On inauguration day, President Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of the approximately 1,550 defendants convicted for their involvement with the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol. He also ordered DOJ to dismiss all other pending indictments. Most of them, about 900, were for non-violent misdemeanors such as trespass and disorderly conduct. He granted the clemency all at once, and did not begin with pardoning the non-violent misdemeanor defendants first and then examining the remaining defendants on a case-by-case basis as he and others previously had suggested.

Meanwhile, on the very same day, just 15 minutes before he left office, President Biden issued the last set of his own pardons. He granted them to members of his family, most notably his brothers, sister, and in-laws, as well as to members of his administration such as Dr. Anthony Fauci and General Mark Milley, and even to political supporters like the congressional January 6 committee members. Biden's pardons followed thousands of pardons he issued this month to what he claimed were non-violent federal offenders and commutations of virtually all federal death penalties.

Many Democrats and media outlets have criticized Trump's mass clemency for the January 6 defendants, even as they casually ignored President Biden's. But let's put aside the hypocrisy for a moment to examine the real differences between the two sets of pardons, regardless of one's views of their merits.

First, Biden granted pardons and commutations to more than 8,000 individuals, which is more than any other modern president. Thousands of Biden's clemency grants were to serious criminals, including murderers, child killers, child abusers, and the biggest municipal embezzler in history, Rita Crundwell. Several of the grants benefitted well-connected Democrats. In both 2022 and 2024, Biden abused his pardon power to achieve mass sentencing reductions that Congress refused to pass by law. President Obama did the same thing when he issued mass commutations of drug sentences. //

Second, it's obviously not principle but politics that drove Biden's pardons; Biden's post-election mass death row commutations did not follow his self-proclaimed opposition to the death penalty. He left three men on death row whose commutations would have politically harmed Democrats. He did not commute the sentences of Dzhokar Tsarnaev (Boston Marathon bomber), Dylann Roof (murderer of nine black churchgoers in Charleston), and Robert Bowers (murderer of 11 worshippers a synagogue in Squirrel Hill, PA). Biden's alleged opposition to the death penalty also did not prevent DOJ from filing capital murder charges against Luigi Mangione.

Third, President Biden needs to pardon his family, officials, and allies only because he fears the very lawfare that he invented. Biden's DOJ broke more than two centuries of history to prosecute a former president and the candidate of the major opposition political party. He is like an arsonist who demands more spending on fire departments. Because of his stated fear of retaliation, Biden pardoned his family and associates before prosecutors ever launched investigations. These pardons were to Biden's own benefit, as their reciipients are much less likely to disclose any information that directly implicate President Biden to the family's alleged "pay to play, 10 percent for the Big Guy" schemes.

Contrast that with Trump's clemency, which did not directly benefit him or his family, and covered defendants who were actually convicted or charged, unlike Biden's preemptive pardons that covered up to 10 years' worth of potential and actual criminal activity for his family and allies. //

Democrats have resorted to pardons because they appear to expect lawfare to continue. DOJ released Jack Smith's special counsel J6 report even though Trump had won the election and DOJ could no longer pursue charges. It is even trying to release the special counsel report about the Florida classified documents case, even though Trump's co-defendants are entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Both President Trump and Attorney General–designate Pam Bondi are positioned to stop the lawfare, but only if the Democrats abjure their politicization of criminal justice. Lawfare can descend on Democrats as easily as on Republicans.

Matt Viser
@mviser
·
Follow
President Trump sits and takes question after question from reporters in the Oval Office, something that almost never happened with President Biden.
7:53 PM · Jan 20, 2025

Chris D. Jackson @ChrisDJackson
·
Replying to @mviser
[Biden] Literally did the same thing on his first day.

10:08 PM · Jan 20, 2025

Matt Viser @mviser
·
Replying to @ChrisDJackson
The transcript from that day indicates Biden spoke for less than 3 minutes and took 1 question.
10:30 PM · Jan 20, 2025

During my morning perusal of X, I came across a post from Chaya Raichik's "Libs of TikTok" account that I thought really summed up a change we didn't just feel, but saw. With the Biden administration out and the Trump administration in, a change of aesthetics occurred, and it began with the Trump family.

