Vaunce News

🔒
❌ About FreshRSS
There are new available articles, click to refresh the page.
Today — March 28th 2024Your RSS feeds
Yesterday — March 27th 2024Your RSS feeds
Before yesterdayYour RSS feeds

'The Message Is Too Feminine': James Carville Slams Democrat Strategy, Biden's Low Approval Rating

Veteran Democrat consultant James Carville is blaming President Joe Biden's low approval ratings on “too many preachy females” in the party, and he compared seeing the abysmal polling numbers to “walking in on your grandma naked.”

The post ‘The Message Is Too Feminine’: James Carville Slams Democrat Strategy, Biden’s Low Approval Rating appeared first on Breitbart.

Smartest Thing a Liberal Said Last Week

(Steven Hayward)

The Biden Administration’s diplomacy with Israel over its war against Hamas has reached the Animal House “double-secret probation” stage, with Secretary of State Antony Blinken warning Israel that it may find itself diplomatically “isolated” in the world if it attacks Rafah. Is it possible for Israel to be any more “isolated” than it already is in the joke that is called “the diplomatic community”? Dean Wormer could hardly have done it better, though, to be fair to Faber College, Dean Wormer would make a better secretary of state than Blinken.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Hoodie) is having none of it:

I’m starting to think that instead of banning hoodies on the Senate floor, maybe we should require them. At least for Democrats.

Chaser—I’m finding it harder to dislike this guy for his otherwise liberal views:

dibs on your parking space https://t.co/o9QUhIbKyF

— Senator John Fetterman (@SenFettermanPA) March 21, 2024

Chaser—Fetterman does have some competition this week, from the Ragin’ Cajun himself, James Carville: “A suspicion of mine is that there are too many preachy females [dominating the culture of the Democratic Party].”

Maher: Dems Should Stop Neglecting Issues that Impact People for Identity Politics

On Friday’s broadcast of HBO’s “Real Time,” host Bill Maher stated that “Democrats should move on from identity politics” and one reason is that “The more you obsess over identity, the more you ignore the bread-and-butter issues that win and

The post Maher: Dems Should Stop Neglecting Issues that Impact People for Identity Politics appeared first on Breitbart.

Bobbing along

(Scott Johnson)

In his opening statement to the House Oversight Committee earlier this week, the glorious Mr. Tony Bobulinski torched Reps. Dan Goldman and Jamie Raskin:

We keep hearing from certain corners that our “democracy is at risk” and that “democracy is on the ballot in 2024,” yet the same people preaching this mantra, who know better, continue to lie directly to the American people without hesitation or remorse. Representatives Dan Goldman and Jamie Raskin, both lawyers, and Mr. Goldman a former prosecutor with the Southern District of New York, will continue to lie today in this hearing and then go straight to the media to tell more lies.

Mr. B., long may you run.

Professor Jonathan Turley takes it from there in the (highly recommended) Fox News column that he has now posted at his personal site: “The Dripping Away of the Democratic Party: Sir Thomas More and the Biden Corruption Scandal.” In the introduction to the column posted on his site, Professor Turley writes (links omitted): “Various members misrepresented my earlier testimony during the hearing on the basis for the impeachment inquiry. Members like Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) stated that I joined other witnesses in saying that there was nothing that could remotely be impeachable in these allegations. That is demonstrably untrue. My testimony stated the opposite.”

What about Goldman? You can’t leave him out:

Rep. Dan Goldman, D., N.Y., captured the problem for Democrats in even addressing any of the mounting evidence contradicting the president. Yet, Goldman has long shown a willingness to rush in where angels fear to tread.

In previous attacks, Goldman repeatedly hit the Bidens with friendly fire when eliciting damaging answers from witnesses. Goldman has a habit of raising the worst evidence that his colleagues have avoided. In one hearing, he stumbled badly in raising the WhatsApp message where Hunter told a Chinese businessman that his father was sitting next to him and would not be pleased unless he sent him money. On another occasion, he prompted an IRS whistleblower to note that an email Goldman read into the record was actually a direct contradiction of the denials of the president.

In the latest misstep, Goldman pressed former Biden partner Tony Bobulinski on a proposal shared with Hunter and others to reserve 10% for “the Big Guy.” In other emails, Bobulinski was told to use such codes to avoid mentioning Joe Biden’s name. He was expressly identified as “the Big Guy.” Video

Goldman snapped at Bobulinski, “Did anyone ever respond to that email?”

Bobulinski responded “Yes, they did numerous times. Hunter himself did.”

Goldman blurted out “you’re right” before angrily reclaiming his time to cut him off.

The video below excerpts Bobulinski’s anticipation of the Raskin/Goldman defense of the Biden family business.

House Oversight Committee hearing goes off the rails when Hunter Biden's former business partner Tony Bobulinski calls out Reps. Jamie Raskin and Dan Goldman for lying on behalf of the Biden Crime Family. pic.twitter.com/Xny4VTbhVc

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) March 20, 2024

Exclusive — Donald Trump: ‘Migrant Crime’ Is New Category of Crime in America Thanks to Joe Biden, Democrats

PALM BEACH, Florida — Former President Donald Trump told Breitbart News exclusively last week that he sees a new category of crime emerging in the United States because of President Joe Biden and his fellow Democrats’ policies: “Migrant crime.”

Report: Biden Administration Relying on Democrat 'Influencers' Who Created 'Bloodbath' Hoax

Democrat social media "influencers" affiliated with the White House created the "bloodbath" hoax — the misleading claim that former President Donald Trump called for a "bloodbath" of political violence if he is not elected, according to a report.

Data Shows Minority Voters Shifting Party Affiliation

New polling suggests the country is about to see a “racial realignment” in upcoming elections.

A recent analysis shows a consistent downturn in the number of “nonwhites” who call themselves Democrats.

John Burn-Murdoch is the chief data reporter for the Financial Times. His March 11 analysis shows that since 1960, there has been a steady decrease in black people, Latinos, and other nonwhites identifying as Democrats. As it currently stands, about 50% of minorities self-identify as Democrats.

NEW ?:

American politics is in the midst of a racial realignment.

I think this is simultaneously one of the most important social trends in the US today, and one of the most poorly understood. pic.twitter.com/QeRsuMSKaL

— John Burn-Murdoch (@jburnmurdoch) March 11, 2024

Burn-Murdoch said he foresees that a majority of nonwhite voters could identify as Republicans in future elections.

“The migration we’re seeing today is not so much natural Democrats becoming disillusioned but natural Republicans realizing they’ve been voting for the wrong party,” Burn-Murdoch said.

Other polls have produced similar data. According to Gallup polling, Democrats have lost nearly 20 points in support from black Americans switching party preference in the last three years—down from 86% to 66%.

The Financial Times reporter chalks this up to reduced stigma for voting conservative among nonwhite voters. Basically, conservative people of color are now choosing to vote their values, not party loyalty, Burns-Murdoch says.

One example he shows is on the issues of gun rights and abortion. The percentages of nonwhite voters who vote pro-Second Amendment and pro-life are growing.

These data points could have importance in the upcoming election. For example, in Georgia, eligible black voters make up a third of the population.

In a statement to The New York Times, Joe Biden pollster Celinda Lake said, “We have to get the [African American voter] numbers up and we have to get African American voters out to vote, and we have to get the numbers up with young people and we have to get them out to vote.”

Biden presently has 73% support with black men and 83% support from black women. According to The New York Times, no Democratic candidate has won less than 80% of the black vote since the civil rights movement of the 1960s.

Also according to The Times, former President Donald Trump currently has almost four times the support of black voters than he had in 2020. A New York Times-Siena Poll has him at 23% black support, up from 4% support in 2020 and 6% in 2016.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com, and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post Data Shows Minority Voters Shifting Party Affiliation appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Rubio to GOP: Don’t ‘Shy Away’ From Exposing Democratic Abortion Extremism

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Republican Florida Sen. Marco Rubio responded to GOP consultant Kellyanne Conway’s abortion advice by urging lawmakers to expose Democratic extremism.

