WE NEED TO DEAL WITH JOE BIDEN AND HIS NEO-FASCIST ASSAULT ON OUR CONSTITUTION AND BORDER! TODAY!
BREAKING NEWS: Trump Rails Against
Biden, Justice System Outside NYC Hush Money Trial
Classified Documents Are No Big Deal AFTER ALL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GAMER LAWYER JOE BIDEN, SOCIOPATH LIAR IN THE WHITE HOUSE
No charges in Biden classified documents case
THE BIDEN REGIME'S USE OF THE JUDICIAL TO ASSAULT BIDEN'S ENEMIES HAS BEEN PERVASIVE. MERRICK GARLAND DOESN'T DO MUCH AT ALL BUT PROTECT THE BIDEN CRIME FAMILY AND ASSAULT PRO-LIFERS.
JOE BIDEN IS A REMINDER OF THE COST OF LETTING A PIG PARASITE GAMER LAWYER BECOME PRESIDENT.
What the Media hasn't Told you About Carroll v. Trump
By now, everyone in the entire world heard about a New York federal jury’s award of $83 million dollars to E. Jean Carroll against Donald J. Trump for what she claims was defamation arising from her claim of a sexual assault in a Bergdorf’s dressing room. The verdict itself consists of $18.3 million dollars in compensatory damages and $65 million in punitive damages. What virtually no one reports is these damage awards are grossly excessive. The overwhelming likelihood is Donald Trump won’t have to pay anywhere near this amount of money, even if his efforts to reverse the verdict altogether fail. Let’s take a closer look at the reasons why.
Some background is in order for readers to understand the case and its complicated procedural posture.
E. Jean Carroll is a journalist who wrote an advice column for Elle magazine for over two decades. In 2019, she published a book in which she claimed Donald J. Trump, who was then President of the United States, raped her in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan in 1994, 1995, or 1996. (I cannot be more specific about the date, since Ms. Carroll herself does not even recall the year it supposedly happened.) When she went public with the accusations in 2019, some 25 later, President Trump vociferously denied her claims.
In response to President Trump’s vigorous denials of her claims, Carroll filed suit in New York State Court in 2019 seeking damages for defamation. The USA removed the case to federal court under a federal law (commonly known as the Westfall Act) calling for the USA to be substituted as a defendant in the place of President Trump. Carroll could not sue over the sexual assault claims in 2019, because any such claims were lost due to the passage of time because of the statute of limitations.
While the 2019 defamation suit was pending, the State of New York passed the Adult Survivor's Act and revived Carroll’s sexual assault claims. This allowed Carroll to file suit against Donald J. Trump over the alleged rape itself. She sued in federal court in New York on November 24, 2022. Included with the rape allegations were additional defamation claims, again pertaining to Trump’s denials, this time in 2022.
In an unusual twist, the suit filed in 2022 (involving the actual sexual assault claim and some defamation claims) went to trial before the suit filed in 2019 (again, the 2019 suit only involved defamation claims). In May 2023, a jury in New York awarded Carroll $5 million dollars in combined damages against Trump on the 2022 suit. The jury found against Carroll on the “rape” claim, but found in her favor on the other claims. That case is on appeal.
In January 2024, the 2019 defamation claim went to trial. This time the jury found Donald Trump’s forceful denials of Carroll’s claims were defamatory and awarded $18.3 million in compensatory damages and $65 million in punitive damages. What the media is not telling you is Carroll will not collect $83.3 million, because the compensatory damage award is grossly excessive and the punitive damage award violates the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. Her damages will be reduced, even if the case is not reversed altogether.
The Excessive Compensatory Damages. Compensatory damages are the actual loss or damage a party suffered. Recall, the award for what Carroll claims (and the jury found) were defamatory statements made by Trump in 2019 totaled $18.3 million in compensatory damages. This award was made on New York State Law defamation claims. The United States Supreme Court ruled in a case called Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc., that state law governs the review of the amount of a jury verdict in a diversity case like this one.
Under New York State law, a money judgment is excessive “...if it deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation.” This standard requires the court to review the evidence presented at trial in support of the award and compare the award to other similar New York cases.
A review of New York case law on defamation reveals no comparable awards to this one, in fact it is not even close. New York law simply does not support compensatory damages of more than $3 or $4 million, nowhere near the $18,300,000 awarded to Carroll by the jury. There are no $18.3 million compensatory damage awards by New York State courts. Once the award is found to be excessive it must be lowered to the maximum amount which can be recovered. This is known as the maximum recovery rule. At the very least, Carroll’s compensatory damages should be reduced from $18.3 million to $3 or $4 million. (There is also the issue of duplicative damage awards, since similar awards were made by both juries, including for “repairing” Carroll’s reputation and defamation).
The Excessive Punitive Damages. While compensatory damages are awarded to compensate someone for actual losses, punitive damages may be awarded in some instances as a punishment. Again, the jury in the Carroll case awarded $65,000,000 in punitive damages on Carroll’s 2019 claims. This award is grossly excessive under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
In BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, the United States Supreme Court ruled an excessive punitive damage award under State law violates the 14th Amendment Due Process rights of the party cast in judgment. The Court noted the primary concern is the ratio of the compensatory damages to the punitive damages. In another case the Supreme Court observed when compensatory damages are “substantial” a punitive damage award equal to the compensatory damage award would usually be the most allowed. Federal cases confirm compensatory damage awards in the $300,000 to $1,000,000 range (far less than the award to Carroll) were “substantial” for these purposes. See here, here and here.
