Due to bad weather in both Iowa & Little Rock tomorrow, the plane we were to use to get there & back for the @realDonaldTrump

events is unable to go & we have to cancel. I hope IA caucus goers turn out next week and send a MAGA message by voting for @realDonaldTrump


See you in Iowa?

Sarah (the fine new Gov of Arkansas) & I are headed to Iowa Monday to campaign for Donald Trump ahead of caucuses. I hope you can make it to one of these events:

Team Trump Iowa Faith Event featuring Governor Sarah Sanders and Governor Mike Huckabee ( in Ottumwa, Iowa

Team Trump Iowa Faith Event featuring Governor Sarah Sanders and Governor Mike Huckabee in Des Moines, Iowa (

Today, January 5, is supposed to be the day the Colorado secretary of state certifies the ballots.  So it looks as though the ballots will have to be certified with Trump’s name on them.  Even so, unless/until the U.S. Supreme Court weighs in, we don’t know if they’ll be able to get away with not counting Trump votes, as the Colorado Supreme Court has determined they don’t have to count legally-cast votes, at least the write-in ones.  And if they don’t have to count write-in votes, why should they necessarily have to count Trump votes at all?  (We’re not attorneys but find the question intriguing.) 

By the way, in shocking-but-not-surprising breaking news, the totally objective and nonpartisan Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who publicly supported taking Trump off the ballot, attended a private fundraiser for Biden in November.  The state attorney general was apparently there, too.  Here you go.  This is what we’re up against...

While awaiting a ruling from SCOTUS on the decision to remove Trump from their state primary ballot, Trump released a looooong analysis on “X” including all the documented ballot hanky-panky surrounding the ‘20 election.  The implication:  any sane person in his position would think the election had been stolen from him.  If it wasn’t, they sure were working feverishly for nothing.

And surely that will be part of Trump’s defense if it comes to that.  Special Counsel Jack Smith is alleging that Trump willfully committed fraud when he said the election was stolen and made moves to have the allegations looked into.  By putting all this out, Trump is saying he truly believes the election WAS stolen from him, and that once you go through all this, you’ll likely think so, too.

The problem, of course, is that those who already believe Trump is guilty will find some way to discredit (in their minds) all of this evidence.  But as Kanekoa the Great, who posted all this, says, “I look forward to fact-checkers debunking this, citing sources from the corporate media that spent four years claiming Trump was a Russian agent and dismissing Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation.”

And, voila, there’s already one such post, from “Grok,” and it’s particularly amusing.  Why, he informs us that Trump’s allegations have been debunked by none other than “PolitiFact, a Pulitzer-Prize-winning website,” and also (hold your breath) the BBC.  And the results were certified by Congress in 2021.  And multiple recounts in swing states such as Arizona and Georgia (recounts of the same ballots that were counted before), “have confirmed Biden’s win.”  Well, that’s good enough for me!

This reaction was inevitable.  Kanekoa simply says, “I encourage you to review the numerous citations in this report and reach your own conclusions.”

Here are summaries of just a few examples:

Wisconsin was called by 20,682 votes.  The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled dropboxes illegal under Wisconsin law, and they had plenty of them in pre-determined locations, funded by outside groups.  It was election commissioner Meagan Wolfe who unilaterally declared dropboxes could be used, but the commission never voted to establish this.  You’ll want to read the decision by Justice Rebecca Bradley, as well as about the other ways they apparently “faked the vote” in Wisconsin.

Then scroll down and you’ll see Pennsylvania, which was called by a margin of just 80,555 votes.  Later it was determined that there were 121,240 more votes cast than there were voters.

Then there are Arizona and Georgia; what a mess.  We can’t have another election that’s as much of a mess as this one was.  It’s too bad that Trump released this at the same time the Epstein “names” were dropped, as the media can now conveniently ignore it all.

(Side Note: I’ve long said that you don’t even need claims of hacked voting machines or trucks full of fake ballots to be suspicious of the 2020 election. The way the media and the government colluded to silence conservative voices and suppress negative news about Democrats to tilt the table, while Democrats across America waged legal warfare to illegally change voting laws without legislative approval so deeply undermined public trust that it was inevitable that many people would refuse to believe the results before they were even announced. One of the pillars of American society that keeps so many people of widely diverse views united is faith in the honesty of our elections, and the Democrats have been swinging a wrecking ball at it for years.)

Speaking of Georgia, as we previously mentioned, True the Vote just won a decisive legal victory there, in their legal battle against Stacy Abrams' Fair Fight, legal teams led by Marc Elias, and the Biden Department of “Justice.” As announced in their press release, “a federal court in the Northern District of Georgia today affirmed that citizens have the right to lawfully petition their government in support of election integrity without fear of persecution or prosecution.” 

Their release is a must-read, and it includes a link to their video, “The Georgia Story Through the Eyes of True the Vote.”  Their president is Catherine Engelbrecht, a dear friend.

