Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
A sham wrapped in banana
By Silvio Canto, Jr.
It's hard to think about the Trump verdict without thinking of bananas, republics that is. Who knew that we would ever see such a travesty in the U.S.? I didn't but then again I have never suffered from a derangement syndrome.
I agree with Matt Taibbi:
Maureen Dowd in the New York Times in this morning’s op-ed about Donald Trump’s trial:
Even though the case was a stretch and not the strongest one against Trump, there was something refreshing about the jury doing what no one else around Trump has been able to do -- not the inexplicably sycophantish Republican lawmakers, not the corrupt Supreme Court, not the slowpoke Merrick Garland.
Whoa. Trump has so altered American consciousness that detractors feel comfortable publicly supporting the idea of slapping 34 felony convictions on the man as punishment for alleged earlier offenses. Dowd’s slip (if it was one) wasn’t rare. Editorial pages, broadcast panels, even political mailers in the past days implored readers to focus on Trump’s overall history, not this particular case.
Yes, we are irrationally obsessed with Trump that we want him destroyed. I remember when we used to send people like that to a psychiatrist, or a witch doctor in previous generations or some cultures.
The good news is that Trump is right when he refers to them as sick and nasty people. They are making his case every time that they go so far just to get the Orange Man. We will survive and Trump will return to power. I just hope that he appoints an Attorney General who goes after lawfare for once and for all.
In the meantime, I hope that some red state district attorneys are exploring their options. I guess that statutes of limitation don't matter and local district attorneys are now free to go after presidents. Wonder what accounting procedure was used to record the Paula Jones payments? I'd like to know.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/06/a_sham_wrapped_in_banana.html
Two quick points about the ‘conviction’
By George Shuster
I wish to make two quick points about last week’s “conviction” of President Trump, because, though important, they have not yet been made with the clarity they deserve:
1. Immediately after the verdict was announced, District Attorney Alvin Bragg could not rush to the podium fast enough to lie to the American people. He said the jury unanimously convicted Trump of falsifying business records to influence the election. Here are his words:
The twelve everyday jurors vowed to make a decision based on the evidence and the law, and the evidence and the law alone. Their deliberations led them to a unanimous conclusion, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant, Donald J. Trump is guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, to conceal a scheme to corrupt the 2016 election.
He knows that is false, because corrupt Judge Merchan instructed that there were at least two other paths to a guilty verdict, having nothing whatsoever to do with the election; on this point it is entirely possible that far from being unanimous on guilt, the jury was unanimous in concluding that he was innocent. Put another way, Bragg knows full well that it is possible not a single juror found Trump was trying to influence the election.
This is one of the many issues ripe for appeal. In the meantime, anyone who hears one of the fascists of the left repeating Bragg’s lie should call out their lie, and point out that they are the ones trying to influence the election by dishonest means.
2. When the Supreme Court agreed to take up the issue of presidential immunity, the left predictably howled with feigned indignation. They said the Court was doing so only to assist Trump, because the issue was allegedly “simple” and that the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C. had supposedly “masterfully” solved the issue by determining there could never be any immunity no matter what the circumstances. Yet the SCOTUS was required to take up the issue because a) it was a case of first impression, caused by the fact that no other regime in U.S. history has attempted this sort of broad-scale weaponization of the government against its political opponents, b) it has therefore now become an important issue not only with regard to Trump, but as to all presidents in the future, and c) it is indeed a very complex issue, going to the very constitutional structure of balance between the coordinate branches of government.
What the left seems to be oblivious about is the fact that they have provided a rich menu or template against which the issue of immunity must be assessed. In fact, the more intense and extensive their weaponization efforts, the more it is incumbent on the SCOTUS to analyze immunity from every angle. If, as can be predicted, the opinions they render are themselves very complex, the left owes that fact to their own complex network of lawfare.
The Court will undoubtedly identify certain proactive areas which need partial or complete immunity under our system. If the Court does its job fully, however, the left has demonstrated a need for a reactive carve-out as well. A president needs to be able to react to political partisan lawfare by demonstrating its character. The jurisprudence of selective prosecution would provide a good starting point for analysis along those lines. Unless a president can protect his decisions against nakedly partisan attacks abusing the legal system, America will kiss separation of powers goodbye, and a corrupt regime will be able to attack without restraint its political enemies, just as they do in totalitarian tyrannies throughout the world.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/06/two_quick_points_about_the_conviction.html
Lawfare: DNC flavor of the month
By Paul C. Binotto
The same people who claim Alito’s bias and demand his recusal now have and will defend the burning and desecration of the nation's flag in all manner of so-called “peaceful protest” during the Black Lives Matter riots and the pro-Hamas campus protests. They will also give apology for, and in other contexts, say they despise the American flag and the republic for which it stands.
Politico shills for Scott Wiener, an LGBTQ+ activist, in his fight for Pelosi’s seat
By Andrea Widburg
Politico, a Democrat media outlet, wrote a profile of California state senator Scott Wiener. It’s interesting because Wiener is running against Nancy Pelosi for her seat in the House of Representatives, and it’s clear that Politico thinks Pelosi’s time is over. However, to elevate Wiener, Politico had to gloss over Wiener’s more sexually offensive behaviors and policies.
The gist of the essay is simple: Wiener is the dynamic, pro-business (San Francisco-style, of course) future, while Pelosi is already in the past. But since Pelosi still has the women’s vote and a daughter who might want her mother’s seat eventually, Wiener is courting women. In other words, we’re seeing the old guard versus the new guard and the gays versus the women. It’s the typical modern Democrat party internecine battle.
But to make the article palatable, Politico had to ignore a few things about Scott Wiener. Here’s how Politico describes his sexuality:
Wiener is hardly a typical male politician — he’s a gay man who paints his nails (he was sporting a cherry-red polish during his interview) and shows up to kink festivals in San Francisco shirtless and in a leather harness.
That’s it, but there’s so much more. First, about those “kink festivals.” Last July, a shirtless Wiener posted a picture of himself attending the “Amazing Dore Alley street fair”:
That looks pretty par for the course for a modern leftist politician. Nothing too outré out that, right?
Well, yes, unless you know what the “Dore Alley” or, as it’s more commonly known, the “Up Your Alley” fair is about. In 2008 and 2015, published photo essays about the fair. Do not click on the links if there are children around or if you’re in a public place. Do not click on the links if you have a low-revulsion tolerance.
Most especially, do not click on the links if you do not like seeing the following activities on a city street: men wearing bondage gear and nothing else, outfitted as demons, masturbating in public (alone or in groups), being whipped, being sodomized with objects, engaging in oral sex, engaging in Sam Brinton-style pup play, doing awful things with urine, or displaying deeply blasphemous slogans.
The fact that a person in public life would not only attend the Dore Alley fair but would actually boast about it should horrify people. The public behavior is so debased and so perverted that those who enjoy those activities should hope that no one ever knows about them. But of course, that’s not Wiener’s style. He’s out and oh-so-proud.
Scrolling through Wiener’s Instagram feed, you realize that a large part of his life revolves around his sexuality. A quick visual survey says that approximately 30% of his posts are informed by his obsession with what he does with his genitals.
I don’t mean he’s posting pictures of himself having sex (thank God). It’s just that his “G” identity in the LGBTQ+ spectrum is non-stop. It’s “gay” this and “trans” that and “LGBTQ+” the other over and over. The remaining 70% is garden-variety modern leftism (abortion, unions, masks, lockdowns, racial obsession, gun grabs, vaccines, Big Government, climate change, etc.), making him indistinguishable from Pelosi herself.
However, it’s not just that Wiener’s sexual orientation obsesses him at a personal level. It also affects him at a political level. What Politico failed to report about Wiener is how he’s been very active in changing some important California policies.
Thanks to Wiener, if you knowingly infect someone with HIV in California—a fatal disease unless you live the rest of your life on drugs—it’s no longer a felony. Now, it’s a misdemeanor.
Thanks to Scott Wiener, California identification and other documents have become meaningless because they recognize a “gender” other than the only two human sexes.
Thanks to Scott Wiener, it’s no longer illegal for a 25-year-old to have sex with a 15-year-old. What’s really funny is that Wiener argued that laws forbidding ephebophilia (i.e., sexual attraction to adolescents) are specifically homophobic. Harvey Milk, an ephebophile who became a martyr when he was assassinated in 1978 (everyone ignores that Mayor Moscone, a straight man, was assassinated, too), would be proud. Parents who love their teenagers, though, should be very worried.
Lastly, on the sexual side, thanks to Scott Wiener, California is now a “trans refugee” state, protecting children seeking so-called “gender-affirming care” in California. It’s ostensibly intended to protect children and their families from “anti-trans” laws in other states such as Florida and South Carolina. However, you can readily see it being used to protect runaways from their parents or children stolen away by one parent in custody battles.
One more thing that bugs me: Wiener loves parading around his Jewishness as a leftist cudgel. However, the best that he could come up with regarding the Israel-Hamas war was a statement back in November when he called for the hostages to be returned (that was good) and then demanded a ceasefire, Netanyahu’s ouster, and a two-state solution, with Israel on the one side and an openly exterminationist enemy on the other. And how he wants that two-state solution...
Before today, it would be hard for me to imagine anyone worse for America than Nancy Pelosi. However, now we know: Wiener is it. You don’t want to put this man anywhere near the federal government, lest he do to America what he and his partners do to each other.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/06/politico_shills_for_scott_wiener_an_lgbtq_activist_in_his_fight_for_pelosi_s_seat.html
Biden's sneaky back-door amnesty for illegals
By Monica Showalter
That's who Biden is bringing in to our country in his pursuit of more Democrat votes. He's not even honest about it -- he's sneaking it through as these politicized judges dismiss these cases on the grounds that these characters are no threat to the public, except of course, some of them are.
Trump or Demented Dems: who is really going to prison?
By Noel S. Williams
Demented Dems are salivating at the perverted idea that Trump could go to prison.
They are demented because they are the ones who are mentally imprisoned.
It is perverted because they live in an alternate universe where not only the established tenets of human nature are skewed, but where the laws that make civil society compatible are ripped asunder. A place where Dems like Joe Biden and Hillary are above the law, but MAGA Republicans are beneath it.
No wonder Dems denounce western civilization -- they don’t adhere to its emphasis on reason and rationality. They don’t recognize the better angels of our nature. Rather than celebrate one of our foundational premises -- the (ongoing) pursuit of equal justice -- they seem determined to take us back to the dark ages, where might makes right.
