Only People As Senile As Joe Biden Is Can’t See How Senile Joe Biden Is

posted by Derek Hunter at Townhall 

You’d have to be as senile as Joe Biden is not to realize just how senile Joe Biden is. The man can’t remember which world leaders are alive and which are dead. His staff could put JFK on his calendar, and he’d get excited and dressed up. When the report came out this week calling him an “elderly man with a poor memory,” there was shock on the left, then about 20 minutes of honest analysis about the implications of that. Then it shifted. The outrage moved to the fact that anyone would dare report such a thing and that the Attorney General would allow it to be written in an official report. What no one did was deny it. 

A few commentators tried to downplay it, but no one in the media insisted the President was even as sharp as a butter knife. They couldn’t; we have eyes. (Apologies to blind people, but how blind could you be if you’re reading this?) 

The man is not well; if he had any family members who loved him more than they love their proximity to power and the attention and opportunities that afford them, they wouldn’t put him through this. But Joe has been a short-tempered, entitled jackass his entire life. People like to surround themselves with similar people, if only because decent people avoid them like the plague. And when it comes to family, the apple doesn’t rot far from the tree. 

Jill, Hunter, his brother James, and all the random Bidens with LLCs in their names who, since they do literally nothing to earn the money that randomly shows up in their accounts from overseas, have to at least be in on the grift by omission. If any of them cared, wouldn’t they stop this humiliation? I can think of a couple of people I really disliked in high school who I wouldn’t mind seeing shuffling, confused off a stage, or looking confused as to whether or not they simply passed gas or some post-digested food while being asked a basic question. Still, I don’t let those thoughts go very far because, even with them, I’d feel too bad to enjoy it. I’d like to help. I wouldn’t, but I’d at least consider it for a few minutes.

Joe has no one who dislikes him only slightly, who feels bad enough for him to put that aside and have “the talk” he needs to have, probably a number of times.

Instead, he must get a steady stream of reassurance. That it works is another sign of just how far gone he is. 

By the way, have you noticed how no MSNBC host has called for the release of the video of his discussion with the special prosecutor? Just like the release of Biden’s bank records would clear up so much about where his money came from or whether or not he’d actually “loaned” his son and brother a bunch of money they curiously “repaid” with about 10 percent (for the big guy) of what they received from foreign governments, the release of this video, or even just the audio or transcript, would demonstrate the mental capacity of Joe Biden as it exists today. 

That’s what terrifies Democrats.

Rather than even risk the naked truth being shown, they adopted the Clinton defense. 

So much of what the Democrats do in the face of corruption is what they learned from Bill and Hillary. With Bill, it was denied for as long as possible; then, once they broke out the black light and saw he’d definitely been there, they declared it to be an old story and insisted everyone had already moved on. With Hillary, it was a lie for as long as possible, then when the truth comes out, act indignantly about someone telling the truth because that’s not what they’re supposed to do.

James Comey laid out one hell of a damning case against Hillary’s abuse and mishandling of classified material, then announced he’d decided she will be allowed to get away with it. The outrage wasn’t over Clinton’s lies or illegal, reckless actions, it was over how Comey wasn’t supposed to point out all of her corrupt actions, just say she’d done nothing wrong and walk away. 

Comey became the story, not the lawbreaking. He’s spent every day since trying to suck up to the left over it.

The left tried to make Special Counsel Robert Hur the issue. Democrats were mad that he actually laid out the case he uncovered about how a US Senator managed to remove classified material from skiff, which is highly illegal and would send everyone reading this (even the blind people) to prison for a long time, and how a Vice President took classified material home even though he had zero authority to do it. And he never returned any of it, just let it flop around his various offices and garage, all of which were easily accessible to his junkie son who just so happened to be “doing business” in the countries those US intelligence documents were about. 

It's just the damnedest coincidence, isn’t it?

Democrats would much rather make a stupid argument about “How dare he?” then discuss why the White House has to have Biden enter and exit Air Force One from the kiddie door rather than add a senior assist chairlift on the adult stairs. 

