DEMOCRATS: THE GREAT GASLIGHTING OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY

GASLIGHTING AMERICA
For years, Democrats proclaimed that “Democracy is on the ballot.” It was their rallying cry, moral high ground, and ultimate justification for nearly every action and policy decision.

However, as events have unfolded, especially in light of President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 race, that slogan has aged like milk. It has exposed deep hypocrisy and revealed the disturbing tendency among the political elite to project their own actions and fears onto their opponents.

The Hypocrisy: Selling a False Presidency

As Jake Tapper revealed through interviews with over 200 Democratic insiders, it’s now undeniable that the highest ranks of the party knew President Biden was in cognitive decline. And not just recently, the signs of this deterioration date back to 2015. Yet, they pushed forward, campaigning with full knowledge that Biden wasn’t mentally capable of executing the duties of the presidency or protecting America as the Commander-in-Chief.

This wasn’t an error. This was not a case of ignorance. It was complicity.

These weren’t the voices of fringe actors as they included elected officials, campaign staff, and even Biden’s personal physician. All repeated the same tired line: “He’s fine.” They ignored, dismissed, and outright lied about the mounting evidence of Biden’s severe mental decline. And they did it while insisting that Americans must vote for him as their patriotic duty to preserve democracy.

In whose America do honest men and women knowingly encourage fellow citizens to vote for a figurehead, a shell of a man not truly in command of his faculties, as a defense of democracy? In whose America do honest men and women knowingly accept the manipulation of the democratic process under the guise of protecting it? This is not just hypocritical, it’s traitorous as it impinges on the national security of the United States.

The Projection: Accusing the Other Side of Their Own Sins

While selling this deception, top Democrats painted a chilling picture of what a second Trump term would bring: autocracy, corruption, a nation where citizens “would no longer have a say in our affairs,” to quote the corrupt, liar, leaker, and evidence manipulator Adam Schiff. But those are precisely the actions of the progressive communist democrats who claim to be acting in the name of democracy.

Consider this: According to Tapper's reporting, the same people claiming Trump would rule without accountability were quietly managing a presidency behind the scenes, propping up a man who could barely remember the names of his aides. A president shielded from public scrutiny by a media apparatus that was knowingly complicit.

In psychological terms, this is projection: attributing one’s own undesirable behaviors and motives to someone else. Democrats accused Trump of undermining democratic norms while they themselves ran a Potemkin presidency — one where public trust was maintained only through a carefully orchestrated illusion.

The Real Threat to Democracy

If democracy truly depends on transparency, informed consent of the governed, and leaders who are answerable to the people, then the behavior of top Democrats over the last twelve years of the Obama and Biden presidencies are a case study in how democracy can be undermined from within — not by overt tyranny, but by deception, denial, and elitist authoritarianism.

The question now isn’t whether Joe Biden was fit to lead, it’s who was actually leading the country in his name. Who made the decisions, gave the orders, negotiated with foreign leaders, and guided domestic policy while the man ostensibly in charge faded in and out of lucidity? Who was using the AutoPen to affix Biden’s signature to official documents with the force of law? Who attempted to pardon the treasonous activities of those who engaged in a silent coup d'état or tried to effect an internal “color revolution?”

This isn’t a partisan issue. It’s a civic crisis. If political leaders — supported by legacy media and institutional power — can collectively hide the incapacitation of a sitting president, then the idea that the people rule is a fiction. It’s democracy in name only.

Bottom line…

It is time to pull the curtain back to expose those who unconstitutionally assumed presidential powers and governed in the name of a husk of a president. To disenfranchise millions of primary voters and hand-select another unsuitable, dysfunctional candidate.

It’s not enough that Biden stepped aside. The American people deserve the truth. Not spin, not retrospective justifications, but a full accounting of who ran the country, who enabled the cover-up, and why so many were willing to lie — not just to the press, but to the public they’re supposed to serve. Likewise, the exposure of the media propagandists who enabled the cover-up by creating false narratives, censorship,

Hypocrisy and projection may be tools of political survival, but they’re also hallmarks of declining democracies. If we’re serious about saving ours, the reckoning must start now.

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

DON'T BLAME BIDEN: IT'S OBAMA'S COVER UP

Obama-biden-curtain-1

What if history didn’t unfold exactly as the progressive communist democrat media propagandists portrayed it?

