Remember When Patriots Ran Congress?

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about a recent vote taken in the Senate.

The article reports:

None of Democrats’ witnesses in a congressional hearing Tuesday could say resolutely that they believe only citizens should be able to vote in a federal election.

During a Senate Judiciary Hearing on the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee asked the witnesses to provide a basic “yes” or “no” answer to a series of questions about non-citizens voting.

“Do you believe that only citizens of the United States should be able to vote in federal elections?” Lee asked each of the witnesses.

“We don’t have a position about non-citizens voting in federal elections, we believe that’s what the current laws are, and so we’re certainly fighting for everyone who is eligible under current law to vote,” Executive Director of The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Damon T. Hewitt said.

“That’s a decision of the state law but I want to emphasize –” President of Southwest Voter Registration Education Project Lydia Camarillo said.

“It’s a decision of state law as to who should vote in federal elections?” Lee interjected.

“States decide who gets to vote in various elections, and in federal elections I believe that we should be encouraging people to naturalize and then vote,” Camarillo said.

“Okay but you’re saying that the federal government should have no say in who votes in a federal election?” Lee pressed.

“I don’t have a position on that,” Camarillo responded.

The article concludes:

The John Lewis Voting Rights Act seeks to federalize all elections by stripping states and local jurisdictions from making changes to their elections without approval from federal bureaucrats. If the legislation is passed, the U.S. Justice Department could essentially take over an election if its left-wing allies claim minority voters are being harmed by something as simple as requiring an ID or proving citizenship to vote.

A federal judge recently ruled Arizona’s law requiring individuals to prove U.S. citizenship in order to vote in a statewide election is not discriminatory and could proceed after leftists lodged a series of suits.

“Arizona’s interests in preventing non-citizens from voting and promoting public confidence in Arizona’s elections outweighs the limited burden voters might encounter when required to provide” proof of citizenship, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled.

The potential for mischief under the John Lewis Voting Rights Act is endless. Just for the record, there is no reason for non-citizens to vote in American elections–they have no skin in the game. If things go bad in America, they can simply go home.

How Long Can This Continue?

On Sunday, Clarice Feldman posted an article at the American Thinker about our rapidly disintegrating President.

The article notes:

A day after his pumped-up divisive State of the Union address, unsurprisingly headlined “fiery” by the copycat media lackeys, President Biden, speaking in Pennsylvania, reverted to his old befuddled self.

“Pennsylvania, I have a message for you: send me to Congress!” 

“Last night [at] the U.S. Capitol — the same building where our freedoms came under assault on July the 6th!”

“We added more to the national debt than any president in his term in all of history!”

Some Americans believe that the senility and dementia are an act. I don’t agree, but I think it would probably be better if it were.

The article continues:

Well, the last statement is true. I’ll give him that. And large budget deficits are a pattern in Democrat-run cities and states. Democrats pay off cronies and constituencies with government money and then raise your taxes because they’ve spent more than they were able to squeeze out of the economy.

Nearest to me, that pattern is evident in Maryland and Washington, D.C.: They look the other way at rising crime because they defunded the police and decriminalized conduct and then bemoan empty purses as people and businesses flee. They locked down their states and were surprised to learn that capped the revenue spigot. They made ridiculous, frivolous expenditures like bike lanes and street cars and painting BLM on a major street and then can’t pay for necessities like cops, road repairs, and schools.

The article concludes with a list of some of the accomplishments of Calvin Coolidge and some of the things that happened under his watch:

Without government interference, private enterprise quickly electrified the country and created a transportation revolution as more Americans could drive their new automobiles.

Average earnings rose 30 percent in a decade. Gross domestic product (GDP) rose by a third… This great economic and lifestyle revolution for Americans of modest means happened with basically no guidance from the federal government. The government largely stayed out of the way. 

We can dream, can’t we?

It really is time for a change.

Changing The Rules

On Friday, Victor Davis Hanson posted an article at The New York Post detailing how the Democrat party has changed some of the basic rules of our Republic in recent years. It’s a long list.

Here are the highlights of the list:

1. When in control of the Senate, demand the end of the filibuster; when not, don’t.

2. Call for the end of the Electoral College — but only if it appears to recently favor the candidate of the opposition.

3. In an election year, change any state balloting laws deemed unhelpful through administrative fiat or court order to favor your political candidate.

4. Seek to flip electors from voting in accordance with the popular vote count in their states; indict as an insurrectionist any of the opposition who dare do the same.

5. Raid the home of any opposition ex-president who removed classified files; exempt any sitting president of your party who did the same.

6. Swarm the private homes of, and then bully and intimidate, any Supreme Court officials, politicians or citizens you oppose.

7. Appoint two special counsels: one to go after the current chief presidential opponent in an election year; the other to exempt and excuse the sitting president for the very crimes charged against his rival.

8. Lobby to remove any oppositional president through the 25th Amendment; smear anyone as ageist who suggests a cognitively challenged sitting resident of your party should be subject to similar invocations of the 25th Amendment.

9. Exempt thousands of arrested rioters from charges of 120 days of arson, looting, injuring 1,500 law enforcement officers, and assault — but only if they are radical supporters of your party.

10. Excuse any demonstrator or rioter for desecrating public monuments and cemeteries or shutting down bridges and freeways, or swarming and disrupting the Capitol Rotunda — but only if they agree with you and/or are pro-Hamas. Otherwise, ensure the charged face lengthy prison sentences.

That’s just the top ten. Please follow the link to the article to read the next ten. It’s amazing how far we have fallen in recent years. When you read the list of things that used to be considered out-of-bounds that have been done since 2016 or so, it is scary.

 

 

 

Why Should They Listen To The Voters?

On Saturday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog about one possible outcome of the 2024 election. It is becoming very obvious that as the powers that be work harder and harder to make sure that President Trump does not get a second term, more and more voters are deciding to support him–just to have their voices heard. This is going to make for a very interesting year.

