Enough already! Ban these weapons NOW!

 Another school shooting (the 36^th, so sadly, in 2024 alone, down from 82 a year ago).

Yesterday, four people—two teachers and two fourteen-year-olds—were killed in Winder, Georgia’s Apalachee High School, by a student wielding an AR-style weapon.

Apalachee High in Winder, GA,
is the latest in the long, grim line
of assault-weapon shootings

The killer is a fourteen-year-old boy.

A fourteen-year-old boy who, for some reason, had access to a semi-automatic weapon that can fire up to 60 bullets per minute, bullets that fly at over 3200 feet per second, a terrifying velocity that can cause damage, as one trauma surgeon says, “like a grenade went off (inside the victim’s body).”

That the student obtained such a weapon is a matter for law enforcement (and why he would do such a thing is a matter for mental health experts), but the bigger issue is that such a weapon is available, at all.

There’s no argument, really. AR-style weapons should be banned.

The proof is evidenced by the heinous tally of death and destruction caused by shooters using the AR-style weapons.

That includes this—so horrifyingly—partial list of just some of the school shootings with an AR-style weapon:

Robb Elementary School, Uvalde, TX (2022): 21 killed

Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Parkland, FL (2018): 17 killed

Sandy Hook Elementary, Newtown, CT (2012): 26 killed

Student survivors from the 2018 Parkland
 shooting are evacuated from their high school

(The shooting at Sandy Hook—and the loss of those 26 lives—as you may remember, was despicably and falsely championed by many on the right as a “false flag” operation, a  fake and staged event meant to further gun control interests).

And now we add Apalachee (four killed), the deadliest school shooting since six people were killed just last year at The Covenant School in Nashville, TN, by a killer using AR-style weapons.

And that doesn’t even include other mass shootings that used an AR-style weapon, such as in an Aurora, CO, movie theater (2012, 12 killed), a Sutherland Springs, TX, church (2017, 26 killed), a Pittsburgh, PA, synagogue (2018, 11 killed), or a country music festival in Las Vegas (2017, 58 killed).

It used to be you'd remember the sad details of a mass shooting because it was a rare and shocking  event. Now, however, details are lost, place names are often jumbled or forgotten because now--although still shocking--they have, instead, become relatively commonplace.

Don’t scream “SECOND AMENDMENT!” You’d be wasting your breath and exposing your idiocy.

AR-platform weapons (the AR stands for ArmaLite, the company that first made them) are supposedly used primarily for hunting, target-shooting, and personal home protection.

I can’t imagine what sport there is in blasting a deer with a semi-automatic killing machine.

Or, for that matter, what would be the necessity (other than “Because it’s fun?”) of target practice using an AR-style weapon.

GA Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, for
some reason, apparently needs an
 assault-style weapon

And, as far as protection is concerned, guns in the home are rarely used for defensive purposes, but more likely used for purposes such as intimidating family members, with some analyses pointing to home protection with such weapons as about only 30 incidents over a 10 year period.

But AR-style weapons are wildly defended by Second Amendment lovers, who think, I guess, that NO weapons should be banned--although one can’t purchase automatic weapons or bazookas, for example.

And the AR-style weapons are not only defended, but they’re celebrated.

The National Rifle Association proudly calls the AR-15 “America’s rifle.”

Members of Congress have sported mini-replicas on their lapels to show support for their access. The pins were distributed by Georgia Representative and gun store owner Andrew Clyde—whose stake in his Clyde Armory store may be as much as $25 million dollars. By the way, the site of yesterday’s school shooting with an AR-style weapon, is about 20 miles from Clyde’s home and gun store.

Even Alabama GOP Rep. Barry Moore and Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert co-sponsored a bill to designate the AR-15 as  our “national gun” (Boebert also owned the now-shuttered gun-themed “Shooters Grill” restaurant in Colorado).

Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert
sure seems to love her assault weapons

To be fair, the vast, vast  majority of gun violence doesn’t come in mass shootings. Nor does it involve schools. Nor does it even include AR-style weapons.

But some of it does.

