Apparently, the 17 year old kid was there protecting businesses earlier, and a police officer even thanked him and gave him bottled water. Kyle was later separated from the other volunteers and was attacked, tripped and fell, and a skateboard narrowly missed smashing his head. He fired at the skateboarder from the ground and killed him. There are several reports and videos of the boy firing in self-defense, and then holding his hands in the air and turning himself over to the police. Lin Wood has contacted the boy's family and has offered to help.
CNN's resident communist, Van Jones, said last night he hoped someone would find the boy and beat him.
Is the? Media Desperate To Hide This Fact About Recent Police Shooting
And:
Is the? Media Desperate To Hide This Fact About Recent Police Shooting
And:
It is the swingiest county in the swingiest 2020 state.
Click here for the full story.
Finally:
Obviously the JoKe's plan is blame Trump for how he handled Covid 19, blame Trump for the rioting in cities run by Democrats for decades, blame Trump for everything under the sun and then criticize him for not healing the nation. They hope repetition will make these attacks stick.
When Trump responded to the pandemic Biden called him a racist and the mass media berated him for being xenophobic.. Meanwhile Trump got the bureaucracy to respond like no president ever has and was able to offer help even though we were caught totally unprepared.
He then offered to send in help where the rioting was allowed to fester and continues to this day and,until recently, most Democrat mayors rejected his offer either because they had no backbone and were more interested in caving and appeasing the rioters or wanted to make Trump look bad.
Finally, when the rioting began to backfire in terms of public empathy, because the protesting was taken over by anarchists and got out of hand, Biden left his own cave and finally muttered something.
Then, K just gave a syrupy speech attacking Trump on one hand and immediately followed by attacking him for not healing the nation. Another tactic hypocrite Biden is trotting out is calling Trump a liar ( Pelosi recently added the word pathological and Brazile, who gave answers to Hillary prior to her debate with Sanders, also accuses Trump of lying). Biden lied about what he did for his son while he was VP, as did Hillary for her husband and their Foundation, when she was Secretary of State and, with Obama, all three were engaged in arranging spying on Trump after he became president..Trump stretches the truth, he is a huckster real estate type but Biden is both a liar and plagiarist and Pelosi stoops to any level because of her hatred of Trump. When you live in glass houses don't throw rocks.
One of America's great humorous told us during campaigns the truth is crushed. and becomes the first victim
Trump will respond in his acceptance speech. Stay tuned.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This memo is mostly devoted to editorials and op eds that I believe are very significant:. They include the importance of the composure of the Senate after the 2020 election, why Biden will not be able to accomplish what he pledges, ie. restoring normalcy, insights into Chinese demographic issues, an op ed by Karl Rove regarding Biden's failures regarding Covid 19 (I seldom post Rove's comments though I frequently read them.) and finally why The NRA has a right to exist.
+++
The More Important Election
Senate control will decide if change in 2021 is centrist or radical.
The Editorial Board
The party conventions are focused on the race for the White House, but there’s precious little mention of what is arguably the more important contest: The fight for the U.S. Senate. Whoever holds that majority will determine whether change next year is centrist or radical.
This assumes Democrats hold the House, which is likely short of a Republican comeback for the ages. Republicans now hold a 53-47 Senate majority, but their hold is precarious. They’re defending as many as eight seats that are competitive, while they look set to gain back only the Alabama seat held by Democrat Doug Jones. A House, Senate and White House sweep would set Democrats up for the policy transformation that Joe Biden recently said he wants.
This would not be your father’s Democratic Senate, or even Barack Obama’s. A Democratic majority would elevate left-wing progressives like Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Sheldon Whitehouse to positions of power. Normally they’d be constrained by the need to compromise with the minority to get 60 votes to pass legislation. This is what has frustrated both parties for decades, notably Republicans as recently as two years ago on entitlement, health-care and tort reform when they also held all of Congress and the White House.Democrats have all but announced that, even with a narrow majority of 51 or 52, the 60-vote legislative filibuster is going the way of bourbon and branchwater. “The filibuster is gone,” former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told Politico last week. “It’s not a question of if, it’s a question of when it’s going to go. . . . Next year at this time, it will be gone.”
