Month: March 2024

The scope of Democrat attempts to gain an illicit advantage in the 2024 election is breathtaking.

The latest maneuver comes from Democrat Colorado judges, appointed by Democrats, to keep Trump off the ballot. The decision was based a series of dubious allegations. The first baseless premise is that the one-day riot at the Capitol was an “insurrection” similar to the Civil War. The concept that a portion of the 14^th Amendment, designed to prohibit former Confederates from holding office, is applicable to Trump is absurd. Further, there is no convincing evidence that Trump was responsible for the trespass into the building.

The Colorado decision is merely the latest example.

Democrats have diligently worked to prevent ballot security measures from being enacted.  As the Biden Administration has flooded the nation with illegal immigrants, attempts to get them to vote will be a major challenge.

In New York City. In 2021, NPR reported that New York City wanted to allow 800,000 noncitizens to vote in local elections. The measure was struck down in court.

Act for America reports that “The concept [of non-citizen voting through lax security] is not new. Only 5 states feature citizenship status on their drivers license or state issued identification card including Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, and Wisconsin…Unfortunately, only the State of Alabama requires a legal form of identification that also requires proof of citizenship and they do not accept inferior forms of ID to vote in their state. This leaves us with 49 States that DO NOT have any security as it relates to proof of citizenship to vote. We are relying on the honor system, without oversight and accountability. 49 states allow inferior forms of identification at the polls that do not verify citizenship status, including Employee ID Cards, Student ID cards, a Fishing License, Bank Statements, Credit Cards with or without a photo, social security cards, and other absurd forms of identification.”

A Townhall analysis quoted  Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) warning that Biden wants to turn illegal migrants into Democrat voters— hence the reason the administration is looking the other way at one of the worst border crises of U.S. history. “The Biden administration has done this intentionally. [Department of Homeland Security] Secretary [Alejandro] Mayorkas has done this intentionally. For what reason? Everybody asks me all the time. I think that ultimately they hope to turn all these illegals into voters for their side,” Johnson said. “It sounds sinister, but there’s no other explanation for what’s happening down there. It’s an absolute humanitarian and now national security crisis — catastrophe really — and they could reverse it overnight if they wanted to, but they don’t.”

In prior elections, Democrats have sought to ignore existing ballot laws. Just one example: American Military News notes that Republicans are backing an appeal in a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn an Illinois law that allows mail-in ballots cast on or before Election Day to be counted up to 14 days afterward.

The use of election workers to engage in Democrat-oriented partisan activities is a growing problem. A Daily Signal review that “A nonpartisan organization that trains election workers from across the country is now being run by two liberal voting activists—one who previously worked for the nonprofit that distributed hundreds of millions of dollars of Mark Zuckerberg’s election grants during the 2020 elections. The grants were supposedly to “help” local governments run elections, but most of the money went to election offices in Democrat-run localities. Meanwhile, most board members of the National Association of Election Officials, commonly known as The Election Center, are current or former elections officials from heavily blue counties. “Left-wing activists want to insert ‘progressive’ groups into our election machinery, making partisan actors a permanent part of how we count ballots in all future elections,” Hayden Ludwig, director of public policy research at conservative advocacy group Restoration of America, told The Daily Signal.”

The results of all of this are obvious. In June, a Rasmussen poll revealed that “A majority of voters continue to suspect widespread election fraud, and expect cheating at the ballot box to influence the 2024 presidential election…54% of Likely U.S. Voters believe cheating is likely to affect the outcome of the next presidential election, including 30% who think it’s Very Likely.”

Illustration: Pixabay

The Biden Administration has done more than opened up the border to illegal immigration. It has done more than allowing potential criminals, terrorists, and carriers of disease to enter the nation.  It has virtually made illegal aliens an elite class with privileges exceeding those of American citizens.

In December, total nationwide encounters of illegal immigrants reached a record 371,036, eclipsing the previous monthly record set in September by 30,000. In just the first three months of fiscal year 2024, nearly one million illegal aliens were encountered at our borders, and these figures do not include thousands of ‘gotaways’ who are known to have entered but evaded law enforcement, according to FAIRUS.

