What happens in America affects us here on the other side of the Pacific. A weak or erratic American government leaves the world a much more dangerous place. Moreover, the forces of evil over here keep a close watch on what happens over there. Anything they get away with in the U.S. they will sooner or later try in Australia. On the other hand, any rolling back of the tide there gives hope for the same thing over here.
The 2024 election was as crucial as the 2016 one. In 2016 the issue was the Supreme Court and illegal immigration. By 2024 there was not much they could do about the Court, but the Democrats were going to effectively destroy the U.S. with massive illegal immigration. They were also involved in something which would have embarrassed a tinpot Third World dictatorship: the legal harassment of a political opponent. If this became a precedent, it would be a greater threat to democracy than anything they could accuse Trump of. And, of course, there was the way Kamala Harris was constantly carrying on about abortion, a reminder that the Democrats, like the Labor Party in Australia, is on the wrong side of every one of the culture wars.
It's not my aim to treat Trump as a hero. Nevertheless, he was an outsider. He had never climbed his way up through the party system. As a billionaire, he was not beholden to the political donor class. But he did know how to speak the language of the common man, and to recognize their special interests rather than the interests of the political class. And he arrived at an opportune time.
At that time the left establishment was triumphant. Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet announced: "The culture wars are over; they lost, we won" and recommended treating conservatives like the Nazis were treated by the victors in World War II. The reason the left establishment resents Trump so much is that, in the war for the soul of the nation, they had almost won. The 2016 election would be their ultimate victory. As I pointed out in my 2016 essay, for decades the Supreme Court has been making law rather than enforcing it. Instead of abiding by the words of the Constitution and the intentions of the writers, they had been simply making it up in order to impose their own left wing political views on the nation. Now a conservative judge - one who followed the Constitution - needed to be replaced, and the left establishment was set to replace him with one of their own, who could be guaranteed to simply invent laws and make the left establishment's culture permanent.
The second issue was illegal immigration. The establishment even refuses to call it illegal; they call it "undocumented". The Democratic Party based itself on minority voters. White people - or at least, non-Hispanic whites - consistently vote Republican. Without ethnic minorities, Republicanism would be the natural government of the U.S. For that reason, Democrats have consistently sought to reduce the proportion of non-Hispanic whites in the country. Their intention has always been to invite in all and sundry and bribe them with welfare. That this is their plan cannot be doubted; they have said so many times among themselves. However, whenever anyone challenges them on the matter, they insist that the Great Replacement is just a "conspiracy theory". Once they won in 2016 they intended to give all those illegals citizenship and encourage more to come in, thus producing a permanent Democrat majority in a U.S. which no longer resembled the U.S.
Not only that, but they expected the Trump campaign to go down in a screaming heap. The polls were all against it. They saw it as the last gasp of the traditional U.S.A. So confident were they that Clinton hadn't even prepared a concession speech. When the count come in her demeanour took on a close resemblance to a stunned mullet.
You can see, therefore, why the left had a meltdown on Trump's election. It wasn't supposed to happen. They had the soul of the nation in their bag, and suddenly it was snatched away from them. That is the reason for crowds coming out chanting, "Not my President!" and presumably mature college students being reduced to manipulating play dough in order to face the psychological trauma of an election not going the way they wanted. Ultimately, there was the "Russiagate" hoax, in which they spent several years attempting to "prove" that Trump had won the election with Russian help.
Not only that, but the other side was starting to notice something. Despite being a flawed human being, he was a good president. He ran a tight ship, and he kept his promises. The program he presented during his presidential campaign he actually put into progress. The result was that even people who refused to vote for him the first time round changed their minds.
The Big Lie
Of course, the people who were used to running the country could hardly sit around and let that happen, so a conspiracy was formed at the highest level between political leaders and big business in order to influence the 2020 election. No, this is not a conspiracy theory on my part; they actually boasted about it after the event, although they spun it as "saving" the election.
Since then, it has been impossible to find references to Trump's claim of election fraud without the word "false" attached. So let me say it straight out: the Big Lie about the 2020 election is that it completely above board. The fact is, the system of voting and counting in the various states is wide open to fraud which is next to impossible to detect. However. in the wake of the disputed 2000 election, a bipartisan commission was set up with ex-President Carter (D) and James Baker (R), and they made a large number of recommendations to protect electoral integrity. These included:
- restricting mail-in voting (mail-in was the rule, not the exception in 2020, and it is wide open to fraud)
- voter ID
- avoiding duplicate registration across state lines
- election observers.
