The prosecution may well have terrible consequences beyond the department for our politics and the rule of law. It will probably inspire ever more aggressive tit-for-tat investigations of presidential actions in office by future Congresses and by administrations of the opposing party, to the detriment of sound government.
— New York Times, 8/8/23

A little late for cautionary introspection.

Then again, such a “tit-for-tat” would be of concern if Republicans had balls, which obviously is a tall order.

Imagine the shit storm that would ensue had a Republican DA indicted Hillary Clinton in 2015 regarding her unprotected server and the deletion of thousands of subpoenaed emails. The Democrats would be screaming about “election interference”, the media would be whining about the appearance of partisan lawfare, and her supporters would engage in their tradition of “mostly peaceful” protests resulting in hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dollars in private and public property damage, not to leave out injury and possible deaths.

The most recent indictment of Trump swirls around his audacity to question the results of the 2020 election; an election we’re all told was on the up-and-up and we must accept it because Democrats say so. Most laughable is that some, demanding we accept election results, are the media sanctimonious; many of them forgiven-and-employed wife beaters, substance abusers, repeat plagiarists, and Lucite block awarded gaslighters. Media persons had no problem cheerleading Democrat efforts to overturn the election victories of Republicans, including those where recounts proved they still won.

If this is the new metric, then all of the following Democrats MUST be indicted and tried for election denial conspiracy and attempting to overturn a certified election. Citing the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act would be a nice touch.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Barbra Lee (D-CA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), President Joe Biden, Al Gore, Tipper Gore, former President Bill Clinton, former President Jimmy Carter, former Governor Terry McAuliffe, Rev. Jessie Jackson, Sr., former DNC Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), former Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL), former Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), former Rep. Stephanie Tubbs (D-OH), Reps. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), former Senator John Kerry, Teresa Heinz Kerry, former DNC Chairman Howard Dean, former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), former Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), former Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), former Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), former Sen. Barrack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), former House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Danny Davis (D-IL), former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), former Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), former Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-CA), Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), former Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Robert F. Kennedy Jr., former Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA), former Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Stacey Abrams, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Attorney General Eric Holder, Andrew Gillum, former Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D-NY), former State Sen. Rita Hart (D-IA), Vice President Kamala Harris (D), Biden Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, Kamala Harris’ Communications Director Jamal Simmons, Biden HUD Secretary Marcia Fudge (D-OH) and more should all be indicted for conspiracy to sow the seeds of mistrust in our election system and overturning the results of an election.

Okay, we can give the dead a pass with honorable mentions.

And seeing how the notion of the “statute of limitations” would be suggested to shield them from legal unpleasantries, the Constitutionality of such protection would also need be questioned since that phrase appears nowhere in our founding document and articles.

I don’t recall any battle or war ending just because the side on the offensive met little to no resistance. Democrats need to actually suffer the ramifications of their bully tactics and if that means they face possible personal financial devastation because of legal defenses, so be it. If some have to actually do jail time, boo fucking hoo. How does it feel?

The political purge of Donald Trump is not the beginning but also a warning to all Americans by an unrestrained Democrat left. They won’t call off their dogs until those at their top suffer and the only thing stopping that is the fact too many elected Republicans, who could return the favor, are too chicken shit to do so.

We can only pray that one day changes.

It’s been a constant as far back as most of us can remember that Democrats have been playing fast and loose with their variation of the sociopathic mental disorder known as projection: disparaging others for doing what they knowingly do themselves.

Today’s Democrat Party and their media depend on the cultivated ignorance of their voters to portray Republicans as extremists for daring to look into numerous, blatant irregularities in the 2020 election while demanding the American people accept Democrat victories as legit and final simply because they say so. No denial is tolerated when the Democrat wins.

However, it IS standard operating procedure for Democrats to reject Republican victories despite their convenient denials….

Biden and Democrats have a long history of contesting election outcomes.

Many Democrats, including Hillary Clinton and Barbara Lee (D-CA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), have cast doubt on every single Republican presidential victory in the last two decades.

Every single Democrat president since 1977 has cast doubt on the legitimacy of U.S. elections.

As recently as this year, Biden cast doubt on the legitimacy of the upcoming 2022 midterms.

DEMOCRATS CALLED THE 2000 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ‘STOLEN’, ‘FRAUDULENT’, AND A ‘COUP D’ETAT’

For years, Democrats have refused to accept the results of the 2000 presidential election.

Al Gore repeatedly claimed that he was the real winner of the 2000 election.

In 2002, Gore claimed he “would have won” if every vote in Florida was counted and that he “absolutely” believed he would become president after the ordered recount.

Gore’s wife, Tipper, said that “I still believe we won“.

In 2016, Gore brought up the 2000 election during a rally for Hillary Clinton and did not refute chants from the audience saying he won.

In 2017, Gore implied Jeb Bush “may have had something” to do with him losing Florida.

Gore, in 2017: “Actually, I think I carried Florida.”

Hillary Clinton, more than once, questioned the legitimacy of the 2000 election.

In 2002, Clinton said Bush had been “selected” and not elected president.

In 2016, Clinton said that the Supreme Court “took away a presidency” in Bush v. Gore.

Then-President Bill Clinton in 2001 claimed that Gore actually won the election, suggesting that all the votes in Florida were not counted and that the Supreme Court had altered the outcome.

Clinton: “The only way [Republicans] could win the election was to stop the voting in Florida.”

Former President Jimmy Carter has repeatedly denied the results of the 2000 election.

Carter, in 2005: “There is no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president“.

Carter, in 2014: “I don’t think that George W. Bush won the election in 2000″.

Terry McAuliffe repeated claims that the 2000 election was “stolen” for over two decades.

Repeatedly in 2001, then-DNC Chairman McAuliffe claimed that Al Gore won the election.

In 2004, McAuliffe falsely accused Republicans of “stealing” the 2000 presidential election.

In 2008, McAuliffe accused Republicans of “stealing” the 2000 election in his autobiography.

In 2017, McAuliffe once again claimed that Al Gore “did win the election“.

In 2021, McAuliffe doubled down on his previous “stolen” election claims and refused to say that Bush won the 2000 election.

Former presidential candidate Rev. Jessie Jackson, Sr. said Gore’s election was “essentially taken and stolen“.

Former DNC Chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) in 2016 said that Al Gore won Florida.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), a member of the January 6^th Committee, has repeatedly suggested the 2000 election was illegitimate.

In 2002, Raskin wrote that the Supreme Court had “[frozen] the election results” in an “outrageous assault on democracy,” saying the Court had “determine[d] the outcome of a presidential election“.

In 2003, Raskin called Bush America’s first “court-appointed president.”

15 House Democrats even objected to counting Florida’s electoral votes.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) questioned the 2000 Florida election results, calling them “fraudulent” and staging a walkout of the House chamber.

Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) questioned the integrity of the election and “the future of our democracy“.

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) claimed that there was “overwhelming evidence” that Bush did not win the 2000 election and vowed there would be “no peace” as a result.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) called the Florida electoral count “inaccurate“.

Former Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL) said that Bush “was not elected,” saying in 2004 that Bush was chosen by the Supreme Court and that the election was stolen in a “coup d’état“.

DEMOCRATS REPEATEDLY CAST DOUBT ON THE LEGITIMACY OF THE 2004 ELECTION

The election in 2004 was no different than 2000, with Democrats once again denying the results of an election they did not agree with.

In 2005, then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and then-Rep. Stephanie Tubbs (D-OH) filed an objection to the certification of Ohio’s electoral college votes.

