Biden – Wow!!!: Wow is about all you can say when it comes to Department of Justice special counsel ROBERT HUR’s report. Just wow!
The Special Counsel’s report reads “We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”
It went on to say: “Mr. Biden’s memory also appeared to have significant limitations … Mr. Biden’s recorded conversations with [ghostwriter MARK] ZWONITZER from 2017 are often painfully slow, with Mr. Biden struggling to remember events and straining at times to read and relay his own notebook entries. In his interview with our office, Mr. Biden’s memory was worse. He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended (‘if it was 2013 — when did I stop being Vice President?’), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began (‘in 2009, am I still Vice President?’).”
So, Biden’s own Justice Department says he’s not mentally fit for prosecution… yet he’s totally fit to be Commander-in-Chief for four more years!?!
Come on!
And then… Attorney General Merrick Garland has to explain that he’s going to charge Trump for records he’s allowed to have, but not charge Biden for records he arguably stole and wasn’t allowed to have? Can’t wait to hear that twisted logic!
It’s hard to see how Biden survives this.
President Kamala Harris???: Ready or not, here she comes!
Democrats and Republicans are already privately talking about invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Biden from office. The only question is this: which Democrat will be the first to go public, and when does Biden’s Cabinet take action?
Kamala Harris is eagerly waiting in the wings. The challenge for her is the fact that many in her own party do not believe she would be a good president, let alone a good candidate for president. So, the question becomes: has she developed a strong enough political machine to withstand a convention challenge from other Democrats who would like to replace her?
Trump Wins Nevada & USVI GOP Caucuses: President Trump had some good news this week. Not only did the Supreme Court seem to imply that they may rule against Colorado’s attempt to keep Trump off the ballot, but there were also indications that this could be a unanimous decision, which would be good for the process and America.
And then he has big wins in the U.S. Virgin Islands GOP Caucus, where he pulled in almost 75% with 5 candidates on the ballot, and in the Nevada GOP Caucus, where he won in an uncontested race. In both cases, he won 100% of the delegates to the national convention, putting him one step closer to the nomination.
The Virgin Islands Republicans used Rank Choice Voting, designed to determine the consensus candidate amongst Republicans. When they originally set their rules and moved up their caucus date, there were still eight candidates running. By the time the caucus rolled around, there were five left on the ballot, with only two contesting the race.
I was there working one of the polls. The process went smoothly, and many Republicans said they appreciated the opportunity to rank the various candidates and give their voice a bigger impact. Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna was there all day with us whipping votes for President Trump and commented on how smoothly and enthusiastically Republicans engaged.
For primaries and nominating conventions/caucuses, Rank Choice Voting is a process worth exploring. We are reminded that Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin was nominated using Rank Choice Voting and today he stands as one of the most popular governors in America.
Read more below and follow me on Twitter & GETTR – @sanuzis
–Saul Anuzis
Click Here for Past Commentary from Saul
Saul’s News Weekly Rewind Video
This Week: National Debt is spiraling out of control, Newt Gingrich says Biden may not be the Democrat nominee this fall, and POTUS speaks to dead foreign leaders!
Links to the articles discussed in the video:
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/cbo-26-trillion-deficit-2034-national-debt-116-gdp
https://dailycaller.com/2024/02/05/newt-gingrich-democrat-nominee-joe-biden-michelle-obama/
DONATE TO 60 PLUS!
We’re fighting every day for seniors and retirees by working to eliminate the death tax, ensure healthcare freedom, and save social security for future generations. With your essential help we will continue the fight. You can even donate using Bitcoin and Ethereum!
Thank you for your help and support of the 60 Plus Association.
Donate Today! Visit https://www.60plus.org/donate
Hur report portrays Biden as ‘elderly man’ with ‘poor memory’
Special counsel Robert Hur‘s report on his 15-month investigation into President Joe Biden‘s mishandling of classified documents includes damning assessments of the president’s mental acuity amid concerns about his age before November’s election.
In his nearly 400-page report, Hur provides details regarding his decision not to prosecute Biden criminally, unlike former President Donald Trump, such as the likelihood that a jury would sympathize with him and that he could not remember, “even within several years,” when his son Beau Biden died, among other important dates.
“Biden’s memory was significantly limited, both during his recorded interview with the ghostwriter in 2017 and in his interview with our officer in 2023,” Hur wrote.
“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview with him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory,” he said. “Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him — by then a former president well into his eighties — of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”
Biden, the White House, and Biden’s personal attorneys have defended the president from Hur’s report, all three underscoring the lack of criminal charges.
