Biden's "victory" in the 2020 election was surely magical.

Candidate Joe Biden was so effective at animating voters in 2020 that he received a record number of votes, more than 15 million more than Barack Obama received in his re-election of 2012. Amazingly, he managed to secure victory while also losing in almost every bellwether county across the country. No presidential candidate has been capable of such electoral jujitsu until now.

While Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton’s 2016 totals in every urban county in the United States, he outperformed her in the metropolitan areas of Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. Even more surprising, the former VP put up a record haul of votes, despite Democrats’ general failures in local House and state legislative seats across the nation.

If Biden is inaugurated on January 20, 2021, that's when the real magic will have to start.  That's when he needs to convince the majority of American voters that he's the legitimate President of the United States.  They don't believe it right now.

I'm so honored!

On election night Fox News called Arizona for Joe Biden with only about 75% of the votes counted.  In the meantime, Fox refused to call Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Georgia where 99% of the votes were counted and Trump seemed to be substantially in the lead.  Speculative on my part to be sure, but how did Fox News know which states not to call with so much of the vote already counted?

For me that was an early sign, but quite obviously, I'm not alone in thinking that massive election fraud was going on.

In the early day, which is now, there is a human tendency for many not to believe their lying eyes.  The media, all in on this, promote that the Liz and Bernie equivalents are nice people, there is no proof of fraud.  That's what Markopolos and Carreyrou heard too.

Witnesses were threatened.  Attorneys attacked for probing.  Carreyrou saw a bit of that.  Even after Carreyrou published his first story about Theranos fraud, the Wall Street Journal management had Liz at one of their events.  This is how this stuff works!

In the end, which is not far out, it all comes apart.

Patrick Byrne is the founder and former CEO Of Overstock.com.  According to Byrne vote fraud in the 2020 election was accomplished in what he calls "drop and roll."

From Ruling Class to Oligarchy

By Angelo Codevilla

For four decades beginning in the mid-1960s, a class of rulers grew in America. They became ever more uniform socially and intellectually, ever more opposed to the rest of Americans, and ever more powerful. This happened as government took upon itself the tasks of eliminating poverty and harmonizing the races, and as it controlled ever greater shares of the national income. 

Increasingly, their powers were based on claims of expertise coming from the universities

In 2010 Professor Codevilla published a predecessor discussion to the article linked above in which he described an America divided into Ruling Class vs. Country Class entitled America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution.  It is well worth the time to read it.

In sworn statement, prominent mathematician flags up to 100,000 Pennsylvania ballots

Williams College Professor Steven Miller, a Yale and Princeton trained math expert, said he analyzed Pennsylvania ballot data collected by former Trump campaign data chief Matt Braynard as well as 2,684 voter interviews conducted by a phone bank and found two concerning patterns.

In his sworn statement Professor Miller asserted:

Thus I estimate that the number of ballots that were either requested by someone other than the registered Republican or requested and returned but not counted range from 89,397 to 98,801.

Kaleigh leaves them speechless.

The following article was provided by Stefan Gleason, President of Money Metals Exchange.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It was only after he entered politics that President Donald Trump began to fully grasp the bias, dishonesty, and fakeness that runs throughout the so-called mainstream media.  But gold bugs and sound money advocates have long known to distrust the reporting of establishment news sources.

Journalists’ anti-gold and anti-Trump biases converged this week as the Senate took up President Trump’s nomination of Judy Shelton to the Federal Reserve Board.  Shelton, a fierce Fed critic and past supporter of a gold standard, drew intense opposition from Senate Democrats. She also faced opposition from Republicans Lamar Alexander, Susan Collins, and Mitt Romney.  A path to her confirmation appeared to exist earlier this week, but that path was blocked, at least temporarily, on Tuesday.  Two Republican Senators had gone into quarantine and Democrat Kamala Harris shuttled in from her Vice President in-waiting training to cast a “no” vote.  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell took procedural steps which enable him to bring Shelton back up for another vote when the two quarantined Republicans return.

But that didn’t stop the press from pronouncing her nomination dead.  “Kamala Harris Rushes Back to Washington to Block Trump From Putting a Crank on the Fed Board,” blared a headline from Slate. The article smeared Shelton as a “crank who wants to return to the gold standard and get rid of deposit insurance.”  NPR, somewhat more diplomatically, derided Shelton for “her unorthodox support for the gold standard, a theory long discarded by mainstream economists.”  Meanwhile, NBC News also parroted the party line about Shelton. She is, we are told, “known for her unorthodox support for the gold standard, an archaic policy concept to which no developed economies today adhere.”