31 House Democrats voted to reject electoral votes from the state of Ohio, including Reps. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), James Clyburn (D-SC), and now-Senator Ed Markey (D-MA).

In 2005, House Democrats authored a report claiming there were “‘numerous, serious election irregularities” in Ohio’s presidential vote.

John Kerry raised questions about the election on multiple occasions, claiming that many voters were “denied their right to vote; too many who tried to vote were intimidated”.

In November 2005, New York University professor Mark Crispin Miller said that John Kerry told him he thought “the election was stolen”.

Kerry’s wife Teresa Heinz Kerry also claimed the presidential election could have been hacked and stolen.

In 2004, then-DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe commissioned a “comprehensive investigative study on election practices in Ohio” to address “legitimate questions and concerns”.

In 2006, then-DNC Chairman Howard Dean stated that he was “not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided” in 2004.

In 2008, Dean accused Republicans of stealing elections and inferred they stole the election in 2004.

Then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) questioned the “integrity” of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election.

In January 2005, then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) claimed there were many “legitimate” questions regarding the “accuracy” and “integrity” of the 2004 election.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) applauded objections to the 2004 election and thanked Sen. Boxer for objecting to Ohio’s electoral votes, saying voters can’t be confident their vote will be counted.

Then-Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) applauded Sen. Boxer and Rep. Tubbs Jones for objecting to Ohio’s electoral votes, calling their objections an “important service for American democracy”.

Harkin also accused Republicans of a “concerted effort to suppress the vote” and suggested electronic voting machines could lead to “serious fraud”.

Then-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) in 2005 applauded Democrat efforts to contest the 2004 election, called the election “flawed,” and suggested problems may have been the result of “manipulation”.

Then-Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) alleged “systematic voter disenfranchisement” and faulty voting machines in the 2004 election.

In September 2008, then-Sen. Barrack Obama (D-IL) joked about the 2004 election, saying it helps that in Ohio “Democrats are in charge of the [voting] machines” in the upcoming election.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) questioned the use and efficacy of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election.

In January 2005, then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) praised Sen. Boxer’s challenge of the election, saying the debate is “fundamental to our democracy”.

Pelosi said it is “appropriate” to have the debate concerning the 2004 election and claimed that there were “legitimate concerns” regarding the “integrity” of U.S. elections.

Then-Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) argued the 2004 election was “riddled with unnecessary problems”.

Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL) claimed the 2004 election contained widespread “fraud”.

Then-Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) claimed that “dirty tricks occurred across the state” of Ohio in the 2004 election.

Then-Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO) blamed “inadequate and malfunctioning” electronic voting machines for “numerous irregularities”.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) claimed democracy was once again “thwarted” in 2004 and blamed the use of electronic voting machines for voter suppression.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) said, “the system of voting broke down Nov. 2, 2004” and called for an independent audit of discarded ballots.

Jackson Lee then said, “we cannot declare that the election of November 2^nd, 2004 was free and clear and transparent and real for all of those who attempted to vote”.

Then-Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-CA) in 2005 attacked the efficacy of voting machines saying they “can’t be trusted.”

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) repeatedly claimed there were irregularities in the 2004 election.

In November 2004, Nadler said that “we are requesting an investigation into all the allegations, of irregularities with respect to the electronic and other voting machines”.

In November 2004, Nadler said that “well, we have received…any number of communications, e-mails, everything about all kinds of irregularities”.

In December 2004, Nadler said that “paper ballots are extremely susceptible to fraud”.

In January 2005, Nadler said the right to vote was “stolen” from voters.

Then-Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) cast doubt on the security of electronic voting machines in the 2004 election saying he was “worried” that some machines do not have a paper trail.

Then-Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) said Boxer And Tubbs performed a “very valuable public service” and stated he was concerned with all “reports of voting problems in many parts of the country”.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) said the problems with the Ohio election could have been “outcome determinative”.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in 2006 wrote an op-ed claiming that Republicans “stole” the 2004 election.

Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr. “questioned the legitimacy” of the election and suggested the Bush victory was the result of “fraud and stealing”.

Of course when their guy won, Democrats had nothing but uniform praise for the integrity of the 2008 and 2012 elections. Michelle Obama was finally proud of her country.

But when Donald Trump won in 2016….

DEMOCRATS REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE RESULTS OF THE 2016 ELECTION

In 2017, seven House Democrats tried to object to the 2016 election electoral votes.

After President Trump’s victory in 2016, 67 Democrats boycotted his inauguration, with many “claiming his election was illegitimate“.

After the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton repeatedly questioned the legitimacy of the election and claimed the election was stolen from her.

In September 2017, Hillary Clinton said she would not “rule out” questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election.

In March 2019, Clinton smiled in agreement when former State Sen. Hank Sanders (D-AL) said the election was stolen from her.

In May 2019, Clinton said the 2016 election was “stolen” from her.

In September 2019, Clinton dismissed Trump as an “illegitimate president” and said “he knows” he stole the 2016 presidential election.

In October 2019, Clinton said that Trump knows that he is “an illegitimate president“.

In December 2019, Clinton nodded in agreement that she won the election.

In July 2020, Clinton said Trump is scared for Americans to see “how illegitimate his victory” was.

In October 2020, Clinton claimed that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying, “we still don’t really know what happened“.

Former President Jimmy Carter said he believed that “a full investigation” would show that Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said “I believe” Russian interference altered the outcome of the election.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) dodged answering whether Trump was “a legitimate president“.

Rep Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) said the “legitimacy is in question” of Trump’s presidency.

Then-Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) said he did not believe President Trump is a “legitimate president“.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) “applauded” John Lewis and said that he was “right on target”.

Then-Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA) said that John Lewis’ remarks on Trump not being legitimately elected “are reasonable”.

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) said “there absolutely is a cloud of illegitimacy” to Trump’s presidency.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said that Trump’s election was “illegitimate” and that Trump “is an illegitimate president“.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) justified his decision to object to certification saying Republicans engaged in “deliberate voter suppression … in numerous swing states“.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) refused to attend President Trump’s inauguration ceremony because Trump’s election victory was “tainted” by “foreign interference and voter suppression”.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) refused to say if Trump was a “legitimate president“.

DEMOCRATS HAVE CONTINUED TO CAST DOUBT ON OTHER ELECTIONS SINCE 2016

In 2018, Stacey Abrams refused to concede after losing the Georgia governor’s race and repeatedly challenged the “legitimacy of the election” after her loss.

Following her defeat, Abrams never conceded and continued to argue that she truly won the election.

Abrams said she would not concede a race that was an “erosion of our democracy,” was “not a free and fair election,” and was simply “not just“.

She called her defeat “fully attributable to voter suppression” and argued there was widespread voter disenfranchisement.

Many other prominent Democrats supported Abrams in her stolen election claims:

Hillary Clinton said Stacey Abrams “would have won” Georgia’s gubernatorial race “if she had a fair election” and that Stacey Abrams “should be governor” but was “deprived of the votes [she] otherwise would have gotten.”

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said “I think that Stacey Abrams’s election is being stolen from her“.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) said that “if Stacey Abrams doesn’t win in Georgia, they stole it“.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said “the evidence seems to suggest” the race was stolen from Stacey Abrams.

Former Vermont Governor and DNC chair Howard Dean said Abrams “should not concede” and that the election was “almost certainly stolen”.

Obama Attorney General Eric Holder said “I tend to think Stacey Abrams won that election“.

