Joe Biden seems to try to give Democrats reasons to not vote for him

Obama and Clinton look to boost Biden without overshadowing him

The Washington Examiner points out how Biden’s use of the more popular presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton may backfire on the current (yet addled) president.

President Joe Biden is hoping the star power of his Democratic predecessors, former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, will shine a light on his campaign against another former president, Donald Trump, during a high-profile New York City fundraiser.

But although his last State of the Union before November’s general election addressed concerns about his age, his campaign is under pressure to make sure Biden is not overshadowed, particularly by his younger, more popular former boss.

The Biden campaign dismisses the idea that the president has an enthusiasm problem, citing expectations Thursday night’s fundraiser could raise more than $25 million, with 5,000-plus attendees anticipated to be at Radio City Hall.

“Democrats are unified and energized behind President Biden’s reelection campaign, and that will be on full display this Thursday in New York City,” Biden campaign spokesman Kevin Munoz told the Washington Examiner. “Donald Trump has no juice heading into the general: Huge chunks of Republican primary voters have made clear they have no interest in voting for him this November, Republican leaders like his own vice president are openly opposing him, and even if Trump wanted to reach them (he does not!), he has no cash or energy to do so.”

“Elections are won by putting in the work to assemble a broad, diverse coalition, and Joe Biden is doing just that,” Munoz said.

Simultaneously, Republican strategist and former chief of staff to Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) Cesar Conda contended Biden’s support in black, Hispanic, and Asian communities is “hemorrhaging.”

“President Trump has made significant gains with minority voters, which is why I think we will [see] Barack Obama earlier and often on the campaign trail compared to 2020,” Conda told the Washington Examiner. “But I don’t think Obama’s appeal will transfer to Biden because blacks and Hispanics have been battered by rising gas prices, grocery bills, and housing costs caused by Biden’s policies. They know that they were much better off financially during the Trump-era economy.”

Meanwhile, the Trump campaign is claiming “Crooked Hillary,” in addition to “Barack Hussein Obama,” is “coming out of the bullpen to help Joe Biden shuffle over the finish line because Democrats know Biden is weak, unpopular, and incompetent.”

“Their reinforcement efforts will fail when President Trump defeats them on Nov. 5,” Trump campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said.

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

Even if Democrats do not hear the opposition, they remember the past

Surely these Democrats remember the better economy coming out of Trump’s term. They might even remember the more centrist views of Barack during his first term and Bill during his whole two terms.

If they are Baby Boomers or Generation X, they might remember the hardships of the last socialist-leaning president (the peanut farmer). Therefore, they might remember how many years it took of Reagan to get out of the Carter malaise.

So, pointing us to better times likely will not motivate voters to the polls.

…

Biden White House quietly intervening in international labor dispute despite objections he may be breaking the law

Fox News looks into how Joe Biden has decided to take up the cause of Mexican labor despite warnings from others telling him he may be breaking the law.

The White House is escalating a labor dispute at a major mine in central Mexico, an action backed by powerful labor unions, but it could have a devastating effect on workers and the economy.

The United States Trade Representative (USTR), which is housed in the White House, is pursuing the case by leveraging a little-used tool in the 2020 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

The Rapid Response Labor Mechanism (RRM), is a provision that allows the government to take enforcement action against factories if they fail to comply with domestic freedom of association and collective bargaining laws. As part of its effort, the USTR successfully convened the first-ever RRM tribunal to review concerns brought by labor officials in the U.S. and Mexico.

“This announcement upholds the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to creating a more level playing field for workers to feel empowered and using every enforcement tool at our disposal to safeguard workers’ rights,” U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said after her office filed its initial motion to convene the RRM tribunal.

However, the process has faced considerable pushback from the Mexican government, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the owner of the mine, Grupo Mexico, which has argued the U.S. government doesn’t have jurisdiction in the dispute. Critics have also warned the process, which is expected to conclude with a ruling as early as Friday, has lacked transparency.

The case dates back more than a decade and a half when, in 2007, the powerful Mexican miners’ union Los Mineros went on strike at Grupo Mexico’s San Martin mine in Sombrerete, Zacatecas, which produces a high quantity of Mexico’s lead, zinc and copper supplies. The strike was related, in part, to safety conditions at the site.

According to legal filings reviewed by Fox News Digital, the San Martin mine reopened 11 years later, in 2018, when the mine’s operator struck a deal with Los Trabajadores Coaligados, a coalition of workers that voted to return to work and end the strike. In June 2023, the Mexican Conciliation and Arbitration Board, a government panel, confirmed in a ruling that the strike was over and San Martin could operate as normal.

(Read more at Fox News)

This only accentuates the claim by President Trump that Biden is “Mexico First”

At a time that we are being flooded by illegal aliens, this will not sit well with most voters. At a time that most Americans struggle to make ends meet, having Joe Biden go to bat for a Mexican union just does not seem right.

And at a time that Joe keeps claiming he works for America and has our economy running better than it ran under President Trump, that will likely keep people home on election night.

…

If Democrats will do this type of injustice to fellow Democrats, what have the 6 January defendants had to endure?

What first caught my eye was this report from Fox Digital that made the Sylvia Gonzalez case seem non-partisan

On 18 March 2024, Fox News Digital released the following video consisting primarily of the words of one of the lawyers from the firm supporting Sylvia Gonzalez before the Supreme Court.

In the deep-blue part of San Antonio, a city councilwoman carries a petition for her constituents and gets arrested

The Texan reported in a 23 October 2023 article on the case of Castle Hills Councilwoman Sylvia Gonzalez and the way the mayor, police chief, and city manager worked to squash the petition that got her elected, get rid of her First Amendment rights, and jail her.

The story contained in the alarming allegations raised by former Castle Hills City Councilwoman Sylvia Gonzales is fit for a movie plot. Now, the 76-year-old grandmother’s tale will be reviewed by justices of the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether she may sue several officials who she says violated her constitutional rights.

According to court documents, Gonzales was concerned about the direction of Castle Hills, her small municipality surrounded by the larger City of San Antonio, and not only decided to run for city council but also started a citizen-led petition calling for the removal of the city manager.

The filings describe how Gonzales faced hostilities from incumbents in the city government and their political allies, beginning with an attempt to oust her immediately after being sworn into office by claiming her oath of office was not properly administered by the county sheriff.

Gonzales secured a court order preventing them from removing her from office, but the battle raged on.

At a city council meeting after the citizen-led petition calling for the removal of the city manager was presented, Gonzales says she briefly stepped away from the council dais. When she returned, Mayor JR Trevino asked her where the petition was, and after looking she found it inside her binder lying on the dais.

Gonzales says she doesn’t know how the petition came to be placed in her binder.

Trevino then instructed Chief of Police John Siemens to conduct an investigation into the seemingly innocuous moment.

After a Castle Hills police officer did not find any wrongdoing in his investigation,  Siemens hired a local attorney, Alex Wright, who also holds a police commission with Castle Hills to conduct another investigation.

After a month of investigating, Wright obtained an arrest warrant for Gonzales, charging her with tampering with a government record — a misdemeanor, for which she was booked into jail as opposed to receiving a citation.

The efforts against her continued to pile up, with a group of citizens described as being “politically aligned” with Trevino filing a lawsuit seeking her removal from office, citing “incompetency” as the basis for their petition.

After beating back the criminal charges and the multiple attempts to remove her from office, Gonzales says that her reputation was destroyed and she was forced to spend thousands in legal bills.