Melania Trump was, as always, the definition of beauty, grace, and poise, but so did Ivanka Trump, as usual. In fact, all the Trump women looked incredible, from Melania to Kai Trump. A really great moment from yesterday, that went under the radar, was when the Trump family was sitting on the stage at Capitol One stadium. Trump hadn't arrived yet, but the crowd was showering the family with praise. The camera displayed a family that looked clean, healthy, happy, and beautiful. //

It wasn't that long ago that we were being force-fed something entirely different and being told that it's good and beautiful.

The Biden family is corrupt. So corrupt that it apparently needed pardons, and with that corruption came people who displayed the opposite of beauty. In fact, it spit in the face of beauty in order to push non-conventional "beauty." //

Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok
·
Class is back.
5:45 AM · Jan 21, 2025

Understand, this isn't just about a beauty standard, this is about a path America could take. This is literally a "which way, Western world" moment.

To further solidify my point, I want to show you how the degeneracy of the Biden family produced outward ugliness that was often a politically-based rejection of tradition and goodness.

Back in June, I compiled a list of deviants the Biden administration had attracted, some of whom it even employed. //

The outward aesthetic matched the inward state of the soul. The Biden administration chose ugliness in so many forms because its corruption and degenerate politics caused a physical display of resistance to traditional beauty.

To make myself clear here, beauty can come in many forms, but even a person who people would consider to be less than attractive can be beautiful thanks to an inner goodness that shines through. Class and morality go a long way in outward presentation.

Roald Dahl had a very interesting quote about this:

“If a person has ugly thoughts, it begins to show on the face. And when that person has ugly thoughts every day, every week, every year, the face gets uglier and uglier until you can hardly bear to look at it.

A person who has good thoughts cannot ever be ugly. You can have a wonky nose and a crooked mouth and a double chin and stick-out teeth, but if you have good thoughts it will shine out of your face like sunbeams and you will always look lovely.”

Just before entering the Capitol Rotunda for the swearing-in of Donald J. Trump, outgoing President Joe Biden issued a few more pardons - including to a number of his family members: James B. Biden, Sara Jones Biden, Valerie Biden Owens, John T. Owens, and Francis W. Biden. //

justpaul
21 hours ago
Joe Biden just admitted his entire family is corrupt and guilty.

And now they can all be called to testify against him without the protection of the Fifth Amendment. //

GBenton surfcat50
20 hours ago edited
Their guilt is a win even if they individually escape justice. In the larger war to take America back, their collective and efficient admission all at once of their guilt may well accelerate the restoration of this country and strip their defenders of even a shred of cover.

It's official - the Biden crime family and crime syndicate.

The Democrat party narrative ends in disgrace. Now it's time to drive a stake through the heart of Marxism. //

GreenLanternMD
21 hours ago edited
This is actually a huge gift to Trump, who stood to lose whether his DOJ prosecuted Biden’s criminal associates or not. Now, while they tacitly admit to the commission of crimes, he can expose them without being accused of prosecuting his enemies, and, had he not prosecuted them, having to explain why he was not seeking consequences for their treasonous behavior. Now that’s on Biden and his co-conspirators.

Milley, the retired Army general and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who on several occasions subverted orders from his Commander-in-Chief, had his portrait removed from the Pentagon within two hours of President Donald Trump's inauguration.

The portrait's removal has been confirmed by CNN and Reuters. It had been revealed just 10 days ago. //

Of those pardoned by Biden, Milley stands out as having taken actions that could reasonably be described as treason. It is far from hyperbole in the case of the former Joint Chiefs Chair.

Milley, according to a book titled "Peril," assured his counterpart, General Li Zuocheng of the People’s Liberation Army of China, in the final days of Trump's first term that the United States military would not strike the communist country. Even if Trump ordered such actions based on his assessment they were in the best interest of the defense of America.

Perhaps most astonishing was the quote from that book, which shows Milley was willing to warn China — a hostile foreign nation — if an attack was in the works. //

Trump's nominee for FBI Director, Kash Patel, in an exclusive interview with RedState, suggested Milley contravened authorization from then-President Trump regarding the deployment of the National Guard on January 6th.

Milley had claimed the National Guard was deployed to the Capitol at “sprint speed.”

However, congressional testimony from Brig. Gen. Aaron R. Dean II, then the Guard’s adjutant general, suggested the deployment was stalled for the sake of optics, as evidenced by several calls to Ryan D. McCarthy, the Secretary of the Army at the time, to commence deployment going "directly to voice mail.". //

MyDogsMum TXavatar
7 hours ago
Does the pardon exempt him from a dishonorable discharge?