The article reports:

In 2001, 2005 and 2017, some Democrat House members objected to the certification of electoral votes for the winning Republican presidential candidate. Those objections, while “denialist,” were only symbolic. But Democrat leaders in the House are now suggesting that if they control that body following November’s election–as they well might–they may refuse to allow a victorious Donald Trump to take office.

Notice that the objects to the electoral votes were not allowed in 2020–they were pre-empted by the events outside the Capitol and a parliamentary procedure was used to block them when the House reconvened.

The article concludes:

The Democrats have become so insane on the subject of Donald Trump that it is hard to know which of their mutterings to take seriously. But if Trump wins the election and a Democrat-controlled House refuses to certify his election on the ground that he is an “insurrectionist” under the 14th Amendment, we will be past the point of a constitutional crisis. If that happens, the only realistic path forward will be disunion, possibly accompanied by civil war, but preferably not.

This is one reason why the Supreme Court should put the 14th Amendment theory out of its misery, once and for all. It is obvious that the drafters of that amendment meant the just-concluded Civil War, in which 600,000 Americans lost their lives, when they referred to “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. In contrast, the January 6 protest was not one of the 50 most destructive riots of the last few years, and the only person killed was Ashli Babbitt. Not a single participant in the protest was arrested in possession of a firearm. Some insurrection!

In the interest of preserving the Republic, the Supreme Court should rule definitively that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to Donald Trump.

Stay tuned.

Does The New York Legal System Recognize The Eighth Amendment?

The Eighth Amendment states:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

On February 27th, The American Thinker posted an article explaining how that amendment applies to the New York judgement against President Trump.

The article reports:

On February 16, 2024, a judge in New York State imposed fines totaling just over $360 million on former president Donald J. Trump, The Trump Organization, and several related Trump companies and trusts in the civil case brought by the New York attorney general.  President Trump’s sons Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump were fined just over $4 million each.  The court imposed additional sanctions, including injunctions against former president Trump; Donald Trump, Jr.; and Eric Trump from serving as officers or directors in New York corporations for specified numbers of years, among other sanctions.

The media reporting on the court’s decision has been massive since the decision was rendered.  However, little or no reporting focused on the constitutionality of the fines under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  President Trump and his co-defendants all have substantial 8th Amendment “excessive fine” challenges to raise.  In fact, a review of the facts and applicable law reveal that this decision is simply more election interference.

The article concludes:

Applying these factors to the New York court’s decision reveals that the fines are clearly excessive.  There are no victims in the Trump case.  No one was harmed.  Each and every financial institution involved was fully repaid and made money on its loans.  Further, a review of case law in New York demonstrates that there simply are no cases ordering a defendant to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in disgorgement without any victim being deprived of anything.  Finally, just how “reprehensible” is it to obtain loans and credit facilities and then pay the lenders back, in full, on time, in compliance with the agreement?  The answer is, not very.

Once again, a court in New York issued yet another political decision masquerading as justice.  The fines imposed by this New York court on former President Trump and his sons and businesses are grossly and unconstitutionally excessive.  While President Trump and his co-defendants undoubtedly have many defenses to the claims to raise on appeal, chief among them should be a constitutional challenge to these grossly excessive fines.

The U.S. Constitution is an amazing document. It is impartial when followed. My hope is that it will be followed in this case.

Inflation Isn’t Over, And The Damage Will Continue

No one who has bought groceries recently or filled up their gas tank believes inflation is over. Yet recently economist Paul Krugman declared, “Inflation is over. We won.” I guess he doesn’t do the grocery shopping in his family. Yes, inflation has slowed. However, we are still dealing with the price increases that occurred in the past three years. If the baseline is where we were when President Biden took office, the inflation rate is somewhere over 15 percent. If we are talking about the past few months, the number is much lower. However, that number is in addition to the 15 percent that we have already been dealing with.

On Saturday, Real Clear Politics posted a commentary about the damage the Biden administration has done to the economy.

The commentary notes:

The truth is that the wild inflation, high interest rates, bank failures, and other economic harms of the last three years were all entirely avoidable and all entirely caused by President Biden and the Democrats’ arrogant and unwise policies.

This is not “Monday morning quarterbacking.” Some of us were saying this well before the fact. My May 7, 2021 column (“Joe Biden, Economy Killer”) accurately forecast the inflation, rising interest rates, and rising government debt service long before the Biden administration even acknowledged the risks were real.

The U.S. economy did not need another giant stimulus plan when Biden and the Democrats took control in 2021. The U.S. gross domestic product, knocked down by the COVID shutdown in the first half of 2020, had jumped up by a record 33% in the third quarter of 2020 and by another 4% in the fourth quarter, all before Biden took office. The S&P stock market had risen 16.3% in 2020. Employers were waiting for workers to come back to work, and another stimulus package had been passed with bipartisan support in the last quarter of 2020. Happily, the inflation rate was only 1.4% as 2020 ended, with a one-year Treasury rate of just 0.10% and a 10-year Treasury rate of just 0.95%

The commentary concludes:

The Congressional Budget Office last week revised its government deficit estimates upward, expecting $48.3 trillion of government debt by 2034. Interest expense on the federal debt this year has already jumped up to $870 billion, which is larger than the defense budget. Additionally, Biden’s higher interest rates will continue to increase debt service costs as old government debt rolls off and is replaced at higher costs. The risk is stark: a 3% higher interest rate on even the existing $33 trillion level of federal debt equates to $1 trillion of extra federal interest expense each and every year, on top of the already giant existing debt service number.

There is no painless way to pay down this deficit or cover this extra annual government interest cost. The need for billions and billions of extra tax money or budget cuts will fuel fierce political fights, populist divisions, and national anger for years to come. All this public unrest will also be the legacy of the bad Democratic economic policies since 2021. Professor Krugman, when it comes to Bidenomics, “We lost.”

I believe we can turn this around, but it will take an administration that includes people who have worked in the private sector and run businesses. Whatever administration is elected in November needs to include people hired for their qualifications and experience–not for any other reason.

