WE CAN'T SAVE AMERICA UNTIL WE
GET RID OF JOE BIDEN!!!
The Democrats are Certain They Will Never be Held Accountable for the Trump Indictments and Biden Cover-Up
Never in the 235 years since the ratification of the Constitution has an administration premeditatively and blatantly prosecuted, on specious and conjecturable charges, the titular leader of the opposition party and leading candidate for president. And doing so while overtly flaunting their egregious actions to protect and cover-up for the incumbent president who has been exposed as potentially complicit in massive bribery and fraud. In any previous election cycle, these overt and unabashed actions would have been the death knell for the incumbent president’s campaign and his party.
Yet the Democrats are blatantly unconcerned, supremely confident that they will prevail in 2024 regardless of who they nominate. What underlies this inordinate arrogance?
- Is it because they know their alliance with the deep state, the legacy media, and social media allows them to use, without consequence, any unethical or border-line illegal means to destroy and hamstring Donald Trump or any Republican nominee as well as protect their candidates and officeholders?
- Is it because they believe they can successfully manipulate the voting process in the battleground states to ensure a win regardless of whether it is Biden or whoever they nominate?
- Is it because they are confident, due to the lawfare they are waging against Trump, that the Republican primary voter will make certain that Donald Trump is the nominee, as the Democrats are convinced that independents and moderates in the swing states will never vote for him in the general election?
- Is it because they are certain Trump will be found guilty of at least one out of 78 (plus 13 in Atlanta) criminal charges which would precipitate a massive schism in the Republican Party as nearly half of Republicans would not vote for him in the primaries if he is convicted of a crime, thus, eventuating in massive numbers of Trump voters staying home in November?
- Or is it all the above?
The unprecedented hubris of the Democrats is undergirded by their all-encompassing alliance with the legacy and social media. These allies willingly attack the Democrats’ political adversaries but, more importantly, censor and deliberately suppress any negative news that might affect the party, it’s hierarchy or their candidates, most notably, Joe Biden and a corrupt Justice Department.
As the past eight years have confirmed, the onslaught directed at Donald Trump from this cabal has been withering, unrelenting and frequently misleading. Unfortunately, these tactics have oftentimes been successful in affecting the mindset of a sizable percentage of the American people. With this media behemoth unequivocally supporting them, it is little wonder that the Democrats are so shameless in persecuting Trump and protecting Biden.
The success of the Democrat cabal in unconstitutionally changing state voting laws, ballot harvesting and legalizing mass mail-in voting dramatically altered the voting landscape of this nation in 2020. These steps together with the usual ballot fraud and manipulation by the Democrats in every election cycle resulted in the disputed and questionable win by Joe Biden.
In the wake of the 2020 debacle, many red states shored up their election laws and made changes to mail-in voting. The blue states have done essentially nothing to ensure voting integrity. Thus, the solid red states will remain Republican, and the solid blue states will remain Democrat.
Therefore, the 2024 presidential election will hinge on five battleground states: Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. And it is these states that the Democrat machine will focus on in 2024 as any Republican candidate for president must prevail in three of the five states in order to win the presidency.
In 2022 because of a lack of coherent messaging, get-out-the-vote campaigns by Republican candidates, and a coordinated effort to offset Democrat ballot manipulation, in four of the battleground states the Democrats won the governorships and three-out-of-four Senate races.
Further, Democrat confidence is buoyed by the fact that in each of the four battleground states in which the Democrats won the governorships they defeated a Trump-endorsed candidate, and in the fifth, Georgia, the incumbent Republican governor easily defeated the Trump-endorsed candidate in the primary. The same scenario applied to the Senate races as the three the Democrats won were also against Trump-endorsed candidates.
The lack of success of Trump-endorsed Senate and governor candidates in the swing states in 2022 further reinforced the Democrats’ mindset that Trump is unduly polarizing; thus they believe it will be easy for them to reprise 2020’s voting manipulation.
Lastly, from the Democrats’ perspective, there is no downside to their unconscionable abuse of the judicial system in attacking Trump.
