Democrat Crime: It's Ubiquitous, Part VI

By Rich Kozlovich

For eight years we watched in amazement as a corrupt Democrat House of Representatives impeached Donald Trump, corrupt prosecutors and corrupt judges attacked Donald Trump and many of those who supported him.   They tried to destroy his business, strip him of hundreds of million of dollars, put him in jail, accuse him of rape, all the while ignoring the law and forbidding evidence showing his innocence to be presented at trial.   If they can do that to Donald Trump, they can do that to anyone, and that was the message they wanted sent.  Defy us and we will destroy you.  

All of which was a criminal conspiracy to deprive Trump of his civil rights to prevent him from running for President in 2024.  And now we know that's not a conspiracy theory, it was a conspiracy, and a crime.  There were four criminal cases in an attempt to jail him and two attempting to bankrupt him, and now now we know it was a criminal conspiracy, worthy of a RICO investigation.

The Joe Biden White House orchestrated the lawfare against President Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2024 election, hoping to jail or bankrupt the Republican standard bearer in order to prevent him from becoming president of the United States. The fact-pattern that I establish in my new book, Breaking the Law: Exposing the Weaponization of America’s Legal System Against Donald Trump, reveals a vast conspiracy to use lawfare to rig the race by engaging in an unprecedented level of coordination across branches of government, Democrat power structures, and the White House itself.

Their plan was simple and devious: If they could not stop Trump at the ballot box, they would stop him in the courtroom. Biden gave it away in a candid moment in October 2024: “We gotta lock him up.” (Trump used similar language about Hillary Clinton, but only as campaign rhetoric when his power over the country’s legal infrastructure was nonexistent). It was a widely held belief in Biden’s inner circle that Trump would be in prison before election day 2024. It was just a matter of making sure he got there.

Marlow's book exposes a scandal ten times worse than Watergate.  The evidence is overwhelming and there must be consequences for this criminal behavior.  

• ‘Breaking the Law’: Exposé Reveals Biden White House Orchestrated Lawfare Against Trump to Rig 2024 Election
• Eight Reasons I Called for the Prosecution of Letitia James for Conspiracy Against Trump’s Civil Rights Ahead of DOJ Bombshell
• The Lawfare Investigations Have Begun: Here’s Who the DOJ Should Investigate Next
• Buying Our Democracy: Meet the Billionaire Leftists Behind the Lawfare Chaos
• Investigation Season: Why the DOJ Should Investigate Judge Juan Merchan Next
• Time for DOJ to Investigate Lewis Kaplan, the Judge Who Threatened to Jail Alina Habba

 

The information in Marlow's book was efforts by him over the past year, all of these cases were improper, and all of them need investigated, all of the investigation will find criminal activity, all of these investigations will justify bringing prosecution to bear.  Marlowe has a list, and I think it will ultimately end up being a very short list leading to a lot more people up the food chain.

1. Reid Hoffman: The Democrat megadonor Reid Hoffman bankrolled E. Jean Carroll’s defamation suit against Donald Trump.
2. Judge Lewis Kaplan: Judge Kaplan, no relation to Roberta, showed obvious favoritism and impartiality during the Carroll trial.
3. Alvin Bragg and Matthew Colangelo: New York City District Attorney Alvin Bragg campaigned for office on the premise that he would pursue and prosecute Donald Trump. 
4. Nathan Wade and Fani Willis:  On November 18, right around when Colangelo would have put in his two weeks notice to the DOJ, Nathan Wade, prosecutor for and boyfriend of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, was at the White House meeting with counsel for eight hours.
5. Jeff DiSantis: DiSantis, a former Biden White House aide was poised to be the Matthew Colangelo of the Georgia RICO case, the wringer brought back from Washington to try to win the case.
6. Lisa Monaco, Vanita Gupta, and Merrick Garland: U.S. Attorney General Garland appointed the deeply partisan Jack Smith to an unconstitutional job as Special Counsel, which lead to 18 months of harassment of Trump in the middle of campaign season. This was blatant extra-legal election meddling.
7. Andrew Weissmann: Interestingly, Trump theorized in conversation that even above Monaco in the actual hierarchy of Biden’s DOJ is Andrew Weissmann.
8. Allison Greenfield: Greenfield was Judge Arthur Engoron’s top clerk when he presided over Tish James’s civil fraud case against Trump.
9. Joe Biden: The Joe Biden White House orchestrated the lawfare against President Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2024 election, hoping to jail or bankrupt the Republican standard bearer in order to prevent him from becoming president of the United States.

As I said, this is in my view a short list, the "little people" who will ultimately lead to the top of that criminal chain.  The House Oversight Committee is compelling the following individuals to appear for depositions through issued subpoenas:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: October 9
Former President Bill Clinton: October 14
Former U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland: October 2
Former FBI Director James Comey: October 7
Former U.S. Attorney General William Barr: August 18
Former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales: August 26
Former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions: August 28
Former FBI Director Robert Mueller: September 2
Former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch: September 9
Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder: September 30

The DOJ has created a U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), manned by people who specialize in these kinds of investigations.  If this is to end, then justice must be served, and people must end up in prison, and not the "little people", this investigation needs to go after the creators of this scandal, Obama, Biden, and Hillary, and all those who facilitated their crimes.  

No one is above the law!  

1. Marlow on Levin Show: Time to Stand Up for Trump, Against Lawfare…
2.  How the Lawfare Superstructure ‘Sped Up’ After Trump Won
3. If Not Held Accountable, Deep State Will Do the ‘Same Damn Thing Again’

Democrat Crimes: The Biden Cabal, Part II

 By Rich Kozlovich Tags: 

Well, we already know the officials of the Obama administration was in manure up to their necks over the "Russiagate" conspiracy....and it wasn't a "theory" after all, imagine that.   So why would we be surprised his administration's third term under the Puppet President Joe Biden would be any different?  Obama corrupted the all the intelligence and law enforcement agencies of the federal government, and Joe followed up that corruption by siccing them onto lawful America citizens exercising their constitutional rights.

We now know another "conspiracy theory" can be put to rest with incontestably documentation that the Biden Administration targeted parents who protested at school board meetings  regarding covid restrictions, the promotion of transgenderism, and critical race theory policies in a conspiratorial attempt to charge them with crimes. 

The government documents, obtained by America First Legal, “conclusively prove” a memo from former U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland “mobilized the full force of the federal government’s firepower against concerned parents—not to protect schools, but to silence dissent”  and the ensuing investigation was “politically orchestrated and coordinated with the Biden White House,” America First Legal charged Friday.

