Elections • Online Censorship

Silicon Valley and Team Biden Collude to Rig 2020 Election

Big Tech’s censorship has nothing to do with accuracy or fairness.

If there is any doubt Big Tech oligarchs are colluding with Team Biden to influence the outcome of the 2020 election, none other than two-time losing presidential candidate Hillary Clinton gave the game away this week.

“We can have democracy—or we can have social networks that allow the spread of weaponized disinformation about our elections,” Clinton tweeted on September 16, “But we can’t have both. Facebook, Twitter, and Google can and must act before the damage is done.”

The Democratic Party and NeverTrump Republicans—backed by a handful of anti-Trump billionaires—are preparing what fairly can be described as a post-election civil war to make sure Joe Biden takes the White House no matter what

The insurgents have “war gamed” a number of scenarios, which include unconstitutional tactics that would result in a Biden win even if the president is legitimately reelected. President Trump recently referred to their efforts as “insurrection,” and Attorney General Bill Barr this week suggested violent agitators should be charged with sedition.

This is for real, folks.

Of course, no war plan in the modern age would be complete without the full complicity of Silicon Valley. Senate Republicans, despite years of bluster, failed to rein in these rogue entities either by revoking their protected status as “platforms” or revising campaign finance laws that would require social media giants to report in-kind campaign donations to Democrats for censoring conservative content and Republican officials without applying the same standard to members of the other party.

So Big Tech, unpunished and undeterred, is working with subversive groups such as the Transition Integrity Project and Protect the Results—misnomers to say the least—to purge their platforms of any content that calls out their tactics, particularly any post that questions the legality of vote by mail.

Democrats plan to extend Election Day into January under the guise of “counting every vote” until they collect enough ballots to declare Biden the winner. While the process drags on, social media and Internet providers will aid that effort by rigging content in the Democrats’ favor. Their complicity already is underway.

Twitter is flagging posts that warn voters about the actual risks of mail-in ballots; a September 12 tweet by the president was flagged for violating the company’s Civic Integrity Policy as the country moves ever closer to an Atlas Shrugged reality.

Twitter’s policy, announced this month, will ban “misleading claims that cause confusion about the established laws, regulations, procedures, and methods of a civic process, or about the actions of officials or entities executing those civic processes,” an arbitrary gauge that gives Twitter cover to promote the Democrats’ unprecedented mail-in ballot presidential election and squash any objection to it.

Big Brother’s blue bird smacked another Trump tweet on Thursday after the president insisted unsolicited ballots will lead to election-year “mayhem.” Twitter disputed his post with a disclaimer: “Experts and fact checkers have continued to assure American voters that voting by mail is a safe and secure option.” One “fact-checker” listed is ABC News. (Twitter announced late Thursday that the company’s public policy director was leaving to join Biden’s transition team.)

Just to make sure Silicon Valley submits to their demands, a group called Accountable Tech, headed by two Clinton loyalists, is demanding Twitter, Facebook, and Google scrub any content that might impede the Democratic Party’s disinformation campaign both before and after Election Day. The group released a “roadmap” for social media giants to heed; a sliding scale of penalties, including permanent deplatforming, would apply to accounts daring to run afoul of their speech-silencing rules.

Accountable Tech is going hard after Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg; in a July letter to Facebook’s Oversight Board, several groups aligned with Accountable Tech accused the company of “actively facilitating voter suppression, magnifying rampant election disinformation, and seeding hate.”

Zuckerberg, as expected, acquiesced. On September 1, he posted a lengthy decree detailing how Facebook would handle information about the election.  

“We already committed to partnering with state election authorities to identify and remove false claims about polling conditions in the last 72 hours of the campaign, but given that this election will include large amounts of early voting, we’re extending that period to begin now and continue through the election until we have a clear result,” Zuckerberg wrote.

The social media tycoon also signaled that his platforms—Facebook also owns Instagram—will be closely involved in the Democrats’ plan to extend vote-counting past Election Day and block any attempt by the president to declare victory. “We will attach an informational label to content that seeks to delegitimize the outcome of the election or discuss the legitimacy of voting methods, for example, by claiming that lawful methods of voting will lead to fraud. This label will provide basic authoritative information about the integrity of the election and voting methods.” Facebook will protect “high risk people,” referring to Democratic governors in swing states, from any online harassment as they fulfill “their critical obligations to oversee the vote counting.”

Zuckerberg is doing his part to amplify Team Biden’s protracted Election Day strategy: he warned in a recent interview that America will have to wait “weeks” until a winner is declared. During that time, Zuckerberg promised, his massive operation will prevent any candidate, including the president, from declaring victory before results are official.

Facebook is wasting no time prepping the battle ground in favor of Democrats; this week, the platform announced it was removing accounts linked to Turning Point USA, a conservative activist group run by Charlie Kirk, a close friend of Donald Trump, Jr. (Twitter also is suspending TPUSA-tied accounts.) Kirk is an outspoken media figure with 1.8 million followers on Twitter; TPUSA has 2.2 million Facebook followers.

Google, too, is getting in on the act. The world’s most popular search engine won’t “autocomplete” searches by users looking for information on what the company calls “misleading content.” This includes any inquiry that “involves claims about one of the candidates, how to cast a ballot or the overall legitimacy of the electoral process.” Google also will remove any featured results or advertisements that prematurely declare a winner in any race.

Big Tech’s censorship has nothing to do with accuracy or fairness; abundant evidence, including the outcome of a recent congressional race in New York that was delayed for several weeks as absentee ballots were counted and discarded, shows that mail-in voting is a prescription for chaos and fraud.

Democrats, NeverTrump Republicans, the news media, Trump-hating billionaires and Silicon Valley have no intention of a repeat of 2016; that year’s defeated presidential candidate just advised Biden not to concede “under any circumstances” as Hillary Clinton remains forever tormented over her loss to Donald Trump.

Caught flat-footed last time around, this powerful coalition wants revenge and redemption—and our Big Tech masters are only too happy to help.


Why Trump Should Demand Debates with Kamala Harris

Pointing out that Joe Biden will not be a strong president actually plays into a major selling point for much of permanent Washington.

In the space of just a couple of days, both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris made essentially the same gaffe, referring to a coming “Harris Administration” as opposed to a Biden Administration. But are these really gaffes?

Rush Limbaugh astutely opined that the slipups might be intentional to reassure voters skeptical of Biden’s ability to assume the duties of president. So why isn’t President Trump debating Harris, the person who might really hold power in 2021?

Biden currently is fending off allegations that he receives reporter’s questions in advance and reads the answers on teleprompters and note cards. His appearances are infrequent and noticeably short when compared to the frenetic campaign schedule of the incumbent. When he wears a mask, he seems to gasp for air. Even his relaxed schedule seems too much for him, as he often appears tired and lethargic. 

Biden’s grasp of world events seems tenuous. He robotically repeats lines about Trump calling white supremacists “very fine people,” and that fallen military servicemen are, “suckers and losers,” despite abundant evidence disproving these smears. 

Moreover, Biden is surrounded by a grotesquely subservient press who obviously collaborate with the campaign. Yet all the handling in the world fails to stop Biden from saying stupid things. Practically every brief appearance features a stumble or wackadoodle statement that shows how out of touch he is. Everyone can see it. Yet his committed voters don’t care. Why?

The first and most obvious reason is that Biden is not Trump. Fifty-eight percent of his voters just want a chance to vote against Trump. His crooked grin and “aw shucks” speech style make him appear nonthreatening. 

Second, while his supporters clearly imagine him snoring through important presidential meetings, they also envision a team of Washington, D.C. lifers handling the real decision-making. Who is the Biden attorney general? Not William Barr. Who is the secretary of state? Not Mike Pompeo. In their place, mercurial avatars appear to the mind’s eye of the Biden voter. When one asks a Biden voter who will really be running things, that voter will freely admit it won’t be Biden. It will be “grown-ups” we’re assured.

The advantage of this Trojan Horse strategy is that attacks on Biden essentially become meaningless, even when true. His incompetence, low energy, and lack of mental acuity are all completely irrelevant. Joe Biden could fall fast asleep in the middle of the upcoming debate with Trump, and it likely wouldn’t phase his supporters in the least.

Adam Mill’s iron rule of a scandal is that the negative information must change the way a candidate’s supporters think of him in order to cause him to lose support. People will never care about Biden’s infirmities so long as they believe he is surrounded by a stable of stable geniuses. 

So Trump should demand a direct debate with Kamala Harris. 

Seriously. Harris will run things soon enough in a Biden Administration and her deficiencies are not getting enough attention. Chief among them is the question of whether she will abuse prosecutorial powers for political gain. With the FBI and Department of Justice increasingly politicized, Harris will have powerful tools of oppression at her fingertips. 

Biden’s harmlessness is irrelevant. He just doesn’t seem like he has four years in him. The very act of asking for a direct debate between Trump and Harris would showcase this duplicity. 

I previously wrote that Biden might not exert 100 days of control over the presidency. Just following the playbook used against Trump, Biden might easily be met at the front door by his own Robert Mueller sent to investigate Chinese influence over the Biden family

If that’s too slow, we always have the 25th Amendment approach of having him declared mentally unfit. The path has already been blazed. Why wouldn’t they tread it again?

Who will Biden pick for his cabinet? When the “brand” of the candidate essentially is to let the government run itself, this question is highly relevant. Looking at who he has tapped as campaign advisors, some disturbing insights can be drawn. 

In foreign policy, Biden has a team of at least 1,000 national security experts spread among 20 working groups. Which among these security experts will be tapped to wield the real policy influence in his administration? That’s impossible to predict because of the vast field of candidates. And that might be the point. It allows the Biden voter to project whatever policy objectives he or she may have onto that faceless avatar she imagines will wield real power in Washington. 

Former Under Secretary of Defense Frank Kendall III leads the defense working group. He may be our next Secretary of Defense and he is on record—no joke—for going to war against efficiency in the Pentagon. He is a defender of waste and bloat

Biden has already signaled that he will tap Beto “hell-yes-we’re-taking-your-AR-15” O’Rourke to lead the coming roundup of privately owned firearms. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who promised to “save” capitalism by remaking it, is being mentioned as a possible secretary of the treasury. Biden also promised to cede the COVID-19 response decisions to the “experts.” This could empower a single unelected bureaucrat with sweeping power while the actual president stands aside. 

Pointing out that Joe Biden will not be a strong president actually plays into a major selling point for much of permanent Washington. Many on the Left seek permanent independence of vital executive functions like the Department of Justice. So a weak president is a de facto realization of that goal. 

Therefore, the American voter should see at least one, and perhaps three, debates between the real choices being presented to the American people: President Donald Trump and Senator Kamala Harris. So why would Trump waste his time debating Biden? Everyone knows Biden won’t be running things and his handlers have been dreading the confrontation with Trump. Let him off the hook and spare the poor man the humiliation. 


Trump Hate Is Not Enough

Joe Biden is not a political bumblebee, he is a lumbering guided-missile whose engine has failed.

I have railed in this and in other outlets many times in recent months against what I have described as a pantomime horse of the Democratic campaign conducted by a “decayed servitor, a waxworks dummy . . . following the science” by hiding in the catacombs of his Delaware home and giving minimum access to docile journalists and practically no authentic members of the public. It must be said that the Democratic Party elders who resuscitated the political corpses of the Joe Biden and Kamala Harris presidential nomination candidacies have performed a political miracle by keeping this ramshackle imposture in serious contention.

There have been hopeless and implausible candidacies and bungled campaigns before, but there has never been in the United States such a long-sustained fraudulent campaign on an unfeasible platform and by such a seriously incapable potential president as this one. It must now, finally, be almost the time when it falls down in shards.

I frequently ask, as (St.) Margaret Thatcher used to say, “Do my ears deceive me?” Unfortunately, they do not. Historians of the future will have to determine why 90 percent of the national political media is so rabidly hostile to President Trump that they have spontaneously assumed the conduct of the Democratic campaign themselves. 

An Odor of Desperation

Joe Biden is a pallid effigy unable to utter complete sentences without requesting the approach of the teleprompter or querying what is coming through his earpiece, even when answering questions his staff has clearly prepared and given to tame journalists from the Democratic networks and newspapers. His press secretary, rejoicing in a name that would have done credit to Dickens, T.J. Ducklo, acknowledged that Biden was reading answers to supposedly spontaneous questions off a teleprompter by aggressively declining to answer the question from Fox News anchor Bret Baier because Baier was “channeling” the allegations of the Trump campaign. 

While Biden addresses audiences of fewer than 20 people, and most of those audiences are comprised of aides and technicians, the official and media Democratic campaign shrieks indignantly that the president is a COVID-19 “super-spreader” when he addresses many thousands of people who flock to the nation’s airports to hear him as he hopscotches around the country. The Biden campaign medical advisor accused the president of “negligent homicide” for speaking to large and mainly mask-less live audiences (though no one died). 

There is absolutely no evidence that this sort of open-air activity spreads the coronavirus, and the Democrats never raised a peep of protest while rioters whom they deemed to be “peaceful protesters” rampaged in cities across the country all summer while Democratic governors and mayors sanctimoniously prevented people from attending religious services—even in their cars in church parking lots—or visiting public parks and beaches.

As California Governor Gavin Newsom acknowledged Trump’s impeccable helpfulness to his state in the COVID-19 and forest fire emergencies during the president’s visit on Monday; Trump volunteered that failure to clear 65 million dead trees had made the forests giant tinderboxes of dry wood and had severely aggravated the fires. But as this was happening, Joe Biden sortied from his basement and denounced his opponent as a “climate arsonist,” and prayerfully demanded to know how many “suburbs will be burned and flooded . . . And blown away in super-storms” because of the climatological philistinism of this administration. 

