Friday, December 22, 2023

The Globalist ‘Final Solution’


As horrific as the Nazis were, today there is another group who seek a “final solution” even more terrifying: they want to eliminate over 7 billion people from the face of the Earth.  In a 2017 interview, Dennis Meadows, co-author of the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth, said the Earth’s population needs to be “brought back down to one billion.”  The current global population is over 8 billion.  

Their idea isn’t new; it reaches back over 200 years, to Thomas Malthus’s 1798 “Essay on the Principle of Population as It Affects the Future Improvement of Society.”  Malthus concluded that un-managed population growth would inevitably lead to a catastrophic societal collapse and advocated for limiting reproduction of “undesirables.”   

Charles Darwin credited Malthus’s essay with giving him his theory of natural selection, which influenced his cousin Sir Francis Galton’s creation of the term and concept of eugenics (“good birth”), the effort to improve the human species by selectively breeding those with good genes (the basis of the Nazis’ efforts at creating an “Aryan superman”).

The flip side of “good birth” was what to do about those with undesirable genetics — the poor, disabled, and mentally deficient.  Malthus argued against providing relief for the poor, to prevent them from breeding.  The Nazis went Malthus one better, simply eliminating in gas chambers those they deemed “undesirable” (Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, et al.) under their “racial hygiene” policy. 

In 1968, the Club of Rome was founded, proclaiming that to be “sustainable,” the Earth’s human population needed to be no more than one billion people.  To distance themselves from the eugenics associated with the Nazis, they re-framed their idea as “population control.”  Aware that their idea would face resistance, they called for global government to enable them to achieve their aims.

Other elites share the Club of Rome’s goals, and many of them trace back to David Rockefeller, head of Chase Manhattan Bank, who was a longtime advocate of global government.  He funded the Club of Rome and was mentor to Canadian Maurice Strong, who ran the U.N.’s Environment Program for over thirty years.  It was through Strong — a Club of Rome member and board member of the World Economic Forum (WEF) — that Rockefeller influenced the U.N., and also Klaus Schwab, head of the WEF.  Longtime Rockefeller friend Henry Kissinger was Schwab’s tutor at the Harvard International Business Seminar for two years, and Schwab credits both Strong and Kissinger as mentors. 

In 1992, Strong introduced the U.N.’s Agenda 21/Sustainable Development, which in 2015 was rebranded Agenda 2030, and Chapter 4 blames population growth for “placing severe [environmental] stress on the planet.”  In 2019, the WEF’s Schwab signed an agreement with the U.N. secretary general to cooperate in accelerating implementation of Agenda 2030’s goals.  So the major international players pushing the “climate change” scheme are ideological descendants of globalist and de-population advocate Rockefeller.

Globalist elites also quietly support the Earth’s de-population in other ways.  For example, the Bill Gates Foundation has pledged $280 million a year from 2021 to 2030 to develop and improve contraceptive technologies, support family planning, etc. (i.e., prevent births).  Gates is infamous for his funding of vaccine testing in Africa, and he (along with UNICEF and the World Health Organization) has been accused of intentionally sterilizing Kenyan children through the use of a hidden HCG antigen in tetanus vaccines.  

But birth control and abortion are a long, slow process for eliminating what is now a 7-billion-people “excess” in the eyes of the de-population globalists.  Mass starvation is faster and more effective, and Agenda 2030 will achieve that.  Read it here, but look beyond the rhetoric to recognize what banning fossil fuels and fertilizers, restricting agricultural emissions, eliminating cattle, etc. will mean in practical terms. 

Does it take monsters to deliberately starve over 7 billion people?  Or just “terrifyingly normal” men like Aurelio Peccei, an Italian industrialist, or Alexander King, a Scots chemist, the co-founders of the Club of Rome?  Or like Bill Gates or Ted Turner, who’ve been buying up productive U.S. farmland to prevent the growing of food?  Or like the “environmentalists” willing to destroy Western civilization through Net Zero to “save the planet”?  Or like Klaus Schwab, the stereotypical middle manager, who would rather this free and unpredictable world be more organized and tidy?  These are the “men in suits” Lewis warned about, who have anointed themselves worthy of deciding the fate of the world.

