Search Results

Democrats are already making excuses for a disastrous Biden debate performance Assuming there won’t be any last-minute chickening-out by Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden, one week from tonight will be the first of three presidential debates (a vice presidential event is slated for October 7) where Biden and President Donald Trump will go head-to-head in political boxing matches of epic proportions. It will be the first time the candidates meet in the fateful 2020 campaign. The forum will be held at Case Western Reserve University and Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland Ohio. Fox News’s Chris Wallace will moderate. The hour and a half-long program will begin at 9 p.m. EDT and won’t include any commercial breaks. It will be comprised of six 15-minute segments, with Wallace selecting the topics and questions. As is true in every quadrennial campaign, the back-and-forth between the candidates and their surrogates has been intense, mean and full of exaggerations on both sides. Last week, Biden essentially accused Trump of causing the 200,000 Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus deaths as well as the noxious wildfires in the western U.S.; not to be outdone, the president said Grampa Joe was cheering on the violence in the inner cities. No one expects them to be overtly civil next week, but hopefully citizens will hear a little bit more about their issue positions. As everyone knows, Trump relishes every opportunity to talk about his administration and its accomplishments as well as to land a few body blows on the opposition. Biden? Well, his people are worried about him holding up in front of the whole world. Amie Parnes reported at The Hill, “Aides and allies to Biden say the Democratic nominee needs to be ready to fact-check Trump in real time and not let the president get away with exaggerating or distorting his record. And they say he needs to aggressively hold him accountable... “Democratic strategist Eddie Vale [said], ‘If you or someone in your family has lost their job, is sick, died, or can't send their kids to school right now who the hell cares about ‘OMG Gaffe!’. Trump keeps mishandling the pandemic every day and people just want someone to make life better again and who cares if someone says a word wrong.’ “One Democratic strategist close to the Biden campaign said Team Biden has to set expectations that Trump ‘should be judged on his record, not on spectacles and showmanship.’ ‘They ought to use Trump's words against him,’ the strategist said. ‘He’s spent months telling America that Joe Biden has dementia and is incoherent. A Biden cogent performance should be a win, period.’” What, you mean if Biden stays awake through the entire 90 minutes that he deserves a prize and a cookie for good behavior? The candidate managed to sound semi-coherent during his Democrat convention speech a month ago, though it was pathetically lacking in policy specifics and was fairly brief by modern-day standards. Trump’s acceptance speech at the RNC was packed with policy specifics and lasted an hour and a half -- so we at least know he can talk that long! From reading the Democrat strategists’ quotes, it’s apparent these people reside in a parallel, nonsensible universe, but it’s not surprising considering every liberal party member lives in a reality-free la-la land which is a figment of their own warped imaginations. Or, more likely, they purposely say stuff like this (“He’s a liar -- raise your hand! Raise your hand!”) because they’re advancing a narrative to gain power, the only useful means to get what they want. Particularly humorous was the strategists’ insistence that Grampa Joe must “fact check” Trump on the spot. Unless the subject is swamp politics circa 1974 or a pop quiz on the different scents of women’s shampoos, Biden doesn’t know any facts. If I’m not mistaken, Democrats basically argued the same thing four years ago when Hillary Clinton prepped to face the unpredictable and always-on-offense Trump. A version of the “advice” was also present in 2012 when Joe took on the wonk-ish Paul Ryan in that campaign’s vice presidential debate. Those Democrats -- they have such a monopoly on facts and figures don’t they? Let’s try a few of our own: 60 million plus -- The number of babies aborted since Roe v. Wade was foisted on America, a tally that’s increased during the COVID-19 pandemic at the insistence of blue state governors and mayors who deemed the nation’s leading abortion factory as an “essential” business. Joe Biden and sidekick Kamala Harris have vowed to keep the infanticide working at full tilt -- at taxpayer expense, if possible -- while pro-life groups have described Trump as the best president on their issue since Ronald Reagan. 8.4 percent -- The unemployment rate in August, five months after the economy was virtually brought to a standstill by CCP virus restrictions and lockdowns. By comparison, the unemployment rate on Election Day, 2012, was 7.7 percent after four years of Obama/Biden policies. Before the coronavirus invaded America, unemployment was at 50-year lows for all groups including women, Hispanics and African-Americans. Consumer confidence was sky-high and Trump was virtually assured of a second term unless something was done to wreck his chances. Did China purposely interfere? 47 -- The number of years Joe Biden’s been in and around the Washington swamp. It’s no secret that the Democrat nominee has never worked a real job, having first been elected to the senate as a 29-year old in 1972. Talk about fact-checking -- Grampa Joe was in the upper chamber so long he’s had the chance to take both sides of every issue for practically his whole career. Don’t forget that once upon a time, Joe was opposed to mandatory school busing. And he earned a reputation as pro-law enforcement in the way-back-when. Those days are gone! 2 -- The total of Nobel prizes Trump’s been nominated for in recent weeks for his administration’s brokering of peace deals in the Middle East involving Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain (with more likely to come). In 2016, Trump promised to keep the military out of stupid foreign wars, a vow he’s largely stuck to despite furious resistance from neoconservatives and the Washington foreign policy establishment. 2 -- The number of years Democrats and the media persisted with the inane “Russian Collusion” narrative. Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his deep state cohorts spent tens of millions of taxpayer dollars overturning every rock, interviewing every hooker in Moscow and bending tradition and the law to drum up the dirt on Trump. The only problem? It was all phony, a lie concocted by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and furthered by enemies within the government. 300 and 1 -- The number of judges Trump hopes to have nominated and confirmed by the end of his first term, and the current Supreme Court vacancy after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg last week. Zero -- The number of Republican votes contributed towards the passage of Obamacare. Biden’s vowed to do whatever it takes to “restore” the federal government’s healthcare monstrosity, and, thanks to persistent pressure from the Democrat left wing, to move towards a single payer system or Medicare for All. Trump has consistently advocated for giving consumers more choice in health insurance while insisting that pre-existing conditions be covered. Our own “fact-check” could go on and on. If anything, Trump will be the one having an exceedingly difficult time highlighting all of Biden’s tall tales, truth bending and outright fabrications. Among them will be smears and slanders of “systemic racism” and all-out attempts to hide the fact that all of this summer’s violence took place in Democrat political strongholds with spineless “leaders” who refused to name the criminals, much less stop them. Democrats realize they’ve got a weak candidate who can’t compete with Trump in a debate The media likes to depict Joe Biden as a master debater, but it’s anything but the truth. The Democrat is easily rattled, doesn’t have a good (or reality-based?) grasp of policy and can’t explain many aspects of his questionable record. And oh yeah, watch the man’s eyes explode out of his skull whenever someone mentions the corruption in Grampa Joe’s family. Biden’s primary opponents mostly left the Hunter Biden topic off the table -- Trump won’t be so kind. Let’s not forget, Barack Obama was personally popular with one segment of the American electorate but his administration wasn’t. An outsider like Trump would never have had a chance to win four years ago if people were satisfied that the big O’s “Hope and Change” mantra had been satisfied. Instead, traditional American culture lay in ruins, racial tensions were rampant and people craved a president who would shake up the swamp and keep his promises. That perfectly describes Donald J. Trump. Make no mistake, this “Trump needs to be fact checked” nonsense is merely laying the groundwork to defend whatever lies and less obvious distortions the Democrat candidate himself says. It wasn’t all that long ago, for example, that Biden said 150 million Americans were killed by gun violence and another 120 million more died from COVID-19. As I’ve said before, Biden talks so fast that his age-dulled brain couldn’t possibly catch up with his mouth. Grampa Joe’s always been regarded as a collegial good guy who got along well with senators from both sides of the aisle. If you’re in need of a back slappin’, hair sniffin’, shoulders massagin’, child repellin’, nude swimmin’, sexual assault denyin’, plagiarism perpetratin’ and fact bendin’ swamp creature, he’s your man! What he’s never been known to possess is a great intellect. It could very well be that the Biden camp is keeping the option open to withdraw from the debate up until the last minute and they’ll use the “Trump will lie his way into a debate win” excuse to keep the Democrat standard bearer safely locked up in Delaware. The party’s been dropping hints about the need for an independent truth verifier for Trump, but what about their own man? The very fact (pardon the term) Democrats are arguing that Biden needs to remain on the offensive means they’re already conceding that Grampa Joe has a lot to defend. Trump has a pretty stellar track record to cite with enough accomplishments to fill two administrations. Biden will not only be answering for the failures of the Obama years but also will need to explain his own policies that supposedly would bring an improvement to people’s lives. Biden will need to be a gymnast doing logic backflips to explain how he’s for and against everything at the same time. How can you support the police and yet seek to cut their funding? How can you be for American workers and give credence to the Green New Deal? Too many contradictions to defend. No wonder his handlers are downplaying his performance in advance. Polls continue to show Biden is ahead yet Trump’s approval rating is steadily rising Every day, it seems, there’s another major establishment media poll showing Biden with steady support, this despite the candidate’s lackluster performance on the campaign trail and utter absence of an issue platform to capture Americans’ imaginations. Not surprisingly, Grampa Joe keeps emphasizing the COVID-19 pandemic, but it looks like citizens are wary of hearing the same old song. Trump, on the other hand, is favorably viewed by a majority of Americans. Paul Bedard reported at The Washington Examiner, “[Last Friday’s] Rasmussen Reports said Trump’s approval rating is 53%, a height it has reached only three other times since his first month in office when support jumped to nearly 60%. Ironically, Rasmussen noted, the last time Trump was at 53% was when Pelosi announced that the House would begin impeachment proceedings. “For the past few weeks, Trump has been on a steady climb in Rasmussen’s ratings. In its weekly rating of the presidential race between Trump and Democrat Joe Biden, Trump, for the first time this week, had an edge over Biden, 47%-46%. “At this stage of his reelection campaign, former President Barack Obama had a 49% approval rating in the Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll.” It should be noted that other polls don’t echo what Rasmussen found and the Real Clear Politics average of Trump’s approval rating is a shade under 45 percent. Rasmussen’s surveys include results from likely voters -- and tends to be more friendly to Republicans than other polling operations. It doesn’t mean they’re inaccurate. Trump also enjoys excellent favorability ratings with minority voters, something other tallies are beginning to show as well. It begs the question: if Americans are seeing Trump more favorably, how could a doddering substance-less dolt like Joe Biden still be ahead in the race? Who in their right mind would trust the polls? They don’t add up, unless people are lying about liking Trump but intending to vote for Biden anyway. Sure, that makes sense. The tension will be tangible a week from tonight when Donald Trump and Joe Biden take the stage in Cleveland for 2020’s first presidential debate. Biden’s backers are already laying the groundwork for a poor performance from their candidate, excusing the man’s lack of wherewithal on Trump’s “lies” and an absence of fact-checking. It’s sad, isn’t it? 2020 Election Joe Biden Supreme Court list Ruth Bader Ginsburg death Donald Trump Trump Supreme Court list Amy Coney Barrett senate confirmation Barbara Lagoa presidential debates Cleveland

