Who Is in the Best Position to Restore American Greatness in 2024?

Donald Trump still represents the best chance we have to reclaim a government committed to the restoration of the rule of law and the sovereignty of the American people.

by Stephen B. Presser for American Greatness

Ever since Donald Trump once again announced his candidacy for president there has been a chorus of voices from former supporters, many of whom respectfully acknowledge his accomplishments, but who now suggest Trump is too flawed to win another election, even against as weak a candidate as Joe Biden. 

Trump’s former attorney general, Bill Barr, argues that Trump “lacks the qualities essential to achieving the kind of unity and broad election victory in 2024 so necessary if we are to right our listing republic.” His own vice president, Mike Pence, even though he acknowledges that the American people know Trump “is as good as his word,” believes that there are “better choices” for the party in 2024. Salena Zito, the reporter who probably understands the appeal of Trump better than any other analyst, now contends “the conservative populist movement is moving beyond Trump.”

Just a few days after Trump became a declared candidate, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the former president was the target of a special counsel’s investigation into possible crimes in connection with his possession of purportedly classified documents at his residence in Mar-a-Lago, and in connection with his communications at the time of the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. 

These are, you’ll forgive the expression, trumped-up charges that likely will eventually fail. 

Indeed, since Trump took possession of the documents in question, he had the plenary authority to declassify them, and since anyone who reads his remarks on January 6 will learn that he expressly cautioned his supporters to act peacefully, it will not be easy to sustain a conviction for insurrectionary activity. An individual guilty of insurrection is barred by law from running for public office, so one could reasonably infer that the reason for the special counsel is to neutralize a feared opponent from running against Biden.

What do Trump’s enemies fear, and could this be an indication that Trump may still be the best candidate for the Republicans in 2024? 

Those of us who supported Trump in 2016 did so for a variety of reasons, but it is undeniable that he actually performed as we had hoped, and that objective historians will credit him with extraordinary success in his first term—he transformed the Supreme Court by the addition of three justices committed to interpreting the Constitution according to its original understanding; he succeeded in reducing unemployment for all Americans, particularly minorities; he made the country energy independent; he reduced the flow of illegal immigration; he eased the regulatory and tax burden on American businesses; he renegotiated trade agreements on a favorable basis; and he avoided additional military entanglements. These were all goals traditional conservatives had advocated for years, accomplished by Trump. 

But the Biden Administration and its fellow travelers in Congress fear something different.

Donald Trump is the only prominent Republican who has acknowledged the extraordinary level of corruption in the United States, and it is the beneficiaries of that corruption who may fear him the most. 

Corruption—the turning of the government from a servant of the people to a kleptocracy involving a favored class of officials, bureaucrats and cronies—was what our framers feared most, and what they believed to be the too frequent and perhaps unavoidable fate of republics. The original constitutional structure, one where power checked power, and where no one branch of government could run amok unchallenged by the others, has all but disappeared in the last generation as real power in our government has come to rest in the federal administrative agencies, and in the executive branch agencies, in particular. Trump understood this, and his railing against the “deep state” was his way of suggesting that the federal Leviathan was now running things for its own benefit rather than for the benefit of the people.

As we have learned from works like those of Peter Schweizer, powerful American politicians such as the Clintons, Joe Biden, Mitch McConnell, and many others are masters at the art of growing rich using their connections and political influence. Small wonder, then, that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was the ultimate source of the infamous Steele dossier, which resulted in the first independent counsel to investigate President Trump; that Joe Biden’s Justice Department now torments Trump; and that Mitch McConnell denied essential campaign funds to Trump-endorsed candidates for the Senate. 

As a man of independent wealth, Trump is uniquely positioned to resist corruption, and rather than being the criminal and grifter his opponents would like us to believe him to be, he is a genuine patriot who loves his country and genuinely seeks to tame a federal government which has become the framers’ nightmare. Those who attend his rallies instinctively understand that and see in him a leader capable of keeping his campaign promises and returning the presidency to a role of serving and not betraying the American people.

There are those who say that Trump’s time has passed, and that his ability through unrestrained and boorish behavior to alienate Americans such as single women and suburban voters renders him unelectable—and it remains true that powerful forces in the media, in the academy, and in many of the state governments are arrayed against him. Nevertheless, Trump does learn from his mistakes, and his lately more subdued tone, his real record of accomplishment, and his innate political talent still make him the most formidable Republican contender.