Joining forces with the Institute for Justice (IJ), Gonzales filed a federal lawsuit against Trevino, Wright, and Siemens, alleging they violated her First and 14th Amendment rights.

The IJ, which is a public interest law firm, defeated a motion to dismiss at the trial court level but failed at the U.S. 5th Circuit after a multi-judge panel ruled that binding case precedent favored the defendants.

(Read more at the conservative source, The Texan)

For bringing the petition her consituents signed, they jailed her

Likewise, the San Antonio Express News reported in a 16 Octover 2023 article on the case that once involved both Sylvia Gonzalez and then-Alderwoman Lesley Wenger on what seem now to be trumped-up charges of evidence tampering.

Four years ago, a bitter political dispute in the small suburban city of Castle Hills landed a city council member in jail. The resulting lawsuit now is headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The high court on Friday agreed to consider an appeal by the former alderwoman, Sylvia Gonzalez, who was arrested by Castle Hills police in July 2019 and charged with tampering with a public document.

She spent a day in the Bexar County Jail but the charge was dismissed by the Bexar County District Attorney’s Office. Gonzalez filed a lawsuit in 2020 accusing other officials of retaliation.

The Supreme Court will decide whether Castle Hills officials, particularly the mayor and high-ranking police, can claim government immunity against lawsuits. The affluent North Side community along Loop 410 has about 4,000 residents.

Gonzalez, now 76, has said she was embarrassed by the arrest. She was placed in an orange inmate uniform, forced to sit on a cold metal bench and had her booking photo released to the media. Her lawsuit sought about $70,000 in legal fees and compensation for stress, harm to her reputation and loss of future job opportunities.

The lawsuit alleged violation of her rights under the First and Fourteenth amendments of the U.S. Constitution. She is represented by the Institute for Justice, a national law firm based in Virginia that bills itself as a guardian of basic American rights.

Senior U.S. District Judge David A. Ezra ruled in her favor, saying the city could have issued a summons for the nonviolent misdemeanor but got an arrest warrant instead, “which ensured that she would spend time in jail rather than remaining free and appearing before a judge.”

A three-member panel of the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling, reversed the district court, determining Gonzalez failed to prove her arrest was retaliatory and upholding the defendants’ claim of immunity.

Lawyers for Gonzalez have said she was the first Hispanic councilwoman ever elected in Castle Hills and was responding to concerns from residents when she “championed a nonbinding, citizen-signed petition calling for the removal of the city manager.”

“This act of political speech and petition, protected by the core of the First Amendment, was met with a coordinated campaign of retaliation by Castle Hills officials,” the institute said in its release.

Anya Bidwell, an attorney with the institute, said the appeals court’s decision “sets an impossible standard for victims of retaliatory arrest and punishment to prove their cases.”

“We are taking this case to the Supreme Court to ensure that government officials are held accountable when they violate the Constitution and that we stop this censorship by retaliation,” Bidwell said.

Castle Hills Mayor JR Treviño, listed as a defendant, along with Police Chief John Siemens and police Detective Alex Wright, declined to discuss the case.

“We can’t comment on pending litigation,” said Treviño, who also is chief operating officer of Treco Enterprises and interim president and CEO of the San Antonio Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

In a release, the Institute for Justice called Gonzalez a “Texas grandmother” and retiree who endured “harassment, false charges, and even imprisonment, all stemming from her efforts to hold Castle Hills city officials accountable for their actions.”

Also arrested the same day, July 18, 2019, was then-Alderwoman Lesley Wenger, 77 at the time. She was charged with tampering with evidence and fraudulent use or possession of identification information.

Gonzalez and Wenger both were part of a three-member council majority that criticized City Manager Ryan Rapelye. They were accused in arrest affidavits of engaging in a yearlong effort to get him fired or force him to quit.

According to one police affidavit, Wenger copied information from Rapelye’s personnel file, including his Social Security number, driver’s license number, date of birth and information about his daughter, then later tore up the yellow sheet on which she’d written it — what police considered evidence. But the DA’s office also dismissed the charges against her.

Gonzalez was accused of illegally taking possession of petitions titled “Fix Our Streets” that called for Rapelye’s removal during a May 2019 council meeting, after a citizen said she’d been misled to sign one of the petitions “under false pretenses.”

The arrests also followed a 3-2 council vote supported by Wenger and Gonzalez a few weeks earlier to restrict residents from speaking until the end of regular council meetings. A new state law took effect in September 2019 that negated that vote, allowing the public to speak on individual agenda items during meetings of governmental bodies.

(Read more at the San Antonio Express News)

It’s odd how nobody brings to the conversation that this is all between Democrats

With the ways that both the press and political figures like Joe Biden regularly demonize Republicans, it’s odd that not one Republican has been involved in this fiasco.

Likewise, on the other end of the conversation, since Republicans are always demonized by the press and political figures, it would seem that either:

• Democrats would jealously guard their reputations and not let them get stained by rapscallions like Senator Bob Menendez, Mayor JR Trevino, or Hunter Biden’s loving daddy
• Or they would at least defend the weak that got them elected.

However, neither of these seem to be the case.

So, why hasn’t the Texas Democrat Party come out and excoriated this mayor and his compartriots? Why hasn’t Joe Biden come out and taken a stand for the little person who stood for what was right? Why hasn’t Kamala Harris hashed up some word salad on how this woman stood in the breach?

Could it be that they see us all as pawns to shuffle around? Are they currently unsure of which ones they will sacrifice before the game ends?

…

Shock: Obama lied on the number of his deportations

Obama included the voluntary returns (who may have crossed back into Mexico several times per day) as deportations

With a hat tip to Ed Bonderenka’s Not of this World and his interview of former border agent Chris Harris, we now find out that Barack admitted to lying to the bulk of America on his deportations. (Select the link above to go to the audio of the interview.)

The Obama record on deportations: Likely not the Deporter in Chief

The Migration Policy Institute revealed in a 26 January 2017 report how Obama’s record as the “deporter in chief” actually was based on a lie. Some 31% between 2007 and 2014 were “voluntary returns” (who were counted as deportations, but were allowed to return to Mexico). To quote the MPI:

These figures demonstrate the Obama administration’s focus on formal removals instead of returns, with formal removals under Obama far outpacing those of the Bush and Clinton administrations even as returns were far lower. This policy to ensure that removals have a lasting legal consequence likely reduced the number of unauthorized immigrants attempting to cross the border multiple times: Overall, recidivism along the border fell from 29 percent in FY 2007 to 14 percent in FY 2014, and was much higher for migrants given voluntary return (31 percent) than for those subjected to formal removal (18 percent), according to CDS data.

(Read more at MPI)

However, if you listen to the interview between Ed Bonderenka and former border agent Chris Harris, you will find that those “voluntary returns” occurred sometimes several times per day and each was counted by the Obama regime as a deportation.

As a continuation of the Obama lying ways, the Biden crime family goes to Congress and lies

Hunter Biden’s opening statement to investigators collides with witness testimony and email evidence

Just The News points out how Hunter Biden’s opening statement contradicted the IRS whistleblower testamony and the email evidence.

In his opening statement to the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday, Hunter Biden told investigators that he did not involve his father in his business deals.

Yet, his assertion directly conflicts with publicly available evidence, Hunter Biden’s own statements, and documentation and witness testimony secured by the committee.

“I am here today to provide the Committees with the one uncontestable fact that should end the false premise of this inquiry: I did not involve my father in my business. Not while I was a practicing lawyer, not in my investments or transactions domestic or international, not as a board member, and not as an artist. Never,” he said in his opening statement obtained by Punchbowl News.

