Search Results

North Carolina Democrat U.S. Senate candidate Cal Cunningham has admitted to swapping sexts and arranging a sexual liaison with the wife of an Army subordinate – in military culture, and in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, short of treason or cowardice in the face of the enemy, there’s no crime an officer can commit that is more despicable. In the brotherhood of arms, Cunningham’s conduct has been recognized as a crime for some 3,000 years, ever since King David lusted after Bathsheba, the wife of one of his officers, Uriah the Hittite, whom 2 Samuel tells us David sent to the front lines where the fighting was fiercest to be killed in battle so that he could make Bathsheba his eighth wife. And it isn’t like this is some “October surprise” dreamed up by Republicans or the Thom Tillis campaign. Democrat Cunningham has admitted to exchanging the sexual texts with California PR strategist Arlene Guzman Todd. Cunningham’s campaign confirmed sext messages first reported by Patrick Howley for nationalfile.com (@HowleyReporter) are authentic. Mr. Howley reports Jeremy Todd was an Army Sergeant First Class who served 15 years in the U.S. Army with five combat deployments including in Iraq and Afghanistan, then studied at the University of Southern California in a determined bid to support his young family. You can read the texts about getting together between Mrs. Guzman Todd and Democrat Cal Cunningham through this link. What is even more despicable about Democrat Cunningham’s behavior is he has based much of his campaign on his military service. And if Cunningham is court martialed and the affair proven with a woman whose husband was enlisted and under his command or supervision, he could face military justice for (at a minimum) conduct unbecoming an officer – if it is proven Cunningham acted to advantage or disadvantage to Guzman Todd’s husband there could be further charges. Were Cunningham to be court-martialed (as the facts indicate he should be) under Article 134 of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice), a conviction for extra-marital sexual conduct with the wife of subordinate carries with penalties including a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to one year. What’s more, Cunningham is a JAG lawyer. He knows about the military penalties attached to this crime which have been in place since at least 1999. In 1999 the Army demoted a retired NATO commander who admitted to affairs with the wives of subordinates. Maj. Gen. David R. E. Hale, was first allowed to retire with honor in February 1998 after he had denied charges of adultery brought against him by one of his subordinate's wives. The Army was immediately accused of employing a double standard of allowing senior officers to escape punishment for sexual misconduct that could lead to more rigorous prosecution of junior officers or enlisted personnel. Hale, who was the Army's deputy inspector general and the commander of NATO forces in Southern Europe, was later demoted to a one-star brigadier general by Louis Caldera, the Secretary of the Army. The demotion included a reduction of nearly $9,000 in General Hale's annual pension of $75,744. The sexting is prima facia evidence of Democrat Cal Cunningham’s conduct unbecoming an officer – the big question now is how will the Army deal with it? Will Cunningham get a pass and the special two-tiered system of justice that allowed Hunter Biden to get a general discharge after he tested positive for cocaine, rather than the court martial he deserved. Will Cunningham be allowed to retire with no disadvantage to his pension or status? And how will North Carolina’s military-heavy voters feel about this vile breach of the brotherhood of arms’ 3,000-year-old code of conduct? We urge CHQ readers and friends to contact Army Public Affairs at 703-695-0373, ask for Lieutenant General Charles N. Pede, Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Army, and demand that the Army treat Democrat Cal Cunningham just like any other officer who admitted to having an inappropriate relationship with the wife of a subordinate. George Rasley is Managing Editor of Richard Viguerie’s ConservativeHQ.com. An Army brat born at Ft. Leonard Wood, Missouri, he served as spokesman for retiring Congressman Mac Thornberry, former Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. 2020 Election North Carolina senate race Thom Tillis Democrats Cal Cunningham text messages sexting Arlene Guzman Todd Jeremy Todd conduct unbecoming dishonorable discharge

Trump positive test for COVID-19 knocks everything else out of focus It was impossible to fathom that anything could’ve knocked out of the headlines the recent Supreme Court vacancy created by liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death three weeks ago -- and the subsequent appointment of conservative constitutionalist Amy Coney Barrett to succeed her -- but Friday’s report of President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump testing positive for COVID-19 managed the feat nicely. I learned of the news a few hours after President Trump tweeted it out. My early rising daughter texted me at just after four in the morning, leaving a message that read simply, “Trump and Melania got corona”. What a way to be jolted awake. Ever since the Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus started dominating the media in early 2020, one had to figure something like this would occur. But to infect the president of the United States? How could it possibly happen? Sure, the doubters and self-appointed “experts” are chuckling under their breath about Trump not taking the virus seriously and carelessly dissing on masks, but supposedly everyone who gets within social distance of the president is screened beforehand to ensure his safety. Yet the virus managed to elude the voluminous protocols and strike at Trump and Melania nonetheless. (Note: Senators Mike Lee and Thom Tillis also tested positive, as did former advisor Kellyanne Conway, RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien. The common point seems to be the ceremony to announce Barrett last Saturday.) Immediately, folks harkened back to the previous few days before Trump’s revelation. How many people had the first couple come into contact with? Was Joe Biden exposed at the debate? Will the entire White House have to be scrubbed, cleaned and disinfected? What about Baron? What does it mean to “quarantine” anyway? Will Trump be able to discharge his duties while staying completely away from people? (His doctor assured the public that he would, and he’s been moved to Walter Reed med center for monitoring.) Do Mike and Karen Pence have it too? (Again, not according to preliminary tests.) And perhaps most saliently, what about the campaign? What about the election, now less than a month away? David Mark wrote at The Washington Examiner, “[A]n I-told-you-so response by [Joe] Biden and his supporters would likely backfire, stirring sympathy for his White House rival and wife. “One immediate decision for Biden is whether to suspend his campaign. If Biden continues on pressing for votes, his schedule is likely to be altered to focus exclusively on taming the coronavirus. Biden would likely discard overt political rhetoric, instead focusing on science related to the pandemic… “The COVID-19 diagnosis for the president and first lady virtually guarantees the pandemic remains front-and-center for the bulk of the presidential campaign. The pair are quarantined for 14 days, which raises questions about Trump's in-person participation at the scheduled Oct. 15 presidential debate.” Democrats had already been talking about ditching the final two debates, and the Trump positive test appears to hand them the perfect excuse for doing so. Biden could easily cancel his in-person campaign events in the next two weeks as well, citing “sensitivity” to the president’s condition and the public’s overt fear of being similarly stricken with the virus. Some of the initial shock has worn off and the panic has died down considerably. Most people realize that the vast, vast majority of individuals who contract the virus recover as though nothing was ever wrong. Just within recent memory, 67-year-old Congressman Louie Gohmert tested positive and fully recovered as did 63-year-old former Texas Rep. Steve Stockman who was wrongly and unfairly convicted of fraud by a biased prosecutor and then confined to prison, where his captors wouldn’t release him along with other prisoners even though he has several co-morbidities. Golfing legend Jack Nicklaus, age 80, similarly revealed he and wife Barbara tested positive earlier this year and recovered with few or no symptoms. They didn’t want to cause a big public stir. This isn’t possible where President Trump’s concerned. The daily positive case tallies continue to rise, as does the national death toll from those who died with the virus (not necessarily because of it). Because the media takes glee in such things, several outlets were happy to point out that because of Trump’s age and “obesity”, that he fits within the high-risk category. Media reports hint at what kind of treatment the president and first lady are receiving, but here’s guessing it includes every proven method of battling the virus. Trump has certainly received enough first-hand reports on the virus to fill-up a warehouse. Is there anything he doesn’t know about it? What the nation can’t do now is use Trump’s condition as an impetus to radically change course on COVID-19 policy or the upcoming election. Nearly seven months into a lockdown that’s touched each and every American life in some form, we’re a lot smarter as to the realities of the threat. Simply put, the virus appears easily transmittable but certainly didn’t equate to a death sentence for upwards of 95 percent of the people confirmed to have had it. When you take into account the huge number of people who showed no symptoms and were therefore not tested, the survival rate is likely well north of 99 percent. COVID-19 is deadlier than the seasonal flu, but by how much? We’ll learn a lot more in the coming days as to how “sick” President Trump and Melania become. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson got the virus back in April and needed hospitalization and a stay in intensive care to beat it. But the virus doesn’t impact everyone the same and Trump will receive the best care from the outset. And he’ll also get something that no doctor’s medicine could provide him -- badly needed rest after what’s been a heck of a year. Just imagine what he’s been through since the beginning of 2020. Prayers and well-wishes are in order. The 800 lb. gorilla in the room -- how will this impact the campaign and the election? For going on four years now, Americans have been subjected to a steady media diet of broadsides concerning Russian interference in the 2016 election and how the enemy possibly influenced the outcome. Recent revelations indicated that the Democrats, FBI and the Hillary Clinton campaign were behind much of the conjecture. Russia this, Russia that, but in the end, most of the trouble originated on this side of the Atlantic Ocean courtesy of adversaries within our own government. But there’s no doubting this one now -- the Chinese Communist Party has meddled in our election this year, and we can’t allow them to change the outcome because of it. Whether it was intentional or not -- and here’s thinking it was definitely on purpose -- the “novel” coronavirus has impacted the entire world. Global deaths have now topped one million, which is still a relatively tiny number considering the earth’s human population is rapidly moving towards eight billion -- but the psychological damage is inestimable. Nothing like a pandemic to get people panicked. Practically every country in the world has altered its social customs to deal with the virus, which has spread to every corner of the globe. Various countries have taken different approaches, with places like Sweden having observed more of a business-as-usual regimen and others, like Spain, having cracked down hard, yet not enjoyed any greater success in keeping people from getting sick. Cold, hard statistics provide little comfort to people, yet this pandemic is relatively mild in comparison to a number of historically dangerous plagues. The infamous “Black Death,” bubonic plague, killed us much as 40 percent of Europe’s population in the so-called dark ages (the mid-14th