Citing a meeting Mayorkas had with Border Patrol agents earlier this month, Jordan and McClintock expressed bewilderment that DHS would release so many illegal immigrants into the country.
“It is hard to think of a bigger incentive for illegal aliens to show up along the southwest border than the promise of being rewarded with a government-sanctioned stay in the United States. Yet two weeks ago you gave them one … [when] you acknowledged that currently more than 85 percent of illegal aliens encountered at the southwest border are being released into the interior of the country,” the GOP lawmakers said.
“Such an astronomical release rate shows a flagrant disrespect for the rule of law and for those Americans and legal immigrants who abide by the law.”
Jordan and McClintock demanded a slew of data from Mayorkas about the release of illegal immigrants, including a month-by-month breakdown of such releases.
The GOP lawmakers also recounted the border crossing statistics to happen during the Biden administration.
They said there have been 35 consecutive months in which Customs and Border Protection has encountered more than 100,000 illegal aliens along the southwest border. In that time, CBP encounters of illegal aliens on the southwest border have totaled more than seven million, including an all-time monthly high of over 302,000 in December, they said.
According to Department of Homeland Security data and sources, the Biden Administration has released more than 3.3 million illegal aliens into the United States.
“Illegal aliens continue to cross our southwest border because they know that more likely than not, the Biden Administration will release them into the U.S.,” Jordan and McClintock said. “To make matters worse, the illegal aliens know that they will then be given a plane or bus ticket—at U.S. taxpayer expense—to whatever U.S. destination they desire.”
Mayorkas, who faces potential impeachment over his job performance, has until Feb. 5 to respond to their letter.
(Jacob Bruns, Headline USA) Alex Soros, the 38-year-old son and protégé of globalist oligarch George Soros, retweeted a image from the Atlantic that has been interpreted as a dogwhistle signal—subliminal or otherwise—encouraging radical leftists to attempt to assassinate the former president Donald Trump, the Gateway Pundit reported.
Last year, the crime and inflation crises largely evaporated. So did the leading theories about what had caused them. https://t.co/WguJQkj1PG
The article and corresponding Soros tweet both purportedly address the dropping crime rates and easing inflation.
But more nefariously, the accompanying graphic includes two photos: one of a bullet hole in a window, and the other of $47 in cash.
The Last Refuge, a conservative website, said that Soros was “[b]eing subtle like a brick through a window.”
Trump is currently the frontrunner to become the 47th President in U.S. history, while if incumbent Joe Biden were to win re-election, he would remain the 46th president since his terms would be served consecutively.
Despite their past condemnations of right-wing rhetoric that they deemed excessively violent, several radical leftist lawmakers, including Reps. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez, D-N.Y., have recently engaged in forms of stochastic terrorism against conservatives, including members of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Atlantic—which was acquired in 2017 by Laurene Powell Jobs, the widow of founding Apple CEO Steve Jobs—has been at the forefront of promoting Trump Derangement Syndrome in the leftist media.
The magazine’s current newsstand edition includes a panic-mongering series of 24 op-eds titled “If Trump Wins,” which collectively push the far-left talking point that the GOP frontrunner and presumptive nominee will rule as a dangerous dictator.
According to the Atlantic article posted by Soros, “the absurdity of Trump as the normalcy candidate is almost too much to bear—especially because the normalcy that voters are desperately craving is, in many ways, already here, and Biden helped deliver it.”
Alex Soros—who has effectively taken over the family business from his aging father—has engaged in Trump hysteria for years. In September, he fretted about the problems that could arise for the European Union if Trump were to be reelected.
“Like my father, I regard the EU as one of modern history’s great triumphs,” he wrote in an op-ed, condemning the former president for his allegedly “isolationist and anti-European policies.”
The tweet prompted a number of amusing responses, some calling out Soros for what appears to be a call for a hit on Trump.
Why does this look like comms? Did someone just call for a hit on 47? 👀
Right wing journalist Steve Sailor pointed out that Soros-backed activism, like Black Lives Matter, has led to a drastic spike in gun violence.
According to Gun Violence Archive, 52.6% more Americans died by gun homicide in 2023 than in 2014, back before the Ferguson Effect-Black Lives Matter Era. Woundings by gunfire are up 66.4% during the Great Awokening.
Yet another Twitter user joked that he would report the younger Soros’s post to the FBI if that organization were not busy with the more important work of raiding raw milk farms.
(Ken Silva, Headline USA) A man convicted in a post-9/11 terrorism sting was ordered freed from prison by a judge who criticized the FBI for relying on an “unsavory” confidential informant for an agency-invented conspiracy to blow up New York synagogues and shoot down National Guard planes.