For those of us in the precious metals community, it’s all too familiar – the personal attacks, the equating of gold to a “barbarous” relic of the past, the invocation of “mainstream economists” as authority figures, etc.  The vast majority of financial journalists lack the intellectual curiosity to seek out the actual views of sound money advocates. Those who tread too indelicately on the gold-suppressing banking cartel are simply blacklisted by major media outlets – as has been the fate of the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee.

A classical gold standard does have potential drawbacks, to be sure.  For one, it would empower the government to “fix” the price of gold in terms of U.S. currency and enable it to cheat the system by subsequently raising the gold price – devaluing the dollar – as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt infamously did.

Many sound money advocates believe gold and silver should instead be allowed to circulate freely as money without any tax impediments so that they can find their true free market value.  Precious metals, along with cryptocurrencies and other alternatives, would have the opportunity to supplant government-issued fiat currencies that are mismanaged.  Judy Shelton as a lone voice at the Federal Reserve would obviously lack the ability to reshape U.S. monetary policy on her own. But the keepers of the prevailing Keynesian, inflationist orthodoxy want to make sure no dissenting voices have a seat at the table. 

Otherwise the media might have to actually take their perspectives seriously.  Journalists constantly condition the public to trust the “experts” – no matter how often reality proves them wrong or how often they give contradictory advice.  For example, the top health experts have proven themselves to be clueless when it comes to forecasting or mitigating the spread of the novel coronavirus. 

First they said travel bans were a bad idea. Then they said masks were a bad idea. Then they said we had to lock down the economy and be forced to wear masks. Now they can’t seem to point to compelling evidence on the region-by-region case trendlines that any of their policy recommendations where adopted have been effective.  But no matter what, the media tells us the anointed public health authorities have to be believed and the skeptics dismissed, demonized, and censored.  After months of fomenting economically crippling virus hysteria and pushing inflammatory racial narratives that led to rioting and crime spikes in cities across the country, the mainstream media managed to sink its credibility to even lower lows on election night. 

Fox News joined other networks (though not all) in prematurely calling states for Joe Biden and falsely projecting that Democrats would increase their majority in Congress.  In fact, President Trump is still contesting some of those states and Republicans defied the media’s faulty polling models to shrink Nancy Pelosi’s majority and pick up at least nine seats in Congress.  The biggest source of election-related misinformation in 2020 was the fake news pumped out by the legacy media and their pollsters. 

Regardless of how President Trump’s policy successes and failures are ultimately judged, one of his most significant accomplishments was to single-handedly discredit the media in the eyes of much of the public.  The public should also know that financial journalists are just as biased and error-prone as political journalists. They seem to have a special disdain for precious metals.  Many openly sneer at the sorts of people who buy gold and silver coins instead of entrusting all their wealth to banks and brokerages.

Investors would be wise to seek out a true market of information, including from alternative, non-“mainstream” sources, when it comes to deciding where to allocate capital. The most successful investors are often contrarians – selling what everyone else wants to buy, buying what everyone else wants to sell.

The fact that sound money principles are so out of favor among policymakers and economists may be a contrarian signal that they are needed now more than ever.

       About the Author:

Stefan Gleason is President of Money Metals Exchange, a precious metals dealer recently named "Best in the USA" by an independent global ratings group. A graduate of the University of Florida, Gleason is a seasoned business leader, investor, political strategist, and grassroots activist. Gleason has frequently appeared on national television networks such as CNN, FoxNews, and CNBC and in hundreds of publications such as the Wall Street Journal, The Street, and Seeking Alpha.

 

Sidney Powell provides a brief history and overview of the features of Dominion Voting Systems software.

In 2018 Trump signed an Executive Order establishing authority to impose sanctions for foreign interference in our elections. In the video below Leigh Dundas explains how it relates to the 2020 Election and the evident fraud that occurred.

Retired Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman has joined Lawfare.  Lawfare, its name implying “use of law as a weapon of war,” has been at war, figuratively speaking, against the presidency of Donald Trump.  It finds common cause with Alexander Vindman. 

The Pritzker Military Foundation today announced the appointment of Alexander Vindman as its first Pritzker Military Fellow, based at Lawfare. The retired Army lieutenant colonel and former member of the National Security Council staff joins the Lawfare team for a two-year fellowship, during which he will write a book, complete a dissertation and do a variety of other public speaking, teaching and writing.

Vindman will be joining me next week on the Lawfare Podcast to discuss the challenges of Russia and Eastern Europe policy, and authoritarian regimes more generally, facing the incoming Joe Biden administration.

