Trump Indictment Is a Mockery of Common Sense

Trump Indictment Is a Mockery of Common Sense
Attempting to criminalize Trump’s dispute of the election could stunt healthy political dissent
By Christopher Roach

August 7, 2023
At the end of the classic independent film Reservoir Dogs, the characters end up in a Mexican standoff. The criminal gang’s ringleader, Joe, insists that Mr. Orange is working with the police, even though he is dying on the floor, having been shot during a failed jewelry store heist. Mr. White – the crooks use aliases – insists that Joe is wrong. Guns get drawn. Mr. White demands some proof for Joe’s claim about Mr. Orange. Joe angrily responds, “You don’t need proof when you have instinct!” You can watch the (admittedly brutal) scene here.
This illustrates something we all experience: People disagree about many things for many reasons. Sometimes they have different sources of information. Often, they have different intuitions about shared information. Sometimes, their views are clouded by self-interest. And, frequently, people disagree because a pattern of facts matches their experience, even though they do not have rigorous proof.
Much of politics has this quality. Politics arise from disagreements. People disagree about their values and opinions, about who should rule and how, and sometimes they disagree about facts, particularly complex ones. What caused a recession? Who started a war? What is the best way to reduce crime? These are factual questions of a sort, but beliefs about these kinds of facts are inseparable from one’s values and loyalties.
A Stretch of an Indictment
For Special Counsel Jack Smith, who has now brought a second indictment against former President Trump, the world is much simpler: There is only truth and fraud. There are no honest disagreements, misunderstandings or debates.
Thus, most of the indictment consists of ridiculous constructs: The election was not stolen, and we know because Jack Smith told us so. Someone told Trump this, but Trump disagreed. Because Trump didn’t embrace the conventional wisdom, he is now a liar committing criminal fraud.
In one typical passage, the indictment alleges: “On November 13, 2020, the Defendant had a conversation with his Campaign Manager, who informed him that a claim that had been circulating, that a substantial number of non-citizens had voted in Arizona, was false.”
Let us set aside the fact that contesting elections has never been criminal before. Since when does someone have to believe everything they’re told? Millions of Americans have concluded the election was stolen or, at the very least, rigged. Are we all criminal coconspirators too?
Information, Misinformation and Disinformation
One of the more corrosive developments of recent years is what I would call the “Results-Oriented Epistemology of the National Security State.” For the bloated national security regime, everything is an information operation. There is no truth as such, only what advances the mission or the party line. After it’s dressed up with the trappings of science, or the intelligence community’s consensus, or NPR’s imprimatur, otherwise unproven beliefs become gospel truth. Indeed, their opposites do as well when the party line changes.
The whole thing reeks of insecurity because outside of this official “truth,” there is very little room for disagreement or debate. Any deviance is given a sinister and value-laden label: disinformation, misinformation, conspiracy theory and hate speech. It is of minor importance that the government-dictated truth is not, in fact, always true.
Under this view of truth and falsehood, the fact/opinion distinction collapses too. Things that were always considered opinions or mixed assertions of fact and opinion – questions like “Who is the most beautiful woman?” or “Who has the best football team?” – now become undebatable axioms, for which there is only one correct view when they involve analogous political questions, like whether an election was fair or what are our foreign policy interests.
This way of thinking really took shape during the Russian Collusion hoax. The media, the FBI and Robert Mueller transformed a handful of Russian-funded memes into dangerous “election interference” and “disinformation,” a threat to our sacred democracy. They repeatedly connected Trump to these hackneyed efforts with a vague charge of “collusion,” even though it was actually his callow opponent, Hillary Clinton, who funded a completely false “dossier” on Trump and colluded with foreign nationals to do so.
Donald Trump pointedly said in a recent opinion piece, “As the Twitter Files have proven, the Radical Left establishment also used the Russia Hoax to attack freedom of speech. They built a sprawling domestic censorship regime under the guise of combatting so-called ‘Russian disinformation’ – which they quickly defined to include any content they did not like.” Having achieved some results this way, our ruling class applied the same approach to complex matters like COVID, mRNA vaccines and the recent transexual mania.
This understanding of truth empowers the government to prosecute Trump for contesting the 2020 election. Trump has done nothing novel here. Candidates have previously contested elections both in court and in the court of public opinion. Remember Stacy Abrams and Al Gore.
Is Political Disagreement Still Allowed?
Until recently, Americans always understood that politics could be rough and tumble, that people have different beliefs about both facts and values and that some things cannot be known with 100% certainty.
The competitive election process was supposed to air out both sides. Voters knew politicians exaggerated the facts a little bit (or a lot). Even so, there used to be a certain amount of trust in the common sense of voters to navigate through the fog and arrive at a reasonable decision. After all, if we do not trust voters to sift through competing accounts of reality and judge proposed policies, why so much praise from our overlords about Our Democracy?
With the Deep State and donor class now united on most items, everyone running for office is supposed to endorse a single, narrow party line or else. We have seen this before.
The indictment alleges Trump fought like hell over the 2020 election, even though he secretly knew he lost. This is ridiculous. Trump, I’ll admit, likely didn’t do extensive regression analysis; it’s not his style. But he smelled a rat with Biden’s avoidance of campaigning, extensive mail-in voting, the prolonged vote-counting process, and the various mid-game rule changes in places like Pennsylvania and Michigan. Trump is being persecuted for noticing.
Returning to the opening vignette from Reservoir Dogs, Mr. Orange really was an undercover cop. Joe was right. Like he said, “You don’t need proof when you have instinct!”
Christopher Roach is an adjunct fellow of the Center for American Greatness and an attorney in private practice based in Florida. He is a double graduate of the University of Chicago and has previously been published by The Federalist, Takimag, Chronicles, the Washington Legal Foundation, the Marine Corps Gazette, and the Orlando Sentinel. The views presented are solely his own.

Former Capitol Police Chief Says Federal Agencies Withheld Crucial Intelligence About J6 Threats

NEWS: American Greatness
Former Capitol Police Chief Says Federal Agencies Withheld Crucial Intelligence About J6 Threats
By Debra Heine
August 11, 2023

In an interview with Tucker Carlson Thursday, former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund alleged that federal agencies withheld crucial intelligence from his department about the potential for violence on January 6, 2021.

The mission of the United States Capitol Police is to protect Congress, yet, according to Sund, he was kept in the dark about intelligence assessments regarding alleged plots to attack the Capitol and harm members of Congress.

Carlson previously spoke with Sund for his former Fox show earlier this year, but that interview never aired. Carlson posted the explosive new interview Thursday on X.

Sund, a 30-plus year veteran of D.C. law enforcement, told Carlson that he was a “rule of law” type of guy who thought it was very important to perform his duties in as apolitical a way as possible. Sund resigned from his position shortly after the riot amid pressure from Congress and the Capitol Police union.

He said he has seen many “special security events” during his career, and J6 security was handled very differently than anything else he’d experienced.

Sund explained that the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and the military were “swimming” in intelligence that pointed to potential violence on January 6, but he hadn’t heard a peep about it.

“Think about it. I am the chief of police at the United States Capitol, probably one of the most prominent and should be the most secure building in the United States and the world. You know, you’d like to think of that,” Sund said. “But when you look at it, and don’t take my word for it, look at, there’s now at least four congressional reports talking about the intelligence failure, IG reports, GAO reports talking about various intelligence failures. But coming into it, you know, think about it. FBI, the Washington Field Office didn’t put out a single document, a single official document specific to January 6.”

“DHS didn’t put out a single official document specific to January 6,” Sund continued. “That’s very unusual. I’ve been through many other events in Washington, D.C. — FBI would host a joint conference call at the least and maybe an executive JTTF, Joint Terrorism Task Force briefing or, and for all these big events, DHS and FBI would get together and put out something that was called JIB — Joint Intelligence Bulletin. Zero for January 6.”

Carlson told the former USCP chief that it was hard to believe that he was left out of the loop accidentally.

“You’ve described this as an intelligence failure, but a failure is something that happens accidentally and I don’t see how this could be accidental, ” he remarked.