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, speaking on Sunday, said "Voters of this country should be heard ... they're the ones who this Constitution envisions should decide who has the power to make this appointment… To jam this nomination through the Senate is just an exercise of raw political power." Biden said that if he wins the Nov. 3 election, he should have the chance to nominate the next Supreme Court justice. However, the former vice president rejected the idea of releasing the names of potential nominees, as President Trump did. However, he reiterated his pledge to nominate an African-American woman to the court, if he has the opportunity. Biden’s comments were made in response to President Trump’s statement on Saturday that he will make his nomination this week and named Amy Coney Barrett of the Chicago-based 7th Circuit and Barbara Lagoa of the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit as possible candidates to fill the vacancy created by Friday's death of liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. "I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman," Trump said at a campaign rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina, where supporters chanted "fill that seat." "I think it should be a woman because I actually like women much more than men," joked the President. Biden’s reticence about naming names is a big change from his position in June, when he indicated that he would be releasing a list of potential Court nominees, specifically “African American women” “We are putting together a list of a group of African American women who are qualified and have the experience to be on the court,” Biden said in June. “I am not going to release that until we go further down the line in vetting them.” However, as Jordan Davidson reported for The Federalist, there is still no word from Biden on when that list will be published. And given that he has now flip-flopped on the propriety of releasing such a list it seems doubtful that the former vice president will keep his word to let voters evaluate the judicial philosophy and temperament of the judge he plans to elevate to a lifetime appointment on the Nation’s highest court. White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany was not about to let Biden off as easily as the establishment media flaks who cover his campaign do. Ms. McEnany told Fox & Friends, “Well look, the former vice president, in all due respect, instead of telling the current president what to do, he needs to tell voters where he stands. We don’t know who is on his Supreme Court list. We don’t know what kind of justices he would nominate. We know, very squarely, this president’s been very transparent, putting forward two lists as to exactly, not just what his justices would look like, but what their names would be. This is paramount importance to the American voters. This is now a lynchpin issue of this election, and Joe Biden, where do you stand? What do your justices look like? Do they believe in the Constitution? Do they abide by the Constitution? Do they believe in the plain words of a statute? He needs to answer those questions before telling President Trump exactly how to move forward.” She later added, “This is a lifetime appointment. These are issues that hit at the very core of our liberties, like the Second Amendment, like the right to life, the First Amendment, freedom of speech. These issues determine the very values of this country, so knowing where he stands, knowing these names, is very important to voters and really the onus is on him now to put out that list.” Senator Chuck Grassley, former Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary likewise said Trump’s “transparency” in publishing the potential nominees is a privilege of voters that should also be afforded by Biden. “The Biden-Harris ticket owes voters the same transparency President Trump has demonstrated along with the same commitment to nominate from that list should there be a vacancy. There’s no reason to hide something as consequential as who would be named to our highest court,” Grassley said. Republican Senator John Barrasso on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday brushed off Democratic complaints about the nomination process. "Let's be very clear - if the shoe were on the other foot and the Democrats had the White House and the Senate, they would right now be trying to confirm another member of the Supreme Court," Barrasso said. Just a few days before the death of Justice Ginsburg the Senate’s Number 2 Democrat, Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois said, “I sincerely hope he [Biden] does not do that,” meaning announce a list of potential Supreme Court nominees. “We ought to go back to the regular order of things. If and when vacancies occur he can look for the very best person at that moment.” Well, there is now a vacancy and we think former vice president Biden, and the Democrat Party, should stand up and fulfill Biden’s original pledge to release the list of “African American women” from whom he would choose to replace the late Justice Ginsburg. 2020 Election Joe Biden Supreme Court list Ruth Bader Ginsburg death Donald Trump Trump Supreme Court list Barbara Lagoa Amy Coney Barrett

R.I.P. Ruth Bader Ginsburg. And the world is about to explode Every once in a while, there’s a piece of news that jolts your consciousness and occupies your mind as the only thing that matters. I was cooking dinner the other night when my wife matter-of-factly mentioned, “Did you hear Ruth Bader Ginsburg died?” Say again? “It says here that Ruth Bader Ginsburg died.” She’d been sifting through a seemingly non-stop list of emails on her phone when the blurb popped up. We’d had some important agenda items during the day and were in heavy contemplation about what to do about them when the story broke like lighting on a cloudless evening. “This changes everything,” I said, and immediately switched the TV to Tucker Carlson’s show. Everyone in America knows the 87-year-old Bill Clinton-appointed liberal Supreme Court justice was ill for some time, and the rumors surrounding her impending demise had intensified in recent years, only to be proven premature when the stubborn lawyer made another miraculous disease-defeating comeback. With mere weeks to go until the 2020 election, it was assumed that whatever was ailing the nation’s second female Supreme Court member would hold off until voters determined who would choose her successor. Apparently not. Time and fate wait for no one, not even someone whose death would traumatize an already hopelessly divided country. It’ll only get rockier from here on out, if that’s even possible. Simultaneously, speculation started on when -- or whether -- President Donald Trump would move forward with appointing Ginsburg’s successor. And it certainly looks as though Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will follow through with his pledge to hold a confirmation process and vote. Some urged caution. Others were for traveling full speed ahead. Writing in favor of the latter course -- and for Amy Coney Barrett as the perfect one to appoint, Scott McKay wrote at The American Spectator over the weekend, “[T]his nomination is there for the confirming, it gives the country an excellent Supreme Court justice who will do excellent service for a protracted period of time, it’s a transformational choice which creates a new Supreme Court for the 21st century, it’s a political win which delivers Catholic voters and suburban women for the president’s party, it creates a feminine cultural icon setting precisely the right tone and it demonstrates once and for all to conservative voters that unlike the Republican Party of the Bush era, this GOP has the will and the sand to deliver on its promises. “On big items. With big stakes. For lasting change. “Make Amy Barrett happen, Mr. President. Don’t think twice, don’t wait. Move the nomination forward, and work with Sen. McConnell to ram it through with all possible speed. You won’t regret it — in fact, the political capital it will give you will seal the election not just for you but for your allies down the ballot in November.” As he always does, McKay introduces a convincing argument. I don’t know if he’s a lawyer, but if he is, maybe he’s presented a case or two before the black robed jurists in big marble buildings. If the question were as cut-and-dried as McKay offers it, President Trump should have long ago commanded his people to prepare the paperwork for when the occasion arises. And man, has the occasion arisen this time. The arguments for moving ahead now are many. But so are the reasons for exercising restraint. My initial reaction was to wait on it. Sure, Trump has said many times he would make a selection when the opportunity presented itself and McConnell’s repeatedly insisted that he would act on the nomination in his capacity as Senate calendar-setter. There’s not a heck of a lot that Republicans and Democrats agree on these days -- if anything -- so in essence, McKay is right. It’s up to the President and Majority Leader to determine the proper strategy. For his part, Democrat Minority Leader “Chucky” Schumer immediately announced that the nomination should be postponed until after the election. Ginsburg herself laid it out as a dying wish that the “next president” should select her successor. Not to minimize the enormous deeds that RBG accomplished during her lifetime, but nowhere does it specify that outgoing Supreme Court justices get a say in who (literally) fills their seat upon departure. Likewise, there’s no guarantee of future employment for Ginsburg’s staff and if the next justice prefers a different type of décor in the office, he or she will bring in painters and new furniture will be ordered. It’s not like starting a job as an underling in law firm where you sit where they tell you to and the plain and bare cubicle only provides sufficient space for a framed photo and a diploma. Justices serve for life if they wish, a reality America’s experienced twice in the last four-plus years. Legendary originalist Justice Antonin Scalia died suddenly in mid-February, 2016, right in the midst of the Republican primary season and days before South Carolina conservatives were slated to vote. Trump was lodged in a battle for the GOP nomination with Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and others (no need to mention John Kasich here, he was never a factor). I thought Scalia’s death and the resultant Supreme Court vacancy would swing the race towards a more proven competitor (Cruz). I was wrong. The voters trusted Trump to make the decision. Shortly after Trump earned the requisite number of delegates to secure the nomination, he released a list of names he would consider for Scalia’s seat if elected. In doing so, Trump consulted with the conservative Federalist Society, a stroke of genius that probably won him the election. Election Day exit-surveys revealed that a high percentage of Americans were motivated by the impending high court dilemma -- enough to carry the first time politician over the finish line in several key states. Many think Trump should refrain from making the choice now for the same reasons, namely that a vacancy will provoke a wave of fence sitters to get off the couch and cast their ballot for Trump, just like in 2016. Realistically speaking, no one can or will ignore this. Even the dwindled and pathetic band of NeverTrumpers couldn’t resist changing sides now, right? If they truly count themselves as conservatives, there’s no way they could pull the lever for Joe Biden when they know he promises to fill Ginsburg’s chair with someone at least as radical and leftwing as she was. Grampa Joe hasn’t released his own Supreme Court list, likely fearing that naming names would commit him to something when all he hoped to do in the lead-up to the election was hang out in his protective Delaware basement bunker and mumble about the Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus. Biden won’t be able to shrink from the spotlight now. No more cowering out of sight. He’ll actually need to do something other than slam Trump as a racist. Joe didn’t choose Ginsburg’s fate, but the circumstances have chosen for him. What to do? At his Saturday night rally in North Carolina, Trump said he was planning