Democrats are irresponsibly demagoging to fire up their far-left base that’s already violently unhinged, in hopes that abortion will save them from oblivion in the midterm elections. I think they’re making the same mistake that many liberals in the media make: thinking that Twitter is America.
A new CBS poll taken after the SCOTUS decision ending Roe found that Americans opposed overturning Roe by 52-31%. Also that 50% of Democrats said this will make them more likely to vote, up from 40% last month. That's obviously giving Democrats motivation to fan the flames.
But will that bump be enough to make a big difference? And will it hold once all the hysteria dies down and people start to figure out that they’ve been misled about what the ruling really means (the SCOTUS didn’t ban abortion, it just sent the issue back to the states)? Besides, most of the voters most likely to be motivated by this are in blue states, where abortion laws will remain unchanged and possibly get even more liberal.
More to the point, for all the 24/7 focus on abortion, it’s just not that big an issue for most people. CBS also reports that the highest priority issue with voters is inflation, followed by the economy and crime. None of that is good news for Democrats. Abortion came in 6th, with 42% calling it high priority, but of those, many are doubtless pro-life. By comparison, 82% named inflation as high priority. And as the RNC’s Tyler Bowyer points out at this link, the issues that got the least votes for “high priority” were January 6th, climate change, COVID and abortion, or as he puts it, “the entire Democratic platform for 2022.”
Big decision from the Supreme Court this week—they finally overturned Roe v. Wade on 6-3 vote because they actually read the Constitution. So we’re clear—this doesn’t end abortion, it simply returns the decision to the people elected representatives in the states. Despite the elation among those of us who are pro-life and the despair among the pro-abortionists, the fact is some states like New York and California will probably have MORE abortions, while pro-life states like my state of Arkansas will have no abortions. But it’s a reminder that elections really do have consequences, and if you wondered why it mattered that Donald Trump was elected instead of Hillary Clinton in 2016, just remember that if Hillary had been elected, this decision would have likely been 7-2 in FAVOR of abortion right up until the moment of birth. So if you are truly pro-life, then even if you didn’t like Donald Trump’s mean tweets, I hope you realize that Trump’s election is why we finally have a responsible court.
This week on Sean Hannity’s show on Fox, I told Sean something I’ve observed for a long time in government. There are some people in public office who don’t do anything but look like they ARE doing something. Then there are those who are doing some great things, but don’t look like they are doing ANYTHING. And then there’s Joe Biden who isn’t doing anything and by golly it LOOKS like he’s not doing anything.
He was on vacation…again…in Delaware last weekend and fell off his bicycle. He wasn’t injured and I’m genuinely grateful for that, but that seemed to be the perfect metaphor for his entire Presidency. Wanting to appear younger than he is—he’ll be 80 in November—the bike could be a good look for him since he acts every bit of 80 at the podium or when he shuffles in and out of the room. But if he keeps wrecking his bike or tripping on the stairs to Air Force One, he might want to trade in the bike for a walker, or at least get some training wheels for the bicycle.
And Joe’s messes seem to be rubbing off on others. If you are planning on flying anywhere this summer, you might want to reconsider it. The airlines are in meltdown. As someone who is on planes by necessity 2-4 days a week, it’s become a real frustrating mess as many flights are canceled, delayed, or changed at the last minute. And the prices for the privilege of being stuck in an airport and never making it to your destination is about twice what it was a year ago.
But thinking about driving? You might need to sell a kidney just to fill up your tank. And since you only have 2 kidneys, I hope you take somebody with you to sell a kidney to get back home.
Remember when we were told that we needed to get rid of Donald Trump and get Biden in the White House because he’d bring the adults back in charge? After all, Joe Biden has been in Washington since he was in his 20’s.
So according to the press and the DC swamp-rats, Joe Biden was bring the country together and heal us. Are we healed? Is the country together? Are our cities safer? Are your groceries cheaper? How about the gas in your car? Do you feel that unity we were promised? Or do you now remember when Joe Biden screamed at a citizen at a campaign rally? (Biden screams “I don’t work for you!” Or when he called another voter a “Lying, Dog-faced pony solider?”.