The punitive damage award in Carroll of $65,000,000 is 3.55 times the outrageously high $18.3 million-dollar compensatory damages award. This punitive damage award is clearly unconstitutionally excessive and should be reduced to a 1 to 1 ratio.
What should happen as the case moves forward is the compensatory damage award of $18.3 million dollars should be reduced to $3 or $4 million, then the punitive damage award should be limited to a ratio of 1 to 1 to the compensatory damages. If that happens, the total award would be in the $7 to $8 million dollar range ($3 or $4 million in compensatory damages and $3 or $4 million in punitive damages).
Even if the Court twists and contorts itself into allowing the $18.3 million in compensatory damages to somehow stand, the punitive damages will necessarily be reduced to an equivalent amount of $18.3 million resulting in a massive reduction in the total damages to $36,000,000.00.
While, any of these amounts are unreasonably high for a claim of a person who cannot remember the year a sexual assault allegedly took place, the overwhelming likelihood is E. Jean Carroll will not recover anywhere near $83.3 million, even if Trump’s efforts to get the entire judgment reversed prove unsuccessful.
Daniel R. Street is an attorney with over 25 years of litigation experience. He is the author of the Fake News Exposed about Trump book series. Links to his books, Substack, social media and more may be found at his website danielrstreet.com.
ALL IT TAKES TO DESTROY A DEMOCRACY IS A PACK OF PARASITE LAWYERS. THE DEMOCRAT PARTY'S RULING CLASS OF PARASITE LAWYERS HAVE BEEN AT IT SINCE BILLARY CLINTON. ALL HAVE GOTTEN FILTHY RICH OFF OF ELECTED OFFICE BY SERVING THE 1%.
Tom Cotton: Special Counsel Report Indicated a ‘Blatant Double Standard’
During this week’s broadcast of “Fox News Sunday,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) dismissed the critics of Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report, claiming it was a political hit job on President Joe Biden.
The Arkansas Republican said that although there were no “bombshells,” it did demonstrate a double standard within the Biden administration.
“Paul Krugman writing about this over The New York Times says, it’s a hit job by the Special Counsel, adding it was full of snide, unwarranted, obviously politically motivated slurs,” FNC host Shannon Bream said. “He called it disgusting. Critics say you didn’t need almost 400 pages to explain why you’re not prosecuting the President.”
“Well, Shannon, look, the report makes it clear that President Biden intentionally took classified material and he willfully disclosed it to his own ghostwriter,” Cotton replied. “That’s clear. That’s exactly what Donald Trump has been charged with. The Special Counsel had to explain why he wasn’t going to charge President Biden with a crime since President Trump is facing the exact same crime. And the explanation is, President Biden’s memory is failing, not just now, but seven years ago, when he couldn’t remember — when he talked to his ghostwriter about whether his material was classified.”
“Now, look, there’s no new bombshells about President Biden in this,” he continued. “The American people have seen for years that he is a man with a failing memory. What this report indicates, though, is that you have a blatant double standard. If Joe Biden is not going to face criminal charges, then Donald Trump shouldn’t be facing criminal charges either. The reason he is, not just in that documents case, but the other case, is that Joe Biden is a failed president, and the Democratic Party knows the only way to stop Donald Trump from being elected president this fall is to try to convict him and imprison him. That’s what you would expect to see in a place like Pakistan or Brazil, not in the United States of America.”
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor
JOE BIDEN'S ONLY TWO OPTIONS:
1. GET REELECTED TO AVOID INDICTMENTS. ONLY ILLEGALS WILL VOTE FOR JOE.
2. RETIRE AND COUNT HIS BRIBES LIKE ANY OTHER SENILE WHITE COLLAR CRIMINAL. JOE HAS A PILE OF MANSIONS THE CHINESE BOUGHT HIM SO HE WON'T HAVE TO HANG IN THE GARAGE WHERE HE HIDES STATE SECRETS FOR CASH.
Jesse Watters : UNBELIEVABLY, this is Transpiring
Sen. Hawley Says AG Garland Should ‘Either Charge’ Biden or Invoke 25th Amendment
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said Friday that Attorney General Merrick Garland should invoke the 25th Amendment if he declines to charge President Joe Biden for the president’s handling of classified documents.
In deciding not to charge the president, Mr. Hur said that a jury likely wouldn’t convict the president in part because he would present himself as “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”
Commenting on the report, Mr. Hawley told Fox News on Feb. 9 that he believes the attorney general should act in accordance with the provisions outlined in the U.S. Constitution.
“I’m calling on [Mr. Garland] publicly now to do what I think is required under the law in the Constitution … either charge the president, or he will go to the cabinet and tell them: ‘I believe we have to invoke the 25th Amendment.’ He’s got to do one or the other,” the senator said.
“If he doesn’t, it will just confirm what everybody thinks, which is that there are two tiers of justice and that Garland himself is completely complicit in the corruption of this administration,” he added.
25th Amendment
The 25th Amendment lays out the constitutional process for removing a president who has been deemed unable to discharge the responsibilities of his office.The amendment can be invoked by the vice president and a majority of the president’s cabinet—“or of such other body as Congress may by law provide”—by transmitting their written declaration of the president’s incapacity to president pro tempore of the Senate and the speaker of the House. At that point, the vice president would assume the office of acting president.
