(Correction: our editor wishes to apologize for pulling a "Joe Biden" with Agent BARNETT's name in this piece when it ran originally, adding that 3AM might have been the time for performance-enhancing drugs. Also, Amy Coney Barrett had been in the news all day. We promise never to refer to her as Amy Comey Barrett. Please enjoy the corrected version in its entirety.)

I don’t know if Maria Bartiromo had something in her eye during this weekend's edition of SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES, but it sure looked like a small tear running down her cheek as she reported that, according to her sources, John Durham’s report on the “Trump/Russia” investigation would not be out until after the election.

Durham’s office reportedly had concerns that delivering his conclusions this close to the election would be considered too politicizing, but I strongly disagree. I’m with Sen. Ron Johnson, who appeared on her show later in the hour. We’ve long been saying that it’s the withholding of information until after the election that should be seen as politicizing, not the releasing, as voters deserve all the information they can get before casting their ballots. Sen. Johnson said essentially the same thing on Sunday.

One of Bartiromo’s guests, Sen. Lindsay Graham, did have encouraging news: the Senate Judiciary Committee intends to call William Barnett, the FBI agent who opened the Michael Flynn case –- after being personally selected by Joe Pientka, who supervised “Crossfire Hurricane” –- and learned over time that it was all about “getting Trump.” Sean Davis and Mollie Hemingway have a new report on the interview with Barnett conducted just under two weeks ago by U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, who was appointed by Attorney General Bill Barr to review the special counsel’s handling of the Michael Flynn case.

One thing that stood out to me in reading this was that Barnett said special counsel agents would actually joke about it being a game of “Collusion ‘CLUE.’” In this game, he said, investigators choose any character, in any location, conducting any activity, and pair this person with another character and interpret it as evidence of collusion. Hilarious.

Barnett is essentially a whistleblower now –- not the kind Democrats like –- and the transcript of his interview with Jensen, or at least the summary, was obtained by Flynn lawyer Sidney Powell and filed with Judge Emmet Sullivan. (If Durham isn’t going to release any report before the election, we’re dependent on this sort of process to get the facts out.)

Barnett said in his interview that there was never any basis for the Trump/Russia “collusion” theory. He told DOJ investigators that “the handling of the probes [Flynn and Paul Manafort] troubled him so much that he threatened to quit working on it in one case, and threatened to go to the Inspector General in another."

In 2016, when Barnett was first assigned to the case, he thought that reading through the evidence would give him a better understanding of why the investigation into Trump’s “collusion” with Russia was launched. But after about six weeks, he still couldn’t figure it out. He characterized their theory as “groping.”

Barnett is the agent who moved to close the Flynn case due to lack of evidence. He’s the one who was told by Peter Strzok that the “7th Floor” wanted to keep it open and that Flynn should be investigated for a Logan Act violation. (Recall that then-Vice President Joe Biden was present at the January 5 Oval Office meeting during which this was discussed and, according to Sally Yates, was the one to bring up the Logan Act.) Barnett was not familiar with the Logan Act –- who was? –- but after researching it, knew that it didn’t apply to Flynn, who was not a private citizen but the incoming national security adviser.

Read the Davis/Hemingway piece for details of how Barnett was cut out of Strzok and Pientka’s “ambush” interview with Flynn. Apparently, Barnett was left out of other meetings as well, as the Flynn probe was directed “from the top down,” meaning all the direction was coming from senior officials. (My speculation is that by then, they would've liked to have him off the case but were worried about what he might say publicly.)

By February, 2017, Barnett had had his fill and asked to be removed from the case. In his interview, he said that the Flynn investigation “was problematic and could result in an IG investigation.” (He didn’t need a crystal ball for that one!)

Ironically, it was the supervision by top officials that had made him think it must be legal, as uncomfortable as it made him. Barnett added that one analyst who was “very skeptical of the Flynn collusion investigation” ---name not provided, but it wasn’t Barnett --- was indeed removed from the Flynn investigation. (Surely Jensen has interviewed that person.)

When the Flynn investigation was made part of Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe in May, 2017, Barnett told team member Jeannie Rhee that there was “no evidence of a crime” committed by Flynn. She dismissed his concerns. He said he didn’t want to be involved in the special counsel, but Peter Strzok urged him to move over there. Davis and Hemingway report that Barnett “decided to work at the special counsel office in the hope his perspective would keep them from ‘group think.’”

Once Barnett was working with the special counsel, he could see the “group think” in action --- what he characterized as “GET TRUMP.” The investigation was run in the opposite way of how an FBI investigation would be. He said, “There was always someone at SCO (special counsel’s office) who claimed to have a lead on information that would prove the collusion, only to have the information be a dead end.” It happened over and over.

Incidentally, Barnett never wiped his phone, though he testified that other members of the special counsel would joke about wiping theirs.

The notes from Barnett’s interview ended with this: “Barnett believed the prosecution of Flynn by SCO was used as a means to “get TRUMP.”

It seems there might be much more behind Durham’s delay than we even imagined. has some interesting observations on that.

This report came in after Maria Bartiromo’s show, and I hope she’s had a chance to read it. This writer doesn’t think that Jensen and Barr were prepared for what has been revealed by Barnett about the political calculations involved in the Russia Hoax investigation. There is speculation that Barr is extremely upset that Mueller, now aging and perhaps fading a bit mentally, was being used as cover by Andrew Weissmann and others to overstep wildly in their desire to “get Trump.”

Something had to trigger Barr’s decision to have Barnett interviewed by Jensen. It’s possible that this has to do with Judge Emmet Sullivan’s (mis)handling of the Michael Flynn case, as it shows the case to be even more obviously politically motivated than we knew. The message to Sullivan: “Sure, you idiot, go ahead and keep this case open. The longer you keep it open, the more we’ll reveal.”

And apparently there is more. What we’ve seen has to do with “Crossfire Razor,” the investigation into Flynn. The rest is known only to investigators. It seems that the information that Jensen got from Agent Barnett may indeed be a game-changer. Even so, it’s wrong to keep it under wraps, for whatever reason, until after the election. Two words: interim report.

MIA Candidates

September 28, 2020

Many people are talking about Joe Biden’s “home in bed by 9 a.m.” campaign, but there are also questions about why his running mate Kamala Harris is equally MIA. She hasn’t held a press conference since Biden picked her 45 days ago. Does she really need two months to “prepare for the debate” with Mike Pence?

But Harris did finally speak out in public this week. Americans' support of BLM is plummeting and polls show people are sick of violent rioters and bullying thugs masquerading as “peaceful protesters” and want more police to restore law and order. Even Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi finally felt forced to speak out against the lawlessness.

However, during an appearance at the NAACP’s national convention Thursday, Harris was effusive in her praise of Black Lives Matter and the ongoing protests. Harris praised the “brilliance” and “impact” of BLM, adding, "I actually believe that Black Lives Matter has been the most significant agent for change within the criminal justice system." She also hailed the protests as “an essential component of evolution in our country," declaring, “the people's voices must be heard, and it is often the people who must speak to get their government to do what it is supposed to do, but may not do naturally unless the people speak loudly -- and obviously peacefully." I'm sure the DNC was relieved that she tacked on that last part as an afterthought.

Maybe this will give a clue as to why the Democrats have been keeping her hidden and would rather have nobody speak for their ticket than her. She gives away what the real governing philosophy will be if they can just get enough voters to take in the Joe Biden Trojan Horse.

Calling A "Lid For The Day"

September 28, 2020

I warned you that you’d better learn the media term “called a lid for the day” (meaning a candidate will have no further comments or events for the rest of the day) because we were hearing it a lot from the Biden campaign. But just to be clear how little time Joe is putting into campaigning, his people have put a lid on the day before noon nine times so far this month, and some of those lids dropped before 9 a.m. I’d say that Trump does more before 9 a.m. than Biden does all day, but for Biden, 9 a.m. IS “all day.”

Now, with major news exploding all around us, Biden has nothing scheduled except a trip to Washington to mourn Ruth Bader Ginsburg from now until Tuesday, when the first debate takes place.

Matt Vespa at suggests that this is because they’re panicked that he’ll go off the rails if asked about the blockbuster Senate report on his son Hunter’s financial shenanigans, but seriously, what are the odds that any media outlet he’d talk to would ask him about that? The big liberal news outlets that even mentioned that report presented it not as an in-depth expose of Hunter’s shady influence peddling but as a partisan attack on Biden “without evidence” (Trademark registered.)

The official excuses for Biden spending less time campaigning than Hillary Clinton (and I mean less time than she’s spending NOW) are that he’s “modeling good coronavirus behavior” by not appearing in front of crowds like Trump (I thought the virus didn’t spread in crowds of Democrats who hate Trump) and that he’s “preparing for the debate.”

This was dutifully echoed by his media peanut gallery. But the debate was over five days away when his campaign put a lid on that day, the next day, the weekend and the first two days of next week. Trump is preparing for the debate while dealing with many major issues and campaigning all over the US. In other words, working all day long, like a President has to. Plus, we know what the debate topics will be and that Chris Wallace will ask both candidates to describe their visions for America under their leadership.

If, after 47 years in Washington, 8 years as Vice President and three Presidential runs, Joe Biden can’t tell us off the top of his head what he would do if he became President, then there’s nothing on the top of his head other than hair plugs.


September 28, 2020

On his Fox News show Thursday, Tucker Carlson shined a spotlight on how out of control the power-mad enforcers of arbitrary coronavirus “safety” measures have become. It’s obvious that in some jurisdictions, exerting power over certain groups far outweighs any objective standards of safety or any consideration for the Bill of Rights.

At that link is the segment from Carlson’s show, featuring absolutely shocking (in the first case, literally shocking) footage that as he rightly says, makes you question whether we are still living in America.

The first part is a video of a mom in Logan, Ohio, who was watching her son in a sports event when a large cop and a couple of other people, presumably from the school, came over to tell her she was in violation of the state mandate to wear a face mask. She said she has asthma and can’t wear a mask. Besides, the event was outdoors, and she was sitting well away from anyone else in the sparsely-filled bleachers, and the mandate applies only indoors and in places where social-distancing is impossible.

Nevertheless, when she refused to put on a mask or leave, the cop grappled with her, handcuffed her, TASED her (the jolt also shocked a nearby child on the metal bleachers) then forcibly hauled her away under arrest. I don’t know what’s more shocking: the taser, the behavior of the cop and officials, or the fact that so many other Americans just sat there quietly watching this outrage.

Here is more about the story, with a link to the police department’s response. They claim she was not arrested for nor wearing a mask but for criminal trespass, because she refused to leave (note: because she refused to leave a public event where the mask mandate did not apply. Try again.)

I’m normally not a big fan of lawsuits, but I hope she has a real shark lawyer. The same goes for the church in Moscow (as Tucker points out: Idaho, not Russia) where worshippers were handcuffed and arrested for singing hymns at an OUTDOOR worship service.

In what I hope and pray is the start of a new trend that will inspire churches like the one in Idaho, the Capitol Hill Baptist Church has filed a lawsuit against the DC government, arguing that its never-ending ban on gatherings of over 100 people (even outdoors with masks and social distancing) places an impossible burden on the fundamental First Amendment right to freedom of religious expression. The lawsuit points out that DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, who refuses to let churches hold services, has given her approval to mass anti-police protests and even appeared among a crowd of tens of thousands of protesters on June 6 and called the event “a wonderful thing.”

The DC church is being represented by the Texas-based First Liberty Institute, which defends religious freedom rights. Click the link if you’d like to learn more and maybe contribute to the legal expenses.

I’m glad to see Americans finally standing up and saying “no more” to this partisan tyranny hiding behind the name of “public safety.” If you can safely attend a protest rally, you can safely attend a worship service. Those who defend the protesters by claiming it’s their First Amendment right might want to read a little further in that Amendment.

This also drives home how vitally important it is that President Trump appoint a Supreme Court Justice who cares about protecting the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and that the Senate confirm that person with all possible speed.


Saturday, tens of thousands of people came to Washington, DC (on their own dime, not bused in by any deep pockets activists) to join the Rev. Franklin Graham for Prayer March 2020.

Some in the mainstream media mischaracterized it as a rally of Trump supporters, but aside from some MAGA caps (which actually stood for "Make America Godly Again"), it was not. In fact, the organizers requested that there be no political signs. And even though (whether by coincidence or Divine design) President Trump was nominating Amy Coney Barrett to the SCOTUS on the same day very close by, this was a nonpartisan event for anyone who was concerned about the direction our country is heading. As Rev. Graham said, "Let's exalt the name of Jesus Christ. Let's call upon the name of Almighty God. Repent of our sins and ask God to heal our land. And that He would work in the hearts of our politicians.”

If you weren’t able to attend, you can read more, see photos and watch the replay of the live stream on video (hosted by Cissie Graham Lynch and myself) at this link.

And here is more information on Prayer March 2020 and quotes from the speeches.


Project Veritas just released a new undercover video expose of alleged voter fraud tied to Rep. Ilhan Omar. It involves accusations of vote buying and ballot harvesting to keep Omar and other members of the DFL (Democratic-Farmers-Labor Party) in power in Minnesota. This is a must-read, and more details are at the link.

Just a few lowlights: alleged ballot harvester Liban Mohamed is on video showing piles of ballots in his car and bragging about harvesting 300 that day for his brother, Minneapolis City Council member Jamal Osman (state law bars anyone from acting as a “designated agent” for more than three absentee voters.)

An anonymous whistleblower also claims that before the August primary, Omar’s ballot harvesters went to the Charles Horn Towers public housing complex and took every ballot from seniors there. She said, “They have perfected this system…They will tell you we are applying for your ballot. They take a picture of your Social Security and your driver’s license. They have a database. When the ballot comes, they track it. Sometimes, they make fake emails. They track the ballot. Then they come and pick up the ballot, unopened…They don’t give a (bleep) about any Somali…The DFL wants to win this state at all costs…and the victims is the Somali people.”

She also claims that young people and women were paid for their votes in the primary and that campaign operatives “were carrying bags of money…When you vote and they mark you off, then you get in the van, they give you the cash.”

Read the whole thing and get justifiably and non-partisanly furious. These tactics not only put corrupt politicians in power over all of us, they also cancel out legitimate votes and disenfranchise real voters. I have little faith in Minneapolis officials to investigate this (they’re too busy defunding their police department), but maybe it will finally convince FBI Director Christopher Wray that vote fraud really is a problem worth dealing with.


Judge Amy Coney Barrett is under assault for having religious beliefs that leftists think will color her decisions. She already answered this attack brilliantly last year at Hillsdale College. Click this link and must-read her entire response:

In a nutshell, she pointed out that even people with no religious beliefs have personal moral convictions, and setting them aside is “a challenge for those of faith and for those who have no faith.” But it’s the job of a judge to set aside personal convictions and follow the law and the Constitution. She said it’s “a dangerous road to go down to say that only religious people would not be able to separate out moral convictions from their duty.”

In this one response, she not only shot down the loudest leftist objection to her (religious bigotry), but if they continue to press it, then they’ll be admitting that they want judges who don’t make rulings based on their personal beliefs. That would be both a tacit endorsement of non-activist judges and a rejection of all the reasons for which they are currently deifying Ruth Bader Ginsburg.


I don’t have much in common politically with Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, but on ABC’s “This Week,” he made some comments that deserve to be taken seriously by his fellow Democrats.

Other Democrats are throwing ridiculous allegations at Judge Amy Coney Barrett (including claiming she’s totally unqualified and suggesting she’s a racist for…adopting two black children?), and threatening to try to disrupt and delay her confirmation hearing with procedural tactics and general tantrum-throwing. But Durbin admitted that Democrats have no power to stop her confirmation, that "we can slow it down perhaps a matter of hours, maybe days at the most. But we can't stop the outcome."

Instead, he said, "I've met with every Supreme Court nominee since I've been in the Senate. I will extend that courtesy, if she requests it, for at least a socially distanced, safe meeting, perhaps over the phone. I want to be respectful. We disagree on some things. And in terms of participating in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, I'll be there to do my job."

Even more stunning, Durbin publicly refuted Hillary Clinton’s plea to Joe Biden not to concede the election under any circumstance (like she’s apparently never conceded that she lost in 2016, and this is what that kind of denial of reality does to your mind.) Durbin said, "I respect her, I like her. But I think she's just flat-out wrong. The election itself is going to be announced, the winner will be announced at some point. If we are going to maintain a democracy, peaceful transition through an election is the only way to do it. Whoever the winner is, if it is clear and legal, that should be announced and the other party should concede." (This is assuming that Hillary was not talking about dragging out the results while enough new ballots could be “found” to win.)

Durbin’s words are a refreshing throwback to a time when political differences took a backseat to the good of the nation, and when all Americans observed the great traditions that have made America such an exceptional nation, like accepting losses, respecting other people’s right to hold different views, working across the aisle and observing a peaceful transfer of power after elections. One of the silliest stories of the past month has been the accusation that if Trump lost, he might not accept the outcome and that would be a “constitutional crisis.” Would it be worse than all the Democrats who still haven’t accepted that they lost four years ago, and are willing to burn the Constitution over it, from blowing up the Electoral College to packing the Supreme Court? They’re like children who scream that no race is “fair” unless they win it.

These days, too many people not only ignore those traditions, they deny that America even has great traditions or is an exceptional nation at all. Yet the things they would replace our traditions with would reduce us to the level of “world’s biggest banana republic.”

May Dick Durbin’s wise words (and courage to speak them aloud) sink into his fellow Democrats’ craniums and inspire some long-overdue soul-searching. At long last, there’s an adult in the room. (Or at least there was until he started endorsing some of the proposed changes Democrats would make if they win back the White House and Senate, but we can all save him from himself by voting to prevent that.)


The founder of Black Lives Matter of Greater Atlanta, Sir Maejor Page (not a typo), was arrested by the FBI on fraud and money-laundering charges for allegedly misappropriating $200,000 in donations. He’d pledged to use those donations “for George Floyd.” The FBI says he used them for food, dining, entertainment, clothing, furniture, a home security system, tailored suits and accessories and a $112,000 house (all for himself, not for George Floyd.)

PJ Media points out that, to be fair, the local branch of BLM had already branded him a con man, a camera hog and a “dangerous person with violent tendencies.” While those sound like job qualifications for many of today’s “community organizers,” they’d already thrown his group out of the Atlanta BLM branch.

That story also points out that in just three months this spring and summer, Page’s Facebook page raked in $466,000 in donations, and as PJ Media points out, it’s unclear if any of it went to any charitable endeavor at all. You might think, “Well, at least it improved one black man’s life,” but check out the Fox News link. I know nothing about his family background, but judging from his mugshot, he looks whiter than I am.


There are a lot of terms that today’s leftists toss around that they don’t seem to grasp the meaning of, like “Nazi,” “fascist,” “gender,” “impeachable offense,” “illegitimate” and “literally.” We’ll have to add “unprecedented” to the list. Every time Trump does something that many other Presidents have done, they thunder that it’s “unprecedented!”

The latest example is for him to nominate a SCOTUS Justice in an election year. As an example, I’ll cite one of the left's most prominent thinkers, actress Alyssa Milano, who tweeted, “Never before in our nation’s history has a Supreme Court Justice been nominated and installed while an election is already underway. It defied every precedent and every expectation of a nation where the people are sovereign and the rule of law reigns.”

Georgia GOP Chairman David Shaffer responded, “Except when Woodrow Wilson replaced the Chief Justice who resigned to run against him in 1916 or when Dwight Eisenhower appointed William Brennan three weeks before the 1956 election or when it happened a half dozen other times during a Presidential election year.”

