Author: jh staff

Election Irregularities Call for a Full Investigation

The establishment media are ignoring, suppressing, and even dismissing altogether an enormous amount of evidence that indicates significant voting irregularities took place during the 2020 presidential election. Additionally, there are serious inferences of fraud as it relates to the counting of ballots.

Using the coronavirus as justification, prior to the election the Democratic Party pushed through a voting procedure that had never been used before. This resulted in an unparalleled number of mail-in, absentee, and provisional ballots pouring into the system.

This would not be the only segment of the voting process that would earn the label of “unprecedented.” Last minute rule changes, software glitches, count halts, ballot dumps, and statistical anomalies made their ugly appearances this election-go-round, all to the benefit of one Party only.

Make no mistake, though, this election is in no way over. In football terminology, it may be that we are still in the third quarter, with lots of big plays to come.

The mounting evidence that continues to surface presents a pressing need for a complete investigation and judicially supervised remedies, including recounts, audits, and even election do-overs.

The term used in the law of negligence, res ipsa loquitur, has a counterpart appropriateness here. The Latin term, which means “the thing speaks for itself,” stems from its use in Roman trials. In tort law, it provides elements of a cause of action, when a tortious injury would not ordinarily occur without negligence.

In the case of this election, there are results that would not ordinarily occur without fraud.

In Democrat-run swing states, where on election eve President Donald Trump was leading over Democratic challenger Joe Biden, ballot counting inexplicably came to a screeching halt.

A few hours later, massive amounts of ballots suddenly appeared. Few, if any of the votes, went in President Trump’s favor.

The Numbers Story

In Michigan, Democratic presidential candidate Biden at one point received a block of 138,000 votes. Nearly all of the votes added to his tally. This is a statistical impossibility.

Data scientists have noticed other mathematical patterns that raise serious inferences of election fraud. Benford’s law is a forensic tool that is commonly used to detect potential fraud in accounting and vote tallies.

The Benford principle dictates a specific distribution of digits in data to determine whether such data are random and natural.

The digits of the vote counts are expected to follow an exponential distribution across the integers. When the analysis of numerical data samples indicates that the samples are not actually random, i.e., a numerical violation of Benford’s law, an inference of fraud is produced and has been used to detect fraud in elections. Numerical data that deviate from Benford’s law have been admitted in court as evidence of vote fraud.

Informal analyses of Trump’s numbers show no violations of Benford’s law; however, candidate Biden’s numbers do show violations that indicate fraud.

There are other ways that numbers become indicators of election fraud, including the vote total differential between candidate Biden and other down ballot candidates as well as precincts that have more than 100% voter participation.

As of this writing, the GOP has not lost a single seat in the House. Instead the Party has picked up several new House members and added at least three state legislatures, a result that appears highly inconsistent with a win by candidate Biden, who experienced record low enthusiasm across his entire campaign.

In Pennsylvania, due to a lack of signature verification, the rate of rejected mail-in ballots is almost 30 times lower this year than it was in the 2016 presidential election; this is yet another statistical anomaly.

During the inevitable coming litigation, based on claims of irregular voting and election fraud, data from Democrat-controlled swing states will be analyzed, and statistical anomalies and violations of Benford’s law will be presented to the courts.

The Software Story

Dominion Democracy Suite software was used for tabulating ballots in Michigan’s Antrim County. A reported “glitch” caused at least 6,000 Republican votes to be counted as Democrat votes, according to Michigan GOP Chairwoman Laura Cox.

When corrected, the miscalculation, which was first reported by a county clerk, changed the results of the county from candidate Biden to President Trump.

Forty-seven other counties in Michigan may also have suffered a similar glitch, due to the same software. If each of these counties, when corrected, were to have a switch-over of 6,000 votes, it would result in President Trump receiving 282,000 additional votes, likely changing Michigan’s election results.

Dominion Democracy Suite software is reportedly used in 30 other states, including all of the other swing states.

The Election Law Story

Election rules in the United States are made by the state legislature. In order to be counted, election law in Pennsylvania requires ballots to be received by November 3.

The state legislature in Pennsylvania turned down the governor’s request to allow ballots to be counted that were postmarked by November 3, but not actually received until November 5.

The governor then went to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to obtain a court order to continue counting the ballots. It was an illicit move and merely a way in which to circumvent the state legislature. The Democrat-controlled court issued the illegal order, one that violated state law.

