LTP News Sharing:
By Frank Miele
According to the Wall Street Journal, 50 percent of voters believe the political divide will worsen. AP / Richard Drew
Did you see that Liz Cheney and Adam Schiff think Donald Trump should be prosecuted for trying to steal the 2020 election? I mean, who would guess?
The headline from Vanity Fair says it all: “Shocker: Congress has evidence Trump may have engaged in a criminal conspiracy.”
The intent of that sarcastic headline is to convince you it wasn’t a shock at all, because everyone already knew that Trump had engaged in a criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. Democrats certainly “knew.” Liz Cheney certainly “knew.”
But what makes the headline unintentionally ironic is that it is completely unshocking that Liz Cheney and House Democrats claim to have evidence that Trump “engaged in a criminal conspiracy.” After all, isn’t that what Congress has been claiming even since before Trump was elected in 2016?
To Democrats (and the Republicans who savor a drink with Democrats in the Senate cloak room), Trump is evil incarnate – Vlad the Impaler without the charm. Remember when he engaged in a criminal conspiracy with the Russians to overturn the 2016 election? Oh sure, there was no evidence of that except for what Hillary Clinton and her minions invented,but that’s what makes Democrat allegations so dangerous – the only evidence they need to convict a suspect is the evidence of their own convictions. If they believe it, then it is so.
Honestly, it is hard to see how the rule of law – or this nation which is built upon its foundation – can long continue when such meretricious manipulators wield the power to denounce and destroy their political enemies.
The Jan. 6 Select Committee on which they sit issued a court filing recently that proclaims “a good-faith belief that Trump and others may have engaged in criminal and/or fraudulent acts” in their efforts to prove the 2020 election was stolen.
Mind you, this has nothing to do with the Jan. 6 riot. The violence that occurred is irrelevant to any assertion that he “engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States.” Instead, what is being alleged is that President Trump had no right under law to contest the election in the United States Congress, and that by seeking to prove that the election was fraudulent, he himself is guilty of fraud.
If allowed to stand, this would do away with the concept of election monitoring altogether. Or perhaps that has already happened – specifically when Chris Krebs, head of the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, declared without evidence that “the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history.”
Without evidence? Isn’t that what the Fake News Media has constantly said about Trump’s allegations of a stolen election? Yep, the only difference being that Trump had thousands of affidavits of fraud and mischief while Krebs had nothing but his eyes closed tight. And in the ensuing months since November 2020, more and more evidence has been made public that confirms Trump’s suspicions about the election. Here are two recent examples:
— In Georgia, video evidence has been sent to the secretary of state’s office that shows dozens of people dropping off multiple ballots in drop boxes. This raises the obvious question – where did the ballots come from? Even if they were obtained and cast legally, Georgia law is unambiguous. Each voter using an absentee ballot “shall … mail or personally deliver same to the board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk.” The only exceptions are for “a voter with a physical disability” or “voters confined to a hospital.” The disabled may have their absentee ballot returned by a family member (as defined by the law) or a household member. Voters confined to a hospital don’t even have that option. They can vote an absentee ballot immediately upon delivery by a registrar or absentee ballot clerk and return it to the official, again personally. No provision allows Democrats to pay operatives to collect and dump bundles of ballots into drop boxes in the dead of night.
— In Wisconsin, a former state Supreme Court justice compiled a disturbing report that alleges bribery and official misconduct in the 2020 presidential election. Michael Gableman was hired by the state legislature to conduct an investigation and has recommended that legislators consider decertifying Joe Biden’s victory in the state based on his findings of extensive fraud, including illegal use of absentee ballot drop boxes; corruption of the election as a result of $8.8 million spent on partisan get-out-the-vote efforts by a Mark Zuckerberg-funded nonprofit; and “many nursing homes’ registered residents voting at 100% rates and many ineligible residents voting, despite a guardianship order or incapacity.”
Most Americans have probably never heard of either of these investigations, which reveals the success of the media and the Washington, D.C. establishment in squelching any dissent from the prevailing narrative – namely that Trump invented his claims of election fraud and had no evidence.
But Trump was right, and the evidence of irregularities in the 2020 election has mounted month by month, as polls consistently reveal that millions of Americans harbor doubts about the legitimacy of the Joe Biden presidency.
That’s why Donald Trump remains the leader of the Republican Party and the presumptive GOP presidential nominee in 2024. He not only believed that he was the true winner of the election in 2020; he still believes that to this day, and so do millions of other Americans. As Trump wrote in response to the recent court filing, “The actual conspiracy to defraud the United States was the Democrats rigging the Election, and the Fake News Media and the Unselect Committee covering it up.”
Trump’s statement concluded, “The Unselect Committee’s sole goal is to try to prevent President Trump, who is leading by large margins in every poll, from running again for president, if I so choose. By so doing they are destroying democracy as we know it. Their lies and Marxist tactics against political opponents will not stop the truth…”
The reference to Marxist tactics is particularly timely as, on the other side of the world, Comrade Putin bombs maternity wards in Ukraine and then claims that the Ukrainians are blowing up their own babies. Or something. It doesn’t matter what because the Ukrainians are Nazis, right? So you can say anything you want about them.
Just like, if you are a Democrat or Liz Cheney, you can say anything you want about Donald the Impaler.