The National Review’s Dan McLaughlin dug even deeper into the history. He writes, "There have been 29 such (election year) vacancies, and Presidents made nominations for all of them, in most cases promptly…In 19 cases, the President’s party held the Senate; 17 of the 19 vacancies were filled, the exceptions being the bipartisan filibuster against Lyndon Johnson’s nominees in 1968 and George Washington’s withdrawal and resubmission in the next Congress of a nominee who was ineligible to be confirmed (he’d voted to create the Court, and the Constitution made him wait until there was a new Congress seated). Nine of those 17 were confirmed before the election, and eight after. Three were confirmed in lame duck post-election sessions even though the President had just lost reelection.

If the Democrats would like some help in understanding what “unprecedented” actually means, I’ll use it in a sentence: “It would be unprecedented if one of today’s leftist celebrities did any research before tweeting.”


From’s Katie Pavlich.

“Harvard professor Lawrence Tribe admits on Fox News Sunday that there is nothing unconstitutional about President Trump nominating Barrett and Senate moving forward and then says, ‘But there are a lot of things in the constitution that are stupid.’ Sums up the left’s view well.”


Potential Great News: doctors in Florida think they might have found a combination of drugs that cures the COVID-19 (Chinese) coronavirus with nearly 100% effectiveness. The big question: will this finally entice Joe Biden to come out of his basement?


It’s become depressingly common for politicians to tar their opponents as Nazis, fascists or “literally Hitler.” This is not only slanderous, it’s reprehensible because it “normalizes” such characterizations and dilutes the meaning and horror of what actually happened in the Holocaust, comparing the death of six million Jews to a petty political disagreement.

Sadly, Joe Biden tried to put a new spin on this low blow by comparing President Trump to Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s minister of propaganda, and his claim that if you tell a big lie often enough, the people will believe it.

This is the latest and ugliest manifestation of the canard that Trump lies all the time (you know, about the FBI being out to get him, about not actually colluding with Russia, etc.) What makes it even more jaw-dropping is that it's being used as a reason for why we need to elect Honest Joe Biden, who aside from his family’s shady financial dealings has repeatedly changed positions, denied he knew about the anti-Trump plot that we know was discussed at a meeting he attended, and who has seen his presidential aspirations repeatedly sunk by incidents of plagiarism and lying about his own background, including his academic background. The latest example is one for which nobody’s been able to find any evidence, and I’m hardly surprised.

Delaware State just confirmed that they can find no proof of Biden’s 2019 claim that he attended that school. He was the commencement speaker twice and got an honorary degree, but no, he didn’t attend a historically black college.

I look forward to tomorrow’s debate, where I wonder if Joe will channel Steve Martin and tell the audience, “I started out as a poor black child…”


From our “Voter Fraud Is A Rightwing Myth” File: Authorities investigating election issues in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, found nine mail-in military ballots that had been discarded. All nine were votes for Trump.

Skeptics may scoff that it’s “only nine ballots,” but those would be nine US military members who would’ve been disenfranchised from selecting the commander-in-chief who has the power to send them into endess, pointless wars or not, just as every fake vote cast disenfranchises a real voter. Also, we don’t know at this point how many ballots were discarded, only that nine were recovered.

As the linked story notes, this follows a report of three trays of mail, including absentee ballots, being found in a ditch in Wisconsin.

For those who dismiss the Pennsylvania story because it’s “only nine ballots,” we have news that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed 134 felony charges, including election fraud, mail-in ballot fraud and tampering with a government record, against four people in an alleged scheme to steal a Democratic primary election in Gregg County in 2018. In that race, incumbent County Commissioner Shannon Brown was losing to his primary challenger by a handful of votes until mail-in ballots put him five votes ahead, and he went on to be reelected.

Brown is now facing 23 charges with the others filed against three associates. Paxton says the accused engaged in a scheme to swing the election by targeting young, able-bodied voters to cast ballots by mail by fraudulently claiming the voters were “disabled,” in most cases without the voters’ knowledge or consent. 239 of those ballots bore the signatures of just five people supposedly helping the voters fill them out. The investigation came after the challenger smelled a rat and sued, noting that over a third of the ballots cast were by mail and 29% claimed to be disabled, which must make Gregg the most disabled county in Texas.

It’s interesting that as the Democrats are denying mail-in vote fraud exists, we keep getting evidence that it does and is largely used by Democrats (ahem…New Jersey!) In this case, it was (allegedly) used by a Democrat to cheat another Democrat out of an election win! You’d think that would at last raise their concerns about voter fraud.

But then it appears Democrats might be getting concerned about their big “everyone vote by mail” push blowing up in their faces, since they’re changing their position faster than Joe Biden has on…well, name any issue. They’ve been pushing hard for universal voting by mail (not requesting an absentee ballot, but just mailing out blank ballots to everyone on the voter rolls, which would flood the nation with easily-falsified ballots (again, see “New Jersey.”) But now, they’re urging their voters to vote in person.

Previously, the cover story fed to the media for why Democrats had to vote by mail was that while the coronavirus doesn’t spread at leftist protests and riots, it’s wildly contagious among people in masks standing six feet apart in orderly polling station lines. But now, there’s a new cover story: if Trump loses to mail-in voters, he might refuse to leave office and institute “fascism,” something he’s never threatened and that is laughable coming from the people who’ve given us masked thugs threatening people with violence if they don’t vow allegiance to the thugs’ political views and vote the way they’re told.

Stacey Lennox at PJ Media suggests a more believable reason for the sudden flip-flop: while Republicans are listening to Trump (and me, I hope!) and planning to vote in person, far more Democrats say they plan to vote by mail. And while that does make voter fraud easier, they suddenly realized that mail-in ballots are far more likely to be disqualified because voters on their own are more likely to fill in the ballots incorrectly.

Naturally, the Biden campaign denies that they’ve never encouraged anyone to vote by any particular method. So the advice to Democrats remains what it has always been: Vote early and vote often.

Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats unveiled proposed legislation called the “Protecting Our Democracy Act,” which would severely curtail Presidential powers. Of course, they made no secret of the fact that it’s aimed specifically at President Trump, because long-term thinking is not their strong suit.

Boy, where to begin? First, the USA isn’t a democracy, it’s a representative republic, so they don’t even know what kind of government they’re a part of running. And I’ve always assumed they don’t know what the Constitution is, but it provides for three co-equal branches of the government. Congress doesn't have the power to limit the President’s powers, and if they try, he’ll either ignore them or take them to the Supreme Court, and guess how that will work out, especially a couple of months from now.

At least it’s a relief to know that for all the public gasbagging they did about this, they’re not actually dumb enough to vote on it and send it to the Senate, which they know would stomp it like a cockroach. Like virtually everything else the Democrats have done since taking over the House in 2018, it’s an empty piece of political theater designed solely to smear President Trump. Wouldn’t it have been nice if they’d taken the time and energy they wasted on this political mudball and instead put it into working with Trump and the Senate to pass another coronavirus relief bill? This is what Americans who are hurting from the shutdowns get for Halloween instead: a trick instead of a treat.

I’ve said for a long time that even though the “7th Floor” at the FBI was thoroughly partisan and out to get Trump, the rank-and-file agents and administrators were generally good people just trying to follow the rules and do their jobs. As it turns out, this observation was right. FBI text messages and internal notes finally obtained by Michael Flynn lawyer Sidney Powell and included in her latest federal court filing show agents’ enormous concern with what was going on.

Sure, we’ve read plenty of anti-Trump messages from those involved in “Crossfire Hurricane,” but these newly declassified communications are arguably worse, in that they show a (to use a word currently in vogue) SYSTEMIC problem at the FBI that was so serious and so obvious, other agents –- their names still redacted –- were worried about the potential fallout.

Sean Davis and Mollie Hemingway reported this on Thursday in THE FEDERALIST, under the headline “’Trump was right’: Explosive new FBI texts detail internal furor over handling of ‘Crossfire Hurricane” Investigation.”

Here’s something new: The same day that CNN leaked that President-elect Trump had been briefed by then-FBI Director James Comey about a (bogus) story in the Steele “dossier,” one agent texted another, “We all went out and purchased professional liability insurance.”

“Holy crap,” another agent texted back. “All the analysts, too?”

"Yep,” the first one texted. “All the folks at the Agency as well.” He went on to say, “...I think the concern...was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece.”

Earlier, in August of 2016, one FBI analyst remarked, “doing all this election research – I think some of these guys want a Clinton presidency.”

No kidding.

Another text from October of 2016 said, “[REDACTED] is one of the worst offenders of the rabbit holes and conspiracy theories.”

And here’s a particularly prescient text: “I’m [telling you], man, if this thing ever gets FOIA’d, there are going to be some tough questions asked.”


We'd thought that the order to close down the Flynn investigation came on January 4, 2017, the day before the infamous Oval Office meeting with Comey, Brennan, Biden, Yates, Rice and, of course, President Obama. It turns out that the original order to close the case may have come as early as November 6, 2016, Election Day. (NOTE: I’m curious to know if this came very late in the day, after they realized to their horror that Trump had won.) One agent texted, “We have some loose ends to tie up, and we all need to meet to discuss what to do with each case - he said shut down Razor.” (“Razor” is code for the Flynn case, which was part of "Crossfire Hurricane.")

"So glad they’re closing Razor,” another agent responded.

Another shocking revelation in these texts: To spy on Flynn’s finances, the FBI used not regular subpoenas, but what they call national security letters (NSL), which receive NO JUDICIAL REVIEW. They were doing this weeks after the initial order to shut the case down. Agents who knew better were talking amongst themselves about this…

"The decision to NSL finances bought him time,” one agent says. (We don’t know who “him” is.)

"What do we expect to get from an NSL [?],” was the reply. “We put out traces, tripwire to the community and nothing.”

"Bingo, another agent replied. “”So what’s an NSL going to do[?] No content.”

"Haha this is a nightmare,” another agent said. The conversation goes on similarly.

In one series of texts sent the same day as the big Oval Office meeting, one agent says that “Trump was right” when he tweeted that the FBI was delaying his transition briefings on so-called “Russian hacking” so they could cook up evidence against him. (Was he ever.)

Here are more of the agents’ texts from the red-letter day of January 5 (some punctuation fixed):

"So razor is going to stay open?”

"Yep. Crimes report being drafted.”


"What’s the word on how Obama’s briefing went?”

"Don’t know but people here are scrambling for info to support certain things and it’s a madhouse.”

"Jesus. Trump was right. Still not put together...why do we do this to ourselves? What is wrong with these people??”

The texts even reveal that agents suspected the leaks about Flynn’s calls with Russian Ambassador Kislyak were leaked by the White House…

"FYI – someone leaked the Flynn calls with Kislyak to the WSJ [Wall Street Journal].”

"I’m sorry to hear that.” (Sarcasm alert.) I’ll resume my duties as Chief Morale Officer and rectify that.”

"Published this morning by Ignatius.” (That’s a reference to WASHINGTON POST writer David Ignatius.)

"It’s got to be someone on the staff. PDB [Presidential Daily Briefing] staff. Or WH seniors.”

If you’re not up to date on the Flynn case, Hemingway and Davis review that as well, including the bizarre efforts of Judge Sullivan to keep it going despite Barr’s decision not to prosecute. But the real news here is the texting FBI agents were doing that shows they knew exactly what this was –- a political hit job --- and they were concerned enough to take out liability policies! We don’t get to see those names, but John Durham does, and let’s hope he’s talked with every one of them --- especially the one who wrote about "scrambling for info to support certain things."


As if this weren’t enough, we’ve also learned that Steele's sub-source for the Steele “dossier” had been the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011 for suspected contact with Russian intel officers. In other words, they thought he might be a RUSSIAN SPY. This is something else they should’ve disclosed to the FISA court but didn’t.

We know this now because the Senate Judiciary Committee is looking into it, and Sen. Lindsay Graham, who chairs the committee, wrote to AG Barr to request expedited information about the reliability of Christopher Steele as a source. Barr responded by directing the FBI to (at last) declassify this material.

Barr said he’d consulted with Durham and determined that revealing this information would not compromise the ongoing investigation. So it's logical to assume that Durham has already looked into it.

Again, the bitter irony: Democrats have accused Trump for years of “colluding” with Russians, when it’s the Hillary campaign that did that very thing.

Sen. Graham appeared Thursday night on HANNITY to summarize the findings. He said he hopes this is a “game-changer,” but given the slant of the media, I doubt it will change much of anything until we see some indictments, whenever that might be.

A Very Hollywood Story

September 25, 2020

Actress Alyssa Milano, a Twitter leftwing activist and proponent of defunding the police, made embarrassing headlines after she reportedly called 911 about an “armed gunman” in black clothing on her property (she later claimed a neighbor called 911, but admitted her husband made a follow-up call to police.) She lives in an 8,000-square-foot, $2.5 million home in a gated community in an upscale area north of L.A.

The call elicited a massive police response, including a K-9 unit and a helicopter. They determined that the “armed gunman” was a teenager shooting at squirrels with an air rifle.

Milano praised the police, but blamed “rightwing trolls” for “targeting” her with ridicule, which you must admit would be extremely hard to resist doing.

Let it be known, though, that I am not singling her out for mockery. She did the right thing in calling the police. I think that by now, we should have all learned that if you see a young person in black clothing carrying what appears to be a rifle, the police should definitely be called in to deal with the situation in whatever numbers are needed. If that had happened in Portland, Minneapolis, Seattle, etc., a lot of black neighborhoods and businesses might not be smoking ruins today.

I also don’t think it’s fair to single her out for hypocrisy for denouncing the police while expecting them to pull out all the stops to protect her. In that regard, she’s simply like virtually every liberal celebrity in Hollywood, like the ones who want to defund the police and ban you from owning a gun to protect your family while they’re protected by armed bodyguards and battalions of cops at awards shows.

And it’s not even a new story. Back on June 2nd, I wrote about a certain former NBA and ESPN star who was tweeting “Burn it all down” about the Minneapolis riots, and just one day later, frantically tweeting about some “animals” trying to get into his gated community, then expressing relief when the cops showed up and repelled them.

But I will ask this: what’s with all these liberal celebrities living in “gated communities”? I thought walls were useless for providing security.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order that sales of gas-powered cars will be banned in the state by 2035. Why didn’t he cut out the middleman and just order the climate to stop changing?

Put aside the fact that by 2035, Newsom will have been out of office for at least eight and hopefully 12 years. For those of us who are so old we remember when Jimmy Kimmel was funny, this grandiose order elicits an amusing sense of déjà vu.

For decades now, California’s liberal politicians have been belching out laws and policies, orders and incentives, all to try to force all the state’s residents into electric cars. Their utter cluelessness about how markets work have doomed all these efforts to humiliating failure. They’ve mandated that a certain percentage of cars sold had to be electric by a certain time, and forgot that first, consumers had to want to buy them. They’ve mandated that a certain number of EVs had to be on every car lot, which forced makers and dealers to waste space with cars that gathered dust as consumers purchased SUVs. They’ve offered rebates, carpool lanes and other incentives to try to bribe people to buy them.

They previously used their imagined godlike powers to declare that there would be 5 million EVs on the road in California by the end of the last decade. They reached 11% of that goal.

The fact is, Californians didn’t want electric cars. They do a LOT of driving, and they get stuck in loooooong traffic jams on overcrowded freeways (another reason to thank their liberal politicians), and they don’t want to be in a car that might die if they turn on the A/C and then have to find an outlet to charge it for hours just to get home.

As technology improved, electric cars became a bit more popular among a certain small subset of the market (in some circles, “EV” stands for “Electric Virtue-Signaler”), but they’re still impractical for the majority of drivers.

Newsom claims that by 2035, EVs will be superior to gas-powered cars. Maybe, maybe not. But will California’s politicians be superior to today’s, who can’t even provide enough juice to keep people from having to swelter in their homes with no lights or air conditioning? If not, what are they going to plug all those electric cars into?

James Taylor, president of the Heartland Foundation, called Newsom’s order a “classic example of politicians seeking short-term political gain by imposing impossible requirements on future residents and politicians.” He said they’d actually create an ecological catastrophe: to generate enough “green power” (which the state’s leftist leaders also are mandating), thousands of square miles of land would have to be clear-cut to install windmills and solar panels. Taylor added, “On the other hand, it will leave fewer forests for Newsom to mismanage and turn into overgrown fire hazards.”

Personally, my theory is that this is a plot by California liberals to stick every resident with an electric car and no electricity to charge it with, making it impossible for them to flee to Texas.

When I write negative commentary about Democrats, I hope my readers know that I’m using that as a shorthand term to refer to certain current party leaders and office holders whom I believe are taking the country and their party in a very dangerous and radical direction. I’m not referring to working class Americans who have traditionally voted Democrat, many of whom are alarmed at the direction their party is heading. I’m also not referring to all Democrat politicians.

For instance, while Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and I might disagree on a number of issues, I find her to be a rare example of an open-minded liberal who’s willing to reach out and find common ground, as you can see in this interview with her from last weekend’s episode of “Huckabee” on TBN.

Of course, that refusal to treat anyone who disagrees with her as a monster and a pariah could be why she was the only presidential candidate who won delegates and still wasn’t asked to speak at the Democratic Convention.

Another rare Democrat is West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, who scolded his fellow Democrats for attacking Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Catholic religious faith just because she’s rumored to be a potential Trump SCOTUS nominee.

On Fox News, Manchin gave them a much-needed lesson about something fundamental to the American system:

“I’m Catholic, OK. And religion should not enter into it. It sure doesn’t with me…The freedom of religion is one of the basic rights we all have as an American citizen. Whether you’re Catholic, whether you’re Protestant, whether you’re Jewish, evangelical, whatever it may be, God bless you. You worship who you want and you worship how you want. You worship the same God. All of us do.”

That actually sounds like something you’d read here!

So in case you think I’m just being a political partisan when I criticize Democrats, remember that I’ve always said I think it’s good for America to have a robust two-party system. But that requires both sides to respect the free exchange of ideas and everyone’s right to hold their own views, even if you disagree with them. I might even be saying many more nice things about Democratic leaders if they’d have the guts to stand up and strongly denounce mob rule, character assassination and the attempt to influence elections by making threats.

Proving once again that you can’t cure “stupid,” the Seattle City Council voted 7-2 to override Mayor Jenny Durkan’s veto of their plan to defund the local police department by about $3 million (they claim this is a “down payment” on their plan to cut police funding by 50% by next year.) Think about it: they're actually worse at their jobs than the Mayor of Seattle!

In a city torn by radical rioting and lawlessness, Council President Lorena Gonzalez declared that it’s vital to cut the police budget and spend the money on social programs instead because “Everyone deserves to feel safe…” Safe from the police, she means. Because that's the big worry in Seattle: being assaulted, robbed and set on fire by the police.

I’m sure that just like the poor people suffering under the brain dead city council of Minneapolis, they’ll end up feeling very safe from having the police intrude on the criminals who are going to be targeting them daily. Seattle voters who start asking, as people in Minneapolis now are, “Where are the police?!” should mark it down now so they can remember it: the police are gone because you voted leftist morons into power. And believe me, I don’t use that term as a pejorative but because it’s the most accurate term I can think of, based on the evidence.

Breaking News on the SCOTUS Nomination: Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, one of the Republicans who was originally said to be opposed to confirming a Trump nominee before the election, now says she won’t rule that out if the Judiciary Committee passes one. Also, it depends on who it is.