In New York City, four illegal immigrants viciously assaulted two New York City Police Officers. The criminal aliens were released from custody within a few hours.

Crimes which, if U.S. citizens were involved, would be referred to federal authorities if appropriate, are not being reported if illegal aliens are involved.

One analysis that 64% of federal arrests in 2018 involved noncitizens, despite them comprising only 7% of the population at that time, and that was before the massive influx under Biden.

A 2023 House report found that: “Based on cost data provided by the National Institute of Corrections, and an analysis of Justice Department statistics of each state’s illegal and deportable alien population, one study estimates police expenditures associated with illegal aliens cost states around $8.95 billion in 2022, with judicial costs around $3.72 billion and prison costs about $6.2 billion. 24,954 criminal aliens were in federal incarceration, and according to a 2020 Department of Justice (DOJ) report, 94% of criminal aliens in Bureau of Prisons custody in FY19 were unlawfully present. Data from the bureau also indicates the average annual cost per individual incarcerated in federal prison in FY20 was $39,158. Assuming these figures, that’s nearly $1 billion to incarcerate criminal illegal aliens in federal prisons.”

The costs are more than just dealing with increased crime. Throughout the nation, local governments are dealing with increased crime, drug use, human trafficking and other crimes committed by illegals.

At various times and places, Throughout the United States, American school children have been dismissed from class in order to use their rooms to house illegals. They have been deprived of recreational and sports facilities for the same reason. Homeless veterans have been ejected from shelters to make room for illegals.

State and local budgets have been severely strained due to the heavy costs imposed by housing, feeding, educating, and medicating illegals. According to the House GOP Homeland Security Committee,     “housing and other services just to those who have been released into the United States on Mayorkas’ watch, or entered as known gotaways, could exceed $451 billion.”

A New York Post article reports that “American travelers are outraged by signs appearing at US airports appearing to allow migrants onto flights without showing proper identification. US citizens traveling domestically have to show a valid identification card or a passport to board a plane, but signs at certain airports say there are different rules for some newly arrived migrants.”

The statistics are blatant and disturbing.  The salient question is why has the Biden White House followed this path? 

To a growing number of Americans, the excess spending, soft on crime, and other progressive policies endorsed by Democrat leaders are deeply unpopular. However, the election fortunes of both the President and Democrats in general could improve if a grateful population of illegal aliens attain  the opportunity to vote.

The attitude is best expressed by Rep, Hal Colson, (D-Vermont) who expressed, in a Stateline article, the sentiment of a growing number of Democrats “People always glom onto the idea that you have to earn our right to vote by becoming a citizen…I just don’t buy that. We’re talking about a large chunk of the community that’s closed off.”

As Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC)  notes, “Over the past few years, an alarming trend has popped up in cities nationwide where non-citizens (foreign nationals), and in some cases illegal immigrants, are allowed to vote in local elections. As I write this, non-citizens can vote in certain elections in New York City, San Francisco, Chicago, and some jurisdictions in Vermont and Maryland, as non-citizen voting becomes increasingly popular across the country.”

Whether legally in some jurisdictions or illegally elsewhere, illegal aliens will go to the polls. In record numbers. Although no statutes currently exist allowing illegals to vote in a presidential election, it is inevitable that some election officials will look the other way as they do.  This is facilitated by cynical measures such as providing illegals with drivers’ licenses, which can be used to register to vote.

Illegal voting may well change the outcome of the 2024 election, and President Biden and his party will benefit.

Illustration: Pixabay

Climate change actions, “green new deal” and similar policies, many based on flawed, fraudulent or incomplete data are economically unrealistic, technologically unsound, and oblivious to life essential necessities.  

The Hoover Institute describes massive measurement errors, a failure to take into account the role of the Sun and clouds, and the inadequacy of modelling techniques that underpin much of the arguments for green policies.