U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon on Friday granted James Cromitie, 58, compassionate release from prison six months after she ordered the release of his three co-defendants, known as the Newburgh Four, for similar reasons. The four men from the small river city 60 miles north of New York City were convicted of terrorism charges in 2010.
When Judge McMahon freed the other three defendants last July, she criticized the FBI’s role in radicalizing them.
Onta Williams, David Williams and Laguerre Payen—three of the men known as the “Newburgh Four”—were “hapless, easily manipulated and penurious petty criminals” caught up more than a decade ago in a scheme driven by overzealous FBI agents and a dodgy informant, Judge McMahon said in her ruling last July.
Though a jury had already rejected the men’s argument that they were entrapped by the FBI more than 10 years ago, McMahon’s opinion excoriated the bureau for doing just that.
“The real lead conspirator was the United States,” McMahon wrote in granting the men’s request for compassionate release, effective in three months.
McMahon outlined how Hussain manipulated the lead defendant, Cromite, by pretending to be a wealthy Pakistani businessman, promising Cromite as much as $250,000 if he would plan, participate in and find others to join a jihadist “mission.”
In 2008, Cromite then recruited Onta and David Williams, as well as Payen, to serve as “lookouts” while he planted “bombs” manufactured by the FBI at a synagogue and community center in Riverdale.
“Nothing about the crimes of conviction was of defendants’ own doing,” the judge said last July.
At the time, Cromitie wasn’t part of the compassionate release request and was expected to complete his prison sentence in 2030. But Judge McMahon also ordered his release last week, and had similar comments about the FBI’s conduct towards him.
“The notion that Cromitie was selected as a ‘leader’ by the co-defendants is inconceivable, given his well-documented buffoonery and ineptitude,” she wrote.
Cromitie has served 15 years of his 25-year minimum sentence. The New York-based judge ordered Cromitie’s sentence to be reduced to time served plus 90 days.
Cromitie’s attorney, Kerry Lawrence, said Saturday he had not yet been able to reach his client, but that Cromitie’s family was very happy.
“I’m obviously thrilled that Mr. Cromitie will be released from prison, but still believe that his conviction was entirely the product of government entrapment,” Lawrence wrote in an email. “Seeing as he was hounded and manipulated by the government informant way more than any of … the other defendants who were previously ordered released, it would have been shocking if Judge McMahon didn’t grant our motion.”
In the post, Ye (as Kanye now refers to himself) referenced Jaws, the iconic James Bond nemesis featured in The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker.
According to the Daily Mail, the titanium mouth-wear cost Ye a cool $850,000.
An unidentified source told Today, “They are, as the name suggests, fixed and permanent. This goes way beyond veneers or grills. His particular implant is quite unlike anything that has been done before.”
But the source said West did not have his teeth removed.
So, why did Ye choose titanium for his new look? He didn’t say. One would assume it was for the aesthetic. But he could have picked another metal.
This got me thinking, what metal would likely offer Kanye the best return on his investment?
Precious Metal Returns in the 21st Century
To figure this out, I looked at the historical data in this century for five different metals. I chose January 2000 as the start date and the spot price on Jan. 19, 2024, as the end date. That will give us a good sense of the long-term performance of each metal during this century.
Of course, past performance does not guarantee future results.
The average gold tooth weighs 3 grams. I multiplied this weight by 28 teeth and calculated that a full set of dentures would use about 3 ounces of gold – give or take.
Of course, metals have different densities, so the weight of titanium dentures might be slightly different than that of a gold set. But I figure these numbers will let us at least ballpark the cost of the metal.
Here’s what we came up with.
2000 price per ounce Current price per ounce Percent Change
Gold $282.05 $2,040.45 623.4%
Silver $5.30 $22.82 330.6%
Platinum $414.00 $914.70 120.94%
Titanium 26 cents 16 cents -38.5%
Copper 5 cents 24 cents 380%
So, based on the metals’ performance titanium was the worst choice if Kanye was looking for a return on his investment. The price of titanium is very stable, and it is an abundant element.
Gold would have been the best choice for a good long-term return, based on the metals’ performance during the 21st century. Copper offered the second-best return, followed by silver and platinum.
One thing is clear – precious metals historically chart solid returns in the long run. This makes sense when you consider the Federal Reserve and the U.S. government are constantly depreciating the value of the currency. Increasing commodity prices reflect this monetary inflation – particularly monetary metals such as silver and gold.