“I need not tell you that selective prosecution is morally, ethically, and legally prohibited,” Ms. Tenney wrote. “We don’t prosecute or decline to prosecute people based on their personalities, or on the public’s anticipated perception of them. If Special Counsel finds that the evidence forms a reasonable basis to bring charges, he must do so.”
The decision also exposes an inconsistency in the Justice Department’s treatment of President Biden and former President Donald Trump, who is currently being prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith in a very similar case.
Ms. Tenney, noting this disparity, wrote, “The Department of Justice cannot ethically bring charges against former president Trump because he has mental acuity and a forceful personality and decline to bring charges against President Biden because of his cognitive decline. President Biden needs to be charged. Unless he is not mentally competent to stand trial.”
Trump: If Biden ‘Too Mentally Incompetent to Convict,’ He’s Unfit to Serve
Former President Donald Trump said on Saturday that if President Joe Biden “is too mentally incompetent to convict at a trial,” as laid out in Special Counsel Robert Hur’s damning report of the Biden classified documents probe, then he is unfit to serve as president.
Trump made his argument at a packed afternoon rally in Conway, South Carolina, broadcasted by Right Side Broadcasting Network, ahead of the state’s Republican primary in two weeks, where polls indicate he will trounce former Gov. Nikki Haley (R-SC).
“The special counsel’s report tries to let Biden off by claiming that he is too mentally incompetent to convict at a trial,” Trump noted, implying that this demonstrates Biden is unfit to lead. “‘I’m not going to charge him with a crime, but it’s okay for him to become Commander in Chief’ – think of that one.”
After a brief disturbance, in which an anti-Trumper in attendance made an outburst and was quickly removed, Trump said, “But we know that Joe Biden has always been too mentally incompetent.”
In his report, Hur cited Biden’s memory as a factor in the decision not to prosecute, as Breitbart News Capitol Hill Correspondent Bradley Jaye noted:
The report says the investigation “uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen” but does not establish guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Yet Hur’s assessment of Biden’s “significantly limited” memory also played a part in his decision not to prosecute.
“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” the report states. “Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt.”
Trump, who has been charged on 40 counts in his own classified documents case by Special Counsel Jack Smith under Biden’s Department of Justice, also contended the decision not to prosecute Biden underscores “a weaponized two-tiered system of justice in this country.”
“Crooked Joe got off scot-free,” Trump said before quipping, “and I don’t know if you call it scot-free; they said he was a mental basket case.”
He went on to add, “Biden’s thugs are still trying to put me in jail on fake charges for crimes that they openly admit that Crooked Joe did. He actually did these crimes.”
“Now, I’m not looking for anything to happen to this guy. He wouldn’t know the difference,” Trump said, vowing there would be “no revenge” if he was elected as the 47th president. “But this is selective political persecution. Not prosecution – persecution.”
IF JOE BIDEN IS SO SENILE AS HE STAGES, THEN HOW HAS HE BEEN ABLE TO WRECK SUCH HAVOC?
Where do the Democrats go from here?
Last week, Special Counsel Robert Hur announced in his 388-page report that, “Based on our direct interactions with and observations of [Biden], he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him—by then a former president well into his eighties—of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness...”
Sounds weirdly similar to FBI Director James Comey, supposedly a Republican, releasing then Presidential candidate Democrat Hillary Clinton on July 5, 2016, from any accountability for multiple felonies by declaring, “Although there is evidence of potential violations regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case...” He said this after spending several minutes listing her alleged crimes.
What we’re seeing here with Special Counsel Hur, another alleged Republican just like Comey, is another masterful display of the Deep State, working hand-in-hand with Democrat operatives to ensure they never let a crisis go to waste. They are setting the stage for President Biden to be removed as the presidential nominee for the Democrat Party.
Image: Joe Biden (edited). YouTube screen grab.
I would not be in the least surprised if this plot had been planned the day the classified documents were found haphazardly stored in Biden’s garage, documents that he allegedly took control over while he was a Senator and Vice President and, therefore, lacked any legal authority to possess classified documents. Simply put, Joe Biden violated the Espionage Act. Bigly.
The Democrats and their government operatives, including their media wing, which lies daily by not covering Biden’s gaffes and incoherent utterances, know that Biden is not mentally fit to be president. They know, too, that he will lose by such a huge margin that even large-scale voter fraud cannot manufacture enough votes to overcome his projected losses.
The logical next step would be to remove the President via the 25th Amendment. But the glaring fault with that scenario is that the hapless Vice President Kamala Harris is next in line for the Presidency. No one in the Democrat hierarchy wants to see that nightmare become a reality.
However, if Biden can’t stay the course, it’ll be interesting to see how they throw Kamala Harris under the bus. Sadly for the Democrats, while checking the proper melanin and gender boxes, Harris has a lower job approval rating than Biden and has demonstrated that she is incapable of anything other than giggling or making utterly meaningless pontifications that are confusing to even the sycophantic media trying to make her look good.
It will also be interesting to see who will be selected to carry the torch forward. Perhaps the evil, conniving, manipulative Democrats have outsmarted themselves this time.
Too frail to fail, too old to hold? Don’t believe it.
Do you remember the episodes of the Sopranos where Uncle Junior faked dementia to avoid prosecution?