on announcing a nominee in a few days -- and that it would be a woman. He even polled the audience who enthusiastically cheered his every sentence on a cool evening in the Tar Heel State. There’s little doubt it will be Barrett, then. The rest… who knows? Releasing a nominee and moving the process forward before the election will unleash war Kamala Harris is the Democrat nominee for vice president. She’s also a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. If Trump appoints Barrett -- or another woman -- the upper chamber’s machinery will be set in motion to determine her fitness for the Supreme Court. Seeing as Barrett faced the confirmation gauntlet with the same cast of politician characters in 2017, it wouldn’t seem there’d be a whole lot new to talk about this time around. Senator Dianne Feinstein didn’t mince words three years ago in saying something to the effect of, “I think in your case, professor, when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that’s of concern.” Dogma? The dictionary defines dogma, as, “a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.” You know, the Bible? With throngs of paid protesters outside the senate office building (assuming COVID-19 restrictions won’t allow for public attendance), the masked leftist forces -- and the Democrat senators -- will attempt to depict Barrett as the second coming of Atilla the Hun. Amy is the mother of seven (including two adopted children from Haiti), but liberals will stop at nothing to label her as anti-woman, anti-choice, anti-poor, and, as would be expected these days, racist and homophobic. Black Lives Matter will take some of the millions Democrats have donated to them and pay squatters to camp out and occupy as much territory as possible. Democrat staffers are no doubt combing through everything Barrett’s ever written or uttered, poaching a word, phrase or paragraph that purportedly proves she’s biased and would prejudge every case that comes before her. Her personal life will be dragged through the mud, then sifted for dirt particles. Her professional career will be dissected and criticized. Harris will likely take center stage and once again don her proverbial prosecutor hat to cross-examine every tidbit of testimony. Democrats will grandstand and delay. Instead of posing questions to the nominee, they’ll engage in lengthy monologues about the unfairness of holding confirmation hearings just weeks or days before a national election. They’ll inflate the significance of one Supreme Court seat far larger than it was ever meant to be. They’ll lie and stonewall. Maybe they’ll even bring back Teddy Kennedy’s “In Robert Bork’s America” to foretell of Armageddon if Barrett is confirmed. Kennedy said, “Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists would be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy.” Substitute Barrett’s name for Bork’s and it works just as well this year. The rhetoric will be over-the-top. The protests could easily turn violent. Democrats will threaten and condone social unrest. Feminists and leftist LBGTQ groups will fundraise like never before. Pandemonium will ensue. The verbal assaults on Trump will also be relentless. RINOs like Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Mitt Romney will chime in their disapproval. Democrats will use the platform and national exposure to conduct an hours and days-long negative campaign commercial. They’ll use the network and cable news coverage to bash on Trump, McConnell and senate Republicans. They’ll use the hearings to prop up their senate candidates while pilfering any conservative within shouting distance. If the Democrats turn the process into a circus -- which everyone knows will happen -- they will assure one sad fact: Ruth Bader Ginsburg will have profoundly affected the world much more with her death than her consequential life. From here on out, Ginsburg’s name will be associated with the 2020 election and doddering Joe Biden’s candidacy. Is this what they really want? For better or worse, Trump sees this as a challenge too juicy to bypass If we’ve learned anything about Donald Trump in the five years he’s dominated the political world, it’s that he enjoys a good fight. Whereas many career politicians run and hide at the prospect of confrontation and disagreement, Trump relishes it. For this reason, it’s more than likely he’ll view the open Supreme Court seat as the right forum to set more distinctions between himself and the American left. Michael Goodwin wrote at The New York Post, “A sixth conservative on the Court could be dynamite to Democrats on numerous issues, including abortion, religious liberty, law enforcement, immigration and racial quotas. “Dems often look to the federal courts to approve measures they can’t get through Congress. The prospect of that avenue being closed has led to talk within the party that, the next time they hold Congress and the White House, they would expand the court to perhaps 13 members. “Knowing that, Republicans have both the right and a reason to use their power until the congressional term ends Jan. 3. Indeed, because the confirmation likely would not be settled by Election Day, it’s conceivable that the Senate could take its final votes in late December, even though some members of both parties may have lost their elections.” There are a lot of scenarios at play here, including a close election that’s still in doubt going into December. The prospect of a contested result moving to the Supreme Court for a determination would bring disastrous consequences to the country. Imagine having the short-handed Court be called to solve a controversy and they split 4-4. Chief Justice John Roberts has been unreliable in the last decade or so and few would put it past him to join with the liberal bloc (Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan) to muck up the waters once again. Who decides? There’s no easy answer. We’re living in extraordinary times. Pray everything is settled peacefully. God’s wisdom has never been so necessary. As if the 2020 election could get any more divisive and stranger, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death added another ingredient to a pot that’s already boiling over. In the coming days, President Trump will make a monumental decision that could determine the fate of the 2020 election and his presidential legacy. Either way, it’ll be fascinating to watch. 2020 Election Joe Biden Supreme Court list Ruth Bader Ginsburg death Donald Trump Trump Supreme Court list Amy Coney Barrett senate confirmation Barbara Lagoa

From a purely political perspective, the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg could seal the election of President Trump and a Republican majority in both chambers of Congress. It is necessary for the nomination and vote to happen after the November 3 election. Having a vacancy on the ballot will significantly increase the vote for Trump. Having a vacancy on the ballot will significantly increase the GOP vote for the House, Senate, governors, and down-ballot races. Voters go to the polls to expect what you will accomplish, i.e., a conservative Supreme Court. Voters do not go to the polls to thank you for a job well done. An example is Winston Churchill who weeks after winning WWII was voted out of office because he was talking about his accomplishments, while his opponents talked about the future. It puts Biden on the defensive to come up with a list of nominees, which he won’t because it probably would cost him the election. The confirmation process before the election would dominate the conversation and the media’s focus through November 3. The media will use it to paint Republicans as unprincipled and hypocritical. Republicans want the conversation to be about the views of a Biden nominee. Submitting a nominee before the election will divide Senate Republicans, and also get the focus off Biden’s nominee. Waiting until after the election will encourage some Republican Never-Trumpers on the fence to move to Trump. Waiting until after the election will encourage some Republican Never-Trumpers who are now for Biden to switch their vote to Trump. Sermons in tens of thousands of evangelical and Catholic churches about a pro-life court will be frequent and impactful. How do we know waiting until after the election for the nomination and confirmation is necessary? In the 2016 election, 26 percent of Trump’s voters said the Supreme Court was the number one reason why they voted for him. Not only will that hold true in 2020, but the percentage will be even larger. So, Mr. President, I respectfully suggest that keeping the Supreme Court vacancy on the ballot November 3 is the necessary choice for America, Republicans, your MAGA base, and your re-election.

Historically, the Jewish vote, like the African American vote, has been strongly Democrat. That doesn’t mean there aren’t a substantial number of Jewish conservatives who vote Republican, but unsurprisingly, with more Jewish people located in liberal urban areas, they, like their neighbors, tend to vote for Democrats. However, conservative voices in the Jewish community, such as Rabbi Aryeh Spero, Daniel Horowitz, Shmuel "Shmuley" Boteach, Morton A. Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, former Senator Norm Coleman, writers Michael Ledeen, Ben Weingarten, Ben Shapiro, Carolyn Glick and radio personalities Dennis Prager, Mark Levin, and others have become nationally recognized in and beyond the Jewish community as advocates for conservative values and policy solutions. And out of their leadership, and the leadership of many other Jews who support a government bounded by the Constitution and favor traditional values and a strong America, and who recognize that the Democratic Party has mainstreamed anti-Semitism has come a slow recognition that the Democratic Party is not the friend of the Jewish people, or of Israel – but that Donald Trump is. As Norm Coleman wrote in a recent op-ed for The Times of Israel, “virulent anti-Semitism… now flows from the lips of the ascendant ‘progressive leadership’ of the Democrat party; including Ilhan Omar, Rashid Tlaib and AOC.” However, wrote former Senator Coleman, President Trump’s record is a story of perseverance and success in the face of overwhelming opposition – and his every success has benefited the United States and the Jewish community. President Trump’s pro-Israel actions, such as moving the US embassy to Jerusalem were important, but there is much more to praise in the President’s Middle East policy, wrote Senator Colemen. First is the President’s decision to take the US out of the disastrous Obama-Biden Iran nuclear deal, a badly conceived effort that let Iran continue to cheat its way toward nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles to carry them. Trump’s “maximum pressure” policy against Iran has deprived the mullahs of the resources to pursue their nuclear dreams and limited their ongoing nefarious deeds as the largest state sponsor of terrorism – which was funded by American cash as part of the nuclear deal. Next was President Trump’s decision to buck the warnings of failed diplomats and show true friendship to Israel. He recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and began discussions with the Israeli government about the extension of Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank, moves that made it clear that the US backs Israel’s national and sovereign rights. Trump’s policies implicitly called on the Arab world to recognize the State of Israel’s legitimacy and permanency. This not only strengthened the US-Israel alliance, but made possible the incredible diplomatic successes of the UAE-Israel peace treaty and the Bahrain-Israel agreement. Real, concrete peace has begun between Israel and Arab states, for the first time in 25 years. That is truly historic, concluded Coleman. As Rabbi Spero said after the recent signing of the Abraham Accords: I am certain that, if President Trump is re-elected, more Arab countries will come on board and sow diplomatic relations with Israel. If, however, a globalist left-winger such as Biden or Harris wins this November, the circle of peace will stop expanding inasmuch as the globalists will revert to their decades-old formula of pressuring Israel and making Israel concede to all the ill wishes of Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah. But it is obvious that Fatah, the PLO, and these groups still do not want peace with Israel, nor will they ever recognize Israel as a sovereign Jewish state. Besides, the spigot of money running from the European countries, the NGOs, and United Nations agencies would stop flowing toward the Palestinian Arab leadership once a state was formed. Its leaders would be forced to relinquish the “romance and excitement” of terrorism and revolution and focus on water works, electric plants, road building, hospitals, and other infrastructure. Most of them consider this boring and below their blowing-things-up