Over the past few years, the Democratic Party has allowed itself to be taken over by a far-left fringe that operates almost entirely on emotions. That’s why their stances on various issues have no intellectual consistency: their principles shift radically, depending on whatever it is they want at the moment. Because of this, they’ve destroyed many of their own arguments. When they bring up some well-worn justification for whatever issue they’re defending, it’s now easy to throw one of their other stances at them that completely negates it.

For instance, all of a sudden, all they care about is the right to abortion. They think this will be a winning issue with women voters, so they’re using the old trope of Republicans waging a “war on women” and wanting to take away a “woman’s right to choose!” But hold on: just last week, weren’t these same people telling us that men could get pregnant? A month ago, their Supreme Court nominee claimed not even to be able to define what a “woman” is. And in an attempt to attract “trans” money (there aren’t that many trans votes), they’ve been waging their own war on women by forcing them to compete in sports against men who “identify” as women and are twice their size.

They can’t chant, “My body, my choice!” anymore and claim to be defending body autonomy after forcing people to wear face masks and inject their bodies with a vaccine they objected to, on threat of losing their jobs and their civil rights. Barack Obama just declared that “there are limits to how much the government can encroach on our personal lives,” apparently forgetting that his Party wants to encroach on everything from our vaccine decisions to our social media posts to our free speech rights to where we’re allowed to pray.

They excoriated anyone who didn’t mouth allegiance to Black Lives Matter and put the BLM logo on their social media pages. But how can they say, “Black lives matter,” when they’re defending legalized abortion? Roe v. Wade ushered in a veritable genocide of black babies, with black victims far out of proportion to their population numbers.

The left’s favorite writer of historical fiction, “1619 Project” creator Nikole Hannah-Jones, predictably tweeted that the pro-life movement started as a pro-segregationist movement, and tried to paint abortion opponents as racist. But I didn’t show my belief that black lives matter by giving money to racially divisive hustlers to blow it on mansions. I defended black lives by opposing the actual destruction of millions of black lives, as well as babies of all other races, because I believe (more heresy!) that all lives matter.

The most laughable of all their unthinking clichés that I’m hearing everywhere now is the claim that overturning Roe v. Wade is an assault on “our democracy.” They keep using that word, but I don’t think they know what it means. The Justices in Roe took the right to decide abortion policy away from the voters. Returning that decision to the voters of the individual states would restore democracy.

If you want a quote from someone who really has no use for democracy, try this: “I’m not prepared to leave that (abortion laws) to the whims of the public at the moment.” – President Joe Biden.

Glenn Greenwald has a great Substack primer for liberals on the history and purpose of the Supreme Court. Spoiler alert: it’s not to ensure that majorities (or people who scream the loudest) get whatever they want. On the contrary, it’s to prevent majorities from passing laws that violate the Constitution.

Greenwald notes that leftwing activist Waleed Shahid tweeted a quote from Lincoln, that “if the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, [then] the people will have ceased to be their own rulers.” He cluelessly failed to realize that that’s the exact argument we on the pro-life side have been making against Roe for half a century.

He also includes a stunningly oblivious quote from’s Ian Millhiser, claiming that if the Supreme Court overturns Roe, it will mean “five unelected aristocrats” acted “undemocratically” to decide the legality of abortion. As Greenwald asks, “Who do they think decided Roe in the first place?” The unelected black-robed aristocrats of the Court in 1973 assaulted democracy. If Roe is overturned, it will be a long-delayed victory for democracy.

It’s always hard to choose the dumbest, most hysterical reaction from the left to any news story that doesn’t go their way, but it’s a safe bet that the best place to start is with Rep. Eric Swalwell. Although to be fair, he’s not the only one to make the jaw-droppingly stupid claim that “the Republicans won’t stop with banning abortion. They want to ban interracial marriage. Do you want to save that? Well, then you should probably vote.”

That’s about the most succinct example I’ve seen that the Democrats intend to demagogue the SCOTUS’ Roe ruling to the hilt in a cynical attempt to get people to vote for more of the misery that having them in power inflicts on us all. I would never insult anyone by assuming they’re dumb enough to actually swallow (or Swalowell) this tripe, but for the record:

The Alito draft decision makes it crystal clear that this decision applies solely to the uniquely incorrectly-decided Roe v. Wade ruling on abortion and not to any other ruling or right.

One of the conservative Justices concurring in the opinion is Clarence Thomas, who is in an interracial marriage. He would probably agree with the outrage expressed by a number of other black Republicans at the idea that they want to outlaw their own interracial marriages.

Also worth noting: polls show that 94% of Americans approve of interracial marriages while 71% want abortion banned or restricted. Why are the Democrats attacking our democracy?

As much as the left wants to use the issue of “reproductive rights” to direct the national conversation between now and November, some news outlets, such as the New York Post and the U.K. Daily Mail, are actually continuing to unearth important, jaw-dropping stories that have nothing to do with that.