I do.
As someone who had two parents with senile dementia listed as cause of death, I’ll say that Joe’s dementia is remarkably consistent, and easily identifiable … very different from what I experienced with my folks. It’s almost like watching a fictional television show where they are writing about dementia, without much personal experience … or for dramatic effect.
Like the cop shows of the 1980s where the police were in shootouts every episode it was outside the realm of reality. If you talk to any cop who worked during the 80s, most will say they never even drew their weapon during their career. The cop shows were a Hollywood writer’s idea of what police work was like.
What Joe Biden is doing on camera looks a bit like a 1980s cop-show version of dementia.
Real dementia involves a lot more spontaneous crying … or any spontaneous crying.
The “memory” thing that is causing people to say he obviously has dementia, isn’t what advanced senility looks like.
It’s what people think it looks like.
I wish I could describe what actual senility looks like, or even describe a specific event in my parents' care that caused me to think Cheatin’ Joe is faking it.
Police in the Texas Panhandle just seem to know when a car drives past them with a trunk full of meth. If you asked them how they know, they wouldn’t be able to really put it into words. This is the same for me with this situation. I wish I could find the words. I’d better, after all, I’m trying to write an essay about this subject.
Let’s try this: Because of various portrayals of senility on television, I was wholly unprepared for it when I encountered a nonfictional situation. The ideas of what dementia looks like were so misrepresented by fictional portrayals, I had trouble identifying that senility was what my parents were experiencing.
And the doctors didn’t bother testing for it, so we were left on our own, twisting in the wind.
If I were trying to fake dementia to try to convince someone… I would probably act a lot more like Joe than my Mom and Dad.
If I were faking it, I would stumble about and look confused, I would mix up people's names, and throw out random gibberish in my speech. I would pretend not to remember.
My parents remembered their jobs and in what order in life they occurred. They remembered the names of people they were just introduced to. And their random gibberish was so remarkably composed, I would compare it to liberal word salad … dumb, but arranged to sound authoritative.
And it almost always fooled me.
This example seems weak, but the following is really the least-nuanced and most obvious dementia … thing, I experienced with mom.
My Mom was feeding her cat strangely. At the time, I had a home-based small business that kept me on duty 24/7, just like her care, and for three years I only got to sleep five hours a night at most. I was exhausted all the time.
As I was doing the daily routine, including grocery shopping … I noticed that canned cat food was always on her list, no matter how many cans I purchased the day before (or was it the day before that ? On five hours' sleep, who knows?)
After a few weeks and several strange confrontations with Mom about the frequency with which canned cat food ended up on her list; I decided to keep all grocery receipts.
A week later, I pulled them out and discovered that she was having me spend something in the neighborhood of $900 a month on Fancy Feast based on the week’s buying pattern.
When I showed her the receipts, I got the strangest reaction from her that involved lots of tears and accusations of me trying to starve her cat.
It was so bizarre that I backed off, and just kept buying ridiculous amounts of cat food to keep her from getting upset.
I brought in all the food, and took out all the garbage … and to this day I have no idea what she did with all that cat food. She didn’t eat it, and there’s no way the cat ate it … so I don’t know.
Mom’s death certificate said: Senile Dementia of the Brain as cause of death. While I wasn’t surprised, I wasn’t expecting that to be the cause.
And only after she was gone for a while, was I able to piece together the puzzle and reach the same conclusion as the medical examiner.
I see it now, quite clearly. But it was anything but obvious at the time.
Now, while there is a case to be made that Ukraine money sounds a lot like Mom’s cat food … I seriously doubt it.
On the other hand, if I were Joe, and my son was Hunter, I would be busy pretending I didn’t know who the president was … that’s for sure.
Joe is just so obvious.
Double Exposure
Every day the Israeli Defense Forces find more proof of the perfidy of the UN and UNRWA. Did you guess that the UN’s demand for a quick ceasefire was intended to conceal this? If so, you guessed right. This week, among other things, the IDF discovered Hamas's Intelligence Headquarters and an enormous tunnel beneath UNRWA HQ in Gaza, equipped with a huge server and data farm which was receiving its electricity from UNRWA sources. I’d hate to prejudge the honesty of the UNRWA officials who claim they’d no idea what was going on under their feet -- I mean, they might have thought there were giant hordes of very big moles under their HQ. Still, their denials strain credulity. Indeed, tunnels and tunnel entrances and weaponry and sometimes even terrorists have been found in every UNRWA facility in Gaza. Hamas (and certainly UNRWA) believed that these were the safest places to plot, hide themselves, store their weapons and surveillance equipment, and then bleat that they were immune from attack by the Hamas victims.
And then there are those who wanted us to believe that the stumbling, incoherent president was sharp as a tack despite two life-threatening brain aneurisms and advanced age. This week, the special counsel revealed your skepticism about Biden’s mental capacity was not misplaced. Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report, released by Attorney General Merrick Garland, reveals your concern was well-warranted. He found that Biden had removed classified information, mishandled it, disclosed it to someone not authorized to see it, and left it unsecured in “the garage, offices, and basement den in Mr. Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware, home.”
He found evidence that President Joe Biden “willfully” retained and shared highly classified materials when he was a private citizen, including documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan. The report nevertheless concluded that criminal charges were not warranted.
