LOL! Badass Street Artist “Sabo,” Covers LA In SHOCKING Messages Only Days Before Clooney’s Celebrity Fundraiser For Biden

The confused “president” Joe Biden will skip the  “peace summit” in Switzerland on June 15-16, where his buddy Volodymyr Zelensky will speak. Instead, the Democrat Party presidential candidate, who is falling behind in funding, will fly to California, where the far-left actor George Clooney and his human rights lawyer wife are hosting a fundraiser with Julia Roberts and Jimmy Kimmel for the head of the Biden Crime Family.

Hollywood’s self-important actors Julia Roberts and George Clooney, with Clooney’s third-wheel wife, Amal.

The move is likely to anger Ukraine, which has warned that the struggling summit in Switzerland “needs” Mr Biden.

Vice President Kamala Harris talks to ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Tuesday. (Jimmy Kimmel Live / YouTube screenshot)

As usual, whenever there’s a celebrity fundraiser for a high-profile politician, Sabo, the highly gifted street artist, covers the area where the fundraiser is being held with in-your-face messages most artists wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot pole.

The brilliant artist shared images that revealed his handiwork on his Facebook page. The first image is posted on a stop-sign-shaped sign showing the viral photo of then-VP Joe Biden breathing heavily on the neck of the young daughter of Democrat Senator Chris Coons during his swearing-in ceremony while he and his wife stood by and watched.  The image is glued over the sign to the entrance of the former comedian Jimmy Kimmel, who, thanks to Trump derangement syndrome,  is now an unfunny and angry little man with low ratings in the late-night space.

The second image Sabo shared on his Facebook page is a photo of a little girl peeking out of a shower curtain with an accompanying sign that reads, “Biden Bed Bath & Beyond,” a play on the now-defunct household goods chain that was one of the first stores to stop selling My Pillow brands. The little girl in the shower cap is a reference to Joe Biden’s daughter Ashley’s diary,  which has now been authenticated, where she wrote about her dad, Joe, coming home and taking “inappropriate showers” with her.

A bench on a sidewalk features a similar scene but with Joe Biden joining the little girl in the shower.

George Clooney has had his own issues with Joe Biden’s White House policy, as he complained by text message last week about the president’s denunciation of the International Criminal Court’s issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli leaders, according to the Washington Post.

Clooney got his own bench in LA with a fitting message, considering how President Trump gets under his skin. The bench reads: ‘TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME – IT’S REAL AND MANY SUFFER, BUT THERE’S HELP – If You Or A Loved One Is Suffering From TDS, Eat Two —-s and call this number (—)——–

For the record, we have no idea whose number this is.

George Clooney’s activist wife, Amal, who is currently attempting to charge members of the Israeli Army with war crimes against Palestinians or Hamas (we’re not sure, as many times they are one and the same), was also a target of Sabo. Dressed as a Hamas terrorist, wearing a suicide vest and holding the detonator in her hand, the image also serves as an advertisement for their fundraiser for Biden.

The “O Brother Where Art Though?” poster is hilarious. It’s a take-off on the popular satirical movie by the same name that features George Clooney as one of three escaped convicts searching for hidden treasure while a sheriff relentlessly pursues them. Sabo’s poster features the 3 most prominent members of the Biden Crime Family: Joe, Hunter, and Joe’s brother Jim.

The final poster shared by Sabo features a cartoon rendering of a photo of Hunter found on his laptop that shows him smiling with teeth that appear to be rotted. The acronym FBI appears across the top of the poster featuring a gun-toting  Hunter, and next to his head, the poster reads, “The Fortunate First Son.” The words “Above the Law” run across the bottom of Hunter’s body next to the advertisement for the Clooney’s fundraiser for Joe Biden.

Sabo relies strictly on donations for his one-of-a-kind work that sends a strong message to voters who happen to encounter his work on park benches, street signs, and billboards. Readers can also purchase his unique, high-quality artwork by clicking on this LINK.

Mr. Biden called the warrants issued by Amal Clooney’s law firm “outrageous.” His administration has indicated they may sanction the ICC, which could affect Mrs. George Clooney. The Clooneys, however, remain steadfast in their commitment to support anyone for president with a “D” next to their name, regardless of their mental capacity or their apparent inability to lead the free world.

Why do people who love America continue to pay to see movies by these anti-American Hollywood freaks?

The post LOL! Badass Street Artist “Sabo,” Covers LA In SHOCKING Messages Only Days Before Clooney’s Celebrity Fundraiser For Biden appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

US-Saudi Arabia Petro Dollar Pact Ends – Joe Biden’s Failures Are Bringing an End to Global Dollar Dominance

Leaders from the BRICS Alliance meet in 2018 including Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. The original BRICs nations included – Brazil, Russia, India, and China and South Africa.

In March 2023, South Africa’s Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor announced that Saudia Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Algeria, Argentina, Mexico, Nigeria, and other nations wanted to join BRICS Alliance. This was a direct threat to the West and US dollar dominance.

Via Kanekoa.

South Africa’s Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor says Saudia Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Algeria, Argentina, Mexico, Nigeria, and other nations want to join BRICS.

Since the start of the US proxy war in Ukraine, BRICS nations have refused to https://t.co/p79OrHGWib… pic.twitter.com/j6LFKOtUjr

— kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 28, 2023

Was this always the plan for the Obama-Biden regime? To take down US dominance on the global stage? Because that is taking place on a rapid scale.

Under Biden, who is openly mocked on the international stage, traditional U.S. allies are now aligning with China.

Saudi Arabia announced in March 2022 it was considering accepting the Chinese yuan instead of the US dollar in future transactions.

Last week Joe Biden allowed the 50-year-old petrodollar agreement between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to expire.
Tip Ranks reported:

The term “petrodollar” refers to the U.S. dollar’s role as the currency used for crude oil transactions on the world market. This arrangement has its roots in the 1970s when the United States and Saudi Arabia struck a deal shortly after the U.S. went off the gold standard that would go on to have far-reaching consequences for the global economy. In the history of global finance, few agreements have wielded as many benefits as the petrodollar pact did for the U.S. economy.

The petrodollar agreement, formalized after the 1973 oil crisis, stipulated that Saudi Arabia would price its oil exports exclusively in U.S. dollars and invest its surplus oil revenues in U.S. Treasury bonds. In return, the U.S. provided military support and protection to the kingdom. This arrangement was a win-win situation for both; the U.S. gained a stable source of oil and a captive market for its debt, while Saudi Arabia secured its economic and overall security.