(Money Metals News Service) Bullion investors are naturally concerned about unsound monetary and fiscal policy. Many of them buy precious metals, in part, because they recognize the federal government is out of control when it comes to borrowing and spending.
This makes the most recent betrayal by the Republicans in the House of Representatives relevant to our readers.
Last week, the newly installed House Speaker – Mike Johnson – cut a deal with Democrats to pass yet another continuing resolution and keep deficit spending at a level only briefly surpassed during the height of the COVID panic.
This year’s deficit is expected to be about $2.5 trillion – something unimaginable just a decade ago. The 2014 deficit was unprecedented at $485 billion, about 1/5 of the current level. Given the recent trajectory, next year’s deficit could be more than $3 trillion.
If the deficits continue expanding unabated, confidence in the U.S. dollar could crater, triggering very high inflation.
Hard choices need to be made in order to avoid such a calamity. Yet the politicians in charge can’t even make simple sacrifices.
Representative Chip Roy was one of the 106 Republicans who voted against the resolution to spend the mountain of money that our government doesn’t have. He laid the situation out perfectly on the House floor prior to the vote.
But at the end of the day, 107 House Republicans collaborated with 207 Democrats to dodge even a minuscule 1% cut in spending.
The hypocritical Republicans likely mouthed some commitment to fiscal responsibility and limited government to voters during their last campaign. Voters now know what those commitments are worth.
To be fair, the hard choices that have to be made in order to balance the budget are only possible in theory.
There is no politically viable means for politicians to stop the metastasizing federal debt. That ship sailed long ago. And a ship that massive is nearly impossible to turn.
Most federal spending is all but untouchable. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest payments on Treasury debt combined for nearly 60% of all spending in 2023. Defense accounted for another 13%. Given the almost sacred nature of these programs, few politicians dare propose any significant cuts.
The politicians are fiddling as Rome is so obviously burning.
A federal default in some form is inevitable. The political hacks who want to pretend our government is incapable of default because the Fed can always print the money needed to meet obligations should start telling the truth.
They know there isn’t any meaningful difference between a debtor that fails to repay versus one who repays in devalued money.
In other words, there are two ways for our insolvent federal government to screw lenders.
The second way, a default through inflation, is more dishonest and less direct than an outright default. No doubt that is why American politicians and central bankers have already embraced this method.
The lack of principled leadership in Washington, D.C. is what put us on the one-way road to national insolvency. And absent principled leadership that reinstitutes limited government, the outlook for the Federal Reserve note “dollar” looks grim.
China ranks as the world’s biggest gold market, and Chinese demand has a significant impact on the global gold market.
Gold charted a 17 percent increase in yuan terms and was the second-best-performing asset class in China. Only global stocks outperformed gold in renminbi terms.
Gold was up 14% in dollar terms in 2023.
According to the World Gold Council, “geopolitical risks, sizable central bank purchases – and intensifying expectations of major central banks lowering rates” supported gold in 2023.
Even with rising prices, wholesale gold demand was up in 2023.
Gold withdrawals from the Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) totaled 1,687 tons in 2023, a 7 percent year-on-year increase. Wholesale demand was 3 percent above the 5-year average.
According to the World Gold Council, gold’s “eye-catching performance and strong local and global central bank purchases led to extensive coverage by local media.”
And gold’s attractiveness was further boosted by the increasing need of households to preserve value: the local gold price’s outstanding performance drew their attention when the currency other major assets weakened.
The WGC said innovations by jewelry manufactures and expanding product ranges that adapted to evolving consumer preferences also boosted gold’s appeal.
China Daily reported a 12.2 percent increase in gold and silver jewelry sales through the first three quarters of 2023. According to the president of the Gems & Jewelry Trade Association of China, the jewelry sales nearly doubled growth in the overall retail sector.
According to China Daily, jewelry exports recovered to pre-pandemic levels, with the total value reaching about 66.7 billion in 2022. That represents an 18 percent increase compared to 2019. The overall export value of jewelry from January to June 2023 came in at 39.4 billion yuan, a 13.3 percent increase over the same period last year.
This growth in Chinese gold demand happened despite some economic headwinds. As the World Gold Council put it, “China’s economic recovery in 2023 was not a smooth sail and consumers remained cautious in spending.”
COVID-related restrictions were dropped at the end of 2022, a notable rebound in consumer spending and the return to normalcy in all industries fueled China’s growth in early 2023. But the momentum didn’t last, as Q2 and Q3’s growth failed to meet market expectations. The sentiment improved mildly in Q4, pushing 2023’s annual GDP growth to 5.2 percent, above the 5 percent target set by policymakers.
