Search Results

In November, Americans should not accept getting what they deserve “Every nation gets the government it deserves” -- Savoyard philosopher Joseph de Maistre For those unfamiliar with de Maistre, he was no liberty-loving revolutionary. According to Wikipedia, he was, “A key figure of the Counter-Enlightenment, Maistre regarded monarchy both as a divinely sanctioned institution and as the only stable form of government. He called for the restoration of the House of Bourbon to the throne of France and for the ultimate authority of the Pope in temporal matters. Maistre argued that the rationalist rejection of Christianity was directly responsible for the disorder and bloodshed which followed the French Revolution of 1789.” Wow, heavy stuff. If you bring up de Maistre’s name and background at an otherwise happenin’ party, don’t be surprised if your fellow guests make a polite excuse and leave your presence to seek out a sunnier disposition in some other reveler. There aren’t a whole lot of folks these days who would argue for a return to monarchy in order to inspire more stability in government, but nevertheless, de Maistre’s observation -- “Every nation gets the government it deserves” -- is a salient one. And, his final point -- that rejecting Christianity led to the bloody French Revolution’s aftermath -- well, it’s hard to argue in that case. There’s a lot of lack of belief going ‘round these days, too. Nevertheless, with some polls showing Democrats primed to not only defeat President Donald Trump in November but also maintain or increase the party’s hold on the House of Representatives -- and take the majority in the Senate -- there are a lot of sensible people thinking that if America is be dumb enough to vote the liberal party into power across the board, then maybe we deserve what we get. Yes, things have gotten that bad. As would be expected, some feckless congressional Republicans are among those squawking the loudest about the coming ballot box catastrophe. In a piece titled, “Republicans fear disaster in November,” Olivia Beavers and JulieGrace Brufke reported at The Hill, “Republicans are privately fearing the worst possible outcome in November, one that could leave them without the White House or a majority in either chamber of Congress next year. “House Republicans face numerous, almost insurmountable obstacles: a cash shortfall against the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, 27 retiring lawmakers and a Republican National Committee that is more focused on reelecting President Trump and protecting the Senate GOP majority. They also need to pick up a net 17 seats to win back the House. “While Republicans noted the political landscape appears to change by the day, some are expressing a growing sense of doom.” Of course the “doom” was predicted by anonymous lawmakers who were so sure of themselves (not!) that they wouldn’t lend their names to the record. (To be fair, both House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Minority Whip Steve Scalise weren’t nearly so cynical.) Most of those interviewed seemed satisfied that Trump would turn things around soon and, if so, there’s at least a fighting chance for good things on Election Day. For the naysayers -- shocking, isn’t it? Hard to imagine (again, not!) establishment Republicans being pessimistic about their chances in an upcoming election, but remember, they aren’t Democrats. If it wasn’t obvious already from observing liberals since the days of Jimmy Carter, Democrats always think they’re going to win. It’s a type of hubris that’s ultra-contagious among lovers of big government because they automatically assume everyone loves “free stuff”, amnesty, abortion and the LGBTQ agenda and wouldn’t dream of rejecting checks from Uncle Sam even if they realize deep down that their grandchildren’s grandchildren will be paying it back. Likewise, liberals bet on Americans being drawn by the millions to the cause of Black Lives Matter and the “largely peaceful” street demonstrations while turning the other cheek to rioting and drastic boosts in street violence. For weeks after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, hordes of “woke” young adults and hip oldsters marched side by side with signs and slogans about “justice” and “change” and… well, you know. Get rid of the police and everything will be hunky-dory! If you don’t believe it, just ask the former residents of CHOP (or was it CHAZ?). Confidence -- or a lack thereof -- is a funny thing. It’s like a certain professional football team in the Buckeye State that’s enjoyed year-after-year of high first round draft choices. Fans figured such a regular infusion of great talent would equate to success on the field. The only problem is the other teams weren’t so sure that pedigrees were as important as team chemistry, selfless attitudes, hard work, great coaching an organizational structure built around winning. Today’s Democrats think they’ve got the best candidates pitted against the most hated of all presidents in history, and that the top of the ticket will drag the rest of the Republicans down with him. Their pollsters tell ‘em it’s true. And those professional prognosticators also rave about how scared people are of their own mortality due to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP, or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus, and that voters blame Trump for a purportedly slow response that’s cost tens of thousands of lives. The vast majority of establishment media members are perpetuating the myth because they want to see Trump founder (even though he’s a ratings and readership generating machine for practically everyone in the industry, regardless of ideology). Democrats’ strategy is transparently simple: keep Joe Biden muzzled and out of the spotlight so the uninformed can still envision him as the same ‘ol back slappin’, mask wearin’, hairdo sniffin’, child repellin’, nude swimmin’, shoulders massagin’ and sexual assault denyin’ great guy he’s always been. So what if he’s visibly failing and supplies truckloads’ worth of gaffes whenever he opens his mouth. Last week, for example, Joe said to a group of Hispanic and black journalists, “By the way, what you all know but most people don’t know, unlike the African American community with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly different attitudes about different things.” Huh? This is a direct quote. Any nation that elects Joe Biden as its leader deserves what it gets, a politician who’s so beholden to ethnic groups and spreading racial divisions that he can’t get it straight even when he’s pandering to them. Do we really want four years of this? Electing Democrats will have consequences; people who vote should hear about them But this isn’t a personality contest and the election is about more than the difference between Grampa Joe and the always quotable Donald Trump. The media would love for Americans to consider 2020 as a single-issue referendum on four more years of Trump’s tweets and quirky interviews versus the affable and likable Biden, even if the man can’t seem to stop sticking his foot in his mouth. Trump hasn’t made it easier on Republicans by constantly picking petty fights with cultural figures and never letting well-enough alone, but the onus is on everyone in the conservative universe to make it a choice between worldviews instead of “he’s offensive versus he’s old and stupid”. Trump can do his part by returning time and again to the big themes he championed in 2016 -- stopping illegal immigration, law enforcement, safe streets, national security, lower taxes and regulation, getting the government out of business decisions, energy exploration, America-first trade, safeguarding every American’s right to bear arms, protecting the unborn and vigorously defending religious liberty. And appointing originalist judges who interpret laws rather than make them. This is what nationalizing the election looks like, and down-ballot Republicans should stick to the big items as well instead of engaging in nitpicking and criticizing their own leader. If Democrats win, their policies will destroy the country. It’s been said a lot lately, but with Joe Biden in the White House, another congressional term with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker and an upper chamber led by the always on the verge of tears “Chucky” Schumer -- sans the filibuster -- liberals will run roughshod over constitutional rights and traditions as well as explode the budget deficit. As a test case, the Trump administration recently pushed to make the big tech giants stop filtering and censoring conservatives’ free speech; this would be replaced by bureaucrats enabling the liberal robber barons to do whatever they want in the name of banning “hate speech” and obedience to the thought police (the only police liberals tend to like). Democrats don’t want people to speak freely or advance opinions contrary to the prevailing elitist wisdom. A Biden presidency would mean constant kowtowing to leftist organizations and accepting the dictates of the LGBTQ lobby even when the vast majority of Americans either don’t care or oppose what the interest groups stand for. If voters don’t wake up to the realities -- and Republicans don’t vigorously campaign on what the legislative outcomes would be -- then it could be said we’ll get what we deserve. Who would’ve thought we’d prove de Maistre correct two centuries later? In football, run for yards, throw for miles, but a political ground game is essential It's often said of quarterbacks that they should always think pass-first and leave running as a last resort. The old refrain, “Run for yards and pass for miles” was somewhat disproved last year by Baltimore Ravens’ MVP-winning quarterback Lamar Jackson as he threw for 36 touchdowns and ran for seven more while setting an NFL season record for rushing yards by a signal-caller. It may sound strange, but this year, Joe Biden’s campaign is analogous to the old line of thinking, committing his campaign to “airwave” communications and contacts rather than doing it the old fashioned way -- through an effective door-to-door, human-to-human pitch. Tyler O’Neil wrote at PJ Media, “Joe Biden and the Democratic Party may have seriously hobbled their election prospects in November by refusing to send out staff and volunteers to campaign door-to-door, building the essential ‘ground game’ that helps win elections. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee (RNC) claim to have volunteers and staff knocking on 1 million doors a week across America. “The Biden campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) claim that they are not committing political suicide but merely adapting to the coronavirus pandemic. They told Politico that they can compensate for the lack of in-person canvassing with phone calls, texts, digital organizing, and virtual meet-ups with voters.” This is an interesting hypothesis that will certainly be tested in the ensuing months. From a distance, this seems to indicate a couple things. First, though the Biden campaign appears to have plenty of money for everything it needs to do -- including a blitz of TV and internet ads that we can’t crawl away from -- it doesn’t look like they have a big volunteer force. Even polls that show Grampa Joe comfortably ahead usually have Trump’s base as dramatically more enthusiastic and ready to go to the voting booth to support their candidate. Biden’s backers are primarily people who can’t stand Trump. They’ll hold their nose and vote for Joe but it won’t translate to people taking the time and expending the energy to do the less exciting grunt work of walking communities and speaking to people personally. I think if this were the case the Biden leaders would find a host of people who will vote for him -- but only reluctantly. Second, it shows Democrats and Biden are betting people are more scared than they actually are regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. If citizens are really so worried about catching the virus that they won’t open their door to representatives of a candidate they support… it says something. And it’s not like the Trump campaign’s door-to-door effort is akin to a mosh pit full of sweating, virus-transmitting humans. Hardly. The grassroots movement is following strict guidelines including social distancing. They’ll also be wearing masks… so no need for the Kens and Karens of the world to toss coffee in anyone’s face! (This is a MUST SEE video.) O’Neil concluded, “While the coronavirus pandemic is serious and Americans should expect their president to take precautions, they should also expect their president not to cower in fear. Campaigns should take precautions to keep staff, volunteers, and voters safe while canvassing, but that does not mean they have to cancel ground game operations. Biden may have an edge in the polls, but this ground game gap may sink him.” Let’s hope so. Otherwise, decent people might be forced to endure the government the country deserves, like de Maistre prophesied. It doesn’t take a 19th century French philosopher to suggest that Americans should consider the whole picture this November when they head to the voting booth to choose between Republicans and Democrats. Liberal party members and the media would prefer to make it all about Trump, but somewhere along the line, folks must realize there’s a lot more to it. #BlackLives Matter 2016 election 2020 campaign 2020 Election Bernie Sanders CHAZ CHOP Conservatives defund the police Democrats Donald Trump Drain the swamp Elizabeth Warren Establishment Republicans George Floyd Hillary Clinton Joe Biden Kellyanne Conway Mike Pence monument defacing police brutality police reform Republicans riots Tim Scott Trump administration violence