In private they all knew all these parents did was covered under the Constitution as freedom on speech and could in no way justify the federal governmetn charging them with crimes.  As one "DOJ attorney wrote to colleagues in an email on October 3, 2021":

I read the letter from NSBA, and looked at the links for a handful of footnotes, and it appears to me that the vast, vast majority of the behavior cited cannot be reached by federal law. I only saw three stories that involved what sounded like a possible “true threat” … Almost all the language used is protected by the First Amendment; the main issue seems seems to be the disruption and obstruction of school board meetings, which can be reached by local trespassing laws or disturbance of the peace laws, but nothing remotely federal. So it seems we are ramping up an awful lot of federal manpower for what is currently non-federal conduct.

In no way could these parents be classified as "domestic terrorists" as Joe Biden and Merrick Garland was attempting to do.

 

We Now Have the Smoking Gun Proving Biden House Pressured DOJ To Target Parents -Now, explosive new documents obtained by America First Legal leave no room for doubt: the infamous memo from Attorney General Merrick Garland—which painted parents as potential "domestic terrorists,” for speaking out against COVID mandates, critical race theory, and gender ideology—was not a matter of law or public safety but was motivated by pure, unvarnished politics, and was the result of pressure from the White House.

 

This list of how the Biden administration wasted tax dollars, often corruptly, is probably extremely long, but let's take a couple.   There's this, Biden EPA Hastily Routed Billions To Political Allies, as the author notes:

“The more information that is revealed about the GGRF, the shadier the entire scheme looks,” Michael Chamberlain, director of PPT, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The irony is that when federal employees finally start cutting red tape and expediting a process, it’s to make sure taxpayer money is irrecoverable to taxpayers. It’s clear from these documents that Biden’s EPA cut corners to get the money ‘obligated’ before the funds expired on September 30, 2024, even if it meant ‘finalizing’ agreements with grantees they fully intended to re-negotiate later. In the private sector, this is the kind of thing that sometimes lands people in jail.”

And this:  New Report Reveals Biden’s State Department Blew $1.2M on Embassy Pool Upgrades in War Zones - While American families struggled with inflation and rising costs at home under the Biden administration, the administration quietly poured millions of taxpayer dollars into upgrading luxury amenities, such as embassy swimming pools, in places like Iraq and Russia. .........

History and time are on the same side, but they're not on Joe Biden's side. He has never been a good man or a good public servant. What he has been is the head of a crime family.  His time is coming to an end very soon, but the real Joe Biden needs to be exposed to establish incontestable documentary history of the corruption, the tyranny, and what can reasonably be called the treasonous actions of the Obama/Biden administration. 

There are six words no Democrat, or their myrmidons in the Pravda media, has uttered since Trump has been elected.  "No one is above the law!" Lock-em up! 

It’s Not About Biden. It’s About the Left.

By Daniel Greenfield @ Sultan Knish Blog

 

2024 might as well have been 2004 or 1984. In the two-decade cycle, Democrats wake up shocked to discover that their policies of treason, taxation and social collapse are unpopular and retreat to summits at expensive hotels with consultants to discover what went wrong.

The party’s public discourse blames everything on Biden. And Biden, whose picture will be featured in next year’s political encyclopedia under “Senile Old Coot”, is an easy target. But it’s not as if Biden was at the top of his game in 2020 or 2016 when Obama discouraged him from running in favor of the much more popular and crowd-pleasing charms of Hillary Clinton.

Biden isn’t the reason the Democrats lost. He’s the fall guy for it. Swapping in Kamala didn’t save the Democrats. And after the election, the party remains historically unpopular. Most of the country votes for candidates based on core issues, usually economic, not how well they speak.

Running two presidential candidates in one election, neither of whom you would trust to watch your dog overnight, let alone run your country, didn’t help, but the Democrats lost on policies. Most Americans did not believe that the economy would get any better under Democrats and they blamed them for high crime, mass migration and crazy social policies like transgenderism.

And the Dems know it. That’s why internally they’ve come up with three answers that they deliver at retreats for party operatives, prospective 2028 candidates and major donors.

The consultants urge adopting whatever policies are popular regardless of ideology. The activists urge doubling down on the crazy. Political gurus find the craziest thing this election cycle and urge the Democrats to make a show of backing away from that one thing.

But what no one in the party wants to discuss is where the “crazy stuff” came from at all.

Democrat insiders blame some of the crazier stuff, police defunding, drag queen story hour and marching with Hamas, on the vague and poorly defined “interest groups”. Why these “interest groups” have become so influential, they can’t explain because they can’t talk about the Left.

It’s easier to blame a few “interest groups” than to talk about the larger ideological war. A few interest groups couldn’t compel half the country to adopt the belief that women didn’t exist.

After the BLM riots, there was a limited reckoning among Democrats, not about the destruction and violence (which can never be discussed or acknowledged among the faithful), but about the impact of adopting the unpopular ‘Defund the Police’ program which they now mostly deny ever existed. Similarly there is now a very limited reckoning about the most unpopular element of transgenderism, men competing against women, with a few aspiring candidates like California’s Newsom and Arizona’s Gallego coming out against it in principle, but not in practical policy.

After 2024, a cottage industry of Democrat consultants telling politicians how not to talk about transgenderism boomed. Most tell candidates to describe it as a divisive non-issue, to (“as a father”) hypothetically disavow boys playing against girls and then focus on “potholes not potties”.) Whether these cynical performances work, it’s still a matter of putting lipstick on a pig, a donkey or a 300 lb man who wants to be called ‘Suzy’. Much as with BLM, the Democrats aren’t reckoning with what happened, but with how unpopular some of their policies are.

The intellectual underpinnings of the movements responsible remain unaddressed. Internally, consultants blame “interest groups” as if that could explain the sheer havoc and insanity that their party adopted, championed and is now running away from without actually talking about it.

When Democrats talk about “interest groups”, what they really mean is that the big money, from Soros to the Ford Foundation to numerous other billionaires not even on the radar, has financed large networks of organizations that push ideological and policy trends like BLM and Trans. They can’t actually mention the donor level because that’s where their own money comes from.

But blaming the donors would also fall far short of a meaningful critique of the party’s problem.

Major donors and foundations are not just financing interest groups or trends, but a larger ideological program. BLM and transgenderism are part of intellectual frameworks that conservatives and some liberals will name and shame, like ‘critical race theory’, but that Democrats refuse to analyze in terms of their impact on what their party has become.

The frameworks are those of the Left by whatever name it’s going by this week.

Past Democrats were willing to disavow and criticize the Left. Today’s Dems deny it even exists. Much as they deny that socialism is far more popular with their base than anything else. After being pulled so far leftward that their presidential nominee had to defend taxpayer-funded sex changes for illegal alien criminals, all they can do is blame a few “interest groups”.