Considering those two conditions would apply to any SCOTUS nominee, this shouldn’t even be news (“Bulletin: Senator Does Constitutional Duty!!!”) But the big news here is that with Murkowski and Mitt Romney both rejecting the Democrats’ threats and demands to refuse to do their jobs, at least one side of the Senate is still functioning according to the Constitution, not politics. The equally good news is that threats, ultimatums, name-calling and temper tantrums may have finally ceased to be effective tools of political persuasion.

It might have helped if everything the Democrats are threatening to do (harass and assault Republicans at their homes and in public, riot, burn things down, pack the Court, etc.) they hadn’t already been doing for months/years or already threatened to do anyway if they got into power.

Low Energy Joe

September 24, 2020

There’s an inside term in political journalism that everyone needs to learn: “Put a lid on the day.”

No, that doesn’t refer to thinking “Oh, put a lid on it” every time Nancy Pelosi opens her mouth. It’s what a campaign team tells the media to let them know that there will be no more comments, appearances or events involving the candidate for the rest of the day. And the media are hearing it a lot these days from the Biden campaign, and very early in the day, which worries them since they are the unofficial PR arm of the campaign.

For instance, Tuesday morning before 9 a.m., Biden’s aides told the media they were “putting a lid on the day.” So 42 days away from the election, while President Trump is jetting around the country, giving 90-minute campaign speeches and addressing the UN in between dealing with major policy issues, Biden is declaring the day over before most people even get to work.

In the linked article from David Marcus of the Federalist, he goes to some lengths to say he has tried hard not to accept rumors or assumptions about Biden’s mental or physical health. I’ve also tried not to get into that kind of personal speculation. Maybe it is some brilliant "lay-low strategy" they're following. But when the candidate not only seems incapable of remaining coherent even with a Teleprompter in front of him, and his campaign day ends at 9 a.m., you have to start wondering if Biden is capable of handling the most demanding job in the world.

It’s obvious that his supporters in the media are starting to panic. I hate giving the leftist magazine the Nation any clicks, but just to prove I’m not making this up, one of their writers just published a screed insisting that there’s nothing to be learned from presidential debates so we should cancel them all, “permanently.”

Translation: I’m saying “permanently” because I don’t want to admit that I’m scared out of my wits about this particular candidate in these particular debates, but I’ll write another screed arguing the opposite in four years.

If Biden is capable of being President, then he should at least be capable of working past the end of the “Today” show. If he’s not, and the Democrats know it, then they are attempting to pull a shameful scam on the American people, and one that’s cruelly unfair to Biden as well. As for all the claims that there should be no debates because Joe Biden is just too honest and pure to lower himself to debate Trump, my response to that is “Put a lid on it.”

Good Economic News

September 24, 2020

How about a little good news that you probably won’t hear in the media? After the big economic downturn due to the coronavirus shutdowns, the economy has already rebounded enough that Americans’ household wealth recently hit its highest level ever.

The shutdown and stock market plunge in April dropped Americans’ total household wealth to $111.3 trillion, but the Federal Reserve reported Monday that in the April-June quarter, it rose nearly 7% to a record $119 trillion. For the quarter ending in June, the value of homes grew $500 billion while stock portfolios leaped by $5.7 trillion. The amount of money in checking accounts rose 33% to $1.8 trillion, while savings accounts rose 6.1% to $11.2 trillion.

It was partly due, of course, to the relief checks and expanded unemployment payments, but it also shows that the economy wasn’t destroyed, it just had the wind knocked out of it by China, and it's already getting back on its feet. I look forward to hearing the numbers for July-September, which I assume will be even better. I hope they arrive before the election so that voters aren’t misled into taking a U-turn back to the economic tar pit of the Obama-Biden years.

Bring It On

September 24, 2020

The Democrats’ hyperactive threats to burn down the country over a judicial nomination aren’t generating the fear and intimidation they might have hoped. The reactions mostly range from “Yawn!” to “Bring it on!” After four years of threatening us for daring to voice any opinion they disagree with, followed by months of rioting, arson, assaults and looting in their own cities, many Americans have had it with their bullying and demands to give them what they want or else. We’ve been there, done that, and have the videos on Facebook to remember it by.

Their rhetoric has become so overheated that even CNN anchors are starting to roll their eyes at fellow CNN anchors.

In fact, they’ve done so much of this that we’ve now reached the point where threats really become ineffective: Americans are starting to laugh in their faces, aided by the conservative satire site, The Babylon Bee, which summed up their tiresome tantrum threats with a couple of hilarious stories.

And since there’s not enough laughter in the world (if you tune in the late night "comedy" shows, you’d think there was none), here’s one more Babylon Bee story on a related topic.

I don’t want to be accused of being a “climate denier” (I do believe there is a climate) or of being so anti-science that I disagree with Nancy Pelosi when she warns us, “Mother Earth is angry.” But if we’re ever going to get the terrible wildfires in California under control, it’s necessary to look at real facts and not simply accept overheated claims that “manmade climate change” is entirely to blame for the fires – something that even Gov. Gavin Newsom recently admitted wasn’t true.

Toward that end, I thought I’d point you to a couple of recent reports that look at real statistics and history of both wildfires and weather trends to see if the environmental left’s claims about droughts, temperature and forest fires (pardon the expression) hold water.

First, check out this report from the Foundation for Economic Education.

It asks the provocative question, if global climate changes are to blame for California’s fires, why aren’t other places with forests on fire? Texas, for instance, has more forest acreage than California and a hotter climate, but it’s not burning down. California's winds get blamed, but those have been blowing for millennia. Maybe, as the article points out, it’s because 95% of Texas’ land is privately owned by people who practice wise management policies like controlled burns to remove dead vegetation that turns into kindling, something that California’s environmentalists won’t allow.

"Well, then, how do you explain why the number of wildfires and the acreage on fire are both at record levels?"

Answer: they aren’t. 2020 is on track to be a very bad year, but not as bad as 2017.

“Still, that was the all-time record year for forest fires!” Only because the records being cited start in 1960. In 1930, about five times more acreage burned as in 2017, and the annual average from 1926-‘52 was several times higher. Forest fires have been with us since before there even were humans in North America, but in recent decades, we learned how to control them. Only California has made those methods illegal.

Ironically, one thing that’s also illegal in California is arson, but that hasn’t seemed to stop anyone from doing it.

Of course, pointing all this out doesn’t mean that there is no climate change going on. But the climate is always changing. The big questions are, is it due to humans and is it catastrophic? It’s now conventional wisdom that the answer to both is a big “YES!” and if you disagree, you’re a science-denying lunkhead.

So to check that out, a researcher for the Global Warming Policy Foundation examined data mostly from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) “to analyse trends in temperature, precipitation, droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, sea-level rise and wildfires. In particular, it takes account of the widely varying regional climates.” The goal was to determine the state of the climate in 2019.

Here’s what the data shows, quoted directly from the report’s summary:

• “Average temperatures have risen by 0.15°F/decade since 1895, with the increase most marked in winter.

• There has been little or no rise in temperatures since the mid 1990s.

• Summers were hotter in the 1930s than in any recent years.

• Heatwaves were considerably more intense in decades up to 1960 than anything seen since.

• Cold spells are much less severe than they used to be.

• Central and Eastern regions have become wetter, with a consequent drastic reduction in drought. In the west, there has been little long-term change.

• While the climate has become wetter in much of the country, evidence shows that floods are not getting worse.

• Hurricanes are not becoming either more frequent or powerful.

• Tornadoes are now less common than they used to be, particularly the stronger ones.

• Sea-level rise is currently no higher than around the mid-20th century.

• Wildfires now burn only a fraction of the acreage they did prior to the Second World War.

In short, the US climate is in most ways less extreme than it used to be. Temperatures are less extreme at both ends of the scale, storms less severe and droughts far less damaging. While it is now slightly warmer, this appears to have been largely beneficial.”

I’m sure many people will attack the report, the writer and the foundation that funded it. But I’ll be waiting to see if they produce any evidence that he or NOAA got their weather data wrong.

Wrong Hill

September 24, 2020

Speaking of being on the wrong side of history (and common sense), a new USA Today/Ipsos poll found that 64% of Americans believe protesters and counter-protesters are overwhelming America’s cities. Interestingly, only 48% of Democrats agree that cities are under siege.

Fifty percent of Americans say they believe theft and vandalism have gotten worse in their own communities, 68% think vandalism has gotten worse nationwide (only 68%?), 63% think assaults on police have gotten worse nationwide, and more people believe assaults on police have gotten worse over the past six months than assaults by police.

The poll also found that 54% of Americans think people should own firearms to protect themselves from violent protesters, and 56% agree that when necessary, federal law enforcement officers should be sent in to restore law and order. Democrats were much less likely to agree with both of those positions.

I don’t claim to know everything about politics, but I can tell you that when heading into a major election, telling over half of Americans that they’re wrong on the most important personal safety issue of the age is not the hill I’d want to be standing on.

If you wonder why I reference George Orwell so often, it’s because 1984 might not have been the way he predicted, but it turned out he was just off by about 36 years. Remember how Winston Smith, the main character in “1984,” had a job in the deliberately misnamed “Ministry of Truth” rewriting old news stories and removing (“canceling?”) “unpersons” from photos to make history conform to the party line? Today, instead of working for Big Brother, he could work for Black Lives Matter.

I’ve previously written about how this organization, like the “Ministry of Truth,” uses the indisputable truth that “black lives matter” as a name to cover for the fact that it’s actually a radical anti-American organization run by self-proclaimed “trained Marxists,” and that their website proudly proclaimed that their goals include dismantling the “Western-prescribed nuclear family structure” and fostering “a queer-affirming network” by “freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking.”

Unfortunately for them, a lot of people have started looking and listening more closely to their radical rhetoric and violent behavior and realizing that they are more concerned with tearing down America than lifting up black people. So guess what? Abra-cadabra! The “What we believe” page of their website where they admitted what they really are has suddenly disappeared! Try to click on it and you get a message reading, “Sorry, but the page you were trying to view does not exist.” Big Brother would be proud.

Well, sorry, but one thing Orwell didn’t predict is that the Internet is forever. That page may no longer exist on their site, but it’s been archived in plenty of places where it can’t be thrown down the memory hole so that they can rewrite history. And after four months of rioting, we’ve all figured out what BLM really stands for. We no longer need their web page to tell us.

Campaign Update

September 23, 2020

Monday, President Trump held one of his open-air “protest rallies” (he calls them that because according to Democrats, the coronavirus spreads at Trump rallies, but not protest rallies.) He spoke for slightly over an hour. Here’s a link to the entire speech.

The Secret Service arrested two people near the rally who were carrying a backpack with a gun and ammo in it. No details yet on what their intentions might have been, but here’s what we know at press time.

Whatever they intended, it’s a good reminder to anyone dumb enough to listen to AOC’s calls to become more “radicalized” that when you start threatening federal officials like the President and Senators, you don’t get put in pretend jail for an hour by a liberal DA who then releases you to go do it again. You get arrested by federal agents, hit with federal charges and sent to a federal prison, where sticking your middle finger in people’s faces and calling them filthy names is a very effective way to commit suicide.

Meanwhile, on the Democratic side on Monday, Joe Biden spoke at an aluminum plant in Wisconsin, where he once again attacked Trump’s handling of the coronavirus, declaring, “He panicked. The virus was too big for him.” (Actually, viruses are so small that it’s impossible to keep them from coming across the border, although one good way to slow it down was to stop travel from China, which Trump did and which Biden called hysterical and xenophobic.)

I guess he thinks Trump should have kept his cool and done pretty much nothing, the way Obama and Biden did about the H1N1 virus.

However, the most memorable thing said by Biden went largely unreported by the sycophantic media, but I think you should hear it. It’s his novel version of the Pledge of Allegiance. Here’s what he said:

“I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation, indivisible, under God, for real.”

I think they should start the first debate off with that.

If you read the commentary for Tuesday morning, you know that if Democrats take the Senate and White House, their threats of packing the Supreme Court, eliminating the Electoral College, granting statehood to Puerto Rico and DC, and making other seismic changes will be carried out whether or not President Trump fills the vacant Court seat before the election. So Trump may as well DO IT, and, in fact, intends to. As we reported yesterday, the Senate apparently has the votes. So that part of the discussion is over, or at least should be.

EVERYONE knows that if a Democrat President were in the same position as Trump, with a Democrat Senate to confirm his choice, he’d have his new (activist) justice sworn in faster than you can say “Christine Blasey Ford.” The full Court would be able to start hearing cases in October, hardly missing a beat.

But the double standard applies once again. The media are completely off their meds. The meltdown on CNN and MSNBC was so predictable that there’s no point in even getting into it. Mostly, they’re wrongly equating one situation (the Merrick Garland nomination), in which the President and Senate were of different parties, with another situation, in which the President and Senate are of the same party. But these scenarios are very different, and the anger we see is coming from their blind partisanship and willful ignorance. I’ll do what I hope you do --- ignore it.

Except for one dangerous part of it: They’re encouraging the Democrats to go ahead and “burn it all down": As soon as they gain power, pack the Court to suit the President, destroying checks and balances. (VOX said this might be “the only solution.”) Add states, to gain senators who vote their way. Get rid of the filibuster completely. “Blow up” the Electoral College and choose the President by straight popular vote (gee, why shouldn’t California and a handful of big cities pick the President?). Maybe even impeach the attorney general, for, um, agreeing with Trump too much. Do whatever it takes to hold onto power. The media apparently learned in journalism school that they’re supposed to be the cheering section for all this.

THE FEDERALIST has a great piece on just how far the media and the Democrats (but I repeat myself) plan to take this.

However, this episode has taken one surprising turn. Under the heading of “even a broken clock is right twice a day,” I have to give credit to Utah Sen. Mitt Romney for seeing the big picture on this issue and putting history and precedent over politics and personal grievance. The LA TIMES wrote that Mitt “made the wrong call,” which means he made the right call. They also left out –- I’m sure deliberately –- the first part of what he said, about the fairness of following the law, so I’ll put that back in:

"My decision regarding a Supreme Court nomination is not the result of a subjective test of ‘fairness’ is based on the immutable fairness of following the law, which in this case is the Constitution and precedent,” his said. “The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm one of its own.”

Romney went on to say that he would follow the Constitution and vote based on the nominee’s qualifications. Good job, Mitt!

House Republicans had something to say about Court-packing, too. Not that Democrats care.

As reported in POLITICO on Monday, Joe Biden refused to tell a reporter whether or not he would pack the Supreme Court if he won. He weaseled out by saying, “It’s a legitimate question. But let me tell you why I’m not going to answer that question: Because it will shift all the focus. That’s what he [Trump] wants.”

"Shift all the focus”? To quote Biden after the passage of Obamacare, “This is a big (bleeping) deal!” The idea of Court-packing is a big deal. Shouldn’t we focus on it right now? If Biden won’t renounce Court-packing, that tells us his party intends to do just that if they get the chance.

This is also one more example of Biden flip-flopping, as he said during the primary race that he “would not get into Court-packing...we’d begin to lose any credibility the Court has at all.”

And so we would. Why can’t he say that now?

Kamala Harris was more forthcoming, in a chilling sort of way. As reported by THE NEW YORK TIMES, she said she was “absolutely open to” packing the Court. Well, of course she is. She and AOC are on the same page, you can bet the farm. (Of course, if they end up in power, they’ll likely take your farm.)

Biden won’t even divulge his own “shortlist” of SCOTUS nominees. Maybe he doesn’t know them or remember their names. But he knows who’s in charge of his party, and he has said he’ll have “the most progressive administration in history.” If you want to see progressive, all you have to do is look at the extremists running New York City, Portland, Seattle and San Francisco. Leftists have way too much power NOW; we’d be crazy to give them more.

Finally, for when you have time, it’s fascinating to look back at what happened when Franklin D. Roosevelt tried to get the House and Senate to pass legislation to help him pack the Court, just so it would rubber-stamp his New Deal programs. Back in 1937, even though these were all Democrats, they reacted with horror at such a power-grab and refused. FDR’s plan flopped spectacularly. If only this were still your great-great-grandfather’s Democrat Party.

FDR’s Court-Packing Attempt | The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator | USA News and Politics


September 23, 2020

PJ Media’s Stephen Green does a news round-up that he calls the “Insanity Wrap,” and today’s outdoes itself for craziness.

One of the stories is especially worth noting because it shows us how the media are already gearing up to attack any Trump nominee for Supreme Court on any pretext, no matter how flimsy (shades of Brett Kavanaugh!) Newsweek ran a lengthy article about Trump short-lister Amy Coney Barrett, implying that her particular Charismatic Catholic religious sect was the inspiration for the ridiculous leftist horror-fantasy, “The Handmaid’s Tale.”

Only at the end of the article did they add a postscript/correction noting that author Margaret Atwood never mentioned the group as an inspiration for the book, and that a New Yorker profile mentioned a news clipping that was part of her research, but it was about a different religious group. It ends, “Newsweek regrets the error.”

But apparently not enough to remove the lengthy article promoting the (way-at-the-end) admitted total falsehood of its premise. Welcome to the serious and solemn “Supreme Court vetting process” of 2020.

Return to Impeachment

September 23, 2020

I mentioned elsewhere that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was pressed on whether she would use impeachment to try to block President Trump from appointing a replacement for Justice Ginsburg. She replied that the Constitution requires that Congress “use every arrow in our quiver.” (Actually, it doesn’t. Also, her claim that Trump and his “henchmen” have threatened not to accept the results of the election applies much more accurately to her and her “henchpersons.”)

You can always tell that Pelosi is lying when she starts citing the Constitution, a piece of paper for which she has as much regard as a roll of Charmin. I guess she’s forgotten this bit of recent history, so let me remind her:

The House ALREADY impeached Trump on ridiculous, unconstitutional grounds. The Senate threw it out. Even if (God forbid) the Dems win the Senate, there’s no way they’re winning two-thirds of it, which would be required for removing Trump. And if (again, God forbid) Biden is elected, Trump would be gone anyway.

So the threat of impeachment is pure hot gas. It’s already proven so ineffective that Democrats were too embarrassed even to bring it up at their convention. As a weapon against Trump, it would be the equivalent of those people in movies who fire revolvers at Godzilla.

(Incidentally, did anyone else notice how Speaker Pelosi inexplicably wished “Good morning” to George Stephanopolous, 6-1/2 minutes into their interview? Joe Biden had better keep wearing that mask because whatever he has must be contagious. Yes, this is real.)

"Nine seems to be a good number. It’s been that way for a long time...I’ve heard that there are some people on the Democratic side who would like to increase the number of judges. I think that was a bad idea when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried to pack the Court.”

So said Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg in an NPR interview on July 24, 2019.

Democrats are now threatening to pack the Court with as many as four more justices; it seems they have no problem going against RBG on this, while using her name as a pretext for doing it.

As reported by NPR, she also dictated a statement to her granddaughter in her last days saying it was her “most fervent wish” that she “not be replaced until a new President is installed.” Ah, but this time, Democrats consider RBG’s wishes sacrosanct.

And they ignore something she’d previously said: “...the President is elected for four years, not three. So the powers that he has in year three continue into year four...and that’s how it should be.”

Never mind the confusion created by these very different versions of what she said she wanted, let alone the idea that someone’s deathbed wish should override the Constitution. And what did she mean by “new President”? “New,” as in “different”? Did she mean that if Trump is re-elected, we should hold her seat open till the “new” President takes office in 2025? That sure is a long time to struggle on with a tie-prone 8-member court. Just getting through the next few months that way would be a nightmare, given the inevitable election challenges.