Age isn’t just a number. It’s a profound and growing problem for Biden.
The new blunders detailed in the special counsel’s report have sparked fresh concern about the president’s mental fitness.
Special counsel Robert Hur jolted the presidential campaign Thursday with a withering assessment of Joe Biden’s mental acuity, drawing the president’s biggest political liability firmly into the public conversation.
While Biden’s age is a major concern for voters in polling, top Democrats have danced around the issue, keeping their concerns mostly private. But Hur’s description of Biden, 81, in an official report as a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” may force a new reckoning for the president.
Investigators found insufficient evidence to charge Biden for mishandling classified documents during his time as vice president but wrote his memory “appeared to have significant limitations” and that “he did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died” in 2015. Biden could not remember when he was vice president or the details of a debate about sending additional troops to Afghanistan, they said.
That scathing description came just as Biden’s aides were trying to explain away the president’s most recent verbal gaffes — in which he mixed up the heads of state and recalled recent conversations with world leaders who died long ago.
During a pair of New York fundraisers on Wednesday night, Biden twice described conversations he said he had in 2021 with European leaders at the G7 meeting in the U.K., which took place just months after the U.S. Capitol insurrection. At both Manhattan events, Biden said that former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, who died in 2017, had asked him about the Jan. 6 riot and his reaction if people stormed the British Parliament and killed officers “to stop the election of a prime minister.”
And just days earlier, during a campaign event outside of Las Vegas, Biden mixed up François Mitterrand, the former French president who died in 1996, for French President Emmanuel Macron.
Biden angrily pushes back at special counsel’s report that questioned his memory, handling of docs
A special counsel report released Thursday found evidence that President Joe Biden willfully retained and shared highly classified information when he was a private citizen, including about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan, but concluded that criminal charges were not warranted.
The report from special counsel Robert Hur resolves a criminal investigation that had shadowed Biden’s presidency for the last year. But its bitingly critical assessment of his handling of sensitive government records and unflattering characterizations of his memory will spark fresh questions about his competency and age that cut at voters’ most deep-seated concerns about his candidacy for re-election.
In remarks at the White House Thursday evening, Biden denied that he improperly shared classified information and angrily lashed out at Hur for questioning his mental acuity, particularly his recollection of the timing of his late son Beau’s death from cancer.
The searing findings will almost certainly blunt his efforts to draw contrast with Donald Trump, Biden’s likely opponent in November’s presidential election, over a criminal indictment charging the former president with illegally hoarding classified records at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and refusing to return them to the government. Despite abundant differences between the cases, Trump immediately seized on the special counsel report to portray himself as a victim of a “two-tiered system of justice.”
Yet even as Hur found evidence that Biden willfully held onto and shared with a ghostwriter highly classified information, the special counsel devoted much of his report to explaining why he did not believe the evidence met the standard for criminal charges, including a high probability that the Justice Department would not be able to prove Biden’s intent beyond a reasonable doubt, citing among other things an advanced age that they said made him forgetful and the possibility of “innocent explanations” for the records that they could not refute.
John Roberts tipped his hand, Ketanji Brown Jackson asked about Jan. 6, plus other key moments from Trump’s hearing
Here are the justices’ most revealing comments from the two-hour hearing.
The attempt to have former President Donald Trump disqualified from the ballot met a frosty reception at the Supreme Court on Thursday.
Justices across the ideological spectrum seemed skeptical of a Colorado ruling that deemed Trump ineligible to appear on the state’s ballot because of his involvement in stoking violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
The Colorado decision rested on the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause, which says that those who have engaged in an insurrection against the United States after previously taking an oath to support the Constitution are ineligible to hold office.
But over two hours of arguments on Thursday, the justices repeatedly suggested that states do not have the authority to enforce the disqualification provision. Allowing individual states to do so could lead to a chaotic patchwork across the country, they warned. Instead, some justices said, the insurrection clause can be enforced only through congressional legislation.
Here are five key moments from Thursday’s arguments.
UNDEFEATED: Donald Trump Wins Nevada and US Virgin Islands Caucuses
Donald Trump has won the Nevada caucuses and all its 26 delegates in the winner-take-all contest. This race has been over for weeks. It’s why Trump declared victory after winning the New Hampshire Primary because he’s running virtually unopposed. The only other person on the ballot is Ryan Binkley. All we needed was the vote totals for the caucus, which was held between 5 and 7:30 pm local time and eight and 10:30 pm EST.