They know Joe isn’t up to the job, they’re just terrified it will become so obvious that even the people who don’t pay attention to the news will see it. That’s it; that's what they’re scrambling to hide. That is what Hur’s report showed. And that’s why he will be the target of left-wing vitriol from now through November. 

Robert Mueller, or more accurately the people who propped him up (he might make Biden look spry and alive by comparison), did to Donald Trump exactly what Robert Hur did to Joe Biden – lay out what their investigation found and explained why they didn’t pursue criminal charges. They were cool with it when Mueller’s team did it, even praising him, but with Hur, it’s somehow an outrage. Of course, the only difference between Biden and Trump is Trump didn’t commit any crimes; the Russia hoax was a lie. Biden actually did steal classified material and disseminate it.

Whatever, they don’t care. The only thing that matters to the left is the party to which someone belongs; everything else is foreplay. Unfortunately, in the end, we’re all the ones who are getting screwed. And Joe Biden is blissfully unaware of any of it.

And we Know, On the Fringe, and more- February 11

 

The Coming 2024 Leftist Election Grift

Voter rolls filled with unqualified voters—for instance, voters without a valid address or with an insufficient or incorrect address—are ready-made for fraud.

by Daniel Street for American Greatness

The 2024 U.S. presidential election will likely pit former President Donald J. Trump against current President Joseph Biden in an epic rematch of the 2020 election.  As most Americans know, in 2020, the Democrats and their allies on the far left reached deep into their bag of dirty tricks to put Biden in the White House.  They will undoubtedly pull out all of the stops yet again in 2024.  This time, however, far more people are watching and are aware of the grifts being run in our elections by the left.  With so many election integrity groups and concerned citizens watching this time around, what will the Democrats do to tilt the results in their favor?  They have quite a few arrows in their quiver, but virtually every trick relies on one thing: dirty voter rolls.

Voter rolls filled with unqualified voters—for instance, voters without a valid address or with an insufficient or incorrect address—are ready-made for fraud.  A mailed ballot may go out to that person, but if the address is wrong or incorrect, the ballot will not reach the voter.  These “floating ballots” are often gathered and cast as votes illegitimately.  These practices, along with many others, are widely practiced around the country.

Election integrity groups all over America are fighting to clean voter rolls, state-by-state and town-by-town.  Progress has been made.  For instance, election integrity groups worked hard to clean up Wisconsin’s voter rolls after the 2020 election.  Using fractal technology to tie voter rolls to addresses in state property tax databases, phantom voters are being removed from voter rolls throughout the country, making mail in ballot shenanigans more difficult.  In Michigan, an election integrity group puts qualified voter file data at your fingertips, allowing ineligible voter registrations to be readily identified.  These are just a smattering of the efforts going on across the country to clean up voter rolls, but hopefully the point is made: A lot of people are doing good work to try to clean up the voter rolls all over the country.

What is the problem, then?  How will the Democrats and far-left non-governmental organizations (NGOs) tip the scales back in their favor?  Part of the answer is the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA). This Act is commonly known as the Motor Voter Law, because it mandates states to allow people to register to vote when obtaining a driver’s license.  While this law actually requires states to remove the names of ineligible voters and to maintain “accurate” lists of registered voters and is used by election integrity groups to challenge inaccurate voter rolls, other provisions are problematic.

The NVRA provision presenting the problem in this context is  52 U.S.C. §20507(c)(2)(A).  This provision creates what is known as the “quiet period” in the 90 days leading up to a federal election and prohibits states from “systematically” removing “names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters” during that 90-day window.  As the court observed in Arcia v. Fla. Sec’y of State, 772 F. 3d 1335 (11th Cir. 2014), the NRVA allows three forms of removals in the 90 days before an election: (1) removals at the request of the registrant; (2) removals for criminal conviction or mental incapacity; and (3) removals upon the death of the registrant.  In that case, the court prohibited the Florida secretary of state from systematically removing illegally registered people who were not American citizens in the 90-day “quiet period.”

