington, getting to know the important power brokers. Quietly, off the radar, even as she is being virtually ignored by Republican analysts and commentators, Harris’ efforts are paying off. 

KAMALA HARRIS ACCEPTS INVITATION TO DEBATE TRUMP VP PICK

Harris’ overall approval ratings of 38% (net 11% disapproving) on average today are slightly better than those of her boss (net 17% disapproving), and they have improved since the beginning of the year, when her net disapproval was above 17%. Biden’s have not. Importantly, recent surveys show she is more popular with Black voters – where Biden has suffered a serious swoon – than the president.

Video

Harris can make a solid case that she can carry on the Obama/Biden agenda and that she is healthy and fit to serve four more years. If a large portion of Biden’s unpopularity is due to his age, Harris would be a significant upgrade.

Harris’ improved posture comes at a pivotal time in the campaign and for the president. Scheduling the first of two presidential debates on June 27, way earlier than usual in the election calendar, has triggered renewed speculation about Democrats dumping Biden at the convention. Some think that the timing of the face-off with Donald Trump, many weeks ahead of the Aug. 19 gathering in Chicago, is intended to give Democrats some optionality. If the debate is a complete disaster, it is thought, the party will have enough time to regroup and consider an alternative before their convention.

If a large portion of Biden’s unpopularity is due to his age, Harris would be a significant upgrade.

Recent polls showing former President Trump leading in critical swing states promise disaster in November, not only for Biden but possibly for down-ballot candidates as well. Vulnerable Senate candidates in toss-up states like Pennsylvania and Nevada are reportedly distancing themselves from the president, fearful of being dragged down by the top of the ticket. 

VP HARRIS GRILLED FOR SAYING INFLATION REDUCTION ACT IS WORKING VIA GOV’T GIVING OUT ‘TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS’

But what about all those primaries? Is it even possible to ditch Biden? The answer is yes; during the Democratic convention, the party could technically decide to pick another candidate if Biden withdrew from the race or if the majority of delegates was persuaded that the president was not up to the task.

Video

 There are some 4,000 delegates who will elect the party’s nominee, and roughly 700 so-called Super Delegates who step in only if there is no apparent winner on the first round of voting. There is no legal obligation for any of those delegates to back Biden. In the event of some calamity – a health problem, for instance, or a humiliating defeat in the debate – the majority could choose someone to replace the president.

Or the party could finally persuade Biden to step aside. Some political analysts have expected him to do so for months, considering his age, infirmity and declining popularity. Despite considerable pressure, Joe has hung on, perhaps knowing he can best protect his son Hunter from the Oval Office, because his wife Jill has encouraged him to run again or maybe because of Harris’ weak standing. 

For the first three years of his presidency, Biden outshone Harris, who repeatedly got tangled up in hilarious word salads but more importantly, was tagged with accomplishing little and, especially, doing nothing about the open border.

Video

Though Harris’ approval ratings are still poor, she is arguably more capable than Joe. If Democrat bosses decide to open up the convention to other candidates, in order to keep the party from splitting wide open, Vice President Harris is likely to prevail. That is what happened in 1968.

When Lyndon Johnson announced he was withdrawing from the presidential race on March 31, 1968, his approval rating was about 36%, according to Gallup, only slightly worse than Biden’s today. LBJ knew his chances were dim, given anger about the Vietnam War, and took himself out of contention. At the Democratic convention that year, delegates picked Johnson’s vice president, Hubert Humphrey, to succeed him as the 1968 candidate, despite many within the party seeking an anti-war candidate. 

President Richard M. Nixon dedicates his new administration to the cause of “peace among nations” as former President Lyndon Johnson, left, listens to the inaugural speech Jan. 20, 1969, in Washington. Seated at right is Vice President Spiro Agnew. (AP Photo)

Humphrey was not popular – only 34% of the country supported him on the eve of the convention, compared to 40% backing Richard Nixon and 17% leaning toward the segregationist (former Democrat) George Wallace, who ran as an independent. But, nominating Humphrey was the least contentious of possible outcomes; in the end, Democrat power brokers opted for harmony. The decision did not go well; Humphrey lost that year to Richard Nixon in a tight election.

The reality for Democrats is that if they open up the convention to considering other candidates, Kamala Harris will likely emerge the nominee. She will not leave the game without a fight; and, like Humphrey, the vice president would be the least contentious of alternatives. 

For sure, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and others might throw their hats in the ring, but neither has done the coast-to-coast politicking so necessary to build their case. And, Black leaders, who put Joe Biden in the Oval Office, would almost certainly prefer Harris.

Gavin Newsom speaks
Gov. Gavin Newsom talks about the future UCLA Research Park, California’s new global hub for innovation, being built at the former Westside Pavilion in Los Angeles on Jan. 3, 2024. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)

Humphrey lost, but he went from basement-level approval ratings to nearly winning. It’s possible that Harris could do the same. Democrats may have no other choice.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM LIZ PEEK 

Liz Peek is a Fox News contributor and former partner of major bracket Wall Street firm Wertheim & Company. A former columnist for the Fiscal Times, she writes for The Hill and contributes frequently to Fox News, the New York Sun and other publications. For more visit LizPeek.com. Follow her on Twitter @LizPeek.

Black voters rip Biden’s ‘race baiting’ commencement speech as his support dwindles: ‘Party of hopelessness’


Bailee Hill By Bailee Hill Fox News | Published May 20, 2024 2:00pm EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/media/black-voters-rip-bidens-race-baiting-commencement-speech-support-dwindles-party-hopelessness

Richmond, Virginia business owner Ajay Brewer and Georgia independent voter Bernadette Wright respond to Biden’s most recent pitch to Black voters. Black voters reacted to President Biden’s commencement address at Morehouse College in Atlanta over the weekend, accusing him of “race baiting” while his support in the Black community continues to dissipate ahead of November. 

New York resident Lou Valentino reacted to Biden’s remarks during “Fox & Friends,” accusing him of trying to set Black Americans back after his controversial speech. 

“Race baiter,” Valentino told Lawrence Jones on Monday. “It’s tough to hear that because imagine you going to college for four years… ready to… hit the world, start a career, and… this guy is trying to set you back literally, I don’t know, civil rights. I don’t know what’s going on with the Democrats. This role that they’re trying to play, instead of… pulling up and saying, well, ‘Here we go. This is your time. Congratulations. Let’s kill it. Let’s do our best.’ Nah, you know what, Lawrence? They don’t love you like that.”

VP HARRIS CALLED OUT OR ‘PANDERING’ TO BLACK VOTERS WITH ‘EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN’ DINNERS

Speaking at Morehouse College in Atlanta, Biden questioned whether American democracy would work for the African-American graduates. 

“You missed your high school graduation. You started college just as George Floyd was murdered, and there was a reckoning on race. It’s natural to wonder if the ‘democracy’ you hear about actually works for you. What is democracy? That Black men are being killed in the street,” Biden told Morehouse graduates on Sunday.

Biden Morehouse commencement speech
ATLANTA, GEORGIA – MAY 19: U.S. President Joe Biden receives Honorary Doctor of Laws degree from Morehouse College during the 2024 140th Morehouse College Commencement Ceremony at Morehouse College on May 19, 2024 in Atlanta, Georgia.  (Photo by Paras Griffin/WireImage) (Getty Images)

He continued, “What is democracy? The trail of broken promises still leaves Black communities behind. What is democracy? You have to be ten times better than anyone else to get a fair shot. Most of all, what does it mean? As you’ve heard before, to be a Black man who loves his country even if it doesn’t love him back in equal measure.”

Virginia business owner Ajay Brewer reacted to Biden’s remarks during “Fox & Friends First,” echoing Valentino’s sentiment while accusing the Democrats of stifling the freedom of Black voters. 

TOP MOMENTS FROM BIDEN’S MOREHOUSE COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS

“It’s hopelessness, man… it’s the party of hopelessness,” Brewer told Carley Shimkus on Monday. 

“I could say that… I was a Democrat my entire life until I opened my business… It’s like a drug… victimhood, and, ‘We can do this for you,’  and to be honest with you the Black folks I surround myself with just want government to get out of the way.”

“We don’t need folks to do things for us. We don’t need people to baby us,” he continued. “It’s kind of disturbing… that they pander to us in this manner because they can depend on us at a clip of 90% plus, but I think that’s going to change this election.”

According to a new Fox News poll, Biden’s support with Black voters has declined 7% since October 2020, while Trump’s support has spiked 9% in the same time frame. 

“America is changing and people are becoming more sensitive to what’s affecting us as individuals, as business owners, as parents. Not just because we’re Black, not just because we’re women, not just because we’re men. They can’t keep putting us in these race baskets,” Georgia independent voter Bernadette Wright told “Fox & Friends First” Monday. 

“Accountability season is here, and America is ready for someone who’s ready to lead from a place of understanding that you’re going to have to meet with the states, and you’re going to have to meet with the local government if you want to affect individual communities on a micro level.”

BLACK VOTERS REJECTING BIDEN AS SUPPORT DWINDLES AHEAD OF 2024: ‘EVERYTHING WAS BETTER’ UNDER TRUMP

“When it comes to me as an African American, I need you to pay attention to what’s going on with my business,” she continued. “It’s not always just about, ‘Oh, you’re Black, so you must need this in your community. They don’t even know who we are at this point. We’re just looking for somebody to come to the middle and lead.”

Video

Biden had also been accused of using the speech to cater to Black voters. After he was announced as commencement speaker in April, students and professors quickly called on the college to cancel the speech.