Dr. John Gentry, a Georgetown University professor who was a CIA analyst for 12 years, is worried about the “significant problem” of politicization of the intel community and confident that those agencies will try to interfere with the 2024 election in ways similar to their efforts in 2020.

He’s researched this topic, past and present, for his new book, “NEUTERING THE CIA:  Why US Intelligence vs. Trump Has Long-Term Consequences.”  That sounds like one for the top of the reading list.  As he said to FOX NEWS Digital, “My guess is that the proverbial deep state within the intelligence community will re-emerge because presumably a Republican candidate will again be seen as a threat to the internal policies that many intelligence people like.”  Downplaying the Hunter Biden laptop was “clearly political,” he said, as a highly placed source told him “in no uncertain terms” that it was done “explicitly” with “intent to help the Biden campaign.”

He’s been reading the tea leaves in recent weeks and says former intel officials are likely to resume their political activity against Trump “or whomever the Republican presidential candidate is next year...The activities of the ‘formers’ have resumed already, a bit earlier than expected.” (This is consistent with what we’ve been saying about trying to set aside the conflict by choosing someone else.  How foolish --- they’ll do this regardless of our choice. In fact, they’re already trying to remove other Republicans who questioned the 2020 election from the ballot using the “insurrection” canard, and never mind that Democrats have also questioned every election they’ve lost for decades.)  

Gentry blamed DEI culture for the politicization of the CIA by shifting their attention away from day-to-day operations to “woke” policies.  (He must be familiar with those CIA recruiting films, too!)   We can thank President Obama for a huge step in that direction, Gentry said, courtesy of an executive order that pushed it.  Two other top-level activists were former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

We want to see what he says in his book about “soft totalitarianism,” which he says they were actually starting to talk about (in those actual words) during the Obama administration.

The interview with Gentry doesn’t get into solutions, as is so often the case.  Let’s hope his book does.  In the meantime, we’ll offer a few starting tactics going into this year...






Finally, as of this writing, we still haven’t heard from the U.S. Supreme Court about Colorado.  Jonathan Turley said on Wednesday that if the Court doesn’t come back with some answer, the Colorado court could seek to “moot” (temporarily) the appeal and avoid review.

This is a must-read column.  You’ll detect the deep note of sadness as Turley watches our country going through so much lawfare in so many states.

On Wednesday, President Trump appealed the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court a ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court that found him ineligible to be on the primary ballot in that state.  Those justices, 4-3, claimed he engaged in and incited an “insurrection” on January 6, 2021, and is thus prevented by the 14th Amendment from running for any office.

It asks SCOTUS this question:  “Did the Colorado Supreme Court err in ordering President Trump excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ballot?”

This appeal is no surprise to anyone who knows President Trump, and in case anyone misread him, his attorneys announced their intention shortly after the Colorado ruling.  And on December 27, the Colorado GOP, joined by six voters and the secretary of state’s office, also filed a petition for immediate review by the Supreme Court.

The significance:  President Trump remains on the ballot unless SCOTUS were to reject the petition by January 4 or otherwise rules against Trump.

January 4 --- that’s today!

Why so soon?  In that state, it’s the day before certification of the ballots for the primary.  January 5 is the deadline for the Colorado secretary of state to certify all those ballots, and it cannot be changed.  Once they’re certified, no challenge is allowed.  As they say, it is what it is.

Catherine Yang at THE EPOCH TIMES has an informative report on the President’s legal argument.  They say that over the past few months, more than 60 (!) lawsuits and administrative challenges have been filed against him to keep him off the ballot.  All of these are based on allegations that Trump engaged in insurrection and is therefore disqualified from holding office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

“First, the events of January 6, 2021, were not ‘insurrection’ as that term is used in Section 3,” Trump’s petition reads. The amendment was passed after the Civil War, and insurrection was understood to mean “the taking up of arms and waging war upon the United States,” they argued. More than 600,000 died in the war, and “focus on war-making” in the text was the “logical result. 

(As you certainly know, this amendment was ratified after the Civil War, to prevent those who had picked up their guns and literally waged war against the United States from serving in public office.  And even they could be permitted that privilege again with a two-thirds vote of Congress.)

“By contrast, the United States has a long history of political protests that have turned violent. In the summer of 2020 alone, violent protestors targeted the federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon, for over 50 days, repeatedly assaulted federal officers and set fire to the courthouse, all in support of a purported political agenda opposed to the authority of the United States.”

They also argue that the courts don’t have jurisdiction on this question: “Indeed, every federal court that addressed this issue with regard to the eligibility of President Barack Obama, Senator John McCain, and Senator Ted Cruz held that the issue was for Congress and not the federal courts.”

Of course, you know that Maine Secretary of State Shanna Bellows singlehandedly decided that Trump couldn’t be on the GOP primary ballot up there.  (And, gosh, something tells me she’s not even in the GOP!)  Surely knowing how far over the line she had gone, she did at least put her dastardly plan on hold: “I will suspend the effect of my decision until the Supreme Court rules on any appeal or the time to appeal has expired.”