Sund said that in the days before the riot, he’d had conference calls with law enforcement officials who had access to intelligence about the potential for violence, but neglected to fill him in on it. He said that on January 5, the day before the rally, he organized a call with multiple law enforcement leaders, including then-D.C. Chief of Police Robert Contee; Steven M. D’Antuono, former assistant FBI director in charge of the Washington Field Office; General Omar Jones, then-Commander of the U.S. Army Military District of Washington; and William Walker, the former commanding general of the D.C. National Guard.

“Not one person on that call talked about any concerns with the intelligence—an attack on the Capitol, threats to our officers—that’s what’s scary,” he said.

Sund noted that a Government Accountability Office report came out in July of 2023 showing multiple emails going to D’Antuono in the days before the riot predicting violence at the Capitol.

“And I had a video call with him on that Tuesday and nothing’s said about it?” he added.

Sund told Carlson that he now knows that former Secretary of Defense Christopher C. Miller and General Mark Milley were so worried about the potential for violence, they discussed locking down Washington, D.C., and revoking permits on Capitol Hill. Sund said he would have been the one in charge of revoking the permits, but no one had told him about the threats.

Instead, according to Sund, Miller sent out a memo on January 4, 2021, restricting the National Guard from carrying certain weapons and civil disobedience equipment at the Capitol that would have helped them control the crowd.

When the protest devolved into a riot at the Capitol, Sund said Paul Irving, the House Sergeant at Arms, and Mike Singer, the Senate Sergeant at Arms refused to authorize him to bring in the National Guard. Irving worked for then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Singer worked for then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Sund said for the next 71 minutes he made 32 calls begging for federal law enforcement assistance. He noted that the riot was taking place right outside of Singer’s office but he still delayed approval.

He told Carlson that he finally got approval to bring in the National Guard at 2:09 p.m. but the troops did not arrive on scene until 6 p.m., hours after the fighting had stopped.

“It doesn’t seem like people really want to get to the bottom of it,” he said. “It really doesn’t. And it just gets worse. It gets worse from there.”

While he was still begging for help, Sund said that Irving had told him that he didn’t like the “optics” of the National Guard on Capitol Hill.

“This sounds like a set up to me,” Carlson told Sund. “I’m sorry, it does.”

“It gets better,” Sund replied. “So I beg and beg and he goes, ‘well, I’m gonna walk down the hall and we’ll talk to the Secretary of Defense or whoever he’s gonna talk to.’ Right then I get a notification, oh, I’m still on the call, we have the shooting of Ashli Babbitt. And I said we have shots firing, I still remember yelling over the phone. We have shots firing on the U.S. Capitol, is that urgent enough for you now?”

He noted that the 150 to 180 National Guard Troops that are usually stationed near the Capitol were inexplicably driven away from the Capitol to the D.C Armory on Jan. 6, and he was sent evening troops.

“Can you frickin’ believe me?” he exclaimed.

He told Carlson that while he was begging for help, the Pentagon sent resources to the generals’ homes to protect them instead of the Capitol.

Sund also said the same Pentagon that was so concerned about “optics,” had the National Guard troops that finally arrived pose in front of the Capitol for a magazine shoot.

“So you begin to think—it seems kind of conspiratorial,” Sund said. “I’m not a conspiracy theorist but I can see how people begin to go down that rabbit hole.”

Last May, Sund pointed out on Twitter that Fox News had “canned” Carlson as the host was planning to air his original interview.

“On the day he was fired, @TuckerCarlson was planning to air parts of our 1-hour interview and showcase my book,” Sund wrote in a May 5 tweet. “It was an interview he was excited about and said it ‘made the hair on my arm stand up.’ But Fox canned both Tucker and the interview. Coincidence?”

©2013 – 2023 American Greatness. All rights reserved.
America’s Talking is a registered trademark of Braveheart Media Holdings LLC. All rights reserved.

Why Can’t Trump Find A Decent Lawyer?

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Why Can’t Trump Find A Decent Lawyer?


June 16, 20238:34 AM ET

Former President Donald Trump has now been arraigned and pleaded not guilty. He was represented by two lawyers, neither of whom he apparently wants to lead his defense at trial. He has been interviewing Florida lawyers, and several top ones have declined. I know, because I have spoken to them. There are disturbing suggestions that among the reasons lawyers are declining the case is because they fear legal and career reprisals.
There is a nefarious group that calls itself The 65 Project that has as its goal to intimidate lawyers into not representing Trump or anyone associated with him. They have threatened to file bar charges against any such lawyers. When these threats first emerged, I wrote an op-ed offering to defend pro bono any lawyers that The 65 Project goes after. So The 65 Project immediately went after me, and contrived a charge based on a case in which I was a constitutional consultant, but designed to send a message to potential Trump lawyers: if you defend Trump or anyone associated with him, we will target you and find something to charge you with. The lawyers to whom I spoke are fully aware of this threat — and they are taking it seriously. (RELATED: ALAN DERSHOWITZ: It’s Now More Important Than Ever For Trump’s Trials To Be Televised)
There may be other reasons as well for why lawyers are reluctant to defend Trump. He is not the easiest client, and he has turned against some of his previous lawyers, as some of his previous lawyers have turned against him. This will be a difficult case to defend and an unpopular one with many in the legal profession and in general population.
Good lawyers, however, generally welcome challenges, especially in high-profile cases. This case is different: the threats to the lawyers are greater than at any time since McCarthyism. Nor is the comparison to McCarthyism a stretch. I recall during the 1950s how civil liberties lawyers, many of whom despised communism, were cancelled, and attacked if they dared to represent people accused of being communists. Even civil liberties organizations stayed away from such cases, for fear that it would affect their fundraising and general standing in the community. It may even be worse today, as I can attest from my own personal experiences, having defended Trump against an unconstitutional impeachment in 2020. I was cancelled by my local library, community center and synagogue. Old friends refused to speak to me and threatened others who did. My wife, who disagreed with my decision to defend Trump, was also ostracized. There were physical threats to my safety.
Our system of justice is based on the John Adams standard: he too was attacked for defending the British soldiers accused of the Boston Massacre, but his representation of these accused killers now serves as a symbol of the 6th Amendment right to counsel. That symbol has now been endangered by The 65 Project and others who are participating in its McCarthyite chilling of lawyers who have been asked to represent Trump and those associated with him.
Trump’s lawyers have now alleged that one of the prosecutors has suggested to Stanley Woodard, the lawyer for Waltine Nauta, Trump’s co-defendant, that his application for judgeship may be negatively affected if he persists in defending Nauta vigorously rather than encouraging him to cooperate against Trump. If that is true – I have not seen the evidence to support it – then it represents a direct attack on the 6th Amendment. (RELATED: ALAN DERSHOWITZ: What If Both Trump And His Prosecutors Are Guilty?)
Whatever one may think of Trump or the charges against him, all Americans must stand united against efforts to intimidate lawyers and chill them from defending unpopular clients pursuant to the 6th Amendment. Bar associations must look into the threats and actions of The 65 Project and of prosecutors who try, by subtle or other means, to influence the representation of clients by threats to their careers or other means.
Hard cases may make bad law, but partisan cases endanger constitutional rights. We must do everything to assure that all defendants, including Donald Trump, get the zealous representation to which the Constitution entitled all Americans.
Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of The Price of Principle: Why Integrity Is Worth The Consequences. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute, and is also the host of “The Dershow” podcast. This is republished from the Alan Dershowitz Newsletter.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

The Trump Indictment In 10 Bothersome Paradoxes

The Trump Indictment
In 10 Bothersome Paradoxes

By: Victor Davis Hanson
The Blade of Perseus
June 13, 2023

Yes, we are told Trump is facing serious charges. Experts tell us he will be going to prison. Some of his legal team have quit. Yes, he was sloppy about communicating with the lawyers of the National Archives. Yet, read the 1978 Presidential Records Act (put into place after the typical sloppy departure protocols of most presidents)—and consider that Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Vice President Mike Pence were likely all in violation. Moreover, we are not stupid, when asked to ignore the following:

1) That a president who had the prerogative to declassify almost any presidential papers he takes with him when leaving office, in a way that a senator or vice-president does not, should be prosecuted for doing just that when a former senator and former vice-president are not prosecuted for doing the same.

2) That an ex-president is prosecuted for having supposedly classified papers in his possession after 18 months as a private citizen, but an ex-senator, ex-vice president, and current president is exempt, despite having classified documents for some 15 years—and keeping that fact absolutely quiet.

