Wednesday, September 25, 2024

The Greatest Scandal in Modern American History That No One Cares About


A little over eight weeks ago, President Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 presidential race, despite being the Democratic Party's presumptive nominee and only true primary vote recipient. He was forced out by the party elite, who watched his debate with Donald Trump and saw what most of America already knew: that Biden is senile. Biden was promptly replaced by Kamala Harris, his vice president, who has since solidified Democratic turnout and is running neck-and-neck with Trump.

But something strange has happened since Biden's ouster: the country went back to ignoring Joe Biden's senility. Photographs and footage of Biden asleep at the beach in Delaware have filled X feeds for weeks since he dropped out of the race. Just last week, Biden turned over a full Cabinet meeting to his wife, Jill, who sat herself at the head of the table and proceeded to lecture Constitutional appointees on women's health issues. Within 48 hours, Biden completely forgot the world leader he was supposed to introduce at a Quad summit, snarling at his aides, "Thank you all for being here and now, uhh, who am I introducing next? Who's next?" The leader, as it turns out, was Narendra Modi, prime minister of the most populous country on earth, India.

So, why isn't it something of an issue that the most powerful seat on the planet -- the presidency of the United States -- is being currently held as a sort of emeritus position by a doddering old fool? Why has an office once held by George Washington and Abraham Lincoln been treated as a sort of throwaway gift to a career corrupt politician, like a gold-plated watch or a set of steak knives handed to a past-his-prime salesman at a Motel 6 retirement reception?

The answer is simple: the person tasked with invoking the 25th Amendment so as to protect the presidency is Kamala Harris. And Harris cannot oust Biden. Were she to do so, that would lead to a pitched battle with Biden himself -- and Biden is already fighting mad, during his waking hours, at his defenestration at her hands. But more importantly, Harris cannot oust Biden because were she to do so, she would make explicit that which has remained implicit: she is the sitting vice president of the United States and thus responsible for the actions of the Biden-Harris administration.

The entire Democratic Party gambit -- their sleight-of-hand shell game -- relies on Biden as the red herring. Were the American people to tie Harris to Biden's record, she would lose the presidency. She has been, instead, proclaiming that she "isn't Joe Biden" while at the same time dissociating from zero of his policies. It's quite the trick. And it could only work with a compliant media and with Joe Biden still retaining the title of acting president. The minute she takes over, she becomes responsible for all of it. And Biden's record is the shoddiest of any president of our lifetimes.

And so the presidency will be sacrificed in order to advance the ambitions of Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party. The world will continue to spiral into chaos thanks to the leadership vacuum at the helm of the United States. And the Democrat-media human centipede will continue to ignore the absolute scandal that takes place every day at the White House, where a clearly befuddled octogenarian staggers from his living quarters to make unintelligible sounds before the cameras as the world burns.



X22, And we Know, and more- Sept 25

 




It’s So Hard for the Ruling Class These Days


There’s a piece at The Free Press about how Wikipedia maintains its lefty slant. In addition to its lefty editors, there’s a Wikimedia: Reliable Sources/Perennial Sources page dividing media into  “Generally reliable,”  “No consensus,” and “Generally unreliable.” Don´t try pushing any sources in the unreliable non-lefty category.

Meanwhile our liberal friends are planning reforms to return the Trump Supreme Court to the glory days when the justices and the educated elite all agreed that “the Constitution means what we the chosen say it does.” And don’t you dare disagree.

Then there’s the war on misinformation and “hate speech,” from Brazil to Britain to the EU to France. Wikipedia first published a four-line misinformation piece in July 2005. By January 2015 it was a couple of pages; today it goes on for ages about fact-checking. If you want short and sweet go to the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency’s MDM page.

It was the best of times; it was the worst of times. And I think that, for our rulers, the age of the internet is the worst of times.

The fact is that the regime is fit to be tied. You can tell that from the #WeBelieve yard signs put out by nice liberal ladies in the months after the Trump win in 2016. The yard signs were devotedly reciting the homeowner’s belief in anti-racism, flood the border, LGBT, feminism, government science, climate change.

Liberal ladies are the most loyal followers of the regime.

And if you read between the lines of sous-chef Kamala Harris’s recent word salad served out to Oprah Winfrey, the menu hasn’t changed since 2016.