For when you have time, the NEW YORK POST has a more detailed story that we highly recommend…

Attorney General Bill Barr has made it clear he does not want Trump to get the GOP nomination, but said this week that “the efforts to knock him off the ballot are legally untenable, politically counterproductive, and, most ominously, destructive of our political order.”  I wonder if he’s considered, though, that for the left, being “destructive of our political order” is not a bug; it’s a feature!

They also could backfire and help Trump, a scenario that, knowing Barr, likely motivates his words as well.

“As a legal matter,” he said, “states do not have the power to enforce the disqualification provision of the Fourteenth Amendment by using their own ad hoc procedures to find that an individual has engaged in an insurrection.”  It’s Congress --- not the individual states ---who has the authority to do that, he said.

Our whole election system could “collapse in chaos,” he warned, if each state uses its own definition of insurrection and its own procedural standards to block candidates.

He had additional words of criticism, specifically for the left: “[This effort] is much like the left’s previous schemes to sidetrack or defeat Trump politically through legal ploys that stretched the law beyond its proper bounds...Nothing is more destructive to democracy than for one faction to try to win in the political arena by disenfranchising its adversaries.”

As you know, Special Counsel Jack Smith did not specifically charge Trump with insurrection, and he certainly would’ve done that if he thought it would stick.  Instead, he charged him with four other felonies:

--- conspiracy to defraud the United States

--- “conspiracy against rights” 

(If you read the description at the link, you’ll find it sounds very much like what Jack Smith is trying to do!)

--- conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding

--- “obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding”

The Supreme Court is going to be ruling on two of these charges soon, in the case United States v. (Joseph) Fischer (one of the OTHER J6 defendants)…  As legal analyst Margot Cleveland says, ”It is likely a majority of the Supreme Court will rule that the ‘crimes’ the special counsel charged are not crimes at all.”

If you’d like to get into the weeds on statutory interpretation and how it relates to Trump’s J6 case, we recommend taking time with her article.  Cleveland says a reasonable prosecutor would put the brakes on Trump’s criminal trial until the issues about these charges can be resolved by the Supreme Court, but that the special counsel and the district court “have both proven themselves anything but reasonable and have revealed their real goal is to obtain a conviction against Trump before the 2024 election, which is now less than a year away.”  Smith may be trying Trump on charges that don’t even exist, she says, lamenting that half the country doesn’t seem to care.

Melissa Hart.  Monica M. Marquez.  Richard L. Gabriel.  William W. Hood III.

These four unelected Colorado Supreme Court justices, in a 4-3 ruling, are guilty of one of the most preposterous cases of judicial overreach in the history of “our democracy.”  Until this travesty can be reversed on appeal before the United States Supreme Court, our Republic is LESS democratic because of them.  Democratic principles and the Constitution founded on them have been tossed out the window.

They ruled that Trump is ineligible to be on the Colorado ballot for President under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which disqualifies sworn officials who “engaged in insurrection.” This is the dream of Trump-haters who were willing to do anything, sacrifice any principle, to strike him from the ballot and nullify the choice of Americans who support him.

Oh, and if you think those voters can just write in his name, you’re in for a shock.  They thought of that, ruling that “the Secretary [of State] may not list President Trump’s name on the 2024 Presidential primary ballot, nor may she count any write-in votes cast for him.”

If anyone is a threat to democracy and unfit for public office, it’s these judges whose brains have been so eaten away by the TDS virus that they can’t be trusted to honor the Constitution and uphold the most basic rights.

This is election interference right out in the open.  To accomplish this, they had to contort history and the law so much that these can hardly be recognized any longer.

Let’s look at history.  As you probably know, the 14th Amendment was ratified soon after the Civil War, in 1868, for the purpose of disqualifying members of the Confederacy from holding U.S. office.  The people who wrote it had just just been through a REAL insurrection that killed hundreds of thousands of people.  I wonder if those Colorado judges have the slightest idea what that was, or if they even care.  They were just grasping at whatever they could use.

Now, as to Trump himself engaging in “insurrection.”  The barracuda currently masquerading as Trump’s special counsel would eagerly have prosecuted him for that if he thought for a minute he’d be able to make that stick, but he didn’t.  Trump not only hasn’t been convicted of insurrection, he hasn’t even been charged with it, not by the most Trump-deranged prosecutor on the planet.

Dissenting Colorado Chief Justice Brian Boatright recognized this, arguing that Colorado’s election law “was not enacted to decide whether a candidate engaged in insurrection.  In the absence of an insurrection-related conviction, I would hold that a request to disqualify a candidate under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment is not a proper cause of action under Colorado’s election code.”

Another dissenter, Justice Carlos Samour, said in a lengthy opinion that this suit is not a “fair mechanism” for determining Trump’s eligibility for the ballot because it deprives him of his right to due process, as he has not been convicted.  “Even if we are convinced that a candidate committed horrible acts in the past --- dare I say, engaged in insurrection --- there must be procedural due process before we can declare that individual disqualified from holding public office,” he wrote.