Frank Miele, the retired editor of the Daily Inter Lake in Kalispell Mont., is a columnist for RealClearPolitics. His new book, “What Matters Most: God, Country, Family and Friends,” and his earlier books are available from his Amazon author page. Visit him at HeartlandDiaryUSA.com to read his daily commentary or follow him on Facebook @HeartlandDiaryUSA or on Twitter or Gettr @HeartlandDiary.
Project Veritas Torches the New York Times and Explodes the January 6 Narrative
By MARK JUDGE | The Stream
Serious journalists know that our oligarchs used Jan. 6 as a Reichstag fire, to target political dissidents.
A Pulitzer prize-winning New York Times reporter has been caught in a video by the conservative group Project Veritas admitting his colleagues vastly exaggerated the danger of the election integrity protest on Jan. 6.
The reporter, Matthew Rosenberg, also called his colleagues names that questioned their courage and manliness.
January 6 Was in Fact “No Big Deal”
Rosenberg, the national security correspondent for the New York Times, said the media’s coverage of the Capitol riot was “overblown” and that the events of Jan. 6, 2021 were “no big deal,” according to undercover video released Tuesday by Project Veritas.
In print, Rosenberg and his colleagues have described the claim that there were FBI plants instigating the protestors outside of the U.S. Capitol a year earlier as a “reimagining” of the “attack.” But in the Project Veritas video, which appears to have been recorded without his knowledge, Rosenberg paints a different picture. Here he admits that “there were a ton of FBI informants amongst the people who attacked the Capitol.”
Could These Reporters “Man Up” Already?
“I know I’m supposed to be traumatized,” Rosenberg said in the video, “but like, all these colleagues who were in the (Capitol) building and are like, ‘Oh my God it was so scary!’ I’m like, [expletive] off!’”
Rosenberg said the Times was “not the kind of place where I can tell someone to man up,” but he said “I kind of want to be like, ‘dude come on, you were not in any danger,’” according to the video. “These [expletive] little dweebs who keep going on about their trauma … . Shut the [expletive] up.” Rosenberg then used a profanity to indicate that his colleagues at the Times lack courage.
“They were making it too big a deal,” Rosenberg said of the political left. “They were making this some organized thing that it wasn’t.”
Breathless Accounts of the GOP’s “Far Right” Transformation
Jeremy Peters, another New York Times reporter, recently published Insurgency: How Republicans Lost Their Party and Got Everything They Ever Wanted. The book argues that the Republican party has changed in recent years, becoming a far-right collective under Trump. At the same time it ignores evidence that at the same time Democrats have migrated to the radical left.
Thus, Peters fetishizes the January 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol while ignoring the most extreme actions of Democrats — like bailing out violent Antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters. Or the Stasi-like attack on Brett Kavanaugh during his nomination for the Supreme Court, which only receives a few fleeting pages at the end of Insurgency.
Like many liberals, Peters obsesses about January 6. He describes the atmosphere around the crowd as having “an almost bestial energy.” He also claims that “Trump didn’t bring anything to the Republican party that wasn’t already there.”
Which Party Drifted to the Extreme?
The truth is, the Times has it exactly backwards. It is liberalism that has drifted into insanity, not conservatism.
This is evident in James Piereson’s remarkable book, Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism.
Piereson argues that in the 20th century up until the 1960s, liberalism was largely a doctrine of maintaining government programs and slowly expanding freedom and equal justice for all people. Institutional liberalism was not radical. Adlai Stevenson and John F. Kennedy liberalism had little overlap with the Communist-infiltrated progressive movement. Indeed, radicals on the American left derided pro-American liberalism as “conservative.”
A Bit Insipid
This liberalism, argues Piereson, was competent, patriotic, often anti-communist, and accomplished good things. Still, over time it became such a dry and programmatic philosophy that it was missing something vital. Namely, the human soul, the thrill of a life in God, even just plain fun. Liberalism saw little role for faith and no room for the complexity, excitement, unpredictability, and tragedy of life. The worldview was not revolutionary but … managerial.
This is why 1950s liberalism was criticized by the left as much as the right. Piereson cites the liberal intellectual Lionel Trilling, and his 1950 book The Liberal Imagination. Trilling wrote: “The world is a complex and unexpected and terrible place which is not always to be understood by the mind as we use it in our everyday tasks.” As Piereson elaborates, “liberalism … because of its programmatic focus and near exclusive emphasis on politics, lacks an imaginative dimension that might give it a better sense of the richness and complexity of life.”
One Day in Dallas
When John F. Kennedy was killed, liberalism went crazy. Unable to face the fact that Kennedy was murdered by a Castro-loving Communist (Lee Harvey Oswald), liberalism fell into conspiracy mongering. Its managerial calm gave way over time to a violent, anti-religious, paranoid and utopian New Left frenzy. Thus was forged the world view of our Stasi media and socialist politicians.
That’s why those people were so ruthless and propagandistic in dealing with the protestors of January 6. Piereson argues we now have “punitive liberalism.” That is to say, punishing liberalism. America was to blame for Kennedy’s death, and traditional Americans should be shamed and made to pay.
Punitive liberalism has become the religion of modern liberals. Liberalism today, in its censorious cancel culture, race obsession and policing or speech, is completely malicious.
Project Veritas has just exposed its snarling face.
Author: Frances Rice