After losing his Florida gubernatorial race in 2018, Andrew Gillum withdrew his concession and pointed to “questions over the handling of the vote” in certain counties.

In 2020, after losing his House race, former Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D-NY) called for authorities to investigate voting irregularities and issues of “massive disenfranchisement of voters“.

Former State Sen. Rita Hart (D-IA) contested the election results of her House race loss in 2020, arguing that ballots were improperly rejected.

BIDEN AND HIS OFFICIALS HAVE PUSHED STOLEN ELECTION CLAIMS

In both 2013, and in 2016, Biden claimed that Gore won the 2000 presidential election.

In May 2019, Biden said he “absolutely agrees” that Trump is an “illegitimate president“.

Kamala Harris has repeatedly cast doubt on election results over the years.

Following the Georgia gubernatorial race in 2018, Kamala Harris claimed that “without voter suppression, Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia” and that Gillum would be “the governor of Florida”.

In 2019, Harris agreed that Trump was an “illegitimate president“.

Multiple Biden administration officials have a history of denying election results.

For nearly two decades, Biden’s Chief of Staff Ron Klain claimed that Al Gore won the 2000 election.

Biden Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre tweeted that the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race was stolen.

Jean-Pierre also cast doubt on the 2016 election, tweeting “stolen election …..welcome to the world of #unpresidented Trump”.

Kamala Harris’ Communications Director Jamal Simmons for years tweeted that Bush “stole” the 2000 election.

Cedric Richmond – Biden’s former Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement – said that John Lewis’ remarks on Trump not being legitimately elected were “reasonable”.

Then-Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH), now Biden’s HUD Secretary, said that Trump “may not be a legitimate president“.

And there’s probably more to come after every election Democrats lose from here on, so Joe Biden should be careful when he refers to “election deniers” being “enemies of the state”.

Liberals may be numerically-challenged when convenient.

Republicans can count and that’s what they’re afraid of.

First, a few notable quotes from the “Soul of the Nation” speech, which was a sorry exercise in projection for Trump-hating dimwits who watch CNN, MSNBC and subscribe to the New York Times and Washington Post.

They [MAGA Republicans] refuse to accept the results of a free election. And they’re working right now, as I speak, in state after state to give power to decide elections in America to partisans and cronies, empowering election deniers to undermine democracy itself.
— Joe Biden, 9/1/22

It all depends if previous elections have truly been “free” from undo interference.

79% say ‘truthful’ coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop would have changed 2020 election
FBI says it ‘routinely notifies’ social media firms of ‘potential threats’ as it hits back at Mark Zuckerberg’s claim on Joe Rogan that Facebook quashed Hunter Biden laptop stories for seven days after warning from the agency
Groups with strong liberal ties funneled massive 2020 election grants to Democrat-rich districts
Ballot Harvesters in Georgia Stopped at Democrat Offices In between Runs to Drop Boxes During 2020 Election

Yep, it was the most secure election in history. Except for that Russian interference in both 2016 and 2020. Unfortunately, one accusation turned out to be a Hillary Clinton/DNC dirty trick and the other turned out be a cover story to mask an embarrassment to the Democrat candidate so patterns need be taken into account.

Back to Biden’s rantings, when it comes to repeatedly refusing to accept the results of a free and fair election, Donald Trump and his supporters need to get to the back of the line.

9/26/19: Hillary Clinton: Trump is an ‘illegitimate president’

In 2000, Al Gore (D) and his fellows contested the results all the way to the Supreme Court before conceding. And, of course, there’s 2016. How many leftists have there been who still don’t accept the defeat of Hillary Clinton? Good grief! After all this time, Hillary herself still hasn’t accepted the outcome. In fact, Hillary Clinton is the only person I’ve heard to openly advocate for a losing presidential candidate to not accept the election results. Hillary’s exact words were, “Joe Biden should not concede [the election] under any circumstances … he will win if we don’t give an inch…”
— Baltimore Sun, 10/27/20

But wait; there’s more!

5/31/19: Why Stacey Abrams Is Still Saying She Won
5/9/22: Biden’s New Press Secretary Is A ‘Stolen Election’ Conspiracy Theorist Who Called Trump An ‘Illegitimate President’

In fact, Democrats routinely attempt to decertify Republican president-elects which ironically brings us back to Biden’s words in Philadelphia where he said, “Democracy cannot survive when one side believes there are only two outcomes to an election: either they win or they were cheated.”

Projection.

1/6/17 House Democrats fail to muster support to challenge Trump’s Electoral College win

It was a rather disorganized and pitiful display.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee said in a phone interview that she as many as 10 colleagues plan to challenge the validity of electoral votes in multiple states, where she argued voter suppression tactics may have tainted the outcome. The maneuver to impede Trump’s election also faces another potentially crippling problem: challenges to electoral votes require the support of at least one member of both House and the Senate. So far, Jackson Lee said, no senators have stepped forward to join the effort.
— Politico, 1/6/17

This was also standard operation procedure for the Democrats.

Democrats Objected to Electoral Vote Certification in 2000, 2004, 2016

There are dozens of instances and venues where Democrats have refused to accept their respective election defeats. Nothing from Joe Biden or Karine Jean-Pierre on that and there are Democrats who are doing all possible to work with compliant Democrat state legislatures to change voting rules, in some cases, months before an election.

5/9/22: Eric Holder on gerrymandering: “Republicans have to cheat in order to win” elections

Of course when Democrats do it, it’s called “redistricting”. Meanwhile, when it comes to the outrageous and unfounded criticism of the accuracy of voting machines…

Marc Elias, a prominent Democratic election attorney, argued in a court filing this week that faulty voting machines may have misread thousands of votes in a House election in upstate New York, a claim similar to the debunked allegation some Republicans pushed regarding the 2020 presidential election.
— Daily Caller, 2/5/21

If it helps Democrats defeat Republicans, they will create new illusions on the “free and fair” election that ultimately benefits them.

Ranked-choice voting
Voters rank candidates in order of preference. If a candidate receives more than 50% of first-place votes after the first tabulation, then they win, but if there is no majority winner, then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated.  In the next tabulation, voters who chose the eliminated candidate as their top pick will have their votes go to their second-place pick. This process is repeated until one candidate receives a majority of the votes.
— Fox News, 9/1/22

Watch how quickly the left will call ranked-choice voting unconstitutional once their candidates lose in this system.

Biden rambled on.

They promote authoritarian leaders, and they fan the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, to the rule of law, to the very soul of this country. They look at the mob that stormed the United States Capitol on January 6th — brutally attacking law enforcement — not as insurrectionists who placed a dagger to the throat of our democracy, but they look at them as patriots.

Democrats conveniently dismiss any attempt to compare the January 6 foolishness to the liberal Democrat 2020 “Summer of Love” Black Lives Matter/Antifa rioting that occurred in hundreds of American cities and cost many lost enforcement personnel and citizens their lives, not to mention billions in private and public property damage.

But the takeover of a “People’s House” didn’t occur for the first time ever in Washington, D.C. after the 2020 election. Leftists have shot up and bombed the Capitol before, but let’s not get all distracted by the past. Actually, the takeover of a legislature building is a rather common occurrence when Dems don’t get their way, want something, and most of the time without a permit.

Liberal Democrats are encouraged and allowed to occupy government spaces but when the right protests, Democrats call the cops to have the gathering declared an “unlawful assembly”.

And they see their MAGA failure to stop a peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election as preparation for the 2022 and 2024 elections.