Hard to believe we’re linking to NEWSWEEK on this, but they actually have good coverage on what the dissenters (all Democrats, incidentally) said.

In Colorado alone, there are 3.8 million voters, including close to a million registered Republicans (that ratio, by the way, gives you a clue as to what’s wrong with their Supreme Court.) And this outrage is going on all over the country.  As Kayleigh McEnany pointed out on FOX NEWS last night, there have been 31 cases seeking Trump’s’ removal from the ballot.  More than a dozen cases remain pending, some in “red” states such as Texas and South Carolina.  (One was dismissed in Florida.  Thank you, Florida.)

Well, so much for the will of the people.  In McEnany’s words, “If you can’t beat them, disqualify them.”

Former acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker made a great point: “This was a close call for them.  It was a 4-3 decision.  And when you take someone off the ballot and disqualify a candidate, it should be with unbelievable evidence…”  The facts are “very thin” here, he said, based on the findings of the ultra-partisan January 6 committee “from Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and others.”  Trump, he noted, told his supporters to go “peacefully and patriotically” to the Capitol building to make their voices heard.

“This court just ignores anything that is evidence that helps President Trump.”  He pointed out that other state Supreme Courts have looked at this issue and “nobody’s been willing to go out as far” as this one.  It’s a completely partisan attempt that the left is celebrating right now.

Of course, the U.S. Supreme Court will have the final say.  Colorado only has till January 5 (!) to have this settled, so law professor Jonathan Turley says it’ll be put on the “rocket docket.”  The U.S. Supreme Court absolutely must get involved, he says, because the Colorado Supreme Court is “dead wrong.”  To get to their opinion on this, the Colorado court had to have a “sweeping interpretation on every single issue in order to get where they wanted to go” --- except on one particular issue, that of free speech.  “Then they adopt a narrow interpretation.  They suggest that Trump DOESN’T have free speech protection.”  They even hearken back to speeches Trump made in 2016!

This opinion truly is a product of Trump-deranged minds.  As Turley says, “The factual and legal basis of this opinion is really so porous that the Supreme Court will make fast work of it.” And they'll get their chance quickly: Trump wrote to his followers, "The Colorado Supreme Court issued a completely flawed decision tonight and we will swiftly file an appeal to the United States Supreme Court and a concurrent request for a stay of this deeply undemocratic decision. We have full confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these un-American lawsuits.”

“The path that this court has put us on could not be more dangerous,” according to Turley.  “...You know this country needs some healing. And what the Colorado Supreme Court did is they basically took a blow at democracy in the name of democracy...We never needed the democratic process more. We need voters to be able to make a decision. Because at some point we have to come back together.”

If this sort of thing were ever to be allowed to stand, we would no longer be recognizable as America.  As Turley has written, “Such ballot-cleansing is common in countries like Iran, where citizens await to learn which opposition candidates will be allowed to run.”  That’s why, we would add, this abomination has to be a shocking wake-up call for American voters, as it reveals just how far the left is willing to push the boundaries.  They HAVE no boundaries.  They say they care about “democracy”?  Give me a break.

Here’s what Turley wrote about the lower-court judge’s opinion in November, before the case went to the State Supreme Court.  Judge Sarah Wallace was right, he said, in rejecting the 14th Amendment argument but very wrong in her analysis when she said Trump’s speech was inciteful and unprotected.

As for legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, he had no problem calling this election rigging.  Again, an “insurrection” means taking up arms against the United States, as the South did during the Civil War.  “To remove Donald Trump from the ballot for an offense that he hasn’t even been tried or convicted of --- what is that?  It’s violating his right to due process, which happens to be guaranteed by [that] very amendment, the 14th, and elsewhere in the Constitution.”

Importantly, Jarrett also pointed out that the language in the amendment doesn’t even apply to the office of President.  Colorado officials have “brazenly manipulated the clause for purely political reasons, another example of election interference by Trump opponents.  This is an effort --- make no mistake --- to deprive Americana voters of THEIR right to make the decision as to who should be President.  It is ANTI-democratic.  It’s the equivalent of rigging the ballot box.”  Jarrett sees it as inflaming voters and further boosting Trump’s support (as it should).


RELATED:  Republican presidential primary candidate Vivek Ramaswamy has said he’s removing his name from the Colorado ballot, on the principle that Republicans --- not the courts --- should be able to pick their own nominee.  He’s calling on the other GOP candidates to remove their names as well.  He sees failure to do so as “tacitly endorsing this illegal maneuver which will have disastrous consequences for our country.”  Good for him!


Here, Vivek is included in a round-up of explosive social media reaction…

Ron DeSantis and even Trump’s staunchest Republican critic Chris Christie also slammed the decision, as did Robert Kennedy Jr., who tweeted, “Let the voters choose, not the courts!”

