Donald Trump, Gunslinger

posted by Rob Jenkins at American Thinker 

A common plotline in the Western movie genre involves a lone, hard-bitten, rough-around-the-edges gunslinger, scarcely better than an outlaw himself, who rides into a small town plagued by genuine, hard-core outlaws.

The townspeople, even if they don’t like the gunman much -- even if they find him uncouth or unfit for polite society-- quickly turn to him as their savior and beseech his help in ridding them of the baddies. And he grudgingly agrees, for reasons that aren’t entirely clear but usually come down to this: He doesn’t care for the bad guys, either. Despite the rough edges, he is driven by a fundamental desire for fairness and justice. He really just wants to be left alone, and he believes others should enjoy that same privilege.

In short, he is the quintessential American hero: tough, courageous, competent, iconoclastic. He neither seeks to dominate nor will he allow himself to be dominated. He bows to no one.

Oh, and he wins. He does rid the town of the bad guys. And then he rides off into the sunset.

As you may have recognized, this is the basic plot of numerous iconic westerns, including Shane, The Magnificent Seven, and Clint Eastwood films like High Plains Drifter and Pale Rider -- although those last two have darker endings. The story line is even parodied in comedies like Blazing Saddles and Three Amigos, which suggests that it is iconic indeed.

My contention is that, in modern-day America, Donald Trump is our hard-bitten gunslinger. With a personality forged in the dog-eat-dog world of New York real estate, he can certainly be a rough character. He says harsh things and he doesn’t sugarcoat them. He is notorious, in his business dealings, for staying just inside the lines (the bogus charges brought against him by his enemies notwithstanding). Many probably wouldn’t care to invite him over for dinner or bring him as a guest to a friend’s party.

And yet….

There can be little doubt that our country is currently besieged by bad guys. Real, honest-to-goodness outlaws whose corruption knows no bounds. Who are determined to push their destructive agenda on America -- DEI, CRT, abortion up to birth, the “trans” agenda, unfettered immigration, currency manipulation, profiteering from foreign wars -- by any means necessary. Who don’t hesitate to take the law into their own hands in order to punish their perceived political enemies. Who clearly will not be satisfied until the rest of us are forced into submission.

In the wake of Joe Biden’s disastrous debate performance, people all over American -- even Democrats -- are now waking up to this reality. They can see that they’ve been lied to. They’ve been had. Our government and media are full of bad actors so intent on consolidating their own power, they’ve allowed this husk of a man to masquerade as president for three-and-a-half years, while they pull his strings from behind the curtain.

It is also clear that, if this corruption continues unchecked, the United States will devolve in short order into something that is no longer a representative democracy. Something much more like an oligarchy or even a semi-fascist state, where the powerful elites control everything. Such, indeed, is their goal. Can any rational person now doubt that?

What can be done? Who can save us from this fate? At this point in history, there is just one man who fills that bill: Donald J. Trump.

Perhaps there could have been others, like Florida governor Ron DeSantis. DeSantis is a good man and a fine leader. I have no doubt he would make a terrific president. On a personal note, I would have voted for him in the Georgia Republican primary if he had gotten that far.

But there is an argument to be made, I think, that DeSantis, for all his admirable qualities, is not what we need right now. To return to our Western analogy, he’s more like the good-guy sheriff, the pure-in-heart, Dudley-Do-Right-type who bravely faces down the outlaws even though he might not be quite up to the task -- unwilling to fight dirty in what is sure to be an epically dirty fight.

Maybe, for that kind of fight, we need a guy who’s a little rough around the edges himself. Who’s not afraid to get down in the dirt. Who can throw a mean roundhouse as well as take one. (Note that, in their desperation, the townspeople don’t turn to a “good man.” They turn to one who knows how to fight fire with fire.)

Maybe, for that kind of fight, against the lawless, self-styled “elites” who seek to strip us of our God-given rights and make us into serfs who will “own nothing and be happy,” we need our own Shane, our own Pale Rider, someone to put the fear of God in these assholes and run them out of our town -- because, never forget, it is our town.

As one of the townspeople says to the Clint Eastwood character in High Plains Drifter, “You’re a man that makes people afraid, and that’s a dangerous thing.”

