On March 28, 2025, in Attack of the Robes, I explored the problem of out-of-control federal District Judges, who, by issuing nationwide injunctions, have effectively vetoed President Trump’s Executive Orders, designed to implement the policies that voters endorsed in the 2024 election.  The blatant misconduct of the judges had gotten out of control.

Fancying themselves as super-executives, some of the 680 federal judges have stymied nearly every Trump order, by freezing executive action with nationwide injunctions, also known as universal injunctions.  What this means is, one person brings a lawsuit against the government in say, California.  The judge uses the filing of this single plaintiff to issue an injunction that prohibits the government from implementing its policy anywhere in the country.

Trump 47 Executive Orders were the subjects of more than 40 universal injunctions in five months.  85% of the injunctions came from California, Washington, Maryland, Massachusetts, and D.C., districts replete with berobed progressive ideologues masquerading as jurists.

As lawsuits and appeals take years to resolve, this practice effectively stopped the Chief Executive from governing.  Needless to say, this is not a consequence  intended by the Founders, and had it continued, our nation would have devolved into a judicial tyranny, turning democracy into judocracy, a term I had to make up because it never was intended to exist.

Last week, the Supreme Court finally remedied the situation  in Trump v. CASA, Inc.  Writing on behalf of herself, and the other five Justices on the Court, Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s    opinion drastically curtailed the issuance of universal injunctions.  The three liberal rubber stamps on the Court dissented.

I make the distinction between Justices and rubber stamps on this basis.  A judge or Justice says, “These are the facts, this is the law, therefore this is the judgment that must be reached.”  Rubber stamps, namely “Justices” Sotomayor, Kagin, and Jackson, employ a different methodology.  “Here is the result I must reach, so here’s the judgment.”  Simple, but hardly judicial.

In her majority opinion, Justice Barrett recounts that the use of universal injunctions was nearly unknown from the Founding until the 1960’s.  In the 21st Century, they have become more prevalent.

In a nutshell, the proper role of the Supreme Court is to interpret the question before them in terms of the original intent of the Founders who enacted the Constitution.  By this method, if a practice is not included in the Constitution, was not recognized by English Common Law at the time the Constitution was ratified, or was not granted to the Courts by Congress, then it is not authorized.

Nothing in the Constitution permits universal injunctions, nor was the practice part of English Common Law.  The only Court in the Constitution is the Supreme Court.  All other federal courts are created by Congress, which spells out the limits of their powers.  Congress never granted the right to issue universal injunctions.

Injunction is a remedy available to judges, but as Justice Sotomayor herself has noted, it is relief that may be afforded only to parties to a lawsuit, not to the public at large.

Justice Barrett devoted much of her opinion to a refutation of the dissenting opinion of Justice Katanji Brown Jackson.  This practice in itself is routine.  However, the tone of the refutation was unusually blunt for a Supreme Court opinion.  Normally, when a Justice says something meant to convey the notion that his or her colleague’s position is a load of crap, it’s done in gentle language, such as, “my learned colleague is mistaken.”  Justice Barrett’s take down of the Jackson dissent was no less than a brutal slap down, and one which was well deserved.

Justice Jackson is a product of Harvard.  She served on the Board of Harvard Overseers.  (I thought “overseer” was a racist title).  Anyway, it’s now clear why Harvard is so screwed up.  As a District Court judge, she invalidated a number of Trump 45 Executive Orders, writing, “a President is not a King.”  This made her a perfect Biden appointment to the high Court, which Biden was seeking to “Trump proof.”

In her dissent, Justice Jackson says the real question before the Court wasn’t whether a District Court judge is authorized to issue a universal injunction, because that’s a “mind numbing technical query.”  According to her, the real question is, “may a federal court order an Executive to follow the law?”

Confirming her claim that she doesn’t know what a woman is, Jackson wrote, “those who birthed our nation limited the powers of government to protect freedom.”  (I guess she considers the Founders birthing persons).  Jackson fails to notice that the judiciary is part of the government.  Moreover, judicial tyranny is more dangerous than Executive or Congressional tyranny, because we get to vote for them.  Judges are installed for life.

