Guest silences CNN panelists with the facts after they swoon over Biden's 'selfless' and 'heroic' decision, Oval Office speech.

 Guest silences CNN panelists with the facts after they swoon over Biden's 'selfless' and 'heroic' decision, Oval Office speech. 

by Chris Enloe 

Some Democrats have even compared Biden's decision not to run for re-election to George Washington's decision not to seek a third presidential term.

CNN political analyst Scott Jennings went there.

After President Joe Biden spoke from the Oval Office on Wednesday — never explaining why he chose to end his re-election campaign — a CNN panel that featured Biden allies swooned over the president for being "selfless" and "heroic," claiming Biden willingly chose to step away from power.

'You're asking the country to overlook a lot of dishonesty about Joe Biden's abilities, capabilities — his capacity to serve for another four years.'

But Jennings quickly rained on their parade.

The Republican commentator, instead, brought forth all of the evidence indicating that Biden's decision to step aside is not the selfless act of courage Democrats are claiming it to be.

"It's odd to me that just a few weeks ago — heck, a few days ago — most Democrats were still looking at television cameras and saying that this person is up to another four years. I mean, he's obviously running on fumes," Jennings began. "They weren't 'cheapfakes,' no matter what the government told you."

"In fact, I still think it's a legitimate scandal how they ever arrived at the decision to run again in the first place," he added.

The Biden family and his staff, Jennings continued, "have a lot of explaining to do," referring to their decision seemingly to hide Biden's cognitive decline.

But that's not the only problem for Democrats. In fact, the praise for Biden, Jennings said, hides the fact that Democratic Party leaders forced Biden to step down from his re-election campaign, thus ignoring the will of voters.

"I'm still shocked at how easy it is to overthrow the president," Jennings observed. "He got 81 million votes in 2020, and then he get 14 million more. But at the end of the day, he was no match for a handful of party bosses who run the Democratic Party."

"At the end of the day, a bunch of people looked into TV cameras over the last days, weeks, and months, and told you a lot of things — a lot of things that were not true about this president," he pointed out.

The panel did not immediately challenge anything Jennings said.

But later in the discussion, David Axelrod, a close ally of former President Barack Obama, took exception to Jennings' observations. He claimed Biden wasn't "toppled" by Democratic Party bosses before chastising Jennings for not giving Biden enough "grace."

Jennings, however, did not have the patience for Axelrod's revisionist history.

"What you're asking Republicans to do is to overlook a lot of dishonesty that came right out of this White House, that came right out of the vice president, people who worked for him, his family, other Democrats, Democrats in Congress," Jennings told Axelrod. "You're asking the country to overlook a lot of dishonesty about Joe Biden's abilities, capabilities — his capacity to serve for another four years and so on."

Jennings ultimately told Axelrod that it is "weird" Democrats are pretending that Biden wasn't pushed out by party bosses, especially considering that Biden and Democratic Party leaders were insisting just one month ago that Biden is capable of serving another four years as president.

Despite the fact that Democratic voters chose Biden in their primary elections, Vice President Kamala Harris became the party's presumptive nominee this week when enough delegates pledged to support her campaign.

Harris, unfortunately, has an uphill fight if she wants to seriously challenge Donald Trump for the White House.

See more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/scott-jennings-cnn-panel-biden-decision-not-to-run

Trump likely won the 2020 election after all

Chris Talgo February 09, 2024

After extensive analysis using raw survey data coupled with mail-in vote totals, we concluded that mail-in voter fraud almost certainly changed the 2020 election outcome in all six crucial swing states.

According to the legacy news networks, social media platforms, various deep state actors, and other corrupt institutions, the 2020 election was the safest and most secure in history and anyone who questioned Joe Biden’s victory was a wacky “election denier.”

That has been the dominant narrative for the past three years, which has produced a chilling effect and caused many to forgo conducting a deep dive concerning whether the 2020 election really was as safe and secure as we have been told it was.