Gold demand wasn’t just a function of jewelry sales. Chinese investors were keenly interested in the yellow metal in 2023 as well.
Chinese demand for gold bars and gold coins came in at 82 tons in the third quarter alone. It was a 16 percent increase year-on-year and the strongest Q3 Chinese gold investment demand since 2018. It was also above both the five-year and 10-year third-quarter averages.
Through the first nine months of 2023, investment gold demand was up 26 percent compared to 2022.
Chinese gold-backed ETFs led global inflows last year, adding 10 tons to their holdings. That drove Chinese gold ETF holdings to 61.5 tons with total assets under management reaching 29 billion yuan ($4 billion).
Strong demand coupled with a decline in gold imports led to a significant price premium in China last year.
The Shanghai-London gold price premium reached an annual average of 1.5 percent ($29 per ounce). It was the highest premium in history. The daily premium record was set on Sept. 14, when the local gold price premium reached $121 per ounce. (6.4 percent).
Chinese central bank gold buying also helped boost the local gold market and helped drive another strong year of central bank demand globally.
The People’s Bank of China began reporting gold purchases again in November 2022 after over a year of silence. Since then, the central bank has announced increases in its gold reserves every single month.
In 2023, the People’s Bank of China officially increased its gold holding by 225 tons. That pushed its official reserves to 2,235 tons as of the end of December. Gold now accounts for 4.3 percent of China’s official foreign exchange reserves.
There has long been speculation that China owns far more gold than it officially reveals. As Jim Rickards pointed out on Mises Daily back in 2015, many analysts believe that China keeps several thousand tons of gold “off the books” in a separate entity called the State Administration for Foreign Exchange (SAFE).
(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., has revealed that the now-defunct, Democrat-controlled Jan. 6 Committee deleted more than 100 files from its politicized investigation of the Capitol Hill protest-turned-riot.
Fox News reported Monday that the Jan. 6 Committee deleted the encrypted files from its probe just days before Republicans took over the majority in the House of Representatives.
Fox reported that Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., who chaired the Jan. 6 Committee, promised to provide four terabytes of archived data, but that Loudermilk and his colleagues have only received approximately two terabytes of data to date. Loudermilk is leading a new GOP effort to investigate Jan. 6.
“As you acknowledged in your July 7, 2023 letter, the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (Select Committee) did not archive all Committee records as required by House Rules,” Loudermilk wrote in a letter to Thompson, obtained first by Fox News.
“You wrote that you sent specific transcribed interviews and depositions to the White House and Department of Homeland Security but did not archive them with the Clerk of the House.”
Loudermilk reportedly added that Thompson also “claimed that you turned over 4-terabytes of digital files, but the hard drives archived by the Select Committee with the Clerk of the House contain less than 3- terabytes of data.”
According to Fox, Loudermilk was able to recover “numerous digital records from hard drives archived by the Select Committee” by hiring a team to conduct forensic analysis of the data and archived hard drives.
“One recovered file disclosed the identity of an individual whose testimony was not archived by the Select Committee,” Loudermilk reportedly wrote. “Further, we found that most of the recovered files are password-protected, preventing us from determining what they contain.”
Loudermilk reportedly asked that Thompson provide him “a list of passwords for all password-protected files created by the Select Committee” so that his committee can “access these files and ensure they are properly archived.”
Loudermilk’s statements corroborate claims Fox News host Jesse Watters made in August, when he said the Jan. 6 Committee destroyed approximately half of its evidence.
“The Democrat-run Jan. 6 committee is missing one and a half terabytes of data,” Watters said at the time, noting that such a volume likely includes critical records of security failures on Capitol Hill, as well as video depositions from Trump’s Cabinet members.
The missing data will likely include emails and text messages, as well, according to Waters.
(Ken Silva, Headline USA) When the Biden administration released its domestic terrorism strategy in June 2021, white supremacists and militia members were deemed the gravest threats to the country’s security.
It turns out, the Southern Poverty Law Center, a leftist organization with a long history of inflating the white supremacist terror threat, helped craft the Biden strategy. According to an article earlier this month from the Daily Signal, the SPLC’s president, Margaret Huang, recently bragged to her donors about how the SPLC helped steer the country’s counterterrorism apparatus.
“I think there’s no question that we are unparalleled in our abilities to track and monitor the hate and extremist groups in the country, and I can tell you that we’ve had many agencies in the new Biden administration reaching out to solicit our expertise and our knowledge and information to help shape the policies that the new administration is adopting to counter the domestic terrorism threat,” Huang reportedly said in a fundraising event video obtained by The Daily Signal.