How will the left seek to take advantage of this 90-day “quiet period” where voters may not be systematically removed from the rolls?  What happened in Muskegon County, Michigan, in 2020 is illustrative. In October 2020, thousands of voter registration applications were filed in Muskegon County, Michigan.  The city clerk was immediately suspicious, as many of the applications were in the same handwriting and contained incomplete or invalid addresses.  The city clerk reported the matter to local police.  An investigation confirmed many of the registrations were fraudulent and that the company gathering and submitting the registrations worked with Democratic political organizations, including working with the Biden campaign in multiple States in 2020.

The police interview with the contractor’s “compliance officer” was obtained by an independent researcher and released in November 2023.  In it, the employee outlines the problems with “false registrations” that were happening “everywhere,” not just in Muskegon.  Listen to this person’s interview for more on the type of organization this is and how it operates.

Under a provision of the Federal Voting Rights Act, 52 U.S.C. §10307(c), a person who knowingly or willfully gives false information as to his “name, address, or period of residence” to register to vote or “who conspires with another individual” for the purpose of encouraging false registration may be imprisoned for 5 years.  Despite this, no one was prosecuted for the thousands of false voter registrations submitted in Muskegon, Michigan.  In fact, instead of expanding the investigation to other jurisdictions in Michigan as well as into other states, the investigation was shut down, according to news reports.  That does not inspire much confidence in the people in charge of maintaining the integrity of our elections, does it?

In the 90-day “quiet period” established by the NVRA, local election officials are effectively the only screening system in place to block unlawful voter registrations.  While challenging an individual registration remains possible in the 90-day “quiet period,” challenging thousands of registrations submitted on a particular day or series of days will undoubtedly be a prohibited “systematic” challenge.  Do you think these officials in many of the Democrat bastions in big cities would refuse to accept these bogus registrations?  Do you think what happened in Muskegon, Michigan, was an aberration? In jurisdiction after jurisdiction and city after city, piles of fraudulent registration applications will probably be readily accepted.  After all, why not?

The bottom line is that the entire Democrat and far-left get-out-the-vote apparatus will be in overdrive in the 90 days before the 2024 presidential election, submitting as many voter registrations as possible (valid or not) in order to harvest as many ballots as conceivably possible.  This will be one of the primary battlegrounds that will determine the outcome of the 2024 election.  Is the RNC ready for it?  If “what’s past is prologue,” the answer is probably not. Election integrity groups are doing what they can, but they will need your help.  If Americans hope to maintain legitimate elections, 2024 is the time for “all hands on deck.”

No Matter What Trump Says, Boycott Bud Light

posted by B.L. Hahn at The Federalist 

On Tuesday, former President Donald Trump used his social media platform Truth Social to call for the end of the boycott of Anheuser-Busch and Bud Light. There is speculation about why Trump did this, including the fact that a lobbyist for Anheuser-Bush is reportedly holding a fundraiser for him next month. In his post, the president cited a variety of reasons for ending the boycott, but none of them make sense.

He noted that Anheuser-Busch employs many people, including some veterans, but this is hardly unique. Any company of this size will invariably employ veterans and make donations to respectable charitable organizations. He also claimed Anheuser-Busch is not a woke company, even though they exploited a mentally ill transgender activist and celebrated his affinity for women’s clothing with no respect whatsoever for basic decency, the truth, or their customer’s values. Anheuser-Busch never publicly acknowledged what it did wrong. If that’s not a woke company, please tell me what is.

Trump pointed out that there are more egregious examples of corporate wokeness. He’s right, but the fact that there are companies worse than Anheuser-Busch does not negate their sins. If such thinking were taken to its logical conclusion, only one boycott could ever exist, and it would target the most woke company in America while every other woke company got a pass simply because they’re not the absolute worst. This would be a misguided approach, to say the least.