And it seems as though banning such weapons would be a relatively easy fix.

History suggests the same. Enacting a Biden-as-Senator bill in 1994 to prohibit “the manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semi-automatic assault weapon” (such as AR-style weapons) for ten years, saw “lower average annual rates of both mass shootings and death resulting from such incidents than before the ban’s inception.” A sharp and immediate increase in both started again when the ban ended in 2004.

So, isn’t it enough? Isn’t Apalachee High School or Parkland or Sandy Hook or Uvalde enough?

Or will we—or more specifically, the communities, the families, the schools, the kids—have to simply endure more of these horrific events year after year after year?

Um, so VP DOESN'T matter now...?

What JD Vance says about his importance as Trump's pick for VP is, well, kind of a disturbing statement, really.

"My attitude is, it doesn't really matter."

But what does Donald think
 about JD? Turns out, not much...

Um, it doesn't matter to voters who the person is that is a heartbeat away from the Presidency?

Guess not, because, fortunately, Vance's opinion of his insignificance dovetails nicely with his boss's views (from Trump's amazingly inflammatory appearance at Wednesday's NABJ conference):

"...the Vice President, in terms of the election, does not have any impact. No impact."

Well, to a VP-pick, that's certainly got to be a resoundingly reassuring kick in the crotch, huh? And, to a nation weighing the competency of the person who is next on the US chain of command, hearing both ends of the ticket say it doesn't really matter who it is, really isn't that comforting, is it? 

For some reason, Trump
admires fictional murderer and
cannibal Hannibal Lecter

(Perhaps Trump thinks he could even win with 'the late, great Hannibal Lecter?")

Nine times in the history of our country, a Vice President has had to step into the Presidency (eight were for President deaths, but the most recent, Gerald Ford, became President with the resignation of Richard Nixon, 50 years ago this week).

Trump and Vance apparently think voters don't seem to care who that "number two" (no pun intended) person is. That's a problem when "number one" is an overweight, far from beloved, fearmongering felon that is the oldest nominated Presidential candidate in the history of our country. Not exactly the poster child for a four-year term in what is ostensibly the most stressful job in the world.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, just one year ago, Republicans sang a very different tune. The GOP, in fact, was saying the exact opposite--how important Biden's second-in-command was because he was an older President. As former rival (and now-Trump-suck-up) Nikki Haley said at the time, "A vote for President Biden is a vote for Kamala Harris."

Fortunately for our democracy, Pence
 wasn't the VP Trump thought he was

To be honest, if Trump had cared enough and had vetted his 2016 Vice President to be as unprincipled as he was--and now, presumably, as JD Vance is-- Biden's victory would have likely been overturned.
Thankfully for the country, despite tremendous pressure from Trump and the Trump supporters chanting, "Hang Mike Pence!" outside the Senate chambers, Pence did not bend to Trump's twisted will, but, instead, followed the directive of the US Constitution and ratified Biden's electoral vote victory. 

So, the VP turned out to be very important to this country.

And Harris's pick may help to shore up regional outreach or offer strength regarding Harris's perceived weaknesses (I'm looking at you and immigration, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly).

But, to Trump and his pick, it doesn't matter.

I guess that really says a lot, doesn't it? 

And that is, perhaps, the most disturbing statement of all.

Remembering the GOP demonization of Joe Biden

Now that Joe Biden's out of the Presidential race, the GOP will have to start its work on demonizing Harris.

But before we let Biden go, let's take a moment to review the disgusting lies told about him by Trump and his GOP.

The GOP certainly gives Pinocchio
a run for his money

Pre-MAGA GOP colleagues universally found Joe Biden to be a decent and honorable man. For decades. Decent and honorable.

That all changed when the GOP needed to create distractions in order to defend their indefensible President Trump who had had a dalliance with Russia, worked to overturn the election, hoarded and hid classified documents, did nothing for 187 minutes while the US Capitol was being overrun, was found to be a sexual abuser and a business fraud, and was convicted of 34 felonies.

Yikes! That’s a lot of distractions to create.

So, they did.

Biden rigged the election.

Biden accepted bribes.