Last week our friends Stephen Moore and Phil Kerpen proposed in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal that President Trump reset the debate on the latest coronavirus relief bill through an Executive Order deferring collection of the payroll tax. We agreed with that idea, in large measure because feckless Senate Republicans had already scuttled a payroll tax cut – their best pro-growth idea – and instead, released a $1 trillion spending bill. President Trump had already figured out that compromising with Speaker Nancy Pelosi is a fool’s errand, because the House won’t agree to anything that boosts growth and job creation. The Democratic plan he was supposed to “compromise with” includes a six-month extension of the $600-a-week unemployment bonus and $3 trillion in new spending, that would sink the economy and imperil Mr. Trump’s re-election, which of course was the whole idea. Over the weekend President Trump acted boldly to bypass the congressional dithering and political gamesmanship and announced his own version of the payroll tax deferral, saying, “it is clear that further temporary relief is necessary to support working Americans during these challenging times.” To that end, the Executive Order directed the Secretary of the Treasury to use his authority to defer certain payroll tax obligations with respect to the American workers most in need – which the Executive Order defined as any employee the amount of whose wages or compensation, as applicable, payable during any bi-weekly pay period generally is “less than $4,000, calculated on a pre-tax basis, or the equivalent amount with respect to other pay periods.” “This modest, targeted action will put money directly in the pockets of American workers and generate additional incentives for work and employment, right when the money is needed most,” said President Trump. Predictably. Democrats and the hard Left of Republican anti-Trumpers went nuts when the President announced the Executive Order. During an interview on Fox News Sunday, Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called the orders “unconstitutional slop.” “No, in fact, what the president did is – I agreed what the Republican senator said – is unconstitutional slop,” Pelosi said, echoing comments made Saturday by GOP Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska. “While it has the illusion of saying we’re going to have a moratorium on evictions, it says I’m going to ask the folks in charge to study if that’s feasible. While he says he’s going to do the payroll tax, what he’s doing is undermining Social Security and Medicare, so these are illusions,” Pelosi said. However, the reality is, as President Trump said before signing the orders, negotiations between the White House, and congressional Democrats and Republicans were at an impasse. “Democrats have refused these offers. What they really want is bailout money for Democrat governors and mayors that have been run very very badly for many years,” Mr. Trump said. President Trump is right, there should be no bailout of poorly managed Democrat states – such as New York, Illinois, and California. What’s more, President Trump has now made the election a referendum on middle-class taxes – he’s given Americans a tax cut now and can campaign on forgiving the taxes if reelected. And by targeting it to the taxes owed by those making $4,000 or less bi-weekly Democrats can’t credibly call it a tax cut for the rich. Even better, it gives Republican House and Senate candidates something to campaign on and energizes the Republican base, which has been in a state of near rebellion over the idea of trillions more in spending, which is guaranteed to include billions in Democrat priorities as the price of passage. The Phase 4 stimulus negotiations – with the focus on trillions in spending – are a train wreck for the GOP. There is no possible positive outcome in “compromising” with the Democrats. This strategy is a game-changer for the economy and the GOP’s congressional election prospects, if Republican candidates are smart enough to embrace it. We urge CHQ readers and friends to call the White House at 202-456-1111 or use this link to email the White House to let President Trump know you back him and you support this bold move to enact pro-growth economic policy and rearrange the political chessboard for the 2020 election. And while you have the phone in your hand, contact the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee and tell them to get GOP Senate and House candidates on board with the President’s pro-growth plan by committing to forgive the deferred taxes in the next Congress. 2020 Election bailouts congress relief bills Covid-19 Dr. Fauci economic policies IRS mandatory vaccination national economic emergency payroll tax cut pro-growth Section 7508A of the U.S. Tax Code tax repayments Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin

As a friend of ours pointed out to us, it appears that the Leftwing oligarchs who run Silicon Valley, and especially the social media monopolists at Twitter and Facebook, keep trying to censor this Trump video, so it would be a shame if CHQ readers and friends helped spread it and keep it live through the election. More to the point, where do these self-appointed and self-righteous oligarchs get off censoring the President of the United States? And where is all this pre-election censorship leading? Or as non-political social media observer John Brandon said in a column for Forbes, “hold on for the ride.” As Mr. Brandon observed, time and time again, the slippery slope is far from a fallacy. Sometimes, small slips do lead to major slides, and Twitter and Facebook are making tiny steps toward what? “You will continue to see them make adjustments as we get closer and closer to a volatile election,” digital marketer Matt Ray from ChatterBlast Media, a digital marketing company, told Mr. Brandon. “Facebook and Twitter are not subject to the same rules and regulations as our radio or television airwaves.” Now, here’s where it gets interesting. “Social media platforms are becoming more aggressive with the material they are allowing to populate their sites,” Mr. Ray said. “And much more aggressive in their review of that material. They have to. People are angry with them. Facebook and Twitter are owned by publicly-traded companies, and a majority of Americans are concerned with social media's ability to manage divisive speech, fake news, and propaganda.” Social media platforms are becoming more aggressive with the material they are allowing to populate their sites because a “majority of Americans” don’t like what they see on Facebook and Twitter? How this video could reasonably be characterized as “divisive speech, fake news and propaganda” eludes us. We find Matt Ray’s claim to be very hard to believe, because it appears he’s claiming a majority of Americans are against free speech – and try as we might, we couldn’t find a poll that confirmed Mr. Ray’s claim. The best (or perhaps scariest) data we could find shows that large minorities of younger people support the idea of “prohibiting certain speech or expression of viewpoints that are offensive or biased against certain groups of people.” But that’s not a majority of Americans. Indeed, when the Washington Post examined the question of social media censorship after a Senate hearing on the topic, one poll that jumped out was this one; “Most Americans (59%) say people should be allowed to express unpopular opinions in public, even those that are deeply offensive to other people,” a 2017 survey by the Cato Institute found. “A substantial minority (40%), however, say government should prevent people from engaging in hate speech against certain groups in public.” However, it is clear that support for censorship skews upward in the younger demographic. To what extent is difficult to say, concluded the Washington Post. The three polls of young Americans that the Post looked at (from Pew in 2015, Gallup in 2016 and YouGov in 2017) all worded their questions differently and found varying levels of support for the idea of censoring hate speech or statements that offend minorities. At the low end, Gallup found 22 percent support among college students. At the high end, Pew landed on 40 percent among 18- to 34-year-olds. But that’s a far cry from a “majority of Americans.” So let’s circle back to that quote from digital marketer Matt Ray from ChatterBlast Media, “Facebook and Twitter are owned by publicly-traded companies, and a majority of Americans are concerned with social media's ability to manage divisive speech, fake news, and propaganda.” We haven’t been able to find any data that proves or supports Mr. Ray’s assertion that a majority of Americans want social media to manage “divisive speech, fake news, and propaganda.” However, we do find a lot of evidence that large percentages of younger Americans are upset by and do not want to be exposed to views with which they do not agree – especially if those views are characterized as offensive to minorities. Perhaps Mr. Ray is confusing “lots of young people” with “a majority of Americans.” Or maybe Facebook and Twitter are merely using snowflake complaints as an excuse to do what they want to do anyway – which is ban President Trump and Trump supporters from using their platforms to communicate and thus influence the election in favor of Joe Biden and the Far Left Democrats. We’ve viewed this Trump video many times, and we couldn’t find anything offensive in it, or anything that constituted “divisive speech, fake news, and propaganda,” and unlike the social media giants, we want Americans to view it and judge for themselves, so please watch it and forward it to your family, friends, fellow church members, clubs and social networks if you like it too. 2020 Election anarchists anti-government antifa Bob Avakian Censorship CHAZ CHOP Communists Department of Homeland Security Department of Justice Facebook Federal Protection Service Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf Revolutionary Communist Party Silicon Valley Twitter

Campaign 2020 is nearly here and there’s great economic news on the horizon It's starting to feel real, and not just because the Democrat “convention” begins a week from today. The “it” I’m referring to is the heart of the 2020 presidential campaign, the immortal quadrennial political jousting match between two competing American worldviews, which this year features candidates similar in age and Western European ethnic origin but couldn’t be more different in most other respects. Democrat nominee-to-be Joe Biden announced he will reveal his running mate choice this week -- and this time he probably will actually follow through with it. With only seven days remaining until he’s (presumably) officially nominated during his party’s rollcall of the states (again, assuming there is one), the career swamp dweller politician is running out of news cycles to keep everyone in suspense. The country and the world know who President Donald Trump’s righthand man will be, the same one who successfully helped the first-time politician win the presidency four years ago -- Mike Pence. The GOP’s own party extravaganza kicks off two weeks from today. Since no one’s exactly sure what either event will entail, predictions vary as to how large of a poll “bounce” the candidates might receive from the subdued hoopla. The future is definitely uncertain, but one aspect seems evident: the American economy that was effectively leveled by the onset of the Chinese Communist Party (or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus will come roaring back in the third quarter. Happy days are here again? We’ll see. Jay Heflin reported at The Washington Examiner, “The economy is on course for a record jump in gross domestic product in the third quarter, which will be announced shortly before November’s election. ‘I certainly think it will be double digits,’ said Doug Holtz-Eakin, the president of the center-right economic think tank American Action Forum who was also the chief economic policy adviser to Sen. John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign… “The record numbers wouldn't reflect underlying economic health. Rather, they would represent a partial restarting of the economy after the worst of the pandemic interruptions to business. GDP shrunk at a record-breaking 32.9% annual rate in the second quarter, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported last week.” In other words, there’s nowhere to go but up. When you lose roughly a third of your economic output within the span of three months, there’s not much you can do to sugarcoat it. Apply balm to the burns (in the form of “relief” from the government) and hope the sores will heal in due time. Some of the growth will help, but we’re still a long way from getting back to strength. Heflin continued, “Despite the expected third-quarter growth, economic activity will still be below what it was before the pandemic hit the U.S. Still, a big economic growth number for the third quarter could be a feather in the cap of Trump’s reelection campaign, as economic trends have proved highly influential in presidential elections. But capitalizing on GDP growth will be easier said than done.” Yes indeed. Heflin’s report indicated the anticipated stellar economic growth numbers will be released only a few days before the election, a time when many voters will have already cast ballots via absentee or, gulp, mail-in procedures. Therefore, there won’t be much opportunity to disseminate the good tidings to the low information voters who’ve been -- and will be -- fed a steady diet of doom and gloom from the frightfully compromised establishment news media for as long as folks can remember. There is one good thing about this. Statistics show there are always a certain percentage of late deciders in every election. These are generally non-politically engaged people who are highly susceptible to events in the last hours before the election. Case in point was 2012 when Hurricane Sandy ravaged the east coast mere days prior to the vote. It provided President Obama with his ultimate “presidential” photo op moment, aided in the effort by “co-star” New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie. They had their famous “hug” and the rest was history. Four years ago those who made up their minds just before the election cited the open Supreme Court seat as a major factor in their deliberations between Trump and Hillary Clinton. Unless something drastic