This outrageous ruling not only is a body blow to the rule of law and our democratic process, it also has done serious damage to America’s international standing, giving other nation’s the perfect response when we criticize their rigged elections. El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele warned that "The United States has lost its ability to lecture any other country about ‘democracy.’”


COMPARE AND CONTRAST:  This isn’t the only courtroom travesty going on.  The six alternate Trump electors from 2020 in Nevada were indicted earlier this month.

And here’s some potentially good news for several January 6 defendants, including Trump.  Watch this 7-1/2-minute video and see how the Supreme Court is getting involved...

For when you have time, here’s Julie Kelly with more on that…


FINAL WORD:  We’ll give that to President Trump, who posted on Truth Social: “‘Justice’ weaponization is a very dirty game to play, and it can have repercussions far greater than anything that Biden or his Thugs could understand. They ought to withdraw all of their Fake, Political Indictments against their Republican Opponent, me, immediately. This is a Pandora’s box, that works two ways, and it should be closed and tightly sealed RIGHT NOW.”

We talk a lot here about election interference, and not just the direct kind that might have happened with mail-in ballots on Election Day.  Much of that interference --- perhaps the type that, overall, bore the most fruit in 2020 and likely affected the outcome --- has to do with the suppression of information that Americans deserve to know before casting their votes.  And nowhere is this more obvious than with the Hunter Biden laptop story in 2020.  At that time, the government was working overtime to make sure you didn’t see it, or, if you did, that you quickly discounted it as “foreign disinformation.”  This from the party that professes so loudly to care about “our democracy.”

Oh, they love democracy, all right, as long as they can game the system and manipulate enough voters to vote their way.

Even as the 2020 election recedes in our rear-view mirror, we’re able to piece together more of what was done then to censor needed information.  This discovery comes to us thanks in large part to outside-government organizations such as Judicial Watch, whose Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests continue to bear fruit, as you’ll see below.  And now there’s America First Legal, headed by former Trump adviser Stephen Miller, who has shown himself to be eminently worthy of The Second Trump Administration if that’s where he would like to be.  Maybe as communications director/press secretary?

In late October, AFL filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) alleging a “coordinated communication” and an unreported in-kind contribution to the Joe Biden presidential campaign and related entities in violation of federal law.  This has to do with that bogus “classic earmarks” letter signed by 51 former U.S. intel officials, with the goal of censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story ahead of the 2020 election.

“There are reasons to believe that the public statement by 51 former intelligence officials was a coordinated political operation to help elect Vice President Biden in the 2020 election...” the complaint reads.

The full complaint runs 13 pages with 110 pages of exhibits, stating that “the Biden for President Campaign in 2020, the Biden Victory Fund, the Democratic National Committee, and the Biden Action Fund should have reported on coordinating efforts” as in-kind donations.

It’s hard to say how the value of that letter to Biden’s campaign can even be determined.  At the risk of sounding like a parody of the old MasterCard commercial, we’d say it’s...priceless.

As is now well known, that “classic earmarks” determination by the intel “experts” was completely bogus.   In late 2019, a year before the letter was signed, the FBI had taken possession of Hunter’s laptop from computer shop owner John Paul Mac Isaac and were perfectly aware of what was on the hard drive.  They had to know without a doubt that every disturbing entry was real.  But it didn’t matter --- the officials who unquestioningly signed that letter hadn’t even seen the contents of the laptop.  They did it to help Joe Biden win, perpetuating yet another hoax on the American people to interfere with an election.

As FOX NEWS reports, “The Obama administration officials who signed include former [CIA] Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence [DNI] James Clapper, and former CIA Director and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.  Former George W. Bush DNI Michael Hayden, a vocal Trump critic, also signed.”  We would add the note of sad irony that both Brennan and Clapper, and additional signatory Paul Kolbe of the CIA, have recently been named by DHS Director Alejandro Mayorkas to a new intelligence “expert” board.

The complaint also mentions that Clapper and Panetta donated to the Biden Victory Fund and the Biden for President campaign in 2020.

Based on testimony from former CIA Deputy and Acting Director Mike Morell to the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, we know that then-Biden campaign adviser (now Biden’s Secretary of State) Tony Blinken spearheaded the effort to create this letter.  Morell testified that he’d been recruited by Blinken to write the letter.

According to the Judiciary Committee, Morell also explained that Biden campaign manager Steve Ricchetti called him following the October 22 debate to thank him for writing it.  (During the debate, Biden had played the letter up big, using it as evidence that the laptop story was “Russian disinformation” when he had to know it wasn’t.)  “Morell also explained that the Biden campaign helped to strategize about the public release of that statement,” the committee said.  “Morell further explained that one of his two goals in releasing the statement was to help then-[former] Vice President Biden in the debate and to assist hm in winning the election.”  In other words, it was FOR THE CAMPAIGN.

This bogus letter was also used to provide cover for the censorship by Twitter and Facebook of the Hunter laptop story.  Why, how could it not have been Russian disinformation when 51 intel experts had encouraged that conclusion?    