3) That a “disinterested” special counsel who is currently indicting a conservative Republican ex-president and current opposition presidential candidate, is married to a leftwing documentary filmmaker, whose recent work includes Becoming, a 2020 obsequious documentary of Michelle Obama.

4) That the current president removed classified documents, and kept them stored while President of the United States in as many as four unsecured locations, including a poorly locked garage, shared by his drug-addled son, who made millions of dollars by leveraging foreign governments in quid pro quo fashion, presumably on the principle that he and his father had inside information that could be of monetary value—and is not being indicted.

5) That never before in U.S. history has any administration overseen the indictment either of an ex-president of the opposite party or a current leading candidate for president of the opposite party—or both.

6) That many ex-presidents have removed presidential papers that were under dispute as to their exact legal ownership and classification and were never—until now—indicted.

7) That typically frequent archival disputes over presidential papers are considered jurisdictional matters that rarely even escalate to civil cases and are not violations of criminal statutes—until, oddly, now.

8) That a number of prominent ex-officials have committed by their own admission felonies with impunity:
 John Brennan, as CIA director admittedly lying on two occasions, at least once under oath to the U.S. Congress;
 James Clapper as Director of National Intelligence admittedly lying under oath to the U.S. Congress;
 Andrew McCabe, interim FBI director, admittedly lying under oath to federal investigators on at least three occasions;
 Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State, U.S. senator, and two-time presidential candidate admittedly destroying subpoenaed emails, smashing subpoenaed communication devices, unlawfully transmitting classified information on her own unsecured private email server, illegally hiring a foreign national to work on her presidential campaign, and conspiring to construct three paywalls to hide her payments to a British subject to compile and spread false information against her presidential opponent with the intent of destroying his character and his rival campaign.
 Navy veteran Walt Nauta is being charged with a felony for saying “I don’t know” in the fashion of James Comey’s 245 “I don’t know/recall/remember” while under oath before Congress.

9) That Trump is being indicted in a fashion never witnessed before after his opponents previously had impeached him twice in a historical first resulting in two acquittals in the Senate, another historic first, including a Senate trial as a private citizen in yet another historical first after a special counsel spent 22 months and $40 million in a failed effort to indict Trump on false charges of “Russian collusion,” after the FBI suppressed information about a laptop that was injurious to President Trump’s then opponent and now current President Joe Biden with the lie of “Russian disinformation,” after 51 former government intelligence authorities in conspiratorial fashion lied, on a Biden campaign prompt, in a signed letter that the laptop was likely “Russian disinformation,” and after the FBI interfered in two presidential election in efforts to harm two Trump candidacies.

10) That Trump’s home was raided in surprise fashion by legions of armed FBI agents pursuing reports of unlawfully removed classified documents, in a manner that the current president was not subject to such FBI treatment for the same alleged crime, and was allowed to have the matter resolved by his own lawyers and government agents without the presence of law enforcement.

Another VDH twist on the same subject:
Indict Walt Nauta?
Why Not the Biggest Liars First?

The last thing this country needs is any more bottled-piety lectures
on the rule of law from Special Counsel Jack Smith, Joe Biden,
and the array of admitted lying former high government officials.

By Victor Davis Hanson
American Greatness
June 14, 2023

Walt Nauta is a 10-year-Navy veteran and served as an aide to former President Trump both in and out of office.

Special Counsel Jack Smith has now indicted him for allegedly “making false statements in interviews with the FBI.” The indictment’s subtext is that Nauta refused to cooperate with and turn state’s evidence for the special counsel in its efforts to convict the former president.

But why stop the indictments of a man who loyally served and followed the orders of the former president of the United States, was a Navy veteran, and a hard-working immigrant from Guam?

Are there not far bigger fish to fry to remind Americans that justice is blind?

After all, when Special Counsel Smith announced his indictment of Trump, he lectured America on the rule of law and the cherished notion that no one is above it.

So let us start with the former interim director of the FBI itself, Andrew McCabe.

McCabe admittedly lied four times about his illegally leaking sensitive information to witnesses and mishandling classified information.

Have those crimes suddenly ceased being felonies?

Or, is it now the policy of the United States government that an FBI director can lie with impunity, and leak, and mishandle sensitive classified information?

Yet Walt Nauta may be sent to prison while McCabe will continue to earn a fine salary at CNN as a paid “expert” to deplore . . . what exactly?

What McCabe knows best from his own experience with the deed—the “mishandling of classified information”?

Nauta reportedly is being indicted for claiming he “did not know” what he supposedly did know in relation to the movement of the president’s papers.

His denial was proffered with nearly the exact phraseology that another FBI director, James Comey, used under oath when he stonewalled congressional inquisitors on 245 occasions.

Was the FBI director ever indicted for feigning ignorance or amnesia before Congress?

Did Nauta ever record a private, and likely classified, conservation he had with the president of the United States in the White House, and then leak it to the New York Times?

That is precisely what James “Higher Loyalty” Comey bragged about doing.

Most recently, Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm admitted that she, too, recently lied while under oath to Congress when she denied owning private stocks.

Was Nauta’s “I don’t know” a greater threat to the rule of law and the security of the republic than the lies of the secretary of Energy? She deliberately misled Congress about potential conflicts of interest involving her stock portfolio.

Then we come to Joe Biden, the current president of the United States. He has sworn that he never discussed business with his son, Hunter Biden, currently under suspicion for tax improprieties and leveraging foreign governments by selling them supposed Biden influence.

Yet plenty of witnesses have contradicted Joe Biden’s statement. Photos even reveal him side-by-side with his son’s business associates.

For nearly 20 years, Senator, Vice President, private citizen, and President Joe Biden has concealed the fact he unlawfully took classified documents home and moved them about in various unsecured locations.

Was Mr. Biden’s movement of classified documents for the last 20 years less egregious than what Nauta is accused of having done?

Was the Biden Corvette garage more secure than the closets and bathrooms inside the Mar-a-Lago gated estate?

Biden’s lawyers, after nearly two decades, only came forward because of the media hype surrounding the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago in search of classified documents.

Is there some law that states that a senator, vice president, and president can improperly remove classified documents, move them about to various unsecured locations, and avoid the sort of felony indictments now facing Nauta and Trump?

Let us end with the greatest exemptions of all—those accorded to Hillary Clinton.

She has variously committed the following likely major felonies.

One, she illegally transmitted classified information involving national security over her own unsecure server while secretary of state.

Two, she destroyed both email records and communication devices that were under government subpoena.

Three, she was untruthful about both the use and destruction of said subpoenaed items.

Four, she illegally hired a foreign national, Christopher Steele, to work on her campaign as an opposition researcher.

Five, she conspired to disseminate false documents among top government intelligence and investigatory agencies as well as the media, for the sole purpose of destroying her presidential opponent Donald Trump and thereby warping the 2016 election process.


Clinton—like self-confessed liars or dissimulators John Brennan, former CIA Director, James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence, and former FBI Directors James Comey and Andrew McCabe—was exempted from all legal jeopardy. She, too, continues to monetize her past notorieties and controversies.

The last thing this country needs is any more bottled-piety lectures on the rule of law from Special Counsel Jack Smith, Joe Biden, and the array of admitted lying former high government officials.

They, not Walt Nauta, should be ashamed.

So much MORE than Trump………….Dov Fischer

Dov Fischer June 14, 2023 Why the Trump Indictment Is About So Much More Than Trump

American The rot at the top demands only the demonstrably strongest of American presidents.

It is hard to feel bad for Donald Trump. He is richer than most of us ever will be. He has been president of the United States, an honor limited to five or fewer people in a generation. He doesn’t have to save up miles on credit cards to stay free at hotels. For those who measure life’s apex by material standards outside of religious and spiritual dimensions, Trump basically has scored at the peak in all categories. One degree of separation from anyone he wants.