Last week, Conway urged Republicans to stop highlighting that their Democratic opponents support unfettered abortions of unborn babies, though Democratic Party leaders and most Democratic politicians have repeatedly refused to specify any protections for the unborn that they would support.

Her advice is a marked shift from what the pro-life movement has focused on as of late—prominent pro-life groups, such as Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, encourage Republicans to highlight Democratic extremism on abortion.

Rubio had similarly urged Republicans, in a January memo first reported by The Daily Signal, to engage a three-pronged approach: to fight for a pro-family agenda, to highlight Democratic extremism on the issue, and to tell the truth about the horrors of abortion.

He also emphasized to his colleagues that Republicans have the moral high ground on the issue, one that deals with the killing of an unborn child.

“Pro-lifers should recall that protecting unborn human beings is the moral center and purpose of our movement—and we cannot be shy about saying so,” he noted. “No pro-life strategy deserves the name without advocating just limits on abortion.”

On Tuesday, Rubio reiterated this stance.

“Protecting life is the moral center and purpose for the pro-life movement,” the Florida Republican told The Daily Signal.

“We should not shy away from exposing the extremism of Democratic lawmakers and abortion advocates, who believe it should be legal to kill babies until the moment of birth,” the senator added.

Conway had laid out an abortion-related political strategy during Politico’s Health Care Summit last week, where she also touched on her support for both TikTok and in vitro fertilization.

Conway emphasized that she is “100% pro-life” and encouraged Democratic lawmakers and commentators to “stop being science-deniers” and “stop pretending you don’t know what you see on a sonogram.” She pointed out that Americans, when polled more granularly on abortion, are both supportive of abortion exceptions and supportive of protecting unborn babies that can feel pain.

But Conway, who formerly served as Donald Trump’s senior adviser, also said that she does not encourage Republicans to point out that their opponents support abortion up until birth.

“Notice how I did not say, and counsel clients against saying, ‘Democrats are for abortion up until the moment of birth.’ You know why that’s not the best way to say it?” she asked. “Nobody knows anybody … who is about to give birth and says, ‘You know what? I don’t really like stretch marks. I’m not really ready to have another person in my life. I changed my mind.’ Nobody knows anybody like that.”

Conway then went on to imply that Trump was speaking metaphorically when he said to failed 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton: “If you go with what Hillary is saying, in the ninth month, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby.”

“That’s sort of a metaphor for who is really extreme here, and people reflexively said, ‘Oooh, could that be true?’ And I think it changed a lot of the conversation,” Conway explained.

In a statement to The Daily Signal following publication of this story, Conway accused The Daily Signal of “barking up the wrong tree,” praised Rubio’s efforts exposing abortion extremism, and back-tracked on her suggestion that Trump was speaking metaphorically about born-alive abortions.

“Senator Rubio and I agree on the importance of defending Life and exposing the extremism of pro-abortion Democrats, and have been doing so for decades,” Conway said. “His leadership on the issue, including on the debate stage against a female Democrat in 2022, is part of why I recommended him in a recent NYT oped (LINK) to be on President Trump’s short list for Vice President.”

“President Trump spoke unequivocally, not metaphorically, leading  the way for the professional politicians who had shied away from saying it,” Conway added. “We changed the conversation and gave courage to others to speak out against the no-limits, no-shame Democrats. Our Administration lodged significant, historic gains for Life.”

She also explained:

“Our pre-Dobbs polling in February 2022 showed that a Republican who opposes abortion with the three exceptions beats a Democrat who support allowing abortion ‘for any reason, up until the moment of birth’ (56% – 34%). I’ve used the phrase ‘up until the moment of birth’ dozens of times publicly and privately. Yet, we have found that alone has not and will not move hearts and minds and expand a culture of Life. All the lesser-included offenses, e.g., sex-selection abortion, taxpayer-funded abortion, fetal pain abortion, late-term abortion, are widely unknown and deeply unacceptable to a majority of Americans. We are actively encouraging leaders to add these facts to their “all f the above are onerous” appeal, finish their sentences and not limit themselves to  ‘up to the moment of birth.'”

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post Rubio to GOP: Don’t ‘Shy Away’ From Exposing Democratic Abortion Extremism appeared first on The Daily Signal.

'Americans Want This to Stop': Campaign to Ban Members of Congress from Stock Trading Heats Up

Research showing politicians made trades worth more than $1 billion in 2023 has bolstered a campaign to ban congressional leaders from stock trading, a practice that has long been criticized.

Kellyanne Conway Tells GOP: Stop Saying Democrats Support Abortion Up Until Birth

GOP campaign consultant Kellyanne Conway urged Republicans to stop highlighting that their Democratic opponents support unfettered abortions of unborn babies, suggesting instead that Republicans focus on consensus.

Conway laid out an abortion-related political strategy Wednesday during Politico’s Health Care Summit, at which she also touched on her support for both TikTok and in vitro fertilization.

Conway emphasized that she is “100% pro-life” and encouraged Democratic lawmakers and commentators to “stop being science-deniers” and “stop pretending you don’t know what you see on a sonogram.” She pointed out that Americans, when polled more granularly on abortion, are both supportive of abortion exceptions and supportive of protecting unborn babies that can feel pain.

But Conway, who formerly served as Donald Trump’s senior adviser, also said that she does not encourage Republicans to point out that their opponents support abortion up until birth—though the Democratic Party and most Democratic politicians have repeatedly refused to specify any protections for the unborn that they would support.

“Notice how I did not say, and counsel clients against saying, ‘Democrats are for abortion up until the moment of birth.’ You know why that’s not the best way to say it?” she asked. “Nobody knows anybody … who is about to give birth and says ‘You know what? I don’t really like stretch marks. I’m not really ready to have another person in my life. I changed my mind.’ Nobody knows anybody like that.”

Conway then went on to imply that Trump was speaking metaphorically when he said to failed 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton: “If you go with what Hillary is saying, in the ninth month, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby.”

“That’s sort of a metaphor for who is really extreme here, and people reflexively said, ‘Oooh, could that be true?’ And I think it changed a lot of the conversation,” Conway explained.

She did not immediately respond to a request for further comment for this article.

.@KellyannePolls claims Trump was speaking metaphorically when he said in 2016 that Hillary supports very late term abortions.

Trump at the time: “If you go with what Hillary is saying, in the 9th month, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb…" pic.twitter.com/06XyYs604l

— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) March 15, 2024

Conway’s remarks conflict with the strategies of prominent pro-life groups, such as the Susan B. Anthony List, which encourage Republicans to highlight Democratic extremism on abortion.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., similarly urged Republicans, in a January memo first reported by The Daily Signal, to engage a three-pronged approach: to fight for a pro-family agenda, to highlight Democratic extremism on the issue, and to tell the truth about the horrors of abortion.

He also emphasized to his colleagues that Republicans have the moral high ground on the issue, one that deals with the killing of an unborn child.

“Pro-lifers should recall that protecting unborn human beings is the moral center and purpose of our movement—and we cannot be shy about saying so,” he noted. “No pro-life strategy deserves the name without advocating just limits on abortion.”

“This moment is an opportunity for Republicans to refocus and remember who we are,” he wrote. “Our party believes in the dignity of the human person, the importance of family, and the unalienable right to life. There is no cause that unites those beliefs more perfectly, and that motivates tens of millions of our party’s supporters more fully, than the pro-life cause. We have a responsibility to advocate effectively for that cause.”