Times sure have changed. As I said on Sean Hannity’s TV show Monday night, it was Sen. Harry Reid who “threw the match in the gas can” in 2013, when he killed the filibuster for judicial appointments. He was told at the time that it would come back to bite, and now it has. Thank God we have a President who won’t be intimidated and will do his duty, and I pray the Senate will do the same. I also wish we had some real journalism going on; then people would know that proceeding with nomination and confirmation of a new justice under these circumstances is constitutional and customary.

Andrew C. McCarthy, writing in NATIONAL REVIEW, makes the same point I did over the weekend --- that what happens now really all comes down to politics. One party will do what it calculates it has the power to do, given the anticipated political fallout.

As McCarthy points out, there was nothing wrong with President Obama nominating Merrick Garland for Supreme Court Justice, just as there was nothing wrong with Sen. Mitch McConnell’s Senate majority blocking that nomination. It’s all constitutional. The rest –- all the “outrage” –- is pure politics.

McCarthy worries, though, that Republicans’ push to confirm before the election may make it harder for Trump to win against enraged Democrats, as it motivates them even more. I don’t know about that. At the risk of sounding like Chandler Bing from FRIENDS, could Democrats BE more enraged? Republicans could smile and nod and confess to deep-seated racism and capitalist greed and cave to everything the left wanted, no matter how insane and unconstitutional, and they’d still move the goalposts and find more reasons to be enraged. It would never end. Republicans have the opportunity to make this appointment, it’s perfectly constitutional, and they must take advantage of it, just as the Democrats absolutely would. Case closed.

Sen. Lindsay Graham said on Hannity’s show that “we’re gonna move forward in the [Judiciary] committee, we’re gonna report the nomination out of the committee to the floor of the United States Senate, so we can vote before the election. That’s the constitutional process.”

Why so determined? “After Kavanaugh, everything changed with me,” he said. “They’re not gonna intimidate me, Mitch McConnell or anybody else...We’re gonna have a process that you’ll be proud of, a nominee who’s gonna be supported by every Republican in the Judiciary Committee, and WE’VE GOT THE VOTES TO CONFIRM THE JUDGE [emphasis mine] on the floor of the Senate before the election. And that’s what’s coming.”

Trump says he'll announce his choice on Friday or Saturday. Senators know it'll be Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who reportedly met with the President on Monday, or one of several other women on his shortlist (which he, unlike Biden, has revealed).

So this is apparently happening. Get ready to hear a lot more threats about packing the Court as “payback” for doing what the Senate absolutely has the constitutional right and, arguably, obligation to do.

REASON has a must-read (cautionary) article that outlines the various power-grabs the Democrats intend to make as soon as they are able. What everyone needs to understand is this: IF THEY GAIN POWER, THEY WILL DO THESE THINGS WHETHER TRUMP WAS ABLE TO GET HIS NOMINEE CONFIRMED OR NOT. For this reason, no matter what else happens, Biden and the Democrat ticket absolutely must not win. I cannot say this strongly enough. If they do, the America we love will be largely over. Republicans have to win in such a landslide that there’s nothing Democrats can do after November 3 to upset the process and the will of the electorate.

Author Josh Blackman agrees with Jeffrey Toobin in the NEW YORKER that these changes are not only good payback but “good policy as well.” He’s all for 1) the complete elimination of the filibuster, 2) statehood for DC and Puerto Rico, with two new senators for each (“an appropriate rejoinder”), 3) adding to the number of lower-court judges, and 4) adding to the number of SCOTUS justices (“the greatest and most appropriate form of retribution”).

"If Republicans succeed in stealing two seats,” he writes (note his choice of the word “stealing”), “the Scalia and Ginsburg vacancies, the Democrats could simply pass a law that creates two or three more seats on the Supreme Court." He likens this to playing a game of hardball.

See how the “game” is rationalized? (Again, they really don’t care what RBG would think of adding seats.) I brought up this article to get you into leftists’ heads and show you what they have planned. Clearly, they intend to do these things whether Trump gets his way on a new justice or not.

Leftists want us to take them very seriously, up until the point they’re held responsible for what they say or do, and then they become like Gene Wilder in “Young Frankenstein”: “I was JOKING! Don’t you know a JOKE when you hear one?!!”

One delicious example came last week when Princeton University President Christopher Eisgruber decided to engage in some fashionable virtue signaling by releasing an open letter declaring that "racism and the damage it does to people of color persist at Princeton" and that "racist assumptions" are "embedded in structures of the University itself." This came after hundreds of Princeton faculty members released an open letter claiming that "anti-Black racism has a visible bearing upon Princeton’s campus makeup."

So, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos (hooray!) sent a letter to Princeton, announcing a federal investigation into the school’s admitted racist practices. It points out that since Eisgruber became president in 2013, Princeton has received over $75 million in federal funds by repeatedly representing to the government that it was in compliance with the ban on racist practices required under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The letter orders Eisgruber and a corporate representative of the university to appear under oath for questioning, to answer written questions about these admitted acts of racism, and to produce records related to them and to the school’s sworn (possibly perjurious) declarations that they do not engage in racism when they applied for grants.

Seems to me, Princeton has two options:

1. Admit they are racist and return the $75 million-plus any penalties for misrepresenting themselves on federal forms. Or…

2. Admit their president was just talking through his hat and engaging in empty public self-flagellation because that’s what liberals are expected to do these days: virtue-signal about racism, even though they don’t really mean it.

Either way, Congratulations Secretary DeVos for finally forcing these pompous phonies to put up or shut up.

Restoring “Honesty” to the White House: Joe Biden went to the Constitution Center and told lie after lie about the Constitution, the Supreme Court and his own past statements.

To sum up the major whoppers:

No, Trump did not wait until after Ruth Bader Ginsburg died to demand that Biden release his list of potential SCOTUS nominees. He’s been doing that since he released his own list on September 9th. (Some pundits noted that since Biden has pledged to nominate a woman of color, which restricts his potential candidates to liberal, female, minority, top-level federal judges, his list should be very short and quite easy to compile -- or to guess.)

No, Constitutional norms don’t bar the Senate from confirming a SCOTUS nominee in an election year. That argument against an Obama nominee was called the “Biden rule” in 2016, and Biden insisted that it didn’t exist.

Biden also claimed that the SCOTUS doesn’t meet again until after the election. Its next session starts October 5th.

But to give him credit, Biden did say one thing that’s true: "We can't keep rewriting history, scrambling norms, ignoring our cherished system of checks and balances."

It would have been nice, though, if everything else he says wasn’t an attempt to do just that.

President Trump says his list of Supreme Court nominees is down to five and he’ll be naming a replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg within days. Many Democrats, from political leaders and celebrities down to Twitter keyboard warriors, are ranting that “nothing is off the table” if he and the Senate do their Constitutional duty and vote on that nominee. They’re threatening everything from violence in the streets to expanding and packing the SCOTUS with leftists when they get back into power, both things they were already doing/threatening anyway, but it’s good of them to remind voters of why they should NEVER be put back into power.

All this childish tantrum-throwing prompted some conservative commentators to start making lists of what the left has already done over the past few years, just to see what, if anything, might be left on the table that they haven’t already hurled in their mindless rage. So I decided to compile one, too. Here’s what they’ve already tried:

1. Months of rioting, looting, arson, vandalism and attacks on and even murder of police and innocent citizens in their own cities (they’ve also tried it in a few Republican areas, but that did not go well for them.)

2. Violent assaults against Republican politicians and media figures, including nearly killing Rep. Steve Scalise by shooting up a House GOP charity baseball practice; multiple assaults on Sen. Rand Paul; and attempts to assault all of us who attended Trump’s nomination speech at the White House.

3. Staging a baseless impeachment to try to undo the 2016 election.

4. Staging a Deep State coup to frame Trump and his people and undo the 2016 election. This includes falsifying evidence, perjury, setting perjury traps, sullying the reputations of the FBI and other agencies, and many other assorted offenses against the law, the Constitution and basic decency.

5. Leaking classified information to try to undermine the President.

6. Politicizing the entire news media (includes the media’s credulous promotion of countless anti-Trump books and stories based on anonymous sources refuted by people who were actually there.)

7. Destroying late-night comedy, movies and professional sports with endless leftist propaganda.

8. Shutting down their own economies and public schools, ostensibly because of a virus they baselessly blame on Trump, even when they knew the painful shutdowns weren’t necessary (see “Nashville.”)

9. Mailing deadly ricin to the White House (this comes after years of liberals “normalizing” the idea of assassinating the President.)

10. Setting up the apparatus for mass voter fraud and announcing in advance that they will refuse to accept the results of the election unless they win.

11. And to take their insanity to a whole new level, Antifa jerks smashed up a car that they thought belonged to a “Nazi” (i.e., anyone who disagrees with them), but which actually belonged to one of their own, in total disregard of the fact that there was a poor, terrified dog in the back seat. Put this in the “How low can you go?” category.

And now – after assaults, murders, riots, arson, looting, lying, ripping up the Constitution, assassination attempts and even terrifying a dog -- they’re threatening even worse unless we install them back into power over us and give them a Supreme Court seat that they have no right to fill. I think they’re making the mistake that many toddlers do of thinking that just because the adults have thus far shown remarkable patience and restraint, we’re going to let this public tantrum go on forever and keep rewarding it.

Personally, I sense that many Americans are fed up with the Dr. Spock approach of remaining patient while the child screams his or her lungs out. They’re about ready for the Captain Kirk approach: “I have had…enough…of YOU!” But I hope they express it at the polls by simply kicking them out of office.

PS to number 11 above: If the car owner wasn't really a "Nazi," what was he doing owning a dog? Doesn’t he know that the latest thing that’s “racist” is being white and having a dog? That’s “cultural appropriation,” stolen from the ancient people of color who domesticated wolves! No, I'm serious.

According to this loon, white people should give their dogs to people of color, so they can live in a perfect, non-racist home. It’s obvious, in many ways, that he’s never read Southern humorist Lewis Grizzard. I believe he was the one who observed that dogs are natural racists: a black family’s dog will always bark at a white person and vice versa.

Unsurprising Story

September 22, 2020

In a shocking but somehow unsurprising story, a professor at Marshall University in West Virginia is on suspension pending an investigation after allegedly telling students during an online class that she hoped all of Trump’s supporters would get the coronavirus and die before the election. I thought universities were supposed to create “safe spaces” for students. How safe would a Trump-supporting student feel in her class?

I say it’s unsurprising because this is the kind of nasty, dehumanizing, violent, radical left rhetoric that’s become all too common among university faculty who fancy themselves smarter and better than the rest of us. At least this one is still clinging to enough shards of self-awareness to say she’s sorry she’s “become the type of person” who wishes death on people who disagree with her politically.

That prompted this interesting blog post on how apparently intelligent and well-educated people who live in a bubble where only one view is ever expressed can let a steady diet of political hatred turn them into soulless tyrants with no regard for human life.

What is missing from these people’s lives that has left such a huge hole in their souls that they would prioritize ideology over human life? I think I know what it is, but she works in a university so I assume I wouldn’t be allowed to give her a Bible.

If you thought the left had gone insane over the coming election (and its results-be-damned aftermath), you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

With the sudden vacancy on the Supreme Court, they have completely lost their minds. On Sunday, Nancy Pelosi threatened to impeach Trump if he dared to do his constitutional duty and nominate a new justice. She described impeachment as “one of the arrows in our quiver.” Good grief.

Interestingly, in a Sunday evening presser, Sen. Chuck Schumer was joined not by Pelosi but by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, which should tell you who is really running the show among the Democrats.

The media are nuts, too. To cite one of many incendiary comments, Reza Aslan tweeted, “If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire (bleeping) thing down.”

To his credit, President Trump says he’s going to go ahead with his obligation (his word) to make the nomination.

Schumer said, “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.” That’s hilarious; we all know what he said in 2016 (the opposite), and what he’d do now if positions were reversed (fill the vacancy immediately).

He knows, of course, that if Trump DOESN’T nominate someone before the election, the chance of us having a “new President” rises exponentially, as nothing would make Trump’s supporters stay home in fury like his failure to do this. Republicans would burn their OWN party to the ground.

Sunday on FOX News’ MEDIABUZZ, I addressed the political reality by citing Harry Reid, recalling that he “blew up the filibuster” on judicial nominees when Republicans had warned it would come back to haunt him. “So,” I said, “when the Republicans have an opportunity to put a Supreme Court justice on, they’re gonna do it, because they have the Senate and they’ve got the White House. I think there’s plenty of, sort of, double-talk going around...Both parties have taken the position that they’re going to do what they CAN do when they’re in power...That’s politics; that’s how it works.”

In an appearance on SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan said that “Trump is “following the historic norm. Nine out of ten times, when the party in the White House is the same party that’s controlling the Senate [NOTE: that is key]...during an election year, you put someone forward, they get confirmed.”

Indeed, in 2016, the WASHINGTON POST noted that “one-third of all U.S. Presidents appointed a Supreme Court Justice in an election year” --- including six lame-duck Presidents!

The critical issue here is getting someone on the Court who will respect the law and the Constitution. But the left has given us a preview of coming attractions on what we can expect from them, as they don't respect the Bill of Rights one whit (a whit being smaller than a coronavirus).

As for Pelosi’s threat to impeach the President (also AG Barr) if Trump moves forward, Jordan said, “I don’t think the American people like to be threatened.”

So at this point, the question isn’t whether Trump will nominate a new justice (he will), but rather if the Senate will vote soon and not wait till after the election. House Judiciary chair Jerrold Nadler also has issued a threat: that if the GOP Senate confirms before the election, but in November it goes Democrat, that'll mean payback time, as Democrats “pack” the Court the way Franklin D. Roosevelt hoped to during his administration.

What should the current Senate do? Delay voting in hopes that Democrats won’t try to pack to Court later if they get the chance? Or stop acting like Charlie Brown does every time Lucy promises not to take away the football if he’ll just kick, and take the doggone vote?


The threat to pack SCOTUS is serious, indeed; that’s why Republicans MUST keep the Senate this November. Mark this, if they take the Senate and have a new President to appoint leftist justices, they’ll pack the Court faster than you can say “Ruth Bader Ginsberg.”

As I said on MEDIABUZZ, Democrats have “walked away from everything the President has laid on the table that they said they wanted: DACA, infrastructure, tax reform, dealing with COVID...They don’t want solutions; they want control.” They detest Trump because he won’t play their game. Senators had better not play it, either. has a great new column about why Republican senators must reject any “grand bargain” on this with Democrats. It sounds a lot like me, so, of course, it’s a must-read.

"Bonchie” says, “...I think it’s one of the dumbest suggestions I’ve ever seen in my life. It’s basically negotiating with a person threatening to blow your brains out with a gun that has no bullets." He means Democrats have no power now on this and don’t know that it would change after the election.

"Further,” he says, the idea that giving into Democrats here will somehow heal the nation’s divide is ludicrous and naive. If the GOP doesn’t replace Ginsburg before the election...the riots won’t stop and Antifa isn’t going away. You cannot fix what ails this nation with political olive branches.”

That the GOP Senate would press forward in this scenario should surprise no one. Mitch McConnell told FOX News’ Bret Baier in February, “If you’re asking me a hypothetical, whether this Republican Senate would confirm a member of the Supreme Court, to a vacancy created this year [before November]...we would fill it.”

Of course, the media will NOT do their duty, which is to report this accurately. There is nothing unconstitutional or unusual about confirming a SCOTUS nominee this close to an election when the President and Senate are of the same party. Doesn’t matter; the media are already saying this is OUTRAGEOUS!! But that's just another lie, another false narrative –- an extremely inflammatory one, but they don’t care.

They’ll do anything to pressure the few reachable Republican Senators to waver.

Steve Hilton, on his FOX News show THE NEXT REVOLUTION, had a spectacular opening monologue about madness from the left that is a must-watch! He says pretty much everything else I’d like to say --- with one glaring exception: he did say the Senate should vote after the election. On the other hand, his guest, Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn, pointed out that the process generally takes about 30 days from nomination to hearings and another 30 days to the vote.

On the OTHER hand --- I’m sounding like Tevye in FIDDLER ON THE ROOF --- there’s something else to consider: we desperately need a full-court to rule on the various election challenges that are inevitable after Nov. 3. That could be the most important consideration of all.

Many of you know me and my wife, Laura Ainsworth, through this newsletter. For over ten years, we have worked as writers/researchers for Gov. Huckabee on his radio, TV, Internet and book projects. He trusts us to dig up news that’s accurate and quotes that are fully sourced and in context, to ferret out fake news, and not to share slanted stores that ignore some facts to support a viewpoint, even if we agree with it. There’s plenty of that elsewhere.

Since you know we are straight shooters who try to bring you the honest truth, we thought you might be interested in hearing our personal experience with contracting COVID-19. This was frightening news for us. Even though we are otherwise healthy and not elderly, we’d heard all the scare stories. Laura is also an award-winning retro-jazz singer and recording artist (you can hear her music here: and on “Huckabee” with the Music City Connection here. So we have to protect her voice.

Plus, she has a preexisting condition: In 2009, she got swine flu (H1N1) during the second wave, which was only diagnosed later because they weren’t testing for it even that late (so much for Biden’s claim that he would handle pandemics better than Trump.) She was very sick for eight months, developed pneumonia and pleurisy, and suffered permanent scarring on her lungs that recently sent her to the ER. She even had to relearn to sing after that.

So we were very worried last month when we came down with suspiciously familiar symptoms. After a trip to a parking lot testing center where we had to stick a six-inch Q-Tip up our noses until our eyes watered, we were told to self-quarantine until we got the results. A few days later, the tests came back: Positive. We both had the Covid.

We were asked if we knew where we got it. No. We’d followed all the precautions: hand washing and hand sanitizer, social distancing (I’ve been doing that since high school), working from home (which we’ve done for years), masks in public, etc. We did go to a few restaurants, but they all took extreme precautions, and we only sat in open-air patios far from other diners. This suggested to me that much of the talk about the precautions – and Biden’s insistence on expanding and enforcing them indefinitely – is mostly “security theater.” If you really know anything about “science” and the size of viruses, you know that wearing a cheap surgical mask to stop a virus is like putting up a chain link fence to keep out mosquitoes.

What was the disease like? We both coughed a lot. We had fevers, but never that high, and they went away after four or five days. We lost our senses of smell (it’s weird to hold a jar of peanut butter up to your nose and smell nothing), but luckily, that’s come back. We had no appetites and had to force ourselves to eat. We also felt queasy (it’s odd to feel like you might throw up when your stomach is so empty it’s cramping.) We also lost much of our sense of taste (I mean our taste buds, not that we started listening to Cardi B music.) Unfortunately, we retained enough to have a constant horrible taste in our mouths, like sucking on pennies. We had no energy and slept a LOT, suffered headaches and body aches, and our skin was so sensitive that having clothes or blankets touching us was very irritating.

Fortunately, we live in a place where there are plenty of delivery options, so we had food, medicine and (most importantly) supplies for the 12 rescued parrots and cockatoos we live with.

We started to feel better after a week or so. As sick as we were, we never missed a day’s work on the newsletter or TV show or a day’s birdcage cleaning, so I think you could say we definitely had mild cases. We never took anything other than aspirin, Pepto-Bismol and vitamins. Laura is still trying to get some energy back, and I still have a lingering wheezy cough, but we’re out of quarantine and mostly back to normal.