Justice Barret minced no words, writing that Jackson’s dissent “is not tethered to statute or precedent, nor frankly to any doctrine whatsoever.”  Jackson recognizes really no limit to judicial power.  Justice Barrett writes, “she offers a vision of the judicial role that would make even the most ardent defender of judicial supremacy blush.”  Barrett added, the Jackson position “is at odds with two centuries of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself.” Ouch!

Jackson complains that the analysis of the majority of the Court “involves boring legalese.”  Her prescription?  Once a judge decides something is illegal, everyone, everywhere must comply.  This sort of applies the Left’s Anthony Fauci principle to the judiciary.  Fauci was “the science,” so when he spoke, rightly or wrongly, all were obliged to submit.  Judges are “the law,” so when they speak, “everyone from the President on down must follow the law.”

The Jackson opinion remarkably states that “the Majority is so caught up in the minutiae of the government’s self-serving arguments, that it misses the plot.”  Firstly, every party to a lawsuit makes self-serving arguments.  It’s their job.  And as Professor Jonathan Turley aptly notes the “minuitae” that Jackson complains of consists of things like the Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1798.  Turley added, “It’s the minutiae that distinguishes  the rule of law from judicial impulse.  Simply put, if one can’t be bothered by such “minutiae,” then one ought to avoid a judicial career.

While Jackson sees the role of the judiciary as overseers of the Executive, Justice Barrett correctly points out that’s not the proper judicial role.  Judges may resolve cases and controversies affecting the particular plaintiffs and defendants before the court.  The judiciary is not a super-government.  Jackson’s overriding principle is “everyone from the President on down must follow the law.”  As Justice Barrett wisely reminds her, “that goes for judges too,” adding, “when a court concludes that the Executive has acted unlawfully, the correction is not for the court to exceed its power too.”

All in all, the majority opinion in this case returns District Court judges to their proper lane, while at the same time conveying the clear message that Justice Jackson doesn’t know what she’s talking about.  When one judge’s review of  another judge’s argument starts with the phrase, “As best we can tell,” the plain language translation is, “disregard that, it’s gibberish.”

Here’s hoping that, with the meddlesome judges out of the way, the Trump agenda can move forward.

As with most things, Winston Churchill said it best.  “When the eagles are silent, the parrots begin to jabber.”  Churchill was referring to the fact that, strong leaders, who throughout history have been compared to high-flying eagles, often are confronted by chattering from the bottom feeding rabble of political life.

That sentiment probably didn’t originate with Churchill, but likely goes back to one of Aesop’s fables, The Eagle, The Jackdaw, and the Magpie.  Here again, the eagle is the ruler of the smaller birds.  In Aesop’s telling, the eagle’s solemn assemblies often were disrupted by impertinent conduct from the noisy chattering of the magpie and the jackdaw (a crow), who each sought precedence in the Eagle’s court.  The eagle decreed that “the greater fool of the two shall in future take precedence.”  The moral of the story, “only fools try to be self-important.”

I was reminded of these sentiments in the aftermath of last Saturday’s U.S. bombing of nuclear sites in Iran.  For many years, President Trump has vowed that Iran would not be permitted to develop nuclear weapons.  That long has been a stated U.S. policy, but Trump is the first president to take real action.

In 1984, President Reagan named Iran a State sponsor of terrorism.  In 2002, President Bush included them in the Axis of Evil.  In 2003, evidence of the production of enriched uranium was found in Iran.  In 2013, Il Duce Obama and “Bolt Neck” John Kerry concocted “the Iran nuclear deal,” which was supposed to slow down the Iranian nuclear program.

The plan was a shameful ruse, which did nothing to end Iranian production of nuclear weapons, resulted in no inspections, and involved us sending pallets loaded with cash to Iran.  Iran used the money to continue enriching uranium, and to fund terrorist organizations.  Thousands of Americans have been killed and maimed by Improvised Explosive Devices supplied by Iran.  Trump ended the deal in his first term.