Is there anyone on our side right now -- on the side of America, of the Founding -- who strikes more fear into the hearts of our enemies than Donald Trump? No. Obviously not. They hate all conservatives, that’s for sure; but they fear him so much that he has lived rent-free in their heads for nigh onto nine years, now. (If you don’t believe that, just watch CNN or MSNBC for ten minutes, if you can stomach it.) They fear him so much, they’ve literally tried to jail him on a series of trumped-up charges—to the point where future generations will probably think “trumped-up” refers to the attempted railroading of the 45th president.

To put it succinctly, right now, Donald Trump is all we’ve got. He’s the only one who can go up against these outlaws and stand any chance of taking them out. If he can’t do it, I don’t know if anyone can. May God be with him.

Freedom Gardens, Speech Corridors, and Black Markets

posted by J.B. Shurk at American Thinker 

Battered conservative syndrome is real!  We have gotten clobbered over the head so many times during the last decade that we’re almost numb to the pain.  Even worse, we’ve been conditioned to accept each new blow as if we somehow deserved it more than the last.  We do not.

We have seen how quickly Western governments will use every “emergency” to dispatch basic civil liberties.  We have watched American political operatives rig elections with mail-in-ballot fraud.  We have endured online censorship of our political speech.  We have been targets of gun-grabbing politicians seeking to disarm us.  We have suffered discrimination from banks that refuse us service.  We have remained mostly quiet as the DOJ treats J6 protesters as seditious traitors and blacklists the rest of us as likely terrorists.  We have put up with Marxist prosecutors maliciously pursuing us for our personal beliefs.  We have kept our heads down while corporate employers demand total obedience to their “woke” religion.

We also know what’s coming.  The technological infrastructure for “vaccine” passports, digital IDs, central bank digital currencies, online speech codes, race-based privileges, AI surveillance, and social credit scores is being built right now.  “Climate change” fanatics are making it harder and more expensive to grow food.  Digital prison walls are going up all around us.  “Green energy” regulators and technocratic snoops are creating a system that minimizes our freedom and maximizes their control.  The question, then, is whether we use this foresight to prepare for the future or to complain about its inevitability.

I ran across someone online warning that the “green energy” Nazis were driving up the cost of energy so quickly that we would all freeze to death during the next few winters.  Perhaps.  Or perhaps cold people will revert to collecting wood for indoor fires.  I figure that we will know when “Green New Deal” totalitarianism is “winning” when we see formerly law-abiding citizens illegally logging in protected forests and parks.  The more expensive energy becomes, the more likely that the skies above towns and cities will be filled with soot.

Necessity is a wonderful motivator.  People who are forced to choose between survival and subservience weigh their options more adroitly.  That’s why I’m ultimately optimistic about our future even though I know bad times are surely coming.  Some generations must witness the evil of totalitarianism before they finally recognize that unconstrained government power is as deadly as any disease.  After all, what caused greater social harm — the COVID virus or the government’s abusive lockdowns, economic destruction, and authoritarian mandates?

Now ask yourself how you can best prepare for the next time the police state demands total compliance.

A century ago, homeowners all over the country cultivated essential crops no matter how small their parcel of land.  During both world wars, the federal government actively encouraged citizens to grow what they could, so as to increase the available food supply for our fighting forces overseas.  Fast-forward to the present, and government agencies are actively discouraging homeowners from growing their own food.  Municipal ordinances and neighborhood covenants prevent citizens from maximizing the benefits of land ownership.  Environmental regulations turn home gardens into potential legal liabilities.  The federal government harasses Amish farmers and other experts in husbandry for ignoring bureaucratic rules written by cubicle kings who don’t even know how to farm.  

Does it seem a little strange that government know-it-alls work so hard to prevent Americans from growing their own food when people around the world suffer from hunger?  Wouldn’t any government that pats itself on the back for being “progressive” and “humanitarian” find great benefit in increasing America’s production and supply of basic crops?  A cynical person might conclude that the U.S. government does not want Americans to be self-sufficient because a self-sufficient population is much harder to manipulate.  An even more cynical person might suggest that the World Economic Forum and its fascist friends can never force Americans to “eat the bugs” unless Americans are first starving.  After all, how can the WEF’s Malthusian enthusiasts reduce the planet’s human population, unless those who wish to cull us also control what we have to eat?