happens, there will be no such vacancy this year. Another issue will take precedence. What will it be? At the same time, even some of the most engaged citizens don’t have the longest of political memories. Pundits of all stripes were sure this year’s impeachment debacle would weigh heavily on Americans’ minds as they entered the voting booth, but no one’s talking about it now and the official witch hunt probably won’t be mentioned much in this fall’s campaign. Similarly, the government shutdowns that took place in Trump’s time won’t be brought up either. The urgency of the moment, right? However, the economic recovery seems certain to be on the radar screens of voters one way or another as will the ongoing struggle to contain and then destroy the CCP virus. Democrats will pull out all the stops to portray Trump’s and his administration’s response to the pandemic as the only thing that matters in their calculations. But what if the rumored vaccine is approved at around that time? Or, just as importantly, what if the “curve” is flattened again to the point where it’s non-existent? Doctors are becoming more and more effective at treating COVID-19, so the panic may well have (somewhat) subsided by then. Nevertheless, Democrats’ messaging will concentrate on depicting Trump as an uncaring hard-hearted cad who didn’t take the coronavirus threat seriously, is responsible for tens of thousands of deaths (a.k.a. “The Trump Virus”) and is only serving as president to enrich himself and bolster his family fortune. They’ll also be hard at work pinning the nation’s economic slowdown on Trump and blame him for all the alleged suffering people are enduring as a result of poor policy choices. Liberal party members will do everything within their power to keep people scared to death of catching the virus, even if statistics and common sense reveal that, with few exceptions, it’s primarily life-threatening to the elderly and those with serious pre-existing conditions. They’ll poo-poo the emerging science on treatments such as hydroxychloroquine and mixes of various other supporting drugs. They’ll shout from the rafters that Trump didn’t do enough to ramp up ventilator production or distribution of personal protective equipment (PPE). They’ll savage him for not adopting a mask-mandatory stance in the beginning and cry foul that he’s criticized Dr. Anthony Fauci too much. They’ll also try exposing Trump as flippant, arrogant and obnoxious for daring to hold a rally (in Tulsa) and for his Independence Day celebrations at Mt. Rushmore in South Dakota and on the White House grounds the next afternoon. The script isn’t hard to write. They’ll also lay on a thick coat of racism, blaming Trump’s “divisiveness” for the conditions that led to nationwide “peaceful protests” coupled with organized leftist rioting, statue destruction and desecration and social unrest. Brainless Hollywood celebrities and “woke” athletes will insist that Black Lives Matter is only about “justice” and “raising awareness” of police excesses. And the media will devote hour upon hour to negative coverage of Trump. Very little energy will be spent by the haters in putting forth the Democrat party platform itself, which thus far consists of several incredibly expensive and unrealistic spending proposals (such as dumping $700 billion into economic stimulus and $2 trillion over the course of four years for environmental boondoggles) as well as Biden’s plan to raise taxes. Sure, Joe, hike tax collections on people who are driving the economic recovery. That will soar like a lead balloon. The eternally disgruntled socialistic income redistributors will love it -- but here’s thinking the productive people won’t be nearly as enthused. And Democrats will downplay the bound to be unpopular social planks in their agenda, since the “normal” people aren’t as wild about transgender “rights” as the utopian liberal class. Don’t black pre-born lives matter? We’re yet to see how the teacher union-driven school closures will be viewed this fall. By the looks of it, President Trump plans to make school choice a major part of his Make America Great Again agenda. Smart move. You can hide, Joe, but you can’t run… from the presidential debates At the same time Democrats are downplaying the impending positive economic numbers, they’ll do their darndest to keep Grampa Joe Biden out of the spotlight, perhaps even having him pull out of the three scheduled presidential debates. Several Democrat strategists made news last week by publicly encouraging the party nominee to avoid the high-profile face-to-face forums like the plague (sorry to use that word). The reasons mentioned for telling Joe to prematurely pull out of the critical programs were that no one could possibly correct all the “lies” Trump would tell and Biden wouldn’t gain anything from being there because he’s already so far ahead in the polls. They’re wrong. Has there ever been a more blatant attempt to disguise the flaws of a man who’s interviewing for the world’s most challenging political job? It says something not nice about your candidate when you’re actively floating the idea that he or she isn’t up to debating an opponent. Further, it’s almost unheard of for a challenger’s handlers to suggest the tactic. Typically speaking, incumbents with large campaign coffers, a track record of achievements and accomplishments and a likely advantage in the gift of gab might possibly agree to skip the always-unpredictable debate stage environment. But challengers have every incentive to appear because they need to make their case for why the office holder doesn’t deserve reelection. Unless they ain’t got it. Which is truer in Biden’s situation? The media will do its part in defining Trump -- or trying to. They’ve been doing it for his entire five-plus-year political career. Joe Biden’s been defined as well, though the Democrat must demonstrate he’s still lucid and capable of mentally performing in the Oval Office. The president travels the world to meet leaders and adversaries, works hard on domestic policy and is responsible for appointing the people who oversee the executive branch. If Joe Biden isn’t strong enough to endure three 90-minute debate sessions, how could he possibly hope to function as president? Democrats may think Biden will be the ultimate figurehead president and his VP and party puppeteers will be pulling the strings behind the stage. But they’ll never get that chance if Joe’s a no-show in the debates. Would they really be that dumb? (Answer: Yes!) Trump hints at how and where he’ll accept the 2020 GOP nomination We can’t say what the Democrat convention will look like, but President Trump threw out some hints last week as to the GOP version. Katherine Doyle reported at The Washington Examiner, “President Trump said he would likely accept the Republican nomination in a live address from the White House in August. “’It's the easiest alternative,’ Trump told Fox & Friends on Wednesday. ‘I'll probably do mine live from the White House.’ The White House is ‘the least expensive from the country's standpoint,’ Trump added. “The president also said that the media would be permitted to be in attendance. ‘We're going to let the press go in and watch it, but you know, socially distanced,’ Trump said, alluding to restrictions placed on gatherings due to the coronavirus.” This brief blurb from Trump reinforces a couple themes that will be emphasized time and again this fall. First, Trump wants to demonstrate that he’s conscious of the cost of government, and two, the part about social distancing is in keeping with the new Trump-ian humility towards virus preventative measures. It won’t take much effort to make Joe Biden and Democrats look like big spenders, so if Trump plays down the hoopla, he’ll be setting the right example in people’s minds. The country is still restless over the future -- it would be in bad taste to make a big deal of a party acceptance speech now. Similarly, by insisting that the media play by their own six feet (or more) apart distancing rules, the campaign will show they’re just as skilled at playing the theater aspect of the CCP virus as the other guys. With the party conventions set to take place in the next two weeks, Americans are enjoying the last bit of calm before the political storm. With Joe Biden announcing his running mate and forecasts of economic improvements by Election Day, we gather that the rhetorical battle is just about to commence. Grab your helmet and hit the fox hole, it will be nasty. #BlackLives Matter 2016 election 2020 campaign 2020 Election Bernie Sanders CHAZ CHOP Conservatives defund the police Democrats Donald Trump Drain the swamp Elizabeth Warren Establishment Republicans George Floyd Hillary Clinton Joe Biden Kellyanne Conway Mike Pence monument defacing police brutality police reform Republicans riots Tim Scott Trump administration violence

Our friend Morning in Nevada PAC President Adam Laxalt has alerted us to the details of the “election reform” measure Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak and the Democrat-controlled legislature rushed through in an emergency special session — on a party-line vote, in just a 48-hour period over the weekend, with no members of the public present, and under the cover of night. And it’s even worse than we thought. Mr. Laxalt says there are so many problems with this “reform,” not only in how it was passed, but also in its contents, as well as its being just the latest example of the Governor’s inconsistent and self-contradictory approach to the COVID outbreak (much more on the latter topic in ITEM 2, below). Especially troubling is the way it will leave Nevada’s elections susceptible to rampant fraud this November, thanks to its radical embrace of universal mail-in voting as well as California-style “ballot harvesting.” As Adam Laxalt put it in an op-ed for RealClearPolitics: “All of this adds up to strong reason for Nevadans to be gravely concerned about the integrity of their vote this November. … What [Democrats have] just done constitutes a shameful, dangerous, and hyper-partisan assault on election integrity in our state.” Some of the measure’s most dangerous provisions include: Requiring that all active voters receive a mail ballot, whether they’ve requested one or not. Providing that ballots received by election officials without a postmark for up to three days after Election Day be considered valid by default. Allowing ballot harvesting on a broad scale, and for multiple ballots to be submitted in a single envelope with only a single signature required on the envelope, and no signature requirement for the enclosed individual ballots — leaving it to the discretion of election officials to decide whether the votes should count. Allowing for an individual to sign a ballot on another’s behalf. And allowing for drop boxes for collecting ballots with no signature requirement — an especially dangerous form of ballot harvesting, which conventionally at least requires a signature. Laxalt summed things up this way: “Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak and his legislative allies claim [the bill] … is a necessary safety precaution in the face of the COVID-19 epidemic. In reality, it’s a blatantly partisan attempt to radically overhaul Nevada’s elections in a way that blows the door wide open to widespread voter fraud.” And of course, it’s painfully obvious that Democrats fully expect to be able to leverage the new vulnerabilities in our election system in order to cheat their way to victory this November. It was all just begging for a legal challenge. ITEM #1:  Fortunately, it didn’t take long for such an effort to get under way. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports that: “The campaign of President Donald Trump has filed a lawsuit against Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske over changes to the state’s general election plan passed by the Legislature on Sunday. “Trump’s campaign, the Republican National Committee and Nevada Republican Party filed the lawsuit in Nevada District Court on Tuesday evening. They allege several provisions of Assembly Bill 4, the election changes adopted by the special session on Sunday, ‘lack clear standards to guide the actions of county and city officials administering certain parts of Nevada’s elections.’ “‘Democrats changed the rules of the game at the last minute to try and rig this election,’ RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel said in a statement Wednesday. ‘AB4 will destroy the confidence every voter deserves to have in our elections.’” The President deserves a lot of credit for his leadership in elevating this issue, said Laxalt, including early on, when he retweeted Laxalt’s initial tweet in response to the bill: “In reality, it’s a blatantly partisan attempt to radically overhaul Nevada’s elections in a way that blows the door wide open to widespread voter fraud.” Laxalt’s original tweet has already garnered 22,600 likes and 16,500 retweets, and the tweet has 1.6 million impressions and counting — making it clear that people here in Nevada and indeed all across the country are rightly fired up over this issue. ABC News Chief Political Analyst Matthew Dowd, not surprisingly, took issue with Laxalt’s tweet, responding: “Ummm, they are trying to make it easier for all to vote. Why is that a problem?” Don’t worry, said Mr. Laxalt, we’ll deal with this in ITEM 4 below. ITEM #2:   “Consistency in responding to COVID has never been Gov. Sisolak’s strong suit,” Laxalt observed in his op-ed. Boy is that ever true. Laxalt drove home this point in an interview about the “election reform” bill this week with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, noting: “In the bill is that there's going to be more in-person, early-vote election sites than ever in our history in Las Vegas, in Clark County, and more Election Day. So I thought this was about COVID. I thought it was too dangerous to vote in person. We're going to have the largest in-person election at the same time. So this Governor, who tells us that construction of the Las Vegas Raiders Stadium has to go on during the entire COVID, with positives in these sites, is now telling us it's not safe to vote.” Click this link to watch the full interview. Expounding further in his RealClearPolitics op-ed, Laxalt wrote: “While taking a heavy-handed approach to shutting down economic activity in some industries, and also implementing draconian limitations on church attendance, [Sisolak] has allowed for politically favored construction projects to move forward, for casinos to be packed with visitors, and for restaurants to stay busy, while also saying and doing nothing to stop the swell of protests that recently broke out across Nevada. Yet apparently it’s so crucial for Nevadans to practice social distancing that we need a revolutionary expansion of mail-in voting? Which is it, Governor?” Laxalt’s take on Gov. Sisolak’s mind-boggling inconsistency prompted a tweet from Newt Gingrich: The hypocrisy of Nevada’s so-called election reform bill is pointed out brilliantly in this piece by @AdamLaxalt. Casinos and restaurants can be packed with people, but churches and voting sites pose too much of a health risk. Clearly, the Governor’s standard in making these decisions is whatever he feels like — and whatever best conforms to his partisan political agenda — on a given day. ITEM #3:  As you’d expect, the left is already circling the wagons in defense of the bill. Matthew Dowd, mentioned above, is just one of many examples. As we’ve noted several times before, the fact that mail-in voting increases the risk of voter fraud has long been recognized across party lines. It’s only recently that Democrats and their friends in the press have made it a partisan issue in order to advance their own interests. A bipartisan report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, which was chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and James Baker III, found that “vote buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail.” And even the New York Times acknowledged that “there is a bipartisan consensus that voting by mail ... is more easily abused than other forms.” Now, Mark Levin has discovered yet more evidence of this bipartisan consensus, and discussed it on his show this week. As the show’s synopsis reads: “Democrats Jerry Nadler and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz have both gone on the record years ago to say that paper ballots are highly susceptible to fraud. Yet, the Democrats are pushing for voting by mail with paper ballots, not with voting machines that leave a paper trail.” You can listen to the show here. ITEM #4:  By the way… did you see this? CNN reports: “A government investigation concluded that the United States Postal Service ‘improperly coordinated’ with a postal workers union that supported Hillary Clinton's campaign. “The investigation, as documented in a report from the Office of Special Counsel, said the USPS granted employees union leave time off, at the request of the union, to do political activity — which OSC concluded was a ‘systematic violation’ of a law regarding the political activity of federal employees. “The report said the practice was longstanding, perhaps ranging as far back as the 1990s.” But yes, we should all feel confident that the Postal Service will perform its crucial role in an all-mail voting scheme with complete honesty, diligence and fairness, said Laxalt. ITEM #5:  Democrats and their media parrots like to argue that concerns over mail-in voting are overblown and politically motivated. They claim there’s no reason to believe that when put into practice, it will actually lead to any problems. Well, one reporter decided to put it to the test. Writing for Townhall, Beth Baumann shares an illuminating story: “A reporter from WRDW in Pennsylvania decided to conduct an experiment. The reporter's team set up a PO Box and mailed numerous sets of fake ballots all across Philadelphia. The idea was to simulate people returning ballots to the local election office. They initially mailed 100 mock ballots. Two days later, they mailed another 100 ballots. The PO box was checked a week later. “When the reporter opened up the PO box, there was a slip saying the box owner had to pick up the mail from behind the counter. When the reporter went to retrieve the mail, the postmaster told him there was nothing back there. “‘I don't see anything there for you,’ the woman behind the counter said. “The reporter eventually talked to a manager, explained what they were doing and suddenly she found a box of mock ballots that were ‘somewhere else.’ “As the reporter went through the mail, it was discovered they obtained two pieces of someone else's mail, including a birthday card. “The worst part: 21 percent of all the mock ballots hadn't materialized after four days. The first batch, which had been sent out a week prior, also had some ballots missing. "‘So out of our 100 ballots, 97 arrived, which sounds pretty good, unless you consider the fact that means that three people that tried to vote by mail in our mock election were, in fact, disenfranchised by mail,’ the reporter stated. “Three percent may not sound like a lot, but it can be pivotal, especially when elections are close.” Just imagine the consequences if this were to be played out across an entire state — or, indeed, the entire country. ITEM #6:  Even if one grants that mail-in voting won’t intentionally be manipulated (a highly dubious premise, but let’s go with it for the sake of argument), there are serious practical problems with such an approach. Here’s Laxalt again from his op-ed: “[T]here are significant procedural and logistical challenges that would come with trying to effectively implement such a dramatic electoral overhaul in a high-stakes presidential election year. New York state’s recent primary debacle, in which the huge influx of mail-in ballots led to disaster in trying to determine the results, should serve as a warning to other states — including Nevada, where the secretary of state’s office has fewer than five investigators assigned to protecting our elections — of the kinds of problems that may well ensue this November as a result of taking a similar path. The more states that go down the mail-in road, the more likely it becomes that the entire nation will be plunged into confusion and chaos this fall.” For more on the New York disaster, check out this piece from Michael Goodwin, who reports that, “Five weeks after the Democratic primaries, no winners have been declared.” Do Nevadans understand the disaster Democrats have just set Silver State voters up for? As President Trump tweeted, “Nevada has zero infrastructure for mail-in voting. It will be a corrupt disaster if not ended by the courts. It will take months, or years, to figure out.” We are with President Trump, Adam Laxalt and Morning in Nevada PAC on the dangers of the Nevada Democrats’ dangerous universal mail-in voting scheme. If you’d like to learn more about Adam Laxalt’s fight to preserve free and fair elections in Nevada go to Morning in Nevada PAC. 2020 Election ballot harvesting Covid-19 Democrat legislature Democrats Donald Trump Emergency session Gov. Steve Sisolak Joe Biden mail-in voting Morning in Nevada PAC Nevada social distancing voter fraud voter ID

At every turn, we are admonished to accept the dictates of the Authorities regarding the Covid-19 epidemic—the officially designated public health authorities, the Wise Men like Bill Gates, the media babbleheads who scold us when we stray from their ideological nostrums, and the politicians who kowtow to all of the above. Who are we to think we know better than these Authorities and their media and political flacks? It can be intimidating to fight back when their official wisdom consumes every pixel of the Washington Post and the New York Times, of CNN and MSNBC and all the rest.  All the more important, then, to put our current Authorities into historical context.  We need to remind ourselves how the Authorities and Wise Men of any era can easily become the fools and villains of history. Socrates The Greek philosopher Socrates is generally considered one of the fathers of Western philosophy and the West’s first moral philosopher.  He left no writings, so we know him best through his students Plato and Xenophon, as well as the playwright Aristophanes and later philosophers such as Aristotle.  The names of his opponents—the Authorities of Athens—are forgotten in the dustbin of history. We do know that 399 years Before Christ he went on trial in Athens and was forced to drink a potion that included the poison hemlock.  His crimes?  Corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens and impiety—“not believing in the gods of the state” (what an apt description of the accusations levied against the opponents of today’s Authorities!). In 399 B.C. the practical path was to obey the dictates of the Authorities of Athens.  They were in control, and they let you know it.  But where are the defenders of those Authorities today? Galileo If Socrates calls into question the wisdom of the political Authorities of the day, Galileo calls into question the wisdom of the scientific Authorities of the day. Galileo has been called the “father of observational astronomy,” the “father of modern physics,” the “father of the scientific method,” and the “father of modern science.”  I challenge you to name any of his accusers, the Authorities of his day. Galileo is best known, of course, for questioning the accepted wisdom of his day—that the Earth is the center of the universe and the other planets revolve around Earth.  This brought him into conflict with both the scientific Authorities of his day and the religious Authorities of his day—and specifically the Roman Inquisition.  He was tried by the Inquisition, found guilty of heresy, forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. Today, of course, we laugh at the positions of those Authorities.  Galileo was vindicated by history, but his fate demonstrated the power of their authority in his and their time. Of particular interest to us during today’s pandemic is Galileo’s role in developing the scientific method.  It is a continuous process in which you constantly question and revise your hypotheses when that is called for by new observations and evidence.  In short, there is no final scientific Truth that cannot be questioned. This is the opposite of what we see today.  Our medical Authorities dictate what “works” (ventilators, vaccines) and what doesn’t work (intravenous vitamin C, hydroxychloroquine) despite the observations and successes of front-line doctors around the world.  That is what happens when your medical system is controlled by the State.  Dr. Fauci and the Centers for Disease Control are today’s equivalent of the Inquisition and Vatican of Galileo’s day, dictating what is to be accepted and what is to be rejected. This Happens Throughout History Socrates and Galileo are two of the most famous examples of heretics who defied the Authorities of their day—and paid the price.  But this is nothing unusual in history.  People also repeatedly submit to mass hysteria, and later observers wonder how they could have ever fallen for such ridiculous notions.  The witch trials are perhaps the best-known example. Today we are living through such a period of mass hysteria and fear.  We have allowed our Authorities to bring down the strongest economies in the history of the world—those of the United States and other developed nations—on the basis of mass hysteria and fear involving the Covid-19 virus.  Hoping to make sense out of the era I’m living through, I have started reading the classic account of such phenomena—Charles Mackay’s Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, published in 1841. Outside of the witch-hunt hysteria, the most famous example may be Tulipomania—when hordes of supposedly sane people believed Dutch tulips were destined to become the new world currency.  But Mackay, a popular journalist with a flair for investigating and documenting such delusions, gives us dozens of examples from throughout the history of the West.  This is social history, political history, financial history, religious history, and scientific history combined. Somehow I feel that perhaps I can better cope with today’s crazy world by laughing at these earlier delusions and realizing that we managed to survive these earlier bouts of mass panic and fear.  Any such comfort, however, will not relieve us of our duty to expose today’s extraordinary popular delusion and madness.  If we don’t, this could be the world’s last, final bout of insanity. This article was originally published by Richardcyoung.com and is reposted here by the gracious permission of the author and Richard C. Young. David Franke's Previous Articles on the Coronavirus Pandemic: How Big of a Threat Is the Coronavirus? (March 26) How Bad Has the Pandemic Been? How Bad Will It Be? (April 6) An Economic Shutdown Based On…What? (April 15) Is Sweden’s Problem Coronavirus or Immigration?  (April 21) Let the Lockdown End, County by County (April 27) Reopen the Economy and Protect the Most Vulnerable: We Can Do Both (May 4) The Best Defense Against Covid-19 is a Strong Immune System (May 15) Why Covid-19 Is So Different from Previous Pandemics (May 26) Like Humpty Dumpty, the Lockdown Hoax Comes Tumbling Down (June 12) Covid-19’s Greatest Tragedy: The Nursing Home Elderly (June 17) The Second Wave of the Fear Campaign (July 21, 2020) David Franke David Franke was one of the founders of the conservative movement in the late 1950s and early 1960s, starting his media career at Human Events and National Review (editorial assistant to William F. Buckley Jr.). His articles have appeared in the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Esquire, and many other publications. His books have included Safe Places, The Torture Doctor, Richard C. Young’s Financial Armadillo Strategy (as co-author to Dick Young), and America’s Right Turn (with Richard A. Viguerie). He was Senior Editor of Silver & Gold Report in the 1980s, and served as the writer/editor of John Naisbitt’s Trend Letter in the 1990s. A native Texan, David now lives in Virginia’s beautiful Shenandoah Valley.