century). Today’s figures are nary a rounding error by contrast, but to point it out makes one “insensitive” and “unserious” when people are frightened of a media-fanned health disaster. During last week’s debate, for example, Trump correctly pointed out that you can’t trust statistics from Russia and China as to their real mortality totals. Is the true death toll much higher and we don’t know about it? Even so, modern medical science is keeping morbidity rates low. To base one’s vote on the direction of the country on COVID-19 just doesn’t make sense. But tell that to the person who has lost a loved one or knows someone who knows someone who died (I think this describes many of us). Other possible effects: We don’t precisely know the timeline of when Trump actually contracted the virus, but it could work as a deflector towards his unusually harsh mindset during last week’s debate. I commented that Trump looked tired and irritated during the program, which certainly could have contributed to his surly demeanor. No one claims that Trump is jovial and a welcoming presence to people he doesn’t like -- such as Grampa Joe Biden -- but even so, the unabashed hostility was uncharacteristic for the lifelong real estate mogul and reality TV celebrity. Let’s not forget, some commentators in 2012 reasoned that President Barack Obama’s lethargic performance in that year’s first presidential debate might have been due to not getting accustomed to the high altitude in Denver (where the event was held). Whatever the reason, the big O came back much stronger and seemingly more prepared when he squared off with Mitt Romney in the second debate (with a big shove from “moderator” Candy Crowley, too). Could catching the coronavirus be Trump’s Hurricane Sandy? It seems strange to mention it, but events and occurrences that are larger than life can easily impact voter attitudes. Americans were on the verge of voting out Obama eight years ago when a huge late-season storm hit the New York area, providing just the right opening for the flailing lifelong community organizer to look empathetic and like a true leader. Obama’s “hug” with New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie was probably worth a couple points alone. The virus could do for Trump what practically nothing else could, depict him as an “average guy” who gets sick just like everybody else. It would be in extremely poor taste for Biden and Democrats to rip into him now… what if he gets really ill? The last thing Democrats want is to be viewed as is heartless and lacking compassion, even for someone they despise -- like Trump. It's hard to label someone a lying racist who’s just in it for himself when the man is convalescing from what liberals view as an aggressive, dangerous disease. Maybe, maybe not. But it’s hard to see how testing positive for COVID-19 will ensure defeat for Trump. His voters are already locked in, and, as indicated above, those who might be wavering might see the ailment as the cause of Trump’s poor debate showing. Just saying. Polls show tales of Trump’s post-debate demise were premature Even prior to the news of the president’s and first lady’s bout with COVID-19, surveys showed that Trump was holding steady -- or even gaining ground on challenger Grampa Joe Biden. Paul Bedard reported at The Washington Examiner, “The media panned President Trump’s rowdy debate performance, but it appears that it helped him and he is ‘on the rise again,’ according to the first post-debate approval survey. Sliding from 52% approval over the weekend to 46% Wednesday, Trump is back up to 49% Thursday in the daily Trump tracking poll of likely voters from Rasmussen Reports. “According to the poll analysis, ‘This survey is the first to include a night of polling following the first presidential debate between Trump and Democrat nominee Joe Biden. The president's approval ran in the low 50s for 10 days through the end of last week but dropped as low as 46% in the first three days of this week following his nomination Saturday of federal Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court. Now his approval appears to be on the rise again. By next Monday morning, all 1,500 voters in the daily tracking survey will have been polled following Tuesday night's contentious debate.’ “Meanwhile, Gallup pushed Trump's approval rating up on Thursday to 46% from 42%. And, it said, ‘56% expect Trump will win the election; 40% think Biden will.’” In other words, many observers, myself included, might have been off-base in suggesting that Trump’s uneven debate showing could cost him with crucial swing voters. It’s important to remember that Joe Biden didn’t do well in the event either, haplessly defending his crooked son Hunter and saying that Antifa is an “idea and not an organization.” That “idea” just shows up in city centers with lasers, umbrellas and urine bombs -- and breaks lots of stuff and assaults people. Biden couldn’t name a single law enforcement entity that supports him and said the “Green New Deal” would pay for itself. Grampa Joe doesn’t even know what he believes. Trump’s zingers exposed the lack of foundation. And now, the COVID-19 narrative has completely changed. Might Trump earn some empathy? The news of President Trump and first lady Melania contracting COVID-19 rocked the political world. In a year when practically everything that could happen has happened, it was the latest wrench in an already faltering American electoral machine. With four weeks to go until Election Day, lord only knows what will transpire between now and then. Stay tuned. 2020 Election William Barr abortion pro-life Donald Trump Supreme Court nomination Ruth Bader Ginsburg death senate confirmation Amy Coney Barrett Chuck Schumer Democrats Trump COVID-19 Walter Reed Hospital Kellyanne Conway Mike Lee Thom Tillis Ronna McDaniel polls

Trump must be smarter, better and calmer in his campaign from here until November 3. And now he has to deal with quarantining from testing positive for COVID-19. Did President Donald Trump blow it? A lot of us were wondering as we viewed Tuesday night’s “debate” -- if that’s what you’re still calling it. To label the 96-minute forum cringeworthy is putting it mildly. I received texts from some of the staunchest Trump fans I know during the fracas and most of them sounded the same somber tone. Here we were, watching perhaps the greatest politician of our lifetimes tossing our dreams down the political round-file, unable to contain or restrain himself from acting like a loutish fool before the whole country while simultaneously turning doddering and hopelessly corrupt Grampa Joe Biden into a sympathetic character. From a purely visual standpoint, Trump appeared to be as far from “presidential” as one gets in today’s mixed-up, upside down American political landscape. Thoughts passed through our heads -- ‘How am I going to explain this to my anti-Trump friends who’ve been whining and griping about tone and tweets and lack of character and divisiveness and… and… (insert your liberal media talking point here)?’ Maybe he wasn’t feeling well. Perhaps he was developing symptoms from COVID-19, as he and first lady Melania tested positive for the virus. After sifting through what the candidates actually said, however, perhaps the bloodbath wasn’t as heinous as it appeared at the initial run-through. I recorded the debate on my DVR and don’t have any interest in revisiting the whole program, but there were certain moments that could be used in the final month before Election Day to not only resurrect Trump’s campaign, but push him past the finish line. Nevertheless, an opportunity was missed the other night. In a pieced titled “Debate was a blown opportunity for Trump”, the Editors of The Washington Examiner wrote, “In all of his interruptions, Trump, despite his reputation for being a master at messaging over the TV medium, lost chances to damage Biden. He often set up attacks only to fall back into repeating phrases that didn’t communicate to outsiders what he was talking about. “Trump, if he had one goal, was to establish that Biden, despite his centrist image, would ultimately be beholden to the radical Left. However, he never clearly explained this point... “[D]ebates cannot be viewed in a vacuum. They must be viewed in the context of the broader campaign. And given that Trump is losing, he needed to show that Biden was too far left and too mentally unfit to be president. But Trump did not accomplish that. After months of attacks claiming Biden doesn’t even know that he’s alive, Biden exceeded that low standard by showing he could stand and debate for 90 minutes, remaining more or less composed in the face of Trump’s relentless attacks. The tie, thus, went to Biden.” This closely parallels my own impressions of the debate. Substantively speaking, Trump was the far superior candidate. He’s the one who’s presided over what was a very successful economy until the Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus invaded our shores. He was methodically making inroads with the people most interested in draining the swamp. Trump was fearless, and he did things that no other president would dare to do, such as move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. Then the virus -- and the nationwide panic that ensued. Everyone was grappling around in the dark wondering what to do, including Democrat governors and mayors. On Tuesday night, Trump was correct in pointing out how Democrat blue state leaders praised his administration’s early response, which Biden untruthfully denied because it destroys his narrative. At several points in the evening, Trump had Biden on the proverbial ropes but inexplicably let him escape, mostly because he couldn’t suppress his own instincts to keep attacking. Grampa Joe can’t possibly win the argument but he can prevail in a “war” by allowing himself to be beat up by the much more assertive attacker. Democrats excel at playing the victim, remember? Trump sometimes doesn’t know when to stop, which is fine in his personal business dealings but won’t fly with a skittish voting public that seems to care more about manners and niceties than it does about policies that could destroy the country. Biden emerged from the program looking pretty good, something that bothered my Trump-supporter acquaintances to no end. They were depressed over it. It’s almost like the Continental army during the Revolutionary War -- how do you retreat and cede ground in almost every contact with the enemy and still end up getting the other guy’s sword at the end of the hostilities? You maintain the loyalty of the soldiers -- and in this case, your voters. Trump won on the issues. But if he can’t shake the impression that he’s a narcissistic egomaniac of a man, he’ll forfeit the prize. It’s okay for him to endure what many consider a pretty painful defeat as long as he maintains the attitude that he can once again find and maintain the offensive -- but perhaps conduct himself a lot better next time around in the heat of the moment. Of course, there are questions about whether the next debate will even take place, since all bets are off with Trump now needing to isolate himself for a period of time. What was already the oddest of odd years has just taken another turn to the strange. Trump can take a page from U.S. Grant in a desperate situation Another historic military analogy might explain here. At the fateful civil war Battle of Shiloh, Union Generals William Tecumseh Sherman and Ulysses S. Grant met to discuss the events of the near-disastrous (for their side) first day of fighting. Sherman said something to the effect of “Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?” Grant looked up. “Yes,” he replied, followed by a puff (of his cigar). “Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow, though.” Without going into excessive detail, the southern forces had pushed Grant’s Yankee soldiers to the brink of collapse, pinned against a river and with little means of escape. A lesser general might’ve considered seeking terms for surrender of his army, but not Grant. The legendary warrior was rumored to have been intoxicated during the battle, but it wasn’t true. There was no let-up in Grant, a trait he carried with him all the way to General Robert E. Lee’s capitulation three years later at Appomattox Court House in Virginia. Trump’s and Grant’s outward personalities are polar opposites, the former being mercurial and temperamental as opposed to calm and cool under