When Facts Contradict The Narrative

On Thursday, The Federalist posted an article about the crisis at our southern border. For more than three years, President Biden has been complaining that he can’t do anything about the border unless Congress passes bills that fund Ukraine. He chooses to overlook the fact that on his first day in office he overturned the Executive Orders passed by President Trump that sealed the border. He also chooses to overlook the fact that he not only refused to build the wall–he sold the parts to build it for pennies on the dollar. (article here)

The Federalist reports:

President Joe Biden has vehemently denied any blame for the years-long U.S. southern border invasion with claims that Congress, not the president, must act to defend the nation.

“I’ve done all I can do,” Biden said last month on the White House lawn. “Just give me the power.”

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said the same thing two weeks ago. “There is no executive action that the president can take,” she said, to reinforce the border.

But now Politico is reporting that the president does, in fact, recognize the authority at his disposal to address the border crisis. On Wednesday, the paper reported the administration is “considering a string of new executive actions and federal regulations in an effort to curb migration at the U.S. southern border.”

“Among the ideas under discussion include using a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act to bar migrants from seeking asylum in between U.S. ports of entry,” the report read. “The administration is also discussing tying that directive to a trigger — meaning that it would only come into effect after a certain number of illegal crossings took place.”

The article concludes:

Lies about presidential powerlessness, however, have become the standard response from Democrats on the border. The number of illegal crossings has approximately doubled under President Biden, with 1.7 million “gotaways” evading capture over the three years he’s been in office. Last week, House Republicans formally impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for failing to keep U.S. borders secure.

“It certainly is a crisis,” Mayorkas said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” earlier this month, “But fundamentally, Congress is the only one who can fix it.”

Biden’s allies on Capitol Hill have made the same arguments. New York Rep. Dan Goldman called the House impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas an example of “taking the scalp” for “the MAGA base” to scapegoat blame for a crisis which can “only be addressed by legislation.”

While Democrats continue to say this on TV, Politico reports more executive orders for border action are in the pipeline, indicating the White House believes it can indeed address the border without the need for action from Congress.

The border remains open because country-club Republicans want cheap labor and Democrats want future voters. Meanwhile, Americans are being denied benefits and being forced out of jobs by illegal immigrants who are working outside the system. We need to close the border, and we need to enforce e-verify.

The Consequences Have Arrived

On Tuesday, The Conservative Review posted an article detailing what has happened in Oregon as a result of decriminalizing the possession of hard drugs such as heroin, methamphetamine, and cocaine in 2020.

The article reports:

Oregon became the first state in the union to decriminalize possession of hard drugs such as heroin, methamphetamine, and cocaine in 2020. This radical experiment in lawlessness has been an unmitigated disaster.

While initially deaf to the concerns raised by Republicans, recovery specialists, and Christian groups concerning Ballot Measure 110, state Democrats are now poised to re-criminalize drug possession and bring their four-year experiment to an end. After all, the majority of Oregonians want the measure repealed.

…The so-called “Drug Addiction Treatment and Recovery Act” eliminated criminal penalties for possession of various quantities of hard drugs. As a result, junkies can now carry one gram of heroin; 2 grams of cocaine; 2 grams of meth; less than 40 user units of methadone; 1 gram or 5 pills of MDMA; less than 40 user units of LSD; and fewer than 40 pills of oxycodone.

Possession of such quantities amounts to a non-criminal Class E violation, which at most can result in a $100 fine or a recommendation for a health assessment with an addiction treatment professional.

Those caught with even more of these once-controlled substances have also seen penalties softened, such that they now face a misdemeanor charge with less than a year in jail, a fine, or both.

Extra to decriminalizing hard drugs, the measure mandated the establishment or funding of recovery centers throughout the state funded by taxes on marijuana.

The article lists the results of the law:

According to Oregon Health Authority data, fatal overdoses have skyrocketed in recent years. In 2020, there were 824 fatal overdoses. The year M110 went into effect, there were 1,189 fatal overdoses. Preliminary data indicates the number of deaths from overdoses in 2022 was north of 1,100.

Fentanyl is proving especially lethal. OregonLive.com noted that in the year ending September 2019, there were 77 known fentanyl deaths. In the year ending September 2023, there were reportedly 1,268 overdose deaths.

There appears to be a correlation between fatal overdoses and M110.

Please follow the link for further details and possible solutions. This really should not be a Republican/Democrat or Liberal/Conservative issue. I believe all of us want to protect our children and young adults from the dangers of hard drugs. Hopefully Oregon will pass a law that moves the state in that direction.

Keeping The SALT Limit Where It Is

On Wednesday, Yahoo News posted an article about a bill to change the SALT deduction. The bill failed in the House of Representatives. The SALT deduction is the State and Local Tax deduction that President Trump capped at $10,000. High-tax states like New York, New Jersey, California, and Pennsylvania want the limit higher. That way when they charge their residents exorbitant tax rates, the residents can deduct those taxes on their federal income tax. In some high-tax states, just the real estate taxes on an average home are over $10,000. Generally, allowing higher SALT deductions is a gift to wealthy people and to people who live in high-tax states. In a sense, lower-tax states are funding the spending of the higher-tax states.

The article at Yahoo states:

A bill called the SALT Marriage Penalty Elimination Act, which would have raised the tax cap for some married filers and ease some of the burden in high-tax states like New York, was on the table in the House of Representatives. But it was rejected before it could even be formally considered.

“I’m hopeful this can be a moment of unity among my colleagues on both sides of the aisle,” said Rep. Mike Lawler (R.-N.Y.), the bill’s lead sponsor, as the debate got underway on Wednesday afternoon.

But — as was widely expected — it was not to be, with both Republicans and Democrats voting against the bill as it failed to garner agreement in a procedural vote.

The final vote on adopting a combined rule was rejected in a tally of 195-225, a defeat that is likely the end of the bill for the time being.