I shudder to think of even the remote prospect of our (likely) future president being put in a Dem prison. Regardless, he will never be imprisoned. The MAGA-truth, accompanied by spiritual awakening, will set him free. The MAGA “deplorables” will set him free. The ultimate verdict, wrought by the elections, will set us free.
So who is really going to prison? The unrepentant, diehard Dems will remain forlorn. Without invasive intervention, they’ll remain trapped in stifling leftist orthodoxy. Their mental prison being contaminated by repetitive negative thoughts and dark Dem emotions. Confusion, depression and anxiety riddle their broken, Bidenesque brains.
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy might help them breakout from their Dem delusions. Then again, such are the depths of their Trump Derangement Syndrome, that a session of electrical brain tapping, a form of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, may finally help them escape their mental imprisonment.
Meanwhile, no matter his temporal conditions, Trump will enthusiastically lead us to broad, sunlit uplands, free of illegal aliens. A place where the better MAGA-angels of our nature frolic. A place where truth shall make one free.
But don’t worry you anti-American and anti-Western Dems -- he won’t go medieval on you. Success will be his revenge as you rot in your mental prison. As FDR mused, “[m]en are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds.”
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/06/trump_or_demented_dems_who_is_really_going_to_prison.html
Holding Anthony Fauci accountable?
By Paul S. Gardiner
Another criminal referral to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) soon may be made by members of the U.S. Congress to investigate Dr. Anthony Fauci for lying under oath to Congress, which is a felony crime. Representative Jim Comer, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, soon may follow Senator Rand Paul in requesting that the DOJ to criminally investigate Fauci for lying under oath to Congress.
But lying to Congress does not even begin to compare with or address the horrendous amount of suffering and death caused by the toxic health care policies and hospital protocols developed and promulgated by Anthony Fauci and many of the officials listed herein. In this regard, these officials bear “superior responsibility” for the health care policies and toxic protocols that killed tens (hundreds?) of thousands of Americans during the recent COVID-19 pandemic.
Rather than hope for a bona fide DOJ investigation of Anthony Fauci and other high-ranking officials for alleged federal crimes, efforts are underway at the state level in Florida, Texas, and Louisiana to have criminal investigations conducted based on violations of state criminal codes. If the investigations establish sufficient probable cause of crimes being committed, then the accused individuals can and should be indicted and prosecuted to the full extent of state law.
Each of the legal briefs described herein contains extensive evidence of state crimes committed. The briefs include numerous handwritten letters submitted by aggrieved next-of-kin family members requesting the criminal investigations. Contact information for details about COVID-19 victims in each of the three states is also provided.
The Florida, Texas, and Louisiana attorneys general and district attorneys need to honor their citizens’ requests for justice and accountability for the deaths of their loved ones. Further, these public officials swore an oath to stand for justice and protect the rights and lives of their respective citizenry. Now is the time for these public servants to courageously and rightly pursue truth and justice on behalf of their aggrieved citizens and their lost loved ones.
Below is a brief summary of the Florida, Texas, and Louisiana legal briefs.
FLORIDA: In October 2023, a 20-page legal brief with exhibits was submitted by attorneys, including an ex-prosecutor, to the Florida attorney general and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. The extensive legal brief requests investigation and subsequent indictment and prosecution of the below named individuals for alleged statewide COVID-related criminal offenses committed against tens of thousands of Floridians. To date, little if any action has been taken on this request.
The request was made on behalf of the next-of-kin relatives of 32 victims in Florida, who request investigation into the deaths of their loved ones under toxic COVID-19 hospital protocols; intentional COVID-19 infection mismanagement; and suppression and denial of life-saving treatments in Florida hospitals, nursing homes, and other facilities.
The accused include:
- Anthony Fauci, ex-director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
- Cliff Lane, deputy director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
- Francis Collins, ex-director, National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- Deborah Birx, ex–White House COVID response coordinator & former director of DOD HIV Research at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research
- Rochelle Walensky, ex-director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
- Stephen Hahn, ex-commissioner, Federal Drug Administration (FDA)
- The administrators of hospital systems providing care to patients in Florida, including but not limited to AdventHealth Hospital Organization
Alleged violations of Florida criminal code include:
- Murder while Committing Acts of Terrorism, Fl. Stat. §782.04
- Murder while Committing Aggravated Abuse of the Elderly and Disabled Adults, Fl. Stat. §782.04
- Aggravated Manslaughter of the Elderly, Disabled Adults, and Children, Fl. Stat. §782.07
- Florida Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO), Fl. Stat. §895.03
TEXAS: In March 2024, a 26-page legal brief with exhibits was submitted by attorneys to the district attorneys of 22 Texas counties to initiate criminal investigations of Anthony Fauci and other officials for alleged COVID-related crimes committed against citizens of Texas. The criminal referral requests (to be sent to Texas attorney general Ken Paxton) were submitted to the district attorneys for Angelina, Bexar, Brazos, Collin, Cooke, Dallas, Fort Bend, Galveston, Guadalupe, Grayson, Gregg, Harris, Hays, Johnson, Lubbock, Montgomery, Smith, Tarrant, Tom Green, Travis, and Wise Counties. Current status of the referral requests is unknown at present.
The requests were made on behalf of the next-of-kin relatives of 46 victims in Texas, who request investigation into the deaths of their loved ones under toxic COVID-19 hospital protocols, intentional COVID-19 infection mismanagement, and suppression and denial of life-saving treatments in Texas hospitals, nursing homes, and other facilities.
The accused include the same individuals in the above Florida filing with the addition of the following officials:
- Robert Redfield, ex-director, CDC
- Peter Daszak, president, Eco-Health Alliance
- Rick Bright, director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority
- The administrators and health care providers of hospital systems and facilities providing care to patients in Texas, including but not limited to Baylor, Scott, and White Hospital Systems.
Alleged violations of Texas criminal code include:
- Capital Murder – Tex. Penal Code §19.03(a)(7);
- Manslaughter – Tex. Penal Code §19.04;
- Trafficking of Persons – Tex. Penal Code §20A.02;
- Participation in enterprise through racketeering or unlawful debt collection – Tex. Penal Code §72.04 by Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity – Tex. Penal Code §71.02;
- Injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual – Tex. Penal Code §22.04
LOUISIANA: Next-of-kin relatives of nine Louisianians (victims) request investigation into the deaths of their lost loved ones under toxic COVID-19 hospital protocols; intentional COVID-19 infection mismanagement; and suppression and denial of life-saving treatments in Louisiana hospitals, nursing homes, and other facilities. In response to their requests, attorneys have prepared an extensive 30-page legal brief with exhibits that soon will be submitted to the Louisianna attorney general and applicable district attorneys.
The accused include the same individuals listed in the Florida and Texas legal briefs.
Alleged violations of Louisiana criminal code include:
- Terrorism – by Causing Intentional Killing or Infliction of Serious Bodily Injury, La. R.S. 14:128.1(A);
- First Degree Murder, La. R.S. 14:30 and Second Degree Murder, La. R.S. 14:30.1;
- Manslaughter, La. R.S. 14:31(A)(3);
- Prohibited Racketeering Acts, La. R.S. 15:1353;
- Cruelty to Persons with Infirmities, La. R.S. 14:93.3;
- False Imprisonment, La. R.S. 14:46 and Second Degree Kidnapping, La. R.S. 14:44.1
A FINAL THOUGHT: The late evangelist Billy Graham once said: “Courage is contagious — when a brave man takes a stand, the spines of others are often stiffened.” America desperately needs at least one brave prosecutor to lead in courageously pursuing truth and justice on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of aggrieved next-of-kin families who wrongfully lost loved ones during the recent COVID-19 pandemic.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/06/holding_anthony_fauci_accountable.html
Libertarians: Vote for Trump with your eyes open
By Jay Davidson
Trump is one of only two choices we have. The fact that the ever-bigger-government left hates him so much strongly suggests that leftists fear Trump. Therefore, he is on the right track. The fact that a leftist population and N.Y. justice system would warp the concept of law to such an extreme tells me that they are the real danger to freedom. The left is making the decision for us. We cannot allow this tyranny to exist in America.
‘Getting Trrump’ Doesn’t Solve Anything
By Christopher Chantrill
Do you not understand, dear liberal friends, that your problem is not Trump, or bitter clingers, or deplorables, or clowns. Ordinary middle-class people are voting for populist nationalist parties and politicians all over the western world not because of racism or hate or white privilege, but because your ideas, your politics, your rule Makes Things Worse.
The Trump Conviction and the New Democrat Playbook
By P.F. Kelly, Jr.
The new breed of radical Democrats can’t talk about their real priorities, which plainly is to transform American society and traditions, and they can’t lie about it forever, so they have only one option: shut down the opposition. Shut down their most formidable opponents.
The State of the Coup
By Jim Darlington
They promoted the BLM/Antifa riots, in the middle of a national quarantine and lockdown. They mandated vaccines for all, that are somewhere between worthless and murderous. They’ve broken the border and broken the people’s bank accounts. They’ve managed to make the weapons dealers richer while making our military a joke. They’ve made our cities filthy and dangerous. They are turning our little boys into little girls, unable to properly read or write or do ‘rithmatic.
Never Vote for Democrats, Period!
By Ed Brodow
If Biden gets another four years, America will never be the same. “Every single thing this man and his administration touch they absolutely destroy,”
America Has Crossed the Rubicon
By Brian C. Joondeph
The Rubicon has been crossed. Can America get back to the constitutional and honorable side of the river? Or has the die been cast? If the former, there is hope. If the latter, then the American experiment is sadly over.
Anthony Fauci Is Still Immune to Taking Responsibility
Former COVID response leader shifts the pandemic blame.
by Graham J Noble | Jun 4, 2024
Anthony Fauci, the former chief of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), was better known to most Americans as the federal government’s point man on pandemic response. To hear him recount his version of how the COVID-19 outbreak was dealt with, however, one would think Fauci had little to no influence over any of the decision-making or the improvised science used to justify those decisions. Such was the case when the doctor appeared before the House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic on June 3.
It is difficult to forget the protracted fight over the origins of the virus that caused a virtual shutdown of the global economy. Every American remembers the lengths to which the leaders of the medical community and large swaths of the media went to persuade the nation that COVID-19 jumped from animals to humans in a so-called Chinese wet market. Alongside that narrative, an enormous amount of effort was expended trying to silence those who expressed a suspicion that this particular strain of COVID was developed in a Chinese virology lab and then escaped.