So spare me the nonsense about the adults taking over. I can’t think of one thing the so-called “adults” have made better. Nothing. Nada. If this is what adults do to us, I’m ready for the kids to come back. And if they tweet some stupid stuff, I’ll shake my head and frown as I fill up my tank with gas that costs half of what it does with these adults in control!
The January 6 committee is on an unlawful search-and-destroy mission.
This blatantly political committee, deliberately running afoul of the rules under which it was formed, exists not to find out what went wrong at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, but to wield power over Trump supporters and crush them. Attorney General Merrick Garland and his ‘Justice’ Department are openly helping them do it. One of the latest to fall victim is former Trump attorney John Eastman, who, last Wednesday, had his phone confiscated by the FBI –- on the spot, before he had even been shown a warrant.
“I’d like to see the warrant,” he said repeatedly, hands over his head in obedience. “I’d like to see the warrant before you take my property.” They pulled his phone out of his pocket anyway. He noted to the person recording, “I want you to see that they took my property before providing me with a warrant.
“I’d like to read the warrant,” he continued after they finally showed it, though the FBI already had his phone.
Eastman appeared on Tucker Carlson’s Monday evening show, explaining that the warrant gave him no specifics about what he’s alleged to have done –- “no indication of any crime that this is connected to.” It said they could confiscate his phone, “and all the information contained in the phone.”
It said the allegation was “in an attached affidavit,” but the affidavit was NOT attached to the warrant. “The Fourth Amendment’s very clear here,” he said. “When they search and seize your property, they have to give a particular description of the things to be seized.” If the affidavit wasn’t attached, they didn’t fulfill that requirement.
“The courts have been very clear about that,” he said. “So this warrant is invalid on its face.”
But what he thought was even more important is this: With modern Smartphones, the ‘Justice’ Department now has full access to all his most private information –- financial records, etc. –- and those of his “nearly 100” legal clients. This is privileged information. Eastman likened this to what used to be called a “general warrant” when British kings would issue them, “to rummage through someone’s belongings to see if they could find evidence of some crime.”
So Eastman is another victim of Pelosi’s fishing expedition. “The very reason we have the Fourth Amendment is to prevent that kind of abuse,” he said, “and yet that’s what they’re doing.”
“As an attorney, I have ethical obligations,” he said, “to do everything I can to protect the privileged communications with my clients. So we will be filing a motion --- it’s called a Rule 41 motion --- to retrieve my phone, to retrieve any information they’ve taken off of that phone, that they have illegally seized from me.”
He said they’re forcing those who “don’t bow the knee to the Biden administration to rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees trying to protect our constitutional rights and those of our clients.”
(NOTE: Eastman has a GiveSendGo account set up for help with the cost of this legal fight.)
As if this weren’t bad enough, over the weekend, the committee once again showed its propensity for lying. Margot Cleveland reports in THE FEDERALIST that they blatantly lied to the public about former DOJ attorney Ken Klukowski to tie him into a plan to encourage the Georgia legislature to convene a special session to look into election irregularities and perhaps, based on its findings, select an alternate slate of electors. Liz Cheney, in particular, painted him in a suspicious light.
Klukowski has released a public statement of his own that says, “The January 6 Committee falsely accused me on Thursday of being a go-between in a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. That accusation is false both in its broad outlines and its details. Since the Committee first contacted me, I have cooperated without hesitation, provided it with hundreds of documents, and sat for many hours of recorded depositions. The information produced from those efforts fully contradicts the Committee’s statements regarding my actions, yet the Committee has chosen to keep such information to itself rather than share it with the public.”