This is not in any way meant to downplay the seriousness of this disease, because we know it’s been much worse, even deadly, for some people, so we count ourselves lucky. But for us, as bad as it was, it was hardly the worst thing we ever had (I had something far worse last winter that dragged on for two months.) For most people like us (not elderly and otherwise in good health), it seems to be like a bad, rather weird version of the flu that’s mostly over within a week.

Now that we've had it, we feel strangely relieved. All that worry and effort avoiding it, then we got it, and…that’s it? It’s over now? I feel like making T-shirts that say, “I’d had it already, so save your mask lecture.”

Our experience did convince me that shutting down the world economy over this was one of the dumbest mistakes in history. We should have scrupulously protected those most at risk (like not putting COVID-19 patients into nursing homes), encouraged everyone else to follow reasonable precautions (for all the good it did us), and otherwise gone on with life. I seriously doubt that the death rates would have been noticeably different (look at Sweden), but millions of people would have been much better off and countless businesses would not now be extinct.

Finally, do I blame Donald Trump because we got sick from a virus that lying Chinese communists unleashed on the world? Of course not, I’m not an idiot. The same people who’ve spent the past four years saying Trump is crazy to think he can keep millions of illegal immigrants from crossing the border now expect us to believe he had the power to keep a virus out. I’m just glad we didn’t catch whatever brain disease they have.

"Putting a national lockdown, stay-at-home orders, is like house arrest. It’s --- you know, other than slavery, which was a different kind of restraint --- this is the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in American history.”

Attorney General Bill Barr made the above comment during a discussion at Hillsdale College on Wednesday. The lying and twisting of his words started immediately, along with the expected OUTRAGE!!! CNN accused him onscreen of “comparing stay-at-home orders and slavery” as Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina exclaimed, “I think that that statement by Mr. Barr was the most ridiculous, tone-deaf, God-awful things I’ve ever heard. It is incredible that the chief law enforcement officer in this country would equate human bondage to expert advice to save lives.”

Except that Barr DIDN’T “equate human bondage” to following lockdown advice. Read it again. He specifically EXEMPTED slavery from the comparison he was making. He was comparing the lockdown with all the other intrusions on civil liberties EXCEPT slavery, which he placed in a class by itself. When you take slavery (and surely he meant that to encompass the later Jim Crow laws as well) out of the discussion, as he did, it’s certainly arguable that widespread stay-at-home orders and the near-total lockdown of the American economy are exactly what he said they are, the worst and most large-scale intrusion on civil liberties we’ve ever had.

That doesn’t matter, though, because a lot of people aren’t smart or conscientious enough to look at what Barr really said and understand the difference. Of those who ARE capable of doing this, some of them deliberately twist his words to fool the less intelligent and/or informed.

CNN kept on with this, of course, with presidential historian Jon Meacham saying in an interview with Don Lemon that “’s incendiary hyperbole. If you think that this is akin to slavery, you obviously never suffered under the burden of slavery in real time or in its longtime, uh, longtime system of segregation...”

Except that Barr never said the lockdown was “akin” to slavery. To repeat: he exempted slavery from the comparison, as it was a “different kind of restraint” (indeed). Barr was comparing the lockdown to OTHER intrusions on civil liberties and finding it to be the most extreme of THOSE intrusions.

Barr was right. To cite just one example, I’ve written about the damage done to the great city of Nashville, right around the corner from where I produce my TV show. The tourist economy of Nashville has been destroyed by the closing of restaurants and bars by mayor John Cooper, along with the livelihoods of countless musicians. Shockingly, government officials have even tried to hide the data that show a relatively tiny number of people caught the virus at those restaurants and bars. The intrusion into people’s lives and livelihoods has been devastating.

As brilliant as Barr is, he should anticipate before the words come out of his mouth how they'll be twisted to say something he didn’t mean at all, and speak accordingly to head off incidents like this. But this time, sadly, he let the predictable happen. Because of the resolve he has to discover the truth about certain activities, he’s got a big target on his back. Attorney General Barr is seen by the left as a huge threat --- you know, not counting Donald Trump, who is uniquely loathed and despised --- and is perhaps the biggest threat to the left in American history.

See what I did in that last sentence? I did NOT compare Barr to Donald Trump or say that Barr is “akin” to Donald Trump. I set Trump aside in the discussion. I said if you DON’T INCLUDE TRUMP, then Barr is maybe the biggest threat the left had ever faced. Just as Barr was saying if you DON’T INCLUDE SLAVERY, then the lockdown was the worst intrusion on civil liberties Americans have ever faced.


In another part of the same conversation, Barr said this of the organization Black Lives Matter:

"They’re not interested in black lives...they’re interested in ‘props,’ a small number of blacks who are killed by police during, uh, conflict with police, usually less than a dozen a year, who they can use as props to achieve a much broader political agenda.”

Again...OUTRAGE!! You’d think that Barr had said he personally wasn’t interested in black lives. No, he was exposing the ugly truth about an organization that is centered around a Marxist agenda and is using black lives –- and the pretext of racial “justice” –- to further that agenda. They ARE using tragic incidents with police to start riots, looting and burning that, ironically, destroy black lives and predominantly black neighborhoods. That organization apparently is NOT interested in the damage it causes those black lives.

Once again, Barr is correct.

Don’t think so? In a must-read article, here’s what you should know about the real BLM, the so-called “Black Lives Matter.”

Black Lives Matter founder Alicia Garza has another venture called the Black Futures Lab, and if you click to donate (for the love of heaven, don’t donate), you’ll be told to send the money to the “Chinese Progressive Association” explaining that the Black Futures Lab is “a fiscally sponsored project of the Chinese Progressive Association.”

By the way, the Chinese Progressive Association is organized as a 501(c)3, tax-exempt.

A 2009 paper from Stanford University that appears on the website describes it as a pro-People’s Republic of China organization whose “support for the PRC was based on the inspiration its members took from what they saw as a successful grassroots model that presented a viable alternative to Western capitalism.”

That's what this is really about. Again, read the article, and Barr will not only be seen as correct but as understating the threat of Black Lives Matter.

They Were Wrong

September 17, 2020

A hat tip to Stephen Green of PJ Media for reminding us of this typically pompous, condescending and wrongheaded pronouncement by former Obama Secretary of State John Kerry, most recently seen lecturing us at the Democratic Convention about how Trump is totally botching foreign policy. In 2017, Kerry predicted that if Trump moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem, it would ignite a violent uprising in the Middle East that nobody would be able to control.

In fact, like everything John Kerry says with utter self-assurance, this was laughably incorrect. There was no violent uprising, Trump has just overseen landmark peace deals between Israel and Bahrain and the UAE, and he says nine more Arab nations may soon join in those deals. Another reminder: Kerry brokered Obama’s brilliant Iran nuclear deal that involved giving the world’s biggest state sponsor of terrorism billions of dollars in exchange for unenforceable pinky-swear promises that they wouldn’t use it to build nuclear weapons.

And yet none of this record of being wrong-wrong-wrong will penetrate the thick skulls of the media talking heads who continue to tell us that we must restore the Obama-Biden Administration to power because Trump is screwing up our foreign policy by…what, not launching enough pointless wars or enriching our enemies enough? Not getting our troops killed for no reason? Bringing too much peace to the Middle East? Well, electing them again will certainly put a stop to all that!

It was a ridiculously odd “coincidence” that about 30 phones used by members of Robert Mueller’s special counsel team were completely erased before being turned over to John Durham’s investigators. But the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, headed by Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, voted Wednesday to authorize over two dozen subpoenas, and this destruction of government records will definitely be on the agenda.

It’s really kind of funny to read POLITICO’s report on this, as their methods are as transparent as Saran Wrap. Consider that in the opening paragraph, they term this effort “part of a highly partisan, Republican-led investigation targeting former Obama administration officials’ role in the presidential transition period.” Why, it’s “targeting President Trump’s political foes less than 50 days before Election Day.” The story does quote a Republican, though. Mitt Romney.

Democrats called the committee’s probes “inappropriate fishing expeditions,” which I have to say is something they know quite a lot about. Ranking Democrat Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan sent a letter to Sen. Johnson on Monday formally objecting to the subpoenas, accusing Republicans of just trying to help Trump's bid for re-election.

How about calling these efforts what they really are, a possibly last-ditch effort to find out the TRUTH of what has gone on to undermine Donald Trump ever since he announced his candidacy for President? If Democrats (shudder) take the Senate in the coming election, ALL investigations will be shut down faster than you can say "Chuck Schumer." This could be a case of now or never for justice to be done.

At the same time, Sen. Johnson has apparently acknowledged that his committee's effort would help Trump. According to POLITICO, he told a radio host that the probe “would certainly help Donald Trump win re-election and certainly be pretty good, I would say, evidence about not voting for Vice President Biden.” If this raises your hackles, I would point out that deliberately putting off finding the truth until AFTER the election is, in effect, influencing the election --- just in the other direction, by CONCEALING the truth from voters, who deserve to know. That observation applies to John Durham’s findings as well.

"Our investigation is focused on uncovering and revealing the truth," Sen. Johnson said, “but Democrats seem intent at every turn to frustrate and interfere with our oversight efforts.”

This could get interesting. Those targeted with subpoenas include former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, former FBI deputy Director Andrew McCabe, former FBI counsel Lisa Page, former FBI agent Peter Strzok, former Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough, former FBI agent Joe Pientka, former FBI director of counterintelligence Bill Priestap, former UN ambassador Samantha Power, former White House national security adviser Susan Rice, former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith (who has already pleaded guilty to making a false statement after altering a document to lie about Carter Page), former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former top lawyer for the FBI James Baker, top DOJ official Bruce Ohr, Cambridge University professor and FBI “confidential human source” Stefan Halper, and former Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew. There’s also James Baker, head of the Office of Net Assessment at the Defense Department, which had hired Stefan Halper as a contractor.

Oh, and last but not least, Sidney Blumenthal. Fun times!

Some of the subpoenas do involve Ukraine and Joe and Hunter Biden, as Johnson wants to formally investigate claims made by Andriy Derkach, described by POLITICO as “a pro-Russian Ukrainian lawmaker who was just sanctioned by the Treasury Department for election interference.” In fact, the Treasury Department called him a Russian agent. That must be why Jacob Lew is being subpoenaed.

In another bit of unintentional hilarity, Sen. Chuck Schumer did the (for him) laughably predictable thing and brought up “Russia Russia Russia!” Have you noticed this is always his fall-back? He sought to pass a resolution “calling for a cessation of any Senate investigation or activity that allows Congress to act as a conduit for Russian information." Message to Sen. Schumer: Your act is getting stale.

For a less slanted take on the story than POLITICO’s, I recommend this one.

And also this one.

In related news, the Senate Judiciary Committee has been (finally) busy setting up hearings as well, with chairman Lindsay Graham (finally) announcing that Comey has agreed to testify without a subpoena about “Crossfire Hurricane.”

The scheduled date is September 30. Graham said on Wednesday’s HANNITY show that Comey “will be respectfully treated but asked hard questions.” (I assume they’ve figured out how to get around Comey’s sneaky refusal to renew his own security clearance.) They’re also in negotiation with McCabe and Strzok. (“He’s selling a book,” Graham joked about Strzok. “We will see if he will come without a subpoena.”)

Mueller, however, has already declined to appear voluntarily. He says he “doesn’t have enough time.” He might have a point; judging by his previous testimony, there’s not enough time in the world for him to familiarize himself even with his own report, which it seems someone else wrote and put his name on. But I’d say go with a subpoena for him and anyone else who tries to weasel out. It sure would be nice to get their comments on all those curiously “wiped” phones.

According to an article in Politico...

...Joe Biden seems obsessed with not getting the COVID-19 (Chinese) coronavirus (too bad he’s never told his family members to put more distance between themselves and China.) It’s why his speeches are held in the middle of bug-infested fields with carefully-disinfected microphones and the press held back at least 20 feet from him and confined inside hula-hoops on the ground.

So, if the coronavirus is so terrifying to him - and the way his campaign constantly slams Trump supporters for gathering in large crowds that aren’t BML riots, so the virus might spread there (”Science!”) – why was Joe perfectly able to vote safely in person in the Delaware Primary?

Doesn’t this disprove the entire Democrat argument that we must have national mail-in voting because it would be deadly for people to vote in person? Biden is 77, which puts him squarely among the most likely group to die of COVID-19 (he’s so old, he literally couldn’t remember where he was going to be the next day), and we know he’s incredibly paranoid about catching it, yet he voted in person with no problems. President Trump immediately jumped on the news, tweeting that if Biden, “as weak, tired and sleepy as he is,” can vote safely in person, “any American can do it!”

It’s hard to argue with that logic, but I’m sure the mainstream media will.

On a side note, there’s the question of why Politico would run such an article that makes Biden sound weak and paranoid. A glance at Politico’s home page will show that they currently exist for the express purpose of attacking everything Trump does (including creating peace in the Middle East) and trying to elect the Harris-Biden ticket. Rush Limbaugh has a reasonable theory: that the point of the story was to lay the groundwork for giving Biden an excuse not to debate. Why, he’s just being “responsible” by not showing up to risk spreading the virus.

But if that is the plan, I can’t imagine voters thinking that he could possibly stand up to the rigors of the toughest job in the world if he can’t even stand up at a podium for 90 minutes.

Much Overdue Good News

September 17, 2020

Rioting and looting apparently wasn’t polling as popular as the Democrats thought, because all of a sudden, the revolving door on blue city jails seems to have stopped spinning.

In Portland, a “peaceful protester” who allegedly shined a laser powerful enough to cut through paper and start fires into the eyes of a police officer has been charged with second-degree assault, unlawful use of a weapon, and two counts of unlawful directing of light from a laser pointer. This happened to multiple officers, so I hope we can look forward to multiple indictments of multiple “peaceful protesters.” More good news: all the officers have mostly recovered, so they will not suffer permanent blindness.

Meanwhile, in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, a fed-up judge threw the book, sharp corner first, at 13 alleged rioters who are accused of attacking police headquarters and setting an arson fire. This came during rioting over the fatal police shooting of Ricardo Munez, a mentally ill man who was off his meds and awaiting trial for stabbing four people last year, and who was running toward the cops with a knife in his hand when he was shot. The judge set bail so high ($1 million each for seven of the rioters) that they are still in jail. Joe Biden’s campaign staffers will have to pony up a lot more donations to bail them out.

Note that the dad of one young woman who was arrested insists she was there as “a medic” (yeah, that’s the ticket!) as she has been at previous protests, and claims her $1 million bail is “obscene,” “outrageous” and “clearly against the 8th Amendment,” which according to legal experts I’ve read, is not correct. In some places, arson is a felony that can bring up to 35 years in prison, and if it seriously harms or kills somone, whether intentional or not, the charge can escalate to attempted murder and life in prison. So yeah, your daughter is in serious trouble and could be considered a flight risk, hence the high bail.

Maybe instead of blaming the judge and venting to the media, dad should use jail visiting hours to have that little talk with his daughter about respecting the law and other people’s rights and not setting fires that he should have had when she was five.

Wrongthink, news update

September 17, 2020

While professional football allows players to kneel during the National Anthem and wear the names of felons on their uniforms, Little Miami High School in Morrow, Ohio, suspended two football players (the sons of a firefighter and a police officer) for carrying flags onto the field on 9/11 to honor police and firefighters who died on that date attempting to save others.

The school athletic director claims the boys were punished because they were told they weren’t allowed to do it but did it anyway, and “we did not want to place ourselves in a circumstance where another family might want a different flag to come out of the tunnel, one that may be [one that] many other families may not agree with from a political perspective.”

Judging from all the angry messages the school is getting from the community, there aren’t too many locals who understand why the boys were told they couldn’t do it or why anyone would think that honoring fallen first responders on 9/11 would require some sort of equal time for opposing views.

This again illustrates how too many people running our schools have the “courage” to punish students for daring to express beliefs that leftists oppose, but quake with fear at the idea that leftists might complain about being exposed to beliefs they disagree with. And if one of the beliefs that you find offensive is that we should honor the police and firefighters who heroically gave their lives to save others on the anniversary of September 11th, then I think the correct and proper response to your complaints is “Go pound sand.”

Addressing the specifics of what Democrats might do to prevail in the upcoming election, REVOLVER NEWS has done an important series on it, detailing the “Color Revolution” tactics being implemented by the Biden campaign. This is not conspiracy theory; we already know from their own mouths and the activities of their Soros-funded “Transition ‘Integrity’ Project” that they’re working to create uncertainty about the vote and have plans for handling various Election Night scenarios so that Biden is inaugurated no matter what the electoral count.

For when you have time, here’s the most recent installment in that series, centering on a particular anti-Trump operative, Norm Eisen. It’s very long and detailed, but if you haven’t been listening to Dan Bongino’s recent podcasts or perhaps aren’t even familiar with the term “Color Revolution,” I hope you’ll get to it soon. Either way, I’ll summarize the key points below.

On Tuesday night, Tucker Carlson had as his guest Darren Beattie, a former speechwriter for President Trump who now happens to work with REVOLVER NEWS. Beattie explained that Democrat operatives, including some who testified at the impeachment proceedings, are using the same tactics that U.S. intel agencies have used in other countries, such as Ukraine, to launch what are known as Color Revolutions.

Beattie told Tucker that the end game for the Democrats is to implement this “very specific type of coup,” defined as “a regime change model favored by many in our national security apparatus,” especially for Eastern European countries. It’s a way “to overthrow regimes that they don’t like,” not by sending in massive troops and going to war, as we did in Iraq, but by engineering an internal revolution, typically through a contested-election scenario.

Sound familiar? Now, do you ever wonder why Hillary told Biden not to concede UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES?

The other part of the Color Revolution model is “massive mobilized protest,” a combination of “peaceful protests and civil disobedience.” All they have to do is amplify what they’re already doing, in response to the “wrong” election outcome. Of course, the media must be on board as well, but we know that piece of the puzzle is already in place.

According to Beattie, the same individuals who have a history of using these tactics in a professional capacity to spark a revolution in other countries are using them now, here in America against our own democratically-elected President. They’re “using the very same playbook,” he said.

One of those people, he said, is Norm Eisen, whom he described as a “key legal hatchet man, Democrat operative” and --- I am not kidding --- former Obama White House “ethics czar.” Though Eisen works quietly behind the scenes, Beattie said he’s “a key architect of nearly every effort to censor, sue, impeach and overthrow the President.” This would sure explain a lot. Specifically, his activities include over 180 lawsuits against Trump, authorship of 10 articles of impeachment against Trump a month BEFORE the Ukraine phone call had even been made (!!!), special counsel for the impeachment, and, of course, working on the Transition ‘Integrity’ Project. He’s behind the strategy, Beattie said, of “suing President Trump into paralysis and his allies into bankruptcy.”

This activity started before Trump even took office, beginning with David Brock’s blueprint for undermining and overthrowing his presidency, “Democracy Matters: Strategic Plan for Action.” The REVOLVER NEWS piece has a summary of this if you’re not familiar, and if you’d like to read the whole blasted thing, the WASHINGTON FREE BEACON obtained a copy of the “private and confidential” memo, and here it is.