The cost of these policies, estimated to be about $5 trillion just to switch from coal, nuclear and natural gas to 100% renewables, notes the Heritage Foundation, is unrealistic.  They ignore the fact that for the foreseeable future, wind and solar have little chance to provide adequate, dependable alternatives to fossil fuels.  Further, these expenditures would divert funding from advancing breakthrough technologies, such as fusion power, which could revolutionize energy production. Many of the same mistaken voices who prevented the construction of pollution-free nuclear power plants are the same that push the current erroneous moves. By the way, many of the same voices that confidently spoke of global cooling are now pushing global warming with the same level of confidence and with the same disdain for those who try to bring up appropriate questions.

It is not a coincidence that this has become a political issue. Much of the policy changes advocated have more to do with adopting socialist style economic changes, despite the reality that socialist nations have had a far worse record of environmental stewardship that their capitalist counterparts. It is not a coincidence that while the United States and Europe would have to make dramatic moves to comply, China, the worlds’ worst polluter and leading socialist nation, is given a free pass.

Green advocates  seek to punish advanced nations for providing the industrial revolution that has built the modern world, dramatically increased the standard of living, and provided the food that has lifted much of the planet out of starvation.  They would make essential fuel unaffordable for a vast population that requires heat to prevent freezing to death, or cooling to prevent heat stroke, and the assets necessary to produce adequate food.  

Recently, the New York Post reported that many wealthy politicians and climate campaigners forget that much of the planet remains mired in poverty and hunger. As such, wealthy nations are increasingly replacing their development aid with climate spending. The World Bank, whose primary goal is to help people out of poverty, has announced it will divert no less than 45% of its funding toward climate change, shifting some $40 billion annually away from poverty and hunger.

But everyone won’t be harmed from extreme green moves. Politically connected donors to Democrats have profited, as was the case in the Solyndra scandal, in which vast sums of monies went to a solar panel company that eventually went bankrupt, but not before funds were bundled on behalf of Barack Obama. Former Vice President Al Gore, notes the Daily Mail, million from climate alarmism.

Climate Realism emphasizes that “The secret of the Green New Deal is that it will make rich, politically connected elites even richer. Your average rustbelt worker will lose while those connected to politicians will win big.”

 House Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH) recently stated that “ President Biden has put Americans at risk by pushing a ‘whole-of-government’ climate agenda that increases energy costs, undermines consumer choice, and strengthens America’s adversaries, especially China and Russia. This drastic and burdensome policy agenda also appears disconnected from his stated climate goals, in that many of the so-called ‘green’ energy technologies have significant environmental impacts. Even worse, the rush-to-green agenda is far from over.

For instance, I am deeply concerned with the EPA’s recent announcement on proposed standards for light-and medium-duty vehicles that would force the electrification of two-thirds of our domestic car market…Democrats and the Biden administration don’t want to examine the true costs of these policy choices to the environment, human rights, and national security in the United States and around the world…the deployment of renewable energy technologies that require clearing a significant amount of land…The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that solar panels need 5 acres of land to generate one megawatt of electricity, and wind turbines need 35 acres! To put that in context, you need thirty times the amount of land covered in solar panels to equal the capacity of one natural gas fired power plant…These same renewable energy technologies pose risks to Americans at the end-of-life stage. The International Renewable Energy Agency projects that global solar panel waste could reach 78 million tons by 2050, with anywhere from 7.5 million and 10 million tons of waste in need of disposal in the United States. The sheer amount of waste, some of which the EPA considers to be hazardous, is deeply troubling and begs the question of whether existing landfill capacity will be overwhelmed.

“And let’s consider human rights! The supply chain of critical materials essential for solar, wind, and EV batteries is tainted with forced labor, slavery, and child labor abuses. Both the State Department and the Department of Labor have acknowledged violations with more than 40,000 children engaging in ‘artisanal and small-scale mining,’ digging for cobalt with their bare hands in the Congo, as well as thousands of members of the Uyghur Muslim community forced into labor in China. We cannot be morally selective. It is our duty to ensure that American energy supply chains do not rely on slavery or child labor.

“We should also prioritize American national security rather than handing federal subsidies and American taxpayer dollars to Chinese companies. China controls 50-70% of lithium and cobalt refining, key inputs for EV batteries, as well as 90% of global refining capacity for rare earth elements.”

Photo: UNICEF

President Biden has made numerous claims about economic progress, most of which are not supported by independent information and statistics.

