Elected Democrats are demonstrably incompetent. Democrats running for president warn constantly that President Trump is teetering on the verge of totalitarian fascism, all the while promising all the unconstitutional laws they will impose upon the country by executive fiat if elected. And our press (yes, they're overwhelmingly on the left) has lost all semblance of journalistic integrity.
A few months ago, I wrote, "It's time to abolish Congress." I was half joking when I started that piece but had myself pretty well convinced by the time it was completed. Things have only gotten worse since. This past week, we've been treated to the latest congressional theater of the absurd, as House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler attempted to hold hearings on the possibility of impeaching President Trump. But the committee's first witness, Corey Lewandowski, Trump's former campaign manager, wouldn't play along. Lewandowski used his opening statement to call out Democrats' "false narrative" and accuse them of lying to the American public "with the purpose of undermining the legitimacy of the 2016 election results."
Lewandowski's combative approach scored points with viewers. Millions of Americans who voted for Trump see these latest ruses and political machinations for what they are.
First, we were told that the Trump campaign "colluded" with Russia. Unfortunately, the Mueller investigation that the left so dearly hoped would prove its specious allegations only served to show the American public that within the FBI and the Justice Department were individuals (Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr) whose loathing for Trump was so all-encompassing that they were willing to compromise proper investigative procedures if it meant undoing the 2016 election.
Then we heard accusations of obstruction of justice. Those accusations didn't pan out either.
Now the same representative who decried the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton for perjury 21 years ago wants to impeach President Trump because — why? Well, it's not entirely clear. Because he tweets bombastic statements that Nadler doesn't like? Wants to enforce immigration law?
It isn't just elected Democrats at the national level. Cities like Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles and San Francisco — run by Democratic mayors and city councils — have high rates of crime and homelessness. San Francisco and Los Angeles have growing cases of typhoid fever, tuberculosis and other diseases borne by fleas and human feces, piles of which coat the streets. California's legislature has not been able to solve those grave problems. But it has banned plastic straws in restaurants.
The Democratic candidates for president seem to be spending their time on the campaign trail outdoing each other's absurd grandiosity. Bernie Sanders wants to federalize health care. Elizabeth Warren wants a federal wealth tax, and her proposed Accountable Capitalism Act would require all corporations with a market cap of $1 billion or more to be governed under the regulations of a new federal bureaucracy. Beto O'Rourke said during the last debate, "Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47." (In a beautiful bit of irony, President Trump chided O'Rourke for his "dummy" statement, stating that O'Rourke's comments are making it harder to get federal legislation on gun safety measures passed.) Kamala Harris says she'll give Congress 100 days to pass gun control legislation, and if it doesn't, she'll just write it herself by executive order.
These people think they should have the power to take over the U.S. economy? God help us. Most of them have never run even a small business or made a payroll. If we give these incompetent buffoons control of our country, we are the idiots.
And then there is the news media. This week, two New York Times reporters, Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, launched their new book, "The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation." The Times published an essay promoting the book. The public was promised "new bombshells." What they got was a warmed-over accusation that has been denied by the very woman someone else (Max Stier, who just happens to be a former aide to President Bill Clinton) claims was assaulted. The woman herself refused to be interviewed and has told friends she has no memory of any such incident.
There was widespread shock at The Times' apparent deception and manipulation. (National Review writer John McCormack called the story "one of the worst cases of journalistic malpractice in recent memory.") And how does The Times defend itself? Deputy editorial page Editor James Dao describes Pogrebin and Kelly's book as a "nuanced" exploration of "the social and cultural forces that shaped Justice Kavanaugh." He justifies The Times essay about the book (and its convenient omissions) saying, "The essay included new information that illuminated the authors' broader narrative and bolstered their conclusion that, even though Senate investigators concluded her account lacked corroboration, Ramirez's claims were in fact credible." (Deborah Ramirez was an earlier Brett Kavanaugh accuser.)
Amazing! Did you catch that? During the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, Ramirez admitted that her memory was faulty. The new woman these authors claim was assaulted similarly 30-plus years ago says she can't recall such a thing ever happening. But it was the authors' "broader narrative" and the authors' "conclusion" that mattered — not the truth.
In the face of these extremists, we're supposed to be worried about a president who tans and tweets too much? Sorry. It's not even close.
Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.