Cleveland has full details and says the evidence backs Klukowski up. And a key person she spoke with to ascertain this, Andrew Kloster, the White House official who coordinated senior DOJ appointments, offered Cleveland this insight: “The January 6 investigation is all about attacking mid-level and senior staff like Ken, so we don’t have a farm team in 2024, no matter who the President is. This isn’t about truth, but about making it impossible for conservatives to successfully enter and leave government.”
In fact, Klukowski told Cleveland he disagreed with John Eastman about what the Vice President was empowered to do regarding the election. He believed December 14 had been the deadline for appointing electors. He also never advised Vice President Pence or any member of his staff.
“I was concerned the committee might make cynical assumptions during its investigation of January 6, Klukowski told Cleveland, “but I was stunned that the committee would make claims about me for which it had a mountain of evidence establishing, for certain, those statements were false.”
He doesn’t have a transcript of his testimony to the committee, so he’s calling on them to release it. When Cleveland contacted Liz Cheney’s office to see about this, and also to ask if she disputed what Klukowski had said about the committee fraudulently implicating him in a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election, she received no reply.
She strongly advises Republican leaders to demand all transcripts of all depositions, because if they lied about Klukowski, it’s probable that they lied about other witnesses, too.
Another writer at THE FEDERALIST who gets what’s going on at the Department of ‘Justice’ is Beth Whitehead, who has an overview of the legal double standard at the DOJ. Just look at who gets raided...and who doesn’t.
The U.K. DAILY MAIL reports that a voicemail from future President Joe Biden to son Hunter Biden proves without a doubt that Joe was lying when he said he never discussed Hunter’s foreign business dealings with him.
The voicemail was from a password-protected backup of Hunter’s iPhone XS, retrieved from a copy of the hard drive from his abandoned laptop.
On December 12, 2018, the elder Biden called Hunter after reading a NEW YORK TIMES article about Hunter’s multi-million-dollar dealings with CCP oil giant CEFC. The NYT story had reported that CEFC Chairman Ye Jianming had been arrested in China and his top officer Patrick Ho had been convicted in the United States over bribing African officials to help Iran evade oil sanctions. The NYT had also reported that when Ho had been arrested, he’d called Joe’s brother Jim, who told the NYT he thought the call had been meant for Hunter.
After seeing the story online in the TIMES, Joe called Hunter and left this message: “Hey, pal. It’s Dad. It’s 8:15 on Wednesday night. If you get a chance, just give me a call. Nothing urgent. I just wanted to talk to you. I thought the article released online, it’s going to be printed tomorrow in the TIMES, was good. I think you’re clear. And, anyway, if you get a chance, give me a call. I love you.”
“I THINK YOU’RE CLEAR”??
The DAILY MAIL has all the details. As they report, this voicemail is is “the latest in an overwhelming body of evidence suggesting that he lied about not talking foreign business with his son.”
As Josh Boswell, senior reporter at the DAILY MAIL, told FOX News’ Jesse Watters Monday evening, “It’s almost more important what wasn’t said, right? It wasn’t a phone call from Joe Biden to his son saying, ‘What the hell are you doing? I’m reading about deals with corrupted criminal Chinese businessmen! What’s going on?’ It’s ‘You’re in the clear.’ He clearly knew what was going on.”
When he asked the White House to comment on this, they declined.
Jerry Dunleavy and Andrew Kerr, reporting on this for the WASHINGTON EXAMINER, offer a timeline, saying that this exchange took place about five months before Joe Biden started his presidential campaign. Biden later famously said, “I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.”
Also, Joe made this call to Hunter five days after wiring $75,000 to Hunter’s account to help him pay for his monthly $37,000 alimony (editorial note: !!!) and his daughters’ rent, tuition, healthcare and other expenses. Between November 2018 and March 2019, Hunter also spent over $30,000 on escorts, many of whom were linked to “.ru” Russian email addresses. This was a period in which his dad committed to wiring him a total of $100,000 to help him with his bills. Thus, Hunter’s dad, as the EXAMINER reports, “unwittingly helped finance Hunter’s trysts with Russia-linked escorts.”