The same news outlets that screamed from the rooftops the fake story that Trump colluded with Russia will ignore the Daily Mail’s latest report about Biden Family Russian connections. In fact, until this March, when The New York Times and Washington Post finally admitted the laptop was real, one had to go looking to find the reports about it. Google and Facebook certainly weren’t going to bring them to you. As you know, even the newly-appointed head of Biden’s unconstitutional bad joke, the “Disinformation Governance Board,” roundly dismissed it as “a Trump campaign product.”

But in their latest update, the Daily Mail has emails showing that in 2012 and 2013, Hunter Biden courted a Russian oligarch with very close ties to Putin --- Vladimir Yevtushenkov, 73 --- to seal an investment deal, meeting with him in Moscow, at the Ritz-Carlton in New York, and in Washington, DC. Hunter’s now-jailed former business partner Devon Archer wooed him as well, laying the groundwork in 2011 with his own trip to Moscow, staying in luxury hotels and eating bear meat (“yummy”) while talking real estate investment with the oligarch.

Though this man first made his fortune in Russian telecoms and later in oil, he moved into defense, owning a company called Sistema that, according to other reports, supplied Putin’s army with the drones that are now being used to bomb and kill Ukrainians. Until last year, he also owned Russian defense contractor RTI.

Sources close to him say he’s the brother-in-law of Russian billionaire Elena Baturina, whose name will be familiar because a Senate investigation determined she had wired $3.5 million to Rosemont Seneca Thornton, one of the companies connected to Hunter. Yevtushenkov denies he’s related to her, but it does appear that she’s the one who introduced him to Hunter.

The deadly consequences of this man’s business are coming home to roost now, with Ukraine being turned to rubble and countries such as the U.K. and Australia adding Yevtushenkov to their sanctions list. Last week, a leaked audio recording allegedly captured him talking with a Georgian oligarch about how to circumvent international sanctions arising from Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. But so far, he has been untroubled by any such sanction from the United States. Somehow, this man remains untouched, one of the handful of oligarchs who haven't been sanctioned by the Biden administration. This could be coincidence, I suppose, but it’s extremely unfortunate that we’re put into the position of having to speculate. That’s why conflicts of interest need to be revealed BEFORE elections, not censored by social media and hidden from voters.

As the Daily Mail reports, “Hunter’s multiple meetings and apparent business deals with him are the latest in a troubling web of his connections to Putin-linked mega-rich individuals which has emerged from his abandoned laptop." Their story sorts out the meetings that took place around the globe and that certainly give the impression of a tight business relationship with the Ruskies.

One of the businessmen in this circle, Kazakhstan banker and “fixer” Marc Holtzman --- also very closely tied with “Vladimir” --- was at the now-infamous secret meeting at Cafe Milano in 2015 that was organized by Hunter and attended by then-Vice President Joe Biden. Recall that the White House first denied that Joe Biden had been there but had to own up after photos emerged. The President has lied repeatedly about not having anything to do with, or even any knowledge, of his son’s business ventures.

This is the murky water the Bidens were swimming in. As we’ve said before, it was common for influential people in Washington to have a dip in it –- and sometimes total immersion –- as dealmakers and lobbyists for shady foreigners. Paul Manafort did business in that world, and Trump’s political enemies tried their hardest to tar Trump and HIS offspring with that, when there turned out to be nothing of concern. But those same adversaries of Trump continue to turn a blind eye to the Biden Family’s blatant influence-peddling and very real business ties to rich, powerful Russians, even as one of them appears to be avoiding sanctions from the United States.

The left does not care about collateral damage to American citizens in its quest to shape the political narrative of this country and destroy its adversaries. A case is point is John Paul Mac Isaac, who came to possess Hunter Biden’s laptop after it was abandoned at his computer repair shop, lost his livelihood and reputation, and is now suing for $1 million, plus punitive damages. These, according to his attorney Brian Della Rocca, “will be the much bigger number and will be determined at trial.”

Mac Issac has also written a book coming out November 22 of this year, called “AMERICAN INJUSTICE: My Battle to Expose the Truth.” It would be nice to see this before Election Day, but that’s the breaks.

“After fighting to reveal the truth,” Mac Isaac told the New York Post, “all I want now is for the rest of the country to know that there was a collective and orchestrated effort by social and mainstream media to block a real story with real consequences for the nation. This was collusion led by 51 former pillars in the intelligence committee and backed by the words and actions of politically motivated DOJ and FBI. I want this lawsuit to reveal that collusion and, more importantly, who gave the marching orders.”

We wish him the best in that endeavor. Especially the part about who gave the marching orders.

He has previously tried to sue Twitter for defamation but didn’t get anywhere that time, ending up on the hook for Twitter’s legal fees of roughly $175,000. But this time, he’s got the backing of a nonprofit, The America Project, founded by retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, his brother Joe Flynn, and businessman Patrick Byrne, who has also been attacked for looking into the 2020 election. Flynn, as you know, has been through an enormous legal and personal hell of his own, due to the intel community and media relentlessly lying about him.

The group said this: “’[We’re] honored to sponsor John Paul Mac Isaac in his fight against the injustice that has been done to him when the political elite coordinated with the leftist news media claiming the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation --- which was a blatant lie.”

