Joe Biden’s denials shift as evidence piles up about his involvement in Hunter’s deals

Susan Ferrechio reporting for Washington Times

President Biden’s repeated denials that he participated in his son’s foreign business transactions or ever spoke with his son about them have shifted after an accumulation of evidence from bank records and eyewitness testimony in recent weeks shows he likely played a pivotal role in securing the lucrative deals.

Mr. Biden remained silent Friday when reporters shouted questions at him about a Justice Department special counsel investigation of his son Hunter Biden related to tax evasion, financial schemes and suspicions of acting as an unregistered lobbyist for foreign entities.

The president has long denied involvement in his son’s business deals, but a House investigation has compiled evidence that Mr. Biden helped his family pocket millions of dollars by serving as the influential “brand” and briefly joining phone calls and business meetings.

---

---

Questions about Mr. Biden’s candor were raised again last week with the surfacing of a 2015 photo showing then-Vice President Biden aboard Air Force Two en route to Ukraine talking with adviser Amos Hochstein. According to congressional investigators, Mr. Hochstein repeatedly warned about a conflict of interest from Hunter Biden’s job on the board of Ukrainian energy firm Burisma that paid $1 million a year.

Hunter Biden and his associates also sought help from Mr. Hochstein on behalf of Burisma on a Ukrainian gas tax initiative, but it’s unclear whether the adviser provided any assistance.

Republicans called the Air Force Two photo “damning.” They said it was further evidence that Mr. Biden was well aware of his son’s business deals and spoke about them.

The photo was taken on the way to Kyiv, where Mr. Biden met with President Petro Poroshenko and demanded that he fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, who had been investigating Burisma.

At an event Tuesday in Arizona, Mr. Biden did not deny knowing about his son’s business deals but said, “I never talked business with anybody.”

Mr. Biden was responding to a reporter’s question about testimony from his son’s former business associate Devon Archer.

Archer recently told House investigators that Mr. Biden, as vice president, phoned into about 20 of Hunter Biden’s business meetings and dined twice with their business associates.

Mr. Biden’s response marked a shift from his professed ignorance about his son’s lucrative deals, including his board seat on Burisma, which paid Hunter Biden a total of more than $3 million.

Asked in a 2019 Axios interview what job Hunter Biden was performing for Burisma to earn the hefty paycheck, Mr. Biden said, “I don’t know what he was doing. I knew he was on the board, but that was it.”

Archer, who is facing a prison term on an unrelated securities fraud conviction, testified that Burisma owner Mykola Zlochevsky and another top Burisma executive, Vadym Pozharskyi, arranged a phone call, through Hunter, with Vice President Biden in December 2015. The Burisma executives wanted to talk with him about a state corruption probe of their company that was hindering efforts to break into U.S. energy markets.

Mr. Pozharskyi also dined with Mr. Biden at a Georgetown restaurant in April 2015, Archer revealed to House investigators.

Archer said the dinner conversation did not include any business talk. Democrats have downplayed Archer’s testimony and said Hunter Biden was merely selling “the illusion” that his powerful father would help Burisma executives and other business associates.

Earlier this summer, two IRS whistleblowers told Congress that they found evidence of more direct involvement from Mr. Biden.

In their investigation into Hunter Biden over unpaid taxes, IRS investigators uncovered WhatsApp messages in which Hunter Biden threatened a Chinese business associate to make good on a payment.

“I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled,” Hunter Biden messaged to Henry Zhao on June 30, 2017. “Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight.

“And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”

After the revelations, the White House changed its message.

Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre pivoted away from claiming that the president was ignorant of his son’s business deals. “The answer remains the same. The president was never in business with his son,” she told reporters.

Mr. Biden started denying knowledge about his son’s business deals in 2019 when he ran for president.

“First of all, I have never discussed with my son or my brother or anyone else anything having to do with their business, period,” Mr. Biden said at a campaign event in Spartanburg, South Carolina, in August 2019.

He told reporters that during his time as vice president, “There wasn’t any hint of scandal at all when we were there.” He pledged “an absolute wall” between the White House and his family’s business deals.

“That’s why I never talked with my son or my brother or anyone else, even distant family, about their business interests. Period,” Mr. Biden said.

Archer disputed Mr. Biden’s claim this month in an online interview with Tucker Carlson. He called the denials “categorically false” and said Mr. Biden “was aware of Hunter’s business [and] met with Hunter’s business partners.”