The Biden administration’s partnership with the SPLC may explain why the Justice Department has targeted mothers protesting at school board meetings and traditionalist Catholics.
The SPLC lumps organizations such as Moms for Liberty with other “antigovernment groups” that are “part of the antidemocratic hard-right movement,” including “specific militia, sovereign citizens, constitutional sheriffs and conspiracy propagandist groups” that pose a threat to the country.
And last year, it was revealed that the FBI used SPLC “intelligence” to justify targeting traditionalist Catholics as potential domestic terrorists.
Additionally, DOJ emails made public in 2022 showed that federal prosecutors worked with the SPLC to stifle Georgia‘s efforts to maintain election integrity, Just the News reported at the time.
The Daily Signal noted the irony of the SPLC crafting a domestic terrorism strategy when one of its lawyers was charged with domestic terrorism last year in relation to his role in the attack on the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center—also referred to as “cop city.”
Perhaps the SPLC’s darkest scandal is its connection to the deadliest domestic terrorist attack in American history, the Oklahoma City bombing.
About eight years after the April 19, 1995, tragic attack, a leaked FBI memo revealed in 2003 that the SPLC had its own informants operating in an Oklahoman white supremacist compound called Elohim City, where suspects in the OKC bomb plot were known to have resided.
Citing a “highly placed confidential source in the DOJ,” the journalists who obtained the memo reported in 2005 that the FBI had been using the SPLC as a surveillance cutout. The journalists, J.D. Cash and Roger Charles, said the FBI was using a spy network operated by the SPLC to do what many in the bureau were afraid to do because of guidelines in place during the Clinton administration.
“Attorney General Janet Reno would not allow the FBI much latitude in developing intelligence inside the far-right due to concerns that such activities might violate existing departmental guidelines on ‘domestic spying,’” J.D. Cash and Roger Charles wrote in July 2005 for the McCurtain Daily Gazette.
“To skirt Reno’s policies, the FBI developed a relationship with cutouts such as the SPLC that could use their own spies to do what the FBI could not. These non-government agents then passed their intelligence products back to the bureau.”
Because the OKC bombing suspects who had resided at Elohim City were never arrested in relation to the attack—as Headline USA reported here—Cash and Charles wondered whether the SPLC was helping the FBI conceal information about the case. Cash and Charles—the latter who worked a brief stint on McVeigh’s defense team—were developing the theory that the FBI was trying to conceal the fact that one of its informants had gone rogue and helped carry out the bombing.
The two investigators confronted SPLC founder Morris Dees with their suspicions, but Dees reportedly declined to divulge information.
“Dees admitted that he had an informant at Elohim City as the [FBI] teletype said. However, the coy attorney refused to elaborate on the situation, except to say he had warned then-attorney general Reno, six months before the attack, that, ‘An attack on the government is planned by members of the far right,’” Cash and Charles wrote in 2005.
“Dees went on to say that after the attack he immediately called Reno to say the media had it wrong. ‘I told her the attack was domestic, not foreign,’ Dees said.”
Dees was reportedly also confronted about the matter during a conference at Southeastern Oklahoma State University in 2003, but he also declined to comment at that time.
“If I told you what we were doing there, I would have to kill you,” Dees reportedly said in 2003.
Just as the best proof of the stolen 2020 election was the effort that Democrats made to tamp down all discussion and examination of it, the clearest indicator of Biden’s imminent exit may, paradoxically, be the way they are trying to oversell his candidacy.
Simply put, Biden’s advanced age notwithstanding, the abject failures of his administration should be prohibitive to a second term. There is absolutely no way that in a normal scenario we would not see a flood of viable Democrats into the primary field—whether they truly see former President Donald Trump as an existential threat or, conversely, as an easy mark.
The radio silence, paired with the pantomime that Biden is their guy and that they are willing to take the gambit on a 2016 repeat, tells us by virtue of omission that something is amiss.
The New York Postrecently became the first major newspaper out of the gate to state the obvious: that a long forecasted Michelle Obama run may be in the pipeline.
Yet, even the Post column Wednesday by Cindy Adams coyly treated this as if it were some organic decision that had spontaneously sprung from the Obamas’ growing concern about a Trump victory, and not a carefully choreographed plan to finish the Marxist makeover that began in 2008.
THE TRANSITIONAL PRESIDENT
It is highly likely that the original plan to run Michelle in 2020—when she started sending some of the same smoke signals as she is currently—got derailed by the pandemic.