fire no matter what the circumstances like the latter. And Trump would never smoke a cigar. But like Grant, Trump never gives up, either. For better or worse, it’s not in Trump’s person to admit defeat and he’ll go to his reward before ever hoisting the white flag. It's also not good to be unnecessarily or carelessly killed doing what you believe in. Trump isn’t like a kamikaze pilot or Islamic suicide bomber. There’s got to be a method to the madness to pair with his firm resolve to send Joe Biden back into permanent retirement. It’s obvious that everyone has a bad day (or night) from time to time, but with that realization in mind, it’s time to try something new. Trump needs a different strategy. If his current one isn’t working, find a better one. After closely observing Trump on nearly a daily basis for the past five years, it’s my opinion that the president never does anything on a whim. He’s too good at assessing character and situations to get himself in a pickle of his own creation without searching for a deeper meaning. Trump had to have known how his constant interruptions and lambasting of the frail Grampa Joe was being viewed by half the public as mean-spirited and unbecoming of the dignity of the office. (Hint: not well.) Seeing as campaigns are marathons and not sprints, Trump was laying the foundation for something bigger and hopefully, better. Having already shored up his voting base, perhaps Trump the candidate was seeking to destroy the impression that he’d thrown-in with the Washington political establishment. In essence, Trump was going after the first-time/infrequent voters who don’t care about “getting along” and “unity” as much as they want a combative non-politician to go in and keep wrecking the place. That being said, first and foremost, Trump is a politician now, and his “job” is not only to govern the country -- like choosing the awesome and principled Amy Coney Barrett to serve on the Supreme Court -- but also to win the election. That’s it, period. There aren’t any consolation prizes for second place and there certainly isn’t any kind of moral victory for having already defeated the awful Crooked Hillary Clinton four years ago. As one of my Trump friends aptly put it, “Trump is Trump and no one’s going to change him. He’s got a heavy weight on his shoulders in that a lot of people are counting on him to be the firewall against socialism. So, he’s got to have the mindset that he’s doing it for more than just himself.” The same amateur political pundit suggested Trump might’ve been knocking the stuffing out of poor ol’ Joe Biden because he was trying to suppress the hair sniffin’, nude swimmin’, sleazebag son defendin’, shoulders massagin’, child repellin’ and sexual assault denyin’ man’s votes -- by having his followers conclude, “I’m not going to vote for either of these clowns.” At this point, I reject no theory. It appears certain that Joe Biden, despite his insistence to the contrary, has no plans to deal with anything. It’s easy to snipe from afar and blame Trump for 200,000 COVID-19 deaths when you’ve been sitting in your basement snacking on ice cream and watching as your staff does all the work for you, including the thinking part. Assuming Trump and Melania recover from the virus, it will make it even harder for Democrats to claim the sky is falling and the world needs to be shut down. Just saying. Biden and cohorts aspire to eliminate the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court, too. Judging by the intensity in Grampa Joe’s voice and his earnest attempts to not address the question, Biden doesn’t want to go on the record supporting such an election-losing screwball scheme. Beyond that, electing Biden to the presidency would be a tragic shame. It can’t happen. Let’s keep the goal in mind at all times. Trump must recognize it, and quickly. Boxer Mike Tyson famously said, “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.” Tyson later elaborated on his wisdom, “People were asking me [before a fight], 'What’s going to happen?' They were talking about his style. 'He's going to give you a lot of lateral movement. He's going to move, he's going to dance. He's going to do this, do that.' I said, ‘Everybody has a plan until they get hit. Then, like a rat, they stop in fear and freeze.'” Joe Biden most certainly is a rat, and he very well might freeze. But if you’ve got him backed into a corner due his own verbal flailing, let the guy talk -- and trust that people are smart enough to see through the fibs and deflections. Put together the strategy that will bring a triumph, because in 2020, winning isn’t everything -- it’s the only thing. Yes, the NFL will sanction you severely for not wearing a mask (even outdoors) In the you-can’t-make-this-stuff-up category comes news that the ultra-PC National Football League is considering a proposal to penalize coaches (or more specifically, teams) for not wearing masks during games. League poohbahs claim it violates virus protocol, but there has to be more to it. ESPN.com reported, “The NFL has issued another strong warning to coaches who won't wear masks on the sideline during games, threatening suspensions and forfeiture of draft picks as punishment for failing to comply with COVID-19 game-day protocols, according to a league memo obtained Wednesday by ESPN's Adam Schefter. “The strongly worded memo, sent to coaches, general managers and team executives by NFL executive vice president Troy Vincent, includes a passage in which the NFL says it will ‘address lack of compliance with accountability measures that may include ... suspensions and/or forfeiture of draft picks.’ “It marks the second time this month that the NFL has warned coaches to comply with coronavirus-related protocols by wearing a mask on the sideline.” Oh, the horrors! A guy on a football field with a headset on isn’t covering his face! He might spit on you! Or sneeze! Or exhale in your direction! The NFL will fold! Make no mistake, this has absolutely zero to do with “keeping people safe” or slowing the spread of the invisible Chinese plague. Pure and simple, it’s a poorly disguised and desperate attempt to “protect the shield” and save what’s left of the league’s rapidly deteriorating brand. So, average Joe fan thinks -- ‘It’s okay to allow players to protest the national anthem and turn off a large segment of the paying public, but it’s not okay to permit league personnel to breathe uninhibited due to misbegotten fears of spreading a virus that really isn’t dangerous -- at all -- to yourself or your players (unless you’re really old or have a health condition)?’ The other night, Grampa Joe said it wasn’t possible to fix the economy until COVID-19 is dealt with. Is that true, NFL? Are you willing to forego all your gate and some of your TV revenue indefinitely to perpetuate the myth that everyone is destined to catch and then perish from the CCP virus? If Biden wins, will you go along with everything the 78-year-old tough guy orders? It's stupid. But that’s life in the 2020 Democrat hysteria world. The stakes are too high. Donald Trump needs to do whatever is necessary to win this election, and that includes devising a new plan for approaching debate etiquette. Democrats will do everything in their power to fan the public’s fear over COVID-19, the Supreme Court and whatever else will help them. It’s up to President Trump to stop them. 2020 Election William Barr abortion pro-life Donald Trump Supreme Court nomination Ruth Bader Ginsburg death senate confirmation Ronald Reagan Amy Coney Barrett Chuck Schumer Democrats riots protests Trump tests positive for COVID-19

Just as Alice in Wonderland experienced, the Democrats have created a surreal environment for us. President Trump is fighting such insane notions that logic slips away amidst withering attacks by the press and Democrats. The burning cities you see live on CNN are not really burning; nor are statues being toppled. No. You’re seeing peaceful protests. In the underworld of Alice, elected Democrat officials blame President Trump for not stopping the violence of "peaceful protests" that the Democrats support and promote while refusing help from the president to stop the violence. It's Trump's fault for the violence that's really "peaceful." Our collective heads want to explode. Below are some helpful predictions of events you may see unfold that may help ease your surprise at the zoo. Perhaps you can share them at the water cooler and your colleagues will be wowed when they come to pass. I call them “bites of Tapas” – thoughts inside the goo of political machinations. 11. Only in the Democrat world of dystopia do you find the governor who puts infected seniors in a virus-free elderly home, killing thousands of elderly; or does that governor get to write a book on what a wonderful job he did protecting people from the virus. Three Democrat governors replicated the insane action of putting infected persons into a virus free environment of the elderly. It should be noted that a patron of a Big-Box store was outside the store giving "Covid-19 hugs." He was criminally charged for spreading the virus. Why are the three Democrat governors not charged or even investigated? If a Republican put infected seniors in virus-free homes and they died, there would be hour-long television specials on families who lost loved ones because of the policy. 12. Democrats and the press say the Russians and President Trump are promoting the fact that "voter fraud in elections is real." According to the left, vote-stealing is not real - it's just Russian propaganda to make people believe there is vote-stealing. The left’s claiming voter fraud is fake is like saying rioting is peaceful. Government taxpayer-funded radio NPR even refuses to believe voter fraud is real. NOTE: If they are willing to burn down buildings, they are willing to do massive vote stealing. I'm old enough to remember the 2020 primary in New York. Reportedly 80,000 ballots are still missing. That was just one congressional district. And we must not collectively forget dead people voting in Mayor Daley's Chicago or Duval County in Texas in which vote cheating changed the outcome of those elections. There wouldn't be Presidents JFK or LBJ, if it hadn’t been for Democrat vote-stealing. Vote-stealing is in the DNA of the Democrat Party. Cheating happens and Republicans need to counter the belief that vote stealing doesn't occur. 13. Former President and community-organizer Barack Obama is neck-deep in the radical-communist movement of Black Lives Matter. He brought BLM to the White House and helped with their first organizing and fundraising efforts. 14. Just days before the first votes cast, a wild claim from two years ago that President Trump hates the military was magically spun up through the liberal Atlantic magazine by an author and hardcore Obama supporter with no accuser on the record, they claim. The press went crazy and even Fox news became lemmings, repeatedly running with the unverified claim that had no one publicly went on record with documentation. Never mind that Democrats called our military men Nazis or that President Obama cut our military by over a trillion dollars, while President Trump has rebuilt our military by increasing spending by over a trillion dollars and gave three pay raises to our defenders of freedom. This unchecked claim was followed with false accusations that it's President Trump who has brain problems. So the press ran with it, again with no proof, never mentioning that Biden had two brain surgeries and has "mini strokes". (Tapas #8) 15. Democrats cut the police budgets, falsely claiming that will lower crime. When President Trump wants to reduce federal funding to those same insane leftist political figures of the "less police means less crime" crowd, they scream “illegal;” “not fair for cutting budgets during Covid-19;” “he’s destroying our country.” Irony is lost to the sycophant lemmings of the press core that cutting budgets is okay only if you are a leftist activist politician. 16. The shut-down caused a record number of suicides; increases in mental illness, massive depression, alcohol abuse, child endangerment, divorce, hunger, lost income, collapse of the food service industries, loss of airlines; and bankruptcy of thousands of companies. The secret no one wants to talk about is that, according the Economist, Sweden never closed anything down and has about the same number of virus cases as nations of the rest of the world. 