Biden weaponized the Department of Justice.

And none of it was true.

Not one court found that the election had been rigged. Trump's administration (even his daughter, Ivanka) attested to its legitimacy. The right's baseless claims about Dominion vote-switching or Trump's felonious lies about Georgia's dead voters have all been debunked.

And the sheer scope of rigging an election would include law enforcement, poll workers, political individuals and organizations (both Democrats AND Republicans), and the judiciary. AND NO ONE EVER SPILLED THE TEA?!

And how about Joe's bribes (as part of a GOP impeachment fishing expedition)? Records showed that about $5000 pertained to his son's truck payments, and the $200,000 from his brother James was clearly shown as a loan repayment (by the way, head of the Biden impeachment committee James Comer also loaned his OWN brother about $200,000).

Well, still, Biden certainly weaponized the DOJ, right? Similar to the election-rigging lies, such an operation would have been massive. Joe would have not only had to strongarm the DOJ, but local District Attorneys and their staffs, FBI investigators, judges throughout the country, citizens on several Grand Juries, witnesses, the lawyers (including Trump's) who selected the jurors to hear and decide his case, as well as the jurors themselves.

For good measure (to evidently throw people off the scent of his insidious weaponization plot) Biden retained the Special Prosecutor investigating HIS OWN SON! And then he let the court proceedings run their course of convicting him. I'm curious, was Joe willing to also throw Jill under the bus, if it had come to that?

As Joe Biden would say, "C'mon, man!"

And now that Biden is gone, it's Harris's turn to take the slings and arrows launched by the lying, desperate, and morally-bereft GOP.

How long, for instance, before Trump amplifies another birther accusation against an opponent (especially one born of two immigrants)? Or creates dishonest narratives about her record? Or maybe the porn-star-hush-money-payer will salaciously question Harris's past? 

After the demonization of Joe Biden--a decent and honorable man--nothing is beneath Trump and the GOP.

Harris, I think, is more than ready to take them on.

 

Can Kamala Harris win?

Now that Democrats are coming to grips with Biden's much-needed departure from the presidential race, it's time to choose the successor.

Being this late in the game, the logical choice is Biden's VP Kamala Harris.

But can Harris win?

She has a lot of things going for her.

Harris can beat Trump in November

She's got the name recognition, her policies have been out there since her run for the Democratic nomination in 2020, she was elected Vice President in 2020 and is on the Biden/Harris ticket that resoundingly swept the primaries in 2024.

Harris is a known commodity that could hit the campaign trail running.

And, perhaps the biggest reason of all, because Harris and Biden share a campaign committee, all $91 million on hand of the campaign's war chest would come Harris's way (which wouldn't likewise transfer to any other Democrat).

Note: Although, amazingly, that massive amount still trails Trump's $116 million, it towers above the available funds any other potential Democratic hopefuls might have.

Harris's polling tends to run a bit better than Biden's in a match-up with Trump. Her numbers are generally better, as well, with two demographics that are well-positioned to make a difference in the upcoming election: Blacks and women.

She has also gained renown as a champion for abortion and women's reproductive rights, an issue that has mobilized voters even in red states to support laws protecting a woman's right to choose. Ostensibly, Harris would bring those voters out in November, as well.

There are the Biden/Harris administration successes she could point to--bipartisan bills regarding infrastructure and semi-conductor production, for example--and what, by then, should be a much more positive picture regarding issues such as inflation and the border (especially with Biden's recent executive action).

And her experience as a California prosecutor would eviscerate Trump's positions and record--the exact opposite of what Biden should have done (and was unable to do) in his catastrophic June debate.

Some down sides: She's connected to the perceived failures of the Biden administration, i.e., inflation and immigration (the latter of which she was tasked with improving, pretty much to no avail); her disapproval rating runs higher than her approval (although she still fares better than both Biden and Trump); she fostered some policy and performance criticism during her time as San Francisco DA and California Attorney General; and the above-mentioned Biden/Harris administration successes appear to have been pretty much all Joe, no Kamala.