In reality, the 2020 election was most likely marred by widespread mail-in voting fraud. And even worse, the extensive mail-in voter fraud almost certainly tipped the election in favor of Joe Biden.

In other words, had rampant mail-in voter fraud been prevented in the 2020 election, Donald Trump would have won the Electoral College and been re-elected to a second term.

At this point, you may be wondering how I can be so sure that the 2020 election was tainted by mail-in voter fraud. The answer is simple: The voters have told us so.

In late 2023, the Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports conducted a simple survey to gauge the degree of voter fraud in the 2020 election. We asked 1,085 voters who participated in the 2020 election about their voting behaviors three years prior. To our surprise, the results showed that at least one in five mail-in voters admitted to committing ballot fraud in the 2020 election.

Our findings caused quite a stir in the media, especially among those who suspected the 2020 election was not completely secure due to the dubious changes to voting rules state officials unconstitutionally imposed under the cover of COVID-19.

Shortly after the poll was released, former President Trump called it “the most important poll released in the last 20 years” and “the biggest story of the year.”

Eventually, we began to wonder if we could apply the poll results to publicly available election data to determine whether mail-in voter fraud impacted the outcome of the election. This was no easy task.

After extensive analysis using the raw survey data provided by Rasmussen coupled with state-based and other reputable sources documenting mail-in vote totals, we concluded that mail-in voter fraud almost certainly changed the 2020 election outcome in all six of the crucial swing states.

This is all laid out in great detail in the Heartland Institute’s latest policy study, aptly titled “Who Really Won the 2020 Election?” (Spoiler alert: not Joe Biden.)

Here are just a few of the main takeaways:

Upon further analysis of the Rasmussen survey data, we found that more than one in four mail-in voters (28.2%, to be precise) admitted to committing at least one kind of election fraud in the 2020 election.

Under multiple scenarios, with differing rates of mail-in voter fraud taken into account, our results indicate that Trump would have won the Electoral College in the 2020 election had fraudulent mail-in ballots not been counted.

Even if the level of fraud detected in the Heartland/Rasmussen survey substantially overstated mail-in voter fraud by multiple orders of magnitude, Trump would likely still have won the 2020 election.

According to the official 2020 election results, Biden defeated Trump in the Electoral College 306 to 232. The national vote tally was similarly lopsided, with Biden receiving approximately 81 million votes to Trump’s 74 million votes.

But the 2020 election, like most recent national elections, was ultimately decided in the swing states.

In 2020, Biden won each of the six swing states by fewer than 20,000 votes, a tiny margin in the context of the overall vote.

But here’s the rub: When we extrapolated for mail-in voter fraud in the six crucial swing states, using state-specific mail-in voter data and accounting for a variety of fraud rates (from the 28% level all the way down to the 1% level), the Electoral College vote changed considerably.

In almost all the hypothetical scenarios we lay out, Trump would have won enough Electoral College votes to defeat Biden soundly. In other words, Biden’s Electoral College victory, although seemingly large, was predicated on razor-thin margins in all six of the swing states.

We know for a fact that each of the six swing states changed its election rules in the months leading up to the 2020 election to allow for mass mail-in voting based on inaccurate state voter registration rolls. We also know that several of these states made it easy for mail-in voting fraud to be committed by eliminating common-sense guardrails like signature verification and permitting shady election practices to take place like ballot harvesting.

So it stands to reason that these unprecedented last-minute changes to voting procedures likely resulted in a flood of fraudulent ballots being counted. It also stands to reason that widespread mail-in voter fraud in the 2020 election disproportionately benefitted Joe Biden, seeing that he received more than twice as many mail-in votes as Trump.

When considering all these factors, it seems obvious that Biden’s 2020 victory was aided and abetted by rampant mail-in voter fraud. But as they say, what’s done is done. It does no good to cry over spilled milk or shady elections.

