Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program is Accelerating Because of Joe Biden

As we approach the 2024 U.S. presidential election, 

the Middle East will become more unstable, 

and Iran will get closer to having a nuclear weapon.

by Fred Fleitz for American Greatness

According to a new International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report, Iran increased the rate of its production of near weapons-grade uranium (60% uranium-235) in late November 2023. This increase ended a slowdown of Iran’s 60% uranium enrichment that began in mid-2023 and increased the number of nuclear weapons it could theoretically make and the amount of time to construct them.

Iran’s recent ramp-up of uranium enrichment followed warnings last year that the number of nuclear weapons Iran could construct has become dangerously high.

A March 2023 assessment report by the Institute for Science and International Security indicated that Iran could enrich enough weapons-grade uranium (90% uranium-235) for one nuclear weapon in 12 days. In mid-November, the Institute assessed Iran was capable of making enough weapons-grade uranium “for six nuclear weapons in one month, eight in two months, ten in three months, eleven in four months, and twelve in five months.”

Iran enriching uranium beyond the 60% level is reportedly a red line for Israel and could trigger Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities.

Although it is not clear whether or when Iran will make the jump to weapons-grade enrichment, alarms were raised in mid-November that Iran has taken steps to prevent the IAEA from detecting just such a move when it barred the agency’s most experienced and expert inspectors from entering the country. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi called this “a serious blow” to his agency’s capability to conduct meaningful inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities.

This means Iran could start enriching uranium to weapons-grade at any time without being detected.

If Iran took this step, any weapons-grade uranium it enriched would be in the form of a gaseous uranium compound that would need to be processed into uranium metal to fuel a nuclear weapon. This would take about a year. Iran would probably conduct one or two underground nuclear tests before adding a nuclear weapon to its arsenal. Any one of these moves could trigger Israeli airstrikes.

An Enormous Biden National Security Failure

The most damning element of this story is that Iran did not begin enriching uranium to near-weapons grade until Joe Biden became president.

Biden entered office determined to restore the deeply flawed Iran nuclear deal (the JCPOA) negotiated by the Obama Administration, which President Trump withdrew from in 2018. Shortly after the administration initiated multilateral nuclear talks in 2021 to revive the JCPOA, Iran started enriching uranium to the 60% level, probably to gain leverage in the talks.

Instead of halting the nuclear talks because of this development, the U.S. and its European allies ignored it and continued to offer Iran concessions. Despite the U.S. offering Iran increasingly generous concessions, negotiations collapsed in June 2022. The concessions offered by the U.S. to Iran were so extravagant that three members of the Biden Administration’s negotiation team at the nuclear talks resigned in late January 2022.  Several attempts in the second half of 2022 by the U.S. and European states to negotiate an interim nuclear deal with Iran also failed.

This situation took a stunning turn for the worse in the spring of 2023 when the Biden Administration agreed to a secret deal with Iran that “froze” Iran’s uranium enrichment at 60%. By striking this agreement, the Biden Administration knowingly legitimized Iran’s uranium enrichment at a near weapons-grade level. This also means Iran’s recent increased 60% enrichment is consistent with its commitment to the Biden Administration.

Acceleration of Iran’s Nuclear Program Likely to Continue in Run-Up to 2024 U.S. Election

Driven by a global perception of President Biden’s weak leadership and incompetent foreign policy, provocations by Iran and its proxy groups have grown in recent months. These include the October 7 Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, a sharp increase in attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria by Iranian proxy groups, and attacks against Israel and Red Sea shipping by Yemen’s Houthi rebels, another Iranian proxy.

A growing belief that President Biden could lose the 2024 presidential election will probably cause Middle East security to deteriorate further this year as America’s enemies in the region attempt to exploit Biden’s weakness before he is replaced next January by a more decisive president with a more effective foreign policy.

Concerning Iran’s recent expanded production of near weapons-grade uranium, this probably represented Tehran exploiting American weakness under President Biden and was intended to challenge the United States as well as advance its nuclear weapons program. It was also likely an Iranian ploy to pressure the Biden Administration to resume nuclear talks and offer more concessions.

With Iranian leaders believing that the Biden Administration could end in early 2025, there likely will be more significant advances in Iran’s nuclear program this year to take advantage of the current administration’s weak foreign policy and to pursue a possible last chance to revive the JCPOA on terms favorable to Iran.

It is therefore crucial that Congress be on the lookout in 2024 for any desperate last-minute attempt by the Biden Administration to strike another dangerous nuclear deal with Iran and demand the immediate halt of any such effort.