At a different point in the Wednesday conversation, Politico’s Ryan Lizza asked Conway: “How do you advise a Republican candidate who genuinely says … ‘I believe an embryo is a human life’?”

“I know a few people like that,” Conway responded. “I don’t know many. I know you always want them to be the rule, not the exception … .”

“You don’t know anyone who believes that life starts at conception?” interrupted Lizza.

“I know many people who believe that, you’re talking about embryos,” she continued, before he pressed: “You don’t know anyone who believes embryos are a human life? That’s a very common position in the pro-life movement.”

.@RyanLizza: "How do you advise a Republican candidate who genuinely says…I believe an embryo is a human life?"@KellyannePolls: "I know a few people like that. I don't know many. I know you always want them to be the rule, not the exception…"

Lizza: "You don't know anyone… pic.twitter.com/UQsv276asr

— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) March 15, 2024

She later said that she would advise a candidate who believes life begins at conception to say, “I am pro-life, and here is what that means,” before emphasizing the importance of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as “our first rights.”

Conway also encouraged GOP candidates to talk about close family members and friends who are pro-abortion, and to highlight the abortion exceptions that they personally support.

“You show me your exceptions,” she encouraged Republicans to say to Democrats, “And I’ll show you mine.”

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post Kellyanne Conway Tells GOP: Stop Saying Democrats Support Abortion Up Until Birth appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Doesn’t know Schumer from Shinola

(Scott Johnson)

In a long speech on the floor yesterday Senate Majority Chuck Schumer called for the replacement of the current Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Times of Israel has posted the full text of Schumer’s remarks here. According to Schumer, Netanyahu is an obstacle to peace, the two-state final solution, and the Big Rock Candy Mountain. We must popularize the phrase “He doesn’t know Schumer from Shinola.”

Jonathan Tobin places Schumer in the context of his career to date: “He’s been in public office continuously since the age of 25, and the 73-year-old Senate Majority Leader has spent his adult life grandstanding for the cameras and the press while always seeking some momentary political advantage as he schemed, back-stabbed and bloviated his way to the top of his profession.”

We can infer that Schumer now approves of foreign interference in another country’s elections. Only yesterday that was a big no-no for purported thought leaders toeing the Democrat Party line.

In this case the government Schumer seeks the replacement of a government that was democratically elected and formed by a close American ally fighting for its life under extremely difficult circumstances. That’s no way to treat a friend.

Schumer pretends that the relevant policies of the Netanyahu government are peculiar to Netanyahu and his coalition. That does not seem to be the case.

Schumer gives aid and comfort to Hamas and its friends in the Democratic Party. We can infer that the obstacle posed by Netanyahu is to the political objectives of the Democratic Party as conceived by President Biden.

Biden has just renewed his sanctions waiver on $10 billion held for the genocidaires of Iran. See Richard Goldberg’s New York Post column “Biden continues Iran’s access to $10 billion just weeks after its proxy killed three American soldiers.” Biden — he doesn’t know Schumer from Shinola.

One has to wonder about the impact of Schumer’s speech in Israel. It can’t help but demoralize Israelis fighting for their lives. However, they are unlikely to think they need Schumer’s help to assess their own best interests. In articulating and pursuing Israel’s war aims, Netanyahu speaks for the people of Israel. They do not support surrender to Hamas or adoption of the two-state final solution.

Senator Tom Cotton has posted a statement responding to Schumer. Senator Cotton sees the unstated obstacle Schumer is addressing: “[T]he main elections that worry Chuck Schumer aren’t Israel’s but our elections because the rampant antisemitism that the Democratic Party has allowed to fester in its ranks is massively unpopular with the pro-Israel American public.” Senator Cotton adds this “come to Jesus” element to his statement for Schumer’s benefit: “Chuck Schumer should remove the log in his own party’s eye before he whines about the speck in Israel’s eye.”

Political Realignment Is Upending Joe Biden's 2024 Coalition, Polling Shows

The realignment creates a problem for Joe Biden and Democrats who count on the black, Latino, and blue-collar vote to win elections.

Marlow: Dems 'Love' Letting People with Diseases Through Border and Violating Major Reason Why We Have Border

On Monday’s edition of OutKick’s “Tomi Lahren is Fearless,” Breitbart Editor-in-Chief and New York Times bestselling Breaking Biden author Alex Marlow discussed the measles outbreak among migrants in Chicago and stated that it shows the hypocrisy of various instances of “mask performance art” during

America’s Most Important Political Trend

(John Hinderaker)

This is a good complement to Steve’s post immediately below. Why did Democrats decide, seemingly in unison, that it would be a good idea to enable millions of illegal immigrants? Because they (or, in any event, their children) will be voters, and the Democrats assumed they could count on minority votes for many years to come.

But that may have been a miscalculation:

NEW 🧵:

American politics is in the midst of a racial realignment.

I think this is simultaneously one of the most important social trends in the US today, and one of the most poorly understood. pic.twitter.com/QeRsuMSKaL

— John Burn-Murdoch (@jburnmurdoch) March 11, 2024


This is part of the broader realignment of the parties. The left’s current obsessions–the “trans” movement, global warming, the war on food and gasoline, and so on–are of no good whatsoever to working people. They are of interest primarily to wealthy whites, especially wealthy white women. Blue collar minorities, like other working people, are not stupid. They can see that it is the Republicans whose policies actually help them, and they are starting to vote accordingly.

How Illegal Can You Get?

(John Hinderaker)

Joe Biden can’t get far enough left to satisfy his base. In last night’s SOTU, he referred to Jose Ibarra, the career criminal who *allegedly* beat Laken Riley to death, as an illegal immigrant. Which is exactly what he is, although the correct legal term is “illegal alien.” Bizarrely, liberals were outraged, not that Biden referred to Ibarra as a murderer, but that he called him an illegal immigrant. This roundup is from Alpha News:

Democrats in Minnesota and across the country are infuriated that President Joe Biden referred to a criminal, illegal alien as an “illegal” during the president’s State of the Union address on Thursday. Specifically, President Biden was referring to the illegal immigrant who has been charged with murder in the killing of Laken Riley.
***
In response, left-wing Democrats have expressed outrage that President Biden referred to this criminal, illegal alien as an “illegal.” Just after President Biden’s speech concluded, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota put out a social media post on X saying, “Let me be clear: No human being is illegal.”

This message was parroted by Democrats all over the country. In Minnesota, state Rep. Maria Isa Perez-Vega, D-St. Paul, re-posted Congresswoman Omar’s message. Jason Chavez, a member of the Minneapolis City Council, also put out a statement saying, “No human is illegal.”

A myriad of other Democrats, including Congresswomen Cori Bush, Ayanna Pressley, and Delia Ramirez, put out social media posts with the exact same message. Last night, Nancy Pelosi went on CNN and said President Biden should have used the word “undocumented” when referring to the illegal alien.

Congressman Chuy Garcia, D-Illinois, put out a statement saying, “As a proud immigrant, I’m extremely disappointed to hear President Biden use the world ‘illegal.’”

Breaking the law is illegal. Is that really so hard to understand? And, oh–by the way–murder is illegal, too. Although liberals seem to care a lot less about a young woman who was beaten to death than they do about policing their wacko speech code. But I suppose there is nothing surprising about that.

Schumer: Reversing Trump Border Policies Didn't Cause Problem, Dems Moved and GOP Said Let 'So-Called Crisis Fester'

On Friday’s broadcast of ABC’s “The View,” Senate Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) stated that the problems on the border are not due to President Joe Biden reversing several Trump-era policies, cited Republicans who saw the Senate border bill

Democrats on Laken Riley's Accused Killer: 'No Human Being Is Illegal'

Democrats are furious President Joe Biden used the term "illegal" during his State of the Union (SOTU) address to describe the man accused of murdering Laken Riley in Athens, Georgia, in February.