Contrary to that claim, here are some of the documented instances where Hunter Biden involved his father, Joe Biden, in his business deals with foreign partners:

Cafe Milano Meetings

In 2014, Hunter Biden hosted a dinner meeting at Cafe Milano in the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington, D.C. Biden’s emails show that he invited two oligarchs with whom he was in business: widow of the former Moscow mayor Yelena Baturina and Kazakhstani businessman Kenes Rakishev.

Devon Archer confirmed in his testimony with the Oversight Committee both Baturina and Rakishev were in attendance. Another Kazakhstani oligarch, the former Prime Minister Karim Massimov also reportedly attended. He also told investigators that then-Vice President Biden showed up at the meeting and interacted with the assembled partners.

In 2015, Hunter Biden hosted a similar gathering at the same upscale restaurant. He invited Burisma executive Vadim Pozharskyi, the point man between the Ukrainian gas company and the Biden associates. Emails and Archer’s testimony confirm Pozharksyi was present.

“Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent (sic) some time together,” Pozharskyi wrote Biden in an email following the dinner meeting. “It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure.”

Trip to Beijing aboard Air Force Two

In December 2013, Hunter Biden flew to Beijing aboard Air Force Two with his father during an official government trip. During the trip to China, Hunter Biden arranged a meeting between Joe Biden and Jonathan Li in the lobby of the hotel where they were staying.

Jonathan Li is a Chinese businessman who joined with Hunter Biden and his associates in forming BHR Partners, a private equity firm that was backed by several Chinese state owned enterprises, including the Bank of China.

“How do I go to Beijing, halfway around the world, and not see them for a cup of coffee?” Biden told The New Yorker magazine.

Naval Observatory Meeting

In testimony to the impeachment inquiry, Devon Archer told investigators that Hunter Biden arranged a meeting for a foreign client with his father at the official vice presidential residence, the Naval Observatory, Just the News previously reported.

In 2015, Hunter Biden brought Mark Holtzman – then the top official at Kazakhstan’s largest bank – and former Kazakhstani Prime Minister Karim Massimov, who had previously attended one of the Cafe Milano dinners alongside Rakishev, to the residence.

Archer said the meeting was to discuss Massimov’s candidacy to be the United Nations Secretary General. Hunter Biden and Archer were engaged in trying to secure business for Burisma in Kazakhstan at the time, hence the favor for such a prominent banker and the politically-connected oligarch, Archer said.

(Read of the biggest of lies in regard to CEFC, Burisma, and Mexico at Just The News)

One thing is certain, lying never creates an eacy path.

When you lie, you just lay a trap for yourself.

…

You just might be a Democrat if …

Eric Utter of the American Thinker injects both truth and some humor into the mix as he reviews how Democrats act in America’s current political climate. Here are the first nine entries:

If you are fine with showing your I.D. while entering a Costco warehouse but believe it’s beyond the pale to be asked to provide an I.D. when voting for the president of the United States, you just might be a Democrat.

If you like the phrase “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” but think chants of “USA, USA” are trite, offensive, and possibly violent, you just might be a Democrat.

If you strongly support continual increases in the minimum wage but are baffled and upset by increasing prices in goods and services, you just might be a Democrat.

If you dance a little jig of happiness when you hear that mask mandates may be coming back, you just might be a Democrat.

If you don’t want the border secured because you’re afraid you won’t be able to find a reasonably priced gardener or pool boy, you just might be a Democrat.

If you think the Obamas are beatific near-deities who tried their best to heal and unite the nation but that Trump is Hitler or the Antichrist, you just may be a Democrat.

If you get your news from “The View,” MSNBC, and Salon, you just might be a Democrat.

If you think NPR is utterly fair and balanced but Fox News is not, you just might be a Democrat.

If you look at Hunter Biden’s “paintings” and see a talented artist, you just might be a Democrat. (And if you purchase one, you just might be a Democrat donor.)

(Read the next ten entries at the American Thinker)

If you never heard of any of the faults of Obama, you likely are a Democrat

I am just pointing out the obvious (not as well as Eric did).

…

Kevin McCarthy says Santos expulsion was a mistake

Does this come under the label of “We should be beating the Democrats at their own game”

Or is this an audition for MSNBC?

Kevin McCarthy says Santos expulsion was a mistake

The New York Post brings conservatives another cudgel that we can use with Kevin McCarthy the next time he tries to join the conservative conversation.

Expelling George Santos from Congress was a mistake, according to former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who is set to retire from the chamber by the end of the year.

“I would have leaned to some other punishment for him,” said McCarthy, who was out of town during the Dec. 1 Santos expulsion and did not cast a vote.

The disgraced Long Island pol should have been able to “have his day in court” before the House of Representatives took action, McCarthy added.

A censure — like the one recently doled out to Rep. Jamaal Bowman for illegally pulling a House fire alarm — would have been more appropriate, the California Republican said.

The former speaker, now on a farewell media tour, said he had received congratulatory calls and messages from world leaders and high powered CEOs. But one person he hasn’t heard from is his replacement, current Speaker Mike Johnson.

“He hasn’t called for advice,” McCarthy said. “I wrote a note for whoever became speaker and left it there with some advice.

(Read what you can at the New York Post)

Maybe this isn’t anything more than Monday-morning quarterbacking

Although I have the temptation to believe that Mr. McCarthy might be grinding in the fact that, again, Republican leadership has been duped into playing “good guy” as the Democrats continue to break the rules and keep their members in Congress (e.g., Menendez and underage Peurto Rican girls, Omar and her second husband/brother, …), I will give the former representative the benefit of the doubt. Never mind that he leaves office when it makes it harder to put another Republican in behind him. Surely that is just a coincidence and not a fit of vindictiveness against the conservatives who held him to his word.

Still, with all of this considered, maybe this is just McCarthy continuing things in the Democrat way: making snide shots at those in charge as he departs. That puts him right in line with Obama.

…

Even the leaders of the illegal alien caravan sees Biden’s policies as stupid

Biden’s and Barack’s inane border policies even seem stupid to the illegals

The largest migrant caravan in a year heads to America and the leader mocks Biden’s border policies

The New York Post not only notes the enormity of the caravan coming, but also tells us about the mocking words from the caravan’s leader.

The largest migrant caravan in a year, estimated to include some 7,000 people, is heading toward the US — and its leader claims President Biden has “dropped the ball” on immigration and allowed Latin American countries to “gang up” on his administration.

This latest caravan, comprising migrants from Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, and Venezuela, left southern Mexico on Monday, bound for the US border.

Officials in the Mexican state of Chiapas said some 3,500 people set off on foot from the city of Tapachula near the Guatemalan border — but one of the caravan’s organizers, Irineo Mujica, claimed there were around 5,000 in the initial group, and that that number had since swelled to more than 7,000.

Mujica, a US citizen, and self-described “human rights defender” who has been accompanying the migrants, told the cable network Real America’s Voice he believed the leaders of Latin American countries were conspiring to create the current immigration crisis to extract money from Washington — and that Biden was allowing it to happen.

“I believe the Biden administration has dropped the ball,” he said. “A lot of the countries are fueling this immigration by … transporting people in.”

Mujica further claimed immigration was being “weaponized” against the US and the Biden administration – and that Mexico was “ganging up” with other countries in the region “to make sure all this immigration goes straight into the United States.”

The caravan organizer argued that “irresponsible” Latin American countries have been charging migrants money in exchange for rides to the US border, where he said they were temporarily held before being released, instead of being deported.