Because of the above factors, as we approach the 2024 U.S. presidential election, the Middle East will become more unstable, and Iran will get closer to having a nuclear weapon. Although I believe this is unlikely, if Iran were to cross any Israeli “red lines” on its nuclear program, this could trigger Israeli airstrikes against Iran and result in a regional war.

This is another solemn reminder of why competent leadership by U.S. presidents is critical for global security and why U.S. presidential elections matter.

And we Know, On the Fringe, and more- January 13

 

For anyone who is in the cross path of a very, very freezing week, I feel ya. I'm getting it hard next week as well.

♦️𝐖³𝐏 𝐃𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝♦️

W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

posted by DarkGoldenMan

I’d like to take this opportunity to thank all of the community members who take the time to contribute. 

This feature will post every day at 6:30am Mountain Time. 

The FBI -- the Dog That Turned on Its Master

posted by John Green at American Thinker 

Feedback is a fundamental principle of control theory. All systems, regardless of whether they’re technical or social, require negative feedback to maintain predictability and stability. System actions which deviate from those desired must trigger a response which counteracts (rather than reinforces) the deviation. When an automobile begins to accelerate, the cruise control applies negative feedback by reducing the throttle to maintain control. Were it to do otherwise, the car’s behavior would be unpredictable or even catastrophic.

The same principle applies to people. Accountability for one’s actions maintains the predictability of human behavior. When one is punished for breaking the rules, the likelihood of future infractions is reduced. If a child is punished for anti-social behavior and rewarded for teamwork, a productive contributor to society is developed. If a child receives little or no feedback about his behavior, a person with no sense of right or wrong is created. If a child is rewarded for bad behavior, a monster destined to prey on society is created. The penalties that accompany laws are the negative feedback that prevents our society from doing a “Thelma and Louise” -- socially speaking.

In 1908, in response to rising organized crime, the federal government decided that additional accountability was warranted. It created a watchdog called the Bureau of Investigation (which later became the FBI). Given the sweeping police powers of the watchdog, its agents receive training about the limits of their authority, and are required to swear a sacred oath to those they serve that they will not abuse their authority.

We trusted our new watchdog to hold miscreants accountable for violation of federal laws. But we failed to hold the watchdog itself accountable. We never yanked the leash and said “bad boy” when the dog deviated from its oath. Subsequently the dog learned bad habits. After decades of biting people without consequences, we’re faced with a beast that has become a menace to society, rather than its protector. Our “watchdog” has become the threat which it was intended to police.

In his book, The Thin Blue Lie, Greg Dillon chronicles one such episode in which accountability failed. While working as a Supervisory Inspector for the Connecticut Chief State’s Attorney’s office, Dillon was assigned to a joint fugitive task force which included other state agencies and the FBI. In late 1994, he became aware that various FBI agents on the task force were falsifying affidavits for warrants (a felony), at the urging of the lead FBI Special Agent, Ralph DiFonzo Jr. Making matters even worse, the agents were attributing the false statements in their affidavits to other members of the task force.

After reporting the issue to his Connecticut leadership, Dillon was shunned by the FBI, and ostracized by his own office. Meanwhile, Director Freeh, known for his “bright line” ethical behavior edicts, issued a letter of commendation to the task force. The agent who had ordered, “If you don’t have it (probable cause), lie.” wasn’t disciplined. He was promoted. The dog bit a bystander (violated its oath), received a treat (positive feedback), and learned from it.

Years later, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe worked with his boss, James Comey, to set a perjury trap for Trump’s National Security Advisor, General Michael Flynn. It was part of the bureau’s “insurance policy” to undermine the Trump presidency. The prosecution of Flynn ruined him financially.

An Inspector General investigation found that McCabe had leaked information to the press (against bureau policy) and lied to federal investigators (a felony). The IG recommended criminal prosecution. Then Attorney General Jeff Sessions opted to merely terminate McCabe’s employment. However, when Merrick Garland became the attorney general, he cleared McCabe’s record, reinstated his pension, and awarded him half a million bucks for his trouble. The dog broke FBI policies, undermined an election, violated a patriot’s rights, and received a “good dog” from the AG. It was another learning moment for the pack -- to the public’s detriment.

In the runup to the 2020 election, the Special Agent in Charge of the Detroit Field office, Steven D’Antuono, oversaw what is now widely recognized as an entrapment scheme -- the Governor Whitmer kidnapping case. The FBI used paid assets to talk a bunch of drug and alcohol-addled halfwits into the kidnapping plot. It was a political dirty trick carried out to assert that President Trump’s rhetoric was responsible for a rise in domestic terrorism.