His ongoing persecution by corrupt state and federal officials can actually be turned into a powerful endorsement through carefully crafted anti-corruption messaging. He will have to convince his fellow Republicans through the primary campaign, but he has done it before, and he still represents the best chance we have to reclaim a government committed to the restoration of the rule of law and the sovereignty of the American people.

Christian Patriot News, On the Fringe, and more- Nov 27

 

Been resting all day, here's hoping I feel awake enough to get some watching in! Here's tonight's news:

Just How Dumb Do Democrats Think Their Donors Are?

posted by Derek Hunter at Townhall

That title is a question for the ages, but it’s one for which there is new evidence toward an answer nearly every hour of every day. More often than someone with extreme OCD in cold season scrubs their counters with bleach after a friend with the sniffles stopped by and sneezes, Democrats are on a relentless question for other people’s cash. It’s a scary thought to realize there are people in this country who not only fall for it but are so wildly supportive of the manipulative masterminds behind it. 

There’s an old quote that has been attributed to a bunch of people – H.L. Mencken, Louis B. Mayer, P.T. Barnum, etc. – that goes something like “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.” I don’t know who actually said it, or if it was ever said by any of them, but it’s a handy quote to have and is perfect for changing for a political setting. My version would be along the lines of, “No Democrat ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of their grassroots donors.”

I’ve always found fundraising emails to be dumb pieces of propaganda attempting to fool people into giving money they likely can’t afford or otherwise wouldn’t except for something they’ve read triggering them to act. It’s a con job. 

Hey, if you support a candidate and want to donate to them, knock yourself out. It’s your money, cook it up and eat it for all I care. But Democrats use manipulation and play on the abject ignorance of their base to sucker them out of money they likely can’t afford. I find that disgusting. 

As I said, do what you want with the money you earn, but no one should reward anyone who insults your intelligence. Make them earn it with some honesty. 

Outside groups pretending to be associated with campaigns or causes are the worst. Republicans aren’t immune to this either. Some group calling itself the Committee to Make America Great Again Yet Again and tosses in a bunch of pictures of President Trump, you could be forgiven for thinking it’s associated with the former President. It’s likely not, it’s a con.

Democrats live in this space.

Nancy Pelosi, the twice-defeated outgoing Speaker of the House, is furiously raising cash for her “Pelosi Legacy Fund” so she never has to spend any of her ill-gotten gains to travel or eat. She’s out there using former President Barack Obama’s name to milk suckers of cash, and it’s some of the dumbest stuff you will read this year.

“WOW! Barack Obama just broke his silence on Georgia, and called on EVERY Democrat to spring into action,” the Pelosi email opens. “President Obama knows Republicans are now FLOODING the Georgia runoff with $14 MILLION to take the lead, and he knows it’s going to take every single one of us to stop them. That’s why Nancy Pelosi is answering his call and asking 2,038 grassroots Democrats to STEP UP before midnight to help protect every inch of Democratic progress we’ve made. Can our beloved Democratic heroes count on you to rush $15?”

Do you mean to tell me Obama knows Republicans are trying to win in Georgia? Were Democrats indifferent to the prospect until they realized this? Were they withholding money? No, Warnock spent way more money than Herschel Walker. 

Still, if “Republicans are now FLOODING the Georgia runoff with $14 MILLION to take the lead,” that seems pretty cheap. And I’m not sure how 2,038 Democrats giving $15 each for a total of $30,570 is going to defeat that, do you?

Of course, Pelosi isn’t counting on her donor base doing the basic math and asking simple questions, she just wants them to click through and give her that money.

Sickeningly, the “Team Pelosi” email ends with, “When beloved Democratic heroes like Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi ask for help, we wouldn’t dare let them down.” Doesn’t that make you want to throw up? 

“Can our two beloved Democratic heroes count on you at this moment to contribute $15 before midnight, help rush a WAVE of resources to Democrats like Warnock, and stop the likes of Herschel Walker from EVER barging into power?” they ask one last time.