What do the Democrats actually believe? Nothing. They have no defense against being pulled leftward because their entire belief system consists of fossilized cliches from the 60s about the virtues of civil rights, immigration and unions. (These also form the core of their voting blocs.)

Biden was the perfect candidate for a party that hasn’t updated anything in 60 years.

If the Democrats were to take a hard look at the Left, they would also have to decide what they believe. Instead, they employ consultants who tell them to either minimize the craziness of their policies without addressing the craziness of the underlying ideology or to adopt whatever good government policies the public likes at any given moment (DOGE reforms, cut spending) from Republicans and then work out afterward how they’ll reorient themselves ‘Bill Clinton’ style.

Ever since the Clintons, Democrats adopted the motto that beliefs and policies don’t matter, values do. When trying to reconcile extremist views, they keep talking about how those values are theirs because they are rooted in progress, love and equality even if in practice they involve burning down neighborhoods and denying that women exist. Obama beat the ‘values’ language to death and the Hillary and Biden campaign proved how little reach it has with American voters.

Values are very nice, but not when they lead to cities being overrun by illegal aliens and girls having to shower with ‘Suzy’ who can bench press the entire team with one of his hands.

A real party reckoning wouldn’t involve teasing out the various details about Biden’s infirmity, a reality that only CNN anchors and Democrat politicians could pretend to be ignorant of, and deal with the much larger issue of what they believe and what they don’t believe. The party is historically unpopular with leftists, who believe it’s not radical enough, and with everyone else, who believe it’s too radical, and the Dems have no answer except a deeper level of denial.

Democrats had to push the denial button pretty hard to pretend that Biden was at the top of his game when he couldn’t walk a straight line or finish a coherent sentence in less than 10 minutes, but they’re in even deeper denial when they pretend that their unpopularity is just a minor messaging problem and that they haven’t adopted objectively insane positions.

The Left took over the Democrats because it’s a core of fanatics that excels at taking over institutions, but those institutions have to be vacuously lacking in identity and awareness. It’s a whole lot easier to brainwash people who don’t believe in anything than those who do.

The Democrats fell into leftist radicalism because they stopped believing in anything. The old moderates died or, like Joe Biden, became living fossils who went along with whatever their younger aides told them. The party became as much of a puppet as Biden was in his last years.

And that’s the real reason why the image of an out-of-touch confused old man in the White House is so painful for Dems. It wasn’t just Biden that was a senile puppet, it’s his whole party.

What happens when you’re part of a party of puppets? You don’t ask questions.

You don’t notice when your president is out of his mind because you already learned not to notice when your party is out of its mind. What you do is chant “Black Lives Matter” and “No Human Being is Illegal” and “Men are Women” along with other simple-minded slogans so that you don’t think. And then you see that everything is in ruins and wonder what happened.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.  Thank you for reading.

 

Election 2028: Democrats Have a Lot of Baggage, Part I

"One of the painful signs of years of dumbed-down education is how many people are unable to make a coherent argument. They can vent their emotions, question other people's motives, make bold assertions, repeat slogans-- anything except reason." - Thomas Sowell

By Rich Kozlovich   

 Democrat theme song for the 2028 election sung to the tune of Perry Como's Let Get Letters song.  

We have baggage, we have baggage, we have loads and loads of baggage. Dear (Nominee to be named) would you be so kind and raise my taxes, bring immigrants who hate me to be my neighbors, increase regulations, end the Constitution, and censor the ones I hate best. 

Michael Moore has been quoted as saying, “I am the center. I am the mainstream now of the Democratic Party”.   So, the Democrat election strategy will be rude, crude, and stupid?  What could possibly go wrong? 

Since Bakke, the experiment has gone horribly wrong. We got riots, we got legalized theft, we got reparations, we got cities burning, we got DEI, we got streets telling us how much BLM. Now we’ve got a lovely new statue in Times Square. And how did Americans of any color prosper from all that? No one did. No one improved, no one produced anything of value, and no recipient of this largess managed to elevate not only their own lives, but the lives of others. Instead the entire tenor of the country got dumbed down and became incompetent. And because it is impossible for some people to change for the better, we got Crockett et al, mouthy, angry, and ready to body slam.  J.C Raines

New York is under the total control of the Democrat party, and New Yorkers are so pleased with their performance, they're fleeing the state and taking $14 billion dollars with them.

 

The black vote was almost monolithic when it came to elections.  All  for the Democrat party, and for years, but now those who voted for Trump are telling Van Jones they'd do it again.  Without reservations. 

 

In California the vote for leftists is automatic, and universal.  In one county:

 

73.2% of Marin voters actually thought that John Kerry was fit to lead the country. In 2008, unsurprisingly Obama won by 77.77 percent, the same percentage that voted for Hillary in 2016. However, in 2020 and 2024—both of which were elections with mail-in ballots only, Marin went stratospherically to the left: Biden got 82% of Marin’s votes in 2020 and Kamala got 80.6% of the votes in 2024............

 

And that's the type of incompetence they're voting for in Marin County.  And what have they discovered.   The Democrats are just as incompetent as conservatives keep saying they are.  Now, they're getting what they deserve....good and hard.  

 

California is is debt for spending vast amounts state Medicaid dollars on homeless housing, and he's not in jail, imagine that, and he's getting support for a run at the Demoncrat nomination for President in 2028.   Apparently he thinks America should look like California, while being the world's fourth largest economy, ....." with a GDP of more than $4.1 trillion, could be on the brink of insolvency."   And Californians haven't figured out these insane policies Newsom promotes are at fault?  But it won't matter, they would vote for these nitwits all over again.   Imagine that!  Schadenfreude.

 

Joe Biden was completely lost for four years, and the Democrats and their myrmidons in the media knew it.   Yet the heaped scorn on anyone who declared otherwise. It was dereliction of duty at the highest level.

 

Anyone with no agenda and half a brain knew the latter and has known since Biden first ran for president. And all indications are that his cancer developed over time. So, where was the Surgeon General for the last four years? Where was the cabinet? What did they know and when did they know it? And who was running the country while Biden was sleepwalking through the presidency?

 

It's impossible for his cabinet not to have recognized his dementia, and one  witnessed what we all saw through what they insisted were our lying eyes.  One Secret Service agent claims Biden would get lost in his White House closet.   

 

....the guy literally stumbling around in the White House residence couldn’t find his way out of his own closet,” Hawley added. “The president of the United States.”

 

This is a scandal greater than anything that happened during Watergate.

 

Reports regarding the state of the economy?  They lied, it turns out the Labor Department claims hundreds of thousands of Biden jobs were fake.  Hundreds of thousands!  It clearly have to have been a coverup by the Labor Department, and the entire Democrat leadership.  