Mike Ford MyDogsMum
6 hours ago edited
Yes. A dishonorable requires conviction by a General Court Martial. A GCM is part of the same federal “sovereign.”

The Biden pardon precludes that
Streiff and I had that phone conversation earlier today.

Having said that, the pardon removes his self incrimination protection and do he can be compelled to testify regarding anything he has done prior to the Biden pardon.

Carey J Dolfin9999
6 hours ago
The Fifth Amendment only protects you from self-incrimination, which requires legal jeopardy. The pardon removed the legal jeopardy, making it impossible for him to incriminate himself. Therefore, he can be required to testify about ANYTHING he has knowledge of, or face Contempt of Court/Congress charges. If he lies under oath, he is subject to perjury charges.

I’m guessing it would take quite a lot to cross California Democrat Sen. Adam Schiff’s ethical line because in Donald Trump’s first term and in the subsequent corrupt J6 Committee, the long-necked Democrat proved that he was willing to do just about anything to “get Trump.” As fierce and nasty a partisan as you could find in The Swamp, Schiff was a leader of both impeachment trials against the 45th president—now the 47th president—and for years promised evidence of Russia collusion that he never produced.

We're still waiting, Adam.

He is so dishonest that the House censured him in 2023, making him only the 25th House lawmaker to face the punishment in U.S. history.

But evidently, Adam has found someone even more corrupt than himself: former (oh, I type that with such glee!) President Joe Biden, who has thrown out a slew of pardons in his waning days in office. Even Schiff was able to see that the pardons were not in the best interests of the country: //

He tries to claim that Biden’s J6 Committee pardons were “unnecessary” and “unwise” because he and fellow committee members, former Reps. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) and Liz Cheney (R-WY) did such “important work.” But if it was so important, why did Trump become president on Monday despite your stunning conclusions, and why does Biden feel the need to give you a preemptive pardon? A classic Shakespeare quote comes to mind, Adam: You "doth protest too much, methinks." //

When one of the most ethically challenged people ever to cast a cloud over Congress says you've crossed a line, you've really, really crossed a line. //

It wasnt me
43 minutes ago
He doesn't have to accept the Pardon.

Submitted by another.
In the 1915 Supreme Court case Burdick v. United States, the Court ruled that a pardon carries an "imputation of guilt". The Court also stated that accepting a pardon was "an admission of guilt". //

Black Magic
8 minutes ago
“I continue to believe that the grant of pardons to a committee that undertook such important work to uphold the law was unnecessary, and because of the precedent it establishes, unwise,”

Buuuut......I'll take it.

this is a final moment of shame for what is now inarguably the worst presidency in modern history. He has deeply abused his power to protect people from the repercussions of the law while repeatedly claiming to be "defending democracy." Does handing out pardons like candy for unspecified crimes while claiming the recipients didn't do anything wrong sound like defending democracy to you? This is the move of a third-world dictator, not a President of the United States. //

polyjunkie
an hour ago
Posted elsewhere but germane here:

What FJB has just set precedent for is utterly corrupt and may bring down our Republic.

Consider this: Now a President’s minions can do anything he wants them to do and be pardoned for it. For example, a future president could order the assassination of political rivals, then pardon the assassin. If there are objections by Congress or the Courts, a few more assassinations and pardons will solve that problem. FJB has just set the stage for a future president to end his political opposition because he is effectively untouchable. Now executive branch members are effectively above the law. They can lie to Congress, the Courts, the public, and there are no consequences.

FJB, you despicable a$$hole. //

jester6 polyjunkie
an hour ago edited
This is several orders of magnitude worse than the presidential immunity ruling in Trump v. US that the left freaked out about.

And it's not just that Biden did it, it's that a significant part of the country supports it. Politics is the art of the possible. The scenario you describe above is not only possible, it is more or less likely at this point. //

Ed in North Texas anon-shh5
an hour ago
Not at all a precedent. Been done before, will be done again. Pardoning people who have not been criminally charged goes back to George Washington and on to Ford's Nixon Pardon (Nixon had not been criminally charged, not even with an Article of Impeachment introduced or passing the House).

Sir, why did you pause LNG exports? Liquified natural gas is in great demand by our allies, why would you do that? Cause you understand, we just talked about Ukraine, you understand you're fueling Putin's war machine?" And he looked at me, stunned, and he said, "I didn't do that." And I said, "Mr. President, yes you did, it was an executive order like three weeks ago." He said, "No, I didn't do that," he was arguing with me.