Hey, how about this Harris/Walz yard sign priced at $12.99:

HOPE OVER FEAR
TRUTH OVER LIES
SCIENCE OVER FICTION
DEMOCRACY OVER FACISM[sic]
DECENCY OVER DECEIT

It echoes what Nicole Shanahan told Tucker Carlson the other day. When she was a girl in Oakland, California, they taught her in school that Democrats were good people and Republicans were bad people.

By the way, I don’t hate the liberal ladies and their #WeBelieve signs, or the $12.99 signs. I just like to know what the liberal faithful are being carefully taught, because I believe that I need to know what the regime is teaching them to believe.

I get the anguish of our liberal lady friends. Back in early 2016, we were going to follow the election of the First Black President with the First Woman President in an incandescent arc of justice. Of course we were. It was so empowering. And then Asteroid Trump hit, and a dark night descended on the Earth. Of course, it was the Russians that intercepted the missile launched to take out Asteroid Trump! It had to be!

But the more our liberal friends enforce their Narrative and bleat about misinformation, the more they are telling us that their regime is in trouble.

For me, liberals yelling about misinformation are helpful. They are telling us where the major threats to their Narrative and their regime are occurring. They are telling us what they don’t want you to know.

And our side does it too, when center and right intellectuals descended on a podcaster in the late Darryl Cooper unpleasantness.

But in the real world, I have Questions, and one thing I’ve wondered about is: how did people afford the passage from Europe to America before the advent of steamship steerage? Not to mention James Cameron’s magnificent Titanic. Now I know.

I was reading Garet Garrett’s The American Story and he mentioned, in a chapter on slavery, the indentured servant story.

See, in colonial America, the country desperately needed labor. And back then, due to the agricultural revolution and landowners switching from feudal lordship to agricultural “improvement,” the rulers in Europe needed to get rid of their “waste population.” In response to demand, a system of indentured servitude grew up in the colonies. In part, it was all about sending over paupers and convicts; in part it was voluntary. But these people had no money. Who paid for their free passage to the Americas? Simple. The new arrivals were sold at auction for five to seven years of indentured servitude, and the money went to pay the shipowner for his trouble.

And what did these folk do, after the indenture was over, and they were now free?

Picture… with a bag of seed, an axe, and if he could, a pair of oxen… a man a woman and an infant as they vanish into the wilderness.

There’s your settler-colonialist, unmasked. What a monster! And then came August 1619, and the first shipload of Negro slaves.

So which is worse? The rulers of Europe shipping off their waste population to the Americas, or African chiefs flogging their captured slaves to European slave-traders?

If you make the wrong choice, you could be guilty of “misinformation.”



Deep State Spooks Back Kamala, While Black Gangs Warn of Civil War Against Her Imported Venezuelan Crime Syndicate

 Deep State Spooks Back Kamala, While Black Gangs Warn of Civil War Against Her Imported Venezuelan Crime Syndicate

Remember that Kamala Harris is the candidate of the Good People. The Best People, actually: the credentialed and compassionate, the upscale and sophisticated, those with sufficient noblesse oblige to care about the “most vulnerable among us.”

You’ll need to repeat that to yourself a hundred times a day — or let our captive media hammer it into your head — because all the actual evidence points the other way. Namely, that Harris is the dull-witted, inarticulate puppet of corrupt, self-serving elites — a DEI hire who just manages to pronounce the words flashed on a teleprompter or whispered in her ear, then boogies around acting “brat” to drum up turnout in our chaotic, crumbling blue cities. And that she has been fully complicit in hundreds of catastrophic policies for which Joe Biden was happy to be the yammering carnival barker.

Harris has just been endorsed by the most dangerous people in America. No, not violent criminals in supermax prisons. They’re patriotic, Norman Rockwell 1940s Boy Scouts compared to the criminal network that just came out for Kamala: The highest-ranking members of the American Deep State, who are the main culprits in almost one million pointless deaths in Ukraine. That war was almost avoided, until the U.S. intelligence community torpedoed a reasonable deal, in order to create a bloody quagmire weakening Russia, as General Mark Milley admitted was the real U.S. objective.