The Democrats’ One Theme

In the Red Queen manner of the Democratic media and the putative candidate’s scriptwriters, there was no longer the slightest requirement for any evidence, and all evils of nature or coincidence are the results of the malice, incompetence, or perversity of the incumbent administration. 

One of the chief puppet-masters, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), congratulated the president on the agreements he brokered between Israel and the UAE and Bahrain (and the Nobel Peace Prize nominations the Democratic media have not mentioned) as a “distraction” from COVID-19 infections. Trump hate is the Democrats’ one theme.

Perhaps the novel concept of “super-storms,” (which Biden’s election would banish like a halcyon before they arose) would replace the growing public concern about the urban guerrillas with whom the Democratic Party played footsie all summer. One of my very learned readers, a scientist in Mobile, Alabama who would be happy to adhere to the Biden counsel to “follow the science,” wrote to me on Monday night that he had to stock .38 caliber ammunition from a pawnshop because the normal emporia were sold out. He added that “the fact that the general public is opposed to being murdered by the friskier elements of the Democratic base seems to have eluded the nominee’s political consultants.”

Apart from the scandalous charade that Joe Biden remotely possesses the intellectual stamina to execute the great office that he seeks, and the unabashedly Marxist program that the Democrats have adopted as a placebo to the Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez Left, the greatest outrage of this fake campaign is its ambiguity about urban violence, its identifying with Black Lives Matter (much of whose leadership is composed of violent antiwhite racists), and its ambivalence between the police and the perpetrators of mob rule. 

Harris has expressed her admiration for Jacob Blake, who appears to have a legitimate complaint about having been shot seven times in the back by a Kenosha, Wisconsin policeman, but was armed and apprehended in the midst of committing a felony; sympathy would be reasonable but admiration? That seems premature. 

Both Biden and Harris have supported, albeit euphemistically, defunding and partially disarming the nation’s police, in the face of an unprecedented surge in urban violence. Despite the almost totalitarian fervor of the Democratic media’s lunge for control of public opinion, polls show two-thirds of Americans are now very concerned about urban violence, and the silence of the Democrats about the subject at their convention and of their nominees until very recently has been contemptible.    

The Farce Will Be Over Soon

The standing of the Democratic nominee in the (mainly Democratic front) polls is a levitation that defies all laws of nature and politics. 

Joe Biden is not a political bumblebee, he is a lumbering guided-missile whose engine has failed. Violence is a far more profound, less explicable, and less remediable problem than the coronavirus. COVID-19 fatalities and the unemployment that resulted from the shutdown Biden wishes to perpetuate or restore continue to decline and an effective vaccine now appears likely in the next few months. 

Despite Biden’s monstrous falsehoods that the American performance is the worst of any advanced country in the world, and despite the president’s inconsistent early public comments about it, Trump has managed the crisis well. Not even Ducklo could make the case that vacuous Joe Biden could have done better. 

The Democratic campaign is a gigantic fraud and Trump hate will not legitimize it. Fox News Ch Sean Hannity refers to the “candidate protection program,” and my eminent colleague Victor Davis Hanson reminds us of the Wizard of Oz and the dog and the curtain. 

Many epigrams are applicable and there are precedents for candidate Biden in fiction if not in U.S. history, but it will end in shambles on November 3. It has been a bold defiance of the laws of gravity and politics, but this farce can’t go on much longer without the audience mounting the stage. 


An October Surprise in the Waiting

President Trump should take his shot for a hat trick on terrorism.

At the Republican National Convention last month, Carl and Marsha Mueller told the nation how in 2013 their daughter Kayla was kidnapped by Islamic State terrorists, tortured, and repeatedly raped by the Islamic State’s Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. During this 18-month ordeal, Kayla’s father explained, the government let them down, but “if Donald Trump had been president when Kayla was captured, she would be here today.”

That is uncertain, but another reality is undeniable.

Under President Trump, the U.S. military set up Task Force 814, named for Kayla’s August 14 birthday. In Operation Kayla Mueller last October, the task force took out al-Baghdadi. The ISIS chieftain was not the only terrorist in Trump’s sights. 

As Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the RNC, “the president approved a strike that killed the Iranian terrorist Qasem Soleimani. This is the man most responsible for the murder and maiming of hundreds of American soldiers and thousands of Christians across the Middle East.” That went down on January 3, but President Trump still has unfinished business on the terrorism front. 

On November 5, 2009, at Fort Hood, Texas, U.S. troops prepared for deployment to Afghanistan. U.S. Army Major Nidal Hasan, a self-described “soldier of Allah,” shouted “Allahu Akbar” and opened fire on the unarmed Americans. Hasan killed 13, including, Private Francheska Velez, 21 and pregnant. The soldier of Allah wounded 42 others, including Sargeant Alonzo Lunsford, an African American who took seven bullets from Hasan. 

The killer was never described as a racist, and the Obama Administration passed off the mass murder as “workplace violence,” not even gun violence. Vice President Joe Biden issued a 58-word statement expressing sympathy for the families of “the brave soldiers who fell today.” No word from the vice president about who killed the brave soldiers, in the “senseless tragedy.” 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) lamented the “unspeakable tragedy,” and “the losses of those who were killed.” On the other hand, the San Francisco Democrat failed to number the victims or name any of them. Pelosi also failed to call out Hasan and offered no thoughts on what might have motivated “the gunman” to murder 13 Americans.

For all but the willfully blind, this was Islamic terrorism and it could have been prevented. The facts are easily accessible in Lessons from Fort Hood: Improving Our Ability to Connect the Dots, a 2012 report based on congressional hearings.

Hasan came to the attention of the FBI for the 18 emails he sent to jihadist Anwar al-Awlaki. That rang alarms at the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force in San Diego, and agents alerted the Washington Field Office, which dropped the case. There has never been any word about who gave the order to stand down, and whether they were ever held accountable. 

Hasan was sentenced to death in 2013 but nearly 11 years after his crime, this soldier of Allah remains alive. If Alonzo Lunsford and other victims think something is wrong about that, it would be hard to fault them. As Michael Corleone might put it, “where does it say you can’t execute a convicted mass murderer? I am talking about a terrorist who murdered 13 Americans, was sentenced to death, and finally got what was coming to him.” 

The soldier of Allah is currently residing at Leavenworth, so no need to hunt him down. A good date for the execution would be October 26 or 27, to coincide with the al-Baghdadi hit. Joe Biden said that hit happened despite President Trump’s “ineptitude as commander-in-chief.” In a statement, Pelosi said, “the death of al-Baghdadi is significant,” but “our military and allies deserve strong, smart and strategic leadership from Washington.” By ordering the strike on Soleimani, Pelosi said, Trump was “engaging in provocative and disproportionate actions” and “provoking further dangerous escalation of violence.” 

Biden said President Trump “flat-out lied” about Soleimani’s plans to attack U.S. embassies. Iran was now “in the driver’s seat” and “this is a crisis totally of Donald Trump’s making.” Biden did not recall reports that in 2015, when he was Obama’s vice president, the United States tipped off Soleimani that Israel was closely tracking the Iranian general. 

Hasan’s execution would give Biden a chance to speak out about the soldiers who “fell” at Ford Hood. For her part, Pelosi might call the execution a “provocative and disproportionate” action, and the nation might hear from the previous president, quite outspoken of late. For those who have forgotten, Obama could restate the official “workplace violence” interpretation.

Five years after the attack, in 2014, the Department of Defense was still refusing to classify the Fort Hood shootings as terrorism, and the victims were still denied the medals they deserved and the medical treatment they needed. “We believe that if the president could hear, first-hand, our plight and our mistreatment at the hands of his bureaucracy,” wrote Lunsford, “that he would take the steps needed to set things right. Therefore, we ask for 10 minutes of his time.” President Obama declined to meet with the survivors of Hasan’s terrorist attack.

If this terrorist finally got what was coming to him, that would be a terrific story. With an election just around the corner, American voters might like an October Surprise like that. 


My Apologies, Mr. President

A suburban mom reflects on her 2016 vote and vows to do better in 2020.

Randall Smith made the point in a recent essay that a “do what you feel” society accustomed to indulging itself will not have the discipline or the grit to be truly progressive in the sense of doing what it takes to make the world a better place for future generations.

Immediately upon reading the article, I thought of President Trump. 

When Trump was elected, I was really disturbed. It just felt like a surreal joke to me. He was a party-switcher and a womanizer. I didn’t trust him. I feared he would ruin the presidency by turning it into an unbearable, narcissistic, reality-show farce, and his unfiltered mouth would get all the crazy dictators of the world stirred up and bombing. 

But this time around, I came away from the Republican National Convention feeling hopeful, protected in a “he’s got my back” kind of way, and completely blown away by how dedicated he has been to advancing pro-people, pro-America policies in such a short period of time—certainly more than any president I can remember, Republican or Democrat. 

From prison reform and tax cuts and incentives to pull good businesses back into the inner cities to declaring the opioid crisis a national emergency and launching a three-pronged all-out offensive against it involving education, cracking down on domestic and international supply chains, and funding proven recovery programs, Trump has been on America’s side. 

He restored funding to historically black colleges and sought the counsel of black Americans for his administration’s policy. Whether tough no-nonsense survivor single moms, ex-prisoners, or neurosurgeon Ben Carson as secretary of Housing and Urban Development, his administration has shaped its policies with input from people who know firsthand the overwhelming challenges of poverty, violence and racism that black Americans, and particularly our innocent black youth, face because generational sins have had huge generational consequences. 

He has stood up to China and created favorable trade deals for our workers. He has revitalized the military, showcasing it to create peace through strength, and has created and championed the space force; he took out two important terrorist leaders, thus delivering ISIS a horrible blow. Yet he has also championed the individual soldier: bringing home American boys from foreign entanglements and reforming the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

Today a workman came to give us an estimate on ductwork we need done in the basement. He was an ex-Marine and his knees were blown out—shattered along with other injuries to his legs during his tour of duty. In 1999, he applied for disability and was denied. The official determination was that he had torn cartilage in his knee as an 11-year-old so the condition was preexisting. He resubmitted his case, providing proof of the validity of the injury and was denied. In 2005, he tried again and was told they had no records of his previous claims. He produced the two denials and was denied a third time. 

As a single dad with full custody of his kids, he just felt he wasn’t going to waste his time trying anymore. But when Trump came into office, his veteran friends encouraged him to resubmit because things seemed to be moving. He said he applied in August 2019 and received full benefits plus retro payments by the first of December 2019. He explained how, pre-Trump, many veterans’ claims were routinely “lost” because VA bureaucrats would issue an immediate denial and then destroy the claims so as to come in under budget. Coming in under budget qualified them to receive bonuses for their money-saving, budget trimming work. His conclusion: “When Trump was firing everyone at the VA he was cleaning house. I voted as an independent last time. This time he has earned my vote.” 

All Trump’s firings since he has been in office at first made me nervous, underscoring a preconceived notion in my mind that he was unstable and too egotistical to work with anyone. Post-convention and after listening to the testimony of our contractor, I now see it in such a different light. He is effective because he makes sure his teams are top-notch and focused on getting the job done.

Trump’s administration has been at work eliminating intrusive governmental regulations so as to allow small businesses and many industries across the country to breathe and grow; he’s pushed through federal aid in record time to states during times of emergency. He’s appointed judges who honor the Constitution, and been a champion for school choice and religious liberty. He is standing strong against riots, violence, and radical movements and politicians who are calling to defund our police or promoting socialist agendas that history has shown over and over again lead to tyranny and spiritual, cultural, and economic poverty and devastation.

To me perhaps the most mind-boggling thing of all about the Trump phenomenon is that he breaks the religious Right’s womanizer stereotype mold. He speaks more boldly for the pro-life cause than some of our ministers and priests and stands firmly against pro-choice advocates who are lobbying for increasingly extreme abortion “rights”—like abortions at full term and the abolition of conscience protections. It causes my blood to run cold to think of any doctor having to abort a full-term baby, and it sickens me to think how New York and other states embrace and celebrate on national television with laughter their legislative victories in these matters as pro-woman, pro-doctor, or pro-human. No pro-choice friend or family member or pregnant woman I know who has been in such a crisis thinks abortion is a celebratory, laughing matter.

The Trump Administration seems to be keeping its head on straight as the rest of the nation goes pandemic bonkers. We wring our hands and despair, while the administration pushes, presses, demands that science and business and even government deliver: ventilators, PPE, eventually a vaccine, and that big, beautiful hope-inspiring Navy medical ship sent out to relieve hospitals overwhelmed by the pandemic. (Ah, what the fear of public humiliation and ridicule can do to get a fire under the buttinskies of the most entrenched bureaucrats.) 

From what I can tell, Trump and his administration simply won’t get distracted from the Make America Great Again promise and are absolutely determined, come hell or high water, to equip struggling and hard-working Americans of all races with the tools they need to succeed—not handouts, hand-ups; not welfare, jobs; not sentimental campaign promises, effective actions and results. 

As a mom of four, Herschel Walker’s comment about President Trump when he was owner of the U.S. Football League always taking the phone calls from his kids even during important board meetings, inspired me. In this fast-paced, tech culture, “Family First” is a very hard value to live. So many of our families are struggling and falling apart and we are losing a sense of who we are. I get it now, Mr. President, we need to put our American family first. Not out of selfishness or because of some superiority complex but out of the recognition that our American family is in crisis.

We need to pull in and care for our own. We can’t continue trying to save the world when we are drowning and hostile dictators all around the world are eager to watch us do so.

