They all laughed - Don Surber

 Substack

"That’s right. You can bonk someone in the head and walk out of jail without posting a bond but for Trump, the rules are different. Rather than stand up to this injustice, the American media embraces it and applauds his loss of liberty."

"I have underestimated the lack of intelligence of the media whores in DC, perhaps because in my brief 35 years in newspapering I worked with publishers and editors who could walk and chew gum at the same time. But Byron York’s reporting on a DC shindig showed just how tiny the brains are in the media.

"York reported, “Democrats hope a guilty verdict in a criminal trial — any trial will do — will peel away voters who say they support Trump now but would not support him if he were a convicted felon. We’ll see.

“ 'But the lawfare campaign is already having another effect on Trump. It has put the former president under severe financial stress in two ways. The first is the tens of millions of dollars in legal fees Trump has already spent defending himself against the onslaught of criminal charges and lawsuits. The other is the crippling financial penalty, $454 million, in the lawsuit brought by the elected Democrat attorney general of New York, Letitia James.”

"On top of that, there is that $83 million judgment against him for denying he raped E. Jean Carroll, a fabulist funded by a bulky billionaire to bleed Trump dry with these unprecedented and unconstitutional civil suits.

"Forbes reported, “Billionaire LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman funded E. Jean Carroll’s prosecution alleging former President Donald Trump raped her, through a nonprofit group the major Democratic donor backs; now that a jury has found Trump guilty of sexual abuse, some have questioned Hoffman’s role in the process—here’s what it looked like.”'

"The details were interesting and revealed that Hoffman also funded other similar lawsuits." . . .

John F. Kennedy Would Not Recognize Today`s Democratic Party

 Religio-Political Talk (RPT)  "What Dennis Prager was asking James Swanson (audio below) was “what about the newer understanding that JFK was conservative?” (Prager has always echoed Reagan’s statement: “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. The party left me.” This fresh look at history supports this long held belief  by many ex-Dems.) When historians go through Kennedy’s speeches and candid confessions, as well as policy, they are more-and-more coming to the following conclusion:

"A short excerpt from an article by Ira Stoll, in the October 2013 edition of THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR, . . .

…."WHAT I TAKE to be the truth about John Kennedy and his conservatism has, in the years since he died, been forgotten. This is partly because of the work of liberal historians and partly due to changes in America’s major political parties. Yet calling Kennedy a conservative was hardly controversial during his lifetime. “A Kennedy Runs for Congress: The Boston-bred scion of a former ambassador is a fighting-Irish conservative,” Look headlined an article in June 1946. “When young, wealthy and conservative John Fitzgerald Kennedy announced for Congress, many people wondered why,” the story began. “Hardly a liberal even by his own standards, Kennedy is mainly concerned by what appears to him as the coming struggle between collectivism and capitalism. In speech after speech he charges his audience ‘to battle for the old ideas with the same enthusiasm that people have for new ideas.’”

"The Chicago Tribune reported Kennedy’s election to the U.S. Senate in 1952 by describing him as a “fighting conservative.” In a June 1953 Saturday Evening Post article, Kennedy said, “I’d be very happy to tell them I’m not a liberal at all,” adding, speaking of liberals, “I’m not comfortable with those people.” In 1958, Eleanor Roosevelt was asked in a television interview what she would do if she had to choose between a “conservative Democrat like Kennedy and a liberal Republican [like] Rockefeller.” She said she would do all she possibly could to make sure the Democrats did not nominate a candidate like Kennedy." . . .

Nathan Wade’s Testimony Found False, What About Willis’?