Three Basic Truths Behind the Trump Indictment Trump’s first presidency was of unequivocal achievement. He was almost Mount Rushmore quality. Under his presidency, our economy boomed, unemployment reached record lows — particularly for historically discrete and insular minorities that rarely could get a fair break — America avoided a single war entanglement, a rat pack of the world’s leading terrorists were knocked off like ducks at a carnival, North Korea stopped testing nuclear weapons, Iran had to satisfy itself with biding its time for a Democrat to become president, Arab countries lined up one-by-one to grow up and make peace with Israel, Putin did not bother a fly, jobs that had abandoned America for Mexico and China came back home, the American industrial Midwest and its iron-and-steel industry was salvaged. Trade rules were changed so that others no longer could take advantage of America with impunity; their trade barriers were reciprocated, and none dared retaliate. European countries were forced to pay substantially more toward NATO. The list goes on. For every new federal regulation, two others were canceled. Work began seriously on the wall to bar illegal immigrants. Taxes were reduced. A most successful line of consistently conservative federal judges was empaneled.

It is a great shame that Trump did not get four more years after the first four, and it is an equally tragic disaster that he was succeeded by the most incompetent and corrupt moron to have entered the Oval Office in at least a century.
The impact is felt everywhere. Food bills have gone through the roof. Gasoline prices exploded. Electric and gas bills. Everything. Americans pitifully now are happy with bloated food costs and paying $5 a gallon at the pump because it has been worse and can get worse any minute. When they make it through a day on the New York City subway and have not seen anyone pushed onto the tracks or stabbed on the platform, they feel safe. A day without encountering urine on a Frisco or Oakland sidewalk is cause for celebration. Putin wars with Zelensky forever, and America foots a bill by borrowing trillions from China that we will never be able to repay to 2/9 ensure that, like Vietnam and Afghanistan, no one ever wins but the show goes on for 20 seasons. We refuse to produce and market our own energy because the woke prefer to keep it underground and have us buy dirtier oil and gas from dictatorial Arab Muslim sheikhdoms. Parents pray the schools will not convert their normal children into homosexuals and lesbians, and they count victories by banning drag queens from library hour. Culture and homespun family values are attacked by a government that should proclaim June as Shame Month, not Pride Month. Parents don’t know what to do about college. If the kids do not go to college, will they lose out in the competitive job market of the future? Will they lose the opportunity to expand their abilities to think broadly outside the box? But if they do go to college, what ensures that they will broaden their perspectives anyway — rather than more probably be brainwashed to become woke and abandon all decent values? (RELATED: Exclusive Interview With Kyle Reyes, Father Who Pulled His Kids Out of School Over Pride Video) In the midst of this chaos, no one — absolutely no one — perceived that America’s single greatest danger is a corrupt justice system. Trump’s Indictment Reveals the Corrupt Justice System Justice is the foundational pillar of all society: “Judges and officers shall you make in all your gates, which the L-rd your G-d gives you, tribe by tribe; and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment. You shall not pervert judgment; you shall not give [special] recognition to [litigants]; neither shall you take bribery; for bribery blinds the eyes of the wise and perverts the words of the righteous. Justice, justice shall you pursue, so that you may live and inherit the land that the L-rd your G-d gives you” (Deuteronomy 16:18–20).
Biden’s Banana Republic Of all the revelations since the Trump election, none has jolted Americans as badly as learning that our justice system is fundamentally corrupt. Initially, when names emerged like James Comey and Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe and Lisa Page and Kevin Clinesmith, conservative commentators opined that, really, 99 percent of the federal justice system is honorable, with the drek only at the top. A great many Americans no longer believe that. Justice is not blind in America. There are two tiers. And how can a democracy survive becoming a tyranny when a police state takes sides? Compelling arguments can be made each way as to whether Trump should be indicted for taking top-secret documents from Washington to Mar-a-Lago as souvenirs. On one hand, he had the authority as president to declassify those documents anyway. On the other hand, there is a reason he never declassified those documents: As an intelligent patriot, he knew those documents were too sensitive to declassify.
A fair and honest justice system reasonably could be assigned to weigh the ramifications of those documents’ removal. But Biden did the same and worse because he pilfered top secret documents that he did not even control. He left them exposed in a garage and in a public building. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton perpetrated a severe federal felony when she deliberately destroyed 33,000 emails. In America, no one gets away with spoliating evidence. Martha Stewart did not. Nor do law enforcement officers or even United States military personnel. There is an explicit federal statute, 18 U.S. Code § 1519: “Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.” Yet, Hillary had her emails “bleached,” her hard drive hammered to smithereens, her 33,000 emails — all about yoga and wedding dresses — wiped out … and she got away with it. Members of the corrupt Biden Crime Family sold out America by taking millions from our country’s enemies, all the way up to the Big Guy. Yet, even with Republicans controlling the House, the wheels of justice are jammed. It is unbelievable. They subpoena people. People do not show up, so they get cited for contempt. And then what? What ever became of Lois Lerner, who participated in corrupting the election process? What ever became of Eric Holder, who was cited with contempt? But the same “justice system” that cannot produce justice encounters no impediment when persecuting Trump allies like Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, Peter Navarro, and others. Obama got away with corrupt real estate deals with Tony Rezko. Bill was never indicted for Paula Corbin Jones or Kathleen Willey or Juanita Broaddrick. Hunter remains free. Joe approaches his forthcoming presidential race unencumbered by an indictment or prison, even as his henchmen indict his leading electoral opponent weeks after a Soros defense attorney criminally indicted Trump in New York for being naughty.
We Need Trump or DeSantis to Uproot the Rot The perversion of justice under Merrick Garland and Biden further has corrupted the democratic process. The GOP has a Kentucky Derby of excellent contenders lining up for 2024, but only two have the demonstrated mettle to meet the moment’s demands.
Trump can do it. Ron DeSantis can do it. That’s it. Like Trump, DeSantis has proven far stronger than anyone expected. He fights and beats politically woke untouchables: Disney, teachers unions, academic tenure, abortion, sexual perversion in school curricula, illegal immigration.

Mike Pence is a good man, but not for now. Except for Jan. 6, Mike Pence was a 100 percent Trump-MAGA team player through four years. He even is better than Trump on matters of cultural and religious values, abortion, sexual perversion, and common decency. Absolutely no serious American conservative leader would have acted differently than Pence did on Jan. 6. He was true to conscience. Nevertheless, at this time of public corruption of justice, America stands at the brink. There must be a Republican president with a Republican Senate and a Republican House to turn the Justice Department inside out, top-down, and replace it with a department devoted to equal and blind justice. Only the strongest of presidents can possibly eradicate the evil, focusing laser-like on finally overseeing justice meted to the Bidens and Clintons and letting those pieces fall where they may. Pence is not strong enough for that. Neither are Tim Scott or Nikki Haley. America cannot afford mere “nice” during this national crisis. Chris Christie is not conservative on the social and cultural issues that are at the core of whether America can survive even if justice returns.
The Trump indictment is about so much more than Trump. It reveals the rot at the top that demands only the demonstrably strongest of American presidents. Only Trump and DeSantis have the track records. No doubt there are other great Americans who could do the job too. But the corruption of our justice system has deterred them. Their gain. America’s loss.

Rabbi Dov Fischer, Esq., is Vice President of the Coalition for Jewish Values (comprising over 2,000 Orthodox rabbis), was an adjunct professor of law at two prominent Southern California law schools for nearly 20 years,

The March Madness of the President: Victor Davis Hanson

The March Madness of the President

Joe Biden’s political utility and near senility serve as exemptions for his often sexist, racist, and creepy riffs.

By: Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

March 12, 2023

Another couple of weeks, another bout of madness from Joe Biden and his team. Of recent Biden delusions, consider:

ü Biden went off in one of his impromptu Corn Pop or “beat-up-Trump-behind-the-bleachers” fables. These often slurred and nearly unintelligible tales characteristically virtue signal Biden’s own victimhood and “courage.”

ü They are interspersed with his bizarre propensity for eerie female contact. So we see or hear of his long record of blowing into the ears and hair or squeezing the necks of young girls. He hugs, for far too long, mature women. He can call out among a crowd an anonymous attractive teen stranger. Or, recently he relates an incoherent but quasi-sexual vignette.

ü So Joe recalled his patient days in his usual off-topic “no lie/not kidding/no joke” manner (i.e., tip-offs that he’s lying). He told us that a noble nurse once would “come in and do things that I don’t think you learn in medical school—in nursing school.” The president got a nervous laugh from the apparent quasi-pornographic reference (but then again Joe is excused because he is a “feminist”) before he detailed her technique:

“She’d whisper in my ear. I didn’t—couldn’t understand her, but she’d whisper, and she’d lean down. She’d actually breathe on me to make sure that I was—there was a connection, a human connection.”