Eisen authored something called, literally, “The Playbook” (full title: “The Democracy Playbook: Preventing and Reversing Democratic Backsliding”), about how to start a Color Revolution with election fraud and mass protest to question the winner’s legitimacy. That book is based on one from decades earlier, Gene Sharp’s classic “From Dictatorship to Democracy.” Sharp wrote an even earlier book on government overthrow that was thought to be so powerful, one Lithuanian defense minister said, “I would rather have this book than the nuclear bomb.” According to Sharp’s bio, “he developed his core theory of non-violent action: a method of warfare capable of collapsing states through theatrical social movements DESIGNED TO DISSOLVE THE COMMON WILL THAT BUTTRESSES GOVERNMENTS [emphasis mine], all without firing any shots.”

The REVOLVER NEWS piece goes into detail about specific countries in which these tactics were used. I think it’s important to note that Sharp’s work can be used for good –-- if it promotes the actual will of the people to break the chains of an authoritarian government. For example, his writings played an enormous role in the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991; Russia had put him on their list of “most dangerous threats to the Russian state.” Chinese dissidents have gone to prison for distributing his books. (Sharp died in 2018.)

But those were cases in which authoritarian governments were subverting the will of the people. To follow this “playbook” to overthrow a legitimately-elected President of the United States is a horrific abuse --- defeating democracy, not promoting it. To carry this off, they have to redefine “democracy” to mean “themselves being in power.” That way, only one outcome is permissible.

"Make no mistake,” the piece reads, “the Color Revolution has nothing to do with democracy in any meaningful sense and everything to do with the ruling class ensuring that the people will never have the power to meddle in their own elections again.” And that takes the prize as the most frightening sentence I’ve read about what’s going in America right now.

We need two things to stop them: 1) the growing awareness of what they are doing, and 2) TOTAL RESOLVE not to give into them on anything, no matter what they try to pull. They have to get "woke" to the fact that they can't dissolve our common will. I’m ready...are you?

Money to Burn

September 15, 2020

Billionaire Mike Bloomberg could be using his vast fortune to help his struggling hometown of New York City, but instead, he’s using it to try to inflict all its problems on the entire nation by electing Joe Biden and his crew of DeBlasio-like handlers to the White House. You’d think he could look at what’s happened to the city he used to run and realize the disaster that occurs when you put leftists in charge of anything, but apparently he’s blinded by Trump Derangement Syndrome.

In what’s actually a good sign for Trump (the Democrats must be really nervous about the internal polls they’re seeing), Bloomberg has pledged to spend $100 million of his own money on ads to try to help Biden bamboozle the voters of Florida (Democrats hate when billionaires influence elections, except when it's their billionaires.)

While I’m concerned about how many lies can be spewed with $100 million, I have to point out that just because Bloomberg is selling his snake oil, that doesn’t mean people are buying. During his disastrous Presidential bid, he blew more than $1 billion. He ended up winning 55 delegates, who cost him $18 million each. Or put another way, he paid $241 for each vote he won. Still, at that rate, $100 million could buy nearly 415,000 votes, if people are dumb enough to believe his advertising. Of course, it’s possible that most of the people who voted for Bloomberg only did it in hopes that if he became President, he’d stop interrupting every YouTube video they were trying to watch.

Naturally, President Trump had a reaction on Twitter, and it was as blunt and to the point as ever:

“I thought Mini Mike was through with Democrat politics after spending almost 2 Billion Dollars, and then giving the worst and most inept Debate Performance in the history of Presidential Politics. Pocahontas ended his political career on first question, OVER! Save NYC instead.”

Big Salute

September 15, 2020

A big salute to Jacksonville Jaguars tight end Tyler Eifert, for daring to go against the far-left, anti-cop flow of the current NFL. The League allowed players to put the names of people allegedly affected by “systemic racism” on their uniforms (after previously refusing to allow salutes to heroes like the Dallas cops who were killed by a sniper while protecting people who were protesting them.) Eifert took advantage of the new rules by putting the name David Dorn on his helmet.

Dorn was the retired St. Louis police captain who was working as a security guard and who was murdered in cold blood by rioters/looters.

The story notes how brave it was of Eifert to choose to honor Dorn, which tells you a lot that’s sad and infuriating about the current state of the NFL.

If anyone else in the NFL would like to honor people whose lives truly were affected in the most extreme way by racist violence, there are a growing number of them, some police and some just law-abiding citizens, who have been murdered or severely injured by rioters and looters under the BLM/Antifa banners.

Meanwhile, in a hopeful sign that people are finally coming to their senses and realizing that you can’t judge a book by its cover (you can put the dust jacket of “Bambi” over “The Communist Manifesto,” but it’s still “The Communist Manifesto”), the Premiere Soccer League just became the first sports league to remove the BLM logo from their uniforms after waking up to what that group actually stands for. It’s a small start, but it’s a start. Let’s hope the NBA, NFL and MLB get their eyes opened to reality soon, before they cease to exist.

And in more hopeful “We’re fed up to the eyeballs with this garbage” news, more than 10,000 scholars and academics have signed “The Philadelphia Statement,” standing up against the “cancel culture” and the poisonous leftist tyranny that exists on America’s campuses. Granted, they’re conservative and libertarian academics, but at least someone is finally organizing to present a united front of opposition. I’m old enough to remember when it would have been liberal academics who stood up for free speech and the right to debate ideas openly without fear of violence, repression and reprisal. But then, I recently became eligible for Medicare.

Voting Begins

September 15, 2020

Believe it or not, thanks to mail-in voting, people are already casting votes for President. Voting this early is a very bad idea if you want to cast an informed vote, which is one of many reasons why Democrats like it. We haven’t even seen the first debate (if we ever do see a debate, which remains to be seen.) Biden’s supporters are desperately casting around for some reason for him not to debate. They seem to have landed on “Trump is a lying liar who lies, so poor Honest Joe would have to ‘correct’ all his falsehoods.” Or to put it another way, Trump will say things Biden disagrees with, and he’ll have to try to refute him, which is also known as “A DEBATE.”

To push this pablum, they’re repeating the nonsensical claim that Trump has told over 20,000 lies. To arrive at that number, the leftist media basically declares everything that Trump says to be a “lie,” including opinions they disagree with, irrelevant details, hyperbole for rhetorical effect, obvious jokes and things that are plainly true but they don’t like to hear them.

They never seem to remember, however, that “Honest Joe” Biden has built his entire career on false claims about his resume, plagiarizing other people’s life stories and speeches, and enriching his relatives through their connections to his office. This isn’t a matter of interpretation: one of his previous presidential bids crashed and burned specifically because he was caught plagiarizing someone else’s speech and biography. So far in just this campaign, he’s claimed to be in favor of banning fracking, then denied it; in favor of defunding police, then denied it, then claimed Trump wants to do it; against shutting down travel from China, then in favor of it; for mandatory mask-wearing, then against it; and for the “peaceful protesters,” then against the violence they were committing the entire time he was claiming they were peaceful.

If that’s your idea of “honest, no malarkey straight talk,” then check out these eight “big whoppers” that should disqualify him from the Presidency if he thinks that liars don’t belong there.

Finally, as long as we're being scrupulously honest, here’s Howie Carr with a list of recent comments by Biden that the media failed to report. I think this is the real, honest reason why Joe’s supporters are as scared of letting him debate as they are of assaulting a Trump supporter who isn’t over the age of 80.

Another Middle East peace deal

September 14, 2020

Friday, President Trump announced another “extraordinary” Middle East peace agreement to establish full diplomatic relations between Israel and the Kingdom of Bahrain. It’s similar to last month’s agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This also comes a week after Trump brokered a deal to normalize economic relations between Serbia and Kosovo that includes Kosovo recognizing Israel and Serbia agreeing to move its embassy to Jerusalem.

White House deputy press secretary Brian Morgenstern said, “This is an extraordinary achievement. The President made the first major breakthrough like this in 26 years. In less than a month, he's made yet another one."

He said Trump "has not one, but two Nobel Peace Prize nominations now in recent days because the President is ending endless wars and he's bringing about peace and prosperity, promoting our ally, Israel, normalizing relations with Arab states, really tremendous developments, and also isolating those who want to do harm and cause violence and dysfunction, isolating actors like Iran."

Well, now we know why so many former Deep State Clinton/Bush/Obama proponents of endless wars are so adamant that Trump must be removed from office. With this incompetent lunatic in charge, peace is breaking out all over!

Media 101

September 14, 2020

Last February, President Trump downplayed the coronavirus because he didn’t want to panic the public. So we must replace him with Joe Biden, who responded, “It was a life-and-death betrayal of the American people. It’s beyond despicable. It’s a dereliction of duty. It’s a disgrace.”

Part they don’t mention: also last February, Joe Biden accused Trump of “hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering” for taking strong actions to contain the disease and declared that this is “not a time to panic about coronavirus.”

There’s more at this link…much, much more, like what other Democrats and the WHO were saying at the time. You might want to click on it because you’re not likely to see it anywhere else. It all went down the Memory Hole…

On the subject of the media running interference for Joe Biden, David Harsanyi did their job for them and compiled a list of actual questions they would be asking Biden if they were professional journalists and not unpaid DNC press agents.

About a week ago, I brought you THE most important pre-election story of them all, about Democrats readying for a possible “coup,” and linked to this piece by Michael Anton in AMERICAN MIND. Since we presented it as a must-read, I’ll link to it again here to make sure you don't miss it.

Since its publication, that piece has created quite a stir –- at least among conservatives –- and Mark Levin had Mr. Anton on his FOX News TV show on Sunday.

It’s true that the Democrat Party and the media (but I repeat myself) have no intention of allowing President Trump to be re-elected, no matter what. They will do anything within their power, legitimate or otherwise, to stop it from happening. The tradition of Election Day has been rendered almost moot as it is, with early voting starting this year even before any scheduled presidential debate (if they happen at all), along with the horror of widespread, essentially uncontrolled mail-in balloting.

As we discussed, they’ve twisted the whole plot to make it seems as though TRUMP is the one who will resist the will of the people, as though it’s TRUMP who will destroy the public’s faith in the system, when they are the ones openly doing those very things. They hide their activity in plain sight.

They're the ones who plan to count the ballots until they win. If Biden wins enough electoral votes after the first count, they will somehow head off any recounts. If Trump wins, they will count, and count, and...”find” more ballots...and count again until Biden miraculously has just enough electoral votes, and then the counting will be over. Recall the quote often attributed to Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, who may or may not have said it: “The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

Anton, who was a member of the National Security Council under Trump and is now a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute (“Recovering the American Idea,” which is a good idea) and a research fellow at Hillsdale College, has a new book out that might be as much of a must-read as his “coup” commentary, called “THE STAKES: America at the Point of No Return.”

I don’t think I have to tell you that we’re very close to that no-return point on numerous fronts right now. Specifically, though, Anton is talking about the threat of one-party as opposed to two-party government, the looming prospect of locked-in blue-state rule, as in, say, Oregon, but coast to coast. Yikes.

Of what the left is already doing to advance the “coup,” he says, “There are ten or twelve data points one could point to. To me, the strongest is when Hillary Clinton herself, who lost to Donald Trump in 2016, said, ‘Joe Biden should not concede under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.’” Presumably, Hillary was talking even about a 50-state Trump landslide. She does not care what the voters want, only what “their” voters want.

Anton said that of all the times there have been recounts, he can think of only one in which the Republican ended up pulling ahead, and that was in 2000 for George W. Bush in Florida, when the Supreme Court finally had to step in and stop the process.

Biden himself has talked about getting the military involved to “drag” Trump out of the White House. Disgraceful. And we had the story last week about the two former Army officers who wrote an open letter to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, advising preparation to deploy an active-duty combat unit to remove Trump from office on January 20, 2021, should that be necessary. (Fortunately, Gen. Mark Milley responded that the military would play “no role” in any transfer of power.)

Anton had a message he hoped would get passed along to everyone in the military, so here’s where we can all do out part. He is hoping that every military officer, current or former, will get the word out to “friends who are loyal to the U.S. military, who are loyal to the Constitution,” to “knock off” this kind of talk. “And if someone tries to whisper in your ear that this is what you need to be doing in January of 2021," he said, "tell them to BUZZ OFF, and that you are loyal to the Constitution, you are loyal to your oath and you are loyal to the American military that was founded literally in the American Revolution and is one of our cornerstone institutions that defend our freedom.”

Amen. Got that? Please spread this message to everyone you know who's serving our country in the military.

Levin tied Democrats’ effort to use the armed forces this way to that thoroughly-debunked piece in THE ATLANTIC that said Trump had called them contemptible names. Anton, who worked around the President a great deal during the first 14 months of his administration (including visits to military bases and all foreign trips) and never saw anything from him but deep respect and admiration for our troops, agreed that this was part of the strategy. “It’s impossible for me to believe that he could have said something like that,” Anton said. “I think that story is completely made up.”

He explained that they’re able to get away with making it up because they just about control the media (FOX News and conservative sites like this one being the exception), including cable, broadcast, pop culture (Hollywood, music, etc.), and social media. He discusses this in his book, calling it “the megaphone.” The left hold the megaphone. These institutions push out the narrative, he said, which is that “Trump is illegitimate, Trump was elected by the Russians.” Those who find out the contradictions and try to enlighten others are de-platformed. Big Tech is heavily into muzzling anything pro-Trump this year.

This is why millions of Americans STILL think Trump “colluded” with Russia. If (when!) Trump wins, they’ll rehash the same “Russia Russia Russia!” routine. Who knows how many phony “dossiers” are being passed around right now?

Levin and Anton also discussed something quite interesting in Bob Woodward’s new book. Now, I wouldn't believe one thing Woodward said about Trump, but this is an anecdote about then-Secretary of Defense Jim Matttis. According to the book –- which I’ll remind you is anonymously sourced –- Mattis, along with former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coates, discussed possibly “colluding” with some Cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove Trump. It might be that “7th floor” officials at the FBI weren’t the only ones contemplating an “insurance policy.” And here, it involved top-level military. This sort of thing used to be unimaginable.

It’s another reason why this message needs to get out to our military, now, at all levels: Do not allow yourselves or others within your ranks to be used in such a way to subvert the Constitution and the will of the voters. It will mark the end of our republic if you do.

Remember when we learned Hillary and her aides had erased their hard drives with BleachBit software and literally hit phones with hammers to destroy the information on them? James Comey said on July 5, 2016, that “no reasonable prosecutor” would charge Hillary after the “Mid-Year Exam” investigation because it wasn’t her INTENT to skirt the law.

We all laughed until we cried at that one, but now we’ve learned, thanks to a release of documents from the Department of Justice, that a large number of high-level people who SURELY knew better destroyed their communications, too. Coincidentally, these were all members of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigative team.

What are the odds that the devices of over 20 of Mueller’s team members would have been “wiped” in a variety of creative ways before they were to be handed over to the DOJ for review?

There are numerous methods for achieving this: by just “accidentally" wiping, by inputting an incorrect password too many times, or by leaving a device in “airplane” mode with either incorrect or no passwords provided.

Or, as with Lisa Page’s phone, the device could simply be reset to factory settings (no reason given, as far as we know), in effect wiping the device clean of all Information before it was handed over to the Office of the Inspector General.

Gosh, it happened with lead prosecutor Andrew Weissmann’s phone, too, after he entered his password too many times in doing so. You’d think someone smart enough to be the lead prosecutor on a case of this magnitude would know how to open his own phone without wiping off all the data. On the other hand, he surely would be smart enough to know how TO wipe the data, if he so desired.

Some of the phones apparently just “wiped themselves.”

Over a dozen Mueller team members lost their data by putting their phones into “airplane” mode, locking them and then forgetting their passwords or otherwise “accidentally” wiping them.

It is yet to be seen if anyone has been able to recover the data, but at the very least, we learn from this that the people investigating President Trump were not keen on going by the book and didn’t care about the requirements for documenting their activities. Given what we know, it seems much more likely that they were actively hiding those activities.

Sean Davis at THE FEDERALIST posted 87 pages of documents relating to the lost phone content (be glad you don’t have to slog through that), leading to this comment.

Actually, Weissmann had THREE phones that went down. One was wiped “accidentally.” The other two were wiped by entering the wrong password too many times. Maybe someday his phone records will turn up; if so, they’ll probably be in the same place as the rest of Mike Flynn’s exculpatory evidence. (In case leftists are reading this, I’m joking.)

As often as these high-level government officials must have traveled by air, it seems unlikely they’d have been thrown for a loop by the prospect of turning their phones off and on. Hillary could at least try to pass for a ninny when it came to electronic devices (“You mean, like, with a cloth?”), but these people just can’t, not credibly.

But, as Davis tweeted, “The newly released DOJ records from the OIG investigation of corruption during the Mueller probe shows that a key tactic used by the Mueller team was to put the phones in airplane mode, lock them, and then claim they didn’t have the password.”

Lindsay Graham said on Thursday’s HANNITY, “If you can’t manage your own phone, why should we trust you to investigate a crime?...I guess they just ran out of hammers and ‘bleaching’ material. So the question is, did they obstruct justice? Did they INTENTIONALLY [emphasis mine] delete information from their phones because Horowitz was on the case?”

This is a developing story. Graham’s committee is not involved with criminal prosecution, but regarding that, he said, “I would be shocked if the only person prosecuted is [Kevin] Clinesmith.” Clinesmith, you’ll recall, has been indicted for falsifying evidence against Carter Page, changing a document to say he was not an asset for the CIA when he actually had been.

Graham said Thursday that he has “made an invitation” to James Comey, Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok to come before the Senate Judiciary Committee to answer questions raised by the Horowitz report. “None of them have testified since Horowitz issued his report,” Graham said. “I’m working with their lawyers to try to get them into the committee...They may have good answers, but they need to be asked the questions.” I should add that, unlike Graham, Durham has subpoena power.

So, did the special counsel team deliberately erase their devices before turning them over to the IG? Judging by the circumstantial evidence we know, yes, they did. Can this be proved? That’s up to investigators, and we don’t know everything they know. But we do know this, in Graham’s words: “We cannot live in a country where this is tolerated. ‘Trump/Russia’ –- look how much money they spent, how many agents were involved many subpoenas issued, how many lives turned upside down. The question for me –- was there a double standard here? –- it’s pretty obvious to me there was.”

His Cheshire-cat expression also suggested he knows more than he’s telling now. “You think you’re mad about the phones being wiped? Stay tuned. We’ll talk in about ten or twelve days and we’ll see if there’s something else you could get mad about. Just stay tuned.”

Well, Senator, we're not exactly going anywhere. I can’t imagine being much madder, given what we already know. But, sure, we’ll be waiting.

UPDATE late Thursday --- Apparently, the way some of those phones were set up, it took entering an invalid password TEN TIMES before the information would be wiped. But they still managed to do it!

Remembering September 11

September 11, 2020

Today marks the 19th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks, the deadliest attacks ever on US soil. Despite coronavirus precautions, there will still be memorial ceremonies today in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington. President Trump will speak and lay a wreath at the memorial to the heroes of Flight 93. Fox News has created a continually-updated live blog page where streaming video will appear, as well as updated news and links to other memorial events.

As I wrote last year, today is a date that will live in infamy, but also in the annals of heroism.

On the morning of September 11th, 2001, our nation awoke to the shocking news that we were under savage attack by Islamic jihadists who, before the day was over, would kill nearly 3,000 people in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington. The attack was aimed at America, but because it focused on the World Trade Center, the victims were from many nations. But as much as that day displayed the cowardice and animalistic behavior of the terrorists, it also showcased the heroism and selflessness of so many Americans, from the NYPD cops and firefighters rushing toward danger to save others to citizens in cities across America standing in line for blocks to donate blood. Petty differences like race or politics were swept aside as we all came together like family, because our nation was under attack.