(Read more at the New York Post)

If this leftist facilitator can see it, why doesn’t the main stream press report on it?

Surely it could not be a case of their also being leftist facilitators, could it?

Maybe they are getting a cut of the bribes coming in from China and who knows where else. Maybe they are getting cartel money. Certainly the cartels and China are making a mint off of the fentanyl flowing over Biden’s and Mayorkas’ open border.

…

Why does Biden have this nonsensical border policy?

A 2018 New York Times article explains why: “We can replace them.”

The New York Times said the quiet part out loud in their headline: “We can replace them.”

For a few hours on Saturday morning, I felt good about America. I was at a smallish rally in the Atlanta suburb of Riverdale, listening to Democratic politicians including Senator Kamala Harris and Georgia’s Stacey Abrams, who could become the first African-American female governor in American history. Abrams told a story she often repeats on the campaign trail, about being 17 and arriving at the governor’s mansion for a reception for Georgia’s high school valedictorians.

Her family didn’t have a car, and she described getting off the bus and walking with her parents along a driveway to a set of black gates. A guard approached, and she remembered him saying, “This is a private event — you don’t belong here.”

Though they were eventually let in, Abrams recalled little of the event itself. “The only clear memory I have of that day is a man standing in front of the most powerful place in Georgia, looking at me and telling me I don’t belong,” she said. “But with your help in 10 days we will open those gates wide!” The crowd stood, applauding and cheering, as Abrams said, “Because this is our Georgia!”

(Read the liberal gameplan at the New York Times)

Of course, this was 2018 and Abrams lost, but claimed the election was stolen. But before the election, they were sure “we” (minorities, assumed to be liberals) can replace “them” (Whites, assumed to be conservatives).

With the help of Biden and his Bidenomics, it seems many of the minority community have decided to vote with their pocketbooks (and some smart politicians are reacting accordingly).

We can only hope that the illegals that Biden has saturated the nation with will see the gap between the abortion-pushing/transgender-selling Democrats and their traditional values.

…

Democrat plans that need to be stopped now

There are multiple venues where we need to root out the anti-American Democrat themes.

From

• Convoluted ways of dealing with our foreign entanglements to
• Repeated allowances for somone who cannot embrace American ideals to
• Just not having a firm grip on how to handle goverment to
• Allowing foreign nationals into our voting systems, …

There are Democrat ideas that need to be removed from our systems.

Those ideas need to be removed now, before they have a chance to take root.

Obama links Hamas attacks with “unbearable” Israeli occupation

Newsmax informs us of an Obama speech where (even in the light of the evil shown recently by Hamas) he let slip his baseless socialist theory of oppressors and the oppressed.

Former President Barack Obama is coming under scrutiny for his recent remarks on Israel’s war on Hamas, giving moral equivalence to the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks by linking them with Israel’s “occupation” of Palestinian lands.

“What Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it,” Obama said, following that statement immediately by saying, “And, what is also true is that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable.”

Obama made the remarks Friday at his Foundation’s “Democracy Forum.” Video excerpts of Obama’s comments were posted Pod Save America’s X page.

Critics were quick to note the former president’s moral equivalency of the brutal Hamas attacks that killed over 1400 Israelis, with the Daily Mail headlining that “Barack REFUSES to Pick a Side.”

(Read more at Newsmax)

In opposition to the Daily Mail assessment, I say Barack has picked a side (but the actions of that side are too horrific to justify just now).

From the beginning of his regime, Barack picked the side of the Islamists. No matter how many attacks we saw on American soil, he always sought ways to excuse them. No matter how horrific thos attacks were, he sought ways to continue the soft-headed programs of George W. Bush where America emulated Britain and imported “allies” from the Islamic lands where they respected strong men and had no tradition of Democracy.

Furthermore, from the beginning, Barack painted anything American or capitalist as imperialist (never mind that Islam and socialism are two of the quickest routes to proverty of the masses). Hence, in Barack’s little mind, the best way to improve things was to bring down capitalist states, bring down Democracies, and bring down Western-influenced states.

Never mind that Israel had been on the books as being in that area since before 10,000 B.C. Never mind that the term “Palestine” was invented by the Romans by manipulating the name “Philistine” (a barbaric seafaring people who had plagued the Israelites before the Romans). In Barack’s mind, the Israelites (become Israelis) were supposed “occupiers” (just like George Washington occupied the presidency before the “noble” Barack).

…

Rashida Tlaib again calls for the eradication of Jews from Israel, but then tries to sugar coat it

Fox News gives us the words of the Islamist member of the House, Rashida Tlaib as she tries to dig herself out of another hole by digging deeper.

Greene included something Tlaib wrote on X Friday that said, “From the river to the sea is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate. My work and advocacy is always centered in justice and dignity for all people no matter faith or ethnicity.”

(Read the full article at Fox News)

“From the river to the sea” is a call for murder. Nothing less. Anyone who supports the lives of anyone (especially Jews) needs to stand up against this hate.

All of the Islamists chanting that phrase know what they mean; therefore, this is not an attempt to explain the truth to them. This constitutes Tlaib trying to foist a lie on anyone dumb enough to accept her lie.

The one way to get out of this lie comes by just stopping the use of that phrase.

…

This constitutes a government that has gone beyond serious reputational damage

CNBC tries to make the story about a billing mistake of $108,895 on a student loan payment assessment by the Department of Education. However, the real story centers on a government that has gone well beyond its mandate.

As student loan bills restarted in October for tens of millions of Americans, the companies that service those loans made errors that potentially violate federal and state consumer protection laws.

In a memo quietly published Wednesday night on the U.S. Department of Education’s website, senior officials in the department’s office of Federal Student Aid detail how some of its servicers botched the return to repayment, and possibly put the government at “substantial reputational risk.”

(Read more liberal swill at CNBC)

Admittedly, the chance to eliminate this liberal program has flown

Still, this illustrates the incompetency of government to handle things that should be in the private sphere.

…

The fine print of Democrats’ plan to turn migrants into voters. Right now.

Fox News expposes the Democrat plan to turn illegal aliens into today’s voters — not voters in the future.

If you think offering migrants luxury hotel rooms, free meals, laundry service, transportation, health care and immigration lawyers is excessive, just wait until they can vote. Democrats are pushing to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections in New York City, Boston and other municipalities, as well as statewide in Connecticut.

The number of migrants pouring across the southern border hit a record high, according to data released Saturday. Illegal immigrant crossings soared 21 percent over the previous month. On a yearly basis, the figure hit 2.48 million.

Democrats may feign shock and distress. Don’t be fooled. Dems see these newcomers as their guarantee of a permanent voting majority in local elections. Not years from now, after the newcomers become citizens. Right now.

New York Mayor Eric Adams’ rhetoric is typical. He warns that the overwhelming number of migrants arriving — currently 16,000 to 17,000 a month — “will destroy New York City,” but he’s also leading the legal effort to turn migrants into voters. Adams and other New York Democrats pushed President Joe Biden to expedite work authorizations for them. They said it’s about making migrants self-sufficient. Maybe, but Dems have another powerful motive.

If you read the fine print of New York City’s “Our City, Our Vote” law, enacted in December 2021, it says that anyone with a work authorization who has been in the city for a mere 30 days can vote, even if they entered the country illegally.

Biden’s recent action fast-tracking work authorizations for Venezuelan border crossers, who make up about 41 percent of recent arrivals in New York City, will make tens of thousands of them eligible to vote under New York City’s new law, as soon as they obtain their working papers.

That is, if New York City’s voting law is allowed to go into effect. A big “if.” The law is tied up in court.