In recent weeks, evidence came to light suggesting that Iran was months away from producing 11 nuclear warheads to be mated to the short-range missiles and ICBM’s that Iran has been producing.  That prompted the Israelis to act.

President Trump devoted a good deal of time to attempts to end the war between Iran and Israel.  He offered to host talks.  The Iranians refused to participate.  Last Thursday, the President set a two week deadline for negotiations.  On Friday, the Iranian Foreign Minister declared that there was nothing to talk about.  The next day, the U.S. struck the nuclear sites.  As this is written, a shaky cease fire has ended the fighting between Israel and Iran.

Yet while the end of a Mideast war might seem to be a positive development, many of the jackdaws, magpies, and parrots who inhabit the Democrat Party are incensed to the extent that, this week, they tried for a third time to impeach President Trump.  They failed.  The vote was 344 to 79.

What’s their beef this time?  President Trump ordered the strike on Iran without first asking the Congress for its permission.  This is, to say the least, hyperbole.  It is to say the most, pure bullshit.

At issue is the War Powers Resolution, a 1973 law, enacted over the veto of President Nixon.  The law, which never has been interpreted by the Supreme Court, is of questionable constitutionality.  Article I of the Constitution says the Congress shall declare war.  Article II makes the President the Commander in Chief of the military.

Legal or not, the War Powers Resolution makes clear that a President may order any military action he sees fit, including committing troops, for a period of 90 days without the need for any Congressional approval.

In the case of Iran, the Administration gave appropriate notice to Congressional leaders before the strikes.  The incursion stationed no troops overseas, and our forces were engaged for a matter of hours, and then withdrawn.  But that wasn’t good enough for the Trump-hating Democrats.

The reigning queen of the magpies, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, said Trump “has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations.  It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.”

Rep. Sean Casten called the bombing without the approval of Congress an “unambiguous impeachable offense.”  This imbecile added, “No president has the authority to bomb another country that does not pose an imminent threat to the US without the approval of Congress.”  I guess the imminent production of nuclear weapons by people who continually chant “Death to America,” and who have killed thousands of Americans, doesn’t represent a threat.

The usual leftist suspects also chimed in.  Bernie Sanders called Trump’s strikes “grossly unconstitutional.”  Rep. Val Demings complained, “The President does not have the authority to start a war with Iran at the expense of the American people without congressional approval.”

Rep. Jim Himes, vied for the role of king of the jackdaws by carping that he did not have notice of the attacks as other members of Congress had.  “According to the Constitution, we are both sworn to defend.”  “My attention to this matter comes BEFORE bombs fall.  Full stop.”

This is pure idiocy.  Consultation with 535 blabbermouths, half of whom are crazed practitioners of sedition, would turn a surprise attack into a suicide mission, destined to fail.

But by far, the sharpest comments came from that parrot princess from Texas, Jasmine Crockett.  “I am a black woman in America who just happens to be educated enough to know what the law is.”  “If you Google war and authority and Constitution, you’re gonna see Congress.  He could have hollered at us on Monday.”  Yeah, Jasmine.  Didn’t Trump know it was the weekend?  How dare he exceed the 40 hour work week just to prevent a nuclear war?

She must have Googled the wrong terms, because Crockett added, “I’m the one that’s supposed to make the fucking  decision” on bombing Iran.”  Somebody should “holla” at her to shut her piehole.

This Democrat jabbering is wrong, dangerous, and designed to give aid and comfort to our enemies.  And as with all things Democrat, it’s blatant hypocrisy.  A President (named Trump) needs Congressional approval to order a military action?  Really?

President Clinton sent troops to Haiti and Bosnia without approval.  Clinton also ordered airstrikes in Kosovo and Iraq, and he famously used missiles to destroy an aspirin factory in Sudan.  No Democrat complained.

President Biden bombed Yemen for eight months.  No Democrat complained.