What if the Biden presidency was not a standalone administration but a carefully constructed continuation of the Obama era, shrouded in secrecy and veiled power, where the Obama-Biden dynamic was more than meets the eye?

The Washington House That Never Emptied

Former President Obama defied presidential norms by choosing not to return to Chicago or settle into a quieter life post-White House. Instead, he remains in Washington, D.C.—an unusual choice that should raise eyebrows. One can easily imagine that his nine-bedroom, 8.5-bathroom Kalorama stone mansion, purchased from former Bill Clinton press secretary Joe Lockhart, was the setting for secret meetings and strategy sessions.

Political pundits who began to question whether the Biden candidacy was a so-called “shadow presidency,” merely a vehicle to preserve Obama-era influence behind the scenes, were dismissed as conspiracy theorists and faced derision, censorship, or cancellation by the progressive communist democrat media propagandists.

The Biden Administration’s Familiar Faces

Even a casual observer could see that the Biden White House and Administration were filled with an overwhelming number of Obama administration alums. From Ron Klain, Susan Rice, Jake Sullivan, Antony Blinken, Anita Dunn, Bob Bauer, Jen Psaki, Denis McDonough, Avril Haines, Alejandro Mayorkas, Samantha Power, John Kerry, Cecilia Rouse, Brian Deese, Steve Ricchetti, Bruce Reed Jeff Zients, and other influential figures in the Biden administration with deep ties to the Obama years. It’s almost as if the staff were pre-selected in a backroom meeting years prior. With few exceptions, Biden wasn’t picking his team—he was inheriting one.

The Biden Policy continuity in this narrative becomes striking. The Iran Deal redux, the revival of climate accords, and the same diplomatic tone suggest not just a return to norms, but a deliberate restoration of Obama’s unfinished agenda.

When Conspiracies Turn True—And Worse

Many of the so-called “conspiracy theories” dismissed during Obama’s presidency—mass surveillance, media manipulation, IRS targeting of political groups, and the weaponization of government agencies are not only validated but discovered to be part of a wider, darker campaign of influence. Even foreign policy blunders, once seen as missteps, are revealed to be deliberate experiments in power projection.

Classified documents weren’t just misplaced—they were moved with a purpose. Political opponents aren’t merely criticized—they’re surveilled. And the media? In this universe, key figures are shown to have had regular contact with aides from the Kalorama compound.

The Man Behind the Curtain?

We don’t claim to unveil a hidden truth—but to pose a provocative question: in the world of power, is what we see ever truly what we get?

We now know the portrayal of Joe Biden as a strong, competent President and Commander-in-Chief was total bullshit, he was little more than he carefully placed face of continuity—while Barack Obama, the architect of the modern progressive era, continues to wield quiet control from the shadows of Washington, D.C.

The Cover-Up Continues

President Biden’s current illness—whether exaggerated or downplayed by official channels—is not merely a health concern, but a carefully timed distraction. Its purpose? Twofold.

First, it redirects the public’s attention away from the deeper issue: the continued and concealed role of former President Barack Obama in the day-to-day orchestration of executive decisions. With the mainstream media focused on Biden’s condition, questions about Obama’s unusual post-presidency influence, his permanent Washington residence, and the unusually high number of his former staffers dominating the West Wing are conveniently muted. Truth be told, this does not appear to be a coincidence, but the product of coordination.

Second, the illness narrative acts as a pressure valve to silence dissent. As more Americans demand accountability for what they see as a years-long manipulation of democratic institutions, Biden’s health offers an emotional shield, making any criticism of the administration seem callous or conspiratorial. The word “traitor,” once reserved for foreign actors, is now whispered in hushed tones about those who, in this imagined world, have deceived the public while posing as defenders of democracy.

Investigative voices—journalists, whistleblowers, former insiders—find themselves sidelined or vilified under the guise of “national unity” during a health crisis. Calls for congressional hearings into intelligence overreach, election integrity, and media collusion are postponed indefinitely. In this continuing cover-up, Biden’s illness becomes not a misfortune, but a strategic pause, delaying the inevitable reckoning that many Americans fear may never come.