The Nazis murdered 17 million people, but today’s global elites are willing to kill 500 times that number under the guise of “sustainability.”  Anti-Nazi German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, having witnessed the world’s appeasement of the Nazis during the 1930s, wrote: “If I see a madman driving a car into a group of innocent bystanders ... I can’t simply wait for the catastrophe and then ... bury the dead.  I must try to wrestle the steering wheel out of the hands of the driver.”

When the images of Auschwitz (et al.) forced the world to acknowledge the Nazi Holocaust, the post-war world promised “never again,” but nobody’s trying to wrestle the wheel from the globalists today.  Instead of stopping it now, before the mass graves are dug, most U.N. member-nations (193) are actively implementing it.  And this time, unlike the 1930s, they don’t even need to avert their gaze so they can later claim “we didn’t know.”  If Agenda 2030 succeeds, there’ll be precious few left to hear that lie.



And we Know, On the Fringe, and more- December 22

 




Nicaragua-Bound Legend Airlines Flight Grounded in France Over Suspected Human Trafficking.

 

A Nicaragua-bound flight carrying over 300 Indian passengers was grounded in France over suspected human trafficking.

 

It's being revealed that the French authorities have grounded the flight from the United Arab Emirates to Nicaragua after receiving a tip that it could be carrying victims of human trafficking, on Friday, December 22.

 

The flight, originating from the UAE, was due for refueling at Paris Vatry Chalons Airport (XCR) in France. Special investigators are now questioning all the occupants , and two people are in custody pending further examination, the Paris prosecutor’s office said in a statement.  

It said an anonymous tip signaled that the flight, operated by Romania-based charter company Legend Airlines, was carrying people who could be victims of human trafficking. 


The passengers and crew are sequestered in the small Vatry airport, where they will spend a second night Friday on camp cots while the investigation continues, according to an official with the Marne regional administration.

 

They initially remained in the A340 plane, surrounded by police on the tarmac, but were then transferred into the main hall of the airport to sleep Thursday night, the official said.

 

The investigation was entrusted to the National Jurisdiction for the Fight against Organized Crime. The National Directorate of Border Police, the Air Transport Gendarmerie and the Vitry-le-François search brigade were jointly seized. Human trafficking is punishable by 20 years of criminal imprisonment and a fine of 3 million euros. 


The Indian Embassy in France posted on X that embassy staff had obtained consular access to the passengers.

"We are investigating the situation and ensuring the well-being of passengers.''

 

Legend Airlines did not respond to requests for comment. Liliana Bakayoko, identified as a Legend Airlines lawyer, said on France's BFM TV that the company denies any role in eventual human trafficking. 


She said a customer, whom she wouldn't identify, chartered the plane and was responsible for verifying the identity documents of each passenger. The customer communicated the passenger information to the airline 48 hours before the flight, she said.

“We hope to leave very quickly with passengers who are not concerned” by the suspicions, the lawyer for the airline Legend Airlines told franceinfo. “Nothing can be blamed on the company” which has neither the “possibility” nor the “right” to “check the criminal records of people who board ,” she says. 

"The contract for this "charter flight with passengers of all kinds, (...) provides that it is the partner who has the obligation to carry out the checks" , according to the lawyer, who deplores " commercial damage (.. .) considerable".  

 

https://fl360aero.com/detail/nicaragua-bound-legend-airlines-flight-grounded-in-france-over-suspected-human-trafficking/1564    




Will Partisan Lawfare Destroy Trump? ~ VDH


We have never seen anything like this 
before in American history


Trump Derangement Syndrome became Orwellian with the recent ruling of the Colorado Supreme Court.