This latter theory of the virus’ origin has gained significant ground since the height of the pandemic. But there is still no denying that the powers-that-be wanted it suppressed. At his hearing, Fauci insisted he had nothing to do with the attempts to kill what became known as the “lab leak” theory. Still, the former NIAID director is on record supporting the animal-to-human transmission narrative. It seems unlikely that the doctor was unaware that differing voices were being ridiculed, shouted down, censored, and, in a few cases, even threatened. There is no public record of Fauci urging the so-called experts to keep an open mind about the origins of the virus. One could be forgiven for determining, then, that even if he personally did not direct the efforts to stifle the lab leak theory, his silence was a form of complicity.
Anthony Fauci and the Missing Science
When grilled about the heavy-handed methods used to supposedly slow the spread of the virus – the mask mandates, the social distancing rules, the school closures, and, of course, the vaccine mandates – Fauci again dodged responsibility. He is – or was – supposedly the nation’s leading infectious disease expert. In that capacity, Fauci had a duty to be honest with both the leaders of government he was advising and with the American people about individual precautions that are effective and those that are not.
Claiming, then, that the mass-masking, the vaccine mandates, the six-feet social distancing, and the closures of schools and businesses all originated from guidelines put out by the CDC and had nothing to do with him is feckless, to say the least. Neither back at the height of the pandemic nor today can Fauci point to any scientifically objective peer-reviewed studies that establish the effectiveness of mass-masking. Indeed, during a 60 Minutes interview in early 2020, he observed that, while wearing masks may well provide people with a false sense of security, it would have no meaningful effect on the spread of the virus. Less than a year later, however, Fauci was appearing in public wearing not just one but two masks. He knew the masks wouldn’t slow the infection rate of COVID-19. Yet, Fauci nevertheless committed himself to disseminating the unscientific notion that strapping a piece of fabric to one’s face would somehow block the passage of the microscopic droplets in which the virus traveled.
Asked by Rep. Michael Cloud (R-TX) if there was any scientific evidence supporting mask mandates for children under the age of five, Fauci responded, “There was no study that did masks on kids before. You couldn’t do that study. You had to respond to an epidemic that was killing four to 5000 Americans a day.” Here is Fauci admitting that there was no scientific basis for forcing young children to wear masks.
The most astounding – some might even say the most outrageous – thing Fauci said during the June 3 hearing was that the unvaccinated are “probably” responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths. “Probably” is a word few credible scientist would want to use during a science-based discussion. Fauci has no evidence to back up his claim – which, of course, is why he used that word. He vaguely referred to “analysis” in an attempt to confer some measure of credibility upon himself:
“[A]nd, you know, some have done studies, [vaccinologist] Peter Hotez has done an analysis of this, and shows that, in people who refuse to get vaccinated for any of a variety of reasons, [they are] probably responsible for an additional two to 300,000 deaths in this country.”
That’s some pretty flimsy evidence. Some people have done studies or analyses and have concluded a probability. Very scientific. Contrary to what the nation was told about the COVID vaccines, it is now widely accepted that the vaccinated were, in large part, as susceptible as the unvaccinated to contracting the virus and spreading it. Fauci’s claim, then, is little more than speculation – and rather tasteless speculation, at that — when one considers that he is virtually accusing the unvaccinated of mass murder with no supporting evidence.
Failed the American People
New banner Opinion 1The American public was bullied into conforming to all kinds of new rules for social interaction – few of which appear to have had any measurable effect on the spread of COVID-19. It is certainly fair to say that Fauci commanded a great deal of respect – among most Americans – when it came to teaching them how to protect against the virus. Thus, he could have, and should have, spoken out against some of the more spurious rules by which people were told to live. Had he done so, people would have listened to him, and they would have believed him. And the country would have been spared a great deal of unnecessary drama. COVID-19, meanwhile, would have spread at just the same rate — no slower but also no quicker.
The closures of schools and businesses were all entirely unnecessary – and we know that now because we all saw how quickly the virus continued to spread even after these measures were put in place. The detrimental effects of those closures are still being felt today. Fauci was in a unique position back in 2020 to prevent all of that – even if it meant going against what the CDC was advising. Nobody cared about what the CDC was saying; as the public face of the government’s response to the pandemic, they wanted to know what Fauci had to say. But he said nothing. He walked around wearing his two masks, and with his silence – if nothing else – he tacitly put his stamp of approval on all of the anti-COVID measures and all the flawed science that was used to justify them.
https://www.libertynation.com/anthony-fauci-is-still-immune-to-taking-responsibility/
President Biden Supports Son Hunter in Gun and Crack Trial
Like Donald Trump, Hunter is facing trials across the country.
by Scott D. Cosenza, Esq. | Jun 4, 2024
The first of two federal criminal trials involving Hunter Biden began on Monday, June 3. He faces a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison and more than $750,000 in fines. Yes, Donald Trump is not the only one fighting multiple indictments across the country. Later in September, Hunter will face criminal tax fraud and evasion accusations in a California federal court. But back in President Joe Biden’s power base of Wilmington, DE, son Hunter is on trial presently for three federal felonies for lying about drugs during a gun purchase.
Remaining Silent
Criminal defense attorneys seem to have a love-hate relationship with statements about crimes. On the one hand, they wish clients would shut up and not provide police with gift-wrapped cases of incriminating speech. However, many criminal defense attorneys’ beach houses can be tied directly back to such statements and the cases that result. Hunter talked himself into these charges, writing about his profligate drug use in his book Beautiful Things. Biden’s confessions took on criminal significance beyond possession of dangerous controlled substances when it became clear he bought a gun during a crack binge.
The federal gun buyer background check asks buyers if they are unlawful users of or addicted to a controlled substance. Hunter checked “no,” generating the charge of three crimes: the false statement by checking no, a second false statement regarding making a false statement in a firearms transaction record, and the third barring illegal drug users from possessing firearms. The charges were filed by a Trump appointee to the Justice Department.
By Monday afternoon, Hunter’s jury of 12 was set. Did they get a chance to hear his father’s statement on the trial? Probably not. But perhaps before the trial is over, they will. Wilmington-area residents learned that while Joe Biden refuses to comment about a pending criminal case, apparently, that doesn’t include references to the defendant in this particular trial.
Biden Backs Biden
President Biden sent a statement on the trial directly to various media outlets, just as jury selection in Hunter’s trial began; the White House did not publish it.
“I am the President, but I am also a Dad. Jill and I love our son, and we are so proud of the man he is today. Hunter’s resilience in the face of adversity and the strength he has brought to his recovery are inspiring to us. A lot of families have loved ones who have overcome addiction and know what we mean. As the President, I don’t and won’t comment on pending federal cases, but as a Dad, I have boundless love for my son, confidence in him, and respect for his strength. Our family has been through a lot together, and Jill and I are going to continue to be there for Hunter and our family with our love and support.”
Hunter claimed that he was “smoking crack every 15 minutes” around the time of the gun purchase. The trial is expected to last about a week. US District Judge Maryellen Noreika, a Trump appointee, is hearing the case.
https://www.libertynation.com/president-biden-supports-son-hunter-in-gun-and-crack-trial/
Trump Verdict Fallout: Moving the Middle Is All That Matters
How the folks in the middle are reacting to the Trump conviction.
by Leesa K. Donner | Jun 4, 2024
It’s only been a few days since a Manhattan jury brought forth a speedy and stunning guilty verdict convicting former President Donald Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Since that time, the political class has run amok. Republicans are closing ranks in support of 45 while many Democrats are rejoicing in what they perceive as justice served. However, the real issue is not where the party faithful stand amid all this hullabaloo but where the independents will fall. Will they lean into the beleaguered former president or distance themselves from him?
A few flash polls made headlines right after the verdict was announced. One survey spoke to just over 400 likely voters. That would be a yay for “likely” because these people are a better barometer of the political weather than those who fall under the heading “registered” voters. But a yuck for the sample size: 403 people surveyed is a better number for an oversized wedding than a political poll. The word “flash” could almost be synonymous with a flash in the pan, which is nothing more than a transient phase with little or no long-term effect.
Then there was the YouGov flash poll, which got high marks for its sample size (3,000) but violated a credibility standard by interviewing “adults,” so there’s no way of knowing how many are registered or likely voters. Thus, the integrity of both public opinion flash surveys is questionable, which is why – as Liberty Nation reported – they should be taken with a grain of salt.
Since these flash polls, there have been four more reliable surveys: I&I/TIPP, Morning Consult, Forbes/HarrisX, and Reuters/Ipsos. Morning Consult had the current president up by one point, and Forbes/HarrisX had Trump up by 2 points in both a two-way and five-way race. Reuters had Biden up by two, and the I&I/TIPP had the heavyweights tied in a two-way and again in a five-way race. But we’re not interested in those above-line numbers because, like a treasure hunt, the real poll gold is often found buried in the deep waters known as the cross tabs.
At this point in the presidential contest, what really matters is not the prize fight between Ali and Frazier or even where it stands with the three others — Robert F. Kennedy, Jill Stein, and Cornel West – but with the voters who have yet to pitch their tent in either camp. And that takes us to the land of the independent.
Trump Verdict — Swaying the Indies
The independents strut their stuff in the I&I/TIPP survey, showing Trump with the knockout punch. In a head-to-head match-up, independents favor the former president by – sit up and take notice – 38% to 26%. The history of this poll is worth mentioning because in May Trump pulled in only 33% of the independents.
Another gauge of political strength is the enthusiasm factor (pollsters call it support intensity). This number takes into account those who are willing to say they strongly support a candidate. Again, Trump takes home the blue ribbon, with 65% to Biden’s 50%. According to the editor of Issues & Insights, Terry Jones, the upshot of the survey is “Trump does not seem to be politically damaged by his legal troubles. He may even be politically stronger.”
The Pendulum Swings the Other Way
The Morning Consult poll found yet another surprising shift, with “nearly half of Independents” saying they want former President Donald Trump to drop his 2024 campaign … ”* HarrisX conducted an overnight survey of 1,006 registered voters and found 22% of independents were more likely to vote for Trump following his conviction in New York. However, another 28% said they were less likely to pull the lever for The Donald. Finally, the Reuters Ipsos poll found that 16% of independents are more likely to vote for Trump with the conviction factored in. Another 26% said they were less likely to cast their ballot for him.