Democrats denied Republicans the opportunity to celebrate Inauguration Day 2017 and Biden will never mention the attempted assassination of Republicans at a baseball practice in Alexandria, Virginia by a Bernie Sanders supporter. Political violence has been extremely rare on the right and routine from the left.

They tried everything last time to nullify the votes of 81 million people. This time, they’re determined to succeed in thwarting the will of the people. I will not stand by and watch — I will not — the will of the American people be overturned by wild conspiracy theories and baseless, evidence-free claims of fraud. 
— Joe Biden, 9/1/22

Before we blindly agree that the 2020 election was on the up-and-up just because they told us so, don’t forget the growing number of instances where we were told to accept something the left and their media insisted was truth that had to be acted on just to find out it was either very wrong or an intentional lie. Remember those in the Trump administration and/or supporters who’ve been arrested (and in some cases financially ruined defending themselves against federal law enforcement) while Democrats who have genuinely broken the law get the customary wrist slap if any punishment at all.

Seeing how the United States is a constitutional republic, the only threat to “democracy” is the fact that most of the word Democrat is in it. Biden’s vindictive policies have been so destructive to Americans, he’s doing all he can to keep what semblance of a base he has left because when Republicans take the majority in 2022 and Trump gets back in the White House in 2025, there will be a reckoning.

It will be very ugly and well-deserved.

But with the ongoing socialist-Democrat, #BigTech-led purge of all things conservative and Republican, these “principled” corporation is taking the cowardly approach and have joined in on the left-wing attacks.

Republicans in Congress faced growing blowback on Monday from businesses that said they would cut off campaign contributions to those who voted last week to challenge President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

The announcements by Amazon.com, General Electric Co, Dow, AT&T, Comcast Corp, Verizon Communications, American Express Co, Airbnb, Best Buy and Mastercard, among others, threaten to throttle fundraising resources for Republicans who will soon be out of power in the White House and both chambers of Congress. AT&T and Comcast, for example, are among the biggest corporate donors in Washington.
— Daily Mail (UK), 1/11/21

The question to these corporations and their newly-woke values should rightly be, where the hell were they in 2000 and 2004 when Democrats lost the presidential election and shortly thereafter, challenged the outcome using the same process used by President Trump and his allies now decried?

BTW — To acknowledge a consistency to this day, the majority of “irregularities” cited in 2000 and 2004 occurred in Democrat-run black districts. Funny how that keeps happening….

The pile-on is now safe.

Deutsche Bank AG and Signature Bank, two of Donald Trump’s favored lenders, are pulling away from the billionaire president in the wake of last week’s deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The German lender has decided not to conduct any further business with Trump and his company, said two people with knowledge of the matter, asking not to be identified because the deliberations were confidential. Trump owes the Frankfurt-based lender more than $300 million.

Signature Bank, the New York lender that’s long catered to his family, is closing two personal accounts in which Trump held about $5.3 million, a spokesperson for the firm said on Monday. It’s also calling for the president to step aside before his term officially ends on Jan. 20.
— Bloomberg, 1/12/21

Some of these corporations have made it known they’ll revisit this policy in time for the 2022 elections where political winds may change and it may be necessary to curry favor with Republicans. They’ll depend on short memories; something too many in politics have in abundance where campaign dollars are concerned.

The blowback from Trump supporters, and the sane portion of the public, is real and it hurts.

Facebook sees $34 billion erased from market cap as Trump-ban fallout continues to spook tech investors
Twitter loses $5 billion in market value after Trump is permanently barred from the platform

It never takes long for the arrogants to display their chutzpah and racist condescension.

The current damage done to the conservative, Trump-supporting electorate will be something we’ll be told to get over and these cowardly, politically-motivated corporations will soon find out how their #woke decision plays out in the real world.

In this particular case, simple numbers explain why things don’t get done in an efficient manner in our nation’s capital.

Americans’ incomes have risen in recent years, but the wealth hasn’t been evenly distributed, according to the latest estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau. There were 21 counties with median household incomes above $100,000, the new estimates show, and half of the top 10 fell in northern Virginia, just outside the nation’s capital, which itself boasted a median income of $77,649.
— US News & World Report, 12/6/19

The Washington D.C. region including The District, Southern Maryland and Northern Virginia is unsympathetically referred to as “recession proof” because when cyclical economic downturns befall the rest of the nation, certain people are almost always spared the pain.

The Great Recession is one of the most severe economic downturns in American history. Washington D.C. appeared almost unscathed as the rest of the country suffered. The capital city was also one of the first places to start seeing growth when the recovery started. Washington’s success stirred resentment as the region thrived amidst the downturn. New buildings and a wealthy economy were fueled by the federal government and taxpayers.
— Inside Sources, 8/7/17

One would think those fortunate enough to be gainfully employed with generous compensation and benefits would be grateful to those who pay to maintain those comfortable lifestyles.

Alas, that is not always the case….

…
Unlike most industries that actually create and manufacture products that people are willing to purchase, D.C. creates virtually nothing aside from constant reasons why they should keep their jobs, if not create more for those with mediocre creativity and incentive to improve their skills.

One possible reason there is so much resistance to the Trump presidency is that the president’s business acumen has exposed a culture where the actual completion of a project puts fat-and-happy incomes in peril. After a building is erected, those who built it move on and look for another construction project. In D.C., simple tasks are oh-so slowly performed as to not put their jobs in peril and that philosophy trickles down to the lackluster approach of foreign policy, health care, or mostly anything that could improve the lives of citizens by making a solvable problem go away.

The cost of living is also much higher in this area because higher-paid federal employees have more disposable income and those who service them took note many, many years ago.

One thing that drives the capital and its environs is those very large federal paychecks, which now amount to about $90,000 a year in money wages and just under $125,000 a year in total compensation. Washington pay has long been above the national average, but it is pulling away. In 2000, the median compensation for an American worker at large was about 74 percent of the median compensation for a federal employee; today, the average working taxpayer makes only 55 percent of what the average federal tax-eater makes. Our would-be class warriors talk about “transfers of wealth” and “transfers of income” when they mean mere changes in those metrics, but in this case, there is a literal transfer, with the most fearsome agency of the federal government — our corrupt and politicized IRS — raiding our households and businesses to support $1,000-a-night La Tur habits in Washington.
— National Review, 11/6/16

This has also had the negative effect of gentrification which, despite the faux laments, makes these areas whiter, more “progressive” thus less tolerant of those not well paid, liberal and white.

The mediocrity, when it comes to the calibre of the typical federal employee, is also a self-maintaining mechanism because they are in the majority. Federal employee unions have made it almost impossible to shed dead weight and generous pensions are one of the sole motivators of those who’ll do just enough to do their “25” so taxpayers can enjoy the privilege of supporting them for the rest of their lives.

And that is why you see Hill staffers who put in ten years at modestly-paid jobs and then go to work at lobby shops that pay them enough to drive a Bentley and live in one of those horrifying weird $3 million suburban piles in Arlington.

The nonprofit sector (representing many ideologies and causes) also thrives where principles are sanctimoniously packaged; principals are lavishly compensated while they suck up to those in the immediate area who enjoy annual tax write offs. Their overheads are many times more than those in private sector, and they really don’t have to achieve their promoted missions. The media is hardly any better as so many employees never leave their office spaces to collect news, but simply search online for interesting stories they can repackage (aggregate) and make their own.

