Here’s How Biden Admin Destroyed Our Immigration Law

/in , , , , , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes

Since early 2021 we have witnessed somewhere between 7 million and 8 million illegal entries across the now-nonexistent southern border of the U.S.

The more the border vanished, the more federal immigration law was rendered inert, and the more Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas spun fantasies that the “border is secure.” He is now written off as a veritable “Baghdad Bob” propagandist.

But how and why did the Biden administration destroy immigration law as we knew it?

The Trump administration’s initial efforts to close the border had been continually obstructed in Congress, sabotaged by the administrative state, and stymied in the courts. Nonetheless, it finally had secured the border by early 2020.

Yet almost all of the Trump administration’s successful initiatives were immediately overturned in 2021.

Construction of the wall was abruptly stopped, and its projected trajectory was canceled. The disastrous Obama-era “catch and release” policy of immigration nonenforcement was resurrected.

Prior successful pressure on Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador to stop the deliberate export of his own citizens northward ceased.

Federal Border Patrol officers were forced to stand down.

New federal subsidies were granted to entice and then support illegal arrivals.

No one in the Democratic Party objected to the destruction of the border or the subversion of immigration law.

However, things changed somewhat once swamped southern border states began to bus or fly a few thousand of their illegal immigrants northward to sanctuary city jurisdictions—especially to New York and Chicago, and even Martha’s Vineyard.

The sanctuary-city “humanists” there who had greenlighted illegal immigration into the southern states suddenly shrieked. They were irate after experiencing the concrete consequences of their own prior abstract border agendas. After all, their nihilism was always supposed to fall upon distant and ridiculed others.

New York Mayor Eric Adams went from celebrating a few dozen illegal immigrants bused into Manhattan to blasting his own party for allowing tens of thousands to swamp his now bankrupt city.

But why did the Biden administration deliberately unleash the largest influx across the southern border in U.S. history?

The ethnic chauvinists and Democratic Party elites needed new constituents, given their increasingly unpopular agendas.

They feared that the more legal Latino immigrants assimilated and integrated into American society, the less happy they became with left-wing radical abortion, racial, transgender, crime, and green fixations.

Democratic grandees always had bragged that illegal immigration would create what they called “The New Democratic Majority” in “Demography Is Destiny” fashion. Now they slander critics as “racists” who object to left-wing efforts to use illegal immigration to turn southwestern red states blue.

Mexico now cannot survive as a modern state without some $60 billion in annual remittances sent by its expatriates in America. However many illegal immigrants rely on American state and federal entitlements to free up cash to send home.

Mexico also encourages its own abject poor and often indigenous people from southern Mexico to head north as a safety valve of sorts. The Mexican government sees these mass exodus northward as preferable to the oppressed marching on Mexico City to address grievances of poverty and racism.

The criminal cartels now de facto run Mexico. An open border allows them to ship fentanyl northward, earn billions in profits—and kill nearly 100,000 Americans a year. Illegal immigrants pay cartels additional billions to facilitate their border crossings.

Don’t forget American corporate employers. Record labor nonparticipation followed the COVID-19 lockdown. In reaction to the dearth of American workers, the hospitality, meat packing, social service, health care, and farming industries were desperate to hire new—and far cheaper—labor.

Human rights activists insist that the borders themselves are 19th-century relics. And the global poor and oppressed thus have a human right to enter the affluent West by any means necessary.

Many in the tony suburbs and in universities do not live anywhere near the southern border. So they pontificate on the assurance that thousands of unaudited illegal immigrants will never enter their own enclaves or campuses.

The result is elite-bottled piety—but not firsthand experience with the natural consequences of millions chaotically fleeing one of the poorest countries in the world to pour into the wealthiest. Without background checks, vaccinations, and health audits, legality, high school diplomas, English facility skill sets, or capital, the result is an abject catastrophe.

Polls continue to show that the American people support measured, diverse, legal, and meritocratic immigration as much as they oppose mass illegal immigration into their country and the subsequent loss of American sovereignty on the border.

They understand what the Biden administration does not: No nation in history has survived once its borders were destroyed, once its citizenship was rendered no different from mere residence, and once its neighbors with impunity undermined its sovereignty.

Ending illegal immigration now depends solely on the American people overriding the corrupt special interests and leaders who profit from the current chaos and human misery.

*****

This article was published by Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Rand Paul Comes Out Swinging Against Lindsey Graham Over Ukraine Aid

/in , , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 2 minutes

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul called out his fellow Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham over Ukraine aid Thursday while on Fox Business.

Graham told reporters Wednesday those opposed to giving Ukraine more aid should stay out of it until they’ve visited Ukraine and seen the war firsthand.

“Somebody needs to remind the Senator that we don’t have any money. We are about $1.5 trillion dollars in debt for this year. Over the last three months we’ve accumulated almost a trillion dollars in three months. The total is $33 trillion, so we don’t have like an extra rainy day fund or a surplus we can send them,” Paul said in response.

“We have to borrow the money from China to send to Ukraine, so no matter what your sympathies are in the war, and I am sympathetic to Ukraine fighting off the Russian aggressors, but at the same time I think it’s irresponsible to think about their country before I think about my country.”

Paul claimed U.S. funding is also helping Ukrainian government worker pensions, and he believes most Americans agree with him that aid needs to be cut.

Paul then went on to criticize Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskyy for saying he’s not holding elections next year, claiming it would be inconvenient during a war and expensive. Paul then argued Europe has a greater incentive to help Ukraine fight off Russia, and Ukraine should rely on its neighbors.

Zelenskyy is visiting the White House and Capitol Hill this week to ask the U.S. for more aid in addition to the $100 billion that Congress has already approved, per The Wall Street Journal. President Joe Biden’s administration has called for an additional $24 billion in aid amid a spending conflict that threatens a government shutdown Sept. 30. (RELATED: ‘Huge Catastrophe’: JD Vance Says US ‘Blank Check’ Spending Focus On Ukraine Is ‘Massive Strategic Victory’ For China)

Other Republicans have expressed opposition to additional funding.