Joe Biden, you're no Harry Truman

At his State of the Union address on Thursday, President Biden was aiming for the come-from-behind victory that Harry Truman enjoyed. But his staff seems to have missed big lessons.

Oblivious to the Irony: Democratic Party Becoming Enemy of Democracy

I remember learning about democracy back in grammar school. We learned about it in the context of the American Revolution: Britain’s King George III may have ruled as a capricious monarch, but the intrepid Colonists fought for the then-novel concept of democratic self-government.

A cursory glance at Merriam-Webster is instructive. That venerable dictionary defines “democracy” as “government by the people” or, more elaborately, as “a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.”

Simple enough. But someone ought to remind our nation’s liberal elites and the foot-soldier activists of today’s Democratic Party.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous rebuke of the recent Colorado chicanery that rendered former President Donald Trump ineligible for the state’s GOP presidential primary ballot. That all nine justices agreed with Trump’s core legal argument—state actors cannot strike from the ballot alleged “insurrectionists,” absent specific implementing legislation from Congress—is nothing short of remarkable.

For months, liberal pundits and anti-Trump legal “experts” assured us that the 14th Amendment “insurrection clause” argument for Trump’s ballot disqualification was ironclad. Who can forget how, after the Colorado Supreme Court legitimized Trump’s removal in December, one-time conservative judicial stalwart-turned-Trump Derangement Syndrome patient zero J. Michael Luttig opined that the court’s logic was “masterful,” “brilliant,” and “unassailable.” Left-wing cable news outlets platformed countless other guests who ceaselessly pushed the same argument.

In the end, the argument garnered zero votes at the Supreme Court. Even Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson didn’t debase themselves by going along with such a half-baked, anti-democratic ruse. So much for “unassailable” logic!

One of the great ironies of our present age is that democracy’s would-be eponymous outfit, the Democratic Party, has become an enemy of democracy itself. The fact that party activists across numerous states pursued the extraordinary tactic of literally banning their leading opponent from the ballot is emblematic. But the anti-Trump criminal prosecutions and other unsavory lawfare tactics Democrats are also now weaponizing give the game away: Democrats hate democracy and harbor immense disdain for normal Americans’ beliefs.

Put simply, they don’t want to leave the country’s fate in our hands.

Hence, the current bizarre spectacle of Democrats ostentatiously bragging about the need to save “our democracy” while simultaneously pursuing some of the most anti-democratic stratagems in modern American history. Anything, it seems, to prevent the American people themselves from deciding the 2024 election.

To the warped Democratic mind, nothing is more “democratic” than preventing the actual demos from having its say. The horror!

An on-air MSNBC panel during the left-wing network’s Super Tuesday coverage was paradigmatic. Analyzing exit polling from Virginia, hosts Rachel Maddow and Jen Psaki could not believe voters ranked immigration as their top issue. “Well, Virginia does have a border with West Virginia,” Maddow quipped, as the others guffawed along with her.

Liberal elites to Americans suffering the myriad consequences of a wide-open southern border: Drop dead.

That’s literally “drop dead,” actually, in the case of Laken Riley, the former nursing student tragically killed two weeks ago by an illegal alien in Athens, Georgia. (Say her name, liberal media.) That’s literally “drop dead,” as well, for the majority of the 110,000-plus Americans who died of drug overdoses in 2022—70% of which were caused by fentanyl and other synthetic opioids trafficked across the border.

The reality is that during Joe Biden’s presidency, which has overseen the most illegal immigration and the most beleaguered southern border in American history, every town is a “border town.” The MSNBC clowns might delude themselves to the contrary, as they retire at night to their gated communities, driven by their chauffeurs. But that reality is still reality.

Those Americans who want their border secure, their communities safe, and their wages spared suppression by illegal alien labor are the “rubes” whom liberal elites are so passionate about denying from the democratic process that they will invert democracy itself to do so.

Destroy democracy in order to save it—don’t you see?

COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post Oblivious to the Irony: Democratic Party Becoming Enemy of Democracy appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Manchin: 'Biden Owns' 'Dangerous' Amount of Unvetted from Border in U.S., Dems Could Have Acted and Biden Must

On Wednesday’s broadcast of NewsNation’s “Cuomo,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) reacted to reports that the CBP One app has been used to release hundreds of thousands of migrants into the country by stating that the border, “in my lifetime, is

Arizona Cranks Up More Criminal Charges

(John Hinderaker)

Politico reports that Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes (a Democrat, of course) is accelerating an investigation that may lead to prosecutions of people close to President Trump’s 2020 campaign. Which is odd on its face, since the events that are the basis for the investigation happened more than three years ago. Why the sudden hurry? Obviously, Democrats see that Joe Biden is losing, and are throwing the kitchen sink at Trump:

Arizona prosecutors in recent weeks issued grand jury subpoenas to multiple people linked to Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign, a sharp acceleration of their criminal investigation into efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the state.

The new steps, first reported here, are a sign that Attorney General Kris Mayes, a Democrat, is nearing a decision on whether to charge Trump’s allies in the state, including GOP activists who falsely posed as presidential electors in December 2020.

“Falsely posed as electors.” What an absurd characterization! In a number of states, Trump’s campaign had people lined up to be electors on his behalf in the event that his various legal challenges might succeed before the Electoral College met. There is nothing wrong with this, let alone illegal. The same thing happened in Hawaii in 1960, and would have happened in Florida in 2000 if the Supreme Court hadn’t first put the matter to rest.

The “fake elector” theory is one of several ways in which the Democrats have tried to criminalize making claims of voter fraud. In the wake of the 2020 election, Donald Trump and many others believed that the election had been stolen by the Biden campaign. Were they right? I doubt it, but we will never know for sure. There wasn’t enough time between the election and Biden’s inauguration for claims of voter fraud to be litigated on the merits, and in no case did any court ever permit the necessary discovery, conduct a trial and make findings on the extent of voter fraud by the Democrats.

In multiple criminal proceedings, Trump is accused of “trying to overturn” — or “plotting to overturn” — the result of the 2020 election. Again, there is nothing wrong with this. Al Gore tried to overturn the result of the 2000 election, and Al Franken got into the U.S. Senate by overturning the result of an election. There is nothing wrong with pursuing legal election remedies. And where extensive voter fraud is suspected, an attempt to investigate, litigate and overturn a fraudulent result is commendable, not criminal. But the reality is that voter fraud can only be prevented; it can’t be litigated and corrected after the fact. The Democrats have blocked common-sense ballot security measures at every opportunity, and they have no one but themselves to blame if the public widely suspects that our elections are rigged.

Sadly, it appears that some Trump associates have been bullied into guilty pleas in shameful criminal proceedings alleging that they were “fake electors.” This reflects the reality that government at either the federal or the state level can destroy your life at will. At some point, nearly everyone will surrender rather than go through bankruptcy and see his or her life destroyed.

The misuse of criminal proceedings by the Democratic Party to punish its political opponents is the most vicious legacy of our current political crisis.

After last night

(Scott Johnson)

Digging deep into the Super Tuesday primary results, I foresee President Biden facing off for a rematch against President Trump. Can you feel the excitement? The two candidates represent juggernauts within their respective parties.

Let’s take the Democrats first, courtesy of RealClearPolitics. What we have here is one full boatload of results. They raise the question: who is Marianne Williamson and what is she doing here? She is the best-selling author of a variety of books including A Return to Love: Reflections on the Principles of a Course In Miracles, A Woman’s Worth, Illuminata, The Healing of America, and Illuminated Prayers. Her books have been translated into more than twenty languages. Williamson continues to inspire audiences on a global scale as she lectures internationally in the fields of spirituality and new thought.

I infer from the results that Democrats resist the light. They resist new thought. Also, we don’t have a prayer. We need a miracle.