However, in court it was discovered that the FBI had as many assets involved in the “conspiracy” as there were alleged domestic terrorists. In fact, the FBI assets had planned every aspect of the operation, and actively recruited others to join the “conspiracy.” Under FBI guidance, the “conspirators” had even conducted a protest at the Michigan Capital, which was eerily similar to the events of January 6 -- almost as if it were a dress rehearsal.

As the case went to trial, D’Antuono was promoted to head the Washington Field Office -- just in time for January 6. It seems he was a very good dog to his leftist benefactors.

Now we’re witnessing firsthand what an out-of-control watchdog is capable of. Agents are violating our rights by colluding with social media to censor our freedom of speech, targeting Catholics for their religious observance, and investigating parents as domestic terrorists. They’re openly using police state intimidation tactics to conduct armed raids against the elderly (Roger Stone), nonviolent defendants (Mark Hauck), and even journalists (James O’Keefe).

There are so many instances of bad behavior that it’s impossible to cover all of them in the space of this article. A partial list includes Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Atlanta Olympics bombing, the Olympic gymnastics scandal, the Midyear review, Crossfire Hurricane, and on and on.

In 2023, Director Christopher Wray was called before Congress to account for his vicious pack of attack dogs prowling the streets with impunity. Wray simply

• Lied, as he did with his Seth Rich testimony;
• Obfuscated with “I don’t know” or “part of an ongoing investigation”; or
• Ducked questioning entirely by leaving for vacation.

His behavior was like the alpha dog, snarling at his owner, and daring him to take a swing with the rolled-up newspaper. It was a stark demonstration that our “watchdog” has learned that disobedience to its master is of no consequence.

In all the above cases, the punishment for those who swore an oath, was considerably less than it would have been for those they are sworn to serve. The system feedback has been either ineffectively weak, or destructively reinforcing of misconduct. The FBI has not accepted accountability, it has merely posed for the appearance of accountability. Like all criminals, corrupt FBI agents are doing a risk/benefit analysis. They’ve clearly found that the benefits (perks from their benefactors) outweigh the risks (an occasional slap on the wrist). The bureau’s out-of-control spiral, has proven that its accountability is woefully inadequate.

When a dog can’t be trusted among the vulnerable, there are only three options: train it, restrain it, or put it down. The one response that is patently incorrect is to reward it -- patting the dog on the head with a new headquarters, and consolidating its operations in Washington so that the pack may be trained by the Deep State.

Maybe Why Bill Gates Is Out There Buying Up Farmland: New report offers suggestions for reforming US immigration system

 McALLEN, Texas (Border Report) — A new report released Thursday by the Migration Policy Institute suggests wide-ranging reforms to the U.S. immigration system. It emphasizes addressing immigration issues not just at the Southwest border.

The report, “Shifting Realities at the U.S.-Mexico Border: Immigration Enforcement and Control in a Fast-Evolving Landscape,” traces factors that have stretched thin the U.S. border management system and offers recommendations on ways to create a more effective system. This includes:

• Establish multi-agency border processing centers where federal officials work alongside non-governmental organizations. This includes U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and Office of Resettlement officers processing asylum-seekers with certified NGOs and legal service providers.
• Create a federal mechanism to direct migrants to interior destinations with available services and capacity, like Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, which openly advocates for migrants to come to its city. This would prevent cities like New York and Denver from being overwhelmed with migrants seeking asylum.
• Invest in technology and personnel for federal agencies.
• Work with Mexico to strengthen enforcement and border cooperation efforts. This includes ensuring Mexico humanely houses migrants who are waiting to make asylum appointments on the CBP One app. And would have the United States help Mexico to improve its immigration systems so migrants will want to stay south of the border.
• Develop refugee processing and resettlement programs within the Western Hemisphere

“The volume and diversity of migrant arrivals have strained U.S. border enforcement beyond its capabilities, overwhelming an immigration and enforcement system not built for them,” analysts Ariel G. Ruiz Soto, Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh and Doris Meissner write.

During a visit to Eagle Pass, Texas, on Monday, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said newly created migrant processing facilities, called Safe Mobility Offices, have been set up to assist migrants in Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Ecuador.

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas speaks to reporters on Jan. 8, 2024, in Eagle Pass, Texas. (Sandra Sanchez/Border Report)

He also said the United States is implementing “programs to enable different nationalities to access relief in the United States without making the perilous journey in the hands of smugglers.”