Abandoning the Bud Light boycott would be a catastrophic error in the culture war. Whenever boycotts are announced, I’m always skeptical of their chances for success, mostly because there is no reliable pattern as to whether corporate boycotts triumph or fail. But the Bud Light boycott has something going for it that most other boycotts do not: It involves a product conservatives can easily live without. In my estimation, the success of any given boycott can be accurately predicted by how much effort is required to maintain it. With Bud Light, the bar is low — this should be a layup for conservatives.

I’m no beer connoisseur, but Bud Light is not exactly a top-shelf brew, and, more importantly, the market is filled with countless other nearly identical beers. If this boycott fails, it is safe to assume most future corporate boycotts will eventually fail. We must pick our battles. It’s difficult to boycott companies that provide services or products necessary to live and function in modern society (e.g., banks and credit card companies). Because of how ubiquitous leftism has become, the only way to boycott every leftist company would be to live primitively and completely off the grid in the middle of the wilderness.

The Bud Light boycott is a litmus test. If conservatives cannot maintain a boycott that requires virtually no effort on their behalf, then the rot of corporate leftism will continue to spread. What conservatives do next will send a message to corporations and politicians. Make no mistake — they’re watching closely. Whether conservatives continue this boycott will be determined by our will and our commitment to the truth.

If Anheuser-Busch wants this boycott to end, the solution is rather simple: Issue a public statement acknowledging that men cannot become women. The fact that any company would hesitate to do this in the first place proves that corporate leftism threatens even the most basic truths. This is not the time to surrender — and Trump needs to understand that more than anyone.

The Obama 'Nudge Unit' Rides Again

posted by Robert L. Kinney III at American Thinker 

One of the things the Obama-Biden Administration is known for was its use of psychological tricks to get Americans to do what government officials wanted Americans to do. Some describe this method as a government “nudge” while others describe it as manipulation or coercion.

Politico described it as the government “using psychology on citizens” as a way for policymakers to change people’s behavior:

For the past year, the Obama administration has been running an experiment: Is it possible to make policy more effective by using psychology on citizens? The nickname is “nudging” -- the idea that policymakers can change people’s behavior just by presenting choices or information differently. […]

Nudging has gained a lot of high-profile advocates, including behavioral-law guru Cass Sunstein and former budget czar Peter Orszag. Not everyone likes the idea --“the behaviorists are saying that you, consumer, are stupid,” said Bill Shughart, a professor of public choice at Utah State University -- but President Obama was intrigued enough that he actually hired Sunstein, a law professor at Harvard who co-wrote the best-known book about the topic, “Nudge.”

The president officially adopted the idea last year when he launched the White House’s Social and Behavioral Science Team (SBST), a cross-agency effort to bring behavioral science research into the policymaking process. Now the team has published its first annual report on this experiment.

“Nudge” has been defined in this way:

A nudge […] is any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people’s behavior in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives. To count as a mere nudge, the intervention must be easy and cheap to avoid. Nudges are not mandates. Putting fruit at eye level counts as a nudge. Banning junk food does not.

Emphasis should be on changing people’s behavior “in a predictable way.” One of the major government promoters of nudging, Cass Sunstein (a President Biden National Security official), has unconvincingly suggested that nudging is not manipulative, coercive, secretive, or trickery.

It is reasonable to conclude that the scholars’ idea of “nudge” is likely manipulation, coercion, and/or trickery, at minimum, most of the time.

The term is based on the physical nudge, in which one person physically or forcefully pushes another in the direction desired by the nudger. The nudgee is able to sense both the nudger and the direction in which the nudger desires the nudgee to go.

In other words, it seems that physical nudges never occur without the nudgee’s knowledge of being nudged.

It seems that necessary conditions, then, for psychological nudges would include informing the nudgee that they are being nudged, by whom they are being nudged, the nudgee’s predictable response/behavior, the nudger’s desired response/behavior, and other relevant information.

Now, how many times did the government or others say something like, “President Obama and all of us in the White House’s Social and Behavioral Science Team are nudging you here to make this behavioral change which we used psychology to determine would be your predicted behavior. This is a nudge; you are still free to repel our nudge, though, and choose what you want.”