While I agree that all of our taxes should go down, limiting the SALT deduction was a way to hold high-tax states more accountable.

The Number The Mainstream Media Is Somehow Overlooking

On February 5th, Red State posted an article that provides a whole new perspective on the Democrat South Carolina primary election. The mainstream media reported that President Biden won 96 per cent of the vote. That’s logical considering the efforts the Democrats have made to keep other people out of the primary. However, there is another number that the mainstream media forgot to report.

The article reports:

To his credit, Biden did notch a resounding win in the Palmetto State. He garnered 96 percent of the vote, leaving Marianne Williamson and Rep. Dean Phillips (D-MN) in low-low single digits. Funny thing is, only about 131,000 people cast votes in the primary — out of over 3.4 million registered voters. Meaning less than four percent of the state’s registered voters bothered to participate in Saturday’s primary — and less than nine percent of the registered Democrats. 

Even taking into account Biden was the prohibitive favorite, that’s a decidedly unenthusiastic electorate. Which prompts one to ask: If an incumbent president gets 96 percent of the vote with only four percent turnout, does it make a sound?

The lack of participation should cause Democrats to lose sleep at night.

What Is The Penalty For A U.S. Citizen?

An American who is arrested for Driving Under the Influence faces jail time, losing his license, and heavy fines. What should the penalty be for a person who is here illegally who is arrested for Driving Under the Influence?

On Thursday, The Conservative Review reported that 150 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives voted against a measure to state that aliens who drive “while intoxicated or impaired” are inadmissible and, if convicted of such an offense, deportable. How in the world would voting against the measure keep Americans safe?

The article reports:

In a bipartisan 274-150 vote, the House of Representatives passed a measure on Thursday that would declare that aliens who drive “while intoxicated or impaired” are inadmissible and, if convicted of such an offense, deportable.

The 150 lawmakers who voted against the measure were all Democrats. But 59 other Democrats joined 215 Republicans in voting to approve the measure.

“Any alien who has been convicted of an offense for driving while intoxicated or impaired, as those terms are defined under the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred (including a conviction for driving while under the influence of or impaired by alcohol or drugs), without regard to whether the conviction is classified as a misdemeanor or felony under Federal, State, tribal, or local law, is deportable,” the measure reads.

There is currently on the books a law making an illegal deportable if he is guilty of moral turpitude. This law simply clarifies the current law. At any rate, isn’t entering a country illegally breaking the law? Shouldn’t that be subject to deportation?

Creating An Energy Crisis In America

The last real energy crisis America experienced was in the 1970’s. It was then that the country discovered that there was a price to be paid for not being energy independent. We have forgotten that lesson.

On Friday, Red State reported:

In a Friday morning announcement, the White House and Department of Energy (DOE) revealed their next target — and it’s enormous.

The White House is halting the permitting process for several proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal projects over their potential impacts on climate change, an unprecedented move environmentalists have demanded in recent months.

[T]he pause [will] occur while federal officials conduct a rigorous environmental review assessing the projects’ carbon emissions, which could take more than a year to complete. Climate activists have loudly taken aim at LNG export projects in recent weeks, arguing they will lead to a large uptick in emissions and worsen global warming.

The article concludes:

Chatterjee (former Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chair Neil Chatterjee) was right— but here’s the thing. Facts, data, and science only matter to Democrats when they support the left’s narratives. We saw it with COVID-19. When facts don’t support the left’s narratives, they are to be dismissed, lied about, or outright ignored. (See: “Anthony Fauci.”)

Finally, House Speaker Mike Johnson released a statement following the White House announcement, warning that Biden is playing into Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hand.

This announcement by President Biden is as outrageous as it is subversive. Stalling LNG export terminals, like Calcasieu Pass 2 in Louisiana, not only prevents America’s economic growth, it empowers our adversaries like Vladimir Putin.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began, American petroleum producers have increased LNG shipments to our partners in Europe to prevent a catastrophic, continent-wide energy crisis and to provide an alternative to Russian energy exports.

It is outrageous that this administration is asking American taxpayers to spend billions to defeat Russia while knowingly forcing allies to rely on Russian energy, giving Putin an advantage. 

This policy change also flies in the face of the commitments made when the White House announced the joint US-EU Task Force less than two years ago to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russia and strengthen energy security.

Nailed it. The question is, whether Biden is capable of understanding the gravity of the Speaker’s statement. The answer is no doubt chilling.

The Bottom Line

If the environmental alarmist crowd came out today and announced it has changed its position on natural gas, Joe Biden would be singing its praises before he eats his pudding cup and goes nighty-night.

Pleas follow the link to read the entire article. We are committing economic suicide.

Creating An Unnecessary Constitutional Crisis

On Thursday, John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article about the crisis at the southern border. There has been a crisis at our southern border since day one of the Biden administration when President Biden undid some of the procedures President Trump had put in place to deal with illegal immigrants. I am not sure why this is finally being addressed after three years, but I am glad that someone is taking action. It is very possible that it is finally being addressed because of the impact moving the illegal aliens around the country has had on Democrat-controlled cities. I am always suspicious of the timing of crises–in recent years they have become political tools.

John Hinderaker reports:

The Biden Administration has dealt a devastating blow to America by opening up the southern border to all comers. The influx of illegals threatens our national security and our economy, and it has placed an intolerable burden on the border states. How intolerable, is demonstrated by the panic that seizes blue cities when they are faced with a tiny fraction of the burden suffered by communities near the open border.

Joe Biden’s border policy is unconstitutional. Under Article II, his most fundamental duty as president is to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Biden has not faithfully executed our immigration laws; rather, he has deliberately sabotaged and negated them. This is an impeachable offense, but what to do in the meantime?

In Texas, a constitutional crisis may be brewing. Governor Greg Abbott, having had enough of the scofflaw Biden Administration, had fencing erected along the border to discourage illegal migration. Biden, determined to illegally undermine our country, directed that the fencing be torn down so that more illegals can pour in. The case reached the Supreme Court, which voted 5-4 to overturn a Court of Appeals decision that enjoined federal border agents from cutting the wire. So for now, the Court has the feds back in control.