Although the precincts have been counting late-received ballots, the U.S. Supreme Court via Justice Samuel Alito issued Pennsylvania an order to segregate the late-received votes and remove them from the counted totals.

The validity of late-received votes will almost inevitably end up being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the ballots received after November 3 are thrown out for violating Pennsylvania election law, the result of the election in that state will likely change.

The Coming Story

President Trump and the GOP have obtained sworn witness testimony that alleges poll watchers were denied entry to the polls, election officials took actions that were not authorized by the state legislature, a post office manager ordered postal workers to back-date ballots to November 3, and election workers illegally created new voter files; all this, in order to create more ballots for candidate Biden.

These claims must be fully examined and litigated. Getting to the bottom of all of it is not just about the 2020 election. Rather, it is about all future elections in America and whether representative democracy survives.

Symbols Define the 2020 Election

Each human being has an innate need to communicate with others. He or she also has a deep yearning to understand what another is attempting to convey, and to be validated on a personal level that he or she has been understood.

Communication, of course, frequently involves language. But the communication companion to language is the symbol, which may take the form of a language-based sign, pictorial sign, hand or facial gesture, clothing, shoes, an accessory such as a hat, jewelry such as a necklace, earring, or bracelet, etc.

In analytical psychology, pioneer Sigmund Freud actually used symbolic images to explain the meaning of dreams, while his colleague, Carl Jung, theorized that certain universal symbols called “archetypes” derive from the collective unconscious and alter conscious behavior.

Archetype symbols are a means of sending shorthand messages to the subconscious and conscious minds of human beings.

A fairly new multidisciplinary field called “semiotics” conducts research and analyzes the manner in which meaning is produced from signs and symbols.

How does all of this relate to the 2020 presidential election?

Well, in politics, meaning is generally communicated through words. However, symbols have become increasingly significant over time, especially with the advent of multiple social media platforms and limitless visual imagery via video.

Persuasion is at the heart of any political campaign, and communication through symbols is one of the most powerful methods of persuasion a candidate can access.

As it pertains to politics, the meaning of a message has a way of effortlessly emerging when presented through recognizable symbolic representations.

Needless to say, symbolic communication played a major part in the 2020 presidential campaign for both major parties, and particularly for the presidential candidates themselves.

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden consistently appeared in public wearing – the mask.

The mask became a dual symbol, one of personal responsibility in avoiding the contracting of COVID-19, and one of a supposed caring attitude with regard to the spreading of the virus to others

One main Biden campaign theme was the supposed mishandling of the pandemic, which he attempted to use to try and reframe the president’s successful actions against the virus.

When the former vice president made live campaign appearances or appeared in photographs and/or on videotape, he made sure that he had donned a mask, or at least had one hanging from his ear. This was meant to convey his seriousness with regard to COVID-19, which he no doubt hoped would translate into folks thinking he could do a better job of managing it.

Interestingly, for many Americans the mask had the opposite effect and was perceived as a symbol of government control and loss of freedom.

President Donald Trump had a symbol that across the years rose to legendary heights – the red MAGA hat. It was hardly the only symbol that the president brought to the campaign stop stage. His speeches and events included an array of time-honored national symbols, which for many evoked a deep heartfelt love of country.

Sadly, for others the symbols generated anger to the point that some formed mobs, which took to the streets to burn flags, deface federal and state buildings, and tear down statues. Their intense hatred for the meaning behind the symbols, and for the American people at large, was laid bare.

Symbols are a precious part of the heritage of America, and they have meanings that bind us together in mind, heart, and soul. These symbols are ones that are instantly recognizable.

Here are some examples:

–The Liberty Bell, a bold symbol of independence.

–The Statue of Liberty, with a broken chain draped at her feet, representing an ever-emerging liberty; a torch in one hand, symbolizing enlightenment; a tablet in the other hand, with the date of the Declaration of Independence inscribed upon it, symbolizing the rule of law.

–The Bald Eagle, America’s national bird, representing the soaring spirit of her people, who are able to accomplish anything their hearts desire.

–The Bison, America’s national mammal, representing a proud and confident presence.

–The Oak, America’s national tree, representing a solidness and strength.

–The Rose, America’s official flower, representing a prayer enveloped with the fragrance of idealism.