Circling back to my original thought, there is nothing I would rather do than give President Trump a first-class mouth upgrade—President Reagan-style. A mouth that is smooth and polished, light-hearted in its ribbing, and full of respect for all people including his enemies. But . . . I am guilty of judging President’s Trump’s mouth too harshly. His proven record of action makes me trust him in a way I absolutely didn’t before. 

He donates his salary to charity. That speaks to me. I believe he truly loves America and what it stands for, and I feel like he sees our people, our nation hemorrhaging—he’s in all-out emergency response mode, getting dirty and bloody as he tries to get those tourniquets on, and here I am shouting at him from the sidelines, “Tisk, tisk, Mr. President, your word choices are offensive.” 

What a joke! Before I put myself on a pedestal for my “kinder,” “gentler” way with words and people, I better make sure my delicate psyche, vanity, and stomach can handle the gruesome daily battle against entrenched hypocrisy, bureaucracy, evil and corruption—that my warm, fuzzy words can be backed by consistent, decisive actions that mean something. President Trump has made me very aware of my inner wuss—the coward made strong by her own judgments of moral superiority. 

My apologies, Mr. President. I misjudged you and grossly underestimated you. It is my judgy mouth that needs to be corrected this time—for criticisms I have made superficially and at no personal cost to me, from the comfy spectator chair on the sidelines of the war raging on this great American battlefield.

Thank you, Mr. President. God Bless you and your family, and God Bless America!


America Is on the Ballot, So Let’s Win

Americans may not be as patriotic as we once were, but do we still basically think of ourselves as belonging to the nation of Washington and Lincoln? On November 3, we will find out.

The Democrats and Republicans spent hours giving speeches at their nominating conventions, but their respective takeaways were simple enough. One party thinks America is racist to the core and that it must give way to something radically new. The other party thinks America is already great and that it is worth defending. Vice President Mike Pence got to the heart of the matter:

In this election it’s not so much whether America will be more conservative or more liberal, more Republican or more Democrat. The choice in this election is whether America remains America.

Part policy boast, part paean to the nation, President Trump’s speech defended not only his first term in office but the America of the last 250 years. “Your vote will decide whether we protect law-abiding Americans or whether we give free rein to violent anarchists, and agitators, and criminals who threaten our citizens,” Trump said. “And this election will decide whether we will defend the American way of life or whether we will allow a radical movement to completely dismantle and destroy it.”

Trump didn’t have to go reaching for this bold message. It came ready-made from current events. We have become partisans, not within one nation, but of two nations. But only one of these is recognizable as America. Doubtless the Democrats think of themselves as patriotic in some way, but the loyalty they pledge is not to George Washington’s country. It is to something entirely novel.

This election is not just about policy, but our heritage, our Constitution, our most basic freedoms. We will choose whether to honor heroes like George Washington, or criminal riffraff like George Floyd. We will choose whether America is a free nation, where the rights to life, liberty, and property are secured, or a revolutionary despotism, in which those rights are conditioned on what we believe and what we look like.

The Democrats spent most of their convention talking about something called “systemic racism.” Until recently, this fashionable concept was unfamiliar to most Americans. Now, we are told, it is at the very heart of America and its identity. America, according to this view, is not, and never has been, exceptional. Far from it, America is oppressive and evil.

This is now the Democratic Party line, and it is the basis of a revolution that has already changed the country in profound ways. To be clear, this revolution has very little to do with the American Revolution.

Washington, D.C.’s Democratic mayor recently suggested “contextualizing” the Washington Monument, presumably with a plaque reminding visitors that the father of our country was a racist. This was the recommendation of a “working group” of progressive busybodies summoned to decide which of the city’s artifacts from the antediluvian world before George Floyd are still allowed, and which must be expunged for failing to align with the platitudes of contemporary liberalism. 

Of course, there are flow charts and woke jargon to go with it. “Our decision-making prism focused on key disqualifying histories, including participation in slavery, systemic racism, mistreatment of, or actions that suppressed equality for, persons of color, women and LGBTQ communities and violation of the DC Human Right Act.” Try saying that 10 times fast.

This stuff is no longer fringe, but mainstream in Democratic circles. And this revolution is not just a matter of monuments and symbols, although they matter a great deal, but things more fundamental to civic order and happiness.

This summer, by one reckoning, there have been at least 200 riots in cities across the nation. The Left celebrates them as a sign of restraint (just 7 percent of “protests” were violent!). Meanwhile, livelihoods have been destroyed, people have randomly harassed, assaulted, and even killed innocent citizens with relative impunity. Through it all, journalists and Democrats have offered tepid denunciations or outright lies.

Not only that, they have rejected equality under the law to embrace a new set of punitive laws and customs. It is becoming the Democratic Party’s position that the enjoyment of basic rights, including the presumption of innocence (whether in the court of public opinion or law) and the right to self-preservation, should depend on whether you are a member of a “protected class.”. 

So it is that Joe Biden can blame a white Trump supporter for his own murder while exalting as a martyr a black man who is shot while resisting arrest. And so it is that looters and gutter trash are given free rein to terrorize innocents for months on end, while those who dare to defend their lives and property are declared racists and enemies of the state without hesitation. 

These double standards now pervade our society and public conversation. We can feel them. They hang over us like a sword.

Because recent polls have frightened them, Democrats now insist that all of this is taking place in “Donald Trump’s America,” but that is a malicious deflection. The Democrats didn’t mention the riots at their convention because the rioters are their partisans. It’s that simple.

The truth is Democrats don’t want to better America, they want to replace America. That isn’t what they put out front, of course. They just want a “more perfect Union,” as they said in one overwrought speech after the next at their convention, quoting a Constitution they don’t believe in and otherwise routinely slam as outdated. But they spoke of America as a woefully incomplete revolutionary project, a “work” that is really just beginning. America, to paraphrase Lincoln, cannot endure permanently half woke and half free.

But Biden will be a president for all, they say, while pointing to Trump and his millions of supporters as an existential threat to “who we are.” As they made clear, this “we” includes illegal immigrants, but not anyone who thinks it shouldn’t.

What kind of a country looks upon its origins with this kind of disgust? Upon citizens with this kind of contempt? It is how invaders look upon conquered peoples, and it is how the Democratic Party now views the America of Washington and Lincoln.

The ancients warned that democracies fail, that they inexorably descend into mob rule. America was supposed to be different. It was meant to be a constitutional republic, where reason and fairness would prevail. The Democrats want to reject all of this. 

Many Democratic voters probably do not realize how extreme their party has become. Of course, some have realized it, and with any luck, many more of them will.

Americans may not be as patriotic as we once were, but do we still basically think of ourselves as belonging to the nation of Washington and Lincoln?

If we do, and if the choice we face is made clear to voters this November, it would defy the laws of political physics for Donald Trump to lose.


The Billionaire Backers of the ‘Insurrection’

The mostly behind-the-scenes attempt between Election Day and Inauguration Day to prevent Donald Trump from taking office the first time will go public in 2020.

As I reported last week, a cabal of Democrats and NeverTrump Republicans are plotting a post-election civil war of sorts to make sure Joe Biden assumes the presidency even if Donald Trump legitimately wins. “It’s insurrection,” President Trump said on Fox News last week when asked about the widely-circulated plan. “We’ll put them down very quickly if they do that.”

Let’s hope. A document released last month by the Transition Integrity Project, a headfake name to give the depraved group the appearance of decency, is a shocking battle plan that would plunge the country into more chaos. The same agitators on the Left and NeverTrump Right who’ve stoked nonstop political upheaval over the past four years will exploit our current instability to throw the election to the Democrats. 

But this is more than the far-fetched hallucinations of political outcasts. The mayhem they’ve been war-gaming will be heavily funded by a number of Trump-hating billionaires, and those people have no intention of losing out on their investment.

The mostly behind-the-scenes attempt between Election Day and Inauguration Day to prevent Donald Trump from taking office the first time—one that miraculously failed despite help from the media and the most powerful government agencies in the world—will go public in 2020. And instead of help from James Comey, Jim Clapper, or John Brennan, the 2020 version will be bolstered by the likes of George Soros, Tom Steyer, Pierre Omidyar, a member of the Rupert Murdoch family, and Big Tech titans among others.

One of the co-founders of the Transition Integrity Project is Rosa Brooks. The Georgetown law professor and Obama Administration alum is a former counsel and board member for the Open Society Foundation, created in 1993 by George Soros. The foundation is a massive donor to hundreds of left-wing causes around the world; in July, Open Society Foundation announced a five-year, $150 million investment in “racial justice” groups including Black Lives Matter. 

In 2018, Soros’ two largest foundations reported more than $14 billion in assets.

In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Brooks put the country on notice; unless Joe Biden wins in a landslide, we will be sorry. “With the exception of the ‘big Biden win’ scenario, each of our exercises reached the brink of catastrophe, with massive disinformation campaigns, violence in the streets and a constitutional impasse,” she warned. That reaction will occur, according to the simulations, even if Trump wins the Electoral College but loses the popular vote.

But Brooks isn’t the only connection between deep-pocketed foes of Donald Trump and the post-election insurrection.  Another new group, Protect the Results, is working hand-in-hand with Brooks “to mobilize if Donald Trump refuses to accept the results of the 2020 presidential election . . . [and] prepare for a potential post-election crisis.”

Protect the Results lists dozen of sponsors which in reality are mostly funded by only a handful of anti-Trump tycoons.

George Soros: One of Protect the Results main organizers is a nonprofit called Indivisible. Based out of Washington, D.C., Indivisible was founded in 2016 after Trump’s election; according to a political watchdog, Indivisible’s main donor is the Tides Foundation, a Soros-financed pass through organization.

“Started as a Google document detailing techniques for opposing the Republican agenda under Mr. Trump, [Indivisible] now has a mostly Washington-based staff of about 40 people, with more than 6,000 volunteer chapters across the country,” the New York Times reported in 2017. That year, Indivisible raised nearly $8 million, a figure we presume is much higher in 2020. The group’s policy director is a former advisor for an immigration advocacy center partially funded by grants from Soros.

Other Soros-funded entities including MoveOn.org, People for the American Way, 350Action, and Women’s March are listed as Protect the Results partners. In an interview last month, Soros, a longtime Trump nemesis, suggested the president will be indicted if he loses in November “because he has violated the Constitution in many different ways.” One scenario war-gamed out by the post-election plotters is criminal charges brought against Donald Trump and his associates for unspecified crimes.

Pierre Omidyar: The founder of eBay has poured tens of millions into projects headed by NeverTrump “conservatives” including former Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol since 2017.

Omidyar, whose net worth is around $17 billion, this week issued a blueprint for how to “reimagine capitalism in America” which would “ensure that people who have been historically and systematically marginalized by structural racism, colonialism, paternalism, and indifference will have opportunity, power, and the self determination that comes from economic prosperity and a vibrant, fair, and responsive democracy.” 

Most of Omidyar’s largess has been directed to left-wing causes and Democratic candidates over the years but he found political soulmates on the NeverTrump Right. Two NeverTrump outfits—Republicans for the Rule of Law and Stand Up Republic—are Protect the Results partners. Stand Up Republic is fronted by NeverTrumper Evan McMullin; Republicans for the Rule of Law, headed by Kristol, is one of many groups that receives grants from Omidyar’s vast network.

Kristol participated in the post-election tabletop exercises and bragged on Twitter that he had played the role of President Trump.

James and Kathryn Murdoch: The son and daughter-in-law of Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch are spending lots of money to separate themselves from the family’s conservative legacy. James resigned from the company’s board in July over disputes with the cable news channel’s “editorial content.”

The Murdochs, worth a reported $2 billion, are donors to Kristol’s Republicans for the Rule of Law and another Kristol-operated group, Defending Democracy Together, which is spending tens of millions on advertisements in swing states featuring purported Republicans planning to vote for Joe Biden. (The Murdochs also support the former vice president.) 

Defending Democracy Together publishes The Bulwark, an online magazine that replaced Kristol’s now-defunct Weekly Standard. The blog houses a number of NeverTrumper editors and writers including Charles Sykes and Mona Charen. The Bulwark, like other NeverTrump organs, is pushing the idea that the president, not the Democrats or Joe Biden, won’t accept the results of the election. (Omidyar also supports Defending Democracy Together.)

Tom Steyer: NextGen America, fronted by failed Democratic presidential candidate and multi-billionaire Tom Steyer, is involved in Protect the Results. Steyer spent $123 million in the 2018 election cycle; NextGen America will spend at least $45 million to help elect Joe Biden by persuading young voters to use mail-in ballots. While lamenting out-of-control wildfires in his home state, Steyer told CNN on Monday that the only solution to the alleged climate crisis is “honest to God, Joe Biden.”

While this list covers the anti-Trump vehicles offically bankrolling the post-election revolt, it does not account for the unquantifiable in-kind donations by Big Tech. As I will detail in my next column, Silicon Valley already is seeding the ground for a Biden victory at all costs by using a combination of censorship and intimidation aimed not just at Republican voters but at the president himself—involvement that can justifiably be described as election interference on a scale our foreign adversaries could only dream of.


Biden, ‘The Great and Powerful’

For now Joe Biden’s best hope is that some Emerald City media lackey does not play the role of the tiny dog Toto, rip away the curtain, and reveal the tiny man and his machinery behind the projection.

Media bias is not new.

In addition to the Russian collusion hoax and the phone-call impeachment farce, who can forget the marquee media toadies of JournoList and the release of John Podesta’s email trove? 

Or the moderator Donna Brazile’s primary debate questions, leaked through CNN, or Candy Crowley’s hijacking of a debate as moderator-turned-real-time-hack “fact-checker”? 

Nothing then is new to the media’s fusion and collusion with the “progressive party.” 