It approved the erasure of Trump from the Republican primary ballot in Colorado, by invoking Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

That ossified clause was intended to bar any ante-bellum federal officials who joined the Confederacy from again holding federal offices after 1865.

In no way is Trump’s conduct on January 6 comparable to calling for secession, much less prompting a Civil War that cost the country 700,000 lives.

An “insurrectionist” president does not address unarmed protestors with qualifiers like, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

How also can one be guilty of insurrection without ever being indicted for such a supposed crime, much less convicted of it? 

And the more we learn about January 6, all the more it appears to have been a spontaneous riot, more buffoonish in nature than conspiratorial.

No one has explained the mysterious, politicized January 6 refusal of the Speaker of the House to order a reinforcement of the Capitol police.

Or the FBI stonewalling about its informants in the crowd.

Or the revealing admissions of New York Times reporter Matthew Rosenberg (“a ton of FBI informants among the people who attacked the Capitol”).

Or the warped composition and conduct of the January 6 congressional committee.

Or the months-long official disinformation surrounding the number and circumstances of those who died that day.

That day’s illegality in terms of violence and death paled in comparison to the largely excused and exempted 120 days of summer violence in 2020, when Antifa and BLM engineered riots, arson, and death.

Their planned violence accounted for 35 or so killed, and more than 1,500 injured police officers.

Some $1-2 billion in property was destroyed.

A police precinct, federal courthouse, and iconic Washington, D.C. church were torched.

Mobs attempted to storm the White House grounds and sent the president into a secure underground bunker.

But if one really wishes to imagine genuine “insurrectionary “and actionable language, then recall current Vice President Kamala Harris’s 2020 de facto encouragement to the rioters,

But they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop, and this is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they’re not gonna stop after Election Day. Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they’re not going to let up — and they should not. And we should not.

Or remember this 2020 insurrectionary warning to two sitting Supreme Court Justices by then Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

At the very doors of the court, Schumer revved up an angry crowd with undisguised threats:

I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.

The Colorado court ruling is sadly only the most recent in a long series of disastrous firsts that are slowly unwinding the republic and making a mockery of the rule of law.

Remember the Russian collusion hoax and the 2016 Clinton/Fusion GPS effort to destroy a presidential candidate?

Recall the 2020 Russian disinformation farcical claim concerning the genuine Hunter Biden laptop?

Do not forget the precedent of impeaching a president twice and then trying an ex-president and private citizen in the Senate.

Then there was another first of raiding an ex-president’s private home over disputes about the removal of presidential papers that are typically solved bureaucratically and as a civil matter.

We are also witnessing ongoing lawfare waged by state and local partisan prosecutors to destroy the current leading presidential candidate.

Their indictments either have no merit or would never have applied to liberal politicians or both.

What will be Colorado’s precedent?

Will red-state courts now respond by erasing Joe Biden from their ballots on grounds that he is “guilty” of insurrectionary activity—by deliberately destroying the southern border, undermining U.S. security, sabotaging federal immigration law, and violating his oath of office?

Will some states remove Vice President Kamala Harris from their 2024 ballots on grounds that in 2020 she deliberately incited insurrectionary protestors who had been engaged in riot, arson, looting, violent assaults on police, and attacks on federal properties?

So does the Left see where it is taking the country?

It is destroying all the old parameters of accepted politics in using any means necessary to deny millions of citizens the right to elect their own highest official.

We have never seen anything like this before in American history. But it is only the latest chapter of an ongoing travesty that will not end well.



Biden Military Nominee Celebrated NATO’s ‘Demand’ For ‘Diversity’ And ‘Inclusion’



A high-ranking Marine Corps Reserve official nominated by President Joe Biden previously celebrated a NATO agency’s embrace of neo-Marxist ideology.