The Lawfare fellowship offer illustrates a way that federal employees, including Congressmen and Senators, might cash in upon their departure from government service from non-government institutions, organizations, and companies.  I presume the two-year fellowship it offered him comes with some money, but more importantly it offers the time and support for Vindman to write a book.  Book deals can be extraordinarily lucrative, sometimes even when the book doesn't sell.  And what has Vindman accomplished in his government service that persuades Lawfare that he is deserving of their largesse?

Vindman's claim to fame is to have been the key witness in the Democrats' failed attempt to remove President Trump from office through impeachment.  Trump's supposed offense was to colluding with a foreign government to meddle in an American election.  It was a stretch, but Democrats had been stretching to get rid of Trump from the moment he won the 2016 election.  There was the Obama FBI spying on the incoming Trump administration, the entrapment of General Michael Flynn, the Mueller investigation of Russian election interference which descended into an attempted entrapment of Trump for obstruction of justice, and finally impeachment.

When pressed witness after witness admitted that they "presumed" or "assumed" there was a "quid quo pro."  None of the budding starlets for the Democrat impeachment auditions had first hand knowledge.  EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland was forced to admit that when he asked President Trump what he wanted from Ukrainian President Zelensky, (which certainly sounded as if he were sandbagging the President) Trump replied, "Nothing. I want nothing."  There was no arm twisting, no pressure brought to bear.  Aid to Ukraine was delivered, nothing was received from Ukraine in return.

Now contrast that with the Bidens, where money changed hands and influence was delivered in return.  Burisma paid Hunter Biden $3.1 million over the years.  It paid off.  Joe Biden successfully terminated an investigation into the company that was paying his son by threatening to withhold $1 billion in aid to Ukraine.  Message received:  Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin was fired.

In a rational world the name Biden might appear in a poll question about impeachment.  But no.  At no point did a poll ask, which is the more corrupt:

1. Vice President Joe Biden threatening the Ukrainian government with the loss of $1 billion in aid unless it shut down a criminal investigation of the company that was paying his son $3.1 million.
2. Trump asking Ukraine to look into that? 
3. I don't know.
4. I don't care. Impeach Trump anyway.

The question could be put another way.  Should Joe Biden and his son be shielded from prosecution, or even investigation, for corruption because Joe is running for president?  And even when, pardon my Latin, the "quid pro quo" is staring us right in the face? 

I had predicted Democrats would not vote to impeach.  I was wrong.  Byron York described the impeachment effort in detail in his book Obsession.

Alexander Vindman was important to investigators because he was the only person listening to the call who believed something improper had happened. He reported it not only to the NSC lawyer but also to an unnamed other person, outside the White House but inside the Intelligence Community.

The other unnamed person, the supposed whistle blower, is thought to be Eric Ciaramella.  Rules had to be changed at last minute for Ciaramella to be a whistle blower.  Prior to the Trump exception, whistle blowers were required to have first hand, eye witness knowledge of alleged violations.  But in the special case for Trump, an Intelligence Community Inspector General changed the rules so that a person reporting hearsay evidence could gain the protections of whistle blower status.  The hearsay evidence, such as it was, came from Alexander Vindman.  Here is Byron York's take on Vindman's evidence.

The most serious problem with Vindman’s testimony was that much of it was based on his personal views. Originally, Vindman had seemed a key witness because he had heard the call, but by the time he testified, the White House had released the rough transcript of the call, and everybody knew what had been said.

Vindman said he was “concerned” about Trump’s statements to Zelensky—so concerned that he reported it to NSC lawyer John Eisenberg. Vindman said several times that he was not a lawyer and did not know if Trump’s words amounted to a crime, but he repeated that he felt they were “wrong.” That was when Republican Representative John Ratcliffe of Texas, a former U.S. attorney, tried to get to the root of Vindman’s concerns. What was really bothering him?

“I’m trying to find out if you were reporting it because you thought there was something wrong with respect to policy or there was something wrong with respect to the law,” Ratcliffe said to Vindman. “And what I understand you to say is that you weren’t certain that there was anything improper with respect to the law, but you had concerns about U.S. policy. Is that a fair characterization?”

“So I would recharacterize it as I thought it was wrong and I was sharing those views,” Vindman answered. “And I was deeply concerned about the implications for bilateral relations, U.S. national security interests, in that if this was exposed, it would be seen as a partisan play by Ukraine. It loses the bipartisan support. And then for…”

“I understand that,” Ratcliffe said, “but that sounds like a policy reason, not a legal reason.”

“I was making a judgment call as a layman,” Vindman responded, “thinking that it was wrong.”