The report credits the Biden administration with adjusting to what it calls “these new realities” and says the administration has “introduced an ambitious set of policies intended to improve border enforcement following the May 2023 end of pandemic-era Title 42 restrictions.

This includes the use of the CPB One app for asylum-seekers to schedule asylum interviews at ports of entry.

However, “the study’s findings demonstrate that border control cannot be achieved at the border alone. Given current and likely future migration patterns, the border control mission requires substantial resource investments not just in CBP but also in other agencies involved in migrant processing,” the report says.

“As irregular migration has ballooned throughout the Western Hemisphere, the need for shared responsibility and collaboration, defined not only by heightened migration controls and enforcement but also by access to lawful mobility pathways, is increasingly evident,” the report says, specifically noting Mexico and Panama.

Mayorkas on Monday said he spoke with Panama’s minister of security last week and stressed accomplishments made by a U.S. delegation that traveled to Mexico City last month. Mexican officials are slated to come to the United States later this month for continued talks.

https://www.woodtv.com/border-report-tour/new-report-offers-suggestions-for-reforming-us-immigration-system/

3 Big Covid Whoppers Fauci Confessed To Congress This Week

Fauci confirmed many of the worst fears of those in the medical community who spoke out during his reign of terror.

Dr Pierre Kory reporting for The Federalist

If Dr. Anthony Fauci thought retiring from his nearly-half-a-million dollar government position would end questions about his disastrous policymaking, he was sorely mistaken. This week, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases faced tough questions from the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, and his answers confirmed many of the worst fears of those in the medical community who spoke out during his reign of terror.

Although his 14-hour testimony was behind closed doors, the subcommittee provided an overview of the most salient points that were covered and promised to make a full transcript available soon. Here are the three most notable takeaways and how they can be addressed moving forward.

1. They Weren't Following ‘The Science’

First, Fauci admitted that Covid-19 policies were not grounded in science, confessing that the six feet of social distancing, “sort of just appeared.” Anyone who was ordered to stand an arbitrary distance apart on a jet bridge only to be packed into a plane face to jowl had reached this commonsense conclusion long ago. But it was a stunning reversal for the man who had become so closely associated with pandemic-era policies that we were assured were “following the science.” It was also reminiscent of Fauci’s last spring’s walk back on the efficacy of masks, years after denouncing those who opted not to wear masks of, “actually propagate the further spread of infection.”

Fauci also ignored data about the role re-purposed generic drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine could play treating Covid, while pushing expensive new treatments like Remdesivir, which the World Health Organization just concluded did little to help people hospitalized with Covid and could even do harm. Ditto the role of natural immunity or herd immunity. It was always the Fauci way or the highway, and that meant vaccines.

2. Vaccine Mandates Backfired

That brings us to point two. During his congressional testimony, Fauci finally conceded that Covid vaccine mandates could make people more broadly vaccine-hesitant. Using the levers of government to force citizens to take an untested vaccine rushed to market under the banner of “warp speed” was never a wise idea. Accusing dissenters of “spreading misinformation” and subjecting them to loss of livelihood and mass ridicule compounded the error.

Fauci was right about one thing: the obsession with Covid vaccines undermined trust in public health authorities, which is crucial to any functioning society.

3. Denies Obvious Learning Loss in Children

Lastly, Fauci still refuses to accept accountability for his mistakes. He said he’s still “not convinced” lockdowns hurt kids, despite children suffering an “unprecedented drop in performance” in math and reading scores. According to the federal government, reading test scores among nine-year-olds fell to their lowest point in 30 years, while math scores fell for the first time ever. No one expects perfection from their leaders, but the stubborn refusal to look in the mirror and take responsibility is more than just arrogant — it’s harmful for the ability to fix the problem.

Moreover, reports from the subcommittee did not mention Fauci saying anything about Covid vaccine injuries, or the fact that the government’s compensation program has been a debacle.

At the end of his 40-year reign atop the bio-medical industrial complex, health care spending in the United States is far higher than other high-income countries, yet our health status as a nation is one of the worst among advanced health economies. Our life expectancy has plummeted to 76.4 years, a two-decade low. We have the highest death rates for avoidable or treatable conditions. Since 2021, excess mortality amongst U.S. citizens, especially amongst the youngest and healthiest sectors, suddenly rose to unprecedented levels not seen outside of wartime. Nowhere do we see evidence of our public health agencies investigating which of the ill-conceived Covid policies is driving this catastrophe.