What’s the obvious answer to this increased fragility in the food supply?  Americans must reacquire rudimentary farming skills.  They must experiment with potatoes, corn, legumes, and other nutritious crops and understand what is required to produce even small amounts of food.  They must rediscover the benefits of gardening.  The more they learn now, the more likely they will survive future hardship.  If they choose not to prepare today, they will be left to the mercy of those who control what’s left to eat — such as bug-enthusiast and synthetic food investor Bill Gates — should they ever find themselves starving.  

During times of crisis, growing food is like growing currency.  Whatever a person has to eat becomes a medium of exchange.  “Battered conservatives” who see the erection of totalitarian CBDCs in our future often assume that little can be done to avert their imposition.  Once runaway inflation hits a point when debts cannot be repaid and people cannot afford basic necessities, central banks will have the perfect financial emergency to justify a transition toward digital government funny money.  With such a system in place, government agents will control not only what you can buy with digital dollars but also the purchasing power of what’s been allotted to your account.  It is the ideal vehicle for creating a society where nobody owns anything (aside from the central bankers) and everyone receives the same income regardless of skill, merit, or hard work.  CBDCs give Marxist globalists what they want — a communist oligarchy in which a small number of technocratic “elites” totally control the lives of entirely dependent serfs.

What’s the obvious answer to this increased fragility in the financial system?  To put yourself in a position in which you own valuable commodities beyond the reach of CBDCs’ totalitarian control mechanisms.  That doesn’t mean you need a private vault of gold, silver, or copper.  It means you need to develop the skills that will allow you to grow food for future exchange.  In a dystopian world where central bankers supervise all transactions, any market that arises beyond their control represents a small island for freedom.  Even in our relatively stable financial system today, illicit black markets account for anywhere from ten to thirty percent of the most developed industrial economies.  How do you think the imposition of CBDCs will affect those numbers?  My guess is that black market transactions will quickly grow to rival those of the official CBDC-controlled economy.  Why?  Because under such a communist system, black markets will become the last refuge for free markets.  The time to prepare for such potential future difficulties is now.

Some might argue that in a world where authorities censor speech and monitor all communications, working outside of the government’s reach would be impossible.  I would counter that an entire generation of dissidents residing in the Soviet Union and under the Iron Curtain managed to communicate with each other and spread important ideas with nothing more than pens and sheets of paper.  However effective AI proves at spying on what we say, people who value freedom will inevitably develop workarounds.  Wherever State-sponsored censorship becomes the norm, free speech corridors thrive underground.  

All of which is simply to say: hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.  Just because many of us have become accustomed to being hit over the head with Big Government’s truncheon doesn’t mean we should pencil in future beatings.  We cannot trust our government to protect our liberties because our liberties are a threat to its power.  We must remember how to band together and take care of ourselves.  Forewarned is forearmed.

Miami rally coverage (don't miss it!), X22, and more- July 9

 

Determining Who’s Eligible for Slavery Reparations Could Leave States Vulnerable to Slew of Legal Challenges

 Warnings come as states and cities progress with funding their programs.

As cities and states charge ahead with reparations efforts, questions are swirling about whether the programs are constitutional and how eligibility would be determined, with one observer saying the government trying to prove whether Black people are actually Black highlights “the insanity” of the programs. 

https://www.nysun.com/article/determining-whos-eligible-for-slavery-reparations-could-lead-to-insanity

California’s recent allocation of $12 million in its budget towards reparations could leave the Golden State vulnerable to a slew of legal challenges. 

“Funding for reparations programs may be there, but the constitutional authority is not,” a Pacific Legal Foundation attorney and Reparations Task Force Director, Andrew Quinio, tells the Sun, noting that both the American and Californian Constitutions “do not allow discrimination based on race or ancestry.” 

California, which entered the union as a free state and sent more soldiers per-capita to fight for the North than any other state, has been aiming to lead the way nationally on reparations, citing a legacy of slavery and discrimination in the state that has negatively affected Black Californians to this day. 