Democrats once branded themselves as the party of the working guy; pro-union, pro-American manufacturing, pro-infrastructure and anti-communist, but in its embrace of the violent Communists and anarchists of ANTIFA and BLM today’s New Democratic Party looks nothing like the party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and labor leaders Lane Kirkland and George Meany. As leaders of the American Federation of Labor (AFL), and later the combined AFL-CIO in the 1950s, 60s, 70s and 80s, Kirkland and Meany were staunch anti-communists. American unions, under the leadership of Lane Kirkland, provided Poland’s anti-communist Solidarity movement with material, political, and moral support throughout its decade-long struggle, including for the election campaign that brought Solidarity leader Lech Walesa to power. This contribution was in keeping with a long tradition of assistance to the cause of free labor around the world, including in the communist world. So, what would the leaders of your grandfather’s and grandmother’s Democratic Party think of Joe Biden accepting the endorsement of the leader of America’s Revolutionary Communist Party? As a recent release from the Trump campaign noted, Biden deputy campaign manager Kate Bedingfield made clear that “everybody who believes that Joe Biden should be president” is “welcome into this campaign.” That now includes Bob Avakian, the radical founder and leader of the Revolutionary Communist Party who just endorsed Joe Biden and instructed fellow communists to support Biden in the election. Avakian once faced serious charges of rioting and assault for protesting in favor of Chinese communist Mao Zedong’s bloody and brutal regime. Avakian also titled his memoir My Journey from Mainstream America To Revolutionary Communist. “Bob Avakian has taken the whole idea and conception of communism to another level,” one of his admirers once wrote. As author and historian of communist influence in the United States Diana West tweeted, “Basement Joe's latest endorsement from Rbt Avakian is a vote from someone fighting to overthrow the US government for over half-century.” Avakian’s endorsement further demonstrates that Joe Biden is an empty vessel for the radical left. Indeed, Biden is seriously considering communist Rep. Karen Bass (CA-37) to be his running mate. Bass praised Fidel Castro, traveled to Cuba many times as part of a radical communist revolutionary group that trained in terrorist tactics, and eulogized a Communist Party USA member as her “mentor” in 2017. In their 2010 book, Black Los Angeles: American Dreams and Racial Realities, progressive authors Darnell Hunt and Ana-Christina Ramon write that Bass, in a 2008 interview, provided them with many details about her days as a student at Alexander Hamilton High School on the Westside of Los Angeles. The authors quote Bass as having told them: “It [the white Left] played a huge role for me. In Hamilton [High School] for example, a lot of the Jewish parents were activists and some of them were in the Communist Party. And so I grew up with a lot of red diaper babies [a slang term for children whose parents were members of the Communist Party USA during the Cold War]. And there were some African American parents who were in the Communist Party. There were teachers who were in the Communist Party. So, white radicals were very influential. And at the same time you have the [Black] Panthers and the whole black movement.” In her 2008 book Blue Grit, progressive author Laura Flanders identifies Bass as “a former Black Panther.” As Discover the Networks documented, in 1973, Bass began a long-term involvement with the Venceremos Brigade (VB), a Cuban Communist front group founded in 1969 by Fidel Castro and the radical members of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), and administered by the Cuban intelligence service, the General Directorate for Intelligence (DGI). Portraying itself as a well-intentioned group of volunteers dedicated only to helping poor Cubans harvest sugar cane, VB’s real purpose was, as bestselling authors and political commentators David Horowitz and Peter Collier explained in their 2005 book Destructive Generation: “to meet Cuban and Vietnamese officials in Havana to map out strategies for the war in America, the ‘other war,’ which would ultimately defeat the United States in a way that the battlefield situation in Vietnam never could have.” Said Horowitz in a later interview with Breitbart.com: “The big propaganda was that the [American] imperialists had made Cuba a one-crop country, which was sugar cane. And under Castro the production of sugar cane went down dramatically. And so they called on American volunteers to help them harvest sugar cane. But they also trained them politically.” That training included, among other things, instruction in the use of arms, explosives, and guerrilla warfare techniques. During the Seventies, Bass personally made eight trips to Cuba as a “brigandista.” A  1976 FBI report stated that the long-term objective of the Cuban intelligence officials who ran the Venceremos Brigade was: “the recruitment of individuals who are politically oriented and who someday may obtain a position, elective or appointive, somewhere in the U.S. Government, which would provide the Cuban Government with access to political, economic and military intelligence.” This is who Biden may put a heartbeat away from the presidency. Joe Biden is too weak to be president and too weak to stand up to the radical left. He’s nothing more than an empty vessel for the extremist fringe of the new Marxist Democrat Party, a terrifying cabal which now includes active communist leaders and those who have been, for decades, committed to overthrowing our American constitutional republic and replacing it with a violent socialist oligarchy. Please share this article with your family, friends, fellow church members and social media networks – only you can get the truth out to them about the danger presented by the New Democrat Party. 2020 Election anarchists anti-government antifa Bob Avakian CHAZ CHOP Communists Department of Homeland Security Department of Justice Emgage Action Federal Protection Service Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf Million Muslim Votes summit Muslim Brotherhood Rep. Karen Bass Revolutionary Communist Party George Rasley is editor of Richard Viguerie's ConservativeHQ.com and is a veteran of over 300 political campaigns. A member of American MENSA, he served on the staff of Vice President Dan Quayle, as Director of Policy and Communication for Congressman Adam Putnam (FL-12) then Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, and as spokesman for Rep. Mac Thornberry formerly a member of the House Intelligence Committee and Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

If you missed the Senate hearing on "The Right of the People Peaceably to Assemble: Protecting Speech by Stopping Anarchist Violence" chaired by Senator Ted Cruz, you missed Senator Cruz at his finest. He was serious, he was sharp, he asked incisive questions, and he got under the skin of the Senate’s dumbest member, Democrat Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, to the point that she got up and walked out of the hearing. Senator Cruz made a series of great points about the BLM and ANTIFA inspired violence going on in Democrat-run cities, and the failure of Democrats to criticize it, let alone stop it. Senator Cruz teed-up his remarks by showing a video that we recommend sending around to your networks, especially to anyone who is inclined to not look past the slogan “Black Lives Matter” and to be sympathetic to the so-called “protestors” burning down Democrat-run cities. Here’s a link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSLgBRH_Cfo&feature=youtu.be Here's a link to the Blaze TV coverage of the hearing:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qOnL3oKe3A&feature=youtu.be Sen. Cruz opened the hearing by making the points that: What began as legitimate protests against a vile act of abuse sadly were soon hijacked by opportunists and violent radicals. [...]The fact is, the people who took to the streets because their hearts cried out for justice have become overshadowed by rioters and looters and those who cynically exploit the protests for their own evil ends. And those rioters aren't concerned about racial justice. Indeed, they're willing to make a mockery of the peaceful protest to advance their violent objectives. Their actions are profoundly racist, the rioters as they destroy minority communities, minority businesses, and minority lives across the country. This shouldn't be complicated. Peaceful protests must be protected. Riots must be stopped. No one has the right to assault another person, to firebomb a building, to throw a Molotov cocktail into a police car. That's not exercising a constitutional right-that's terrorizing your fellow citizens. More and more we're seeing signs that a significant portion of this violence, of this rioting, is not random. It is not spontaneous. Rather, it is coordinated and inspired by leftist, anarchist groups like antifa-groups that will, without shame, exploit a national tragedy to attack American buildings, American homes, and American lives. This violence speaks for itself. But for good measure in graffiti on the county courthouse they wrote: ‘Until the police and ICE are abolished, we will burn this city down piece by piece.' They are telling is what their demands are. To shut down and abolish the police. This violence should be universally condemned. All 100 senators ought to come together and say, ‘Don't murder your fellow citizens. Don't attack police officers. Protect each other's rights.' Instead of seeing leaders united, we're seeing too many local officials, mayors and governors, who have made a cynical decision that it's in their partisan interest to turn a blind eye to this violence. To turn a blind eye to the law enforcement officers being attacked on a nightly basis. And even worse than that, to demonize the police officers. To throw out terms like ‘storm troopers' and ‘gestapo' to describe federal law enforcement officers doing their jobs. In support of his resolution to designate ANTIFA as a domestic terrorist organization Senator Cruz has also released two other videos that tell the story of ANTIFA’s violence in graphic terms. WATCH: Antifa's Terrorist Assault on America WATCH: We Will Defend America Against Violent Anarchists For the past several years Antifa has been on the streets, cloaked in black masks, and engaged in violent demonstrations in Portland, Oregon. Journalist Andy Ngo was hospitalized, others, including federal and local police officers, have been seriously injured after being attacked by members of the group. Over a year ago, on July 18, 2019, Senator Cruz and Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana introduced a resolution to designate ANTIFA as a terrorist organization. So far, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has refused to bring the resolution to the floor. We urge CHQ readers and friends to call Senator McConnell to demand that he bring the resolution to a vote and force the Democrats to tell America which side they are on – the side of law and order, or the side of violence, arson and terror. The tollfree Capitol Switchboard is (1-866-220-0044), call right now. The full text of the resolution is below. RESOLUTION: Title: Calling for the designation of Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization. Whereas members of Antifa, because they believe that free speech is equivalent to violence, have used threats of violence in the pursuit of suppressing opposing political ideologies; Whereas Antifa represents opposition to the democratic ideals of peaceful assembly and free speech for all; Whereas members of Antifa have physically assaulted journalists and other individuals during protests and riots in Berkeley, California; Whereas in February of 2018, journalist Andy Ngo was intimidated and threatened with violence by protestors affiliated with Antifa; Whereas on June 29, 2019, while covering demonstrations in Portland, Oregon, journalist Andy Ngo was physically attacked by protestors affiliated with Antifa; Whereas employees of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (referred to in this preamble as "ICE") were subjected to doxxing and violent threats after their social media profiles, phone numbers, and home addresses were posted on the Internet by left wing activists; Whereas according to the Wall Street Journal, an ICE officer was followed by left wing activists and "confronted when he went to pick up his daughter from summer camp", and another "had his name and photo plastered on flyers outside his home accusing him of being part of the ‘Gestapo'"; Whereas the ICE office in southwest Portland, Oregon, was shut down for days due to threats and occupation by Antifa members; Whereas Rose City Antifa, an Antifa group founded in 2007 in Portland, Oregon, explicitly rejects the authority of law enforcement officers in the United States, and Federal, State, and local governments, to protect free speech and stop acts of violence; Whereas Rose City Antifa rejects the civil treatment of individuals the group labels as fascists, stating: "We can't just argue against them; we have to prevent them from organizing by any means necessary."; and Whereas there is no place for violence in the discourse between people in the United States, or in any civil society, because the United States is a place where there is a diversity of ideas and opinions: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate- (1) calls for the groups and organizations across the country who act under the banner of Antifa to be designated as domestic terrorist organizations; (2) unequivocally condemns the violent actions of Antifa groups as unacceptable acts for anyone in the United States; (3) expresses the need for the peaceful communication of varied ideas in the United States; (4) urges any group or organizations in the United States to voice its opinions without using violence or threatening the health, safety, or well-being of any other persons, groups, or law enforcement officers in the United States; and (5) calls upon the Federal Government to redouble its efforts, using all available and appropriate tools, to combat the spread of all forms of domestic terrorism, including White supremacist terrorism. 2020 Election anarchists anti-government antifa Bob Avakian CHAZ CHOP Communists Department of Homeland Security Department of Justice Emgage Action Federal Protection Service Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf Million Muslim Votes summit Muslim Brotherhood Rep. Karen Bass Revolutionary Communist Party