17. Republicans need to stop promoting the Democrats’ groundwork to set the stage for taking weeks to decide who will win the election. This will only back the Democrats’ plans to process vote stealing. Most of the Republicans’ repeating Democrat talking points only helps the left. Republicans should sue any state that adopts policy that open-end voting, unfinished voting, ballot harvesting or vote rigging. These practices hurt America and erodes belief and confidence in our elections. 18. Ms. Kamala said the Russian's voter interference was the reason Donald Trump won, that President Trump is suppressing the vote, that the post office boss is President Trump and he’s using it for voter interference. Of course, Ms. Kamala’s bad mouthing the integrity of the elections is Mr. Trump's fault. Just like Sanders-Biden supporters burning down the cities is President Trump's fault. So understand and clarify: Ms. Kamala talking down the vote and insulting voters is President Trump's fault for voter suppression. 19. Mark Zuckerberg declared he will decide who won the election and it wouldn't be official until his social media declares the winner. That that “his company and ‘and other media’ should work to convince the American public there is nothing illegitimate, strange, or suspect about the results upcoming presidential election taking days or weeks to be tabulated due to mail in voting.” 20. Biden must win at all costs, no matter how many lives will be lost, votes stolen, individual freedoms lost, or degree of constitutional destruction. Power is the only thing that matters to the left. 21. Burning down buildings in a plan and systematic method is a crime. The DOJ should use RICO to prosecute. A word in closing to all who have forgotten Ms. Kamala Harris’ history as head prosecutor in California. Her tenure was 100% politically driven as attorney general. She focused many times on prosecution of Christians and conservatives. If she wins, expect the DOJ to run full speed with investigations and indictments against any accomplished successful conservative or Christian. I can speak firsthand of retribution. Shortly after I took office in 2013, Politico’s headline named me as “Obama’s Number One Needler,” a crime worthy of the death penalty in liberal world. I exposed President Obama's illegal ransom payments to the Haqqani terrorist network for American traitor Berg Bergdahl. I exposed Hillary Clinton's actions to circumvent American law to sell specialized steel to the terrorist nation of Iran. Against the Republican Speaker’s wishes, I pushed via a discharge petition to set up an independent investigation of Hillary Clinton's involvement in the American lives lost in Benghazi, Libya. I followed with another cardinal sin of publishing the unemployment rate of African-Americans and other economic failures of President Obama outside our Congressional office on a fail-o-meter. (The Republican Speaker ordered us to take it down.) I called for disabled veterans and other vets to tear down the wall built with barriers by President Obama around the open air WWII monument, denying American WWII veterans the opportunity to visit their monument during the president’s government shut-down. Now back to the water-cooler to expose your co-workers to mind-numbing logic. Expect, after exposing them to logic, that your leftist colleagues will resort to calling you names. Click Here For Water Cooler Vignettes From Steve Stockman 1 to 10 2020 Election William Barr abortion pro-life Donald Trump Supreme Court nomination Ruth Bader Ginsburg death senate confirmation Ronald Reagan Amy Coney Barrett Chuck Schumer Democrats riots protests

The Far Left and their establishment media allies have spent a great deal of time and energy establishing the narrative that anyone who supports the Constitution, traditional American values and conservative ideas about limited constitutional government is a “white supremacist” or “white nationalist.” The establishment media, especially CNN, MSNBC and various other fake news purveyors have been working overtime to sell the idea that Neo-Nazis are part of the conservative movement and that the racism and hate they display is a pervasive sickness in American culture and politics. Ignoring the demonstrable historical association of the Democratic Party with the Ku Klux Klan, and even though today’s “white supremacists” in fact identify with the Democratic Party and its agenda, a lot of people have bought into the narrative that “white supremacist” racists are conservative. As Dinesh D’Souza proved through his book and movie, “Death of a Nation,” the ideas propounded by such white supremacist leaders Jason Kessler and Richard Spencer are thoroughly grounded in Leftist and Socialist ideology. As D’Souza explained in a C-SPAN interview* “What I am contesting is the meaning of that event [the Charlottesville riot]. Because, from the left’s point of view this was right wing white supremacy, and that was the whole point for Trump to condemn it. I deny that. I deny that, and I deny it, based on a close analysis of who was there and who these white supremacists are, and in this book, “Death of a Nation, I go through the list.” “Jason Kessler, the founder, the organizer of – of Charlottesville, turns out to be an Obama activist, and an Occupy Wall Street guy.” “Think about this. Does it make sense, someone who is an Obama voter and supporter becomes a white supremacist? That makes no sense to me. You think the media would be, like ‘Let’s check this guy out,’ but there was a Charlottesville paper that did. It looked into his background, and it turns out he has a long left-wing history. They interviewed his girlfriend, and she goes ‘he broke up with me because I am too conservative.’ This guy, Jason Kessler.” “Now, we move on to the poster boy of white supremacy, Richard Spencer. This guy is so controversial, that when he went to speak in Florida, the governor declared a state of emergency. So, I interview him and its riveting, it’s about four minutes in the movie. And I asked him a series of questions. It’s very illuminating.” “Does he believe all men are created equal? ‘No.’” “I say, ‘Does he believe in individual dignity? ‘No.’” “Does he believe in the right to life? ‘No.’” “Where do rights come from? He says ‘Well, they don’t come from God.‘” “So, where to do they come from? He said, ‘They come from the government.’” “He is a statist. He believes the government gives you your rights.” “And I ask him ‘What do you think of Reagan?’. He goes ‘Terrible president‘.” “I go ‘Who are your favorite presidents?’ He lists a bunch of Democrats.” “I go ‘Well, those are all Democrats.’. He goes ‘Yeah, I know. But it’s just a party.'” “And, he’s naming people like Andrew Jackson, who was the founder of the Democratic Party. The point I’m trying to make is that the white supremacists are not conservative. They are not conservative in the modern, American sense of conservative. They are unrecognizable to a normal conservative, and that’s obvious from the movie, so what I’m doing really, through a combination of history, and investigative journalism, is contesting these prevailing narratives, but I’m doing it in a responsible and civil way.” So how did these Leftists, who identify with Germany’s National Socialist Party become identified as being part of the Right or conservative movement? The first and most important reason is that conservatives and Neo-Nazis are battling for the hearts and minds of America’s working class – the forgotten men and women that President Trump speaks of so often. The Left’s urban elite have absolutely no interest in pursuing or serving the interests of these Americans – they are all about identity politics and long ago decided to bank their political future on serving the interests of illegal aliens and expanding immigration from Third World populations already grounded in the anti-constitutional ideologies of Islam and Socialism. Thus the battle is for the hearts and minds of mostly young white people who believe the Republican and Democratic parties have ignored their legitimate complaints that free trade as practiced by both political parties isn’t free at all, and that the econometric view of American jobs as just one market in a global market has pitted elite policy-makers against the best interests and quality of life of their fellow Americans. The Neo-Nazis are fighting for the allegiance of these working-class voters by blaming the loss of their upward mobility and quality of life on racial grievance, but their solution – government oppression of minorities – isn’t conservative at all. However, it serves the political interest of Democrats to undermine President Trump and his conservative – populist agenda by pushing this guilt by association narrative and splitting the working men and women of America along racial and ethnic lines. If African – Americans, especially in the Rust Belt – can be convinced that Trump and his white supporters are a bunch of racists then his policies of reducing regulations, raising wages by restricting immigration, rebuilding American manufacturing, renegotiating trade deals and protecting Second Amendment liberties must, through the magic of guilt by association, also be racist. The bottom line: it turns out once you break through the media narrative and get to the truth – it is the Democrats who are dividing Americans along racial lines through their embrace of the poisonous ideology of critical race theory and destroying the nuclear family through their embrace of similar ideas about the oppression of women by “the white male patriarchy.” And when you ask people point blank, “should there be racial preferences?” It is always the Democrats who say, YES. *Thanks to our friends at the Gateway Pundit for their transcript of Dinesh D’Souza’s C-SPAN interview. 2020 Election William Barr racism reparations race relations Donald Trump white supremacist white nationalist socialism Jason Kessler Richard Spencer identity politics critical race theory

Just as Alice in Wonderland experienced, the Democrats have created a surreal environment for us. President Trump is fighting such insane notions that logic slips away amidst withering attacks by the press and Democrats. The burning cities you see live on CNN are not really burning; nor are statues being toppled. No. You’re seeing peaceful protests. In the underworld of Alice, elected Democrat officials blame President Trump for not stopping the violence of "peaceful protests" that the Democrats support and promote while refusing help from the president to stop the violence. It's Trump's fault for the violence that's really "peaceful." Our collective heads want to explode. Below are some helpful predictions of events you may see unfold that may help ease your surprise at the zoo. Perhaps you can share them at the water cooler and your colleagues will be wowed when they come to pass. I call them “bites of Tapas” – thoughts inside the goo of political machinations. 1. Watch for Biden to correct himself. In the past he needed prompting or he searched for words. In all likelihood he's wearing a bug in his ear when necessary. Using a bug is not new. There's evidence this ploy is being implemented. In fact, Biden's team has reportedly practiced with different methods to help Biden communicate. Some questioned in 2016 whether Hillary used a bug at times. Also, let's not count out that the debate questions will end up in Biden's hands before the debate. Remember Hillary got from a CNN staffer (now a Fox employee) the questions before the debate occurred. His receipt of questions would follow precedent with Hillary receiving questions the FBI was going to ask her through Bill Clinton's secret meeting on the tarmac with Obama's AG the day before Ms. Clinton's questioning by the FBI. Many feel that's when Bill was handed the FBI questions. Hopefully, FOX will keep the questions away from their former CNN employee. 2. China has the ability and the need to push the stock markets down before the elections causing great havoc. The economy is the number one polling issue. China, not Russia, is a bigger threat to our democracy. Many leaders of Antifa are followers of Chinese communist dictator Mao. A Trump win would be a personal blow to Xi and to his global plans. 