Generally, the media would address the difference between a White House claim and reality.  However, in its partisan support for the 46^th president, it has been relatively silent, with only a few exceptions.

A review of the facts reveals an economy that has become worse since Biden took office.

Inflation: the Consumer Price Index (CPI) report for September stated inflation grew at a rate of 3.7 percent and cumulative inflation under President Biden grew to a staggering 17.1 percent. The cost of living has accelerated dramatically under the current president. A family of four is paying $15,133 per year, or $1,261 per month, more to purchase the same goods and services compared to the day he took office. The average cost of a gallon of gas was 2.372, compared to $3.09 today. The average cost of weekly groceries continues to grow, overall grocery prices was  11.3% higher in January 2023 compared to January 2022.

According to House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-TX)  “Hardworking families are being crushed by President Biden’s inflation-inducing fiscal policies. Today, a family of four is paying $15,133 per year, or $1,261 per month, more to purchase the same goods and services compared to the day President Biden took office. Every day, they are being forced to choose between medicine or the rent, putting food on the table or gas in the car.

Wages: real wages are lower today than they were at the beginning of Biden’s presidency in January 2021.There are various ways to measure real wages. Real average hourly earnings declined 1.7% between December 2021 and December 2022, while real average weekly earnings (which factors in the number of hours people worked) declined 3.1% over that period.

Debt: The New York Federal Reserve found  that “Total household debt rose by $16 billion to reach $17.06 trillion in the second quarter of 2023, according to the latest Quarterly Report on Household Debt and Credit. Credit card balances saw brisk growth, rising by $45 billion to a series high of $1.03 trillion. Other balances, which include retail credit cards and other consumer loans, and auto loans increased by $15 billion and $20 billion, respectively. 

Biden also alleges that he has reduced the federal deficit. Again, the facts don’t support the claim.  CNN’s Dan White, senior director of economic research at Moody’s Analytics – an economics firm whose assessments Biden has repeatedly cited during his presidency – told CNN’s Matt Egan in October: “On net, the policies of the administration have increased the deficit, not reduced it.” The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, an advocacy group, wrote in September that Biden’s actions will add more than $4.8 trillion to deficits from 2021 through 2031, or $2.5 trillion if you don’t count the American Rescue Plan pandemic relief bill of 2021.

Independent analysts and ratings organizations have taken note. In August, Fitch downgraded the U.S. credit rating. “The rating downgrade of the United States reflects the expected fiscal deterioration over the next three years, a high and growing general government debt burden, and the erosion of governance relative to ‘AA’ and ‘AAA’ rated peers over the last two decades that has manifested in repeated debt limit standoffs and last-minute resolutions.”

Prospects for reform under President Biden’s leadership are grim. The 46^th president continues to use the U.S. Treasury as a political piggybank to accommodate his progressive supporters and to, in essence, buy votes.  Despite the U.S. Supreme Court striking down the White Houses’ student-loan forgiveness program, noting that he lacks authority for such a move, the President has again promised to engage in similar action. He has burdened the states with massive new expenses resulting from his open border policies. His energy policies continue to keep the massive energy cost hikes he caused upon his inauguration excessively high.

The media criticism which would normally persuade a course change in an administration remains muted, as it seeks to limit support for GOP candidates.

Illustration: Pixabay

In July of last year, I discussed the case of Missouri v. Biden, in which Federal Judge Terry Doughty of the Western District of Louisiana issued an injunction against various members of the Biden Administration.  As the Court stated,  “[i]n their attempts to suppress alleged disinformation, the Federal Government, and particularly the Defendants named here, are alleged to have blatantly ignored the First Amendment’s right to free speech.” 

The decision, which was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals states that “since 2018, federal officials…have made public statements and demands to social-media platforms in an effort to induce them to censor disfavored speech and speakers…[federal officials] have threatened adverse consequences to social-media companies, such as reform of Section 230 immunity under the Communications Decency Act, antitrust scrutiny/enforcement, increased regulations, and other measures, if those companies refuse to increase censorship. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields social-media companies from liability for actions taken on their websites…the threat of repealing Section 230 motivates the social-media companies to comply with [federal officials] censorship requests.”