Similar charges were leveled by another special counsel against former president Trump, who asserts that he, with full authority to do so, had declassified them, kept them in secure storage with Secret Service personnel on the premises. No action will be had against Biden -- who, when he removed them, had no authority to declassify anything and broke every law involving classified material. Among the reasons for not prosecuting Biden is this:
“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” the report states. “Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt.”
“It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him -- by then a former president well into his eighties -- of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”
Numerous Democrats have rushed to his defense, indicating that Biden is not in the least bit mentally impaired. The question then becomes, if that’s the case, should the prosecution begin? Alternatively, if he is too mentally impaired to be prosecuted, should he remain commander in chief? It seems hard to avoid these responses, but the Democrats are trying.
The first attack is, naturally, on Hur’s integrity. Those with memories longer than a week or so recall with amusement Nancy Pelosi’s response to those who questioned Special Counsel Robert Mueller. She indicated that any questioning of him was shameless and undermined both the judicial system and the constitutional checks and balances provisions.
Unlike regular prosecutors, special counsels (and independent counsels before them) are obligated to write reports justifying their decisions on whether or not to prosecute. You may recall what happened with Hillary Clinton during the Ken Starr investigation. His predecessor Robert Ray indicated he would not seek criminal charges against her even though, contrary to her statements under oath, she had “ultimately influenced” the removal of the travel office personnel. However, “the evidence was insufficient to prove to a jury [in the District of Columbia] beyond a reasonable doubt that any of Mrs. Clinton’s statements and testimony regarding her involvement in the travel office firings were knowingly false.”
Since prosecutors have ethical restraints against bringing cases they know have no reasonable likelihood of producing a guilty verdict, Democratic officeholders basically have a get out of prosecution ticket in a venue -- the District of Columbia -- which no prosecutor believes would convict them.
Yet another response is the usual for when a Democrat is caught in wrongdoing: make the story a Republicans "pounce" narrative, underplaying what they are "pouncing" about. Naturally, the New Republic is in this camp. From their point of view, the coverage of this devastating report is already "overblown" by a Republican-dominated press. (Yes, they actually printed this.)
More honest publications concede this is devastating for Democrats. Niall Stanage in The Hill:
Whatever language you use, I have not had a single person say, “Well, this really worked out well,” James Carville told this column, “Obviously this has been a bad 48 hours here.” Carville, best known for his central role in former President Clinton’s 1992 election campaign, added that Democrats were now looking to interventions from the Supreme Court, or a criminal conviction for Trump, in the hope that such developments would shift the election in Biden’s favor. “We’re officially in Hail Mary mode here,” he said. A different Democratic strategist, who asked for anonymity, chose a similarly dire metaphor. “We’re at a DEFCON One situation,” the strategist said. “I think between the special counsel report and the more catastrophic press conference that followed, and the even more catastrophic attacking of the special counsel for the report, they are magnifying and dismissing the concerns that the overwhelming majority of Americans have about Biden -- including a lot of Democrats,” Meanwhile, in a CNN appearance Friday, Paul Begala -- who rose to political fame along with Carville during the 1992 Clinton campaign -- described himself as a “Biden supporter”, but continued, “I slept like a baby. I woke up every two hours and wet the bed. This is terrible for Democrats and anybody with a functioning brain knows that.”
It’s too late for many states to add new names to their primary elections. If it’s too late to add a substitute for Biden to the primaries in those states, they’ll have to rely on write-in campaigns. The party apparently lacks a backup plan if it decides to run with a different candidate. Madison Hall in Business Insider:
With less than a year until election day, the Democratic Party has no apparent backup plan if it decides to part with its endorsed candidate.
Choosing a candidate to run against or replace Biden would also likely be a tremendously messy process: Would the party want to go with its current vice president, Kamala Harris, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, or some other dark horse candidate? Who within the party would ultimately make that decision? What happens to all of the Biden campaign's funding? [snip] If a replacement for Biden can't be formally placed on ballots, the only option for the Democratic Party, if it's serious about fielding a different nominee, would be to quickly mobilize a campaign to write that candidate's name on state Democratic primary ballots. But if this write-in campaign isn't implemented before Super Tuesday, there's little chance at all that a formal replacement for Biden will be available on Democratic tickets come November.
The deadline to appear as an independent candidate on general election ballots in November is much more lenient, meaning the Democratic Party could, as a last resort, opt to promote a candidate not even tied to the party on the ballot.
With all this in mind, it's almost certainly in the Democratic Party's best interest to coalesce around Biden as much as possible to build support around his campaign.
Will they go down with the ship? Gin up protests and riots as they’ve done before? Continuing rigging elections, this time with millions of illegal immigrants, illegally voting?
DOJ MERRICK GARLAND HAS DEDICATED HIMSELF TO PROTECTING THE BIDEN CRIME FAMILY. THE GAMER LAWYER HAS DONE IT AGAIN!
Both major parties have squandered the right to govern
Yesterday’s public statement by the Special Counsel for Joe Biden’s abuse of power in sharing and personally hoarding federally classified information/property, says it all. Not only does it underline the appalling double standard of a Democrat administration and ruling party in dealing with its Republican “enemies” but it also highlights the substantial differences in the quality and quantity of Biden’s persecution and that of Donald Trump’s.
Most unfortunately, the GOP is, once again, missing the point and are headed, with an obtuseness almost impossible to forgive at this very late date, in the wrong direction.