“There’s no money in the House right now for Ukraine,” Florida Rep. Byron Donalds told The Recount. “It’s not a good time for [Zelenskyy] to be here, quite frankly. That’s just the reality.”

Republican Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar told the Daily Caller News Foundation he would never support additional funding for Ukraine, since there are more dire issues domestically.

*****

This article was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation and is reproduced with permission.

Here’s All The Evidence Connecting Joe Biden To Hunter Biden’s Foreign Business Dealings

/in , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 6 minutes

The amount of evidence connecting Joe Biden to Hunter Biden’s business dealings is growing as Congressional investigations continue to reveal new information surrounding Hunter Biden’s engagements.

Witness testimony, emails, text messages, flights, and additional evidence indicate Joe Biden was knowledgeable about Hunter Biden’s business dealings and communicated with his son’s business associates on numerous occasions.(RELATED: These Are The Biggest Lies Joe Biden Told About Hunter’s Foreign Influence Peddling)

Hunter Biden’s former business associate Devon Archer testified in July to the House Oversight Committee that Joe Biden spoke with his son’s business associates more than 20 times, including a spring 2014 dinner with Russian oligarch Elena Baturina and a spring 2015 dinner with Vadim Pozharskyi, an executive with Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings.

In addition, Archer mentioned a meeting Joe Biden had in Beijing with a Chinese business associate, whose daughter later received a college recommendation letter from then-Vice President Joe Biden.

Hunter Biden was being paid more than $80,000 per month by Burisma when the dinner with Pozharskyi took place, according to bank records released by House Oversight. Baturina wired $3.5 million to a shell company owned by Archer and Biden in February 2014, bank records show.

“Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure,” Pozharskyi emailed Hunter Biden in April 2015, according to Hunter Biden’s laptop archive.

The Biden family and its associates received more than $20 million from Ukrainian, Russian, Chinese, Romanian, and Kazakhstani business associates, the bank records indicate. (RELATED: Biden-Appointed Prosecutors Did Not Cooperate In Hunter Biden Case, FBI Agent Testifies)

Archer also described to House Oversight how the Biden family “brand” represented by Joe Biden protected Burisma from scrutiny and kept the firm in business. Archer said Hunter Biden “called D.C.” at Burisma’s December 2015 board meeting because of pressure from Pozharskyi and Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky.

Joe Biden took a trip to Ukraine days after Hunter Biden’s phone call and archived emails show then-VP Biden’s office worked with one of Hunter Biden’s business associates on media inquiries related to Burisma on the day of the apparent phone call.

Internal State Department emails show Joe Biden’s office sent them talking points and instructed officials not to single out Zlochevsky in response to media questions. Archer could not confirm whether Joe Biden was on the other end of his son’s phone call.

After his testimony, Archer told Daily Caller co-founder Tucker Carlson it is “categorically false” to claim Joe Biden did not know about his son’s business dealings. In the interview, Carlson displayed a personalized letter Joe Biden sent to Archer in 2011 apologizing for not being able to meet him.

Archer also told Tucker Carlson Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin was a “threat” to Burisma’s business before Joe Biden successfully pressured Ukraine into getting Shokin fired. Archer told Carlson about a raid Shokin orchestrated on Zlochevsky’s office that occurred soon before Shokin was fired. (RELATED: Bankers Flagged Hunter Biden’s Business Dealings As Part Of Warning About Devon Archer, Docs Show)

“You remember last year I was authorized to say we’d do the second tranche of a billion dollars. And he didn’t fire his chief prosecutor. And because I have the confidence of the president, I was there, and I said: I’m not signing it. Until you fire him, we’re not signing, man. Get it straight. We’re not doing it,” then-VP Joe Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations in September 2016.

House Oversight has requested records from the State Department related to Shokin and Burisma to better understand why U.S. officials changed their perception of Shokin in late 2015. Unearthed memos from U.S. and European officials show Shokin was making progress on Ukraine’s anti-corruption goals before he was fired.

A separate FBI FD-1023 form contains allegations from a confidential human source that Zlochevsky bragged about sending bribes to Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. Zlochevsky claims he sent $5 million to Joe Biden and $5 million to Hunter Biden to get Shokin fired, the confidential human source said. The Ukrainian oligarch allegedly possesses two recordings of Joe Biden and 15 recordings of Hunter Biden discussing the bribes. Republican Kentucky Rep. James Comer, Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said in June the FBI is investigating the bribery allegations.

IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley testified to the House Ways and Means Committee in May and disclosed a transcript from Hunter Biden’s former business associate Rob Walker who said Joe Biden met in May 2017 with officials from CEFC China Energy, a Chinese energy company doing business with Hunter Biden. Shapley confirmed Joe Biden’s apparent meeting with CEFC associates when he testified publicly in July.

Furthermore, Shapley disclosed a threatening text Hunter Biden allegedly sent in July 2017 to a different Chinese associate where he referenced Joe Biden’s presence in the room. (RELATED: DOJ Official Reportedly Approached IRS Whistleblower About Hunter Biden Accusations Before He Testified)

“I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight,” Hunter Biden said, according to Shapley.

“I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father,” Hunter Biden added. Images from Hunter Biden’s laptop demonstrate he was with Joe Biden the night he sent the apparent text message, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

Hunter Biden texted a CEFC associate on Aug. 3, 2017, boasting over how the “Bidens are the best” at doing what his boss wants for the company, House Oversight revealed in June.

“The Biden’s are the best I know at doing exactly what the Chairman wants from this [partnership],” Hunter Biden told CEFC associate Gongwen Dong. The next day, Hunter Biden’s shell company Owasco PC received a $100,000 payment from CEFC, House Oversight discovered.

The Chairman of CEFC was Ye Jianming, a businessman who was linked to the Chinese Communist Party before being arrested for bribery, House Oversight said in a memo released in May. Emails on Hunter Biden’s laptop show he was “office mates” with Joe Biden and Dong, alongside Jill Biden and his uncle James Biden.

Hunter Biden’s failed guilty plea deal with the Department of Justice (DOJ) indicates he made more than $600,000 from CEFC in 2017 and roughly $1 million from Hudson West III, a business entity he formed with a CEFC associate. IRS whistleblower Joseph Ziegler testified in July that Hudson West II brought in $3.7 million overall and confirmed the payment from CEFC.