(Read more at Fox News)

If we thought the surges of votes xeroxed at 4 a.m. were bad, just wait for the surges of votes from masses of illegal aliens mixed in with our own ballots

If you thought that the cheating by Biden was bad in 2020 and his response with razor wire around Washington (along with the National Guard troops who had been screened to be loyal to the little dictator), then wait for this round.

…

What has Joe Biden’s open border and weak policy gotten us?

The Department of Homeland Security employs a pro-Hamas individual who posts to social media regularly. Unlike those supporting pro-life causes, that person has not been fired.

Here’s what Mayorkas had to say about that employee and other supporters of Hamas

Townhall comments on the exchange between Senator Josh Hawley and DHS Secretary Mayorkas over a Hamas-supporting employee on the DHS payroll.

Under questioning from Republican Senator Josh Hawley Tuesday during a hearing in front of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas refused to take a position on whether pro-Hamas individuals in the U.S. on a visa should be sent back to their home countries. Mayorkas repeatedly referred to the situation as a “legal matter” and would not give a moral opinion on the situation.

DHS Secretary Mayorkas refuses to answer @HawleyMO’s question about whether the student visas of pro-Hamas foreign nationals should have their Visas revoked: pic.twitter.com/RLaAfCw0F1

— Conservative War Machine (@WarMachineRR) October 31, 2023

Hawley’s questioning comes as pro-Hamas, pro-Jew killing rallies have broken out on college campuses across the country.

Over the weekend Jewish students at New York University were forced to lock themselves in the library and were offered a place to hide in the attic as Hamas supporters — screaming and chanting — attempted to enter the facility.

(See the video of the lockdown of Jewish students and read more at Townhall)

I support free speech; however, I also defend my employer’s reputation by not associating my employer with any of my views.

Because I support the free speech of all, I support the right of people to say stupid and hurtful things. However, because I work for a company that obviously exists in the public square, I do not say things that could be traced back to my employer or would do them great harm.

I would like my government to try to maintain the same standard for its employees. Don’t squelch their free speech; however, as employees of the people, don’t promote messages of hate and killing.

If you haven’t noticed “from the river to the sea” is a call for the killing of all Jews in Israel (just as “intifada” also calls for the deaths of Jews and Christians).

…

Man arrested in Houston supports killing Jews and studied how to build bombs

Houston CBS affiliate KHOU tells of the arrest of Sohaib Abuayyash, a Jordanian who overstayed a student visa and bought a firearm (prohibited for aliens).

FBI Director Chris Wray told Congress on Tuesday about a man arrested in Houston after he allegedly studied “how to build bombs and posted online about his support for killing Jews.”

We first told you about Sohaib Abuayyash, a 20-year-old Jordanian, on Oct. 20. FBI agents arrested him and charged him with possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. But Wray said it went far beyond possessing a weapon.

“He has viewed specific and detailed content posted by radical organizations on the internet including lessons on how to construct bombs or explosive devices,” Wray told Congress. “And that defendant has made statements to others that support the killing of individuals of particular religious faiths.”

Abuayyash has not been charged with building explosives.

A federal judge in Houston has ordered Abuayyash to remain in custody, saying “he has viewed specific and detailed content posted by radical organizations on the internet including lessons on how to construct bombs or explosive devices; and that Defendant has made statements to others that support the killing of individuals of particular religious faiths.”

Abuayyash claimed to be a citizen of Jordan when he entered the U.S. in 2016. In 2019, he applied for asylum status as a Palestinian.

(Read more at KHOU)

So the FBI has taken a break from surveilling parents speaking out at school board meetings?

Somehow, I don’t think this means that the FBI has stopped watching Trump supporters, surveilling parents, or stalking pro-life protesters. I just don’t.

One arrest of one illegal alien does not make a trend for the Biden regime. Still, as something that happened in Houston, it seems odd that this primarily came out as a national story when Wray mentioned the arrest during a Congressional hearing. Otherwise, Biden’s FBI would have been happy to keep this quiet for those who could have been attacked in Houston (assuming that this is a lone wolf).

…

Journalists get a peek at the depravity of Hamas

The Daily Wire was there when journalists were exposed to video not released to the public due to its sensitive nature.

Fox News host Martha MacCallum and other select journalists were shown a 43-minute collection of video footage from Hamas terrorists, security cameras, and social media, taken during the attack in Israel on October 7. Some of the graphic video footage, shown by the IDF, has not been made public out of respect for the victims’ families.

News reports indicate that the footage shows the murder, torture, and maiming of innocent men, women, and children by Hamas.

“Today we were shown the Hamas bodycam and other videos of the attacks of October 7th,” MacCallum posted to X on Friday. “There are no words to explain. It is to witness the darkest evil that can exist.”

“Hamas terrorists laugh and call home to boast how many Jews they killed ‘with their hands,’” she described. “Asking if their parents are proud? Humans bloodied, charred, ripped apart.”

“But it is the cries of the children that I will hear forever,” MacCallum added. “I share this with you because the world needs to know what happened. And so that you can imagine it, because I hope you never have to see it.”

Today we were shown the Hamas bodycam and other videos of the attacks of October 7th. There are no words to explain. It is to witness the darkest evil that can exist. Hamas terrorists laugh and call home to boast how many Jews they killed “with their hands.” Asking if their…

— Martha MacCallum (@marthamaccallum) October 27, 2023

(Read of input from the operational planning team who tried to rescue at victims at the Daily Wire)

If main stream media reporters attended, they must have fallen asleep before the video started.

If ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, or CNN attended this, they must have fallen asleep before the video started. All these reporters drone on about only centers on their pro-Palestinian narrative.

…

Biden’s busted border is a giant red carpet for terrorists

The Daily Caller provides a timeline of increasing border apprehensions of terrorists caused by Biden’s open borders and the resulting invitation to terrorists that this weakness displays.

Is Joe Biden trying to get us killed? His Nagasaki-like destruction of the southern “border” is like a mating call that lures terrorists to have their way with us.

Customs and Border Protection reports, 269,735 illegal aliens invaded America in September, a one-month record. Border Patrol agents apprehended 1,912,663 illegals during President Donald J. Trump’s final 32 months in office.

In Biden’s first 32, CBP encountered 6,292,849 illegals — up a staggering 329%. Even worse, some 1.5 million Known Gotaways appeared in Border Patrol binoculars before disappearing into the homeland.

These illegals were detected and counted, albeit not stopped. Unknown Gotaways break into America invisibly and then vanish. How many? Where? Who knows?

Maddeningly, Biden’s murder of the U.S.-Mexico border (1848-2021) goes even deeper.

Since Trump departed, southern-frontier incursions have soared among illegals in the Terrorist Screening Dataset. Consider these fiscal year apprehensions:

2017 – 2

2018 – 6

2019 – 0

2020 – 3

2021 – 15

2022 – 98

2023 – 169

Border Patrol caught only 11 terrorists trying to penetrate America’s boundaries under Trump. Under Biden? 282 — up an alarming 2,464%.

Also nailed on the “border,” as Biden watched: 73,008 Special Interest Aliens from 12 terror-tainted countries. Between Oct. 1, 2021, and Oct. 4, 2023, these illegals hailed from:

Afghanistan – 6,386

Egypt – 3,153

Iran – 659

Iraq – 123

Jordan – 185

Lebanon – 164

Mauritania – 15,594

Pakistan – 1,613

Syria – 538

Turkey – 30,830

Uzbekistan – 13,624

Yemen – 139

This month alone, through Oct. 14, illegals have busted in from:

Afghanistan – 285

China – Nearly 2,000

Iran – 30+

Pakistan – 35

Russia – 100+

Syria – Nearly 60

These numbers mean potentially massive trouble, especially since Hamas’ unprovoked slaughter of innocent Israelis on Oct. 7 cranked the Middle Eastern cauldron to boil.