calling. Israel and the region have been fortunate indeed to have President Trump’s vision lead the way during these last four years. We believe that the benefits of this treaty will be enormous for all parties involved, while still maintaining Israel’s future sovereignty over its biblical attachment with Judea and Samaria. Every minute broadens the horizons of this extraordinary peace arrangement being brought to fruition by President Trump and his visionary administration. We urge our Jewish friends and readers who may have doubts about voting Republican or voting for President Trump to go to JewsChooseTrump.Org to learn more about the 10 reasons Jews should vote for President Trump: 1. Withdrew from the cataclysmic Nuclear Iran Deal and immediately began reimposing sanctions on Iran that the Deal had lifted or waived – and has continued to impose additional sanctions on Iran; 2. Officially recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital; 3. Moved the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem; 4. Ensured enforcement of the Taylor Force Act – so U.S. taxpayers’ dollars would not be used to pay terrorists to maim and murder Israelis; 5. Officially recognized Israel’s sovereignty over the strategic Golan Heights; 6. Closed the PLO office in Washington, D.C.; 7. Turned off the spigot of US dollars supporting the terrorism-enabler UNRWA; 8. Cut financial support to USAID for Palestinian Arab projects because the Palestinian Authority refused to be exposed to financial liability for terrorism under new US law; 9. Appointed the most pro-Israel US Ambassador to the United Nations in decades; While at the UN as the voice of the Trump administration, Nikki Haley repeatedly and forcefully beat back at the anti-Israel efforts of the Islamist and other anti-Israel representatives at the UN, refusing to countenance the Israel-bashing that appears to be the raison d’etre of the global body; 10. Calls out and refuses to kowtow to members of Congress who support BDS. 2020 Election Jewish vote Rabbi Aryeh Spero RNC speech Abraham Accords Trump foreign policy Bahrain United Arab Emirates Middle East Peace Israel Iran Saudi Arabia Mike Pompeo Daniel Horowitz Shmuel "Shmuley" Boteach Morton A. Klein Norm Coleman

Biden stoked the fires of political animosity when he labeled Trump a “climate arsonist” Be honest -- is anyone ever surprised when a politician says something inflammatory? No matter what the “experts” claim, politics has always been a malicious business. There’s just something about campaigning and getting your way that brings out the beast in people, and in times of economic and social upheaval -- like we have now -- the invective is particularly intense. Many an elected official has lectured that politics isn’t a team sport, but if that’s true, then why does everyone get so honked off when their “team” loses? The 2020 campaign has been particularly wretched. That said, what Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden uttered the other day was far beyond the pale, venturing into uncharted territory for spiteful hyperbole. Commenting on the tragic wildfire situation in the western United States, Tammy Bruce wrote at The Washington Times: “Like children who have been caught doing something forbidden, [Democrats’] instinct is to blame everyone else in an effort to cover their tracks. They blame other people, and the ever-useful and ubiquitous ‘climate change.’ “Moving along that narrative, because we can’t have the Democrats admit their idiotic and deadly policy failures, Democratic presidential nominee and former Vice President Joe Biden made a statement about the fires and climate change attempting to blame President Trump for the massive fire destruction, bizarrely labeling Mr. Trump a ‘climate arsonist.’ “Mr. Biden then went on to claim that Mr. Trump could control the weather. During the statement in Delaware, not far from his basement, Mr. Biden went on an accusationpalooza, ‘If we have four more years of Trump’s climate denial, how many suburbs will be burned in wildfires? How many suburbs will have been flooded out? How many suburbs will have been blown away in super-storms? If you give a climate arsonist four more years in the White House, why would anyone be surprised if more of America is ablaze?’” I’d already seen the video clip of Biden depicting Trump as the living equivalent of Heat Miser from “The Year Without a Santa Claus” fame, but I didn’t really pause to think about what he’d said until I read Bruce’s take on it. In essence, Biden accused the president of the United States of murdering people because his views of science differ from the accepted liberal orthodoxy on “climate change.” This -- blaming Trump for deaths -- isn’t exactly new. Democrats spent four nights at their party convention last month essentially thrusting an accusatory finger at Trump for his purported incompetence during the Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus pandemic, shamefully insinuating that the commander in chief’s reaction wasn’t “serious” enough and he’d been homicidally negligent by failing to scream “Danger! Danger!” from the White House roof. And he’s a cretin for not wearing a mask all the time. About the mask thing. Liberals think Trump supporters are stupid and that they’ve scorned face coverings just because their political leader chose not to put one on. Like the “sheep” would’ve instinctively followed the shepherd if only the New Yorker outsider president would’ve donned a mask earlier. The notion is absurd; conservatives are liberty loving as it is, and we don’t always follow anyone’s lead. If we did, we’d all dress like Ronald Reagan as president. Or Trump now. At any rate, the “climate arsonist” charge is a big one. Wikipedia defines “arson” as, “[A] crime of willfully and maliciously setting fire to or charring property. Though the act typically involves buildings, the term arson can also refer to the intentional burning of other things, such as motor vehicles, watercraft, or forests. The crime is typically classified as a felony, with instances involving a greater degree of risk to human life or property carrying a stricter penalty…” It doesn’t take a legal scholar to figure being charged with arson could easily be upgraded to murder if there are deaths involved. And lots of people have lost their lives in the conflagrations on the west coast. Therefore, Biden basically called Trump a murderer this week. Trump didn’t physically stick a torch into ultra-flammable brush on a day with high heat and practically non-existent humidity, but to Joe and his band of Chicken Little climate alarmists, Trump did just the same. It's easy for the gullible and uniformed lay observer (translation: Democrat) to buy-in to the climate change argument. California, Oregon and Washington (among others) are experiencing higher than average temperatures and this fire season has been brutal even by recent standards. People seeing the soaring flames consuming a structure and being whipped by winds might logically conclude that something natural -- i.e. climate change -- is at fault for the disasters. But there’s another side to the story that isn’t being considered by the knee-jerk simpleton reactionaries. Bruce lays it out in her piece and Victor Davis Hanson thoroughly addressed the topic in his weekly National Review column -- the notion that poor forest management and neglect has made an already delicate natural balance worse in the above-mentioned states. Blue state governors -- California’s Gavin Newsom, Oregon’s Kate Brown and Washington’s Jay Inslee -- hide behind “settled science” and blame anyone who doesn’t worship at the altar of the nutcase greenies in the Sierra Club. Think of it this way: What if, at the end of a relatively warm and dry winter you pile the balance of your unburned wood and kindling into the fireplace complete with leftover fire starters and plenty of newspaper. Then you allowed your home’s temperature to match the outside air in the summertime and switch off the HVAC humidifier. Then, some “arsonist” thinks it would be fun to toss a few matches into the waiting fuel. Poof! The house burns down. Is this because of “climate change” or is it your own stupidity? Even assuming “climate change” is partially to blame for the extreme fire conditions in the affected areas, you still need a human being on a mission -- or in some instances, lightning strikes -- to get the blazes going. Many of the most destructive burns were the result of actual arsonists. Or accidents, such as pyrotechnics at a “gender reveal” party. We know from experience that Democrats are wont to blame Trump for everything, including the CCP virus’s death toll and the rioting and looting in many of the nation’s large blue cities. They even use a fire-like term to describe his culpability in such places, too, saying Trump uses “incendiary rhetoric” which triggers something within the confined skulls of the miscreant class to go out and burn, break or steal things. If words truly do have that kind of profound significance and fire-starting magic quality, then what Biden said should be given its due consideration -- and rebuke. Modern day politics isn’t necessarily meaner than the old days; news just travels faster Granted, today’s mainstream establishment media doesn’t have much else to do except to constantly peck at Donald Trump, but they advance the impression that the “tone” of discourse is significantly worse than it used to be. Pardon the expression, but social media does “fan the flames” of acrimony, though politicians of yesteryear could be just as vile and wicked as the current crop. That’s true even if you’re talking about Joe Biden. The Founding Fathers came together to devise and adopt the Declaration of Independence, formulate the Articles of Confederation and then, when it appeared the great American experiment might not survive, to unite the country (more or less) with the Constitution. “We the People”, the famous governing charter began, made plain who was sovereign in this new government. Then the great men elected George Washington as the first president, a man without a party who basically agreed to serve because it was his “duty” to the rest of his compatriots. Washington absolutely abhorred factions and spoke on the subject numerous times. To have organized parties, the first president believed, would motivate men to place the interests of their own clique above the greater common good of the nation. Almost immediately members of his Cabinet and “friends” in Congress began organizing into ideological subgroups roughly divided between those who advocated for a powerful federal authority to keep the peace and resolve disputes and those who believed a decentralized, states rights supremacy was preferable. For his part, Washington didn’t outwardly side with either faction, though most historians believe he was closer aligned with the Federalist party and acted accordingly. A sort of inane distrust and animosity developed between the Thomas Jefferson/James Madison adherents and the John Adams/(Alexander) Hamiltonian followers. They weren’t friendly. They schemed behind the president’s back to gain the upper hand, all the while assuring him everything was on the up and up. Washington recognized they were actively working to undermine him. It’s often said that Washington enjoyed the most thoroughly talented and capable cabinet ever in his first term and the worst and least distinguished in his second term. There were serious differences of opinion, and it threatened to rip the young nation apart. The relationships and comity forged during the pre-Revolution and post-war periods evaporated within the span of a couple years. Washington himself wouldn’t forgive the slights and passed on as perhaps the most beloved man in America, but with few friends among those with which he’d served the nation, a fact largely ignored by those who’ve always speculated that politics has continued on a downward slide ever since those opening moments in United States history. What we’re seeing today is perhaps the high ebb of disunity and acrimony between Republicans and Democrats. The relentless name calling won’t help the nation heal after an election winner is declared (or should I say, if it happens). Biden will pretend like he never said anything (he probably wouldn’t remember anyway) and Trump will call for people to come together to solve the nation’s challenges. But will Nancy Pelosi come to the table? How about Chucky Schumer? I wouldn’t bet on it. The victors will pretty much govern alone. It’s human nature. What does Biden hope to gain by blaming Trump for “climate change”? Pundits and pollsters love dissecting the American electorate to determine which candidate is doing better with which group as though such huge collections of human beings could ever be broken down and characterized at such a basic level. While surveys show Trump’s standing has significantly improved with Hispanics and