Promoted by Biden to the rank of major general on Friday, then-Brig. Gen. Douglas K. Clark penned an article published by the NATO Joint Warfare Centre (JWC), touting the organization’s embrace of “diversity” and “inclusion,” concepts often used by leftists to justify the dismissal of a merit-based system in favor of one that makes personnel decisions based upon characteristics such as race. Clark previously served as JWC’s deputy commander and chief of staff from 2020-2022 and is currently the commanding general of the 4th Marine Division in New Orleans, Louisiana.

In his article on JWC’s “organizational culture,” Clark commended the organization for “embracing diversity as one of [its] leadership goals” and further claimed he was “proud” the JWC launched a “human capital-focused programme built upon [its] commitment to diversity and inclusion.” “This is because people truly are our most important asset in meeting the JWC’s goals and objectives,” Clark wrote.

But the brigadier general didn’t stop there. In the subsequent paragraphs, Clark wrote that “commonalities and differences” are what “enable the growth of any organization” and opined that the current security climate doesn’t demonstrate the JWC’s “need” for diversity but its “demand” for it.

“In this environment, we do not need diversity. We demand it!” Clark wrote. “‘Together! We make NATO better!’, the JWC’s maxim, is exactly about our emphasis on diversity. Because this is how we will meet NATO’s evolving requirements, holding on to curiosity, innovation, and cooperation.”

Clark is hardly the only notable military official to espouse support for so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI)-type ideology. Several of the service members promoted by Biden in recent months have been caught promoting leftist philosophies and causes — and in some cases — attacking those who don’t support such positions.

The Air Force’s Benjamin Jonsson, for example, penned an article in the Air Force Times in the weeks following George Floyd’s death claiming that “white colonels” are the “biggest barriers” to addressing so-called “racial injustice” in the U.S. military. Jonsson asserted that “[d]efensiveness is a predictable response by white people to any discussion of racial injustice” and that white colonels are “largely blind to institutional racism, and we take offense to any suggestion that our system advantaged us at the expense of others.”

Meanwhile, Navy Rear Adm. Derek Trinque often denigrated non-leftists, particularly those questioning the government’s unscientific Covid response. On Aug. 17, 2021, for example, Trinque “endorsed” an Aug. 2, 2021, article from The New York Times encouraging insurance companies to “penaliz[e]” people who didn’t receive the Covid jab. He also criticized Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee’s executive order allowing optional masking at schools and supported the Pentagon’s vaccine mandate, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and the desecration of Confederate monuments and installations named after Confederate figures.

To read about Biden’s other “woke” military promotions, see hereherehere, and here.



Illegal Immigrant Told to Check in With ICE Sometime Between Now and... 2031


Joe Cunningham reporting for RedState 

While the Democrats continue to do very little of actual importance with regard to the border, and with the Biden administration still acting as though it's not a problem, it's often hard for people to understand not just the flood on the border but just how broken the entire system is from start to finish.

Case in point, Fox News' Bill Melugin is reporting that a Columbian woman who crossed into El Paso, Texas, illegally was told by authorities to check in with ICE sometime around the beginning of the next decade.

She was caught crossing illegally into Texas, released, and told to report to ICE in New York in eight years.

I am trying to behave and not swear so much, after all it is the Christmas season. But still, this kind of information is the reason the "F-word" exists. Because there are no other words that can so effectively express the emotions you feel when reading that kind of information. "Fiddlesticks" doesn't work. "What in tarnation?" just doesn't have the same punch.

But shouting out the four-letter word that rhymes with "truck" somehow just expresses the outrage with the right amount of passion.

Anyway, this is clearly a Biden administration problem. Our good friend Congressman Ted Lieu would like you to believe otherwise, that this is somehow something Republicans refused to deal with, but the numbers don't add up - as my colleague Nick Arama explained.

Illegal entry is at record heights, and it's all because of Biden, unlike Trump. Trump didn't make the border worse, as Biden did. Biden undid everything that Trump did to fix the problem, starting day one after he came in. So that's why it's on Biden. Not that Lieu would deal with that reality. 