3. Antifa trained some of their activists to be medics in Richmond, VA. This follows the logic that they are planning vast violence and disruptions during and after the elections – not to mention the Supreme Court justice nomination. Government taxpayer-funded radio (NPR) will, of course, blame right-wing activists for all the cities burning and looting. Notably, the Democrats are planning for major riots and disruptions as they requested from the Joint Chiefs of Staff a pledge that the military will not intervene in America's politics. Which goes back to principle one of leftists. (see below: Tapas #8) 4. This past summer Democrats role-played different ways to disrupt the elections. The "war games" were orchestrated by a professor and former top Obama DOD official now at Georgetown University. The role-playing including insurrection of radicals to disrupt the elections and other cataclysmic scenarios. The left has already threatened to disrupt and burn down America if Biden is not declared the winner. 5. Hillary tipped the Democrat hand by calling for Biden to not concede the election, no matter what. This is the very thing she accused Donald Trump of planning if he lost in 2016. (Principle – Tapas #8) This refusal to allow government of our nation to go forward if President Trump wins, as Democrat minions will bring chaos and civil disorder. 6. Method: Remember Hillary won a rape case in her youthful legal career by blaming the rape victim. Yes, blaming the rape on the victim. She used this dark legal technique again when her husband was accused of rape. She blamed the women of Bill Clinton's assaults on the women who were sexual attacked. Never changing the playbook, Hillary used foreign agents, including Ukraine embassy officials (Andrii Telizhenko) to help her 2016 election. She covered her tracks of corruption again by accusing Donald Trump of what she was doing. (Tapas #8) On page 395 of the book "Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign," they describe her planned use of the fake charge of Russian collusion. 7. Big secret revealed: (don't you want to know what the left is doing?) Listen to what they accuse President Trump and other conservatives of doing. For instance, at the same time they accuse President Trump of not standing down after the election if he loses, if they see President Trump is winning, they're planning on using nearly a thousand lawyers after election day to buy time to stuff ballot boxes and create violent activities. 8. Republicans need to stop calling them "Demonstrators" and call them "Biden-Sanders supporters." Without any kind of evidence, crazy government radio (NPR) calls the rioters “rightwing troublemakers.” Going forward, we should report that, "Biden-Sanders supporters burned down another African-American business and made no effort to help pay for the reconstruction. Black business and homeowners need reparations from Biden-Sanders supporters." 9. They accused President Trump of what they did in 2009. A top Obama official claimed the Swine Flu pandemic of 2008-2009 infected 60 million Americans and that the management of it was a complete failure. After 12,000 deaths in America, Biden had a clever solution to the problem: Obama officials simply stopped collecting the data of deaths and stopped counting. It is baffling that there is not an ad reflecting Mr. Biden's past failure at stopping the Swine Flu pandemic. In order to block the news of that failure, Democrats pointed to Ebola as an example of success. That's bogus. By-and-large, Ebola was not an American pandemic, but one of the African continent. 10. President Trump declares he's going to order nationwide Covid-19 guidance for the nation. The leftists screamed “unconstitutional!” “dictator!” “monarchy!” “Nazi!” President Trump responds with, “Okay; no problem. You governors run the show and set policy.” Now Biden calls for a nationwide edict to wear masks. The press reaction: "Brilliant plan! Smart! Genius!” Biden then attacks President Trump for not setting a national policy. See how that works? No matter which choice President Trump makes, he's attacked. Now back to the water-cooler to expose your co-workers to mind-numbing logic. Expect, after exposing them to logic, that your leftist colleagues will resort to calling you names. Tomorrow Water Cooler Vignettes From Steve Stockman 11 to 21 2020 Election William Barr abortion pro-life Donald Trump Supreme Court nomination Ruth Bader Ginsburg death senate confirmation Ronald Reagan Amy Coney Barrett Chuck Schumer Democrats riots protests

Kamala Harris may have found her true anti-self in Judge Amy Coney Barrett You couldn’t exactly detect it at Tuesday night’s first-in-the-cycle presidential debate (or was it a slug fest?), but Democrats are terrified. They’re not apprehensive of losing the election, mind you, since liberals always assume Americans are mindlessly attracted to their point-of-view by pounding certain winning (not!) issues like… President Donald Trump’s personality and twitchy Twitter fingers, or the slowly rising death toll from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus, or “climate change” rearing its fiery head in the western states. No, the Democrats’ true bugaboo was a late arrival in this year’s political calculus, in the form of a 48-year-old Catholic mother of seven (including two adopted children from Haiti). Alas, the person of Trump’s third Supreme Court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, scares the bejesus out of them, precisely because the lawyer is so “normal”, brilliant and non-threatening. Of particular concern to the liberal set is the upcoming confirmation hearings where the party’s vice president nominee will come face-to-face with Barrett on multiple occasions. As a prominent member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kamala Harris will question the would-be high court justice on her background and judicial philosophy. Might Americans discover that Kamala maybe isn’t such a smiley, great gal after all? Naomi Lim reported at The Washington Examiner, “Harris has already indicated she's leaning toward a politicized assault. She issued a statement through her Senate press office last weekend shortly after Trump tapped Barrett for the country's highest court, the third vacancy he's had to fill during his first term. “Prior to that, she's repeatedly used language such as ‘fight,’ while 2020 Democratic standard-bearer Biden has urged Senate Republicans to uphold their constitutional oaths of office. ‘With the next Supreme Court Justice set to determine the fate of protections for those with preexisting health conditions, and reproductive health options, I will continue to fight on behalf of the people and strongly oppose the president’s nomination,’ Harris wrote Saturday.” While Harris’s statement was overtly honest and hardly unexpected, isn’t it her sworn, constitutional duty as a senator to impartially consider every executive appointment and provide “advice and consent” on the nomination? If not for hypocrisy, Democrats would have nothing at all, but aren’t they imploring Republicans senators to “do their constitutional duty” by delaying or refusing to vote on Barrett as a potential replacement for liberal lioness Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg while still preemptively announcing their opposition to the candidate? Lim’s article offers a couple different schools of thought on whether Harris should go all-out to attack Barrett or hold back and try to appear non-political in this all-important hour of public scrutiny. Anyone who watched Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s hearings two years ago remembers Harris sitting up on the dais, inappropriate smirk on her face and ordering the man to respond to “yes or no” questions that really called for a ton of elaboration regarding the circumstances. Back then, Harris reveled in the attention from being “Prosecutor Kamala” and mugged for the cameras as a certain-to-be presidential candidate looking to distinguish herself as a no-nonsense liberal ideologue who wouldn’t take anything but “yes” or “no” for an answer. Law students and lawyers recognize the interrogation tactic, as clearly Kavanaugh did at the time. Demanding an up or down retort from a witness is a means of impressing upon the jury a clear impression of guilt or innocence. Only Harris wasn’t moving a case before a fact finder (a judge or a jury), she was simply trying to determine whether Kavanaugh could be counted on to rubber stamp precedents that preserve whatever it is that liberals want at a given moment. Another way to put it is, “Will you bow down before me and swear upon your family, your faith and your whole being that your own views regarding political issues won’t influence your vote on our court cases?” Everyone knew what was going on. Harris was planning a run for president and needed to sound “tough” to Democrat primary voters as well as sufficiently angry and vindictive to combat anything Republicans would throw at her. We saw similar behavior in her primary debate performances when she verbally abused her opponents -- primarily Biden himself and then later on, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard. The Californian would stare directly at the camera during her opening statements as though speaking directly to Trump, saying in effect, “I’m only five foot two but I’m meaner than you and if I’m face-to-face with you, I’ll apply a can of whup a--.” Kamala and fellow Dems obviously felt empowered to assault the character of someone like Brett Kavanaugh because he represented everything they despise. As a white male who attended a private school in Georgetown surrounded by kids you might find staffing a Christian youth choir, liberals felt a duty to somehow make him sound evil. They delved into his decades’ old habit of jotting down everything he did in a journal. They asked him about his yearbook scribblings with terminology such as “boof” -- referring to flatulence. And he liked suds. A high school kid liking beer! Perish the thought! It’s highly improbable that Barrett’s high school yearbook relays a fondness for underaged drinking and passing gas, though. Democrats won’t find it as easy sledding this time, as Barrett doesn’t neatly fit the stereotype of a person they’d like to destroy. It’s true, she is white -- but skin color alone isn’t enough to completely discount the woman, especially when she has two adopted kids “of color.” Black radicals have assaulted Barrett for her family’s choice to take in two African-ancestry youths from a hopelessly impoverished Caribbean nation, but given Harris’s Jamaican slaveholding lineage, it isn’t likely she’s itching to touch this subject. Given that running mate Grampa Joe Biden is Catholic (in name only), it’s also unlikely that Harris would pull a Dianne Feinstein and say something as outlandishly bold as, “The dogma lives loudly withinyou, and that’s a concern.” The Democrat vice president nominee doesn’t appear to observe much religion and she doesn’t have any children of her own (her husband has a daughter and son from a previous marriage -- they reportedly call her ‘Momala’). But if there’s something out there in Barrett’s personal past, Democrats will find it. And if they don’t discover anything potentially damaging, they’ll make it up. If Harris goes overboard in prosecuting a case against Barrett, it will blow her media-created sham cover as a “moderate” gal who could just as easily be found playing in the backyard with underprivileged orphans as running for the next-in-line to the nation’s highest office. And it goes without saying, Harris wouldn’t get far in trolling Barrett for her views on the CCP virus, which is Grampa Joe’s go-to issue these days. The virus will certainly come up within the context of Democrats’ assault on Barrett on healthcare (and the possibility of overturning the badly mislabeled Affordable Care Act, a.k.a., Obamacare), but what does treatment of a world pandemic have to do with jurisprudence and interpreting the law? It’s even somewhat iffy as to whether Harris will probe Barrett on abortion. As mentioned above, Kamala never birthed a child (not impugning her lack of production, just saying) and would look flat-out heinous if she lectures a mother who has seven about “women’s right to choose” and feminist doctrine. There aren’t a lot of champions of haggish, bra-burning mean-girl types out there, even if there’s a vocal contingent of Planned Parenthood supporters on the coasts and in Hollywood. Women are “strong” without having to proclaim it. I simply cannot think of a single example of a woman like “All in the Family’s” fictional Edith Bunker who stands behind her man and keeps silent while the bigot spouts epithets and shouts at the TV. More and more women are their family’s breadwinners, and men have taken a much larger role in child-raising. Would Kamala Harris win anyone over by blasting Barrett for being pro-life? To Democrats, 2020 is all about bribing voters on healthcare… and Trump Nobody needs to point out that Democrats don’t have much to say on issues these days. Grampa Joe Biden did introduce several proposals a while back about “buying American”, “investing” 700 million dollars in manufacturing and creating jobs, etc., but we haven’t heard much about them after the Democrat convention. One issue in which Democrats see an opening is healthcare. From Naomi Lim’s story cited above, “Democratic strategists insist the healthcare argument is more persuasive to voters than criticizing McConnell for being a hypocrite. But Harris deployed both arguments Monday during a Biden campaign event in Raleigh, North Carolina. She argued, too, that Barrett threatened voting rights and ‘our ability to make a living, take care of our families, and dismantle systemic racism.’ “’We will not let the infection that President Trump has injected into the presidency and into Congress, that has paralyzed our politics and pitted Americans against each other, spread to the United States Supreme Court,’ she said.” Here, too, Kamala Harris will have difficulties convincing people that a Justice Amy Coney Barrett is a threat to anyone’s financial -- or physical -- well-being. Democrats drone on and on about Obamacare and the evil Republicans seeking to abolish it. As previously stated, through regulatory action and the 2017 tax law, the Trump administration has already gotten rid of the health care monolith’s most damaging provisions. It boils down to the liberal party’s fondness for government control versus the GOP’s preference for market-oriented solutions. The goals are the same -- getting everyone insured, but Republicans aren’t about to require fifty-year-old males to purchase maternity coverage. There isn’t a one-size-fits-all insurance policy for people, and some folks would rather buy something they need rather than what the government tells them to do. Both parties agree on the necessity of covering pre-existing conditions. President Trump has mentioned it numerous times. Democrats like Harris and Biden use the issue to frighten people. Similar to their scare demagoguery regarding Republican efforts to get the budget under control a decade ago, they rely on ignorance and certain elements of the public’s entitlement mentality to get what they want. In the midst of a pandemic, all Democrats do is dangle the “Republicans want you to die from COVID-19” -- and the fearmongering works. Why is liberty and individual choice such a hard sell? We may never learn the answer but it’s unlikely that the ditching of Obamacare would result in catastrophic health consequences to anyone. Any legislation passed to replace it would take care of the rough spots. Confirming Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court won’t affect a citizen’s healthcare -- at all. And here’s betting that most people don’t love abortion nearly as much as the far left does. Joe Biden asked a few weeks ago, “Do I look like a radical socialist with a soft spot for rioters?” Well, Amy Coney Barrett could ask, “Do I look like someone who’s against women’s rights and health insurance?? What will the American people decide? Democrats don’t understand the judiciary and they don’t care How many times since last Saturday have liberals and Democrats accused President Trump of a “power grab” for moving forward with an appointment? Why would confirming a replacement for a departed justice be looked upon as unconstitutional? Juan Williams wrote at The Hill, “If Barrett is confirmed, there is nothing stopping the new 6-3 conservative majority on the Court from overturning Roe v. Wade and denying millions of American women the right to an abortion. “The new Trump majority on the Court could also move to roll back same-sex marriage and legal protections prohibiting discrimination against LGBTQ Americans. There is nothing to stop Trump’s team on the court from striking down the Affordable Care Act and legal protections for people with pre-existing conditions. “Democrats are on the verge of being run over on the Supreme Court. But the Founding Fathers and their heirs will mourn the loss of an independent judiciary.” Juan is just doing his political job, but an “independent judiciary” is the last thing Democrats want. Textualists such as Antonin Scalia -- and now Amy Coney Barrett -- merely require legislation to conform to the language of the Constitution. If the court upholds religious freedom, it doesn’t curtail rights at all. If anything, it guarantees freedom of belief and worship. Legislatures create rights, not the courts. Liberals don’t want to do the work, and they rely on ignorance to adopt their aims when they couldn’t ever get them passed into law. All eyes will be on Kamala Harris when she questions Amy Coney Barrett in the latter’s upcoming senate confirmation hearings. Like all Democrats, Harris sees an originalist court as a threat to her political power. The problem is Barrett embodies the integrity and intelligence that liberals fear most, a jurist who holds the law above politics. Amy Coney Barrett Kamala Harris Joe Biden court packing senate confirmation senate meetings Democrats confirmation hearings Juan Williams Brett Kavanaugh

During Tuesday night’s presidential debate Democrat Joe Biden refused to dismiss threats from Democratic Party leaders to pack the Supreme Court should they gain control of the House, Senate and White House. “It’s a legitimate question,” said Biden, “but let me tell you why I’m not going answer that question. Because it will shift the focus, that’s what he wants, he never wants to talk about the issue at hand and he always tries to change the subject. Let’s say I answer that question, then the whole debate's gonna be about what Biden said or didn’t say, Biden said he would or wouldn’t.” After Trump continued to press him Biden’s final word on the subject was, “Will you shut up, man?” CHQ translation of Biden-speak: C’mon man, of course I’m gonna pack the court. As our friend Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network tweeted: Joe Biden continues to dodge, weave, and refuse to commit that he will not pack the Supreme Court, as the leftist extremists in his party are demanding. Democrats want to replace our current Supreme Court with a liberal super-legislature, stacked with politicians-turned-judges in the mold of AOC, Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. All with lifetime appointments, rewriting the law and Constitution. Left-wing groups have already issued a proposed SCOTUS list and it's loaded with progressive activists. Have no doubt, the so called “judges” on a future Biden Supreme Court/super-legislature will rubber stamp a radical liberal agenda, circumventing the democratic process. Answer the question, Mr. Biden. Are you going to say "no" to court packing and destroying the institution of the Supreme Court? Joe Biden doesn’t have to answer, because his running mate, soon to be President Sen. Kamala Harris, already has, stating, “everything is on the table,” including packing the Supreme Court. And although Biden claims that he is the Democrat Party, other Democrats haven’t been shy about stating the Party’s position: SEN. RICHARD BLUEMENTHAL (D-CT): “If Republicans recklessly & reprehensibly force a SCOTUS vote before the election—nothing is off the table.” SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE (D-CT):“There are lots of options here …and I don't want to lock in on one.” SEN. ED MARKEY (D-MA): “Mitch McConnell set the precedent. No Supreme Court vacancies filled in an election year. If he violates it, when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court.” SEN. MAZIE HIRONO (D-HI): “This is long overdue court reform as far as I'm concerned, and I have been thinking about court reform and what we can do regarding the Supreme Court to make it so much more objective. And so, this is not something that a lot of us have not thought about but on the other hand, but after the election we will only have a serious discussion about any of these things if the Democrats take back the Senate.” SEN. BRIAN SHATZ (D-HI): “We have to learn how to take one battle at a time…We have to try to win this one, if we can, and I'm not giving up on this. And then failing that, we have to win the Senate and the presidency. And then we'll evaluate our options.” SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): “I’ve always said I’m open, even before this seat opened, to consider structural changes in the United States Senate… So those reform possibilities were on the table before we got to this point with the Supreme Court Justice opening and they will remain on the table afterwards.” SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA): “Well, Chuck is right. As he said, everything should be on the table. And we will use everything we've got.” SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): “Well, we have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss right now …” REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): “we should leave all options on the table, including the number of Justices that are on the Supreme Court.” REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY): “If Sen. McConnell and @SenateGOP were to force through a nominee during the lame duck session—before a new Senate and President can take office—then the incoming Senate should immediately move to expand the Supreme Court.” FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER: “In response to a question, Attorney General Holder said that given the unfairness, unprecedented obstruction, and disregard of historical precedent by [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans, when Democrats retake the majority they should consider expanding the Supreme Court to restore adherence to previously accepted norms for judicial nominations.” Joe Biden refused to answer the question on packing the Supreme Court in the first presidential debate because the former vice president is "afraid of alienating his far-left flank" and losing the election, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., told "Fox & Friends" Wednesday. The senator, who made President Trump's Supreme Court nominee list, claimed a packed court would mean losing the right to religious freedom and Second Amendment rights, using tax dollars for abortion-on-demand up to the ninth month of pregnancy, and taking over a home to give it to a giant corporation to use as a parking lot, as a few examples. "That's what Joe Biden is dodging," Cotton explained. We urge CHQ readers and friends to go to their social media accounts and contact Joe Biden through Twitter @JoeBiden or Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/joebiden/ tell Joe Biden you know his refusal to state his position on packing the Supreme Court means he plans to do just that and you plan to vote for President Trump because you don’t want to put America in the hands of an unelected Super Legislature. 2020 Election abortion pro-life Supreme Court nomination Ruth Bader Ginsburg death senate confirmation Amy Coney Barrett Chuck Schumer Democrats court packing