The Democrats believe just one conviction would destroy any chance he might have of swaying independent and moderate voters. If they succeed in finding Trump guilty of one out of 91 specious criminal charges, they think the national drumbeat for Trump to drop out of the race will be deafening.
But, more importantly, it would precipitate a massive schism in the Republican Party as the party would be portrayed as supporting a nominee that has been convicted of a crime. Further, the party may well be faced with potentially no viable alternative, as the primary field may have been marginalized and politically destroyed in the primary process. Additionally, the Democrats are assuming many Trump voters would not show up on Election Day if Trump is not the nominee.
On the other hand, if the trials are delayed until after the election or in the unlikely event that Trump is found not guilty of all 91 charges, the Democrats are confident the ever-growing litany of charges and subsequent public trials will so incense the Republican base that Trump will easily win the nomination and be so damaged among the general electorate that he will be overwhelmingly defeated in November of 2024.
The Democrats are maliciously prosecuting Trump and mindlessly defending Biden because they are certain there will be no consequences for doing so. In their hubris and addled mindset, they are convinced they will not lose the 2024 election.
That arrogance is underscored by their support for an addlepated, incompetent, and venal Joe Biden despite upwards of 70% of Americans believing he should not run for re-election. If Biden should drop out of the race, they are confident they can win in 2024 with a blundering narcissist in Gavin Newsom or, if necessary, an inarticulate blithering buffoon in Kamala Harris.
What should Donald Trump, the other Republican presidential candidates, and the Republican Party hierarchy be doing to deflate Democrat arrogance and overconfidence?
All the Republican candidates, in particular Trump, need to stop maliciously denigrating each other and focus on winning the general election. This they do by exposing the American people to the Democrats’ contempt for the citizenry.
The Republican establishment must awaken from its coma and begin unmasking the Democrats’ reign of terror in supporting violence against their political adversaries, calling for the removal of candidates from ballots, forcefully silencing dissenting opinion, attempting to imprison political opponents and violating constitutional protections against anyone opposed to their agenda that they target.
Meanwhile, the Republican party hierarchy must singularly focus on voter turnout, ballot harvesting where legal, and early voting in every state as well as precinct by precinct observers in all of the battleground states.
If these steps are not taken then the Democrats will be right, there will be no consequences for their actions and they will win in 2024.
Biden Junta Goes Full-on Stalinist Against Trump
With William Barr as Andrei Vyshinsky.
The Biden DOJ keeps hitting Donald Trump with new indictments, including one that could possibly draw the draw the death penalty. These mounting attacks on the former president have drawn comparisons to a banana republic or third world dictatorship. A new development suggests a different dynamic is in play.
Former U.S. Attorney General William Barr was recently asked if he would be willing to testify against Trump. “Of course,” Barr responded. Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case was “challenging,” but Barr does not think it “runs afoul of the First Amendment.” That runs afoul of Bruce Thornton, who makes a strong case that quashing free speech is what Smith’s inquisition is all about.
As Robert Spencer contends, “we’re racing past” the banana republic stage and America is “heading toward becoming a new Stalinist regime in which critics of those in power are arrested by the regime itself, tried on false and fabricated charges, and executed.” Spencer evokes the Moscow Trials of the 1930s, and those sessions pack more verisimilitude than people might think.
As the late Sidney Hook recalled, “the news of the Moscow Trials burst like a bombshell. The principal defendants were all old Bolsheviks, Lenin’s comrades-in-arms who had previously been glorified as the heroes of the October Revolution. Chief among the defendants was Leon Trotsky, then in forced exile, who at one time had been acknowledged by Stalin himself as the architect of the Petrograd insurrection that brought the Bolsheviks to power. The charges were mind-boggling.”
The old Bolsheviks were accused of assassinating Sergei Kirov and planning to kill Stalin himself. They had also “allegedly conspired with the fascist powers, notably Hitler’s Germany and Imperial Japan, to dismember the Soviet Union.” Some defendants were charged with “having been agents of the British military intelligence at the very time they were storming the bastions of the Winter Palace.”