Harry should know. In 2013 he killed the filibuster rule for judicial nominees on a partisan vote. Barack Obama recently called the filibuster a relic of Jim Crow, though he wanted to use it to stop Samuel Alito’s Supreme Court confirmation. No less a former Senate Old Bull than Mr. Biden has signaled he’d be happy to see it go to grease the skids for his agenda.
The pressure from the left will be too intense to resist. Simply watch current Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who for years has advertised himself as a moderate liberal. Last week he told the press that he’s no longer an “angry centrist.” He said he’s moved left with the times and thus can’t take anything “off the table” in the majority.
Mr. Schumer is anticipating a potential primary challenge in 2022 from progressive New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who could raise all the money she needs to take him on. That threat means Mr. Schumer wouldn’t dare buck his backbenchers who want to kill the filibuster. It also means that in the majority he’ll be along for the ride of whatever Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats want.
What would that be? Mr. Schumer said this includes addressing “income and wealth inequality, climate [change], racial justice, [and] health care” and “improving our democracy.” Democrats can pass a tax increase with a mere 51 votes under current budget rules, but killing the filibuster opens the door to all sorts of long dormant progressive priorities.
That includes statehood, plus two Senate seats each, for Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. House Democrats have passed the most far-reaching labor legislation in decades. Right-to-work laws could be banned in the states and secret union elections replaced with “card check” that allows open pressure on workers.
Election mandates imposing ballot harvesting and mail-in voting on states would be likely. Democrats could also expand the size of the federal appellate courts and even the Supreme Court with a mere 51 votes. The only restraint would be public opinion, but Democrats (unlike Republicans) would have a cheer leading press corps behind them.
All of this is more likely than many Republicans think. Senate races have become increasingly nationalized as ticket-splitting ebbs, so President Trump’s undertow could sweep away even moderates like Susan Collins of Maine or Cory Gardner of Colorado. Oh, and in 2022 the GOP will have to defend at least 20 Senate seats—many in swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania—while Democrats protect 12 mostly safe strongholds. Voters, take note.
+++
China Has Troubles of Its Own
Its economic growth is likely to slow dramatically as its population ages and labor force shrinks.
People are justifiably worried about China. It is wrecking Hong Kong and has lost international trust in the process, which makes it difficult to form future deals with its leadership. China’s divide-and-conquer diplomacy abroad, particularly toward countries smaller than the U.S., is aggressive and immature. Xi Jinping’s statist economic strategy has returned to the Maoist model, putting private enterprise under the thumb of the Communist Party at home and exploiting foreign trade relationships.
I support efforts to call out such outrageous behavior—and to work with partners and allies, who largely agree with us about this—to develop the most effective approach possible to deal with it.
Americans long underestimated China’s progress and its leaders’ ambitions. I reluctantly accept that today’s China is different from the one I once worked with constructively. But as we deal with the present, we should also consider future relations with a country that faces significant emerging internal structural problems. China’s next 20 years are unlikely to repeat its past 20.
Take the labor force. Growth in gross domestic product is a factor of a country’s labor-force and productivity growth. Deng Xiaoping once told me how the ingenuity and hard work of the Chinese people would power huge advances, given market liberalizations. That combined with an explosion in the pool of available workers—a youthful population bulge, plus migration from farms to cities. China’s GDP grew from 11% of the U.S.’s in 1997 to 63% two decades later, in the process lifting hundreds of millions out of abject poverty. But the labor force of Mr. Xi’s China is now declining—in contrast to the steady, immigration-driven growth of the U.S.—and is projected to lose 174 million workers by midcentury. To borrow a phrase from the political economist Nicholas Eberstadt, this will “bound the realm of the possible” in the Chinese economy.
Meanwhile, the Chinese population over 65 is set to double by 2050 to nearly 400 million. Many will need housing or other public assistance. A heretofore young, productive and risk-taking China budgets for essentially no social safety net. Successive generations of only children—as early as 1990, four-fifths of Shanghainese children had no siblings—have upended the traditional family model of caring for the elderly. And selection of boys during the era of the one-child policy means that now the country has a shortage of women. That doesn’t amount to a no-child policy, but it may produce a no-child result.