Whenever the gloom-and-doom of a government shutdown reaches public awareness, it’s been shown many Americans are fairly indifferent because they’re rarely inconvenienced. But it the D.C. area, it’s time to panic. The media throws government employee sob stories in our faces. We’re to feel sorry for those who’ll suddenly find themselves out of work while most everyone knows as soon as the shutdown ends, these employees will be back to work and receive compensation for the forced time off.

But the most ironic is how the media mismanages optics by presenting federal employees, most of whom one would think is primarily worried about how to pay rent or a mortgage, daycare costs, make car payments, etc.

One in five new vehicles sold in those states is from a luxury marque (about a third higher than the national average) with BMW leading the way, because D.C. is exactly that douchey, and Mercedes-Benz in second place. Aston-Martin is unusually popular in Virginia; Bentley sells unusually well in Maryland.

It turns out most important to these employees is food, which bad optics is manifest when you see the obese whining on broadcast news, alerts are issued by local supermarkets and restaurants that a federal government identification card entitles them to free meals, goodie bags and breaks on bills because we should all sympathize with them; a concept not bestowed on Americans when politically-bollixed bad times hit the rest of the nation.

Restaurants are offering free food for workers who present their government IDs, historic sites are offering passes to federal workers, major banks are rolling out special assistance programs, and some centers are even offering free knitting classes for government employees.
— The Hill, 1/3/19

So, pay attention whenever census numbers again reveal the have-and-have-nots are not just a rich vs. the poor political narrative. It’s also a reminder that there are hundreds of thousands of people in one relatively small region of the United States that are living a comfortable life and despite what they’re not doing or doing TO us, expect us to maintain them.

What a difference four years makes.

(CNN) — An evenly divided electorate split sharply, and in some states decisively, on age, gender, religious, racial and ideological lines, according to national exit polls.
— CNN, 11/3/04

In 2004, George W. Bush won 51% of the popular vote yet the electorate was “split sharply”, implying that the American people didn’t want him to do what ever he wanted. According to the left (who declared he wasn’t their president), Bush had no mandate.

Fast forward to November 5th, 2008 and the definition of “mandate”, at least to our progressive wing, changed….

(thinkprogress.org) — John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress (currently on leave to head the Obama transition), explained this morning on Fox News Sunday that President-Elect Barack Obama’s victory last week constituted a strong endorsement by the American people of a “progressive philosophy” and has given progressives a “real mandate for change.”
— Think Progress, 11/9/08

Barack Obama won only 52% of the popular vote.

Thus the confusion.

Why was George W. Bush denied the mantle of mandate while Barack Obama was declared his, and only with a one percentage point difference between them?

Can you say delusional wishful thinking made reality?

If anything is going to rile up the right, it is the gloating.

Refresh my memory if I’m forgetting something, but when President Bush was inaugurated in 2001, I don’t remember promos this blatantly triumphalist even on Fox News. It passive-aggressively defies you to disagree with it, as it asserts that this guy who hasn’t even been sworn in yet will undeniably be an inspirational, nay, an historic figure. Even if you didn’t vote for him, you have to admit that Jan. 20 will be a truly amazing day. Right?You have to admit it, right? Well, admit it!

We’re being told to join in the nationwide celebration (like we have a choice), but not all were respectful on past January 20ths….

2005

Tens of thousands protest Bush inauguration in Washington
1/21/05

Tens of thousands of people took to the streets of Washington Thursday to protest the inauguration of George W. Bush for a second term as US president. Many lined the route of the inaugural parade, booing and jeering as Bush’s limousine made its way down Pennsylvania Avenue. “Not our president,” some chanted.

Can anyone out there imagine the high frequency squealings that would be emitted if Republicans protested the Obama inaugural parade, chanting “Not our president”?

Students protest Bush’s inauguration
1/21/05

While coronation festivities were under way in Washington for President Bush Thursday, local residents performed a mock inauguration on a live bush — the plant — in protest. Ducking catcalls and hoots from supporters of President Bush, about 35 students and Athens residents staged a noisy but peaceful “counter inauguration” Thursday afternoon at the Arch.

One sign read, “He ain’t my president. Disappointed? Yes. Defeated? No. Continue to speak out.” The sign was held by 55-year-old Drago Tesamoveich, a resident of Colbert. “People need to continue to speak out to show that the president doesn’t have a mandate,” he said.

Let’s not forget that while Barack Obama’s win was “historic”, a 53% popular vote win isn’t a mandate. Then again, we know how words like “mandate” changes its meaning when interpreted by a victorious or defeated left.

And this isn’t a recent phenomenon.

Thousands protest, hold vigils on inauguration
1/21/05

Thousands of people in dozens of cities across the nation walked out of work and school, held mock coronations, intoned the names of the Iraq war dead and held candlelight vigils to show their disapproval of President Bush as he was sworn in for his second term.

“The administration thinks it’s got a mandate to continue its policies,” said David Williams, a 49-year-old construction company owner from Oakland, Calif., who wore a T-shirt to the San Francisco march with Bush’s picture and the description, “International Terrorist.”

If Republicans were to throw bottles, tomatoes, an egg, and burned an American flag while Obama’s motorcade “crept” by, just what do you think the outrage level on the left would be? This, by the very same now instructing us to be respectful.

2001

Crowds Protest Bush Inauguration
1/21/01

George W. Bush’s motorcade crept through the largest inaugural protests since Richard Nixon on Saturday, enduring thousands of protesters who hurled insults at the newly installed president. Some threw bottles, tomatoes and an egg and one demonstrator burned an American flag atop a lamppost.

Protesters clashed briefly with police clad in riot gear at a few flash points while Bush remained inside his armored stretch car for most of the parade up a soggy, cold Pennsylvania Avenue.

I wonder if all those Obama supporters who “pushed back” during the campaign see just how immature they come off as. They can be as rude as they want to a president they didn’t support, yet got down right ugly when you didn’t support their guy.

Thousands protest Bush’s Inauguration
1/20/01

Demonstrators turned out in droves on Saturday — a miserably gray and drizzly day, with temperatures hovering in the mid-30s — to protest the Inauguration of President George W. Bush, whose election was contested all the way to the Supreme Court. Police would not estimate the size of the crowd, but many thousands of protesters were in evidence.

“The level of people on the streets shows that people are really upset about lack of democratic process,” says Liz Butler of the Justice Action Movement, the umbrella organizing committee responsible for the protest. “They took it to the streets. We saw tens of thousands. We saw far more protesting Bush than supporting him.”

They came out in scores, co-existing on the parade route with supporters of the new president and lining Pennsylvania Avenue from the Capitol to the White House. Interspersed between Bush-Cheney signs and Texas flags were thousands of protest placards, bearing inscriptions such as “Bush Cheated,” “Hail to the Thief,” “Selected not elected,” “Bushwhacked by the Supremes” and “Golly Jeb, we pulled it off!” There were also plenty of R-rated signs, like “Dick and Bush” and “George Wanker Bush.” One poster included a caricature of a metaphorically toothless Bush in the image of Alfred E. Neuman.

While the liberals gather and celebrate in ways that would send them off with razor blades to bathtubs with warm water had we had won and gloated in this manner, I will sit silently, seethe, and mentally prepare a hit piece for the next Republican who asks us to be tolerant and inclusive.

I will tactfully remind them that our liberals don’t observe the rules they issue for the rest of us to observe.

During the next Republican victory, I will gloat my ass off. I will show these pictures (and a lot more) to remind the lamenting left that we were classy. We were respectful. We toned it down as they asked, and what did we get for it?

You wanna see “gloat”?