I’ve raised the question before: Since we know that Joe Biden isn’t running the country, and neither is Kamala Harris, who actually is? Like right now, at this moment. Seriously: who?

Who decides whether we send troops to Lebanon, guide Ukrainian missiles to Moscow, or otherwise slide even closer to World War III?

Now we have our answer. Our wizards behind the curtain have come out into the light and identified themselves.

Like Russia under Putin, we are governed by our secret police. And they won’t give up power easily.

“Chicago Will Go Up in Flames”

Perhaps the worst of these policies for Americans has been the embrace of totally open borders by our former “border czar.” Importing some 10 million unvetted, mostly uneducated foreigners pell-mell into America sounds so insane that no Democrat before 2008 would have gone near the idea. But Biden and Harris didn’t just let it happen. They aggressively recruited and imported these surplus unskilled workers, then dumped them on mostly Trump-voting counties. But plenty made their way to blue states and cities, where the natives are getting restless:

Is it really our duty as Christians to incite a civil war? To punish our poorest neighbors and blow up our own country, instead of inspiring and aiding less fortunate nations?

If that were Christianity, I would persecute it myself. I’d briefly consider feeding such “Christians” to the lions, but in the end, I wouldn’t. It’d make the poor lions sick.

But Immigration Is Too Hard to Fix

Some people who reluctantly admit that it was disastrous for the Democrats to wave in 10 million illegals insist that the problem is too far gone to fix. If large numbers of people want to get into your country, it’s like a bad weather front: You just have to accept it and deal with it. The government of Italy disagrees, as Gateway Pundit reports:

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni … is one of the most popular leaders in Europe, and to achieve good results, she has sometimes had to clash with some of her more liberal counterparts. … It arises now that under Meloni, Italy’s level of illegal immigration has plunged an astonishing 64%.

Her government has cracked down hard on smugglers and worked with Italy’s neighboring countries to diminish the flow.

Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said Sunday that their success shows once and for all that enforcing tough border policies is possible — it just takes hard work.

It also takes leaders who actually love their countries and their fellow citizens. One such candidate is running for president this year.


🎭 π–πŸ‘π π““π“π“˜π“›π“¨ 𝓗𝓾𝓢𝓸𝓻, π“œπ“Ύπ“Όπ“²π“¬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, π“žπ“Ÿπ“”π“ 𝓣𝓗𝓑𝓔𝓐𝓓

 


Welcome to 

The π–πŸ‘π π““π“π“˜π“›π“¨ 𝓗𝓾𝓢𝓸𝓻, π“œπ“Ύπ“Όπ“²π“¬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, π“žπ“Ÿπ“”π“ 𝓣𝓗𝓑𝓔𝓐𝓓 

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. 


How The ’60s Changed America For The Worse

Stumbling Toward Utopia places the nation’s crisis in a moral context stemming from the utopian perspective of the 1960s.



Henry Kissinger, in his fine book, Leadership: Six Studies in World Strategy, captures the essence of the 1960s cultural and social revolution, not just in France, but in the western world generally:

In May 1968, a student revolt that grew into a general protest-one expression of a Europe-wide movement-consumed much of Paris. Students occupied the Sorbonne, where they festooned windows and columns with Maoist posters. They erected barricades in the Latin Quarter and engaged in street battles with police. Everywhere graffiti proclaimed the protesters’ anarchic sensibilities: “It is forbidden to forbid.”

“It is forbidden to forbid.” This pithy phrase encapsulates the core belief of the culture warriors of the 1960s across the United States as well as Europe. Paradoxically, the phrase combines both utopian and nihilistic visions of some prelapsarian world which, in the addled minds of some, dispense with personal responsibility, family, social bonds and a constrained and tragic view of the human condition. It is this pathological development, and its impact on American society, culture, and politics, even to this day, that is the subject of Timothy S. Goeglein’s compelling book, Stumbling Toward Utopia: How the 1960s Turned Into a National Nightmare and How We Can Revive the American Dream.

Goeglein pinpoints 1968 as the historical moment that brought us to “the beginning of America’s version of the Cold War, in which we could become divided as a nation, ideologically, spiritually, and eventually geographically. In many ways, it has never ended.” Assassinations, the Vietnam War and draft, racial unrest, the ascendancy of the Baby Boomers, sexual liberation and a general distrust of authority, tradition and norms all contributed to the age.