Il Duce Obama takes the cake, however.  The recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize ordered 563 airstrikes on Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen without approval.  In Yemen, instead of hitting al Qaeda, he used cluster munitions to kill 55 people, including 33 women and children.  Obama ordered the Navy Seals to Pakistan to kill Osama Bin Laden without approval.  Obama committed troops to Jordan, Uganda and Turkey.  Obama bombed Syria, Somalia, and Yemen, and sent the Navy to the Straight of Hormuz, all without Congressional approval.  No Democrat complained.

The latest jabbering of the Democrat jackdaws, magpies and parrots must be attributed to their chronic Trump Derangement Syndrome.  Eagles cannot, and will not, be bothered by the endless chattering of these annoying scavengers and preening parrots.

Nightly, the various news channels tell us the Democrat Party needs to move to the political center to regain success.  The pundits keep talking, but clearly, the people running the Democrat Party aren’t listening.  They’re still clinging to the extreme Left.

In 1964, a right wing extremist, Barry Goldwater, famously proclaimed, ”Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”  He was roundly condemned for what today sounds like a reasonable sentiment.  For the current day Democrat Party, the Goldwater quote might read, “Extremism in hopes of ending liberty is no vice, moderation in regard to any issue is prohibited.

And so, last weekend, as President Trump was presiding over a parade for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, the denizens of the Left were conducting what they called No Kings protests all over the country.

The No Kings movement, according to its organizers, calls for a National Day of defiance.  Here’s some stuff from their website, “They’ve defied our courts (lie), deported Americans (lie), disappeared people off the streets (lie), attacked our civil rights (lie), and slashed our services (lie).  The corruption has gone too far.  No thrones.  No crowns.  No kings.”

“We’re taking action to reject authoritarianism—and show the world what democracy really looks like.  The flag doesn’t belong to President Trump.  It belongs to us.”  I guess that’s so they can burn it.  “We’re inspired by the 3.5% principle: it only takes 3.5% of the population engaging in sustained, strategic protest against authoritarianism to achieve significant political change.”

The 3.5% principle, has been adopted by many climate change groups.  It comes from the writings of Harvard Professor Erica Chenoweth.  The theory is that protest by 3.5% of the population of a country can topple a government.  Three examples cited by Professor Chenoweth are Georgia, the Philippines, Sudan, and Algeria.

If it worked there, it can work here, right?  Not so fast.  In Georgia, protests led to the resignation of President Eduard Shevardnadze, who had been installed by a military junta.  Likewise, in Sudan, it toppled a president installed after a military coup.  The 3.5% action in Algeria came after a civil war that killed 3 million people.  And in the Philippines, the protests toppled the government of dictator Ferdinand Marcos, who had declared martial law and suspended the constitution to stay in power.

Simply put, the 3.5% principle has never worked to topple a government installed after a free and fair election.  This is so because, places where free and fair elections are held don’t need revolutions to change the government.  You just go vote.

But this glaring flaw in the No Kings argument isn’t the sad part.  What is sad is that the dolts marching in the streets for this No Kings nonsense actually do believe that the Trump Administration is no different than a military dictatorship.

Here’s what it looked like –

I love that last one.  Fear of the law must be why he covered his face.

No Kings partners include a veritable Who’s Who of loony Leftist groups.  There are the usual suspects.  The ACLU;
Common Cause “Immigration enforcement is not law and order, it’s tyranny;” Bernie Sanders and his Political Revolution PAC; 50-50-1 also connected to Bernie, which  Newsweek calls “mostly peaceful;” Families Over Billionaires, which opposes tax cuts.  (Ironically it’s funded by Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss); Greenpeace; MayDayStrong, which supports  “workers over billionaires,” and is pro immigrant (cheap labor for Bernie’s oligarchs); Move On.org (Soros); Planned Parenthood;  350 Action (extremist climate change); and Don’t Frack Your Mother (an anti oil group).

Then there were the labor unions.  the AFT; American Federation of Government Employees (opposes government layoffs); Alliance to Reclaim our Schools (wants to spend more money on a failed educational system); CWA; Postal Workers Union (stamps are going to .78 next month); Care in Action Domestic Workers Union (promotes election of women of color, but not Winsome Sears); and SEIU.