Weak though it was, it was enough to get House Democrats to vote as a partisan block to impeach.  No Republicans joined them.  Since Democrats held the majority, impeachment passed, but when it got to the   As soon as it went to the Senate, the Republican majority voted it down.  No Democrats joined them.  The impeachment resolution and subsequent trial were partisan affairs.

Back to the Lawfare announcement:

It is a great pleasure to welcome Vindman to Lawfare. We believe that competition amongst great powers, managing a confrontational relationship with Russia, and effective Europe-EurAsia policy will continue to be among the most significant national security challenges this country will face in the coming years.

Few people in the United States government have risked more to tell the truth on these subjects than has Vindman.

What risk is Lawfare talking about here?  And, for that matter, what truth?  I haven't noticed anybody who steps up to lie about a Republican president, or attack him in any way, ever suffering any consequences for it.  On the other hand there can be great risk to people who openly support Trump.

Written By Sam Jacobs — November 13, 2020

Regardless of where one falls politically, the sanctity of the vote is a bedrock of a functioning representative democracy. Voters have to believe their vote matters. And that the vote is free, fair, and accurate.

The basic facts of the 2020 American Presidential election are concerning because mounting evidence indicates there’s been a concerted effort by state Democratic Parties to flip the election from President Donald Trump to former Vice President Joe Biden in a number of key swing states with the help of notoriously corrupt Democratic Party machines in at least five American cities — Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Pittsburg, and Atlanta.

Here are the basic facts of the case: On Election Night when America went to bed, President Trump had a commanding lead in virtually every swing state, as well as Virginia, which no one expected him to win. However, when America woke up the next day, we found that he’d lost these leads, largely on the basis of mail-in ballots found in the middle of the night and out from under the watchful eye of legal election monitors.

What’s more, these massive caches of votes – almost all of which were for former Vice President Biden – came via large dumps primarily from the five aforementioned cities in states predominantly run by Democratic governors.

When one looks at the statistical likelihood of the reported turnout, the numbers are so improbable they’re more at home in a one-party state like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq or North Korea...

Read the rest at Libertas Bella.

From their analysis of the data Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai and his colleagues reveal the characteristics of an algorithm that can be invoked in the election software used for tabulating the votes in Michigan.  In a nutshell, as the percentage of Republicans within voting precincts increases, the preference for Trump expressed as a percentage decreases. 

The good Doctor, in my view, could have done a better job with his initial description of the x and y axes in his county data graphs. But from the subsequent descriptions of his analysis, it appears that the y axis is a Trump Preference expressed as a percentage that under normal circumstances varies above and below zero percent. The x axis is the percentage of Republicans in a given precinct.

The algorithm shifts votes from Trump to Biden.  When it is applied, the resulting vote totals show a Trump Preference that declines and goes negative in linear fashion as the percentage of Republicans in the precincts increases.

Neil Cavuto of Fox News abruptly broke away from Kayleigh McEnany's press conference on fraud in the 2020 presidential election.  Here is an excerpt from her statement:

"There is only one party that opposes voter id, verifying signatures, citizenship, residency eligibility. There’s only one party in America trying to keep observers out of the count room. You don’t take these positions because you want an honest election."

Cavuto came back on to cut her off.  It was a bit of slick coordination on the news set, cutting away from the press conference and back to Cavuto.

“Whoa, whoa, whoa, I just think we have to be very clear.  She’s charging that the other side is welcoming fraud and welcoming illegal voting. Unless she has more details to back that up, I can’t in good countenance continue showing you this.”

Imagine that — Fox news deciding that there are announcements from the White House that viewers must not see and hear.  Here's the video of Cavuto shielding the public.  If I were to describe him in one word it would be smug.  One word is not enough, though.  He is also dishonest.  Wasn't it perfectly acceptable to call President Trump a Russian asset?  A racist, xenophobic, serial liar?  Was anybody ever shut down for saying that?

>

Kayleigh McEnany, on the other hand, made specific, credible accusations, for which there is evidence.  Here is her full statement.

Democrats routinely invent smears of their opponents while hiding their own criminality, and they get a lot of help from Big Tech and MSM.  Now Fox News has joined the team.  But when Fox made its early call, projecting Joe Biden winner in Arizona, it drove away a big slice of its viewing base.  At the same time, Fox refused to call Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia where Trump had sizable leads and larger percentages of votes already counted than Arizona.  But as the night progressed counting was stopped in Democrat run states, and when it resumed Trump's leads in all of them began to disappear.  Meanwhile in Arizona, as vote counting continued, Trump continued to cut Biden's lead.