That's where things get even crazier. Biden went on to admit he signed an executive order, but he told Johnson that believed he had only authorized a study on the effects of LNG.

JOHNSON: I said, "No you're not sir, you paused it, I have the terminal, the export terminal in our state, I talked to those people this morning. This is doing massive damage to our economy, to our national security."

I thought, "We are in serious trouble." Who's running the country?" I don't know who put the paper in front of him, but he didn't know. //

It wasnt me WesW
8 hours ago
I like Johnson, but imagine if he had walked out of that meeting to cameras outside the White House and repeated that in January of 2024.

And said, "Who lied to the President about what was in the EO?
If someone didn't lie to him Why doesn't he recall what was in it?
What other decisions was the President deceived about?
How can we be sure?". //

Charlie the Deplorable
9 hours ago
I originally planned to write a comment ripping the Speaker for not taking more forceful action somehow. And then I thought through his options. Impeachment requires “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Although there’s probably some bribery somewhere along the way, nothing impeachable seems relevant to the case. His other alternative is the 25th Amendment. But he would need to convince the VP and cabinet to stick out their necks and affirm his disability. They already were covering it up such that I wouldn’t have presumed they could be convinced to act. His third option would have been to go public, hoping for the press and the people to pressure him to resign. Yeah, good luck with that one. So I don’t see any path for him to have done anything about it.

And even if he had succeeded, we would’ve been left with VP Harris in the Oval Office. Which many could argue would be worse.

This episode points out the need for a vigorous, multi-sided press. RedState readers knew of his vegetative state somewhere in 2020-2022 depending on what you believed. That simply wasn’t enough to force a compliant democrat party to act. And that is why I’m a VIP Platinum. We need a fervent press, with both left and right having a strong voice.

it’s past time for Republicans to provide a pithy answer to counter the Democrat’s deceptive question.

As I explained last year when the legacy media hounded then-Sen. J.D. Vance to say Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, there is a fundamental flaw in the question: “The query includes an undefined term — ‘lost’ — which holds a different meaning to Trump supporters and to the anti-Trump inquisitors.”

“If ‘lost’ merely meant Biden is the president of the United States, then that’s an easy answer: Yes, of course, Trump lost, as Biden was inaugurated,” and he is currently nearing the end of his four disastrous years in the Oval Office. But that’s not what those demanding an acknowledgement that Trump lost mean by “lost,” and yesterday’s hearings confirmed that reality, for Bondi repeatedly and expressly attested that, yes, Joe Biden is the president of the United States.

What Durbin, Blumenthal, and pretty much everyone else demanding a “yes” or “no” answer to whether Trump lost the 2020 election seek is a concession that Trump’s election challenges were frivolous, unfounded, or wrong. Democrats inject such concessions into their meaning of “lost.”

That’s why Bondi answered Durbin’s question as she did, by stating both that she accepted that Biden is president of the United States and that she saw firsthand issues in Pennsylvania’s election.

In other words, it depends on what you mean by “lost.”. //

“If asked whether Trump ‘lost’ the 2020 election, meaning that if all legal votes were counted and all illegal counts discarded — and the counting was done legally pursuant to controlling election law —” the answer should be a resounding, “I don’t know.”

As I wrote last year: “No one can possibly know the answer to that question because in 2020 there were too many election laws violated or ignored, and too many illegal votes counted. But the lawsuits challenging the election outcomes were tossed as moot once the votes were certified, so there was never a determination on the validity of the tallies, leaving uncertain the accuracy of the election results.” //

So, here’s a simple, soundbite for the next Trump nominee cornered with the query, “Did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?”

“It depends on what you mean by ‘lose.’ Joe Biden is the president of the United States. But Biden did not win a free and fair election, and the country has suffered the devastating consequences for the last four years as a result of the Biden presidency.”

And the 2020 election was not free and fair: Not when the FBI pre-bunked the Hunter Biden laptop story, causing social media companies to censor the evidence of Joe Biden’s involvement in his son’s pay-to-play scandal; not when the Biden campaign’s senior advisor, Antony Blinken, “set in motion” the release of a public statement signed by 51 former intelligence agents that falsely framed Hunter’s laptop as Russian disinformation; not when there were “systemic violations of election law” which “disparately favor[ed] one candidate,” and “allow[ed] for tens of thousands of illegal votes to be counted;” and not when illegal drop box were placed in Democrat-heavy precincts and Zuckbucks were used to get out the Democrat vote.