With less than nine months before the 2024 presidential election, however, we must ensure that this does not happen again. It is incumbent upon the 50 states to ensure that their voting systems are as safe and secure as possible. We still have time to make necessary changes.

Going forward, will enough states do the right thing? Or, like so many other things in today’s upside-down world, is the quaint American tradition of free and fair elections a vestige of the past?

 

 

 

Howie Carr: Hunter Biden, the poster boy for ‘Democrat privilege’

Dec 10, 2023

Biden cares about more than any other, it’s that all Americans should pay their “fair share” of taxes.

As he sternly tweeted last January: “We’re making corporations and the super-wealthy start to pay their fair share in taxes.”

Because, you see, these tax-cheating rich bastards aren’t paying a damn thing, as he so often points out, as in June 2022:

“They don’t pay a penny so if we had a minimum tax of 15 percent, a minimum 15 it doesn’t hurt them at all. They make a lot of money still and we could raise a lot of money to make sure that child care doesn’t cost you 1,400 bucks a month.”

Because, see, some fathers refuse to pay child support to their children, especially the illegitimate ones they have with ex-strippers. These greedy hypocritical rich swine fly around in private jets to court appearances, and then have the nerve to tell the family-court judge they’re broke. But I digress…

“I think you should be able to make a trillion dollars,” Joe Biden said last March. “Just pay your fair share, Jack.”

Ah, so there’s the rub. Joe wants this random guy named “Jack” to pay his fair share. He said nothing about his own son Hunter. Hunter’s fair share is apparently… nothing.

Which is why Hunter now finds himself indicted in federal court in California, charged with income-tax evasion, failure to file and pay taxes and filing false or fraudulent tax returns.

I guess Hunter Biden wasn’t listening to Pop back on Sept. 16, 2021.

“All I’m asking is you pay your fair share. Pay your fair share!”

It is a recurring theme for the president known as Brandon.

“Look,” he thundered on June 3, 2022, “if you can make a billion dollars I’m all for it. Just pay a little bit of it. Just pay a little bit of your fair share, you know? Pay your fair share!”

Can we quote you on that, Mr. President?

“I think,” Hunter’s dad proclaimed on Oct. 6, “you should be able to be a trillionaire or billionaire or a a zillionaire if you want. But pay your taxes for God’s sake, pay some fair something approaching a fair tax.”

What we have here, yet again, is the old Democrat double standard. If they didn’t have double standards, they’d have no standards at all. Taxes for thee, but not for me. Do as we say, not as we do.

Just like free speech, as we saw with the college presidents from the Poison Ivy League this week at that Congressional hearing. If you “misgender” someone and use the wrong pronouns, that can get you cancelled. Argue that there are only two genders — you’re fired!

But if you chant “Gas the Jews!” well, then it all depends on the context.

It’s the same with paying taxes. The context here is, if you’re Hunter Biden, you don’t have to worry about paying no stinkin’ taxes. Pay no attention to what Daddy Joe Biden says out on the road.

“You can make a billion dollars,” he screamed on March 11 of last year. “Make a billion dollars for God’s sake! Pay your fair share dammit right now!”

Joe says Hunter Biden is the smartest man he knows. But for such a towering intellect, Hunter seems to make the kind of criminal errors lesser mortals learn to avoid early on.

In fact, some might argue that Hunter is the poster boy for what other Democrats like to call “white privilege,” although it might be described more precisely as “Democrat privilege.”

For example, if you don’t have Democrat privilege, you might want to refrain from publicly bragging about crimes you’ve committed, especially if the statute of limitations hasn’t yet expired.

You’d think a graduate of Yale Law School might comprehend this basic legal concept. And you certainly wouldn’t want to include a laundry list of your crimes in your “memoir,” lest they end up being quoted in your indictment.

Which in Hunter’s case they are, in paragraphs 115 and 116.

Do you know how jammed up the average guy without Democrat privilege can get if he doesn’t pay alimony to his ex-wife? This alimony headache is nothing new. The late actor John Barrymore observed more than 80 years ago:

“You never know how short a month is until you have to pay alimony.”