(Read of jihadi reports from San Diego at the Daily Caller)

And these are just the ones dumb enough to get caught. Who (except Iran) knows how many jihadis got through?

Considering the bold threats Iran’s koran-waving president made against the United States, who but Iran knows how many jihadis they have installed in through the Democrat cheesecloth border?

…

Serving in Biden’s armed forces: twenty-five attacks endured in two weeks balanced by one response with a drone

Fox News seems to be the only news outlet reporting on the 25 attacks against American forces abroad or the one responding attack by the Biden regime.

U.S. forces in western Iraq were targeted in another drone attack early Tuesday morning, according to a report, marking the latest in a string of assaults on American troops in the Middle East as the Israel-Hamas war continues.

Two armed drones were used against Iraq’s Ain al-Asad airbase, Reuters reported, citing a security source and a government source. The base hosts international troops that assist Iraq in defeating a terror group called the Daesh, or the Islamic State. No casualties or damage were reported.

Tuesday’s attack would make the 25th on U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria since Oct. 17. The attacks have included a mix of one-way drones and rockets, resulting in the death of an American contractor and 24 injured troops, according to U.S. defense officials.

The attacks have increased in recent weeks as President Biden and other senior leaders continue to express support for Israel and its right to defend itself after one of the worst terror attacks in decades left more than 1,400 people dead, including 34 Americans.

(continued)

In response to earlier attacks, U.S. military forces last week conducted “self-defense strikes on two facilities in eastern Syria used by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and affiliated groups,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin said Thursday.

(Read the whole article at Fox News)

Jake Sullivan: “We will respond”

CBS News carries the water for Jake Sullivan as he claims America will respond if attacked. What? Once every nineteen or twenty-five times?

MARGARET BRENNAN: Before I let you go, do you now believe Iran is deterred?

JAKE SULLIVAN: Well, what I believe is that the United States will follow through on what we say we’re going to do. We said that if our troops were attacked, we would respond, we responded. If they’re attacked again, we will respond again. And we are vigilant, because we are seeing elevated threats against our forces throughout the region, and an elevated risk of this conflict spreading to other parts of the region. We are doing everything in our power to deter and prevent that. But I’m not going to predict what the future brings, other than to say that if we are attacked, we will respond.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Jake Sullivan, thank you for your time. And Face the Nation. We’ll be back in one minute. Stay with us.

This is what pure propaganda looks like.

…

The reality: antisemitic attacks increase in America

Even left-wing oulets like PBS have started to admit that antisemitism has been driven to new highs by the importation of antisemitic crowds.

Antisemitism rose in the U.S. in 2022 and shows little sign of abating worldwide as political radicals have gained mainstream popularity, researchers said in a report released Monday.

(continued)

The researchers found that visibly identifiable Jews, particularly ultra-Orthodox Jews, who are also known as haredi Jews, are the primary targets of antisemitic violence in the West.

“Haredi Jews are the main victims not only because they are easily identifiable as Jews, but also because they are perceived as vulnerable and unlikely to fight back,” the report said.

The rise in Jew-hatred in the U.S. is not limited to white supremacists. It said that “the antisemitism of the far-right and far-left are pushing into the mainstream of American culture and politics from both sides.”

(Read more liberal tripe at )

So — just like Biden doesn’t blame the criminal, but the victim — this liberal outlet blames the Jews

Just as Biden wants to ban the gun, but release the criminal — these liberals want to blame the orthodox Jews, but don’t seem to mention the anti-Jewish and anti-Christian actions of the hoards of Muslims that Biden and Obama have imported.

Maybe now might be a nice time to take a trip down memory road in Bunkerville, where we might see some attacks by Muslims on peoples of other faiths.

NEW: Pro-Palestine mob takes over the street and swarms an elderly driver in Minneapolis.

After the driver made it through the initial mob of people, he was blocked at the next intersection by cars.

The mob then chased after the man to harass him some more.

Footage on the… pic.twitter.com/YwuKLEdbNS

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 23, 2023

Yesterday, a pro-Palestine mob attacked a Christian man in Skokie, Illinois. You didn’t hear about this because it doesn’t fit the narrative.

pic.twitter.com/twZJ0vhk83

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) October 23, 2023

…

What we miss when we call the Oct. 7 massacre a “pogrom”

The Forward explains the October 7 attack and the following events from the perspective of those who find themselves at the center of the attacks.

Pogrom.

Rarely has just one word done so much to join together so many pundits and politicians. Since the events of Oct. 7, a term we associated with the mostly distant past, spanning the medieval Crusades and modern Czars, has become commonplace. In our country, liberals and conservatives, Jews and non-Jews, Republicans and Democrats have all invoked the word “pogrom” to describe Hamas’ massacre in Israel of more than 1,300 men, women and children.

There is little reason to wonder over the insistent iteration of this word, especially for American Jews of Russian ancestry. No single word better captures the searing reality of Jewish life in Russia from the late 19^th to early 20^th centuries than pogrom. It derives from verbpogromit’, the Russian verb for break or attack, and applies to the breaking and attacking of Russian Jews from 1881 and the assassination of Czar Alexander II to 1905 and the bloody events in Kishniev.

(Read more at The Forward)

Maybe, like many things liberal, this article is trying to push the violent act against a people into the past.

Yes, it was an attack. And that, at the root of the Russian word, is what is meant.

However, unlike the old event, this is a current happening. Maybe people, including some in Israel referring to it as a pogrom, want to put it into the past.

Nonetheless, we would not be here without Biden’s and Obama’s theory that American interests (like Israel) need to be diminished and other powers (like Iran) need to be brought up in power to balance out our diminishment so that there exists a new balance without America.

…

Thanks to the policies of the Obama and Biden regimes, the new axis of rvil — Russia, China, North Korea, Iran — have come up to pose a worldwide existential threat

The Gatestone Institute observes the damage of the unproven theories put into practice by the Obama and Biden regimes.

• The Biden administration… is also financing the ruling mullahs of Iran with billions of dollars to put the finishing touches on the country’s nuclear program and for delivering more weapons to Russia with which to attack Ukraine.
• “We’re sitting still, and the Chinese, the Russians, Iran, North Korea, and several others, are moving to shore up their relations and threaten us in a lot of different places.” — Former US National Security Advisor John Bolton, The Hill, March 12, 2023.
• Since Russia invaded Ukraine, the Biden administration seems to be allowing Iran’s ruling mullahs to prosper from the war and emerge as the winners.
• “I have a question for you – how does Russia pay Iran for this, in your opinion? Is Iran just interested in money? Probably not money at all, but Russian assistance to the Iranian nuclear program. Probably, this is exactly the meaning of their alliance” — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Jerusalem Post, November 4, 2022.
• “Today, China, Russia, North Korea and Iran continue to invest in technologies to expand their capabilities to hit the United States with nuclear weapons. All four countries have also escalated their threatening rhetoric, indicating their willingness to use nuclear weapons in a military conflict. By expanding their nuclear programs, each has made clear that our nuclear arsenal is no longer a deterrent to their potential use of nuclear weapons.” — U.S. Rep. Mike Turner, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, Fox News, May 4, 2023.
• Thanks to the Obama and Biden administrations’ monumental capitulations to Iran’s regime — and the refusal of both administrations not only to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program but also to prevent anyone else from stopping it — the Russian-Iranian-Chinese-North Korean alliance now poses a global existential threat.