An email sent in May 2017 by former Hunter Biden business associate James Gilliar alludes to Joe Biden as “the big guy” in a discussion about a potential business deal.

“10 held by H for the big guy,” Gilliar suggested, with the “big guy” moniker referring to Joe Biden, former business associate Tony Bobulinski confirmed to the New York Post. “Don’t mention Joe being involved, it’s only when u are face to face[.] I know u know that but they are paranoid,” Gilliar texted Bobulinski on May 20, 2017, according to House Oversight.

Walker received $3 million worth of payments from State Energy HK, a different Chinese energy firm, and sent more than $1 million of those payments to LLCs held by Biden family members, House Oversight revealed in March. Ziegler also confirmed the payments from State Energy HK in his testimony.

“It’s really hard. But don’t worry, unlike Pop [Joe], I won’t make you give me half your salary,” Hunter Biden texted his daughter Naomi in 2019, according to text messages from his laptop archive reported by the New York Post. Emails on Biden’s laptop indicate he wired himself $100,000 from Joe Biden’s bank account when he was dealing with financial issues.

Moreover, emails on Biden’s laptop show Hunter was paying Joe Biden’s phone bill and paid for house repairs for Joe Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware residence, the Daily Mail reported. 

Hunter Biden took an estimated 15 flights with his father on Air Force Two when Joe Biden was vice president, according to an analysis conducted by Fox News. The first son accompanied then-VP Biden on trips to Canada, Mexico, Europe, Africa and Asia, the outlet reported.

House Oversight has requested the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) provide records from Hunter Biden’s apparent flights and multiple aliases Joe Biden appeared to use for government purposes, including a meeting with Ukraine’s president that Hunter Biden was aware of ahead of time.

Hunter Biden’s business associates visited the White House more than 80 times when Joe Biden was vice president, Fox News reported based on White House visitor logs.

The younger Biden met with his father, Devon Archer, and a lobbyist for Kazakh Prime Minister Karim Massimov at the Naval Observatory, the vice president’s official residence, Archer testified. House Oversight is looking closely at the Naval Observatory meeting as part of its investigation, the New York Post reported.

The House Ways and Means, Oversight and Judiciary Committees will be leading an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden over Hunter Biden’s business dealings and IRS whistleblower testimony accusing the DOJ of giving Hunter Biden special treatment in their ongoing investigation, Speaker McCarthy announced Tuesday.

The role Joe Biden allegedly played in Hunter Biden’s business dealings is a central component of the impeachment inquiry and House Oversight’s probe into the younger Biden’s affairs.

The White House said in June that Joe Biden was “not in business” with his son and Joe Biden said Archer’s testimony was “not true” in August.

“The House GOP investigations have turned up no evidence of wrongdoing by POTUS,” White House spokesman Ian Sams tweeted on Sept. 12. “In fact, their own witnesses have testified to that, and their own documents have shown no link to POTUS,” Sams added.

Hunter Biden was indicted Thursday on three gun charges and faces a maximum of 25 years in prison. Special counsel David Weiss is simultaneously investigating Hunter Biden’s taxes following the collapse of his plea deal in July. Shapley and Ziegler have accused DOJ investigators of giving Hunter Biden special treatment under Weiss’ watch prior to his special counsel designation.

Biden pleaded not guilty to two tax misdemeanors after Delaware U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika scrutinized an immunity provision in the pretrial diversion agreement for his felony gun charge. Noreika’s pressure caused a dispute between Biden’s counsel and the DOJ resulting in the collapse of Biden’s plea agreement.

*****

This article was published by The Daily Caller News Foundation and is reproduced with permission.

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

/in , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 5 minutes

Washington’s involvement in the Russo–Ukrainian war is encouraging new and hostile combinations of powers.

Last week, North Korea’s Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un visited Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. The meeting was serious, in contrast to their perfunctory summit four years ago. This time Moscow was the suitor, seeking artillery shells, missiles, and perhaps more for its war against Ukraine.

American commentators chortled at the once grand Russian state’s supplications to such an isolated and impoverished regime. Yet whatever embarrassment Putin may feel is undoubtedly minor compared to the potential benefits for his government. Russia already outproduces Ukraine, Europe, and the U.S. in critical materiel, and is seeking to increase its edge, possibly to prepare another offensive.

In contrast, Ukraine’s allies are, if not quite useless, then significant disappointments. General Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s highest-ranking soldier, complained that Kiev’s artillery forces “have been outshot tenfold at times because of limited resources.” It seems the U.S. has been unable to keep up with Ukraine’s demand. Europe has done no better. Oops!

Indeed, European military efforts barely qualify as pathetic. Germany’s once-celebrated Zeitenwende has turned into a bust, as the Scholz government has retreated from its lofty goals. Even worse, the British government, despite its Churchillian rhetoric, has moved backward on defense outlays as a share of GDP and announced cutbacks in its ground forces since it is protected by water and ships—and by the United States, of course. European officials prefer to leave the latter factor unstated, and Washington continues to play the patsy, especially under President Joe Biden. Rather than laugh at Moscow, Washington should ask why its allies are so much less prepared for war than the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Putin’s turn to the DPRK highlights the failure of Washington’s policy of war against all. Although still the world’s most powerful nation, the U.S. has encouraged the formation of a growing antagonistic coalition.

For years, Moscow and Beijing were divided on key issues, and both governments tempered their cooperation with Pyongyang and Tehran. Today, American hostility has driven all four together. Their grouping remains ungainly, but both the DPRK and Iran are strengthening Russia’s war effort and likely will gain much in return. China has increased its political influence with and won economic concessions from Iran, while the DPRK offers a potential military deus ex machina that could greatly complicate Washington’s task in any war with the People’s Republic of China.