You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

When a person decides to enter the arena of ideas, I would ask him or her to make a simple decision: either be a pundit or a politician. When one is a pundit and tries to influence the sentiments of others, all he or she has is their word. Politicians have no such impediment. Their primary goal is to be elected by as many people as possible, so past loyalties can and will be sacrificed to meet that objective.

I feel like I’ve been Keyed….

At the risk of alienating myself from the good people who support him, it’s now time I stick by my convictions and cut Alan Keyes and this new baggage loose.

I nervously talked with him briefly in 1996 on the phone when I was making a pitch to produce the radio and television advertisements for his presidential campaign. I had a more lengthy conversation with his chief-of-staff, but later I had to look the other way when he acted the fool trying to crash a televised presidential debate in Atlanta and got arrested. That campaign bid failed, but I remained a loyal fan of his.

I watched in awe as he delivered incredibly moving speeches during the Clinton impeachment rallies in Washington, D.C. I saw him make women cry as he put words together in ways that could only be described as genius, and he was ad-libbing…!

It was that Alan Keyes that gave me the fire in the belly to become active in politics and later a columnist. I knew, as such, I’d have to carefully choose my positions and be ready to stand by them no matter what. To do otherwise risks credibility, which is all a columnist has.

I went to Stanford Law College last February and despite the snickering from some students who hide within the safety of group-think, I defended my thesis against reparations. I wrote a column saying so two years ago and have remained consistent whenever the topic came back into the news. Should I flip on that position, I’ll have to not only explain myself to those who will feel betrayed, but those who didn’t like me in the first place who’ll throw that column right back in my face.

In April 2002, Alan Keyes wrote an anti-reparations column called “Paid in Blood” in which he said:

“Holy Week is a season for reflecting on a great price paid, once and for all, and the life that arose in triumph over sin and evil once that price was paid. And what an unfortunate season, indeed, for some to renew their effort to extort ‘reparations’ for slavery from their fellow citizens.

“Yet, lawsuits have been filed. Those responsible propose to settle the accounts of slavery leaving the Civil War out of the equation – complete and utter nonsense. The price for the sin of slavery has already been paid, in blood.”

Thousands of white people died in an effort to free blacks from the legal industry of slavery. Since then, yes, the road has been rocky, but if the legacy of slavery were still ingrained in society, there would be no Oprah Winfrey or Bill Cosby or Michael Jordan, or me. They only thing separating their stature from mine is that they got seriously paid.

But Keyes adequately made the point; “The price for the sin of slavery has already been paid, in blood.”

Keyes quoted President Abraham Lincoln:

If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came until all the wealth piled by the bond-man’s 250 years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said 3,000 years ago, so still it must be said, “the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether.”

Before we get too far off course, since we know where Keyes was coming from before, let’s compare that to what he said on August 17, 2004, when in an attempt to suck up to liberals and blacks in Illinois, he suggested that a “tax amnesty” be granted to help black people and called it a “traditionally Republican, conservative and market-oriented approach.”

When asked by a Chicago Tribune reporter who quoted Keyes on his television show when he said, “You want to tell me that what they suffered can actually be repaired with money? You’re going to do the same thing those slaveholders did, put a money price on something that can’t possibly be quantified in that way.” Keyes replied our nation has tried many ways with “the Great Society programs of the sixties” to “the original and proper concept of affirmative action developed under Republican leadership during the Nixon years” and he questions its success.

He added idea of “removing the tax burden from the black community for a generation or two in order to encourage business ownership, create jobs and support the development of strong economic foundations for working families. This has the advantage of letting people help themselves, rather then pouring money into government bureaucracies that displace and discourage their own efforts.”

I would’ve liked to see Alan Keyes state his objection of reparations to the quick-pick-lotto-mentality electorate. I would’ve liked to see if he could have single-handedly turned around that issue and left the Randall Robinson wing neutered. That would be one hell of a legacy. But Alan Keyes became just one more in a group of hacks that will say and do anything to get elected and it is therefore a sad day.

Keyes’ objected to reparations before because it would take money directly from citizens who were not directly involved in the slave trade. He now claims a ‘tax-exemption’ reparation would correct “the historic imbalance that results from the truth that black slaves toiled for generations at a tax rate that was effectively 100 percent.”

He concluded by saying, “My firm goal and ultimate objective is to replace the income tax, and thereby free all Americans from this insidious form of tax slavery. It is well known that this is one of the key priorities of the Keyes campaign.”

I acknowledge I walk on shaky ground when going up against Alan Keyes rhetorically, but this is no place for his spin. In reality, another word for spin is “bullshit.”

Alan Keyes was one of those people who instructed us to stand up for our convictions and be ready to defend them no matter what. When a professor at Stanford called me and fellow black conservatives “misguided” in front of a national television audience, I didn’t retreat. I didn’t qualify. I didn’t tone it down. I didn’t forget what I wrote before in order to-go-along-to-get-along.

I stood my ground and denounced a scheme that would make certain “scholars” and lawyers rich beyond their dreams, and make black people better off temporarily. As I said there and wrote before, once the money’s gone, what’s next? How many times can blacks go back to the well and seek more water? And if you think race relations fluctuate now, just wait until every non-black in this country has to dig deep to right a wrong that happened close to two centuries ago.

In 2002 Keyes wrote, “Our liberty, reborn from the Civil War’s labor, remains imperfect – as we must expect of any mortal thing. Pettifogging lawyers and dishonest scholars will always be able to carp selectively and ignorantly about the warts upon our body politic.

“But the truth of the Civil War is that the terrible price for American slavery has been paid, once for all, by the American people’s deliberate acceptance of their duty to pay it when, in God’s providence, Southern intransigence brought it due.”

So what happened to Alan Keyes? What happened to those “convictions?”

Last May 14th, I went to Faneuil Hall in Boston to record Keyes on the eve of the Gay Marriage law being enacted in Massachusetts. After his speech, I approached his agent and asked if the congressional candidate I was representing could meet Alan. I was asked point blank, “Is he pro-life?” After answering in the affirmative, I realized that this was a qualifier. Keyes seemingly didn’t want to share the same air as someone who didn’t share his convictions.

So how now can Keyes look people in the eye who’ve stuck by him amidst four failed candidacies and television show and expect us to look the other way on this, especially when we dare not cross him when it comes to betraying his “convictions?”

Every black conservative needs to take a time out and slowly remove the knife Alan Keyes has firmly planted in each of our backs. When I go to colleges this fall and try to articulate a different point of view on politics, I’ll have to be prepared when Alan Keyes’ words are thrown in my face. Since Keyes now calls for some kind of payback, my opinion will certainly be taken as a joke when compared to someone of his former stature.

For that reason I will have to distance myself from Alan Keyes for the time being. After writing this, I know I’ll be persona non grata with the Keyes folks, but I do this because that’s what standing on one’s principles means, and I refuse to be spun. What he’s doing is essentially talking down to an audience he must feel is gullible and beneath him. That goes against everything I believe as a black Republican.

I’m sure if he loses in November he may take it all back, since after being rejected by the citizens of Illinois, all he’ll have is what is left of his loyal Republican base.

I understand that politics makes people say and do things they feel uncomfortable with, but I never thought that would apply to “Mr. Convictions” himself.

I never dreamed I would ever be in disagreement with Alan Keyes out of fear he’d lecture me into tears. But this time he’s wrong and he’s damaged a lot of people who’ve been standing by him in this battle of ideas. I may not ever be able to talk with him on the phone again, but so be it.

That is called “conviction.”