It doesn’t appear that those on the left and right have budged since the Trump verdict; however, three of the four standard polls indicate that independents are moving away from voting for 45, and the Trump campaign should take notice and adjust its message accordingly. To be sure, the independent voter can be fickle. One post on X summed it up quite well. Someone called SteeJo wrote: “Expecting to see an editorial titled “I’m an Independent who believes Trump’s guilty verdict should make him drop out of the race, but if he doesn’t I’ll vote for him any moment now.”
*We were unable to confirm this information because Morning Consult cross tabs are behind a security wall, which requires the outlet to be contacted for permission to view its data sets.
https://www.libertynation.com/trump-verdict-fallout-moving-the-middle-is-all-that-matters/
Eric Trump to Newsmax: Left Wants 'Real Harm' Done to My Dad
By Mark Swanson | Monday, 03 June 2024 08:46 PM EDT
Eric Trump told Newsmax on Monday that the "derangement" on the left is so "truly sick" that they would like to see "real harm" done to his father because nothing else is working.
Trump, the second son of Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump, joined "Carl Higbie FRONTLINE" to summarize the wish list of the Democratic party in the aftermath of last week's conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records.
"Sincerely, these people would love to see real harm done to him," Eric Trump told Higbie. "They try and do that every day in terms of going after his wallet, trying to bankrupt him, trying to go after his family, subpoenaing all of us, trying to go after him criminally for absolutely nothing. They weaponize every system. But I mean it, they would love to see real physical harm done to him. And it pains me to say that."
Eric Trump was reacting to former FBI Director James Comey saying over the weekend that it's logistically possible to imprison the former president by putting him in a double-wide in a prison field. And, if Democrats had their way, without his Secret Service security detail.
"You know, it's really sick. The derangement is truly, truly sick. They would love to see him rot out there," Eric Trump said.
"But you know who doesn't? America. When you see the swing of independents coming over to my father, they know exactly the games that have been played. There's only so many times you could cry wolf," said the vice president of Trump Organization.
Eric Trump rattled off all the attempts made on Donald Trump's presidency and current candidacy, including from the first impeachment while president, to the attempts to keep him off the ballot a few months ago, to now four criminal trials.
"I mean, how many more of these hoaxes do you want? They have one, you know, job, and they realize that [Joe] Biden is not going to beat [Donald Trump] at the polls. [Biden] has zero enthusiasm," Eric Trump said.
"So, guess what? They would love to throw him in jail. They'd love to strip away his civil liberties. They would love to do anything they could to take him out of the race. That's been their plan the entire time, and it's obviously not working," Eric Trump added. "And you know frankly, Carl, every day it's backfiring. I mean, the love and support right now is better than it's ever been before.
"And so, you know, keep playing your games, you know, keep doing stupid things," Eric Trump said in a message aimed at Democrats. "And I promise you, you know, it's a law of unintended consequences; it will come back to catch them as it has every other time in the past."
https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/eric-trump-newsmax-dems/2024/06/03/id/1167327/?ns_mail_uid=110c4f27-b39e-4490-8c9e-becd156886f8&ns_mail_job=DM631203_06042024&s=acs&dkt_nbr=010504a2llku
Banana Republics Starting To Feel Kinda Bad For United States
WORLD — Banana republics from across the globe have begun to feel a bit bad for the United States, and wondering if perhaps they ought to do something to help.
"It's sad. I mean we have sham trials here too, but at least we have bananas," said dictator Omar Carrillo. "I just really feel for them, you know?"
According to sources, several banana republics have begun to express concern that the corruption in America has gotten out of hand. "When we do show trials to destroy opposition candidates, we still charge them with crimes that at least exist. I mean, come on," said General Jose Cavazos. "We also at least pretend that justice was done, instead of just smirking at the press and walking away. That's so mean-spirited, right? We at least give our population false hope instead of just spitting in their faces."
At publishing time, the banana republics had decided to help America by sending troops to help monitor the election for fairness, and also a bunch of bananas.
https://babylonbee.com/news/banana-republics-starting-to-feel-kinda-bad-for-united-states
Biden's war on Medicare
President targeting Advantage, Part D programs for destruction
Published June 2, 2024 at 3:54pm
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire.]
By Newt Gingrich & Jim Frogue
Real Clear Wire
President Joe Biden’s full-frontal assault on Medicare is becoming visible to America’s seniors. It will result in fewer patient choices, reduced benefits, and ultimately worse health outcomes. Biden’s efforts, assisted by Congressional Democrats, are destroying Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage.
Medicare Advantage was originally created as Medicare Part C in 1997 when I was Speaker of the House. It was introduced to create more comprehensive health plan options for seniors that included, for the first time, prescription drug coverage. The idea was to leverage consumer choice and market competition by insurers. Seniors can change plans annually for any reason.
More than 30 million seniors are in Medicare Advantage, which is more than half of all Medicare-eligible seniors. Enrollment has been on a “steady climb for the for past two decades,” according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. All MA enrollees have voluntarily chosen to join because it is better for their health.
A 2021 poll by Better Medicare Alliance showed seniors in MA have a 98 percent satisfaction rate. Ninety-five percent said it is important to have options beyond traditional Medicare. Ninety-three percent said a candidate’s position on MA would affect their vote. A bipartisan poll by the Healthcare Leadership Council in November, 2023 found more than 9-in-10 said they were pleased with their MA coverage.
Last week, CVS Aetna Chief Financial Officer Tom Cowhey told investors that the company may shed up to 10 percent of their four million MA enrollees next year. Humana CFO Susan Diamond suggested 5 percent of their enrollees may be dropped. This translates into as many as 1.5 million seniors losing their coverage of choice. And this figure is dwarfed by the millions of MA beneficiaries who will see reduced coverage around prescription drugs, vision, dental, transportation, gym memberships, and many other popular benefits that are only offered in Medicare Advantage.
A new report by the Kaiser Family Foundation noted that most states offer Medicare Advantage plans to their state retirees. Twelve states, including key swing states Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Georgia, offer only Medicare Advantage plans. Senior voters in Philadelphia’s Main Line are unlikely to appreciate attacks on Medicare Advantage.
Biden’s war on Medicare doesn’t end with just Medicare Advantage. The so-called Inflation Reduction Act – passed in 2022 with exclusively Democratic votes and was signed into law by President Biden – is wrecking the popular Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage.
Medicare Part D was created by Congressional Republicans in 2003 and was signed into law by President George W. Bush. For nearly two decades, Part D prescription drug-only plans were stable, affordable, competitive, and did something truly amazing for a health care program – stayed within original budget projections. To the surprise of even the bill’s authors, more than 1,000 plans signed up to participate within a year.
The Democrats promised that their Inflation Reduction Act would increase drug coverage for seniors and limit their out-of-pocket costs to $2,000 per year in 2025. It also allows seniors to pay their drug costs in installments. Sounds great. But seniors will be shocked on Oct. 1 when their Part D premiums skyrocket. Premiums were up 21percent last year and are likely to jump 50 percent this year. Awkward timing for Biden and fellow Democrats who are hoping to campaign on “lowering prescription drug costs.”
The Inflation Reduction Act is negatively impacting patient cost-sharing for prescription drugs in Medicare Part B as well. According to a new analysis in the trade publication Drug Channels, the inflation adjuster for most drugs is increasing instead of decreasing. Even instances where a drug price may be declining, it could still trigger big jumps in patient out-of-pocket costs.
IRA proponents boasted of their Medicare reforms saving $266 billion from 2023 to 2031. Even if that projection ends up holding true (and it doesn’t look likely), that amount is only a partial down payment on $670 billion for the IRA’s various green energy tax credits and new environmental spending.
How well is the Biden administration’s green energy spending going? The $7.5 billion in federal spending has resulted in only eight new charging stations for electric vehicles. And this at the same time consumer interest in electric cars is plummeting.
It is well known that the political left in America wants to move us toward government-run single payer health care. Imagine just one insurer and if you don’t like it you can’t leave. So, it is no surprise that Democrats would want to destroy the private sector’s involvement in Medicare, no matter how popular with seniors. But it is somewhat surprising that Democrats would be so politically obtuse to have smoking wreckage appear just before the presidential election. It remains to be seen if Republicans will capitalize.
https://www.wnd.com/2024/06/bidens-war-medicare/
Which Movie Will It Be?
James Howard Kunstler
Jun 03, 2024
“It’s almost as if the principals (prosecutors and judge) were performing for their political audience — with a wink, a nod and a stage whisper (“watch this!”) as they ignore yet another fundamental element of American due process.” — Jack DeVine on “X”
The ninnies of Bidenworld seem to not understand that by subjecting Mr. Trump to a kangaroo court they’ve made him the kind of outlaw that Americans revere above every other archetypal hero. He’s the new American Robin Hood, the people’s outlaw — with “Joe Biden” relegated as the wicked Sir Guy of Gisbourne, master of foul play and servant of the evil regent Prince John (Barack Obama). The galvanizing moment in this melodrama was not the verdict in Judge Juan Merchan’s kangaroo corral of a court, but the next day in the White House when “Joe Biden” was asked to comment on it as he shuffled away from the podium, halted, turned, and smirked silently at the cameras, a gesture that is sure to live in infamy.
The fun should really kick off when the judge gets to sentence Trump-the-Outlaw July 11, a few days before the Republican convention. Life in some New York state pen? A year on Rikers Island? House arrest? Who knows. But you can bet that just like Robin-of-Locksley, Donald-of-Mar-a-Lago will manage to slip out of his captors’ clutches and cleverly vanquish them. In a sane world, of course, the US Supreme Court would be entreated to adjudicate this gross insult to due process as spelled out in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
But you might have noticed that this is not a sane world, at least not these days, and not a few supposedly sober analysts, such as Jonathan Turley of George Washington University, claim that a SCOTUS review is a long-shot — which only confirms the reigning insanity since it’s hard to imagine a more compelling moment for the SCOTUS to carry out its fundamental duty: to elucidate the meaning of our Constitution and resolve disputes arising therefrom.