The article includes a memo written by Texas Governor Greg Abbott stating that it is the responsibility of the federal government to enforce the border. It also includes screenshots of tweets by other governors supporting Governor Abbott.

The article concludes>

Sarah Hoyt says that Oklahoma, Montana, Virginia, Arkansas, West Virginia, Louisiana and Idaho have also lined up behind Texas. And, she reports, the entire Republican Governors Association has signed a letter supporting Abbott. So far, no Democrats. Fine: let’s let sovereignty be the issue on which the 2024 election turns.

I haven’t studied the constitutional issues raised by this crisis in any detail. For the moment, I would simply say, with Justice Robert Jackson, that the Constitution is not a suicide pact. No sane interpretation of the relevant constitutional provisions could conclude that a scofflaw president, by violating federal law and betraying his oath of office, can disable the states, who came together to form the federal government in the first place, from defending themselves against foreign invasion.

A nation without borders is no longer a nation. The battle has been joined. Let’s fight it out.

Not Everyone Has The Gift Of Self-Awareness

On Monday, ABC Channel 5 in Cleveland posted the following headline:

Howard Dean says leading GOP candidates don’t look presidential

I’m stunned.

The article reports:

Speaking to Scripps News moments before the start of Monday’s Iowa caucuses, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean said that none of the leading Republican presidential candidates look presidential. 

Dean, who was a presidential hopeful in 2004, had a disappointing showing during the Democratic Iowa caucuses that year. His campaign might be best remembered for the “Dean Scream,” after Dean gave an impassioned speech when he finished third in that year’s Iowa caucuses. Dean was behind eventual Democratic nominee John Kerry and his eventual running mate John Edwards. 

The article also notes:

“Biden is the president and he’s acting like a president,” Dean added about not campaigning in Iowa. “I think Biden has gotten a bit of a raw deal from the mainstream media. People want to focus on his age. You know, I’ve been around a long time; this is the most extraordinary president on domestic policy in terms of job creation, bringing high tech to rural areas, which is badly needed, climate change.”

One reason Biden wasn’t in Iowa is that the Democrats’ Iowa caucuses are scaled down this year. Instead of choosing their presidential preference, Iowa Democrats are caucusing to discuss policy and to choose delegates. 

After a while, you begin to wonder what universe some people live in. I don’t expect to see a lot of campaigning from President Biden this year. It has become obvious in the past year that he is losing his battle with dementia. I have not posted pictures of some of his recent episodes of disorientation because I believe it is cruel to post them, but it is also cruel to put a man with obvious dementia in the presidency. I also suspect that there might be an abrupt switch of the Democrat’s 2024 candidate sometime this spring. Also, I find it interesting that Howard Dean is commenting on looking presidential.

Beware of Wolves In Sheep’s Clothing


I am on Facebook. There is also a Right Wing Granny group on Facebook (that anyone can join) where I place articles that I may later write up for the blog. Recently there has been a group on Facebook claiming to be mainstream Republicans (they are actually never-Trumpers) posting things saying that the Democrats want President Trump as the candidate because they know Joe Biden can beat him. They have also recently posted that if President Trump is the nominee, the Republicans will lose their majority in the House and will lose Senators. They have the freedom to post whatever they want, but let’s look at this more closely.

First of all, when you see a post similar to the ones mentioned above, find out who is funding the group. There are a lot of uni-party groups claiming to be Republican that are being funded by groups that we know do not want Republican success—or at least the success of Republicans who are not part of the uni-party.

I want to address the claim that if President Trump is the nominee, the Republicans will lose their majority in the House and will lose seats in the Senate. Frankly, if the Republicans in Congress don’t start acting like Republicans, they deserve to lose both the House and the Senate. Whatever happened to closing the southern border? Can’t they find any Democrats who are willing to work with them on closing the southern border? What about cutting spending? What about sending money we don’t have overseas and refusing to audit how that money is being spent? Can’t the Republicans at least make these things an issue every day? Shut down the government if you have to—there are worse things. I believe that the dumbest thing America ever did was air condition government buildings in Washington—if we had not done that, the politicians would have gone home during the summer! That would have been good for the country.

At any rate, don’t believe the trolls on Facebook. Anyone can form an organization and claim to be something they are not. If the Republicans don’t start acting like Republicans, none of them deserve our vote.

About That Iowa Caucus…

On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article about Monday’s Iowa Caucus. It was a good night for President Trump–he won all but one county, which Nikki Haley won. But wait! There’s more to the story.

The article reports:

The One County Out of 99 Counties that President Trump lost in Iowa on Caucus night ran out of party-switch forms on Caucus night.

President Trump won every single county in Iowa on Monday night except Johnson County, where Iowa City and the University of Iowa are located.
Nikki Haley won that county.

The article notes:

And Anthony Salvanto will find this to be very interesting indeed. They had 50 forms for people who wanted to register tonight or switch their party registration. They ran out of those forms. Members of the caucus team here had to run out to multiple people’s homes to get printer paper and get their printers fired up. They printed another 25 or so sheets of paper.

They estimate about 75 people were new registrations or switched their registration from Democrats and Republicans in order to play in this caucus tonight. And I think that’s a big reason why Nikki Haley was lifted up. You’re getting a little noise here as they clean up was so impressive in this particular outing. If she can repeat that, because we’re talking about 20% of the vote here. Thereabouts, give or take, were new registrations or crossovers, and that is above the typical rate.

Be prepared for similar shenanigans in New Hampshire.

Action Is Good, But When Do We See Results?

On Friday, Townhall reported that Congressman Jim Jordan is seeking a specific document from FBI Director Christopher Wray regarding payments to the Biden family from overseas entities.