According to the No Kings 3.5% principle, 3.5% of the population can change the government.  In the U.S., that would mean about 1.2 million people in the streets every day.  But not in all 50 States.  Texas and Florida, with 56 million people, or 16.2% of our population, aren’t playing this game.  In Florida, Brevard County Sheriff Wayne Ivey eloquently summed up the situation, telling protestors to “protest all you want, but don’t use violence.”

“I’m gonna break it down for you, alright, and if somebody wants to know what I mean by turn violent.  This is what I mean.  If you resist lawful orders, you’re going to jail.  Let me be very clear about that.  If you block an intersection or a roadway in Brevard County, you are going to jail.  If you flee arrest, you’re gonna go to jail tired because we are going to run you down and put you in jail.  If you try to mob rule a car in Brevard County, gathering around it, refusing to let the driver leave in our county, you’re gonna get run over and dragged across the street.

If you spit on us, you are going to the hospital and then to jail. If you hit one of us, you’re going to the hospital and jail and likely will get bitten by one of our big, beautiful dogs we have here.  If you throw a brick, a firebomb, or point a gun at one of our deputies, we will be notifying your family where to collect your remains at.  Because we will kill you, graveyard dead.  We’re not going to play.”

So I guess Texas and Florida don’t count in the 3.5% equation.  In the final analysis, it really doesn’t matter anyway.  1.2 million, or 5 million, or 20 million people protesting the government won’t change the fact that Trump was elected with 77 million votes in a free and fair election.  The government won’t be changed until or unless the Democrats start wining elections again.  And that’s not going to happen if they keep supporting issues that 60 to 90% of the public oppose.

The Dems can stage all the Days of Defiance they want.  If they’re like this last one, they’re just digging their hole deeper.  Picture the contrast.  While the Leftist nuts were marching up and down chanting “No kings.  No crowns,” to combat imaginary government overreach, Trump was presiding over the U.S. Army’s 250th celebration, with a pageant of flyovers, parachutists, and soldiers in period uniforms, telling the true story of the fighting men and women who banished real Kings and crowns from America, and who have kept us free.

Did the Left learn anything from last week’s events?  Likely not.  When viewed through the distorted lens of the Left wing, the contributions of the Army don’t matter.  They marched against Kings and we have no King in America.  Hurray!  We won!  The inconvenient facts are irrelevant.

When asked if he thought he was a King, Donald Trump had the perfect reply.  “I don’t feel like a king.  I have to go through hell to get stuff approved, if I was a King, I wouldn’t be in court all the time.”

So to the motley crew of mindless No Kings marchers, I say, “No Kings?  No shit!

Tomorrow is Flag Day. (It also happens to be President Trump’s birthday).  This day commemorates the approval of the design of our flag, which happened on that date in 1777.  In 1916, President Wilson proclaimed June 14 as Flag Day, and the Congress made it official in 1949.

This week, the City of Los Angeles decided to celebrate Flag Day early, or perhaps just wanted to protest Donald Trump’s birthday, so some of its more militant residents, aided by hordes of professional agitators, decided to stage a riot.  And not content to celebrate Flag Day on only one day, they decided to extend the holiday for a week.

The ostensible trigger for the festivities was a court authorized search and arrest operation by ICE, the FBI and other federal agencies, conducted last Friday in Los Angeles.  First, we were treated to the usual Leftist and media bullshit, e.g., ICE is “disappearing” women, children, hard-working migrants, and even American citizens.

None of that was true.  What was going on was a criminal investigation, and the arrests of criminal aliens, to include people convicted of murder, child abuse or molestation, domestic violence, manslaughter, grand theft, narcotics violations, identity theft, battery, and burglary.