Yet the reparations have come under fire for burdening populations that had nothing to do with slavery in America. No one racial group makes up a majority of California’s population, and the state has more Latino residents (40 percent) than white residents (35 percent), as well as a significant Asian American and Pacific Islander population, the Public Policy Institute of California notes. 

“The state is paving the way to unlawfully advantage and disadvantage individuals based on race because of a sordid history that much of California’s current diverse population wasn’t part of,” Mr. Quinio says. 

The state’s reparations task force, established by the legislature in 2020, issued a long report of recommendations last year that the group said hopes will “serve as a blueprint for other states, and eventually, the federal government” to address the wrongs of slavery, adding that “this national shame can ultimately be comprehensively redressed only through national reparations.”

If fully implemented, the report’s proposals are estimated by the Pacific Research Institute to cost nearly $3 trillion. 

Lawmakers haven’t yet tried to pass all of those proposals, instead saying there will be a “multi-year effort to implement the legislative recommendations in the report.” So far, the California Legislative Black Caucus has prioritized a package of 14 bills that it introduced earlier this year — none of which include direct cash payments. “While many only associate direct cash payments with reparations the true meaning of the word, to repair, involves much more,” the chairwoman of the Black Caucus, Assemblywoman Lori Wilson, said of the legislative measures. 

Several of the bills have already advanced in the Senate and are being considered by the Assembly, including a bill to compensate Black residents for land that was taken by eminent domain. The Senate is meanwhile considering a bill, already passed by the Assembly, to require the state’s Department of Consumer Affairs to prioritize Black applicants, especially descendants of slaves, who are seeking occupational licenses. The reparations package also includes a ballot measure this November — that was approved by the legislature — to prohibit involuntary servitude for incarcerated people. 

Despite the $12 million set aside in California’s budget, reparations backers are already clamoring for more and promising that it’s only a start.

“Although we wanted more, I’m deeply appreciative of the $12 million in the state budget for reparations. Even in these tough fiscal times, this funding is a clear reflection of our priorities and values as a state,” a state senator, Steven Bradford, a member of California’s reparations task force, said in a statement. “This clearly states the reparations do matter and will be a priority in California going forward. This is just the beginning.” 

As the Golden State charges ahead, Evanston, a suburb of Chicago, is facing a lawsuit after it became the first city in the country to enact a taxpayer-funded reparations program.

The city has committed $20 million to a program that provides $25,000 in payments to Black persons who lived in Evanston while aged 18 and older between 1919 and 1969 and their descendants, the lawsuit against the city, filed by Judicial Watch, notes. The city’s website identifies Black and African American people as “persons having origins in any of the Black racial and ethnic groups of Africa.” The city of Evanston didn’t respond to a question from the Sun about how it verifies eligibility and prevents reparations fraud, but a representative of the city manager’s office said the city “will vehemently defend any lawsuit brought against our city’s reparations program.”

“Both federal civil rights law and the Constitution don’t allow Evanston to give away money based on race like they are, and our clients are eligible for the program, but for their race, so that requirement has got to be removed,” the president of Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton, tells the Sun.

When asked if he had additional information about the city’s eligibility requirements, Mr. Fitton referred the Sun to the lawsuit but said the city having to try to “determine whether someone’s actually Black when they say they’re Black” serves to highlight “the insanity of their program.”

“The excuses used that some sort of generalized or systemic or vague allegations of racism generally could be the basis for, you know, the woke racism that they’re promoting in this program isn’t going to hold legal water,” Mr. Fitton says. “The Constitution requires you treat people equally under the law, and they’re not doing it, based on race here.”

The lawsuit comes as Detroit, Boston, Chicago, Washington D.C, and the state of New York have established or are in the process of creating reparations commissions to study the lingering effects of slavery and make policy recommendations. 

“This is the first official reparations program. I think other localities and states are taking steps to proceed to reparations, but they haven’t gone there yet, and so we’re looking carefully there, at California, Chicago, Washington, D.C.,” Mr. Fitton says. “And hopefully lawsuits like this educate other politicians what they’re not allowed to do under law.” 

MAGGIE HRONCICH

Ms. Hroncich is from Pittsburgh and a graduate of Hillsdale College. Her work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Federalist, and The Daily Signal.