Biden’s presents himself as a throwback to the old-fashioned Democratic Party, yet he has adopted the policies of party’s far left. Most prominent among these policies is the opening of our borders and the implicit rejection of the sovereignty of the United States. Over the past three-plus years these policies have wrought great damage. Biden wants to test the outer limits of Adam Smith’s proposition that “There is a great deal of ruin in a nation.” One can’t help but wonder if we can put ourselves back on track.

It’s not Joe Biden’s Democratic Party. It’s the woke left’s Democratic Party. It’s the party of those who say the things which are not.

Biden made an appearance during the narrow window of his waking hours yesterday. He appeared to have dropped in from outer space. He sounded like he had not been briefed since he blasted off from his homeworld. J.B., phone home.

FULL VIDEO:

REPORTER: "What's your message to Democrats who are concerned about your poll numbers?"

BIDEN: "My poll numbers? The last five polls you guys don't report. I'm winning — five! Five in a row!" pic.twitter.com/Mz5gWQMRSA

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 5, 2024

On the Republican side of Super Tuesday (also courtesy of RCP), President Trump wrapped up the Republican nomination. Nikki Haley will suspend her campaign later this morning.

This is Donald Trump’s Republican Party. If President Trump were to keel over and leave us with an open convention in Milwaukee next July, I assess the odds that the delegates would turn to Haley at zero. It would be a politician in the mold of Trump — probably Ron DeSantis, or perhaps J.D. Vance or Vivek the Mistake. Trump has transformed the Republican Party. By contrast with Biden and the Democrats, he has stamped the party in his image.

I am surprised by the not insubstantial fraction of votes that Haley pulled yesterday. Some portion of the Haley represents Democrats voting in open primaries. Haley won Vermont, but even if she were the nominee she would lose it in November. Vermont is a socialist state. I’m not talking about Vermont. Assuming Trump can survive the Democrats’ lawfare, he cannot win without a united Republican Party. He has some work to do to put the Republican house together. His choice for vice president could help.

It is difficult to project the state of play in the coming months. My crystal ball is cloudy. Much depends on the course of the Democrats’ lawfare against Trump and, to a lesser extent, the nature of the campaign Trump runs. I think he best serves his own interests at this point when he is out of the news and provides the alternative to Biden. If the election can be reduced to a binary choice, Biden should lose. The Democrats’ lawfare means to preclude that.

Yesterday brought more news of the illegal immigration that Biden has invited, inflicted, facilitated, fostered. Biden’s derelictions in office are historic in nature. The Daily Mail reports, for example, “Biden administration ADMITS flying 320,000 migrants secretly into the U.S. to reduce the number of crossings at the border has national security ‘vulnerabilities.'” The New York Post reports “Elon Musk says Biden flying 320K ‘unvetted’ migrants into the US sets stage ‘for something far worse than 9/11.’” Elon Musk — he’s no dummy.

The true numbers involved in the invasion that Biden invited are staggering, whatever they are, as are the secondary effects. As I say, we need a miracle, or something like it.

Sinema Is Out

(John Hinderaker)

Kyrsten Sinema announced today that she will not seek reelection to her Arizona Senate seat:

Sinema’s move is significant but not unexpected. She raised only $595,000 in the final quarter of 2023, a fraction of the totals that Lake and Gallego each raised — although Sinema maintains nearly $11 million in her campaign account.

So it sounds like her mind was made up a while ago. Sinema’s withdrawal means the race will be between Republican Kari Lake and Democrat Representative Ruben Gallego. Gallego is a far leftist; this is how Lake describes him:

He votes with Joe Biden 100% of the time, supported the Iran Deal, sanctuary cities, defunding the police, and voting rights for everyone pouring across the border. He even called the border wall “stupid.”

Lake will now be a heavy favorite to flip the Senate seat, obviously a desirable outcome. But I am a little sorry to see Sinema go. She was an old-fashioned–i.e, sane–Democrat. A dinosaur, in other words. While she no doubt voted with the Dems most of the time, there were important instances, as for example the original “Build Back Better” disaster, when she stood in the breach on behalf of the Republic. And I have it on good authority that she couldn’t stand her Democratic colleagues, which perhaps contributed to her decision to walk away.

In any event, while Kari Lake will likely mark an important step toward restoring Republican control of the Senate, we owe Kyrsten Sinema a debt of gratitude.

Joe Biden Winner of Alabama Democrat Primary

President Biden is the projected winner of the Alabama Democrat primary race, according to early results.

Liberals Explore Other Ways to Disqualify Trump After Supreme Court Shoots Down Colorado’s Ballot Ban

The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision Monday shut down state efforts to remove former President Donald Trump from the ballot but left a few options open for Democrats seeking to disqualify him, which some began exploring soon after the ruling dropped.

Democratic Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin already said he is working on a bill that would create a pathway to disqualify candidates, stating it is “good news” the Supreme Court did not challenge the Colorado court’s finding that Trump engaged in insurrection. Rather, the Supreme Court ruled against Colorado on the basis that it is Congress, not the states, that has the power to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment against federal officials and candidates.

dailycallerlogo

“[T]he Supreme Court punted and said, it’s up to Congress,” Raskin said on CNN Monday following the ruling.

The ruling kept open the option of states enforcing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment against their own officials and candidates, as Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, the left-wing group that filed the action against Trump in Colorado, has already been filing lawsuits to do. For federal officials, it held Congress is responsible for enforcement.

“I am working with a number of my colleagues, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Eric Swalwell, to revive legislation that we had to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed Insurrection is disqualified by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” Raskin said Monday.

Democratic California Rep. Zoe Lofgren likewise told Politico Monday that it “does not at first read appear that the court indicated a viable path to implement Section 3 of the 14th Amendment absent enactment of a law outlining procedures to do so.”

Before the ruling, some senior Democrats suggested in comments to The Atlantic that they would not certify a Trump victory on Jan. 6, 2025, if the Supreme Court failed to provide clear guidance on whether or not he committed an insurrection. The Supreme Court’s Monday ruling put boundaries on how Congress can enforce Section 3: requiring it be enforced by legislation that shows “congruence and proportionality” to the conduct in question.

Notre Dame Law professor and election law expert Derek Muller told the Daily Caller News Foundation rejecting certification remains “possible” but would be an “uphill climb” for Democrats.

“The court seems to suggest that legislation to enforce Section 3 must be appropriately tailored,” he said. “It’s not clear the Electoral Count Reform Act, if used to enforce Section 3, would fit that bill.”

“That said, Democrats objected or attempted to object to election results in 2000, 2004, and 2016, so I think it remains entirely possible that if Trump wins, at least some will attempt to do so,” he continued. “But any objection even to get a debate now needs 20% of each chamber to sign an objection, and to sustain an objection requires a majority in both houses, which seems nearly impossible.”

Some legal scholars thought the Supreme Court intended to shut the option down by specifying the kind of legislation required. The liberal justices seemed to have similar concerns when they wrote the majority’s opinion rules out “enforcement under general federal statutes requiring the government to comply with the law.”

“By holding that Section 5 enforcement legislation is the sole mechanism by which federal office-holders can be disqualified, the decision forestalls such potential scenarios as a Democratic Congress refusing to certify Trump’s election,” George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin wrote for Reason.

Practically, Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, told the Daily Caller News Foundation he doesn’t think Democrats have the votes to take such action.

“[Raskin] doesn’t have a hope of passing any such bill unless Democrats get rid of the filibuster in the Senate,” he told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Moreover, if he writes a bill that specifically goes after Trump, he may run into constitutional problems with a violation of the ban in Article I, Section 9 on bills of attainder and ex post facto laws.”

Regardless, any effort Congress makes is likely to spark legal challenges of its own, on which the Supreme Court will have the “last word,” University of California, Los Angeles law professor Rick Hasen wrote Monday.