Trump is projected to clinch over 95 percent of the vote. The former president remains undefeated in the 2024 GOP primaries.
Nikki Haley decided not to participate in the caucus, opting to run in the primary on Tuesday, where no delegates would be awarded—the Nevada GOP was clear on their position. Haley suffered total humiliation that night, losing to ‘none of these candidates’ by 30 points. Tim Scott and Mike Pence, who have since suspended their campaigns, were the only other names on the ballot. Haley could only garner 30.9 percent of the vote. The literal ‘no one’ category got 62.9 percent. It meant that hordes of Republican voters took time out of their day to drive to the polls and tell Nikki to shove it.
It sets up Trump for delivering the final blow against the former South Carolina governor in her home state, where she’s projected to lose by at least 30 points. It could be a forty-burger.
While all eyes were on Nevada, Trump also clinched another win in the US Virgin Islands, where some folks thought Haley could pull off a sneak win. That is not the case.
A Border Crisis By Design
It is unequivocally the intended result of Biden administration policy.
Three years into the border crisis, most Americans still don’t understand what’s actually happening at the border. This lack of understanding extends to the mainstream press and to most Republicans, who have struggled to communicate effectively on the issue.
The cause of the current crisis is President Joe Biden’s unprecedented refusal to enforce federal immigration law, which requires that all asylum-seekers be detained rather than released into the United States. The solution, therefore, is for Biden to start enforcing federal law as he is constitutionally required to do—or for Congress to deny the president something else he wants until he does.
Many observers, however, seem unclear about the cause of the crisis. Praising a not-yet-released Senate immigration bill, which a trio of senators is currently negotiating with the White House behind closed doors, the Wall Street Journal editorial board writes that “the President needs Congress to fix the underlying incentives at the border.” But the president, not Congress, has created the incentives that have attracted so many illegal aliens, by offering a near guarantee that asylum-seekers will get released into the U.S. rather than detained as their claims are adjudicated.
Under presidents of both parties before 2021, those trying to enter the U.S. illegally at least had to evade the authorities. This hasn’t been true under Biden. U.S. District Court Judge T. Kent Wetherell writes that U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) Chief Raul Ortiz “testified that the current surge differs from prior surges that he [has] seen over his lengthy career in that most of the aliens now being encountered at the Southwest Border are turning themselves in to USBP officers rather than trying to escape the officers.” Ortiz, whom the Biden administration selected as chief, said that aliens are likely “turning themselves in because they think they’re going to be released.”
The difference in the number of releases under Biden and under his immediate predecessor is like the contrast between the Himalayas and a pitcher’s mound. According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) statistics, in December 2020, the last full month under President Donald Trump, the USBP released 17 aliens into the U.S. In December 2023, the most recent month for which statistics are available under Biden, the USBP released 191,142 aliens into the U.S. In other words, the USBP released 0.009 percent as many aliens into the U.S. during the final month under Trump as it did during the most-recent month under Biden—for every one alien released under Trump, 11,244 were released under Biden. That’s not a normal increase; it’s a flash flood.
The Senate Border Deal Is a Horror Show
The Senate’s border deal has been released, and it’s a horror show. It’s a $118 billion package tied to more aid for Ukraine that does next to nothing to solve the current crisis at the southern border. Don’t let the billions more in border security fool you. More funding for border agents is Biden-speak for more personnel to process the asylum claims, not to deport people who shouldn’t be here.
And while the bar for would-be asylum seekers has been raised in the bill, there are other provisions in the legislation that ensure Democrats have plenty of talking points for when they make their mass amnesty push, which has been the Left’s long-term goal (via NYT) [emphasis mine…
…Of course, The New York Times buried the portions about the kids of H-1B visa holders and a pathway to citizenship for Afghan refugees. Also, we will pay for the legal representation of any migrant under 13. The bill also adds 250,000 new visas over the next five years. House Speaker Mike Johnson said the bill was dead on arrival. House Republicans released a standalone Israel funding package to deliver a body blow to this Senate bill.
NYC launches $53 million program to hand out credit cards to migrants, illegal immigrant families to receive nearly $1,000 a month
New York City will soon start handing out pre-paid credit cards to illegal immigrants, according to a new report.
The New York Post reported, “The $53 million pilot program, run by the New Jersey company Mobility Capital Finance, will provide asylum seekers arriving at the Roosevelt Hotel with the city cash to help them buy food, according to city records.”
Mobility Capital Finance will provide “Immediate Response Cards” to families being housed in hotels by the city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development.