But there are two ENORMOUSLY important points that would help Kamala Harris win in November:

1) She's not Biden

2) She's not Trump

So, Democrats, let's get on with it.

It's Harris's time.

Bring on November.

Here's a great take about why Harris may NOT win (from Politico)

Trump shooting exposes disingenuous GOP

Well, that didn't take long.

Mere minutes after the horrible assassination attempt on Donald Trump, Georgia's Republican Representative Mike Collins posted this despicable accusation on X: Joe Biden sent the orders.

To recap: an elected government official just accused the President of the United States of ordering the assassination of a political rival.

Agents surround Trump after his being shot

Fortunately, Trump is relatively okay (full disclosure: I am adamant in the belief that Donald Trump has been destructive to this country, but there is NO excuse for this terrible act; political voices should only be silenced via the ballot box).

Biden had carelessly stated, to be sure, after his debate debacle, that he needed to focus on Trump, to, metaphorically, "put Trump in a bullseye."

But Biden did not order such a despicable act (nor did Biden ever specify to "fight like hell" after telling his supporters to come to a specific time or place because it "will be wild").

Interestingly enough, however, ordering the assassination of a political rival, was EXACTLY what Trump's legal team argued a President would have the right to do under the broad umbrella of presidential immunity.

The GOP has rightly decried this political violence and called for "unity." 

This is the same political party that celebrates the January 6 carnage in which Trump's GOP supporters--whom they now call patriots--stormed the US Capitol, injured Capitol police and chanted to hang Trump's own GOP Vice President.

By the way, not only DIDN'T Trump denounce the violence (in his name) against Capitol police and the ransacking of our country's Capitol (nor did he once call to check on his VP Pence), Trump, instead, told these political thugs he "loved" them and that these perpetrators of grotesque political violence were "very special."

And Trump was the same guy who spread rumors and mocked the vicious, politically-motivated attack on the husband of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (who yesterday tweeted about the Trump shooting: "...political violence of any kind has no place in our society. I thank God that former President Trump is safe"). 

Come to think of it, Trump was the same guy (along with his political party) who defended a "Trump train" of Texas supporters in pick-up trucks who surrounded a Biden campaign bus, ostensibly trying to force it off the road.

So, yeah, you can--and SHOULD--decry political violence and call for unity. 

And you can do that with certainty and with clarity. And without the slightest sense of irony.

Unless you're Trump's GOP.

Oops! Trump gets his wish

Back when the 2020 presidential campaign started, Donald Trump needed a strategy to beat Joe Biden. 

Trump didn't have any real policies. He couldn't speak knowledgably about the issues. His own track record included botching the Covid response, crashing the economy, and disparaging institutions such as the judiciary and the FBI. 

So, Trump defaulted to bully mode: relentlessly attack an opponent with personal insults and baseless allegations. This one was that Biden was feeble--physically and mentally. 

And as he entered 2024, in the wake of impeachments, indictments, convictions, civil judgments, and lying to overturn an election, Trump continued the attacks with the wish that enough people would believe his lies and accusations to swing the election.

Sure, there have been Biden gaffes over the years--although Trump had his share, too. But as Biden bested Trump in the 2020 debate, or was elected President, or even delivered a rousing State of the Union speech earlier this year, Biden's cognitive decline wasn't really a salient issue for anyone outside of Trump's MAGA sphere as they tried to distract voters from their own candidate's court proceeding after court proceeding (they also ceaselessly touted Hunter's "nothing-burger" laptop, or empty impeachments against members of Biden's administration, or non-existent bribes supposedly coming Joe's way). 

Primarily because of Biden's shortcomings being exposed during the debate (and since), it now appears that Biden has slowed. 

Trump has been granted his wish.

As a result, Trump now leads Biden in most polls. The Democrats are sniping and in seeming disarray. And Trump's Republicans are united behind him as he heads into Milwaukee to accept the GOP nomination.

But now that Trump's gotten his wish, is it a case of "be careful what you wish for?"

After all, there remains a real possibility that Biden--a struggling incumbent who Trump had at least a 50/50 chance to defeat--will be replaced.

