Advertisement

Yesterday, we had one word to say about President Biden’s “Jan. 6” commemorative speech: DISGRACEFUL. (Well, it was the one printable word we had.) Honestly, it was just too nauseating to write about right then, but perhaps it’ll be a bit less gag-inducing now, with a little distance put between us and it.

Biden repeatedly lied in his roughly 25-minute speech from the hallowed Statuary Hall inside the Capitol complex.

“For the first time in our history,” he lied, “a President had not just lost an election, but tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.” Trump did no such thing and, in fact, was working within the process laid out in the Constitution. His rally was peaceful –- he TOLD participants to be peaceful –- and as such it was an expression of his constitutional right to peacefully protest. Biden implied in his speech that Trump had wanted his supporters to breach the Capitol, to physically prevent the vote from being certified, and had even personally engineered this. That is a lie.

He said Trump had sat in the White House dining room, “doing nothing for hours” with “the nation’s Capitol under siege” and the mob “hunted down members of Congress.” A timeline has been established that shows this, too, is a detestable lie.

Biden went on to lie about the election, too, and its aftermath. As Sophie Mann reports in Just The News, “Biden said there is no evidence, anywhere, to suggest that the results of the election were altered, flawed or in any way untrustworthy.” That claim is false, and recent polling shows most Americans don’t believe it. In fact, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest interference in a variety of creative ways. Was the election stolen outright, by strategically rigging the outcome in carefully targeted locations? We can’t say until enormous questions are answered and essential materials are provided to auditors. The lack of transparency is in itself suspect.

https://justthenews.com/government/white-house/anniversary-january-6-biden-says-trump-tried-prevent-peaceful-transfer-power

Biden didn’t hesitate to get personal about his predecessor, either, and that’s when the speech became shamefully unpresidential. Trump, he said, is someone who “values power over principle.” By refusing to accept the results of the election, he said, Trump is rejecting “the will of the people.” On the contrary, Trump believes the will of the people has been thwarted by those who would get into the White House by hook or by crook.

This pathetic speech was Biden’s own attempt to hold onto power as his presidency is clearly failing. A new Rasmussen poll of likely voters shows that only 28 percent think Biden will be re-elected. Another 21 percent think he’ll resign before the next election. And a plurality of 38 percent think he’ll lose to the Republican candidate. As The New York Times wrote in December, “On top of concerns about Biden’s age and general unpopularity, there is an overarching fear among Democrats of the possibility of a Trump comeback --- and a determination that the party must run a strong candidate to head it off.” Could there BE a weaker candidate for re-election than Joe Biden?

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/01/06/only-28-percent-voters-think-biden-will-be-reelected/

Though the histrionics we saw yesterday seem ridiculously out of proportion to what actually happened (especially when that is compared to many months of BLM/Antifa violence), Glenn Greenwald warns that the Democrat Party and “the dominant wing of the U.S. corporate media” will play this for all it’s worth. “The orgy of psychodrama today was so much worse and more pathetic than I expected --- and I expected it to be extremely bad and pathetic,” he writes. And later, “Far too many centers of political and economic power benefit from an exaggerated and even false narrative about January 6 to expect it ever to end.”

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-histrionics-and-melodrama-around

The only thing I can think of that might cause this, if not to end, to at least recede a bit, is the revelation that protesters were “helped” past the barricades and into the Capitol that day, a scenario that seems more plausible all the time. We’ve brought you the excellent National File reporting on that, and here’s another report from Red State that raises more questions...

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/01/06/whatever-happened-to-alleged-capitol-rioter-john-sullivan-n502773

If that’s what happened, it doesn’t excuse Trump supporters for playing along on an extremely ill-advised adventure, but it certainly adds a whole new dimension to the story. One thing Biden never mentioned in his speech was the fact that Trump offered thousands of National Guard troops to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that day –- you know, to keep things peaceful and under control –- and Pelosi, who was in charge of security, turned him down. No, he never said a word about that.

You get what you pay for

January 7, 2022

You get what you pay for, in this case racial divisions and spiraling crime rates. And someone paid plenty to buy that for America.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/ari-j-kaufman/2022/01/05/new-york-times-offers-stunning-report-on-left-wing-racial-fundraising-n1547195

Thomas Edsall of the New York Times (!) just published an investigative report called “The Law of Unintended Political Consequences Strikes Again” that tallies up the amount of money that “progressive” elites and philanthropic entitles showered onto divisive, racial groups after the killing of George Floyd. The total was nearly $25 billion (yes, “billion” with a “b.”)

It’s the largest outpouring of “philanthropy” ever spent on a single cause in such a short time, probably by a factor of 10. And aside from vastly enriching a lot of so-called socialists and grifters, it’s also torn the country apart, aggravated racial divisions and gotten a lot of criminals released (I question whether those were unintended consequences.) It's also gotten a lot of innocent people killed, many of them black (murder victims in blue cities are disproportionately black, and black neighborhoods are suffering the most from reducing the police presence there.) It’s also helped fund the most radical left elements of the Democratic Party, pushing the party so far to the left that it’s likely about to get wiped out in the next elections.