In 1968 I was a sophomore at a Jesuit university in the Midwest which, in a very few years, threw ROTC off campus, allowed African-American basketball players to segregate themselves on a separate dormitory floor, gave students a pass for missing class to protest the Cambodia incursion and other politically correct causes. As to sex and drugs, it was becoming de rigueur, although not quite mandatory as it seemed to be at many other campuses across the country.

Indeed, if I had but one mild criticism of Goeglein’s trenchant critique of the 1960s and its consequences, I would call it a stampede rather than a stumbling. Ideas are conveyed in light speed, more by contagion than discourse or persuasion. And Goeglein provides a masterful description of the origins and transmission of the toxic ideas which swept the nation and beyond in that decade. Like a good trial lawyer, he lets the evidence speak for itself.

After first relating a narrative on the decline of a small town of an old friend and correspondent, from the 1960s to the present time, he offers the reader several concise, data-rich chapters on the various “stumbles,” both cause and effect, of the cultural unraveling of that crucial decade. They encompass morality, education, entertainment, fiscal deterioration, family dissolution, religion’s decline and the loss of civility in America. The effect is staggering given the sheer carnage those times have brought to the national culture and body politic.

Timothy Goeglein’s rogues’ gallery of culprits for the forbidden-to-forbid culture, includes, but is not limited to, progressives such as John Dewey, Margaret Sanger, Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Marcuse and the authors of the 1962 Port Huron Statement, most prominently, Tom Hayden, future husband of Jane Fonda, and president of the Students for Democratic Society (SDS), an organization that called for a “New Left” in the nation’s politics. The Port Huron Statement defended Castro and the USSR, promoted sexual liberation, radical feminism, dismantling the military, the takeover of private enterprise, universal health care, the closing of prisons and on and on.

Add to the list Allen Ginsberg, Saul Alinsky, the author of Rules for Radicals: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Then there’s Norman Lear, Dr. Alfred Kinsey, truly a piece of work, Masters and Johnson and Hugh Hefner. Hostility to moral restraint, families, patriotism and the market economy were common themes for most of these icons of modernity.

“At its core, the sexual revolution replaced the self-sacrifice required of both spouses to make a marriage work with a selfish ‘all about me’ philosophy based on personal ‘satisfaction’ rather than mutual respect,” writes Goeglein. “Once it became all about sex, love and commitment took a back seat.”

Most enlightening is Goeglein’s explanation of the Great Society’s deleterious influence on the work ethic and family formation resulting in more poverty and misery in its wake then before. At the beginning of the ’60s, 73 percent of children lived in a traditional two-parent never-divorced home, headed by a father and a mother. By 1980, it was 61 percent and 46 percent by 2015, with predictable results on poverty and prison populations. The Brookings Institution reports that children in single-parent families are about five-times as likely to be poor as children in married-couple families. These are the fruits of no-fault divorce, sexual liberation, and the welfare state created by the Great Society.

Goeglein marshals crushing statistical evidence for the decline in educational attainment in America tracing the decline to educational theorist John Dewey, “a self-proclaimed humanist and ‘democratic socialist,’” and opponent of Christianity as a “dying myth.” Reading, writing, and arithmetic took second place to socialization and collectivism.

Stumbling Toward Utopia places the nation’s debt crisis in a moral context stemming from the utopian perspective of the 1960s. The national debt in 1960 $286 billion but $32 trillion (with a “T”) in 2023 and growing. Entitlement spending trumps infrastructure and national defense. Inflation followed culminating in “stagflation” in the Jimmy Carter years. This is a bipartisan phenomenon. Richard Nixon grew entitlement spending 20 percent faster than the Johnson administration.

Timothy Goeglein does not outline any wonkish policy recommendations, although the reader may infer a few here and there. He does counsel a kind of new “Great Awakening” if you will, a term he does not use, but accurately characterizes his argument for the theological virtues of faith, hope and love to heal the nation, our families and the hearts of our citizens rendered isolated, lonely and forlorn by the social and cultural devastation of the 1960s. At root he is calling for a revival of personal responsibility, and love, in each of our lives, homes and communities.