COVID-19 threatened to throw the entire script out of sequence, calling into doubt the orchestrated chaos of migrant caravans and race riots that they had carefully planned out, and demanding the sort of genuine leadership of the Obamas that was “above their pay grade.”
At any rate, Joe Biden—the man who has spent the past 50 years boasting of his willingness “to prostitute himself” to the highest bidder, and of whom Obama told a donor in the 2020 primaries, “Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f**k things up”—was the perfect patsy for a four-year reign of terror that would function as a “sort of transitional” period.
— Madam Auntie VP Kamala Harris is THEE GOAT! (@flywithkamala) October 6, 2020
Biden’s specific path of destruction seems custom-made to build on the agenda that Obama set in motion but lacked the fortitude to implement on his own.
The Left will try to pitch Michelle Obama as a blank slate, and those who have framed the current race as a choice between a doddering empty suit and a Nazi dictator will, undoubtedly, suggest that she falls in the exact center between the two.
Because Biden, by design, has systematically violated many norms, it will seem at surface level to be a return to normalcy, with Michelle making a point of refusing to “go low” while giving her many surrogates carte blanche to do precisely that on her behalf.
Yet, in reality, a Michelle Obama presidency would be a continuation of the Biden presidency, which is, in turn, a continuation of the Barack Obama presidency. It would be the third and final act in the wokest, most epic Higher Ground Media disaster movie ever made.
Here are five things that America could expect to see from the next Obama term, when the Biden “transitional” phase ends and the real work begins.
The topics: immigration, the judiciary, censorship, gas prices and Israel, plus one speculative “wild card” that has about a 50–50 chance of coming to fruition.
UNIVERSAL AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS
From 2014 onward—despite what the gaslighting, goalpost-moving Left will claim— Obama was advancing an open-border policy by refusing to enforce federal immigration law.
On Friday, Biden said as much, telling a bipartisan group of mayors that the border hasn’t been secure for the “last 10 years,” according to The Hill.
Trump saw some minor successes in stemming the flow of illegals during the pandemic. Nonetheless, the outright resistance he faced from leftist “sanctuary” cities and the activist legal challenges via George Soros-backed “nonprofits” left open the possibility that another caravan could come at any moment and overwhelm the system—which they did, after Biden rolled back Trump’s border policies on day 1 of his presidency.
That effort is now in full throttle, and as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez noted recently, with policies like Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” off the table, there is not much that can be done about the more than 10 million illegals who have gained access to the U.S. on Biden’s watch and are now awaiting asylum hearings set for years, if not decades, in the future—except to declare blanket amnesty.
AOC wants to amnesty over 20 million illegal immigrants. A vote for literally ANY democrat is a vote for amnesty. These democrats are looking for a new voter base.@TheDemocrats@AOC#Election2024
This, of course, has always been the end game. Once these illegals are in the American system for long enough, the courts continue to rule that they are entitled to a sort of de-facto citizenship.
Democrats could wait another 20 years and hope that the second generation in this permanent sub-class of government dependents remains loyal to them; or, under the next Obama administration, they could hold the border hostage until Congress agrees to make amnesty a political concession.
COURT-PACKING WILL DESTOY THE JUSTICE SYSTEM
It was shocking news when, in 2010, Barack Obama scolded the Supreme Court during his State of the Union address for not supporting a political agenda.
But who—except for those who planned it out—would have imagined that Obama’s subtle swipe at the court would evolve into a full-fledged assault on American jurisprudence?
As with open borders, it was Obama’s administration that paved the way for the current two-tiered justice system. Former Attorney General Eric Holder was the first DOJ leader to openly use political beliefs for selective enforcement of the laws as a matter of policy and principle.
Moreover, the Obama judges installed in the D.C. district court via Harry Reid’s implementation of the “nuclear option,” which ended filibusters on most Senate judicial confirmations, have been instrumental in the development of lawfare as a powerful tool of the Left.
Nearly all accountability for the permanent bureaucracy—including the corrupt national intelligence apparatus—must go through notorious activist-judges like Tanya Chutkan, Beryl Howell, Christopher Cooper and Amit Mehta, whose allegiance is to their radical worldview and not the rule of law.
The one and only backstop is the U.S. Supreme Court, which the Left is urgently trying to destabilize and delegitimize.
Biden already laid the framework for radical “reform” with a controversial court-packing commission.
But it seems to be the fraudulent charges against Trump that offer the most likely path for pushing this objective, along with imposing new congressional oversight of the high court and term limits to further dilute the co-equal branch of government.