During the speech, a smattering of Morehouse students and faculty also protested Biden’s speech by turning their backs on him. The protest was not widespread, however, and those participating did not disrupt his address beyond showing their backs. The small protest was a reminder of the continued unrest at college campuses across the country, however, where anti-Israel protests have forced some universities to cancel their commencement ceremonies altogether.

Fox News’ Lindsay Kornick contributed to this report. 

Harvard Poll: Trump Leads Biden by 6 Points


By Fran Beyer    |   Monday, 20 May 2024 01:49 PM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/harvard-poll-donald-trump-joe-biden/2024/05/20/id/1165415/

Former President Donald Trump leads President Joe Biden by 6 points nationally in a hypothetical head-to-head race, according to a Harvard-Harris survey released Monday. Trump topped Biden 49% to 43%, while 8% of respondents were undecided.

When undecided voters were pushed to select the candidate they leaned toward and included with the rest of the sample, Trump led 53% to 47%  — a 2 point increase from April, when he led Biden 52% to 48%, Breitbart reported.

With “leaners” included, Trump garnered the support of 95% of GOP voters, while Biden had 91% of Democrats. Nearly 1 in 10 Democrats broke for Trump; 1 in 20 Republicans supported Biden, Breitbart reported.

Other survey findings showed:

  • 69% have made up their minds on who they’ll vote for; 31% are still weighing the choices.
  • 46% of participants said Biden is mentally fit; 54% said they have doubts.
  • 49% say Biden is getting worse as president.
  • 55% say Trump has committed crimes for which he should be convicted; the same number say Democrats are using the legal system in a biased way to take out a political opponent.
  • 50% of voters say Trump’s legal cases make it impossible for him to be a viable candidate for president,
  • 79% want Biden and Trump to debate each other; 63% say the debates will provide valuable information.
  • 63% say Biden’s pubic lapses are more frequent these days.
  • 59% say questions about a president’s age, memory or lapsed concentration are dangerous; 41% say fears are overblown politically.

The poll’s margin of error was 2 percentage points.

Related Stories:

© 2024 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Biden’s Voldemortian Theory of Privilege: The President Whose Voice Must Not Be Heard


By: Jonathan Turley | May 20, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/05/20/bidens-voldemortian-theory-of-privilege-the-president-whose-voice-must-not-be-heard/

Below is my column in The Hill on the curious claim of executive privilege over the audiotape from President Joe Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur.  It is the first time that I know of where the content of a presidential conversation was treated as unprivileged, but the audio of the conversation claimed as privileged. It is also an invocation on answering questions about alleged criminal acts committed while a private citizen. It is, in my view, entirely without merit but Attorney General Merrick Garland appears more interested in running out the clock than prevailing on the claim.

Here is the column:

While all eyes were focused on a Manhattan courthouse for Donald Trump’s trial, a curious thing happened in Washington. President Joe Biden invoked executive privilege in defiance of Congress. It is not the invocation that is particularly unusual. What is curious is that Biden is withholding the audiotape of his own interrogation by Special Counsel Robert Hur, even though the transcript has been released as unprivileged.

It appears that Joe Biden is “he who must not be heard.”

The invocation of privilege over the audiotape is so transparently political and cynical that it would make Richard Nixon blush. Multiple committees are investigating Biden for possible impeachment and conducting oversight on the handling of the investigation into his retention and mishandling of classified material over decades. Classified documents were found in various locations where Biden lived or worked, including his garage. The mishandling of classified material is uncontestable. Broken boxes, unprotected areas and lack of tracking are all obvious from the photos.

The comparison to the Trump case in Florida is both obvious and disturbing. Where Trump was charged with a litany of charges, including mishandling and retention of documents (in addition to obstruction), Hur decided not to charge Biden at all. His reason was outright alarming: The president is an elderly man with failing memory.

Biden made the situation even worse with a disastrous press conference in which he attacked Hur and misrepresented his findings. Biden told the public that the special counsel did not find willful retention of material. This was untrue — Hur not only found that Biden had done this, but repeatedly detailed such violations in the report.

Biden also claimed that he had not shown classified material to third parties, even though Hur specifically found that he had and established that there is a witness to that violation.

Biden also attacked Hur for bringing up the death of Beau, his son who passed away in 2018. In showing why Biden could use his diminished faculties as a defense, Hur had noted that Biden got the date wrong of his own son’s death.

In the press conference, Biden angrily asked “How in the hell dare he raise that?” Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself it wasn’t any of their damn business.” It was later shown that it was not Hur but Biden himself who raised his son’s death, which he often does in speeches.

Hur’s view that Biden’s diminished cognitive abilities would undermine any prosecution left many dumbfounded. After all, the man who is too feeble to prosecute is not only running a superpower with a massive nuclear arsenal but running for reelection to add four more years in office.

From impeachment to oversight to the 25th Amendment (allowing the removal of a president for incapacities), there are ample reasons for Congress to demand information and evidence from the government on these questions. Congress is also interested in looking at repeated omissions for “inaudible” statements. Under this sweeping theory that Biden can legitimately withhold these recordings under executive privilege, any president could withhold any evidence of incapacity or criminality.

The House is poised to find Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt for refusing to release the audiotapes. It is a cynical calculation. Garland knows that his own department will never prosecute him for contempt of Congress. Obama Attorney General Eric Holder was clearly in contempt of Congress and abused executive privilege arguments to shield embarrassing details tied to Operation Fast and Furious. His department refused to even submit the matter to a grand jury.

Garland also knows that it will take months to get any ruling on the matter once Congress can file with a court. That will push any decision and release until after the election. While the administration and liberal legal analysts insisted that courts should expedite any and all trials of Donald Trump before the election, they are not eager for the public to know this information about whether Biden seemed feeble or confused under questioning.

A court may be a tad confused as to why a president’s answers are not privileged, but the actual audio recording of those answers can be privileged.

White House counsel Edward Siskel added to the dubious basis for the claim in a letter to House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio.) and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) on Thursday. He suggested that, if there were a compelling reason for the audiotapes, it might be different.

“The absence of a legitimate need for the audio recordings lays bare your likely goal—to chop them up, distort them, and use them for partisan political purposes,” wrote Siskel. But that is not a basis for an executive privilege assertion. How material would be treated is not relevant to whether Congress has a right to the information.

Past presidents have routinely over-extended privilege claims for political purposes. Nixon had his own tapes in the Watergate scandal. Of course, he was denying access to all of the information on the tapes. Yet, in a strange way, that may have been more compelling, since Nixon was arguing that the disclosure would compromise the content of privileged conversations.

Biden is not claiming the actual conversations as privileged; only how he sounded and spoke the words that are already in available transcripts.

For the Justice Department itself, these pendulum swings between being a contempt hawk and dove are enough to give a judge vertigo. The department just prosecuted Trump officials for refusing to appear or supply evidence to Congress. Likewise, arguments of privilege by former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows have been rejected. Yet privilege is now being asserted for this conversation between Hur and Biden, concerning potentially criminal conduct committed when Biden was a private citizen — neither vice president nor president.

In other cases, federal and state prosecutors have argued that Trump’s statements on Jan. 6 were criminal, made in relation to private interests and not protected under executive privilege or immunity. Notably, unlike in Biden’s case, these were statements made while Trump was president and concerned matters raised during Trump’s term. Likewise, prosecutors rejected claims that Trump has any protection over his call with Georgia officials over the demand for a recount. Imagine if Trump had argued that it was privileged to hear his voice, but not to read his words in the call.

Biden’s Voldemortian theory of privilege is unlikely to succeed legally, but that is not the point. Garland knows that it is likely to succeed politically. With generally favorable judges in Washington, the Biden administration hopes to run out the clock on the election. If Biden wins the election or the Democrats win the House, there may be no ongoing investigation or justification to support the demand in court. Of course, unlike Voldemort, who simply did not want to be named, Biden wants to remain “he who must not be heard” outside of short, carefully controlled settings.

What Hur heard could therefore remain a privilege of office.

Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.

Biden driving China, Russia into ‘shocking’ partnership, expert warns: ‘Blunder of the highest order’


Bailee Hill By Bailee Hill Fox News | Published May 16, 2024 1:00pm EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-driving-china-russia-shocking-partnership-expert-warns-blunder-highest-order

President Biden has made his “biggest blunder” yet by driving China and Russia into a closer strategic partnership through his faulty foreign policy, one expert warned, as Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in Beijing to strengthen bilateral ties. 

Heritage Foundation senior fellow Michael Pillsbury argued on “Fox & Friends” thathe “shocking” relationship the two nuclear world powers have fostered never would have happened under the Trump administration.

PUTIN SIGNS DECREE NAMING NEW RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING REPLACEMENT OF DEFENSE MINISTER

“Basically… we’re seeing what [former President] Trump was trying to do with China when he called himself ‘Tariff Man’ to get leverage over China to help us in various ways,” Pillsbury told co-host Brian Kilmeade on Thursday.

“That’s simply not happening with Biden and to draw, to push together two nuclear powers, Russia and China, it’s really a blunder of the highest order. … The Russians had a million army troops built up on the Chinese border for a while, so to see them come together like this to me is just shocking. It’s one of the biggest blunders we’ll see in my lifetime.”

Pillsbury’s comments come as Putin visited Xi in Beijing to strengthen bilateral relations and garner additional support for the war in Ukraine. 

Putin Xi
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping shake hands during a meeting in Beijing on Oct. 18, 2023. (Sergei Guneyev/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

Putin began his two-day state visit on Thursday, where both countries claimed to want an end to the war in Ukraine. 