So at least something good may eventually come of all the money that was parted from all those fools.

PS - Speaking of voter backlash and unintended consequences, look at what blue state COVID policies are doing to Florida voter registration. Looks like these refugees don't need to be reminded not to vote for the same policies that drove them out of blue states.

https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2022/01/05/jaw-dropping-gains-for-gop-in-florida-as-covid-refugees-register-red-n1547078

Dr. Robert Malone, one of the inventors of the mRNA technology used in COVID vaccines, says that if you believe in God, the Omicron variant looks like a Christmas present. He said it’s so infectious, it’s blowing right past all the vaccines, but so mild that to his count, it’s caused only 10 deaths worldwide, and is spreading natural immunity to everyone who gets it. Malone said it’s acting like the kind of vaccine scientists might design on purpose, and “This is about as good as we could possibly want right now in terms of outcomes.”

https://www.westernjournal.com/good-news-mrna-scientist-says-omicron-looks-like-something-vaccinologist-design-purpose/

What a hopeful, positive message about a possible end to all this pandemic fear and paranoia. No wonder he was banned from Twitter.

No, I’m just being facetious. Here’s what actually got him banned from Twitter.

https://www.visiontimes.com/2021/12/31/robert-malone-twitter-ban-pfizer-clinical-trial.html

A reader writes:

Hi, Gov. Huckabee. Thank you for your daily newsletter. Regarding Jan. 6, which was an unfortunate event, I saw a clip of [Texas] Sen. Ted Cruz referring to this as a "terrorist attack," which to my mind would equate it with Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11, which is nonsense. I know Democrats are committed to keeping Jan. 6 alive as the worst day in American history, but when Republicans start jumping on that bandwagon, I get greatly concerned, especially someone like Cruz who should not be engaging in exaggerated rhetoric. (Could it be he is planning on running for President in 2024 as a challenge to Donald Trump?) God bless.

Marilyn M.

………….

Thanks for writing, Marilyn. Only Sen. Cruz knows what he thought he personally had to gain by describing the rioters of Jan. 6 as “terrorists,” but it must have been something. We’d expect to hear this from, say, Liz Cheney, but whatever is going in Cruz’s mind right now is baffling. Of course it was nonsense –- we’ve shown with hard facts over just the past couple of days how ludicrous it is to compare the Capitol Hill riot with a real terrorist attack such as 9/11 –- and Cruz had to KNOW it was nonsense before the words left his mouth. He said it anyway, very deliberately, fully aware that it was ludicrous, so there must be some method to his madness.

But madness it is.

Cruz went on Tucker Carlson’s show Thursday night to try to help himself, and I’m being charitable when I say that it did not go well. Tucker didn't buy his explanation that he’d been “sloppy” and made a mistake with his poor choice of words, because Tucker knows that master-debater Cruz doesn’t EVER choose words sloppily. Also, this isn’t even the first time Cruz has used the word “terrorist” in this context; nearly a year ago, he called the incident “a terrorist attack” and “an assault on the citadel of democracy,” which, frankly, sounds more like something Chuck Schumer would say. So, to his credit, Tucker didn’t let Cruz get away with it.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/groveling-ted-cruz-fails-to-convince-tucker-carlson-that-calling-jan-6-a-violent-terrorist-attack-was-a-sloppy-mistake?

“I don’t believe you used that word accidentally,” Tucker told him. Cruz then tried to walk it back by saying that’s the term he uses for people who attack police. Carlson still didn’t let him off the hook, noting that even those charged with assaulting officers are not actual terrorists and that no one associated with this event has been charged with terrorism. (Note: nobody’s been charged with insurrection, either.)

“Why did you use that word?” Tucker asked Cruz. “You’re playing into the other side’s characterization.”

Tucker's right --- that’s exactly what he was doing, and the "why" is a real head-scratcher. If it’s true he’s planning to run for President in 2024 and assumes he'll likely be challenging Trump in the primary, this has got to be the worst way to go about it. It makes him look bad, it fractures the GOP, and, perhaps most of all, it plays into the disgusting lie that’s become the new fake anti-Trump mantra to replace the old fake anti-Trump mantra, which is to say, “Russia Russia Russia!!”

As it is, whether or not Trump is the candidate –- we know, of course, that anyone else will be tarred as a proxy for Trump –- we’re going to hear, day in and day out until Election Day '24, the lie that Trump supporters are terrorists and a threat to “our democracy,” And that leads right into our next story...

Scott Adams, best known as the creator of the DILBERT cartoon strip but also a bestselling author, trained hypnotist and professional prognosticator who predicted (like us!) Trump would win in 2016, made some interesting points about January 6 in his Thursday podcast (Episode 1615) of “Coffee With Scott Adams.” Worth quoting at length, so we will:

“...There were a ton of people there who didn’t even know they were breaking the law because the fences were down before they got there. They were just...protesting. So if you’ve got a President who is presuming without the benefit of a trial that these people were there for insurrection, you have put the assumption of guilt on citizens from the highest office in the land. The highest office in the land, the President, just put the assumption of guilt on a bunch of people --- some of ‘em were guilty, some, some. But most of them, not so much. Most of them were trying to do what they thought was preserving democracy, by postponing the certification until some audits could get done.