Not only is the Biden administration turning a blind eye on the growing alliance between Iran, Russia, China and North Korea, and looking the other way on their evasions of sanctions, it is also financing the ruling mullahs of Iran with billions of dollars to put the finishing touches on the country’s nuclear program and for delivering more weapons to Russia with which to attack Ukraine.

“We’re sitting still, and the Chinese, the Russians, Iran, North Korea, and several others, are moving to shore up their relations and threaten us in a lot of different places,” former US National Security Advisor John Bolton recently warned.

“It’s an indication that the Saudis and others are trying to hedge their bets with China and Russia, because they don’t think the United States has the resolve and the fortitude necessary to do what they need to do to protect the world against Iran and its intentions. The Chinese have a strategy they’ve been following. We kind of wander around from day to day.”

Iran is currently producing more oil and selling it at levels close to the pre-sanctions era to countries such as China, which desperately needs more oil. China, North Korea and Russia have also been upgrading and expanding their nuclear arsenals. The Iranian regime, now that it is aligned with Putin’s Russia and the Chinese Communist Party, would probably be delighted to conquer the US and Israel.

Since Russia invaded Ukraine, the Biden administration seems to be allowing Iran’s ruling mullahs to prosper from the war and emerge as the winners. Iran has become a major weapons exporter to Russia – and not limited to exporting just drones. Iran’s arms exports to Russia are providing the mullahs with a great opportunity to perfect their military systems as well as to profit financially.

The Iranian regime, of course, needs something more in return from Russia than just putting the finishing touches on its nuclear weapons program. Militarily speaking, Russia is moving to provide advanced military equipment to Iran’s regime, such as air defense systems, helicopters and fighter jets. This can only make the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism — which chants “Death to America,” “Death to Israel,” and freely murders its own citizens – an even stronger expansionist state.

David Barnea, director of Israel’s Mossad, warned on September 11, 2023:

“I have a feeling that more deals will be interdicted soon. We are concerned that the Russians will meet Iran’s demands to supply it with weapons and raw materials that will put Israel at risk.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky also previously warned:

“I have a question for you – how does Russia pay Iran for this, in your opinion? Is Iran just interested in money? Probably not money at all, but Russian assistance to the Iranian nuclear program. Probably, this is exactly the meaning of their alliance.”

If Russia succeeds in helping Iran acquire nuclear bombs, this is an existential threat not only to Israel, but also to the US and its allies.

After all, one of the core pillars of the Islamic Republic of Iran has been to destroy both the United States (“the Great Satan“) the Jewish state (“the Little Satan“).

(Read more on the threats against the Great Satan at the Gatestone Institute)

…

A recent post compared imbalances in Biden’s treatment of LGBTQ in rich and poor nations. Let’s look at how publicly Joe plays favorites with his weaponized law enforcement

The FBI harbored Biden allegations since 2017, through impeachment and election

Just The News quotes Representative Comer as it builds a case for Biden’s friends in the FBI having protected Joe since 2017.

If House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer’s sleuthing turns out to be right, the FBI harbored a deep, dark secret through the first Trump impeachment, the Hunter Biden laptop saga and the 2020 election fury. The secret: that a validated and well-paid informant raised concerns all the way back in 2017 that Joe Biden was involved in a $5 million bribery scheme involving Ukraine.

The question emerging now is did America’s most famous crime-fighting agency deep-six the allegation or dismiss it as “Russian disinformation” without thoroughly probing it.

Comer made the bombshell revelation Tuesday night in an interview with Just the News, just a day after reviewing an FBI FD-1023 form that memorialized the informant’s allegations, and two days before he plans to hold a vote in Congress to hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt for failing to provide a copy to his committee as demanded by a subpoena.

He said the version of the informant report he was allowed to review by Wray had about 10% of information redacted and made clear the allegations were first reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigations back in 2017 as Donald Trump was beginning his term as president.

“Yes, it is Ukraine,” Comer told the Just the News, No Noise television show when asked what country the alleged bribery involved. “This form 1023 involves a business person from Ukraine, who allegedly sent a bribe, a substantial bribe to then-Vice President Joe Biden.”

Asked whether the allegation involved the Ukrainian oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky, whose Burisma Holdings energy firm first hired Hunter Biden into a lucrative board and consulting job in 2014 when father Joe Biden was vice president, Comer carefully demurred.

“I probably better punt on that question. The name was redacted,” the powerful House committee chairman answered.

(Read more at Just The News)

Since this document was an unclassified banking document — a Suspicious Activity Report — why is it now both classified and redacted?

Since this SAR dates back to when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and Barack Obama sat his rear in the Oval Office, could this have to do with protecting their sorry rear ends?

…

Just remember, it was the Peter Strzok notes that showed that Biden raised the “Logan Act” in an Oval Office discussion about Flynn

The Washington Examiner reminds us by way of a 24 June 2020 article that Joe Biden was the one who brought up using the Logan Act against General Flynn. Therefore, weaponizing the FBI against his political enemies does not seem so far of a stretch (unless you want to call Peter Strzok and those on his side liars).

Former Vice President Joe Biden mentioned the “Logan Act” during an early January 2017 Oval Office discussion about the investigation into retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, newly released notes suggest.

It’s not fully clear what Biden said about the 1799 law, but Flynn’s legal team said “it appears” he “personally raised the idea” during a meeting between former President Barack Obama, then-FBI Director James Comey, national security adviser Susan Rice, and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates in the days leading up to President Trump’s inauguration. Biden is now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and leading in national polling.

New insight into the conversation is given by chicken-scratch notes taken by former FBI special agent Peter Strzok, who later oversaw the bureau’s interviews with Flynn, then Trump’s incoming national security adviser, as part of the counterintelligence investigation into links between the Trump campaign and Russia.

The notes were disclosed in a court filing Wednesday to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia around the same time a federal appeals court ruled in a 2-1 decision that the judge presiding over the case against Flynn grant the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the criminal charges against him. U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Jensen of Missouri, who was picked by Attorney General William Barr to review the government’s case against Flynn, “obtained and analyzed” the document. Biden’s comment about the Logan Act are the only words that appear in quotation marks.

The officials were discussing phone calls Flynn had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about a United Nations resolution on Israel and sanctions during the presidential transition period. At one point, Strzok wrote that Comey said the calls “appear legit.” Obama emphasized that “the right people” should look into Flynn.

In a memo hastily written on Trump’s Inauguration Day, Rice noted that Comey had “some concerns” about those calls and warned “that could be an issue as it relates to sharing sensitive information.” Rice’s email to herself claims Obama insisted everything be done “by the book.”

Both Strzok and Rice note that Obama asked if there is any sensitive information he should not mention to the Trump transition team. Rice wrote that Comey replied, “‘Potentially.’ He added that he has no indication that Flynn has passed classified information to Kislyak, but he noted that ‘the level of communication is unusual.’”

Earlier in the meeting, Obama said something to the effect of “these are unusual times,” according to Strzok’s notes, with Biden saying, “I’ve been on the Intel Committee for ten years and I never” before the notes trail off.

__

Actually, I have no problem calling Peter Strzok, Joe Biden, and the rest who were in that Oval Office meeting liars

Call a spade a spade.

No matter what we call anyone or anything, we primarily need to look at the behaviour of people. Hence, when people behave badly by scheming to use our institutions against the people of America, we need to punish the bad behavior. Likewise, when people provide exemplary performance, we need to reward it — even if (at times) they are a boar.