ü A woman leaning over to blow into a prone man’s ear certainly constitutes a “human connection.” Yet all of Joe’s fables have different Homeric-style retellings. Two years ago he claimed that the same nurse in question actually blew into his nostrils. What a strange air-pressure technique that must have entailed for a person recovering from brain surgery. But perhaps it was consistent with biblical references to God blowing the spirit of life into the nose of man.

ü About a week later, referencing that hospital stay, Biden added that doctors “had to take the top of my head off a couple of times, see if I had a brain”—a reference that did not reassure the nation he is not enfeebled.

ü No one in the media had much of a reaction because Joe Biden’s political utility and near senility serve as exemptions for his often sexist, racist, and creepy riffs.

ü Instead, the media wrote off the nurse breathing into good ol’ Joe’s orifices as belonging to the same weird genre that a while back gave us inner-city kids stroking the golden hairs on Joe’s tan legs, or the shower revelations of Ashley Biden’s diary, or his “you ain’t black,” “put y’all back in chains,” and “junkie” sorts of racial condescension (e.g., “Why the hell would I take a test? C’mon, man. That’s like saying before you got on this program, you take a test on whether you’re taking cocaine or not. What do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie?”).

ü Joe also blustered to a crowd during Black History Month, “I may be a white boy, but I’m not stupid.”

ü The crowd laughed at the idea that the jester Biden believes white people are usually stupid, but that he, Joe, the exception to his race, is not stupid, despite being white. At least Biden finally referenced himself as “boy.” Usually, he has used that racial putdown for prominent blacks like Maryland Governor Wes Moore or a senior White House advisor Cedric Richmond.

The February-March madness of Joe was not through. Sometimes, his venom renders him disgustedly comic, as when he took the occasion of mass American deaths from fentanyl on his watch, to chuckle that the carnage was at least worse under Trump (an abject lie):

‘I should digress, probably. I’ve read, she [Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene], she was very specific recently, saying that a mom, a poor mother who lost two kids to fentanyl, that, that I killed her sons. Well, the interesting thing is that fentanyl they took came during the last administration.’ Followed by the Biden laugh.

Apparently, 100,000 dead at least deserve from Joe a “Trump did it” chuckle.

Joe, for the third time in two years, tripped and nearly fell ascending the ramp of Air Force One. At some point, even his supporters will concede that when octogenarians repeatedly stumble and fall, if not put under careful watch or provided a walker, it is only a matter of time until they break a hip and become bedridden.

In another replay, once again Biden finished his remarks, turned around to exit—and had no idea where he was going to go or whose invisible hand he was supposed to shake.

Amid all this, Biden more or less stuck to his now tired rhetorical themes.

One is the serial denunciation of the MAGA Republicans. Usually, he trashes them as semi-fascists or un-American, often in the context of his “unity speeches.” After calling for reconciliation, bipartisanship, and unity, Joe then usually tightens his face, grimaces, and starts yelling about the MAGA dregs and chumps.

If Biden is really angry, he adds the intensive adjective “Ultra” for the MAGAites. He gets particularly incensed when referencing the one percent who “don’t pay their fair share” (the one percent pays over 40 percent of all income tax revenues). Biden is oblivious that the entire Biden clan is under popular suspicion of not reporting all of the millions of dollars in quid pro quos leveraging they raked in from foreign governments without registering as their agents.

Note that his entire team, when stung by charges of incompetency or illegality, usually follows Joe’s tactic of “Trump did it.” So when Pete Buttigieg was criticized for ignoring the East Palestine rail wreck and reminded of his past serial transportation failures, junkets, and incoherent systemic racism charges, he retreated to blaming Trump for the derailment.

Buttigieg falsely claimed that Trump’s past lifting of particular electric railcar brake regulations caused the wheel bearing failure in East Palestine, a lie that even members of his department could not stomach.

Too, Joe creates elaborate fables. In the past two weeks, he returned to his civil rights lie that he was a campus activist agitating for racial justice. At least he did not add his usual fillips of being arrested or standing up to apartheid police in South Africa.

In Biden’s world, he brags he has reduced inflation. Yet when he entered office in January 2021, the annualized inflation rate was 1.7 percent. Two years later in January 2023, inflation went up to 6.4 percent, after hitting a high in June 2022 of 9.1 percent—3 ¾ times higher than when he took office. In mid-March, we will learn of the February 2023 annualized rate, but it is expected to climb back to more than 8 percent.

If anyone compares the current price of eggs, rent, diesel fuel, a natural gas heating bill, or building materials to their respective costs when Biden entered office, then he would know Biden’s inflation is cumulative, and has nearly destroyed the affordability of shelter, food, and fuel—the stuff of life.

He mentioned lowering the heating and cooling costs of American homes through his climate change advocacy. In truth, on average electric rates shot up over 10 percent last year. Natural gas and fuel went even higher to over 25 percent in a single year.

Biden talks about his low unemployment rate of 3.4 percent. But it is almost identical to what the Trump Administration achieved—without Biden’s high interest rates and acute inflation—in the months before the massive COVID lockdowns.

Moreover, current low employment is largely a reflection of reduced labor participation—due to early retirements, exits during the pandemic, fear of COVID, long COVID, the zoom culture, and most importantly the Biden continuance of massive COVID-era subsidies that discourage employment. The labor participation rate has hit near historic lows under Biden, lower than the pre-COVID rate under Trump.

It was not until last month that the Biden economy finally achieved the level of total employed Americans who had been working in January 2020 on the eve of the Covid lockdowns.

As far as interest rates for 30-year fixed mortgages, they were 2.9 percent when Biden took office. Now they are currently over 7 percent -2.4 times higher than when Biden took office.

In sum, Biden repeats the same patterns of deception: crash the economy as evidenced by many of its major indicators, then when a data point reveals a slight and likely temporary monthly recovery, he brags he “reduced” inflation, interest, or unemployment.

We also heard during the same week from Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland who was shredded during his testimony to the Senate. He argued that the vastly disproportionate FBI response to violence against abortion centers versus attacks on pro-life groups was only due to the differences between light and dark—literally: abortion centers are attacked during daytime; in contrast, pro-life shelters are attacked during the night.

Apparently, his Justice Department and the FBI shut down at sunset and reawaken at dawn—as if either most violent crime does not occur at night or there is nothing to be done about it when it does.

Garland further embarrassed himself when he could not explain the disproportionate use of force in arresting or detaining conservative suspects versus the virtual exemptions given prominent left-wing suspects.

Most embarrassingly, when asked why he did not charge mobs that swarmed the homes of conservative Supreme Court justices to influence their decisions—a federal felony—he lamely claimed there were federals protecting the residences.

In Garland’s world, some criminals committing felonies are completely exempt if law enforcement prevents further violent manifestations of their criminal behavior. So illegally swarm a Supreme Court justice’s residence to influence a court decision, but then stop short of escalating further by the sight of law enforcement—and, presto, you never committed a crime in the first place.

Garland finished off his recent nonsense by repeating the lie that five police officers were killed due to the January 6 protests. In fact, none were. Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes after the protests were over. The other four committed suicide weeks or even months later and no one has connected their self-induced deaths with any act of the protestors.

About the same time, a beleaguered Pete Buttigieg went off on riffs about Tucker Carlson, who, he implied, lacked the grassroots, working-man fides of Buttigieg.

He claimed that for all the criticism he has endured, he believes that he will be remembered for posterity for his fight against “climate change”—although he did not point to any concrete result in reducing carbon emissions due to his singular policies.

Buttigieg will be known but for other characteristics: He repeatedly emphasizes his identity politics gay stature both to note his supposedly pathbreaking courage and to claim victimhood when attacked. He sees transportation through the lens of race and so chases the unicorn of white privilege, whether concerning past freeway routes or the makeup of current construction crews (falsely charging that white men are overrepresented on them). Under his tenure as Transportation Secretary, the country experienced dangerous supply interruptions, ossified ports, and harbor-bound trains robbed in Wild West fashion.

Buttigieg’s diversity mandates either did nothing to ameliorate or actually led to:

ü a series of near-miss airline crashes,

ü the complete shutdown of the airline industry due to computer glitches and weather,

ü the implosion for a week of Southwest Airlines,

ü the East Palestine derailment disaster, and

ü labor interruptions.