“This would never happen under Trump,” Pillsbury said. “This is a big blunder, I think, by the Biden people to drive Russia and China together. This was one of Trump’s goals never to allow this to happen.”

PUTIN TO VISIT CHINA THIS WEEK TO MEET WITH XI, CHINESE FOREIGN MINISTRY SAYS

Meanwhile, China has vowed “resolute measures” against the U.S. in retaliation for Biden’s newly announced tariffs on $18 billion worth of Chinese imports. The new measures include an increase in the tariff rate on electric vehicles from 25% to 100% this year, along with hikes on tariffs in “strategic sectors” including steel, aluminum, semiconductors, batteries and solar cells, the White House said. 

“China heavily subsidized all these products, pushing Chinese companies to produce far more than the rest of the world can absorb. And then dumping the excess products onto the market and unfairly low prices, driving other manufacturers around the world out of business,” President Biden said Tuesday in a speech at the White House. 

Former Trump national security aide John Ullyot argued the summit between Putin and Xi was clearly a “show of force” against the U.S. as both countries face deepening tensions with the West. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

“It’s a show of force in the sense that it is… a rebuke to the West, that has… put in these sanctions,” Ullyot said Thursday on “FOX & Friends First.” “But it also is a sign that there’s increasing access here between Russia and China, where… Russia has been shut off from exporting oil and natural gas to the Western Europe, and so now they’re having to look at other markets, and of course, the biggest market… that’s a border state of theirs, and in the region in Asia it is obviously China, so they want to strengthen that.”

Video

“There’s a pipeline that is out now on hold that they want to get approval for the pipeline that goes through Mongolia from North Russia,” he continued. “But more than anything else… this is a show that there’s an axis that… Russia can exploit to work with China to go against the sanctions that are put on Russia, so also get financial and currency stability as well.”

The hikes come after Trump imposed tariffs on thousands of Chinese goods in 2018 and 2019 in response to an investigation that found China was violating U.S. intellectual property laws and coercing American companies into transferring sensitive technology to Chinese firms as a condition of gaining access to China’s market.

Fox News’ Greg Norman contributed to this report. 

Bailee Hill is an associate editor with Fox News Digital. Story ideas can be sent to bailee.hill@fox.com 

No, President Biden Did Not Commit an Impeachable Offense in Freezing the Arms Shipment to Israel


By: Jonathan Turley | May 16, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/05/16/no-president-biden-did-not-commit-an-impeachment-offense-in-freezing-the-arms-shipment-to-israel/

Below is my column in USA Today on the effort to impeach President Joe Biden over his freezing of arms shipments to Israel. While one can strongly disagree with the policy or the motivation behind the action, it is not a high crime and misdemeanor in my view.

Here is the column:

After the two impeachments of former President Donald Trump, Congress seems to be on a hair-trigger for anything that can be plausibly, or even implausibly, defined as a high crime and misdemeanor. The latest example is the impeachment resolution introduced against President Joe Biden over his decision to withhold arms from Israel in an attempt to prevent an operation in Rafah to destroy Hamas’ remaining military units. While there is much to question about Biden’s motivations and his means to pressure Israel, it is not an impeachable offense.

The sponsor of the impeachment resolution, Florida Republican Rep. Cory Mills, maintains that “President Biden abused the powers of his office by soliciting a ‘quid pro quo’ with Israel while leveraging vital military aid for policy changes. This egregious action not only compromised the credibility of the United States but also undermined the interests of our longstanding ally.”

On the surface, there is an obvious appeal for Republicans to use these grounds to impeach Biden. After all, in 2019, Democrats impeached Trump on the basis of a phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in which the president threatened to withhold military aid to that country. Democrats insisted that Trump used the threat to deny aid as a way to encourage Zelenskyy to investigate Biden for corruption in Ukraine.

Political analysts on the left and the right have acknowledged that Biden’s hardened stance toward Israel is due to his faltering poll numbers and the threat that he could lose Michigan and Minnesota in the upcoming election. A loss in Michigan, where the state’s large Muslim population has rejected Biden’s past support for Israel, would likely doom his chances for reelection.

Presidents often make decisions based on politics

Even assuming that Biden’s recent changes were motivated by politics in Michigan (which I believe is a fair assessment), it would not be a high crime and misdemeanor. Presidents routinely act out of political interests. Indeed, a democracy involves using one’s voting power to influence politicians like Biden to change policy. The more than 100,000 “uncommitted” votes in Michigan’s Democratic primary clearly spooked the Biden White House.

To impeach presidents for such discretionary conduct would make impeachment a type of “vote of no confidence” device used in countries like the United Kingdom. That is not the purpose of impeachment, which was meant to be a rarely-used measure to address the most egregious forms of presidential misconduct.

The recent resolution falls into a type of “just desserts” rationale for impeachment. I testified in the first Trump impeachment and opposed it on constitutional grounds. I warned Democrats that they would rue the day that they lowered the standard and short-circuited the process for impeachment.

At the time, I told the House Judiciary Committee: “President Trump will not be our last president and what we leave in the wake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come. I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. If the House proceeds solely on the Ukrainian allegations, this impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president. That does not bode well for future presidents who are working in a country often sharply and, at times, bitterly divided.”

Democrats were wrong then; Republicans are wrong now

After ignoring that warning, Democrats went a step further in the second impeachment in 2021 and used what I called a “snap impeachment” in an attempt to punish Trump for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Campus protests: Columbia cancels graduation ceremony because of student protests. It’s the wrong choice.

It would be an easy thing to say “well, turnabout is fair play, so a pox upon their house.” The problem is that this is the people’s house, and we all are harmed by the destruction of the impeachment process. Democrats were wrong in 2019 and 2021 to impeach Trump, but yielding to the same political motives now is no virtue.

Ironically, the new impeachment resolution does precisely what Biden is accused of doing: using constitutionally bestowed powers for raw political purposes.

The White House has insisted that this latest effort is “ridiculous.” Except that isn’t ridiculous given Democrats’ past actions. But it is equally wrong.

In 2023, I testified in the Biden impeachment hearing and said that I believed that there was sufficient basis − and potential impeachable conduct − to justify an inquiry into the Biden corruption scandal. Without prejudging the outcome of that investigation, it was clear that, if proven, some of the allegations would meet the demanding standard under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

The new allegations would not. Even if Biden were shown to be hampering Israel’s war to help him win Michigan, it would not be sufficient. The line between politics and policy has always been imprecise, if not imperceptible.  All presidents are first and foremost political creatures. They often use the most noble sentiments to hide the basest interests. There is a place to render a verdict on such cynical calculations, but it is not on the floor of the House. It is rather in thousands of polling places on Nov. 5.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on X, formerly Twitter: @JonathanTurley

Another Crushing Poll for Democrats


By: Kevin Jackson | May 12, 2024

 Read more at https://theblacksphere.net/2024/05/another-crushing-poll-for-democrats/

The news keeps getting worse for Democrats. And it’s a pattern they’d better get use to.

Trump mooned Democrats in New York City. It’s only a matter of time before he’s done with these kangaroo courts. But while Democrats attempt election interference, Trump gets stronger with each hit.

Each attempt to get Trump acts as a reminder of the good ol’ days of the Trump administration. The Dow gave back most of its profits over just a few days. This dramatic drop came on the heels of the latest inflation numbers. Apparently, inflation isn’t going down, but instead continues going up.

Just in time for the holiday season, huh?

Back in 2016, Trump explained the situation with illegals. And post-coup, Trump explained that immigration would metastasize, and that’s exactly what happened. Biden fathered an invasion.

Trump called it; and America heard the call.

According to Axios, most Americans support mass deportations:

Share of Americans who say they support mass deportations of undocumented immigrants

Survey of 6,251 adults taken March through April 2024

A purple bar chart showing the share of U.S. adults who support mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, by Race/ethnicity, political affiliation and generation. The data was collected from a survey of 6,251 U.S adults March through April 2024. It shows that 51% of the general public supports this policy. The highest support was Republicans at 68%, and the lowest was Black respondents at 40%. Notably, support decreases with younger generations, with 60% of Boomers or older in favor, compared to 48% of Millennials.

General public 51%

Race/ethnicity

White 56

Latino 45

Black 40

Political affiliation

Republican 68

Independent 46

Democrat 42

Generation

Boomer+ 60

Gen X 53

Millennial 48

Gen Z 35

Data: The Harris Poll; Chart: Axios Visuals

Half of Americans — including 42% of Democrats — say they’d support mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, according to a new Axios Vibes survey by The Harris Poll.

  • And 30% of Democrats — as well as 46% of Republicans — now say they’d end birthright citizenship, something guaranteed under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

These items are gaining steam due to Trump’s bold stance on immigration. And what balls it takes for him to announce that he would implement mass deportations.

Don’t be surprised to see all these numbers improve as the election nears. Then, when Trump gets back in office, he will no longer allow the propaganda to propagate.

Why it matters: Americans are open to former President Trump’s harshest immigration plans, spurred on by a record surge of illegal border crossings and a relentless messaging war waged by Republicans.

  • President Biden is keenly aware the crisis threatens his re-election. He’s sought to flip the script by accusing Trump of sabotaging Congress’ most conservative bipartisan immigration bill in decades.
  • But when it comes to blame, Biden so far has failed to shift the narrative: 32% of respondents say his administration is “most responsible” for the crisis, outranking any other political or structural factor.

Axios Vibe Check: Amid a record number of border crossings, nearly two-thirds of Americans said illegal immigration is a real crisis, not a politically driven media narrative.

What they’re saying: “I was surprised at the public support for large-scale deportations,” said Mark Penn, chairman of The Harris Poll and a former pollster for President Clinton.