China today is no Potemkin Soviet Union—it has trillions of dollars in foreign currency reserves and is deeply integrated into global supply chains. But having consumed more cement in three years than the U.S. did in a century, excess capacity now plagues domestic industries and drives China’s global scramble for outward infrastructure lending.
Serious economic and equity tensions, for example in health and education outcomes, have grown up between urban and rural regions and will drive a need for cross-subsidy. Mr. Xi’s turn toward lending to fill in for slowing growth means local governments and businesses are now swamped in contingent debts, often off-book. An example is high-speed rail. State-owned China Railway took on nearly $1 trillion in debt to build that sprawling network; a few major lines are profitable, but most are not, and interest payments alone exceed operating revenues.
As Americans again debate their own attitudes toward the role of government, we should recall that Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher’s calls for markets and personal freedom as engines of human prosperity were heard in Beijing, too; their insights helped power Deng and Jiang Zemin’s economic ascent. But Mr. Xi’s campaign to stamp out intellectual discourse in China has threatened those reforms—and therefore the country’s economic prospects.
Perhaps sensing the change in trend lines ahead, China has undertaken a slate of narrowly self-interested foreign policies. Having been secretary of state, I can attest to the diplomatic and military costs, expertise and experience that go into developing and maintaining an outward global posture. But with its current approach, I suspect China will struggle to win over durable partners in such efforts. In the process, there is a risk that our two countries stumble into confrontation due to missteps or mutual miscalculation.
China misunderstands us, too. To reduce the temptation for opportunism by anyone, including China, Americans must do better on our own challenges: government debt, stagnating and inequitable educational outcomes in disciplines that will define our future prosperity and security, and the demographic need for a reasonable and consistent immigration policy.
We should quietly develop specific off-ramps from conflict with China—e.g., rules of the road for military ships and aircraft with a communication mechanism to address any incidents; stockpiling of important traded goods such as pharmaceuticals, rare earths or agricultural products—that would improve mutual stability. It is important that leaders here—and leaders there—work from a realistic view of China’s position, our own position, and our collective future.
Mr. Shultz is a distinguished fellow at the Hoover Institution. He was labor secretary, director of the Office of Management and Budget and Treasury secretary under President Nixon and secretary of state under President Reagan.
+++++++++++++
Joe Biden Can’t Restore Normalcy
The Democrats may now represent more disruption than coronavirus-fatigued voters want to hazard.
By Daniel Henninger
Donald Trump Jr. described Joe Biden as the Loch Ness Monster, a lifelong swamp creature. That was patty-cake compared with what Democrats think of and won’t stop saying about Donald J. Trump. Wash away the neurotic personal animus, and the Democratic case for Joe Biden is that by ending the nonstop Trump disruption, or “chaos,” Mr. Biden will restore the country to normalcy. He won’t.
Only the most sound-asleep voters can believe that with one day’s voting in November they can melt the Wicked Witch of Trumpland and dance down the yellow-brick road to more temperate times. Returning to pre-2020 normality anytime soon, no matter which candidate wins, is impossible.
Most people aren’t thinking about the next four years; they’re thinking about the next 12 to 18 months. They are wondering each day when or whether the pandemic will end and what the post-coronavirus world will mean for them and their families.
The economic and personal disruption has been immeasurable. Within weeks, daily economic activity went from normal to nearly nothing—an event with no precedent in modern history.
What comes next for the daily work people took for granted isn’t clear. At first, salaried workers were OK, but then the ranks of people on paychecks were thinned with furloughs and layoffs. American Airlines said this week it would unload 19,000 people. JPMorgan Chase says rotational work is likely to become permanent. Laying off unseen remote workers will be easier in the next recession.
A significant migration is occurring out of urban centers into the more predictable calm of suburban life. Younger people are choosing to live closer to where they grew up.
Normalcy? Joe Biden is running in an election year when liberals are fleeing New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago and other cities overwhelmed with protests, homelessness and spreading disorder.
For nearly all families, one of life’s basics—educating their children—is in flux. With public-school teachers and their unions refusing to go back to work under nearly any pandemic conditions, parents are spending evenings discussing immediate educational alternatives for their kids.
The annual fall ritual of going away to college is in disarray. Remote learning for higher-ed is looking more like the long-term normal. Joe Biden may lose the election if college-age voters, always hard to turnout, are in turmoil with their personal lives this fall.