Bottom line…

You know the progressive communit democrats are gaslighting you when they claim it is a conspiracy theory that Biden just arrived at Stage 4 Prostate Cancer in a month and demand you ignore the past and "look forward."

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

SCOTT ADAMS: A TRUE AMERICAN HERO DYING OF PROSTATE CANCER

UPDATE: 5/23/25 -- As per Scott Adams, he is starting a virtually unknown interventional protocol which suggests a 30% survival rate. The pragmatic Adams refuses to identify the treatment protocol to limit public speculation and comments. While Scott has professed to be an agnostic, not knowing whether or not God's existence is either unknowable in principle or unknown in fact, best wishes and prayers cannot hurt.  

Dilbert-scott adams

“Some of you have already guessed, so this won’t surprise you at all. But I have the same cancer that Joe Biden has. So I also have prostate cancer that has also spread to my bones.

But I’ve had it longer than he’s had it, well, longer than he’s admitted having it. So my life expectancy is maybe this summer. I’d expect to be checking out from this domain sometime this summer.” – Scott Adams

In the grand landscape of American satire, few figures have cast as long a shadow or drawn as many knowing smiles as Scott Adams. Now, as he faces his final chapter with courage and clarity, we pause to reflect on the extraordinary impact of a man whose simple drawings revealed the often absurd complexities of modern life.

For those who don’t know of Scott Adams, he is the sharp pen behind his iconic creation, Dilbert, the patron saint of cubicle workers everywhere.

Dilbert is more than a comic strip character—he’s an icon of the modern workplace. Created by Scott Adams in 1989, Dilbert quickly became the universal symbol of life inside the corporate machine: the endless meetings, the jargon-filled emails, the clueless managers, and the soul-crushing bureaucracy. In a sea of beige walls, fluorescent lighting, and inbox overload, Dilbert stood tall—not with bravado, but with bemused endurance. And in doing so, he became a hero of the modern age.

Dilbert is an engineer by title but a philosopher at heart. He never rants. He doesn’t fight the system. He endures it, questioning, observing, and quietly revealing its absurdities. His calm, deadpan reactions reflect what millions of office workers feel but can’t always say out loud.

For those trapped in cubicles worldwide, Dilbert became a kind of comic relief and silent solidarity whose daily musings were posted on break room refrigerators, forwarded in email chains, and tacked to corkboards.

Mocking the clichés of corporate culture, including pointy-haired bosses, endless PowerPoint presentations, and buzzwords like “synergy” and “paradigm shift,” Dilbert allowed workers to laugh at the inefficiency, pettiness, and occasional insanity of office life. It didn’t change their jobs, but it reminded them they weren’t alone.

Where other comics chased gags, Dilbert chased truth, delivered in four-panel strips, and gave workers not just humor but validation worldwide.

Scott Adams…

A former communications engineer at Pacific Bell from 1986 to 1995, Adams drew on his real-world experience in the workplace to craft humor that resonated with millions. In addition to his comics, he has written several bestselling books on business, success, and persuasion. Known for his provocative views and unfiltered commentary, Adams remains a unique voice in both the cartooning and cultural commentary worlds. Beyond cartooning, he has written several bestselling books on business, success, and persuasion, and is known for his provocative, often controversial public commentary.

Bottom line…

For decades, Dilbert has served as a mirror to the white-collar world—an office-bound hero armed not with a cape, but with sarcasm, skepticism, and a slightly bent tie. Scott Adams gave a voice to cubicle dwellers everywhere, turning fluorescent-lit frustrations into universal truths. He made us laugh at our bosses, question our processes, and—most importantly—recognize that we weren’t alone in feeling that something about corporate life just didn’t make sense.

But beyond the comics, Adams has always been more than a cartoonist. He’s been a provocateur, a thinker unafraid to challenge assumptions, and a man who walked his own path regardless of popular opinion. He ventured into writing, business, technology, and commentary with the same daring brushstrokes that defined his art. While some of his views sparked controversy, they also sparked conversation—an increasingly rare achievement in a polarized world.

Now, as he battles terminal prostate cancer—a journey no man chooses but many face with silent dignity—we salute not just the creator, but the human being. The man who turned office politics into punchlines. The artist who helped millions laugh through the monotony. The mind that never stopped asking “why?” even when the answers were uncomfortable.