But 300,000 is a disaster that has to be dealt with or it's going to crush us. There's no way the CBP can deal with that. 

Yeah, the math ain't mathing.

We really, really need adults in the White House. It's run by a bunch of far-left progressives who think that border policy is racism. I am starting to suspect, given everything we've seen, that the adults are not, in fact, back in charge.

The border is a major national security risk. Guns, drugs, and foreign nationals are all crossing into the U.S., leaving us at risk of so many major problems down the road that I am not sure the U.S. could ever fully recover. The fentanyl crisis alone, which is a direct impact of decades of bad border policy, should be enough for us to want to fix it immediately.

But we don't - and won't, it seems.

The world is on fire and the Biden administration is more focused on green energy and telling Israel how to conduct its war than it is focused on keeping Americans safe. This is unsustainable.



‘You Must Be 40’ To Be President, Whiffs California Lt. Gov. While Masquerading As Constitutional Expert



The Democrat lieutenant governor of California is calling on the state’s top election official to “explore every legal option” to remove former President Donald Trump from next year’s ballot — but her appeals to the Constitution don’t hold up.

“The constitution [sic] is clear,” Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis wrote Wednesday. “[Y]ou must be 40 years old and not be an insurrectionist.”

The minimum age requirement for the presidency outlined by the Constitution, however, is 35.

Kounalakis’ letter was written on the heels of a radical decision handed down by the Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday to ban the Republican front-runner from the 2024 ballot over the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. In a 4-3 decision, the court, which is made up of justices entirely appointed by Democrats, removed ballot access from the former president, citing a Civil War-era provision barring candidates who “engaged in insurrection” from elected office.

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the justices wrote.

Trump’s attorneys have pledged to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“We have full confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these unAmerican lawsuits,” said Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung.

Shortly after the Colorado Supreme Court handed down the ruling, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley ripped the decision on Fox News as “hands down the most anti-democratic opinion I’ve seen in my life.”

“To call this an insurrection, for the purposes of disqualification, would create a slippery slope for every state in the Union,” Turley said.

After a snap impeachment failed to convict the outgoing president in 2021, Democrats are still trying to use the riot to bar their top political opponent from a possible return to the White House next year. Democrats from California to Michigan have now called on their state election officials to legally nullify Trump’s third presidential run by keeping him off the ballot.

Trump, meanwhile, still faces 91 state and federal charges as Democrats simultaneously unleash a campaign strategy of aggressive lawfare to keep Republicans out of the White House. Although corrupt media scaremongers have said Trump’s second term will be a dictatorship, President Joe Biden has more in common with a strongman like Russian leader Vladimir Putin than the Republican front-runner. Trump’s top political opponent for 2024 isn’t his Republican rivals who trail the former president by more than 53 points in the polls. It’s the Department of Justice run by none other than Joe Biden, and other left-wing activists in black robes.



Half of All U.S. Buick Dealerships Take GM Buyout Instead of Spending Millions Retooling to Meet EV Needs


This is somewhat of a predictably tragic outcome all things considered. I remember a previous conversation on these pages when GM moved massive investment into China to build their mid-size SUV brand, Encore.

Continuing the U.S. decline of the brand, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that approximately half of all Buick dealership in the U.S. have opted to take a buyout from GM, as opposed to spending millions in retooling, restructuring and retraining their staff to accommodate the EV influx.

Most of the EV’s shoved onto the dealer lots sit idle without customers to purchase them.

Wall Street Journal – General Motors (GM) has bought out about half of its 2,000 Buick dealers nationwide, based on their decision to not sell electric vehicles, according to a company spokesman Wednesday.

Dealers who are taking the buyout would give up the Buick franchise and no longer sell the brand, he said. The dealer can continue to sell other GM models, such as Chevrolet or GMC, that often account for a higher percentage of sales.