–The motto “In God We Trust,” representing an all-encompassing faith in something more enduring than our mortal selves.

–The Flag, America’s official emblem, representing the qualities of justice, courage, and self-sacrifice, a tribute to those past and present, who give all, so all can live free.

May God bless America, now and forever.

President Trump’s Success Boosts African-American Support

There are some intriguing indicators that suggest President Donald Trump is going to do better than expected in garnering votes in the upcoming election from the African-American community.

Emerging signs include the president’s demonstrable track record of policies that have benefited the Black community, as well as the record high approval number that he now experiences with African-American voters.

But perhaps the most interesting indicator of all is the large number of prominent public figures who now go by the title of “formerly known as Democrat.”

The Democratic Party has typically relied upon a strong showing of support over the years from African-American voters. However, as the public in general and the Democratic Party in particular have learned, when you’re talking about President Trump there is very little that can be characterized as “typical.”

In the 2016 presidential election, CNN exit polls (https://www.cnn.com/election/2016/results/exit-polls) indicated that then-candidate Trump received 8 percent of the African-American vote and 13 percent of Black male voters. The latter percentage was a historically high number for Republicans.

What has surprised many in recent days is the fact that some well known hip-hop artists made headlines in their Trump-supportive opining, and for some, in their tacit and/or explicit endorsements. This has obviously caused concern on the part of certain Democrat strategists and candidates alike.

Recently, rapper 50 Cent gave a social media endorsement to President Trump, expressing his wariness with the stratospheric tax rates that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s tax plan portends. Predictably, the artist was deluged with social media haters who were intent on hurling insults.

Following the backlash, 50 Cent doubled-down via his Instagram account, sharing a Fox News video about his Trump endorsement and attaching a pithy caption: “I don’t want to be 20 cent,” adding, “62% [income tax rate] is a very very bad idea.”

Senior advisor to the Trump campaign Katrina Pearson used her Twitter account to reveal that actor and hip-hopper Ice Cube was actively helping the Trump administration to connect with the African-American electorate. Cube’s detractors attempted to smear him for being a Trump supporter, and the cancel culture launched an attack.

Undeterred, the rapper has confirmed his assistance to the president, but he has yet to endorse him outright.

Cube is advising President Trump on an administration initiative titled “The Platinum Plan,” which will reach out to African-American communities in an effort to improve overall economic circumstances using the Trump administration’s innovative “Opportunity Zones.”

Another hip-hopper, Waka Flocka Flame, was recently blasted by social media trolls for the comments he expressed about President Trump being a better president than the previous occupant of the White House, former President Barack Obama.

Joining in with more hip-hop Trump energy are BlocBoy JB, Fivio Foreign, and longtime Trump ally Kanye West.

Jason Whitlock, sportswriter for Outkick, is an African-American Trump convert himself, who has observed the rap community’s growing esteem for Trump and has a grasp on the phenomenon.

Whitlock, who also recently conducted a focused interview with the president, told Fox News’s Tucker Carlson, “I think there’s some clear momentum for President Trump, particularly I think with black men. I think we’ve been carrying on a facade for three and a half years as black men that somehow we can’t relate to Donald Trump, that we didn’t celebrate him in hip hop music for decades, that he wasn’t friends with countless black athletes, entertainers.”

The truth is the president’s name has been part of the hip-hop repertoire since the genre’s inception. The rap world has long-embraced success and all of its attendant parts.

Across his lifetime, President Trump has been the quintessential symbol of success, and as destiny has made manifest, this has never been more true.

In a track that emerged back in 1989, rapper Ice-T’s collaborator Donald D shouted out, “Yo Ice, I did a concert at the White House. And after that, me and Donald Trump hung out!”

Consequently, many hip-hop artists placed the Trump name within their lyrics. Rapper Rick Ross had the most Trump mentions, nine songs between 2008 and 2015. Hip-hopper Nas recorded seven songs with Trump mentions between 1996 and 2012. Artists Migos and Young Thug had six each, and Lil Wayne and Raekwon featured five Trump references.

After the rise to hit status of NBC’s “The Apprentice” in 2004, President Trump’s brand as sensei of success was cemented into the cultural fabric. The then-New York tycoon appeared in tunes by hip-hoppers Chingy, Mystikal, Lil’ Kim, Diddy, and Young Jeezy.