But it’s never been a problem for Hunter.

In paragraph 75 of the indictment, the feds quote Hunter’s Oct. 13, 2018 text to his ex-wife Kathleen. He’s saying he can’t pay her because “the wire came back due to insufficient funds/you know tuitions alimony taxes rent. Jesus.”

The feds boldfaced the word “taxes” because, as they noted, “The Defendant had not paid his 2017 taxes when he sent that text.”

So if Hunter didn’t have the money to pay legally obligated alimony in 2018, how was he spending his ill-gotten gains that year?

According to paragraph 38, in 2018 Hunter took out $772,548 in “ATM/Cash Withdrawal.” He also dished out $383,548 in “Payments — Various Women.”

Hunter also invested another $100,330 in 2018 on “Adult Entertainment.”

In all, Hunter spent $1,852,031 in 2018, “despite having done little to no business in that year,” as the feds note in paragraph 114.

Of course all this amounts to nothing in the end. Hunter won’t do any prison time, because… Democrats.

The sleazy prosecutor who filed this laff-riot of an indictment is the same guy who last summer was trying to broom the entire case against Hunter. His name is David Weiss, and he allowed the statute of limitations to run out on all of Hunter’s Burisma-related tax cheating from 2014-15.

But now we’re supposed to believe Weiss is on the level. And for goodness sake don’t Google his father “Meyer Weiss crooked IRS agent $200,000 payoffs.”

Thank God for the IRS whistleblowers, a handful of GOP Congressmen and a Trump judge. But whatever happens at trial, Hunter skates. Democrat privilege — don’t leave the crack house without it.

Let’s close with Joe’s stern warning from April 2022 for you and me and of course for “Jack.” But not for Hunter.

“I think if you can make a billion dollars or a million dollars or a hundred million you should be able to do it.” His voice then dropped to a whisper. “But pay your fair share!”

Hey Joe, here’s a quarter, call someone who cares. Better yet, call Hunter.

Tucker Carlson and the rise of Matriarchal Marxism

 

By Jason Whitlock

April 25, 2023

The matriarchy can fly the "mission accomplished" flag across America. It toppled the man-made meritocracy that imperfectly defined American culture for 200+ years.

The fall of Tucker Carlson at Fox News symbolizes the matriarchy’s prioritizing of message over merit. Performance could not shield Carlson from the consequence of America’s adoption of a feminized culture that levels the playing field by castrating men, reimagining traditional standards, and embracing a false reality.

Monday morning, Fox News cut ties with the most popular host on cable television. According to the Los Angeles Times and other so-called news outlets, Rupert Murdoch, the founder of Fox News, decided to oust Carlson partially because of a discrimination lawsuit filed by Abby Grossberg, a former talent booker on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” Grossberg claims she was bullied and subjected to anti-Semitic remarks while working for Carlson.

It’s a familiar pattern at Fox News and across corporate media and America. From Roger Ailes to Tavis Smiley to Bill O’Reilly, the misbehavior of men and/or allegations of disgruntled female employees are used to dislodge men from positions of influence.

Let me state this for clarity and transparency. I was a frequent guest on Carlson’s program. I consider Carlson a friend. I find him smart, authentic, and reasonable. I have not spoken to him since he and Fox News parted ways. Nor have I spoken with Bryan Freedman, the brilliant lawyer reportedly representing Carlson in his dispute with Fox. Freedman previously negotiated my settlement with a media outlet.

Now, I don’t buy the allegations against Carlson. According to the L.A. Times, Grossberg worked on Carlson’s show for a short time after being reassigned from a different Fox News show. She was fired.

It’s difficult to fire any employee. Many of them – man or woman – claim they were harassed, bullied, treated unfairly. They’re always reluctant to admit their shortcomings. You catch an employee stealing, and he will instantly claim you overlooked a co-worker committing murder.