Oil being denominated in U.S. dollars alone has significance beyond the categories of oil and finance. By mandating that oil be sold in U.S. dollars (DXY), the agreement elevated the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. This, in turn, has profoundly impacted the U.S. economy. The global demand for dollars to purchase oil has helped to keep the currency strong, making imports relatively cheap for American consumers. Additionally, the influx of foreign capital into U.S. Treasury bonds has supported low interest rates and a robust bond market.

But that is all ending now thanks to Joe Biden and his reckless economic and foreign policy.

The petrodollar’s expiration could weaken the U.S. dollar and, by extension, the U.S. financial markets. If oil were to be priced in a currency other than the dollar, it could lead to a decline in global demand for the greenback. This, in turn, could result in higher inflation, higher interest rates, and a weaker bond market in the United States.

Joe Biden is single-handedly destroying the US dollar’s status in the global economy.

It is hard to describe how destructive Joe Biden has been to American life.
It’s as if he is purposely trying to bring down our economy.

BRICS News reported:

Saudi Arabia’s 50-year-old petrodollar agreement with the United States has expired, with no new agreement in place.

Saudi Arabia will now sell oil in multiple currencies, including the Chinese RMB, Euros, Yen, and Yuan, instead of exclusively in US dollars. pic.twitter.com/MxdUn8t2ZP

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) June 12, 2024

The Biden agenda.

pic.twitter.com/kskoytgtgo

— Tinfoil Baddie (@tinfoilbaddie) June 12, 2024

The post US-Saudi Arabia Petro Dollar Pact Ends – Joe Biden’s Failures Are Bringing an End to Global Dollar Dominance appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Michigan Judge Rules Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s Election Manual Is Unconstitutional and Against State Law — A Major Blow to Crooked Michigan Democrats

Judge Christopher Yates

Michigan Judge Christopher Yates just ruled that Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s Election Manual sent to election officials across the state is unconstitutional and against state law.

Judge Yates also mandated strict signature verification for mail-in ballots, making it more difficult for Democrats to cheat with their mass-manufactured votes.

BREAKING: A Michigan judge just ruled that the Democrat Secretary of State’s election manual issued to local election officials is unconstitutional & against state law. He is also mandating strict signature verification for mail in votes in the upcoming 2024 election

“The Court… pic.twitter.com/mVmq7QA4td

— George (@BehizyTweets) June 13, 2024

This blows holes in Jocelyn Benson’s plans for election chaos in Michigan.

Here is Judge Yates’ conclusion:

For all the reasons set forth in this opinion, the Court declares that the “initial presumption” of validity in signature verification of absentee-ballot applications and envelopes mandated by the December 2023 guidance manual issued by defendants is incompatible with the Constitution and laws of the State of Michigan.

For similar reasons, the Court declares that the catch line referring to an “initial presumption of validity” in R 168.22 is incompatible with the Constitution and laws of the State of Michigan.

Accordingly, those provisions must be excised from the guidance manual and the catch line in R 168.22. In contrast, the Court concludes that R 168.24 is permissible under the Michigan Constitution and the law of the State of Michigan in all respects, so the Court shall deny the plaintiffs’ request for declaratory relief with respect to Rule 4.

Finally, because the Court has ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor on the merits in addressing the guidance manual, the Court need not consider whether the guidance manual was promulgated in violation of the AP A. The Court hereby invites the plaintiffs to submit a proposed judgment under MCR 2.602(B)(3) memorializing the Court’s rulings and, if appropriate, closing the case.

Benson said the manual was necessary. Benson believes the manual supports by providing clear guidelines to local clerks on signature verification.

WKAR reported:

Benson, a Democrat, says it’s necessary to implement a voting rights amendment to the Michigan Constitution that passed in 2022. The Republican National Committee is among the plaintiffs challenging the guidelines.

Assistant Attorney General Heather Meingast represented the secretary of state in Monday’s Court of Claims arguments. She said the guidance will help local clerks know what to look for when they are comparing signatures on ballot sleeves against what is on file.

“That’s exactly what this rule does – it fills in some gaps, giving clerks some understanding of discrepancies and significant dissimilarities,” Meingast said. “Otherwise, you have nothing. There’s zero guidance on what’s a significant discrepancy.”

The plaintiffs include the RNC, the Michigan Republican Party, a township clerk and others. They argue the guidance puts a spin on the rules that leaves too much room for mistakes or mischief.

GOP attorney Robert Avers said the guidelines are not necessary.

“There are a lot of safeguards built in that prevent disenfranchisement,” he said, adding the constitution’s early voting window gives voters and election officials time to correct discrepancies. He said, for example, the law requires that voters get a text when an absentee ballot is rejected.

The full Order and Opinion are included below:

The post Michigan Judge Rules Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s Election Manual Is Unconstitutional and Against State Law — A Major Blow to Crooked Michigan Democrats appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Disgraced Ex-Trump Prosecutor Nathan Wade Interrupted by ‘Consultant’ During CNN Interview After Being Grilled About Fani Willis Sexual Relationship Timeline (VIDEO)

Screenshot: CCN/Youtube

Disgraced former Donald Trump prosecutor Nathan Wade was interrupted by his own ‘media consultant’ during an interview on CNN’s ‘The Source’ with Kaitlan Collins. The interruption occurred as Collins grilled Wade over the timeline of his romantic relationship with Fani Willis.

Collins asked the straightforward question, “Just to clarify, when did the romantic relationship between the two of you start?”

Wade struggled to provide a coherent response. He said, “Yeah. So we get into… There’s It’s been this effort to say that, Okay, these exact dates are at issue, and these exact dates are…” before being interrupted by his media consultant.

The disgraced prosecutor glanced off-camera mid-answer, mentioning he was getting “signaled here.” His microphone was removed as he stepped aside to confer with his media consultant. The CNN team was heard in the background to “keep rolling.”

Screenshot: CNN/Youtube

As the camera kept rolling, Collins, who looked confused, patiently waited for Wade to return to his seat. On his return, she asked if everything was “OK” before pressing him again on the timeline of his relationship with Willis.

Wade evaded a direct answer yet again, stating, “So I believe that the public has, through the testimony and other interviews, the public has a clear snapshot that this is clearly just a distraction. It is not a relevant issue in this case, and I think that we should be focusing on more of the facts and the indictment in the case.”

Collins justified her line of questioning by referring back to Wade’s own testimony.