Under Weak Democrat Leadership, U.S. Unprepared For Looming War With China

Under Weak Democrat Leadership, U.S. Unprepared For Looming War With China

BY: HELEN RALEIGH for The Federalist 


The Biden-Harris administration has hamstrung the U.S. military even as China’s army, navy, and air force are on the rise.



The Commission on the National Defense Strategy recently released a report warning that the United States faces the most severe and pressing defense challenges since 1945. The report not only emphasizes the potential for a near-term major war but also underscores the urgent need for action, making the gravity of the situation clear.


The commission, having meticulously reviewed both public and classified information, has identified China and Russia as major adversaries seeking to undermine the United States’ global influence. However, the commission’s greatest concern lies with China. Its report reveals that “in many ways, China is outpacing the United States and has largely negated the U.S. military advantage in the Western Pacific through two decades of focused military investment,” which is a cause for grave concern.


The commission estimates that China spends about $711 billion annually on defense, although some experts estimate it to be around $474 billion. The wide range of estimates for China’s defense spending is due to the Communist regime’s notorious practice of hiding the actual scope of its defense spending from its published government annual budget. Some speculate that Beijing might have underreported its past defense spending by as much as 40 percent.


One thing is sure: China’s yearly defense spending is climbing steadily upward, which poses a serious threat to the United States and its allies, as it allows China to further develop its military capabilities and potentially challenge the current global order.


The commission noted that China already has “the largest aviation force in its region” and the largest army and navy globally (with 370 ships and submarines). In its recent report, the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), a think tank based in Washington, D.C., points out that the Chinese military is on a war footing, as the regime “is heavily investing in munitions and acquiring high-end weapons systems and equipment five to six times faster than the United States … China is now the world’s largest shipbuilder and has a shipbuilding capacity roughly 230 times larger than the United States.”


Besides preparing for the war itself, China has been deepening its economic and military ties with other U.S. adversaries, including Russia, Iran, and North Korea, helping enhance their military and economic power to cause a menace to the U.S. influence worldwide. For example, China and Russia established a “no-limits” partnership in February 2022, right before Russia invaded Ukraine. Since then, through purchasing Russian oil and gas and agriculture products, China has been propping up Russia’s economy and minimizing the effect of economic sanctions the West has imposed on Russia.


On the military front, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines testified at a congressional hearing that “China’s provision of dual use components and material to Russia’s defense industry is one of several factors that tilted the momentum on the battlefield in Ukraine in Moscow’s favor, while also accelerating a reconstitution of Russia’s military strength after their extraordinarily costly invasion.”


The commission is deeply troubled by the United States’ unpreparedness as the global security landscape grows increasingly perilous. The U.S. military, lacking the necessary capabilities and capacity, may be unable to confidently deter hostile nations or prevail in combat. This urgent and pressing situation, exacerbated by the Department of Defense’s convoluted “research and development (R&D) and procurement systems, reliance on decades-old military hardware, and a culture of risk avoidance,” demands immediate attention and action.


However, the major constraint of the U.S. military’s capacity and capability has been the Biden-Harris administration’s defense budget cut (after inflation) four years in a row. Take the administration’s 2025 budget, for example. The U.S. Army is asking for 442,300 troops, a decline from 485,000 in 2022. The U.S. Navy will have 287 ships in 2025, down from 296 today. Navy experts estimated that to defeat the Chinese navy in a battle at sea, the U.S. Navy “needs about 350 ships and another 150 unmanned or lightly manned vessels, for a total of 500.” The United States military has been on a trajectory of managed decline under the Biden-Harris administration. It is crucial that we advocate for increased defense budget allocation to address these issues.


The Biden-Harris administration’s decision to accumulate significant national debt on domestic initiatives like the Green New Deal while reducing U.S. defense spending is also a matter of urgent concern. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) has reported that the interest payment on our national debt has already exceeded government spending on national defense, a situation that demands immediate attention, especially as the potential for near-term major war has increased.