“We may well have a nasty, nasty post-election period in which Congress tries to disqualify Trump but the Supreme Court says Congress exceeded its powers,” Hasen said.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com, and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post Liberals Explore Other Ways to Disqualify Trump After Supreme Court Shoots Down Colorado’s Ballot Ban appeared first on The Daily Signal.

CNN's Sidner: GOP Ensured Dems Had to Deal with Immigration Regardless of 'How Bad' Busing Was

On Tuesday’s broadcast of “CNN News Central,” co-host Sara Sidner stated that Republicans have ensured that immigration is “in the faces of people who don’t normally see it” in New York and Martha’s Vineyard, regardless of “how bad” the busing

Supreme Court 'Must Be Dissolved': Liberals Melt Down over Ruling that States Can't Disqualify Trump from Ballots

Progressives bashed the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling that states could not disqualify former President Donald Trump from appearing on the 2024 presidential ballot, with some even suggesting that the court be "dissolved."

Brooks: We Need Asylum Pause, Dems Have Supported 'Decriminalizing' Border

On Friday’s broadcast of “PBS NewsHour,” New York Times columnist David Brooks stated that President Joe Biden’s immigration policies “haven’t worked” and Democrats have had left-wing positions on the issue like Democratic presidential candidates who supported “decriminalizing the border.” He

Maher: Trump's Abortion, Immigration Stances Are What Democrats Used to Support

On Friday’s broadcast of HBO’s “Real Time,” host Bill Maher and Newsweek Opinion Editor Batya Ungar-Sargon stated that 2024 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s reported support for a ban on abortions after 16 weeks is what Democrats used to believe and

'Nothing Embarrassing' Happened Here: Democrats Defend Lloyd Austin for Keeping Hospitalization Secret for Days

Democrats on Thursday during a congressional hearing with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin defended his failure to inform President Joe Biden that he was in the hospital for three full days amid two wars and troops being under attack in Iraq and Syria.

Dem Rep. Moskowitz: Riley Death 'Failure' of Sanctuary Cities, Consequence of Border 'Failures' Dems Were 'Late' on

On Wednesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “America Reports,” Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) stated that Laken Riley’s death “is a failure of the sanctuary city policy,” and one of the “consequences of the failures going on at the border.”

Senate Republican Blocks Democrats' IVF Trojan Horse Bill

A Senate Republican blocked the quick passage of a Democrat-led bill on Wednesday that would have installed federal protections, not just for in vitro fertilization (IVF) but for all “assisted reproductive technology” as defined by the federal government.

Democrat Denialists

(John Hinderaker)

In 2001, 2005 and 2017, some Democrat House members objected to the certification of electoral votes for the winning Republican presidential candidate. Those objections, while “denialist,” were only symbolic. But Democrat leaders in the House are now suggesting that if they control that body following November’s election–as they well might–they may refuse to allow a victorious Donald Trump to take office.

The Atlantic did the original reporting, behind a paywall. This is from the Election Law Blog:

Murray and other legal scholars say that, absent clear guidance from the Supreme Court, a Trump win could lead to a constitutional crisis in Congress. Democrats would have to choose between confirming a winner many of them believe is ineligible and defying the will of voters who elected him. …

In interviews, senior House Democrats would not commit to certifying a Trump win, saying they would do so only if the Supreme Court affirms his eligibility. But during oral arguments, liberal and conservative justices alike seemed inclined to dodge the question of his eligibility altogether and throw the decision to Congress.

“That would be a colossal disaster,” Representative Adam Schiff of California told me. “We already had one horrendous January 6. We don’t need another.” …

The choice that Democrats would face if Trump won without a definitive ruling on his eligibility was almost too fraught for Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland to contemplate. He told me he didn’t know how he’d vote in that scenario. As we spoke about what might happen, he recalled the brutality of January 6. “There was blood all over the Capitol in the hypothetical you posit,” Raskin, who served on the January 6 committee with Schiff, told me….

The Democrats have become so insane on the subject of Donald Trump that it is hard to know which of their mutterings to take seriously. But if Trump wins the election and a Democrat-controlled House refuses to certify his election on the ground that he is an “insurrectionist” under the 14th Amendment, we will be past the point of a constitutional crisis. If that happens, the only realistic path forward will be disunion, possibly accompanied by civil war, but preferably not.

This is one reason why the Supreme Court should put the 14th Amendment theory out of its misery, once and for all. It is obvious that the drafters of that amendment meant the just-concluded Civil War, in which 600,000 Americans lost their lives, when they referred to “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. In contrast, the January 6 protest was not one of the 50 most destructive riots of the last few years, and the only person killed was Ashli Babbitt. Not a single participant in the protest was arrested in possession of a firearm. Some insurrection!

In the interest of preserving the Republic, the Supreme Court should rule definitively that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to Donald Trump.

Get a Load of Fani

(John Hinderaker)

Fani Willis’s prosecution of Donald Trump has descended into comedy, currently of the bedroom farce variety. As all the world now knows, Willis carried on a torrid affair with Nathan Wade, whom she hired to lead the Trump prosecution and to whom she paid an extraordinary amount of taxpayer money, and then helped him spend it. That is corruption of the most old-fashioned sort. Willis and Wade have claimed that their affair did not begin until 2022, some time after she hired him to prosecute Trump.

Which turns out to be a lie:

Phone records, recently unveiled in new court documents obtained by The Post, indicate a pattern of late-night visits by Wade to Willis’s apartment, raising questions about the timeline of their relationship.

According to the cellphone data presented in court, Wade frequented the vicinity of Fulton County District Attorney Willis’s condo in Hapeville at least 35 times before their confessed affair.
***
[Investigator Charles] Mittelstadt highlighted times that refuted both Wade’s and Willis’s testimony that they had not begun a relationship prior to November 2021, and that he had only visited the apartment on occasion to discuss business.

“I was directed into a deeper analysis on two specific dates: September 11-12, 2021 (before I understand Mr Wade was hired) and November 29-30 (prior to what I understand was the in-court testimony that the romantic relationship began in 2022).

“Specifically, on September 11, 2021, Mr Wade’s phone left the Doraville area and arrived within the geoface located on the Dogwood address [Willis’s condominium] at 10.45pm,” Mittelstadt said.

“The phone remained there until September 12 at 3.28am at which time the phone traveled directly to towers located in East Cobb consistent with his routine pinging at his residence in the area. The phone arrived in East Cobb at approximately 4.05am, and records demonstrate he sent a text at 4.20am to Ms Willis.

“Additionally, on November 29, 2021, Mr Wade’s phone was pinging on the East Cobb towers near his residence and, following a call from Ms Willis at 11.32pm, while the call continued, his phone left the East Cobb area just after midnight and arrived within the geofence located on the Dogwood address at 12.43am on November 30, 2021. The phone remained there until 4.55am,” he added.

Willis and Wade are the most famous illicit couple since Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. Like Strzok and Page, Willis and Wade appear to have made texting and phoning one another a full-time job:

Mittelstadt’s report also showed Wade and Willis had made more than 2,000 voice calls to each other and exchanged just less than 12,000 text messages over an 11-month period in 2021.

It makes you wonder when Wade found time to rack up all those billable hours.

I don’t know what the future holds for Donald Trump, but I think we can confidently predict that the Sun soon will set on Fani Willis’s political career.

Pamela Geller: American Thinker: The Actions of The Guilty

Please read my latest column over at the Thinker.

I was suspended for saying the
e l e c t i o n was s t o l e n.