Reed D. Rubenstein, senior counselor and director of oversight and investigations for America First Legal, concludes that we’re seeing a “pattern” of election meddling, citing intelligence officials’ failed attempt to help Hillary Clinton win in 2016 by lying about “Trump/Russia collusion.”  (Recall examples such as Alpha Bank?)

As Rubenstein said, “The [FEC’s] charge includes election integrity --- Americans have the right to know who is coordinating with federal candidates.  But this right is only as effective as the agency that enforces it.  The FEC must act here.”

In other censorship news, thanks to yet another FOIA request, Judicial Watch has uncovered more government censorship through private entities, this time about COVID, as evidenced in dialogue between the Biden Surgeon General and Facebook in mid-2021.  No wonder we can’t believe anything we hear from either the government or social media on this (or any other) subject.

In just 14 pages of conversation between U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and top FB executives, we see the path to stunning submission to the government by FB, as they sought “to better understand the scope of what the White House expects of us on misinformation going forward.”

Murthy enumerated several helpful suggestions for combating misinformation, such as focusing on addressing “misinformation in live streams, which are more difficult to moderate due to their temporary nature and use of audio and video.”  Also, FB should “prioritize early detection of misinformation ‘super-spreaders’ and repeat offenders” and “impose clear consequences.”  They also should “amplify communications from trusted messengers and subject matter experts” (presumably those agreeing with Dr. Fauci and the CDC).

It’s fascinating to read the correspondence between Murthy and Nick Clegg, VP of Communications and Global Affairs at Facebook, to see how Clegg diplomatically pushes back on some of this, saying they’re “partners in the same battle” but that he “thought the way we were singled out over the past few days has been surprising and misleading, and I believe unproductive to our joint efforts, too.”  Still, Clegg later seems to have resolved his concerns and settled into his role as co-censor, later writing that he “wanted to make sure you saw the steps we took just this past week to adjust policies on what we are well as steps we are taking to address the ‘disinfo dozen’:  we removed 17 additional Pages, Groups and Instagram accounts tied to the disinfo dozen...(resulting in every entry of the disinfo dozen having had at least one such entity removed.”

Aren’t you intrigued to know who the “disinfo dozen” were and what they were daring to say in their social media posts?  Were they saying that masks didn’t stop the spread?  That vaccines didn’t guarantee protection against infection and transmission?  That COVID might have started in the Wuhan lab?  That mRNA vaccines were experimental and might be dangerous to some?  “Misinformation” like THAT?

Well, we looked them up and found them identified in an article from the FORBES archives that supported “removing their platforms.”  (Not that the writer was calling for censorship, he said as he called for censorship.)  The heretics included Dr. Joseph Mercola and (yes) Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  Ironically, if you want to see some REAL misinformation about COVID vaccines, read this now-horribly-dated FORBES article, which is rife with it, such as that the vaccines are “highly effective” and are “the only realistic way to end the pandemic.”

Anyway, Clegg later writes to Murthy about “how we can partner in this next push to vaccinate children.”

There’s much more to this; I hope you’ll read the Judicial Watch press release at the link.  Tom Fitton, president of JW, said, “These emails confirm that Facebook censored Americans at the direction of the Biden White House and Biden’s Surgeon General’s political operation.  This is a massive violation of the First Amendment.”

There’s no way to deny the sad truth that Democrats had a good election day. They see the results of the Ohio vote enshrining the “right” to abortion as their golden key to turning out voters who will ignore all other issues just for that. So expect to see a lot more demagoguing about abortion in 2024, and attempts to put more laws and constitutional amendments on the ballots in swing states to turn out Democrat voters. It might even turn off some moderate Republicans, who’ve been swayed to think of abortion as a “personal freedom” issue.

Paula Bolyard at PJ Media has more on that Ohio vote, what it might mean, and what it doesn’t really mean. And yes, a large reason for it was that a heavily-funded pro-abortion lobby frightened voters by lying through their teeth about what pro-life legislation would do, while the Republicans did virtually nothing to counter their false narratives.  

I was on Sean Hannity’s show last night, talking about the messaging problem that pro-lifers and Republicans have on abortion.

We need to stop playing defense and go on offense. We need to start fighting back against the left’s false rhetoric about killing babies in the womb being “women’s health care” and that anyone who isn’t all-in on abortion wants to harm women. We must make it clear that we recognize that an abortion has two victims: both the baby and the birth mother, who in many cases got talked into the abortion by the father, a relative, or even the abortion providers themselves, for whom dismembering unborn babies is a lucrative business.

We must let women know that we are not out to punish the mother, but to help her, whether it’s to keep her baby or to find a loving adoptive home, but never to condemn her. And to counter the slanderous claim that we don’t care about women’s health, we need to talk about the fact that women are exploited by abortion proponents. They’re not told about the long-term consequences of abortion, physically, emotionally or spiritually.

And instead of getting bogged down in arguments over “how many weeks,” we should talk about something everyone understands and can relate to, like the heartbeat. We all know that when your heart stops beating, you die. It stands to reason that if a baby’s heart has started beating, it’s alive. Everyone gets that.