Yet never in American history have mainstream journalists not merely promoted a candidate but actively fused with his political candidacy to the point of warping, fabricating, and Trotskyizing the news and indeed history itself. 

The trope of a vast charade to create an illusionary powerful figure out of nothing is an old one in fiction, Hollywood and television. We remember “The Great and Powerful” Wizard of Oz fakery, a formidable screen image created backstage by gears and levers operated by a tiny man “behind the curtain.” Similar is the famous scene in an episode of the old Star Trek series, depicting a near comatose on-air John Gill used as a televised prop by his puppeteers, in a utopian federation project gone haywire.

But reality has outdone art with the Biden campaign. The concoction is holistic, from the mundane construction of a fantasy, on-the-go candidate to the supposed middle-of-the road old Joe Biden from Scranton radiating an aura of kindness and moderation in times of plague, panic, and protest. 

Bunker Illusions

For six months, Biden has run a Zoom campaign on the pretext of mandatory quarantines—our current version of a 19th-century, stationary presidential candidate, who campaigned by spitting out wit and wisdom while immovable on his front porch. 

Biden has conducted no free-wheeling, unscripted press conferences. He will not do extended one-on-one interviews with a disinterested journalist. He rarely will even try Trump-like cameo appearances on CNN or MSNBC to answer unscripted questions from supporters. His press events instead are Orwellian, requiring a media mass suspension of disbelief. 

The questions are canned. They are submitted in advance by “journalists,” whether formally or via electronic chatter. The inquiries are obsequious—seldom a word about Hunter Biden, China, Biden’s troubling racist remarks, his handsy past, his scary cognitive lapses, or his “contract” with Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). Instead the softball, known-in-advance inquiries are in spirit carried over from the Obama years, phrased in the manner of “Were you outraged enough by Trump’s outrage?”

Biden’s Oz functionaries seemingly are always experimenting with all sorts of screen props. The trick is to discover how best their challenged candidate can square the circle of completing sentences and remaining semi-coherent, while not giving away the game that his illusionists are feeding him answers to synthetic questions. 

When asked point-blank on Fox News by Brett Baier whether Biden used a stealth teleprompter, his national press flak, T.J. Ducklo would not answer with a simple yes or no. Instead, he went on the attack, with the fossilized accusation that right-wing Fox News asks too many partisan questions. 

So we were left with a de facto “yes”: Biden does read off a stealthy teleprompter when answering canned press questions—and gives the impression he does not.

But Biden, like the mirage of the Wizard of Oz, nonetheless can’t always keep the curtain closed. 

When he strains to see the teleprompter that sits just behind, and thus out of sight of, his camera lens, he slips and mutters “bring it closer”—reminding any who watch, except the media that helps collude in these orchestrations, that the question asked is not a serious one, but a prompt to facilitate the proper nonspontaneous response.

Yet even then Biden cannot act out the part of the Star Trek federation’s addled Gill without someone either giving him the prewritten answer on the teleprompter or writing it out for him in real-time. Sometimes if Biden is not reading a hidden teleprompter script, he looks down in panic for notes or his smartphone instructions in ways that only expose the sheer ridiculousness of this faux media-staged event.

Sometimes he shows off family pictures on screen that seemingly inadvertently reflect and expose the ghostly presence of a teleprompter’s reflection in the background. On other occasions when speaking, Biden searches in vain for his “schedule” and asks handlers to fetch it, whatever that exactly means.

In a presidential campaign first, Biden even reads out the written directives of his controllers as if to say “I’m not really saying this myself, but so what?”

So not surprisingly, during one of these sessions, out came a reference to his script’s talking point “topline” headings. When faking impromptu answers, Biden bumps into and voices his handlers’ notation of “end of quotation.” 

Occasionally a “citizen” questioner sort of rebels from the media Borg and asks an unapproved question (e.g. “I’m just going to be honest Mr. Biden, I was told to go off this paper, but I can’t. We need the truth and I am a part of the truth”). In reaction, Biden’s handlers and fact-checkers rush to assure the public that the approved question was written by the questioner’s sympathetic organization rather than from Team Biden itself—as if we are supposed to believe the campaign had no idea what its own surrogates would ask.

Sometimes the effort is scary. When old photos reappear in a CNN puff piece about a younger Biden holding his young son at a long-ago Washington Redskins game, the team logo—the now-politically incorrect Redskins logo—is airbrushed from his son’s stocking cap. And then presto, legions of “disinterested” “fact-checkers” in the media emerge to confess that Biden, not CNN, supplied the doctored image. 

But, in turn, the Biden campaign assures the press that the doctoring was only for “copyright” reasons, as if candidates routinely photoshop out all the cap logos they wear. The impression is that Biden is terrified that his new leftist friends in the Ministry of Truth are combing his past and ordering embarrassing moments to go down the memory hole.

Oz Wizardry

As a general rule, the Soviet-style apologia for the media-Biden fusion—usually outsourced to a now utterly corrupt left-wing institution called “fact-checking”—only solidifies the fact that the media and the Biden campaign are indistinguishable.

In Soviet times, one easily just assumed the opposite from Moscow’s party-line efforts and, presto, stumbled onto the truth. In the case of Biden’s optics and press conferences and appearances, we easily deduce that the downside of scripting and programming a compliant candidate far outweighs the existential risk of turning Biden loose to answer questions like a normal human being. 

True, even before his cognitive decline, Biden was known in Washington as someone whose incoherent and impromptu loquaciousness usually embarrassed his friends more than hurt his enemies—in addition to his long history of plagiarism and inflating his thin résumés with false data about his past. 

But with the onset of his cognitive decline, Biden’s own once-feeble social antennae are now more or less unplugged most of the day.

The result is that he has a creepy propensity to blurt out patently racist tropes as if the old inner Biden who talked of Obama as “clean” and the first “articulate” black presidential candidate, and pandered to his working-class Democratic supporters with references to the inner-city “jungle,” is now free of his harnesses, bits, and halters. 

For some time, Biden unchained has shouted about “you ain’t black,” and, earlier, his Corn Pop series of inflated tales as Biden, the white knight, equipped with a chain no less, protecting the inner city from itself. 

Biden showed his tough-guy mettle with putdowns of a transitorily noncompliant black journalist and sneered that he is comparable to a “junkie” and drug addict. To a liberated Biden, blacks just don’t think independently like Latinos.

Given all that, the decision of his campaign and their media stand-ins to reinsert Biden into his safe space, wheel him out for scripted occasions, and pray at least that he can follow either the teleprompter, his iPhone, or written notes in his lap, or remember his cues—without including the prompts themselves—seems understandable. 

This was all known to Democratic primary voters who initially wanted little to do with Biden. The narratives advanced by primary rivals Kamala Harris and Corey Booker implied that he was either a virtual racist or cognitively challenged or both—insinuations the left-wing media was willing to fuel, in the heydays of a preferable Berrnie Sanders, Elizbeth Warren, or Beto O’Rourke prairie fire candidacy. 

All that media fantasy imploded when would-be savior Michael Bloomberg proved little more than a billionaire bore and Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders cranky and shrill socialist septuagenarians with even scarier agendas. 

Floating to November

So the lightweight Biden was reflated as a sort of centrist hot air balloon to be used to float the hard-Left basket carriage beneath across the election defining line.

But fusion/collusion is not just a matter of a Potemkin veneer. Biden’s agenda is a fantasy creation. His role was to save the party from Sanders, win suburbanites, and pander to the party’s socialist sympathizers of Antifa and the Black Lives Matter movement. That is an impossible task because today’s Democratic Party is a conglomeration of squabbling tribes and looney agendas. 

Biden is now ordered to keep still on the issues of the day, because what he once said to get nominated and please the Left would lose him the election. He wants to defund the police, but not to defund the police. He wants to phase out fossil fuels and end fracking but not to end fracking in Electoral College-rich Pennsylvania. 

The rioting, Biden insists, is due to police brutality but not due to it entirely. Trump’s COVID policies killed thousands, but Biden’s own bromides are either identical or would be less effective. 

And on and on, as Biden is made to wink and nod to the Left that his only role is to get them elected before collapsing at the finishing line. 

The media thinks this will work, and so owns the project. Biden will stay sequestered, visit a key state occasionally, pop out of the plane to say he is “barnstorming” Michigan or Wisconsin and then fly back into his Biden bunker for more Zoom puff interviews—and hope progressive polls show that he can endure weekly bleeding until November 3.

Every four or five days the media will blast the airways with, “Trump is ripping out mailboxes,” “Trump won’t concede and will have to be forcibly removed,” “Trump insulted our war dead as ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’ as he hid from the rain to keep his hair dry.” Most recently Bob Woodward’s book queued up for its turn of 72 hours of smears, right after gab-bag Jeffery Goldberg’s anonymous sources faded out. 

Will this joint project of progressive ideologues of the Democratic Party and the major media work? 

So far the rope-a-dope has succeeded in slowing down somewhat the pace of the erosion of Biden’s lead. And Biden as the tough-talking Wizard projection will continue until, when, or if the polls show an undeniable Trump surge ahead. 

For now Biden’s best hope is that some Emerald City media lackey does not play the role of the tiny dog Toto, rip away the curtain, and reveal the tiny man and his machinery behind the projection.


How to Win Reelection in the Final 60 Days

It’s time for a full-court press.

If history is to repeat itself with Donald Trump as victor in the 2020 presidential election, the campaign will need to bend its strategy, cross certain t’s and dot other i’s, now. The execution must be near perfect. Much like the miraculous first victory, we count on the metaphysical necessity of a Trump victory to let Providence ensure the assortment of circumstances that will lead us to victory.

Execution is everything. As the inspirational Tony Robbins says, “Knowing information is not the same as owning it and following through. Information without execution is poverty. Remember: we’re drowning in information, but we’re starving for wisdom.”      

Trump 2020 Needs to Stay Wise!

If the busybodies at the Republican National Committee and Trump campaign are reading, I offer my sage advice for what it’s worth. 

Follow it to a second Trump term. Neglect it and the Trump presidency will go down as an incomplete one-term presidency. You don’t want to lose to senile O’Biden and the woke Left.

I was one of the original backers of 45 and have stayed with him through thick and thin, up and down. I was a surrogate on air and in print well over 200 times for the last winning effort. I was persecuted for my political faith.  I want him to win again. 

President Trump needs to heed this strategy as well, as he detests losing, and the United States needs him to win big and finish the job he has started. He is all we have standing between our country and the abyss of Joe Biden—really, woke Kamala Harris.

While America is a nation, elections are won and lost in particular states. Forty or more of the states are already pretty much determined. Some are in our column; others will firmly go Democrat. Focus only on those that can put us over the top in the Electoral College. They are Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Maine (one district), Minnesota, and Arizona. 

Go after them like a rat terrier. Help the Republicans keep control of the Senate, too. Don’t waste time in New York, California, or the coasts. Forget about it.

Guarantee the base. They are with you, Mr. President, but get them more motivated and willing to all turn out and bring a friend or two. The two issues to do that as you well know are: law and order and the economy. 

You need to quell the riots, reduce the virus, and get more money into the hands of the masses. Forget about everything else. Focus like the proverbial laser. Drop all extraneous activity and hyperbole. Stop with the flailing and uncoordinated junk. Message to persuade. The Trump videos are great! Do more airport rallies with crowds. Say we are back!

You need more suburbanites, particularly women; more blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, and more Reagan Democrats to come on board. All are within reach. Vastly more people will vote for you privately in the booth even if they don’t say so now. The way to go at this is twofold: what are we for? The winning purpose is a safe and prosperous America. 

Foreign policy is critically important. Remind voters of all the accomplishments so far. Then, dissuade them from going for a crony, swamp creature like Joe Biden, who will permanently change the country and install globalism with China as its centerpiece. Does that mean going dirty? 

No, it just means telling the truth. Say clearly what we are against.

The three nationally televised debates will be absolutely crucial because this election year is so unique. No rallies, “virtual” conventions, little traditional campaigning. You need to prepare, seriously prepare. Be natural, know what you are going to say, practice, and have zingers ready. I can send you some. They will get coverage and be remembered. 

You have to show Biden for what he is in the debates. Take no hostages and expose his poor mental state and newfound hard-leftist bent. Tell him: “No Malarkey.” Make him Quid Pro Joe. One conclusive image of him faltering means—you win.

You don’t want to wake up like Thomas Dewey did, slip in the final polls like Michael Dukakis, or get creamed on the final days of 2016 like Hillary Clinton. Surprise all the pundits, naysayers, pollsters, and haters. They want you to lose, badly. The way to avoid that fate is to follow this advice. Stay on target. Punch and counterpunch, harder. 

Do not tire. Never relent.

On COVID-19, spend 95 percent of your time putting out the “Warp Speed” plan to vaccinate all of America. The schools should reopen but the reality is only a successful vaccine wins the day and defeats the Wuhan nemesis. On the economy, remind everyone of the way things were just four months ago and show the contours of a V-shaped recovery. It is underway. Get checks into the hands of every taxpayer, ASAP and the $400 to those who need it. Sign the bottom line—Your President. Announce a bipartisan trillion-dollar infrastructure program to be commenced the day after reelection. You are the builder who can bring our country back.

Name your next Supreme Court appointee—a strict constructionist—in September. It will bring out conservatives you need to get over the top. Get the Justice Department to indict at least a half-dozen of the deep state culprits who attempted to cause a coup d’état.

You need to look and act presidential. Use the bully pulpit, the Oval Office, the Rose Garden, and the Roosevelt Room to your full advantage—daily. Be transparent and available—the opposite of your opponent. Show a dose of humility as well as confidence that America needs a leader to save her and keep her great

Get out the vote by using every possible means from canvassing to social media to algorithmic advertising. Take the sound opinion of Niccòlo Machiavelli in The Prince

A prince is despised if he is considered changeable, foolish, weak, mean, and uncertain. A prince should avoid these characteristics. In his actions, he should try to show greatness, courage, seriousness, and strength.