That is a slight to Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer, isn’t it? Again, something Democrats count on their donors being too stupid to notice is they said “our two beloveds,” not “two of our beloved.” Then again, maybe the people writing these garbage fundraising emails are the truly dumb ones. Meh, it’s probably all of them.

Trans Ideologues Who Cheer Cutting Off Healthy Genitals Shouldn’t Set Federal Medical Standards

Along the new frontier of ‘transgender health,’ destructive ‘standards of care’ are being set by ideologues — with the government’s blessing.

by Douglas Wilson for The Federalist

Imagine the Environmental Protection Agency decides that, instead of setting air pollution standards, it will outsource oversight to an industry group called the “Emission Standards Coalition,” which, despite its innocuous name, is funded and staffed entirely by coal companies. Or, closer to home, imagine that city councilmembers in your quiet suburb decide that henceforth all speed limits will be set by the local auto racing club.

We all would promptly object, haranguing the government for abdicating its most basic responsibility to citizens. “Foxes shouldn’t guard henhouses,” we’d say. Rules meant for public health and safety shouldn’t become tools to advance special interests and profit seekers. Lifting pollution and speed limits may benefit factory and Ferrari owners, but the public at large will have to cope with the resulting damage.

Farfetched as these examples might seem, something like this is happening in health care. Along the new frontier of “transgender health,” novel and even destructive “standards of care” are being set by ideologues and billionaire-backed foundations — all with the government’s blessing.

Earlier this year, President Joe Biden’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a proposed rule under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act. Behind its 190-plus pages and innocent-sounding name (“Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities”) hides a radical agenda that would reshape the nation’s health care in alarming ways.

HHS is proposing new national standards for what it calls “gender affirming care,” mandating that doctors provide these services and insurance plans cover them. What is “gender affirming care” exactly? HHS never really says. Its proposed rule neither defines the term nor identifies objective standards — such as age limits — that might apply. Instead, HHS incorporates guidance from medical societies and a group calling itself the “World Professional Association for Transgender Health,” or WPATH.

WPATH is not a government agency. It is a trans-activist group. Its president is Dr. Marci Bowers, a man identifying as a woman and self-described “pioneer in the field of Gender Affirmation Surgery” with her own transgender reality show, “Sex Change Hospital.” WPATH’s staff appears to be largely borrowed from Veritas, a for-profit company that does marketing and public relations for medical societies. WPATH’s funders include the Arcus Foundation (“one of the largest LGBT funders in the world”), the Soros-backed Open Society Foundations, and the Tawani Foundation, headed by transgender billionaire Jennifer Pritzker.

‘Standards’ Reflect Radical Backers

In 2018, the Tawani Foundation gave WPATH $200,000 to develop its so-called “Standards of Care,” a gift that earned Pritzker the WPATH “Philanthropy Award.” And Pritzker is heavily invested in trans causes. While the foundation has been funneling money to groups like WPATH and the National Center for Transgender Equality, its for-profit arm, Tawani Enterprises, is making financial bets on medical devices, implants, and surgical cutting tools. With the transgender surgery market expected to grow by billions of dollars over the next decade, one careful observer notes that “it is hard to avoid the impression of complementarity” here.

No surprise, then, that the WPATH standards that HHS hopes to enshrine into law reflect the radical views of its backers. On the list of WPATH “treatments” are mutilating surgeries (mastectomies, vaginectomies, penectomies), “chest binding,” “genital tucking,” “aesthetic procedures” like “body contouring” and “voice surgery,” and puberty-blocking drugs for children. There’s no minimum age requirement for these procedures. WPATH even calls for “psychotherapy” for prepubescent “gender diverse children” to “explore their gender,” with parents involved “as necessary” and excluded if their involvement is “contra-indicated.” WPATH says it’s “committed to advocacy” for “social and political climates that ensure social tolerance, equality, and the full rights of citizenship.”

This isn’t medicine. It is the destruction of healthy bodies, the indoctrination of children, and the dissolution of parental rights. It is radical sexual ideology under the guise of science.

Rest of the World Backs Away

Even to call WPATH’s guidance “standards of care” is misleading. As the Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine explains, a true standard of care “is a treatment approach that all reasonable providers would use in a particular clinical situation,” but no such consensus exists for so-called “gender affirming care,” especially for kids. And the mounting damage this form of “care” is doing to both kids and adults is well-documented. It’s why countries around the world are backing away from it, even as HHS bureaucrats are strangely doubling down.