Or, how many Americans even knew that the Obama-Biden Administration had a Nudge Unit which used “psychology on its citizens” to get them to act in a predictable way? Probably not many. (Some might have known of former President Obama’s support for nudging but might not have known about the actual Nudge Unit labeled as the White House’s Social and Behavioral Science Team.)

The point is that government nudgers and other psychological nudgers most often act covertly and secretly, while a physical nudge and the desired response of the nudger does not occur secretly.

Thus, government nudges are likely manipulation, coercion, and/or trickery.

The Obama-Biden Administration started a “Nudge Unit” to “use psychology on citizens” in America and get Americans to act in a predictable way. The Nudge Unit was in the Office of Science and Technology Policy (a potentially significant fact in and of itself). The Trump Administration then eliminated the Nudge Unit. Then the Biden-Harris Administration re-commissioned the U.S. government’s Nudge Unit:

The Biden-Harris Administration formally rechartered the Social and Behavioral Sciences Subcommittee (SBS) of the Committee on Science of the National Science and Technology Council in April 2022. The SBS coordinates policy action to address pressing social issues and Biden-Harris Administration priorities using the tools and insights of the social and behavioral sciences.

The Biden-Harris Social and Behavioral Sciences Subcommittee functions to “advance the Biden-Harris Administration’s Agenda”:

The social and behavioral sciences offer unique tools for describing, understanding, and addressing societal challenges, and assessing and evaluating initiatives, programs, and policies. As described in its Charter, the SBS leverages these tools to advance the Biden-Harris Administration’s agenda, to carry out short-term, high-priority tasks, and to lay the groundwork for longer-term coordination of agency efforts related to the social and behavioral sciences.

Emphasis should be on both the use of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Subcommittee, or “Nudge Unit,” to “advance the Biden-Harris Administration’s agenda” and “lay the groundwork for longer-term coordination of agency efforts related to the social and behavioral sciences.”

The question then, should not be “is the Biden Administration using psychology on Americans?” but instead “how is the Biden Administration using psychology on Americans to advance the Biden-Harris agenda or a swiftly chosen replacement candidate?”

Regardless of opinions on the Super Bowl and celebrities, Americans should at least be aware of the government’s Nudge Unit which might be using psychology to nudge Americans and advance the Democrat agenda.

Dem Insiders Have Delusional Answer to Biden's Mental Woes: More Makeup and Better Lighting

Bob Hoge reporting for RedState 

After the Hur classified docs report dropped February 5, Bidenworld went into full panic mode because—although the special prosecutor unbelievably declined to file charges despite massive evidence that the president broke laws in retaining highly sensitive material in his garage, his home, and the Biden Penn Center—they nevertheless painted a devastating picture of Biden’s declining mental health and swiss cheese memory.

But some Dems think they have the (ludicrous) answer: coat Biden in more makeup and improve his lighting so he doesn’t look like he has one foot in the grave.

Democratic operatives and consultants have chipped in with advice: Spend a whole lot more time working on his makeup and lighting, they tell Biden aides, or finally accept that the arthritis explanations aren’t working and start having him do more events where he starts out seated instead of being photographed shuffling to a podium.

Other Democrats are blunter, reacting with rage when talking about the president still going on bike rides after his 2022 tumble on camera (which he got right up from) or going shirtless on the beach last summer. At this existential moment for American democracy, they say, a faltering president is too often too close to a costly embarrassing moment.

Notice how the always Biden apologist CNN is quick to point out that Biden "got right up" after his embarrassing fall. Yes, but he virtually face-planted just trying to bring his bike to a stop. Not a good look.

He also wiped out at an Air Force commencement in June of 2023 and has fallen several times trying to climb the steps of Air Force One. 

There's an old saying, "Put lipstick on a pig; it’s still a pig." Now, don't get me wrong, I am not calling the president a swine, although some of his actions have been pretty piggish. But the point is there's not enough makeup in the world to hide his obvious inability to be the leader of the free world. 