In a recent op-ed in The Wall Street Journal our friends Stephen Moore and Phil Kerpen wrote that President Trump needs to reset the debate on the latest coronavirus relief bill, and we agree. As Messrs. Moore and Kerpen pointed out, Senate Republicans have scuttled their best pro-growth idea—a payroll tax cut—and instead released a $1 trillion spending bill. Last week Mr. Trump acknowledged that compromising with Speaker Nancy Pelosi is a fool’s errand, because the House won’t agree to anything that boosts growth and job creation. The Democratic plan includes a six-month extension of the $600-a-week unemployment bonus and $3 trillion in new spending. It would sink the economy and imperil Mr. Trump’s re-election. The solution proposed by Moore and Kerpen is an Executive Order forbearing collection of the payroll tax, the same strategy President Trump used to postpone the filing date for federal income taxes. Payroll taxes are shared by the employer and employee. Each is responsible for a 6.2% levy that goes toward Social Security, as well as a 1.45% tax that funds Medicare. In 2020, the Social Security tax is subject to a wage base limit of $137,700. As Moore and Kerpen explained in The Wall Street Journal, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin has the power, enunciated in Section 7508A of the U.S. Tax Code, to postpone the IRS' "performing [of] certain acts ... for a taxpayer determined by [Mnuchin] to be affected by a federally declared disaster." "The president needs to pull an end run, and there’s a legal way to do that," Moore and Kerpen wrote. "He should declare a national economic emergency and announce that the Internal Revenue Service will immediately stop collecting the payroll tax. "To protect benefits," they continued. "[Trump] should order Treasury to put bonds into the Social Security and Medicare trust funds." Moore and Kerpen noted that President Obama had done just that in 2011, making a similar move by Trump harder for presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden to reasonably object to. As Steve and Phil noted, there’s the hitch that taxpayers could still be on the hook for the taxes once the deferral period – whatever it is – expires, but that holds out the prospect of adding a game changing element to the 2020 presidential campaign. As part of the announcement of the deferral President Trump could also pledge to sign a bill—now or after the new Congress takes office on Jan. 3—to forgive those repayments. "That would make the election a referendum on middle-class taxes. Mr. Trump can give Americans a tax cut now, and sign it into law later," Moore and Kerpen wrote. "This bold act would flip the political tables. Democrats can’t credibly call it a tax cut for the rich." Even better, it would give Republican House and Senate candidates something to campaign on and energize the Republican base, which is now in a state of near rebellion over the idea of trillions more in spending, which is guaranteed to include billions in Democrat priorities as the price of passage. The Phase 4 stimulus negotiations are a train wreck for the GOP. There is no possible positive outcome. Except this strategy, which could be a game-changer for the economy and the GOP’s congressional election prospects. And the President sounds like he is warming to the idea. At a White House press briefing Monday evening, President Trump said he does indeed have the power to unilaterally suspend the collection of payroll taxes. “I can do that also through an executive order,” Trump said at the briefing, “so we’ll be talking about that.” We urge CHQ readers and friends to call the White House at 202-456-1111 or use this link to email the White House to let President Trump know you back him and want him to make a bold move to enact pro-growth economic policy and rearrange the political chessboard for the 2020 election by immediately declaring a national economic emergency and announcing that the Internal Revenue Service will immediately stop collecting the payroll tax. 2020 Election bailouts congress relief bills Covid-19 Dr. Fauci economic policies IRS mandatory vaccination national economic emergency payroll tax cut pro-growth Section 7508A of the U.S. Tax Code tax repayments Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin

Liberal culture warriors couldn’t inflict any greater insult on America if they tried “You couldn’t have walked it out there any better” -- unnamed golf announcer commenting on a pro golfer’s drive on a pristine looking golf course somewhere in America. All of us are prone to hyperbole from time to time. I’ve said the same exact statement (above) to my son when he hits a fantastic tee shot. But unless the ball ends up in the hole every time, there conceivably is a spot you could’ve walked it to that would constitute a superior resting place for the dimpled sphere. For those who play, golf is a constant pursuit of perfection, and perhaps what makes it most enticing to enthusiasts is the fact you can’t actually ever reach the pinnacle. Yes, there are holes-in-one, albatrosses, eagles and birdies, but the former scores are like lightning strikes on a cloudless day. They don’t happen often. In politics, it’s often mentioned that candidate x couldn’t be doing worse if he or she were actually trying to screw up. The saying’s been used a number of times in reference to President Donald Trump, a man who sometimes does things that defy common political wisdom. There are those who say Trump’s tweets are ill-timed and poorly thought-through. It is what it is. The president prides himself on being a different kind of politician, and “he couldn’t have done worse if he were trying” is in the opinionated mouth of the speaker. That being said, there are instances where something happens that leaves people shaking their heads and thinking it doesn’t get any worse than this. Such was the case last week at the outset of the National Basketball Association “opener” (which really was just a resumption of the season that was halted in March) where entire teams of players knelt in protest of the National Anthem. Joe Concha reported at The Hill, “NBA teams knelt and locked arms during the national anthem Thursday as the league reopened its season on courts painted with ‘Black Lives Matter.’ … Every player from the four teams competing Thursday knelt during the national anthem to draw attention to racial injustice. “’That was beautifully done. Done in unity. Nice to see,’ former NBA star Shaquille O’Neal said on TNT. ‘Again, when you have your platform, I think it’s very important that you speak up, very important that you speak your mind.’” Speak up? The idiots took a knee on a basketball court. Great platform to make a fool of yourself, no? Funny how it used to be. Professional ballers have always had political opinions and a good many of them haven’t been shy about expressing them. Hall of Famer Bill Walton was an anti-Vietnam war hippy and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar a social activist, yet they didn’t use their hoop forums to shove their opinions down the throats of people who came to watch the orange ball being dribbled, shot and inbounded. Concha additionally reported, “’So we use our voice to raise awareness, now we have to go vote. We have to vote our mayors in — our mayors appoint chiefs of police. We have to vote senators and politicians,’ O'Neal added. ‘It doesn’t just stop with sending out a tweet or just yelling all the time. We have to continue to fight, continue the movement. ... I’m proud of everyone.’” I’m guessing the reaction at many homes to the flag affronting was not quite as positive as O’Neal’s. For lots of folks, assuming they bother tuning-in at all anymore, the likely impression was, “They couldn’t alienate more people at once if they tried.” Full disclosure: I don’t watch the NBA, haven’t for years and probably wouldn’t view a game even if it were the only thing on cable on a dreadfully cold and boring Saturday night with the furnace on the blink and a roaring fire crackling next to the TV. Oh yeah, I still wouldn’t watch if I were parched in the middle of a hot and dusty desert and on the edge of fainting and a cool spring was feeding into a straw positioned just-so on a comfy couch under an awning near the images. Professional basketball lost me years ago when the “athletes” became walking billboards for tattoo and piercing parlors and the “woke” started lecturing people on politics. In recent times superstar LeBron James, among others, has been extremely politically visible, appearing at Democrat rallies and stirring up all sorts of nonsense about “justice” and “gun violence” when he lives in a virtual armed fortress wherever he resides (he’s jumped teams several times). People like LeBron are essentially entertainers without a script. If I wanted to be entertained, I’d dial up a pre-CCP virus Trump rally. Talk about exciting. Now the hoopsters seem fully committed to “speaking out” and joining with competitors from practically every other professional sport in thumbing their noses at the paying public by insulting the American flag. Much has been written about the bankrupt and empty “protests” these spoiled and pampered sports-playing celebrities are partaking in. They claim it isn’t about disrespect to veterans and those who bled for those stars and stripes. It’s about “justice” for “victims” of brutality and “systemic racism” -- the same system that made them filthy rich. Yeah, right. They couldn’t have said it worse if they’d tried to tick folks off. But there is some entertainment value in the offering. For Shaquille O’Neal to mumble nonsensical crapola like “raising awareness” and encouraging people to vote for mayors who appoint police chiefs and also to vote for senators and politicians, while in the next breath referring to “tweet” and “yelling”… why didn’t he just tattoo “Joe Biden for President” on his forehead while holding up a written sign reading “Wokesters hate Trump.” Do these guys think ordinary people are stupid? Do they surmise that the fans in their COVID-19 restricted living rooms don’t know who and what they’re talking about? Last Thursday folks tuned to TNT hoping to take part in the resumption of the pro basketball season and instead were treated to idiots in uniforms donning “Black Lives Matter” shirts and then, in unison, taking a knee while the national anthem was played. What would’ve happened if members of the 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team went to coach Herb Brooks and told them they were boycotting the national anthem? Would Brooks have subsequently said it was “beautifully done” and complimented them on their “unity” in the doing? While it’s true a good many of these basketball players were brought up in poor communities in single parent households, with little opportunity and social problems all around, what excuse is there to act in such a way? The same could be said for Ben Carson. So did Sen. Tim Scott. So did millions of “white” kids in poverty-stricken regions of the country who battled their own set of challenges, including run-ins with law enforcement. Anyone in the hills of West Virginia feel akin to the NBA players? Eastern Ohio? Western Pennsylvania? The northern part of Minnesota? Neither of my grandfathers finished high school. They lived in areas without a lot of modern amenities. They didn’t complain. And they lived good lives. Now we’re told by these morons to look back at history and recognize the “white privilege” our ancestors enjoyed. And it’s not just about skin color. Should a successful descendant of Chinese or Korean immigrants feel guilty for being born into a culture that stressed hard work, respect for authority, academic achievement and abiding by the law? How about African immigrants -- like my old pastor, Elijah -- who were raised in rural villages and grew up in large families, but were taught stringent values by their elders? We’ll hear “They couldn’t have done it worse if they tried” a lot in the coming months. Here’s thinking sports viewers could be divided into several