By someone younger than Trump.

By someone smarter than him.

By someone less controversial than him.

Which could significantly change the calculus regarding the election.

And that wouldn't be good news for Trump.

But it just could be the very thing America has been wishing for. 

Biden goes off the rails

Biden's campaign is in serious trouble.

His poll numbers are dropping, allies are leaving, voters are questioning his cognitive abilities.

And that is readily apparent to anyone.

Unless your name is Biden.

It's time to go, Joe.

And that denial of reality is serious trouble for Democrats--and for this country.

For some reason, Joe (and Jill) seems to think that Biden can turn his candidacy around based on his past accomplishments rather than the reality of the present--or the doubt of a coherent Biden future.

His debate should have sealed his fate. His answers were rambling, mumbling, and, at times, downright incoherent.

If that wasn't the final nail, his "redemption" interview with George Stephanopolous--an interview, again, with his ramblings, a reluctance to answer questions about his mental acuity, and his refusal to submit to cognitive testing--surely was. 

But, inexplicably, it wasn't.

Today, Biden wrote a letter to Democratic legislators telling them he would not step aside.

He denies cratering polling numbers. He dismisses abysmal approval ratings. He defies those allies that suggest that it's time to go.

He clings to the (incredibly misguided) belief that his accomplishments are enough, that the despicable character of his opponent is disqualifying, that HE alone can beat Trump. 

But it's just not reality. It's not. And I'm not sure why he (or his advisors--I'm looking at you, Jill) can't see that.

And, regarding his mental acuity, that incredibly absurd belief and lack of judgment is more than enough to prove that Biden should no longer be running the country.

It's time to go, Joe.

Joe, it's time to bow out

As if Biden's stumbling, fumbling, mumbling debate performance wasn't bad enough to doom his reelection chances, last night's "redemption" interview with ABC's George Stephanopolous should be the end of his presidential campaign.

Biden's interview--just another "bad night?"

This was an interview for which Biden should have been prepared, focused, and convincing. 

But he wasn't.

Instead, Biden rambled. He deflected when asked questions about his cognitive capabilities. He was disingenuous (or clueless) when talking about falling numbers in the polls or the maelstrom in Democratic circles resulting from his alarming debate earlier in the week. And when asked if he had since watched the debate (which he optimistically termed  simply "a bad night"), Biden inexplicably claimed, "I don't think so."

I don't think so? How would he not know if he watched it or not?

But perhaps the biggest drop of all: Biden said he wouldn't take a cognitive exam.

"I have a cognitive test every single day."

No, you don't, Joe.

And this would be THE easiest thing to do to bring your campaign back, putting all the questions and concerns to rest. Just take an evaluative test.

But he won't do it.

Because, I think--and I'm guessing as does every other American think likewise (including Jill Biden)--he isn't sure he would pass one.

And that's sad.

But it happens. And when it gets to that point, even though a person is still capable of doing lots of things, running the world's most powerful country is no longer on that list.

So, it's time to bow out, Joe Biden. Thank you for your decades of public service, your accomplishments as President, your decency as a person.

It's time to move on.

For you, and for the country.

Here's a complete transcript of the interview from ABC News

Biden's story (and campaign) keeps crumbling

President Biden's team is in crisis/spin mode, scrambling to keep Biden's campaign alive as his poll numbers drop.

And it's not going well.

As you may have seen (or certainly heard about), Biden's debate--arguably the biggest night of his life-- was a disaster. He was wide-eyed, slack-jawed, and couldn't regularly respond to Donald Trump or the moderators with coherent, salient arguments (I wrote about it here).

"Oh, he had a cold," said the Biden campaign.

And then more excuses.

Biden attributed his horrible performance to jet lag from his G7 European trip--from which he had returned TWELVE days prior and then spent almost a week at Camp David.

His White House staff said Biden had just prepped too much.

His wife, Jill, offered that her husband "didn't feel great" for the debate.

And none of it explains anything, really.

Biden's debate performance was pitiable, to be honest--with the US President appearing as a dazed and confused elderly man. It was sad to watch (and scary, too, if one stops to consider that this man is responsible for things like the nuclear codes).