We can and will win. It’s time for a full-court press. At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787, the quintessential American, Benjamin Franklin was queried about the outcome. His memorable reply: “A republic, if you can keep it.” 

All Americans are counting on you to help them keep it. Our future is in your hands. Make that the consequence of this election.

Mr. President, be patriotic and above all, stay optimistic. Win.


2010: An Election Fraudyssey

Democrats are confident they can score a big win in November. Americans have seen this movie before, and to avoid a similar outcome, ballot fraud needs to be addressed before Election Day, not after.

Democratic strategists of the Hawkfish firm, funded by Michael Bloomberg, are touting a scenario in which President Trump wins big on election night, but when all the ballots are counted, Trump is the loser and Joe Biden the winner. Such a production already played out with Kamala Harris, in her 2010 race for California attorney general.

The former San Francisco district attorney was so lightly regarded at the time that the Sacramento Bee endorsed her Republican opponent, Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley. A prosecutor since 2000, Cooley had the backing of most law enforcement groups.

As CBS News reported, Cooley ran up “a comfortable lead in early returns” and on election night proclaimed victory. The next day, the Harris campaign declared, “Harris will be the next attorney general of the state of California.” Four days later CBS reported that the race “could take weeks to decide,” and Cooley trailed Harris by 12,000 votes. More than 2.3 million “late or provisional ballots remain to be counted,” according to the office of Secretary of State Debra Bowen, a Democrat. Scott Hounsell worked on the Cooley campaign and described the scene

“In the weeks leading up to the race, stories began to circulate about mail ballot operations being conducted throughout the state by forces loyal to Harris’ team.” On election night, Cooley held a lead of nearly 10 points and at 9 p.m. declared victory, but then “as the hours transpired, Cooley’s lead began to shrink, first to eight percent then five, four, and three.” By 2 a.m., Cooley’s lead shrank to less than a percentage point. 

Last year, Roll Call ran a story headlined “When Kamala Harris lost on election night but won three weeks later.” As author Bridget Bowman noted, in the late stages of the campaign, the Service Employees International Union, then headed by Laphonza Butler, launched a campaign for Harris. In the days following the election, Hounsell recalls, “the county employees who were counting these ballots were all SEIU members, often proudly wearing SEIU gear and chumming around with Harris team officials. As we were challenging a few votes, dozens of other employees were counting and eliminating votes on their own.” 

It was an “impossible situation,” Hounsell explains, and almost as if Harris and her team “knew what was coming.” Three weeks later, Harris was victorious by 0.8 percent of the 9 million total votes cast. For her part, Harris viewed the job as a stepping stone to higher office. She targeted for-profit colleges, supported gun control, and in 2013 refused to appeal the court decision overturning the 2008 Proposition 8, which sought to ban same-sex marriage. 

The new span of the Bay Bridge, $5 billion over budget and riddled with safety issues, had whistleblowers calling for a criminal investigation. Harris failed to launch any criminal probe, which was no surprise. The bridge had been a pet project of her former boyfriend Willie Brown, whose daring acts of poontronage set up Harris in lucrative sinecures. 

 California’s attorney general stayed quiet in 2014 when Mexican national Luis Bracamontes gunned down police officers Danny Oliver and Michael Davis in Sacramento County. In 2015, Mexican felon and repeat deportee Jose Inez Garcia Zarate shot and killed Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier. Harris defended the city’s sanctuary policy and failed even to decry the “gun violence” in that case. 

On December 2, 2015, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik killed 14 unarmed innocents and wounded 22 at an office party in San Bernardino. One year later, Harris finally issued a statement on the terrorist attack.

In 2016, former flame Willie Brown told former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to butt out of the Senate race and make way for Harris. In 2020, Brown was very pleased that his former understudy accepted Joe Biden’s offer. 

Biden’s strategists are now positively triumphal that Trump will win big on election night, but when all the ballots are counted, the Biden-Harris ticket will prevail. With Biden in obvious mental decline, Harris herself could wind up in the Oval Office. 

As Hounsell explains, voter fraud and biased counting of less than 1 percent handed Harris the victory in 2010, and such “ballot harvesting” is now legal in California, where more than 1 million illegals have been registered to vote by the state DMV. The illegals will all get mail ballots, by order of Governor Gavin Newsom. Government employee unions, the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, are also an issue. 

As Bridget Bowman notes, the SEIU’s Laphonza Butler is now an adviser to Harris’ presidential campaign. The SEIU parades around the California capitol chanting “This is our house!” and would surely be pleased to claim the White House. 

Another government union, the National Association of Letter Carriers, has endorsed Joe Biden for president, hoping for the bailout funds Nancy Pelosi has promised. A partisan force will thus carry the ballots Democratic strategists claim will put Joe Biden in the White House, in a thrilling come-from-behind victory like that of Kamala Harris in 2010. 

Americans have seen this movie, and to avoid a similar outcome, ballot fraud needs to be addressed, to the full extent possible, before November 3, not after. It is possible that President Trump could win by such a margin that Democratic post-election fakery would fail. But as the president says, we’ll have to see what happens. 


Joe Biden’s Two ‘Colleges of Collusion’

With the Penn Biden Center for Global Engagement and the Biden Institute for Public Policy and Administration, the Democratic nominee has found that higher education pays in more ways than one.

It’s worse than you think,” wrote The New Yorker in 2016 about Trump University. NPR castigated it for offering no degree after four years and having no accreditation. Comedians like John Oliver dumped on it in a long produced segment. 

Such was the coverage  when Donald Trump was running for president four years ago. 

It was not without some justification, as Trump University was little more than a diploma mill meant to cash in on Trump’s brand from “The Apprentice.” And his primary opponents made sure to point it out. But Trump University was closed in 2010, five years before he announced his candidacy. 

In 2020, however, as Trump’s opponent Joe Biden gears up for the debates, there has been scant coverage of Biden’s ongoing conflicts of interest in higher education. This despite the fact that the two Biden “colleges” involve foreign cash, have no classes accredited or otherwise, and are largely staffed by his political cronies.

In February 2017, fresh off eight years in office and in the wake of a stunning election in which their party had been swept out of office, a number of former Obama Administration officials helped to launch the Penn Biden Center for Global Engagement. This University of Pennsylvania initiative supposedly was going to impart the secrets of statecraft from former Vice President Joe Biden to young, would-be foreign policy advisors. 

Rather than locate this initiative on campus, however, Penn rented out expensive office space at 101 Constitution Ave. in Washington, D.C., across from Capitol Hill. The staff of the Penn Biden Center is composed almost exclusively of ex-White House and State or Defense Department officials for Biden and President Obama, even though Penn has a posted six-step hiring process for executive staff and must keep all documents on file for three years. What are the chances that such a process would come upon former Iran Nuclear Deal staffer Colin Kahl or lobbyist Daniel Erikson of Blue Star Strategies, a firm deeply entwined with Biden’s son Hunter in the Burisma natural gas scandal?

The Penn Biden Center, despite its stated mission, does not provide any academic instruction, and has not held an event since a 2017 Chicago conference, so one could be forgiven for not hearing about it or the $775,000 in salary that Biden has earned from it since its opening. 

In May, the National Legal Policy Center, a conservative watchdog group, filed a complaint with the Department of Education demanding that the PBC disclose anonymous gifts, including $22 million that originated from the People’s Republic of China. But apart from the NLPC and local Philadelphia media, there has been virtually no media scrutiny surrounding the PBC’s funding, staffing practices, and lack of actual academic activity. 

The Penn Biden Center has issued no academic reports, instead simply publishing and tweeting out opinion pieces written by its staff on foreign policy on niche sites like Balkan Insider. The entire operating profile of the PBC suggests that it is a washing machine for foreign monies dressed in a cap and gown for the benefit of former political appointees and Penn.

But the PBC was not enough, apparently. The University of Delaware also has the Biden Institute of Public Policy and Administration and the school’s renamed Biden School of Public Policy. Its vice chairman is Biden’s younger sister, Valerie Biden Owens, who the New York Times in February profiled as the manager of his previous Senate and presidential campaigns in 1988 and 2008. 

Samantha Vinograd, a national security analyst at CNN and former National Security Council point person on Iraq under Obama, is a “senior advisor” at Delaware’s Biden Institute. The school’s managing director is Mike Donilon, the brother of former Obama National Security Advisor Tom Donilon and a veteran political consultant for Biden since 1981. 

Politico in 2019 profiled Donilon as one of the aides assisting the former vice president in his battle to defeat the progressive Left and keep the party in the center. His UD executive salary is unknown as Delaware does not have a sunshine law requiring it to disclose such information for academic executives. 

Meanwhile, according to Inside Higher Ed, UD has accepted $28.6 million not only from China, but also from Qatar, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Russia. The only outcry to investigate these connections has come from three GOP House committee ranking members. The Biden School of Public Policy is ranked 38th in the country by U.S. News and World Report, while UD itself is ranked 39th among public colleges and universities.

The ties between the university and the state’s former senator go back beyond the founding of the institute and the renaming of the public policy school. 

In 2008, it emerged that Hunter Biden’s old lobbying firm Oldaker, Biden & Belair had successfully lobbied for an earmark for UD. In April, as Biden was grappling once again with charges of sexual assault by former aide Tara Reade, his Senate archives housed at the university were the subject of demands for public disclosure. But as Fox News reported, its board of trustees rebuffed them. Board president John Cochran was Hunter Biden’s boss at credit card company MBNA during the 1990s and bought Senator Biden’s house in 1998 for $1.2 million. The same report documented campaign donations to Biden from seven other trustees.

Biden’s cronies at UD are not shying away from playing a hand in his current campaign, either. 

In 2019 Mike Donilon received $20,000 as a consultant for American Possibilities PAC, a firm formed by Biden that received more than $36,000 from the official Biden for President campaign. Donilon is now the chief strategist for the campaign itself. The PAC’s former executive director, Greg Schultz, would later serve as campaign manager for the Biden campaign from April 2019 until March of this year. 

The Democratic Party has championed diversity and intersectionality the past few years. Yet when perusing the public profile of its standard-bearer the only intersection that is reached is the one between his political appointees, the academic industrial complex, and anonymous foreign donors. Whereas Donald Trump has been hounded over allegations of sexual impropriety by women like E. Jean Carroll who have called rape “sexy” on live television, Biden’s most prominent accuser gets almost no airtime and records of her time in his office are sealed by a state university that clearly has a conflicted relationship with him. 

All of these facts should worry anyone who expects Biden’s team, now incubating at these institutions, to take control next January.


It’s Impossible for Biden To Stand Up for Law and Order

There is no space on the Left to aggressively counter left-wing violence.

Joe Biden made a major pivot last week: he acknowledged riots exist and they are bad.

“I want to make it absolutely clear, rioting is not protesting, looting is not protesting,” Biden said in an ad aired last week. “It’s lawlessness, plain and simple, and those that [sic] do it should be prosecuted.”

This statement should be a basic opinion for all politicians, regardless of party. Reporters dutifully concluded that this condemnation nipped this issue in the bud and the riots are now a less effective weapon for Donald Trump. Biden stands up for law and order, according to this interpretation. Only liberal journalists are credulous enough to believe this malarkey. 

Biden offers no means to stop the violence and he refuses to assign proper blame for the violence. He blames Donald Trump and his supporters for the violence—not the left-wing militants on the streets. “Fires are burning and we have a president who fans the flames. He can’t stop the violence because for years he’s fomented it,” he says in the ad.

Biden even made a not-so-subtle threat in one of his messages about the riots. “Does anyone believe there will be less violence in America if Donald Trump is reelected?” he tweeted

The message: vote for me or there will be more riots and anarchy.

The Democratic nominee will not actually stop the violence or safeguard Americans from crime. He supports radical criminal justice reform efforts that would put more violent people on the streets, opposes necessary tactics to quell the riots, refuses to pinpoint the actual perpetrators of the violence, and is the figurehead of a party that feels “law and order” is racist.

Biden’s criminal justice reform plan would coddle criminals at the expense of public safety. His plan demands the release of thousands of convicts to end “mass incarceration,” the elimination of the cash bail system, an end to private prisons, abolishing mandatory minimum sentencing, and will direct the Department of Justice to prioritize the investigation of “police racism.” 

While not quite calling for the defunding of police, Biden says the federal government should withhold funding from police departments that fail to meet progressive standards. Biden claims his plan will make our country safe from crime, but the only two areas he promises to crack down on are “hate crimes” and gun ownership. The Democratic candidate pledges to strip law-abiding Americans of their right to defend themselves. The McCloskeys and Kyle Rittenhouse would be helpless against rioters in Biden’s America.

The Democratic Party cares more about coddling criminals than punishing crime—unless that crime is a Trump supporter owning a firearm.

Bail reform would be especially beneficial for the rioters. Many of those arrested in Portland were quickly released and promptly went back to causing chaos in the streets. Biden’s policies would ensure more of these criminals can ravage cities without fear of punishment. 

While Biden promises to end the violence, he excoriates Trump’s methods for doing so. In July, he lambasted federal law enforcement using standard riot control methods against rioters.

“We all remember the appalling scenes in front of the White House, when peaceful protesters were gassed to make way for a Trump photo op,” he said. “Now Homeland Security agents—without a clearly defined mandate or authority—are ranging far from federal property, stripped of badges and insignia and identifying markings, to detain people. They are brutally attacking peaceful protesters, including a U.S. Navy veteran.”