  • “I think they’re just sending a message to politicians: ‘Get this under control,’ ” he said, calling it a warning to Biden that “efforts to shift responsibility for the issue to Trump are not going to work.”

Ouch. There simply is no way to spin this. And Trump doesn’t back down:

Zoom in: Trump has vowed to carry out the “largest domestic deportation operation in American history,” eyeing sweeping raids and detention camps in a plan that would target millions of undocumented immigrants.

  • Americans typically aren’t eager to deport immigrants who have put down roots in the U.S. But the poll of 6,251 U.S. adults suggests that the dynamic may be changing amid rising fears about crime and violence.
  • Trump has fanned those fears at every opportunity, campaigning on false claims of a “migrant crime wave” and declaring that immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country.”

When asked to identify their greatest concern around illegal immigration, Americans most frequently cited:

  1. Increased crime rates, drugs, and violence (21%).
  2. The additional costs to taxpayers (18%).
  3. Risk of terrorism and national security (17%).

The Left claims this data is wrong. However, these are the same people claiming that crime is dropping, while they omit data from the largest crime areas in the country.

Argentinian gang members beat up New York City cops and Democrats say ignore it. They released the guys almost immediately, too.

America is waking up, and Trump is the best alarm clock ever.


Without The SAVE Act, The Only Thing Keeping Foreigners from Voting Is the Honor System

BY: MIKE LEE | MAY 13, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/13/without-the-save-act-the-only-thing-keeping-foreigners-from-voting-is-the-honor-system/

Someone holding an 'election integrity' sign.

Author Mike Lee profile

MIKE LEE

MORE ARTICLES

Congressional Democrats insist that the SAVE Act — which requires proof of citizenship to establish eligibility to vote in federal elections — is unnecessary because federal law (18 USC § 611) already prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections. Those making this argument ignore a glaring problem: the government officials who register voters and conduct federal elections aren’t allowed to require proof of citizenship.

It’s therefore shockingly easy for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, leaving our elections dangerously vulnerable to foreign interference. Anyone — even an illegal alien or other noncitizen — can register to vote in federal elections, just by checking a box and signing a form. This is all on the honor system. No proof of citizenship is required.

It’s not just that state officials — who are responsible for federal voter registration and elections in our country — don’t verify citizenship in this context; it’s that the Supreme Court has told them that they’re not allowed to do so. In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., 570 U.S. 1 (2013), the Court held that the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA, also known as the “Motor Voter” law) prohibits states from requiring proof of citizenship when processing federal voter registration forms.

The SAVE Act would fix this gaping loophole by requiring anyone registering to vote in federal elections to provide proof of citizenship. It would also require states to review existing federal voter registration files and remove all noncitizens.

Remember: every state issues driver’s licenses to noncitizens, and 19 states issue them to illegal aliens. This, coupled with the Motor Voter law and the Supreme Court’s ruling, makes it shockingly easy for aliens — legal and illegal — to vote in federal elections, even though they’re prohibited from doing so. Considering that there are now nearly 30 million noncitizens in the U.S., including about 12 million who have entered illegally since the last presidential election, we desperately need the SAVE Act.

While Democrats are already mocking the SAVE Act, they don’t dispute that noncitizens shouldn’t vote in federal elections. Rather, they insist that there’s no need for the bill because noncitizens — being prohibited by law from voting in federal elections — categorically do not vote in such elections. That argument fails for one simple reason: it implausibly assumes universal compliance with a law that has become breathtakingly easy (and correspondingly tempting) to violate.

Some say that noncitizens wouldn’t dare register to vote in federal elections, as doing so is illegal and could adversely affect their present or future immigration status. Even if this assumption were correct with regard to many (or even most) noncitizens in the U.S., that still wouldn’t disprove the need for the SAVE Act.

If even a tiny percentage of America’s 30 million noncitizens were to vote, they could change the outcome of a close federal election. And, as noted by the Immigration Accountability Project, it’s odd for the left to insist so vehemently that illegal aliens don’t vote, given that congressional Democrats have inserted language “to waive inadmissibility for illegal voting in all [their] amnesty bills.”

Democrats can’t have it both ways; they can’t (1) credibly say that illegal aliens don’t vote in federal elections, and then (2) expect us to forget their own proposals, which assume the opposite is true. In any event, and regardless of how many (or few) noncitizens may have voted in the past, why not take steps to prevent it from happening in the future?

The sanctity of your vote is at stake. Now more than ever, we need to make sure that our elections are fair, lawfully conducted, and free of foreign influence. To do that, it’s imperative that Congress pass the SAVE Act.

All of the democrats’ arguments are just as ridiculous. This guy has something to say about them.


Mike Lee is a U.S. Senator from Utah and author of “Our Lost Constitution: The Willful Subversion of America’s Founding Document.”

Biden’s Student Loan Bailout Sends Taxpayer Funds to On-Campus Mobs


BY: CHRISTOPHER JACOBS | MAY 07, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/07/bidens-loan-forgiveness-plan-makes-taxpayers-fund-on-campus-mobs/

protests on campus

Author Christopher Jacobs profile

CHRISTOPHER JACOBS

VISIT ON TWITTER@CHRISJACOBSHC

MORE ARTICLES

In remarks regarding the growing unrest on college campuses nationwide last Thursday, President Biden denounced the violent acts associated with many of the demonstrations and the growing wave of antisemitism on college campuses.

But, as the saying goes, talk is cheap. There’s one simple way to give his position teeth: Congress should enact legislation prohibiting the Department of Education from making taxpayers assume or otherwise modifying student loans for any student found responsible by his university or a court of law for acts of antisemitism, trespassing, property damage, intimidation, or violence.

Loan Giveaways Encourage Campus Chaos

Biden might be loath to admit it, but in many ways the campaign for mass student loan forgiveness has helped cause the current campus debacle. This year’s seniors entered college during the 2020 election campaign, meaning that most students currently on campus spent their college career hearing promises that much if not all of their debt would be forgiven.

This leftist movement to make American taxpayers pay off other people’s college debt has further weakened the already-tenuous link between a degree and its earning potential. If they believe the government will ultimately forgive the cost of their education, students have no reason not to major in Grievance Studies, or some similar Marxist-adjacent course of study. Assuming their loan debts will get nationalized also makes students less concerned about potential employers refusing to hire them due to their participation in on-campus riots.

With less incentive for students to choose practical degrees, and officials prioritizing woke nostrums over intellectual rigor, colleges have given up all pretense of ideological balance. As a result, some institutions have become less like universities and more like madrassas, places that inculcate and radicalize youths rather than educate them.

The way Biden has continued to pursue loan forgiveness, despite a rebuke of his unconstitutional plan by the Supreme Court, set an example that demonstrators have replicated. The president may now deprecate the mob’s actions, and call for respect for the rule of law, but when he publicly brags that the nation’s highest court “didn’t stop me” from pursuing his objectives, can anyone blame the would-be jihadis on campus for thinking themselves entitled to take the law into their own hands?

Restore Sanity to Campuses

Congress can and should take a stand, by cutting off the financial spigot for participants in the bedlam. If Biden opposes the chaos on campus so strongly, he should be willing to take a break from buying votes via taxpayer loan payoffs to cut off access for those creating mayhem. And if Democrats on the left like Rep. Ilhan Omar wish to exclude from loan payoffs any participants in Islamophobic or other offensive acts, few Republicans — who oppose Biden’s forgiveness proposals outright — will object.

Some might fear this proposal would encourage already-timid university administrators to take a weaker line against the demonstrators because individuals held responsible could face significant financial repercussions. But in some cases, civil authorities may be able to act irrespective of whether the higher education institutions in question do. More importantly, this measure should deter students as much as university officials, if not more so.

Another potential concern, that Congress prohibiting loan bailouts for a narrow sliver of the population might be viewed as lawmakers permitting Biden’s power grab for other students, doesn’t appear to pass muster, either. The House passed a bill last spring disapproving Biden’s original student loan payoff plan, but the fact that the measure didn’t get enacted into law didn’t stop the Supreme Court from striking the plan down as an unconstitutional power grab.

Finally, this proposal focuses solely on actions, not speech. Like all other Americans, students can and should have the right to protest, and to express their views, however offensive others may find them. But when speech crosses into intimidation, or encampments that create safety and health concerns, let alone breaking into buildings, those actions should bring consequences — in this case, financial ones.

A Practical Solution

Prohibiting student loan payoffs is less expensive and more practical than the other alternative: giving demonstrators a one-way ticket to the Gaza Strip. It would also send a message in clear and uncertain terms about what the American people, through their elected representatives, think of the mayhem that has unfolded in recent weeks.

In the longer term, the recent campus chaos should prompt Congress to consider repealing the student loan program entirely, a reform that would incentivize students and universities to prioritize college affordability, while saving taxpayers at least $300 billion over the coming decade. But at minimum, lawmakers should act now to ensure that hard-working taxpayers are not subsidizing participants in violent demonstrations on campuses nationwide.


Chris Jacobs is founder and CEO of Juniper Research Group, and author of the book “The Case Against Single Payer.” He is on Twitter: @chrisjacobsHC.

Most Powerful Anti-Biden Video to Date


By: Kevin Jackson | May 4, 2024

 Read more at https://theblacksphere.net/2024/05/most-powerful-anti-biden-video-to-date/

Biden, Kevin Jackson

Joe Biden is becoming universally hated. And you can bet that Democrats are scared to death at what happened recently at a protest.