 

They lie constantly.  According to them Trump was Russian puppet and traitor and the Steele dossier was valid.  Kavanaugh was a rapist, Jussie Smollett was lynched, you're children had to be kept out of school for two years to end covid.  Everything they touted about covid and the need for everyone to be vaccinated was either an outright lie, or a misrepresentation of the facts, and you can keep your health plan under Obamacare.  

 

Joe Biden is as sharp as a tack, the economy under his administration was booming, and any increases in your bills is an illusion.   Liz Chaney was a paragon of integrity rising above politics,  and Republicans are weird, because America needs as many illegal immigrants as possible, and if you disagree you're a bigot.   Trade with China is good because it keep their slaves-labor factories open. 

 

Alternative energy is settled science, cutting government waste and fraud is a danger to "our democracy, and any flaws in America's education system can be fixed by pouring more money into the teacher's coffers.  The Deep State is apolitical, and there's no white genocide taking place in South Africa.   Here's the complete list offered by Charlton Allen, it's not "nearly exhaustive."  

 

Four years of scandal, tyranny, and disaster.  COVID Mandates, mass illegal immigration, wasted trillions of programs that were bound to fail, but make their cronies rich, ignoring the law in favor of "social justice", and a broad embrace of DEI over competence, and the consequences for this will never be totally overcome any more than the consequences of the stupidity of the Nixon and Carter years. 

 

Halfwits, nitwits, misfits, dipsticks, and meritless pinheads.  

A vile cesspool of destructive self interested corruption.

U.S. Sent Billions in Famine Relief to Yemen. The Population Rose 30%

By Daniel Greenfield @ Sultan Knish Blog

In May 2024, the Biden administration announced that it was providing $220 million in aid to Yemen which the United States had been at war with since the start of that year.

Even while the US Navy was engaged in what the Associated Press would describe next month as the “most intense combat since World War II” with Yemen’s Houthi Jihadists, the U.S. Mission to Yemen boasted of having provided “nearly $5.9 billion” in aid beginning with the Obama administration, of being “the largest donor of humanitarian assistance” and urged that “other donors must join us in stepping up” to fund an Iranian-backed terror group at war with us.

A terror group whose motto, like its Iranian patrons, is “Death to America.”

One arm of the United States government, the Pentagon, was fighting the Houthis, while another arm, the State Department and USAID, were funding them. While Navy personnel on board US Navy vessels had seconds to prepare and counter Houthi strikes, State Department and USAID personnel worked to keep the Houthi’s Hodeidah port open so more “aid” could pass through it. The US Navy was not allowed to strike Hodeidah even though it was the Houthi lifeline for the weapons that the Houthis were using to attack American and other vessels.

The Biden administration had ended President Trump’s support for Saudi action against the Houthis and lavished a fortune on the terrorist areas because terrorist supporters and international groups had falsely claimed that Yemen was suffering from a deadly famine.

Before Islamic terrorist supporters, their leftist allies and international aid groups faked a famine in Gaza to save Hamas, #YemenFamine was trending on social media along with photos of wounded and starving children. Much as in Gaza, there was no famine. Rather the Houthis were seizing international aid which they then resold to create food shortages. The more aid came in, the more the Houthis seized. The fake famine was used to mount an international pressure campaign to end the attacks on the Houthis and send billions of dollars in relief to Yemen.

Massive shipments of urea, a fertilizer also used in explosives, were allowed into Yemen to help grow crops and stop the mythical famine. Even though urea was proscribed, the shipments were not interfered with in the name of ending the famine that wasn’t happening. Along with the urea came ammonium perchlorate which is used in rocket fuel. The rockets being fired at US Navy vessels were fueled by the famine lie. False claims of a famine were a tool of war.

By 2018, over $4 billion in humanitarian aid had poured into Yemen. The UN’s World Food Program, which would later invent and become the loudest voice promoting the Gaza famine hoax, operated 5,000 distribution sites to supposedly aid 10 million people whom it claimed were facing emergency conditions, but could only track 1 in 5 of its food basket allotments.

In 2017, two-thirds of those who were supposed to be receiving food had not gotten anything.

In one Houthi province, the UN sent twice as much food as the people needed, and came away claiming that the majority of the population was still in desperate need of food.

The WFP, and even the AP eventually admitted that the Houthis were taking much of the food. The Houthis created fake lists of starving people who needed food. International aid groups resorted to sending money so that Yemenis could buy the food aid that was being resold.

Even though all of this was well known, the Biden administration kept on sending more aid five years later. The money didn’t go to the people: it went to the Houthis at war with America.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s first order of business was taking the Houthis off the list of foreign terrorist organizations, making it legal to fund them, despite “their reprehensible conduct, including attacks against civilians and the kidnapping of American citizens” because of “the humanitarian consequences” that would take place in Yemen. Even as the Houthis went to war against America, “humanitarian aid” provisions protected the delivery of fuel, and the port and airport operations that allowed the Houthis to get more money and weapons.

Earlier this year, the UN demanded $2.47 billion for its 2025 Yemen Humanitarian Needs and Response Plan. In February, the Houthis killed a WFP worker (an event that got far less publicity than the deaths of aid workers in Gaza), but in April, the WFP expressed outrage that the United States was finally, at least temporarily, pausing aid and would not be allocating over $100 million in funds to the enemy region at war with the United States.

After 9 years of non-stop famine (and billions in spending), 17 million people are facing acute hunger in Yemen. That’s up from 15.9 million people in 2019.

Since the famine began, Yemen’s population shot up from 30 million to 39 million.

Having a population increase by 10 million or 30% during a famine is unprecedented. What accounts for this Yemeni miracle? Miraculously, Yemen’s population rose sharply as an unprecedented wave of foreign aid poured into this country. It’s unknown how many of these miracle births were real or fake names to collect yet more humanitarian aid for the hungry.

After the latest round of airstrikes, a Yemeni man interviewed on camera, chanted, “Death to America” and bragged that “our country is fortified with the skulls of American demons.”

More accurately, it’s fortified with $5.9 billion in American taxpayer money.

Since Yemen’s population seem to have figured out how to increase by a third during a famine affecting half their population, they clearly don’t need any more help from us, which should be used to help actual starvation victims in African countries that can’t just pump oil from the ground. Not only should we stop sending aid to Yemen, we should block all further aid.

If we don’t want to be in a perpetual war over passage through the Red Sea or depend on the goodwill of a terrorist group for access to it, we should cut off the money to the terrorists.

And while Iran has supplied the Houthis with weapons and money, in Yemen, much as in Afghanistan, Iraq and Gaza, much of the money going to the terrorists comes from us.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.  Thank you for reading.