While the Democrats’ “position” now is that Biden should be effectively shielded from prosecution due to age and memory issues—as just used by the Special Counsel to excuse Biden from ANY prosecution—critical requirements of law and justice are being entirely scuttled off to an extraneous and clearly, specifically irrelevant issue of “age.” What happened to this: How old was Biden when he started keeping classified documents for himself, for his own uses (and we know a good deal about that), and how old was he when he kept doing it, e.g., between administrations and into the current one?
Again—a kindergartener would understand the real moral issues here—was Biden “this old” when he began squirreling away classified documents during his vice presidency? Why does any presidential defense as to storing classified documents in personal locations work for Biden, on any timeline, when Trump’s home was raided, and he is still under violent persecution—ignoring the legal prerogatives of past U.S. presidents—after leaving office, from these charges? Trump is protected as having been president, a defense Biden has never had; Trump had his in one of the most secure locations in the world, his private residence at Mar-a-Lago, while Biden had his plopped in the seat of an open-top car in an unsecured garage.
The real “crisis” here is clear, and it isn’t age. The stupid/wicked MSM has taken the Special Counsel’s workaround for Biden and turned it into a circus: the clown is Biden, aging and babbling, but the fools are the short-sighted Republican politicians who are only too happy to push Biden out and at-least-as-bad Kamala in, leaving their so-called hero Trump in the same awful mess he has been fixed in for years now.
Today’s scandal is not about an old man: Didn’t we all already know that? The scandal is that the Democrat party reserves its cold, calculated “compassion” for its own ranks, while filling the vacuum in with a wild, indiscriminate, and terribly foolish prosecution of Trump, and anyone who happens to want to vote for him.
Speaker Mike Johnson is among the very few in his party that are getting this right:
What is wrong with our Republican politicians? Can they not discern between making progress in justice or chasing it down yet another choreographed rabbit hole? It’s simple: face off with the Democrats, for once. Stop voting with them. Stop squandering our tax money on them. Stop playing war-footsie with them. They are dangerous and without scruple. Hold that party and their leader accountable to the last penny, in everything. Now. And, for heaven’s sake, stop obeying the MSM by accommodating its pathetic, vigilante communications agenda in your main talking points.
Image: Free image, Pixabay license, no attribution required.
Classified Documents Are No Big Deal
Special counsel: Biden 'willfully' disclosed classified materials, but no criminal charges warranted
No charges in Biden classified documents case
It Can’t Be Biden
Despite having always been a walking gaffe-machine, there was once a time when it would have been difficult to deny that Joe Biden was among the slipperiest in the nest of vipers that is Washington, D.C.
That time is certainly not now. It would be bad enough that, as President* of the United States, he’s incapable of taking scripted questions from predetermined and friendly reporters. But the ravages of age have impaired him beyond even the most basic cognitive and physical function. He shuffles about aimlessly, as if lost, whether he’s at the G7 Summit or in the White House Rose Garden. Even with the aid of a teleprompter, his slurring makes his speech incomprehensible. His inability to remember key details, and butchering of simple exchanges with the press and diplomats, has made him the subject of mockery among world leaders.
Understandably, given these circumstances, the looming question is: Who’s going to replace Biden on the Democrat ticket in 2024? This has been a topic throughout his presidency, and it really picked up steam in 2023. Now however, those discussions seem to have gone by the wayside, and we’re all meant to assume that Democrats are prepared to have him headline.
Many would suggest that we’re just too far along to replace him now. “Is it too late for Biden to bow out in 2024?” Thomas Gift asks rhetorically at The Conversation. “Technically, no,” he answers, but he suggests that it’s unlikely due to 30 states already having passed the deadline to get candidates’ names on the primary ballot. And if Biden isn’t replaced by March, he says, then there would be a “high-stakes fracas at the party’s convention” in August.
There are a lot of uncertain things in politics, and predictions are risky. But you don’t have to know much about reading political tea leaves to conclude that Biden’s appearance on the ticket in November of 2024 would be a catastrophe for Democrats.
Biden appears to be simply unelectable at this point, and while I don’t believe that Democrats are diabolical geniuses, I also don’t think they’re too stupid to recognize this.
Some things are so obvious that almost everyone can see them. After having watched Biden bumble around and led around by handlers for a few years, a full 77% of Americans feel that Biden is too old to serve another term in office, for all the aforementioned reasons which have been impossible to ignore.
In the realm of politics in America, 77% is a landslide. You’d have a hard time getting 77% of Americans to agree on anything, and for reference, that’s higher than the percentage of Americans who say that the American flag “makes them feel proud.” But 77% of Americans, including 69% of Democrats, agree that Biden is just too old for a second term.
The news only gets worse from there. According to an NBC poll, Donald Trump has a 23-point lead over Biden on the question of which candidate has the “mental and physical health to be president.” On the matter of who might better “secure the border and control immigration,” Trump owns a 35-point lead. Who can better deal with the economy? Trump by 22 points. Dealing with crime and violence? Trump by 21 points.
Among the only issues where Biden actually leads Trump is on abortion (by 12 points) and climate. The trouble for Democrats is that abortion and climate are prioritized as a top issue by only 21% of American voters. Since each respondent in this poll was allowed to select three of their top issues, and given the fact that these two issues tend to be peculiarly prioritized only by very socially-minded leftists in suburbia and left-wing college students, the 1-in-5 voter who prioritizes abortion is likely the same voter that prioritizes climate policy.