Does Biden propose ending riots and looting with social workers? Or maybe he hopes his strongly-worded statement will make them go away? Whatever his thinking, he proposes no means for ending the violence besides kicking Trump out of office. 

The implication is that red-state America just needs to comply with the rioters’ demands and no one gets hurt. If Trump supporters resist, then the violence only gets worse. It’s a bargain with hostage-takers, and no person with any degree of intestinal fortitude would accept it. 

There are people who Biden may ruthlessly pursue if the riots persist under his administration—but it’s not Antifa or Black Lives Matter. It will be any American who dares challenge the violent anarchists. 

Biden only made his condemnation of the riots after the Rittenhouse shooting and the Proud Boy brawls in Portland. A right-wing backlash outrages them more than the innocent lives lost, the hundreds of destroyed businesses, and the defilement of the rule of law. 

The corporate leftist media and Democrats have already set on blaming the violence on right-wingers if they can’t ignore it. It’s almost guaranteed that Biden will direct federal resources to crush conservative opposition to the violence. There’s a dismal chance he will do the same against Antifa. Liberals either refuse to believe Antifa exists or imagine they’re just like our soldiers who defeated Hitler. There is no space on the Left to aggressively counter left-wing violence.

Just look at how Democratic officials treat the rioters in Portland. The Democratic district attorney, Mike Schmidt, says he won’t prosecute most rioters. Mayor Ted Wheeler, a Democrat, continues to appease Antifa and refuse federal help as far-left militants lay siege to his apartment building. This is the kind of response we will see on a national level under a Democratic administration.

Biden’s support base backs Antifa and Black Lives Matter. Seventy-five percent of Democrats support the “protests” that devastated Kenosha, Wisconsin last month. Ninety-five percent of Democrats support Black Lives Matter. An astounding 35 percent of Democrats support violent demonstrations. Biden is not going to go against the majority of his party and bring the hammer down on left-wing militants. The Democratic base doesn’t seem to mind the violence unless the Right can be blamed for it.

As evinced by Biden’s criminal justice plan, the Democratic Party cares more about coddling criminals than punishing crime—unless that crime is a Trump supporter owning a firearm. 

Biden’s pivot is an act of desperation. His campaign knows the riots are playing in Trump’s favor and he can’t appear to be on the arsonists’ side. He had to condemn and show he stands for the law against anarchy. But anarcho-tyranny is the natural result of Democratic policies—only his loyal supporters in the media refuse to see this.


Big Lies Matter

Democrats hoped to use anti-police riots after George Floyd’s death to shore up the black vote. Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison led the effort by hiding the truth about what really happened.


Americans were horrified by the video of George Floyd dying under the knee of a white Minneapolis police officer in May. Many supported protesting police brutality against blacks, thinking the cops in Floyd’s case must have broken every rule in the book.

What few people knew at the time is that Minnesota’s Attorney General Keith Ellison, former six-term congressional Democrat and deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, deliberately withheld video evidence that exonerates the police and, had it been made public, might have prevented a wave of anti-police murder and mayhem from sweeping the country.

Floyd’s death on May 25 was captured on a bystander’s cellphone video. But another, much longer video, taken by a police body camera and kept from public view for over two months, shows events involving Floyd and the police in a very different light. 

For one thing, in the body-cam video Floyd, who had ingested a potentially lethal overdose of fentanyl, is seen repeatedly resisting arrest; for another, officers are shown following official guidelines in Minneapolis Police Department training material for handling someone in Floyd’s condition. 

The neck restraint that shocked viewers when the cellphone video went viral is a standard law enforcement technique for handling suspects exhibiting symptoms of drug-induced delirium, as Floyd was. 

Yet not a single city official, from the Democratic mayor of Minneapolis to the 13-member Democrat-dominated city council, was honest enough to tell the public that police officers taking George Floyd into custody were carrying out procedures taught by the city’s own police department and approved by the city government.  

Hurry-Up Offense

At a June 3 press conference only days after Floyd’s death, Keith Ellison—the first African-American and the first Muslim to be elected to statewide office—announced he would be the lead prosecutor in the Floyd case. After a hurried investigation, he charged the four police officers, but held back the critical body-cam video, knowing it wouldn’t help his case and might even get it tossed out of court—and out of the news.

One former officer, Derek Chauvin, was charged with second-degree murder; three others, Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng, and Tou Thao, were charged with abetting second-degree murder. 

A hearing in the case to consider motions for dismissal is scheduled for Friday.

Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman’s office, which will handle the trial work, is known for targeting racism and police misconduct. Freeman also happens to be the only county prosecutor in Minnesota to win a murder conviction against a police officer. 

In that 2017 case, former Minneapolis officer Mohamed Noor was charged with shooting and killing Justine Damond during a 911 response. Noor was found guilty of second-degree murder and sentenced to 12-and-a-half years in prison. 

Both the Damond and Floyd cases have a racial component that made international news. In the Damond case Noor, who had been a police officer for two years, is a black Somali-American, and Damond was white Australian-American. In the Floyd case, Chauvin, with 20 years on the police force, is white, and Floyd was black. 

But that’s where the similarities end. In the Damond case, there was no body-cam video of the deadly shooting. Just the same, it was obvious from court testimony that Noor had not followed official police department guidelines the night he shot Damond. 

In the Floyd case, body-cam video is crucial since it shows the officers involved had followed—not violated—official police department guidelines. 

System Failure

Then there’s this: According to notes from an interview with county attorneys dated June 1 and released two weeks ago by the Hennepin County prosecutor’s office, Dr. Andrew Baker, chief medical examiner for the county, said blood taken from Floyd when his body arrived at the hospital contained more than enough fentanyl to cause respiratory failure.

A county autopsy, which identified no life-threatening injuries from the police, confirmed Floyd’s lungs were two-to-three times their normal weight indicating a “fatal level of fentanyl.” If Floyd were found dead in his home, Baker told attorneys, he would conclude the cause of death was “an overdose.” 

At the time of Ellison’s press conference, when charges against the officers were first made public, Freeman should have known what the county medical examiner had said from a report filed with his office two days before. The same goes for Ellison. At a minimum, these news facts called for further investigation. But charging the cops was more important. 

After examining all available medical and electronic evidence, George Parry, a former federal prosecutor and an expert on police brutality and misconduct, agreed that Floyd died of a drug overdose. The four police officers, he wrote in The American Spectator,  “are not guilty of the charges and played no material role in bringing about Floyd’s death.” 

Mob Rule

Keith Ellison told the Washington Post that rather than releasing the police video a “higher priority for me is a successful prosecution” of the police officers.

In his public statements, Ellison often talks about “justice for George Floyd”—a favorite chant of demonstrators—as if justice for the police officers is immaterial and unimportant. And in this case, clearly it is. 

In fact, what seemed to matter most to Minneapolis elected officials, as violence “honoring” Floyd increased, was to stand back and not interfere with angry mobs looting and setting fires

When the city council finally did act, it was to ban the type of neck restraint used to subdue Floyd and to approve a proposal to eliminate the police department entirely in favor of a new “holistic” approach to public safety. 

Authorities in other cities run by Democrats were quick to adopt the Minneapolis model, doing little or nothing to stop the spreading anarchy, justified by the murder of a black man by a racist white cop.

In a presidential election year—when defecting African-American voters could mean four more years of President Donald Trump—that’s all anyone needed to know.

Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., Democratic Party leaders were certain any inconvenient details about Floyd’s death would be kept from the public long enough for the ensuing urban upheaval to damage Trump. 

The corrupt media would never investigate and, better than that, the party had Ellison on the case. 

Hiding the Truth

Before Ellison was elected to his current position, he and Tom Perez, former Obama Administration labor secretary, made up the most radical one-two combination ever to lead the Democratic National Committee. 

In 2017, when the pair ran against each other for the chairmanship of the DNC, some Democrats opposed Ellison, believing his past support of the Nation of Islam and criticism of Israel might alienate Jewish donors. Ellison’s leadership of the Congressional Progressive Caucus was another problem. Moderates feared he would move the party out of their comfort zone. Around the same time, Mother Jones published a glowing profile praising Ellison as “everything Republicans thought Obama was. Maybe he’s just what Democrats need.”

Perez won in a close vote and named Ellison his deputy. The plan was to make peace between the party’s Hillary Clinton faction and socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), whom Ellison supported in 2016. The project did not succeed. 

After rigging the presidential primaries (for the second straight time) when it appeared Sanders—not even a Democrat—might win, the party in 2020 handed the nomination to enfeebled former Vice President Joe Biden. Then, dropping any pretense of moderation, agreed to a “unity” pact with Sanders and his leftist followers.

Democrats saw anti-police riots, organized after Floyd’s death, as a way to shore up black voter support, and Ellison was perfectly positioned to sustain the effort by hiding the truth about what really happened the day Floyd died.  

By Appointment Only

It was mid-July before the police bodycam video was delivered to the Hennepin County court where it could be seen by appointment only. It would be another two weeks before the video was leaked to the British Daily Mail, and the general public got to see it. 

Thus, more than two months of nationwide death and destruction might have been avoided had Ellison released the video earlier. If that leaves blood on his hands . . . well, he had other things to worry about.

With polls showing Trump’s approval on the rise among African-Americans, Democratic Party strategists knew something had to be done. The cellphone video of George Floyd’s death was tailor-made for stirring up black fear and loathing of the police. As lead prosecutor in the biggest murder case since the O.J. Simpson trial, Ellison could make sure that was the only video anyone would see.

When he filed charges against the four former police officers Ellison admitted, “Getting a conviction will be hard.”  

In other words, the state’s progressive establishment may not like the outcome when the case goes to trial on March 8. Losing in March, though, wasn’t what concerned him. Losing in November was.

Ellison knew from the start winning the Floyd case would be a long shot. On the other hand, throwing the cops to the mob could yield immediate benefits by generating enough racial hatred to help Democrats beat Trump and steer the country to the radical Left. 

 And if the other side doesn’t fold in 2020, Ellison warned in a recent radio interview: “Next time the uprising and social disruption may be even worse.”


Where Is Joe Biden’s Supreme Court List?

A Biden list would confirm the worst of Americans’ fears about what sort of dystopia a Democratic presidency, armed with the levers of judicial branch nomination powers, would inflict upon We the People.

President Donald Trump on Wednesday unveiled his much-anticipated new Supreme Court nominee “list.” A whopping 20 names long, Wednesday’s list includes figures from all walks of legal and political life: federal appellate court judges, federal district court judges, sitting U.S. senators, current and former Trump administration figures, current state officers, and a former U.S. solicitor general.

With the 24 viable names remaining from the three previous “lists”—the first two of which were released during the 2016 presidential campaign and were crucial to ensuring religious conservative voter turnout for Trump—there are now 44 candidates being publicly floated for the next Supreme Court vacancy.

The latest list, an election year attempt to secure conservative turnout amidst a deeply disappointing—perhaps crisis-inducing—recent Supreme Court term, is a positive development for a forceful, full-spectrum, nonlibertarian conservatism. Some of the potential nominees from the list who are most likely to be considered seriously for the next high court vacancy—Judges James Ho (full disclosure: my former boss) and Gregory Katsas, in particular—are truly outstanding. And the fact that other no-holds-barred social conservatives, such as Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Judge Kyle Duncan, were included at all ought to be reassuring to traditionalist conservatives who prioritize the timeless substantive goals of republican self-governance over the fetishization of a morally denuded proceduralism.

Conservatives, leery as ever following last term’s devastating cases on issues as wide-ranging as abortion, immigration, Title VII, and whether half of Oklahoma is actually part of Oklahoma, now have 44 names to actively vet and consider. True, a more truncated and meaningfully targeted list would have been better to salve social conservative wounds, but the fact is that those on the right most upset with the list are the sclerotic old guard who steered the legal conservative movement toward this crisis point.

And especially when considering some of the outstanding holdovers from the first three lists—Judges William Pryor, Amy Coney Barrett, and so forth—the reality is there are many people Trump has named who, if nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court, would make substantial headway in reviving the right to life, defending religious institutions, securing national sovereignty and promoting the common good of the nation, communities, and families.

As disappointing as the last Supreme Court term was, we have still come a very long way from Harriet Miers.

All of which leads us to an obvious question: Where on earth is Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s Supreme Court nominee list? Alas, that obvious question has an answer that is just as obvious: It’s not coming. And it’s not coming for the extraordinarily simple reason that Joe Biden, Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), and Democratic Party grandees all know that such a list would scare the living daylights out of the American people.

In 2016, between one-fifth and one-quarter of the electorate, according to exit polling, cited the Supreme Court as their number one issue on which to vote. Of that judiciary-centric slice of the voting electorate, Trump outpaced his rival, Hillary Clinton, by a huge margin of 15 points.

The Supreme Court is clearly a losing political issue for Democrats and the American left. After all, it is the side that has consistently lost major cases and has had its substantive moralistic prerogatives democratically removed under the risible pretext of black-robed constitutionalization that stands the most to gain from institutionally reclaiming Alexander Hamilton’s “least dangerous” branch.

Put more simply: The progressive Left’s relentless, century-plus-long crusade to twist the Constitution beyond recognition and embolden a sycophantic legal academy and judicial oligarchy willing to implement its vision via judicial fiat has, as a blunt political matter, reached the point of diminishing marginal returns. This is no small irony.

And there’s more. On issue after issue, the median American—law-abiding, patriotic, religious or at least friendly to religion—would be repulsed by the radicalization a Biden Supreme Court list would entail.