Indeed, a few years ago, both Moscow and Beijing were generally opposed to Iranian and North Korean nuclear efforts. Today, perceived necessity has degraded or even dissipated those sentiments. Russia is expanding economic ties with both governments to ease the impact of American sanctions. Forging a new relationship with Moscow has been especially important for the North, which is suffering from serious food shortages. More worrisome for Americans, Russia might also aid Pyongyang’s missile development, including ICBMs capable of targeting the U.S. If so, Washington officials have no one to blame but themselves, having bragged about helping to kill Russian generals and sink Russian ships. Moscow now has a chance to return the favor. Unfortunately for the U.S., proxy wars don’t run only one way.

China has been more cautious but has nevertheless benefited from the purchase of cheap Iranian oil. The PRC has also helped keep North Korea afloat. Although Beijing would prefer a pliant, house-broken ally without nukes, a well-armed, aggressive North offers at least two benefits. The first is to unsettle Northeast Asia and especially Washington’s allies, discouraging them from looking beyond their own security. The second is to pose an especially serious threat if Seoul supports the U.S. in a conflict with China.

To allied officials, the failure of much of the so-called Global South to commit to the West in its campaign against Russia has been a shock. History weighs heavily on one-time colonial relationships. Moreover, the U.S. of late has proved to be inconsistent, reckless, and destructive. Not even its friends feel comfortable dealing with arrogant officials who have carelessly, and often callously, started or supported wars that ended up killing hundreds of thousands of people while insisting that “the price is worth it.”

Most members of the Global South still oppose Moscow’s aggression. Nevertheless, they rejected the West’s claim to moral leadership and eagerly took advantage of discounted oil shipments and sanctions-busting opportunities. Even India, seen as a major counterweight to Beijing, has resisted allied affection.

Yet Washington has learned nothing. For instance, the Biden administration fulminated against North Korea for aiding Moscow. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan suggested that the DPRK would suffer from global scorn: Its support for Russia is “not going to reflect well on North Korea and they will pay a price for this in the international community.” Alas, Pyongyang’s rulers are not known for feeling shame. Countries that maintain relations with the North are unlikely to change their position because of an arms deal with Russia. Other states aren’t likely to pay much attention.

Indeed, an air of unreality surrounds Washington’s well-demonstrated ability to make enemies. The Russia-China axis is of greatest concern. Neither country has any interest in warring against the U.S., but mutual cooperation makes it more difficult for Washington to counter their activities in their respective regions. And when their efforts align, as in the Middle East, where both are engaging Iran and Saudi Arabia, American influence suffers.

Unfortunately, antagonism toward America, or at least American policy, is the strongest force pushing them together. For instance, Beijing and Moscow compete for influence in Central Asia and elsewhere, including North Korea. Territorial disputes between China and Russia reach back in history. Beijing has brazenly stolen Russian technology and is ruthlessly using its current geopolitical advantage for economic gain. The PRC also is concerned about its ties with the West amid Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. Nevertheless, the Sino-Russian entente looks solid.

Rather than consider revising policies that have backfired so spectacularly, some U.S. policymakers assume that eventually one of the contrary powers will defect. For instance, three years ago the Atlantic Council’s John Herbst wrote: “The Chinese-Russian temporary alignment of interests is unlikely to overcome the fundamentals of geopolitics.” Alas, Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine undercut that theory, with Russia becoming dependent on the PRC. Nevertheless, Herbst still insists that Russia will eventually come the West’s way, choosing to be a docile junior partner to America rather than China.

There is similar talk about the PRC and North Korea. American analysts insist that Chinese support for the North is not to Beijing’s benefit, which should give its nominal ally to the U.S. If only Xi Jinping properly understood his own nation’s interest, he would encourage Korean unification under a government allied with America, strengthening Washington’s containment policy toward the PRC. Moreover, Moscow’s burgeoning dealings with the DPRK, assert American policymakers, should spark concerted Chinese pressure against the North’s ongoing military expansion. If only American officials explained Beijing’s interests to Beijing’s solons, the latter would enthusiastically advance U.S. interests.

These are charming sentiments of the “wouldn’t it be great” variety. Wouldn’t it be great if the U.S. could do whatever it wanted without the slightest response from its adversaries? Wouldn’t it be great if American officials merely needed to state their wishes and foreign leaders would rush to comply? Wouldn’t it be great if even the most foolish, self-serving, and counterproductive American policies were greeted with wild acclaim and complete acquiescence around the globe?

Unfortunately, that isn’t our world today.

The anti-American coalition might not last because its internal pressures are so great. Washington, however, is doing its best to hold its adversaries together. Warring against Moscow and threatening other states both politically and militarily creates an obvious common bond. Challenging the serious, even vital interests of such governments cannot help but foster shared antagonism toward America. Absent a change in American policy, confrontation seems certain and conflict is possible.

Yet American policymakers never seem to learn. Today, Capitol Hill is filled with demands to wage war in (and effectively on) Mexico in the name of combating the drug trade. If the U.S. invades, one can imagine the hostile reaction in Mexico and across Latin America, which long have bridled at imperious Washington policies. Some of those governments might seek greater cooperation with China and Russia in response.

The Putin-Kim détente reflects decisions made in Moscow and Pyongyang—but also in Washington. Myopic American policies are encouraging cooperation among several unfriendly governments. The U.S. may outlast or overcome any such combinations. If the past is prologue, however, many brave Americans may end up dying unnecessarily along the way. Such is the price of Washington’s “war against all” approach to the world.

*****

This article was published by The American Conservative and is reproduced with permission.

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

FBI Had So Many Jan. 6 Plants It Lost Count

/in , , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: < 1 minute

The latest news is that the FBI (otherwise known as the Federal Bureau of Immorality) had so many paid plants in the crowd on Jan. 6, 2021, that it lost count. The “fedsurrection” is real, not a conspiracy theory.

It was an FBI plant that later testified to the innocence of the Kansas City Proud Boys (the FBI has also been accused of destroying evidence for the Proud Boys’ case). We have video footage from one undercover cop who mingled with the crowd that day and urged people on into the Capitol. Likely federal asset Ray Epps boasted that he had “orchestrated” Jan. 6. We know that the majority of protestors there that day were peaceful and that at least some if not most of the violent minority were also plants, or at least not Trump fans; MAGA protestors tried to intervene to stop the destruction, identifying the violent rioters as Antifa. Nancy Pelosi had a camera crew set up before the event.