House Republican leaders recently wrote to White House Counsel Stuart Delery to ask whether Mr. Biden was tapped into his son’s business deals. The letter points to the shifting statements from the president and his press team that seem to offer wiggle room to accommodate the bank records and witness testimony that could tie the president to his son’s business deals.

“The American people must have confidence that the President of the United States is not compromised by foreign interests,” lawmakers wrote.

The White House has not responded.

X22, Christian Patriot News, and more- August 14

 

✝ What a possible sequel to Sound of Freedom might look like

 

Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/sound-of-freedom-director-talks-possible-sequel-following-films-success

“Sound of Freedom” writer-director Alejandro Monteverde opened up about the possibility of a sequel to the hit that has become the highest-grossing indie film since 2019’s “Parasite.”

The movie, which deals with the horrors of human trafficking, has earned more than $170 million at the box office as of Monday. According to Variety, Monteverde said there are already talks about a follow-up.

“There’s definitely a lot of interest to exploring [the subject] a little deeper, because this is just the tip of the iceberg,” the director told the outlet in a wide-ranging interview.

“There’s a lot of interest to kind of explore Haiti, what’s happening in Haiti,” he added. “There’s [sequel] talks focusing on Haiti.”

Monteverde admitted going into opening weekend, he said he thought it would be great if the movie earned $5 million.

“I will be really happy with that,’ he said. “$14 million I thought for the whole run.”

 

“Sound of Freedom,” based on a true story, comes from Angel Studios, the same studio responsible for the popular faith-based television series, “The Chosen.” Actor Jim Caviezel portrays Tim Ballard, a federal agent who quits his job and embarks on a dangerous mission to rescue a young girl from sex slavery in South America.

The director said, “Haiti was a big part of Tim [Ballard’s] work. I was very tempted to do Haiti on this film. But I wanted to do an origin story, and it was too much material. I needed to end where I ended.”

Announcement Concerning 'Pelosi Federal Building' in San Francisco Explains Big Problem With Democrats

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

If there’s anywhere in the country that shows the bad results of years of bad Democratic policies, it’s San Francisco.

They can’t blame Republicans for what the once beautiful city has become — its downfall has been completely at the hands of the Democrats who have been in charge.

You would have thought that having a high-profile person in a great position of authority for many years — former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — that might have helped the city. But she’s been supportive of progressives, and the city has fallen to crime and drugs.

Instead, this is the kind of thing that you see now.

As we’ve written before, stores have been locking down or fleeing. Target locked down its entire product range behind security glass. Nordstrom bailed out of the two stores it had there and T-Mobile even shut down its flagship store. Whole Foods left within a year and Park Hotels also bailed.

While stores are fleeing, the media is writing about how much you can make as a drug dealer in the area. Can we talk about how twisted that all is and how lost San Francisco is when they are in this kind of a position?

Successful drug dealers can make $350,000 a year or more, according to The San Francisco Chronicle.

The base pay for a senior software engineer at Google is around $211,000 or more. [….]

The money has become an attractive albeit dangerous calling card for some Honduran migrants who hope to flee poverty and violence in their home villages. According to the Chronicle, Honduran migrants — mostly from Siria Valley, north of Honduras’ capital Tegucigalpa — dominate the open-air drug trade prevalent in the Tenderloin and South of Market neighborhoods.

The drug business is now resulting in a housing boom in some areas of Honduras to where they’re sending the money. Is this what Joe Biden meant when he said improving the “physical structure” so illegal aliens don’t have to come here?

But if you truly wanted another example of how bad it is in San Francisco, it would have to be this story.

Officials at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services advised hundreds of employees in San Francisco to work remotely for the foreseeable future due to public safety concerns outside the Nancy Pelosi Federal Building on Seventh Street.

The imposing, 18-story tower on the corner of Seventh and Mission streets houses various federal agencies, including HHS, the U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of Transportation and the office of Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. The area is also home to one of the city’s most brazen open-air drug markets, where dozens of dealers and users congregate on a daily basis.

HHS Assistant Secretary for Administration Cheryl R. Campbell issued the stay-home recommendation in an Aug. 4 memo to regional leaders.

“In light of the conditions at the (Federal Building) we recommend employees … maximize the use of telework for the foreseeable future,” Campbell wrote in the memo, a copy of which was obtained by The Chronicle.

What’s the name of that building? It’s the Nancy Pelosi Federal Building. Now let’s start with why anyone would name a building after Pelosi. But there’s so much crime that can’t even ensure the safety of the people that work there, they’re just telling them to stay home. Doesn’t that say everything in one appropriately named building? Here’s some video of what it’s allegedly like nearby. No wonder people are told to stay home.