black male voters, the tallies also suggest he’s lagging with white suburbanites… and working class whites as well. Really? W. James Antle III wrote at The Washington Examiner: “President Trump has work to do to ensure he can replicate his strong 2016 showing among working-class white voters, crucial to his Electoral College victory, this fall. While Trump remains the heavy favorite among this voting bloc, public polling suggests his margins are smaller, and turnout, especially in the battleground states, will be key… “[S]uburban white voters may have turned sharply enough against Trump to balance these gains [with minority voters], and his numbers among white people without college degrees are below the landslide margins that helped propel him into the White House last time around. “A recent Fox News poll found Trump winning 41% of Hispanics nationally, up considerably from the 28% he won according to the 2016 exit polls. The same survey showed him carrying 55% of noncollege white voters, down significantly from the 66% he captured on Election Day four years ago.” Polling is what it is, but it’s extremely difficult to imagine any of these staunch 2016 Trump voters abandoning him at this point. Trump has made good on his campaign promises to rework trade agreements and place greater emphasis on manufacturing in America. Pre COVID-19, the economy was humming along, median incomes were way up and poverty declined. Trump constantly highlighted the Opioid epidemic as well. These voters will not have wholesale jumped off the Trump train this year. The mask fascists are elites, not working-class people. And it’s not like Biden’s going all-in on “climate change” is destined to attract large numbers of working-class folks who stereotypically favor inexpensive energy and enjoy firearms and the great outdoors. I also don’t see these people sympathizing with Black Lives Matter. In other words, I just don’t see it. Republican consultants quoted in Antle’s piece don’t see it either. It may be true that the president continues to struggle with suburbanites, but the others? Who has time to worry about “climate change”? Like Biden, do they consider Trump a “climate arsonist”? Moving into late September, it seems clear polls and pundits will continue seeing Joe Biden as enjoying a comfortable lead in the 2020 horserace. Common sense and experience indicate otherwise, and the more Democrats blame President Trump for wildfires and COVID-19 deaths, the more they stand to lose. American voters aren’t dumb; they’ll show it on Election Day. Donald Trump Joe Biden basement bunker Trump rallies 2020 campaign COVID-19 coronavirus Donald Trump Republican National Convention Kamala Harris grassroots campaign riots Black Lives Matter protests Gavin Newsom western wildfires climate change climate deniers

News aggregator Matt Drudge, whose eponymous website rose to prominence as the site where anti-establishment news was posted without censorship has seen his numbers crash since he abandoned his base and joined the #NeverTrump crowd. A year ago in September 2019 Drudge was pulling close to 95 million readers and well over 100 million in August of 2019. This year Drudge’s monthly traffic in August was 63 million readers, according to similarweb.com analytics, down from 66 million in May. Drudge’s downward spiral began when he mysteriously abandoned the conservative – MAGA viewers that made his website one of the most trafficked sites on the web to become Joe Biden’s biggest cheerleader. The change was so dramatic that BizPac Review reported, ‘We don’t think Matt is there anymore, word is he sold, just waiting for confirmation’ Drudge’s subsequent sallies at President Trump revealed he was still around, so in our view Matt Drudge has earned his place on the president’s hit list. As Vanity Fair pointed out he was a key player in helping the president win the 2016 Republican primary, and thus the presidency, and visited the White House early on—Trump once called him a “great gentleman” and treated his headlines like gospel. Mind you, we have no quarrel with “fair and balanced” as the slogan for one news outlet goes, but Drudge suddenly decided to stab President Trump, and by extension his millions of supporters, in the back. In July, Tucker Carlson, whose Fox News show is regular viewing for the president, called Drudge “firmly a man of the progressive left.” Drudge relentlessly flacked the phony impeachment narrative put out by serial liar Adam Schiff and has done his best to downplay the China connection to the pandemic, while trying to lay the body count at President Trump’s feet. The conflict really escalated when a particularly aggressive Drudge headline noted Trump’s denial that a “Mini-Stroke Sent Him to Hospital,” complete with a kicker: “VIDEO: [Trump] Dragging Right Leg.” Conservatives have naturally voted with their keyboards and taken their web viewing of the news elsewhere, and new anti-establishment web news aggregator have risen to take Drudge’s place. As the citizenfreepress.com posted: I have looked at Matt Drudge’s actual traffic numbers, on Quantcast, every week for the past 12 years. Quantcast is a slice of javascript code you install in the header of your website and it counts every page view and visitor. It functions almost exactly the same as Google Analytics. Matt Drudge used to average 1 billion page views per month, as he famously used to brag. Remember those headlines from 2016 — ‘Thanks a billion!’ He ran that same headline every 30 days for the entire year. Now in 2020 Drudge Report is getting 475 million page views per month. Though the chart only shows the past 30 days, I can attest that his traffic has been in the 450-500 million range for several months in a row. So Matty is down 53% from his peak. “The goal since I started was to get to 10% of Drudge’s traffic by the 2020 election. CFP is at 5% now, so it’s going to be close,” the citizenfreepress told NOQ Report. “For the last 12 months the site has been growing organically by approximately 5,000 readers per month – so we will see if we can hit the goal.” The site is self-funded and does not carry ads. The content on the site is generally conservative and includes links to major right-leaning sites like Breitbart, Hotair, and RedState. It also links to mainstream media sites, though the headlines often point out buried ledes or address the news with snark that ridicules the news itself. For example, a San Diego Union-Tribute article linked to from CFP had the title ”Will electric planes take flight and help cool a warming planet,” but the link text on CFP framed it as, “Climate freaks want ELECTRIC planes — What could possibly go wrong…” President Trump has given a shoutout to another Drudge competitor, Revolver. Tweeting from his @realDonaldTrump account the President posted: “Our people have all left Drudge. He is a confused MESS, has no clue what happened,” Trump tweeted Monday. “Down 51%. @DRUDGE They like REVOLVER and others!” Revolver, the outlet Trump mentioned, is one of several more vocally pro-Trump Drudge alternatives that have appeared in recent months. The president retweeted Rep. Paul Gosar (AZ-4) promoting the outlet as a Drudge alternative earlier in the month. Revolver at https://www.revolver.news/ is part of American Greatness and is unabashedly pro-American and pro-Trump MAGA policy. For example, here are yesterday’s Revolver exclusives: Revolver Exclusive: Disloyal Elements in Trump Administration Plan to Sneak Birthright Citizenship Activist onto Supreme Court Revolver Exclusive — Meet Norm Eisen: Legal Hatchet Man and Central Operative in the “Color Revolution” Against President Trump Of course, our favorite conservative website remains ConservativeHQ.com, with exclusive conservative news and commentary and aggregated links to other top conservative writers and thinkers. Check our new website through this link. 2020 Election Matt Drudge audience NeverTrump anti-Trump Democrats Joe Biden Drudge Report Trump agenda impeachment Revolver

Even Democrats are worried about Joe Biden’s hide-from-the-coronavirus strategy In a year chock full of bizarre and trend-breaking occurrences (impeachment, Joe Biden’s resurrection from the political dead, the discovery and onset of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus, lockdowns, school closures, the George Floyd protests and riots, statue desecrations, more “social unrest” in various blue cities and a presidential contest between two distinctly different worldviews), none has been more puzzling than the Democrats’ inexplicable unwillingness to come out to campaign. Lots of people laugh about Grampa Joe’s “basement bunker” self-quarantine, a plan likely devised by anyone close to the Democrat nominee who’s grasped his inability to run a coherent campaign, much less assume the duties of the president of the United States. Hidin’ Biden has certainly earned his nickname. Up until recently, liberals seemed overconfident that simply tucking Joe away from view -- and practically stuffing a gag into his mouth -- would be good enough to defeat President Donald Trump in November. Now? Maybe they’re not so sure. Amie Parnes and Jonathan Easley reported at The Hill, “Democrats are growing worried about Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s play-it-safe strategy with 50 days to go before the election. “They are specifically worried that as President Trump’s campaign reaches millions of voters through in-person door-knocking events and big rallies held in defiance of coronavirus restrictions, the Biden campaign is relying on digital organizing and phone outreach… “Biden has wrapped his campaign around a follow-the-science approach to the coronavirus, ripping Trump for his handling of the pandemic. His campaign pivoted away from in-person contacts once the pandemic struck, while encouraging voters to mail in ballots. Those wanting Biden to do more traditional campaign events understand the argument, they just worry it will backfire.” Yeah, there’s nothing like getting another email, text, or robo-call from a billion-dollar campaign to generate enthusiasm for your nominee. While it’s safe to say supporters of either candidate get amped up when they hear about a stump event coming to a location near them, it’s just as sure a bet that no one gives a hoot about seeing Joe Biden’s mug in another electronic communication. Radio, TV and internet ads help define the candidates and provide repeated reassurances the message that’s driving the voter bases is being constantly reinforced, but they don’t motivate activists to expend the time and effort to do the drudge work of campaigns. A live rally, however, gets the “troops” juiced to hit the road and fills them with enough resolve to endure the downside of in-person canvassing -- rejection and, unfortunately, hostility from the increasingly unhinged left. The Democrat brains are right to be worried about Biden’s soft approach. I’ve often told my kids, “Nothing great was ever accomplished by sitting around.” Likewise, no campaign was ever won by demonstrating to people that you care so much about them that you wouldn’t dream of coming near them. We live in strange times, but they’re not that strange. And there really isn’t any truth to the above claim that Trump is conducting “door-knocking events and big rallies in defiance of coronavirus restrictions.” Whose restrictions are they talking about? The Hill reporters must be referring to state and local mask mandates or limits on crowd size, etc. But it’s common knowledge that the Chinese plague isn’t known to spread outdoors. And there are strict rules for door-knockers regarding what’s permitted and what’s not when attempting a contact. (And when someone is exposed to a person who has the virus, they voluntarily self-quarantine like West Virginia Republican Senator Shelly Moore Capito did this week.) Therefore, the Democrats’ inertia doesn’t make sense. If it’s supposedly okay for citizens -- even those in the most affected age groups -- to order food delivery or packages brought to the front door, what’s the risk of having a campaign volunteer visit homes, stay comfortably away, wear masks and talk to people? Can you spread the virus through conversation? What gives? Democrats’ continued reliance on the CCP virus as an excuse to run a non-traditional virtual campaign is a curious one. Polls do seem to show that people remain afraid of contracting the disease through in-person contact with infected individuals, but after six months of recommendations, warnings, threats (wear a mask or else!) and a huge dose of begging by those who willfully surrender their freedoms for so-called “security”, the worries over the pandemic have considerably subsided in many ways. Those at higher risk still need to take extra precautions. The rest of the public can adhere to the preventative measures and live life pretty normally, no matter how much the Democrats seem to preach otherwise. You can scare some of the people some of the