It was a set-up to destroy Donald Trump and MAGA. Since then, innocent Jan. 6 prisoners have been imprisoned, tortured, and denied both their rights and basic necessities in jail.

“[InfoWars, Sept. 20] The former head of the FBI’s Washington D.C. field office, Steven D’Antuono, is blowing the whistle on the bureau’s countless number of paid informants who took part in the Jan. 6th debacle.

D’Antuono told the New York Post this week his field office had ‘Confidential Human Sources’ (CHS) embedded in the J6 crowd, but also explained ‘informants run by other field offices’ were taking part in the protest unbeknownst to him at the time…Former Capitol Hill Police Chief Steven Sund previously told The Post the FBI ‘had at least 18 undercover agents in the crowd plus another 20 from the Department of Homeland Security’ in addition to the unknown number of CHSs.”

Jan. 6 really was a fedsurrection.

4 Ways Washington’s Spending Spree Caused Inflation With Trillions in Waste, Fraud

/in , , , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes

Americans are justifiably unhappy with the state of the economy.

The inflation figures for August took a turn for the worse—meaning, families have now lost $5,100 in purchasing power since President Joe Biden entered the White House.

In addition to the burden of inflation, rising interest rates are making home mortgages unaffordable, pushing the American dream out of reach for millions.

While month-to-month economic numbers tell part of the story, a new report from The Heritage Foundation explains how Washington’s reckless spending pushed the economy to this tipping point. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.)

The special report, “The Road to Inflation: How an Unprecedented Federal Spending Spree Created Economic Turmoil,” reveals that Congress passed an astonishing $7.5 trillion in new spending between 2020 and 2022—or more than $57,000 per household.

Pushing such an unprecedented amount of deficit spending had predictable consequences.

>>>Read the full report here: “The Road to Inflation”

At a time when supply chains were strained by the COVID-19 pandemic and harmful government-imposed lockdowns, throwing more money at a lower volume of goods and services could only drive prices up.

It would be one thing if the spending spree had been made up of good investments. Unfortunately, most of the initiatives were poorly designed, based on faulty economic reasoning and/or motivated by political opportunism.

The following are just four of the areas where the federal government misused trillions of dollars in taxpayer resources during the spending spree:

Welfare Expansion Causes World Record Fraud

At the start of the pandemic, Congress expanded eligibility and increased payments for the unemployment insurance program.

At the time, it was easy to predict that this would have negative consequences, incentivizing workers to actively seek joblessness or otherwise game the system to maximize their handouts.

Incredibly, even the most cynical analysis underestimated just how big a problem would result from this welfare expansion.

A combination of individual scammers and organized crime rings using identity fraud bilked the federal government for at least $100 billion, with upper-end estimates of $350 billion to $400 billion.

To put that in perspective, the Bernie Madoff scheme that generated extensive media coverage and numerous documentaries was worth $65 billion. (Naturally, the press is less interested in publicizing fraud enabled by a welfare program.)

Slush Funds for State, and Local Governments

In addition to increased federal payments for mass transit, education, and Medicaid, the spending spree included a whopping $500 billion in few-strings-attached handouts to state and local governments.

The first batch of this money, $150 billion, was approved as protection against potential tax revenue declines at the start of the pandemic. However, it soon became clear that most areas were not experiencing a tax decline, and the total amount of revenue loss was much smaller than expected.

Despite that reality, Democrats passed an additional $350 billion in slushy funds.

Since there was no revenue gap, state and local governments blew through their second round of handouts with inflationary check-cutting, record-setting levels of corporate welfare, bailing out government-owned golf courses, tax credits for Hollywood studios, promoting tourism, special bonuses for government employees, and much more.

As with the unemployment insurance fraud, we will never know the total amount of money wasted on “relief” payments to state and local governments.

Teachers Unions Held Schools Hostage

Perhaps the most infuriating part of the spending spree took place in early 2021.

Amid a raging debate about reopening schools, with children receiving substandard educations, teachers unions were pressing to keep schools closed. That was part of a pressure campaign to give government-run K-12 schools a massive federal handout.

The Biden administration kowtowed to teachers unions, and it was later revealed that officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention colluded with union officials on school-reopening guidance to help stack the deck.

In the end, Democrats approved $123 billion for public K-12 schools, rewarding the unions for holding schools hostage.

Since there was no pandemic-related need for such a huge amount of money, much of it went toward hiring sprees and raises for school employees.

Regrettably, the obscure nature of how funds were distributed means that we will likely never know what public schools did with that windfall.

Business Support Program Defrauded

The Paycheck Protection Program passed early in the pandemic, was designed to help businesses keep employees on the payroll during the lockdown-driven economic downturn.

However, the $835 billion program—with Congress intending to get money out the door quickly—suffered from a lack of guardrails. Hundreds of billions of dollars in spending were flagged for review. There were hundreds of billions of dollars in improper payments, and the volume of fraud overwhelmed the system.

While some violators (such as a man who used the program to buy a $57,000 Pokémon card) were caught, countless others got away scot-free.

Conclusion

In the wake of the spending spree, the national debt is now more than $33 trillion, or an average of $253,000 per household.

Ignoring the dangers of such an incomprehensible amount of debt, and ignoring the ongoing damage that elevated inflation is having on family finances, many in Washington are still determined to keep the federal gravy train rolling.

  • The pending set of appropriations bills is loaded with pork, including goodies for left-wing activist groups and frivolous recreational projects.
  • These bills also contain tens of billions in fraudulent budget gimmicks that hide spending.
  • Several other measures that would or could increase spending are also looming on the horizon, including the so-called farm bill (where most of the money goes to welfare programs), and supplemental appropriations that would throw tens of billions more at Ukraine and to leftist nonprofits that encourage illegal immigration.

It’s crucial for the American public to be on guard against politicians whose default response to most problems is to throw other people’s money around.

That has been a bad habit for many years, but now it has turned into a chronic addiction the country can’t afford.

*****

This article was published by Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.