Two opposing groups managed to find common ground in their disdain for Joe Biden. Watch here, as University of Alabama protesters who differ dramatically on issues managed to chant the same thing:

Perhaps Joe Biden is the uniter he’s always claimed to be? Because he managed to get pro-Trump and LGBTQ+ groups to agree to one common theme: “F Joe Biden!”

No wonder Biden desperately woos young students by (unconstitutionally) erasing their tuition debt.

The game with this move is to have Trump rescind the free money, thus transferring blame to Republicans for undoing an illegal act. Clever when you think about it. Except, people aren’t falling for it anymore, as most people resent paying for other people’s debt. Particularly indoctrination debt.

Obviously, the Biden ploy isn’t gaining him any sway with the youth vote, as protests all over America continue against Biden’s policies. Polls with youth continue to provide bad news for Biden. So his policies are seen as a pander, more than real initiatives to help students and ultimately the country.

Whether the students are right or wrong in their protest is immaterial to me in the discussion. The fact that they see Biden as wrong benefits America.

Trump supports Israel.

Why haven’t Democrats even attempted to play this card? Trump has been vocal in his support of Israel. And let’s face it, he kept terrorism at bay for the most part during his tenure.

Biden’s problem? It’s difficult on the Biden administration who purports to support Israel while funding terrorists. And oh, the irony that Biden can’t take credit for his support of Hamas and Iran, less he admits to suborning the enemy.

Biden funded Iran who funds Hamas and other terrorist organizations. Iran is the George Soros of funding terror; except they have a deep pockets partner in Joe Biden.

As for the college students, admittedly they are morons. But they represent the enemy of my enemy as it relates to Biden. So, I’m actually happy they targeted him, regardless of their warped reasons.

The by-product of the student (terrorist) protests is the attack on academia, as well.

Colleges and universities birthed these idiot ingrates and raised them to be void of critical-thinking skills. I enjoy seeing Leftists feed off each other, as academia as we know it today begins its death spiral.

I’m tired of funding ignorance and indoctrination. We pay a fortune to train students on how to give up on real dreams and instead get indoctrinated.

Perhaps we finally are getting our money’s worth? Because it appears that Leftist chickens have come home to roost. And they are serving up crow.

Filings: Jack Smith Tampered with Evidence In Get-Trump Classified Documents Case


BY: TRISTAN JUSTICE | MAY 06, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/06/filings-jack-smith-tampered-with-evidence-in-get-trump-classified-documents-case/

Mar-a-Lago

Author Tristan Justice profile

TRISTAN JUSTICE

VISIT ON TWITTER@JUSTICETRISTAN

MORE ARTICLES

Special Counsel Jack Smith admitted federal prosecutors tampered with evidence in his criminal case alleging former President Donald Trump mishandled classified documents.

According to a Friday court filing, prosecutors said documents the FBI seized from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence are no longer in the same order in which they found them, and some are mislabeled and may even be misplaced. A government “filter team” that dealt with the boxes once the FBI took them “was not focused on maintaining the sequence of documents within each box,” the special counsel’s office wrote in the filing.

Later the filing says, of early inventories and scanned records of the seized document boxes, “Because these inventories and scans were created close in time to the seizure of the documents, they are the best evidence available of the order the documents were in when seized. That said, there are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans.” A footnote on this last sentence says: “The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court.”

The filing also suggests the Department of Justice and FBI may have lost and mislabeled some of the documents. When the agencies first took the documents at Mar-a-Lago, government employees used many blank sheets of paper as substitutes and cover papers for what they decided might be classified documents.

After the FBI brought the document boxes to Washington DC, federal employees and contractors began replacing these “handwritten sheets” with proper classified document covers. At that point, the filing says, “In many but not all instances, the FBI was able to determine which document with classification markings corresponded to a particular placeholder sheet.” This indicates the special counsel’s office disclosed it isn’t sure whether some it lost or mislabeled some of the allegedly classified documents it seized in the Trump raid.

In response, Trump’s defense team filed a motion to dismiss the case over prosecutorial misconduct.

Smith charged Trump last June with 37 criminal counts related to the former president’s handling of classified documents. In July, Smith added three more counts against Trump as Democrats strategize to retain the presidency by imprisoning their chief political opponent in an unprecedented lawfare campaign. New evidence shows the Democrat White House worked closely with the DOJ and National Archives and Records Administration in crafting the documents case against Trump.

The classified documents case is Trump’s largest election-year court battle, as nearly half of the 88 total charges against him currently are related to the records. Federal prosecutors confiscated 33 boxes of documents from the hostile raid on Trump’s home in August 2022, according to Fox News. The Department of Justice has spent more than $23 million in taxpayer dollars for Smith to investigate Trump.

In April, Federalist Elections Correspondent Brianna Lyman outlined three major revelations to emerge from the classified documents case to date, including deep state pressure to move forward with Trump’s prosecution and White House involvement.

“President Biden also retained classified documents after leaving the vice presidency,” Lyman reported. “Yet he was not charged because prosecutors say they believed he would ‘present himself to the jury, as he did during our interview with him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.’”

The Department of Energy allegedly revoked the former president’s security clearance retroactively once Trump was indicted.

In February, journalists Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi, and Alex Gutentag reported the FBI raid may have been orchestrated to cover up the intelligence state’s role in the Russia hoax. The article posted on Shellenberger’s news website, Public, outlined how intelligence officials fretted over the presence of a classified “binder” in Trump’s possession that former CIA Director Gina Haspel was careful to protect for years.

“Transgressions [the feds might have wanted to cover up] range from Justice Department surveillance of domestic political targets without probable cause to the improper unmasking of a pre-election conversation between a Trump official and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to WMD-style manipulation of intelligence for public reports on alleged Russian ‘influence activities,’” Public reported.

The binder was “Trump’s insurance policy,” according to an unnamed source cited as “knowledgeable about the case.”


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist and the author of Social Justice Redux, a conservative newsletter on culture, health, and wellness. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com. Sign up for Tristan’s email newsletter here.

The Real Threat to the U.S. Economy Isn’t Election Integrity, It’s Joe Biden


BY: M.D. KITTLE | MAY 06, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/05/06/the-real-threat-to-the-u-s-economy-isnt-election-integrity-its-joe-biden/

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yell addressing the press in India.

Author M.D. Kittle profile

M.D. KITTLE

MORE ARTICLES

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen last week warned that “threats to democracy” will imperil U.S. economic growth. Yellen’s admonishment is a less-than-veiled finger wag at former President Donald Trump and anyone who would dare question the official lie that the 2020 election was “one of the most secure elections in history.” 

The real threat to the economy is Joe Biden, his buffoonish treasury secretary, and the rest of the capitalism-crushing useful idiots in this dangerous administration.

As Democrat Party public-relations firm the Associated Press reported, Yellen used “economic data” in her address Friday in Arizona to “paint a picture of how disregard for America’s democratic processes and institutions can cause economic stagnation for decades.”

“Yellen, taking a rare step toward to [sic] the political arena, never mentioned Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, by name in her speech for the McCain Institute’s Sedona Forum, but she hinted at the former president’s potential impact if he regains the White House,” the AP’s Fatima Hussein and Josh Boak propagandized in a shared byline. 

The former Federal Reserve chairwoman, who has routinely injected herself into the “political arena,” used the speech to “serve as a sort of warning for business leaders who may overlook Trump’s disregard for modern democratic norms because they prefer the former president’s vision of achieving growth by slashing taxes and stripping away regulations.”

Yellen’s comments, and the AP article marketing them, are as nakedly political as they are hilariously absurd. Trump’s assertions that the 2020 election was rigged — by shattered election laws in swing states, unprecedented infusions of leftist third-party cash in election administration and election interference by the same rotten-to-the-core corporate media peddling Yellen’s assault on democracy diatribe — are more dangerous than Bidenomics? Americans and economic data disagree. 

‘Transitory’ Regret

Yellen’s comments preceded Gallup’s latest Economy and Personal Finance poll showing Americans’ trust in Biden’s leadership at an all-time low.  The poll, conducted April 1-22, finds just 38 percent of respondents say they have a “great deal” or a “fair amount” of confidence that Biden would do or recommend the right course for the economy. Former President Donald Trump, the Republican opponent Democrats and their pals in the Deep State are trying to throw in jail, is polling at 46 percent on the economic question. 

Understandably, Americans are downright cranky about the shaky state of their personal economy, compliments of the Biden administration’s prosperity-crippling policies.

“With Americans less optimistic about the state of the U.S. economy than they have been in recent months and concern about inflation persisting, their confidence in President Joe Biden to recommend or do the right thing for the economy is among the lowest Gallup has measured for any president since 2001,” Gallup reported Monday. 

Over the past three years, Americans learned to be confident that Biden would do the wrong thing. And his bungling treasury secretary has provided plenty of political cover. What is stunning is that a majority of Americans (57 percent) until 2022 had confidence in the Dementarian’s management of the economy. Only President George W. Bush had a lower rating, with a meager 34 percent confidence number at the end of his second term amid the real estate bubble-burst recession. 

As inflation began to climb in 2021, economics genius Yellen described the soaring cost of things as a “transitory” problem. She doubled and tripled down as inflation ballooned to levels not seen since the real Great Recession of the 1980s, caused in large part by the policies of a lousy president Biden is often compared to: Jimmy Carter. 

Yellen earlier this year offered her “regret” for saying what was patently false. It didn’t take a PhD from Yale and a University of California, Berkeley professor to know that higher prices were — and remain — here to stay under Bidenomics

“I regret saying it was transitory. It has come down. But I think transitory means a few weeks or months to most people,” Yellen said during an interview with Fox Business in March.