“Now, of course, when the fake news reports about it, they act like the idea was that they’d just take over and change the government. No demand like that ever happened. The only demand was, ‘Can you give us a few days to audit some suspicious stuff. That is PROTECTING the republic, at least in the minds of the people there.”

Also this: “We’re giving the states the presumption of innocence when they’re not giving us an auditable election. That’s backwards. The presumption has to be that the election is corrupt if you can’t audit it. That doesn’t mean it is...[but] the government has to prove they’re not guilty. They’ve gotta open the books.”

Darn right.

...............................

Last but certainly not least, this: “...You are in the middle of a massive brainwashing operation. I don’t know the degree to which it is organized, but it looks organized. It looks as if the whole January 6 thing is to keep Trump out of office and to keep Trump supporters and Republicans in general demonized by keeping that story in your head. Because it creates the situation where Democrats can do anything to Republicans, ‘cause dammit, those Republicans deserve it --- look at them and their insurrections!”

First AOC, now Rep. Eric Swalwell is the latest far-left Democrat from a locked-down blue state to go straight from blaming the pandemic on Republicans to being caught vacationing maskless in the reviled free state of Florida.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/eric-swalwell-spotted-maskless-mandate-free-florida

This hypocrisy is as blatant as it is unsurprising to anyone who follows these people closely. But many Americans don’t follow politics all that closely (lucky them), and are shocked that anyone could be such obvious hypocrites.

Kurt Schlichter had a great comment in a subscriber-only article at Townhall.com about why merely pointing out their hypocrisy isn’t enough:

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2022/01/05/leftists-love-groveling-n2601345

“Let’s not fool ourselves that they will somehow be shamed into suffering the same inconveniences (as) their lessers, i.e., everyone else. They won’t. At some level, they want us peasants to see that they are beyond the rules they make for mere mortals. To whine about it for the sake of whining about it is to practice helplessness…When we point out their hypocrisy, we need to have a purpose, and that purpose is to wake up everyone else. Hypocrisy means nothing to us because we already know these are bad people. But it is powerful juju when it comes to people who have yet to gobble the red-pill and see the members of our garbage ruling caste for (what) they are.”

Friday afternoon, the Supreme Court heard arguments for blocking or upholding the Biden/OSHA vaccine mandate on businesses and health care workers. The conservative Justices seemed open to the idea that states have the power to impose such mandates in a health emergency, but were skeptical that an unelected federal agency does. They seemed to think that such a sweeping and destructive edict, one that is decimating businesses at a time when they’re already struggling with worker shortages and supply chain disruptions, should at least have to come from Congress. The plaintiffs’ attorney pointed out that the Post Office is seeking a waiver from the mandate because it will make it so hard to deliver the mail, proving that not even the government can comply with its own mandate.

Possibly the most shocking part of the oral arguments, however, was not that the liberal Justices seemed open to a dictatorship of unelected federal bureaucrats (big surprise), but just how confused about the law and how filled with stunning misinformation they were.

Justice Sotomayor seemed especially clueless, admitting to not understanding the distinction between state and federal powers (Gorsuch had to explain it.)

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/justice-sotomayor-claims-not-to-understand-the-distinction-between-state-and-federal-powers/Supreme

But Sotomayor also spewed a number of false COVID claims that would get her banned from Twitter for life if she were a conservative pundit. Among them: that the vaccines prevent disease and transmission in the workplace, that Omicron is just as deadly as Delta, and that there are over 100,000 children in the hospital with severe COVID, many on ventilators (there are currently 3,342 children nationwide in hospitals who’ve tested positive for COVID, and most are incidental to the real reason they’re there.)

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/01/07/sonia-sotomayor-loses-her-ever-loving-mind-at-oral-arguments-over-bidens-vaccine-mandate-n503133

Even that stunning array of misinformation takes a back seat to Justice Breyer, who seemed to think that the OSHA mandate would block 100% of all new COVID cases. He also said hospitals are at near-capacity (they’re slightly above average capacity), and most jaw-dropping of all, that yesterday, there were 750 million new cases of COVID in America. He later corrected himself to 750,000, which is good, since 750 million is more than twice the entire US population, so every American would have had to get COVID twice in one day. Wow, that Omicron variant really is transmissible!

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/01/07/it-wasnt-just-sotomayor-breyer-was-in-fantasyland-as-well-on-vaccine-mandate-n503226

When you consider that the liberals on the court are from the same background, social circles and mindset as the liberals who came up with this policy, the odds that it’s intelligent, well-reasoned, based on facts and consistent with the law and the Constitution seem lower than Kamala Harris’ approval rating.