China’s Communist Party Infiltrates American K-12 Schools

/in , , , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 5 minutes

The Chinese Communist Party has, or has had, ties to 143 school districts in the United States, including 20 near military bases, through its “Confucius Classrooms.” This means that Chinese state propaganda is probably now pretty much all over American K-12 classrooms.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has or has had, ties to 143 school districts in the United States, including 20 near military bases, through its “Confucius Classrooms,” according to a recent report, “Little Red Classrooms: China’s Infiltration of American K-12 Schools” by Parents Defending Education (PDE), a grassroots organization.

Confucius Classrooms, are, purportedly, “centers that teach Chinese language and culture.”

According to the book Hidden Hand: Exposing How the Chinese Communist Party is Reshaping the World, by Clive Hamilton and Mareike Ohlberg:

“Initiated in 2004 as an innocuous way to spread the Party narrative… ostensibly devoted to teaching Chinese language and promoting Chinese culture they are, as former propaganda chief Li Changchun put it, ‘an important part of China’s overseas propaganda set-up.'”

In 2020, the US Department of State and the US Department of Education warned about the Confucius programs at American colleges and universities, and designated them as foreign agents:

“There is increasing evidence that they are also tools of malign PRC influence and dissemination of CCP propaganda… with the Beijing-based funding that comes with it, [they] can provide an institution with financial and other incentives to abstain from criticizing PRC policies, and may pressure the institution’s faculty to censor themselves.”

Attention to Confucius Institutes has mainly been centered around colleges and universities, but less so on K -12 education. This means that Chinese state propaganda is probably now pretty much all over American K-12 classrooms.

Nicole Neily, president of Parents Defending Education, said recently:

“The alarming evidence uncovered by our investigation should concern parents, educators, and policymakers alike. Families deserve to know who is influencing the American education system so that they can make informed choices about what their children are learning behind closed doors.

“The Trump administration took steps to rein in Confucius Institutes at colleges and universities. It is frightening, however, that no such transparency mandate exists at the K-12 level. Accordingly, it is imperative that elected officials at both the federal and state levels take immediate action to gauge the extent of these programs in order to ensure that American schoolchildren receive a high-quality education free from undue foreign interference.”

PDE observed that more than $17 million had been spent by the CCP on Confucius classrooms in the US between the years 2009-2023. According to PDE:

“Three of the nation’s top science and technology high schools have ties to Chinese government affiliated programs including Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology has had ties to Tsinghua University High School—the high school affiliated with one of China’s top military schools, Tsinghua University…The CCP has had ties to school districts near 20 U.S. military bases. While the United States is not officially part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Chinese state media has touted the work done by Confucius Institutes and Confucius Classrooms to further the Chinese Communist Party’s global influence.”

According to Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars, China’s propaganda in American K-12 schools works through omissions and praise of the Communist country that influences how children will see China as they grow up. Wood told the Daily Signal in a recent interview:

“Part of this is simply propagandizing the students so that they learn about China, but they don’t learn about the South China Sea, which is being heavily militarized by China. They don’t learn about the plight of the Uyghurs, the efforts to gauge in organ harvesting, the efforts to suppress Tibet.

“There are in China so many policies that violate human rights and which signal the aggressiveness of the regime there, which has its designs on becoming a worldwide hegemon, that need to be presented to Americans in a softer light.

“So what’s happening in these schools is that they learn that China is a benevolent institution, the heir of an ancient civilization that means nothing but goodwill to the rest of the world…

“And the notion that you can take children who have some aptitude for the hard sciences and math and get them to view China as a potential partner and friend, I think, is very disturbing as well.

“So we have, on one hand, the broad misleading imaging of China, but also the notion that China can be a partner to these students all through their educational careers. We’re creating an assembly line for talented young men and women who will be unable to distinguish the American national interest from the Chinese national interest. They’re getting blurred together at a young age and that’s very difficult to undo once it’s done.” [Emphasis added.]

Wood noted that CCP infiltration of American K-12 schools is “almost everywhere.”

“That is, in every state that we’ve looked at, we have found instances of it, but I would say it’s concentrated in the feeder schools to elite education, which means mostly West Coast and East Coast, but not exclusively those.

“The effort here is, China’s not just spreading around its resources promiscuously across the land. It’s looking for places where buying influence will yield results in the long term. So, it’s widespread, but much more prevalent here on the East Coast and California.”

China’s influence in New York schools, for example, is so prevalent that several Republican Members of Congress from New York sent a letter to New York Governor Kathy Hochul, asking her to take action:

“An alarming new report has exposed how millions of dollars of funding from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have flowed into America’s K-12 classrooms. Programs vetted and managed by China’s government have infiltrated 34 states and Washington, D.C., which impacts approximately 170,000 students across 143 school districts. Unfortunately, this investigation discovered 12 school systems in our own state have received money from the CCP. This includes the New York City Department of Education, which received $375,575.00 in CCP-connected funding. Considering China’s adversarial relationship with the United States, this is deeply problematic and presents a national security concern for our constituents and state…

“We are writing to not only share this dangerous situation, but to request that you address this concerning report and the underlying issue of CCP influence in New York K-12 education.” [Emphasis added.]

Hochul reportedly has close relations with CCP representatives in New York. She has repeatedly met with Huang Ping, China’s New York Consul General, who once described Hochul as “an old friend,” an honorific bestowed on those who have “rendered great services to China,” as Clive Hamilton and Mareike Ohlberg write in their book, Hidden Hand.

Huang has denied any Chinese wrongdoing on human rights, Taiwan or the Uyghur concentration camps, which he has said are mere “campuses” for reeducation. Most recently, Hochul sent Elaine Fan, a senior aide who is Director of Asian Affairs at the New York State Governor’s Executive Chamber, to participate in an annual Chinese propaganda event, known as “An Evening of Chinese Culture” jointly hosted by the New York Mets and the Sino-American Friendship Association, a CCP-linked outfit.

Perhaps it is time for a deep-dive investigation by the US House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party, chaired by Rep. Mike Gallagher.

*****

This article was published by the Gatestone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

America’s ‘Rainbow’ Military Is On Track To Lose Another Major War

/in , , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes

“US military asks the public for help finding its missing F-35 fighter jet after its pilot had to eject while training over South Carolina.”