More than any presidential election one can remember, this one will be determined by two overwhelming domestic events—the coronavirus pandemic and the protests that followed George Floyd’s killing on May 25.
If Donald Trump loses, it will be because he confirmed voters’ negative opinions of him with the self-inflating press briefings he ran in the early weeks of the health crisis. Disapproval of his handling of the pandemic hit nearly 60%, while approval for governors was over 60%. Barring a big event, the election was all but over in early May. Then that event happened. George Floyd was killed.
While the case against Mr. Trump is that people can’t take more disruption, the Democratic agenda itself has grown so disruptive that the idea of a Biden return to normalcy is nonsense.
The Floyd-related events have put unexpectedly complex political forces in motion for the Democrats. It was remarkable that no one at the Democratic convention mentioned the post-Floyd protests, looting or shootings, often in black neighborhoods. How hard would it have been for Chicago-born Michelle Obama to say something useful? Instead, Team Biden decided it was in their interest to pretend a major political event doesn’t exist.
And maybe that calculation was right. Back during the pre-pandemic, pre-protest primaries, the general-election difficulties posed to a Democratic presidential candidacy by Bernie Sanders and the other progressives were already evident. Improvising a solution, the Democratic elders (literally) decided only Mr. Biden could soft-soap these “transformative” policies—now codified in the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force—while purporting that the election is entirely about Mr. Trump’s Twitter -sodden persona.
In normal circumstances, Mr. Biden and his convention might have been able to get away with conjuring “10 million well-paying jobs” after his party has banned fossil fuels in 15 years. But in the three-month George Floyd aftermath, the party has moved way past even this platform.
At the same moment the country is struggling through a pandemic of personal and economic uncertainty, the Democratic agenda has stretched to include their intention to overturn a pervasive, irredeemably racist American social structure. And without Joe Biden having to say it, that party to-do list includes truly novel ideas such as defunding big-city police departments.
Add in the Pelosi multi-trillion virus-spending blowout. Surely some sense is growing among suburban swing voters that this Wizard-of-Oz spending can’t go on.
This is the party running on making the U.S. normal again?
For many voters, this election is a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea. But the Democrats’ blue sea has risen past embracing transformation to defending tumult. That may be more disruption than pandemic- and protest-fatigued Americans want right now.
+++
The NRA Has a Right to Exist
New York Attorney General Letitia James’s attempt to dissolve the 150-year old organization is unconstitutional government overreach.
By David Cole
The American Civil Liberties Union rarely finds itself on the same side as the National Rifle Association in policy debates or political disputes. Still, we are disturbed by New York Attorney General Letitia James’s recent effort to dissolve the NRA.
Ms. James’s office charges that NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and other officials misdirected millions of the organization’s charitable funds for their personal use. But the attorney general’s complaint doesn’t stop there. It attempts to dissolve the NRA altogether, thereby penalizing the entire organization for the wrongs of some of its leaders.
The NRA isn’t popular with New York’s politicians. Ms. James has called it a “terrorist organization.” Gov. Andrew Cuomo had his chief financial regulator urge New York banks and insurers to reconsider doing business with the NRA and other “gun promotion” groups, and proclaimed in a campaign mailer that “If the NRA goes bankrupt, I will remember them in my thoughts and prayers.”
You may have your own opinions about the NRA, but all Americans should be concerned about this sort of overreach. If the New York attorney general can do this to the NRA, why couldn’t the attorney general of a red state take similar action against the ACLU, the AFL-CIO, Common Cause, or Everytown for Gun Safety?
Our democracy is premised on the right of association. The First Amendment protects not only the right to speak, but also to band together with others to advance one’s views. Making or resisting change in a democracy requires collective action, and a healthy democracy therefore demands a robust “civil society.” The right to associate can’t survive if officials can shut down organizations with which they disagree. The Supreme Court has notably invoked that right to protect union members, Communist Party adherents, the Boy Scouts and the NAACP.
That’s why two years ago, we supported the NRA’s lawsuit charging Gov. Cuomo with violating its First Amendment rights. Mr. Cuomo moved to dismiss the case, but a federal judge ruled against him, holding that if he targeted the NRA for its gun-promoting views, he violated its First Amendment rights.