It has been pointed out that if these recommendations had been accepted, much of the controversy about the 2020 election would have been absent.
The fact is, anomalies happen in U.S. elections which would never have been tolerated in Australia. Thus, it is well established that Republican observers were not permitted to observe the counting in several states. The conspirators even boasted about it. If this had occurred in Australia the election would be declared invalid for that particular electorate, or county as they call it in the U.S., but you can't do that for a Presidential election. We may have some suspicions about the count under such circumstances, but where is the proof?
In Fulton County, Georgia CCTV recorded something amazing. At 10.30 pm counting was called off ostensibly because of a break in the water main. Then, at 10.50, after all the Republican observers had left, the four Democrat poll workers pulled out four cases of ballots from where they had been hidden under a floor-length tablecloth and started counting them. Once more, this would never be allowed in Australia, but although we may have some suspicions about hanky-panky, but how do you prove it? (This was not the only shonky activity which took place on election night.)
You will remember that, on election night, four swing states ceased counting within a few minutes of one another around 3 pm. No reason was given. One commentator has asked some pertinent questions: who ordered it, or what authority, on what grounds and, most importantly, why has the media never investigated it? There may have been a good reason for one (and that reason should be given) but four sounds suspiciously like co-ordinated action. Interestingly, they were trending heavily in Trump's favour, but once the recount began, it favoured Biden. Again, one might be plausible, but four? And again, although there may be suspicion of fraud, how do you prove it?
A professional who was involved in exposing insurance fraud has claimed that all the indications are for industrial size fraud in the 2020 election. So was the election "stolen" as Trump claimed. Again, you may have suspicions, but how do you prove it? That was why Trump was wrong to try to get Congress not to certify the election. There was no solid proof. He should have just taken it on the chin. As I said before, the American electoral system is wide open to fraud which is next to impossible to detect. This is a serious matter, because elections must not only be fair, but be seen to be fair. At least in 2024 the Republicans took extensive measures to ensure that was the case.
Lawfare
Trump tends to do unorthodox things which leave him open to lawfare. But does anyone really believe he would have been subject to multiple lawsuits if he hadn't run for election? After all, they had four whole years to take action if they really believed he was guilty of criminal activity. In fact, the only one which would have had any substance was taking classified documents home. However, Biden was equally guilty - even more so because he wasn't president at the time - but they refused to charge him ostensibly because he was too old and sick.
In a New York court, where it could be guaranteed to get an anti-Trump jury, he was sued by Jean Carroll for allegedly raping her 30 years before. Who knows what really happened, but an actual rape in the changing room of a department store has certain logistical problems. In any case, probably because Trump didn't give evidence in his own defence, they found for the claimant, and awarded her $2 million damages for sexual abuse (not rape) and $3 million for defamation of character. Defamation of character? What violation of her reputation is worth more than the violation of her body? He called her a liar! Think about it: if you are accused of wrongdoing and you call your accuser a liar, you are liable for slander! Apart from that, no-one's reputation is going to be harmed by being called a liar by Trump. Her called her a liar a second time, and she was awarded a further $83.3 million! That's more than 40 times the damages for alleged sexual abuse. Don't try to tell me this was not part of a "get Trump" campaign.
What about the "felony" trial, also in New York? It worked like this. He paid "hush money" to a porn star to gain her silence about their sexual encounter. This is disgusting, but it is not illegal. He paid this by a complicated method involving a third party so that it wouldn't show on the records. Since this did not involve any business fraud it is questionable whether this was illegal. But if it were, then it was a misdemeanor, and the two year statute of limitations had passed. However, it was promoted to felony status on the basis that it was performed in order to commit, or to hide, another crime. In such cases, it is necessary to nominate up front what this other crime was. That was not done at the trial, so Trump was denied due process of law. However, when it was over, the judge stated that it was somehow a violation of federal campaign finance laws i.e. that he should have declared the hush money as a campaign expense. Apart from the fact that this is the silliest idea ever presented, that would make it a federal offence, over which the state court had no jurisdiction. But the judge also suggested that falsification of other records, and a possible tax crime might also have been involved. He instructed the jury that they did not have to determine which of these three "offences" was involved, as long as one was possible. And, as mentioned before, the accused was not notified beforehand. This, then, was the farce that led to Trump being labelled a "felon" by his enemies.