The article reports:

As House Republicans continue to explore impeaching President Joe Biden, House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has a request for FBI Director Christopher Wray. On Thursday night, Jordan sent Wray a letter informing him that the Committee is seeking an FBI FD-1023 form from March 1, 2017 to do with “a confidential human source (CHS) report about payments made to the Biden family from foreign entities.” As the letter explained, the FD-1023 in question “is referenced in a second FD-1023 from June 2020 detailing bribery allegations that involve President Biden and his son, Hunter,” and is needed to “evaluate whether sufficient grounds exist to consider drafting articles of impeachment.” 

The Committee knows about the FD-1023 thanks to testimony  that former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania Scott Brady provided, who had asked the FBI to find information on files to do with Burisma–where Hunter Biden served on the board of directors–after he had been tasked by then Attorney Bill Barr to sort through FBI files. 

As Jordan explained during his Thursday night appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity,” the 2017 FD-1023 “became the basis for…Brady… asking to talk to the [CHS] that produced the 1023 form we have.” They’re now asking for this form. 

Brady testified it was “correct” that the FD-1023 in question “was not information provided from the public.” The FBI also waited until being contacted by Brady to reach out to the CHS for more information. Brady categorized the FD-1023 as having “not been developed,” making clear “it’s fair to say that it had not been looked into or developed any further.” It was because of Brady’s directive that the FBI took action to develop the information in the FD-1023. 

Frankly, it is my opinion that all that will become of this is that Christopher Wray will stall until the end of the year, hoping that a few more Democrats will be elected to the House of Representatives and the issue will go away. We have seen so much obvious evidence of wrongdoing for years, and nothing has been done. I am not optimistic about that changing.

Finding The Common Ground

On Wednesday, Townhall posted an article about a common factor among some  of the people attempting to remove President Trump’s name from the presidential primary ballot.

The article reports:

Maine’s Secretary of State Shenna Bellows claims to be unbiased when she ruled that Trump is disqualified from running in the state’s 2024 presidential race. But Bellows, the Democrat whose Dec. 28 ruling booted Trump off the Republican primary ballot in the northeasternmost U.S. state, previously cashed in on Soros family money.

According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, during her doomed U.S. Senate bid against Republican incumbent Sen. Susan Collins in 2014, Bellows received a $2,600 donation from Andrea Soros, the daughter of billionaire investor George Soros, who notoriously spends his wealth influencing local elections across America by bankrolling the campaigns of Democrat picks.

The article notes:

Maine was the second state to officially declare Trump ineligible. In Colorado, the state Supreme Court decided on Dec. 19 to enforce Trump’s disqualification. Leading the charge in the Colorado case to ensure Trump’s removal is the Orwellian-named Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Between FY 2017 and 2021, CREW was given more than $2.8 million in grants by the Foundation to Promote Open Society, which acts as one of Soros’s two chief grantmaking vehicles, for “general support” and “support[ing] political advocacy on ethics in government,” according to an Open Society Foundations database.

And another one…

Spurred by Colorado’s decision, California’s Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis followed suit, requesting in a Dec. 20 letter that the state’s Secretary of State Shirley Weber “explore every legal option” to remove Trump from the presidential primary ballot there.

Kounalakis, too, is a Soros recipient. According to campaign finance records, Soros and his wife Tamiko Bolton Soros, another Open Society Foundations board member, handed over a total of $45,400 to bolster Kounalakis’ successful 2018 campaign and 2022 re-election. Now, Kounalakis is gunning for the California governorship in 2026. Last year, Soros gave Kounalakis an additional $36,400, the maximum amount allowed, just a few months after she launched her bid to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom.

And in conclusion…

Free Speech for the People is the 501(c)(3)organization that filed a flurry of lawsuits across multiple states to bar Trump from the ballot by claiming that he violated the 14th Amendment’s little-used “insurrection” clause (Section 3). Dubbed the nationwide “14Point3 Campaign” in reference to the constitutional provision, the left-of-center nonprofit advanced 14th Amendment challenges in MinnesotaMichiganOregon, and Illinois as well as organized the most recent Massachusetts complaint.

…In the past, Free Speech for the People was partly funded through grants awarded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, which has received $1.5 million in funding from the Foundation to Promote Open Society, a primary Soros grantmaker. Between 2013 and 2017, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund gave Free Speech for the People $275,000 in grants, according to archived 990-PF forms.

See a pattern yet?

 

What Can We Learn From This?

On Monday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about some interesting twists and turns in the primary election in New Hampshire on January 23rd.

The article reports:

As the DNC is telling New Hampshire Democrats the upcoming primary is “meaningless,” the background Democrat control officers like David Plouffe are telling them to vote for Nikki Haley.  The New Hampshire Attorney General has had enough of this manipulative scheming and sends a letter to the DNC telling them to stop. [Letter pdf HERE]

Forgive me…. but I am laughing a little.   When you work as hard as we have to showcase the fraud within the two-private-corporation election system (DNC & RNC), year after year, after year, this type of stuff is just gold, GOLD.

You see, there comes a point in the display of the marionette strings when they just start glowing so brightly, those who try to retain pretenses can no longer support the ruse.   Yes, finally, the DNC bloom comes off the ruse.

Nikki Haley is a very smart lady. If she were not a tool of the uni-party and the military-industrial complex, she would make a good President.

The article includes the following:

PREVIOUSLY – […] “I think it’s probably too distasteful for a lot of people. But for those who would be up for it, to do something tactically—I don’t know if it would stop Trump, but, you know, it could help extend the primary.” … “I think, when you look out in the rest of the states, Trump’s clearly a dominant favorite, but in a two-person race, there’s a healthy number of Republicans who are open to an alternative if she’s the only one. So, I think for liberals, or Democrats, or independents who might not ever support Nikki Haley to be the president to cast a strategic or tactical vote, to me, makes a lot of sense.”  ~ David Plouffe

Please carefully consider your vote in the presidential primary regardless of where you vote. There are a lot of shenanigans going on the keep the deep state in power. If you want to keep your freedom, vote against the deep state.