The Dem’s objective is to make it verboten, silence us completely, like it never happened, make people afraid to talk about it – like Soviet Russia or communist China. That’s why we have to keep saying it. pic.twitter.com/NrOsFWwdCU

— ???????? GELLER REPORT ???????? (@PamelaGeller) January 17, 2021

January 16, 2021

The Totalitarian Left Moves to Silence All Dissent

In an article that was picked up by the Mercury News, Ethan Baron of the Bay Area News Group wrote Tuesday that “A week after false claims of a stolen U.S. presidential election drove a deadly insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, Twitter is allowing a far-right supporter of President Donald Trump to claim the election was stolen.” Baron’s intention was clear: he wants Twitter to ban me, as it banned Trump, for telling truths they want buried. His article shows how monstrous and totalitarian the left really is: leftists think they can publicly call for the censuring and banning of someone whose views they hate, and just like that, you disappear.

The left and its propaganda arm, the establishment media, are now working hard to make it illegal, and get you banned from social media, to state the obvious fact that the election was stolen. The Democrats are seeking to criminalize and penalize anyone who says theelection was stolen. Their “insurrection” hoax, and impeachment of the president without due process or giving him the chance to defend himself, is designed to shut down any and all talk of their infamous election fraud. This is not the behavior of people who know they won fair and square and are watching their opponents have a tantrum about it. This is the action of the guilty.

That said, the election was stolen. The mountains of evidence of election fraud were never examined in any court, and then we were told that there was no evidence at all, or if there was any, it had already been dismissed in court challenges. The court cases were all dismissed on technicalities and procedural issues, not because there was no evidence of voter fraud. That evidence has still not been examined.

But it is a hallmark of the rapidly advancing totalitarianism of our age that thumbsuckers like Ethan Baron think they can kill you with righteous indignation. He wrote: “Anti-Muslim activist Pamela Geller, in a tweet Monday about banks freezing political donations after a pro-Trump mob stormed the seat of the U.S. government, said the banks’ decision was, ‘Further proof the election was stolen.’” I am not “anti-Muslim” any more than foes of the Nazis were “anti-German,” but that’s another story. Baron offered no counterargument to my contention about the banks. He just presented it as if it were self-evidently false and egregious.

Baron knew, of course, that he didn’t have to show that what I said was inaccurate. All he had to do was point out that I had deviated from the leftist line, and the jackbooted neo-fascists who run Twitter and the other social media platforms would spring into action.

It was reminiscent of the media outrage that was directed at me in May 2015, when I hosted the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest in Garland, Texas that was the site of the first ISIS attack on American soil. I was raked over the coals not just on CNN, but also on Fox, which hadn’t yet switched sides then, and by conservative spokesmen who should have known better. I was defending the freedom of speech against violent intimidation. We never saw the hate and attacks that were directed at me in the wake of that event in Garland directed at the Fort Hood jihadi, the Times Square jihad bomber, the Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony jihad bomber, the Boston Marathon jihad bombers, the New York subway jihad bomber, or any other jihadis.

We have never seen the media hatred and anything like the attacks that were directed at me directed towards the jihadists who beheaded journalist after journalist (their own!), or towards those who beheaded hundreds of Christians, executed them because they were non-Muslims, or towards the perpetrators of the ongoing genocide of non-Muslims and secular Muslims in Muslim countries.

If we had a responsible media, they would stand for the freedom of speech as we did in Garland. If we had a responsible media, it would be applauding the fact that some people are still standing up and telling the truth about the election despite the immense pressure from powerful forces to stop doing so.

How do these people not understand this most basic, elemental concept of freedom?

I didn’t start this war for the freedom of speech, but I won’t lie down and submit, either. Twitter and the rest may heed Baron and ban me. But even then, this isn’t over. What remains to be seen is whether the free world will finally wake up and stand for the freedom of speech, or instead kowtow to this evil and continue to denounce me and others like me. What’s really frightening and astonishing about this assault on our freedom of speech is the number of people cheering on the silencing of dissent from the establishment line. I never expected that from my fellow Americans. But if the darkness of totalitarianism does come to the United States, it will be thanks to them and to the likes of Ethan Baron.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of The Geller Report and author of the bestselling book, FATWA: Hunted in America, as well as The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Pamela Geller, American Thinker: The AIPAC Boycott and Obama

Read my latest article over at The American Thinker:

The AIPAC Boycott and Obama

By Pamela Geller, American Thinker, March 23, 2019:

NBC News reported Thursday that “several Democratic presidential candidates will skip the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s policy conference this year after a prominent progressive group called on them to boycott the event.” This has been a rapid descent. In 2017, Kamala Harris said it was “an honor” to speak before AIPAC. But as quickly as the Democrats’ Jew-hatred is being normalized now, it has also been a long time coming. I warned about it over ten years ago.

The candidates who are boycotting AIPAC include senators Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Bernie Sanders, as well as Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Julian Castro, and Howard Schultz. According to NBC, “the candidates’ decisions to skip the prominent pro-Israel lobbying group’s conference come one day after liberal group MoveOn.org called on all 2020 presidential candidates to steer clear of the event.”

The Democrats are now officially the party of Jew-hatred. This is largely due to the disastrous presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. It was Obama, with his consistently shabby treatment of Benjamin Netanyahu and relentless demonization of Israel, who mainstreamed and normalized anti-Semitism among the Democrats.

I warned about it all. In May 2008, before Obama was elected, a reader invited me to a senior-level AIPAC event at Cipriani’s. I went up to the Executive Director, Howard Kohr, and said that I understood AIPAC was “nonpartisan, but Obama will be lethal for the Jews.” Kohr scoffed. I went on to relate all that I had unearthed in my two years of relentless investigation of Obama, and I laid it out, point by point, fact by fact, with as little hyperbole as possible. Kohr shook his head. He would have none of it. We are nonpartisan, he insisted. To what point are you nonpartisan? If there is a candidate, a party, an official that is a Jew-hater, do you maintain neutrality, like Switzerland? He just smiled and walked away.

I meticulously documented Obama’s Jew-hatred, and his entourage of Jew-haters, in my book The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War On America. I noted in that book that the American Jews who voted so overwhelmingly for Obama could have and should have seen his anti-Semitism and how he would normalize Jew-hatred in the Democrat Party. Take, for example, of a March 2007 account by the pro-Palestinian blogger Ali Abunimah at the the Electronic Intifadah website. Abunimah recounted how Obama had adopted a pro-Israel position as a matter of political expediency as his national aspirations developed. “The last time I spoke to Obama,” Abunimah recalled, “was in the winter of 2004 at a gathering in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood. He was in the midst of a primary campaign to secure the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate seat he now occupies. But at that time polls showed him trailing.”

When Abunimah greeted him, Obama “responded warmly,” and volunteered an apology for not being more outspoken against Israel: “Hey,” said the candidate to Abunimah, “I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I’m hoping when things calm down I can be more up front.” Abunimah added: “He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the The Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy, ‘Keep up the good work!’”

Abunimah’s piece — and Obama’s numerous anti-Semitic associations — got little attention. Throughout his life Barack Obama has been close friends with numerous virulent anti-Semites: Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Khalid al-Mansour, Rashid Khalidi and others.

It may be an old cliché, but it’s true: show me your friends, and I’ll show you who and what you are.

American Jews should have noted this, and noted it well. Instead, they fell for Obama’s smooth talk. But when Obama became president, he was true to his word to Abunimah, and turned viciously against Israel. And the whole world should have seen it coming.

Everything that is happening now in the Democratic Party — the relentless pandering to the Jew-haters Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the abject failure and collapse of the effort to rebuke Omar for her Jew-hatred, even indirectly, the boycott of AIPAC by the presidential candidates — I predicted and warned about. All my warnings are coming true. What does Howard Kohr have to say now?

Pamela Geller: American Thinker: The Actions of The Guilty

Please read my latest column over at the Thinker.

I was suspended for saying the
e l e c t i o n was s t o l e n.