I think Fox has been coordinating with the Democrats.  It's speculation, of course.  But how else would Fox know to call the Arizona race, and not any of the others?  Who at Fox knew that vote counting would stop in certain states, and know not to call them?  And why would Fox not treat Kayleigh's charges, true or not — and I believe they are true — as the explosive news that they are?  Instead Cavuto's effort was to cast doubt, to dismiss as obviously false.  And then move on, promising to return to the news conference if Cavuto judged that Kayleigh would offer "details."

If there was anything left of Fox's credibility and its viewing base after the early Arizona call, Cavuto torched them with his smug and condescending dismissal of Kayleigh's press conference.  So Fox News has thrown away its credibility.  Not really a big deal to me.  It's been working at it for a while.  Recently Newt Gingrich was cut off when he brought up George Soros. 

"Progressive district attorneys are anti-police, pro-criminal, and overwhelmingly elected with George Soros's money. And they're a major cause of the violence we're seeing because they keep putting the violent criminals back on the street," Gingrich said Wednesday.

"I'm not sure we need to bring George Soros into this," said co-host Melissa Francis.

"I was going to say you get the last word, Speaker," Faulker said.

"He paid for it. I mean, why can't we discuss the fact that millions of dollars..." Gingrich said before co-host Marie Harf injected.

"No, he didn't. I agree with Melissa. George Soros doesn't need to be a part of this conversation," Harf said.

"OK. So it's verboten," Gingrich replied.

"OK. We're going to move on," Faulkner said.

Whose voice was in Melissa Frances's ear piece, telling her to cut off any talk of George Soros?  Who pulls those strings?  Fox personalities know what they're not supposed to say, or even allow to be said.  Some seem uncomfortable with it, like Harris Faulkner, but others, like Cavuto, seem to relish the job.

But there is a more dangerous consequence than the lower ratings that come from the way the media, including Fox, have behaved.  They are instilling expectations in the American public that the 2020 elections are a done deal, and Biden will be inaugurated on January 20, 2021.  The elections  are not done.  Certification can't happen until all recounts and challenges have been dealt with.  Fox and the rest of the media can't possibly be unaware that they are setting up a threat of violence.  If, at the end of it all, Trump prevails in the courts and in the recounts, and is still the president, he will be called the usurper, the illegitimate president. We are all but guaranteed there will be rioting, looting.  Cities will burn, property and livelihoods will be destroyed, and people will be killed.  It won't be Trump supporters rioting.  Riots and looting are part of the Democrat strategy, and the media know it.

My sense of the sentiment on the right is, "We hope that doesn't happen, but if you must riot, well... bring it."  It's hard to imagine how and where this will end, but it won't be before Trump's had his day in court, and the recounts have all been completed.

For the first time in over 100 years, the Union Leader has endorsed a Democrat for president. "Our choice is Joe Biden*" Note the asterisk. I cancelled my subscription and sent in an op-ed piece which the editor accepted. He emailed back asking me for a "headshot" (picture) in case they decide to publish it.  Since a week has gone by and they still haven't published it, I've concluded that they don't intend to. Tomorrow is election day, and I've decided to publish my op-ed here at Libertarian Leanings.  Here it is:

To The Editors:

The Union Leader's endorsement of Joe Biden for president is nothing short of shocking.  Choosing a man whose 47-year record includes no notable positive accomplishments, over a president with four years of solid, even unprecedented achievements, is mind boggling. 

In 2016 there was no one in America, with the exception of Donald Trump, who could have foreseen our nation becoming energy independent, and that he might build off of that to broker Middle East peace agreements that included recognition of Israel by several Arab nations.  Trump inherited a situation in the Middle East leftover from the Obama/Biden administration where ISIS occupied an area the size of Pennsylvania, but then with help from Arab states he drove them out of it, destroying the ISIS caliphate in a matter of months. 

On the domestic side historically low levels of unemployment and a booming economy, pre-Covid, are outweighed in your view by deficits, which you fail to lay where they belong -- at the feet of Democrats.  The fault, you say, lies with Trump for flashing "dollar signs in the eyes of Capitol Hill Democrats."

Trump's election has revealed an astonishing level of corruption in our government.  We, who get our news outside of the legacy media, have watched as the Obama/Biden administration was caught spying upon a rival political campaign.  It is well documented that the FBI hid exculpatory evidence and falsified documents in order to get the FISA warrants necessary to continue their spying.  Specifically, the FBI falsified an email, to hide the fact that Trump campaign advisor Carter Page had actually worked for the CIA -- not Russia.