I could go into more detail, but the point is clear: Trump would win no prizes in the character stakes, but this lawfare gives a whole new meaning to the words, "trumped up".
Biden and Harris
What can be said about Biden? Even during the 2020 election his cognitive decline was visible. As soon as he came to power, he reversed many of Trump's actions. With respect to Title IX, he insisted that "sex" meant "gender identity" and so women were forced to compete against men who claimed to be women. At the same time, he announced that Universities should try cases of alleged sexual assault, and the accused was to be treated as guilty until proved innocent. At the same time, he cancelled the sanctions against Iran, because obviously appeasement is the best way to discourage the forces of evil from building a nuclear bomb.
But there were two outrageous and egregious actions which define his presidency. The first was obviously his disastrous handing over of Afghanistan, as well as allowing billions of dollars' worth of military equipment to fall into the hands of the forces of evil.
This I would put down to sheer incompetence, but I would like to remind you that it complements a similar action at the beginning of his career. Joseph Biden was a career politician, having been a member of the Senate since 1972. And as such, he was one of the guilty men who threw South Vietnam to the Communists. For those whose memory does not extend back 50 years, let me refresh it. The Communist forces in Vietnam had two arms: the Viet Cong guerrillas and the North Vietnamese Army. In 1968 the Viet Cong made a major offensive, the Têt Offensive. It shocked the world, but it failed, and over the next five years the Viet Cong were largely destroyed. So in 1973, the North Vietnamese Army made a huge offensive into the South, capturing large stretches of territory. Nevertheless, they were driven back, and by 1974 The Economist could write the headline, "The last red fruits of Easter are falling from the vine." Then, in 1975, with victory in sight, the Democrat government of the U.S., of which Joe Biden was a part, cut off all financial aid to South Vietnam. This was not a result of incompetence; it was treachery pure and simple, a deliberate decision to snatch defeat from the gaping jaws of victory. The result was that the North Vietnamese Army overran the south that year, murdering 65,000 people in a bloody purge, and grinding the population down into tyranny. This is a sore point with me, because I had many Vietnamese friends who were left high and dry by this crime. One of them said he cried himself to sleep every night over the loss of his country.
Thus, Biden's 50 year political career was bracketed by two gross betrayals of allies. Be that as it may, the second outrageous action defining his presidency was the virtual abandonment of border control. Something like 2 million illegal immigrants were allowed to flood across the southern border. This was not a mistake; it was deliberate. They didn't even bother to justify their actions. They want illegal immigration. They see it as a method of importing voters, and plan to give them all citizenship. Right now many of the blue states are working on plans to nobble Trump's deportation plans. You can imagine what would have happened if they had won the 2024 election.
Even if he were as sharp as a pin, due to his age alone Biden should have accepted serving for only a single term. If he had done so, they could have chosen a candidate with a better chance of beating Trump. But no, he wanted to run in 2024. Long before that his opponents had been calling out his dementia, but after his debate with Trump no-one could plausibly deny it, so they dropped him and went for VP Kamala Harris. Remember her? Nobody really liked her. At the 2020 and 2024 primaries she received hardly any support. She was chosen as Vice President simply because she had ovaries and melanin. She was a DEI hire and Biden admitted it.
The last two elections saw a greatly increased voter turnout - which I suppose is a good thing. Counting for the last election is not quite complete, but at the time of writing Trump had received 2 million more votes than in 2020, but still 5 million less than Biden received that year. But Harris has received 7½ million votes less than Biden did in 2020. If the 2020 figures were genuine, then a lot of people must have run out of enthusiasm for the Democrats, and decided to stay home.
I'm not at all happy about Trump's tariff plans. However, I am glad he was elected. If he continues nominating conservative judges, closes the border, and deports even a portion of the illegal immigrants, he will have made his mark. And the other side was unthinkable.