However, the last section of that column provoked an unusual response. That section read as follows:

Depends On What “Special” Means

Kerry, taking a page out of the John McCain playbook, called President Bush a tool of “special interests”. Kerry accuses Bush of outsourcing our jobs to other countries. But how would or could a President Kerry deal with leaders of countries where Mrs. Kerry owned factories?

The Heinz Corporation owns 79 plants and 57 of them are located in countries outside of the United States. Remember that when Kerry talks about Bush shipping our jobs overseas.

Heinz’ factories are located in Taiwan, Ireland, France (no surprise), Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Poland, Russia (imagine that…?), Egypt, Israel, The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Canada, Venezuela, Costa Rica, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Australia, Singapore, New Zealand, Japan, the People’s Republic of China (hmmm…), South Korea, Thailand, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Hong Kong.

These food products can be easily made here and shipped there. Quite frankly, I’d much rather my ketchup be made from tomatoes grown in America instead of Zimbabwe.

For any of you who despise Dick Cheney and the numerous times you cite his intervention and preferential treatment on behalf of Halliburton, I’m sure you feel the Kerrys will conduct themselves with the utmost in integrity, right?

History often has a way of repeating itself.

Remember Whitewater…?

Now while I admit to not having a research staff at my disposal, I did do as thorough a research as one man can do and the information I cited was uniform throughout the many sources I examined. So you can imagine my amazement when I received a forwarded email from one of my editors….

Dear Editor,

We would like to correct misrepresentations in Bob Parks’ column on August 2.

First, in accordance with its corporate governance policies, H. J. Heinz Company is a publicly traded corporation with a diverse shareholder base of both individuals and institutions comprising Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike. Neither Mrs. Teresa Heinz Kerry nor Senator John Kerry nor any of the Heinz trusts or endowments – either individually or collectively – holds a significant percentage of shares of the H.J. Heinz Company. (Their current holdings are under 4 percent.) No Heinz family member is involved in the management or board of the H. J. Heinz Company. They have no involvement in the Heinz ketchup business or any of the company’s other brands or products.

Second, 60% of the sales of the H.J. Heinz Company are outside the United States. The company accommodates those customers by providing facilities closer to those markets and maintains a number of overseas facilities that provide products for consumers in those markets. This allows Heinz to pack the freshest ingredients, tailor its recipes to local tastes and deliver the final products in a timely and efficient manner. In the United States, Heinz makes its flagship ketchup in factories in Fremont, Ohio; Muscatine, Iowa; and Stockton, California.

Sincerely,

Debora S. Foster
Vice President
Corporate Communications
H. J. Heinz Company
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15219

The letter included a phone number as well, but some of you can be quite passionate.

I’d like to believe I am a reasonably intelligent person and after a few days to dwell on this letter, I grew increasingly insulted and angry. Calling my words a “misrepresentation” is essentially calling me either dumb or a liar, especially when Ms. Foster probably only wrote the first line herself and pasted it onto an existing form letter. Suspiciously similar verbiage has been issued to other critics as well.

Like I said in my column, I do believe Teresa Heinz Kerry and her husband, should they be elected president, may face the same conflict of interest issues with the Heinz Corporation as those Dick Cheney is constantly being accused of with Halliburton.

The Kerry campaign website (www.johnkerry.com) says, “Corporate profits are soaring, the government keeps expanding, but the opportunities for our middle-class are shrinking. It’s time to bring those opportunities back. John Kerry and John Edwards know that we’re stronger when we create good-paying jobs here, not ship them overseas.”

On the campaign trail Kerry recently added, “If a company is torn between creating jobs here or overseas, we now have a tax code that tells you go overseas. And that makes no sense. And if I am president, it will end as soon as possible.”

But our current tax laws allow American firms to delay paying taxes on income earned by their foreign branches until the money comes back to the United States. If the money stays abroad, those companies avoid paying taxes all together. Kerry’s election plan would require businesses to pay tax on their foreign income immediately. However that new system only covers future profits, and is conveniently not retroactive.

Now while published reports say Kerry personally helped author tax legislation designed to punish companies that relocated overseas, he then pushed for a major loophole that would exempt Heinz from the same penalties.

According to Donald Luskin, Chief Investment Officer of Trend Macrolytics,

Kerry’s economic proposals seem tuned to serve his wife’s economic interests. His proposal last March to end tax breaks for U.S. corporations that do business overseas was designed with a loophole that would allow the H.J. Heinz company keep its overseas tax breaks and get a lower domestic tax rate at the same time.

The loophole will exist for companies located in a foreign country that make a product there but don’t ship that product back to the United States for sale. That company will pay no taxes. I don’t think Heinz or any other corporation that has overseas plants will argue with that code, but I fail to see how that will save domestic jobs, but that’s just me.

But back to our story….

Ms. Foster “wrote” in her letter that the Kerrys own less than four percent stock in Heinz. Now while that’s probably true, to assert that the amount is virtually insignificant and that they have no say in company policy is pure spin coming from a corporate communications pantsuit. As a person who believes in black and white without a whole lot of gray, let’s do some simple math, shall we?

Let’s round that “under 4 percent” to a hard four percent and let’s say the Heinz Corporation is only worth one billion dollars. Unless corporate math is different than that of us mere consumers, the Kerrys’ interest of four percent adds up to around $40 million. And that’s only taking into account that Heinz is worth only one billion dollars, which is a real low-ball figure.

Now if Joe Schmo wrote a letter to the Heinz Corporation, chances are pretty good that if he did get a response, it would most likely be a form letter. But if Joe owned at least $40 million in company stock, I’d be willing to bet Joe would receive a more personalized response in an expedited manner. To assert the “under 4 percent” essentially makes Teresa one of us is what I’d call a “misrepresentation.”

And as for the comments on making the product closer to where the people will buy it, is of course logical and good business. But John Kerry has been accusing President Bush of essentially encouraging the loss of jobs overseas when those very same corporate strategies, in some cases, mirror that of the Heinz Corporation. I was not attacking Heinz per se, but alluding to yet another example of Kerry hypocrisy.

I can understand the Heinz Corporation wanting to distance themselves from the ongoing chatterings of Teresa. But if she’s that much of a loose cannon now, one can only imagine what kind of commotion a First Lady of her crust would make on the world stage. Only an ostrich would believe that she would hide the Heinz Corporation card in her Rolodex for four years, especially since she loves the pretext that the rules don’t apply to her.

I know Ms. Foster is only doing her job and I don’t hold this against her personally. But I don’t mislead, except only in the eyes of those who disagree with me politically.

Unlike some on the left, I’m not going to use this as an opportunity to call for a boycott on Heinz products, because I really could care less. I’m not even going to tell them to “shove it.”

I already buy Hunt’s.

I actually found myself calling into C-SPAN when during their morning roundtable Monday they asked if he should attend. I found myself agreeing with most blacks, but for a more tactical reason.

I would have liked him to go there. Liberal hate for hate’s sake is something I think America always needs to see. Although the pundits thought Karl Rove wanted to keep scenes of Bush being booed off the nation’s evening news, the sight of disrespectful, unrestrained jubilant black people laughing at and insulting the President of the United States would have been educational at the least; alarming at best.

“The problem is they don’t have much of an alternative and so what happens, generally, is they choose the lesser of two evils, which is the Democratic Party. The Republican Party can stress hard work and conservative values but it hasn’t been able to fight the perception that it is run by white, Southern racists.”
— David Bositis, senior political analyst with the Joint Center for Political Studies in Washington, D.C.