In this somber moment, we thank Scott Adams for the wit, the candor, and the legacy. Whether through a comic strip or a thought-provoking tweet, he has etched his mark on the culture, one panel at a time.

May peace, comfort, and clarity accompany him now, just as his work accompanied us through countless mornings with coffee in hand and a smirk on our faces.

Thank you, Scott. You made my workplace a little more bearable—and the world a little more interesting.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

THE FINAL COVER-UP: DEMOCRATS PLANNING TO USE BIDEN'S HEALTH TO ERASE HISTORY?

Biden-today Biden-cancer
The Media Propagandist's Spin Begins: Biden’s Illness as a Convenient Curtain Call for a Troubled Presidency

In a continuing display of political theater that’s become all too familiar in America, the corrupt Democratic Party and its media propagandists appear to have begun laying the groundwork for Joe Biden’s exit, not with candor, but with narrative manipulation.

The revelation of Biden’s aggressive prostate cancer is being spun not as an opportunity for an honest retrospective examination of Biden's leadership of his Administration, but as a sentimental “End of an Era.”

But what era, exactly, are we talking about?

To hear the legacy media propagandists tell it, this is the twilight of a noble president who led the country with a steady hand—a man who brought “decency” back to the White House.

However, anyone paying attention knows that Biden’s administration has been far from steady or transparent. Behind the warm sentiments, pre-death eulogies, and dramatic editorials lies an effort to rewrite history, to smother scrutiny with sentimentality, and to absolve the administration of its many transgressions.

Let’s be clear: Joe Biden was not a functioning leader. From day one, his presidency bore the markings of a managed enterprise—a “cabal,” as Time Magazine all but admitted in a shockingly brazen 2021 piece that described “a well-funded cabal of powerful people” who “fortified” the 2020 election. Biden was the face; others pulled the strings. His Cabinet, policy moves, and public appearances often were coordinated and orchestrated not by conviction, but by a committee of Obama acolytes who managed to exploit their raw political power in the name of an unaware president.

Now, as his health becomes another excuse to escape accountability, we’re being told to forget all of it.

Forget the Afghanistan debacle. Forget the skyrocketing inflation and regulatory overreach. Forget the censorship efforts exposed in the Twitter Files. Forget the collusion between intelligence agencies and media outlets. Forget how dissent was labeled “disinformation,” and how parents at school board meetings were treated as domestic threats. Forget the soft coup waged against the Trump presidency through years of false hoaxes and collusion narratives and impeachment efforts rooted more in politics than facts.

The American people are being asked to replace scrutiny with sentiment for an old man’s impending demise.

Unlike the Democrats, who fervently wish for a fatal catastrophe to befall President Trump, Trump has been nothing but gracious to Joe Biden in this stressful time.

Dt-biden
Bottom line…

While Joe Biden’s illness is tragic on a human level, and no American should wish ill upon the former President of the United States, his condition should not be used as a shield to block inquiry into the last four years. We must not let this moment be used to clean the slate for an administration whose legacy is marred by dysfunction, corruption, overreach, and the lack of candor and transparency.

The American people deserve accountability, not a mediadriven curtain call carefully orchestrated to absolve and reset the Democratic Party.

If the Obama-Biden era is indeed ending, let it end with honesty, not with a manufactured sentimental smokescreen designed by media propagandists to bury the truth along with the facts of its failed presidents and policy failures.

Remember, the progressive communist democrats lied then, and they are lying now! Don’t let Biden’s cancer become the Democrats’ escape plan.

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

FROM PROGRESSIVE TO PRO-JIHAD? THE DEMOCRAT SUPPORT OF RADICAL ISLAM

Cfri-box

The Israel-Gaza conflict has exposed deep ideological fractures in American politics, with a growing segment of the Democratic Party moving in a very different — and disturbing — direction.

From public statements downplaying Hamas atrocities to outright hostility toward Israel’s very existence, Democrat leadership is signaling a dangerous sympathy not just for the Palestinian cause, but for the extremist ideologies that fuel jihadist violence. This is not a fringe issue anymore — it’s fast becoming a central feature of the modern left.