Enduring Trump supporter West, who is ostensibly running for president and is reportedly on ballots in some states as vice president, appears to remain a Trump backer.

In an April interview with GQ magazine, West said, “It’s unclear if Ye’s vote will still be for Trump as he is running for president as well. In any event, perhaps we’ll find out on Election Day.”

Whitlock wrote, “Kanye said he and President Trump shared ‘dragon energy,’ natural instincts for leadership.”

West’s ‘dragon energy’ characterization, in my opinion, refers to a special kind of steadfastness that it takes to make any desired objective a success.

Those who impartially examine the track record of the Trump administration can’t help but notice a string of laudable successes, including energy independence, de-regulation, defeat of ISIS, NATO finance reform, improved trade deals, record low unemployment, record wage growth, and progress towards peace in the Middle East, just to name a few.

Additionally, a growing segment of African-Americans, along with many of the artists in the hip-hop world, also know that they have a powerful advocate in the White House. Employment, school choice, university funding, prison reform, and pro-life policies have made an impression on leaders in the Black community.

Social media legend and “Blexit” originator Candace Owens, NFL legend Herschel Walker, civil rights attorney Leo Terrell, and “Grey’s Anatomy” star Isaiah Washington, all former Democrats, have become vocal supporters of the Trump presidency and of his re-election campaign.

As President Trump said at the recent second presidential debate in Nashville, Tennessee, “Success is going to bring us together.” 

The truth is it already has.

New Patriotic-Themed Music COMING SOON

Proceeds to Tunnel to Towers Foundation

A charity committed to ensuring we never forget the events of 9/11 and the sacrifices that were made and continue to be made by our first responders. Through the Fallen First Responder Home Program, Tunnel to Towers aims to pay off the mortgages of fallen law enforcement officers and firefighters killed in the line of duty that leave behind young children.

The Role of Projection in Democrat Politics

Back in the 19th century, famed Austrian neurologist and founder of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud identified a psychological defense mechanism in human beings that he termed “projection.”

Freud’s concept of projection encompasses the notion that in order to avoid facing uncomfortable feelings about themselves, individuals will impose the same negative characteristics upon another person.

In my assessment, which results from my academic coursework, professional background, and ethics studies, there is another kind of projection that exists, which takes place within the moral realm of human consciousness, one that I term “moral projection.”

Moral projection occurs when an individual experiences feelings of guilt over acts that he or she has committed or omitted. This individual may subsequently find the uncomfortable feelings difficult to confront and/or manage. The conduct, or lack thereof, which evoked the feelings of guilt, also frequently becomes very difficult for an individual to own.

Using the defense mechanism concept, an individual may assign to another individual or group the same attitude and behavior that initially generated his or her own attendant guilt.

In other words, take your blame and pin it on another.

Moral projection has been used extensively by Democrats in their ongoing war against anyone who would get in the way of their agenda du jour. It continues to be wielded as one of their main political and propaganda weapons.

The idea that the concepts of good and evil are mere opinions, which have an elasticity in application that is dependent upon a situation, is often referred to as “moral relativism.”

The infiltration of conceptual moral relativism into our schools has degraded the consciences of generations of students at every educational level.

Simultaneously, it tilled the soil of young minds into fertile fields that were susceptible to the planting of left-wing doctrine. This was one of the ways in which the Judeo-Christian principles upon which our American Republic depends were supplanted.

A significant portion of young people who were infected with the poisonous weeds of moral relativism now endorse the ideas and actions of hate-based radical organizations and violent anti-American groups.

Saul Alinsky, an icon of liberals and leftist extremists, once wrote, “To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles. The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play his mother off against his father in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life.”

The resultant loss of a shared moral sense has enabled and even encouraged the use of political tactics that are devoid of conscience. Moral projection is one of the most blatant.

It is a horrible experience to be accused. For those who adhere to an ethical code, it is what keeps many in check from too freely accusing others.

Here are but a few examples of the moral projection arrows that the Democrats have recently pulled from their quiver and shot at adversaries:

-In order to deflect from the fact that the Democrats and their media allies have for months enabled violence in cities across the country, they falsely claim that the violence was caused by, as Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden recently said, “white supremacist groups menacing our communities.”

-In order to distract from candidate Biden’s numerous mental lapses, Democrats publicly accused President Donald Trump of having mental focus issues following his medical treatment for Covid 19.