Another alarming sign of the United States’ unpreparedness for war is the negative effect its military support of Ukraine has had on U.S. military stockpiles. The support has led to a depletion of America’s inventory of certain weapons and ammunitions, underscoring that “the U.S. defense industrial base (DIB) is unable to meet the equipment, technology, and munitions needs of the United States and its allies and partners.” The DIB’s limited capacity to “produce, maintain, and replenish weapons and munitions” will severely hamper the U.S. military’s fighting capability.


Furthermore, the commission warns that a military conflict with a near-peer such as China will result in staggering military and economic costs. Even without a full-out war, “the global economic damage from a Chinese blockade of Taiwan has been estimated to cost $5 trillion, or 5 percent of global gross domestic product (GDP),” which will certainly affect American businesses and consumers.


The commission is concerned that “the U.S. public are largely unaware of the dangers the United States faces or the costs (financial and otherwise) required to adequately prepare. They do not appreciate the strength of China and its partnerships or the ramifications to daily life if a conflict were to erupt. They are not anticipating disruptions to their power, water, or access to all the goods on which they rely. They have not internalized the costs of the United States losing its position as a world superpower.” This concern is a serious one because the United States will not win an all-out war against adversaries such as China without the support and resolve of the American public.


The commission closes its gloomy report with a list of recommendations, two of which are notable. First, “Congress should pass a supplemental appropriation immediately to begin a multiyear investment in the national security innovation and industrial base.” Among other things, this supplemental appropriation would help “expand industrial capacity,” “harden facilities in Asia,” and “secure access to critical minerals.” Second, “for fiscal year 2025, real growth in defense and nondefense national security spending is needed and, at a bare minimum, should fall within the range recommended by the 2018 NDS Commission.”


Ultimately, the American public must be made aware of the potential grave threats we face and factor this into their decisions this November. Do Americans want to elect someone who will continue to impose policies that accelerate America’s economic and military decline and relinquish America’s global leadership role or someone who will stop America’s self-imposed decline, introduce policies that will strengthen this nation economically and militarily, and make America great again?


Make no mistake: An economically and militarily powerful America is the best deterrent of World War III.

Democratic Campaign Has Become a House of Cards - Conrad Black

 Vice President Harris will not be able to get through six more weeks to the election concealing her colossal inadequacies.

Seen with a little perspective, it is clearer than it has ever been that the bipartisan political establishment that governed at Washington after the retirement of Ronald Reagan, the OBushintons, as I have often described them here, were caretakers coasting on Reagan’s coattails, until President Obama made race the principal criterion and motivation of public policy. 

In foreign affairs, he told large audiences at Cairo and in Ghana that they had had difficulties with America as a white Christian country, but all that was in the past now that America was governed by a non-white president with a partially Islamic background. 

Practically all sense of national interest was jettisoned in favor of the naΓ―ve fantasy that white Christian notions of superiority were the chief sources of the world’s problems. Domestically, American politics was atomized into aggrieved groups whose collective rights were politically promoted as enjoying precedence over the concept of individual rights upon which the United States was founded and flourished.

As the Obama era ended, it was confidently expected that we would return to the Clintons (Hillary) or the Bushes (Jeb). Donald Trump was practically the only person in America who seems to have sensed correctly that approximately half the population was disgusted with what they thought had become a log-rolling, back-scratching operation at Washington, an entirely Democratic city where the Republicans resembled the Democrats, and the regime anesthetized the disadvantaged with a corrupt welfare system while the country was governed for the benefit of Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and Hollywood. 

In 2016, Trump rudely interrupted the status quo that had obtained since 1980, when for 36 years, one member of the Bush or Clinton families was either president, vice president, Secretary of State, or preparing to be their party’s nominee for president.

So great was the shock at Trump’s election, that there arose at once a determination to profess that it was an illegitimate election, to harass, to resist, and immobilize and discredit Trump’s administration, to criminalize policy differences, and, in 2020, to exploit the Covid pandemic to alter voting and vote-counting rules.

These changes enabled the expedition of scores of millions of ballots to voting lists that are inevitably partially outdated at all times because of people dying and moving, and raised concerns about ballot harvesting and the verifiability of the ballots cast. 

For reasons that historians of the future will need to identify, the national political press, including even those few outlets that were reasonably civilized to Trump, locked arms in support of the righteous complaint that it had been a pristine election. Trump was outspent two to one, and opposed by 95 percent of the national political press, but if 44,000 votes had flipped in Pennsylvania and two other states, he would have won in the electoral college.  