No Sale

Inflation has come up since Yellen expressed her regret. Soaring mortgage rates have priced Americans, particularly young families, out of home ownership. The housing crisis could be the “death knell for America’s middle class,” Newsweek warned in December.

American workers have seen any income growth devoured by rising costs for everything from gas to Happy Meals. Yes, Democrats’ massive expansion of government regulations on business — especially small business, climate change cultism, foreign policy debacles, and unsustainable spending — has everything to do with why middle-income earners are feeling the pain and increasingly frustrated.

Just as frustrating, you have the accomplice media covering for the bungler-in-chief, telling Americans what they’re experiencing is simply not real. The New York Times’ gag-worthy piece last month claiming Biden has a positive story to tell on the economy is political propaganda of the most ludicrous order. No one should be surprised about such absurd water-carrying by a Biden-backing corporate media that has pushed Democrats’ perfect election narrative despite Democrats’ many, many imperfections. 

Now the tone-deaf treasury secretary wants to tell American businesses that tax-cutting, “election denier” Trump is more of a threat to the U.S. economy than the economic menace that is Joe Biden. America isn’t buying what Yellen is selling. They can’t afford to. 


Matt Kittle is a senior elections correspondent for The Federalist. An award-winning investigative reporter and 30-year veteran of print, broadcast, and online journalism, Kittle previously served as the executive director of Empower Wisconsin.

Biden Botched Financial Aid Rollout. And it’s Parents and Students Who Are Paying the Price.


By: Kevin Roberts @KevinRobertsTX / Lindsey Burke @lindseymburke / May 02, 2024

Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/05/02/biden-botched-financial-aid-rollout-and-its-parents-and-students-who-are-paying-the-price/

Completed FAFSA applications were down nearly 30% as of April 19. (Photo Illustration: Richard Stephen/Getty Images)

In a normal year, May 1 is known as National College Decision Day, the deadline for students to commit to enrolling at a college, guided in part by their financial aid awards. But the Biden administration’s disastrous rollout of a new financial aid application has left tens of thousands of families in the dark about their students’ future and prompted several universities to push back their enrollment deadlines.

As of April 19, completed FAFSA applications were down nearly 30%. At best, it means many students and parents don’t know how much it will cost to attend college in the fall. Even worse, it may lead frustrated young people to skip college altogether.

The Free Application for Federal Student Aid is a notoriously cumbersome form that all prospective college students must fill out if they want federal loans or grants. Previously more than 100 questions long, FAFSA’s current crisis can be traced to 2020, when the FAFSA Simplification Act dropped the number of questions on the form to about 40.

Ironically, because of the Biden administration’s incompetence, the simplification has led to massive complications and confusion for families this year as they apply for college. Focused on other priorities, the Biden administration failed to update the FAFSA website before October, when most students start applying.

In fact, the “improved” FAFSA website didn’t go live until the end of December, and even then, only in 30-minute increments. This was presumably so that the department could meet the statutory deadline for release, as Inside Higher Ed reported. When the website finally became available in a more final form in January, the Department of Education still wasn’t processing applications or relaying students’ financial information to colleges. It said it’d be able to do that by mid-March.

President Biden’s FAFSA Chief Steps Down

With the May 1 deadline now here, the Biden administration is still running behind, prompting the bureaucrat in charge of the new form to resign last week. But it’s students and their families who are paying the real price of this debacle.

Couple that reality with what families are now seeing at America’s universities—protests featuring ugly displays of antisemitism—and it appears that higher education is experiencing the same “Zoom moment” that K-12 schools experienced during COVID-19. Parents now see up close what schools are teaching and the values they relay. All of this is the perfect recipe for a significant decline in college enrollment this year.

That might not be such a bad thing. Far too many students feel that pursuing higher education is their only option for success, and if this FAFSA debacle ushers in a much-needed course correction, that would be a welcome silver lining.

But for those students still pursuing traditional higher education, this academic limbo is maddening.

Colleges Push Back Enrollment Deadlines

Colleges are trying to adjust, and many have extended their decision deadlines, some as far out as July. Department of Education officials had to explain the disastrous rollout in congressional hearings, more of which should come soon.

All of this is yet another reminder of the pitfalls of the federal government’s involvement in higher education. Today, the federal government originates and services most student loans. But the Department of Education wasn’t designed as a bank, nor Uncle Sam as a lender. And it’s clear the agency isn’t up to the task.

The FAFSA debacle conjures up memories of the disastrous rollout of the Obamacare portal a decade ago.

As dual trainwrecks of the FAFSA rollout and antisemitic university protests play out simultaneously, there’s no better time for Congress to cut off the open spigot of federal funds to universities and protect future American students.

Originally published by USA Today

Liz Peek Op-ed: Biden White House signals pessimism about election in surprising way


Liz Peek  By Liz Peek Fox News | Published April 30, 2024 5:00am EDT

Read more at https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/biden-white-house-signals-pessimism-election-surprising-way

It’s not just atrocious polls that suggest President Joe Biden will lose in November; it’s also the behavior of the White House. In just the past few weeks, the Biden administration has rolled out over a dozen new initiatives and rules, many of them – like banning development of Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve – likely to impact our country far into the future. It’s a startling avalanche of executive activity.

Call me crazy, but that looks like a White House panicked that its days are numbered.

Who can blame them? A new national CNN poll shows Trump leading the president by six points, one of the biggest gaps yet; more important, Fox News surveys have Trump inching ahead in several critical swing states. 

NEW POLL REVEALS WHAT BIDEN HAS IN COMMON WITH THESE ONE-TERM PRESIDENTS

Bad polls, an unpopular president, disruptive protests at home and rising threats around the world, sinking consumer confidence and resurgent inflation; all signs point to defeat in November. Hence, the whirlwind of regulations, which includes the following:

1. New FTC rules that ban non-compete agreements;

2. A re-write of Title IX;

3. EEOC charges of racism against a company because they avoided hiring criminals;

4. More federal help on student loans;

5. FTC preventing the merger of two luxury goods makers;

6. New overtime rules;

7. New regulations detailing airline refunds;

8. New decision restricting drilling in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve;

9. FTC blocking hospital group mergers;

10. New power plant emissions rules;

11. Putting on hold a ban on menthol cigarettes;

12. A revamp of school lunch mandates, reducing sugar and salt.

The Biden administration appears to be preparing for the worst, pushing through policies that could be overturned if passed later in the year. Congress has 60 days to nix rules promulgated by federal agencies with a simple majority; if there’s a red wave, Biden diktats adopted in the traditional “lame duck” session would likely disappear. The Trump administration employed that tool successfully, ditching several policies rolled out late in President Obama’s second term; Biden returned the favor when he came to office.

ABC’S GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS SAYS 2024 RACE CAN’T BE TREATED NORMALLY AFTER BIDEN URGES PRESS TO ALTER COVERAGE

Some decisions, like forgiving student loans or not banning menthol cigarettes which are favored by Blacks, are obviously meant to attract targeted voters. Others seem to scratch a progressive itch, like the upending of long-standing employment laws. 

Voters should wonder: Is all of this activism well-thought-out? The answer is almost surely no. After all, these are the folks that forced Detroit automakers to go all-in on EVs, sure that Americans were ready to abandon their gas-guzzling SUVs.  

Consider the FTC, led by the reckless ideologue Lina Khan. Under Khan’s guidance, the FTC has clamped down on corporate merger activity. Most recently, the agency sued to block luxury fashion firm Tapestry’s acquisition of Capri. Tapestry owns Coach, Stuart Weitzman and Kate Spade, while Capri owns the Versace, Jimmy Choo and Michael Kors labels.  

Lina Khan testifies before the House Judiciary Committee
Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan testifies before the House Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill on July 13, 2023. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

BIDEN ADMIN ABRUPTLY DELAYS PLAN TO BAN MENTHOL CIGARETTES AMID WIDESPREAD OPPOSITION

Henry Liu, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition claims, “This deal threatens to deprive consumers of the competition for affordable handbags…” Forgive me, but only a man could utter such nonsense. Any woman will tell you that there are a gazillion handbag makers, and that they compete mainly on style and image, not price. And, frankly, that few of them are “affordable.” 

This is one of many examples of the FTC interfering with the normal pursuit of business. Fashion is fickle; companies continually add names and brands to survive. Liu has no idea what he is talking about. 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

But we cannot dismiss this FTC intervention as insignificant. The Biden White House, just like that of President Obama, is tragically lacking in business leaders, and in common sense. 

Lina Khan is a typical progressive Biden appointee, who is now compiling an impressive record of overreach and defeat. She failed to prevent Meta from acquiring the virtual reality company Within, failed to keep Microsoft from buying Activision and will probably fail in her effort to keep grocers Albertson and Kroger from combining.  She denies that mergers can create efficiencies and lower costs for consumers. As an undergraduate, she wrote a paper criticizing Amazon for being big; if Khan had been in charge, Americans would not be enjoying the obvious convenience of the world’s largest online retailer. 

It isn’t just the FTC which, by the way, is also behind the outrageous and sure to be overturned ban on non-compete agreements. Consider the new Department of Transportation demands that airlines must “immediately” refund money for delayed or canceled flights and reimburse passengers for equipment issues like non-working TVs. Talks about adding headaches to an industry constantly toggling between profits and losses! What the government should be doing is investing in critical air traffic control equipment and infrastructure; let consumers punish airlines that don’t treat them fairly. 

Some of the White House’s most enduring and damaging new rules have to do with energy. Biden is desperate to shore up his bona fides with the environmental lobby, and so has added new restrictions on domestic oil and gas development. Consequently, he just banned exploration of a vast swath of Alaska’s huge National Petroleum Reserve, even though the region contains some of our country’s most promising prospects and despite support for drilling from the state’s native population. 