The first pre-paid credit cards will be provided to illegal aliens residing at the Roosevelt Hotel in Manhattan. However, if the program is deemed to be a “success,” the city will expand the program to the estimated 15,000 migrant families being housed in NYC hotels.
The cards will only be available for use at bodegas, grocery stores, supermarkets, and convenience stores. The migrants reportedly must sign an affidavit promising to only spend the money on food or baby supplies or they will be removed from the pilot program.
According to the Daily Mail, “It is unclear how city officials will check if cards are being abused – and if the scheme will worsen the crisis by encouraging other migrants to head to the Big Apple in the hopes of receiving free money.”
Texas is defending U.S. against a southern border invasion
An invasion is happening at America’s southern border. Despite its duty to protect our sovereignty, the federal government has turned a blind eye to a crisis that is growing worse every day. Fortunately for the people of Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott has taken a stand to defend his state and, by doing so, the rest of the country. I stand with Texas.
Mr. Abbott is within his authority under the U.S. Constitution — specifically, Article 4, Section 4, which states the federal government must protect a state from invasion. Furthermore, Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution is equally clear: A state cannot engage in war unless it is actually invaded.
According to data from the House Homeland Security Committee, U.S. Customs and Border Protection recorded more than 2.4 million encounters at the southwestern border with illegal aliens in fiscal 2023. So far this fiscal year, 169 people on the terrorist watch list were apprehended attempting to enter the country illegally.
Encounters at the southwestern border increased by over 40% from 2021 to 2023 and by more than 100% since 2019. The numbers in October showed a 40% increase since September 2021.
In fiscal 2023, CBP agents seized 27,293 pounds of fentanyl. As the House Homeland Security Committee documents noted, this is enough to kill more than 6 billion people. It is a chilling reminder that this is more than a border-state issue. It is a national security crisis.
All the more reason for Mr. Abbott and other state leaders to act. The national media are confused about the meaning of the recent 5-4 decision by the Supreme Court in relation to the federal government and Texas.
To be clear, nothing in the high court’s order stops Texas officials from putting up barbed wire, fences or other barriers on state or private property along the border. Oddly, the order also allows the federal government to tear it down while the case is pending.
Will Biden Back to Trump Represent a Smooth Transition of Power? Not While Obama is Around
While mainstream reporters kept questioning whether or not President Trump would leave office willingly, he did so on schedule and as required. Will Biden do the same if Trump is re-elected? Don’t count on it while Barack Obama is around.
While we’re at it, did the media question Obama’s behavior upon leaving office? In particular, did Obama offer a smooth transition for Trump to assume the presidency? A wave of evidence shows that he did not. Obama continually thwarted his successor, unlike every previous president in U.S. history.
Constant Meddling
Obama’s post-presidency was unique among presidents. He never moved from Washington D.C. Upon leaving office, Obama set up headquarters a short drive from the White House. His compound included his family residence, an apartment for Valerie Jarrett, his former senior advisor, and offices for Jarrett and various staff people.
Organizing for Action, Obama’s umbrella organization was focused on steering public discourse and national events through the mobilization of thousands of volunteers, all to undermine Trump’s presidency.
Feds charge New Jersey political operative with mail-in ballot fraud
Federal prosecutors announced charges Thursday against a New Jersey political operative they say orchestrated a mail-in ballot fraud scheme in the 2022 election, casting ballots in the name of people who never actually voted.
Authorities say Craig Callaway paid ballot harvesters to request ballots from election officials, purportedly on behalf of valid voters. Mr. Callaway collected the ballots and the voters never saw them — but they were still cast and counted, indicating that someone fraudulently filled them out and submitted them.
The FBI, which investigated the case, reported on four specific fraudulent ballots but prosecutors said there were “many.”
Stop Allowing Noncitizens To Determine Congressional and Presidential Representation
The open border has enabled the Left to amass more political power. Democratic-controlled states have gained congressional seats by welcoming and harboring illegal aliens.
As president, Donald Trump tried to halt this wrongdoing by ordering the Census to exclude all noncitizens from apportionment. But one of President Biden’s first acts in office was to reverse this policy as he began to open the border to millions of illegal aliens.
Barring the Census from including noncitizens in apportionment is critical in making sure that American citizens—the only population who can and should vote in U.S. elections—are picking America’s leaders.
Biden’s intentional border crisis has produced unprecedented apportionment issues, distorting the representation that states have in the House, and how many electoral votes they have in presidential elections.