“But you did testify to this, and you were asked on the stand about when it started and when it ended. It just wasn’t completely clear because before it said before the indictment, which is August 15th here in Atlanta, and then later the answer was at the end of that year. And so I think that was the clarity that people were seeking of when it started and when it ended,” Collins said.

Wade’s responses remained vague and guarded.

“Sure. And there again, there’s a question before the court, and that is the crux of the question. I don’t choose to say or do anything that would jeopardize the case or the court’s ruling. I prefer to allow them to make their decision based upon what they have and accept it.”

WATCH:

My exchange with Nathan Wade tonight on the timeline of his romantic relationship with District Attorney Fani Willis — including an interruption from a member of his team as he was answering when it began and when it ended. pic.twitter.com/S5AJzdsmOC

— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) June 13, 2024

It can be recalled Mike Roman, a former Trump campaign official and co-defendant in the racketeering case led by Willis, moved to accuse both Willis and Wade of misconduct. The motion, spearheaded by Roman’s attorney, Ashleigh Merchant, alleges an “improper, clandestine personal relationship” between Willis and Wade, potentially undermining the integrity of the prosecution against Trump and others.

The motion alleges that this relationship led to financial benefits for Willis, with county records revealing that Wade has been paid nearly $654,000 in legal fees since January 2022. The motion suggests that Wade financed luxury vacations with Willis, using funds from Fulton County, to destinations such as Napa Valley and the Caribbean.

The substantiating evidence for these claims, she argues, exists within sealed records from the Wade divorce case, which she is urging the court to unseal.

The motion further alleges that sources close to both Willis and Wade have confirmed their ongoing personal relationship, which was not disclosed properly nor was Wade’s appointment as special prosecutor approved by the Fulton Board of Commissioners, as mandated by law.

During a hearing, Nathan Wade admitted to having a sexual relationship with Fani Willis. However, he said the relationship didn’t start until 2022—way after she hired him as the top prosecutor in 2021.

“In 2022, District Attorney Willis and I developed a personal relationship in addition to our professional association and friendship,” Nathan Wade said.

Of course, The Gateway Pundit was immediately skeptical of this claim – and it turns out Fani Willis and Nathan Wade are lying about when their illicit affair began.

According to the 122-page filing, a Georgia attorney who is friends with Nathan Wade will refute the claim that their affair began in 2022 after Willis appointed Wade in 2021.

“Willis and Wade claim they did not have a personal, romantic relationship before Willis appointed Wade as a special prosecutor, but Terrence Bradley (“Bradley”) will refute that claim. Bradley is an attorney and a member of the Georgia Bar. Bradley and Wade were friends and business associates. Bradley has non-privileged, personal knowledge that the romantic relationship between Wade and Willis began prior to Willis being sworn as the district attorney for Fulton County, Georgia in January 2021. Thus, Bradley can confirm that Willis contracted with Wade after Wade and Willis began a romantic relationship, thus rebutting Wade’s claim in his affidavit that they did not start dating until 2022,” Michael Roman’s lawyer wrote in the filing reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.

Also, witness Robin Yearti, who worked in Fani Willis’s office, testified that Fani Willis and Nathan Wade started their relationship in 2019—before Willis assigned Nathan Wade as lead prosecutor in the RICO lawfare case against President Trump.  This contradicts the filings of Wade/Willis that the relationship began in 2022.

In March 2024, Nathan Wade withdrew from the Trump lawfare RICO case after Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled District Attorney Fani Wills could continue her RICO case against Trump and his associates.

In his 23-page decision, Judge McAfee ordered Fani Willis to address the “appearance of impropriety” before the case can move forward. McAfee ruled Willis could stay on the case but must fire her lover Nathan Wade, the top prosecutor she hired to hunt down Trump.

Last month, the Georgia Court of Appeals agreed to review President Donald Trump’s appeal to disqualify disgraced Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the sham RICO case against him.

Trump’s appeal hearing to disqualify Fani Willis was tentatively set for October 4th, which means the lawfare RICO trial will likely be pushed past the 2024 presidential election.

The post Disgraced Ex-Trump Prosecutor Nathan Wade Interrupted by ‘Consultant’ During CNN Interview After Being Grilled About Fani Willis Sexual Relationship Timeline (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Left’s Latest ‘Sting’ Against Supreme Court Justice Alito Backfires, Proves How Right He Is

When it comes to smearing Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, the liberals have already lost.

With major court decisions due to drop any day now — from former President Donald Trump’s immunity claims to abortion and gun rights cases to other huge issues — liberal attacks are piling on with the publication of undercover recordings of Alito speaking in what were supposed to be private conversations.

But as “sting” videos making the news this week show, the leftists are only proving how right Alito is.

As National Review senior writer Dan McLaughlin pointed out in a column published Tuesday, the recordings, made by a liberal documentary maker posing as a conservative to try to lure Alito into some click-bait stupidity, ended up doing the opposite: Alito comes across as a man of acumen and honesty — and humility.

His questioner, on the other hand, is clearly a lying grifter.

The “sting” videos are below. The conversation is well worth hearing:

EXCLUSIVE UNDERCOVER AUDIO:
Sam Alito x John Roberts x The Undercurrent

1/ Justice Alito admits lack of impartiality with the Left, says: “One side or the other is going to win.” pic.twitter.com/b5nmxToZ9z

— Lauren Windsor (@lawindsor) June 10, 2024

The documentary maker in question — identified by a cheerleading Rolling Stone piece as Lauren Windsor — approached Alito at a fundraising event for the Supreme Court Historical Society.

Her language was appallingly dishonest — she pretended sympathy for the public pressures Alito has been undergoing, especially concerning the groundbreaking Dobbs decision last year that overturned the legal and moral monstrosity of Roe v. Wade.

It was clearly designed to elicit some emotional response from the justice, one that could be twisted to prove the court is only one good abortion case from pushing the country into the “Handmaid’s Tale” nightmare of the left’s most fetishistic fantasies.

“As a Catholic and as someone who, like, really cherishes my faith, I just don’t, I don’t know that we can negotiate with the left in the way that, like, needs to happen for the polarization to end,” she said. “I think that it’s a matter of, like, winning.”

Alito, like, agreed. But not, like, in a way that any, like, mature person could, like, disagree with.

“I think you’re probably right.” he said. “On one side or the other — one side or the other is going to win. I don’t know. I mean, there can be a way of working — a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. They really can’t be compromised. So it’s not like you are going to split the difference.”

Is there any honest American who could disagree with that?