We would see judges, academics, and career bureaucrats who have dedicated their careers to stamping out religion, wrecking America’s territorial sovereignty, stripping Americans of their individual right to keep and bear arms, and codifying the bloodiest and most reckless of abortion regimes. A Biden Supreme Court list, in short, would confirm the worst of Americans’ fears about what sort of dystopia a Democratic presidency, armed with the levers of judicial branch nomination powers, would inflict upon We the People. Far better for the Democrats to hide their agenda and try to dupe Americans; candor and transparency will not redound to their benefit.

Joe Biden’s decision not to release a Supreme Court nominee list similar to Trump’s is, as a matter of principle, cowardly. But as a prudential matter, it is likely the wiser political move—which itself is immensely telling.



The Resistance War Games a Post-Election Civil War

All of this could be written off as the grudge fantasies of political activists still mad about 2016 except it is backed by some of the wealthiest people in the world.

Consider yourselves warned, America.

Cancel the Election Night party and forget the long-awaited moment when George Stephanopoulos announces, in the late hours of November 3, the official winner. And buckle up for an election-year nightmare that will make the 2000 recount look like a walk in a Palm Beach County park.

A vengeful and well-funded coalition of Trump-hating insurrectionists are prepping the battlefield for a post-election civil war, threatening not only to extend the 2020 election into 2021 but to weaponize every tool at their disposal to make sure Joe Biden assumes the presidency even if President Trump legitimately wins. 

The very same sore losers on the Left and NeverTrump Right who still refuse to accept the results of the 2016 presidential contest are preparing to do whatever it takes—including promote the secession of western states—to force the removal of Donald Trump next January.

Their plan, using the intentionally misleading title, “Transition Integrity Project,” outlines alarming and wholly unconstitutional responses to a number of post-election scenarios. Once upon a time, I would’ve read such a far-fetched document through tears of laughter. But considering the desperation and depravity of the people involved, this terrifying roadmap needs to be taken seriously.

Organizers, including Clinton loyalist John Podesta and NeverTrump leader Bill Kristol, have been playing war games for the past few months, plotting how to deploy media, government, and public armies to install Biden no matter what. Their scorched earth strategy rests on two factors: the use of widespread mail-in voting, intended to delay the official result so they can manipulate the outcome while stoking civil unrest until Republicans cry uncle, and the notion that if he loses, President Trump will claim the Democrats stole the election, a legitimate possibility that this plan only serves to further validate.

The four options described in the report, ranging from a Biden landslide to a slim Trump victory, would propel a constitutional crisis which our already frayed populace is ill-equipped to endure—a climate of ongoing political chaos, by the way, that Democrats and NeverTrumpers have helped breed and hope to exploit.

Teams of imaginary players, representing both campaigns and supporting interests, explored each potential result. (Kristol recently bragged on Twitter that he played the role of President Trump.) Bad guys include Attorney General William Barr; good guys include Senator Mitt Romney (R-Utah).

“In the scenario that most closely mirrored the 2016 election results (e.g., the Democratic candidate wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College), Team Biden pushed to overturn certified results in states with Democratic Governors,” the participants previewed.

To buy time as they harvest Democratic ballots in tight contests after Election Day, the TIP operation will harness support from all living former presidents and anti-Trump Republicans such as Maryland Governor Larry Hogan to urge patience from the public in the name of “election integrity.” Faith leaders will call for calm even as Democrats stoke unrest; in order to involve corporate America in their fight—which shouldn’t be a heavy lift—anti-Trump forces will initiate nationwide work stoppages and strikes.

“Team Biden almost always called for and relied on mass protests to demonstrate the public’s commitment to a ‘legitimate’ outcome, with the objective of hardening the resolve of Democratic elected officials to fight and take action.” (The group at one point envisioned at least 4 million Biden supporters taking to the streets with warnings of “violent skirmishes and vandalism.”)

Those Democratic elected officials, according to the plan, include the governors and legislatures of swing states. One scene may have accidentally revealed the makings of a false flag operation after November 3 if Michigan is the deciding state. 

“A rogue individual destroyed a large number of ballots believed to have supported Biden, leaving Trump a narrow electoral win,” the group imagined. “The Governor of Michigan used this abnormality as justification to send a separate, pro-Biden set of electors to DC.”

Anyone who’s watched Gretchen Whitmer over the past six months knows she will happily defy the law and common decency for attention.

The teams also developed a battle plan if Trump wins Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. The Biden campaign would demand a recount based on accusations of “voter suppression.” In that scenario, “governors in two of the three (Wisconsin and Michigan) sent separate slates of electors to counter those sent by the state legislature.”

If that happens, the plotters predict, it would prompt “a breakdown in the joint session of Congress by getting the House of Representatives to agree to award the presidency to Biden based on the alternative pro-Biden submissions sent by pro-Biden governors.” January 20, 2021 would arrive with no clear winner, raising the specter of military action.

Only one scenario allows for a Biden loss, but any concession would involve a constitutional shakedown. The Biden campaign wouldn’t admit defeat until it “negotiated hard for permanent structural reforms” including long-desired Democratic Party goals such as eliminating the Electoral College and approving D.C. statehood. 

Keep in mind, these are the same folks who routinely accuse the president of violating “constitutional norms,” and therein lies the gist: since Trump allegedly shreds the Constitution and rule of law, they argue without evidence, then his foes are justified in doing the same.

Some of TIPs post-election forecasts are straight-up delusional. During the transition period, Trump might  “maximize the flow of federal money into Trump businesses . . . negotiate business deals with foreign countries; and purge documents that might incriminate foreign governments and business partners,” the group fantasized. Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner might even launch something called “MAGA TV” from the White House.

The Biden team may encourage California, Washington, and Oregon to secede and form a new country—Cascadia—unless Congressional Republicans agree to “structural reforms to fix our democratic system” proposed by President Obama.

Romney plays a starring role in one anecdote; while Trump disputes a slim Biden victory, Romney successfully convinces three Republican senators to declare Biden the victor. “As it became evident that the Biden victory would be certified, Senator [sic] Majority Leader Mitch McConnell privately signaled to several Republicans they could support Romney’s cross-the-aisle effort, recognizing that moderate Republicans are more likely to prevail in 2022.”

Trump’s woes, however, won’t be over after Biden replaces him in the Oval Office. TIP organizers will push to have the president and members of his administration charged with unspecified crimes.

Some observers have compared the Transition Integrity Project’s operation to a “color revolution,” a coup-like strategy the United States uses in other countries to foment civil unrest and oust hostile foreign leaders. (Revolver News has a few excellent pieces detailing the comparison and the players involved.)

But what’s most alarming about TIP’s plan is the deep pockets behind it. All of this could be written off as the grudge fantasies of political activists still mad about 2016 except it is backed by some of the wealthiest people in the world. In my next column, I’ll report how these wannabe insurgents are funded by influential billionaires including George Soros, Pierre Omidyar, Mark Zuckerberg, and the Rupert Murdoch family.


The Atlantic’s ‘Losers’ Attack Is Disgusting and Implausible

No group of Americans has President Trump elevated, assisted, and honored more often than our veterans.

In an electoral democracy, dirty tricks, wild spin, and outright lies are the norm during election season, not the exception. No Hollywood screenwriter could spin wild fiction better than yellow journalists during the political silly season.

Voters accept this, perhaps cognizant of the famous aphorism, usually attributed to Winston Churchill, that democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried. Even with the popular expectation of such cynicism, however, The Atlantic’s latest attack on President Trump is shocking in its sheer, brazen dishonesty. The magazine has engaged in an outstanding display of “newspeak” as defined in George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four—talking past events and reinventing them to meet a current political narrative.

As has been the case with so many other baseless accusations the media have attempted to foist on the president, this one originated with unnamed sources. In this case, those sources are almost certainly disgruntled bureaucrats hoping to help their preferred candidate, Joe Biden, win an election. This claim—that the president refused to visit the graves of American war dead in France because he considered them “losers”—goes beyond all previous stories following this pattern, however, because it is absolutely implausible on its face.

For one thing, there are hard, accessible records from the day in question showing that bad weather, not an imaginary callous hatred of the American soldier, was the reason that a single cemetery visit was scrapped from the president’s schedule during the trip in question. We also have the testimony of former White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and several other senior officials who were actually there, in the room, all of whom state unequivocally that “this never happened.”

Forget, too, that even the most disgruntled bureaucrat of all, John Bolton, who was also present, wrote an entire book detailing every faux pas, off-color remark, and embarrassing anecdote he could remember or invent about his time in the White House, yet neglected to mention anything remotely like the incident described by The Atlantic, and indeed, has denied that it happened.

Even without all this evidence to the contrary, the smear doesn’t land. President Trump thinks the American war dead in France are losers? The very idea is totally inconsistent with everything we’ve ever seen and heard from him.

This is the same ground that President Trump has visited multiple times during his presidency, specifically to honor their sacrifice, referring to the hallowed ground as “freedom’s altar.” This is the place where, on D-Day last year, he pointed out “75 years ago, 10,000 men shed their blood and thousands sacrificed their lives for their brothers, for their countries, and for the survival of liberty.”

The men President Trump supposedly thinks are losers, according to The Atlantic’s anonymous sources, are the same men he has called “among the very greatest Americans who will ever live,” “the pride of our nation,” and “the glory of our republic.”

The Atlantic wants us to believe he considered wounded veterans unworthy of being honored—the same wounded veterans whose plight under the Obama-Biden Administration he made a centerpiece of his campaign and his administration. No president in history has made reform at the Department of Veteran’s Affairs a higher priority than Donald Trump, who has signed no fewer than three major bills to ensure that U.S. veterans receive the care and support they deserve. There is no group of Americans that President Trump has elevated, assisted, and honored more often than our veterans.

What’s more, President Trump has done more to prevent American casualties than any president in the post-Cold War era—unlike Joe Biden, who played a leading role in committing thousands more American troops to far-off war zones with poorly defined missions and unachievable objectives. 

As Sarah Sanders and others have attested, Trump treats every single death of an American serviceman as the tragedy it is, personally calling the families of the fallen and redoubling his efforts to keep as many of our brave soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines out of combat as possible.

Of note, this is an attempt to demean both the service and sacrifice of the fallen heroes of the Battle of Belleau Wood by reducing their bravery to a single point of a false narrative. The Atlantic using their memory as political fodder for an attack on a sitting president is beyond disrespectful to the fallen Marines and soldiers in that World War I battle.

The Atlantic, however, expects the American people to believe that Donald Trump thinks they’re all “losers” and “suckers,” based entirely on the word of a few cowards who wouldn’t even put their names to their ridiculous accusations. It’s disgusting, particularly because it’s such a transparently partisan effort to influence an election that is less than two months away.


‘Bidenizing’ the Truth

For more than 40 years, the “gatekeepers of truth” in the media mostly have given Joe Biden a pass for his lies, half-truths, and intellectual theft.

If today, Joe Biden were to flat-out lie or—to borrow a term his campaign uses every day—“misspeak,” I’m betting the media would simply let it go. That’s where we are right now. In the past, reporters at least sometimes would call out Biden on his whoppers. But not anymore. Today, the media “Bidenizes” just about everything to help the Delaware Democrat and his leftist puppet masters in their effort to win the White House.

What does it mean to “Bidenize”? I would humbly offer that “Bidenize” should be the new “it” word or hashtag, meaning to “exaggerate, gild the lily, lie, plagiarize, fabricate, mislead.” It’s a very useful, flexible word, just like Biden’s flexible approach to the truth. 

Given Biden’s diminished mental acuity, let’s all agree that we’re not going to be seeing much of him live and in person for the next eight weeks or so. If we do, it will be limited and, apparently, any questions from his allies in the media will be expressly verboten. We can also agree that the fabricated stories from the media to diminish President Trump and aid a helpless Joe Biden are going to continue. 

Exhibit A: The Atlantic’s whopper regarding President Trump’s views of the military, our veterans, and military personnel who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. Never mind that the comments attributed to Trump sound like those from the fever swamp of BLM, Antifa,  columnists at the Washington Post, or talking heads at MSNBC and CNN. 

Recall that the media also tried to spin the military cemetery story when the event was canceled originally due to weather. The media tried to make a big deal of it then, and it failed. So instead, Jeffrey Goldberg decided to Bidenize it a bit—this time, adding “anonymous sources” with new, improved, and never-before-divulged details, some two years after the incident. But more than six individuals have gone on the record to show the story is a lie, and flight documents from that day confirm that the cemetery visit was canceled due to weather. 

Compare this to Biden’s claims over the years. In 1987, in a single episode of pique after a reporter inquired about Biden’s law school performance, the Bidenizing began. He claimed he finished near the top of his law school class at Syracuse. He did not. Indeed, finishing 76th out of a class of 85 is the exact opposite of coming out on “top.”

Perhaps he ended up so low because he plagiarized during his first year. Stealing from others’ hard work is a pattern for Biden. Over the years, he not only has conned his constituents and the American taxpayers, but has stolen words written by others to help get himself elected. I’ll give him this, he at least steals from real talent: President John F. Kennedy, his brother, Bobby, even a British Labour Party leader, without any attribution. The 2020 Presidential campaign couldn’t help but Bidenize his policy papers, plagiarizing from leftist environmental groups. 

Joe Biden has been in Washington for a long time. He likes to brag about all the things he’s done and where he’s been. These, too, are often lies. He claimed he was arrested in South Africa while visiting Nelson Mandela. It was a lie. Biden has claimed for years that he was a civil rights activist. A few months ago, a Black Lives Matter leader showed that Biden was lying. Just to show how desperate the Left is, in spite of revealing those lies, that BLM leader still supports the Biden ticket. It’s come to this: they know he’s a liar but “Orange Man Bad!” so it all works in their incoherent thinking. 