The Progressive Embrace of Anti-Western Narratives

At the heart of the shift is the Democratic Party’s radical progressive communist wing, which views the world through a binary lens of oppressors and the oppressed. In this framework, Israel — an extraordinarily productive and comparatively wealthy liberal democracy surrounded by hostile actors — is cast as the aggressor. At the same time, Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, is portrayed as a resistance movement whose innocent civilians are under Israeli siege, despite Hamas’s election in Gaza and the majority support of the population.

Members of Congress, like Representatives Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Summer Lee (D-PA), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Andre Carson (D-IN), and others have repeatedly made statements that equate Israeli counterstrikes with war crimes, while offering little to no condemnation of the brutal tactics used by Hamas. Tlaib, for instance, refused to denounce the October 7 massacre of Israeli civilians outright, choosing instead to focus on alleged Israeli “genocide” — parroting the very rhetoric used by radical Islamic groups.

This kind of moral equivalency isn’t just irresponsible — it’s dangerous. It legitimizes terror and emboldens America’s enemies, both abroad and at home.

So why is the Democratic leadership tolerating this? The answer lies in political calculus.

  • Appeasing their Far-Left Base

The modern Democratic coalition includes growing blocs of young voters, far-left activists, and identity-driven interest groups who see global politics as a story of colonialism and resistance. Within this worldview, Israel, despite being a democratic ally, is cast as an oppressive symbol of Western imperialism.

As a result, appeasing anti-Israel sentiment has become a form of political virtue-signaling. Democrats risk alienating their activist base if they appear too supportive of Israeli security or too harsh in their condemnation of Hamas and other jihadist groups.

  • The Rise of Islamist Influence in Democratic Politics

What was once unthinkable in mainstream American politics — sympathizing with Islamic fundamentalists — is now creeping into the rhetoric of a major political party.

In places like Dearborn, Michigan, and other cities with growing Muslim populations, Democratic politicians are increasingly walking a tightrope: balancing between traditional party values and the vocal demands of voters who support Palestinian resistance, even when that includes justifying the actions of groups with explicit jihadist agendas.

This viewpoint is exacerbated by the hundreds of radical Islamist students accepted into America’s most prestigious colleges and universities, and the billions of Islamist dollars flowing into our educational institutions. Not to mention the unchecked and unvetted horde of Muslim illegal aliens pouring over our open borders and welcomed into America by the Democrats. Forming tight-knit cultural enclaves with enough political power to seek local, state, and federal representation. District politics support their culture and national origins over American values and time-honored precedents and traditions.

No one is saying the entire Democratic Party endorses radical Islam. But it is fair to ask why the party is unwilling or unable to draw a firm line against atrocities committed by jihadists. When condemnation of terrorism becomes conditional, America loses moral clarity.

  • America’s Safety and Security Gaps Extend Beyond the Middle East

This pattern isn’t limited to Middle East matters. The same Democrats who hesitate to call out Hamas are often the ones pushing for open borders, defunding law enforcement, and slashing military budgets. It’s part of a broader ideology that undermines American strength and erodes our ability to protect both our interests abroad and our citizens at home.

Israel is not just another foreign ally; it is a frontline partner in the global fight against terrorism. When Democrats treat our ally with suspicion and give rhetorical cover to our enemies, it sends a message: that weakness, not resolve, now defines the American left.

Bottom line…

It is time to choose a side.

The Democratic Party is at a crossroads. The party has been infiltrated by progressive communist democrats who are attempting to destroy America from within – a fact that is a glaring reality with revelations from sworn testimony and documentary evidence. By all metrics, the Democrats should not be a serious player in national governance, security, and foreign policy — lest it continue down a path of appeasement, identity politics, and soft-pedaling extremism?

Constitutional conservatives don’t have to guess where they stand. We believe in the right of nations to defend themselves. We believe in calling out terrorism for what it is. And we believe that America must never compromise with ideologies — radical Islam included — that seek to destroy freedom, democracy, and the Western way of life.

The contrast couldn’t be more evident.

We are so screwed with Democrats in power.

-- Steve

Stand-with-israel

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

JAKE SULLIVAN AND BLINKEN: THE DUO WHO ALMOST BROKE THE UNITED STATES

JAKE--SULLIVANSullivan's Big Lie: “I sat with President Biden in the Oval Office, I sat with him in the situation room, from the beginning of my time to the end of my time,” Jake Sullivan said. “I saw him operating, decision making, executing as commander in chief during all that time.”