One side or the other is going to win — because when two irreconcilable forces are in active conflict, one or the other will eventually win. Alito didn’t predict which side it would be. He didn’t even, strictly speaking, state a preference (though his authorship of the Dobbs decision — and its tone — make that pretty clear).

He merely stated a fact.

It’s also important to point out that there is a way of “living together peacefully” — more or less in the state of the country as it is — but in the long term, something is going to give.

And then, playing her role to the hilt, Windsor went as far as to invoke “godliness” (the judgmentally minded might call it a kind of blasphemy, considering she was lying through her leftist teeth).

“I think that the solution really is, like, winning the moral argument,” she said. “Like, people in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness.”

“I agree with you,” Alito said.

“Bingo!” cried the editors at Rolling Stone, slapping a summary headline on the piece: “Supreme Court justice says he ‘agrees’ that the U.S. should return to a place of godliness.”

If wishing a county to be in a state of “godliness” isn’t damning, what is?

But Alito also knows it isn’t the court’s job to determine whether the United States is a place of godliness — that’s up to Americans and the representatives they elect.

In a video from 2023 Windsor intercut, she recorded Alito describing his view of the Supreme Court. Again, it was exactly what a normal American would want to hear:

In that portion of the video, in where Windsor again cited the “polarization” of the country and what can be done about it, Alito lamented the role of “the media” in eroding the public trust in the court (like Eve lamenting the serpent, under the circumstances), but also made it clear the court has limits that are inherent in its creation.

“We [the justices] have a very defined role, and we need to do what we’re supposed to do,” he said.

“But this is a bigger problem. This is way above us. So I wish I knew the answer. I do.”

The humility of the words “way above us” is not in any liberal politicians’ makeup — whether they’re on or off the court.

What Alito was describing was the will of the American people and — probably — the will of God.

The Democratic Party and the American left in general have spent decades proving they have scant respect for either. But it’s exactly the kind of humility the country needs from the men and women on the highest court in the land.

In another video, a Windsor colleague identified as Ally Sammarco — “who identifies as a former Republican turned Democratic strategist,” according to The Washington Times — expresses crocodile tears of sympathy to Alito for the “attacks” he’s facing in the media. Then she asks him what he thinks is behind it.

EXCLUSIVE UNDERCOVER AUDIO feat. the debut of my colleague @Ally_Sammarco:
Alito v @ProPublica

Justice Alito rants on ProPublica and minimizes Justice Thomas’ extraordinary ethics breaches as “any little thing they can find” pic.twitter.com/HXFlaxRpWm

— Lauren Windsor (@lawindsor) June 12, 2024

Again, Alito’s response defied the desires of Democrats for clickbait quotes.

“I think it’s for a simple reason. They don’t like our decisions,” he said. “And they don’t like how they anticipate we’ll decide some cases that are coming up. That’s the beginning and the end of it.”

Again, is there an honest American who can disagree? The fact that these recordings even exist proves his point.

Alito is a target of the attacks, especially the ongoing faux fight over flags outside his homes.

Justice Clarence Thomas, a man whose public rectitude is irreproachable, is another constant target — as a black conservative with a towering intellect, even his existence is an insult to the fringe left.

And now the leftist assault on the Supreme Court is reaching its peak for the session, as the justices ready the release of opinions on Trump immunity, charges related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol incursion, the abortion drug mifepristone, the Second Amendment and curbing the power of the administrative state.

It’s going to be a massive final sprint for the conservative-majority court, and liberals are already launching preemptive attacks, with Alito in the crosshairs.

Every Supreme Court justice makes history with every day on the job, of course. But Alito is different. His authorship of the Dobbs decision puts him in the rarefied company of Supreme Court justices whose landmark decision have etched a place in the chronicles of the country. (For good or ill: Chief Justice Earl Warren, author of the Brown v. Board of Education decision is in that group, along with Roger Taney of Dred Scott and Harry Blackmun or Roe v. Wade.)

He knows what place he has; he knows the power that he has, but he also knows that that power is sharply limited by the very Constitution that created it.

That’s a lesson every American politician should learn and live by. It’s a lesson most sorely needed by big-government, Democratic politicians from President Joe Biden on down to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her squad.

Liberals trying to smear Sam Alito might think they’re hurting him and the court, but all they’re really doing is showing how much he belongs there.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Left’s Latest ‘Sting’ Against Supreme Court Justice Alito Backfires, Proves How Right He Is appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Newt Gingrich: Biden’s Problems Are the Real Threats

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Newt Gingrich
Real Clear Wire

Democratic analysts don’t seem to understand why the all-out legal assault on President Donald Trump isn’t working. It’s because they keep talking among themselves and not with the American people.

The American people don’t live and work in the New York-Washington political-media-government bubble. If reporters and analysts listened to Americans, as we do at America’s New Majority Project, they would learn how decisive the choice between President Joe Biden or President Trump is. They would also see how difficult, if not impossible, it will be for President Biden to get easily re-elected.

The propaganda media is trying to focus the election on what it sees as President Trump’s flaws. The Democrats, including the Biden campaign, are trying to focus the election on what they see as the threat President Trump represents.

But the 2024 election is ultimately going to come down to a simple question: Can the American people afford four more years of Biden’s policies and principles?

President Trump’s problems all involve his own alleged behavior and activities. Even the totally phony legal attacks remain locked into a Trump-centered issue. No American is hurt by the things President Trump has supposedly done. Indeed, few Americans pay any attention to the outlandish, manipulated legal attacks on President Trump.

Most Americans see the case against Trump as political lawfare. If anything, they are offended by the left’s assault on the rule of law and the Constitution. This is why the conviction in the so-called hush money trial led to an enormous surge of contributions to Trump’s campaign. Far from running away from President Trump, the American people found themselves running to defend him. They saw him as a champion being persecuted unfairly and took the conviction as a direct warning of what could happen to them.

By contrast, President Biden’s problems all impact everyday Americans. Bidenflation continues to drive already high prices higher. Child care costs increased 4.1 percent in the last year. Young parents are having to take on third and fourth jobs just to break even on costs. Grocery prices are forcing Americans to make tough decisions about how to feed their families. Young people can’t afford to buy houses – which is more than offsetting any good will Biden might have generated by (illegally) waiving student loan repayments.

President Biden’s policies are causing millions of Americans real pain.