 

Corruption In Politics: The Case Of Trump And Cryptocurrency

 May 04, 2025/ Francis Menton @ Manhattan Contrarian

In the New York Times from this past Thursday (May 1), the lead story was a scathing exposé of alleged corruption of our current President. The headline and sub-headline (print version) were “Trump Shapes the Policy On Crypto, and Cashes In. Hushed Deals and Foreign Investors Propel President’s Digital Money Start-Up.” The sub-headline in the online version was even more scathing: “World Liberty Financial has eviscerated the boundary between private enterprise and government policy in ways without precedent in modern American history.” The story fills the entire upper right-hand quadrant of the front page, plus another full page and a half in the interior of the paper.

So according to the Times, this is not just some ordinary, every day, run-of-the-mill political corruption. Rather, it is corruption that has “eviscerated” boundaries between business and government, and is “without precedented in modern American history.”

Is there any substance to these charges?

As readers here know, my view has long been that the game of politics is inherently corrupt. Politicians are in a position to use the powers of their offices in a thousand ways, large and small, to benefit themselves and their friends and supporters, and to disadvantage adversaries. Almost no human being is immune from the temptation to use those powers for such purposes at least a little. And thus there is no such thing as a politician against whom at least some charge of corruption cannot credibly be alleged.

And it is far worse with today’s massive and intrusive federal administrative state. Essentially every business is under the thumb of federal regulation — and even if a business is not currently regulated, it could be. Every business is also taxed, and the taxes for any given business could be either increased or decreased at any time. So if a President is involved in changing regulation in any way, or in changing taxation in any way, or even in not changing regulation or taxation when some people say that he should, did he do that to benefit the financial interests of himself or his family, or did he do it because he thought it was good public policy? And don’t forget, it could be both!

Because every politician does things that can credibly be charged as corruption, I think that by far the most important question about any allegation of political corruption is whether the action in question is at least arguably illegal, and if so, what is the theory of illegality? Beyond that, it is also completely fair to ask whether something might not be right or good, even if legal. Just because something isn’t even arguably illegal doesn’t make it immune from criticism. All allegations of self-dealing are fair game for criticism of a politician, and for the voters to take into account.

With that background, let’s give the Times their best shot to make their case. The subject of the big May 1 article is a crypto start-up by the name of World Liberty Financial. WLF was launched in September 2024, shortly before the recent election. The majority owner of WLF is The Trump Organization (which the Times calls a “Trump family corporate entity”). Since taking office for his second term, President Trump has significantly eased the federal regulation of the crypto industry, including ending SEC investigations and disbanding a Justice Department task force focused on the industry. The Times calls this a “broad unwinding of Biden-era scrutiny of the industry.” From the Times:

Mr. Trump’s return to the White House has opened lucrative new pathways for him to cash in on his power, whether through his social media company or new overseas real estate deals. But none of the Trump family’s other business endeavors pose conflicts of interest that compare to those that have emerged since the birth of World Liberty. The firm, largely owned by a Trump family corporate entity, has erased centuries-old presidential norms, eviscerating the boundary between private enterprise and government policy in a manner without precedent in modern American history. 

Mr. Trump is now not only a major crypto dealer; he is also the industry’s top policy maker. So far in his second term, Mr. Trump has leveraged his presidential powers in ways that have benefited the industry — and in some cases his own company — even though he had spent years deriding crypto as a haven for drug dealers and scammers.

The gist of the Times’s claims against Trump in the piece is summarized as a “range of conflicts of interest trailing the company.” Here is their list:

• World Liberty has directly benefited from Mr. Trump’s official actions, such as his announcement of a federal crypto stockpile that would include a digital currency the firm has invested in. The president’s announcement caused a temporary jump in the value of World Liberty’s holdings.
• World Liberty has sold its cryptocurrency to investors abroad, including in Israel and Hong Kong, according to interviews and data obtained by The Times, establishing a new avenue for foreign businesses to try to curry favor with Mr. Trump.
• Several investors in World Liberty’s coin managed firms that the federal government accused of wrongdoing. They include an executive whose fraud case was suspended after he invested millions of dollars in World Liberty. Other investors and business partners, some of whom haven’t been publicly identified before, are looking to expand in ways that will require the Trump administration’s approval.
• World Liberty proposed swapping cryptocurrencies with at least five start-ups, and often used the Trump name to solicit steep payments as part of the deals. Even in an industry with a disreputable history, the deals raised alarm among veteran executives.

My reaction is, is that the best you’ve got? The most serious of the allegations is the first one, that “World Liberty has directly benefited from Mr. Trump’s official actions.” And so have hundreds and hundreds of other businesses benefited from the broad de-regulatory agenda of the second Trump administration. Trump himself may be benefiting from the de-regulation of crypto, but everyone else also has the opportunity to do the same. And any gains could be undone by a crackdown in a subsequent administration. Meanwhile, despite the frequently over-heated language of the Times piece, it never makes any suggestion of illegality. If there is any basis under which this may be illegal, I am unaware of it. Perhaps some readers may have a theory.

Looking at this situation at a more general level, our recent Presidents (and other prominent politicians) can be divided into three big categories from the perspective of exposure to corruption. In Category One, we have people, like Trump, who have come to office with substantial business interests that they have retained while in office. In Category Two are the politicians who have served in public office for their entire careers, and have never held a significant private sector job or business interest. 

Category Three consists of those who had a career in the private sector, but substantially cashed out before entering public service, and now just have investment portfolios. Examples from Category One include Lyndon Johnson and Jimmie Carter. Also, if I might take one non-presidential example, Nancy Pelosi. Examples from Category Two include Bill Clinton and Joe Biden. Examples from Category Three include Ronald Reagan and the two Bushes.

From the point of view of potential corruption, it might be best to have all politicians come from Category Three. However, nothing in the Constitution requires that. And nothing about Category Three makes it completely free from temptation to corruption either. Plenty of political decisions affect the value of investment portfolios, even diversified ones.

As between Categories One and Two, I’ll take politicians from Category One any day. Someone from Category Two who advances to the high office of the Presidency has tremendous temptation to develop personal wealth by accepting large payments from third parties to influence government policy. 

Both Clinton and Biden are clear examples of this. 

Bill Clinton created the Clinton Foundation in 2001 after leaving office, and the Foundation then raised more than $2 billion over the next 15 years, during much of which time his wife was widely expected to become the next President. Large donors included foreign actors with clear interests in influencing U.S. policy. The overhead of the Foundation provided hundreds of millions of dollars to fund the Clintons’ lifestyles and staff. 

This enterprise skirted extremely close to the edge of quid pro quo bribery. In the case of Biden, between 2019 and 2023 I wrote an entire eleven-part series titled “Biden’s — Stone Cold Crooked,” explaining why the publicly available facts about the Bidens’ conduct in Ukraine and China made for a lay-down case of quid pro quo bribery. Somehow the Biden Justice Department was never interested in pursuing the case.