Amazingly, however, he followed his feeble debate performance the next day with a cogent and rousing speech in North Carolina. 

So, what gives?

As former House Speaker (and staunch Biden supporter) Nancy Pelosi wondered regarding Biden's tremendous debate stumble, "I think it's a legitimate question...is it an episode or is this a condition?"

Of course, the White House isn't offering any clarity on that question.

Just yesterday, the White House Press Secretary said Biden hadn't had any medical exams since his last one in February.

Now, word comes out that Biden actually did see a doctor after the debate. 

The White House explained it away by saying it was only a "brief check," not a physical.

But this lack of transparency and the ever-evolving stories coming out point to one thing as Biden's team is in crisis mode: this IS a crisis.

And should it ever come to a split-second decision--maybe regarding a nuclear launch or an insidious cyber-attack on our infrastructure or thwarting an attempted coup--who is making that decision to protect our country, a clear-headed President or the elderly man at the debate who froze like a deer in the headlights?

And if you have to even ask that question, it's clear.

Joe Biden has to step aside.

And no spin can disguise that.

Biden: Not dead yet?

Following Biden's debate debacle last night, many people (me included) determined his election chances were dead in the water.

Not so fast.

Today, in Raleigh, NC, Biden pulled a Mark Twain--he delivered an incredibly coherent and powerful speech.

Biden's NC speech today shows he's
still in this thing

Unbelievable, in fact. 

I mean, WHERE WAS THIS GUY LAST NIGHT?! 

Biden said the things he should have said in a way that would have made him the frontrunner. 

Hands down.

Unbelievable.

If he can be more like today and less like he was last night, 

Biden's campaign is not dead yet.

Here's a short clip

ADDENDUM: However, that being said, I still believe that Biden should bow out. And the sooner, the better.

Trump: Daily Despicability

Inmate #PO1135809

Donald Trump is despicable.

He doesn't care about the people.

He doesn't care about the law.

And he continues to prove it day after day.

Men wait outside a soup kitchen
 during the Great Depression

Yesterday, he said he hoped the US economy collapses in the next year (essentially so it wouldn't hurt him politically if he was elected President)--not taking into account the loss of businesses, the loss of jobs, the short- and long-term suffering and effects on our fellow citizens that MAGA insists Trump cares about so much. 

Nope. He hopes the economy crashes now so it won't affect his image.

And, just this morning, in his presidential immunity trial, Trump's team--defending the self-proclaimed "Law and Order" President--argued that a President couldn't be criminally charged with having his political rivals assassinated unless he had been first impeached and convicted of that in Congress.

Actual text from today's federal appeals court hearing:

Judge: Could a president who ordered SEAL team 6 to assassinate a political rival and is not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution?

Trump lawyer: If he were impeached and convicted first.

Think about that. 

Trump's team is arguing that a US President could have his political rivals murdered, and if the Senate was spineless/immoral enough not to vote to convict the President in an impeachment trial (as happened in Trump's insurrection impeachment trial because Senators feared violence directed towards their families, or because some Senators clung to the weak argument that it wasn't proper to convict a, by then, former President), that the once-President would be able to walk away scot-free.

No one would be safe in Trump's America

That means if Biden ordered such assassinations now, he couldn't be charged unless he was convicted in the Democrat-controlled Senate. And if the Democratic Senator votes were affected by fear of violence or personal political repercussions or because of peer-pressure or lack of moral/ethical turpitude, Biden would happily railroad off into the sunset.

And that's what Trump thinks is acceptable?

My, God.

On second thought, despicable doesn't even begin to describe him.

The GOP goes "fact-free"

House Republicans have gone "fact-free."

The House GOP tries
its new "fact-free" diet

After more than a year of investigations into their fanciful allegations of Joe Biden malfeasance, they have formalized an impeachment inquiry of President Biden--only the sixth one in the history of our country--without the slightest evidence of any "high crimes or misdemeanors" that are required for an actual impeachment. 