Biden’s open border policy allows Venezuelan criminals to go to New York City and murder policemen. Biden’s open border policy allows fentanyl and other drugs to flood our country and poison our communities. When more than 100,000 Americans a year are dying from drug overdoses, it is hard worry about how Trump valued his apartment or paid his attorney.

The average American can’t afford groceries, gasoline, or the electricity bill thanks to Bidenflation. Democrats want Americans to focus on these legal attacks. But Americans are focused on their own survival in the terrible economy President Biden and Democrats created.

For the elite establishment Democrats, this is all still about politics. For the American people, it’s about survival.

Economically, Biden’s destructive policies make life more expensive. Culturally, people are sick of radical dictates which denigrate religious liberty and seek to indoctrinate children against the will of their parents. Finally, as a matter of safety, Americans realize that Biden does not have the knowledge, ability, or wits to defend our nation against our adversaries.

The 2024 election isn’t about what the establishment media thinks. It’s about America’s survival.

For more commentary from Newt Gingrich, visit Gingrich360.com. Also, subscribe to the Newt’s World podcast.

This article was originally published by RealClearPolicy and made available via RealClearWire.

The post Newt Gingrich: Biden’s Problems Are the Real Threats appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Rising Tensions in the West Bank: The Threat of a Third Intifada and the Growing Influence of Palestinian Islamic Jihad

Palestinian Islamic Jihad, courtesy of the IDF, May 9, 2023. 

Since October 7th, Israel has understandably tightened its grip on the West Bank, stepping up security measures. There are checkpoints, facial recognition systems, and requirements to show ID to move in and out of different zones.

Palestinians in the West Bank say they are being threatened by Israeli soldiers and settlers, highlighting the inconvenience caused by the murder of innocent civilians in Israel.

People are complaining about IDF raids on markets and other locations, but the Israelis insist the raids are necessary to combat terrorism. Proof of the threat posed by West Bank extremists is that IDF raids have repeatedly uncovered caches of explosives and other weapons, as they have several times this year.

As a result of increased tensions and rising animosity on both sides, the West Bank has become a powder keg of hate and resentment among Palestinians. Experts believe this could turn into an intifada, potentially expanding the conflict to include the West Bank and possibly drawing in Hezbollah. “Intifada” is an Arabic word meaning “uprising” or “shaking off,” and it refers to two major Palestinian uprisings against Israeli rule in the occupied territories.

The First Intifada (1987-1993) was a grassroots uprising that began in December 1987, sparked by a traffic accident involving an Israeli vehicle and a Palestinian pedestrian in Gaza.

This uprising involved widespread demonstrations, strikes, and boycotts, along with violent confrontations between Palestinians and Israeli forces. It led to significant international attention and eventually to the Oslo Accords in 1993, which aimed to establish a framework for peace and Palestinian self-governance.

The Second Intifada (2000-2005), also known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada, started in September 2000 following the visit of then-Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, a site sacred to both Jews and Muslims. This visit led to widespread violence and clashes.

The Second Intifada was marked by more intense and widespread violence than the first, including suicide bombings, Israeli military incursions, and significant casualties on both sides.

In both intifadas, international rights groups condemned Israel, blaming it for the high death toll. However, the stated goal of the people carrying out the intifadas was the destruction of Israel.

In each of the Israeli incursions, including the 2008 Gaza incursion, weapons were found, as well as tunnels used to transport weapons and terrorists from Egypt and points outside of Gaza and the West Bank.

The Palestinian Authority, headquartered in Ramallah, the largest city in the West Bank, is the internationally recognized representative of the Palestinian people, particularly in the West Bank.

It was established as a result of the Oslo Accords to govern parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In ceasefire negotiations, the PA often acts as a mediator or a party to the discussions, especially when the conflict involves multiple Palestinian factions.

However, neither Hamas nor Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a leading militant organization in the West Bank, accept the rule of the Palestinian Authority. Despite this, all three entities support the UN-backed ceasefire proposal and have sent mediators to Qatar and Egypt.

PIJ is a designated terrorist organization operating primarily in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Founded in 1979 as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, PIJ is a Sunni group that receives support from Iran, Syria, and Lebanese Hizballah.

PIJ’s primary objective is the establishment of an Islamic Palestinian state and the destruction of Israel. Its military wing, al-Quds Brigades, sometimes coordinates with Hamas, but the two groups can be at odds over disagreements about how to confront Israel.

Palestinian Islamic Jihad is known for its use of mortar and rocket attacks, suicide bombings, IEDs, and other forms of armed aggression against Israeli targets. PIJ is designated a terrorist organization by several countries, including the United States, the European Union, Canada, Australia, and Israel.

PIJ, like Hamas, believes that Israel must be destroyed, but the two groups disagree about how to achieve that goal. Hamas has both a militia and a political wing, whereas PIJ is strictly militant. This is one reason why they are critical of the Palestinian Authority, which they see as compromising and even collaborating with Israel. Support for PIJ has been growing in the West Bank because of the group’s campaign of violence against Israel. In May of last year, they launched 100 rockets at Israel.

The Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) opposes the Oslo Accords, which marked the first official mutual recognition between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and set the stage for future negotiations towards a two-state solution.

PIJ rejects any negotiations or agreements that recognize Israel’s right to exist and instead advocates for the complete liberation of historic Palestine through armed struggle.

Although the Oslo Accords may or may not have been the best solution for the Israel-Palestine conflict, the PIJ’s opposition to the Oslo Accords underscores the danger that the PIJ poses to Israel. PIJ believes armed struggle is the only solution and will not accept any peace agreement that allows Israel to exist.

The post Rising Tensions in the West Bank: The Threat of a Third Intifada and the Growing Influence of Palestinian Islamic Jihad appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Rising Restrictions on Religion Driven by Government Controls

Rising Restrictions on Religion Driven by Government Controls

Leviathan remains the main enemy of freedom of belief and practice.

(Photo by HUSSEIN FALEH/AFP via Getty Images)

The world is an ugly place for religious believers. Every faith faces persecution somewhere. By numbers, at least, Christians are at greatest risk. In the 50 worst countries making Open Doors’ 2024 World Watch List, 317 million Christians are estimated to suffer from “very high or extreme” levels of persecution. 

Attacks come in many forms. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom explains, 

Governments enforce laws and policies to restrict or punish peaceful religious activity and expression, to impose official religious interpretations, or to discriminate on the basis of religion. Societal actors, including individuals, mobs, and violent groups, often purporting to act in the name of religion, target those they deem the religious other. Derogatory and dangerous rhetoric against members of religious groups, including from government officials and religious leaders, heightens intolerance and can provoke violence.