In addition, the president’s EPA has recently issued new power plant emissions rules that could force the closure of many coal-fired power plants, even as demand for electricity expands. It also requires by 2032 wide-spread use of carbon-capture technology that does not yet exist on a large scale.  Similar rules adopted by the Obama administration were overturned by the Supreme Court in 2016; critics claimed executive overreach. The Biden team’s approach, which could undermine the nation’s energy security, is likely to meet the same fate.  

These are not sensible policies; they are the wish-list and fantasies of a progressive White House not likely to pay the price for their damaging meddling. Here’s hoping.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM LIZ PEEK

Liz Peek is a Fox News contributor and former partner of major bracket Wall Street firm Wertheim & Company. A former columnist for the Fiscal Times, she writes for The Hill and contributes frequently to Fox News, the New York Sun and other publications. For more visit LizPeek.com. Follow her on Twitter @LizPeek.

Sleepy Joe Rests After Vowing He Won’t Until Every Hostage Is Home


BY: M.D. KITTLE | APRIL 29, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/29/sleepy-joe-rests-after-vowing-he-wont-until-every-hostage-is-home/

President Joe Biden speaks at the annual White House Correspondents Dinner.

Author M.D. Kittle profile

M.D. KITTLE

MORE ARTICLES

President Joe Biden has a message for the 133 hostages held by the monsters of Hamas: He will not rest until they are “back in the arms of their loved ones.” 

“They have my word. Their families have my word,” Biden pledged Saturday on the POTUS X account before heading to a posh, black-tie White House Correspondents’ Dinner to rub elbows with the corporate media sycophants who have been carrying water for him.

Such a vow from the vaguely alert octogenarian known for being full of crap must have been comforting to the families of the people who have spent the better part of the past seven months in an unimaginable hell while the Biden administration has been sweet-talking the same people who want to wipe out Israel and annihilate Jews. 

Biden tirelessly avoided any talk of the political headaches of hostages and Israel’s right to exist during the annual fete of self-important politicians, journalists, and celebrities at the Washington Hilton. Reportedly on the menu, Terrine of Jumbo Lump Crabmeat as an appetizer, an entree of Smoked Paprika Rubbed Filet with Foraged Wild Mushroom Ragout and Pancetta & Gala Apple Demi, washed down with some very fine Chateau Ste. Michelle, Chardonnay, and Cabernet Sauvignon. Safe to say the menu for Hamas’ captives was not nearly as epicurean. 

But pretending to think about hostages works up a man-sized, elitist appetite.

“And let there be laughter. I hope for lots of side-splitting, light the internet on fire laughter,” Kelly O’Donnell, NBC senior White House correspondent and president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, insipidly said in her opening remarks.

But not a word about the goings on in Gaza and Israel from Biden or the assemblage of narcissists, to the chagrin of the hundreds of Hamas sympathizers protesting outside the high-priced Hilton. 

“Shame on you!” shouted the protesters adorned in the traditional Palestinian keffiyeh, the Associated Press reported. Their renunciations, like those of the professional protesters at Columbia and other college campuses, were reserved for Israel, the United States, and anybody who dares do business with them.

It was tough all over. Some of the correspondents’ dinner guests had to “hurry through hundreds of protesters outraged over the mounting humanitarian disaster for Palestinian civilians in Gaza,” in the AP’s telling. The self-loathing reporters forced to cover the glitzy affair couldn’t help but make the story about the protesters and the poor Palestinians, most of whom have been cheerleaders for the genocidal “From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free” campaign. 

‘Take This Serious’

Biden could muster all of 10 minutes in his stand-up routine, and much of that was to knock the political opponent he’s trying to imprison. The dinner is designed to be a good-natured roast, but Biden’s speech took a grim turn as he warned of the kind of horror only Democrats and the reporters assembled at the Washington Hilton could invent: a J6 apocalyptic future under another Donald Trump presidency. The room of accomplice media members surely shuddered thinking about the hellscape that life under Trump would unleash — like a booming economy, low inflation, a safer world, and a closed U.S. border. 

“We have to take this serious — eight years ago we could have written it off as ‘Trump talk’ but not after Jan. 6,” Biden told the attendees with a straight face. Know this, White House correspondents and esteemed corporate media reporters: Biden will never rest until every one of those Jan. 6 grandmother rebels, Capitol sightseers, and the Republican presidential candidate leading the current White House occupant rot in prison. 

Trump did not attend the dinner. That might have something to do with the fact that he’s been forced to defend himself in a Democrat-led banana republic while trying to find time to campaign for president. But as AP pointed out, Trump never attended the smorgasbord of smugness during his presidency. 

“In 2011, he sat in the audience, and glowered through a roasting by then-President Barack Obama of Trump’s reality-television celebrity status. Obama’s sarcasm then was so scalding that many political watchers linked it to Trump’s subsequent decision to run for president in 2016,” the story asserts as if communicating facts. We all know the No. 1 reason presidential campaigns launch is out of spite. Franklin Pierce jumped in the 1852 race after Whig Millard Fillmore dogged the Democrat about his raging alcoholism. Hell hath no fury like a Jacksonian Democrat scorned by “scalding sarcasm.” 

Biden did spend time on Sunday telling Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu how to run Israel’s war on terror. You’ll recall how much the United States appreciated similar meddling by other nations after 9/11. According to The Times of Israel, Biden spoke to Netanyahu about his joint statement with the leaders of 17 other nations calling on Hamas to immediately release the remaining hostages it is holding in Gaza amid the human shield Palestinians. Israel would grant a ceasefire if the hostages are released. And that’s what an unpopular American president drowning in bad polls really wants: a ceasefire. The release of the hostages is a means to his political ends, which is to get two critical contingencies — Muslims and Jews — off his back. 

And the hostages and their families can rest assured, tough-talking Joe Biden won’t rest until he secures freedom for his political aims. *Not including his daily rests and swanky dinners.


Matt Kittle is a senior elections correspondent for The Federalist. An award-winning investigative reporter and 30-year veteran of print, broadcast, and online journalism, Kittle previously served as the executive director of Empower Wisconsin.

Democrats React to Trump’s New York City Reception


By: Kevin Jackson | April 26, 2024

 Read more at https://theblacksphere.net/2024/04/democrats-react-trumps-reception-new-york-city/

Trump, #TeamKJ, #KevinJackson

For a man who’s supposedly hated in Democrat-controlled cities, Donald Trump made one helluva splash in The Big Apple.

Look at this reception by onlookers as Trump headed to the kangaroo court set up by Alvin Bragg:

This is an impromptu appearance by Trump, and he draws this fawning crowd. Compare this to the pre-fab nonsense of Biden.

Trump gets exponentially more people waving and praising him than Biden can get at his own family reunion.

As one commenter wrote: “Meanwhile Joe Biden is getting his diaper changed.”

Check out this video that blows up the Leftist narrative:

Watch that video multiple times and gauge the crowd. All 360 degrees of video show people in support of Trump. And there may be thousands of Trump worshippers; all people who recognize the political witch hunt Trump faces in Democrats’ election interference efforts. No need for obscure camera angles to hide the crowd, as the press do with Biden.

Speaking of Captain Demento, while speaking in Pennsylvania he recently lamented people with “FJB” signs and children flipping him off:

I congratulate the parents of the 7 or 8-year-old Biden mentioned who flipped him off. Fitting that children recognize scum when they see it, less they turn into Democrats.

Biden is an indecent man at best. However, what’s worse is he pretends to be decent. But Joe Biden fools nobody.

What bothers Democrats and other Leftists is this is happening all over America. To validate what the “81-million-vote-man” lamented, check out this video of Biden heading into the battleground state of Michigan:

We slowed this video down so you could see the more of the signs. Even at regular speed it’s easy to see the throngs of Trump supporters lined up for what appears to be blocks. These people took the time to dress in patriotic anti-Biden gear, carry American flags, and showcase signs to show how much they detest Biden.

Slow-motion shows thousands of people supporting Trump, hating Biden. And this video captures only a fraction of the distance and people. This video lasted a minute, and you saw a fraction of the thousands of Trump supporters.

By contrast, where are the Biden supporters?

Watch ANY video of Biden and the one thing that will be missing is supporters. This slowed down video show no Biden supporters, because Biden is almost universally despised. I’m actually surprised he admitted it in that earlier video.

If Biden were popular, there would be just as many people holding his signs on the other side of the road. But you never hear of clashes between Trump supporters and Biden supporters for one simple reason: there are no  true Biden supporters.

Biden supporters are either Trump haters or virtue-signalers. They only support Biden when they gain something. Privately, only the biggest fool in the country supports this old fool.

Leftists get mad at me for stating this truth. Because the truth hurts, and people hate being caught in their own lies.

Democrats are panicked.

Democrats may pretend to be Tommy Toughass publicly, but in truth he’s scared of his shadow. That’s why he lies about his life, his son’s life, his uncle’s life, and everything else.

Play all the games the Left will, but they are panicked at the visceral reaction against Biden. Everywhere. And the real polls validate what Democrats know: Biden can’t beat Trump.

The strategy of Democrats has been clear since Biden was cheated into office. Tie Trump up in court, and try to bankrupt him. But that’s not working, nor will it.

As I heard the President of the Claremont Institute say, [pp] “Trump is the perfect man for this time.” He went on to say that Trump may not be the best president for all time, but he is undoubted the man for this time.

How anybody could watch Democrats persecute this man and not see what’s happening shows the real nature of Democrats or anti-Trumpers.