Actually, if Biden knew about his son’s proclivities, it’s hard to know for sure if this was done “unwittingly” or not. On the other hand, there’s no evidence on the laptop that he knew he was paying for that. And maybe he was as clueless then about that as he is now about...oh, I don't know, why we have inflation?
Hunter’s response to this story was to shoot the messenger, saying to the EXAMINER, “What’s wrong with you?”
Perhaps Hunter should take a few moments to ponder how the press would have exploded if this same story had involved, say, Donald Trump, Jr., instead of himself.
Legal expert Andrew C. McCarthy was sympathetic to Joe Biden as a father who loved his son, but at the same time recognized that he was “shoveling prodigious sums of money” to Hunter “when the neon lights were flashing that Hunter was compromised and using the money to become even more compromised --- and with Russia, of all places. Joe Biden is a textbook example of why applicants with family members who maintain shady ties with foreign actors, particularly those connected to authoritarian anti-American regimes with highly capable intelligence services, get rejected when applying for a security clearance.”
McCarthy also put this in context, noting the irony that Democrats put our country through two years of anxiety on the fabricated claim that Trump was an agent of the Kremlin. Then, when real information came out about the Bidens in the form of Hunter’s laptop, they dismissed that as “Russian disinformation” and suppressed it in the weeks before the 2020 election.
If you’d like to keep up with the Hunter Biden developments, the WASHINGTON EXAMINER has a page specifically for updates.
Miranda Devine, author of LAPTOP FROM HELL and reporter on all things “Hunter” at the NEW YORK POST, appeared Monday night on Tucker Carlson’s show to discuss the latest. She agreed that this “puts the lie” to Joe Biden’s repeated claim that he didn’t know anything about Hunter’s foreign business affairs.
Biden was “intimately involved,” she said. “...This is, at least, evidence of some sort of guilty knowledge,” referring to the huge family business scheme that the TIMES had been sniffing around. We’re not sure why the Bidens were so anxious about the TIMES finding out about this, when it was the POST doing the real reporting.
With investigative reporter John Solomon and Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan both appearing this weekend on SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES, Maria Bartiromo had the opportunity to ask about the January 6 committee’s focus on presidential pardons.
As I said last week, the Democrats’ overzealousness in raiding the home of another Trump official, former assistant AG Jeffrey Clark, undercuts their premise that no one would seek a pardon without being guilty of a crime. We’ve seen how the Democrats use the legal system to ruin the lives of people who’ve done nothing wrong, and why sometimes, as with Michael Flynn, a pardon is the only escape from their partisan clutches. And now, with their one-sided kangaroo court, they'll make virtually anyone look guilty.
“When you get to the January 6 commission,” Solomon said, “you see...time and again, the same tactic we saw in “Russia”: only put out certain pieces of information; leave the rest out. And so they create illusion that there’s reality there, and then when we dig in and we get the full body of evidence, you find out that what they claim was never true. They’ve used a lack of transparency to create false reality time and time again, going all the way back to Russia collusion.”
Why was the Capitol vulnerable in the first place? As for the warning House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had received about potential violence on January 6, Jordan agreed that it was ample, reminding viewers that President Trump had offered up to 20,000 National Guard troops, which she still turned down. (Fortunately, Trump has solid documentation of this.) That's "something that needs to be answered,” Jordan said, “but I don’t think it’s gonna happen, certainly not with this committee.”
‘Streiff’ at REDSTATE has assessed what we’ve all seen so far, and it’s not pretty. The committee is so transparent, in fact, that we easily glimpsed the ugly, soulless center, as they, in “best Stalinist style,” intended to link “individual Republicans to the insurrection” and “keep Donald Trump on the ballot in November 2022 to run against him.” But the heavy-handed operations they’ve been pulling lately (see Jeffrey Clark and Peter Navarro) are “third world stuff.”