The Wall Street Journal reported in late 2022 that the automaker planned to offer buyouts to its U.S. Buick dealer network. The move came after the Detroit automaker gave the dealers a choice: Invest at least $300,000 to sell and service electric vehicles, or exit the Buick franchise. The investments would cover EV chargers and worker training, among other initiatives. (read more)

The Joe Biden EPA mandates for Electric Vehicles are going to crush the U.S. auto industry and consumers.  On the upside, regular, well-maintained gasoline powered used vehicles will hold their value longer.  Overall new car prices are already ridiculous and the prices of the EV’s are substantially higher.

Along with higher entry prices, the insurance is higher, maintenance costs are higher and the replacement parts for EV’s are insanely high.  In some models the replacement batteries cost more than the vehicle is worth.  How the auto industry thinks these mandates are sustainable is beyond logic, then again maybe that’s the feature, not the flaw.

If the overall goal is to reduce the number of vehicles on the road and control the transportation choices of the American public, then the EV mandate policy is designed well.

It’s all madness, and only one commonsense businessman seems to understand the issue.


MSNBC Hosts Suddenly Concerned Over Safety of Supreme Court Justices


Ward Clark reporting for RedState 

Suddenly, amazingly, astoundingly, MSNBC host Chris Hayes is concerned for the safety and security of Supreme Court Justices. Not the U.S. Supreme Court, mind you, which was "packed" by President Trump with "illegitimate" justices, despite them all having been nominated and confirmed exactly in compliance with the Constitution. No, he's worried about Colorado Supreme Court justices, who earlier in the week decided to find a rationale in one of the most torturously argued cases in history to keep former President Trump off the Colorado primary ballot.

Now Chris Hayes is concerned. Newsbusters' Jorge Bonilla brings us the scoop.

Watch as former CNN chief legal analyst and notorious Zoom onanist Jeffrey Toobin shares these concerns, with brow that is furrowed, with host Chris Hayes towards the end of their segment on the Colorado ruling:

Hayes says:

The final thing I’ll say, and ask you Jeff, is- there's also that threat of violence towards the judges, the justices on the state supreme court and the SCOTUS justices. Like, they signed that majority opinion per curiam anonymously,honestly essentially. You can look up their names. But that's a real concern as well.

Oh, now it's a real concern? Where was MSNBC when Chuck Schumer was openly threatening Neil Gorsuch, among other members of the U.S. Supreme Court?

Jeffrey Toobin, who we are delighted and relieved to note at all times kept his hands where we could see them, replied:

Yeah, and this- there is violence hovering, you know, there was just an arrest in Arizona that didn't get much publicity recently about someone threatening to kill, you know, all sorts of federal officials. You know, violence hangs over this. January 6th was- was, you know, there is an aggressive prosecution that has taken place, but rightwing violence in this country is continuing, and the FBI director has spoken about how difficult it is to stop it, and it hasn’t gone away.

I would remind the notorious onanist, Mr. Toobin, about the Dobbs-leak protests, when protesters illegally picketed the homes of Supreme Court justices; the left didn't seem to have a lot to say about that. Someone who presumably objected to the leaked decision was even arrested for apparently plotting the assassination of as many as three Supreme Court justices.  The response from most of the legacy media:



Look, it's been a while since anyone with enough IQ points to pound sand took MSNBC seriously as a news outlet. Chris Hayes and Jeffrey Toobin, who is still trying desperately to be taken seriously by anyone but his urologist, didn't even necessarily have the worst take on the whole Colorado thing. However, at MSNBC, that bar is set really, really low.

At MSNBC, though, like much of the legacy media, intellectual honesty or even consistency is not on the plate. They do not operate from principle. With these people, it's all about The Side. If the Colorado Supreme Court justices had been appointed by Bill Owens, Colorado's last Republican Governor, if they had ruled precisely opposite of how it actually went down, and those justices were then overtly threatened, Hayes would be silent, and Toobin would be Toobin'.