Democrats Are the Real Threat To Democracy

posted by Derek Hunter at Townhall 

It’s funny watching these extreme leftists congratulating themselves for “telling the truth” about Joe Biden’s decline after four years of screaming obscenities at people who pointed it out before they could no longer deny it. Honestly – and I’m telling the real truth here – they can all go straight to hell. 

There is nothing honest about these people, honestly. They don’t care about anything beyond the election and winning it. To tell you the truth, I wish Republicans could find that level of focus.

Democrats are like the terminator – they can’t be reasoned with and they will never stop, unless destroyed. 

Listen to Democrats talk about abortion, for example. It’s all about how those damned “Republicans have gotten so extreme on abortion.” How? They never say because nothing has changed, going back to at least the Reagan administration.

Democrats, on the other hand, have changed dramatically. They’ve gone from wanting abortion to be “safe, legal, and RARE,” to up till the moment of the birth. They all swear that’s not true, but they won’t entertain the idea of any limits. If abortion in the ninth month “never happens,” as Democrats insist, then what is the harm in banning it? If a city wanted to ban unicorns, what does it matter? They don’t exist, so ban them. You could argue it’s a waste of time, but that’s it. Government wastes all kinds of time, so who cares? If voter fraud never happens, what’s the problem with putting into place some measures to ensure it doesn’t? 

You see why Democrats oppose the concept – they will not ban something that never happens and they won’t admit to supporting. Weird, right?

Nothing Democrats do has the interests of the nation at its heart. The discussion over Biden has never been about his ability to do the job, it’s been about his ability to get reelected or now. That’s all. Joy Reid said she’d happily vote for Biden in a coma to keep Trump out of the White House again. She might get that chance.

Hell, she kind of already did in 2020, didn’t she?

There isn’t much of a difference between Biden in 2020 and Biden now, except the polling numbers. If Joe were running away with this election, if he weren’t the worst president in history, none of this discussion would be taking place. If Donald Trump hadn’t brilliantly accepted Biden’s “debate challenge” immediately, there likely wouldn’t have been any debates and these sycophants with press passes would still be defending the White House from “cheap fakes” and other mythical boogeymen.

It no longer matters how long they were all involved in the cover-up, that they’ve all been involved in the cover-up is all that matters. 

These people cannot be trusted again. Ever. 

Now we get word that Biden is planning on appealing to black voters and union members to save his political behind. Honestly, why would either group vote for him?

Biden has made a career out of lying about being involved in the Civil Rights Movement, including just over the weekend again. He wasn’t; he had nothing to do with it. He also claims support from union members because, well, it’s unclear. His policies have favored the rich, always. Biden spearheaded a bankruptcy bill that made it harder to discharge credit card debt in bankruptcy while he was in the Senate because most credit card companies are headquartered in Delaware and he was their puppet. Did that help or hurt union members?

Everything about Joe Biden is a fraud, so I guess it makes sense that he would remain the nominee of the party that is literally full of frauds. 

Still, shouldn’t some of them, or at least one of them, have something closely resembling a conscience? Decency? Concern for the country over the party? 

None of the discussions happening about Joe Biden are about anything other than whether or not he can win in November. Democrats are worried about how Democrats will fare at the polls, not the senile man incapable of handling an emergency. 

They’re viewing Biden’s horrible debate performance as a chance for a do-over on their nomination after rigging the nomination process to make sure Biden wasn’t challenged. That’s not how it works.

If you want to know what Democrats care about, look at how they’re acting now. The prospect of losing power terrifies them into action, not the prospect of a dementia-riddled old man with his finger on the button. 

I don’t believe Biden would push that button in a fit of confusion, but only because whoever is really running the show would hide it from him. And that’s the problem. We can’t have a President who needs things hidden from him, other facts kept from him, and a team of unelected political hacks whose names are a mystery running the country. 

That’s what we have now. It’s only fitting that the real “threat to democracy” comes from the people accusing everyone else of being one, isn’t it?

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

As the Media Lose More Credibility, Daniel Dale, Dana Bash, and CNN Lie About Biden and the Indictments

Brad Slager reporting for RedState 

With so much swirling in the aftermath of the Biden debate debacle, the press industry in this country is in a state of dysphoria. The exposure of the breadth of their collusion with the administration has many outlets flailing. Excuses are fabricated and deflections attempted -- all in an effort to dispel the culpability. 