In the opening minutes of last night’s debate Democrat nominee Joe Biden said two things that pro-lfe voters of every political stripe should never forget: first he said Roe v Wade was on the ballot; and second, he said “my party is me.” So, here’s what Joe Biden and the Democrat Platform say about the right-to-life; the Democrat Platform calls for “the repeal of the Hyde Amendment,” as well as the codification of “the right to reproductive freedom.” Furthermore, the Democrat Platform says nothing about making abortions “rare.” As for conscience rights, they are nowhere mentioned. Here are the Top 5 Must-Watch Moments from the First Presidential Debate Courtesy of the Trump Campaign. On the corona virus, Biden says voters should trust him more than Trump, but it was Joe Biden who said it was “hysterical xenophobia” to close travel from China as soon as the virus was recognized as a threat. What’s more Biden favors, with no scientific basis whatsoever, a nationwide mask mandate and another nationwide lockdown. Trump says the shutdowns are like being in prison and says Biden will “destroy the country” with the shutdowns. When Chris Wallace asked Biden if there is a “separate but unequal system of justice for blacks.” Biden said there is systemic injustice in education and law enforcement. He says the vast majority of police officers are good but there are “bad apples” who “need to be held accountable.” He says he will put together a group–civil rights groups and police officers–and “work this out.” Yet, Biden blamed law enforcement for “escalating tension” while rioters set fire to court houses and for months, Joe Biden failed to stand up to the far-left rioters and looters, and failed to support the police officers protecting innocent Americans. In the wake of the violence in Portland, Biden called the rioters and arsonists “peaceful protesters” while shockingly blaming law enforcement for “stoking the fires of division.” Biden claims he is not for defunding police but talks about community policing–says officers should know the community and have counselors with them in some instances In fact, Joe Biden all but accused police officers of being responsible for the riots, claiming they were "escalating tension." Biden’s campaign even helped bail violent criminals out of jail, including a murderer, a rapist, and a rioter who shot at police. And Biden said he would not send the National Guard into cities and states where left-wing mobs were rioting. What’s more, Biden said he’d “redirect” funding for police to other things, reiterating he would “yes, absolutely!” redirect funding away from police to other government programs like housing. Kamala Harris recently said a Biden-Harris Administration would “reimagine” public safety, which is the same language used by left-wing “defund the police” activists. The Biden-Sanders unity platform’s proposed destruction of qualified immunity for police would financially eviscerate local police departments even further. As the debate wrapped up Trump asked Biden to name one law enforcement group that supports him and Biden couldn’t answer before Chris Wallace let him off the hook. The final opportunity for Biden to reveal who he and his party are was when Wallace asked both candidates if they will not declare that they won unless the election has been independently certified and ask their supporters not to engage in civil unrest and stay calm. Joe Biden said “yes” to Wallace’s question, even as his supporters have said they will never concede defeat. The same Marxist Black Lives Matter leaders that unleashed violence and looting in American cities, most recently in Rochester, have left not a shred of doubt in anyone’s mind that the same combination of elite liberals, criminal thugs and Antifa Marxists would be deployed to burn and destroy the moment it appears that Trump might be winning. You can watch a video that splices together clips of prominent Democrats and progressives openly calling for political unrest through this link. 2020 Election Cleveland debate Joe Biden Donald Trump Supreme Court economy COVID-19 Fact-check Chris Wallace

Muslim Democrat Representative Ilhan Omar (MN-5) has a long record of corruption and skirting the law, starting with immigration fraud involving her husband/brother and feathering the nest of her toy boy with money from her campaign account, and she’s managed to skate free on all of it. Until now. Minneapolis police say they are “looking into” claims of ballot harvesting and vote buying documented on video by our friends at James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas. The Hennepin County Attorney’s Office said they were also made aware of the allegations but have received no information or cases involving alleged “ballot harvesting” in any elections held this year. Cases of suspected election violations in Minnesota should be reported to law enforcement agencies, who would then submit their investigations to the county attorney, according to a spokesperson for Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman. “If Project Veritas has evidence of election law violations, they should provide it to the Minneapolis Police Department,” the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office said. Project Veritas announced Monday it had videos from Minneapolis resident Liban Mohamed, the brother of Minneapolis City Council member Jamal Osman, claiming he received money to collect 300 absentee ballots in a single day for his brother’s special election race in Minneapolis' Sixth Ward last month. Project Veritas said the ballot harvesting, or allowing third parties to collect ballots and turn them into polling locations, occurred in July during the primary in Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, won by Rep. Ilhan Omar. Omar Jamal, chairman of a Minnesota Somali watchdog group, told Project Veritas that he believes that Rep. Omar is connected to it. Under certain fairly narrow circumstances Minnesota law allows third parties to collect ballots, the activities shown in the Project Veritas video do not appear to meet those circumstances. The Project Veritas video shows a man, Liban Mohamed, talking about harvesting ballots for then Minneapolis city council candidate Jamal Osman. Later in the video, community activist Omar Jamal claims Democratic Representative Ilhan Omar pays for ballot harvesting. "She uses her money and he is one of her many people. He is not the only one who works for her," Jamal says of Omar. Mohamed said he was collecting the ballots to help his brother win the city’s Aug. 11 special election for a vacant Ward 6 city council race—which was held the same day as the primary for Omar’s MN-05 congressional seat. Ward 6 is the heart of the city’s Somali community and the Omar’s political base. Jamal said he was motivated to reach out to Project Veritas, because he wants to eliminate the corruption that weakens his community, such as the ballot harvesting practiced by Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, in which Ilhan Omar has emerged as a rising power broker. “It's an open secret,” he said. “she [Omar] will do anything that she can do to get elected and she has hundreds of people on the streets doing that.” Jamal, as part of his participation in the investigation, interviewed a Somali-American who functions as a ballot harvester his community. In the interview, the harvester described how he was paid to vote in the Aug. 11 special election and primary, along with a Project Veritas undercover journalist. The harvester said Somali-American vote-buying operatives from the Omar machine came to his apartment building to oversee the voter filling out the paperwork. Omar operatives request the ballots and fill them out for the voters, he said. “They come to us. They came to our homes. They said: ‘This year, you will vote for Ilhan,’” he said. “They said: ‘We will make the absentee ballots. We will fill out the forms for you and when you get them back, we will again fill it out and send it.” There was no need to go to the voting site, because the Omar operatives told him: “You stay home and you will not go to the place.” After the ballots are signed and documented the harvester said he got paid. “When we sign the voting document and they fill it out is when they give us the money,” he said. “The minute we signed the thing [ballot] for the election. That’s when we get paid.” Hennepin County Attorney Jeff Wojciechowski told a Project Veritas journalist on a recorded line the ballot harvesting conduct described to him was: “Illegal, and we will be investigating.” You can watch the complete Project Veritas video through this link. 2020 Election Project Veritas Minnesota Ilhan Omar ballot harvesting voter fraud ballot integrity vote buying Liban Mohamed Jamal Osman

Tuesday night’s “debate” was odd from the first moment and went downhill from there “This is strange,” I thought as Tuesday night’s first-in-the-cycle presidential debate commenced in Cleveland, Ohio. The program was moderated by Fox News personality Chris Wallace, certainly no friend to President Donald Trump (or seemingly, to Democrat nominee Joe Biden either), and the audience was small enough to fit inside a large high school classroom. In the age of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus, “normal” doesn’t exist. The lack of buzz in the air added to the weirdness, the forum having more of the feel of the final Democrat “studio” debate (back in March between Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders) rather than the typical quadrennial tension-so-thick-you-could-slice-it-with-a-knife sense of urgency. In the day and age of the 24-hour news cycle with non-stop social media posts, this face-to-face meeting was a tad anti-climactic in terms of drama. Like a World Series game or Super Bowl with empty stands, it just didn’t feel like the “real thing.” Nonetheless, it was must-see-TV and the performers, for the most part, did not disappoint. If you wanted opposing worldviews and a willingness to throw unrelenting verbal punches, you certainly got ‘em in Cleveland! Everyone who’s paid attention to politics in the recent past had a pretty good notion of what the candidates would say in the 90-minute program. Biden’s sole strategy was to offer as little substance as possible, present pie-in-the-sky numbers as though they were facts and do everything within his power to make the election all about Trump. Trump’s goal was to make his presidential tenure sound as though it was the greatest ever, never give an inch to his haters and the “fake news” media and pronounce victory before the first word was uttered. That’s vintage Trump, and his backers love him for it. That being said… this was the strangest presidential debate I’ve ever witnessed. The questions from Wallace weren’t necessarily the issue as much as the contenders constantly interrupting each other and “fact checking” on the spur of the moment -- while the other one was still talking. I don’t think Wallace did much to improve the situation; you almost felt sorry for the guy being in the proverbial middle and having to try and restore order. It felt like being a policeman at a protest or a rally. You can have some miscreant shouting in your face and there’s nothing can do about it. Whenever either participant would start talking about policy and plans for the future, the other would chime in and attempt to throw the other off course. In the few instances where there was room for a couple minute-length answer, one could begin to see actual positions of the candidates and parties. It didn’t happen very often. Sad to say, from a presentation standpoint, I think Biden got the better of it. Presidential debates in our day and age aren’t struggles over policy and accomplishments as much as they center around who was more “presidential” and in control of their emotions. Everyone knows President Trump is dealing with a lot these days, but he seemed tired, and, for lack of a better word, irritated. After three years of endless investigations and media slimes, he has a right to be defensive. But he shouldn’t have tried to make up for it all in one evening. The outsider from New York has never been one to adhere to accepted notions of decorum, but this was one instance where constantly losing his cool didn’t help his cause. If the polls are correct -- that he’s behind nationally and in some key states -- it’s hard to see where he’s going to pick up any undecided voters with such an undisciplined act. It’s one thing to attack the swamp, it’s another thing to behave as though you’re a biker in a bar brawl. I’m not sure anyone was listening at the end… and if they were, Grampa Joe seemed to be the much nicer guy, even if he stumbled and stammered about “climate change” and paying Brazil to stop tearing down the rainforests. Seriously, Joe? Is Congress gonna appropriate funds for South America? From the outset it was obvious Biden would be very aggressive. The vast majority of his voters couldn’t care less what his platform might be, they want to see that one, he has enough brain cells left to handle the job, and two, that he’s sufficiently angry enough to pass the “things are awful today because of Trump” test. Joe seemed to pass the exam on both accounts. Biden paused a number of times, apparently searching for thoughts. And his lifelong stutter was also in evidence, but it probably engendered sympathy from the gullible and ill-informed more than offering hints that he was mentally slipping. Trump was the much more assertive candidate, but he