Having failed to prevent his election, the DOJ appointed Special Counsel Mueller, who after two years could find no evidence of improper contacts between the Trump administration and Russia.  There weren't any. The sad fact is the FBI knew it all along.  Recall that Agent Peter Strzok texted his lover and colleague Lisa Page that he hesitated to join the Mueller investigation because there was nothing to it: "My gut sense and concern there's no big there there."  That was May 19, 2017.

But Mueller dragged it out with the renewed purpose of contriving an obstruction of justice charge for which Trump could be impeached.  It failed.  No one, not even those indicted and convicted by the Mueller team, were guilty of "collusion" with Russia.  Those convicted were caught in perjury traps, or indicted for crimes unrelated to Russia and Trump.  But Mueller kept the investigation open long enough to affect the outcome of the 2018 midterm elections.

When Trump's inevitable impeachment came, it depended upon finding meaning that was not present in a conversation between President Trump and Ukraine President Zelensky.  Trump thwarted partisan Democrats by releasing the full transcript.  Additionally, impeachment depended upon an Intelligence Community Inspector General making last minute changes to whistle blower rules to allow for hearsay.  Previously, a whistle blower had to have first hand, eye witness knowledge.  Finally, the impeachment farce went on behind the closed doors of the House Intelligence Committee, controlled by Adam Schiff who routinely lied on cable news that he had solid evidence of crime, while at the same time claiming that witness testimony was classified, and that he couldn't reveal it.  In fact, there was no such evidence.

And then there's Hunter Biden.  It was a clear quid pro quo when Joe Biden threatened to withhold a billion dollars in loan guarantees from Ukraine unless its government fired the prosecutor that was investigating Burisma, the company that was paying Hunter millions to sit on its board.  Joe bragged about it on video:  "Well, son of a bitch, he got fired."  And the Union Leader?  "We are not satisfied with his responses about his son Hunter’s foreign business dealings."

That can't be true.  If the Union Leader editorial board were truly unsatisfied, it wouldn't have endorsed him.  Instead, it ignores the can of worms that Hunter's dealings opened up.  Worse, the Union Leader is unable or unwilling to acknowledge the danger to our democracy from career FBI and DOJ officials using their positions for the benefit of one political party over another.  It used to be that even the appearance of such impropriety was grounds for firing or demanding the resignations of everybody involved.  But by endorsing Joe Biden, the Union Leader favors sweeping this corruption under the rug -- all of it.  Not only do you avert your own eyes from it, you hide the worst public corruption in our lifetimes from your readers.

The best that can be said of your endorsement of Joe Biden is that it is the product of willful blindness. The Union Leader does a much better job of covering up corruption than investigating and reporting on it.

Could anyone have imagined in 2016 that the United States would be energy independent before 2020? Connect the dots: U.S. energy independence was a necessary precondition to the brokering of Middle East peace deals and the recognition of Israel by three Arab states.

Had a Democrat president accomplished those two things over the course of eight years in the White House, the media would have demanded a place for him on Mount Rushmore. But it's Trump who got these things done, and he did it in his first term along with renegotiating trade deals, reviving manufacturing, and reducing unemployment levels to 50-year lows. That last bit included minority unemployment which was reduced to the lowest levels ever recorded. If China had not unleashed the virus, Trump would be cruising to re-election. He might be anyway.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden has accomplished nothing of note in 47 years in government – with the possible exception of the 1994 crime bill which he now says was a mistake. Forty-seven years of nothing, and now Biden is promising to fix America and bring us all together.

I have a friend who expects a “future of honesty, morality and calm” if Joe Biden wins the election.  I can't imagine it. Leftist progressives have always had trouble selling their socialist policies to the largely conservative American public. When their arguments fail, as they invariably do, progressives turn to vilification and character assassination, with “racist” being their most popular epithet. Can anyone name a Republican president who Democrats haven't accused of racism? With Trump it's only gotten worse.

In fact, 2016 became a turning point when the Democrat candidate decided it would be great strategy to include her opponent's supporters in her accusations of racism. You remember – the basket of deplorables? The racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, you name it? For the first time in my memory, a candidate attacked the voters.

Now in 2020 the media and the Democrats are doubling down. Having white skin makes you guilty of racism. It's called “white privilege.” And of course Trump supporters, by rejecting that theory, are beyond the pale and doubly racist. America, say Democrats, is rife with“systemic racism.” Hell, the U.S. Constitution is now a racist document according to our leftist press.

But if there is such a thing as systemic racism in America, it would have to be the Democratic Party. Guilty by its own rules of “disparate impact.” Disparate impact means there doesn't have to be any evidence of racist intent. Inequality of outcome is sufficient evidence that racism is at the root, and over fifty years of unequal outcomes for African Americans from the inner cities are the damning evidence against the Democrats.