When Your Narrative Just Doesn’t Work

As the walls are closing in on the Biden family crime syndicate, Democrats are desperate to change the focus and change the narrative. The latest attempt is laughable. On Friday, The Daily Caller posted an article about the efforts by the spin masters in the Democrat party to convince Americans that the Trump family is guilty of taking foreign money (just like the Biden family). Only there is a small problem with this claim–the Trump family has hotels and golf courses that produced the money the family received. The Biden family has no visible product or service provided in exchange for the money.

The article reports:

House Oversight Committee Democrats released a report Thursday attempting to connect former President Donald Trump to a pay-for-play foreign influence scheme, but the evidence fell far short of a smoking gun.

Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, released a report revealing that Trump’s business entities raked in at least $7.8 million from 20 foreign governments and their subsidiaries during the first two years of his presidency, including from China, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Malaysia. A majority of that money, however, came from one business that began renting office space from Trump Tower in 2008 and concluded its partnership in 2019, during his administration, the report shows.

“The difference between Trump’s foreign income and Biden’s foreign income is that Trump had legitimate goods and services to sell and was tough on China while the Bidens did not have any legitimate business and Joe has been weak on China,” Seamus Bruner, director of research at the Government Accountability Institute, told the Daily Caller in a statement.

The article concludes:

Hunter Biden’s federal tax indictment in California clarified that he received about $1 million of the funds sent to the State Energy HK account. He made additional income in 2017 and 2018 from Hudson West III, a business entity he formed with CEFC associates. Hunter Biden’s relationship began in 2015 when his father was still vice president, his California indictment shows. 

In November, Comer detailed through a series of bank records how the funds from China made it through multiple Biden family accounts, ending in a $40,000 check to Joe Biden in September 2017.

“Democrats like Jamie Raskin are trying to deflect from the fact that the Biden family bagged at least $30 million from foreign individuals linked to the highest levels of the Chinese military and intelligence apparatus—perhaps the greatest presidential scandal in American history,” Bruner told the Daily Caller.

An Odd Shift In Reporting By The Mainstream Media

Some of us who watch the mainstream media closely are often suspicious when the media starts covering a story that they have purposely ignored. Generally there is a political motive behind the sudden coverage.

On January 3rd, Issues & Insights posted an article wondering why the mainstream media was all of a sudden concerned about the number of illegal aliens coming into America every day.

The article notes:

After spending three years largely ignoring the border, the mainstream press is suddenly all over it, with headlines blaring about a “surge,” “crisis” and “call for action.” Why now?

…Weirdly, the press is even exaggerating the current “surge.” Consider that CNN story, which says:

“Border authorities encountered more than 225,000 migrants along the U.S.-Mexico border this month, marking the highest monthly total recorded since 2000, according to preliminary Homeland Security statistics shared with CNN.”

Except that’s not true. According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection data, illegal crossings exceeded 225,000 in August, September, October, and November of this year, and in six previous months since President Joe Biden took office.

As a matter of fact, illegal crossings have averaged more than 200,000 since Biden moved into the White House.

Also weird is the fact that the Department of Homeland Security is leaking these numbers for maximum effect, given that Homeland Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has spent the past three years insisting that the “border is secure.”

The article points out when the crisis began:

So again, we ask, why now? This is a crisis that began the moment Biden took the keys to the White House.

The Financial Times – in an article headlined “Surge in border crossings creates political upheaval in the U.S.” – offers a clue. It notes that “the migration issue is gaining salience among Democrat voters” and quotes Houston immigration lawyer Charles Foster saying: “It’s gotten to the point that the vast majority of Republicans and a growing percentage of Democrats agree with this concept that the border is wide open now.” 

A December Wall Street Journal poll finds that Biden trails Trump by 30 points on voter confidence in securing the border.

Is this part of the effort on the part of the Democrat party (in conjunction with the mainstream media) to force President Biden not to run again? I believe we will know the answer to that question sometime in March.

When Eyes Are Opened

The Biden administration has not been good for the average American. Food and housing prices are up. Gasoline prices have come down, but not to the pre-Biden levels. The Biden administration’s economic and energy policies are costing middle class and lower class Americans money. Some Democrats are beginning to realize that these policies are becoming very unpopular.

On December 27th, Issues & Insights reported:

The only thing more uplifting than watching several prominent liberals drift rightward is the cluelessness of those on the left as to why it’s happening.

This drift is obvious enough, since it includes journalists once heralded by the left such as Matt Taibbi (who won a Young America’s Foundation award) and Glenn Greenwald, and Democratic politicians, including Tulsi Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (whose speech at a Daily Caller award ceremony drew many loud cheers from the conservative audience), and Sen. John Fetterman (who recently declared that “I am not a progressive”).

Celebrities such as Russell Brand, David Chappelle, and Bill Maher (who “has been riding an asphalt roller over the far left,” according to Townhall) are part of the shift, as are a handful of prominent business leaders, Elon Musk for instance.

That’s to say nothing of the fact that surveys show once tried-and-true liberal constituencies – Hispanics, Asians, blacks, working class, and the young – are abandoning the Democratic party.

The article concludes:

For many in liberal cities such as San Francisco or New York or Chicago, it’s skyrocketing crime, abandoned storefronts, sidewalks full of homeless tents and human waste, and legions of illegal immigrants housed in bus stations, hotels, and abandoned schools. All of it the result of leftist policies.

For still others, it is the many forms of brutal intolerance the left shows toward anyone who doesn’t fall in line with whatever that day’s dogma happens to be, whether it’s school shutdowns, “transgender rights,” the climate “crisis,” or critical race theory. The left is constantly burning former friends at the stake for being heretics.

For many parents, it’s having the government call them domestic terrorists because they complained about lockdowns and gay pornography in their school libraries.

Now, it’s the left’s virulent antisemitism that was always there but only became glaringly apparent in the wake of Hamas’ genocidal attack on Israel.