The Democratic and Never Trump Republican coalition only prevailed by elevating an unfrightening and allegedly innocuous candidate for president, with a vacuous vice president whose own campaign flamed out before the primaries began and who was chosen as the only non-white woman that the party elders thought might appease those voting blocs. 

And President Biden and Vice President Harris were set on top of Bernie Sanders’s socialist program, to compensate the Vermont senator for being robbed of the nomination as too far left to win: a senescent figurehead, atop a quasi-Marxist electoral platform. 

From the start, it was a Potemkin village of a government, a carnival fun-house illusion, for which the national political press turned itself inside out pretending that a fair election had elevated a competent president and an acceptable vice president on a platform that would generate “progress.”

As the circumstances of this pantomime horse of a government became more and more strained, and it failed miserably in every major policy area, multiplying Trump’s inflation rate by seven, admitting as many as 15 million illegal migrants who dangerously overstrained the education and welfare systems of the country and helped sharply raise the crime rate, and imposed a green tyranny that strangled large parts of the economy.

The inept Biden-Harris foreign policy produced the horrifying debacle in Afghanistan and has never given the Ukrainians what they need to win. Having assumed at the outset that Ukraine would be easily defeated, they have pursued a policy of fighting to the last Ukrainian.                  

Underestimating Trump still, they thought they could afford to renominate Mr. Biden in 2024 until he cognitively disintegrated in an early debate. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Obama pressured him to step aside, even while Mrs. Pelosi described him as “a president for Mount Rushmore.” 

Mr. Biden’s last little effort at defiance was to release his delegates to his vice president and impose her on the Democratic Party as their candidate. Up to this point, two-thirds of Americans found her an embarrassment as vice president, but the press rallied again and acclaimed that a vapid, mindless, climate of  “joy” had been created.

Finally, it is becoming clear that the instant reinvention of Ms. Harris will not stop the cascading doubts over the 2020 election: the incumbent president is already a trivia question; the vice president will not be able to get through six more weeks to the election concealing her colossal inadequacies. As this becomes more obvious, the collapse of this immense and outrageous political house of cards will accelerate. P.T. Barnum has already been vindicated; soon the founders of the country and authors of the Constitution will be also.

Democrats Are Accusing Donald Trump of a New Crime, and It's As Insane As You'd Imagine


Bonchie reporting for RedState 

If you thought the 2024 presidential cycle couldn't get dumber, you thought wrong. Following a visit to a Pennsylvania grocery store, Democrats are accusing Donald Trump of committing a new crime.

During a trip to Sprankle's Neighborhood Market in Leechburg, the former president campaigned on lowering prices for Americans. That's when he spotted a mother of three attempting to pay for her groceries. Trump proceeded to pull out a $100 bill and hand it to her while a campaign aide captured the scene on video.

Watch As Trump Wins Hearts and Minds, and Maybe a Few Votes in Pennsylvania


It was a nice moment and came across as pretty standard fare for a presidential campaign. It's certainly not the first time a nominee has walked into an establishment and paid for something. Trump has routinely bought food for people at campaign stops as well. Leave it to Democrats to try to ruin everything, though.

The logic here is as stupid as it sounds. By giving the mother of three money, Trump supposedly broke federal laws surrounding vote buying. Of course, the woman never indicates that she is going to vote for the former president because he helped buy her groceries. Even if she had, though, it'd still be insane to try to make an issue of something like this. 

Here's the language of the statute. 

Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person, either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate; and

Whoever solicits, accepts, or receives any such expenditure in consideration of his vote or the withholding of his vote—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

So not only are Democrats saying Trump committed a crime, but they'd also have the woman who accepted the money thrown in jail. 

Am I the only one exhausted with this stuff? Republicans breathe and left-wingers want to charge them with a federal crime. Meanwhile, actual corruption and possible criminality by Democrats are ignored. It's mind-numbing. It's also disturbing in that it shows just how deranged the modern left is. These are people with zero boundaries who will do whatever it takes to retain power. If that means prosecuting their political opponents, then so be it, as evidenced by the fact that they are doing that right now

Will normalcy ever return to the political world? I don't see how.