What is striking about this is the lack of effort made to rectify things and even reestablish a footing with the public trust. Outlets seem content to resort to the old playbook, insisting on things and expecting the public to simply absorb what they are told. Repairing their image with sound reporting appears secondary. At CNN, this may be even farther down the list as we have seen them continue pushing their agendas while grappling with the fallout. 

What has been especially galling as it involves Joe Biden is the continued falsehoods in reporting, the flawed nature of fact-checking, and the overall journalistic willingness to play patsy to this administration – all the elements that placed the media in a complete downslide right now.

On Sunday, hostess Dana Bash, fresh off of her moderating stint, interviewed Marco Rubio. They covered a variety of topics, with Bash often challenging positions forwarded by the Florida senator and getting placed off balance as he responded with sound comments. One item in particular needs to be countered with accuracy. There was this exchange early in the discussion:

RUBIO: Well, first of all, I'm uncomfortable with the fact now that we have a president who has targeted political opponents. It's funny to me to read these people and hear these people out there warning about all the horrible things they ridiculously claim Donald Trump is going to do if he becomes president again. They're the ones that have been going after their political opponents. Donald Trump has been the one that's been very clear that his vengeance is going to be by winning and making America great again, not going after his political opponents. He said that in your debate that you hosted.

BASH: Senator, there's no evidence…

RUBIO: And they're the ones that have gone after political opponents.

BASH: There's no evidence that Joe Biden has gone after political appointments -- opponents. His Justice Department has.

Mrs. Bash - married to one of the 51 signers of the fraudulent Hunter-laptop-Russian-misinformation letter - was possibly resting on the claim made by CNN’s resident fact-checker Daniel Dale. He has long held the position that there is no supporting proof of Biden being involved in the four indictments, something he repeated as a debunked item in his post-debate analysis.

This is the man who positions himself as the voice of factual authority and whose network holds up as a paragon of truth regarding news items. Yet he is completely fraudulent on this matter. This is not a case of massaging details or lending shading to a story; Dale declares there is no proof of Biden’s involvement. This calls for doing something that will likely upset CNN’s vaunted fact-checker – I’ll present him with the facts.

Georgia Phone Call Indictment

While Fani Willis has made a mockery out of this trial with the revelation of her relationship with the underskilled Nathan Wade, there are other components to this trial that have been underreported. While building the case, Willis wanted to rely upon evidence gathered in the January 6 Committee investigation. 

Then a filing made by Trump’s counsel during the trial petitioned for the details of Wade having met with White House officials on at least two occasions in the course of building the case. During the trial, it was also revealed that the White House counsel sent two letters to the District Attorney

Also raising eyebrows was Willis and Fulton County Deputy DA Dexter Bond attending an event held at the residence of Vice President Kamala Harris just prior to the case. 

New York Bookkeeping Indictment

The Alvin Bragg zombie case has Biden's fingerprints all over it. The original case, involving alleged financial improprieties regarding the payoff to Stormy Daniels, brought charges that normally would rise no further than misdemeanors and which had already been waived off by federal campaign officials. 

The first case had been drawn up by the previous NYDA Cyrus Vance, with the help of lawyer Mark Pomerantz, lent by the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. (This firm’s members are major donors to Biden and staged opulent fundraisers for his campaign.) Once Alvin Bragg rose to the DA’s office, he ended that case against Trump, which led to Pomerantz stepping away. But as he exited, Pomerantz wrote in a new book that Trump could become charged with various felonies, and Bragg elected to rejuvenate his dead case. 

For his felony indictment Bragg employed as his chief prosecutor Matthew Colangelo, who came directly from Biden’s Department of Justice. 

Florida Classified Documents Indictment

This is seemingly ignored by more than just Daniel Dale, but what is tougher to overlook, as Nick Arama covered in 2023, were a pair of New York Times pieces declaring Biden was uttering his desire for charges to be made. It is apparent Biden was leaning on Attorney General Merrick Garland to bring up a case against Trump, and conveniently two emerged.