Nothing Democrats do will stop Trump’s second term and the resurgence of America. MAGA.

Human Trafficking Czar Ignores Democrat-Invited Human Trafficking Over U.S. Border


BY: JORDAN BOYD | APRIL 24, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/24/human-trafficking-czar-ignores-democrat-invited-human-trafficking-over-u-s-border/

Cindy Dyer

Author Jordan Boyd profile

JORDAN BOYD

VISIT ON TWITTER@JORDANBOYDTX

MORE ARTICLES

The ongoing border invasion is perhaps the largest source of human trafficking inside the United States. Yet the woman President Joe Biden tasked with monitoring and combating this problem has largely neglected that nexus in her reports, speeches, and other work since assuming her role in January 2023.

On paper, U.S. Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Cindy Dyer appears qualified to lead that State Department office. Her official bio boasts “three decades of experience working at the local, national, and international levels to prevent and respond to human trafficking, sexual assault, and domestic violence” as well as her lengthy track record as former vice president for human rights at a nongovernmental organization.

It’s safe to say Dyer is no stranger to the conditions that breed exploitation at home and abroad. That might be why the Senate unanimously confirmed her as human trafficking czar in 2022. Notably missing from her work at the TIP office, however, is a focus on what has quickly become the nation’s biggest hub for human trafficking: the southern border.

The Elephant in the Room

Human trafficking was a huge, bipartisan issue until a few years ago when corporate media started associating it with the “far-right.” That narrative shift directly coincided with Democrats’ zeal for unfettered illegal immigration. That means it’s like pulling teeth to get anyone in the regime (including the nation’s lead woman on the job) to talk about the mass human trafficking at our compromised southern border.

Still, it’s happening and, with the help of a vast nongovernmental organization system, is funded with American tax dollars and enabled by American policies.

In 2007, the majority of trafficking victims in the States were clocked as female border crossers. Even our federal government admits on the U.S. Customs and Border Protection website that “border smuggling frequently involves human trafficking.” Since that report was released in 2007, the number of men, women, and unaccompanied minors indebting themselves to smugglers so they can illegally enter the United States has skyrocketed.

At least 10 million illegal border crossers have entered the United States since President Joe Biden’s presidency began. Since illegal immigrants rarely get across the U.S.-Mexico border without paying a price to cartels, those millions likely shelled out thousands of dollars to ensure their illegal passage from Mexico into California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.

The people demanding these payments are “coyotes,” the billion-dollar human smuggling arm of criminal organizations that control the Northern Mexico territory. The profitability and frequency of these cartels’ kidnapping and ransom schemes have increased since Biden effectively legalized illegal border crossings after taking office in 2021.

Tara Lee Rodas, who worked with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement to place unaccompanied migrant children with sponsors, told the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement in April 2023 that children “are being trafficked through a sophisticated network that begins with being recruited in home country, smuggled to the US border, and ends when ORR delivers a child to . . . Sponsors” who may be “criminals and traffickers and members of Transnational Criminal Organizations.”

“Whether intentional or not, it can be argued that the US Government has become the middleman in a large scale, multi-billion-dollar, child trafficking operation run by bad actors seeking to profit off the lives of children,” Rodas said.

See Something, Say Nothing

The 2023 Trafficking in Persons Report, released by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Dyer last June, acknowledges that human trafficking “often occurs transnationally” but stops short of acknowledging that the influx of illegal border crossers welcomed under President Joe Biden contributes to the nation’s modern slavery problems. Instead of addressing the root cause of U.S. trafficking problems — unfettered and incentivized access to the United States via a compromised border — Dyer said the State Department is focused on promoting “equity” that prioritizes “diverse groups and marginalized communities” in foreign countries.

“Promoting equity with respect to race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, and for marginalized communities is not only the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do. When we partner to support vulnerable migrants, advocate for women’s rights, or enact legislation to protect LGBTQI+ individuals, we are creating a more just and equitable world that is also more impervious to human traffickers,” Dyer wrote in the report’s introduction.

Later in the 116-page document, Dyer also demanded foreign governments “re-double their efforts to proactively identify all victims, protect them, support survivors, prevent trafficking even in the face of new and complex challenges, and ensure that law enforcement holds traffickers accountable.” The report confirmed this by calling for U.S. security and government “assistance” for other countries deemed in need of trafficking prevention resources.

Yet Dyer failed in the report to specifically address securing the U.S. border or cracking down on the criminal trafficking that stems from it.

The United States Advisory Council on Human Trafficking Annual Report 2023, released under the Dyer office’s supervision, does touch on the relationship between the border invasion and trafficking but fails to link it to the Biden administration’s open border polices or recommend any serious policies aimed at combating the problem. Instead, the report merely suggests the Department of Homeland Security increase its “oversight,” “support,” and “awareness” of the issue.

Why hasn’t Dyer directed her or her subordinates’ attention to the ongoing border chaos despite its clear connection to human trafficking?

She admitted the quiet part out loud during May 2023 testimony to the House Subcommittee on Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations when she told Chairman Chris Smith, R-N.J., that her office supports the Biden administration’s goals to facilitate amnesty for illegal border crossers instead of deportation.

“Addressing the challenges of irregular migration, specifically providing protection to refugees and asylum seekers and offering lawful migration pathways are key priorities for the administration,” Dyer said.

The Federalist asked Dyer if she believes cracking down on illegal immigration and securing the border would reduce the risk of human trafficking, but she did not respond.

Emboldening crime organizations with promises of citizenship for all doesn’t simply put illegal border crossers at risk of exploitation and harm, it endangers Americans too. Simply put, failure to curb the border crisis is a direct failure to cut down on human trafficking and American suffering in the United States.


Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.

Joe Biden Just Promised America A Massive Tax Hike


BY: DAVID HARSANYI | APRIL 24, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/24/joe-biden-just-promised-america-a-massive-tax-hike/

Joe Biden and AOC

Here is our president today:

Well, obviously Trump should be “proud” of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which is set to expire at the end of 2025. If the GOP presidential candidate had any sense, he would be running Biden’s promise to enact a $2 trillion tax hike, one of the biggest in American history, in a perpetual ad loop. Of course the rich benefited. As did everyone else. Even the New York Times and Washington Post were compelled to admit as much.

In raw terms, as with any across-the-board tax cut, Trump’s reform helped higher earners most, because high earners pay most of our federal taxes. In 2023, the top 1 percent paid eight times the rate paid by the bottom half of taxpayers. The idea that the rich aren’t paying their share is a preposterous zero-sum economic myth spread by resentment-racket class warriors on left and right. If everyone actually paid his “fair share” in this country, we’d be years deep into a violent revolution.

If anything, the problem with Trump’s tax cuts was that the code became more progressive, although other downsides include the lack of any corresponding cuts or reforms of debt-driving entitlements. Quite the opposite.

As a percentage of income, though, the Trump tax cuts benefited the middle class most, as Justin Haskins explained:

A careful analysis of the IRS tax data, one that includes the effects of tax credits and other reforms to the tax code, shows that filers with an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $15,000 to $50,000 enjoyed an average tax cut of 16 percent to 26 percent in 2018, the first year Republicans’ Tax Cuts and Jobs Act went into effect and the most recent year for which data is available.

Filers who earned $50,000 to $100,000 received a tax break of about 15 percent to 17 percent, and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 in adjusted gross income saw their personal income taxes cut by around 11 percent to 13 percent.

By comparison, no income group with an AGI of at least $500,000 received an average tax cut exceeding 9 percent, and the average tax cut for brackets starting at $1 million was less than 6 percent. (For more detailed data, see my table published here.)

That means most middle-income and working-class earners enjoyed a tax cut that was at least double the size of tax cuts received by households earning $1 million or more.

Let’s not forget, as well, when “that tax cut is going to expire”—and there are no assurances anything would pass to take its place—that would slash child tax credits from $2,000 per child to $1,000 and cut additional credits for older children and dependents in half. It should also be remembered that corporate taxes—which Trump cut from 35 percent to 21 percent and Democrats raised again—are also just a tax on consumers.

You may also recall the fearmongering and performative meltdowns among Democrats over the tax reform. Larry Summers, a relatively moderate voice on the left, warned Trump’s bill was “a threat to democracy” and would lead to more than 10,000 dead Americans every year.

“Armageddon,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi warned, declaring Trump’s tax cut “one of the worst bills in the history of the United States Congress”— potentially, then, in a category with the Fugitive Slave Act and the Espionage Act. Unhinged progressive economist Bruce Bartlett said on MSNBC the tax cuts were really akin to rapeof the poor, while the Washington Post ran an article from a “depression historian” who contended, “The GOP tax bill is straight out of 1929.”

What happened? The bill passed at the end of 2017. In 2018,

  • the real GDP increased 3.1 percent, compared with an increase of 2.5 percent the previous year.
  • The price index for GDP purchases increased 2.1 percent in 2018, compared to 1.9 percent in 2017.

Many “new right” populists don’t like defending tax cuts (Ronald Reagan talked about them a lot, so yuck). But the average American family — which is middle class, lives in the suburbs, and votes in high numbers — will surely be more concerned about a rising tax bill than about any issue animating the populist Internet influencer crowd.  


David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist, a nationally syndicated columnist, a Happy Warrior columnist at National Review, and author of five books—the most recent, Eurotrash: Why America Must Reject the Failed Ideas of a Dying Continent. Follow him on Twitter, @davidharsanyi.

Author David Harsanyi profile

DAVID HARSANYI

VISIT ON TWITTER@DAVIDHARSANYI

MORE ARTICLES

Tag Cloud