As reported by the New York Post --- also a victim of the left’s attempt to keep the subject quiet until after the 2020 election --- Mac Isaac was forced to shutter his business near the Biden family homes in Greenville, Delaware, “after people started throwing vegetables, eggs, and dog excrement at his store.” He left the state, exiling himself in Colorado for a year. He contends that this happened because of the lies told about him by CNN, Politico and other news outlets.

Della Rocca said his client “has suffered immensely at the false statements spread about those who brought the information on Hunter Biden’s laptop to everyone’s attention. He has lost his business, friendships, and his honorable standing in the community. This lawsuit is an attempt to repair a small portion of that damage caused by the defendants in the suit...We intend to show that their actions were intentionally malicious.”

The suit names…

1) California Rep. Adam Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Schiff, as we now know, lied his head off about this. As Mac Isaac said, “Without any intel, the head of the intel committee decided to share with CNN and its viewers a complete and utter lie --- a lie uttered in the protection of a preferred presidential candidate.”

2) CNN. Mac Isaac says they knowingly broadcast the “false and defamatory statement” that the laptop was Russian disinformation. This statement “accuses the Plaintiff of committing an infamous crime; i.e., treason, by working with Russians to commit a crime against the United States of America by attempting to undermine American democracy and the 2020 presidential election,” according to the suit.

3) The Daily Beast. Mac Isaac says that in an article called “FBI Examining Hunter Biden’s Laptop as Foreign Op, Contradicting Trump’s Intel Czar,” they lied and said the laptop had been “purloined,” which was an accusation that he stole it.

4) Politico. An article by Natasha Bertrand reported that dozens of former intel officials thought that the laptop was “Russian disinfo.” (Just a thought; maybe this is the article that convinced Nina Jankowicz, head of the new HHS 'Ministry of Truth,' that the laptop was fake. Well, no, come to think of it, she said she thought it was a product of the Trump campaign.)

Newsmax has details as well.

John Nolte for Breitbart News interviewed Mac Isaac in March (shortly after the NY Times finally admitted the laptop was real), and the full transcript appears here. This is highly recommended reading for anyone who wants to know the details about how he came into possession of the laptop in April 2019 and what happened to change his life from that day forward.

Mac Isaac appeared briefly on Tucker Carlson’s FOX News show Wednesday night to announce that he was going to court. (The clips in the lead-in do make one wonder why MSNBC wasn’t included in the lawsuit!) “The collusion that took place in mid-October of 2020 just astonished me when it happened,” he said.

“...It was just a unilateral decision to call this ‘Russian disinformation’ without even deciding if there was going to be any collateral damage, which, there was.”

He said that from these false reports, people just assumed he was a hacker or a thief, mainly because Twitter labeled the material as hacked and banned the story. After the now-infamous letter from 51 former intel officials and the condemnation from Adam Schiff on CNN , he was labeled “a stooge of Putin,” someone whom Putin thanked for his service.

His life was essentially ruined. “I had to get out of town before the election,” he told Tucker. “I had to close the shop and leave Delaware.”

Between now and the May 16 start of the Michael Sussmann trial, there will no doubt be a flurry of motions and decisions, and we’ll keep you up to date.

On Wednesday, Durham won the big battle we recently outlined, in which the attorneys for Hillary For America and the DNC were trying to exclude evidence on the basis of attorney-client privilege. Their argument was ridiculous on its face, as Sussmann has been charged with lying because he told the FBI he WASN’T working as their attorney. Lawyers wanted it both ways: to say he wasn’t their attorney, but also that he was. So now that Durham’s motion to have the so-called “privileged” materials submitted to the court for an in camera review has been granted, he’s virtually assured to get them.

In the words of Bonchie at RedState, “Pretty soon, we’ll know all about who was paid what and exactly how coordinated the effort to frame Donald Trump and weaponize the FBI was.”

For once, he’s optimistic that at least “a sliver of justice” will be done.

Durham had started the week by alerting the presiding judge in the case, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, about fines levied by the Federal Election Commission on Hillary For America and the DNC for violating election laws when they hid the true purpose of payments to law firm Perkins Coie. As you know, they were really paying “oppo” research company Fusion GPS for the creation of the salacious (and fake) Trump-Russia “dossier.” So now the fact that they broke election law is part of the record for this case.

The Epoch Times report is by subscription only, but we also found details here.

In another major victory for Durham, Judge Cooper granted his motion to compel Fusion GPS “tech maven” Laura Seago to testify. Durham had argued that she has “unique insight” into how her company, the Clinton campaign and law firm Perkins Coie orchestrated the “opposition research” into the Trump campaign that sparked the FBI’s “Russiagate” investigation. Here’s an excellent summary of both the Durham wins, from Just the News.

Seago’s lawyer informed the court that, absent immunity from prosecution, she plans to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights. In response, the judge has ruled that “no testimony or other information compelled under this Order…may be used against Laura Seago in any criminal case, except a prosecution for perjury, giving a false statement, or otherwise failing to comply with this Order.” In effect, that’s a grant of immunity --- as long as she tells the truth. Maybe, at long last, we're going to hear some.