Again, Democrats aren’t stupid, and they see what you and everyone else see in those numbers. And the numbers highlight, Mark Murray at NBC says, the clear reversal of the trends observed just six months ago. In July of 2023, Biden went from a 49–45% lead in a hypothetical head-to-head with Trump, to now being at a 47–42% deficit.
The good news, Murray reports, is that Biden “pulls ahead of Trump when voters are asked about their ballot choice if [Trump] is convicted of a felony.” But even that may be a phantom hope, given that Biden’s lead then only becomes a two-point margin, and that’s within the margin of error.
So, are Democrats betting the farm on a Trump conviction? Maybe, but their efforts to convict him haven’t served them well so far.
The first Trump indictment began in June of 2023, and since then, Biden has lost significant ground in most head-to-head matchups with Trump. This isn’t necessarily because Trump has attracted voters, as the NBC poll numbers show. It’s because Biden has shed voters to an incredible degree.
Whatever the reason for that, whether it’s Biden’s ever more apparent senility, the invasion at the Southern border, or Biden’s weaponized government agencies targeting his political rival, the trajectory is calamitous for Democrats. Biden is obviously in freefall, and I can’t imagine that Democrats haven’t already packed a parachute.
Unlike Thomas Gift at The Conversation, and all the other people pretending that we’re too far along for Democrats to anoint a new candidate, I can recall the 2016 and 2020 Democrat primaries. And I know that anointing a presidential candidate at the convention in August might be much cleaner than again having to cover up the DNC’s efforts to thwart the democratic will of its voters, as it did in 2016 and 2020.
We could discuss the oddities in the coin-flips which put Hillary Clinton on the road to the presidency in 2016; but it’s unnecessary. It was so obvious that the DNC would accept nothing less than a Hillary Clinton nomination in 2016 that the DNC was forced to apologize to Bernie Sanders and his supporters for Party officials’ bias against him, which was exposed by a large cache of leaked internal emails.
But that wasn’t the last time that the Democrat elites sabotaged Bernie’s primary hopes, which leads us to the Super Tuesday Massacre of 2020.
Bernie was running away with the primary in early 2020, you might recall, while Biden was floundering. He finished fourth in Iowa, and placed a dismal fifth place in New Hampshire.
South Carolina was his Hail Mary. House Representative James Clyburn offered to help Joe Biden secure the black vote in South Carolina—if he committed to nominating a black woman as his first Supreme Court nominee.
Clyburn saved Biden’s candidacy in South Carolina, keeping Joe alive for the DNC. But the problem was that all the energy and momentum still remained with Sanders.
Then, a curious thing happened. Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar, both having performed fairly well in the primary up to that point, dropped out of the race just before Super Tuesday. This cleared the lane for Biden to generally own the “moderate” vote of the Democrat party. Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren remained in the race, cannibalizing large swathes of the far-left, socialist voting bloc that would likely have gone to Bernie Sanders.
You may have noticed that Pete Buttigieg, who couldn’t fill potholes as the mayor of South Bend, later got a cushy appointment as Secretary of the Department of Transportation. That’s just a coincidence, I’m sure.
Yes, it all looks really shady. But the fact is that the DNC had decided that, by hook or by crook, Crooked Hillary was going to be on the ticket in 2016. And in 2020, it was going to be the generic Democrat fixture, old Sleepy Joe, who would be campaigning from his basement while the trusty Democrat machine worked to normalize mail-in ballots and change election laws to Democrats’ advantage.
The primary system has proven inconvenient to the DNC, and their past shenanigans to ensure that their anointed candidate is “selected” within the primary framework has been difficult to conceal.
As such, it makes sense that the DNC would wait to anoint Biden’s replacement. The very best scenario imaginable for the DNC isn’t to open the process to ideas and speculation and voters today, but to have Biden eliminated from the race at some time around the convention.
It would be a madhouse of speculation and criticism, of course, but all that would be needed is enough of the delegates that were pledged to Biden to break for the newly-anointed candidate. Superdelegates would have no say unless the convention is contested, though it may be contested to make the process look less rigged. Thus, they would be able to nullify the preceding primary votes and disenfranchise the voters once again in order to anoint the DNC’s preferred candidate—but this time, it will be justified by the veneer of necessity.
Biden represents an unprecedented crisis, and that requires an unprecedented response. He is in freefall, and it appears that he’s outlived his usefulness to the Party. It just makes sense for Democrats to pull the ripcord around summertime.
The only remaining question is, who will be the parachute for the Party?
Image generated by AI.
Too incompetent to be prosecuted but not too incompetent to rule?
Per Special counsel Robert Hur’s—a Republican, you’ll be reminded incessantly if you follow this story—findings in the Joe Biden classified documents case, Biden “willfully retained and disclosed classified material after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen.” I’m not a lawyer but I’m pretty sure this constitutes a felony, at least when a Republican or anyone not named Obama, Biden, or Clinton does it. But Mr. Hur won’t bring charges because “Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview with him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”
This brings to mind the story of Vincent “The Chin” Gigante, a mafioso who feigned insanity to avoid prosecution. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think Mr. Biden, at this point, has the capacity to feign anything, least of all competence. But he wasn’t a pathetic, senile caricature of his current self when these crimes were committed. Hur’s decision to not charge reminds of James Comey’s speech exonerating Hillary Clinton of her national security breaches. The difference here is Hur has the authority to charge or not, where Comey did not. Many saw this as Comey taking his boss, then Attorey General Loretta Lynch, off the hook for making an obviously, politically charged call.