Those of us who lived through it can scarcely believe it was 19 years ago, as the painful memories are forever seared into our memories. But we now have colleges turning out students who have no personal memories of 9/11. Thanks to the passage of time and a media and schools that quickly buried the images lest they be too “disturbing” (or too inconvenient to PC narratives), young people have little understanding of what was felt by all Americans in the wake of that horrendous attack. This explains why we now have a crop of young people under the BLM/Antifa banners, attacking police and chanting “Death to America,” just like the people who hijacked those planes, oblivious to the evil they’re aligning themselves with.

Here are some of those 9/11 images that need to be seen and thought about a lot more often.

Young Americans’ naiveté makes them easy prey for those who seek to rewrite history so they can divide and conquer. They lull our youth into blaming the USA for every sin, letting their guards down, and being misled into handing over their hard-fought, God-given rights to those who couldn’t defeat us by force so are now working to defeat us from within.

If you have kids, I suggest a visit to the 9/11 Memorial and Museum in New York, which finally reopens to the public tomorrow. Those of you who are concerned about the safety of traveling to New York and would prefer to wait until Bill DeBlasio is removed from office can take a virtual visit here.

Make sure your children are taught the truth about 9/11. It was one of America’s worst days, yet in the Twin Towers and the Pentagon and on United Flight 93, we also saw Americans at their very best, coming together and heroically laying down their lives for others, whether they were police and firefighters climbing up into the doomed Towers to search for survivors or simply American citizens standing up against the hijackers and saying, “Let’s roll!,” knowing it meant their own plane would crash but they would save countless lives.

As we reflect on and remember 9/11, let’s not dwell on the murderous monsters who don’t deserve to have their names remembered. Let’s focus on honoring the victims and the many true heroes, both on that awful day and in the days and even years afterward. Let us resolve to end the miseducation of our children and start teaching them the truth about 9/11 and about America’s real history and our people’s true heroic character. And let’s never let our guard down again.

Investigative reporter Paul Sperry has just come out with a “developing” story about investigators learning that Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan set up a task force to target then-candidate Donald Trump. Such a task force would certainly explain a lot of what happened with the “Russia Russia Russia!” story, and we’ve been hypothesizing something similar for quite some time, as it's obvious that Brennan’s in deep. Former CIA analyst Larry C. Johnson reported on the task force about a year ago. Here’s what Johnson has to say about it now, in light of Sperry’s latest revelation.

A retired CIA colleague told Johnson in October of 2019 that Brennan had set up a task force, hand-picking the group himself instead of going through the usual posting. Apparently not everyone accepted the invitation, which “could be a problem for John Brennan,” Johnson wrote.

"I am not talking about an informal group of disgruntled Democrats working at the CIA who got together like a book club to grouse and complained about the brash real estate guy from New York,” Johnson said, though I imagine they did that sort of thing, too. “It was a specially designed covert action to try to destroy Donald Trump.”

The way Johnson explains it, a CIA task force, as designed and first used in 1947, can be “expanded” to include personnel from other intel agencies such as the FBI, DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) and NSA (National Security Agency). It operates outside the CIA organizational chart. A typical and appropriate use for it might be to go after foreign terrorists or drug traffickers; it would certainly NOT be used to go after a U.S. presidential candidate! But Johnson was told that’s exactly what Brennan did, with the blessings of then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. (The director of national intelligence coordinates the various intel agencies.)

Johnson’s friends in the CIA have told him that the task force was operating in early 2016 and possibly even in summer 2015. (This would explain a lot of what we’ve already learned from the reporting of Lee Smith and others.)

According to Johnson, the anti-Trump task force included CIA case officers (“handlers” for overseas spies), intel analysts and administrators. Importantly, personnel from the FBI might also have been invited, including Michael Gaeta, the FBI’s “handler” for “confidential human source” (SPY) Christopher Steele, a former member of British spy organization MI-6.

CIA case officers on the task force would have been able to work with foreign intelligence, such as Steele in MI-6 and diplomat Alexander Downer from Australia. They could have used someone like Joseph Mifsud to target George Papadopoulos. They could also have used the NSA to do “targeted collections”; that is to say, to intercept their communications. Let me again stress, all of these activities are legal when used against foreign terrorists or drug traffickers; they are NOT legal when used against a U.S. citizen, and most especially against a major party nominee for President.

Johnson hopes there’s also been an investigation into the so-called impeachment “whistleblower,” ERIC CIARAMELLA (yes, we still dare to use his name around here), to see if he was a part of the task force or perhaps reporting to them.

If this is the way Brennan were using a CIA task force, it was illegal. But even with all he was trying to do to tie Trump to the Russians, he was never able to do it. And no one ever will –- because (say it with me) Trump wasn’t conspiring with the Russians.

Moving ahead to Paul Sperry’s tweet, it makes news because he says not only that Brennan did this, but that “investigators “HAVE LEARNED” he did this.

I assume he’s referring to John Durham’s investigators. Here’s what Sperry tweeted:

"DEVELOPING: Investigators have learned that Obama CIA Director John Brennan ran a secret task force out of Langley with its own separate budget to investigate Trump campaign and alleged ties to Russia. Taskforce set up before FBI officially launched its own probe on 7/31/16.”

Ah, it had its own separate budget. Your tax dollars at work.

Another journalist, Adam Housley, responded, “He’d been doing this well before Trump. As I have reported. Remember I’ve been saying John Brennan ran his own op and had been doing that. I’ve reported/said this for 3 years...”

According to the WASHINGTON EXAMINER, Brennan was questioned by Durham’s team at Langley, his old stomping ground, but Brennan’s spokesperson has said he was told he’s not “a subject or a target” of Durham’s investigation. At the same time, according to ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes, Brennan is NOT in the clear, as he lied under oath to Congress about not including the Steele “dossier” in the Intel Community Assessment of Trump/Russia collusion in January of 2017. (Recall that he laughably said it was not in the “corpus” of information they used.)

If investigators have suddenly found evidence of Brennan’s task force, he can become a subject or target with the snap of a finger. Brennan, who loathes President Trump and has even called him a traitor, is up to his eyeballs in this. And it seems these off-the-book task forces were his M.O., even before he cranked one up against the future President. It’s almost inevitable that some participants are going to skate in this, but let’s hope that justice will finally be served to the one who led the whole thing.


As reported in the DAILY WIRE, Attorney General Bill Barr gives us reason to anticipate more criminal indictments in the Durham investigation.

Phony Bombshell Alert

September 10, 2020

I almost hate to get out of bed these days because apparently, each new sunrise between now and the election is going to bring yet another phony, anonymously-sourced anti-Trump “BOMBSHELL!” fable that some Democratic Party mouthpiece with a byline has been sitting on for two or three years, waiting to launch it within two months of the election. And the rest of the media will dutifully rush to jawbone over it, as if it were the most important story of the day, thinking it’s somehow going to convince Trump voters to violate every principle they hold and go vote for Biden, despite having had four years to watch how Trump actually governs while fielding endless daily attacks of fake news and made-up quotes.

Wednesday’s came to us courtesy of Bob Woodward, who used to be a journalist in the Watergate days of 45 years ago, but has since given us widely-denounced potboilers like the John Belushi hatchet job “Wired;” “Veil,” the CIA expose in which he claimed to hear former CIA Director William Casey’s deathbed confession, even though he was barred from the room and Casey could no longer talk; and now, two anti-Trump books. The controversy du Wednesday came from Woodward’s claim that in a March 19th phone call, Trump told him about the coronavirus, “I wanted to always play it down.” He conveniently didn’t play up the rest of the quote: “I still like playing it down because I don't want to create a panic."

Woodward concludes his book with this quote: “Trump is the wrong man for the job.” You know, like reliable, objective journalists do.

At this link, Matt Vespa covers the latest hair-on-fire “controversy”….

…and also points out that no matter what Trump did, the media and the Democrats (but I repeat myself) would have said he was wrong. If he had played up the dangers, they would’ve accused him of inciting panic. If he didn’t, he would be accused of not taking it seriously. Even Dr. Anthony Fauci responded to Woodward’s claims by saying that there was never a time that Trump contradicted what the top doctors were telling him. It was a new disease and it took awhile for people to learn what we were dealing with. At least Trump’s instincts, like shutting off travel from China immediately, were correct, even while Biden and other Democrats were calling him a racist and a xenophobe for doing it.

Of course, Biden immediately cited the book to slam Trump because if there’s one thing we’ve learned about Joe Biden, it’s that he never waits to find out whether an accusation is true or not before he condemns someone for it. Exactly what you want in a guy who has his finger on the nuclear button.

But Woodward himself is also facing backlash, with questions like, “If you had evidence that Trump was downplaying a deadly airborne disease months ago, why did you wait until close the election and the release of your book to tell anyone?” I guess for the same reason that Democrats who now claim they would have taken it more seriously than Trump were denouncing him for overreacting while telling everyone to ignore it and come on down to Chinatown. Or as late as this summer, telling people that it was fine to ignore safety procedures and go to BLM protests.

As long as we’re playing 20/20 hindsight and blaming political opponents for deaths, here’s a MUST-READ article by Matt Margolis that blows away the laughable claim that if only Biden had been in charge, the pandemic wouldn’t have been so bad. No, it’s not about the H1N1 pandemic that happened under Obama/Biden and that only good luck and the grace of God kept from killing millions of Americans because of their lack of action. This is about the VA scandal. Remember that?

Did you know that more than 300,000 veterans died because of the long waiting lists for care at VA clinics under Obama/Biden, which is 120,000 more Americans than have died of the coronavirus nationwide? Did you know that the problem was improving until they took over, and then it got worse (processing times increased 40% from 2011 to 2013)? Did you know that people who caused the problem and falsified records to cover it up were not investigated and even got promoted while there were complaints of retaliation against whistleblowers who exposed it in 28 states? And this problem was definitely fixable, because when Donald Trump was elected, he FIXED IT!

I hope I don’t have to deal with fresh garbage deliveries by the media every day between now and the election. I think most people have figured out this game by now. At this late date, we’ve lived through this so many times already that nobody’s going to vote for the donkeys because their sheep in the media keep crying wolf.

Biden is a weak appeaser in dealing with China — Trump stands up to China with strength

Politicians like Biden have left cookies and warm milk out for the Chinese as if they were Santa Claus

September 9, 2020


The liberal media want you to believe that former Vice President Joe Biden would challenge Beijing if he is elected as president — but no amount of media spin can transform a serial China appeaser into a bold American leader.

According to a New York Times article published last week, Biden has taken a “journey” with respect to his position on China, adjusting his view of the communist regime over the course of his lengthy political career in Washington.

“As a United States senator, he spoke of transforming China through trade,” the Times article states. “As a presidential candidate two decades later, he denounces it as a ‘dictatorship.’” The article attempts to convince the reader that Biden has matured on foreign policy, and that he now has what it takes to stand up to Beijing after decades of rolling over for our rival.

Biden’s so-called “journey,” however, is more of a lengthy jog on a political treadmill — lots of motion, but going nowhere.

As the American people have learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, Biden couldn’t even bring himself to condemn the Chinese regime for its mishandling of the coronavirus outbreak. And Biden has even echoed Beijing’s propaganda criticizing President Trump’s emergency travel restrictions, which have helped save countless American lives, as being “xenophobic.”

“This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia — hysterical xenophobia — and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science,” Biden said Jan. 31.

Moreover, the Democratic presidential nominee has vowed to reverse President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the corrupt World Health Organization, ignoring the fact that the institution has played a key role in facilitating China’s coronavirus cover-up campaign.

In fact, the WHO publicly disseminated a Chinese study about the pathology of COVID-19 that falsely claimed the virus can’t be transmitted between humans. Why would America trade President Trump’s courage for Joe Biden’s capitulation to the communist dictatorship?

“Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China,” the health organization tweeted Jan. 14.

To make matters worse, Biden recently pledged to “reevaluate” President Trump’s strategic counter-tariffs on Chinese goods if he gets elected this November. The Trump policy is designed to correct Beijing’s years of dishonest trade practices that have stolen millions of jobs from American workers.

Biden doesn’t even comprehend the geopolitical threat China poses to the U.S. Just a year ago, the former vice president passionately insisted that the world’s second-largest economy is not “going to eat our lunch,” airily dismissing widely held concerns about the rise of the communist nation.

“They’re not bad folks, folks,” Biden said at the time. “They’re not competition for us."

Of course, The New York Times went out of its way to point out that Biden has labeled China a “dictatorship,” as though this obvious statement of fact proves that the Democratic presidential nominee has no illusions about the regime’s brutality. But pointing out China’s tyrannical tendencies and recognizing the foreign policy threat it poses are two very different things.

There are around 200 sovereign states in the world. Many of them are dictatorships that pose no challenge to the United States.

China, on the other hand, is determined to undermine America’s hegemony and fundamentally change the world order — and it’s well-positioned to achieve those aims if American leaders don’t assert our country’s interests.

Donald Trump has done just that since taking office, securing a historic Phase One trade deal with China that went a long way toward restoring parity to our trade relationship. We need to keep the pressure on until we finish the job. After years of being played as chumps by China under past administrations, President Trump has put America — and American workers — first.

The liberal media are desperately trying to redefine Biden as a leader who can challenge China — but erasing history is no easy feat. Beijing Biden does not have what it takes to stand up to our biggest geopolitical adversary, and his own actions during this election season show it.

President Trump has put a stop to the long-time swamp policy pushed by politicians like Joe Biden, who have left cookies and warm milk out for the Chinese as if they were Santa Claus when they were actually acting like burglars in the homes of America’s middle class.

Yesterday, I brought you what I consider to be THE MOST important story you’ll hear between now and the election: the plan to create election chaos and do whatever it takes –- riots, looting, military intervention –- to get Joe Biden inaugurated, regardless of the will of the voters. The plan is to organize a coup to take down the President and twist the scenario to make it look as though it’s actually the President trying to play “dictator” and bringing it about.

Last night, I went on Sean Hannity’s TV show, along with former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, to talk about one key element of the plan: the ease of voter fraud.

Ari noted some of the problems we’re going to have with mail-in ballots, even with absentee ballots. “Ballot harvesting is really the biggest problem out there,” he said, “because what it means is, it’s licensing people from the parties, and in particular the Democrat Party that does this, to go out and subject voters to possible intimidation.” They can collect votes from Republican areas and not turn them in, he explained, while turning in the ballots from Democrat areas. And that’s just one way to mess up the count. “There’s no accountability,” he said, “no tracing or tracking on these ballots once they’re collected.”

He noted another problem: states whose deadlines are much too close to Election Day to apply for an absentee ballot. “They won’t get it in time,” he said. “And then all the lawyers are going to be empowered to demand to count every vote, even the ones that came in after Election Day.”

I would add that even the Associated Press is now pointing out problems with absentee ballots. I doubt seriously they'd be doing this unless they thought it helped the Biden campaign.

"If ballots are rejected at the same rate as during this year’s primaries,” the AP story said, “up to three times as many voters in November could be disenfranchised in key battleground states when compared to the last Presidential election, according to an AP analysis of rejected ballots. It could be even more pronounced in some urban areas where Democratic votes are concentrated and ballot rejection rates trended higher during this year’s primaries.”

Ah, and there it is: “some urban areas where Democratic votes are concentrated.” The AP is referring to non-white areas, helping to set the stage for race-based disenfranchisement to be used as a pretext to mess with election results. The AP story places this squarely on the agenda. At the same time, TRUMP is being criticized for casting doubt on the accuracy of absentee and, especially, mail-in voting this fall. HE has to be the one blamed for the election chaos, especially if he wins the initial vote count.

This is going to be a mess, and that’s precisely what the Biden campaign wants, as they almost certainly have internal polling that shows better-than-expected results for Trump. The irony is, Trump is absolutely correct about the inaccuracy about mail-in vote counts and the ease with which the system can be gamed. He doesn’t want mail-in voting. He's old-school; he wants all the votes to count, you know, like in AMERICA.

That’s why he (like me) is encouraging voters to cast their ballots in person, not to mail them. He doesn’t want post-election chaos. It’s the Democrats who want it, and they'll make it happen no matter what they have to do. Heck, they’ve got people writing the checks who will PAY rioters to burn down cities.

By the way, Democrats have found something else to be outraged at President Trump about: his recent tongue-in-cheek comment to supporters about voting for him twice. They seriously accuse him of having broken the law for encouraging voters to cast more than one ballot. I think the main problem the left has might be that they just don’t have a sense of humor. They don’t “get” when he's kidding. Heck, they still think he was seriously telling Russia to find Hillary's emails.

That’s why it actually might be a good idea for the Left Coast to secede and take all those leftists with no sense of humor with them. They can burn their own cities down and listen to their unfunny late-night talk shows in their safe spaces while we get back to work and laugh at their stupidity.

Along those lines, I pointed out on HANNITY that the desire for chaos is being driven not by enthusiasm for Joe Biden, goodness knows, but just by hatred for Donald Trump. “They don’t care who gets elected,” I said, “as long as it isn’t Donald Trump.” And this time, it’s even worse than in past years, when maybe we were just worried about who was going to get the “cemetery” vote. Now, we have to worry about people getting more than one ballot and all the other problems.

As I’ve been saying, President Trump has to have an army of people to go vote, IN PERSON. “If the river is flooding, swim the river at flood stage,” I told Hannity.

He brought up another good point: we need poll watchers everywhere! And we’ll also need an army of LAWYERS. It’s sad that we need this, but we do. (Ari recalled the scenario in which Al Franken finally “won” the Senate race in Minnesota after Norm Coleman actually won the vote count on Election Day. As the recount progressed, 26 precincts ended up with more ballots cast than there were registered voters.)

Normally, I think that when it comes to lawyers, the fewer the better. But this time, bring on the lawyers! Reportedly, the Democrats have brought on board over 600 of them. So, CALLING ALL LAWYERS who are fair-minded and want to work for an accurate (as opposed to a partisan) vote count. We are going to need you. If I were a lawyer, I would be on board right now.

Left-wing groups such as are already organizing a day of “mass public unrest” after Election Day, just in case they don’t like the results (and I don’t think they’re going to). As we’ve said, they want to tie the election in knots and then BLAME TRUMP for it, even as they’re doing it themselves. Look at how they’re already trying to twist the narrative, including their threat of the West Coast seceding unless their demands are met. I say again, let ‘em go.

“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it.”

--- H. L. Mencken

About a week ago, I wrote to warn about what Democrats plan to do to go around the will of the voters should Trump win, even if his win is decisive. VOTE IN PERSON, I said, to make as sure as you possibly can that your vote will count, and be ready for anything after the votes start coming in. That’s especially true if your state is considered to be, even possibly, a “swing” state.

Democrats aren’t even bothering to be secretive about their plans; Madame Defarge herself (Hillary) says that UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should Biden concede. And the WASHINGTON POST ran an op-ed saying that only if Biden won in a landslide would there be no rioting and looting afterwards. It was like saying, “Vote for us, the looters and rioters, so your life won’t be destroyed by looting and rioting.”

Since I brought you that story, the threat has been clarified even more. What the left is trying to do right now is straight out of a George Orwell novel. Recall that in “1984,” the “Ministry of Truth” is actually in charge of just the opposite: maintaining a fiction.

An excellent piece by Michael Anton in THE AMERICAN MIND (thanks to Dan Bongino for calling attention to this) explains just how Democrats have been setting the stage for a coup in the case of Trump winning the Electoral College. This is a must-read.