Garland complied by appointing Jack Smith to two cases - one regarding the classified documents, and one for actions on January 6. A Smith assistant has conducted witness interviews at the White House to build the case about the docs. There also are questions swirling about Smith’s handling of the documents and whether agents manufactured evidence by placing cover sheets on files at the scene. 

D.C. January 6 Indictment

Biden has been quoted on camera pledging he would do whatever was necessary to prevent Trump from becoming president again. When Biden was commiserating with his inner circle, according to the New York Times, he had a primary goal in mind: Focus on January 6 prosecutions with a focus on Donald Trump. “Mr. Biden…believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted, according to two people familiar with his comments.”

The political nature of this case is exposed in two ways. Smith’s case was already regarded as a stretch of the law and possibly violating First Amendment rights, but the recent Supreme Court ruling on immunity parameters has possibly rendered this case completely impotent. Then there was the classic moment on The Hill when Merrick Garland was challenged by Rep. Thomas Massie on his zeal in appointing Jack Smith as Special Counsel to the cases. This is a position needing presidential submission and Senate approval, meaning Smith’s appointment was quite possibly unconstitutional, but it reveals that the DOJ - at Biden’s behest - was intent on going after Trump with a Jack Smith appointment.

---

These are all verifiable facts that the Biden administration is involved in some fashion with all four of the prominent indictments of Donald Trump. Either through assisting with cases or by the president outright calling for action to be taken by his DOJ, the Joe Biden administration is proven to have involvement. For Daniel Dale and CNN to come forward and declare that there is no evidence of this is the lowest form of prevarication: It is a result of sloth, not being disproved through investigation.

If those at his network say there is no evidence of Biden’s involvement, it would only mean they have none because they have not looked for evidence. That is not proof, but the absence of evidence—and the absence of journalism. 

Need to Replace Biden on Behalf of the State Dept Who are Worried About Losing Ukraine Money if Trump Wins

Sundance reporting for Conservative Treehouse 

The U.S. Department of State (DoS), the umbrella agency for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), outlines their policy toward the American public through CNN.  This truthful perspective is why all foreign governments regard CNN and CNNi as “state run” media.

In essence, everyone around the world -except the American public- know that CNN is the State Dept. From that perspective, the viewpoints of CNN then begin to take on an accurate context.

Now, having said that, keep in mind CNN is not necessarily always in alignment with the executive branch, even though the DoS is a silo within the executive branch of government.  The hierarchy within the State Dept consider themselves as more important than the USA executive branch, and the 7th floor of foggy bottom is filled with self-entitled progressive globalists who attend fancy cocktail parties and carry multiple passports. They’re all professional snobs.

The State Dept operates for the private and foreign interests of the USA elites who hold power around the world and in various consulate offices.  The indulgencies are quite remarkable and selling USA influence is big business, really big business.  The DoS as an institution operates on a private quasi-international caste system of power and money.   This creates the baseline to understand the priorities of the State Dept.

The State Department is very worried that another Trump administration will put them in a financial “dry spell” again because President Trump’s foreign policy is against the interests of the people within it.  President Trump controls the foreign policy of the executive branch by using economic relationships to control national security issues.  This means the Dept of State cannot sell foreign policy when President Trump controls the executive branch.  I hope that makes sense.

With that context we are able to discuss the following segment.  The State Department is very worried that Trump will dry up the Ukraine funding.  Therefore, Joe Biden losing to Donald Trump would be horrible for the State Dept….  ENTER CNN.  Now you will understand why Jake Tapper has been unleashed with furrowed brow to remove Joe Biden. WATCH:

The State Dept, via CNN, recruited Jake Tapper away from ABC news in order to advance their interests.

Tapper was well compensated.

All of the CNN anchors hang out with State Dept people.

In a symbiotic relationship, CNN then protects those State Dept interests.

Because DoS is the umbrella agency for the CIA, the CNN peeps also get insider info from IC sourcing and hire the IC officials after executive branch terms.

Does all of this start nuance to make sense now?

The State Department is worried that Biden doesn’t have the juice to beat Trump.

Tapper, with furrowed brow, is there to drive the coffin nails.

Jake Tapper even looks like the State Department snobs now.