Now, it looks like what we’re seeing after a few days for the shock to wear off, is a mighty righteous rage arising among the faction designated as “Red” — that is, the anti-Woke, anti-Globalist, anti-neoMarxist, anti-Deep State blob, anti-Lawfare, anti-Democratic Party chunk of the adult US population. It amounts to a recognition that we are already in some kind of civil war, and that the tactics of “Joe Biden’s” party must and will be opposed by all means. The SCOTUS is the last resort of legal means for redress in this matter, and they would punt this duty at great peril to the country.
To clarify just what this matter is: “Joe Biden’s” White House and Department of Justice conspired with New York County (Manhattan) authorities to maliciously construct and execute a court case made of patently false charges against their principal political adversary, and with a cavalier disrespect to both state and federal law.
As such, the “Stormy Daniels Payoff Case,” as it’s known, is just the latest ploy in a long train of lawless gambits starting with RussiaGate in 2016 (the “Steele Dossier” and all) that have left hundreds of high appointed officials in the federal bureaucracy (plus many retired from it) liable to severe criminal charges ranging as far as sedition and treason. RussiaGate may have started its life as a typical campaign prank by doofuses in the Hillary Clinton organization, but it turned seriously sinister when it was adopted by the FBI and the CIA to execute a plan to harass and defenestrate the elected president, Mr. Trump.
With each subsequent prank, to distract from and cover-up their crimes, the same group of officials has committed more crimes, to the point that the federal government now behaves like a gigantic mafia, dedicated to nothing but crime of one kind or another. The Democratic Party has become this mob’s protective order; the old mainstream media its mouthpiece; and the people of this country increasingly its victims. Naturally, these criminals are now desperate to avoid having to account for their crimes, which is exactly and explicitly what Mr. Trump promises to do.
So, there it is: a criminal regime versus the people defended by their outlaw hero. Does the SCOTUS want to aid and abet this gang of criminals — led by the way, and just so you know, by Barack Obama and his Kalorama coterie, John Brennan, Mary McCord and her Lawfare coterie, Hillary and Bill Clinton and their henchmen, and scores of additional DC lawyers, fixers, and judges — or, will the SCOTUS avert an epic crisis of legitimacy by stepping in to quash the ridiculously fake New York case just concluded?
If they demur in some cowardly blur of excuses, then it’s onto the next truly nation-ending stage of this game. The “Joe Biden” regime would like nothing more than an outbreak of civil violence they can blame on “right-wing extremists.” In fact, they could and probably will gin that up themselves, just as they transformed the Jan-6-21 mass protest against widespread ballot fraud into a “MAGA insurrection.” You are also certainly aware of the sinister millions, mainly young men from faraway lands, who “Joe Biden” imported across the border the past three years. And you might imagine how they could be put to use against American citizens, along with the Democratic Party shock troops known as BLM and Antifa. Summer’s here and the time is right for fighting in the streets. And, of course, even if the SCOTUS puts an end to this latest bit of Lawfare fuckery, the “Joe Biden” crew can always opt to just up and kill its opponent. Nothing is beneath them now. But when that happens, we’ll be in a very different kind of movie.
https://jameshowardkunstler.substack.com/p/which-movie-will-it-be?publication_id=2076970&post_id=145255949&isFreemail=true&r=rd9j8&triedRedirect=true
Who wrote that Gaza peace proposal? All we know is Biden lied
By Barry Shaw
The president of the United States, Joe Biden, went in front of the cameras at the White House on May 31 and presented a multi-stage process for an end of war in Gaza that would release all the hostages, declaring it to be an Israeli peace plan.
So bizarre to have this coming from the American President, not the Government of Israel: https://t.co/dton6d7sWl
— Victoria Coates (@VictoriaCoates) May 31, 2024
It would be interesting to learn from Biden which Israeli came up with this plan.
Biden’s “Israeli” plan sounded comprehensive but it wasn’t, and it didn’t sound right.
According to Biden we would get all our hostages after we release several hundred merciless killers and accepting a ceasefire that would become a permanent cessation in fighting. But no word about the defeat of Hamas and its leaders.
In other words, Biden’s Israel plan gifts a victory to Hamas.
Our officials have negotiated with any partner, friend or enemy, to get our hostages back for months, but the thought that Hamas would emerge armed and dangerous was never on the cards. In fact, this detail has split a part of Israeli society who want the hostages home even if Hamas is left to repeat the horrors of Oct. 7, but they are a vocal but small part of the population.
This part also wants to remove Netanyahu as Israel’s leader. These are led by the malcontents that had split Israeli society up to the day that Hamas attacked on Oct. 7. Prior to that day they included notable, some would say malevolent, former leftist politicians and retired IDF and air force commanders who were telling reservists not to turn up for duty as long as Bibi was prime minister.
For many, these are the people that created the atmosphere in Israel that encouraged Hamas to strike. Now these people are seen as dividing the suffering families of the hostages. They have returned to their public streets with all the equipment but different signs and are using the hostages, and the length of the war, as their cover to have Netanyahu removed.
Israel has a war cabinet comprising both members of the government and opposition to manage the conflict. All, apparently, have the same unified goal that Hamas must be utterly defeated. This is particularly felt by our volunteer soldiers who are dedicated, to the point of self-sacrifice, to eliminate Hamas. All are motivated by the horrific events of Oct. 7 and are fighting under the pledge of “Never Again!”
So for Biden to spell out the conditions of a hostage deal that leaves Hamas alive and killing, and present it as an Israeli plan, did not sound right.
In his words:
“After intensive diplomacy carried out by my team, my many conversations with leaders of Israel, Qatar and Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries, Israel has now offered a comprehensive new proposal. It’s a road map to an enduring ceasefire and the release of all hostages.”
Israelis are angry that after sweeping through Gaza City and Khan Younis, the IDF completely withdrew from Gaza as a precondition imposed by Hamas for the release of hostages. Hamas broke their agreement.
Israel does not engage in negotiations for the release of our hostages in front of the media. Lives are at stake and families’ expectations can easily be dashed.
But Biden broke that sacred bond in a cynical political manner, saying:
“I need your help. Everyone who wants peace now must raise their voices and let the leaders know they should take this deal.”
For Israelis, it sounded like the U.S. president was calling on the international community to dump down on us.
It sounded as if Biden wanted to deepen the rift within Israeli society to bring down our elected prime minister, and to do it during an essential war when the fate of our living hostages is at stake, made it appear an egregious cynical political ploy.
Our hostages should not be expendable pawns in particularly ill-considered publicity event.
Proving that his plan was not Israeli, but his own, Biden said:
“Israel will want to make sure its interests are protected but the proposal says should the negotiations take longer than six weeks for phase one, the ceasefire will still continue as long as negotiations continue.”
An Israeli reading implies that after Hamas plays their psychological time games and extends agreed deadlines, Israel would be obligated not to respond militarily but to sit by and do nothing until someone can persuade Palestinian Hamas to live up to Biden’s expectations.
No Israeli would have come up with that egregious proposal.
Then Biden said:
“Phase two, after an exchange for the release of all remaining living hostages, including male soldiers, Israeli forces will withdrawal from Gaza and as long as Hamas lives up to its commitments, temporary ceasefire will become, in the words of the Israeli proposal, ‘cessation of hostilities will be permanent,’ end of quote.”
It continues:
“Finally, in phase three, a major reconstruction plan for Gaza would commence and any final remains of hostages who’ve been killed will be returned to their families. That’s the offer that’s now on the table, and what we’ve been asking for. It’s what we need.”
This is unacceptable by Israel. We know that if we withdraw Hamas will emerge out of their tunnels and hiding places and history has shown us, we can whistle goodbye to remaining hostages.
IDF soldiers, Hadar Goldin and Oren Shaul, were captured by Hamas ten years ago and haven’t been seen since. Hamas has given zero information to Israel and their families for a decade of their fate or whereabouts.
Ethiopian Israeli Avera Mengistu, and Bedouin Arab Israeli Hisham al-Sayed, were seized by Hamas alive in 2014 and 2015. Where are they? Hamas won’t say.
But, according to Biden, the reconstruction of Gaza begins before the remains of our dead hostages, murdered by Hamas, or these individuals held by Hamas, will be returned home to their families.
Does Biden really trust in Hamas to do the decent and humane thing?
This U.S. president has zero knowledge or empathy for basic Jewish values. Israel will not stop pursuing Hamas until we reach the last of the living and the last of our dead so they can be brought home to their families for proper burial in Israel.
And what of Hamas? Biden doesn’t say. They mysteriously disappear from Biden’s script which, he claims, was written by Israel. But, according to Biden’s script, they will remain alive and killing after an enforced Israeli withdrawal.
But then, Biden let it slip that it was not an Israeli plan after all with a giveaway line; “I’ve urged the leadership of Israel to stand behind this deal despite whatever pressure comes.”
Israel’s IDF is in the final phase of the war to militarily defeat Hamas and annihilate its leadership. If Israel had not been stopped by intense international pressure the war would truly be over by now.
We trusted Biden, we trusted the international diplomatic community. They lied to us. They left our hostages to suffer for additional months because we lost valuable time to give peace a chance.
It didn’t work. It will never work as long as Hamas exists.
The Israeli prime minister does not issue official international statements on a Shabbat, but Benjamin Netanyahu broke that holy tradition by making Israel’s position crystal clear.
“Israel will continue its war against the Hamas terrorist organization in Gaza until all three objectives are achieved: return of all the hostages abducted by the terrorists on October 7, 2023, and in 2014; destruction of the Hamas terrorist organization as a military and governing entity; and taking steps to ensure Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel.”
To emphasize Israel’s position, the Prime Minister added:
“The actual proposal put forward by Israel, including the conditional transition from one phase to the next, allows Israel to uphold these principles."
...and...
“Under the proposal, Israel will continue to insist these conditions are met before a permanent ceasefire is put in place. The notion that Israel will agree to a permanent ceasefire before these conditions are fulfilled is a non-starter.
“Israel’s conditions for ending the war have not changed: The destruction of Hamas military and governing capabilities, the freeing of all hostages and ensuring that Gaza no longer poses a threat to Israel.”
Until the prime minister or the war cabinet, or the Israeli Government Security Council, release any other official statement, this is the position of Israel in its war against Hamas with a primary goal being the release of the hostages, some of whom are American.
If there are differences of opinion within the war cabinet, dissenting members may resign from the cabinet to be replaced by others that share the basic principles of the just war that was imposed on Israel by Hamas.