Biden has also claimed, like Hillary Clinton, that he was shot at while traveling overseas. He said he came under fire while in Iraq. He was caught lying and then “revised” the story. Biden has actually lied about his visits to Iraq on multiple occasions. The lies were so large that even the Washington Post was forced to reveal the truth. 

For more than 40 years, the professional politician that is Joe Biden has mostly been given a pass for his lies, half-truths, and intellectual theft by the same media that now claims to be the “gatekeeper of truth.” But as we know, most of those involved in the media are liars and leftist propagandists so, of course, they’re going to cover for Biden. They cover up for Biden’s inability to speak without notes or to answer unscripted questions. And no doubt, over the next 55 days they will continue to publish Bidenized material against President Trump. 

We can’t stop the media from “Bidenizing” but we can tell it as it is. The next time you see them trying to sell a whopper, just think, “It’s come to this. These poor intellectually stunted folks, just Bidenizing everything now.” But it makes sense: it’s the only play they’ve got.


Two Presidents Accused of Disrespect

Ultimately, the American people decide which of the candidates for president has the strength and character to lead.

Does this sound familiar? A Republican president is attacked relentlessly by the Democratic press for four years as a crass, crude man—and a tyrant and bully unworthy of his high office.

When his re-election becomes a distinct possibility after months of expectations that he is headed for defeat, a pro-Democrat publication—without naming its sources—unleashes a brutal new assault on his character. It reports that the president displayed disdain for the nation’s dead soldiers.

Donald Trump, right?

The airwaves and newspapers were filled with such a story over the weekend, which cited anonymous sources of unknown and unknowable veracity.

But it is interesting that another Republican president got the very same treatment when he was running for re-election in 1864, amidst the carnage and chaos of the Civil War. I write about it in my new book, Every Drop of Blood.

Abraham Lincoln was known for trying to relieve stress and misery by using humor. Many of his critics found his resort to funny (and sometimes smutty) stories grossly unpresidential.

The New York World, on September 9, 1864, reported a disgusting new account of Lincoln’s unworthiness for office, in a piece titled “One of Mr. Lincoln’s Jokes.”

The Charge Against Lincoln

The story was about Antietam, in Maryland, where a horrific battle was fought on Sept. 17, 1862—the bloodiest single day of conflict ever on this continent. Lincoln visited the site in October, two weeks after the fight, and met with Union General George B. McClellan. By September 1864, McClellan was the Democratic nominee for president.

According to the World, Lincoln was riding over the field in an ambulance with several people: his old friend and bodyguard Ward Hill Lamon, General McClellan, and another officer.

Army teams, the newspaper claimed, were still on the field, burying the piles of dead. When the ambulance neared the old stone bridge, “where the dead were piled highest,” Lincoln slapped Lamon on the knee. “Come, Lamon, give us that song about Picayune Butler; McLellan has never heard it.”

“’Not now, if you please,’ said General McClellan, with a shudder, ‘I would prefer to hear it some other place and time.’”

The notion of a vulgar president requesting a comical minstrel song on such hallowed ground might have filled many American families with disgust and anger, especially those who had lost a son, brother, or husband in that terrible war.

The Democrats readily exploited the story, using it in one of their campaign songs:

Abe may crack his jolly jokes
O’er bloody fields of stricken battle
While yet the ebbing life-tide smokes
From men that die like butchered cattle.
He, ere yet the guns grow cold,
To pimps and pets may crack his stories . . .

There was one problem: The story was not true.

Responses from Trump, Lincoln

It is interesting how both Trump and Lincoln responded to the brutal attacks on their character. President Trump immediately blasted The Atlantic’s story as a “hoax,” savaged the magazine, and brought out people who were there that day and denied on the record that he disparaged the dead.

Lincoln’s friend Lamon readied a similarly angry response. He demanded to know the source of the smear. But Lincoln nixed it as too “belligerent.” He said it would be more beneficial to set out the facts unemotionally. The president helped prepare a memorandum.

There was, in fact, a kernel of truth inside the story. As Lamon recounted, during the ride to the battlefield—but not on the hallowed field itself—“the President asked me to sing the little sad song(s) . . . which he had often heard me sing, and had always seemed to like very much. I sang them.”

Someone else in the party—“I do not think it was the President”—“asked me to sing something else; and I sang two or three little comic things of which Picayune Butler was one.”

Lamon continued: “Neither Gen. McClellan or any one else made any objection to the singing; the place was not on the battle field, the time was sixteen days after the battle, no dead body was seen during the whole time the president was absent from Washington, nor even a grave that had not been rained on since it was made.”

Then Lincoln did something distinctly un-Trumpian. He filed the response away instead of releasing it to the newspapers. It was only discovered among his papers decades later.

Trusting the People

The story did not sink him. The president won re-election—mainly on the strength of Union victories in the field, and the sense that Lincoln was finally winning the war.

Lincoln had to trust the voters to recognize that the president who had honored the dead at Gettysburg, and had showed his deep respect for soldiers in a thousand other ways, was not the crass and despicable figure depicted by the World and the Democratic press.

Six years earlier, during his bitter Senate campaign against Stephen Douglas, Lincoln had noted how difficult it was to endure such smears.

“When a man hears himself misrepresented, it provokes him—at least I find so with myself, but when the misrepresentation becomes very gross and palpable, it is more apt to amuse him.”

Trump, we all know, fights fire with fire, and trades ugly insult for ugly insult, an approach that has taken a heavy toll on his popularity and stoked division. Lincoln had a rare ability to set his emotions aside and work to tamp down ill will—even as he was being vilified by his enemies.

Ultimately, the American people decide which of the candidates for president has the strength and character to lead.

A version of this essay originally appeared in EdAchorn.com.


The Left’s Bombshell Backfire Factory

The Left’s so-called “bombshells” consist of nothing more than assumptions, hearsay, and unsubstantiated allegations.

Democrats and their media mouthpieces revel over the word “bombshell.” Since President Trump was elected, this term has been thrown around so many times that it has lost its desired impact, which is to garner national attention about a breaking news story, invariably about the impending demise of the president. Clearly, the Left and the Trump-bashing media have made every effort to amplify the importance of such stories in the hope that they can thwart the president and his policies.

Despite their unceasing efforts, they have failed miserably time and again. Their alleged “bombshells” have consisted of nothing more than assumptions, hearsay, and unsubstantiated allegations that are both unpersuasive and untrue.   

The most recent effort to attack the president came from yet another uncorroborated “bombshell” story in The Atlantic. As reported by Townhall, Jeffery Goldberg’s supposed scoop has it that:

President Trump is accused of skipping a trip to Aisne-Marne American Cemetery outside of Paris in 2018 because the 1,800 U.S. Marines who died there were “suckers” for “getting killed.” The piece also claims the president was lying about a bad weather call that cancelled the trip.

As expected, the major media outlets ran with this story as if it were gospel because it created a negative perception of the president in the eyes of the American public. The problem,  of course, is that it relied entirely on “anonymous sources.” Therefore, there was no way to gauge the credibility of these alleged sources or even to determine whether any of these sources actually exist. Not only was the story based on sources cloaked in secrecy, but it was also immediately refuted by several sources close to the events: 

[N]early a dozen current and former government officials have gone on the record to state the story is false. Further, official government emails about the visit being called off due to bad weather and logistical issues, have been published by the White House.

 The fact that many Democrats and the liberal media simply accepted the allegations in this story as true is concerning, yet unsurprising. After all, this has been their modus operandi since the president was elected. It has never been about truth or the facts. Rather, assumptions, falsehoods, hearsay, and uncorroborated allegations have ruled the day as long as they could potentially hurt the president.

This is not the first time that the Left has pushed an uncorroborated, false, or disparaging story to hurt the president or those close to him.

During the presidential impeachment hearings, Democrats and the media willingly accepted and believed that President Trump engaged in a quid pro quo with the president of Ukraine, despite the absence of any evidence, the fact that one of their star witnesses admitted that no such evidence existed, and the fact that much of the public testimony consisted of second and third-hand information, hearsay, or baseless assumptions. 

During Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings, the Supreme Court justice was forced to defend himself against uncorroborated and unsubstantiated “bombshell” allegations of sexual assault merely because he was a Trump-appointed constitutional conservative. The alleged “bombshell” also had no factual basis. The main accuser’s motivation was exposed as questionable based on later comments made by her attorney while other accusers admitted to fabricating their stories. 

Yet when Jussie Smollett claimed he was beaten up and that he was the subject of a hate crime (another “bombshell”), Hollywood Democrats and some media outlets used this uncorroborated and unverified story to shower blame on the president. Along those same lines, many media outlets and Democrats also blamed MAGA hat-wearing student Nick Sandmann and other students from Covington Catholic High School as the aggressors against the supposedly peaceful Native American, Nathan Phillips, who taunted the students. That “bombshell” also turned out to be incorrect. 

While the Democrats and the left-wing media quickly and easily accept uncorroborated information as “factual” when it potentially hurts the president or those close to him, they are less willing to do so in other circumstances. For example, when Tara Reade filed a police report and accused Joe Biden of sexual assault, some Democrats were unwilling to help Reade while others immediately came to Biden’s defense without calling for an investigation. Reade presented her story to the campaigns of both Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) but there was no interest there in her story.

Why would Democrats so readily discount Reade’s allegations while accepting the uncorroborated claims in The Atlantic, Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing, and the Smollett and Sandmann cases? Are Democrats saying that one kind of story is more “credible,” or “worth believing” than another solely because of who it is about or who it might impact, despite the absence of any factual support? Are those on the Left willing to assume someone’s guilt or innocence solely on the basis of the individual’s political affiliation? 

Sadly, if the end result promises to hurt the president or those close to him, the answer appears to be a resounding yes


Game Time 2020

It’s time to see the psyops of the Left for what it is: nothing less than an attempt to spread disinformation about the true state of the 2020 election.

It is now officially “game on” time for 2020. Everything before this point has been sound and fury, signifying nothing. This is typical of American elections. For example, in July 1988, Michael Dukakis was crushing George H.W. Bush in the polls by 17 points. Guess who didn’t win that November? But now, with the parties’ conventions in the rear-view mirror, we are in the period when things like polls and momentum really count.

So let me set the table for what is taking place right now, because—shocker—the media doesn’t really want you to know the truth. 

Yes, those “paragons of truth,” who are pure as the driven snow, are lying to you. It’s OK if you need to hit the fainting couch and clutch your pearls at this point, but take for example the recent story at The Atlantic alleging Trump’s disparagement of our military. Bald-faced lies, but also an indicator of what is to come: our corrupt and dishonest media will be running numerous fake stories like that in the next 60 days to try to bring Trump down. 

But that’s what liars do: they lie.

Right now, the 2020 presidential race is very tight. Trump actually gets the nod for a slim lead. First, never, ever underestimate the power of incumbency: only five presidents have lost their reelection bid since 1900. Trump has a dedicated base of supporters and, because of structural advantages in the Electoral College, is in the pole position. 

Lest you think I’m making this up: Trafalgar has Trump up by 2 points in Michigan. Rasmussen has a dead heat in Pennsylvania. In fact, if you dig down a little into that Rasmussen poll, among the 82 percent who say they are certain how they will vote in November, Trump is leading, 51-49 percent. National polls such as Emerson and Rasmussen show it a 1-2 point race with Biden barely clinging to the lead. 

Some pollsters that I respect (read: not Fox News, just so we’re clear) think Wisconsin and Michigan are going to go for Trump, with Minnesota and Pennsylvania coin tosses and Arizona and Virginia in play, if it goes well for Trump leading into and on Election Day. The Democracy Institute poll even shows Trump winning the popular vote. The horror of it all! 

But it’s the models and economic indicators that have proven reliable over multiple presidential elections that should give Democrats and their lying mainstream media propagandists pause (did I mention I think most of the press are liars? Because my fear is that it might get lost in all of this that I think they’re miserable, intellectually stunted liars). 

Now I will add one caveat: the only thing that is certain in the era of Trump is that you can bank on uncertainty. That is to say, rock-solid indicators and models that have been extremely accurate for decades show one thing: Trump winning.

Take for example the S&P 500. It has correctly predicted presidential elections since 1984 (which is nine consecutive elections). If the S&P 500 rises in the three months leading up to November, it indicates that the current party will retain the White House. If it falls, then the opposition party will likely win the White House. So watch how the S&P 500 performs between August 3 and November 3. In case you’re wondering, the S&P 500 is up more than 150 points since the beginning of August. 

Then look at Stony Brook political scientist Helmut Norpoth’s model, which correctly has predicted 25 of the last 27 presidential elections. Survey says: Trump crushes Biden, 362 electoral votes to 176 electoral votes. 

Scoot on over to Trend Macrolytics which has correctly predicted the victor in the Electoral College in the past 17 presidential election cycles (1952-2016). An updated analysis has flipped over the last six weeks to show Trump now winning definitively in the Electoral College, 410 electoral votes to 128 electoral votes. Do I think Trump will break 400 electoral votes? Probably not. But the only thing that Trend has gotten wrong since 1952 is the margin of victory. It has always correctly predicted the ultimate winner. 

But if you listen to many in the mainstream media propping up Biden, well, the senile guy hanging out in his basement 95 percent of the time is still in the lead. Sure he is. (Try not to roll your eyes too hard.) But then again, they’re liars and liars are going to lie. 

This all to say that this presidential contest is a very real race. Do I think right now Trump wins on Election Day? We’re at least a political lifetime away from November, maybe two, but I do think Trump wins. So do a number of semi-honest lefties who have said the things that must not be spoken out loud when they admitted Trump will win Election Day but then concede they’ll try to figure out how to steal it afterwards. 

It’s time to see the psyops of the Left for what they are: nothing less than attempts to spread disinformation about the true state of the 2020 election.