NEW: During a one-on-one meeting, Speaker Johnson asked President Biden why he paused LNG exports to Europe, says Biden was completely unaware he had done so.

The United States hasn't had a president for four years.

Johnson says Biden was completely unaware of an executive

Random US Citizen bintexas
12 hours ago edited
Well, if you can turn a man into a woman just by saying it's true, certainly you can turn an unratified amendment into a ratified one...

One of the things that makes it clear that our society continues to deteriorate is the almost Medieval level of superstition we're seeing almost every day. Saying something makes it true (this amendment was ratified). Naming a thing allows you to control it (western medicine widely contains this superstition) A magical belief that behavior can effect nature (climate change). The belief that words can cause physical/spiritual harm (conservatives talking is the same a violence). Belief that a person is the incarnation of the devil (Trump)

Western civilization isn't dead yet, but it certainly is ill.

mikwcas
3 hours ago edited
All I saw [in these videos] was, well, you're fired you're fired you are too, and you and you and you. And so on and so forth.

And I'm not talking about Milley, Yellen or Garland. Talking about all the clapping seals. See ya'.

Archivist of the United States Dr. Colleen Shogan and Deputy Archivist William J. Bosanko released the following statement today on the Equal Rights Amendment and the constitutional responsibilities for administering the ratification process:

“As Archivist and Deputy Archivist of the United States, it is our responsibility to uphold the integrity of the constitutional amendment process and ensure that changes to the Constitution are carried out in accordance with the law. At this time, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) cannot be certified as part of the Constitution due to established legal, judicial, and procedural decisions.

“In 2020 and again in 2022, the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice affirmed that the ratification deadline established by Congress for the ERA is valid and enforceable. The OLC concluded that extending or removing the deadline requires new action by Congress or the courts. Court decisions at both the District and Circuit levels have affirmed that the ratification deadlines established by Congress for the ERA are valid. Therefore, the Archivist of the United States cannot legally publish the Equal Rights Amendment. As the leaders of the National Archives, we will abide by these legal precedents and support the constitutional framework in which we operate.

“The role of the Archivist of the United States is to follow the law as it stands, ensuring the integrity of our nation’s governing institutions. Personal opinion or beliefs are not relevant; as the leaders of the National Archives, we support established legal processes and decisions.

On January 27, 2020, the Commonwealth of Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. The American Bar Association (ABA) has recognized that the Equal Rights Amendment has cleared all necessary hurdles to be formally added to the Constitution as the 28th Amendment. I agree with the ABA and with leading legal constitutional scholars that the Equal Rights Amendment has become part of our Constitution.

It is long past time to recognize the will of the American people. In keeping with my oath and duty to Constitution and country, I affirm what I believe and what three-fourths of the states have ratified: the 28th Amendment is the law of the land, guaranteeing all Americans equal rights and protections under the law regardless of their sex. //

Note the date of the Virginia's ratification: January 27, 2020. The original Congressional resolution that sent the Equal Rights Amendment to the states for ratification included a ratification deadline of seven years. The original deadline was March 1979. There was an extension, passed by a simple majority — not the two-thirds majority required for constitutional amendments — and signed by President Carter.

However, the president has no role in the passage and ratification of constitutional amendments, as the Supreme Court decided back in 1798. //

Even the interns running the White House social media accounts and press releases have to understand that this "affirmation" means less than nothing. The Equal Rights Amendment has not been ratified. It is not the law of the land. It remains as it was: a failed effort to amend the Constitution. Again, the President of the United States has no role in amending the Constitution. It is, as MacBeth said, "...a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." //

The President of the United States has no authority to make any such decree, and Joe Biden can "affirm" this until his eyes fall out and it means a grand total of nothing. This administration is leaving as it lived: with no knowledge of the Constitution and how this republic is supposed to work, and only a tenuous connection with reality. //

mdavt
2 hours ago
Hasn't the Archivist stated she will not abide by any such order?

RedPanda mdavt
an hour ago
Yep!

https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2025/nr25-004

In case you aren't acquainted with the details, Ratcliffe is nailing Rep. Adam Schiff in the above excerpt. He was the "chairman of the intelligence committee" that went on various news programs to lie to the American people and claim that the Hunter Biden laptop was a Russian information operation. That ultimately led to Schiff being censured and prevented from rejoining the committee after Republicans won the House of Representatives in 2022.