Although private actors play an important role, persecution usually is driven by government. Social hostility remains significant in many countries, but politics is exacerbating the worst of religious persecution.

The Pew Research Center has long tracked attitudes and actions toward religion. It recently released its latest global assessment of religious trends, separating government restraints from social hostility. Although Pew’s work suffers from substantial lag times, its findings help us understand the reality of persecution. 

The survey found a drop in social antagonism. State controls, however, were worse than ever. Reported Pew: 

Globally, the median score on our 10-point Government Restrictions Index rose from 2.8 in 2020 to 3.0 in 2021—the highest level recorded since we began tracking this in 2007. The index tracks 20 measures on government laws, policies and actions that limit religious beliefs and preferential treatment of some groups over others; and restrictions on preaching, converting or proselytizing.

In 2021, 183 governments, the most ever, harassed religious believers. In 163 countries, down just one from 2020, governments interfered with worship. Examples of the latter included “policies or actions that disrupt religious gatherings, deny permits for religious activities, bar access to places of worship, and restrict other rituals.” Covid restrictions played an important role. The comparable numbers from 2007 were dramatically lower: 118 and 112, respectively. Overall, attacks on religious believers were up more than 50 percent in both categories.

In 55 countries, government restrictions were either high or very high. That was down two from 2019–2020, the peak only previously reached in 2012. The lowest bound was a still significant 40 nations, set in 2007. The median score increased in 2021 since there were more increases than decreases among individual index scores.

Reflecting the variable and even paradoxical nature of religious persecution, government restrictions and social hostility do not necessarily correlate. The former tend to be consistent, increasing generally steadily over time, from 1.8 in 2007 to 3.0 in 2021. Social attitudes are more volatile, starting at 1.0 in 2007, peaking at 2.1 in 2017, and dropping to 1.6 in 2021.

State controls over religion were highest in China, which had the world’s second-lowest social hostility measure. The driving force for persecution there is political, fear of competition for influence, and especially of transcendent truths which trump the Chinese Communist Party’s claim to power. The situation has worsened dramatically over the last decade, as CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping has greatly strengthened the party’s authority and his own.

In contrast, the worst social hostility in 2021 was in Nigeria. Formal state restrictions on religion are low given the almost evenly divided population. Yet violence from Islamic radicals and terrorists has had a particularly devastating impact on vulnerable Christian communities. Return violence is real but limited, while the Nigerian government’s response has been ineffective at best and malign at worst. Number two was India, where the government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi has inflamed religious conflict for political advantage.

Nineteen states had “very high” restrictions on religion. Fifteen were majority Muslim nations. The rest were various forms of autocracies. The list of discreditables: Afghanistan, Algeria, Azerbaijan, China, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Maldives, Myanmar, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.

The list of “very high” social hostility was much shorter, just seven nations. Four were majority Muslim: Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan, and Syria. Two were mixed, one Muslim-Christian (Nigeria) and the other Jewish-Muslim (Israel). The last was majority Hindu (India). Four others dropped out of the “very high” category from 2020, all Muslim: Iraq, Libya, Mali, and Somalia.

In terms of restrictions, harassment was the broadest problem, occurring in 190 of 198 countries studied. This returned to the 2019 peak. Government harassment increased from 178 to 183 countries. Private harassment stayed the same in 164 nations. In 157 of them harassment was both public and private. In 137 harassment was physical, including attacks on people and damage to property. Also counted were public verbal assaults. There were killings in 45 nations, assaults in 91, detentions in 77, displacements in 38, and property damage in 105.

The booby prize for worst harasser goes to the Middle East–North Africa, where all 20 nations committed at least one act of harassment. No region looked good. Perhaps surprisingly, 33 of 35 nations in the Americas and 43 of 45 in Europe also harassed believers. The Asia-Pacific was “only” 43 of 50. The pattern for interference was similar, with the MENA region again a 100 percent, and the other regions following in somewhat lower numbers than in harassment cases.

Yet the number of cases says nothing about the severity of the measures. European nations increasingly restrict dress typical for more observant Muslims. Islamic governments commonly enforce more draconian restrictions on religious minorities. When Covid hit Western countries often limited religious services in response. Muslim-majority states more often have restricted non-Muslim gatherings as a matter of course. Explained Pew, 

For example, in the Maldives, where Islam is the state religion, non-Muslim groups are forbidden to build places of worship or practice their faith publicly. Similarly, Egyptian law allows only members of recognized religious groups (Sunni Islam, Christianity and Judaism) to express their faith in public and construct houses of worship.

All faiths were at risk of mistreatment. According to Pew, 

In 2021, Christians were harassed by governments or private actors in 160 countries, up from 155 in 2020. Meanwhile, Muslims faced harassment in 141 countries, down from 145 in 2020. Christians and Muslims are the largest religious groups in the world, and since the beginning of the study, they generally have faced harassment in a larger number of countries than any other group. 

Jews were targeted in 91 countries, down from 94, a shockingly high number for a faith whose members make up just 0.2 percent of the world’s population. Other believers, including Buddhists, Hindus, Baha’is, and adherents to assorted ancient and folk religions, were harassed in 64 nations.

Politics, and especially religious politics, is complicated. Many governments simultaneously restrict and subsidize religion. Pew found that 161 governments aided some religious groups. Most common were support of religious education, subsidies for construction or maintenance of religious properties, and aid for religious staff. Of these 161 governments, 149 also harassed religious groups while 134 interfered with worship. 

This often occurs when favored faiths, which are most likely to receive state benefits, back limits on their competitors. Russia is an example, with the Orthodox Church favored while proselytizing faiths such as Jehovah’s Witnesses are punished. Most often it is Islam doing the simultaneous subsidizing and persecuting, either Sunni or Shia, which extracts official favors as the state also ruthlessly punishes those who look elsewhere for spiritual sustenance.

Moreover, some states provide benefits to help control dominant faiths, using the religious establishment to advance dictatorial rule. Pew points to Saudi Arabia, where 

the government funds the construction of most Sunni mosques and gives a monthly stipend to imams at the mosques, sermons are restricted by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, which directs the imams to choose from an approved list.… The Saudi government also has targeted Sunni clerics (along with Shiite clerics) when they express religious views deemed unacceptable by the government.