also came across as petty and vindictive quite a lot. Pettiness and vindictiveness are Democrat traits. Someone Trump trusts, perhaps daughter Ivanka or wife Melania, had better sit down with the president and tell him he’d be much more effective in delivering his message if he’d just let Joe blabber on and commit his standard every other sentence gaffe -- and then destroy him on the rebuttal. Patience, Donald! If this is a “series,” Trump must come back strong in the next two performances. Or he could be in danger of ceding America’s future to a man who said the “Green New Deal would pay for itself,” and, “Antifa is an idea, not an organization.” Where’s the perspective? Maybe debate preparation is more important than we thought Leading into the evening, as is true every four years, the media was intensely curious as to how the men “prepped for the debate.” Biden has been hiding out much of the past week -- as he has been for the last six-plus months -- purportedly to “practice” debating the incumbent. Trump himself was asked during his Sunday press conference what he’s been doing to prepare for the hour-and-a-half test, and he indicated he'd been working with a couple individuals who were “playing the part” of Biden in a mock format. Practice makes perfect, of course, but there’s no such thing as perfection in the political realm. Both men laid it all out on Tuesday night. Biden has been around too long to slip up badly -- or at least appear like he’d blown everything. Perhaps it was the “performance enhancing drugs” that Trump suggested he’d take prior to the program or the near half-century the man’s been around the swamp, but there’s no way Democrats were going to allow their doddering, mentally-slipping candidate to botch it badly. Who knows. Maybe they threatened to demote him if he screwed up. Kamala Harris was likely waiting for the phone call. It’s easy being a liberal, and Biden is one of the more practiced at stating and restating the same refrains he’s been echoing for years. If anything, it’s like a handbook; look up an issue and there’s a canned answer. Illegal aliens are “undocumented persons” who just want to come here for a better life. Government expenditures are “investments” that supposedly pay off with interest to an unnamed constituency that votes Democrat. And no matter what -- Republicans are against “women’s rights” even if they are female or appoint women to high positions, as Trump did last weekend with Judge Amy Comey Barrett. Biden didn’t directly attack Barrett, though he did indicate elevating her to the Court would spell the end of healthcare for the poor and those with pre-existing conditions. Lies that went unchallenged by Wallace -- and Trump could only try and interject. It didn’t go well. Joe himself isn’t necessarily a bad debater -- again, he’s been doing this long enough -- but he’s so gaffe-prone that expectations were already so low going in… that simply managing to stand erect for the allotted time meant he’s qualified to be president. Liberals used a similar rationale in their “With Her” 2016 campaign for Hillary Clinton. Then, as now, they sought to make the choice all about Trump. Biden couldn’t stop the endless recriminations against Trump the person, but did little to assail policies that have by and large worked to stimulate the economy. As for Trump, he “preps” for debates basically every day. Not only does he hold frequent rallies where he reads from prepared remarks from a teleprompter (and generously deviates from them every other sentence to add his own Trump-like personality signature), but the president also regularly takes questions from the press, most of which is hostile and searching for dirt. It could easily be claimed Trump is the most accessible president ever. He seems to enjoy taking questions and answering them. The media screams and howls because they don’t like his answers. Facing the media several times a week is arguably all the “prep” Trump requires to take part in a “debate,” since the candidates are essentially answering a series of questions from a media member (and not necessarily responding to an opponent). Speaking for roughly half the time at an hour-and-a-half long debate is pretty easy stuff for Trump. If given the opportunity, the president would likely talk for the entire time. And he could do it without notes or a teleprompter. Could Grampa Joe say the same? Going forward, Trump appears to need more formal practice. His record is good enough to get people to notice, but his delivery needs polishing. This isn’t a rally where he’s asking people if they would prefer a female or male Supreme Court candidate. Biden put him on the defensive on Tuesday night and Trump took the bait. Here’s hoping he starts prepping for the next debate…today, if possible. Trump won the debate on substance, lost (badly) in presentation Trump really didn’t need to engage in a shouting match with Biden. He’s the president, he has a record full of accomplishments and they stand alone regardless of what the idiot opposite him has to say. Facts are simple things. Trump has made three Supreme Court appointments. No matter how many times Democrats say “Merrick Garland” it doesn’t mean squat because Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh are seated on the Court with lifetime appointments and Judge Amy Coney Barrett will join them in several weeks. Basically, all Trump needed to do was act presidential and in command of the issues. He had to have known going in to the evening that Biden was bent on demagoguing the COVID-19 issue to death (check!), blame Trump for the unemployment situation that was created when mostly blue state governors shuttered their own state’s businesses (check!) and repeat ad nauseum things like “this isn’t who we are” and “systemic racism” (check!, check!). Biden repeated the lie that Trump said “There were very fine people on both sides” at Charlottesville. Why didn’t Wallace clarify the true circumstances? Trump also certainly realized that Biden would harken back to the Obama years as though it was the golden age of American greatness. “Hope and Change” met reality, alright. I’m not sure about the “hope” part was but “change” worked fine. Only in Obama and Biden’s world would women who claim to be men -- and vice versa -- be granted license to run roughshod over the finest military on the planet. Trump has a reputation for being demanding and direct to close aides but is rarely impolite in person. To this observer at least, he would’ve done better if he’d treated his smirking, head nodding, laughing and out-of-touch opponent with the kindness and gentleness of walking an old lady across the street. Do this, and he’s the clear debate winner. Trump supporters like his fighting spirit. But they also admire his political acumen and willingness to go the extra mile to keep his promises. All will be lost if he loses control in a debate setting. “Presidential” matters, at least in this instance. The dynamic might be different at the next debate since it’s slated to be a “town hall” type format, presumably with questions from “real” people audience members. Biden won’t be as able to deflect questions about his leftist agenda and Hunter’s dirty dealings when the query stems from a voter. Let’s hope round two goes to the champion. 2020 Election Cleveland debate Joe Biden Donald Trump Supreme Court economy COVID-19 Fact-check Chris Wallace

Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has emerged as the leader of the Leftist claque calling for Joe Biden to skip debating President Trump. During an interview last week on CBS’s “This Morning,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA-12) reiterated her position that Joe Biden should not debate President Donald Trump. Pelosi argued that Trump “has no fidelity to fact or truth” and “isn’t committed to our Constitution,” she then asked rhetorically, “why bother” holding a debate with him. Host Gayle King teed-up Pelosi’s screed by asking, “You had earlier suggested that you didn’t think Biden should debate. Do you still feel that way?” “I do,” Pelosi replied. “Not that I don’t think he’ll be excellent. I just think that the president has no fidelity to fact or truth, and actually, in his comments the last few days, no fidelity to the Constitution of the United States. He and his henchmen are a danger with their comments, are a danger to our democracy. So, I didn’t want to give him — you know, why bother — you know, he doesn’t tell the truth, he isn’t committed to our Constitution.” This latest rant against Joe Biden participating in a debate with President Trump comes almost a month to the day after Pelosi said she wanted debates scrapped to not “legitimize a conversation with [Trump]” because he lacks “any association with truth.” “I don’t think that there should be any debates,” Pelosi said at the end of one of her regular press briefings. She also said Biden should deny the president an opportunity to “act in a way that is beneath the dignity of the presidency.” “I thought what he did in 2016 was disgraceful, stalking Hillary Clinton like that. I was disappointed that the press didn’t say, ‘Go back to your station,'” Pelosi said according to reporting by the New York Post’s Steven Nelson. The claim that Trump lacks any association with truth has become a Democrat talking point regularly echoed by their allies in the Leftwing media. For example, Seth Cohen, in an opinion piece in Forbes, wrote “Trump is almost never truthful. Trump… is trailing badly in the polls, which puts him in desperation mode. The President would likely use the debates to do what he does most frequently – present dubious and unsubstantiated claims as facts. Trump regularly uses his press briefings and campaign rallies as means to make inflammatory assertions without providing any evidence of their truth, and he would very much use the debates to do the same. Giving Trump one more platform to misinform the American public isn’t in Biden’s interests, which is why the Democratic candidate called for live fact-checking during the debate.” Mr. Cohen went on to say that if Biden does in fact have an interest in debating Trump, “Biden should demand that Trump first release his tax returns and pledge to accept the results of the election. If Trump doesn’t accept the proposal, further confirming that he won’t comply with what have become presidential norms, then Biden shouldn’t give the President a platform to further break them. That would show that not only will Biden refuse to be bullied by Trump, but that he won’t let America be bullied either. And that wouldn’t be cowardice…” Other Democrats have suggested Biden refuse to debate unless an independent fact checker is allowed. Democrats accuse Trump of repeatedly telling untruths about his own administration and as well as his critics. The Far Left Daily Kos picked up that idea and apparently assuming it would advantage Joe Biden, proposed that the moderators, chosen only from the elite “credentialed” White House press corps, “gong” any candidate’s misstatements in real time. The candidate would then be required to respond to the “gong” and explain a valid justification for the statement or withdraw it. Biden, for his part, appears to be intent on proceeding with the debate and given his own history of making problematic claims about attending an historically black college and that 200 million Americans have died of COVID-19 he is probably not in favor of independent real-time fact checking – with or without a gong. That Trump will “win” the debates is not a given, anything can happen on live TV, but as our friend David Catron observed in an article for the American Spectator: Ultimately, voter expectations involving presidential debates will force Biden’s campaign to sail between Scylla and Charybdis. If he tries to avoid them, he will be sucked into a maelstrom of ever-increasing speculation about cognitive decline and fitness to serve. If Biden is allowed to stand on the debate stage with the president, he will be eaten alive by the many-headed man-eater that Trump becomes in such venues, a beast that has already devoured more than a dozen GOP primary opponents as well as the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee. This is, of course, what scares the Democrats and Biden’s handlers. No matter what the former VP does, the debates will be his undoing. 2020 Election Cleveland debate Joe Biden Donald Trump Supreme Court economy COVID-19 Fact-check Chris Wallace