categories. First is probably the smallest group, those who actually agree with the “cause” of the players and watch to simply support their efforts. Second is the avid sports nut who doesn’t care about politics and isn’t bothered in the slightest by the anti-flag gestures. They just want their sports. Third is likely the largest category, diehard dedicated team followers who don’t like the political gestures but will tolerate them out of dedication to family time, etc. They’ll wait until the fury dies down, like with Colin Kaepernick and his absurd “protests” in 2016. The last cluster is tradition-loving Americans who’ve had it with the intentional affronts and will find something better to do rather than be subjected to the non-stop bombardment of politically correct stupidity coming from all sides, including enabling corporations. They also fault team owners for not putting an end to the misbehavior when they had the chance. Too late now. “They couldn’t have done it worse if they tried” -- The issue platform of the Democrat Party It used to be people could have differing opinions on political issues yet still respect the others’ views and defer to the system to determine winners and losers. Ronald Reagan, for example, never enjoyed a Republican-controlled House yet he still was able to pass his economic program thanks to the loyalty and support of conservative (on economics, at least) Democrats who placed partisanship to the side for the betterment of their country. This type of thing just doesn’t happen any longer. It’s not necessarily that the Republican Party has moved swiftly to the right as much as Democrats have gone hard in the other direction. Both sides used to be able to come together on common concerns such as policing -- just ask Joe Biden, circa early nineties -- and immigration, where bipartisan majorities voted in favor of building a border wall, tighter enforcement and pro-American citizen preferences. In the age of Donald Trump, Democrats have wholesale abandoned their previous preferences in favor of opposing everything the president does regardless of its desirability and necessity. It’s gotten to the point where Democrats basically openly advocate for more illegal immigration and won’t settle for “compromise” that doesn’t include full amnesty and eventual citizenship (voting privileges) and benefits for the invaders. “They couldn’t have done it worse if they tried.” Last week’s disgusting interrogation of Attorney General William Barr is a case in point. Barr faced wave after wave of pontificating Democrats lecturing on utopian fantasies rather than accepting the reasoned testimony of the nation’s top law enforcement officer. Anything that contradicts their distorted interpretation of reality is met with open contempt and insulting nastiness. If the national anthem were played before one of these “hearings” Democrats would probably kneel so as to be in unison with their rioting black clad Antifa brethren attempting to burn down buildings and assault federal officers. Could they be any more extreme? Today’s Democrats are an interesting lot, aren’t they? Like with the NBA players, it seems they couldn’t care less what the people at home think. Last week, Roger L. Simon (at The Epoch Times) questioned whether there’s a need for congressional hearings anymore. Simon was right -- what a waste of time. Donald Trump is really a big-hearted, caring guy -- away from the public sphere If it wasn’t obvious before Donald Trump entered politics, it’s certainly well-known now -- the outsider New Yorker loves his tough guy image. But those who’ve known Trump for years swear behind the scenes, he’s a much different human being. Ronald Kessler wrote at The Washington Times, “… Norma Foerderer spent almost every day with the mogul for 26 years as his vice president and top aide. No one knew so well both the personal and business side of Donald Trump. “In the only in-depth interview she ever gave, Foerderer, who has since died, told me there are two Donald Trumps: One is the Trump who appears to the public, making often outrageous comments on television to get attention; the other is the real Trump only insiders know. “’I mean Donald can be totally outrageous, but outrageous in a wonderful way that gets him coverage,’ Foerderer told me. ‘That persona sells his licensed products and his condominiums. You know Donald’s never been shy, and justifiably so, in talking about how wonderful his buildings or his golf clubs are.’ The private Trump, on the other hand, is ‘the dearest, most thoughtful, most loyal, most caring man,’ Foerderer said. That caring side inspires loyalty and is one of the secrets to his success.” Kessler’s article paints quite a contrast to the establishment media’s depiction of Trump as a boorish jerk who no one can stand to be around or work for. There’s no doubt, Trump demands loyalty and he works long hours. People who work in the White House know what to expect. Trump clearly loves people and he enjoys a fair back-and-forth in public debate. He doesn’t respond well to being unfairly attacked. But who does? NBA players kneel and Democrats bash witnesses at congressional hearings, both forums where there’s no dissent. They couldn’t handle it. Professional athletes and Democrat congressmen and women behaving badly seems to be commonplace these days. It’s almost like they’re trying to get folks riled up rather than providing entertainment and good governance. They couldn’t do worse if they tried… or maybe the insults are the latest salvos in a greater war to destroy what remains of American culture. 2016 election 2020 campaign 2020 Election Bernie Sanders CHAZ CHOP Conservatives defund the police Democrats Donald Trump Drain the swamp Elizabeth Warren Establishment Republicans George Floyd Hillary Clinton Joe Biden Kellyanne Conway Mike Pence monument defacing police brutality police reform Republicans riots Tim Scott Trump administration violence

ll The President’s Men and a congressional Republican coup that never will be It's always fascinating whenever Democrats and the media -- one and the same -- give Republicans advice, but one particular suggestion last weekend was shocking in its boldness and astonishing nervy ignorance. Legendary (only because he was immortalized in Hollywood film lore) Washington Post investigative reporter Carl Bernstein thinks it’s time for Republican congressional leaders to conduct a little pow-wow and then pay an unsolicited visit to the executive mansion to present Donald Trump with his walking papers. As I’ve been saying a lot lately, you can’t make this stuff up. Daniel Chaitin reported at The Washington Examiner, “During an appearance Friday on CNN, Bernstein hearkened back to the Watergate scandal, describing how a trio of influential Republicans — 1964 presidential nominee Sen. Barry Goldwater, Senate Minority Leader Hugh Scott, and House Minority Leader John Rhodes — went to the White House in 1974 to tell President Richard Nixon he did not have the support in Congress to survive impeachment, after which he resigned. “’Something similar is needed now. If only the Republican leadership and other Republicans would go publicly and say to this president, 'All right, you want to stay for the rest of your term, but we are going to be a caretaker until this election, and you must begin to act in the national interests and in fact we would like to find another alternative to run as the Republican nominee for president of the United States,'’ Bernstein said.” Ahem. Wow. That’s a heck of a scheme, isn’t it? One can only imagine what such a meeting would entail. Let’s give it a shot (the imagining part): Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and 2012 GOP presidential nominee -- and now Utah senator --- Mitt Romney enter the West Wing through the back door, sneak into the Oval Office via a secret entrance Bill Clinton had constructed for social calls from Monica Lewinsky and various other service babes (I mean visitors) and proceeded to greet Vice President Mike Pence as they had prearranged during a conference call discussing the various coronavirus relief bills. Shortly after, coming off a sharp back-and-forth with the fake news media over the latest Chinese Communist Party (CCP or Wuhan, if you prefer) virus developments, President Trump greeted the watchman outside his office door and entered thinking he’d have just enough opportunity to review reports on the ongoing Capitol Hill negotiations before dinnertime. Party leaders were hard at work trading proposals on how to send more borrowed money to the American public and were at an impasse. Was it time to knock some heads? Somewhat surprised that Republican-land’s movers ‘n shakers were already in attendance, Trump said, “Good. You guys are here. I thought I would have to send someone up to the hill to get you to come down here and talk turkey. Even after me being president for three and a half years, you politicians still don’t know the Art of the Deal. What have ‘Chucky’ and Nancy done now? Spill it.” McConnell looked sheepishly at the others, then replied haltingly, “Um, Mr. President, we didn’t come to talk about the coronavirus relief negotiations. We received a tip from Carl Bernstein -- you know, the Washington Post guy who, along with Bob Woodward, brought down Tricky Dick Nixon in the early seventies -- that we should tell you that, for the good of the country, we’ve decided to remove you as our nominee this year.” Having memorized the precise wording Bernstein instructed them to use, “Grim Reaper” Mitch continued, “You can stay until January to fill out your final months as president, but we will be caretakers of the country in the meantime. You’re unstable and an authoritarian and we’re doing this to act in the national interest, whatever that means. Meanwhile, we’re planning on finding another alternative to run for the GOP.” McConnell shot a quick glance at Pence who was standing beside Trump, dumbfounded that these doltish fools in tailored suits and cloth masks with large Republican elephants on them would even have the guts to offer such a thing. Trump didn’t utter a word but clearly wasn’t impressed with the attempted bloodless coup. “Further,” McConnell cleared his gullet, coughing up a bit of phlegm mixed with bile, “Bernstein said you ‘absolutely’ have acted more recklessly than Nixon did, and he should know, his memory fresh from all that ‘Deep Throat’ material from five decades ago. You’ve endangered the country and the world by failing to act quickly enough to save us all from the Chinese sickness. What did you call it, the ‘Kung flu’? Very funny, Mr. President. And what was the deal with not wearing a mask? All those ‘deplorables’ needed a better example. You’re the president, a shepherd, and the sheep must be led, not left to wander aimlessly. That rhymes-with-rich Nancy Pelosi’s been on us for months and we’re tired of it.” “Yeah!” shouted McCarthy, who couldn’t contain himself any longer. Kev-bo rocked back and forth trying to do a little dance but lost his balance and practically stumbled to the ground. “Uh huh! What he said!” The Californian pointed at McConnell and was about to give the Kentuckian a high five but thought better of it under the circumstances. The man wasn’t used to thinking for himself and couldn’t come up with a better reply, so he just affirmed whatever “Cocaine Mitch” blurted out, thankful that he didn’t have to explain the urgency of getting Trump out of the picture so the establishment could run the show again. By this time Trump was looking down at his stack of briefing materials, the anger gathering underneath his outwardly calm demeanor. But rather than immediately casting these dunces out in the street for their unconstitutional and grassroots defying fickleness, the president decided to play them a tad. “Say I was to go along with yours and Bernstein’s notion and agree to step aside. Who would you get to replace me on this year’s ticket? (Gesturing towards Pence, Trump added) “Mike, are you okay with this, too?” Recognizing that Trump wasn’t serious, Pence nodded and said, “Oh yeah. I can’t wait to hear about who our congressional brains have in mind to replace us.” All eyes moved to Romney who had been engaged in trying to inconspicuously position himself behind the 5’9” McConnell, no easy feat for the 6’2” former presidential campaigner. Of course, Mitt’s immaculately manicured coiffure made him seem even taller. He was visibly sweating profusely. “I can sense all of you looking at me. But yes, I would be willing to step in and run for president again. People forget we -- Paul Ryan and I -- have already battled Joe Biden and we know that he’s sharp as a tack and doesn’t make any mistakes on the campaign trail. I -- I mean we -- feel that if there’s a new nominee, it should be me….” Mitt’s words trailed off as he sensed that no one present was the least bit impressed with the concept. Undeterred, Romney went on, “I’ve learned a lot since Election Night 2012. I’ve spent much time making speeches, begging for the Secretary of State’s position and a couple months ago, I marched in a Black Lives Matter protest. My kind (the NeverTrumpers) doesn’t approve of your moves to disrupt the ‘peaceful’ demonstrations, Donald, and it’s time for you to be drummed out of town. Unlike you, we’re nice -- so no tar and feathers will be waiting.” “Sure, Mitt,” Trump replied matter of fact-ly. “Who do you want to fill