WPATH published its latest guidance in its “partner” journal, the recently renamed “International Journal of Transgender Health.” Among its authors is Susie Green, who heads the United Kingdom-based group Mermaids focused on “gender-diverse kids.” Green is not a medical professional. She spent several years as an IT consultant before famously helping her 16-year-old son undergo transgender surgery in Thailand. Another contributor to the WPATH guidance is Laura A. Jacobs, a self-described genderqueer “activist” and “heretic” whose “psychotherapy specialties” include “LGBTQIA+” adolescents, “BDSM,” “kink,” and “sexwork.”

It isn’t shocking that a bunch of well-funded activists could come together, give their glossy PDFs a veneer of academic credibility, and market their views as a new sexual orthodoxy. What is shocking is that they’ve managed to capture the federal bureaucracy. For HHS to uncritically platform WPATH, mandating shoddy science and destructive medicine as law, is an alarming development that deserves greater scrutiny.

Ultimately, this is a lawless effort. HHS has no power to override the states and the medical profession by imposing “standards of care” for the entire country. Nor can HHS force these standards on health care professionals in violation of their ethical and religious convictions. And purporting to delegate these tasks to billionaire-backed ideologues with no democratic accountability is worse yet. Just as racing enthusiasts don’t set speed limits and coal companies don’t set pollution rules, transgender activists shouldn’t be setting national medical standards.

Joe Biden's Senility Catches Karine Jean-Pierre in a Big Lie on Railroad Strike

Bonchie reporting for RedState 

While it hasn’t received much press lately, one of the most important stories in the country remains the looming possibility of a railroad strike. It goes without saying that a shutdown of most of the nation’s ability to transport fuel and consumer goods would be a disaster for the American public.

Prior to the 2022 election, a tentative deal was reached that froze things in place. What a coincidence, right? Who could have guessed that Democrat-backed unions would take one for the team to ensure that the nation didn’t meltdown before voters went to the polls? Yet, heading into the Christmas season, things remain on a knife’s edge.

That’s left the White House scrambling, and it also happens to be the setup for one of the most blatant lies told by the Biden administration. When pressed on whether President Joe Biden was “directly” involved in negotiations between the unions and the rail companies, his press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, insisted over and over that he was.

But as a new video put together by the RNC shows, that’s simply untrue. How do we know? Because Biden himself told us.

It’s actually disturbing to watch Jean-Pierre tell the same lie no less than eight times, only to have Biden let the truth slip out just two days later. Over and over, the press secretary asserted that Biden was “directly involved” in the negotiations. On Thanksgiving, though, he stated that he has not “directly engaged” and that his team is handling things.

Was this a lack of coordination? I suspect not. Rather, it seems more likely that Biden’s senility struck again, leaving him unable to remember his talking points.

Here’s my big question, though. Why lie about this in the first place? Would anyone have even cared that Biden wasn’t actually directly involved? Would you have cared? I wouldn’t have. Heck, most Americans would probably prefer he not be directly involved, given the president’s long record of failure.

So, what’s the motivation to lie? I think it’s a product of deep-seated insecurity within the administration. In short, because Biden is so clearly out of it and not in charge, his handlers tend to overcorrect, pretending that he’s intimately involved in every important decision. Obviously, he’s not, and the attempt to make it seem that way leads to awkward situations like this where the president is directly contradicting his press secretary. I’ve lost count of how many times that’s happened over the last nearly two years.

What’s Jean-Pierre supposed to do, though? As bad as she is at her job, she can only work with what she’s got, and what she has is a man who can’t be counted on to keep the administration’s lies straight. Given that, maybe not lying so much would be prudent. Just a suggestion.

Jonathan Turley Busts Advertisers Leaving Twitter Who Were Cool With Censorship Before Musk

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

The left has been doing all it can to take down Twitter since Elon Musk took over, with Democrats trying to sic the FTC on Musk, floating the idea of pulling Twitter from the app store, and pressuring advertisers to stop advertising on the site.

According to NPR — which bases its report on Media Matters (so we do not have that as a question) — about 50 of the top 100 advertisers are no longer running ads on the site.