-Democrats and the complicit media are fomenting fears over whether President Trump will accept the results of the upcoming election, while former 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton publicly advises Biden not to do so “under any circumstances” and the campaign hires hundreds of lawyers to go to court to contest election results.

I am not sure where the Democrats and their media cohorts can go to get their consciences back. But I do know where the American people can go to get their country back.

‘Never-Trumper’ Means ‘Always-Sellout’

Billy Crystal and Bill Kristol

The term “sellout” can be used to describe someone who is willing to trade his or her deep personal convictions in exchange for some momentary fame or short-lived gain.

It is also a word that can aptly apply to the “never-Trumpers” of today’s politically fractured society; i.e., those who steadfastly maintain a hate-filled mindset and who indulge in retaliatory thoughts and behavior.

Over the course of his first term in office, President Donald Trump laid down a clear track record of conservatism in the face of untold liberal pressure.

Unmatched in his efforts to rectify years of “progressive” wrongs, he succeeded in transforming the judiciary, de-regulating the economy, reforming national trade policies, and reducing tax burdens on working class folks.

He did all this in the midst of a cadre of so-called conservative Republicans, which grew to become nothing short of a heavily greased and well-funded political machine.

One recent ad campaign is as instructive as it is disturbing.

The advertisement video features the former editor of the now-defunct Weekly Standard magazine Bill Kristol as well as the Hollywood actor and celebrity comic Billy Crystal.

The attempted gag has the two individuals of differing backgrounds and similar names uniting in an effort to persuade Jewish voters to throw their support behind the current Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

Directed by Rob Reiner and written by Phil Rosenthal, the ad was produced for a group called the Jewish Democratic Council of America (JDCA) in partnership with a super PAC called Jews Defending American Values.

“Jimmy Kimmel Live” was the select venue for its debut airing.

It turns out that the JDCA is a left-leaning front group, which was launched in August 2017 as part of the “resistance” movement that was working against the administration of President Trump.

The group’s launch event was attended by an interesting line-up of prominent Democrat officeholders, which included future House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla.

More than twenty elected Democrat politicians chose to take to the podium to speak at the event.

Following a previous ad campaign, which was initiated by the JDCA and included Nazi imagery, criticism poured in from several Jewish organizations such as the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Republican Jewish Coalition, the American Jewish Committee, and the Anti-Defamation League.

Kristol, who in the new ad self-identifies as a “Republican” and a “conservative,” is the quintessential never-Trumper. He has worked non-stop with Democrats to attack and undermine President Trump.

Fox News’s Tucker Carlson notes that for quite a long time Kristol and his never-Trumper buddies have been “advocating for open borders, and nation-building in countries whose populations hate us…”

In addition, Carlson points out that the never-Trumpers have pushed “trade deals that eliminated jobs while enriching their donors, all while implicitly mocking the base for its worries about abortion and gay marriage and the pace of demographic change.”

In my estimation, never-Trumpers are merely your average everyday garden-variety leftists.

What is not your average everyday nugget of info, though, is the fact that never-Trumpers receive their money from uber-wealthy leftists.

The name Pierre Omidyar may not ring a bell, but he is the founder of eBay. He became a billionaire at the young age of 31, with the company’s initial public offering in 1998.

Omidyar has given more than $200 million to left-wing groups, including the Open Society Foundation, the Tides Foundation, the Center for Public Integrity, and the Center for Responsive Politics.

During the Democratic Party presidential primaries in 2008, Omidyar donated to the campaigns of both then-Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Over the course of several years, Omidyar and his wife also donated $200,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and $150,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

As Julie Kelly reported in the Cincinnati Enquirer, another group, Republican Voters Against Trump, is “tied to a nonprofit that has received millions in contributions over the past few years from Pierre Omidyar.”

And Kelly also noted that in 2016 Omidyar donated $100,000 to an entity called the NeverTrump PAC.

Kelly additionally revealed that the Lincoln Project, a prominent never-Trumper organization, received financing from billionaire Democratic donor and leftist Hollywood producer David Geffen, who is a longtime Democratic Party cash source.

During the 2018 mid-terms, never-Trumpers and their ally organizations helped elect far-left radical Democrats to Congress, such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., which helped facilitate Pelosi’s rise to House Speaker.

Anyone who does a cursory review of the Biden/Harris candidacy realizes that never-Trumpers have not just sold out their principles, they have sold out the country.