Even Democrats are now admitting it:

“The cake is already baked,” a despondent former Biden White House aide told The Post. “Most Democrats feel that way about the president already. They think he’s effective and a good person, but nobody really wants him to run. ..and Democrats don’t have the guts to try and remove him from the ticket.”

Longtime Democratic consultant James Carville said the issue of Biden’s mental condition had so harmed his chances in November that a criminal conviction of Donald Trump, his likely opponent, is the president’s only hope.

“We’re officially in Hail Mary mode here,” Carville told The Hill Saturday.

We've reached a sad point in our country when the answer to a failed presidency is more L'Oreal and maybe some Vaseline on the camera lens.

It's not going to work, folks. People see what's happening here, and it's not pretty, and anyone who's being honest will admit that it cannot continue.

Are Democrats Taking a Biden Replacement More Seriously Now?

Sarah Arnold reporting for Townhall 

After President Joe Biden’s disastrous press conference on Thursday, speculation grows that he will be replaced in the presidential election after he made it more than obvious he has no brain cells left. 

The “elderly, irritable man” who stood on that podium addressing the nation was not the type of leader this country can rely on— and Democrats are panicking. With less than nine months before the 2024 election, the party may be exploring other options. 

According to a Democratic operative on Friday, it is “realistic” that Vice President Kamala Harris could replace Biden. However, with approval ratings worse than the president, Democrats know they won’t keep the keys to the White House with her on the ballot.

A December Monmouth University poll found that Harris has just a 35 percent approval rating, with nearly 60 percent of likely voters disapproving of her vice presidency. 

Strategist Brad Bannon said that pressure from his party to step down Biden would be more adamant if former President Trump weren’t running. (Via the New York Post) 

“I think many Democrats who are concerned about the president’s political fortunes don’t like to talk about them because they have a personal loyalty towards Joe Biden,” Bannon said. “No one wants to undermine the president’s ability to beat Donald Trump.”

The political disaster has Democrats hoping to shift the election in Biden’s favor, suggesting additional political persecution of Trump to make the senile president look better on the ballot. 

Democrat James Carville, known for his central role in former President Clinton’s campaign, wrote in his column that the Left is no longer looking to shy away from Biden’s diminishing cognitive health but instead “looking to interventions from the Supreme Court, or a criminal conviction for Trump, in the hope that such developments would shift the election in Biden’s favor.” (Via The Hill) 

A FiveThirtyEight poll found that Biden’s approval rating is a net negative 17 points after his political disaster. 

Even before Thursday night’s embarrassing showdown, Biden polls were well underwater. 

An NBC News poll found that 76 percent of voters — with 54 percent of Democrats— had concerns about Biden, citing his physical and mental health. 

Other strategists suggested the Democrat Party would resort to focusing on controversial issues such as abortion and additional student loan forgiveness measures. 

“Real Time" host Bill Maher suggested Democrats will dump Biden at the Democratic National Convention. 

“You can switch him out at the convention… If a guy says, 'I can't run,' then you have to do it. Then it has to be somebody else. Then, it's an open convention. We've had open conventions many times… They make it up as they go along anyway. It's politics," Maher said. 

Bombshell Filing Accuses Fani Willis of Committing Perjury

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

When the news came that Fulton County DA Fani Willis admitted the affair with the man she appointed to be a special prosecutor in the case against former President Donald Trump -- but said the affair started after she had hired him -- I thought, oh, that's a bad idea, because if it started before that, there's going to be evidence of that, it's going to come out, and she and the case are going to be in even more trouble. 

Now comes a bombshell filing in the case from Michael Roman, a former Trump staffer and one of the defendants in the matter, who says he has evidence that disproves that claim.

Roman claimed in a Friday filing that Willis and Wade's relationship began before the hiring. 

In it, his lawyers claim Wade’s former law partner Terrence Bradley will testify their romantic relationship began before he was appointed to prosecute in 2021, according to the Washington Post.