Based on a wealth of overwhelming evidence, Judge Doughty ruled that “the United States Government, through the White House and numerous federal agencies, pressured and encouraged social-media companies to suppress free speech. Defendants used meetings and communications with social-media companies to pressure those companies to take down, reduce, and suppress the free speech of American citizens. They flagged posts and provided information on the type of posts they wanted suppressed. They also followed up with directives to the social-media companies to provide them with information as to action the company had taken with regard to the flagged post. This seemingly unrelenting pressure by Defendants had the intended result of suppressing millions of protected free speech postings by American citizens.”

Never did I imagine that I would become one of those Americans subjected to censorship, and the violation of my right to free speech.

Last month, I published a book, The Making of a Martyr: An Analysis of the Indictments of Donald Trump. I have been examining and conducting an extensive review of each of the four criminal indictments brought against the former President, and after publishing my findings in a series of columns here on usagovpolicy.com, I assembled my research into a book.

The Making of a Martyr is available at Amazon, both as an EBook and in Paperback. 

That is, if you can find it.

A search on Amazon for the title, The Making of a Martyr, turns up a series of books, none of which are mine.  To find my book. you must search both the title and my name, John H. Wilson.

In an effort to increase sales and the visibility of my book. I submitted a proposal for an advertising campaign to Amazon.  I was willing to pay seventy-five cents per click (that is, when people clicked on the advertising banner on Amazon’s web site, I would be charged), with a daily budget of twelve dollars.  This seemed to be a modest place to start.  But a few days after I forwarded my proposal to Amazon, I received an email rejecting the campaign.  “Your ad…does not comply with our current Creative Acceptance Policies…your ad contains content or book(s) prohibited from advertising.  This may include books about a specific political party, issue, or candidate during an election year.”  I was referred to “section 4.3, Political books under Book Guidelines and Acceptance policies” and advised to “remove the content or book(s) from your ad.”

Under Section 4.3, Political Books, “Prohibited Books” are defined as “[b]ooks that contain a personal attack on a specific political candidate or elected official” or “[d]uring an election year: books about a specific political party, issue, or candidate.” 

Obviously, a book that is primarily a legal discussion of a series of criminal charges currently pending in four different jurisdictions is not a “personal attack on a specific political candidate or elected official.”  However, 2024 is an election year, and The Making of a Martyr is about a specific candidate – Donald Trump.

But so is President Biden The Collected Speeches; The 4 book collection of Too Much and Never Enough, Promise Me Dad, Dreams From My Father, and The Audacity Of Hope (two books each by Joe Biden and Barak Obama; and the 2018 audiobook. Conversations with Joe, which is described as “the edited highlights of Vice President Joe Biden’s 29 city US tour…[t]hese compelling, off-the-cuff conversations are designed to amplify Biden’s powerful message of unity and promise in heartfelt and entertaining fashion.” 

Aren’t most of these books about a specific political candidate during an election year?

Perhaps these books are not being specifically “advertised” on Amazon.  But if you go to the page for each book, you will see a group of suggested books. described as “People who bought this also bought,” or “Related to this topic.”  The suggested books are typically books by Kamala Harris, Barak Obama, or more books about Joe Biden – Obama being the only one who is not currently a candidate for office.

In fairness, the same thing happens when you research books by or about Donald Trump on Amazon.  For instance, when you search for Letters to Trump, which is described as “part of the incredible private collection of correspondence between President Trump and the countless world leaders, celebrities, athletes and business leaders who shaped the United States, and the world”,it is recommended that you also purchase Trump 45: American’s Greatest President.

Maybe these books are also not being specifically advertised.  But when have you seen The Making of a Martyr as a recommended additional purchase? 

You haven’t.

The inability to advertise my book on Amazon does nothing to help sales.  I am left to my own efforts to promote my work.  Is this an intentional act of suppression of free speech on the part of Amazon?  Or is it a legitimate concern for even-handedness during an election year?