Democrats Lose Their Humanity

Human beings generally have a characteristic response when made aware that a fellow human being, be it a loved one, friend, or stranger, has succumbed to a serious illness or has received an ominous medical diagnosis.

Responses tend to reflect a deep-seated empathy and understanding that are innate in people who maintain a well-balanced psychological, emotional, and spiritual equilibrium. If direct or indirect interaction occurs with a suffering person, encouragement and well-wishes typically flow.

On the other hand, if individuals seem to be indifferent to another’s suffering, in common parlance they are likely to be described as cold, heartless, and/or lacking in compassion. Response to news of another’s misfortunes on the part of these individuals is quite the opposite and may generally fall within the category of psychological dysfunction.

In my assessment, this second description is a wholly appropriate way to characterize the insensitive, uncompassionate, and outright cruel remarks that have been made by several Democrats and their allies in the news media and Hollywood regarding President Donald Trump’s positive COVID-19 test and his subsequent illness.

To put it bluntly, a lack of basic human decency has been on display by many on the left. Since the news first hit that President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump had tested positive for COVID-19 and the president was hospitalized, numerous Democrats and their media mouthpieces actually expressed wishes that the president would depart this life.

“It’s been against my moral identity to tweet this for the past four years, but, I hope he dies,” tweeted Zara Rahim, a former national spokesperson for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and a staffer in the White House of then-President Barack Obama.

Rahim subsequently ended up deleting the message.

Steve Cox, an Independent congressional candidate running in California’s 39th District, expressed his hope that President Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden would both die.

The content of statements made by many of President Trump’s political opponents was so heinous Twitter had to issue a warning that the platform would take action against users for tweets that were rooting for the president’s demise. Facebook and other social media platforms followed suit.

Twitter’s announcement was met with immediate criticism from two Democratic congresswomen who are part of a congressional cluster known as “The Squad.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., complained that this policy had not been applied to herself and her colleagues, tweeting the following: “you mean to tell us you could’ve done this the whole time?”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., tweeted, “This is messed up. The death threats towards us should have been taking more seriously by [Twitter].”

Twitter vowed to rectify matters.

“We hear the voices who feel that we’re enforcing some policies inconsistently,” Twitter stated in a post. “We agree we must do better, and we are working together inside to do so.”

Meanwhile other Trump-haters went about claiming that the president’s diagnosis was not real.

In a Facebook post, documentary film-maker Michael Moore opined that the president could be lying about having coronavirus as an opportunity “TO PUSH FOR DELAYING/POSTPONING THE ELECTION.”

Moore also used his Twitter account to snidely state, “My thoughts and prayers, too, are with Covid-19.”

At the top of his opening monologue on “Saturday Night Live,” comedian Chris Rock said something similar to Moore.

“President Trump’s in the hospital from COVID, and I just want to say my heart goes out to COVID,” Rock said.

Joy Reid of MSNBC suggested that the president was pretending to be infected so he would be able to “get out of the debates.”

“Here’s how wrecked Trump’s credibility is at this point: I’ve got a cellphone full of texts from people who aren’t sure whether to believe Trump actually has covid,” Reid tweeted.

Other questionable posts by Bette Midler, Patricia Arquette, Kathy Griffin, Rob Reiner, and Michael Rappaport made their way to the social media.

To their credit, Rachel Maddow, Alyssa Milano, Jamie Lee Curtis, and the Biden campaign responded appropriately.

Not so with other high-profile individuals, including a couple of top Democrat political leaders.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., hit a new low. She actually blamed the president for getting sick and then tried to soften her comments by tacking on her usual disclaimer: “I’m praying for him.”

And Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., carped in a statement that President Trump’s diagnosis is what happens “when you ignore science.”

It is difficult to find words to describe or ways to explain the all-consuming hatred that the left continues to spew out against the president. The 90 percent-plus derogatory coverage he has received from the lopsided media is no doubt a factor.

Human beings are capable of being programmed to hate.

The Democratic Party has spent every day for the past five years devising schemes, first to undermine his candidacy and then to undermine his presidency.

Human beings are capable of being programmed to be distrustful.

The complicit media have name-called, derided, maligned, and outright lied about the president’s person and policies.

Human beings are capable of being programmed to be cynical.