In all these cases he either was on leave or a junket, wrote them off as Trump’s fault, or contextualized them as no big deal.

Delusional Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Majorkas has declared the border closed and the nation secure, even as 100,000 Americans per year have died from overdoses of fentanyl shipped with impunity across the open border by Mexican cartels. When upwards of 7 million aliens flow across the border illegally since Biden took office, it is written off as Trump’s fault.

Finally, last week there were several interviews with FBI Director Christopher Wray. He could not explain why his agency goes full military mode to arrest a father and husband for protesting at an abortion clinic while having no clue who has been attacking pro-life shelters.

In Wray’s mind, the performance art sweep into Mar-a-Lago, which he claims was not a “raid,” was no different from having Biden’s lawyers quietly conduct their own “investigations” of Biden’s improper removal of classified documents (improper with an asterisk, since no vice president has the president’s legal authority to declassify whatever he wishes).

Wray could not explain why the FBI sat on the Biden trove until the midterm election was over, and then only acted to further search Biden’s residences when its own asymmetrical protocols came under fire.

Add up the last few weeks, and we learned that Christopher Wray’s FBI is doing splendidly in its even enforcement of the law. Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is absolutely disinterested and treats all sides equally. Alejandro Mayorkas has closed the border and we are now “secure.” Pete Buttigieg is building a legacy for the ages as a climate change crusader.

And an eloquent and dynamic Joe Biden has compiled an impressive legislative record on his way to a great presidency—with the energy, we are told by Dr. Jill Biden, that is more impressive than any 30-year-old’s.

Drifting into Surrealism

After Sixty Days Biden Is Drifting Into Surrealism
By CONRAD BLACK, Special to the Sun | March 27, 2021

After 60 days of the new administration, American government has descended into surrealism. The secretary of homeland security, Alejandro Mayorkas, blandly assured the Sunday television news programs that “the border is closed,” and that unauthorized and inappropriate entry-seekers are normally turned away. This is clearly a monstrous falsehood and the docile Democratic-boot-licking press knows it to be false.

This ludicrous and tragic charade on the southern border is half of the current administration’s vast and pointless game of pretense, in which it denies the existence of one immense crisis, while grimly and tediously proclaiming the iron duration of another crisis that has in fact, largely passed.

No screening process at all is being applied to large numbers of arriving, so-called migrants, and unskilled, penurious, largely illiterate — they are simply being admitted to the country because that is supposedly the humane thing to do with them.

An uncertain number are gang members and other undesirables, and thousands are children, 80% of whom are believed to have been sexually violated en route. The hardened criminal organizations in Mexico that conduct these progresses to and through the United States border profit from their activities to the tune of millions of dollars a day.

The government of the United States is fully complicit in the criminal violence of these Mexican gangs, and yet its spokespeople, day after day, unctuously repeat pious lies about this unfolding outrage to the press corps that conducted the campaign for the almost comatose candidate who is now the president.

At the same time, President Biden and his team will not let go of the coronavirus as a cause of permanent panic and mourning, and of explicit and dishonest fault-finding with the previous administration.

It is now obvious that the entire Democratic media terror campaign last year to demand slavish obedience to the most alarmist scientists and shut down as much of the economy and normal life of the country as possible, in order to portray President Trump as the author of a public health disaster and bottomless economic depression, was, as many of us suggested, tactical.

The scientists were divided, most of their advice was nonsense — and in any case, ephemeral. Dr. Anthony Fauci, in particular, was the perfect instrument of the Trump-hating press: articulate, experienced, clearly highly intelligent, and rather a telegenic and affable personality, and capable of possibly espousing a tortuous sequence of varying opinion on the same subject: masks, distancing, school openings, etc.

The Democratic campaign and its press hallelujah chorus went to demagogic lengths to conceal from the public the facts that the recovery rate amongst coronavirus sufferers in good health beneath the age of 65 was 99.997%, and that even among all others, with unlimited additional medical problems and up to any age, the survival rate was almost 95%.

It was almost never mentioned that 80% of those who died with the coronavirus had other problems as well and that it was frequently impossible to allocate the relative responsibility amongst the different problems that contributed to their demise.

The whole campaign to “flatten the curve” was a chimera and a fiasco. The scientists knew that the curve would recover as soon as people went back to work and that the only solution was swift development of a vaccine, isolation of the most vulnerable potential cases, and as close to life as usual for everyone else.

We now know that as many as three quarters of those who have contracted the coronavirus have not been reported cases, that all those who have had it enjoy a considerable measure of subsequent immunity, and that the average age of coronavirus deaths was the national life expectancy — 78. All of these facts could have been put together quite quickly to produce a much more intelligent policy.

Instead we had the probably criminal negligence of Democratic governors in New York and New Jersey, who sent coronavirus sufferers back to homes for the elderly where their presence generated precisely the death rates that Mr. Biden constantly invokes with his tediously morbid references to “the empty chair at the breakfast table,” and that was for a time noisily celebrated as, quoting the same source, “the gold standard” of coronavirus management.

Eventually, it will be impossible to disguise the fact that President Trump’s leadership produced effective vaccines with extraordinary swiftness, and these were greeted with derisive snorts of skepticism from President Biden and Vice President Harris and others who said that they “would not trust any vaccine developed by Donald Trump.”

All of the hysteria, the morbid fear-mongering that new strains of the virus would soon push up death rates, and the promise that only if Americans behaved with exquisite obedience to the geniuses of science who were guiding their inert president, would it be possible to enjoy a hot dog and a celebratory beverage on Independence Day with one’s neighbors: it was all bunk.

It is not clear what the administration imagines it is doing by trying to mislead the country as it does. The media are never more venomous than when they feel they have been used, and we cannot now be far from the date when that recognition will dawn upon the credulous ranks of the Trump-hating, Biden-touting, and thoroughly discredited White House press corps.

The Biden Administration cannot possibly have more than a few more weeks to announce that it has fulfilled its humanitarian promises, and can substantially reseal the border, having reformed the xenophobic and racist bigotry and cruelty of the Trump Administration (which is, in fact, the only administration that has enforced a sane immigration policy in over 30 years).

Fact is, Mr. Trump killed the corrupt bipartisan regime by which the Democrats harvested the votes of these millions of unlawful residents and Republican employers exploited their legal vulnerability by chronically underpaying them. The Democrats now are in the business of reestablishing it.

The long-suffering public will not stand for continued shutdowns and the blackmail of the teachers’ unions much longer, either, so the administration will have to proceed rapidly to the front of cresting opinion.

Laws of nature and of politics will sort out some of these issues, but the fact that the administration attempted to prolong both positive and negative fairy tales for no evident reason invites curiosity about who really is driving the government train, and in response to what motives.

This is a phantom administration: a laid-back and thoroughly unprepossessing president, a sharply divided governing party, a completely infeasible legislative program, and still no organizing principle except orchestrated thanksgiving that Mr. Trump is gone. There is no reason to believe that this drifting flotsam of a government has any other idea of what to do with the responsibility it must soon start to discharge.

________ From American Greatness.

Image: “Stranger,” Palais Royal, Paris, 2019. (c) James M. Peaslee.

9/11 style commission necessary for January 6 incident?

Should a ‘9/11-style’ Commission Investigate the Capitol Riot?
Townhall Columnists Byron York
Should a ‘9/11-style’ Commission Investigate the Capitol Riot?
Byron YorkByron York|Posted: Feb 17, 2021 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of
Should a ‘9/11-style’ Commission Investigate the Capitol Riot?
Source: AP Photo/John Minchillo

Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House will vote to create an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. There’s no doubt there needs to be an extensive investigation of the events surrounding the riot. But what is striking is that, even as Pelosi calls for an investigation, a number of government agencies are stonewalling the public on some of the most basic information about the events of Jan. 6.

The public should not have to wait for an investigation to learn how many police officers were injured in the riot, and the severity of their injuries. It should not have to wait to find out the cause of death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. It should not have to wait to find out if authorities confiscated firearms from rioters, and, if so, how many and what type. It should not have to wait to learn details of the shooting of Ashli Babbitt.

The public should not have to wait to learn what officials knew about the possibility of violence before the riot. What did the Capitol Police know? What did the House and Senate sergeants-at-arms know? What did Speaker Pelosi and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy know? Senate leaders Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell? The White House? National Guard officials?