Now the answer should be to shut down the open-air drug selling in the area. But that would make too much sense, instead let’s tell the people to stay home from work. Yet Democrats will stick their heads in the sand on this and pretend like they’re in “recovery.”

The answer is to replace the Democrats.

Youngkin Urges Republicans to 'Beat Democrats at Their Own Game,' Embrace Early Voting

Mike Miller reporting for RedState 

As Democrats continue to outperform us in key elections (see: 2022 midterms, 2020 presidential election), the Republican Party is faced with two options. One, keep blaming every loss on election fraud — I’m not saying it doesn’t exist — or, two, learn how to beat the Democrats at their own game.

Here’s the thing. The Democrats now play an Election Season game, while the Republicans largely rely on the traditional Election Day game. I might not be the sharpest knife in the drawer — but I’m not the dullest one, either. So it’s become obvious to me that the GOP must step up its own election season game — and win. Then, assuming adequate numbers in state legislatures, if Republicans want to limit early voting and impose other restrictions, they’ll be in a position to do.

In other words, rather than simply continuing to moan about “stolen” elections — an effort which, to my knowledge, has changed the results of zero elections —  Republicans must first learn to beat the Democrats at their own game and then change the rules if they choose to do so.

One popular Republican governor believes exactly the same thing.

As my colleague Joe Cunningham reported in early July, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin launched an initiative to boost early Republican turnout in early and absentee voting; two efforts that not only continue to work well for the Democrat Party but have also been effective in putting Republican candidates behind the eight ball in many races before a majority of Republican voters even cast their votes.

Youngkin said, in an extremely well-done ad:

We can’t go into our elections down thousands of votes. And you can secure your vote before Election Day. Join the permanent absentee list and make a plan to vote early — by mail or in person. … It’s time to go to work.

Exactly.

Youngkin penned a Sunday op-ed for USA Today, titled: “Republicans need to stop fighting early voting. It’s how we can win on Election Day.”

In the subhead, Youngkin continued his bottom-line message from July: “Republicans cannot afford to go into Election Day down thousands of votes – that will all but guarantee a loss.”

Youngkin wrote:

Elections are competitions, and the principles for victory are straightforward – which candidate has the most compelling vision, communicates that vision the best, and builds trust to turn promises made into promises kept. Yes, like any team sport in a tough game, the team that fields the best players, executes the better strategy, and competes the hardest, wins.

Again, what’s a better alternative? Pick up our ball and go home — and fall back into the deflection trap and, again, blame voter fraud after every Republican election loss? What did Einstein admonish? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity? Yeah, that.

“Early voting is key to winning elections”

Youngkin referred to his 2021 gubernatorial win over former Democrat Gov. Terry McCauliffe — who was Virginia’s governor from 2014 to 2018:

One of the most important plays in Republicans’ game plan in Virginia is not new or groundbreaking – it involves an aggressive absentee and early voting program. We turned out early voters in our 2021 win, and we’re doubling down in 2023.

In Virginia, you do not need a reason or an excuse to vote early or by absentee ballot. Democrats put these rules in place while in control of Virginia’s government and have used these rules to their advantage by vastly outpacing Republicans in early and absentee voting.

We can either continue complaining, or we can recognize reality, beat the left at their own game and win elections. I chose to win – to make Virginia the best place to live, work and raise a family – which is why I launched Secure Your Vote Virginia.

Let’s say it, together, shall we? “We can either continue complaining, or we can recognize reality, beat the left at their own game and win elections.”

The Bottom Line

So yeah, we can continue to commiserate among ourselves and blame election fraud on every Republican election loss that comes down the pike, or we can learn to beat the Democrats at their own game.

Seems to me, since Virginian Governor Glenn Youngkin won and chose “B,” while those who lost continue to choose “A,” it’s time to hop aboard the “B” train and heed Youngkin’s — and Einstein’s — advice.

Besides, what is there to lose by doing so?

Judges Excoriate Biden Admin For ‘Strong-Arming’ Tech Companies Like ‘The Mob’ To Censor Users

‘That’s a really nice social media platform you got there — 

it would be a shame if something happened to it.’

Shawn Fleetwood reporting for The Federalist

Judges overseeing Missouri and Louisiana’s lawsuit against the federal government for its collusion with Big Tech platforms blasted the Biden administration during court proceedings on Thursday for using mob-like tactics to pressure said companies into censoring free speech online.