The Dem’s objective is to make it verboten, silence us completely, like it never happened, make people afraid to talk about it – like Soviet Russia or communist China. That’s why we have to keep saying it. pic.twitter.com/NrOsFWwdCU

🇺🇸 GELLER REPORT 🇺🇸 (@PamelaGeller) January 17, 2021

January 16, 2021

The Totalitarian Left Moves to Silence All Dissent

In an article that was picked up by the Mercury News, Ethan Baron of the Bay Area News Group wrote Tuesday that “A week after false claims of a stolen U.S. presidential election drove a deadly insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, Twitter is allowing a far-right supporter of President Donald Trump to claim the election was stolen.” Baron’s intention was clear: he wants Twitter to ban me, as it banned Trump, for telling truths they want buried. His article shows how monstrous and totalitarian the left really is: leftists think they can publicly call for the censuring and banning of someone whose views they hate, and just like that, you disappear.

The left and its propaganda arm, the establishment media, are now working hard to make it illegal, and get you banned from social media, to state the obvious fact that the election was stolen. The Democrats are seeking to criminalize and penalize anyone who says theelection was stolen. Their “insurrection” hoax, and impeachment of the president without due process or giving him the chance to defend himself, is designed to shut down any and all talk of their infamous election fraud. This is not the behavior of people who know they won fair and square and are watching their opponents have a tantrum about it. This is the action of the guilty.

That said, the election was stolen. The mountains of evidence of election fraud were never examined in any court, and then we were told that there was no evidence at all, or if there was any, it had already been dismissed in court challenges. The court cases were all dismissed on technicalities and procedural issues, not because there was no evidence of voter fraud. That evidence has still not been examined.

But it is a hallmark of the rapidly advancing totalitarianism of our age that thumbsuckers like Ethan Baron think they can kill you with righteous indignation. He wrote: “Anti-Muslim activist Pamela Geller, in a tweet Monday about banks freezing political donations after a pro-Trump mob stormed the seat of the U.S. government, said the banks’ decision was, ‘Further proof the election was stolen.’” I am not “anti-Muslim” any more than foes of the Nazis were “anti-German,” but that’s another story. Baron offered no counterargument to my contention about the banks. He just presented it as if it were self-evidently false and egregious.

Baron knew, of course, that he didn’t have to show that what I said was inaccurate. All he had to do was point out that I had deviated from the leftist line, and the jackbooted neo-fascists who run Twitter and the other social media platforms would spring into action.

It was reminiscent of the media outrage that was directed at me in May 2015, when I hosted the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest in Garland, Texas that was the site of the first ISIS attack on American soil. I was raked over the coals not just on CNN, but also on Fox, which hadn’t yet switched sides then, and by conservative spokesmen who should have known better. I was defending the freedom of speech against violent intimidation. We never saw the hate and attacks that were directed at me in the wake of that event in Garland directed at the Fort Hood jihadi, the Times Square jihad bomber, the Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony jihad bomber, the Boston Marathon jihad bombers, the New York subway jihad bomber, or any other jihadis.

We have never seen the media hatred and anything like the attacks that were directed at me directed towards the jihadists who beheaded journalist after journalist (their own!), or towards those who beheaded hundreds of Christians, executed them because they were non-Muslims, or towards the perpetrators of the ongoing genocide of non-Muslims and secular Muslims in Muslim countries.

If we had a responsible media, they would stand for the freedom of speech as we did in Garland. If we had a responsible media, it would be applauding the fact that some people are still standing up and telling the truth about the election despite the immense pressure from powerful forces to stop doing so.

How do these people not understand this most basic, elemental concept of freedom?

I didn’t start this war for the freedom of speech, but I won’t lie down and submit, either. Twitter and the rest may heed Baron and ban me. But even then, this isn’t over. What remains to be seen is whether the free world will finally wake up and stand for the freedom of speech, or instead kowtow to this evil and continue to denounce me and others like me. What’s really frightening and astonishing about this assault on our freedom of speech is the number of people cheering on the silencing of dissent from the establishment line. I never expected that from my fellow Americans. But if the darkness of totalitarianism does come to the United States, it will be thanks to them and to the likes of Ethan Baron.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of The Geller Report and author of the bestselling book, FATWA: Hunted in America, as well as The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Pamela Geller, American Thinker: The AIPAC Boycott and Obama

Read my latest article over at The American Thinker:

The AIPAC Boycott and Obama

By Pamela Geller, American Thinker, March 23, 2019:

NBC News reported Thursday that “several Democratic presidential candidates will skip the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s policy conference this year after a prominent progressive group called on them to boycott the event.” This has been a rapid descent. In 2017, Kamala Harris said it was “an honor” to speak before AIPAC. But as quickly as the Democrats’ Jew-hatred is being normalized now, it has also been a long time coming. I warned about it over ten years ago.

The candidates who are boycotting AIPAC include senators Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Bernie Sanders, as well as Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Julian Castro, and Howard Schultz. According to NBC, “the candidates’ decisions to skip the prominent pro-Israel lobbying group’s conference come one day after liberal group MoveOn.org called on all 2020 presidential candidates to steer clear of the event.”

The Democrats are now officially the party of Jew-hatred. This is largely due to the disastrous presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. It was Obama, with his consistently shabby treatment of Benjamin Netanyahu and relentless demonization of Israel, who mainstreamed and normalized anti-Semitism among the Democrats.

I warned about it all. In May 2008, before Obama was elected, a reader invited me to a senior-level AIPAC event at Cipriani’s. I went up to the Executive Director, Howard Kohr, and said that I understood AIPAC was “nonpartisan, but Obama will be lethal for the Jews.” Kohr scoffed. I went on to relate all that I had unearthed in my two years of relentless investigation of Obama, and I laid it out, point by point, fact by fact, with as little hyperbole as possible. Kohr shook his head. He would have none of it. We are nonpartisan, he insisted. To what point are you nonpartisan? If there is a candidate, a party, an official that is a Jew-hater, do you maintain neutrality, like Switzerland? He just smiled and walked away.

I meticulously documented Obama’s Jew-hatred, and his entourage of Jew-haters, in my book The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War On America. I noted in that book that the American Jews who voted so overwhelmingly for Obama could have and should have seen his anti-Semitism and how he would normalize Jew-hatred in the Democrat Party. Take, for example, of a March 2007 account by the pro-Palestinian blogger Ali Abunimah at the the Electronic Intifadah website. Abunimah recounted how Obama had adopted a pro-Israel position as a matter of political expediency as his national aspirations developed. “The last time I spoke to Obama,” Abunimah recalled, “was in the winter of 2004 at a gathering in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood. He was in the midst of a primary campaign to secure the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate seat he now occupies. But at that time polls showed him trailing.”

When Abunimah greeted him, Obama “responded warmly,” and volunteered an apology for not being more outspoken against Israel: “Hey,” said the candidate to Abunimah, “I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I’m hoping when things calm down I can be more up front.” Abunimah added: “He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the The Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy, ‘Keep up the good work!’”

Abunimah’s piece — and Obama’s numerous anti-Semitic associations — got little attention. Throughout his life Barack Obama has been close friends with numerous virulent anti-Semites: Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Khalid al-Mansour, Rashid Khalidi and others.

It may be an old cliché, but it’s true: show me your friends, and I’ll show you who and what you are.

American Jews should have noted this, and noted it well. Instead, they fell for Obama’s smooth talk. But when Obama became president, he was true to his word to Abunimah, and turned viciously against Israel. And the whole world should have seen it coming.

Everything that is happening now in the Democratic Party — the relentless pandering to the Jew-haters Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the abject failure and collapse of the effort to rebuke Omar for her Jew-hatred, even indirectly, the boycott of AIPAC by the presidential candidates — I predicted and warned about. All my warnings are coming true. What does Howard Kohr have to say now?

❌