While the above Insider headline may sound like a comedic piece straight from the pages of The Babylon Bee, it’s not. The U.S. military actually publicly claimed it had lost a multi-million-dollar fighter jet.

The loss occurred Sunday following an alleged “mishap” that required the aircraft’s pilot to eject. The F-35 purportedly kept on flying. It wasn’t until Monday evening — a day after Joint Base Charleston requested the public’s assistance in finding the missing jet — that military officials announced they had discovered a debris field “about two hours northeast” of the base.

The debacle has since prompted the Marine Corps’ acting commandant, Eric Smith, to issue a “two-day stand-down” order for all military aviation units “both inside and outside of the United States.”

A Sign of Decline

This episode raises so many questions. For one, how does the U.S. military — the supposed best and most advanced fighting force on the planet — lose a highly-valued asset, especially over U.S. soil?

Why are military bases such as Joint Base Charleston acting as landing pads for commercial planes transporting members of the People’s Republic of China — the very government trying to topple the United States as the world’s hegemon?

While it’s improbable any of these questions will actually be answered to the public’s satisfaction, the likely answers probably wouldn’t reverse Americans’ waning confidence in the ability of U.S. military leadership to defend the American homeland. Nor should they.

This week’s fighter jet fiasco is just one example of many showcasing a U.S. military in severe institutional decline. Instead of focusing on how to win wars — which should be the sole purpose of any military — top Pentagon brass have since at least the Clinton administration treated the service as one giant, left-wing social experiment.

Through its adoption and outright promotion of neo-Marxist ideologies including DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion), the military has sacrificed efficiency, ruthlessness, and strength for LGBT celebrations, racial politics, and climate alarmism. A look into the backgrounds of President Biden’s many military nominees shows the primary focus of the Pentagon’s leading figures isn’t defeating communist China or protecting Americans from other international threats, it’s crafting a “diverse” and “inclusive” social club where leftist lunacy is treated as gospel and conservative “wrongthink” as extreme.

Look no further than the Pentagon’s abortion policy, which violates U.S. law in using taxpayer money to pay for female military members’ travel expenses to kill their unborn child. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Democrats have baselessly claimed for months that Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s slow-walking of Biden’s military nominees in protest of the policy harms “military readiness.”

If that’s true, then why hasn’t the Pentagon dropped its policy? If “readiness” is such a major concern, why did the military fire thousands of service members who chose not to get an experimental shot? And why isn’t Democrat Chuck Schumer using his power as Senate majority leader to approve Biden’s supposedly important nominees?

The reason, as tacitly admitted by the heads of the Army, Air Force, and Navy, is that taxpayer-funded abortions are a sacrament of the leftist religion so must be preserved at all costs. Coupled with decades of failed military adventurism and nation-building like that conducted in Afghanistan, it’s no wonder the U.S. military is facing the worst recruiting crisis since shifting to an all-volunteer force in 1973.

A High Price To Pay

The Marxist hijacking of America’s military isn’t an accident; it’s an intentional act contributing to the left’s greater plan to re-invent society. For the left, the military is just another piece on the American chessboard to coopt. It’s why the military so vigorously promotes Marxism and penalizes conservative beliefs: to dissuade the God and America-loving patriots who have largely staffed it for generations from joining or remaining in service.

As witnessed many times before, however, the leftist takeover of institutions has its costs. Only America’s “rainbow” military could cost our country its security and well-being.

For decades, the U.S. military has prevented widespread global conflict, deterring aggression from hostile actors and maintaining peace through strength. If the world’s leading aggressors no longer view America as the dominant military power, where does that leave us? If the U.S. gets dragged into a war with a rival power, can we be confident our “rainbow” fighting force can get the job done? The withdrawal from Afghanistan and growing quagmire in Ukraine atop the failed war in Iraq and our military’s distraction into identity politics don’t bode well.

Much like the missing F-35, our nation’s military is lost with no sense of direction or purpose, and those faithfully committed to the American cause are forced to bail out. Let us hope and pray for new military leadership before it’s too late.

*****

This article was published by The Federalist and is reproduced with permission.

Photo Credit: CBS Evening News/YouTube

Google is Where Democracy is Dying?

/in , , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes

Has it been more than five minutes since you heard someone on the left spouting about how our democracy is in danger? The Washington Post adopted the slogan “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” while simultaneously keeping their readers in the dark about a multitude of critical issues. Despite all the hysteria, the Left ignores the single biggest challenge to our democracy which has been scientifically proven.

Dr. Robert Epstein would be considered by most to be a member of the “elite.” He has a PhD in Experimental Psychology from Harvard. He was Editor-in-Chief of Psychology Today. He has been a visiting professor at international universities and now operates the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology (AIBRT). Politically, he is a self-described lifelong center/center-left person who supports the Democrat party.

AIBRT has researched many topics affecting our day-to-day lives including AI, parenting, and stress management. Epstein has done a deep dive into the manipulation of search engines to alter election results and has testified to Congressional committees regarding his research.

“As of January 2018, the National Academy of Sciences ranked AIBRT’s 2015 paper on the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME) to be in the top 1 percent of all scientific papers the organization monitored in all the sciences, both short-term and long-term. As of August 18, 2023, the paper had been accessed or downloaded from PNAS’s website more than 230,000 times, and SEME had been partially or fully replicated multiple times.”

In his U.S. Senate testimony, he stated:

1. In 2016, Google likely shifted at least 2.6 million votes to Hillary Clinton whom I supported. These manipulations are invisible and noncompetitive. They are controlled by Big Tech companies and there is no way to counteract them.

2. In 2018, on election day, the Go Vote reminder that Google displayed on its home page gave a political party (Democrats) between 800,000 to 4.6 million more votes than the other party (Republicans). That reminder was not a public service, it was a voter manipulation.

3. In 2018, spread across many political races, bias in search may have shifted 78.2 million votes.

Though Dr. Epstein focused on Google, he stated, “If you were to examine the data I have been collecting over the past 6-and-a-half years, every one of you would put partisanship aside to reign in the extraordinary power that Google and Facebook now wield with unabashed arrogance.”