  Religio-Political Talk (RPT)

“What I don’t understand is how the court can find that she [Willis] did act improperly in her public statements. He shreds the testimonies, he strongly indicates that he did not believe Mr. Wade, but then he ignores the fact that they testified largely in tandem. Willis adopted his testimony, she supported his testimony. So, if he was false, she was false. And it’s very hard to separate these conjoined twins. It takes quite a surgeon.” — Jonathan Turley

 Turley Says Court 'Ignored' A Key Fact About The Fani Willis Case (rumble.com)

“It really is an astonishing opinion in its disconnect because he clearly did not believe Nathan Wade and many people believe Nathan Wade committed perjury,” Turley said. “But these two essentially testified in tandem – she [Fani Willis] adopted his testimony. So if he lied, then she pretty much lied the same way. They both maintained that the relationship began after he was hired and really held a sort of unified front. I think that what the judge was trying to do in giving these two options to Wade was to gently give a third option to Willis. And that option is to remove yourself, take the ethical course. And I think that’s very clear in his opinion. Nobody reading this opinion with these damning findings could possibly believe that Willis can continue to be part of this case,” Turley continued. “She’s prosecuting people for the underlying conduct she’s accused of committing with Nathan Wade – false statements given to a court, false filings that have been submitted. How could she possibly continue that without damaging her case? But the problem is that she’s had this opportunity to take the high road, repeatedly. She clearly has never wanted to do that, and this will probably be her last chance to do the right thing and remove herself.” — Jonathan Turley, via DAILY CALLER" . . .

Judge Scott McAfee, who ruled on Thursday that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis can continue prosecuting her RICO case against Donald Trump, donated to her in 2020.

THE NATIONAL PULSE may have broken a story that would allow the Judge to take the “option is to remove himself, and take the ethical course.” [Adapted from Turley]:*

• 

  Chip Bok

  
  

Joe Biden’s winners (Including millions of smash-and-grab shoplifters)

Who’s not listed in the cast of winners under Joe Biden is the American people.  They are “the losers” in Joe Biden’s America. 

  Earick Ward - American Thinker   "Joe Biden has been a terrible president — the worst in American history — but that does not mean that his term hasn’t had its share of winners.

"While the vast majority of Americans have suffered under Joe Biden, some segments of American society have benefitted.

Illegal Aliens

"The top of Biden’s winner list has to be illegal aliens.  As the saying goes, what you promote, you get more of.  Joe Biden and his surrogates have actively promoted the arrival of more than 7–8 million new illegal aliens since his inauguration, when he overrode Donald Trump–era policies and instituted new executive orders, opening the floodgates.  Illegal aliens are being housed, fed, given stored value cards, free medical treatment, and “the promise” of amnesty.  A peripheral beneficiary of our open border is the Mexican cartels, who are making bank, trafficking drugs, adults, and children.

NGOs and other Leftist Activist Groups

"On the heels of illegal aliens are non-governmental organizations and other leftist activist groups, who are grifting the government to the tune of billions of dollars per year.  Woke Catholic charities, woke Protestant charities, woke attorneys, woke hotel chains and housing authorities all benefit from the continuation of the border surge.  Leftist homeless groups benefit from the continuation of, not the elimination of, homelessness.  If they “solved” the homeless crisis, they would be out of work.

Sanctuary Cities/States

"Not the “people” in said sanctuary cities and states, but leftist Democrats, who benefit from the increased number of congressional seats afforded them, by the increased counts in the Census, soon to be the right to vote.

Iran, Hamas, Gazans. . .

Keep reading...

The Enduring Wholesomeness of 'Little House on the Prairie': 50 Years Later

PJ Media

"I recently saw that a producer is trying to “reboot” the series. I shudder to think what a 21st-century version of “Little House on the Prairie” would look like. The wokes would ruin it."  Bonchie 

No farmer or rancher would have this for a dog. TD

"Next week — March 30, to be exact—brings one of those milestones that makes me feel ancient. That date marks the 50th anniversary of the debut of one of the most enduring series in television history: “Little House on the Prairie.”

"I don’t remember that night since I was a toddler when the TV movie that served as a pilot for the show aired, but my family watched the show without fail. My siblings and I grew up with the Ingalls family, and my mom made sure that my nieces were familiar with the show, too. With nine seasons and over 200 episodes, the show tackled a host of issues, usually with happy endings.

"The show is notably different from the books, which I’ve also read. They diverge enough that I almost think of them as separate entities in my mind. “Little House on the Prairie” doesn’t suffer from the political incorrectness that made Laura Ingalls Wilder a victim of cancel culture. The characterizations on the show take on a life of their own, and the show concentrates on one era, whereas the books are more expansive.

