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?