Among these sterling examples of hard-working migrants were previously deported characters such as Cuong Chanh Phan, who killed two kids at a graduation party;  Eswin Uriel Castro, who molested a child and was armed with a deadly weapon; Anastacio Enrique Solis-Salinas has child cruelty charges against him and has been convicted of domestic violence and hit-and-run; twice deported Miguel Angel Palafox-Montes, convicted of grand theft, narcotics violations, and identity theft, and charged with battery and burglary; and Russian illegal alien Dzhakhar Aslambekov, who recently was arrested for fraudulently using Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards to access taxpayer-funded welfare programs.

In addition, just as Tom Homan predicted, because Los Angeles refuses to have any contact with ICE, it’s necessary to seek out these criminals in the neighborhoods, rather than simply picking them up at the jail, a number of illegal aliens not the subjects of the searches were uncovered and taken into custody.  This isn’t retribution, it’s required by law.  The ICE agents must detain any deportable person they come across.

Rioting broke out last Friday, and it continues as this is written.   Rioters have attacked police cars and police officers, shut down interstate highways, torched cars, looted businesses, and burned a number of WayMo self-driving taxis, which cost $6000,000 apiece.  Here’s what it looked like.

The Flag Day celebration was just part of the fun.  Unfortunately the American flag wasn’t being honored.  It was being burned.

. 

This was a bit strange because Mexican Flag Day isn’t until February 24.

I had to look this last one up.  It’s the flag of Berkina Faso in West Africa.  They don’t even have a Flag Day.  That may have been the reason that the rioters shot fireworks, threw bricks and bottles at police, and tossed    E-scooters off overpasses, onto the hoods of police cars.

The rioters didn’t forget President Trump’s birthday either.Most people just say, “Happy Birthday.”

Anyhow, true to form, the California elected officials from Gavin Newsom, on down to Mayor Karen Bass, handcuffed the police, and let the riots expand to the point where things got out of control.  The rioters attacked ICE agents, and threatened to storm and damage the federal detention facility and federal buildings.  When local police refused to come to the aid of the federal officers, President Trump federalized the California National Guard, and sent in the guard and 700 Marines to protect federal property.

At this point, the Left really went nuts.  Mayor Bass, with burning cars in the background, proclaimed the rioting “peaceful.”  Fish face Maxine Waters said there is no violence.  CNN and MSNBC reporters standing amidst the chaos, called it, “mostly peaceful.”  Others insisted  what’s happening isn’t a real riot, but more like a fiery sports team celebration.   Demented House Rep. Jayapal declared the rioters have a duty to destroy the City.

Los Angeles was already burning when the National Guard went in on Sunday, but Newsom and Bass blamed Trump for escalating the situation.  You get that?  Trump is simply enforcing the laws enacted by a Democrat controlled Congress, as he’s required to do.  Maniacs responded with violence, and sending in law enforcement officers and the military to restore order, after the L.A. Chief of Police declared the situation “out of control,” is the problem.  You might say the Governor and the Mayor have things Bass Ackwards.

The rioting began with a few hundred ICE protestors, and  transformed into highly organized crowds of thousands that appear seemingly out of nowhere, equipped with matching shirts, professionally printed signs, masks, shields, and weapons.  Although designed to give the impression of a grassroots movement protesting deportation, it’s not that.

As with all things, if you’re seeking the motivation, just follow the money.  Pursuit of money is why most crimes are committed, it’s why most wars have started, and it’s also the reason for the ongoing insurrection in Los Angeles.

One of the main instigators of the riots is the S.E.I.U. union, which I guess has many illegal alien members.  The California boss of S.E.I.U. was arrested the first day.  This comes as no surprise, as S.E.I.U. has a history of starting such protests.

In 2011, I was in San Francisco, returning from Alcatraz on a street car.  The car stopped for a light.  A sound of approaching drums was heard.  The driver declared, “Looks like a protest heading our way.”  There came a motley group of marchers, including thugs, bums, and women pushing baby carriages, all being sheparded through the streets by people wearing vests proclaiming S.E.I.U. in large letters.  This was the start of the Occupy Wall Street protests.