Even without the pandemic, it’s clear that a change is needed. If there is a silver lining, Covid thrust many intrusive and illogical policies to the forefront. Almost everyone remembers sitting in their homes watching faceless government officials – many who had never been elected or appeared on a ballot – issue sweeping mandates with the full force of government.

Doctors who dared dissent faced numerous threatening and delicensing actions by medical boards who exercised their autonomy and freedom in treatment decisions. Our so-called “sin” was spreading “misinformation” that is now looking better by the day.

These actions have left physicians adhering to dictated treatment protocols out of fear rather than using time-honored, individualized approaches that would produce the best outcome for their patients.

Congress deserves credit for holding Dr. Fauci to account. Hopefully, this is the first in a series of hearings. He was right: public health should be guided by science, and not the interests of the pharmaceutical industry.  With time, we are learning that he was the one most guilty of adhering to the latter while ignoring the former, and this cannot happen again without more severe consequences.

Hillary Clinton, Least Likeable Public Figure, Manages to Make Herself Less Likeable

Ward Clark reporting for RedState 

If one were to take a survey of the American electorate and ask them to rate political figures on a scale of likeability, it's anyone's guess who may come in as most likable. But as difficult as it may be to rate the most likable pols, the least likable may be even harder; I mean, the candidates are all up against some pretty stiff competition. But at the top spot as the least likable American political figure, well, that's easy. We're talking, after all, about a person who rode someone else's coattails into public prominence, enriched herself through corrupt real-estate and investing schemes, carpetbagged herself into a Senate seat, and served as Barack Obama's Secretary of State, as President Obama clearly adhered to the maxim, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies, closer." This person combines all the charm and warmth of the Spanish Inquisition with a sense of entitlement the size of Jupiter's Great Red Spot, and once ran an entire presidential campaign on the primary point of "It's my turn, peasants!"

For those of you who haven't figured it out yet, I am writing of Her Imperial Majesty Hillary I, First of That Name, Dowager Empress of Chappaqua. Now we see that Her Imperial Majesty has taken unto herself the task of molding impressionable young minds at Columbia University, teaching a class on "decision-making," (yes, really), and has, amazingly, managed to make herself even less likable than she already was.

Hillary Clinton's class on "decision-making" was blasted by a Columbia University student for lacking insights as she said that the former secretary of state was "basically reading passages from her book" and morphed more into a politician as the semester continued. 

"I would have really, really hoped that she would bring in some more unique insights… rather than her almost basically reciting passages from her book word for word during lecture," current Columbia student Laalitya Acharya, said on TikTok in December. 

This student showed some astonishing audacity, questioning the related wisdom of Her Imperial Majesty! Surely, this young, impressionable person didn't expect Mrs. Clinton to you know, engage with the students on any personal level. And it got worse:

The student said it felt like Clinton became less relatable as the semester continued. 

"Usually whenever you start to… get to know [politicians] more on a personal basis, you start to like them a little bit more because they become more humanized. Over the course of the semester, though, I feel like Hillary Clinton became more of a politician than she was at the end."

Seriously, though — this shouldn't have come as any surprise to anyone who has followed Her Imperial Majesty's career (if you wish to call it that) since she was First Lady of Arkansas. While Mrs. Clinton has made some political miscalculations that registered on the Richter scale — her "basket of deplorables" comment not least among them — she has always had her eye on herself, first and foremost. Everything she has done since marrying Bill Clinton has been a political calculation since, without Bill, she would probably still be the Third Assistant Warden at the Park Ridge, Illinois, dog pound. Honestly, her continued marriage to this notorious member of the Jeff Epstein Society for Wayward Youths is a political calculation as well, as old Bill does have one trait that she lacks: charisma. It's a slimy kind of charisma, like that of a cheap used-car salesman wearing a jacket and tie from the Salvation Army, but he has it.

Columbia likely jumped at the chance to have Her Imperial Majesty on their staff, and it's pretty damned likely they offered her a fat salary and benefits package for the privilege of having her name on their letterhead. But, as Columbia is learning to their sorrow, there are a few things you can count on when dealing with the Dowager-Empress of Chappaqua: If you give her a chance to aggrandize herself, she will; if you give her a chance to profit through corruption, she will take it; and if you think you don't like her now, just wait until you get to know her a little better, then you'll really despise her.

Want to know what's really horrifying? People are urging her to run for President again. And despite all evidence to the contrary, she might think she has a shot at it, should President-ish Joe Biden — who manages to be one of the few people with lower personal approval ratings than Her Imperial Majesty — be somehow convinced to step aside. 