the veep slot?” McConnell, McCarthy and Romney looked at each other suspiciously. “We haven’t gotten that far,” Romney answered nervously. “But a lot of our donors want the party to go back to the days of civility and capitulation -- I mean acquiescence -- with the Democrats. I’m planning a call to Paul Ryan tonight to see if he’d be willing to make this a dual comeback of epic proportions. I heard he’s hangin’ ‘round in Wisconsin suckin’ down local suds and munchin’ on local cheese. He’d be the perfect choice to unify our party and the country. Or maybe John Boehner.” “Oh yeah,” Pence said, unconvinced. “We’ve been here for a few years and in that time, I’ve come to realize the media and Democrats were right to impeach the president and that the Washington ruling elites know a lot better on how to govern our nation than he (gesturing at Trump) does. Forget all the MAGA hyperbole, the country was just great before he even rode down the escalator. And we can trust that all of you will ensure that the border is enforced, stand up for the conservative agenda and champion the pro-life cause like you always have… right????” Pence couldn’t stifle his laughter any longer, doubling over at the thought of these swamp dwellers actually achieving anything on their own. “And if you buy any of that then I’ve got a Joe Biden cognitive intelligence test to sell you.” “Alright, enough already,” Trump verbalized, finally losing his patience. Looking at McConnell and McCarthy, he said, “Get out of here and take your Romney dog with you. Let him stick his head out the car window on the way back to the Hill. Or even better, put him on the roof -- I heard he likes it. What a bunch of losers. Don’t you realize Bernstein started his career the same year Joe Biden was elected to the senate? He’s a dinosaur. Who listens to him? As soon as the people understand what Sleepy Joe and the Democrats represent, it’s going to be a different story. Ignore the polls. We made America Great Again before the China virus and we’re going to do it again. Starting now. OUT!” --Democrats and Trump’s “conservative” enemies can fantasize all they want about taking over the country and getting rid of Trump. The whole notion is absurd. But what else would you expect from some washed-up liberal commentator on CNN? Only Trump can keep Republicans united and heal the nation’s coronavirus wounds If it wasn’t clear from the above satirical glimpse at what a “meeting” to tell the outsider president he needs to step down might look like, many similar plots have been advanced in Trump’s brief political career. It takes serious gall to imply that Republicans would be stupid enough to remove the incumbent now. Doesn’t anyone take into account the opinions and loyalty of the grassroots? Or are these swamp consultants and journalists really that blind? Who could possibly step into a vacant Republican nominee slot tomorrow and credibly make a run in November? Who knows, perhaps the Bush family -- and Mitt Romney -- conspired to advance the possibility that Trump would leave willingly and pave the way for a more establishment-friendly choice to take his place. If anything, Democrats are the ones who should ponder having Pelosi, Schumer and Hillary Clinton head to Delaware to have a chat with Grampa Joe Biden about leaving for the good of the party and country. Liberals everywhere are on pins and needles hoping Biden will hang on for a few more months before completely losing it and being admitted to a care facility. They’ll tuck him out of sight until it’s safe to emerge… and I’m not talking about COVID-19. Clamor growing among Democrats to have Biden bow out of this fall’s debates I never thought I’d say this, but I want to see Joe Biden debate. A lot of liberal Democrats apparently don’t share the feeling. In fact, some are openly pleading with the Democrat nominee-to-be to pull out of the three scheduled debates ahead of time. Valerie Richardson reported at The Washington Times, “Leading the calls for Mr. Biden to drop out is former Clinton White House spokesman Joe Lockhart, who tweeted Sunday that debating President Trump is like ‘debating the last drunk in a bar at closing time.’ ... “Mr. Lockhart … said Saturday it was ‘worth the risk’ for Mr. Biden to drop out of the debates, alleging that Mr. Trump is ‘incapable of telling the truth.’ …  The three presidential debates are scheduled to take place between Sept. 29 and Oct. 22, but Mr. Lockhart said that it would be ‘a fool’s errand to enter the ring with someone who can’t follow the rules or the truth. ‘He will take the truth and destroy it,’ Mr. Lockhart said on CNN. ‘Biden will be in the position of correcting him over and over and over again. I don’t think he should give him that platform.’ “Also advising Mr. Biden to skip the debates are former Hillary Clinton senior adviser Zac Petkanas, who tweeted last week that Mr. Trump is not a ‘legitimate candidate,’ and New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who said last month that Mr. Biden should only debate if Mr. Trump releases his 2016-18 tax returns and agrees to a real-time fact-check.” The question is, who will “fact-check” Grampa Joe? Trump is occasionally known to exaggerate a bit, but Biden’s the one who’s an outright liar. “There have been 150 million people killed by guns since 2007.” Really? To this point, Biden’s debate strategy has been to condescend, distort, pontificate and overstate. Ever notice how big his eyes get when he’s answering a question and his teeth and tongue look like they’re about to leap out of his head? For a guy who admits he had a terrible stuttering problem as a youth, now it almost seems as though Grampa Joe can’t talk fast enough and his mouth is three race checkpoints in front of his brain. Joe Biden can run from presidential debates, but he can’t hide from his record. President Trump’s detractors can hope he’ll just leave quietly before this fall’s election, but they’re plain crazy. Eventually the truth comes out, and here’s thinking Trump will emerge as the more credible candidate. And it won’t even be close. #BlackLives Matter 2016 election 2020 campaign 2020 Election Bernie Sanders CHAZ CHOP Conservatives defund the police Democrats Donald Trump Drain the swamp Elizabeth Warren Establishment Republicans George Floyd Hillary Clinton Joe Biden Kellyanne Conway Mike Pence monument defacing police brutality police reform Republicans riots Tim Scott Trump administration violence

Most conservatives we know have been puzzled by the steady stream of senior Democrat elected officials and high profile pundits and political operatives coming out of nowhere every so often to claim that President Trump won’t leave office if he is defeated in the November election. Most recently, Democrat House Majority Whip James Clyburn, claimed President Donald Trump has no intention of “peacefully” transferring power if he loses the November election, “I believe that he plans to install himself in some kind of emergency way to continue to hold onto office,” Clyburn said. He went on to claim Trump "doesn't plan to have fair and unfettered elections," and compared the president to fascist dictator Benito Mussolini. "I feel very strongly that [Trump] has taken on strong-arm tactics, and I feel very strongly that he is Mussolini. Putin is Hitler," Clyburn told CNN's "State of the Union" audience. Even Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden has gotten in on the act, claiming that “under pressure and political duress,” President Trump may pursue increasingly extreme measures to stay in power. In November 2019, Mr. Biden said he feared that “as the walls close in on him he becomes more erratic. And I’m genuinely concerned about what he may do in order to try to hold on to the office.” Biden has also said he expects the military to escort President Trump from the White House, saying he's "absolutely convinced" the military would escort President Trump from the White House if the presumptive Democratic nominee wins the general election in November. He went on to list a number of former high-ranking military officials who have spoken out about Trump's actions in response to protests that swept the nation following the police killing of George Floyd. Biden cited those remarks as proof that the military would intervene if Trump did not accept the election results. "I promise, I am absolutely convinced they will escort him from the White House with great dispatch," the former vice president said according to reporting by Justin Wise of The Hill. What Democrats are really doing is preparing the information warfare battlefield for the Election Day and post-Election Day chaos they plan to create to drive Donald Trump from office, whether or not Joe Biden wins the most Electoral College votes on November 3, 2020. See Byron York's piece "Will Democrats accept election loss? New report says no." As we explained many times in the past, Election Day chaos is part of the Democrat Party’s political strategy. See It’s Not A Protest, It’s Not A Riot, It’s A Revolution (Part 4) and The Democrats’ Chaos Strategy Almost Worked In Florida for examples. The goal of this chaos strategy is to bring the conduct and results of the 2020 election inside the “margin of chaos,” where means other than counting legally cast votes, attributable to legal voters, will determine the outcome. Crucial to this strategy is to fundamentally change the way American elections are conducted by eliminating in-person, ID checked voting and substituting unverifiable mail ballots, or online voting. And we are seeing a test run of this strategy playout in the Democrat primary in New York's 12th congressional district. Once inside the margin of chaos, the result of the election was put in the hands of one person – Judge Analisa Torres of the Federal District Court in Manhattan, who allowed ballots that were received one to two days after the election date – June 23 – to be counted, so long as they are postmarked by the 23. Though, her order left room for ballots received as late as June 30 to be counted, if they are the deciding factor in the race. Establishment Democrat Carolyn B. Maloney (a close ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi) was leading her Far Left Progressive Democrat challenger, Suraj Patel, by some 3,700 votes, and the judge’s decision was narrowly drawn to force the counting of only a portion of the 12,500 disputed absentee ballots. However, post office officials testified that the system they used to date mail-in ballots was not foolproof. Some ballots weren't postmarked, making the judge's order harder to enforce, and casting doubt on the ability of the post office to handle a November 2020 election involving hundreds of millions of mail-in ballots. Patel has now filed a lawsuit demanding the 12,000 ballots that have been disqualified be counted, including about 1,200 that were missing postmarks. The election has now been called for Maloney, and the bottom line is one person, a judge appointed by Barack Obama, decided the outcome of the election based an arbitrary and capricious standard tailored to achieve the election of the Democrat establishment’s preferred candidate. As we explained in our article “The Democrats’ Goal Is Election Chaos,” the 2018 post-Election Day chaos in Florida, Georgia and elsewhere was not due to incompetence. It was part of a larger, long term plan that has been executed by Democrats to move as many elections as possible into what our friend election lawyer J. Christian Adams calls “the margin of litigation.” Once inside the margin of litigation, election laws and the rules and deadlines, with which honest Republican candidates complied pre-election, are thrown out the window by activist Leftist judges and highly partisan Democrat supervisors of elections to the advantage of Democratic candidates and committees who knew in advance that ballots that were illegal on their face would have a good chance of being counted – as they were in the recent New York House District 12 Democrat primary election. Conservatives must come to grips with the reality that for the new radical progressive Democratic Party politics is warfare, and the only rule in war is to win. So, fast forward to November 4, the day after the 2020 election, at which time we can guarantee that Democrat-controlled states and jurisdictions will refuse to submit final vote tallies, Democrats will sue, demanding that judges takeover the counting of ballots and, post-election, make the rules as to which ballots must be counted. They will in particular demand that an “every vote be counted” standard be applied, even if that means counting ballots that are illegal or defective on their face, e.g. unpostmarked mail-in ballots obtained after the close of the polls. President Trump and Republicans will rightly object to this planned chaos, but Democrats, having prepared the information warfare battlefield with the narrative that Trump is refusing to accept the results of an election he lost, will push the litigation forward, hoping to force a constitutional crisis that will put the decision in the hands of the Supreme Court or House of Representatives, all the while demanding that their Deep State allies in the military remove President Trump from the White House. Would the military act on its own? Joe Biden seems to think so, and Democrats are preparing the information warfare battlefield to justify them doing so.