In addition to S.E.I.U., the L.A. insurrection is being financed by NGO’s that, until Trump was elected, were receiving more than 75% of their revenue from government grants.  The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights took in more than $34 million in government grants, including money from Homeland Security (until Trump arrived and cancelled it).  The Party for Socialism and Liberation is another organization leading the riots.  This organization also conducts anti-Israel riots, and gets some of its funding from the Chinese Communist Party.  Another, the California Poverty Department, minced no words.  “The federal government cut off our funding … so we really have nothing left to lose.”

The use of military troops  has been denounced by Whoopie Goldberg, no less, (and there is no less) as “pure fascism.”  Gavin Newsom objects to the use of the National Guard, and demands Trump remove the guard members, calling their deployment a “serious breach of state sovereignty.”  I think that’s the same thing that Mississippi Governor Barnett and Alabama Governor Wallace said when the 101st Airborne Corps and other troops dropped by to end the riots at the University of Mississippi, and when President Kennedy federalized the Alabama National Guard and sent it to Selma, Alabama.  They were Democrats too.  Some things never change.

The rioters say, “just stop deporting people, remove ICE, the police and the military, and we’ll go away.  You’ve all seen Tom Homan, and you’re familiar with President Trump, so you know that’s not going to happen.  You can’t negotiate with terrorists.

This is a serious situation, not just the usual rioting and looting they do when the Lakers win the championship.  I’ve heard multiple Mexican rioters say California was stolen from their country.  They want the U.S. government out so they can take it back.  That’s the very definition of an insurrection, and as with the Spanish Civil War, communists are inciting the violence.  That war ended with 500,000 dead.  Trump is right.  This must be stopped now, by any means necessary.

Corrupt Demented Imbecile Joe Biden’s four year reign of terror, thankfully has come to an end.  The nation was saddled with a crooked, senile hack who repeatedly proved that he was not in touch with reality.  Who can forget the images of Biden wandering off into the Amazon rain forest, shaking hands with invisible people, tripping and falling, the mumbling, the whispering, and the standing at attention, semi-comatose, and oblivious to the world around him.

Makes you proud, doesn’t it?

Through it all, Democrats and their lap dog media swore to us that Biden was “sharp as a tack.”  He had no mental deficits at all.  On the contrary, we were told, Biden runs rings around the younger staff members.  Anyone unafflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome, who had eyes and ears, recognized these stories for what they were, pure bullshit.

Regardless, the Left kept on lying, Sleepy Joe kept on deteriorating, and the country kept moving on its merry way to Hell in a hand basket.  And all that time, people like Fake Jake Tapper denounced anyone who dared to question Biden’s mental acuity.  You may remember that he terminated his interview of Lara Trump when she said Old Joe was slipping.  “You’re not a doctor,” Tapper railed.

But now, as Il Duce Obama’s pastor, Jeremiah Wright, once famously observed, “The chickens are coming home to roost!”  Once Democrats deposed Biden, ending his presidential campaign, and especially, once his replacement on the ticket, Scamala Harris, lost the election, there no longer was any need to pretend that the Emperor had all his marbles.  The Party was in disarray.  Somebody had to be blamed for the disaster.  So, in true racketeering fashion, they did what all criminals do – they blamed the dead guy, Sleepy Joe.

Democrat elected officials and leftwing commentators now claim to be, “shocked, shocked” to discover that the President of the United States was a blithering imbecile for most, if not all, of his term in office.  “We were lied to,” they protest.  “We simply didn’t know.  How could we?”  Nobody’s buying their crap.

This sudden turnabout, from “Biden’s perfectly fit” to, “How could we have known,” put me in mind of Burt Lancaster’s famous lines from Judgment at Nuremberg.  In that picture, Lancaster plays a German judge on trial for war crimes after World War II.  When it’s suggested that Germans were unaware of the Holocaust, the judge comes clean.

[NOTE – I have amended the dialogue to fit the Biden situation, and have removed the references to Nazis.  I thought this prudent, because this piece isn’t about those other National Socialists.]