Firing a woman is more difficult than open heart surgery. Every communication can be reformulated into an example of sexual harassment or misogyny.

I’m aloof, distant, and measured with all co-workers. It’s the only way I know to protect myself. Media workplaces are minefields. Super attractive women form an obstacle course a Navy SEAL would find difficult to navigate without detonating a blonde, brunette, or red-headed bombshell. For white men, they face the added threat of being charged with racism or anti-Semitism.

The workplace playing field isn’t level. Women have outsized power and control. So do the LGBTQ and people of color who see themselves as perpetual victims of white supremacy. These special-interest groups have used their power and leverage to remake workplace culture. They’ve turned human resources departments into the most powerful force within any company. Managing easily triggered sensibilities takes precedence over maximizing production. Workplaces are day-cares filled with crying babies masquerading as employees.

Over the last 20 years, diversity, inclusion, equity, and other subjective standards unseated performance as king of the workforce. MSNBC’s ratings-deficient Joy Reid has every bit as much job security as Carlson, the highest-rated cable host. So does CNN’s Anderson Cooper. And the ensemble of dimwits hosting ABC’s “The View.”

Reid is black. Cooper is gay. Whoopi (Caryn Elaine Johnson) is black and “identifies” as Jewish. Sunny Hostin is Puerto-Halfrican American. Joy Behar wants to be Bette Midler.

Tucker Carlson is a white man who used his platform to promote Judeo-Christian culture and the patriarchy. There was a time when his dominant ratings would have protected him from the special-interest groups. Ratings used to be the box hosts were required to check.

That time has passed. Message is king. Drawing an audience is optional in the matriarchy matrix. What a host tells his or her audience matters far more than the size of it.

Comedian Steve Harvey is the gold standard for heterosexual Christian men on TV. I like Steve Harvey. He’s funny. He’s likable. He’s also harmless. He bows to the matriarchy. He preaches a homespun prosperity gospel.

He has his own daily talk show. He hosts “Family Feud.” He’s the star of “Judge Steve Harvey.” Corporate America is pouring millions of dollars into Steve Harvey to set him up as the role model for all Christian male influencers.

Be harmless. Bow to the matriarchy. Stay on message.

And the message is simple: The key to improving America is emasculating men and eliminating merit.

You earn only what the prevailing power grants you for your service to the prevailing power.

Tucker Carlson challenged the prevailing power, the matriarchal ideology promoted by leftists. He platformed pundits and experts who challenged Big Pharma on the COVID vaccine, Democrats on the laughable January 6 insurrection narrative, the Alphabet Mafia on transgenderism and drag queens, and the military-industrial complex on the war in Ukraine.

His courageous, afflict-the-powerful, populist style attracted a massive audience. His competitors lack his talent or courage. They conspired to bring him down. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for the government to censor Carlson. Chuck Schumer demanded that Rupert Murdoch stop Carlson from showing the January 6 tapes. The ladies on “The View” celebrated his demise.

Women and emasculated men rule. The matriarchy has taken over the patriarchy. Merit has no place here. The order spelled out in the Bible carries no weight in America.

In pursuit of power and influence, the biblically described “weaker vessel” eradicated competition and emphasized a handful of identities. Diversity, inclusion, and equity killed performance, merit, and Christianity.

Fox News will install an inferior replacement, and the rest of corporate media will claim our affinity for Carlson reflects our misogyny and racism. To be tolerated, the matriarchy requires Marxism and a matrix.

People who receive Covid Vaccines Are 4x More likely to Get Covid

 

Doctor Reveals: 'People Who Receive Covid 'Vaccines' Are 4x More Likely to Get Covid', 95% of People in ICU are Fully 'Vaccinated' (Interview) - RAIR

rairfoundation.com

The doctors are speaking out. 

A former Eastern Ontario Covid Response Team member, Dr. Chris Alan Shoemaker, gave a speech to hundreds on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on the deadly dangers of the experimental mRNA covid shots. Holding the national flag of Demark to acknowledge that country’s recent withdrawal of covid shots for those under 50, he followed this with an exclusive interview with RAIR Foundation USA. 