Over in Category One, consider the case of Lyndon Johnson. Josh Blackman at the Volokh Conspiracy has a summary in a post from January 1, 2025. The summary is largely derived from the Robert Caro biography of Johnson. Lyndon and Lady Bird Johnson owned television and radio stations in the Austin, Texas area. From Blackman:

As Mr. Johnson rose through the ranks in the House, and later the Senate, Robert Caro observed, there was a "twenty-year-long string of strikingly favorable rulings by the Federal Communications Commission" for KTBC. Caro at 286. Coincidentally, Austin was "one of the few metropolitan areas with only a single commercial television station."

When Johnson became President, he purported to put his holdings, including the broadcast stations, in a “blind trust”; but Blackman notes that the trustees were close personal friends and the trust would never meet the technical requirements for a true “blind trust.” Similarly, Jimmie Carter retained his heavily regulated (and subsidized) peanut farm business while President, while also creating a half-baked “blind trust.”

According to Reuters here on January 10, Trump has not created a “blind trust,” but has withdrawn from “daily management” of his business interests, and has turned that over to his sons. Reuters quotes a supposed “ethics expert” as saying that Trump’s arrangements are “not good enough.” Did that ethics expert ever criticize the arrangements of Johnson or Carter?

Is the insubstantial distinction between Trump’s arrangements and the Johnson/Carter “blind trusts” what the Times is referring to as “eviscerating the boundaries between business and government” and something “without precedent in modern American history”?

And then there’s Nancy Pelosi. Critics have noted multiple times over the years where Pelosi or her husband seemed to have done a profitable stock trade just before some Congressional action. This piece from Yahoo Finance on January 8 notes that Pelosi’s stock portfolio was up 54% in 2024, which beat the performance of every hedge fund in the country. At the same time, a bill to restrict stock trading by congresspeople somehow never advanced while Pelosi was Speaker.

Anyway, if you ask for my view of the biggest political corruption incidents of the past few years, numbers one and two would be:

1. ) the multi-hundreds of billions of dollars of funding for the institutions of the Left from the government, and 
2. ) the Censorship Industrial Complex put together by the Biden administration to suppress conservative speech. 

Those things don’t seem to draw big front-page articles from the Times.

The Big Reveal: Biden Was Even More Addled Than We Thought

A trio of books describe a president who completely lost his grip.

By Tim Donner Apr 9, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Opinion, Politics

It is a quadrennial exercise anxiously anticipated by political insiders and those wanting to know what really happened during the last presidential campaign. Months after Election Day, multiple books are released detailing the inside story of the race for the White House. Author Theodore White started the trend with The Making of the President 1960 and subsequent volumes about the next three presidential elections. Others have since picked up the ball and run with it. Three books taking readers inside the Biden world during the unforgettable election of 2024 have hit the shelves, and they share one basic conclusion: Joe Biden has cost the Democratic Party dearly, perhaps for a generation.

Anyone paying attention to his public appearances had to realize something was very wrong with the 46th president. Between his debate with Trump, when he appeared dazed and confused, uttering the infamous “we beat Medicare,” freezing up at a Juneteenth celebration, and experiencing repeated bouts of incoherence for all the world to see, one is left to wonder just how vulnerable the country had become. It got so bad that after the former president was forcibly removed from the race by fellow Democrats but refused to resign, first lady Jill Biden was forced to conduct a Cabinet meeting; convicted felon Hunter Biden had become his father’s principal adviser and Praetorian Guard throughout his final weeks in office. But those are facts of which we were already aware. The inside story is even more chilling.

As Biden’s cognitive decline became alarmingly apparent, his tight circle of advisers closed ranks, denying the obvious, claiming he was a different man in private than in public, “sharp as a tack,” engaged, and, as Joe Scarborough famously declared on MSNBC, the best-ever version of himself. But now we know just how fictitious that truly was. In fact, his behavior behind closed doors was just as, if not even more, distressing. As we suspected all along, it took a cover-up of biblical proportions by Biden’s allies and complicit media to deny what they knew to be true.

Talk About Chutzpah

Perhaps most remarkable is that one of the books, Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again, was co-authored by CNN’s Jake Tapper, who was prominent among those who failed – or refused – to report on Biden’s decline even as he was well aware of it. But now, in an apparent attempt to recover some of his bygone credibility, Tapper writes as if he never participated in the de facto conspiracy of silence by big media. Give Tapper this: He is not lacking in chutzpah. The blurb for the book states, “In Greek tragedy, the protagonist’s effort to avoid his fate is what seals his fate. In 2024, American politics became a Greek tragedy … [Biden], his family, and his senior aides were so convinced that only he could beat Trump again, they lied to themselves, allies, and the public about his condition and limitations. At his debate with Trump on June 27, 2024, the consequences of that deception were exposed to the world. It was shocking and upsetting.”

In Uncharted: How Trump Beat Biden, Harris, and the Odds in the Wildest Campaign in History, author Chris Whipple writes that Ron Klain, who acted as a campaign adviser after serving as Biden’s chief of staff for the first two years of his presidency, viewed the president as “out of it” and even “half-seriously” worried that Biden thought he was “president of NATO.”  As he prepared Biden for the debate that signaled the de facto death knell for his presidency, Klain says Biden “didn’t really understand what his argument was on inflation” and “had nothing to say about a second term other than finish the job.” Seeing Biden worn to the bone from foreign travel in the run-up to the debate, Klain “was startled. He’d never seen [Biden] so exhausted and out of it. Biden was unaware of what was happening in his own campaign. Halfway through the session, the president excused himself and went off to sit by the pool.” On other occasions, Biden would arrive for an event and just sit by himself in The Beast (the presidential limousine) for several minutes, staring blankly into the middle distance.

The book details how aides to Vice President Kamala Harris were worried enough that they “strategized around the possibility that Biden might die in office” and compiled a “death-pool roster” of federal judges who could swear in Harris if Biden passed away. Whipple says, “I happen to think that to call it a ‘cover-up’ is simplistic. I think it was stranger and way more troubling than that. Biden’s inner circle, his closest advisers, many of them were in a fog of delusion and denial. They believed what they wanted to believe.”

In the book Fight: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House, authors Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes write that a number of top Democrats were convinced of Biden’s perilous decline before his fateful debate with Trump. Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) – whose endorsement revived Biden’s flagging campaign in 2020 – Biden adviser Anita Dunn, Al Sharpton, and major donor John Morgan were among those who girded their loins for disaster in Biden’s one-on-one with Trump. Thus, they each decided to watch the debate privately so they would not have to react publicly.