While some may consider that a veiled reference to the beverage volume of choice by some in our populace, I am referring to what should have been a major event that’s been suspiciously ignored by ALL in the major media: the 40th anniversary of the signing of the Civil Rights act. I’m not convinced they are saving their hoopla for the 50th. To do a comprehensive analysis of the happenings leading up to that historic signing would reveal a long running lie, yes lie, repeated on almost a daily basis: that Democrats are the party of civil rights.

I don’t know what liberal unionized-Democrat teachers are pushing on our kids nowadays, but how many blacks kids know that the Republican Party was founded upon anti-slavery principles in 1854, that Republican President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 and freed all slaves in the states that broke away from the Union, and in 1870 the first black senator and congressmen appointed were Republicans. In fact until 1930, all blacks on Capitol Hill were exclusively Republican.

Anyway, Democrats will be the first to say that Republicans recruited Southern Dixiecrats to capture that region’s vote. Democrats define Dixiecrats as racist Democrats. Their aim is to say that racists infiltrated the Republican Party.

Let’s interject some logic here: if southern racist Democrats became Republicans, how could (and would) they vote FOR the Civil Rights Act? It’s a well documentable and easily proved fact that the majority of Republicans voted for the Act, thus the majority of Democrats voted against it. Since Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Act, Democrats fraudulently received and are now drowning in their self-congratulations.

Maybe the remaining Dixiecrats who remained with the Democrat Party had no desire to hang with nigger-lovin’ Republicans, and gladly stayed where they felt comfortable. Maybe the incarnation of these Dixiecrats are those very Democrats who use blacks to win elections then purposefully neglect the very problems they enumerate in the inner city, just to keep those issues alive every two and four years.

As I’ve always pointed out, Republicans have near zero influence in the black community. I see U.S. Senators and Congresspersons guiding blacks, black city councilors, school superintendents, principals, teachers, police chiefs, local “leaders”, and they are almost ALL Democrats. It’s amazing how stupid they think blacks are and how stupid blacks let themselves be. Democrats control almost every aspect of life within the community. How are the problems Bush’s fault?

A Democrat designed the 2000 butterfly ballot in Florida and it’s a Republican’s fault that blacks couldn’t read it?

If all the people who have any say in your life are Democrats, and the same issues that plagued the community decades ago exist today, and are worse, only a blithering idiot would go-along with everyone else and blame the only people who have no influence over you.

That is, if you also wish to avoid being called the ultimate, yet literature-content incorrect slur of “Uncle Tom.” I guess it’s better to walk around acting the fool instead of being called one.

“There is a lot of dissatisfaction among blacks with the Democratic Party.”
— Ron Walters, political scientist with the University of Maryland

I contend racist Democrats remained with the Democrat Party, racists like J. William Fulbright (Bill Clinton’s “mentor”), Robert (KKK) Byrd, and Senator Albert Gore, Sr. who like those of their ilk voted against the Act.

But Gore’s son and later former vice president now feels quite comfortable speaking in front of who he obviously considers “stupid blacks” to call his father a “champion of civil rights” as he did during the 2000 election.

Since either complicit or ignorant “journalists are perpetuating the lie” it’s no wonder that the usual campaign tactic is being utilized by the hustlers to the duped….

Who Be Dissin’ Who?
I know it’s hard to go somewhere you know you’ll receive a butt whupping. I understand why the president avoided the convention. Bush knew he’d be getting the same merciless treatment an aspiring, but not yet honed, performer would receive on the stage of the Apollo Theater. Black folk would be booing, laughing hysterically, and shouting unkind retorts to Bush’s every line.

NAACP “chairman” Julian Bond is already being paid. To instigate the insulting of the leader of the party in power means nothing to him. Should blacks migrate from the Democrat Party, he loses power and relevance, so he plays the same card that most blacks love to believe: that all white people are racists, except the ones they know, all white Republicans are rich racists, and minority Republicans are sellouts.

“When the ultraconservative right-wing attacker has run out of attack strategy, he goes and gets someone that looks like you and me to continue the attack. They’ve financed a conservative coalition of make-believe black organizations, all of them hollow shells with more names on the letterhead than there are people in their membership.”
— Kweisi Mfume, president of the NAACP

Now while I’m at it, if I may interject a little more logic in my analysis: the prevailing wisdom is that if 95% of blacks are Democrats, then the remaining five percent are “misguided” as the liberal panelist essentially called me and other black Republicans during the televised discussion last February at Stanford Law.

Not that I’d ever elevate myself to that stature, but there were a minority of people who rejected the notion that the world was the center of the universe, and was flat. I’m sure 95% of doctors at one time believed that in order to relieve disease, cutting a deep gash in a patient and draining out the “bad” blood was the cure. Sure, when they died it was probably assumed they did because they were too far-gone, but that treatment continued on as the norm for many years.

I’d be willing to bet 95% of the people who spent months in wagon trains commuting from the northeast to California would be in sheer disbelief that one day that same trip could be done in six hours by air.

So just because five percent of us think the NAACP is a sham organization run by hustlers who are enriching themselves on the backs of poor blacks they need to stay down, we need to be discredited. Should the day come that blacks realize that their misery is not only self-imposed, but also a tactical decision, I wouldn’t sell life insurance to Bond, or whoever replaces him.

“They preach racial neutrality and practice racial division. They’ve tried to patch the leaky economy and every other domestic problem with duct tape and plastic sheets. They write a new constitution of Iraq and they ignore the Constitution here at home.”
— NAACP chairman Julian Bond

With the exception of the last statement, Bond sounds like he’s talking about the same Democrats who’ve been social-experimenting with blacks with everything from midnight-basketball to housing projects to denying them school vouchers for years.

They play on the “social injustice” theme by bringing up the tired discrepancy between the prison time done by blacks for dealing crack cocaine, and the lack of time done by whites that deal powder. The conveniently leave out one important aspect of the scenario: violence. I don’t recall hearing stories of little white kids who have to sleep in bathtubs to avoid the stray bullets that punctuates their sleepy suburbs. If higher sentences reduce the murder of innocents caught in gang crossfire, so be it.

It would seem that the only people that are keeping blacks “down” are Democrats and the blacks that are enamored by their talk. Blacks can stay uneducated as long as Democrats lay awash in teacher’s union money. Democrats can spend all their time telling blacks how racist everyone else is, and basically how futile life will continue to be.

What exactly is the Democrat/NAACP message to blacks? Simply that there are racist Republican bogeymen around every corner that seek to keep you down, so why try and succeed? Play basketball, rap, make babies, collect welfare, wait for reparations, and stay under-educated.

“Why did Bush knock down the Towers?”
— Lyric by Jadakiss’ second album “Kiss of Death,” that debuted at No. 1 on the Billboard 200 last week

The NAACP and their image awards, obviously sanctioned by people like Bond, tout the importance of hip hop and rap “music” and it’s message while ignoring the violence, degradation of women, and celebrated illiteracy through the use of juvenile, sexually explicit, nursery rhyme-sounding filth. The “music” is simple and is financed, thus reaped, by liberals in the entertainment business. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Bond and the upper echelon of the NAACP receive some kind of kickback from the “award” ceremony.

Think about this: Bill Clinton in his first two years of the presidency had a Democrat senate and congress to work with. Ask him, after ALL the promises, ALL the accusations of racism, ALL the feeling of your pain, why he didn’t do shit?

Because he didn’t have to, and neither do Democrats.

Who’s laughing now…?