“These actions are obviously choreographed with the January 6 committee because the FBI would have done all this a year ago if it were real...While there is no evidence of any sort of a ‘conspiracy’ to ‘overthrow’ the government, the [DOJ] and the FBI, working at the behest of their political masters in the House Democrat Caucus, will try to create an illusion that the GOP politicians at every echelon of government were involved in this nonsense scheme.”
When Republicans return to power, what must happen is that everyone who participated to the slightest degree in in these “Stasi-like operations” must be “driven from government.” Hear, hear.
Another great weekend commentary came from former U.S. attorney from Utah Brett Tolman, a guest on FOX NEWS’ “Life, Liberty & Levin.” Levin remarked, as we have, that the committee’s process is “about the most anti-constitutional process I’ve ever seen, certainly in public. No opposition, no exculpatory evidence, no contrary witnesses, no Republicans on the committee who are actually Republicans, no ability for people to answer their accusers because they have potential criminal charges hanging over their heads.” This is happening while Democrats hilariously talk about defending the system.
Tolman said that looking at this “as a trial lawyer,” if this were a real court of law, “the judge would be holding them [Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger] in contempt for manipulating evidence, for refusing to hand over exculpatory evidence, for refusal to present a fair assessment of the evidence that they have, for the grandstand; we’d have sanctions, we’d have contempt of court, and the case would be thrown out.
“But not in the court of political ideology.”
The Democrats can’t give an argument that’s “based in fact, based in the law...so they resort to media, they resort to distortion and manipulation, and we all have to sit back and watch as though there’s credibility to it.”
He says he finds no credibility “to any argument they currently are pursuing.” It doesn’t help that these so-called “pro-democracy” arguments are coming from people who ignored or even cheered on the violence in 2020 and are doing the same again with the vicious pro-choice protests.
As for the raid on Jeffrey Clark’s house last week –- not to mention even worse treatment of former Trump adviser Peter Navarro –- Tolman said Attorney General Merrick Garland is “either a puppet, or he’s a very dangerous...man at the helm of the Department of Justice.” For the first time in his long legal career, he said, he sees that “it is not the same Justice Department, it is not the same FBI that I worked with.” The driving force is their political agenda, and they’re blatant about that. “And I think they’re doing it that way,” he said, “because they’re having difficulty winning on any of the merits.
“And so they use DOJ as an arm of the executive agenda. So when you see the January 6 committee...gathering evidence and then manipulating that evidence --- and it’s very clear that they are --- not giving any credibility to evidence that would contradict the narrative that they want to push --- I fear for a Department of Justice who I think 15 years ago would have laughed at the [criminal] referral [becoming] a Department of Justice who will now take it seriously.”
And, as Levin said, “they seem to be investigating everything except January 6.” One witness they need testimony from is Pelosi herself, on what if anything she did to secure the Capitol.
But the committee’s goal is more encompassing, with a massive agenda that includes investigating and smearing the entire Republican Party and, ultimately, getting rid of the Electoral College. To get there, the’ve stretched the meaning of ‘obstruction of Congress,’ Tolman said, in ways we’ve never heard of before. And they’re “trying to lay a criminal predicate to indict the former President of the United States.”
Tolman compared this committee most unfavorably to the (really) bipartisan 9/11 Commission, which was willing to hand out criticism objectively to whichever administration warranted that. They assessed what had been done well or badly by the FBI. And the American people had “some confidence that we were at least going to get some answers.”
Not this time. In vivid contrast, the January 6 committee hasn’t looked into who Ray Epps is, or who put the pipe bombs at the RNC and DNC headquarters, or what orders Pelosi gave and “why it appears that she refused to build up security on the recommendations of the Capitol police.” We need to know what happened on January 6 and “why it was such a monumental failing.”
And they’ll never look at any of the things Democrats did ahead of the 2020 election that gave Trump ample reason to think the process was rigged in Biden’s favor. Trump didn’t just pull all that out of his hat, you know. They just want you to think he did.