Half of Twitter’s top 100 advertisers appear to no longer be advertising on the website. A report from Media Matters for America states that these 50 advertisers have spent almost $2 billion on Twitter ads since 2020 and more than $750 million just in 2022.

Seven additional advertisers have slowed their advertising to almost nothing, according to the report, which was published on Tuesday. These companies have paid Twitter more than $255 million since 2020.

Chevrolet, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., Ford, Jeep, Kyndryl, Merck & Co. and Novartis AG all issued statements about halting Twitter ads or were reported and confirmed as doing so. The others ceased advertising on the platform for a “significant period of time following direct outreach, controversies, and warnings from media buyers.”

Volkswagen has joined those companies, which is incredibly ironic, given they were founded originally by Nazis.

As George Washington law school professor Jonathan Turley observed, these companies were fine with how Twitter had censored speech in the past and shut down stories like the Hunter Biden laptop. They didn’t pull out because of the child exploitation on the site which Musk has now been working to purge. Yet now these advertisers have a problem with free speech?

Turley noted the moves from these companies came after efforts from those on the left including a group connected to Hillary Clinton.

Now, reports indicate that Clinton has unleashed her allies in the corporate world to coerce Musk to restore censorship policies or face bankruptcy. The effort of the Clinton-linked “Accountable Tech” reveals the level of panic in Democratic circles that free speech could be restored on one social media platform. The group was open about how losing control over Twitter could result in a loss of control over social media generally. For Clinton, it is an “all-hands on deck” call for censorship. She previously called upon foreign governments to crackdown on the free speech of Americans on Twitter.

We have been discussing how Clinton and others have called on foreign countries to pass censorship laws to prevent Elon Musk from restoring free speech protections on Twitter. It seems that, after years of using censorship by surrogates in social media companies, Democratic leaders seem to have rediscovered good old-fashioned state censorship.

Accountable Tech led an effort to send a letter to top Twitter advertisers to force Musk to accept “non-negotiable” requirements for censorship.

25 other liberal groups including Media Matters and the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation signed onto the letter to advertisers.

It’s shameful if any company caves to leftist pressure to then pressure Musk because he wants free speech. It says something about any of the companies that have gone along with this. Now, they may find themselves facing consequences when they lose consumers because of it. They’re perfectly free to pull their advertising, and we’re perfectly free not to buy from them. That’s why Musk was trying to sell Twitter Blue verification to be free of that pressure, so the platform could be self-supporting.

But my guess is that they’re cutting off their noses to spite their faces and they’re going to be back, just like CBS who fled Twitter and came back. The advertisers will be back when they think things have cooled down because it’s hard to quit a platform where there are millions of viewers.

Democrat Sen. Markey Whines About Musk Ignoring 'Deadline' to Answer Dopey Questions

Mike Miller reporting for RedState 

You ever wonder if the Democrats and their liberal media sock puppets are aware of how entertaining they are in their blatant hypocrisy over the Devil’s spawn — Elon Musk — and his acquisition of Twitter? Me, neither; they’re clueless, which makes their hysterical hissy fits all the more enjoyable to watch.

Such was the case on Saturday when Massachusetts Democrat Sen. Ed Markey fired off a tweet, whining about Musk, who “failed to respond to my letter by yesterday’s deadline.” Oh please. Markey lacks the authority to compel Musk to respond to his silly deadline and he knows it. Still, Markey tweeted:

@elonmusk could respond to my tweets but failed to respond to my letter by yesterday’s deadline and answer basic questions about Twitter verification. Congress must end the era of failed Big Tech self-regulation and pass laws that put user safety over the whims of billionaires.

We’ll get to Markey’s off-the-charts hypocrisy in a minute, but his wimpy tweet wasn’t even sent to Musk directly; instead, he just referred to the new Twitter boss as if speaking to a third party.

Twitter user “AmericanRN” perfectly translated Markey’s little whine-fest:

@elonmusk didn’t answer my demand by the bogus deadline I made up but maybe it’s because he knows it’s a massively abusive overreach of Congressional power to attempt to regulate Twitter because I’m pissed it will no longer do our bidding and I hate the new CEO.

Bingo.

Now, Markey’s mindblowing hypocrisy.