Ratcliffe, who was DNI during Trump's first term, was the only major intelligence official to come out and tell the truth about the laptop. He did so under a barrage of attacks from the press claiming he was misleading the public to protect the soon-to-be second-term president. In the end, he was vindicated while people like Schiff never apologized for the falsehoods they pushed. That is exactly why Ratcliffe is the right man to lead the CIA. That organization has been politicized and weaponized against Americans for far too long. The time to bring everyone back in line is now, and those who don't want that can "find a new line of work."

The special counsel who prosecuted Hunter Biden for tax and gun crimes released his long-awaited final report on the investigation on Monday, officially concluding the probe that was cut short by President Joe Biden’s sweeping pardon of his son late last year. //

Weiss said that President Biden’s pardon of his son, Hunter, was an attempt to rewrite history: "The Constitution provides the President with broad authority to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, but nowhere does the Constitution give the President the authority to rewrite history.”

MajorKong
43 minutes ago
Top four threats to humanity:

1. Marxism
2. Nuclear war triggered by Marxists (see 1, above)
3. Famine triggered by Marxists (see 1, above)
4. Did I mention Marxists?

Grapie MajorKong
5 minutes ago

5. American Democrats (see 1, above)

Nick Field
@nick_field90
·
Follow
"An uncomfortable thought has circulated among some Biden aides and longtime supporters in the days since Carter died: If Biden passes while Trump is president, would he get a state funeral?"
cnn.com
Biden confronts an ending with Carter’s funeral | CNN Politics
5:21 PM · Jan 9, 2025

Validating their concerns, the aides reference Democrats' absolute delight that Carter's passing means flags will be set at half-staff through President-elect Trump's inauguration, something he has voiced dismay over.

They also note that Trump initially did not lower flags to half-staff at the White House to honor John McCain after his death in August 2018.

Considering their cordial meeting at the White House in November, it seems unlikely that Trump would refuse to honor Biden's wishes. Despite the fact that Biden's administration did their absolute best for years to put him in jail.

Not to mention, it seems more like a case of projection. Is there any doubt President Biden and his aides would have refused to honor Trump had he unfortunately passed while Joe and Kamala were in office?

Recall, if you will, that congressional Democrats in 2021 introduced a bill that would ban former President Donald Trump from being buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

The legislation - H.R.484 or the "No Glory for Hate Act" - was sponsored by Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-CA) and co-sponsored by 13 additional Democrats, including newly minted Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) and former congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA).

The Act’s summary indicated it was designed to “prohibit the use of Federal funds for the commemoration of certain former Presidents, and for other purposes.”

It is designed specifically to prevent “the interment or inurnment in Arlington National Cemetery of any former President that has been twice impeached by the House of Representatives.”

Weird. He should have a special plot, considering he's also the only twice-acquitted former President.

Texas Zombie
2 days ago
The only reason they are concerned about this is they know that if the shoe were on the other foot Biden would not give Trump a state funeral. They know that for a fact. So of course they’re worried that Trump would do exactly what Biden would do. But you know what? Trump is a better man than Biden. And if Biden dies while Trump is president, there will be a state funeral and Trump will say nice things about Biden. Because that’s the kind of guy Trump is.

Souza
@soarathena
Here’s another cool thing I stumbled upon. Not as cool as yours, hah, but it sort of blew me away too.

This was written in 1973 - literally calls out this election as being consequential to eliminating corruption:

“We have noted that corruption appears to visit the White House in fifty-year cycles. This suggests that exposure and retribution inoculate the Presidency against its latent criminal impulses for about half a century. Around the year 2023 the American people would be well advised to go on the alert and start nailing down everything in sight.”

—Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., The Imperial Presidency
11:40 PM · Jan 9, 2025
·
Battleboy
@JohnMercer62573
·
Jan 10
Biden has been in DC for THE ENTIRE 50 YEAR CYCLE...

On Saturday, though, the White House put out a press release revealing the real reason at last--Biden bestowing on Pope Francis the Presidential Medal of Freedom with Distinction, the only so designated honor by the president. Instead of handing it over in person, Biden and Pope Francis spoke on the phone. //

Oh, please!
6 hours ago
The new name for the presidential medal of freedom is "Participation Medals for Marxists."