Over the summer, Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) began laying the groundwork by suggesting Trump wouldn’t go quietly if he lost. Why, the military might have to save us from him. Pieces like Zachary Cohen’s for CNN first tried to cast doubt on Trump’s fitness for office, asking “Can military commanders refuse an order from Trump?” Cohen reassured his frightened readers that with the “layers of safeguards” we have, the President can’t unilaterally deploy a disproportionate nuclear attack. I’ll provide the link to this ridiculous commentary, but read it only if you’re absolutely sure you can keep your head from exploding.

Here’s another completely crazy one, by a couple of retired Army officers wanting to further the scenario of Trump playing “dictator” and refusing to leave the White House if he loses. This is based on nothing other than Trump warning about mail-in ballots and election fraud. (News flash: Trump is absolutely right about mail-in ballots and election fraud. Why do you think Democrats are pushing so hard for mail-in voting? It’s so they can discredit the results if Trump wins, and also to set the stage for chaos.) People actually read this piece of drivel, and I’m sure some took it very seriously.

Then there was the WAPO story we talked about last week: John Podesta’s George Soros-funded “war games” seminar at which about 100 Democrat leaders and some anti-Trump Republicans –- so they could use the word “bipartisan” –- looked at all the possible election scenarios. (Here’s the Orwellian part: this was called “the Transition Integrity Project.”) In the scenario of Trump clearly winning, Podesta, playing the role of Biden, refused to concede (just as Hillary has advised), pressured even states won by Trump to send a Democrat slate of electors to the Electoral College, and “trusted the military to take care of the rest.” In other words, vote for Trump and bring on the coup.

What would follow a Trump win, they said, would be “a street fight, not a legal battle.” Recall that we GOT a legal battle in the aftermath of the George W. Bush/Al Gore “hanging chad” election, with Democrats using the legal dispute forever after to claim that Bush wasn’t a legitimate President. That mess will look like a picnic in the park compared to 2020 if Trump wins, they’re warning. This time, it’s gonna get rough.

And, of course, it will be all Trump’s fault.

So the second part of the plan is to make sure we think it IS all Trump’s fault. The AMERICAN MIND piece goes on to explain why the Democrats have chosen to speak so freely for months about the likely need for an anti-Trump coup. That one’s easy: they’ve got to get the idea of a coup out there –- A COUP CAUSED BY TRUMP –- with the threat that we’ll have “a repeat of this summer, only much, much bigger.” Then, when the time comes, “crank the propaganda to eardrum-shattering decibels and fill the streets of every major city with ‘protesters.’ Shut down the country and allow only one message to be heard: ‘Trump must go.’” And you know the media will do it, blaming Trump for the whole mess.

So, how does the Trump administration prepare for a clear electoral win in which Biden won't concede, when Democrats are already busy twisting the story into the opposite of that? Maybe the Republicans need to play out their own “war game” scenario. In case there is a coup, they also need a clear idea of who is on their side. And the President needs ways to communicate with the American people that can go around most of the major media. (Tweets won’t do it; he’ll be banned, of course.)

Trump had better be ready, and we need to be warning about this from now till Election Day. I believe, just as I did in 2016, that Trump will win. It’ll have to be a landslide to overcome the inevitable mail-in ballot fraud, but he will win. I just don’t believe that THAT many Americans have utterly lost their minds. Democrats will insist Biden really won and that any “coup” is Trump’s fault, but it’s a lie they’ve been setting up for months.

I’ll leave you with an opinion piece about this that is guaranteed not to make your head explode, by Jonathan Tobin in the NEW YORK POST. But take heed: it is very much a warning.

We hear a lot of talk from politicians about values…but do we truly value work and the people who do it?

Companies should pay employees as generously as they can, because good workers have worth. This is why you should always be skeptical of any politician who claims to “care” about workers, but also wants to raise taxes, both on workers and businesses. When taxes are high, it’s a sign that the government disrespects the worker by believing that what it will do with their salary is better than what the person who earned it will do. When we see employees as having worth, we see their work as valuable. That’s the value of work. I believe YOU are valuable and therefore what you DO has value.

I think a lot of politicians don’t understand that a job is more than just a way to put bread on the table. From man’s beginnings as recorded in the book of Genesis, we were hard-wired for labor. God told us to earn our bread by the sweat of our brow. It’s natural for us to want to prove our value by producing.

From the time we are children, we imitate our parents in their work. It’s part of our DNA to want to be grown up, and one sure way to feel grown up is to work. That’s why the loss of a job is far, far more than an economic setback. It’s de-humanizing to want to be productive and not be able. There is pride and dignity in sitting down to a meal that your work provided.

The CDC studied suicide rates since 1928 and found that they mirrored the economy. Suicides took a big uptick during the Great Depression. They plunged during World War II, and spiked again in the recessions of the mid-70’s and early 80’s. Suicides dropped to their lowest levels ever in the year 2000, when the tech boom dropped unemployment to just 4 percent. But after the dot-com bubble burst, America's suicide rate began steadily climbing. Recently, because of the endless shutdowns forcing people not to be able to go back to work, we’re seeing a new spike in suicides.

It’s a stark reminder that employment is more than an economic issue. Good jobs and rewarding labor save lives by making us feel that we're valued and needed. A government handout might provide bare sustenance, but it doesn’t feed the soul. It only demoralizes us.

For six decades, Labor Day meant an American tradition: the Jerry Lewis Labor Day Telethon for the Muscular Dystrophy Association. MDA ended its association with Lewis in 2010, although the telethon continued in ever-shorter form until its final broadcast in 2014. But the association of Labor Day with helping the MDA continues. Some local areas still host telethons, and firefighters across America are out this holiday weekend at intersections, collecting cash for their “Fill the Boot” drive. If you see them, I hope you’ll dig into your pocket and give generously.

And the national organization this year is bringing back the Telethon in a new “COVID-19/Zoom”-friendly way. You can learn more and donate directly at their website:

Although Jerry Lewis passed away a few years ago at 91, active right up until the end, I’m sure that he would want you to continue giving generously and remember that it’s about helping the kids. In fact, while Jerry made the telethon the success that it became, he wasn’t the one who started it all rolling. He gave credit for sparking his six-decade mission to wipe out muscular dystrophy to another man -- a man you’ve probably never heard of. Jerry kept the story secret for many years, until the publication of his memoir, “Jerry Lewis in Person.”

Jerry recalled that it was in 1948. He was 22, and he and Dean Martin were the hottest comedy team in show business. His good friend and press agent, Jack Keller, had helped make them stars, but never requested a single thing for himself -- until one day, he came to Jerry and begged a favor. He had a friend who was in trouble and asked if Jerry would talk to him. His name was Paul Cohen. He’d had MD since childhood, and he’d started a group called the Muscular Dystrophy Association to fight it. They had a few patients, their parents and nothing much else.

By chance, Jerry knew someone whose nephew had had MD. He said he’d watched helplessly as that child had withered like a leaf in the winter, and the effect of seeing that would never leave his mind until a cure was found. So he agreed to meet with the handful of doctors who knew anything about MD at the time. They weren’t encouraging. They warned him that research was in the Dark Ages. Nobody even knew what caused MD, and no known medicines helped. It was like fighting an invisible killer. But that just made Jerry more determined to take it on.

He and Dean began hosting fundraisers…until one night, Jerry jokingly ad-libbed at the end of their TV show that viewers should each send in two dollars. He was stunned when over $2,000 arrived in the mail. And that’s when it hit him: the power of television to raise money for charity. So in 1951, Jack Keller put together a special hosted by Dean and Jerry. It aired on just one station and raised $68,000 (over $671,000 in today’s dollars), and the MDA telethon was off and running.

Over the next six decades, Jerry Lewis’ tireless work on his Labor Day telethons helped raised well over a billion dollars to fight neuromuscular diseases and help the victims and their families. He also inspired millions of Americans to join in the effort. That’s why so many Americans will always associate him with Labor Day.

But let’s also salute an unsung hero. If you think one person can’t make a difference, remember that the Labor Day tradition that raised over a billion dollars to help children with MD started because a man you’d never heard of, Jack Keller…for the first time in his life…asked someone for a favor. And as Jerry observed, it was no surprise to him that the favor was a request to help someone else.

So when you see a firefighter out collecting for MDA, doing his or her bit to help the kids, please do your bit and toss something into the boot. You'd be amazed how all those individual efforts add up.

Labor Day

September 7, 2020

Today is Labor Day, which is sometimes jokingly described as the day when Americans honor workers by taking the day off work. I hope you enjoy the holiday with your family, and enjoy this special Labor Day edition of my newsletter.

These days, it’s easy for free-market conservatives to distrust labor unions because of their corrupt leaders or one-sided politics. For instance, Joe Biden wants to take the much-hated AB-5 law that was destroying California’s gig economy nationwide because that would greatly empower labor unions while harming individual workers who have benefited from the freedoms offered by new innovative technologies to create their own jobs and pick their working hours.

But Labor Day reminds us of that historic era when unions were more interested in protecting workers than in protecting the jobs of union bosses and Democrats. Labor Day observances unofficially began around the turn of the 20th century as a celebration of the union movement, which was fighting truly dangerous and exploitative working conditions, not to mention violent strike-busting tactics. Those kinds of conditions are not beneficial to labor or management.

Workers who get good pay, reasonable hours and a safe workplace are motivated to work harder and make their employers profitable. America’s prosperity and world leader status were the result of shared benefits between labor and management. Recruiting good employees, treating them well, and giving them a stake in the outcome is good business. When labor and management are partners, everyone wins: stockholders, management, workers, and most importantly, consumers.

Before the Chinese unleashed a virus that knocked the wind out of our economy, President Trump wasn't just helping to bring back jobs, but the strong job market and record low unemployment meant companies had to offer higher pay and more benefits to attract good workers. That's how getting government out of the way of job creation benefits everyone. It can come back just as quickly, if the voters don't fall for lies from the proponents of big government and vote against their best interests.

So business owners, value your workers. Workers, treat management as your partner in success. And slackers, goldbricks and goof-offs, please go work for a company that’s already on the decline, so you can just go down together.

Democrat Intentions

September 3, 2020


It was awfully sporting of a Democratic data and analytics firm to tell us in advance how the Democrats plan to steal the Presidential election.

According to them, Trump may “appear” to have won on Election night, even by a landslide. But that will just be a “red mirage,” because so many Democrats will vote by mail that days later, the race will shift to Biden.

That’s the innocent-sounding version. Those of a more suspicious nature might read it as “We’ll find out on Election night how many bogus mail-in ballots we’ll need to manufacture to overcome Trump’s lead. Then if anyone questions those ballots, we’ll accuse the Republicans of trying to ‘suppress the minority vote” and send our BLM/Antifa shock troops out to burn down cities unless Trump concedes and hands over the White House.”

Again, if you think this can’t happen, I’ll refer to you this article that just appeared in the New York Post, in which a Dem operative described how easy it is to steal elections and how he’s been rigging them in the New Jersey area for years.

I hope the RNC is making plans to fight this, since it’s been reported that the Democrats have already lined up at least 600 lawyers to challenge the vote. This could be an open war, so our side had better be prepared.

Of course, the best way to insure this doesn’t happen is to vote in massive numbers, far beyond the potential “margin of fraud.” Go vote in person (not by mail-in ballots that can be intercepted) and take everyone who would vote GOP with you.

I must be getting old: I remember when people won elections by espousing policies that the majority of people agreed with. I even recall when one Democratic Presidential candidate called it appalling and un-American to refuse to accept the results of a Presidential election – before she went on to spend the next four years refusing to accept the results of the Presidential election.


According to Joe Biden, or whoever is putting words on his prompter these days, President Trump is to blame for fomenting all the violence in cities that have been run 100% by Democrats since Joe Biden was in knee pants. This statement isn’t so much a political argument as it is an IQ test. After all, as this column reminds us, the Democrats completely ignored all the riots (sorry: “peaceful protests”) throughout their convention. If they really believed Trump was responsible for them, wouldn’t they have hammered him for that every night? They certainly blamed him for everything else, from the Chinese virus to the heartbreak of psoriasis.

So just to remind us who has really been “resisting” the peaceful transfer of power since 2016, here’s a compilation video of top leftwing politicians and media figures urging political violence and civil unrest in the streets. (Warning: contains disturbing violent imagery that even CNN would have a hard time describing as “mostly peaceful.)

And just to hammer home what’s actually happening and who’s behind it, here’s Sen. Rand Paul making it crystal clear.

Remember how President Trump took so much heat for saying that if you remove all the Confederate monuments, the “protesters” would just move on to demanding that monuments to Washington, Jefferson and other Founders be torn down? That crazy bad orange man! Well, he was right, of course, and he might not even have realized how right he was.

Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser appointed a committee to look into “problematic” monuments in DC, and that confederacy of dunces has issued its report. Surprise! They recommend removing, relocating or “contextualizing” the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, statues of Ben Franklin, Andrew Jackson and other figures, and more.

These are the same people who went ballistic at Melania Trump for disrespecting American history by allegedly removing a couple of cherry trees from the Rose Garden that were never there to begin with. But they want to tear down the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial because Washington should “only honor those individuals who exemplified those values such as equity, opportunity and diversity that DC residents hold dear.” Yep, none of those DC residents got anything from the people who won the American Revolution and wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Remember this the next time Democrats argue that DC should be made a state and granted two Senators. The place seems incapable even of electing a mayor who isn’t a complete embarrassment.

Biden Gets On The Trump Train

September 3, 2020

I was on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show last night, talking about how, at his advanced age, Joe Biden has only now realized that protesting and rioting are not the same thing. And no, people weren’t looting the Louis Vuitton store because they needed a loaf of bread. You can see the video here.

The question put before us on the show was, “Is Joe Biden plagiarizing the Trump campaign?” Well, you go with your strengths, and plagiarism was always Joe’s chief strength. After months of making excuses for rioters and looters, and hosting an entire convention where they weren’t even mentioned, suddenly, the Democrats noticed the polls were cratering (Don Lemon let the cat out of the bag: they didn’t care at all about the victims of the riots; it only became a serious problem when it started hurting their election chances.) And suddenly, Joe Biden denounced the violence, just as Trump has been doing all along because it was obviously the right thing to do.

But this is hardly the first or only example of Biden following Trump (since the Democrats have jettisoned the “Me, Too” movement, maybe this will give “me, too” a new meaning.) Biden’s entire plan for dealing with COVID-19 is mostly a lot of stuff that Trump’s already done, back when it was timely enough to actually help. Biden wasn’t going to campaign until after Labor Day until Trump mocked him for hiding (“Ten days is an eternity in Trumpville!”), and suddenly, Joe comes out and makes a speech. Biden wasn’t going to go to Kenosha, but Trump went, and now Biden is going.

It’s an interesting new definition of “leadership”: doing whatever Trump does first.

Biden will be in Kenosha today, but I think that may prove to be a strategic blunder. We all saw the photos of Trump talking to devastated business owners in the rubble of their former businesses. How is it going to look for Joe to stand in the same setting and try to ooze “empathy” when everyone knows he and his Party have spent the past weeks standing by, letting it happen and denying it even existed? If I were one of those business owners, I would definitely ask him why he employs 13 campaign staffers who donated to a fund to bail out the people who burned down and looted my business.

One reason why the upcoming election is so critically important is that Trump is still the only one who has both the will and the power to drain the swamp. And new evidence shows that the swamp, particularly the vestiges of Hillary Clinton’s State Department, is deeper and more fetid than we knew. Here’s John Solomon’s latest report.

Do you remember that cast of characters from the State Department –-- specifically, the U.S. Embassy in Kiev –- who came in to testify during those laughable fake impeachment hearings last winter, based on a falsified “whistleblower” complaint about Trump’s phone call with the president of Ukraine? Remember Fiona Hill, Marie Yovanovich and that group? If so, then you won’t be surprised at all to hear from Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton that newly-uncovered documents show that embassy officials set up what appears to have been an “enemies list” to help illegally monitor and report on the social media postings of President Trump’s family, his lawyer, and journalists perceived as Trump-friendly.

"The State Department hid these smoking-gun documents for months,” Fitton said.

Thanks again to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit from Judicial Watch, we know that Solomon himself was one of the ones targeted; along with Fitton; Donald Trump, Jr.; the President’s personal attorney and former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani; FOX News personalities Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Sara Carter, Dan Bongino and Lou Dobbs; One America News personality Jack Posobiec; radio host and former Trump White House adviser Sebastian Gorka; and more for a total of 13 Americans.

We learn from the documents that they were using search terms to find out specifically what was being written about Ambassador Yovanovich, George Soros (!!!), and Joe Biden and Burisma Holdings, the corrupt Ukrainian gas company that had put Biden’s son Hunter on its board and paid him handsomely for doing nothing but allowing the use of his name “Biden” on corporate documents.

Here’s a sample communication from former deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent, this one sent on March 27, 2019: “Key thing is to get up to ramming speed from the get-go.” His enthusiastic discussion of the social media monitoring effort seems to have been prompted by John Solomon’s early stories about the embassy’s activities concerning Biden and Ukrainian prosecutors. (This was back when Solomon was reporting for THE HILL; he’d also been on FOX News with these stories. We commented on many such reports at the time.)

Some of the names are still redacted. It would be nice to know who wrote this to Yovanovich, as it seems pretty sneaky: “...I just wanted you to be aware as we are really trying to help them and recognize how hard everyone is working in this especially trying time. The good news is our social media team back here is now helping to provide them with the reports they want when Kyiv is asleep/offline –- through existing PD tools –- so this should greatly help.”

Help WHOM? Who is "them"? The Bidens? And what “existing PD tools” are they using, apparently surreptitiously?

On May 15, 2019, another name in the conversation was redacted, a Digital Media associate for EUR/PD Keniya-Trusant Group apparently offering legal advice, letting them know they had run afoul of the Privacy Act of 1974: “Going to chime in here,” REDACTED said. “So regarding the influencers [Hannity, etc], there are some legal implications of making a list of Facebook influencers or Twitter influencers since they are technically private citizens (even though they’re publicly on the internet) and we cannot compile them into a list and monitor what they are saying using a third-party application without their knowledge. To see what they’re saying, you unfortunately need to use the old school way and manually go to their feeds and view that way. Cumbersome but it’s in compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974.”

I can hear them whining now (no need to “monitor” them): Ah, so our targets are TECHNICALLY private citizens. What an inconvenience –- who knew? Gosh, it’s SO much less cumbersome for us to monitor what they’re saying when we can put them on a list and search for key words. That way, we can be sure and see every word they say about George Soros.

Solomon has talked with some officials who have seen the unredacted memos, and they say some of the redactions offer “additional analysis of the legal issues surrounding the monitoring that occurred.”

I’ll bet they do. One official told Solomon that “Congress may be entitled to see more about the nature of the concerns than was publicly released.” Not to worry about that, of course, as long as Congress is controlled by Democrats, who will bury all of it. That’s one reason why it’s so important for Republicans to gain control of the House again.

Communications employees knew good and well that they weren’t supposed to do things like this. They wouldn’t need some outside legal adviser to tell them about the Privacy Act of 1974. But this is just one of the ways the anti-Trump swamp dwellers were getting their jollies at the State Department outpost in Ukraine in 2019.

If you have some time to go through the 300 pages of still-partially redacted communications, here is the pdf. If anything, it’ll tell you these swamp rats at the State Department had WAY too much time on their hands and that the last thing they cared about was anybody’s rights, particularly if their "enemies" were sympathetic to President Trump. Trump needs four more years to do the serious swamp-draining you know he intends to do, at the State Department and elsewhere.