What We Still Don’t Know About the Fall of Biden

While these books reveal many of the gory details surrounding the Biden and Harris campaigns, we may never know who was really calling the shots for the four years of the Biden administration. We may never discover with certainty who orchestrated the campaign of legal warfare against Trump or just how prominent a role Jill Biden played in her husband’s decision to run for re-election. Some things will be left to idle or informed speculation.

Give Cable TV the Boot – Check This Out!

Meanwhile, other books about the campaign, more focused on Trump, have also been published, including 2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America by Josh Dawsey; The Greatest Comeback Ever: Inside Trump’s Big Beautiful Campaign by Joe Concha; and All or Nothing: How Trump Recaptured America by Michael Wolff. They chronicle how Trump was convicted of felonies, miraculously survived one assassination attempt, sidestepped another, and pulled off a comeback once considered unthinkable, a story for the ages by itself.

But Trump’s comeback was made possible by the insistence of a deeply addled Biden to seek a second term. What happened next will forever be remembered as arguably not just the greatest cover-up in American history but one we all witnessed in real time. It was the quintessential act of gaslighting, as those who surrounded Biden futilely attempted to convince Americans that what we were seeing was an illusion. It ultimately forced Democrats to turn to a certified loser in Kamala Harris and brought their party to its knees, likely for many years to come.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Tim Donner Senior Political Analyst

Null and Void?

If President Biden didn’t comprehend what he was doing, are his laws, orders and regs valid? 

Paul Driessen

Laws in every state govern wills and the transfer of estates and property upon a testator’s death. For example, Virginia statutes provide that “any individual may make a will,” except testators who are unemancipated minors or “of unsound mind.”

Unsound mind generally means not having mastery of one’s mental faculties, which could include being enfeebled enough that the testator is easily subject to improper influence by others, especially someone who would benefit from provisions of the will.

Virginia law considers someone to be of unsound mind if his or her cognitive capacity is totally impaired, meaning the person is incapable of acting rationally or understanding conversations, instructions or decisions. In other jurisdictions, impairment may not have to be “total.” Wills executed by such persons are rendered invalid, null and void.

How might these guidelines apply in other circumstances – decisions by President Biden, for instance?

Joe Biden’s declining mental and physical capabilities were apparent to many even before his election and inauguration. His Delaware basement campaign, to avoid awkward encounters with reporters and citizens, raised many questions. During his presidency, family, White House staff, legacy media, Democrats in Congress and others worked hard to hide, obfuscate, defend and excuse his infirmities, even as they became harder to deny.

Millions wondered just when President Biden became cognitively incapable of leading the United States and Free World. His inability became so obvious during the June 2024 Biden-Trump debate that Democrat Party leaders pushed the 46th president out of the race. But what about before that?

An article published shortly before President Trump’s 2025 inauguration revealed that House Speaker Mike Johnson knew Mr. Biden was no longer “in charge” of the White House, presidency or country long before his cognitive incapacities were finally acknowledged by those whose jobs, prestige or political agendas depended on him being “the best Biden ever.”

During a January 2024 Oval Office meeting with President Biden, the Speaker particularly wanted to discuss a Biden Executive Order that blocked liquefied natural gas exports to Europe. Russia’s war with Ukraine, the likelihood of renewed European dependence on Russian gas if US LNG exports were terminated, and the extent that would enrich Putin’s war machine made this a serious national security issue. Johnson wanted to know WHY Biden had signed the EO just weeks earlier.

“I didn’t do that,” Biden insisted. But in fact, he had.

Johnson suggested that Biden’s staff print the EO, so that the two of them could read it together. Biden finally, but vaguely, acknowledged signing the order. But as PJ Media columnist Matt Margolis noted, it soon “became evident that the President had no grasp” of actually having signed the EO, or of the implications of having done so. 

“I thought, we’re in serious trouble. Who is running the country?” Margolis quoted Johnson. “I don't know who put the paper in front of him, but he didn’t know,” either, Johnson added.

“This exchange underscores a chilling reality,” Margolis wrote. We had a president who not only was “struggling to remember critical decisions” but was also “unable to engage fully in high-stakes discussions with national security implications.” Biden was clearly “not fully in charge.”

When did that incapacity actually set in? And what does that imply for dozens, perhaps hundreds, of executive actions, regulatory sign-offs and presidential signatures enacting legislation into law?

Are they still valid? Or have some (or many) been rendered null and void, because President Biden was no longer in control of his mental faculties? Or because he was enfeebled enough that he was subject to improper influence by staffers who were pursuing agendas even more radical than the president would have agreed to, had he actually been “in charge,” including staffers who might benefit from certain presidential decisions?

Executive Orders can be reversed by EOs signed by a successor president. President Trump did that with a flurry of signatures during his first week in office. Formal rulemakings must go through a more lengthy  and thorough process but can still be undone or rewritten by another administration.

That will certainly be the case with the Obama EPA’s “Endangerment Finding,” declaring that plant-fertilizing, planetary-life-giving carbon dioxide “endangers human health and welfare.”

However, the Biden Administration promulgated 3,248 final rules and regulations – a record 107,262 Federal Register pages. They reflect President Biden’s determination to exert federal control over nearly every aspect of climate change, “equity and social justice,” economic and environmental issues, and our daily lives – including “efficiency” rules for cars, stoves, dishwashers, furnaces and water heaters.

Many of these rulemakings will undoubtedly be examined and reversed under the Congressional Review Act. Others will fall outside its purview and require more than Trump Executive Orders.

And what about Biden’s pardons, many of them murderers and hardened criminals; others convicted offenders like his son; still others people who haven’t yet been charged or convicted of crimes but were given preemptive pardons, in case prosecutors later decide no one should be above the law?

Still more complicated will be legislation, such as the multi-trillion-dollar, pork-laden, Green-New-Deal-subsidizing Inflation Reduction Act, the $1-trillion infrastructure law, the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) and Science Act, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and many others signed by Mr. Biden.  

If they merit revision or recission, must Congress and President Trump go through an entire legislative process – and overcome almost certain Democrat “resistance” – to change or cancel them?

Or do some of these Biden Era laws (and regulations and pardons) fall within the parameters of a wills and estates “unsound mind” analog? If so, at what point was President Biden too cognitively impaired to know what he was agreeing to or signing? Who makes that determination, and on what basis?

It’s definitely a case of first impression, and the outcomes are far from easy, ensured or predictable. But it’s also another way for President Trump and Republicans to reexamine extreme Biden Era decisions.

I went to law school, was licensed in two states, practiced mostly legislative and regulatory law, even wrote a couple of Supreme Court briefs. But mostly I’ve been a policy wonk – pondering, developing, promoting, opposing, and implementing or rejecting public policies.