Victims included Yuri Piatakov, Karl Radek, Nikolai Bukharin, Gregory Zinoviev, and Lev Kamenev. Stalin and his secret police controlled the trials from behind the scenes and the outcome was preordained. Stalin’s prosecutor, Andrei Vyshinsky, referred to the defendants as “a foul-smelling heap of human garbage” and Bukharin as “the damnable cross of a fox and a swine.” The accused “must be shot like dirty dogs!” and they were, replaced by a corps faithful to Stalin.
As Hook recalled, the Moscow trials were also “a turning point in the history of American liberalism.” High-profile liberals such as Corliss Lamont, Theodore Dreiser, Lillian Hellman, Dorothy Parker, Nathanael West, Newton Arvin, Malcolm Cowley, and Granville Hicks, perceived the trials as a model of justice. In some cases, praise for the trials and the USSR “went beyond anything the Kremlin itself ever claimed.”
Defenders of Trotsky organized a Commission of Inquiry Into the Truth of the Moscow Trials, but it got a chilly reception from Roger Baldwin, a founder of the American Civil Liberties Union. Joseph Davies, US ambassador to the USSR, took the trials at face value and Walter Duranty of the New York Times, who covered up Stalin’s terror famine in Ukraine, claimed it was all true.
In similar style, the establishment media was all-in with the charge that Donald Trump had colluded with Vladimir Putin to steal the 2016 election. Deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe raised the possibility that Trump was a “Russian asset,” and Rep. Adam Schiff of the House Intelligence Committee said Trump was “acting like a person who is compromised.”
As former FBI boss Robert Mueller confirmed, there was no collusion and Trump was not a Russian asset. Special Counsel John Durham has now confirmed that the Russia hoax was a product of the Hillary Clinton campaign, and fully abetted by the FBI. As this comes to light, Trump faces charges of mishandling classified information.
Biden’s DOJ alleges that Trump may have violated the Espionage Act by keeping classified documents at his residence. Hillary Clinton, and former Secretary of State Edmund Muskie have also harbored classified documents, without facing espionage charges. Joe Biden has classified documents strewn about his garage, and the papers he donated to the University of Delaware have become inaccessible, even in the face of FOIA requests.
The Espionage Act criminalized dissent against U.S. involvement in World War I. Its invocation against Trump again raises the specter of conspiracy with “foreign powers,” the “Russian asset” charge, and so forth. As Spencer notes, this comes at a time when Donald Trump is the principal opponent of Joe Biden. As with the Moscow Trials, supporters reach for their bullhorn.
Adam Schiff, prime-time promoter of the Russia hoax, hailed the “stunning” detail of the indictment, showing that Trump had “malign intent.” The indictment was “another affirmation of the rule of law” and Trump “should be treated like any other lawbreaker.”
Democrat Stacey Plaskett, delegate from the Virgin Islands, said Trump “needs to be shot,” which she quickly amended to “stopped.” That is hard to top but former Attorney General William Barr was up to the task.
“If even half of this is true, he’s toast,” Barr told reporters. Like police captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains) in Casablanca, Barr claimed he was “shocked by the degree of the sensitivity of these documents, and how many there were.” The former president was peddling “big lies,” including his declassification authority, and claims that Trump is a victim are “ridiculous.” And so on.
A former U.S. Attorney General suspends the presumption of innocence and judges a case before the trial. Barr also backed the unprecedented FBI raid on Trump’s residence, proclaiming “it’s also unprecedented for a president to take all this classified information and put them in a country club, okay?” And in Barr’s view it was the government that was being “jerked around.” This is the same William Barr who in 2020 found no evidence of election fraud, without conducting any investigation or audit of the proceedings.
As he explained in One Damn Thing After Another: Memoirs of an Attorney General, Barr started his career with the CIA. The author praises Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general who appointed Robert Mueller to investigate Trump.
“Few can appreciate the complexities Rod faced during that tumultuous time,” writes Barr, and even fewer will know the important contributions he made to the administration and the country.” Barr also “made it clear that neither President Obama nor vice president Biden were in [John] Durham’s crosshairs.”
Special Counsel Jack Smith may be handling the case against Trump, but in William Barr, Biden has a shrill pro-bono Vyshinsky. In the best Stalinist style, Barr pronounces Donald Trump “toast” before his trial has even started, and “of course” he will testify against the former president he allegedly served.