Dr. Shoemaker, a licensed Ontario physician with 45 years of experience, has worked in emergency medicine, family practice, and on military bases. From 2020 through 2022, he worked in direct patient care at the West Ottawa Covid Care Clinic and was part of the Eastern Ontario Response Team to Covid-19. His experience with the vaccines has convinced him that “the vaccine is a more toxic version than the virus. More toxic, more damaging and more lethal, especially in the long term as it damages your t-cells,” he explains. “Your t-cells are an important part of your immune system to fight viruses and cancer. It will kill you quickly or slowly.” 

Dr. Shoemaker, who traveled to Ottawa from London, Ontario, for a weekend demonstration, is calling on the Canadian government to stop all covid shots on children. “Keep your needles out of the shoulders of our children. The medical facts on this are beyond dispute. Children are given zero help by these vaccines,” he said. “It kills two out every 1,000 within a year. Do you want your child to be one of those two who will die?”

Covid vaccines also appear to be killing young doctors in record numbers. Thirty-eight doctors have died across Canada in recent weeks. “Many of them died within ten days of their fourth jab. They were just following the rules. They were good people,” said Dr. Shoemaker. 

The numbers are in, and the death statistics are too damning. According to the good doctor, the shots don’t even work. “They make you four times more likely to get covid. In the last eight months, 95 percent of the people in the ICU are fully vaccinated. The vaccinated have been harmed. Their immune systems are being harmed. Stop harming your immune systems. You are only going to perpetuate the pandemic.”

And it’s also killing children. Britain’s Office of National Statistics recently released a report showing the vaccine’s horrific toll on children. After studying the first eight months of children’s vaccination, they hoped for a 10% reduction in death rates. They found the opposite. Dr. Shoemaker found that the doubled-vaccinated children died by 5,200%, more than a non-vaccinated child. “Your 10 to 14-year-old is now, by proven statistics out of the United Kingdom, 100 times more likely to die in the following six months than a non-vaccinated child. This is a horrible number. This is why I hold Denmark’s flag proudly at this point.” 

Dr. Shoemaker also went on to compare covid numbers in South Africa, where the rate of vaccination is just six percent, and disease from covid is minimal, to that of Israel and New Zealand, where vaccination rates are extremely high, disease rates are climbing, and those countries are seeing Vaccine Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome. “It’s all junk. It has bad stuff in it. The toxicity of this human-designed genome injected into your shoulder is 100 times worse than getting the virus. The shots go straight into your bloodstream, into your bone marrow, your brain, to your myocardium, ovaries, testicles.”

As vaccine recipients awake to the dangers to their health, Dr. Shoemaker fingered spike protein production in the vaccinated as an ongoing risk. “The effect on the generalized immune system (is bad), the fact that your immune system has been turned into dust if you’ve taken four shots – that is not good for your longevity. Basically, it means that 50 is the new 70. Fifty-year-olds will be dying at the rate of 70-year-olds.” 

This is already being confirmed by funeral directors and morticians around the world. Recent reports from an Alabama-based embalmer, Richard Hirschman, disclose that the age of death is dropping, and he and his colleagues are finding the formation of bizarre, calamari-like clots in the veins and arteries of vaccinated patients. “Prior to effects from these vaccines, these have never been found in human arteries. These proteinaceous clots, proteinaceous jamming, have never been found in human arteries for the last 100 years. So, it’s only happening in the arteries of vaccinated people. And it’s only happened since April, May, and June of 2021,” said Dr. Shoemaker. “People are dying from something that’s propagating within them. And it’s being propagated because of the body’s reaction to the vaccine. It’s happening only since the vaccines have come into play.”