…

Which of these leftist ideologues do you trust?

Biden declares himself “blameless” if US defaults on debt, says “MAGA Republicans” are trying to crash the economy to sabotage his re-election bid

Biden: “I’m looking at the 14th Amendment as whether or not we have the authority”

The Daily Mail quotes Dementia Joe as he tries to weasel out of the homework he should have been doing since January (but didn’t start until last week).

President Joe Biden on Sunday said he would consider using the 14th amendment to solve America’s debt limit but conceded it is probably too close to the June 1st default deadline to use it in this round.
‘I’m looking at the 14th Amendment as whether or not we have the authority,’ he said at a press conference in Hiroshima.
‘I think we have the authority. The question is could it be done and invoked in time that it would not be appealed and, as a consequence, pass the date in question and still default on the debt?’
(Read more at the Daily Mail)

Rather than inventing a 14th Amendment authority, why not return to policies that work and allow Americans to recover from Biden’s first two-plus years?

Rather than spending us into oblivion and spurring who-knows-how-much-more inflation, why not go to the model that recently brought us out of the “Great Recession?”

…

Pelosi tantrum on the 150th Anniversary of the 14th Amendment

In a toothless poke by Nancy Pelosi at President Trump on 9 July 2018, San Fran Nan suggested that the 14^th Amendment primarily made us equal before the law (thus somehow invalidating President Trump’s then-recent appointment of a conservative to the Supreme Court in favor of a LGBTQ-friendly selection she would have made).

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi issued the following statement to mark the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the 14th Amendment, which lays out the rights of citizenship, access to due process and guarantees equal protection under the law to all people in the United States:

“One hundred and fifty years ago, with the ratification of the 14th Amendment, our nation took a monumental step forward in its ever-advancing march toward a more perfect union. By expanding the rights of citizenship and due process and guaranteeing equal protection under law, the 14th Amendment righted historic wrongs by overturning the outrageous, immoral Dred Scott decision. This landmark amendment soon paved the way for many of our nation’s most important legal and legislative victories, including the desegregation of schools, a woman’s right to choose and marriage equality.

“On this historic day, the protections guaranteed in the 14th Amendment are under dire threat from a Republican Administration and Congress determined to undermine the health, safety, civil rights and financial security of hard-working Americans. President Trump’s nominee to replace Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy places a generation of progress for women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, voting rights, workers’ rights and health care in peril. All of President Trump’s potential nominees are prepared to dismantle our nation’s promise of liberty, equality and opportunity for all, and to radically alter the course of American justice for decades to come.

“The rights enumerated in the 14th Amendment are fundamental to our democracy and to our values as a nation where all are created equal. While Republicans work to undermine these values and weaken our democracy, Democrats will stand firm against these outrageous attacks as we continue our work to build a freer, fairer and more just future for everyone.”

(Read this at Nancy Pelosi‘s site, if you like)

I say that selection of a conservative justice over one that favors a 2% which firmly resists righteousness seems like a choice that favors all

A proverb that seems very apt to this situation might explain the groaning in America as of recently:

When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, But when a wicked man rules, people groan. (Proverbs 29:2 NASB)

…

Pelosi says 14th Amendment makes the debt ceiling unconstitutional

Slate works as the “way-back machine” as it quotes Nancy Pelosi in a 20 June 2012 article where she said that the 14^th Amendment made the debt ceiliing unconstitutional.

At a lunch roundtable with columnists earlier today, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi urged President Barack Obama to avoid a new debt-ceiling showdown by stating that a statutory borrowing limit is inconsistent with Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, which states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States … shall not be questioned.”

She at first referred to this possibility obliquely while making a larger point about the lack of cooperative spirit between the Republican Party and the Obama administration but clarified her stance in response to further questions saying, “I would like to see the Constitution used to protect the country’s full faith and credit.” She didn’t offer a legal argument in favor of the position but argued on policy grounds that “you cannot put the country through the uncertainty” again, noting that America’s sovereign debt was downgraded by ratings agencies in the wake of the standoff even though it was successfully resolved.

“This isn’t just about credit ratings,” she said, “it’s about the dynamism of our economy.”

Speaking last summer, former President Bill Clinton also endorsed this approach and anonymous members of Congress alleged that Pelosi privately supported it. Obama, however, has indicated that his administration’s lawyers are not persuaded the constitutional argument is correct. In my experience discussing this with constitutional scholars, the key point is less about the merits of the argument per se than it is about whether there’s anything the courts could or would do to prevent a president from acting unilaterally in this regard. Most people I’ve spoken to feel that this would be a classic nonjusticiable political question and no court would issue a restraining order enjoining the Treasury Department from issuing additional debt.

(Read more at Slate)

Here is one time that I agree with Pelosi

However, this agreement comes from polar opposite stances politically. Hers seems to be one of figuring how to twist the Constitution to fit a modern/progressive/socialist agenda. Mine comes from trying to figure what the founders meant as I read it during work breaks.

While I don’t hold a degree in Constitutional law, my reading of the Constitution finds enough commonality between the Word of God and our founding document that there would be common themes. And, while I cannot prove it, one of those themes seems to be a chance for forgiveness. Because, on one hand, our nation was largely founded by people seeking to start anew and, on the other hand, our God is the model of the Father of the Prodigal son (running out to meet him and covering his rags with luxurious robes), our Constitution would offer to its people the chance to start over. However, in order to maintain the stability needed for such forgiveness, such a standard would not be afforded to the government. Our government must operate at a higher level.

…

President Obama backs away from invoking 14th Amendment on debt ceiling

NBC News reported in a 14 January 2013 article how Obama backed away from using the 14^th Amendment to push up the debt ceiling.

Obama backs away from invoking the 14th Amendment to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling, but would it even worked if he tried to do it?

At a press conference Monday, President Obama confirmed that he would not use the 14th Amendment to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling unless both houses of Congress gave him the express authority to do so.

“If [Congress] wants to put the responsibility on me to raise the debt ceiling, I’m happy to take it,” he said. “But if they want to keep this responsibility, then they need to go ahead and get it done.”

While top Democrats have urged him to look more closely at unilateral options, Obama continues to hold Congress responsible for making good on the debts its own appropriations have incurred.

But if Republicans refuse to raise the debt ceiling, as some have suggested doing, Obama may have to act unilaterally if he wants to avoid a government shutdown. In this scenario, would the President have legal authority to raise the federal debt limit via the 14th Amendment?

Here is the section in question, Section 4 of the 14th Amendment:

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

A Reconstruction-era Amendment, Section 4 was added for two reasons. First, Union lawmakers were eager to affirm that debts incurred by the Confederate South would not be honored by the United States or any other country. This safeguarded Congress from years of disruptive politics. Second, they saw the necessity in guaranteeing the federal debt in case rebel sympathizers returning to Congress threatened to repudiate it for political ends.

Section 4 includes “pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion” as an illustrative example of the kind of debt that would be guaranteed. In other words, compensation for soldiers and their widows was safe from the whims of future Congresses.

(Read more at NBC News)

As for myself, I trust Obama not to get himself in such a bind that the majority of Republicans in the House impeach or override him

If there is anything I trust about Obama, it resides in his self-interest. Therefore, if Dementia Joe has any reason or any reasonable advisors, it would be a good idea for him to steer clear of using the 14^th Amendment to stave off what he sees as a problem. Of course, by increasing debt, he will likely increase our inflation and might push the US out of the market of being the world’s reserve currency.

…