Americans could, and should, know more about these topics right now. But significant parts of the Capitol riot are now shrouded in official secrecy. And the existence of multiple investigations will only make that worse, giving officials an excuse not to speak publicly because there is an active investigation going on. So before the big commission is formed and begins its work, how about Americans learn some of those basic facts about the riot?

Now, a number of top House Republicans — Rodney Davis, ranking minority member on the House Administration Committee, Jim Jordan, ranking member on the Judiciary Committee; James Comer, ranking member on the Government Oversight and Reform Committee; and Devin Nunes, ranking member on the Intelligence Committee, have sent a letter to Pelosi asking for answers for some key questions about security preparations in the days before Jan. 6. The questions have a partisan edge — nothing unusual for Capitol Hill — but they cover things Americans need to know.

For example, the lawmakers want to know about discussions in the days before the riot about using the National Guard to increase security. What did law enforcement agencies tell Capitol Hill leaders about the possibility of violence? And what did those leaders do about it?

Obviously, there are questions about President Trump’s actions before and during the riot. Many of those were touched upon during the recently ended impeachment trial. There is no danger those questions will be ignored, either by a commission or by the media. On the other hand, the questions that House Republicans have posed need answers, too.

Finally, one last word on the description of the still-unformed commission. It is universally referred to as a “9/11-style” commission. Pelosi undoubtedly likes that because it helps cement in the public’s mind an equivalence between the riot and the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history. In both, Democrats say terrorists attacked America. But be reasonable. There is simply no comparison in scale, motivation or anything else between Sept. 11 and Jan. 6.

In case anyone has forgotten, the 9/11 al-Qaida attacks killed roughly 3,000 people, brought down New York’s tallest skyscrapers, destroyed part of the Pentagon, crashed four passenger jetliners and changed U.S. foreign policy for decades. The Jan. 6 riot led to the so-far unexplained death of one Capitol Police officer, the death of one rioter at the hands of police, the stampeding death of another rioter and the natural causes deaths of two more. Parts of the Capitol were ransacked, but not seriously enough that Congress could not meet and finish its work on the night of the riot. It was appalling, but nothing like Sept. 11. (To visualize the difference, imagine that, on the night of the 9/11 attacks, there was a convention that went on as scheduled at the World Trade Center.)

So bring on the investigations. They should be exhaustive. And that will take time. But there are things Americans need to know right now, too.

Byron York is chief political correspondent for The Washington Examiner.

PJ Media
Columnists Political Cartoons Tipsheet Townhall TV Podcasts Radio News Video Entertainment VIP Capitol Voices
Election Results Tags Finance Townhall Radio
About Townhall Advertise Gift Guides Privacy Policy CCPA – Do not sell my personal information California – CCPA Notice Radio Stations Sitemap Jobs Contact Us Newsletters iPhone/Android Apps is the leading source for conservative news and political commentary and analysis.
Copyright © Media. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you

“……Know we are Christians by our hate” Columnists Michael Brown

And They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Hate
Michael BrownMichael Brown|Posted: Feb 17, 2021 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of
And They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Hate
Source: AP Photo/Mohammed Hakim

Did you ever hear the song that begins with the words, “We are one in the Spirit, we are one in the Lord”? The lyrics are very simple, with the repeated refrain, “And they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love, Yeah they’ll know we are Christians by our love.” Today, we might want to change that refrain to “they’ll know we are Christians by our hate, by our hate.” We have become terribly disfigured in recent years, in many ways, the opposite of God’s intent. How on earth did this happen?

If you don’t believe me, visit some of our personal, Bible-affirming, Jesus-believing, social media pages, where we savage each other and attack each other and spread hearsay and even lies about one another with reckless abandon. They are hate-filled pages, pages filled with venom and poison, yet pages that ultimately reflect what is in our own hearts. I ask again: how on earth did this happen?

To give one recent, case in point, when my younger colleague Jeremiah Johnson publicly apologized for wrongly prophesying Trump’s reelection, he received a torrent of hate mail of the basest sort, almost all of it from professing Christians.

This is the fruit of the Spirit? This is the result of our fellowship with God? This is what happens when we are changed into the likeness of Jesus? Obviously not.

Yet I see this every day. We are vile. We are vicious. We are mean-spirited. We treat each other with disrespect and disdain. There is little honor. Little humility. Little grace.

Perhaps worse still, we have been taught to hate and we have found justification for our hatred. After all, the Democrats (or Republicans or whatever people have our ire at the moment) are downright demons. They are Satan incarnate. They are pure evil. They deserve nothing but damnation. They are worthy of our ridicule.

To treat them with even a modicum of decency is beneath our high Christian calling, a calling we now demonstrate by our condescending, cruel, mocking, and merciless attitudes. Oh, how holy we have become!

The truth is that we can hate sin without becoming hateful. We can stand against corruption and evil without becoming vile. We can even be righteously indignant without becoming venomous.

Yet we get in the flesh and violate hundreds of scriptural exhortations, all while puffing out our self-righteous chests. This is a stench in God’s nostrils.

At all points, God calls us to speak the truth in love.

At all points, God calls us to exercise self-restraint.

At all points, God calls us to follow the example of Jesus.

Some will say, “I agree. We should follow the example of Jesus – the Jesus who overturned the tables of the money changers in the Temple and the Jesus who rebuked the Pharisees in the strongest possible terms. That’s the Jesus I emulate.”

Sorry friend, but you’re barking up the wrong tree.

First, you’re not the unique Son of God, and neither am I. Yet when He overturned the tables in the Temple, He did so as the Son of God, taking action on behalf of His heavenly Father. Where, in Scripture, did He ever tell us to go and do the same? Where, in the Bible, is it recorded that the apostles followed His lead and repeated His acts?

Second, it was the perfect, sinless Messiah who rebuked the Pharisees, men who were highly respected religious leaders of their day. Today, He might be rebuking some of us. Not only so, but He did more than simply rebuke them for their hypocrisy. He also died for their salvation.

When we have that kind of love, the love that is ready and willing to die for those we rebuke, then our words will sound and feel a lot different. That is the kind of love that weeps in secret before it rebukes in public.

Third, Jesus explicitly told us how we are to conduct ourselves, saying this: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.

“If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:43-48)

Listen to those words again: “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.”

Are we living as children of our heavenly Father? Whose image and likeness do we bear?

Paul wrote, “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law” (Galatians 5:22-24). What kind of fruit are we bearing?

We should analyze everything we post or text or say against this grid. Is it in harmony with the fruit of the Spirit? Do our words and attitudes reflect true love? Or do they reflect the works of the flesh, which include “hatreds, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions (Galatians 5:20, CSB)?

According to Paul, “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails” (1 Corinthians 13:4-8a).

One of my colleagues, the leader of a major, international media ministry, said that everywhere he has traveled in the United States, he has seen Christians angry and divided over politics.

Is that what has infected us? Have we become so consumed with partisan politics to the point that our Christian identity is now completely intertwined with a fleshly, angry, divisive, and accusative spirit – the very spirit of worldly politics?

Or does the problem run deeper still? Could it also be that we have drifted from our first love with the Lord, drifted from intimacy with Him, drifted from the beauty and wonder of the cross, drifted from fellowship with the Spirit, drifted from being transformed by the Word?

Peter exhorted, “Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart” (1 Peter 1:22).

John wrote, “We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers. Whoever does not love abides in death. Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:14-15).

Are we getting the message?

Jacob (James) added this: “Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless.”

Does that describe us?

Shortly before His crucifixion, Jesus said, “By this everyone will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another” (John 13:35).

Today, we are better known for our hate than for our love.

It is high time – no, it is way past time – for some deep, serious soul-searching and repentance. It is time for radical change. May we learn to love again.

PJ Media
Columnists Political Cartoons Tipsheet Townhall TV Podcasts Radio News Video Entertainment VIP Capitol Voices
Election Results Tags Finance Townhall Radio
About Townhall Advertise Gift Guides Privacy Policy CCPA – Do not sell my personal information California – CCPA Notice Radio Stations Sitemap Jobs Contact Us Newsletters iPhone/Android Apps is the leading source for conservative news and political commentary and analysis.
Copyright © Media. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you

4 year long campaign against President Trump: The Epoch Times:

The Epoch Times: November 25, 2020

The post-election push to pressure President Donald Trump to concede, despite numerous credible allegations of voter fraud and ongoing legal challenges, is not an isolated incident.