There is no longer any such thing as “urban flight.” There are no jobs in the inner city, where people can work and save, and finally escape to the suburbs. Instead, there's the trap of the welfare check. It offers no path of upward, or outward, mobility. There is poverty. There are the worst public schools in the world, which deny the inner city kids the educational opportunities that we in the towns grew up taking for granted. Democrats fight tooth and nail against charter schools, school choice, for inner city kids.

Personally, I believe all of this is by Democrat design. Expansion of the Department of Education to a separate cabinet function and the unionization of public school teachers converted a system of education into an income stream for the Democratic Party. Failure is always rewarded with ever higher levels of funding. But even if it's not deliberate, the disparate impact rule identifies all this for what it is: Democratic Party systemic racism. Democrats have been running those cities for decades.

This isn't lost on black Americans. After the final debate between Trump and Biden, a Rasmussen poll showed Trump's approval jump to 46% among likely black voters. Trump began that week with a mere 25% approval. Former Obama administration official Van Jones brought the liberal wrath down on himself by saying on CNN,

“Donald Trump — and I get beat up by liberals every time I say this, but I’m gonna keep saying it — he has done good stuff for the black community. Opportunity zone stuff, black college stuff. I worked with him on criminal justice stuff. I saw Donald Trump have African American people, formerly incarcerated, in the White House — embraced them, treated them well. There’s a side to Donald Trump that I think he does not get enough credit for.”

You have to give Van Jones credit for having the courage to speak out, Granted, as a black progressive he is unimpeachable. But right after he said it, Twitter lit up with demands for CNN to sack him.

If Joe Biden wins this election, there will be no coming together as a nation, no future of calm. A Biden victory will be the triumph of media inspired fear and hatred. Don't expect Democrats to abandon what may yet turn out to be a winning strategy. The big tech/media/Democrat campaign of vilification will be back in business by 2021. Don't expect conservatives to take it too kindly.

Most recent polling in battleground states by Trafalgar Group.

Poll Date Trump Biden Other Undecided Trump Margin Ohio 11/01/2020 49.2 44.4 3.8 2.6 +4.8 Michigan 11/01/2020 48.3 45.8 3.0 3.0 +2.5 North Carolina 10/31/2020 48.6 46.5 4.0 1.0 +2.1 Arizona 10/30/2020 48.9 46.4 4.0 0.7 +2.5 Nevada 10/29/2020 47.1 49.4 2.6 0.9 -2.3 Florida 10/29/2020 49.6 46.9 2.9 0.7 +2.7 Minnesota 10/25/2020 44.8 48.0 6.1 1.1 -3.2 Pennsylvania 10/25/2020 48.4 47.6 2.9 1.0 +0.8 Wisconsin 10/25/2020 47.1 47.5 4.3 1.1 -0.4 Lousiana 10/06/2020 54.1 35.9 4.6 5.5 +18.2

OK, Louisiana really isn't a battleground state.

Trump Now One With Countless Essential Workers

Joe Biden, after spending a lifetime as a globalist and a parasite who feeds on the ideas of others, is now scrambling to Xerox the Trump agenda with the zealotry of a late convert. He is suddenly blabbering about “buy American” and “hire Americans” and “stand up to China”—words never uttered in the past five decades of Biden’s so often self-referenced career.

 

The Civil Rights Legend Who Opposed Critical Race Theory

As Dr. Walker tried to make clear, thinking in terms of blocs of people, rather than of people as individuals, leads to a whole set of insidious results. How can two people bind together in friendship if they are members of power blocs that are presumed to be inherently opposed? How can a person prove his innocence if he is branded as inevitably a part of a guilty group? Why should an individual strive to succeed by individual merit if group dynamics are presumed to be overwhelming and inescapable? How can we ever find peace among the races and religions if we won't look to each other, person by person, based on actual facts and actual intentions?

 

Why African Americans should be very, very mad at the Democratic Party

That all might help explain why it is that the Democrats, especially those governing our major cities, have done so little for black communities. They want them to be dependent so they can continue to be useful. They need their hard-won moral capital to reinvigorate their Marxism—and that means, by the way, that black Americans must not be allowed to rise into the middle class. America has been resistant to both Marxism and Socialism for so long precisely because of its large middle class. But as long as black Americans do not rise into it, the undeniable injustices of slavery and racism can be used to provide moral legitimation for Marxism.

 

Horowitz: Minneapolis residents scared to leave their homes as city on the brink

The message has essentially been telegraphed that law and order is a racist concept, and so long as anyone acts violently in the name of "racial justice," it is forgiven or even encouraged. The black communities closest to the violence are paying for this a lot more than the gated communities of politicians.