“The Left may not plan to murder Trump,” Robert Spencer contends, “but they’re certainly trying to execute him politically.” On the other hand, the possibility of actual murder cannot be discounted. Consider the murder cases of DNC operative Seth Rich and DHS whistleblower Philip Haney, both unsolved as the FBI withholds crucial evidence.
Don’t forget presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr, murdered in 1968, and President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, murdered in 1963. JFK’s nephew, presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., thinks it’s “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the CIA was involved.
Democrats have not exactly welcomed RFK Jr. to the presidential race, and the Biden Junta is denying Secret Service protection for Kennedy. As 2024 approaches, the people have plenty to ponder.
“In the end, they’re not coming after me,” Trump explains. “They’re coming after you — and I’m just standing in their way.”
Lloyd Billingsley
Lloyd Billingsley is the author of Yes I Con: United Fakes of America, Barack ‘Em Up: A Literary Investigation, Hollywood Party, and numerous other works.
Reader Interactions
‘Clockwork’: Four Trump Indictments Drop After Four Damning Biden Business Revelations
Four damning news cycles about the Biden family business bombshell revelations were each immediately followed by four indictments of former President Donald Trump, causing conservatives to question if the synchronization was just a coincidence.
On Monday night, a grand jury in Georgia indicted Trump for a fourth time. Trump’s first indictment was in New York State, and two more federal indictments followed in Florida and Washington, D.C.
Each indictment immediately changed the news cycle focused on Hunter Biden and the Biden family business revelations. The indictments enabled the establishment media to ignore growing allegations of impropriety of President Joe Biden and to focus on “getting” Trump.
Below is the timeline:
First:
March 16: Hunter Biden admits the “Laptop from Hell” was his after years of denial
March 18: The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office leaks the news of the first indictment
Second:
June 8: House Oversight Committee Republicans confirm an FBI FD-1023 file in which an FBI informant claimed to possess two pieces of evidence that show President Joe Biden received $5 million after threatening to withhold aid to Ukraine until a prosecutor probing the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings was fired
June 9: Special Counsel Jack Smith releases grand jury indictment of Trump in the documents case
Third:
July 31: Devon Archer, Hunter Biden’s best friend in business, testifies before the House Oversight Committee that then-Vice President Joe Biden participated in more than 20 business phone calls to sell the Biden “brand” to associates.
August 1: Special Counsel Jack Smith releases Trump’s January 6 indictment
Fourth:
August 11: Attorney General Merrick Garland designates a special counsel in the Hunter Biden case
August 14: A Georgia grand Jury indicts Trump for questioning the 2020 election
Conservatives told Breitbart News the timeline seems very suspicious and suggested Democrats are trying to keep the spotlight off the Biden family.
“Every one of these nonsensical, politicized, and unconstitutional indictments against President Trump has been designed not only to hurt his chances come 2024 but also to coverup and deflect attention from the far more serious and egregious crimes of President Biden’s son and partner-in-crime, Hunter Biden,” Gavin Wax, president of the New York Young Republican Club, told Breitbart News.
“While Hunter committed real crimes that are being brushed under the rug, President Trump is being charged for speaking his mind, consulting with lawyers, and following the law,” he added. “Based on the latest indictment in Georgia, it seems the next thing these activist DAs will try to criminalize through precedent is mere thoughts that buck the leftist consensus.”
Luke Mahoney, a veteran digital strategist, told Breitbart News the “unprecedented lawfare” indictments occurred like clockwork.
“At this point, it’s like clockwork,” he said. “Every time there is a major revelation in the Biden investigation, the very next day President Trump gets indicted, which shifts the focus of the Republican donor base from defeating Biden and Congressional Democrats in 2024 to defending President Trump from this unprecedented lawfare.”
A conservative commentator who requested anonymity due to fear of retribution from the Hunter Biden legal team told Breitbart News that “Joe and Hunter Biden have to be the luckiest people in the world.”
“Every time bombshell revelations about the Biden Crime Family are revealed — from the Bidens taking millions from Russian and Chinese oligarchs or millions in bribes from the Ukrainian gas company Burisma — there’s another far-left prosecutor ready to hand down the latest indictment against Donald Trump,” he said.