The intolerance, bitterness and hate, the unquenchable desire for control, disdain for free speech, and fanaticism have always been features – not bugs – of the left, something we’ve been saying here for years.

The only reason leftists have been able to pretend otherwise is that they had better PR. But that, too, is failing them.

We can only hope those on the left continue to scratch their collective heads about why people are leaving their ranks, until one day they end up in the dustbin of history. Where they belong.

We have proof that leftist policies don’t work. It’s time Americans started paying attention to that proof.

As The Evidence Mounts

As the evidence mounts that the Biden family had very large inexplicable sources of income during Joe Biden’s political career, the family, the media, and the Democrat party are struggling to explain exactly what was going on. On Thursday, The Hill posted an article with the latest explanation/justification.

The article, by Jonathan Turley, explains:

As the House of Representatives goes into high gear in its impeachment proceedings (and possible contempt resolution against Hunter Biden), the Biden family legal problems continue to mount. In one week, it was revealed that President Biden’s brother James was caught on an FBI audiotape in a corruption investigation, while Ashley Biden, the president’s daughter, is now also facing demands for unpaid taxes.

James Biden is expected to appear before the House for questioning in the coming weeks. The appearance may solidify a new line of defense for the Bidens: that they are harmless grifters.

After years of denying influence peddling with the help of an obligating media, even some Democrats are now admitting that Hunter and his uncles have been selling influence. Biden associates confirmed that Joe Biden was the brand that they were peddling to foreign clients, who paid millions to the family.

The article also notes:

The greater problem facing the White House is that roughly 70 percent of voters (including 40 percent of Democrats) believes that President Biden acted illegally or unethically, or both. Even Hunter’s friend Archer said that the president’s denials of knowledge were “categorically false.” Other witnesses, such as Tony Bobulinski, have stated under oath that they personally spoke to Joe Biden about these dealings.

This is likely why defenders are now failing back on the claim that the Bidens may have been grifting, but not actually selling out. It was an act put on for corrupt marks wanting to buy an advantage. That is why the Biden team immediately said that James Biden took $100,000 but then did nothing to deliver his brother.

It is becoming very obvious that Joe Biden is not the model of an honest office-holder. However, since almost all of these actions were done when he was Vice-President, I don’t see their relevance to impeachment. I haven’t seen any actual evidence that he is currently crooked. Admittedly, you can draw that conclusion based on his past actions, but that really isn’t good enough. The Democrats made impeachment a joke. The Republicans need to avoid doing the same thing.

What First Amendment?

The strength of a republic is partially determined by its media–does the media have the ability to inform the public without being threatened or coerced into reporting what the government wants reported? Right now the mainstream media (which can also be described as the government media) is neither holding elected officials accountable for their actions or reporting the truth to Americans. The government has also taken an aggressive stance against reporters who do not parrot the government narrative on current and past events.

On Friday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article about another government attack on someone for committing journalism.

The article reports:

Steve Baker is a journalist for TheBlaze.com (Blaze Media) & was formally charged by the FBI for documenting the protest and unrest around the Capitol Building on January 6, 2021.

This isn’t the first journalist the Biden DOJ has attempted to prosecute, as Owen Shroyer of Info Wars was recently incarcerated for 47 days based on comments he made during his nightly news broadcast. There were several other reporters who have been investigated and charged.

However, Steve Baker’s case is drastically different than Shroyer’s situation. Steve was a well established reporter (not even a Trump supporter at the time) who attended the Trump rally with the intent of documenting the transfer of power during an important day in American history.

The FBI harassed him in July of 2021, but left him alone after becoming aware of his status as an established reporter. The only issue is, Steve eventually began investigating the federal government’s role in the events of January 6th and uncovered corruption at the highest levels of law enforcement. This apparently upset federal prosecutors who are now formally charging Baker despite him working actively as a credentialed journalist for TheBlaze.com.

The attack on opinions that do not agree with the government narrative is going to continue under the Biden administration. Eventually it will be aimed at all Americans who do not support the administration. Considering only about 30 percent of Americans approve of the job President Biden is doing, that could get interesting. Consider the fact that FISA has been extended despite having been abused and will probably be abused in the future. If you want your country back, do not re-elect anyone who voted to extend FISA, and remove the Democrats in the White House who have misused it.

Terrorism Impacts All Of Us

This is a map of one of the most popular shipping routes in the Middle East:

Ships come through the Suez Canal, into the Red Sea, and eventually make their way to the Indian Ocean. One of the major shipping lines to use this route is A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S.

On Friday, Townhall reported the following:

“Container shipping giant A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S instructed its vessels heading for the southern entrance of the Red Sea to pause their voyages after one of its carriers came under attack. The move threatens to undermine the global economic recovery and adds to pressure on the US to improve security along one of the worlds most important trade routes,” Bloomberg reports. “Disruptions in the area can snarl supply chains and world trade. Back in 2021, the grounding of the Ever Given blocked the Suez Canal for almost a week, throwing ships off schedule for months and tightening the available of cargo space. That accident was estimated to have cut capacity by 20% to 30% for several weeks.” 

The move comes after a Maersk ship was attacked by drones over the past 24 hours.

The article concludes:

Since October 7, when Hamas launched a brutal terrorist attack on civilians in Israel, the Houthis have been attacking ships and launching missiles at Israeli and U.S. targets. Many have been intercepted by U.S. military ships currently stationed in the region. 

In 2021, the Biden administration delisted the Houthis as a terrorist organization. 

By order of the President and as a direct result of a nearly 3-year policy of appeasing Iran and its proxies, the United States today utterly failed in a core mission of upholding freedom of navigation. The magnitude of the moment should not be understated. Beijing is watching.

— Richard Goldberg (@rich_goldberg) December 15, 2023

 

The boldness of the Houthis is a direct result of the Biden administration’s desperate attempt to broker a nuclear deal with Iran. They don’t want to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon–they just want to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon while the Democrats are still in power. As soon as they get out of town, they really don’t care.

Please vote this administration out of office in November.