“In these movies that we see with the mob … they don’t say and spell out things, but they have these ongoing relationships,” Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod said. “They never actually say ‘go do this or else you’re going to have this consequence.’ But everybody just knows.”

Held in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Thursday’s hearing was to consider oral arguments in the Biden administration’s appeal of a July 4 injunction put in place by District Judge Terry Doughty that prohibited the federal government from working with Big Tech platforms to censor what they claim to be “disinformation” online. In his 155-page memorandum ruling, Doughty noted how “the evidence produced [by Missouri and Louisiana] thus far depicts an almost dystopian scenario” and predicted the states’ suit will succeed “on the merits in establishing that the Government has used its power to silence the opposition” on topics such as Covid-19, lockdowns, vaccines, and more.

Doughty separately denied a motion to stay filed by the Biden administration a day after the July 4 ruling.

In comparing the Biden administration’s tactics of pressuring Big Tech platforms to censor free speech to those employed by the mob, Elrod specified she’s “certainly not equating the federal government with anybody in illegal organized crime,” but noted “there are certain relationships that people know things without always saying the ‘or else.'”

“What appears to be in the record are these irate messages from time to time from high-ranking government officials that say, ‘You didn’t do this yet!’ — and that’s my toning down the language — ‘Why haven’t you done this yet?’” she said. “It’s like ‘jump’ and ‘how high?’”

Judge Don Willett expressed similar views when describing how he views the federal government’s “unsubtle strong-arming and veiled or not-so-veiled threats” to influence social media companies’ content moderation policies. In summarizing government officials’ tone in their messages to Big Tech employees, Willett said, “That’s a really nice social media platform you got there — it would be a shame if something happened to it.”

As The Federalist previously reported, communications obtained by the state governments of Missouri and Louisiana show extensive coordination between the Biden administration and Big Tech companies such as Facebook and X, formerly known as Twitter, to squash what they claimed was “dis-” or “misinformation,” particularly posts regarding Covid. A July 2021 email from a senior Facebook representative to U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, for instance, reveals how Biden administration officials and the Big Tech company met “to better understand the scope of what the White House expects from [Facebook] on misinformation going forward.”

The email was sent a day after Murthy published an advisory warning against the “threat of health misinformation” and calling on “tech and social media companies” to “do more to address the spread on their platforms.”

According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Daniel Tenny, a Department of Justice lawyer, attempted to downplay the government’s censorship activities, arguing “The notion that the social media companies felt they had to bend to the FBI’s will when half the time they didn’t — it doesn’t fit any of these theories.” John Sauer, Louisiana’s special assistant attorney general, pushed back on such sentiments and also raised the FBI’s role in Big Tech’s censoring of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop story.

For context, after the New York Post dropped its bombshell report sourced from Hunter Biden’s laptop weeks before the 2020 contest, platforms such as X and Facebook went out of their way to censor the story and prevent its reach. On X, users were not permitted to share the story, even via direct message. The platform further removed links and issued alerts that it may be “unsafe.” Meanwhile, Facebook announced shortly after the story broke that it would be “reducing [the story’s] distribution” pending verification by third-party “fact-checkers.”

Heavily involved in these companies’ suppression of the story was the FBI, which had authenticated the laptop as early as November 2019 but nonetheless warned Twitter and Facebook to be on the lookout for “Russian propaganda” and “hack-and-leak operations” by state actors in the months leading up to the election. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg later admitted during a Joe Rogan podcast interview last year that Facebook’s decision to suppress the story was based on the FBI’s warning.

The FBI “knew that it wasn’t Russian disinformation, and then, having primed the platforms to expect it as a hack-and-dump operation would actually hit, then they said, ‘Is this Russian disinformation?’ [The FBI] said, ‘No comment,'” Sauer recounted. Doughty’s court “found that was a deliberately misleading course of deception.”

Michigan air show: MiG-23 jet crashes moments after two occupants eject

 

Two people aboard a Soviet-era warplane ejected to safety just before it crashed and "burst into a raging fireball" during a Michigan air show, officials said.

The pilot and passenger sitting tandem in the MiG-23 jet were operating the plane as part of the Thunder Over Michigan air show on Sunday.

Parachutes carried them safely to the ground, where they were then sent to the hospital out of precaution.

There have been no reported injuries.  

The crash occurred shortly after 16:00 ET (21:00 BST) on Sunday in Belleville, Michigan, during the Yankee Air Museum's Thunder over Michigan air show, according to a Wayne County Airport Authority statement.