“The Bidens can count on the corporate media covering the Trump news while ignoring the ever-growing mountain of evidence regarding the multitude of Biden family criminal enterprises,” he added.
Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.
WATCH: Hunter Biden’s Lawyer Says DOJ Wanted Plea Deal and ‘Maybe They Still Do’
Hunter Biden's lawyer said Justice Department prosecutors wanted the president's son to avoid trial on tax charges, and he suggested they might still work out a plea deal to save Biden from facing trial.
"We were trying to avoid [a trial] all along," Biden's lawyer Abbe Lowell said in a CBS News interview on Sunday. "And so were the prosecutors who came forward to us and were the ones to say, 'Can there be a resolution short of a prosecution?' So they wanted it and maybe they still do want it."
Biden and the DOJ initially agreed to a plea deal that would have seen the first son dodge prison time for tax and gun charges. But U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika last month rejected the proposed plea deal, raising concerns over its legality and the scope of immunity it offered Biden.
Lawyers for Biden said in a late Sunday court filing that prosecutors reneged on the plea deal, days after the prosecutors said Biden may be headed for a criminal trial.
Lowell in the CBS interview said a trial for the first son is "not inevitable."
The case has become a political lightning rod as Republicans in Congress raise the possibility of impeaching President Joe Biden over his son's business dealings and accuse the Department of Justice of giving him a "sweetheart deal."
(Reporting by Abinaya Vijayaraghavan in Bengaluru and Jack Queen in New York; Editing by Muralikumar Anantharaman, Robert Birsel)
Hunter Biden’s Lawyers Claim Part of “Sweetheart” Deal Still Intact
Hunter Biden’s lawyers maneuvered to keep the terms of the “diversion agreement” within their failed plea deal intact after Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss was appointed special counsel in the case.
On Friday, prosecutors disclosed that plea negotiations fell apart, and Attorney General Merrick Garland named Weiss special counsel to continue the ongoing probe into Hunter Biden’s potential tax, gun, and FARA violations.
Hunter Biden’s lawyers wrote in a court filing on Sunday that the Justice Department (DOJ) decided to “renege on the previously agreed-upon plea agreement,” but that the diversion agreement, providing Hunter Biden broad further immunity, is still in effect and binding.
“The Defendant’s understanding of the scope of immunity agreed to by the United States was and is based on the express written terms of the Diversion Agreement,” the lawyers wrote. “His understanding of the scope of immunity agreed to by the United States is also corroborated by prosecutors’ contemporaneous written and oral communications during the plea negotiations.”
“[T]he Defendant intends to abide by the terms of the Diversion Agreement that was executed at the July 26 hearing by the Defendant, his counsel, and the United States, and concurs with the statements the Government made during the July 26 hearing,” the lawyers continued, “and which the Government then acknowledged in its filings agreeing to the public disclosure of the Plea and Diversion Agreements2—that the parties have a valid and binding bilateral Diversion Agreement.”
The court filing was in response to Delaware Judge Maryellen Noreika’s request after Weiss asked the judge to dismiss the case.
Hunter Biden was expected to plead guilty last month.
But after the irregular plea deal broke down upon scrutiny from Judge Noreika, the prosecutors said Friday they expected the case to go to trial, indicating they wanted to try the case elsewhere, outside Delaware and away from the judge.
According to the Washington Post’s Editorial Board, the plea deal appeared to give Hunter Biden “special treatment,” an exception that Hunter Biden’s lawyers still claim is in effect and binding.
Critics argue that Weiss should not have been appointed special counsel due to his “sweetheart” plea deal, which collapsed under scrutiny.
United States Attorney David C. Weiss. (Screen shot/CBS News)
“Special counsels should not be appointed lightly. They have tended to overspend and overreach,” the Post‘s editorial board wrote. “One temptation in the Hunter Biden case might be to investigate the president himself, as many of his critics wish. So far, the record suggests President Biden’s behavior was not spotless — but also not criminal.”
The DOJ’s probe into Hunter Biden could implicate Joe Biden. A witness who testified before the jury was reportedly asked to identify the “big guy.”