"Looking back at “Little House on the Prairie” today, the show holds up remarkably well. Sure, the scenarios, the acting, and some of the music are over the top, but other than some of the hairstyles, it doesn’t come across as dated to the ‘70s and early ‘80s. The historical subject matter stands up as well, even if some of the minorities on the show benefit from a post-civil-right-era treatment. Above all, it’s still entertaining." . . .

Desperate Biden Falsely Claims Trump ‘Told Us to Inject Ourselves With Bleach’

  PJ Media

"So, where did the fake news that Trump told people to inject themselves with bleach come from? Later,  during the same briefing, a reporter asked the acting undersecretary of science and technology for the Department of Homeland Security, Bill Bryan, “The president mentioned the idea of cleaners, like bleach and isopropyl alcohol you mentioned. There’s no scenario that could be injected into a person, is there?”

Biden, flanked by Obama and Pelosi, again peddles the debunked lie that "Trump told us to inject ourselves with bleach." pic.twitter.com/tJKLIzAwmD

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 23, 2024

"Joe Biden has released a new campaign video with Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Though the video claims to have been recorded live, it hilariously features an insane number of jump cuts, suggesting it actually took multiple takes throughout the recording process to get Biden's performance on the mark.

"But, that aside, the video made it quite clear that Joe Biden is so desperate, that he's trying to rehash long-debunked accusations against Trump in the hopes of trying to turn his faltering campaign around.

" 'This is the guy who doesn't care about science and reason," Biden claims in the video. "Remember, during the pandemic, Donald Trump told us to inject ourselves with bleach. He said there's nothing to worry about if you do that."

"The big problem with this claim is that it never actually happened. 

"The false claim originated from the following exchange during the White House Coronavirus Task Force Briefing in April of 2020. During the briefing, potential COVID-19 treatments were discussed, including UV light treatments, and Trump said, “And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see, it gets in the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that. So, that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with. But it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.”

"It's obvious here that he wasn't advocating for ingesting or injecting bleach; rather, he was exploring the feasibility of using disinfectants internally. He emphasized the necessity of medical supervision, cautioning against any attempt to replicate such measures independently.

“It wouldn’t be through injection," Trump responded. "We’re talking about through almost a cleaning, sterilization of an area. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t work. But it certainly has a big effect if it’s on a stationary object.”

Natasha Bertrand and Trump misinformation

 

CNN Draws Major Backlash for Giving Promotion to Notorious 'Russian Collusion Hoaxer' (msn.com)  "Where do you go after peddling dual lies in the establishment media -- the Donald Trump Russiagate hoax and the fiction that Hunter Biden's toxic laptop was Kremlin disinfo?

"To the top, of course. At least at CNN.

"On Monday, the network you probably only end up watching when your flight is delayed for a few hours announced that Natasha Bertrand, a former reporter at Politico whose stances on the Steele dossier and Hunter's laptop remain controversial blunders that she hasn't disowned to any significant extent, was being promoted to correspondent.

"In her new role, the network said in a media release, Bertrand will be "covering national security, the news organization announced today. She is based in Washington, DC and will continue to focus on national security and politics across CNN’s platforms.". . .

Opinion | How Did So Much of the Media Get the Steele Dossier So Wrong? - The New York Times (nytimes.com)   . . ."So his alleged sexual relationship with Stormy Daniels, who appeared in pornographic films, became the backup for the dossier’s claim of a lurid round with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel.

 “The count is growing higher and higher of porn actresses,” Slate’s editor at the time, Jacob Weisberg, said on MSNBC, adding, “The whole picture starts to be more plausible, the picture that’s painted in the dossier.” Natasha Bertrand, who was then a staff writer at The Atlantic, chimed in, “It makes it much more plausible that Trump did go to Russia and he did have these kinds of sexual escapades with prostitutes.”

The dossier’s credibility suffered a grievous blow in December 2019, when an investigation by the Department of Justice’s inspector general found that F.B.I. investigations “raised doubts about the reliability of some of Steele’s reports.”