The jet crashed into unoccupied vehicles in a parking lot at the Waverly on the Lake Apartments, narrowly missing one apartment building, the airport authority said. 

The plane then "burst into a raging fireball", as local media described it, shortly before emergency crews arrived to extinguish the flames. Thick clouds of black smoke bellowing into the sky could be seen from the ground.

Video footage of the incident shows two short bursts of flames coming from the aircraft as the pilot and passenger are each ejected.

The cause of the crash remains unclear. The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating the incident.

The old Russian war craft was piloted by Dan Filer, who is a retired Navy pilot from Texas, according to the air show's website.

"It's the only privately owned flying MiG-23 in the world," Mr Filer, who collects Soviet-made fighter jets, told a local news outlet in Louisiana last year.

The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 was one of the most utilised Soviet war planes during the Cold War, known for its advanced radar and fire control system. It could fire missiles at targets beyond visual range, according to the National Museum of the United States Air Force.  

 

 

MSNBC Pounces on the Opportunity to Exploit Utah Man Killed by FBI

Jeff Charles reporting for RedState 

The case of the Utah man who was killed by FBI agents who arrived at his home in the early morning hours on Friday with a battering ram, to serve a warrant issued as a result of social media postings he made containing threats he made against President Joe Biden and other politicians is still being discussed on the airwaves and interwebs, as people try to make sense of it all. There are still many questions as to what happened during the conversation between the individual and members of federal law enforcement.

But, predictably, at least one activist media outlet seized on the story as an opportunity to unfairly smear supporters of former President Donald Trump. In a highly-deceptive op-ed, MSNBC columnist Frank Figliuzzi exploited the story to convince readers that a significant number of Trump supporters want to use violence to advance the former president’s political agenda:

No one should be surprised by this development. In fact, I’d be surprised if we don’t see more violent threats against government officials, given the incendiary rhetoric from Trump and his supporters. Robertson’s threats against those officials appear to be an end result of stochastic terrorism, generally defined as the public vilification of a particular group of people that randomly and unpredictably leads to violence against members of that group.

The fact that Figliuzzi uses the term “stochastic terrorism” tells us what we need to know about his agenda. Folks on the hard left have been throwing that word around for the past few years to portray opinions that contradict progressivism as possible incitements to violence.

The author goes on to cite statistics bolstering his claim that Trump supporters are violent domestic terrorism bombs just waiting to go off:

According to a July report from the University of Chicago Project on Security and Threats, “From April 6, 2023 to June 26, 2023, Americans agreeing that ‘the use of force is justified to restore Donald Trump to the presidency’ increased from 4.5% to 7%, or the equivalent of an estimated shift from 12 million to 18 million American adults.”

That research institute found that the increase “likely reflects the response of more intense commitment to Trump following the announcement of the federal indictment against him for mishandling 3 classified documents on June 9, 2023 — about two and a half weeks before our June 26, 2023, survey.”

The article details some of the threats the suspect made in relation to Biden, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, and several others who are targeting the former president and also brings up the Jan. 6 protests at the U.S. Capitol, which was totally not predictable, right?

Figliuzzi ends the hit piece by blaming Trump’s rhetoric for the supposed increase in Trump supporters supporting political violence. “But the poll indicating that millions of Americans think it’s OK to commit violence on behalf of Trump is why his inflammatory language, and that of his proxies, is so dangerous. And why law enforcement can’t afford to be less than vigilant.”

It’s not all that tough to see the flaws in Figliuzzi’s argument here, is it?

Let’s say the numbers on Trump supporters’ attitudes are accurate. Why would the author only discuss these percentages without including some from the other side of the political train tracks? Luckily, I just happen to have some of those numbers right here. A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in 2022 showed that a whopping 22 percent of Democrats believe that the use of political violence against their political opposition was “acceptable.”

Even further, the University of California, Davis, published the results of another 2022 survey showing that, overall, about one in five Americans, regardless of political affiliation, believes the use of violence is justified to “advance an important political objective.”

If I were to use Figliuzzi’s logic, this means that a little over 34 million rabid Democrats also want to murder people for disagreeing with them politically. Who should we blame this on? Biden? Sanders? AOC?

See? Numbers are fun when you can manipulate them to say what you want them to say, aren’t they?