Remember: surveys show that most people agree that there should be limits on abortion, but they vote for the “no limits” crowd because they’ve been led to believe that pro-lifers are extremists when it’s really the pro-abortion crowd who are far more extreme than most Americans.

We need to stop making the mistake of acting like we need to be afraid of this issue. We don’t. We need to say, “We are for life. We may disagree on how exactly we’re going to make that work, but all of us agree that if an unborn child is in the eighth month of development, nobody should be allowed to slice it to pieces and call it 'women’s health.' It isn’t healthy at all, for the baby or the mother." 

Last night was the third GOP primary “debate,” hosted by NBC News and moderated by two liberals and Hugh Hewitt (Breaking News: The next one will be moderated by Megyn Kelly.) The participants this time around were whittled down to Ron DeSantis, Nicky Haley, Chris Christie, Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy. The general consensus was that there were no breakthroughs. DeSantis did the best, with Haley second. Vivek started strong with a flamethrower opening about NBC News and the repeat loser RNC, but went downhill from there.

You can read more about it here:

This is a good analysis by Guy Benson…

And just for fun, scroll back through the comments on’s live blog…

I’m not going to do a blow-by-blow recap, or recount who got called “scum,” or who called whom “Dick Cheney in three-inch heels,” or other petty in-fighting. That just plays into what the media wants: turning these events into divisive sideshows that make Republicans look bad. Why else did the moderators wait until an hour into it, when many viewers had no doubt tuned out, before even addressing the major domestic issues most important to voters, like the economy or the #1 issue for many, our wide-open border? That’s taken on even more urgency, now that people are finally waking up to the dangers of letting terrorists pour across it.

I’ve stood on the presidential debate stage many times, and in 2016, the moderators tried to get me to attack Trump. I refused, and for the same reason I’m not going to critique this (not really) debate. I follow Reagan’s 11th Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican. Just as I said then when we were running against Hillary Clinton, we might have our differences, but there’s not a single person on that stage who wouldn’t be an exponentially better President than Joe Biden.

Besides, I’ve already said I back Trump, he’s ahead in the polls by up to 30 points, and as one commentator said, it’s likely most of the candidates by now have resigned themselves to the idea of Trump being the nominee, and they’re just auditioning for Cabinet posts.


A bad omen for 2024

November 8, 2023

I dread having to tell you about Tuesday’s elections, because on the whole, they were another disaster for the Republican Party. I'll soften it by starting with the few bright spots, like the (too close) reelection of Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves and strong GOP legislative wins in Mississippi and Kentucky, but it would really be a shock if we’d lost those states. But all the high-profile races were a total rout.

Deep-red Kentucky reelected Democrat Gov. Andy Beshear by 52.4% to 47.5% over Republican Daniel Cameron. It’s a mystery why. Beshear is 180 degrees out of phase with most Kentucky voters, but he poses as a moderate while the reliable overrides of his vetoes of conservative bills have helped prevent voters who don’t pay much attention from realizing what his true colors are. Cameron took a lot of attacks, some of them shockingly racist, from Democrats who are especially terrified of letting black conservatives achieve prominent positions and disprove their false narratives. The results were hardly a shock; while polls had tightened, most showed Beshear ahead. Still, the actual gap was larger than the polls, and in a state like Kentucky, that’s a bad omen for 2024.

The worst news, though, came out of Ohio and Virginia. In Ohio, by a 56-44% margin, voters enshrined abortion as a constitutional “right.” This article explains what the amendment says and what Republicans in the legislature might do to overcome it. It also makes clear that the abortion laws being pushed by Democrats are actually far more radical than those in European nations they want us to emulate, and more radical than most Americans' beliefs on the subject, yet they keep winning on this issue.

That vote was propelled by a pro-abortion campaign heavily funded by outside leftist groups that outspent the pro-life side by $10 million. Aided by media sycophants and their own utter shamelessness, Democrats have successfully framed the slaughter of babies in the womb up to the moment of birth as “women’s health care” or “bodily autonomy.” Ohio voters also voted to legalize marijuana, which along with abortion created a perfect storm to turn out their base. They plan to use abortion to the hilt in the 2024 elections, so brace for a tsunami of demagoguery.

In Virginia, where Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin was hoping for the GOP to retake the Senate, they not only failed but lost their majority in the Assembly. This race also was heavily impacted by abortion, with Youngkin pushing for a 15-week ban on abortion, with exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother.

I honestly don’t know what to make of Virginia voters. They just lived through watching Democrats arrest parents for getting upset that their daughters were being raped in school by "trans" males in their bathrooms, and now, they’ve decided to hand power back to them in the name of "women's rights"?