Where were Markey and his pals when various Antifa groups were allowed to spew violent extremism on Twitter 1.0? After Musk on Friday began suspending accounts that call for violence, Portland Antifa threatened violent protests at Tesla dealerships. Any thoughts, Ed? Other than crickets, I mean.

Where were Markey and his pals as Twitter 1.0 helped shape the Black Lives Matter movement? The most common Black Lives Matter hashtags were #BlackLivesMatter, #GeorgeFloyd, #BreonnaTaylor, #Black, and #ICantBreathe. We know how that all turned out.

Ed? Did you issue deadlines for Antifa and Black Lives Matter to respond to questions? Of course, you didn’t. Know why? Because both groups fueled the made-up Democrat narrative about “white supremacy,” “systematic racism,” and other politically expedient crap. But you already knew that.

Then Elon Musk comes along and begins to create Twitter 2.0 by reinstating conservative accounts suspended by the previous regime, and suspending accounts threatening violence, including various Black Lives Matter and Antifa accounts, Ed.

Why not at least have the cojones to admit it, Ed? Of course, you won’t — you can’t.

Truth is, Ed, the leftist stranglehold on social media has finally been breached — and you and your left-wing pals are terrified by the new reality.

CNN Calls Freedom of Speech 'Nonsense' in Moronic Rant

Bonchie reporting for RedState 

Did you know that freedom of speech is “nonsense”? That’s the word from CNN, which let a former CIA flunky spew falsehoods in an attempt to smear Elon Musk’s management of Twitter.

As RedState previously reported, Musk is set to grant a “general amnesty” to formerly banned accounts. There will be some exceptions if those accounts broke the law or engaged in targeted calls for violence, but a deluge of accounts that simply broke leftwing orthodoxy are set to return.

That has the clowns over at CNN shaking in terror, so much so that they are willing to boot basic constitutional principles in the process.

Everything is about Vladimir Putin to these people. According to them, he stalks the shadows like some bizarro Batman, ready to pounce at any moment with memes and “disinformation.” Of course, Robert Baer is in the same camp of flacks who insisted that Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation, and we all saw how that turned out.

Baer’s complaints are, to put it succinctly, nonsense. One, Twitter was overrun with fake accounts prior to Musk’s acquisition of it. Two, the idea that past regulations kept Putin’s regime off Twitter is just laughable. Does anyone really believe that Russia was stopped in its tracks from posting on social media because the last iteration of Twitter banned accounts for saying COVID-19 came from a Chinese lab? I’m pretty sure the Russians, as much as I’ve dogged on their capabilities, are capable of spoofing an IP and posting on Twitter if they want.

And speaking of China, isn’t it neat how CNN and the rest never seem to have a problem with TikTok? I mean, if they are so terrified of foreign influence on social media, you’d think they’d be screaming from the rooftops about one of the largest social media companies being owned by the Chicoms. Never mind that TikTok happens to be most popular among the youngest, most impressionable generation.

Then there’s Baer’s claim that you can’t go to a movie theater and yell fire. Yes, yes you can. That talking point has been debunked more times than I can count (the case that found that was long ago overturned), and yet, leftwing hacks just keep saying it. Prohibitions of free speech are constitutionally limited to direct incitement of violence and legally-provable defamation. Just about anything else goes. Certainly, freedom of speech covers being able to post one’s thoughts on social media, even if the companies themselves can choose to curate as private entities.

Lastly, how in the world is Putin going to “save himself” in Ukraine by using accounts on Twitter? That’s probably one of the dumbest suggestions I’ve seen surrounding this topic. I’d critique it more, but it’s so ridiculous as to be dismissed outright.

I’m constantly struck by just how unimpressive and mediocre these bureaucrats-turned-talking heads are. Is this really the kind of person that makes a career in the federal government as an “analyst”? Come to think of it, given the history of the CIA, that actually makes a lot of sense.

Amateur Hour at Mar-a-Lago

Is there not one competent person on Trump’s team?

posted by Dianny at Patriot Retort

I can’t be the only person whose jaw hit the floor when I read the news about Donald Trump playing host to two anti-Semitic bigots this week. If this is the kind of unforced error we can expect going forward then Trump’s 2024 campaign is going to be one long, drawn-out amateur hour.