Israel strongly urges the United States and the West, to stand affirmatively with Israel in this war, a war we are fighting justly and correctly, despite false accusations.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/06/who_wrote_that_gaza_peace_proposal_all_we_know_is_biden_lied.html
America’s day of infamy: May 30, 2024
By I.Q. al-Rassouli
The Democrat party of Biden is fascist, communist and infiltrated with Islamists and this is precisely why Biden and the Democrats are totally anti-U.S.A. and against the American people.
Empathy and the Trump verdict
By Andrew Solomon
the entire Democrat party relies on this army of emotionally damaged and unstable individuals as their reliable constituents.
The mind virus ideology
By Vaughan Cordle
the "woke mind virus" has already metastasized from academia into corporate America, government, media -- and now even artificial intelligence itself. Under the sinister Orwellian banners of "social justice" and forced "equity," these neo-Marxist progressives are cynically pushing an ominous anti-democratic agenda -- one as corrosive to individual liberties and free societies as it is to our American way of life.
Donald Trump as an Ayn Rand Hero
By Jeffrey Wright
Donald Trump may be the last hope we have of saving our fragile republic. Enough ink has been spilled recounting the myriad failures and corruption of the Biden administration and today’s Democratic party, but suffice it to say, America is at an existential tipping point.
Beneath the Law!
By John Leonard
“No one is above the law!” trumpet the progressive Democrat fanboys in the wake of the Donald Trump sham conviction in New York for alleged crimes on paper. Joe Biden literally tweeted those exact words.
Nobody is above the law except thoroughly corrupt, senile, and decrepit Joe Biden, who took classified documents when he was a senator and vice president when he had absolutely no authority to do so. Biden either directed or allowed his despicable son Hunter to accept millions of dollars in bribes from corrupt foreign oligarchs and even our nation’s enemies.
Despite the real crimes Biden has committed, special prosecutor Robert Hur declined to file any charges, determining that our current president has the mental acuity of a Roomba and wouldn’t be convicted by a fair and impartial jury.
Okay. But what about a jury of New Yorkers?
Oh, yeah...the only thing that mattered to them in that joke of a trial was the last name of the defendant: Trump. Lavrentiy Beria would have been proud of them all...“show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime,” indeed. But what could we expect in a district that voted 94 percent for Biden in 2020?
Judge Juan Merchan committed enough reversible errors to virtually guarantee that the convictions will eventually be overturned by a more sane and reasonable court still willing to follow the Constitution, but when the defendant’s last name is Trump, don’t count on it.
Calling the trial Merchan presided over a “kangaroo court” is an insult to kangaroos. Allowing the salacious testimony of Stephanie Clifford, AKA “Stormy Daniels,” provides a recent precedent for reversal: Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 rape conviction. Clifford’s testimony had nothing to do with the charges in Trump’s case and served no purpose other than to publicly embarrass the defendant.
Merchan’s daughter raises millions of dollars for prominent Democrats and he even donated money to Joe Biden’s campaign, but the judge refused to recuse himself. The two “star” witnesses for the prosecution admitted to extortion and larceny, but Trump is convicted of 34 counts of the same “crime,” a ledger entry he never made that the prosecution insisted was illegal.
Trump wasn’t charged with a crime for paying off a porn star to buy her silence. He was charged with a crime for claiming that it was a legal expense (which it was) made as an illegal campaign contribution. The jury was offered three potential crimes (state election violation, federal election violation, or tax violation) and allowed to choose one of the three. If all twelve jurors agreed that at least one of the three potential crimes had been committed, it didn’t have to be unanimous. How fair is that?
That apparently doesn’t matter, either. The goal has been accomplished. From now until Election Day, Democrats can chant the mantra that Trump is a convicted felon, the first former president in U.S. history to be convicted of a crime.
It gave the AP the excuse to produce this excrement:
Even so, the verdict is likely to give President Joe Biden and fellow Democrats space to sharpen arguments that Trump is unfit for office, though the White House offered only a muted statement that it respected the rule of law. Conversely, the decision will provide fodder for the presumptive Republican nominee to advance his unsupported claims that he is victimized by a criminal justice system he insists is politically motivated against him.
It apparently took five alleged journalists from the AP to construct that absurd sentence. Correction: That garbage article took fifteen AP hacks in total to write. The five primary “contributors” needed help from ten others to write only seventeen hundred words. Are these people grossly overpaid by the word?
What are they blithering about, saying Trump’s claims that he’s being victimized by a politically corrupt criminal justice system are unsupported? Did any of these five intrepid reporters actually look at a transcript of the trial? It got so bad that even CNN was calling the entire trial a weak joke prior to the verdict.
Don’t think the trial was politically motivated? Then why did Matthew Colangelo resign from his position as the third highest-ranking official in Biden’s Justice Department to take a job working for Alvin Bragg? It isn’t a coincidence that less than four months after Colangelo joined Bragg’s office, Trump was indicted on 34 counts of the same BS crime.
Yeah, no one is above the law. But the real question is, is Trump beneath it?
The facts indicate that the trial was grotesquely unfair. Practically every prosecutorial objection was sustained. Virtually every defense objection was overruled. Extremely qualified witnesses were not allowed to testify. Witnesses who should never have been allowed to testify were given free rein to smear and malign the defendant. Stormy Daniels was allowed to get on the stand and claim Trump had virtually raped her after repeatedly swearing under oath that they had never had sex and extorting a big chunk of money from Trump, who allegedly was trying to protect his wife from the sordid accusations, not cheat to win an election.
Speaking of cheating to win that same election, Hillary Clinton committed the crime of paying her lawyers (and claiming that the expenses were legal fees) to commission the infamous Steele dossier, which was clearly election interference and far worse than paying a porn star for her silence. Yet Hillary only had to pay a fine. Don’t even bother trying to convince me that that’s equal treatment under the law.
Michael Cohen was allowed to take the stand and admit he’d stolen 30 thousand dollars from Trump, but Trump is the one currently being threatened with one year in prison (at least in rumors coming from The View.)
Sure, the conviction will almost certainly be overturned on appeal, but the ultimate goal has never been to put Trump in jail. The whole point of this sordid and shameful exercise was to tarnish Trump in the months prior to the election with a new campaign slogan: Trump is a convicted felon. The headlines from the AP, Reuters, CNN, ABC, and virtually every other major media outlet all describe Trump as a convicted felon (because technically, he is). It won’t last, but it was never meant to last much longer than this November.
Only long enough to affect the upcoming election.
Alex Soros couldn’t be more obvious, going on the record to say, “Democrats should refer to Donald Trump as a convicted felon at every opportunity.” His daddy helped fund Alvin Bragg’s job, so it makes sense that Bragg would do Soros’s bidding no matter how ridiculous he will look after losing the appeal. But their focus is on winning the election. Nothing else matters to them.
The very good news is, the strategy seems to be backfiring, big time. Trump raised more money in one day than Joe Biden raised in the entire month, and many NeverTrumps are saying the Democrats jumped the shark. Trump’s approval rating improved by six points.
Trump-supporters are responding to the “convicted felon” charges with “I’m voting for the outlaw” or “I’m voting for the candidate declared mentally competent to stand trial.” Brutal, and true.
In 2020, Trump received more votes than any president in history, even surpassing the totals from his 2016 victory, and yet somehow, some way, Joe Biden managed to magically collect more votes than any candidate for president ever.
Was that election rigged? I honestly believe so. Was the Trump “hush money” trial rigged? I’m certain of it, because I followed the trial.
I hope every time the Democrats call Trump a convicted felon, his poll numbers go up, the crowds at his campaign rally get bigger, and more donations pour in to help pay for his victory in November. Let’s make the margin of victory so large that even cheating won’t make any difference.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/06/beneath_the_law.html
In the Foxhole with Donald Trump
By J.B. Shurk
he embarrassed Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, reduced the Democrats’ psychologically unstable voter base to tears, exposed the epidemic of RINO-ism in the Republican Party, and refused to bow down to the Deep State. They were always going to make him pay.
Essential Information For Understanding Why Trump’s Appeal Will Succeed
By Ted Noel
Donald Trump has been convicted by a jury in Manhattan. “I was convicted. I’m appealing!” Most of us have a TV legal drama perspective. I rise to shine light on this process so that we can properly understand how a guilty verdict was reached in a case where Donald Trump did nothing illegal, immoral, or fattening.
A prosecution must satisfy conditions laid out in the Constitution, which is, should anyone forget, the highest law of the land. It specifies safeguards for the legal process. In the 5th Amendment, we find “No person… shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…” That due process is further defined in the 6th Amendment.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. (Emphasis added)
The prosecuting attorney is an officer of the court and is duty-bound to guard these steps carefully. DA Alvin Bragg ran roughshod over them. The judge is the referee in the court and is obligated at all times to ensure that the defendant’s constitutional rights are fully safeguarded. Under the rule of lenity, when there is a dispute about the law, his only proper option is to rule in favor of the defendant. This is part of what “due process of law” (5th Amendment) means.
Should the judge fail in his duty, the trial court will no longer be a lawful trier of law. Such failures constitute “reversible error,” and that’s what appellate courts consider. They assume, too, that the jury properly considered the facts presented to it. (See the 7th Amendment) Let’s break this down.
The prosecution and the defense will bring in their witnesses and exhibits. If there are objections by one side that the other side is doing something improper, the judge must rule on the legal propriety of what’s happening. Ultimately, everything that the judge lets through becomes the sole basis for the jury’s verdict. (Spoiler alert!)
If the judge lets the prosecution run wild while denying the defense its proper rights, the appellate court will reverse the verdict becauase the jury wasn’t given the facts required to make a proper decision. If the appellate court reverses the trial court, it’s not saying the jury did anything wrong. It’s saying that the Judge did something (or lots of somethings) wrong. Now that you understand what an appeal is about, let’s go through how DA Bragg and Judge Merchan screwed the pooch. Bigly.
I won’t bore you with the process Bragg went through to contort the law in bringing charges. He had total control over the indictment, and there are three key things in it that are important.
First, Michael Cohen submitted every invoice (11 charges). Trump had no control over those. Trump’s bookkeeper, not Trump, made every ledger entry (12 charges). Only the 11 checks involved Trump, and those simply involved his signature. So, 23 of the charges on which Trump was convicted didn’t actually involve him.