It is the culmination of a four-year-long campaign against him, which started during his first run for president in 2016 when the FBI launched a politically motivated investigation of his campaign. During his subsequent four years in office, there have been consistent efforts to remove him from office, first through the Russia-collusion narrative and then through impeachment.

The Epoch Times here provides an overview of some of the main efforts made against the sitting president of the United States.

This is an issue that transcends party lines, as it is not only an assault on Trump, but an assault on the office of the presidency, and with it, an assault on the foundation of America.

The FBI under the Obama administration in 2016 launched a politically motivated investigation of the Trump campaign. Based on publicly available information, we know the investigation was initiated based on the thinnest of evidence: remarks made by a junior Trump campaign adviser to the Australian ambassador in London. In reality, the investigation primarily relied on the discredited “Steele dossier,” produced by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

The Trump–Russia Shadow
While the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation itself would not find any evidence of Trump–Russia collusion, the ongoing investigations, including selective leaks to the media, would create the public narrative that Trump had colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. This cast a shadow over the first few years of his presidency and constrained his actions both domestically and internationally. Some members of Congress had gone so far as to call for Trump’s impeachment over the false allegations.

Former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation James Comey, speaks via a TV monitor during a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on Sept. 30, 2020. (Stefani Reynolds/Pool/Getty Images)
FBI Under Comey and McCabe
The FBI under Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe pro-actively worked against Trump. McCabe was directly involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, working with FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page. After Comey was fired by Trump in May 2017, McCabe actively pushed the agency to further investigate Trump. McCabe’s FBI went as far as suggesting Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr reach back out to Steele, despite that many of the claims in his dossier had been disproven by that time and the FBI had cut ties with him over his leaks to the media.

Perhaps one of the most powerful forces working against Trump during his presidency has been the news media. Over the past five years, they have relentlessly published skewed and inaccurate information about Trump while minimizing or ignoring his accomplishments, seeking to portray him publicly as an illegitimate president. This type of reporting has created a climate of anger, hate, and instability in America. It has resulted in threats made to the president’s life and acts of violence against his supporters.

The House of Representatives on Dec. 18, 2019, impeached Trump along partisan lines. Though the Senate would later dismiss the charge, it left a mark on his presidency and dragged the country through months of public attacks in the media. At the center of the impeachment was a phone call Trump made on July 25, 2019, to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, during which Trump expressed his hope that allegations of potential corruption involving former Vice President Joe Biden would be investigated. Given even the publicly available information at the time, there were legitimate concerns that American political influence and taxpayers’ funds were misused in Ukraine. At the time, it was publicly known that Biden’s son Hunter had received tens of thousands of dollars a month from a Ukrainian energy giant, while then-Vice President Biden—in his own words—had pressured the Ukrainian president to fire a prosecutor as a prerequisite for receiving $1 billion in foreign aid. That same prosecutor had been investigating the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, as well its board, which included Hunter Biden.

Trump’s opponents have accused the president of mishandling the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, commonly referred to as the novel coronavirus, by acting too late. This, however, is contrary to the events of early 2020. The Trump administration on Feb. 2, 2020, banned all foreign travel from China, the source of the CCP virus. This decision was made by the president against the advice of some of his top advisers and exceeded actions taken by most other nations at the time. Meanwhile, his opponents in politics and media described it as xenophobic and an overreaction. In hindsight, the decision proved immensely valuable in helping to slow the spread of the virus. As the virus spread in the United States, the Trump administration increased testing capacity, coordinated with state governments to provide them with the federal assistance they needed, used the defense production act to compel companies to produce critical health equipment such as ventilators, and provided billions in federal funding and eased federal regulations for major drug companies to push for the development of a vaccine.

Foreign Interference
It would be accurate to say that Trump is communist China’s biggest adversary. The president broke a decades-long U.S. policy toward China that was based on the belief that, through engagement and economic development, the People’s Republic would evolve from a totalitarian regime toward a more democratic country. In reality, this strategy of appeasement merely resulted in trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs going to China. And instead of becoming more democratic, the Chinese regime used this wealth to advance its dictatorship, creating the most technologically advanced tyranny the world has ever witnessed. The CCP has consistently worked against Trump during his presidency, both publicly and behind the scenes. Beijing has used its domestic and overseas propaganda channels—often by relying on the United States’ own media—to vilify Trump, going as far as to suggest that the outbreak of the CCP virus in Wuhan was because of the American military.

Black Lives Matter
Black Lives Matter (BLM) has been behind the riots that have plagued American cities for much of this year. The group has hijacked the concerns people have over racism and used them to justify its advance of a Marxist agenda. In a 2015 video, BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors described herself and her fellow founders as “trained Marxists.” Just like in Russia, China, Cuba, and Venezuela, trained Marxists have hijacked righteous causes to advance the communist agenda. Many of those who lived through the Cultural Revolution in China in the 1960s have commented that the riots in the United States over the summer, which included the toppling of historical statues, were eerily similar. The result is a climate of chaos and insecurity that affects the entire country.

Dressed in full black gear including armor, helmets, and masks, and trained in agitation and basic combat, Antifa extremists have been involved in numerous acts of violence during Trump’s presidency. In many cases, these acts of violence, which include the use of weapons, rocks, and Molotov cocktails, were directed at law enforcement and government property. But Antifa members have also directly targeted unarmed common citizens for simply supporting Trump. We saw this happen twice in Washington, where those who had gathered to support Trump were later attacked when alone in the city at night. Antifa’s use of a militia-style force to intimidate and physically attack citizens for their political beliefs creates a powerful climate of fear and stands against the most basic American values.

The Permanent Government
Though Trump as president is the leader of the executive branch, when he came to office he inherited a federal government staffed with hundreds of thousands of employees. It’s no secret that many career officials in the U.S. government have actively sought to undermine or even openly work against Trump. Many in government have been led by false information published by media organizations to believe that they are doing the right thing, and that by working against Trump, they are putting the interests of the country first. In fact, they have done the country a disservice by blocking a rightfully elected president from executing the will of the people.

Mueller Special Counsel Investigation
Following the firing of FBI Director Comey, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein assigned former FBI Director Robert Mueller to continue the FBI’s investigation of alleged Trump–Russia collusion. Mueller would conclude in a final report that there was no evidence of such collusion. But this only came after a nearly two-year-long investigation, giving the media and Trump’s political opponents leeway to portray Trump as an illegitimate president because of his supposed affiliation with Russia.

Illegal Leaks
Throughout the past four years, the Trump administration has been plagued by selective leaks aimed at damaging Trump’s presidency. Some of these leaks have been criminal in nature, such as the leak of the transcripts of Trump’s conversations with foreign leaders—a felony offense. Treasury official Natalie Edwards was found guilty of illegally leaking suspicious activity reports (SARs) on financial transactions by former Trump campaign associate Paul Manafort, among others.

2020 Election Fraud
Following the Nov. 3 elections, dozens of credible allegations of voter fraud or other illegal acts connected to the counting of ballots have emerged. Dozens of poll workers across multiple states have given testimony in sworn statements—under penalty of perjury—detailing irregularities in how ballots were counted, as well as how the workers were instructed to make otherwise illegal changes to ballots, how they were unable to properly observe ballot counting, and how they witnessed new ballots mysteriously appear out of nowhere. The Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee launched a number of lawsuits to challenge the process. They’ve argued that in Pennsylvania alone, 600,000 ballots should be invalidated, as Republican election observers weren’t allowed to witness the ballot processing.

Manufactured Narratives
The use of manufactured narratives to attack Trump has been pervasive since he assumed the presidency. Perhaps the most notable is the claim that he defended neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, Virginia, when in fact he said that that there were “very fine people on both sides,” referring to people who “were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.” Trump specifically added, “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally—but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.” Yet despite this being on public record, Trump would continue to be asked throughout his presidency, especially during the election season, whether he was ready to “denounce white supremacy,” despite having done so on many occasions, even before becoming president

Help us spread the truth. Share this article with your friends.
TelegramFacebookTweet 7761 Shares