Holy 2016 reruns, Batman!

WATCH: Jill Biden Explain All the Things SHE Had to Do to Right the Country

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

If you thought that Joe Biden is a prolific pusher of malarkey, it seems that his wife, Jill, wants to challenge him for the crown. She would have to go a ways, but she's making a big effort with a comment that she made to the audience on the "Morning Joe" show. 

We already reported on her interview with Mika Brezinski which was just a horrible effort to sell Joe Biden for his re-election. 

But that isn't going over very well. It just makes it more apparent how desperate Biden's situation is in terms of the polls when she has to make such an effort. 

But in this comment, she spoke about how she had to "put everything aside" that she had planned to do because of the pandemic when they came in, and she listed everything that she claimed she had to do to right the country. (Wait, was she elected?) But also check this list, this is definitely full-on malarkey. 

"But then the pandemic was happening. And so I had to get to work and travel around the country, get shots in people's arms, get schools open, give people confidence that the vaccines were going to work. Um, we had to get people back to work. So, it was a ho-- I had to put everything aside that I had planned to do. And think of, if you can think back to three years ago, I mean, think what we were dealing with, think of the mental health issues, that still continue."

Maybe she thinks she is in charge, since she always has to lead Joe around. It's funny that she wants to make everything about herself. But is she kidding? SHE was getting shots in people's arms? She, "Dr. Jill," was doing it? Is she kidding with that? Then "get schools open," that's another piece of nonsense. The Democrats were aligned with the the teachers' unions in delaying as long as possible getting schools reopened. It's on their heads that kids were hurt, lost learning time, and maybe suffered a lot of mental health effects. 

Yes, let's recall how her husband threw people out of their jobs with his mandates, including members of the military who had served for years, and encouraged masks on little children that hurt their development. Does she want to take credit for that as well? Does she know how much that hurt people? 

We are so privileged we had Jill here to guide us to tell us what to do. That's the imaginary reality they want to try to sell us, a perverse revision of history in which they are our saviors. But it has no relation to the truth. But the Bidens seem to not care about that, as long as they can hold onto power. 

Biden's Latest Remarks on Economy Show He Has No Idea What He Is Talking About

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

Joe Biden has horrible approval ratings when it comes to the economy. 

That's put the Biden team in a quandary as to what to do when the media asks them about this fact. They've claimed it's just bad messaging--that Americans just don't understand what's going on. 

That of course is both presumptuous and insulting, acting like Americans are stupid and don't understand when they are paying more for everything. 

Biden was in Allentown, Pennsylvania, on Friday. I wrote about some of his remarks about Iran and the Houthis, as well as his scary confusion and creeping on a blonde girl. 

But after he visited a few stores, he went and answered questions from reporters at a fire station. 

One was about the economy, including what he was going to do to change people's minds. So this time Biden decided that he was just going to deny reality and indulged in a little fantasy. 

Biden claimed Americans were "feeling much better about the economy." He added, "What we haven't done is letting them know exactly who got it changed." Got it changed to what? Made it worse? 

Biden claimed consumer confidence was up, "Everyone's doing better. They believe it. They know it." 

That contradicts all reality. It contradicts the polling they just asked him about. 

Here's a recent CBS News poll: 

When your alleged leader won't even acknowledge the validity of your concerns, it's even worse than not solving the problem. 

Remember, Joe Biden wants us to believe he's done great things for the economy. What would that be? We have all kinds of crises now under him--between the troubles in the Middle East, new wars, and Bidenflation. He has spoken about scraping junk fees. As though that would change inflation or have any substantive effect on anything. But then, after what he said was crazy, he brought out the creepy whisper too. 

He claimed it costs $30 to check the balance on Americans' bank accounts, "Is that fair, is that fair?'"

Who charges $30 to check your account? And who calls the bank to check their account? People check on their phones or online. But it costs nothing either way. I don't even know what he thinks he's talking about here. Maybe this happens when you transfer/take out money fees from someplace that isn't your bank. What people want to hear is when their grocery bills will start going down; he has no idea about that, hence why he's talking about junk fees. 

Then he rambled on. 

You're going to go home for Easter, or you're going to go home for Christmas, you're going to go home for the holidays, with your kid, and you find out to to get your kid sitting next to you is going to cost you another $200. These are junk fees.

What junk fee is that? There's a $200 junk fee to have a kid? He seems to have left out whatever "fee" it was he was talking about. 

This is how bad he is already, and it's only going to get worse.