 

Trump Is the Integrity Candidate

The burning question that historians will pose is why this president who has achieved so much and has been so unjustly assaulted by perversions of the justice system and unprofessional press biases is now in what appears to be an uphill struggle for reelection. The foibles of his often overly bombastic and even self adulatory personality do not alone explain this.

If Biden, after a 47-year Senate career highlighted predominantly by plagiarism, grift, and gaffes, manages to win this election it will be a monumental gaslighting achievement of the mainstream media,

 

The Week Washington Went Third World

Coups historically begin with the plotters seizing the means of communication. By 2016, the major media had long since been seized.

 

The following article was provided by Stefan Gleason, President of Money Metals Exchange.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Federal Reserve is warning investors in no uncertain terms that higher rates of inflation are coming. Yet markets, for the most part, have disregarded that warning.

Bond yields, for example, remain well below 2% across the entire duration range. Stock market valuations continue to reflect a sanguine outlook for inflation. And crude oil futures suggest limited upside pressure on prices.

It seems the Fed has a credibility problem.

In August, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell announced that the central bank would begin targeting an inflation “average” of 2%.

By the Fed’s measures, inflation has been running below 2% in recent years. So getting to a 2% average in the years ahead will require above 2% inflation for a significant period.

In September, St. Louis Fed president James Bullard doubled down on higher inflation. He said the combination of loose credit, huge government deficits, and supply bottlenecks caused by coronavirus lockdowns could cause an unexpected surge in price levels.

Billionaire hedge fund manager Stanley Druckenmiller is worried that the U.S. dollar will lose purchasing power much more rapidly than the 2% “average” the Fed is currently telegraphing. Druckenmiller recently said he sees inflation rates likely rising to 5% or perhaps even 10%.

The Fed’s credibility problem could quickly morph from one of not being taken seriously on the risks of higher inflation... to one of not being trusted to keep it contained.

Perhaps gold investors know something that bond holders and most Wall Street analysts don’t.

The gold market surged to a new all-time high in August before selling off in September. The major bull market appears to be intact, however, which means the next rally could lead to higher highs still.

If gold is a leading indicator of rising inflation – i.e., falling confidence in the value and credibility of the U.S. dollar – then investors should expect other assets to follow gold’s lead.

Instead of enjoying endlessly rising equity values, they may suffer from relentlessly rising food, fuel, healthcare, and other costs of living.

The upshot is that investors can own hard assets that may be set to follow gold to new all-time highs of their own in the months and years ahead.

Silver and platinum, for example, remain relatively cheap. They could each double in value from their current levels in terms of dollars and still have room to run before making new nominal highs – let alone real (inflation adjusted) highs.

Gold and Silver’s Response to Inflation Should Be Spectacular

If inflation expectations fundamentally shift from doubt that the Fed will ever achieve its 2% “average” to fear that it might overshoot, then precious metals could see a spectacular rise.

They won’t merely go up a few percent to reflect a gradual rise in inflation. They will go up multiples to reflect surging investor demand for safe havens.

We saw a preview of that phenomenon in the first half of the year in the midst of coronavirus lockdowns.

Demand for bullion went bonkers, sending spot prices and coin premiums sharply higher in a very short amount of time.

A new inflation upcycle can be expected to last much longer and produce much more dramatic results on the charts for metals.

The last true mania phase in gold and silver occurred during the inflationary late 1970s. History doesn’t repeat exactly, of course, but it does give us a rough guide for what could unfold for investors facing a similar environment:

• Severe real losses on cash savings, bonds, and other fixed income instruments.
• A sluggish stock market that fails to keep up with inflation, except for a few select sectors.
• A spectacular rise (and eventual fall) in precious metals prices.

Yes, manias do ultimately end badly. But in the case of hard assets like silver, which have been depressed for years, they are far closer to a major bottom than to a mania peak.

As long as the Fed remains committed to depreciating the currency at a more rapid pace and punishing savers with negative real interest rates (it has vowed to keep its Funds rate near zero through 2023), the major trend for precious metals should remain HIGHER.

      About the Author:

Stefan Gleason is President of Money Metals Exchange, a precious metals dealer recently named "Best in the USA" by an independent global ratings group. A graduate of the University of Florida, Gleason is a seasoned business leader, investor, political strategist, and grassroots activist. Gleason has frequently appeared on national television networks such as CNN, FoxNews, and CNBC and in hundreds of publications such as the Wall Street Journal, The Street, and Seeking Alpha.