The Biden cognitive issue reminds me of humorist Will Rogers’ answer to the threat of World War I German U-boats that were savaging Allied shipping. Rogers proposed that the US Navy “heat the Atlantic Ocean to the boiling point. Then, when the ocean gets too hot for them German subs to stay underwater, they’ll have to come to the surface” and we can “pick ‘em off one by one.”

Of course, he averred, some admirals were likely to ask how they were supposed to boil the ocean. Rogers had an answer. “I leave that to the technicians. Myself, I’m a policy man.”

Like Will Rogers, I’m just presenting policy ideas. It’s up to President Trump, Congress, courts and neuropsychologists to figure out how to implement them.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of books and articles on energy, environment, climate and human rights issues.

The Ousting of Joe Biden – Democrats Tell the Real Story

While gaslighting America about the former president’s health, his own party was anxious to shove him aside.

By Graham J Noble Jan 21, 2025 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags: Articles, Opinion, Politics

Now that it no longer makes any difference, leading Democrats have finally come clean about the ousting of Joe Biden from the 2024 White House race. The backstory has it all: anguish, delusion, behind-the-scenes plotting, suspicion, and recriminations. It’s all very much like one of those unbearable reality TV shows with the motley collection of insecure, talentless narcissists vying for the grand prize. Only, in this real-life Washington, DC, version, the cast is old and ugly rather than young and beautiful. On Jan. 17, The New York Times recounted the story of a modern American palace coup, putting to rest, once and for all, the Democrats’ pre-election narrative that Biden’s retirement from the campaign was some bold and selfless gesture that took the party by surprise.

Even before the June 27 presidential debate – an unmitigated disaster for the incumbent – more than a few Democrats were concerned about Biden’s ability to win re-election. Republicans and conservative commentators were already bludgeoning the Biden campaign over the president’s very obviously deteriorating cognitive and physical state. Democrats and their media stenographers were insisting that Joe Biden was “sharp as a tack” – a phrase used so frequently, at one point, that it became obvious this was a coordinated circling of the wagons.

Biden’s political allies, as well as a host of supportive pundits and journalists, scoffed at conservatives who relentlessly ridiculed the chief executive’s rambling tales, incoherent or nonsensical statements, forgetfulness, and disorientation. But several Democrats were aware of his condition, and they were concerned – if only, perhaps, for their dwindling chances of retaining their own seats with a flaky and confused Joe Biden at the top of the ticket.

Post-Debate Panic

Right after the debate between Donald Trump and Biden – that very night – panic set in. Among the most prominent Democrats agitating for Biden to abandon his re-election campaign were Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, then-House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, and Sens. Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse, both of Rhode Island. At a July 11 meeting, according to The Times report, Reed even demanded public statements from two neurologists, asserting that Joe Biden was fit to serve a second term.

Former President Barack Obama was also on board with jettisoning the frail, fumbling, and now historically unpopular commander-in-chief. But Obama knew he was not the man to get Joe to drop out. The two men had a “fragile relationship,” as The Times piece put it. After irking Joe Biden by endorsing Hillary Clinton for president in 2016, Obama almost certainly couldn’t imagine a scenario in which he advised Biden to abandon a second term bid and that advice being well-received.

For his part, Jeffries was already pushing for Vice President Kamala Harris to pick up the torch. In hindsight, that choice showed the House Democratic leader to be a man of dreadfully flawed political judgment.

Schumer the Reluctant Henchman

But the man who found himself the somewhat reluctant tip of the spear, so to speak, was then-Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York. Not that Schumer wanted Biden to continue running. Quite the contrary. The top Democrat in the upper chamber was terrified Joe Biden could not beat  Trump and that he would also lose control of Congress to the Republicans if he stayed in the race. But Schumer seemed genuinely unaware of Biden’s cognitive deterioration.

For Discerning News Hounds

The top senator spoke with Biden on July 3, desperate to get the president on the counteroffensive in the face of growing doubts about his mental state. “Mr. President,” Schumer said, “the only way you’re going to save this is to show up day in and day out, with unscripted town halls. And people will be able to smell if it’s spontaneous, and it will show that [the debate] was a one-off.”

Of course, Joe Biden was in no way capable of facing either the public or the press in any but the most carefully scripted and stage-managed events. For at least several months prior – and many would argue the problems were apparent much earlier – Biden had said or done something embarrassing during the course of every public appearance. Schumer couldn’t have given Biden a worse suggestion, in fact – unless he secretly knew that Biden would have gone down in flames if he had run with it.

Joe Biden Tilts at Windmills

The whole time, Joe Biden was digging in, determined to stay the course and not at all happy that some people within his own party wanted him gone. The then-president seemed entirely ignorant of his unpopularity among the voting public and of the strength and breadth of opposition to his re-election bid within his party ranks.

Eventually, Schumer made the lonely trek to the Bidens’ Rehoboth Beach house in Delaware to practically give the incumbent an ultimatum. Senate Democrats were on the verge of going public and demanding, in writing, that Joe Biden step aside for someone else. That someone else – Harris – had already been chosen. Biden knew it. Schumer told him he probably couldn’t find more than five Democrat senators who would support him continuing his campaign. The senator also pointed out that Biden’s own pollsters were giving him a 5% chance of beating Trump in the election – something those pollsters were obviously keeping from their boss.

“If I were you,” Schumer told him, “I wouldn’t run, and I’m urging you not to run.” Biden said he needed a week – and the rest is now history.

Curiously, The Times article makes no mention of Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, even though she was one of the key players in the ousting of Joe Biden. At least, that’s what the Biden family believes – and they would surely know. The animosity toward Pelosi is now on full display. Joe Biden rebuffed Pelosi’s multiple attempts to have a conversation with him, Politico reported. The former House Speaker met with Biden’s aides after the latter withdrew from the 2024 race. According to someone who spoke with Pelosi after that meeting, “She’s been told they’re not over it, don’t make more overtures because [Biden’s] blaming her.”

One thing remains a mystery. According to the official 2020 vote count, Joe Biden won more votes than any other presidential candidate in American history – by a considerable margin. The closest was Trump himself in 2024, still some 4 million votes shy of Biden’s reported 2020 tally. In addition – so the Biden White House, Democrats, and the establishment media have claimed – Biden created the strongest economy ever experienced, presided over record job creation, and is greatly admired by just about every world leader. So, how is it even remotely possible that he would have lost to Trump, the worst person who ever lived, according to these same people?

Could it be because everything we were told about Joe Biden and his time in the White House was, from the very beginning, a manufactured illusion – and, after four years of it, most Americans had figured that out?

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

Read More From Graham J Noble Chief Political Correspondent & Satirist