“I am aware.  I am aware!  They would have you believe we were not aware of the President’s mental problems.  Not aware.  Where were we?  Where were we when Biden was mumbling his hate at public appearances?  Where were we when he wandered away from the other leaders at the G7 conference to look at the parachutes?  Where were we when he tripped, fell, and staggered, up stairs, on flat surfaces and on the beach?  Where were we when he froze up, with that vacant stare on his face during appearances with other world leaders?  Were we deaf, dumb, blind?  They say we did not know.  But if we did not know, it was because we did not want to know.”

Of course they knew.  But just like those other National Socialists, consumed by hatred, they rationalized their complicity by telling themselves they were protecting the nation from a more serious threat, in this case, that personification of Hitler, and existential threat to democracy, Donald Trump.

Ironically, in their mindless quest to destroy Trump, and then to maintain power, the people around Biden perpetrated the greatest offenses against our constitutional government since the Civil War.  For the first time in more than 100 years, it wasn’t clear who was exercising the duties of the Chief Executive.

Edith Wilson may have “assisted” Woodrow Wilson after his stroke, but she didn’t pursue policies that helped start a European war, she didn’t spend us into bankruptcy, and she didn’t open the country to millions of invaders.

Given the extent of Biden’s many deficits, one must wonder who actually was making the decisions in the Biden White House.  It sure wasn’t Joe.  House Speaker Johnson recounts a conversation he had with Biden early-on in his term.  Johnson asked why Biden had issued an Executive Order banning natural gas exports, and making Europe dependent on Russian energy.  Biden claimed he hadn’t done that, though he certainly had.  Or at least, there was an Executive Order purportedly bearing his signature.

Lately, we’ve been hearing about the extensive use of an AutoPen device to sign presidential documents.  This is legal if approved by the President.  Was it approved by Biden?  And if so, on which documents.  The pardons and commutations, ostensibly issued by Biden have come under scrutiny.

Joe Biden issued no pardons in 2021.  He issued 9 in 2022, and 4 in 2023.  In 2024, things changed.   From January to December 1, he issued 11 pardons.  On December 1, 2024, he pardoned his son Hunter, and later that month, 40 others.  In January 2025, he really got going.  He pardoned 5 family members for any crimes (unspecified) they may have committed back to 2014.  He gave blanket pardons to Fauci, General Milley, and all members of the January 6 Committee.

Newsweek said he had to pardon his family for fear of the very lawfare he invented.  The real reason was the fear that he and the others would face the justice that they so richly deserved.  Before he was done, Biden “signed” more than 8,000 pardons and commutations, in just a few days.  Or did he?  How could a man who scarcely knew he was alive know what he was doing?

For one thing, that would have been a lot of work.  You think Biden had the concentration and the stamina to do all that?

(That’s Joe’s beloved secretary, Miss Stein, on his left)

Not likely.  So enter the AutoPen.  But who was wielding it?  This week, Miranda Devine wrote a column about the AutoPen issue.  Former Biden staffers have been talking, and suspicion has fallen on the man who Dr. Jill Biden called “her work husband,” Special Assistant to the President, Anthony Bernal, one of the most feared and hated Administration employees.  He was the man who rooted out any disloyalty to the Administration by purging any “heretics” who dared contradict the “Joe is fine” lie.

Bernal reportedly made extensive use of the AutoPen to “sign” presidential documents.  Whether or not Joe knew what was being done in his name is questionable.  Miranda Devine reported that four Biden staffers, who aptly called themselves, The Politburo, were running the government.

One White House source suspects that a key aide to the then-president may have made unilateral determinations on what to auto-sign.  The Biden aide would frequently make mention of what “the boss” wanted, but compatriots would have “no idea” if it was true because the internal culture was to not ask questions.  “Everyone” was suspicious of this individual exceeding their authority when claiming to speak for the president.

The Biden staffers may have hijacked the government,  becoming the “existential threats to democracy” they so often warned us about.  Taking control of the AutoPen, they could have perpetrated the Invasion of the Pen Snatchers.

Congress is investigating this scandal.  They say they will get to the bottom of the AutoPen situation.  This won’t be easy.  If we learned anything from the famous 1956 Sci-fi movie, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, they better look for pods.