Instead, they've uncovered evidence of a loan repayment from Biden's brother, and about $4000 in payments connected to his son Hunter's truck.

They've heard witnesses, under oath, declare they didn't think the President ever had anything to do with the financial business dealings of his son.

They've had their own members, such as earlier Senate Biden investigator co-chair Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, say there's no "hard proof" connecting Joe to any wrongdoing (Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland gave a thorough and scathing response to earlier GOP accusations here).

It's not the same as a previous formal inquiry when Trump was first investigated/impeached for (documented) withholding of Congressionally-approved aid to Ukraine, asking a foreign government for the "favor" of campaign assistance through announcing an investigation into his chief political opponent.

It's not even like when Bill Clinton was investigated/impeached for lying under oath about having an affair with a staffer.

Nope.

To be accurate, no evidence is required to launch an impeachment inquiry.

But it highlights some important GOP priorities--not for the country, but for itself.

Inmate #P01135809

It deflects the actual malfeasance (and two impeachments and 91 felony indictments and liability for sexual assault and defamation and business fraud) of the GOP's frontrunner (unbelievably so) for its 2024 presidential run, Donald Trump. 

And it should take their members' minds off pesky issues such as supporting allies around the world or funding the government before its January default date or having discussions about gun laws or immigration reform. 

So, a GOP-led House--that removed its own Speaker (for the first time in history) and expelled one of its own members (only previously done five times ever)--has now formalized an impeachment inquiry for only the sixth time in the history of our nation.

And this one is fact-free.

Stephen Colbert's take:

Throw Hunter From the Train

Is Hunter Biden being railroaded (with an assist from the GOP) for his tax crimes?

After all, evidence apparently points to his guilt of cheating the US of 1-2 million dollars in taxes.

The GOP's impeachment train
 is ramping up to leave the station

So, prosecution would be expected, with or without GOP pressure, right?

Not so fast.

Biden's attorney, says charges would not have been brought "if Hunter's last name was anything but Biden." 

To be honest, that's pretty hard to argue against.

Let's just look at numbers. In 2019, for example, 148,000,000 individuals filed tax returns. That same year, the IRS recommended tax crime prosecution for just 942 people, primarily for unpaid tens of millions or schemes to bilk other people (and Biden's was neither).

Even so, 942 people?

That's a "whopping" .0006%.

Point zero, zero, zero, six percent.

What are the odds?

Actually, you're ten times more likely than that to get hit by lightning.

A Vanderbilt University tax expert says in an AP article that "the average American has almost as good a chance of winning the lottery as being criminally prosecuted for tax fraud."

But, alas, Hunter Biden is not an "average" American (and he certainly is not winning the lottery). Instead, he's the son of a sitting US President for whom the GOP has a passion to bring down, in an attempt, it appears, as revenge for criminal indictments against their favorite despot, former President Trump. 

Make no mistake, though, this isn't a "witch hunt." There appears to be evidence of criminal activity (just as in Trump's indictments). However, the threat of 17 years of incarceration is unbelievable. Penalties for such tax crime convictions--such as in the cases of Willie Nelson and Nicolas Cage--are most often settled through payment of back taxes and penalties. 

But, um, Biden's already done that.

So, what about the DOJ plea deal with Biden that was reached this past summer?

Um, it was denied by a Trump-appointed judge, coincidentally(?) after the GOP raised a stench about Biden's "sweetheart" deal (although the deal seemed pretty consistent with others in his position). And, following the GOP hue and cry, the DOJ miraculously came up with additional charges without having even gathered more evidence.

So, is Hunter Biden being railroaded (with an assist from the GOP) for his tax crimes?

All a-BOARD!!

Here's a great take by former DOJ Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman (LA Times):

Litman: Hunter Biden isn't being accused of any new wrongdoing. So why was he just indicted again? (yahoo.com)

Can Biden Win?

Can Joe Biden win another term?