Pew does a special assessment of the 25 most populous nations, which collectively account for almost three-fourths of the world’s population. Among this group, China, Russia, Iran, Egypt, and Indonesia had the highest restrictions. Nigeria, India, Egypt, Pakistan, and Bangladesh had the worst social hostility. Those with the greatest persecution, meaning combined score, were Egypt, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, and Nigeria.

It also is worth noting the best states. Japan, Democratic Republic of Congo, South Africa, the Philippines, and the United States of America had the fewest restrictions. Enjoying lowest social hostility were Japan, China, the U.S., Turkey, and South Africa. Best in the combined category were Japan, America, South Africa, Italy, and Brazil. Even these are not perfect, of course. Tokyo has targeted members of the Unification Church and Jehovah’s Witnesses.

The only good news from the Pew study is that there are countries where believers are free to respond to the transcendent as they, rather than the state or the majority, desire. Notable is America’s place on that list. Still, even American believers have reason for concern. The authoritarian left is increasingly willing to sacrifice religious liberty as it campaigns to remold and remake Americans, using the state to punish Christians who resist wokedom’s latest social dictates. Nevertheless, support for treating faith as the first freedom remains high and institutional protections for freedom of conscience remain strong. What occurs in the U.S. is not persecution.

Religious liberty is under siege around the world. There is ultimately no more personal and no more important right than to seek God, without interference, as one understands him. That is not the case in a shockingly large number of nations. But it remains the case in America. We must ensure that does not change.

The post Rising Restrictions on Religion Driven by Government Controls appeared first on The American Conservative.

De Gaulle’s Ghost Is on the Ballot in France

De Gaulle’s Ghost Is on the Ballot in France

The French right is not “fascistic,” but Gaullist—and that’s what the French people want.

Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National, in one snapshot in time, is the most popular party in France and not by a little bit. The RN scored more than 31 percent in last weekend’s European parliamentary vote: French President Emmanuel Macron’s party, which came in second, did not reach 15 percent. People in France and throughout Europe don’t quite consider elections for the Brussels parliament ones that really count: Brussels’ power may be growing, but remains less than that wielded by national governments, at least in the minds of most voters. But the smashing of Macron’s party by Le Pen’s, unexpected and striking, has thrown European politics and financial markets into a tizzy. 

After their win, the RN called on Macron to dissolve Parliament and call for new national elections—hardly expecting that he would. A few hours later, Macron did just that. In three weeks, France will go to the polls again for a two stage election to choose a new legislature. Macron is gambling that faced with the stark option of putting the Rassemblement National in power in Paris where it really counts, the majority of French voters will recoil, choosing again the party of the liberal centrist president—as they did in the presidential votes of 2017 and 2022. 

A second possibility, the RN will do well enough that Jordan Bardella, the precocious Le Pen lieutenant who led the party to victory in the Euro election, will be asked by Macron to become prime minister and form a government in coalition with other parties. The RN will then be in power, constrained by Macron in an unpredictable cohabitation, and likely lose some of the luster it has gained as an opposition party, able to criticize everything and held responsible for nothing. Marine Le Pen, who plans to run for president again in 2027 and now polls better than Macron, would lose her shine too. 

Both these scenarios seem as plausible as one which sees the RN’s rise as inexorable; despite the party’s victory in the last vote, it remains a long way from power. 

Nevertheless, it’s worth taking stock of what Marine Le Pen has achieved politically, against considerable odds. Twenty-two years ago, her father, Jean-Marie le Pen, who had created the National Front as a vehicle for a collage of right wing resentments (Vichy, loss of Algeria, mass immigration), came in a surprising second in a multiparty presidential primary. The French political and media establishment across the political spectrum united against him for the second round—forming a “Republican front”, refusing to debate him, denying him major media access, treating him as a political leper. He garnered 20 percent of the vote in a two-man race. This was the party Marine Le Pen inherited from her father in 2011, one shunned by most serious French people, even though, as was already clear, it came closest to representing French sentiment on the critical issue of immigration. 

The actual relationship between Marine and her father (still alive at 96) is a subject for a playwright of genius, but the political outline is thus: Marine setting out to “dedemonize” the National Front by maintaining its core views on immigration, eschewing the casual antisemitism her father trafficked in, and putting a greater focus on working class economic issues. The intent was to create a nationalist social democratic party, culturally right and economically center-left. She eventually kicked her father out of the party he had founded and soon after rechristened it as the Rassemblement National, borrowing a word evoking the Gaullist organ of the ’70s and ’80s. By 2017, the de-demonization had at least partially succeeded (she came in second in the presidential election to Macron, scoring 34 percent in the two-person race). 

After a better presidential showing in 2022, the RN became the largest force in the French Parliament and could not always be ignored or bypassed legislatively. Major voices in the political media were implicitly or explicitly pro RN. In 2022, the popular and talented right-wing author Éric Zemmour ran for president on a platform further to the right than the RN, which only helped normalize Marine le Pen’s party. 

In the next few weeks, one will hear a lot about French uniting against the “fascist threat to the Republic” which the RN’s rise supposedly represents: Anti-Marine demonstrations began Sunday in Paris before the final votes were tallied, and more leftist demonstrations “against the brown menace” were planned in major cities. 

This charge is a lie, of course: Marine Le Pen’s party is as grounded in the rules of democracy as any in France. In my experience, if you meet a young enthusiast, party worker, or political aide working for the RN, they invariably come from a family of Gaullist parents. De Gaulle was called many things by his opponents after World War II, including an aspiring dictator. By the time of his death, he was acknowledged, sometimes grudgingly, as France’s greatest leader of the 20th century, proven correct against the majority sentiments of his countrymen on the issues most existential for France—first, to submit to or fight Nazism, and second, to persist in maintaining or walk away from colonial rule over Algeria. 

At the top of the issues facing France today are immigration and the foreign policy questions raised by the Ukraine war. Continued immigration from Africa and North Africa will sometime this century reduce the descendants of white native born Frenchmen (Français de souche) to a minority in France, an event with incalculable cultural and political consequences. The circumstances in the suburbs of several major cities, “no-go zones” for the police or “territories lost to the Republic” as they are often called, provide one sort of preview; Michel Houellebecq’s “Submission” represents a more optimistic version. 

The policy platform of Marine Le Pen’s party aspires to terminate the cultural transformation of France through mass immigration. She calls (in her 2022 presidential bid) for an end to family chain-linked immigration, for asylum applicants to be screened outside the country, for the right to public housing to be given to French people first, for the expulsion of criminal illegal aliens, and, perhaps most importantly, for limiting access to French citizenship to those satisfy criteria of “merit and assimilation.” These measures would put an end to most mass immigration pathways (being born on French soil, claiming asylum, one’s brother, parents, etc. already being there) which make France more Third-World every day. 