Next, all 34 of those charges involved actions in 2017. We finally learned in the prosecution’s closing arguments that Trump was somehow committing election interference by trying to “illegally” keep the public from knowing in 2016 about a sexual tryst that both parties had disavowed multiple times. That election was a year before any charged items came into existence. Without a time machine, those events could not possibly affect the election. The entire prosecution is a contradiction.
The biggest legal problem comes from the 6th Amendment. The indictment did not specify which “crime” the bookkeeping issues concealed. That prevented Trump’s lawyers from presenting a defense. When they pushed to get that information, Judge Merchan denied them. He even went further in the jury instructions. The jurors were given a list of possibilities. If they thought he was guilty of any of them, they could find against Trump. There is a suggestion that New York law allows this, but if that’s true, then the statute is unconstitutional. Even Claude.ai recognizes this.
If this interpretation is correct, it represents a serious departure from the fundamental principle that a jury must be unanimous not only in its ultimate verdict, but in its finding of each essential element of the crime.
Trump was entitled to a trial by an “impartial jury.” Since Manhattan is so solidly Democrat, a change of venue would be necessary. Judge Merchan said, “No.” So, during jury selection, Trump’s attorneys tried to get rid of people with a bias against Trump. Merchan let them stay. Trump was not allowed to have an “impartial Jury.”
The 6th Amendment guarantees a “compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.” Merchan went out of his way to prevent this. First, over defense objections, he allowed hours of testimony from Stormy Daniels, who knew nothing relevant to the charges. Her only purpose was to be inflammatory.
Merchan then denied Trump’s ability to bring witnesses, particularly former FEC Chair Bradley Smith, who would have told how the FEC had reviewed this situation and found that it did not violate any law. Instead, Merchan insisted that he would tell the jury what the law was. Merchan effectively barred testimony from the one witness Trump did manage to call, Robert Costello, by instantly sustaining all objections to virtually any part of Costello’s testimony. This functionally denied Trump the “assistance of counsel,” as well as a primary witness in his favor.
Steve Calabresi writes in the Volokh Conspiracy that the entire prosecution was based on criminalizing fully lawful speech protected by the 1st Amendment. Denying an affair, whether true or false, is protected by the 1st Amendment, and Donald Trump had the legal right to contribute any amount he chose to his campaign (Buckley v Valeo, 1976; Citizens United, 2010).
Merchan’s final major constitutional error was not recognizing that the state law invoked had been superseded by the Supreme Court in Trump v Anderson just two months before this trial. SCOTUS declared that presidential elections are federal elections and state courts have no jurisdiction over them. Thus, even if everything alleged by DA Bragg and pushed improperly by Judge Merchan were true, it would not matter. The Manhattan Court had no business sticking its nose where it did not belong.
Because the jury didn’t get to know any of what we’ve discussed, jurors with TDS had no qualms about going with their feelings. They did their job in a courtroom where the DA and Judge had no respect for the law.
This travesty of justice will be slapped down. Due to severe constitutional errors (I use the word politely because the proper term is NSFW), it seems likely that removing the appeal to the federal court would be proper. Mark Levin has even suggested an emergency appeal to SCOTUS. I’ll leave those strategy discussions to people smarter than I am. But it would be poetic justice if Trump takes the oath of office in an orange jump suit days before a federal court vacates the verdict.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/06/essential_information_for_understanding_why_trump_s_appeal_will_succeed.html
Who Killed the British Army?
By Brian Patrick Bolger
the biggest threat to the West, especially the UK and US, is domestic terror -- the terror of liberalism.
If Elected, Will Trump Abandon Ukraine?
Never-Trumpers and beltway insiders raise the specter of Trump walking away from the conflict.
by Dave Patterson | Jun 3, 2024
Any narrative to defeat former President Donald Trump, whether it be accurate and fact-based or not, appears to be the leftist mantra. Pushed by the Biden team and adopted by pundits, there is prevalent a notion that Trump will abandon Ukraine if elected. As the combat successes of the Russian invaders taking real estate from Kyiv ebb and flow, Trump’s comments that he could stop the Ukraine-Russia war in 24 hours have fueled speculation that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee will cut and run from further support to Ukraine. However, beyond the commentary of the Fourth Estate, it’s fair to ask whether the former commander-in-chief has demonstrated such an inclination.
Biden Works to Hobble Trump on Ukraine
President Biden’s “as long as it takes” strategy suggests the current administration has no end-game. With that in mind, the president is working on a ten-year assistance agreement with Kyiv. “However, the real and not-so-veiled reason Biden, the man without a strategy, wants to lock in aid is to hobble former President Donald Trump from reducing or eliminating military and financial assistance to Ukraine if Trump is elected in November,” Liberty Nation suggested. There is no historical precedent for this expectation on Biden’s part or anyone else’s.
In fact, the exact opposite is true. During the Trump administration, the policy toward Ukraine – before the war even began – was to provide lethal aid to counter Russian hostilities in the Donetsk and Luhansk areas. The Obama-Biden administration refused to provide lethal weapons. According to a December 2019 Defense News report:
“US President Donald Trump will seek at least another $250 million in security aid for Ukraine in his 2020 budget request to Congress, including lethal Javelin anti-tank weapons, according to a senior Pentagon official…A $39 million sale of 150 anti-tank missiles and two additional missile launchers is pending, on top of the 200 missiles and 37 launchers the US sold Kyiv in 2018, Bloomberg and others reported last month…”
Furthermore, Trump’s opposition to the recent $61 billion Ukraine aid package had more to do with how the deal was crafted than objecting to helping Ukraine in its struggle with Russian invaders. “A key change in the House bill was to make $9.5 billion for economic aid in the form of forgivable loans, not grants, to align with an idea Trump floated months earlier,” The Wall Street Journal explained. The notion shopped around by the Biden administration that former President Trump is against aiding Ukraine is not born out by the evidence.
On the other hand, President Biden, after his first face-to-face summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in June 2021, halted a planned military support bundle to Ukraine. “The Biden White House has temporarily halted a military aid package to Ukraine that would include lethal weapons, a plan originally made in response to aggressive Russian troop movements along Ukraine’s border this spring,” Politico reported. Even as late as December 2021, just a couple of months before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Foreign Policy reported that the White House had not approved military assistance to Kyiv that included Javelin anti-tank missiles, counter-battery radars, communications equipment, and a variety of small arms.
Trump Applied Broad Array of Sanctions on Russia
At that time, Russia had 90,000 fully deployed combat troops on Ukraine’s border. Pushing the narrative that Trump, if elected, would abandon Ukraine seems more like projection, considering the haphazard dribbling out of critical military aid that has been the hallmark of the Biden administration’s behavior. There is, of course, the administration’s persistent harangue that former President Trump would sacrifice Ukraine to rekindle a cozier relationship with Russian President Putin. It is the “collusion” hoax redux; the record of Trump’s actions toward Moscow tells a different story.
NBC News described the rationale for Trump’s sanctions against Russia at the time:
“[Treasury Secretary] Mnuchin cited a number of Russian activities around the world as support for Friday’s US [sanctions], including Moscow’s occupation of Crimea and violence in eastern Ukraine, support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s attacks against civilians, and Russia’s ‘ongoing cyberactivities’ and efforts to ‘interfere in the democratic processes of the United States and its allies.'”
Though the assertion that Trump would throw Ukraine under the bus if elected in November is popular among Biden cohorts, the record does not bear out that notion. The evidence of what Trump’s administration did in supporting Ukraine during his term in office better reflects what to expect if there is a second Trump term. What we know for sure about the Biden administration is the Russian war on Ukraine will be long – as long as it takes.
https://www.libertynation.com/if-elected-will-trump-abandon-ukraine/
Winning the Web: Presidential Campaigns Face Off on Social Media
Trump and Biden try to reach voters online – but only one seems to be succeeding.
by James Fite | Jun 3, 2024
Donald Trump joined TikTok on Saturday, June 1 – and within 15 hours of posting his first short video, he gained six times the following of the Biden-Harris HQ account, which has been live and active since February. A look at the candidates’ X and Facebook accounts shows a similar situation. The former and current presidents are both vying for attention on social media, but only one seems to be succeeding
.
Social Media Madness
By Sunday afternoon, Trump’s first TikTok video had 38 million views and 2.3 million likes – and he had 2.2 million followers. That’s a lot of reach for a 13-second video posted by a brand-new account. Joe Biden’s campaign account, Biden-Harris HQ, has less than 340,000 followers and just 4.5 million likes spread out over more than 200 videos.
The gap isn’t as extreme on X, formerly Twitter, but the trend is much the same. The President Biden (@POTUS) account has been around since January 2021, the entirety of Biden’s presidency. It has been quite active, too, often publishing several posts per day. Donald Trump’s account, on the other hand, has seen just a single post since 2021: the famous mugshot. Despite this lack of activity, however, Trump has 87.2 million followers on X compared to 35 million for the considerably more active Biden-Harris account.
And then there is Facebook. Trump boasts 34 million followers to Biden’s 11 million; their most recent posts also reveal a stunning gap in engagement. The 45th president garnered 120,000 likes for his last direct post, with almost 24,000 comments; Mr Biden mustered just 2,700 likes with 21,000 comments. A greater volume of comments than of likes is generally – and certainly so in this case – a sign that the commentators are reacting negatively to the post.
Late last year, the Pew Research Center conducted a survey that revealed roughly half of Americans regularly get their news from social media. About a third of the respondents aged 18-29 said they turned to TikTok specifically for news, as did nearly half of the app’s users, regardless of age.
The Golden Ratio
For those who don’t spend a ridiculous amount of time on social media, the term “ratio” may not mean much. But it’s a big deal for those who hope to reach people online. Simply put, if a post is said to be “ratioed,” that means it received much more negative feedback – comments, replies, dislikes, thumbs down, etc. – than positive, creating an imbalance between the engagement metrics.
While the replies to Trump’s posts are a mixed bag, one has a lot of scrolling to do in order to find a single positive comment on any of the posts by the Biden-Harris campaign. Look through the comments on YouTube videos posted by Donald Trump, and you’ll see mostly positive engagement; the opposite is true for videos posted by Biden’s campaign or the White House. While one won’t see many thumbs down, or dislikes, on videos posted by the current administration, there aren’t that many thumbs up (likes), either, at least not compared to Trump videos – and the comments are overwhelmingly negative.