Um, maybe. Depends on a couple things: 1) Issue perception 2) Donald Trump

1) Biden will win no matter what if Democrats can change public perception on three big issues: a) inflation b) immigration c) Biden's age/competence.

a) Inflation is perceived as out-of-control, even though it's still largely a reaction to difficulties with supplies and the labor market (and the world response) thanks to Covid. Overall, inflation is expected to slow even more in the coming months. Most people don't realize that at the end of August, it was 3.7%, down from 7% two years prior (on its way, hopefully, to the "sweet spot" of 2% or so). 

Dems should continue to emphasize downward trends.

b) Perception also sees undocumented immigration as rampant. Just because the GOP hasn't been able to find evidence to back their impeachment threats against Homeland Security's Alejandro Mayorkas, doesn't mean it's not a problem. It's not because of fentanyl smuggling (the vast majority which comes via US citizen smugglers through ports of entry--not through migrants and illegal border crossings), and it's not because of the fictional "open border" nonsense Republicans decry, but numbers are up. 

Democrats need to frame it as a solution to our labor shortage--highlighting the noble immigrant plight of those coming to our country in decades past looking for a better life for their families. 

And Biden needs to embrace the immigration problem. He needs to visit the border. He needs to continually address it and present border policies, framing it as a problem squarely on the shoulders of Congress. 

c) Many people equate Biden's age with competence. Many perceive Biden as old and feeble. Well, he is the oldest President we've ever had (although, at 80, Biden now is exactly the age Trump would be if he were to start another term). And, yes, Biden has had more than his share of gaffes. Biden's lack of interviews and press conferences makes people think he's avoiding them because his responses (and response time) leave something to be desired. Although Trump's innumerable Twitter/X misspellings and recent admonitions about Biden leading us into World War 2 (um, which happened 79 years ago) aren't exactly impressive.

The best way to combat this is to get out there. Meet with the press. Have public rallies. Engage in difficult interviews. To be honest, with Biden the (as of yet) unchallenged incumbent, I don't envision Biden's team pushing for such measures because I don't think that THEY think he'd shine doing so.

There's one more factor to determine if Biden can win: Will Trump be his opponent?

2) If Trump is the GOP nominee--with his grievances, his baggage, and his criminal indictments--Biden WILL win. 

The challenge here, however, is that I don't think Trump will be the nominee. If someone else takes the GOP nomination, and the three issues mentioned here aren't adequately addressed, Biden will have a very difficult task.

But I don't think Biden will continue his run for the White House. I've believed for months that he won't be the nominee (my choice to win has been Gavin Newsom).

So, can Biden win another term? Absolutely. 

Unless he's NOT running against Donald Trump. 

Then, it's anyone's guess. 

ADDENDUM: This poll JUST came out (9/24) and highlights these same perceptions of Biden's shortcomings (and the Democrats better do something about it): Troubles for Biden not just his age in reelection campaign: POLL (yahoo.com) 

Um, U Can't Impeach w/o a Crime

Representative Jamie Raskin issued a press release today that absolutely eviscerates the GOP's Biden impeachment push (you can read his INCREDIBLE assessment here).

The main point: many of the GOP witnesses said they didn't see/think that President Biden had anything to do with Hunter's business dealings. 

And, hmmm, there are absolutely ZERO documents that connect those dealings to the current President.

Even my home state's Trump lap dog--and fake-elector go-between--Ron Johnson (who led a GOP investigative committee about Biden last year) has a couple lines devoted to him in Raskin's release: 

• Sen. Ron Johnson conceded that Republicans have not found any "direct evidence" or "hard proof" of wrongdoing by President Biden.

(you can read the 87-page report--with not one scintilla of Biden wrongdoing--here)

Boy, I bet Trump wishes HIS cases were as evidence-free as this.

And, still, the messed-up, morally-bankrupt, Trump-fearing GOP seems determined to push ahead with a sham impeachment. Unbelievable.

THIS is what the Grand Old Party is reduced to--continuing to do the twisted bidding of its dark overlord, Donald J. Trump.

2024, here we come!

ADDENDUM: Since this post, the intrepid-do-gooders of this committee have found what they claim is evidence of Biden receiving millions in bribes: documented loan paybacks from his brother, and three installments totaling less than $5000 connected to helping his son make payments on his truck.