And that’s why we believe Ms. James has also gone too far. Dissolution of a nonprofit is the most extreme remedy state regulators can seek. It has historically been reserved for organizations that are essentially false fronts for personal gain.
The NRA is different. It’s been around for more than 150 years and has millions of members. It engages in a range of lawful and properly tax-exempt pursuits, including teaching gun safety, operating shooting ranges, educating the public, and lobbying for laws that protect gun rights. If some of its leaders have become corrupt, they should be removed. If its board was incompetent in checking their abuses, it should be reformed.
Dissolution is proper only where a corporation is so subsumed by waste, misuse or fraud that it no longer fulfills a charitable purpose. There is simply no precedent for such extreme action against an organization like the NRA, which, whether you like it or not, has been serving charitable purposes very effectively (indeed, many of its opponents would say, too effectively) for a century and a half. And even if the threat of dissolution is meant only to gain leverage for a deal, threats of unconstitutional action ought not be a part of the attorney general’s arsenal.
The right to associate is a right for all, not just for those whom government officials favor.
Mr. Cole is national legal director of the ACLU.
++++++++++++++++++++
The Left’s Covid Memory Hole
Contrary to what Joe Biden says now, he and his team badly misjudged Covid-19.
By Karl Rove
Last week’s Democratic convention sought to make four points: Joe Biden is a decent man, Donald Trump is horrible, the president bungled the pandemic and Mr. Biden would have handled it better because he grasped the threat from the start.
Whatever you think of the first three, the last is a fabrication. But the former vice president likes to say it anyway. In June he claimed President Trump “did not listen to guys like me back in January saying we have a problem, a pandemic is on the way.” In May Mr. Biden said, “If he had listened to me and others and acted just one week earlier to deal with this virus, there’d be 36,000 fewer people dead.” The early comments of Mr. Biden and his advisers, however, show little evidence he was on top of anything.
Take Mr. Biden’s first statement on the pandemic. In a 773-word op-ed on Jan. 27, he spent 292 words defending the handling of the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Africa, 268 decrying Mr. Trump’s leadership style and 74 suggesting America faced “the possibility of a pandemic.” He devoted only 140 words to what he would do about it: ask Congress in 2021 to beef up the Public Health Emergency Fund, amend existing law to allow presidents to declare pandemic emergencies, and fully fund the Global Health Security Agenda. Mr. Biden also said he’d renew funding this past spring for hospitals that “treat people with infectious diseases,” a program Congress always reauthorizes.
Even the Washington Post later described the Biden op-ed as “more of an attack on President Trump . . . than a detailed plan of action.”
On Jan. 31, the day the president issued a China travel ban, Mr. Biden decried Mr. Trump’s “hysterical xenophobia and fear-mongering.” The Biden campaign now says he wasn’t referring to the ban, but it sounds like he was. Campaigning the next day, Mr. Biden seemed to attack the ban again, saying, “Disease has no borders.”
It wasn’t only Mr. Biden; it was also the people around him. Ron Klain, a longtime top adviser and former Biden chief of staff, opposed a travel ban on Jan. 28, a few days before it was announced, calling it “premature.” Other Biden advisers were also dismissive. On Jan. 30, Biden confidant and coronavirus adviser Zeke Emanuel told CNBC viewers to “take a very big breath, slow down, and stop panicking and being hysterical.” The virus will “go down as spring comes up.”
Throughout February, Mr. Biden’s lieutenants kept minimizing the threat. In a Feb. 6 op-ed, Biden coronavirus adviser Irwin Redlener wrote that a global pandemic was “not very likely” and predicted the chances of “getting a severe, potentially lethal form of the Wuhan virus is negligible.” On Feb. 11 Mr. Klain again played down the likelihood that Covid would become “a serious epidemic.” “The evidence suggests it’s probably not that,” he said. Two days later, Mr. Klain tweeted, “We don’t have a COVID-19 epidemic in the US but we are starting to see a fear epidemic.”
Suggesting in a Feb. 20 interview that there’d been “an overreaction,” Dr. Emanuel again suggested “warm weather is going to come and, just like with the flu, the coronavirus is going to go down.” Then on Feb. 24 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged tourists in San Francisco to “come to Chinatown.” Mr. Klain echoed her three days later, saying people should not be dissuaded by “needless fears about coronavirus.” He added that everyone “should tonight go down to Chinatown in their city and buy dinner or go shopping.”