As Judge Doughtry stated, “it is not imaginary or speculative to believe that in the event of any other real or perceived emergency event, the Defendants would once again use their power over social-media companies to suppress alternative views. And it is certainly not imaginary or speculative to predict that Defendants could use their power over millions of people to suppress alternative views or moderate content they do not agree with in the upcoming 2024 national election…”  

Judge Wilson served on the bench in NYC

Illustration: Pixabay

Sweden has finally become a part of NATO, making it the 32^nd member of the alliance.

Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg noted the action makes the entire alliance stronger. The action came following a vote by Hungary’s parliament, the last holdout regarding Stockholm’s application.  In a statement, Stoltenberg noted that “I welcome the Hungarian parliament’s vote to ratify #Sweden’s membership in NATO.”

 The Nordic nation provides a significant boost to NATO’s armed forces. Overall, it is ranked as having the world’s 29^th (out of 145) most powerful military.

Published sources indicate that “The Swedish Armed Forces is made up of 24,400 active personnel, 11,400 military reserves, 21,500 Home Guard and 5,200 additional conscripts yearly into the Reserves (set to increase to 8,000 conscripts yearly by 2024) as of 2022. The Swedish army has 121 tanks (Leopard 2A5/Strv 122), roughly 1,300 APCs (Patria XA-360/203/180, RG-32 Scout), 800 IFVs (550 CV9040, 150 Bv410, 90 Bv308/309), 11,300 utility vehicles (ex. Bv206/208, MB G-Class 6×6 and 4×4, MB sprinter), 84 towed and 40 self-propelled mortar (12 cm grk m/41, grkpbv90) and 48 self-propelled artillery guns (Archer). It also consists of several different specialized vehicles. The Swedish Navy has a total of 387 ships, including 4 submarines (3 Gotland, 1 Södermanland), 7 corvettes (5 Visby, 2 Gävle), 9 minesweepers (5 Koster, 4 Styrsö), 13 larger patrol boats (2 Stockholm and 11 Tapper) and 9 specialised ships with different support duties. The rest is made up of different smaller vessels such as the CB90. Currently the Swedish Airforce has a total of 210 aircraft, 94 of those being JAS39C/D Gripen (60 JAS39E on order), 6 C130H Hercules (1 with aerial refueling capabilities), 4 SAAB 340 (2 AEW&C and 2 VIP transport), 4 Gulfstream IV (2 SIGINT and 2 VIP transport) as well as 15 UH-60 Blackhawk, 18 NH90 and 20 AgustaWestland helicopters. The rest is made up of different transport and trainer aircraft.”

International experts at the Wilson Center including Jason C. Moyer and Henri Winberg explain that “As a member of NATO, Sweden will provide the Alliance with 1) support from its strong defense industry, 2) high-technological competence, and 3) a significant air force. These contributions will be crucial in preparing the Alliance to combat modern threats, as well as providing a dramatic multiplier to NATO’s capacity in two vital regions—the Baltic Sea region and the Arctic. With Sweden’s modern and diverse capabilities soon to be added to NATO’s toolkit, it is worth taking a look at what the country will contribute to the Alliance, now and in the future…he country’s largest defense companies produce some of the most sophisticated equipment on the market, such as Saab’s Jas 39 Gripen and BAE System AB’s Combat Vehicle 90…The second benefit is the high level of technological competence in Sweden’s private sector. Sweden’s extensive public-private partnerships, considerable R&D funding, and highly-ranked education system are some of the factors behind its success in high-tech. The government launched a national ‘Cybercampus’ initiative in 2020 in partnership between the Swedish Defense Forces, public universities, and private companies, and established the Centre for Cyber Defence and Information Security in Stockholm. As NATO expands its ability to counter cyber and hybrid threats, Sweden’s technological know-how will help prepare the Alliance to prepare for tomorrow’s threats. In addition, with Sweden in NATO, two of the three manufacturers of 5G equipment—Ericsson and Nokia—will be in the same defensive alliance.”

The recent entry of Finland in 2023 and now Sweden is a clear rebuke to Russia’s Vladmir Putin, who at various times issued dire threats if the Nordic nations joined.  Since his invasion of Ukraine, formally passive nations have realized that Russia presents serious and imminent threats to all its neighbors.

Illustration: Pixabay