These measures are broadly popular in the French electorate, which is why Marine Le Pen has been at the center of the French political conversation for decades despite an establishment united against her. They are also Gaullist, in a way that the politicians who managed to become De Gaulle’s political heirs never quite managed to be. Though the issue was too far in the future to be seriously talked about, De Gaulle himself was a multiculturalism skeptic. His views are summarized by this conversation recorded by his aide Alain Peyrefitte. 

“It is good that there are yellow Frenchmen, black Frenchmen, brown Frenchmen. It demonstrates that France is open to all races, and has a universal vocation,” he said. “But under the condition they remain small minorities. If not, France will no longer be France.” 

He went on to say that those who preach integration are “birdbrains, even if highly educated…Arabs are Arabs, French are French. Do you believe the French body politic can absorb 10 million Muslims, which will soon be 20 and after that 40…My village of Colombey-les-Deux-Églises will soon be Colombey-les-Deux-Mosqueés.” 

That passage, at once famous and ignored, shows De Gaulle to be more racially essentialist than today’s mainstream manners would tolerate, and completely estranged from the current establishment dogmas of the West, very much including those of the leaders of France’s Gaullist parties, who more or less submitted to the mass immigration he feared. His musings were prompted by the concept of holding on to Algeria as a colony and integrating it further into France—which was, in the 1950s, the French establishment, colonialist, pro–Algerian war position. The idea that France itself would be turned into a sort of de facto colony for Algerians and anyone else who wanted to settle there was, it must be said, completely beyond his scope. 

Le Pen’s party is unquestionably more Gaullist in foreign policy. In the past six months, Macron has jumped to the forefront of Europe’s Ukraine hawks, perhaps the only European leader who seems genuinely eager to satisfy Ukrainian president Zelensky’s ambition to transform the Ukraine conflict into a broader NATO-versus-Russia war. What De Gaulle might have thought of this is not hard to discern. One of his most famous foreign policy phrases was a “Europe from the Atlantic the Urals”—his vision of an area of common civilization, very much including Moscow and Saint Petersburg. 

The Cold War, with a communist regime in Moscow opposed to everything De Gaulle cherished, stood in the way of his pursuing any kind of pro-Soviet foreign policy, and he made clear that when push came to shove—as in the Cuban missile crisis, he stood with Washington over Moscow. But he withdrew France from NATO’s military structures to protest Washington’s refusal to share nuclear information about NATO forces on French soil, and sought for France an independent foreign policy. The idea that he would support expanding NATO into Eastern Europe as an anti-Russian alliance after the end of the Cold War, and back Washington’s desire to spread American military bases targeting Russia to Ukraine and the Baltics is of course ludicrous. By contrast Marine Le Pen has remained ambiguous about the Ukraine war, criticizing Russia’s invasion, maintaining that most Crimeans feel attached to Russia, criticizing Macron’s musings about escalating French military involvement. The weeks will likely increase pressure to clarify—but she will certainly come down as more of a Gaullist, less an anti-Russia hardliner. 

In the weeks to come we will hear repeated expressions of deep concern about the threat posed by the “extreme right”—in France, in Europe, embellished by claims Europe faces a “fascist” threat from the RN and the other assiduously legalistic and democratic right-wing populist parties. One can be legitimately skeptical about many aspects of Marine Le Pen’s party—whether their economic and fiscal plans make sense, whether they can muster enough elite talent to run the government, whether they would actually be less adept at maintaining the French welfare state than Macron. And of course Le Pen, talented, hard working political leader that she is, is no De Gaulle. But in terms of what she and her party stands for and aspires to emulate, the closest model is that of France’s greatest 20th century leader—the culturally conservative anti-Nazi who brought an end to the France’s colonial wars. 

The post De Gaulle’s Ghost Is on the Ballot in France appeared first on The American Conservative.

VIDEO: Idiot Climate Change Leftists Storm the Field at Congressional Baseball Game – Are Quickly Tackled and Cuffed – But Will These Insurrectionists See Jail Time?

The Congressional Baseball Game, a Washington DC tradition since 1909, was held tonight at Nationals Park in the nation’s capital.

The game is played each summer by members of the United States Congress. Republicans won the last outing 16-6.

On Wednesday night climate change leftists disrupted the game and stormed the field.

The young brainwashed leftists were quickly tackled by the police.

The crowd started chanting, “USA! USA! USA!…”

Pro-Hamas activists were also in the crowd waving Palestinian flags.

BREAKING: PROTESTERS DISRUPT CONGRESSIONAL BASEBALL GAME

Climate change protesters interrupted a congressional baseball game at Nationals Park, Washington, DC.

Capitol Police quickly intervened, tackling and arresting several individuals.

The incident sparked a mixed… pic.twitter.com/Ki4l7CTjYw

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) June 13, 2024

Breaking News: Multiple Pro-Hamas protesters were tackled after they stormed the field during the Congressional baseball in DC.
pic.twitter.com/BkIhxeb7Ql

— The Calvin Coolidge Project (@TheCalvinCooli1) June 13, 2024

The protesters could face federal charges – they won’t. They’ll be out by morning.

WATCH: Police tackled climate protesters who stormed the field at the Congressional Baseball game.

The protesters were wearing shirts that said “END FOSSIL FUELS.”

Eight protesters now face federal charges.pic.twitter.com/QfhjlMolgD

— EnvirosTakingLs (@EnvirosTakingLs) June 13, 2024

More…

NEW: Climate protesters run into the field at Nationals Park baseball stadium in Washington D.C. during the congressional baseball game.

What a bunch of losers.

Capitol Police tackled and arrested several individuals who were seen storming the field.

There were also a few… pic.twitter.com/jBT677jTGk

— Dutch Burke (@DutchBurke) June 13, 2024

Climate Defiance idiots.

UPDATE: Eight of us have been arrested for shutting down the Congressional Baseball Game.

They are behind bars right now.

Make no mistake: It’s the Members of Congress who should be locked up. pic.twitter.com/tNoB4jh0xp

— Climate Defiance (@ClimateDefiance) June 13, 2024

The post VIDEO: Idiot Climate Change Leftists Storm the Field at Congressional Baseball Game – Are Quickly Tackled and Cuffed – But Will These Insurrectionists See Jail Time? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.