On Feb. 29, with news of the first U.S. coronavirus death, Dr. Emanuel told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that “running out and getting a mask is not going to help.” Then on March 12, coronavirus adviser Lisa Monaco and Mr. Biden double-teamed Mr. Trump’s Europe travel ban: She went on CNN and played down its importance while he tweeted, “A wall will not stop the coronavirus.” Mr. Biden also kept holding large rallies until March 9 and talked up in-person voting as late as April 2.
As the pandemic came on, there was no mention of masks, social distancing or lockdowns from Mr. Biden—and until mid-March, no calls for more protective gear, faster vaccine development or using the Defense Production Act.
Mr. Biden can fault the Trump administration for how it dealt with a once-in-a-century pandemic. But he can’t pretend he was right when he was wrong, that he knew better when he didn’t, that his and his team’s advice was good when it wasn’t. Mr. Biden is politically vulnerable on Covid-19. The president should prosecute that case.
Mr. Rove helped organize the political-action committee American Crossroads and is author of “The Triumph of William McKinley” (Simon & Schuster, 2015).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What's new?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What's new?
|
| Foul Play Suspected in U.S. Navy Catastrophe |
| Greatest noncombat disaster in decades! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Susan B. Tuchman and Morton A. Klein
College leaders: It’s time to stop Jew-hatred on campus
If perpetrators of anti-Semitism are punished for their actions, the rest of the university community would get the message that if you harass and discriminate against students because of their Jewish identity, then you will bear the consequences.
(August 26, 2020 / JNS) The anti-Semitism that Rose Ritch endured at the University of Southern California has been all over the media. Ritch resigned as vice president of USC’s undergraduate student government after she was harassed for months by fellow students for one reason only: She is proudly Jewish and expresses her Jewish identity by supporting the State of Israel. Students launched an aggressive social-media campaign against Ritch to “impeach her Zionist ass.”
Heartbreakingly, Ritch felt that she had to resign to protect her physical safety and mental health.
Ritch’s ordeal is outrageous and unacceptable. But sadly, it’s not surprising or new. She is the latest example of what Jewish students have been enduring on their campuses for years.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is a re-post because, though I re-read before I send, I am a lousy editor and often miss mistakes. In this instance what I initially sent conveyed the opposite of what I intended to say. Please excuse my error.
In 6 months a once free people have allowed feckless mayors and governors to permit hooligans to roam our streets, destroy property, challenge enforcement of law and order and ban religious attendance.
A Soros supported district attorney banned a couple from defending their home as rioters broke through private property fencing. The homeowners were charged with a felony. This was not in Russia or China. This was in a suburb of St Louis.
If that is not bad enough, corporate America caved and began funding radical organizations sworn to destroy our republic claiming they were addressing past wrongs. Actually, they were patronizing those who claim America is an evil, racist nation and demanded reparations.
I need not recite all perfidious acts by hypocrite politicians, you know them. Law abiding Americans are being impacted by cowards mistakenly believing we must tolerate acts of appeasement. Should the battle ultimately be lost to those seeking to destroy our nation, America will never be the same because we allowed radicals to destroy our freedoms without a fight. Democrat officials buckled as they rushed to do the bidding of the rioters who demanded we de-fund entire police departments etc. This is today's America. It became so because a Chinese pandemic tested our cohesiveness and patriotism, four police apparently acted outside the scope of their authority making a justified arrest, hatred of a legitimate election drove Democrats and the mass media to disrupt governance and , you know the rest. A prominent Founding Father's said : ' we have a republic if we can keep it' 244 years later we are learning how fragile our republic is as several thousand radicals effectively challenged authority, ending law and order replacing it with chaos , burning, looting and killing. It has come down to a 2020 election where the Democrat Party has been taken over by radicals and the election process is being altered, using the pandemic as an excuse, in order to lay the predicate should Trump win he did so unfairly and by fraud. Once again America will suffer mightily if the losing party and their mass media defenders refuse to accept their defeat gracefully.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
No comments:
Post a Comment