Do the Trump people want their guy to look like the next Lyndon LaRouche?

Yeah, yeah. I know. The readers from the ever-shrinking bubble of Trump fans are already skipping the rest of this column and rushing down to the comments section to declare me an anti-American traitor with Trump Derangement Syndrome.

I don’t suffer from TDS, but I am old-fashioned. Seem I like presidential candidates who don’t break bread with pipsqueak cosplaying Neo-Nazis like Nick Fuentes or mentally unstable bigots like Kanye West.

How was someone like Fuentes permitted to place one goose-stepping jackboot through the front door, let alone dine with Trump? Taxpayers pay handsomely to ensure former presidents have competent staff and secret service protection. And yet at Mar-a-Lago, it’s Amateur Hour.

And here I thought the Biden people sucked at optics. The optics from “My Dinner with Bigots” make the Biden team look like PR geniuses.

But rather than recognize this disaster for what it is, the die-hard Trump supporters snapped into excuse-making mode.

I’ve been reading with a growing sense of dismay the replies from the Trump Super Fans on Twitter as they twist themselves into knots trying to make excuses for such an abject failure.

“Trump didn’t know who Nick Fuentes was!!!”

Okay, but isn’t it the job of competent staff and security to vet people before they sit down for dinner with a former president?

“But, but, but TRUMP DIDN’T INVITE FUENTES!! He only invited Kanye!”

I don’t think “He didn’t invite that bigot. He only invited the other bigot” is the winning argument they think it is.

“Trump was set up! His people betrayed him! He would never have let Fuentes in if Kanye hadn’t played him!!!”

Ah, all right. Trump, the genius 4-D Chess master who is always ten steps ahead of everyone, got outsmarted by a raging anti-Semite, and apparently, all it took was the anti-Semite saying nice things about him on Tucker Carlson Tonight.

Of course, none of the excuses change the fact that it’s Amateur Hour at Mar-a-Lago.

Let’s presume for a moment that Trump was set up and got outsmarted by Kanye and his crew. The fact that not one person in Trump’s orbit stopped this train wreck from happening doesn’t leave me brimming with optimism about Trump’s presidential campaign team.

A competent presidential candidate and a competent team would never inadvertently allow a white supremacist troll like Nick Fuentes or an anti-Semitic bigot like Kanye anywhere within a ten-mile radius, let alone through the front door.

I’m thinking a lot of the people who consistently defended Trump against the slanderous lie that he called Neo-Nazis “very fine people” are watching Amateur Hour at Mar-a-Lago with a growing sense of disgust.

I know I am.

I mean, for crying out loud, why the hell did we bother?

Why bother defending a guy who surrounds himself with incompetent clowns who can’t stop him from stepping on his own dick?

Why should we keep running to Trump’s defense when Donald Trump and his team are going to place him in indefensible situations?

And for those of you who argue that Trump should be able to dine with whomever he chooses, you’re right. We all have the right to associate with whomever we want. But we also have the right not to want to vote for a Republican primary candidate who hobnobs with bigots and Neo-Nazis just because they said nice things about him.

And the die-hard Trump fans are completely free to continue defending this Amateur Hour.

If you want to call my not wanting to deal with two years of this crap “Trump Derangement Syndrome” then go ahead. Spitting out terms like “RINO,” “GOPe,” “Uniparty,” and “TDS” is probably a lot easier than having to face the fact that Trump’s behavior is causing him to lose the support of people who voted for him.

If I’m honest, I think “Trump Derangement Syndrome” is a more fitting label for the people who cling to this Amateur Hour no matter how many times Donald Trump shoots himself in the face.

Like the anti-Trump ResistanceLOL, the die-hard Trump fans have let Donald Trump consume every aspect of their lives to the point where they are losing all sense of proportion and any ability to step back and objectively assess the situation.

And to justify their intransigence, they seem to have convinced themselves that Trump’s supporters are legion and the only people walking away from this Amateur Hour are the un-American turncoats and traitors in cahoots with Paul Ryan and Jeb Bush who are too blind to “trust the plan.”

But there is no plan. No 4-D Chess.

It isn’t brilliant strategy and political savvy that is steering this ship.

It’s incompetence.