time but you can’t scare all of the people all of the time. The facts just don’t back up the Democrats’ fears. GOP convention featured a number of live gatherings, and no one’s fallen ill The Republican National Convention concluded three weeks ago on August 27th. The party’s headlining end-of-daily-program acts -- namely, first lady Melania Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, and Trump himself, all spoke before live socially-distanced audiences of various sizes. The president accepted his re-nomination in front of at least a thousand (I couldn’t find the exact figure, but it could’ve easily been much higher) living, inhaling and exhaling human beings positioned on the White House south lawn on a beautiful summer evening in the nation’s capital. Melania gave her speech before a considerably smaller group in the White House rose garden, but there were still, what, a couple hundred at minimum? Pence used the dramatic backdrop of Baltimore’s Fort McHenry to speak to a gathering that filled the inside of the patriotic landmark. The onlookers included a number of elderly veterans and the vice president’s 87-year-old mother, all members of the most vulnerable (to the virus) demographic groups. Yet no one -- at least that I’ve heard -- has developed a confirmed case of COVID-19 from being at the convention. And you can bet the media would be all over reports of someone in the various audiences being checked into a hospital and hooked up to a ventilator. Joe Biden himself would probably call a news conference outside the facility with scripted questions from the journo drones and proceed to read off a teleprompter the contact-tracing timeline for the sensationalism hungry media, anxious to run the scoop on how the Trump campaign was responsible for callously “endangering” all those people. Granted I didn’t tune-in to CNN, MSNBC or any of the “major” networks very often during the RNC, but when I did switch channels, the pols and pundits were invariably talking about the lack of personal protective equipment worn by the folks at the RNC. I thought CNN’s Dana Bash was primed to throw a fit after Trump spoke with “essential” workers who’d continually dealt with and even recovered from a bout with the virus. But it’s a very safe bet that anyone who gets within sniffing distance of the president or anyone in the White House that they’d been tested, re-tested, examined and had their temperatures taken -- and been given a clean bill of health. I think it’s called common sense. Does anyone have it anymore? Of course, after Trump’s speech, Black Lives Matter “protesters” mobbed event attendees simply trying to walk to their cars or hotels. A good many of the young miscreants “raising awareness” about systemic racism and the lack of fairness in America’s police forces and justice apparatus weren’t wearing masks. And some of those who were had the devices dangling well below their noses. In essence, were they flaunting the mask mandates… or were they given permission by the Democrat party to ignore the rules? Therein lies the problem for Democrats. They need to continue to pound the message that everyone’s in danger and that Biden is merely being prudent -- and patriotic -- by staying put in his home and not unnecessarily exposing anyone by holding mass campaign events. Needless to say, the party’s advance teams are breathing a sigh of relief because they don’t have to do the work of trying to stir up a crowd to come and hear Grampa Joe mumble and stumble his way through a public appearance. Democrats themselves acknowledge that the election outcome will boil down to Trump’s enthusiasm-filled backers versus the angry, venomous, vindictive, spiteful, nasty, revenge-seeking anti-Trump voters. Conservatives and Republicans acknowledge that there are millions of Americans who don’t take to Trump. But it’s not sufficient justification to choose a man like Biden who is the placeholder of all placeholders, a prime candidate for the first ever use of the 25th Amendment’s removal power and a man so brain-dulled that he sometimes can’t even remember what office he’s running for -- or where he is at the moment. The most talented political consultant in the world can’t devise a campaign where the candidate -- and/or his handlers -- is afraid to face the voters. Yet that’s what’s happening this year. Uh oh, Joe Biden isn’t the only gaffe-machine on the Democrat ticket It goes without saying that many seasoned American political observers speculate Joe Biden is serving as the most electable Democrat for one reason and one reason only: to open the door of power to a true-believer dedicated leftist who couldn’t otherwise win the election in a million years, but will still be in charge when Joe’s deposed. Liberal vice president candidate Kamala Harris let the real plan slip the other day. You can’t make this stuff up. Valerie Richardson reported at The Washington Times, “Sen. Kamala Harris, California Democrat, has another way of describing a Biden administration if the Democratic ticket prevails in November: ‘a Harris administration together with Joe Biden.’ “In a Saturday video address, Ms. Harris made what was either a misstatement or a Freudian slip by referring to a potential ‘Harris administration.’ ‘A Harris administration together with Joe Biden as the President of the United States, the Biden-Harris administration, will provide access to $100 billion in low-interest loans and investments for minority business owners,’ she said in the five-minute statement to a small-business roundtable. “Her gaffe, first reported by the Arizona Republic, was quickly picked up by the Trump campaign.” Look for President Trump to highlight Harris’s genuine feelings in his next outdoor campaign rally. To rehash, Kamala Harris’s dig at Biden during the first Democrat presidential candidates’ debate (in June, 2019) was probably the single most memorable moment of the COVID-19 shortened primary campaign. The California senator’s “I was that girl” prepared grandstanding speech temporarily vaulted her into the top tier of liberal would-be challengers to Trump. Then Americans discovered that Harris really isn’t likeable in addition to the fact she’s a mean-spirited former prosecutor who appears to take great satisfaction from brow-beating people for political expedience (see Kavanaugh, Brett). Since she accepted Biden’s invitation to join his ticket, the woman’s overly-contrived and phony happy-gal demeanor isn’t fooling anyone. Kamala obviously views Grampa Joe as the rapidly faltering means to an end -- her being gifted the presidency without the voter-tested approval of the public. Can you imagine Mike Pence saying, “A Pence Administration together with Donald Trump as President of the United States”? The humble Indiana man would never place himself on such a lofty ego-driven pedestal. But Harris does. We haven’t heard the last of this. As the election nears and Biden actually emerges from his protective bunker to participate in presidential debates and larger scale campaign events, his mental acuity will be under ever-closer scrutiny. When it’s blatantly unmistakable that the Democrat presidential candidate is a doddering dunce on the verge of being admitted to a care facility, a lot of folks will remember how Harris sees herself. And it won’t be flattering. In this craziest of all nutty campaign years, it wouldn’t be shocking to see Democrats start locking Kamala Harris away as well as Joe Biden. Maybe liberals could just send Barack and Michelle Obama out to speak to small collections of masked donors and supporters. Desperate times call for desperate measures, right? Donald Trump Joe Biden basement bunker Trump rallies 2020 campaign COVID-19 coronavirus Donald Trump Republican National Convention Kamala Harris grassroots campaign riots Black Lives Matter protests

U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV, a Trump appointee, ruled on Monday that Pennsylvania Democrat Governor Tom Wolf’s coronavirus orders, which shut down the state, closed businesses and limited gatherings, were unconstitutional. The efforts to stop the spread of the coronavirus “were undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency,” Stickman wrote according to reporting by Justine Coleman of The Hill newspaper. "The liberties protected by the Constitution are not fair-weather freedoms — in place when times are good but able to be cast aside in times of trouble," Stickman wrote in an opinion that has become a rallying cry for conservatives across the country. "There is no question that this Country has faced, and will face, emergencies of every sort. But the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment." According to Ms. Coleman’s reporting four Pennsylvania counties — Butler, Fayette, Greene and Washington — along with Rep. Mike Kelly (PA-16), three state representatives, and seven businesses and their owners challenged the state government’s coronavirus orders. Their lawsuit was filed in May, when these counties were in the “red” phase that required residents to stay at home. Matt Petrillo of CBS 3 Philly reports business owners say they’ve been waiting to hear a ruling like this for months. “It actually brings tears to my eyes,” Nichole Missino told Mr. Petrillo. Missino, owner of Giovanni’s Barber Shop in Media, Delaware County, reacted Monday after judge Stickman agreed with her that Wolf’s business shutdown order was unconstitutional. Giovanni’s defied the shutdown order amid the pandemic and reopened in May. “We didn’t have any money coming in from anywhere. It was awful, we were closed for 10 weeks, my barbers were starving,” Missino said. “It’s a complete and total victory for the counties, the businesses and the representatives,” said attorney Thomas W. King III, who represented the plaintiffs in the case. “You can’t order the entire population of Pennsylvania to stay at home.” According to reporting by Paula Reed Ward of triblive.com, plaintiff’s attorney King said the judge’s decision finding gathering limits to be unconstitutional now applies to everyone in Pennsylvania. He said the finding that the stay-at-home order was unconstitutional means it can never be repeated. As for the closure of nonessential businesses, King believes that will open the door to business owners filing lawsuits against the state seeking relief, or compensation, for their losses during the closure. “Our goal in bringing this action was that our county commissioners in Butler believed these orders were unconstitutional and unconstitutionally affected residents of their county.” In testimony for the case, King said, there was no medical evidence presented relative to the spread of covid-19, and Levine did not testify and instead sent a representative to do so. King said he posed the question — once the stay-at-home order was lifted in early June — what establishments in Allegheny County were responsible for the increased spread of the virus, and no one could answer. “You can’t just shut down American society,” King said according to Ms. Ward’s reporting. Stickman wrote that the Constitution “sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency.” “The fact is that the lockdowns imposed across the United States in early 2020 in response to the covid-19 pandemic are unprecedented in the history of our commonwealth and our country,” Stickman wrote. “They have never been used in response to any other disease in our history. They were not recommendations made by the CDC.” Stickman wrote that the defendants never had a set definition for what constituted a “life-sustaining” business, and instead the definition remained in flux. Stickman wrote that there also was no precedent for the closure of nonessential businesses. “Never before has the government taken a direct action which shuttered so many businesses and sidelined so many employees and rendered their ability to operate, and to work, solely dependent on government discretion,” he said. Stickman wrote that the right of citizens to support themselves in their chosen occupation “is deeply rooted in our nation’s legal and cultural history.” “A total shutdown of a business with no end-date and the specter of additional, future shutdowns can cause critical damage to a business’s ability to survive, to an employee’s ability to support him/herself, and adds a government-induced cloud of uncertainty to the usual unpredictability of nature and life.” President Trump, in a tweet celebrating the ruling, said: “Congratulations Pennsylvania. Now we await the decision on the Rigged Ballot Scam, which is so bad for our Country!” He went on to retweet more than 20 references to the story. The governor’s office issued a statement, saying they are disappointed in the ruling and are looking to appeal the decisions that say the stay-at-home and business shutdown orders were unconstitutional. "There's no sense debating a ruling that will be appealed," Wolf said in response to Judge Stickman’s ruling. In other words, the Democrat Governor plans to continue to keep Pennsylvania businesses, such as Giovanni’s Barber Shop in Media, starving while he litigates to reclaim the arbitrary and tyrannical power he arrogated to himself under the guise of protecting Pennsylvanians from the Chinese Communist Party’s virus. Judge Stickman seemed to anticipate Democrat Governor Wolf’s plan to appeal when he wrote, “even a vigilant public may let down its guard over its constitutional liberties only to find that liberties, once relinquished, are hard to recoup and that restrictions — while expedient in the face of an emergency situation — may persist long after immediate danger has passed.” The Capitol Switchboard is (1-866-220-0044), we ask CHQ readers and friends to call Senator Lindsey Graham, Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to demand there be no let up or slowdown in the confirmation of President Trump’s judicial nominees. 2020 Election U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV Trump appointees Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf coronavirus orders lockdowns Constitution liberty business owners stay-at-home orders