In his powerful speech on Parliament Hill, Dr. Shoemaker touched on the dangers of the vaccine to pregnant women, the sheer toxic load imparted with each shot – 40 trillion mRNA strands – and the normalizing of myocarditis, Sudden Adult Death Syndrome, and a host of other diseases in otherwise healthy people. He talked about the deliberate stifling of an effective, safe treatment in Ivermectin and appealed directly to the government. 

“They’re lethal to people, both in the short and long term. I have to say to our premier, Mr. Ford, and to our prime minister, Mr. Trudeau, please make these vaccinations banned in Canada just like they’ve been banned in Denmark. Do it before the 1st of October, and save some Canadian children’s lives. You are killing children in Canada by foisting these vaccinations onto them.” To the gathered crowds, Dr. Shoemaker implored, “Stop believing in government. They are feeding you a line. They are perpetuating a myth. They are not making you safer.” 

see more at https://thereport.be/article/?u=https://rairfoundation.com/doctor-reveals-people-who-receive-covid-vaccines-are-4x-more-likely-to-get-covid-95-of-people-in-icu-are-fully-vaccinated-inteview/&n=0&s=2&c=1&pn=Anonymous

Progressives blast Bill Maher as 'transphobic' for saying it's 'trendy' to be LGBTQ, declaring children transitioning to transgender is not science-based

 Bill Maher dared to discuss the sacred cow of transgenderism – which instantly caused progressives to attack the liberal talk show host.

During Friday night's episode of "Real Time with Bill Maher," the HBO host discussed a Gallup poll about the increase of Americans identifying as LGBT.

The survey found, "The percentage of U.S. adults who self-identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or something other than heterosexual has increased to a new high of 7.1%, which is double the percentage from 2012, when Gallup first measured it."

The Gallup poll published in February said that each generation had increased by around double from the previous generation. There were 0.8% who identify as LGBT in the Silent Generation, 2.6% of Baby Boomers, 4.2% of Gen X, 10.5% of Millennials, and 20.8% of Generation Z.

Maher hypothesized that some of the massive increase in people identifying as LGBTQ could be because it is currently "trendy" to be considered as such.

“Yes, part of the rise in LGBT numbers is from people feeling free enough to tell it to a pollster and that’s all to the good, but some of it is — it’s trendy,” Maher said.

Maher said, "I'm just saying when things change this much, this fast, people are allowed to ask, 'What's up with that?' All the babies are in the wrong bodies?"

Maher questioned a recent statement by the American Civil Liberties Union that listed groups that would suffer "disproportionately harm" by abortion bans. The ACLU did not name women, but did mention "black, Indigenous, other people of color, the LGBTQ community, immigrants, young people, those working to make ends meet, and people with disabilities."

Maher asked, "Abortion rights affects gay and trans people more than you know – breeders?"

"I'm happy for LGBT folks that we now live in an age where they can live their authentic lives openly, and we should always be mindful of respecting and protecting," Maher stated. "But someone needs to say it. Not everything's about you."

Maher moved on to children transitioning – which he described as "literally experimenting on children."

He noted, "Maybe that's why Sweden and Finland have stopped giving puberty blockers to kids because we just don't know much about the long-term effects, although common sense should tell you that when you reverse the course of raging hormones, there's going to be problems."

Maher then listed the potential health risks of puberty blockers for children.

Maher then highlighted that no gay men were selected as a Grand Marshall for the upcoming New York City Pride Parade. "That’s where we are now – gay men are not hip enough for a Gay Pride Parade," he said.

Maher pointed out that the "prime directive" of teens is to do "anything to shock and challenge the squares who brought you up. It’s why nobody gets a nose ring at 56."

"If you attend a small dinner party of typically very liberal, upper-income Angelenos, it is not uncommon to hear parents who each have a trans kid having a conversation about that," Maher stated, then asked, "What are the odds of that happening in Youngstown, Ohio?"

Maher inquired, "If this spike in trans children is all-natural, why is it regional?"