In fact, given the comments, the lack of dislikes seems suspicious – and for good reason. In 2021, just a few months into Biden’s presidency, YouTube was outed as having deleted about 2.5 million dislikes from videos on the official White House channel for the Biden administration. By the spring of 2021, the channel had posted more than 300 videos that garnered nearly 3.7 million dislikes. While Trump took to social media like a fish to water – and was embraced in return – Biden was rejected by the online masses from the very beginning.
Lean in, or Run Away?
The constant “ratioing” of Biden’s social media accounts hasn’t gone unnoticed by the administration. In November of last year, Rob Flaherty, a deputy Biden campaign manager, told Politico that they see X as “an increasingly hostile place.”
“It was initially a place that its value was for communicating with elites and reporters and high-information people,” he added. “But it was also a place where politics could move into culture in a real way and access discreet communities like Black Twitter or Latino Twitter or all these sorts of places where things could happen and bubble up.”
But now that Elon Musk owns X (nee Twitter), it’s full of “a lot of hate right-wing actors and disinformation.” Never mind the fact that Biden was being ratioed for the entirety of his tenure, which includes the two years before Musk acquired the platform. Biden and his campaign continue to use the platform, of course, but it seems they see it more as a necessary evil.
Shortly after Trump’s conviction in New York, Musk invited the former president to a town hall hosted by X. Independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was also offered an event, as was Biden. Trump and Kennedy accepted, but the current president declined. In truth, all three may have made the right decision. Trump and Kennedy both know how to make social media work for them; Biden, not so much.
In fact, watching the sitting president attempt to engage with the public in any way, be it a presser, a speech on the grounds, or a post on YouTube or X – whether it’s televised, streamed, or live – Joe Biden seems to have a hard time getting through any public appearance without doing something embarrassing, such as reading teleprompter cues, shaking hands with invisible people, or getting people or places mixed up. In 2020, Biden was practically invisible, running what many called a “basement campaign.” Clearly, he decided to step out into the public eye after winning the election. But, as the saying goes, hindsight is 20:20 – and looking back, perhaps leaving the basement was a mistake.
https://www.libertynation.com/winning-the-web-presidential-campaigns-face-on-social-media/
Leftist Lawfare Aside, the True Trump Verdict Comes November 5
Will the voters agree that the 45th president ‘had it coming to him’?
by Tim Donner | Jun 3, 2024
There are, obviously, two radically different schools of thought about what transpired in that infamous Manhattan courtroom on May 30, 2024. Most on the right are claiming the guilty verdict – one crime split into 34 counts for maximum effect – will actually make Trump more electable than ever because they believe, as Trump has declared since his conviction, that he is a political prisoner – hard stop. Most on the left embrace the belief that the electorate at large, no matter Trump’s well-established reputation, will be shocked out of putting a convicted felon in the White House – even if he has already served four years there.
If “lawfare” is, as the sitting president claims, merely a right-wing paranoid fantasy, even as the former president is pinned down on dozens of charges based on novel legal theories never before applied to a single person, then why did the opposition party intervene in the trial right before the verdict by sending Robert De Niro up to Manhattan in a naked attempt to intimidate the jury? How many everyday Americans, no matter their political preferences, believe arresting, convicting, and bankrupting the president’s predecessor and hated opponent in the midst of a presidential election is a perfectly legitimate way to enhance the incumbent’s chances of re-election? How many will now believe the left’s narrative about Trump representing a “threat to democracy” is not, in reality, the ultimate act of projection, a specialty on the left?
As we have long known through the Russia collusion hoax, the spying on his campaign, his impeachment on a phone call, the orchestrated suppression of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop, and so many other cooked-up scandals, the left’s argument against Trump is always less about the crime than the man. As predicted by Liberty Nation in the run-up to the verdict, it all centers around the HITCH argument, on which the jury evidently concurred: namely, he had it coming to him – and it doesn’t particularly matter whether his takedown is by legitimate means or not because he represents a unique, break-the-glass “threat to democracy.” And certainly, we cannot have a president who, as Mr. De Niro intoned, will never leave the White House and is out to destroy the world.
Forget the fact that a long-expired misdemeanor was magically transformed into a history-changing felony, one specifically and painstakingly crafted by Trump’s enemies to force voters into swallowing the convicted felon label in the hope they will cast their ballots for Biden. Why else would Biden strategists give up the ghost of claiming they had nothing to do with the four indictments of his political enemy in the midst of a presidential campaign by sending an 80-year-old actor to rant outside the courthouse as the verdict approached?
A Case Designed to Confuse
As the trial dragged on, it became ever more obvious that this case was deliberately designed to confuse everyone. In a turn of events legal analysts say they have never before witnessed, the alleged felony was not even identified until the prosecution’s closing argument, and the jury was given liberty to decide what that felony actually was. So much for the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees a defendant the right “to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.”
But these progressive efforts have boomeranged mightily, allowing the 45th president to surge into what, at least until now, has been a commanding lead. How much more evidence do Democrats need that trying to win the election in court is a riverboat gamble fraught with peril? And one more time, to the matter of White House involvement, let’s ask the question based on mere common sense: If this lawfare strategy was not orchestrated by the sitting president, and central to the theme of his campaign, then why did Biden’s Justice Department parachute its most aggressive prosecutor, Matthew Colangelo, into Alvin Bragg’s courtroom to close the deal?
Trump and the End of the World as We Know It
Is there anyone not in a coma who isn’t already well aware that Donald Trump is a wheeler-dealer, a man of action more than willing to crack eggs to make an omelet and break the furniture in order to do what he knows no other politician is willing to do? A man like that will predictably generate a lengthy list of enemies as he unmasks those who have been pulling the strings in the shadows for so long as to profoundly discredit the very validity of the ruling class. Trump’s foes have tried just about everything to take him down. With the convicted felon label now available to them for the first time, there is little that could drag Trump any further down than he currently stands.
And so, this all comes down to a matter of how many people who were planning to vote for Trump, all fully aware of his reputation and record, will now change their minds about pulling the lever for the same man with a label slapped on him that would terminate the career of any other politician. History has repeatedly demonstrated that, while people will vote in midterm elections to send a message or on a single issue such as abortion in 2022, they vote in their own self-interest when it comes to presidential elections. Will a dubious prosecution of the leading candidate for president be enough to rule out Trump in the minds of voters who have expressed overwhelming displeasure about Biden’s declining condition, the economy, inflation, crime, illegal immigration, foreign policy – and almost everything else?
Democrats and the left-wing media have tried to change the subject from Biden’s failed presidency, reflected by his 40% approval rating. Despite this and what a dozen Manhattanites decided, as Trump rightly declared, the true verdict will be delivered by the people on November 5.
https://www.libertynation.com/leftist-lawfare-aside-the-true-trump-verdict-comes-november-5/
Iranian Leader Thanks College Students For Their Support And Says If Any Of Them Are Interested He Has A Few Wife Slots Open In His Harem
TEHRAN, IRAN — In a touching, romantic statement on X (formerly Twitter), the Supreme Leader of Iran Ali Khamenei let American college students know that he appreciates their anti-Semetic protests and support of his regime and that he also has a few open slots in the harem if any of the women might happen to be interested.
"Dear university students in the United States of America, you are standing on the right side of history," Khamenei wrote in his X post. "Thank you for all the effort you put into hating the Jews. Also, if any of you women over there happen to be into wearing hijabs, having no freedom, and genocidal psychopaths in their 70s, a few slots in the presidential harem have opened up ;)"
"Applicants can apply for a visa through the Iranian government website," Khamenei wrote in a follow-up post.
While Khamenei's post has been well-received by college protesters, most of the female college students have decided "swipe left" on the Supreme Leader of Iran, citing the lack of Starbucks in Iran and the fact that they could be executed for showing a bit too much nose.
At publishing time, Khamenei had retracted his offer after all of the students who responded to his offer turned out to be gay men or transgender women.
https://babylonbee.com/news/iranian-leader-thanks-college-students-for-their-support-and-says-if-any-of-them-are-interested-he-has-a-few-wife-slots-open
Trump Reminds Media He Prefers The Term 'Justice-Impacted Individual'
U.S. — In the hours after being convicted on 34 counts of something or other, Trump issued a reminder to the media that the proper term to describe him is "justice-impacted individual."
The term, commonly used by Democrats and journalists to describe convicted felons, now describes a 2024 presidential candidate, giving Americans an exciting opportunity to vote for someone unfairly targeted by the U.S. justice system.
"I am a justice-impacted individual, possibly the most justice-impacted of any person in history," said Trump in a statement outside the New York courthouse. "This totally fake and phony Democrat witch-hunt conviction by 12 low-IQ haters and losers on the jury has made me a victim of a corrupt and bad system the likes of which the world has never seen before. It's so sad, very sad. Not good."
Trump urged the media to use the more sensitive updated term when referring to him, in solidarity with the millions of powerless American victims of an unjust system.
At publishing time members of the media confirmed they will continue to use their preferred term in Trump's case, which is "dangerous, bad, convicted, illegal felon-criminal with a stinky poopy face."
https://babylonbee.com/news/inspiring-trump-becomes-first-ever-justice-impacted-individual-to-run-for-president
New York Prosecutor Says Nobody In America Is Above The Law He Made Up To Convict Them
NEW YORK, NY — Following the guilty verdict handed down against former President Donald Trump, New York Prosecutor Alvin Bragg used the case to issue a stern warning that nobody in America is above the law he made up to convict Trump.
Bragg's sobering statement came after he and his prosecution team successfully manufactured a case to convict Trump of a crime that remains unidentifiable by legal experts and served as a clear example of what will happen to other Americans if they brazenly run afoul of laws he makes up in the future.
"This is a nation of laws, and I'm the one who makes them up," Bragg said in a celebratory press conference following the Trump conviction. "Every American should think twice before violating the laws that I haven't made up yet, because once I make them up, they'll be held accountable for breaking the new laws they didn't know existed until I came up with them."
The case against Trump, which was unprecedented because Bragg hadn't yet made up the charges, sets a new bar to which all Americans must hold themselves. "Chances are, you're in violation of something," Bragg warned. "I don't know what law you're violating yet, exactly, but once I come up with what you've done wrong, you can be sure that you will all face the consequences."
At publishing time, Bragg was reportedly working closely with the Justice Department to compile a list of Trump supporters so that they could begin work on making up crimes for which they could be prosecuted and convicted.
https://babylonbee.com/news/new-york-prosecutor-says-nobody-in-america-is-above-the-law-he-made-up-to-convict-them