If the Supreme Court overturns the predetermined guilty verdicts against Trump, the Left will cry foul and insist the court has been tainted and politicized. If the high court upholds them, Democrats win the election—and proceed to pack the court, regardless.
PERSECUTION AND CENSORSHIP OF CRITICS
The divisive “ultra-MAGA” rhetoric that Biden has made central to his campaigning comes straight from the Obamas, with Barack first breaking the long tradition of presidents who avoided direct insults on the American people.
In April 2008, the soon-to-be president drew backlash for characterizing his opponents as frightened backwoods rubes who “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
Ironically, given the red-state “antipathy” her husband spoke of, Michelle Obama had told an audience just two months before, “For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country.”
Leftists have since taken their attacks on the opposition to dark and alarming places, while growing increasingly intolerant of criticism that’s redirected their way as being an attack on “democracy” itself.
As hundreds of prosecutions of Jan. 6 political dissidents reveal—along with similar persecutions of pro-life demonstrators, school-board soccer moms, anonymous online pranksters and elderly grandfathers who happen to post the wrong thing on social media—there is no limit to what the government will do to suppress and punish dissent under the new regime.
In fact, that mission recently has been embraced by the World Economic Forum, which endorsed the creation of a global blacklist for alleged sources of disinformation.
However, in order to give the censorship push an aura of “independence” needed to circumvent the appearance of First Amendment violations, it will likely collaborate with “nonprofit” partisan activist groups like the George Soros-linked NewsGuard and the Check My Ads Institute, which appears to have been behind a recent push to smear Twitter owner Elon Musk.
GAS PRICES SURPASS $10 A GALLON
During his first presidential campaign, Barack Obama faced criticism for appearing to support the spike in gas prices to $4 a gallon that happened during the George W. Bush administration.
“[T]he only way we’re going to deal with these high gas prices is if we change how we consume oil,” Obama said in a June 2008 CNBC interview. “And that means investing in alternative fuels, it means that we are raising fuel efficiency standards on cars, that we’re helping the automakers retool … but also by encouraging the market to adapt to these new circumstances more quickly.”
Essentially, Obama sought to artificially impose regulations and gas taxes that would make gas-powered vehicles prohibitive in order to help jolt the tepid consumer demand for electric vehicles. In 2016, when there was little political risk involved for him, the lame-duck president finally got the guts to attempt a 24-cent-per-gallon gas tax.
Similarly, his cap-and-trade plans to force corporations to pay carbon credits, woven into the fabric of the controversial Paris Climate Accords, aimed to further drive up energy costs and incentivize greater reliance on solar panels from companies like the government-subsidized Solyndra.
Biden not only has funneled massive amounts of federal spending toward new green-energy boondoggles and regulatory roads to nowhere (with automakers now revolting over the president’s EV mandates), but has also virtually cut off all U.S. energy production, achieving on the supply side the same price-gouging that his boss envisioned on the demand side.
In June 2022, California also set its average monthly record with gas prices at $6.16 a gallon, but at individual stations they’ve been spotted for as high as $8.49 a gallon.
California’s Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom acknowledged that by keeping the gas tax in place, even when the prices themselves spiked due to supply-chain issues, the state could effectively redistribute its wealth to others, including illegal immigrants.
The Obama administration’s ascension in the U.S. coincided with conservative Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s election, resulting in an unprecedented frosting of relations between the two traditionally close allies.
While it’s safe to assume diplomacy behind the scenes had not always been perfect, there had never, prior to 2009, been any doubt about where the U.S. stood in its unequivocal support of the beleaguered Jewish nation-state.
But all that changed after the Obama administration, led by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, made clear its support for a Palestinian state. In a June 2009 speech in Egypt, Obama himself said, “The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.”
Even as the U.S. maintained a strong military presence in the Middle East, the Obama foreign policy seemed determined to destabilize the region. The CIA-backed series of color revolutions in 2010, collectively known as the “Arab Spring,” claimed to be bringing “democracy” to Muslim countries, but it had the effect of turning them even more hostile to the West by electing extremist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood.
Through his inaction, Obama also appeared to tacitly support the rise of ISIS, the vicious terrorist insurgency that he initially dubbed the “JV squad,” in Syria and Iraq.
In 2014, a Hamas rocket attack led Israel to retaliate in Gaza, resulting in Netanyahu’s complete shunning by the Obama administration. The White House refused even to receive him when the Israeli leader delivered a speech before Congress in 2015, a year Netanyahu was up for re-election.