Democrat partisans are, naturally, calling the prosecutor’s report a hatchet job on the president. If they were being honest they would thank him for putting what many would consider the final nail in Biden’s reelection fantasy. It’s been widely speculated for some time that after acquiring the needed delegate count in the Democrat primaries that Biden would bow out of the race at the convention and throw his delegates to Michelle Obama, Gavin Newsome, or… God help us, Hillary.
I said four years ago that come November there was no way Biden would be atop the Democrat ticket. Obviously, I was wrong. But I feel much more confident in making the same assertion this time around. The $64,000 question is: who will replace him? That he was “elected” four years ago is testament to how corrupt our political system has become; it’s not as though he was competent then either. That senile Joe is some kind of puppet front for a covert third Obama administration is hardly speculative. He has become, for Democrats, the most useful of idiots, but his utility is fading fast.
Raskin: Special Counsel Biden’s A.G. Picked Is an ‘Age-Discriminatory’ Politically-Motivated Republican
On Thursday’s broadcast of CNN’s “Situation Room,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) argued that Robert Hur, the Special Counsel appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to oversee the classified documents probe of President Joe Biden is a Republican who “intended” to raise concerns about Biden’s age with the “kind of age-discriminatory and age-insulting remarks” about President Biden in the report.
Raskin said, “[T]his Republican special counsel said that Joe Biden had been completely forthcoming and cooperative and they’re not bringing any criminal charges against him. He did take some gratuitous slaps at Joe Biden because of his age, and a lot of these kind of age-discriminatory and age-insulting remarks are getting rather tiresome. All we really need from a special prosecutor like Hur is a decision whether there [are] any legal grounds to move forward, he said there [are] not. And he didn’t need to take all those cheap shots, and, obviously, you could take the same kinds of cheap shots at Donald Trump, who recently confused a woman that he sexually attacked and then lied about with one of his wives and also mixed up Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Nikki Haley.”
Host Wolf Blitzer asked, “In the Special Counsel’s report, it says that President Biden couldn’t remember when he was vice president or even when his son Beau died. It is important to note that many Americans are seriously concerned about his age. Does this raise alarms about whether President Biden is fit to serve another term in office?”
Raskin responded, “Well, undoubtedly, that’s what Robert Hur, who comes from my state, he’s a Maryland Republican, undoubtedly, that’s what he intended to do with those ridiculous cheap shots. I just spent an hour with President Biden and the entire Democratic caucus, where he regaled and entertained everyone for an hour and went through all of the extraordinary accomplishments of his administration, including the Inflation Reduction Act. We’ve got the best economy in the world right now, the creation of millions and millions of jobs, just an extraordinary record to run on. So, they’re going to come up with some cheap shots like that. To me, Wolf, it reminds me of the kind of gender-based cheap shots they took at Hillary Clinton when she ran for president, and now there are all these age-based cheap shots that they’re taking on [Joe Biden]. And it does show you how desperate they are, because you could turn them around and use all the same ones against Donald Trump, who is fumbling his way through every day trying to figure out who he’s attacking this day or that and which case based on his criminal conduct he’s attending.”
Special Counsel Finds Joe Biden ‘Willfully Retained’ Classified Docs — but Is Too Mentally Feeble to Prosecute
Special Counsel Robert Hur will not charge President Joe Biden for his handling of classified documents but included stunning revelations in his report of the deterioration of Biden’s mental state that are perhaps more politically damning.
The report says the investigation “uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen” but does not establish guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Source: DOJ
Yet Hur’s assessment of Biden’s “significantly limited” memory also played a part in his decision not to prosecute.
“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” the report states. “Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt.”
“It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him — by then a former president well into his eighties — of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”
Source: DOJ
Hur’s report is riddled with examples and assessments that Biden’s mental faculties and memory have deteriorated, saying, “Mr. Biden’s memory also appeared to have significant limitations.”
Shockingly, the report says, “He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died.”
Biden has often spoken about his son Beau’s death from brain cancer, on numerous occasions attributing his death to dying in Iraq.
Perhaps most damning is Biden’s inability to remember his time as vice president:
In his interview with our office… He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended (“if it was 2013, when did I stop being Vice President?”), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began (“in 2009, am I still Vice President?”).
Despite Hur’s assessment of a prosecution’s chances in court — which mirror the justifications not to charge Hillary Clinton in 2016 — the evidence presented in the report leaves no doubt of Biden’s at-best sloppy handling of classified documents.
Source: DOJ
“Among the places Mr. Biden’s lawyers found classified documents in the garage was a damaged, opened box containing numerous hanging folders, file folders, and binders. The box…was in a mangled state,” the report reads.
The report also revealed evidence that Biden disclosed classified information to the ghostwriter of his book.
The report’s release comes amid renewed questions about Biden’s mental health. In 2024, Biden has described recent conversations with foreign leaders who died many years ago.
Bradley Jaye is a Capitol Hill Correspondent for Breitbart News. Follow him on X/Twitter at @BradleyAJaye.
No comments:
Post a Comment