There is a domino effect that can occur when negative emotions are continuously teed up and then given a solid nudge. Discontent can tip into arrogance, arrogance into anger, and anger into vengefulness.

This is the way humanity is lost.

The question is whether Democrats even care.

Democrats Launch Health-Scare Attack on Judge Amy Coney Barrett

It seems as though Democrats have settled on a scheme to undermine the nomination to the Supreme Court of Judge Amy Coney Barrett.

Apparently already ruled out is a boycott of the hearings by the Democrats. Such a ploy would actually speed up the nomination process, and they look to be hell-bent on doing just the opposite.

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his campaign strategists may be coaching Biden’s running mate Senator Kamala Harris, D-Calif., on how to use the proceedings to grab the media spotlight, as was done during the hearings for now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Although House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently boasted that she and her colleagues have a few “arrows in [their] quiver,” at this point it is unlikely that the Democrats will pursue some of the more off-the-wall options, such as attempting to impeach the president a second time, launching an effort to impeach Attorney General William Barr, or forcing a government shutdown.

It is probable, however, that they will try to delay the proceedings in every way possible. Arcane Senate rules could be employed, as some members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have used in the past to gum up the legislative works.

Another delay tactic may be the advancement of a false narrative, suggesting that the nomination of Judge Coney Barrett is somehow illegitimate.

Additionally, the questioning by committee members of Judge Coney Barrett may include an attempt to entrap the nominee into hypothetical predictions about how she might rule in a case that involves one of the more heated topics, such as abortion, discrimination, or immigration.

The primary focus of the Democrats, along with the left-leaning organizations with which they are aligned, has routinely been messaging.

It looks like Democrat leaders have already shown their cards and decided to go the health care route. They are quite experienced in trying to scare the wits out of folks.

Some Democrat strategists are of the opinion that the Democrats were successful in gaining a majority in the House of Representatives during the 2018 mid-term elections by talking about the imminent loss of health care coverage for pre-existing conditions at the hands of the Republicans.

Well they’re at it again. Health care seems to have become the main attack angle with which Democrats are going to try and harm, pump the brakes on, and/or completely halt Judge Coney Barrett’s confirmation.

Specifically, Democrats are using an upcoming case, which will be heard by the Supreme Court shortly after the election, that involves the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a., Obamacare.

In a letter to Senate Democrats, Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., provided some of the details of the sly Dem plan to de-rail Judge Coney Barrett’s nomination.

There will apparently be an attempt to convince Senate Republicans to forestall a vote on the Supreme Court nominee until after the election.

According to Sen. Schumer, in order for this to be accomplished “public pressure on Senate Republicans” must be exerted. Lo and behold, the minority leader surmises that “health care remains the best way to keep the pressure up.”

Sen. Schumer followed his own wily advice and did so with some reckless rhetoric. Here are some of his recent over-the-top statements:

–“By nominating Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, President Trump has once again put Americans’ healthcare in the crosshairs.”

–“A vote for Amy Coney Barrett is a dagger aimed at the heart of the healthcare protections Americans so desperately need and want.”

Democrats themselves have frequently cautioned against the use of language that could potentially prompt on the part of those so inclined hostility and/or aggressive behaviors toward others.

Use of loaded words such as “arrows,” “quiver,” “crosshairs,” “dagger,” and the like evoke an ugly imagery that may oftentimes precede acts of violence.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi focused on “pre-existing conditions,” declaring that Judge Barrett’s “nomination threatens the destruction of life-saving protections for 135 million Americans with pre-existing conditions together with every other benefit and protection of the Affordable Care Act.”

Former Vice President Biden’s campaign managed to additionally tie the coronavirus to the nominating process, saying, “If President Trump has his way, complications from COVID-19, like lung scarring and heart damage, could become the next deniable pre-existing condition.”

Regarding another facet of the health care-related scheme, Democrats are zeroing in on a book review by Judge Coney Barrett, written in 2017, in which she agreed with the author of the book that Chief Justice John Robert’s legal reasoning in the 2012 Supreme Court case that upheld Obamacare was faulty.

It is important to point out that the above-referenced was a book review, not a court decision or ruling. She has not opined from the bench about the health care law in her capacity as a judge on the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit.

The single passage that Senate Democrats will likely cite from the book review has no predictive value in determining how Judge Coney Barrett would potentially rule on an individual case that has not yet been argued in front of the High Court, including the one that will be heard in November.