While the power structure was focused on Russian interference, Epstein stated it did not shift many votes. Dr. Epstein said though Google censored mainly conservative content it also censors “progressive and socialist content.” This single entity, which is not accountable to anyone, should not have this kind of power. And our government does not want to amend Section 230 to make these operations more accountable to someone.

In April 2023 Epstein published in Gatestone a detailed update of his position on this issue, https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19608/election-threat-big-tech.

As you know, many elected officials deny there is any material fraud in our elections. Hans Von Spakovsky has developed a database hosted by the Heritage Foundation of actual convictions of people across the country for voter fraud violations. Epstein states “Those are tiny incidents compared to what is happening here on a massive scale. That is because Google search results are seen each day in the United States 500 million times.

Many Republicans express what appears to be deeply suspicious thoughts about our national elections. Dr. Epstein states “in general, Republicans cannot win. It is because there are so many different methods available to these tech companies for manipulating opinions and votes without people’s awareness.” Maybe their suspicions are warranted.

Epstein believes the bias is apparent on its face. He says the people who work at the major tech companies all have the same politics and the proof is that 96% of Google’s political donations go to one political party and that is not Republicans.

Dr. Epstein has already collected extensive data backing up his claims. He wants to collect more. To do so he needs substantial financial support. He wants to monitor Google 24/7 to expose their manipulations.

Epstein’s research may explain some of the losses in close elections for Republicans. However, if you look at the situation, giving AIBRT the tools to protect us from this proven trickery may be worth Republicans focusing their efforts to reverse the techs from altering our elections.

The Left is an expert at deflection. While they encourage procedures like ballot harvest, mailing ballots out to every resident of a state and never tracing those ballots, month-long election “days,” registering people based on their obtaining a driver’s license without proof of citizenship, and legalizing non-citizens voting in elections, they point fingers at Republicans for imaginary voter suppression. The real danger to Democracy may be embedded in search engines like Google. You will never hear a peep from the Left because Google shifts elections towards them and they believe winning is everything.

*****

This article was published by Flash Report and is reproduced with permission from the author.

There’s More Than Enough Evidence for a Joe Biden Impeachment Inquiry

/in , , , , /by
Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes

“Without evidence.”

They want those two words imprinted in your mind whenever you hear about the House impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.

“Since gaining the House majority in January,” writes The Associated Press, “House Republicans have aggressively investigated Biden and his son, claiming without evidence that they engaged in an influence-peddling scheme.”

Many other pieces use the same language.

Sticking the words “without evidence” into a story is meant to insinuate that the impetus for an investigation is itself meritless. What kind of people make accusations without evidence, right? But, as they know, inquiries exist for the purpose of uncovering evidence.

Then again, there already exists tons of substantive proof that Joe Biden was likely “engaged” in the family racket. Now, it goes without saying that without the Biden last name, there is no Biden Inc. But numerous witnesses, many with no connection to one another or political agendas, have independently testified that he was involved.

Let’s start with the IRS whistleblowers charged with investigating Hunter Biden’s tax case, who testified under oath that Joe was present in at least one meeting with Hunter’s foreign clients. In numerous private emails and texts and WhatsApp messages he never imagined would be made public, Hunter talks about his dad not only helping him secure payments, but taking a cut for himself.

Hunter’s former business partner contends that Joe was involved. Another of Hunter’s partners, who is also a former close friend, maintained under oath that Joe spoke to Hunter’s associates at least 24 times, often being dialed in on the phone during business meetings. An FBI informant documented conversations that indicated to him that Joe pressured foreign companies to send millions to the family business.

And listen, I get that Democrats want us to believe it was just crazy happenstance that Joe Biden pressured the Ukrainian government to fire a prosecutor who happened to be investigating a company that was paying his son $1 million a year. But if the vice president knew the two were in business—and since he had a sit-down with Burisma executive Vadym Pozharskyi, it is highly likely he did—then his actions were a corrupt conflict of interest, at the very least.

That’s also all evidence.

Yet, Democrats want to create new evidentiary standards for both congressional investigations and for impeachment. No, Joe didn’t need to commit a crime to be impeached. We know this from the first Trump impeachment.

And, no, Biden didn’t need to directly benefit from his family’s corrupt business ventures to be corrupt. If one of the most powerful people in the United States government allows or participates in a scheme to trade on his power to make millions for his family (or deliberately gives the impression that he’s willing to do so), it may or may not be illegal, but it is clearly unethical.

Money, incidentally, is fungible. Just because a shady Ukrainian isn’t writing “re: Joe Biden influence trading” on the memo line of a check doesn’t mean the president didn’t benefit. Perhaps further inquiry into the 20 shell companies and dozens of bank accounts, or the 5,000 emails in which Joe used pseudonyms to converse with Hunter and presumably others—all of it completely normal stuff for an aboveboard family business, right?—will provide some answers.

Now, obviously, there are partisan dimensions to an impeachment. And obviously, some people overstate the existing case against the president. But let’s not forget that Joe Biden has been lying about his knowledge of Hunter’s “work” for years. If the president’s relationship with Hunter was entirely separate and innocent—a product of their love—why does Joe feel compelled to lie?

Whatever the case, standards have suddenly changed. Recall that Democrats claimed without evidence for years that Donald Trump was a Russian asset. To say there is more evidence of Biden’s wrongdoing than was offered in any story connected to Trump-Russia collusion, a hysteria based on leaks, anonymous sources, and fictitious works of political opposition, is to dramatically understate the matter.

Take Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who famously claimed not only to have uncovered a criminal conspiracy by Trump’s 2016 campaign but also to be in personal possession of smoking-gun “direct evidence.” I have gone through dozens of pieces related to Schiff’s declaration, and not one reporter writes that the California congressmen did so “without evidence”—or anything approaching that kind of wording.

Not in the text, much less in a headline.

If the legacy political media were doing their job defending “democracy,” outlets would be deploying teams of crack journalists to track down leads and find out if there is any evidence related to Biden’s wrongdoing, as they did with Trump, rather than playing defense for the most powerful man in the world.

*****

This article was published by Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.