On a serious note, this article is the type of dishonest tripe one should expect from MSNBC or other left-wing propaganda outlets. For starters, the author doesn’t bother to discuss the broader context related to Americans’ growing acceptance of political violence. He simply uses the matter to score a few cheap political points against those dastardly MAGA Republicans Biden keeps rambling on about.

Secondly, he deliberately cherry-picked data to prove his point. Yet, it took only a few minutes to look up surveys and polling showing that plenty of Democrats are on board with the use of physical force for political ends. He could have used this as an opportunity to take a good-faith look at this phenomenon. But nope, it was more important to shout “Orange Man Bad!”

It’s for this reason that Figliuzzi never bothered to examine the root causes of these attitudes. Even a cursory look at the situation shows that this is a national issue, not a partisan one. Yet, the author went the partisan route anyway because political violence is only wrong if a Republican does it, right?

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why people no longer trust the elite media. Instead of trying to get to the bottom of the issues, its members would rather exploit them to advance a political agenda.

Democrats Risk ‘Indictment Fatigue’ in Their Efforts to Weaponize the Government Against Trump

posted by Jeff Charles at RedStateVIP 

We already knew it was coming, but now, we have an actual timeframe. The latest in a long, exhausting series of politically motivated indictments against former President Donald Trump is expected to be issued next week.

Democrats have been salivating like Pavlov’s dog at the thought of putting the source of all their nightmares behind bars ever since he left office. Their close friends and allies in the justice system have been delivering on years-long promises to prosecute him. While they seem to think these indictments might cause voters to reject Trump at the polls, it is equally possible that this plan could be about as effective as rearranging the chairs on the Titanic – a scenario the left seems not to have anticipated.

Fulton County, Georgia, is reportedly poised to bring an election interference case against Trump. The reports confirmed that at least two witnesses have been contacted to testify in the matter:

Former Georgia Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan and independent journalist George Chidi independently confirmed that they had been contacted to testify on Tuesday.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who was on the other side of Trump’s much-scrutinized demand that he “find” exactly enough votes to defeat Biden, told WSB he hasn’t heard from Willis’ office recently.

“They’re doing what they’re doing, whatever that is,” Raffensperger said. “And I’m sure I’ll read about it in the AJC just like everyone else will.”

Others have privately confirmed to the AJC that they were subpoenaed to testify, though it was not immediately clear how many would be asked to come in early next week.

So far, the Justice Department has issued over 40 felony charges against Trump. These charges include obstruction of justice, depriving Americans of their rights, conspiracy to defraud the United States, mishandling classified documents, making hush-money payments to a porn star, kicking puppies, and probably more. I may have made the puppies thing up, but at this point, the situation has become so ridiculous that I wouldn’t be surprised to see this happen.

It is highly doubtful that Democrats expect Trump to go down for all, or even most, of these charges. In fact, given his position as a past president, it is highly likely that he will not see any jail time, even if convicted on some of these alleged offenses.

As I see it, the left isn’t trying to imprison Trump (although they would certainly celebrate if that happened), they are trying to bury him under so much legal drama that it causes “Trump fatigue.” They are banking on the idea that bogging him down with these legal woes will make him a less attractive candidate.

It isn’t an unreasonable theory. This is the first time the nation has had a presidential candidate with these many indictments against him. There is a decent chance that this gambit will work.

But there is also a chance that it will backfire.

What if the Democrats lob so many indictments at Trump that they begin to lose their meaning? In a sense, one could argue that the left is throwing indictments at Trump in the same way they throw the word “racist” at people who disagree with their politics. At this point, the word “racist” doesn’t have nearly the impact it did decades ago. The same thing could happen here, with Democrats diluting the power of these prosecutions by overplaying their hand.

In effect, the left might be bringing about more “indictment fatigue” than “Trump fatigue.” It will not be surprising if Fulton County indicts Trump next week and the country responds with “meh.” Sure, members of the elite media will still wax hysterical about it, but who takes them seriously anymore?

This issue becomes even more pronounced when combined with the reality that everyone, including Stevie Wonder, can clearly see that every single one of these attempts to prosecute Trump is 100 percent motivated by political expediency. The only reason they are coming after the former president is because they do not wish to see him in the White House again after 2024.

The Democrats are playing a risky game here, although it may not seem like it right now. Fulton County appears to be the final strike against the former president – but these overeager politicos could easily concoct more charges to lay on him. If the American public gets tired of hearing about all the indictments – especially when they start failing to get convictions, it could quickly turn people against the Democrats. Sure, they may not like Trump, but they might start to despise his enemies more than him.