On a larger level, how can anyone look at the worldwide disaster created by Democrat rule and vote to keep these people in charge of anything? The cities they run are violent cesspools of crime, homelessness and corruption; the states they run are losing population because all the sane, productive people are fleeing; and their national policies have everything from the economy to border security to the Middle East crashing down around their ears. Joe Biden’s only been in office for three years, and we once again have Nazis attacking Jews in the streets and the threat of World War III! Who can look at the endless catastrophes of Democrat rule and think the most important voting issue is being allowed to kill babies in the womb until the moment of birth?

There are a lot of problems to address if we’re going to stop these electoral debacles and save America from the certain destruction of four more years of Biden and Co. “in charge.” One is that after the Dobbs ruling, the Democrats were able to monopolize the framing of abortion, shroud its brutal reality in fuzzy euphemisms (“women’s health care,” “reproductive justice,” etc.) and convince too many women of the insane notion that the GOP wants to chain them in kitchens and force them to have babies. The pro-life movement worked so hard and so long to overturn Roe v. Wade that I fear they didn’t realize how much effort they would have to keep putting into winning hearts and minds state by state. They might have also underestimated their opponents’ conscience-free zeal in pushing abortion to the utmost limits. They have to redouble their efforts to fight back against the propaganda.

Another issue is turnout. In many of these races, the results could have been flipped if only a higher percentage of Republicans had voted, but they didn’t. Some think it doesn’t matter, “the Democrats will just steal the election anyway, so why bother to vote,” etc. Do you know what that kind of defeatist attitude results in? Defeat! As the horrific results of this election start to become apparent over the next year, I’m sure many Republicans will be complaining about how bad things are getting, and wondering how such incompetent people with such awful ideas came to power. If they didn’t vote, then they can look for the reason in the nearest mirror.

That brings us to the RNC. There was a big push to change the RNC’s leadership that failed, but we were assured they’d learned their lesson and had plans to turn out voters. Well…where were they? I heard a lot of complaints about important races not getting the funding they needed, and saw a lot of races lost to low GOP turnout. Meanwhile, the biggest news I’ve heard from the RNC lately was that it agreed to let NBC and two liberal news anchors host the next GOP primary debate. How many at-bats and strike-outs should they get before they're sent to the Democrat-run unisex showers?

Finally, a lot of people are trying to blame this latest election debacle on Trump, even though he had little to no involvement in most of these races. It’s true, Trump Derangement Syndrome is a big motivator for the Democrat base, but it’s a brain-wasting disease, and I’m sure that will be true for years to come whether Trump is in politics or not. Let’s face it: the current Democrat Party can’t run on its successes and achievements because it has none, other than knowing how to stay in power despite outrageous failure. It succeeds almost entirely on smears, vilification and scare narratives.

If they don’t have Trump, then whoever comes along next will quickly be smeared as “worse than Trump” (they used to say “worse than Hitler,” but I think they’re realizing a lot of their young base are admirers of Hitler.) To them, all Republicans are racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic monsters who want to chain women in the kitchen and bring back slavery (which is odd because Republicans fought a Civil War to make Democrats give up their slaves.) And it makes no difference who the Republican is (just look at the wild attempts to paint new Speaker Mike Johnson as a crazy, dangerous radical right-winger when they don’t even know who he is.)

No, whether Trump is running or not, Republicans will always have to deal with the problem of misled, miseducated voters whose emotions have been fired up by phony Democrat propaganda. We need to have competent leaders to counter that, and the best way is to find someone who can motivate rational people to get off the couch and vote. That didn’t happen yesterday, and it’s going to cost a lot of innocent lives in Ohio.

Here's a round-up of election results…

Some commentary from Fox News…

And I think some pretty spot-on comments from Todd Starnes…

And from Bonchie at…

A Bright Spot In Tuesday’s Elections: Bonchie at also points out that while the GOP didn’t take the legislature in Virginia, they actually overperformed, winning in every district that voted for Biden by less than 9 points. Virginia is a blue state infested with federal employees, so it may be impossible for Republicans to take it. But the strength they showed even in a state like that could bode well for them in swing states in 2024. Hope that makes it easier to get through your day.

I always caution people not to pay attention to polls taken a year before an election, but a new New York Times/Sienna College poll is giving the vapors to Democrats. The results are absolutely devastating for President Biden.

The poll shows Trump with solid leads in five of six swing states, with Biden ahead only in Wisconsin by 2 points (I assume that’s due to the Cheesehead vote.) It also found that two-thirds of Americans think the country is moving in the wrong direction (one-third think this is the RIGHT direction?!), and a majority say Biden’s policies have personally hurt them.

Most terrifying for Democrats, the poll shows that Biden’s jaw-dropping incompetence is causing their coalition of interest groups to fray. Biden’s lead among Hispanics is down to single digits, he leads among voters under 30 by only one point, and his lead in urban areas is half that of Trump’s lead in rural areas. This terrifies Democrats because their route to winning is to separate Americans into warring identity groups, then cobble together enough of them to add up to over 50% of the vote.

This poll is just the latest reason why people like Democrat strategist David Axelrod are urging Biden not to run for reelection, but to retire, go home and try to figure out how many grandchildren he has.