“The romantic relationship between Wade and Willis began prior to Willis being sworn as the district attorney for Fulton County, Georgia in January 2021,” the filing reads.

“Thus, Bradley can confirm that Willis contracted with Wade after Wade and Willis began a romantic relationship, thus rebutting Wade’s claim in his affidavit that they did not start dating until 2022.”

Willis also told the court that they didn't start their relationship until 2022. 

However, Bradley a former friend and business associate of Wade, could “refute that claim” with information proving they were romantically linked as far back as 2020, Roman wrote.

“If, as Bradley confirms, Willis and Wade were in a romantic relationship before she even took office, Wade likely provided Willis with significant other gifts and benefits,” the filing states.

“Of course, the State and Wade have now filed motions to quash Mr. Roman’s lawful subpoenas in an attempt to prevent discovery of these facts.”

Roman is trying to subpoena Willis, Wade, and Bradley to testify on the allegations at the Feb. 15 hearing. The DA's office has filed a motion to quash the subpoenas to stop them from having to testify. 

Roman's filing also detailed more trips between Willis and Wade, including two previously unknown cruises to the Bahamas and a trip to Belize. 

If what she said to the Court turns out to be false regarding the relationship, she could be in big trouble. The Court is going to be looking into the question of the allegations and hear from them how it impacts (or doesn't) the case. 

It sounds like the hearing on the 15th that will address some of the issues will be a barnburner. 

Even This Liberal Admits Trump Will Be Re-Elected As Voters Are Sick of Biden's Migrant Policies

Sarah Arnold reporting for TownhallVIP 

ESPN's Stephen A. Smith took a blow torch to the Democratic Party's reckless open-border policies, predicting former President Trump will slide his way to victory in the 2024 election on immigration alone. 

While discussing the issue on his podcast, Smith claimed Trump is on the "verge" of taking back the White House keys as the country's economy continues to fall short, and the president cares more about his weekend getaways and ice cream cones than the millions of illegal migrants storming the nation. 

"Ladies and gentlemen, Trump's gonna get re-elected. Donald Trump is going to be the next president of the United States if this kind of stuff that I'm reading continues to happen in American cities; Donald Trump is a shoo-in for re-election, even if he's a convicted felon," Smith said. 

The sports commentator argued his stance by pointing out the hardships Americans face every day under the Biden Administration, saying, "We've got poor, impoverished, starving people who are born and raised in this nation." 

"What it came down to for me was this. I see homeless folks in the street of New York all the time that are American citizens; I damn sure see them in California," he said. "Someone's got to say it, so I'm going to say it." 

He then blasted New York City Mayor Eric Adams for launching a $53 million pilot program where illegal migrants will be given free pre-paid credit cards who are housed in hotels across the city. 

Smith questioned how the federal government could "come up" with millions of dollars to fork over to illegal aliens and for aid in Ukraine but can't afford to fix the country's homeless problem.

"How in the hell do we come up with a $53 million pilot program for illegals, but folks who are here legally, or born here, we don't have enough for them?" Smith questioned. "I'm down for helping Israel; I'm down for helping address the situations with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, OK. I'm down for helping the Ukrainians fight off Russia. What about poor and desolate citizens here?" 

Smith demanded to know how the government can print thousands of dollars for foreign countries but can't help the "poor and desolate citizens" in the U.S. 

Smith made his point on why Trump will be elected, criticizing the state of the economy under Biden, saying that Americans shouldn't have to decide whether they will pay bills this week or put food on the table for their families.

"Re-elected, because when he was in office, there was a flourishing economy, there was a whole bunch of other problems… and I personally think his return to the presidency is going to be civil war in his country because he's gonna be desensitized to bringing anybody together because he's gonna on a revenge tour to get back at everybody who went against him," he continued. 

The ESPN sports host said he was "no Republican" but suggested Trump may get his vote over Biden as the country dives deeper into a black hole.