Shortly thereafter, in July 2015, the Obama administration unveiled its Iran nuclear deal, unfreezing billions of dollars and even supplying the rogue Islamic regime with pallets of cash that it could use to fund terrorist operations throughout the region.
Biden’s administration has continued along the same trajectory, helping Iran to secretly plot and fund Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by announcing its plan, inexplicably, to unfreeze billions more in Iranian assets.
The recent expressions of overt anti-Semitism at places like Harvard University (where Obama was secretly behind the effort to protect disgraced ex-president Claudine Gay) reveal how radical leftists have been priming the pump for a complete betrayal of Israel when the moment is right, after the country’s military might and Netanyahu’s political clout have been thoroughly undermined by the current conflict.
THE FIRST TRANS PRESIDENT/LGBT COUPLE?
Headline USA has yet to uncover the incontrovertible, “smoking-gun” evidence that would confirm the longstanding rumors surrounding Michelle Obama’s gender identity—nor, for the sake of public decency, do we ever hope such evidence comes to light.
Rumors have always been Obama is gay & it makes even more sense the way he drives his party toward the LGBTQ+ agenda. His kids are rumored to belong to their best friends the Nesbitt’s who went EVERYWHERE with them and look just like them. pic.twitter.com/AmzcazVdDh
One thing is certain: If the rumors of “Big Mike” are true, then the Obamas will not flinch from letting the truth be known in their next term.
The push to force acceptance of transgenderism as a “mainstream” issue and not a mental illness has been unprecedented.
Many things can be considered Orwellian about the current regime, but nothing has been quite so bold as attempting to redefine the basic science—and the empirical reality—that, while masculinity and femininity may fall on a relative spectrum of varied temperamental identities, gender itself is inherently binary.
The promotion of the transgender fiction is yet another Marxist mean leading to and end. Perhaps it is part of a gradual push to tear down all sexual boundaries and taboos, including things like pedophilia, which has been linked to powerful global influence peddlers in the past.
Or maybe it is setting the stage for Michelle’s big reveal. That not only would make “her” the first transgender president, but also allow Barack Obama to make history (again) as the first openly gay former president.
Such an admission would finally track with the firsthand accounts of people including Barack’s former alleged lover, Larry Sinclair, as well as his own written confessions in a letter to an ex-girlfriend.
(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) Family members and friends of Halyna Hutchins have welcomed the new criminal indictment against infamous, leftist actor Alec Baldwin in connection to the tragic shooting of the cinematographer on the set of the movie Rust.
Gloria Allred, the family’s attorney, issued a statement expressing their desire for accountability in the wake of their family member’s tragic passing.
“Our clients have always sought the truth about what happened on the day that Halyna Hutchins was tragically shot and killed on October 21, 2021,” a statement read, according to the Los Angeles Times.
“They continue to seek the truth in our civil lawsuit for them and they also would like there to be accountability in the criminal justice system,” the statement continued.
The tragic incident unfolded when Baldwin fatally shot Hutchins and director Jour Souza during a movie shoot in 2021. According to reports, Baldwin aimed the gun toward the cinematographer before fatally discharging it.
Baldwin has repeatedly claimed that he did not pull the trigger, but these assertions were contradicted by state prosecutors in New Mexico. They presented an expert witness who testified that the trigger needed to be pulled for the gun to be discharged.
Santa Fe County District Attorney Mark Carmack-Altwies initially filed involuntary manslaughter charges against Baldwin. However, the charges were dropped after special prosecutors Kari T. Morrissey and Jason J. Lewis were appointed, the LA Times reported. Carmack-Altwies recused himself from the case.
The prosecutors clarified that dropping the charges did not absolve Baldwin from potential further criminal charges, stating, “This decision does not absolve Mr. Baldwin of criminal culpability and charges may be refiled.”
Allred is leading a civil lawsuit on behalf of Hutchins’ parents, Olga Solovey and Anatolii Androsovych, and her sister Svetlana Zemko. The lawsuit accuses Baldwin and movie producers of battery and negligence. Baldwin has already settled a separate lawsuit filed by Hutchins’ husband and son.
Allred voiced satisfaction with the criminal charges against Baldwin. “The grand jury has decided that there is sufficient evidence to indict Alec Baldwin on the charge of involuntary manslaughter. We are looking forward to the criminal trial which will determine if he should be convicted for the untimely death of Halyna,” the statement added.
Luke Nikas and Alex Spiro, both attorneys for Baldwin, stated that they “look forward to” the court proceedings.