Cultural conservatives and the parents of young girls were outraged when, back in August, Netflix released a trailer for a movie called Cuties, to be released this month. The advertisement for the new release featured 11-year-old girls twerking in short skirts, clearly sexualizing young girls. But the Hollywood elites keep trying to reframe and repackage, to convince people that this film is, somehow, worthwhile. Conservatives have an entirely different view and have begun to cancel their Netflix accounts in response to this disgusting appeal to pedophilia and the sexualization of children. In addition to the grassroots #CancelNetflix movement, principled limited government constitutional conservative Senators Mike Lee of Utah, Josh Hawley of Missouri and Ted Cruz of Texas have taken steps to get this disgusting appeal to pedophiles taken down. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) sent a letter to Netflix CEO Reed Hastings Friday, asking the CEO to explain why his company’s film “Cuties” doesn’t constitute a criminal exploitation of minors. “While I have concerns with the movie’s young actresses’ influence on other young girls, my larger concern is with the possibility that the inappropriate scenes might encourage the sexual exploitation of young girls by adults,” the letter reads. “The federal government currently spends hundreds of millions of dollars combating child trafficking, child sexual exploitation, and child pornography both domestically and abroad,” the letter continues. “My staff is reviewing the film and the pertinent law to determine whether to refer the presentation of this film to the United States Attorney General for investigation. It would be most helpful if you could provide my office with an explanation on your views as to whether or not the potential exploitation of minors in this film constitutes criminal behavior by Friday, September 18, 2020,” the letter concludes. Similarly, Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) sent a letter to Netflix CEO Reed Hastings calling for the removal of Cuties. Senator Hawley wrote, “In early 2019, journalists first began to report that YouTube videos of children in partial states of exposure were being ‘inundated with comments’ by pedophiles, exposing the children involved in the videos and other children visiting the platform to potential harm. Now Netflix is airing a film called Cuties depicting children being coached to engage in simulated sexual acts, for cameras both onscreen and off. Your decision to do so raises major questions of child safety and exploitation, including the possibility of copycat behavior and exploitation of child actors.” And, wrote Sen. Hawley, “in the interim, please immediately remove this film from your platform.” Sen. Hawley invited Hastings to respond to the following questions no later than Friday, September 18, 2020: Why did your company designate this film with a “TV-MA” for “language” without any mention of its graphic sexual content? In marketing this film, did Netflix consult with any experts or authorities on combating child sexual exploitation or the psychological and emotional impacts of the sexualization of minors? In marketing this film, did Netflix consult with any law enforcement authorities or experts about the possibility of copycat behavior, such as the viewing and imitation of hardcore pornography, by children who may see this film? Did Netflix, at any point, take measures to ensure the protection of the physical, mental, and emotional health of child actors made to perform simulated sex acts and filmed in sexual or sexually suggestive ways? Why did your company choose to market this film—which touches on a range of issues including religion, culture, and social media—with a poster solely depicting scantily clad preteens in sexually suggestive positions?[2] Why did your company choose to market this film with a poster different from the French original, which depicts children throwing confetti in the street?[3] What internal algorithmic designations has Netflix appended to this film, and what are the primary algorithmic characteristics of the film’s primary viewership as of today, September 11, 2020? Following Netflix’s disturbing promotion and defense of what Senator Ted Cruz called “its new pornographic film sexualizing young children,” Sen. Cruz skipped sending a letter to Netflix CEO Reed Hastings and sent a letter to Attorney General William Barr calling on the Department of Justice to investigate whether Netflix, its executives, or the makers of the film “Cuties” violated any federal laws against the production and distribution of child pornography. In the letter to Attorney General Bill Barr, Sen. Cruz wrote: The film routinely fetishizes and sexualizes these pre-adolescent girls as they perform dances simulating sexual conduct in revealing clothing, including at least one scene with partial child nudity. These scenes in and of themselves are harmful. And it is likely that the filming of this movie created even more explicit and abusive scenes, and that pedophiles across the world in the future will manipulate and imitate this film in abusive ways. Sen. Cruz concluded: As you know, the Department of Justice has a significant role in preventing the sexual abuse of children. The Department enforces federal criminal law making it a serious crime to produce or distribute material involving the sexual exploitation of minors, including the filming of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct. […] Although the First Amendment provides vigorous protection for artistic expression, it does not allow individuals or for-profit corporations to produce or distribute child pornography. Accordingly, I urge the Department to investigate the production of ‘Cuties’ and Netflix’s distribution of the film in order to determine whether Netflix, any of its executives, or anyone involved with the making of ‘Cuties’ violated any federal laws against the production and distribution of child pornography. To join us in cancelling Netflix follow the simple directions you can access through this link. 2020 Election Democrats Cuties Netflix Barack Obama Michelle Obama pedophilia Joe Biden twerking sexualization of children #CancelNetflix Sen. Mike Lee Sen. Ted Cruz Sen. Josh Hawley Netflix CEO Reed Hastings William Barr child pornography

If you thought the Democrats’ doom and gloom fixation ended at last month’s DNC… It doesn’t take a genius to proclaim Democrats don’t have much to say these days that offers anyone hope of a brighter tomorrow, but liberal party members aren’t just forecasting a gloomy future if President Donald Trump wins reelection in November. They’re saying the past was just as pathetic and sad, too. Most of the Democrats’ current angst centers on a book/expose detailing Trump’s thoughts during the early days of the COVID-19 health pandemic. As is usually the scenario, Trump sought to keep calm in the face of an unknown challenge. But instead of complimenting the president on his leadership and steadiness in crisis, Democrats chastise him for not freaking out. Yes, it’s true. They think he was too subdued on this one. W. James Antle III wrote at The Washington Examiner, “Veteran journalist Bob Woodward’s forthcoming book Rage has triggered a debate over how President Trump publicly talks about the coronavirus — which, aside from his descriptions of China’s role in the pandemic, has often been characterized more by optimistic pronouncements than rage. “Trump regularly predicts that the worst is over and the virus will soon disappear, even as the U.S. death toll climbs. But interviews with Woodward suggest the president understood its severity even as he issued these public reassurances, prompting reporters to pepper the White House with questions about whether this was dishonest. Joe Biden said that Trump lied and people died. ‘He knew and purposely played it down. Worse, he lied to the American people. He knowingly and willingly lied about the threat posed to the country for months,’ the Democratic nominee argued in Michigan...” Upon hearing that Bob Woodward was planning the release of another Trump tell-all book, my first thought was, “Oh no, here we go again, the ‘All The President’s Men’ thing is back.” Remember it was only a month ago that Woodward’s Washington Post/big Watergate scoop partner Carl Bernstein concocted his own crazy unhinged scheme involving Republican congressional leaders going to the president and telling him that they were taking over the governing of the country and the GOP would choose another candidate to run in November. And all of this would be for the good of the country. Clearly, fame and excessive and undeserved notoriety have infiltrated the craniums of both Woodward and Bernstein to the point where no sunlight of veracity shines through to discredit their blatantly biased “reporting” and political commentary. While it’s (supposedly) true Woodward’s book is based on Trump interviews with the man, there obviously was no inkling back when the conversations were held that the Democrats would base their entire 2020 campaign on the notion of “Trump lied (about the coronavirus) and people died.” Here’s thinking the same people who give a hoot about what Michael Cohen, Stormy Daniels, Omarosa Manigault and Anthony Scaramucci say regarding Trump are the ones who will buy Woodward’s conglomeration and give credence to what it says. There probably won’t be that many (readers), but then again, Trump’s name has fueled liberal Democrat profit taking for years now. Didn’t Hillary Clinton get a big advance for her total failure “What Happened” screed? The ruling class’s animus towards Trump knows no bounds though he’s (directly or indirectly) made a lot of them rich. And in the case of Democrats, Trump’s provided a bogeyman to run against for three straight elections now (including this one). For five solid years they’ve been snooping and probing and prodding and sniffing (Joe Biden taking in some woman’s scent!) and prying and meddling and sneaking into the lifelong real estate developer and reality TV celebrity’s background and family business. It could easily be argued that Trump is the most thoroughly vetted politician of all-time. He’s got dirty laundry from decades ago that might turn up in the inner recesses of some enemy’s mind, but at this stage, there’s nothing that would dent his reputation with his supporters. It won’t be Bob Woodward cracking the shell, at least. Democrats will have to look underneath some other railroad pass or sewer cover for the smoking gun that will bring down Trump. Woodward’s “revelation” that Trump attempted to play down the danger from the Chinese Communist Party (or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus isn’t really news at all. Six months ago, practically everyone was looking at everyone else seeking answers to what it was all about. Politicians from both parties told Americans not to panic. Democrats Andrew Cuomo and Bill de Blasio suggested New York City was entirely safe and none other than Nancy Pelosi told folks to come out and join her in Chinatown for some good ol’ fashioned food and fun. Biden himself savaged Trump for halting travel from China, saying it was unnecessary and “xenophobic.” About that time, reports were surfacing out of Italy about how bad the virus was -- to elderly people. Communist China immediately silenced whistleblowers (real ones, not the fake Adam Schiff variety) who dared to speak out about the origin of the thing -- and some of them paid with their lives. Why not play it down if you’re the POTUS? Would it have been better to “play it up?” Didn’t Trump appoint Vice President Mike Pence to lead the effort in battling the virus and didn’t his task force issue guidelines such as “15 Days to Slow the Spread”? Didn’t Trump give very prominent public advisory roles to Dr. Anthony Fauci and others to discuss the ongoing efforts to figure out what was happening with the virus and then provide guidance on how to beat it? What do Democrats think should’ve been done instead? The nation’s ultimate armchair quarterback/backseat driver, Joe Biden, relentlessly spouts nonsense about taking it (the virus) seriously, wearing a mask, mobilizing the government to get Personal Protective Equipment to first responders and hospitals and, generally, plead with everyone to maintain social distance and avoid large gatherings. Didn’t Trump already do this? To say otherwise is akin to shoveling a bucket full of horsepucky. Reasonable people give leaders some leeway to act in good faith, but not the Democrats In his piece, Antle further wrote, “Critics respond by saying that usually when Trump is truly concerned about something, or wants his supporters to be, he warns of ‘American carnage,’ rather than invoking the ‘light at the end of the tunnel.’ ‘Throughout his five years on the national political stage, Trump has used fear to acquire and keep power,’ opined Washington Post reporter Philip Rucker. ‘Scare tactics are the hammer and screwdriver of his toolkit.’” Well, Rucker’s statement only rings true if we’re talking about Trump’s admonishments and warnings against a horrible destiny in “Joe Biden’s America.” Otherwise Trump usually is effusive in his praise of America, its founders, its ideals, its principles, its exceptionalism, its diversity, its impressive national resources, its human capital, its can-do spirit and the willingness of its citizens to sacrifice and endure hardship to further the common good. Trump called himself a “cheerleader” for the country. Very apropos. Again, what should’ve been done in the early stages of COVID-19? No one knew where it came from, where it spread to, who’s most susceptible to getting it and most urgently, how to effectively treat it. It was like flying blind, wasn’t it? We didn’t know whether to see it as just another media-fanned panic over the latest virus (SARS, Swine flu, West Nile, Ebola, etc.) or as something that was truly pervasive and dangerous this time. How bad was it? We still don’t really know. It was uncharted waters. There’s a challenge in the reality show Big Brother where contestants are set loose in a pitch black room and tasked with not only finding hidden targets (usually safety for the week or possibly a luxury item), they also need to discover a way out of the place. As would be expected, the players bump into things, each other, stick their digits in disgusting-feeling goop and, as was the case this year, lose their shorts (a woman got stuck on something in the dark room and they were pulled off -- and yes, she was wearing underwear). Those participants who are instructed to endure the less-than-desirable test gripe and moan and mutter to themselves about how unfair and difficult it is to try and find something you don’t know you’re looking for in conditions where there’s nothing but your senses, sans vision, to point you in the right direction. For the people watching at home, it’s great entertainment, viewed with a sense of relief that real life isn’t like that. Or is it? Who felt comfortable, from the outset, that there was enough known about the CCP virus to devise fail-safe and unassailable solutions to something no one could understand much less pin down? In the beginning, the media labeled it the “novel coronavirus” and seemed to cheer on the notion that everyone was at high risk and therefore the whole country needed shuttering -- schools, businesses, offices, churches, amusement parks, movie theaters, cruise ships, major sports, gyms, you name it. Put on a mask? What for? Dr. Fauci and the World Health Organization originally said wearing one wouldn’t prevent the spread. Anyone who claims we weren’t stumbling around in obscurity like the houseguests on Big Brother during one of their challenges is lying -- or seeing hindsight through rose colored glasses. Democrats grasped an opportunity to damage Trump’s reelection chances through pinning the mounting death toll to the president even though he’d gone along with Congress’s massive relief bills and even directed military hospital ships to hot spots to stave off a mad rush on medical capacity. Meanwhile, blue state governors and mayors were implementing policies where ultra-vulnerable seniors were haphazardly put in situations they couldn’t escape. Does it really take much smarts to not place infected patients in a crowded environment involving health-challenged old folks with little or no immunity? Tens of thousands died, yet the media still insists that these bungling Democrat politicians “cared” more about their constituents and “took it seriously.” Hogwash. People who aren’t fully consumed with the persistent panic disseminated by liberal cable news channels and newspapers recognize that everything that could’ve been done was done. President Trump’s optimism during the crisis hasn’t cost a single American life, and those who claim otherwise are shameless political opportunists with an agenda separate from health concerns. Election Day will reveal where the country comes down on the matter. Do people see through the ruse? Suburban baseball mom Trump supporter stays mum. Are there more like her? With mainstream establishment media coverage of President Trump well over ninety percent negative, it’s no wonder why people aren’t always confident about expressing their support for the president’s reelection campaign in public. Experience shows there could be a psycho Trump Derangement Syndrome afflicted kook embedded in your next door neighbor or even lurking inside a parent you considered a friend at the little league baseball fields. One anonymous Northern Virginia mom wrote about her experiences at Spectator USA. Does she sound like you or someone you know? Anonymous wrote, “[T]he pandemic changed life as we know it. In May, while our state was still under a shelter in place order, the same senior moms who reminded us to vote in their primary were hosting faux ‘prom dinners’ for their seniors and taking photos (many without masks) that were posted on social media. Rules for thee, but not me. It’s the Democrat way. “Thankfully, in June, youth baseball games started back-up. I made the comment to my fellow baseball mom, how did we get here? She quickly proclaimed that it didn’t have to be like this: if we’d had a true lockdown like other countries and if we had consistent messaging from the government, we’d be on our way out of this mess. So, yeah, it’s all Trump’s fault. What about China’s role? What about the wealthy business and leisure travelers who spread the disease to our most vulnerable populations, I wanted to say — the nursing home residents, illegal immigrants and essential workers? But, I said nothing. I remain silent. “Am I just a wimp? Maybe, but there’s so much hate targeted towards Trump and his supporters...” As I mentioned a week or so ago, our experience mirrors this woman’s in many respects. My son’s “Trump 2020” mask has had a way of giving people confidence that other Trump people are out there and all they need to do is give an approving glance or a thumbs up. It’s almost like a secret society where the majority pretends to go along with the vocal minority, and then the surprise is sprung when the votes are tallied. One can only hope more people start speaking their minds. But signs are everywhere that the “silent majority” will roar at the ballot box. Democrats are working overtime to make the 2020 election all about a Chinese virus and the government’s response to it, but Americans won’t be fooled by the distraction. Joe Biden’s and his fellow party members’ overreaction to the pandemic has turned a lot of people off, and there’s no way the country would ever accept another lockdown. What then, Democrats? COVID-19 coronavirus 2020 Election Trump administration response Joe Biden silent majority polls Rage Bob Woodward Carl Bernstein

You remember “Pizzagate” and the rumor that was circulated in 2016 that Hillary Clinton and other Democrats were heading up a child sex-trafficking ring out of a Washington pizzeria. The conspiracy theory originated on 4chan and was based on emails hacked from the Democratic Party and published by Wikileaks. It stated that Hillary Clinton and her former campaign manager, John Podesta, ran a child sex ring at Comet Ping Pong in Washington. A 29-year-old North Carolina man, Edgar Maddison Welch, went to the Washington pizzeria in December of 2016, and fired his gun, wrongly believing he was saving children trapped in a sex-slave ring. He was sentenced to four years in prison for firing a weapon inside the pizzeria and other offenses. It turns out that while the “Pizzagate” conspiracy theory got the location wrong, it wasn’t entirely off base in tying Democrats to pedophilia. California’s Democrat Governor Gavin Newsome recently signed into law SB 145, which exempts a person convicted of non-forcible sodomy with a minor, oral copulation with a minor, or sexual penetration with a minor, as specified, from having to automatically register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registry Act if the person was not more than 10 years older than the minor at the time of the offense, and the conviction is the only one requiring the person to register. In other words, the measure ends the automatic addition to the state’s sex offender registry list for adults who have oral or anal sex with a minor. Or as our friend Dr. Everett Piper @dreverettpiper explained via Twitter: CA LGBTQ caucus votes to protect 22 year-olds who engage in sex with 12 year-olds from “blatant discrimination.” @PC1170 Yes - you read that right California Democrat state Sen. Scott Wiener, who introduced the legislation, said in a statement on social media the new law would put an end to “blatant discrimination against young LGBT people engaged in consensual activity.” However, as Ian G. Haworth, a political commentator and writer, based in the California Bay Area and the host of the daily podcast “The Ian Haworth Show” pointed out in a column for Townhall: …the language used by Sen. Wiener when he celebrated Newsom’s support. SB-145 “ended “blatant discrimination” against LGBTQ youth,” presenting the recipients of intercourse as the victims of “blatant discrimination.” However, SB-145 has no impact on the minor, but the person convicted of statutory rape. Indeed, presenting SB-145 as having achieved some form of equality for minors is absurd when the law only weakens the punishment for those who abuse minors. Attorney Samuel Dordulian, a former Deputy District Attorney for Los Angeles County, who worked as a sex crimes prosecutor said of the new law, "SB 145 is a misguided attempt to amend laws that the bill’s sponsors argue disproportionately target LGBT people. I would argue that allowing more 25-year-olds who assault 15-years-olds an opportunity to avoid the sex offender registry is no service to the LGBT community. Rather, it hamstrings a valuable deterrent for reducing sex crimes that deleteriously impact all communities. Most importantly, there’s a far more urgent issue that requires the attention and action of California’s elected officials.” Former Oakland Police Department officer Leah Anaya, writing for Law Enforcement Today, got it right when she wrote: If you’re a pedophile and want to rape sweet, innocent, young children, then California is the state for you. If you’re a parent who cares about the safety of your sweet, innocent, young children, then get the hell out of California. The far left is going even further off the deep end, an act I didn’t think was even possible. And the ones most affected by their proposed asinine legislation are those very children you want so much to protect, and pedophiles want so much to molest. And: It means that a bleeding-heart judge can allow a sex offender to just “live his truth” because, hey, it’s not his fault that he is obsessed with and turned on by children. It means that an 18-year old man can engage in sexual intercourse or activities with an 8-year old boy or girl and would not necessarily have to register as a sex offender. Just read those last few sentences one more time to make sure you are taking in the absolute horrendousness of it. How can this even be a possibility, you might be asking? It is simple, Democrats long ago rejected the Biblical definition of appropriate human relations and embraced every form of deviancy as being a form of self-expression, which must be recognized as legitimate and protected by law. When you go to the polls this November, when you vote Republican are not just voting for law and order, you are voting for protecting children from abuse that has been recognized as abhorrent for the 2,000+ years Judeo-Christian mores have held sway in the West. 2020 Election California SB 145 Gavin Newsom sex offender registry Sen. Scott Wiener LGBT child sexual abuse