"Either Ohio is shaming them or California is creating them," he continued. "If we can't admit that in certain enclaves, there was some level of trendiness to the idea of being anything other than straight, then this is not a serious, science-based discussion. It's a blow being struck in the culture wars using children as cannon fodder."

Maher cited Dr. Erica Anderson – a "prominent" transgender clinical physiologist – who believes some children are identifying as transgender due to the "influence of their peers and social media."

Maher explained that children are not just "gender-fluid," but "fluid about everything." He added, "If kids knew what they wanted to be at age 8 – the world would be filled with cowboys and princesses."

Maher joked, "If you are a man who wants to experience life without a pair of balls, you do not have to get surgery, you can get married."

New Rule: Along for the Pride | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)www.youtube.com

According to multiple Twitter reactions, Maher's monologue about LGBTQ enraged progressives. They lashed out and labeled the liberal talk show host "transphobic" and a "transphobe."

A Twitter user accused Maher of spreading "Gay Replacement Theory."

One activist said Maher was "spewing dangerous and hateful rhetoric."

Some progressives demanded that HBO cancel "Real Time with Bill Maher."

There was at least one Twitter user insinuated that Maher be sentenced to death for the crime of being a transphobe.

See more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/bill-maher-trans-lgbtq-twitter-reactions

The week in whoppers: AOC, Rep. Jayapal’s civic illiteracy, the NYT’s warped agenda and more

 

Diary of disturbing disinformation and dangerous delusions

This question:

“Why then for conservatives is the Second Amendment sacrosanct but . . . Roe v. Wade is not?” — CNN’s Don Lemon, May 4

We say: Does Don Lemon know what the Constitution is? He’s a top CNN talking head, yet he doesn’t seem to understand that the 2nd Amendment, guaranteeing the right to “keep and bear arms,” is part of that founding document, America’s supreme law, and is changeable only by other constitutional amendments. Supreme Court decisions like Roe v. Wade, by contrast, are merely judicial rulings. Under the Constitution, the high court can — and has — overturned earlier rulings.

---

This statement:

We say: It’s one thing for a CNN host like Lemon to be ignorant of basic civics, but a sitting member of Congress? Of course Supreme Court justices have the right to change rulings — on abortion or anything else. Yes, they’re supposed to respect precedent, but when they believe precedents are “egregiously” wrong (as Justice Samuel Alito notes in his draft opinion overturning Roe), they have a duty to overturn them. Does Rep. Pramila Jayapal (Wash.-D) think the court had no right to overturn Plessy v. Ferguson, which blessed the “separate but equal” doctrine? 

---

Spot the difference:

The New York Times changed a tweet on the legacy of Weather Underground radical Kathy Boudin.

Twitter

We say: Talk about spinning a story (under pressure, no doubt; the first tweet was deleted) to make a terrorist appear more palatable. No one should ever again have any doubt about the Gray Lady’s warped agenda.

---

This tweet:

We say: The president has legal authority to bypass Congress? Who knew? So Jayapal isn’t the only civics-illiterate congresswoman: Presidents aren’t allowed to ignore the will of Congress but, under the Constitution, must carry out the laws (and only the laws) it passes. AOC and Jayapal must’ve missed junior-high civics class during that lesson.

---

This fact-check:

We say: PolitiFact fact-checker Yacob Reyes rated rated Fla. Gov. Ron DeSantis’ claim — that “almost 60%” of student debt is “graduate-school debt” — “mostly false” because the actual percentage held by grad-degree households is “only” 56%. Huh? Are we in grade school? In his fact-check, Reyes also claims the actual share of grad-school debt (as opposed to debt held by households with graduate degrees) was only about 40%. But DeSantis’ main point — that under Dems’ loan forgiveness, truck drivers and waitresses would be paying off the debts of PhD’s via their taxes — stands. We’d rate Reyes’ fact-check “mostly false.”

— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board

see more at    https://nypost.com/2022/05/05/the-week-in-whoppers-aoc-rep-jayapals-civic-illiteracy-and-more/