Did Sen. Chris Coons Let the Cat Out of the Bag? 'Any Action' to Stop Trump Should Be 'Encouraged'?


The severity to which Democrats and the left suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome continues to amaze us. For Republicans and conservatives, however, watching Democrats every time they try to "get Trump" is like watching an endless loop of the Roadrunner and Wile E. Coyote. The Acme Dynamite Company foils them each time, and Donald Trump's poll numbers go up once again. As the 2024 presidential election gets closer, and more speculation arises about Joe Biden being physically and mentally able to run for a second term, Democrats appear to get more desperate. But did the recent Colorado Supreme Court ruling removing Trump's name from the ballot also make them a bit more sloppy? 


On Wednesday, following the ruling, Democrat Senator Chris Coons of Delaware appeared on CNN to discuss the decision by the Colorado high court. While Coons and every other Democrat celebrate the move to essentially disenfranchise millions of Colorado Trump supporters, it was something he said to host Kate Bolduan that should raise the eyebrows of every Republican, whether they support Donald Trump or not. Coons stated that “any action that makes it less likely” for Trump to be reelected should be "encouraged." Any action, Senator?

Coons appeared to perhaps buffer that statement and went on to say that those actions would also include voters who would not vote him back into office in the election,

“Whether it is a court that determines he’s unfit to hold office because he took up force against our Constitution or mobilized a mob against our Constitution, or because the electorate throws him out, I don’t think it really matters. If he’s unfit to hold office we should all be encouraged by any action that makes it less likely that he will return to the presidency.”

Sen. Coons may be talking about legal or electoral means to ensure Trump is not reelected, but the actions of his party don't seem to reflect that rational means are as far as they are willing to go. From the minute Trump came down the escalator at Trump Tower in 2015, Democrats have been frantically searching in vain for a way to make him go away. Literally, from the moment after Trump was sworn in, the effort to impeach him had begun. That was quickly followed by Russia collusion and the first impeachment case over a phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which Trump was alleged to have pressured Zelensky into investigating then-former Vice President Joe Biden. Then came January 6, 2021, and Trump's second impeachment alleging he incited an insurrection. Since then, there have been four indictments. Each time, his poll numbers go up. 


The great Rush Limbaugh, as he did about a lot of things, explained perfectly what it is that is dogging the left. In a 2020 interview with Trump, he pointed out that "They're (Democrats) able to take out any Republican they choose." Limbaugh finished his explanation,

"...They haven't stopped you. They can't believe it. They're throwing everything — and so they are doubling down on doing whatever they can to try to get rid of you just to prove that they can, and it's frustrating as heck that they haven't been able to." 

So, what are frustrated, desperate Democrats to do? The Colorado ruling may be an indicator of that. If Democrats realize that they cannot stop Trump, is it possible then that they will do the next best thing and stop average Americans, more specifically Trump supporters? Fox News Channel's Laura Ingraham took it a step further Wednesday night in an interview with former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Ingraham asked Gingrich if he thought Americans would be willing to "move on" if the U.S. Supreme Court does not reverse the ruling. Gingrich did not mince words, saying, "...I think the Democrats are dangerously close to causing the kind of confrontation that would be truly disastrous for the country." Gingrich also happened to mention the last time there was an attempt to keep a candidate off the ballot. That was in 1860, when ten states tried to keep Abraham Lincoln off the ballot. If memory serves, that didn't go well for America.

Colorado is not alone. There are attempts in six other states to keep Trump offthe ballot, with 13 other states where lawsuits have been filed. But if the Supreme Court takes up the Colorado ruling and strikes it down, it would likely mean the end of the other cases as well. If that happens, and Democrats and the left are forced to go back to the drawing board, how far does the bar move, and what other "actions" would be "encouraged?"