It is a well-established fact that President Joe Biden was incapacitated and unable to perform the duties of the President of the United States and, more importantly, the role of Commander-in-Chief, who protects the United States from all threats, foreign and domestic.

At no point had the Biden administration invoked the 25th Amendment due to Biden’s cognitive impairment and lack of physical stamina.

So, who was serving as the de facto President of the United States? There is no doubt that Biden’s rapid decline into dementia was hidden by his wife, his inner circle, and, shamefully, by the media propagandists who saw with their own eyes that Biden was unfit for office and that Vice President Kamala Harris was little more than an inside joke.

Looking over the evidence and outcomes of Biden’s major foreign policy decisions and events that were abject failures, it appears that President Biden’s National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan,  having no constitutional or legal authority to act as President or assume presidential duties, served as the de facto President in the foreign policy arena.

The incompetence that crippled U.S. foreign policy…

  • The Withdrawal from Afghanistan (August 2021) – Which ended America’s longest war but was marked by a chaotic evacuation that saw the rapid collapse of the Afghan government, and surrender of billions of dollars in modern arms, the abandonment of a billion-dollar airbase of strategic regional importance, and the return of Taliban rule. Thirteen brave American soldiers were unnecessarily killed, hundreds of Americans and thousands of American-friendly Afghans were deliberately left behind to be hunted, captured, tortured, and killed as unvetted Afghans filled U.S. transport planes for a photo-op.
  • Handling of the Israel–Hamas Conflict (October 2023 onwards) – While the Administration vocally backed Israel’s right to self-defense, they refused to provide fully-paid, congressionally authorized arms, illegally and covertly interfered in a campaign to oust Prime Minister Netanyahu, and provoked another crisis by providing humanitarian aid without securing more significant concessions from Hamas to surrender hostages, reduce their theft of civilian aid packages, or quit rocketing Israel, and implement an authentic peace progress.
  • Failure to Deter Russian Invasion of Ukraine (February 2022) – The Administration failed to impose strict preemptive sanctions on Russia or bolster Ukrainian defenses earlier to deter the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 
  • Strained Relations with Saudi Arabia – While the Biden Administration initially threatened to make Saudi Arabia a “pariah” for the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, they later visited the kingdom as they sought increased oil production and exports, totally undermining human rights and failing to secure meaningful concessions from the Riyadh regime.
  • China Relations – Mixed Signals and Lack of Clear Strategy – While tensions with China over increased spying (remember the 2023 surveillance balloon over domestic military bases), Taiwan, trade restrictions, and theft of American intellectual property increased, the administration pursued “strategic competition,” and inconsistent messaging and policies. Hunter Biden’s corrupt China—related activities were ignored while the “Big Guy” (aka Joe Biden) personally profited from the treasonous sale of his office.
  • Iran Nuclear Deal Stalemate – While Biden campaigned on returning to the ineffective Obama 2015 Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), negotiations stalled and ultimately failed as Iran stalled while continuing to enrich bomb-grade uranium and build intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of striking America’s heartland.
  • Inconsistent Africa Policy -- Promises of partnership and investment were made, but the administration lacked sustained engagement and failed to counter growing Russian and Chinese influence on the continent.
  • Latin America and Migration Challenges -- Efforts to address the root causes of migration from Central America were nonexistent as the Biden Administration encouraged record migration to the U.S. southern border. Relations with Venezuela and Nicaragua were ignored as China expanded its regional influence.
  • Weakening of U.S. Global Image in Some Regions -- Despite rhetoric about restoring alliances and democracy, U.S. policy remained inconsistent or hypocritical, especially regarding human rights and support for international law. At the same time, the U.S. feted its enemies and disparaged its allies. There was an abject failure to exert pressure on a corrupt United Nations.

Incompetence in the Department of State…

Under the leadership of an increasingly ineffectual Antony Blinken, the State Department has come to symbolize a disturbing mix of incompetence and systemic dysfunction.

Blinken’s failure to project strength or articulate a coherent global strategy has left U.S. diplomacy rudderless, while key geopolitical rivals like China, Russia, and Iran have expanded their influence unchecked.

Meanwhile, allegations of politicization and ethical lapses within the State Department have only deepened public mistrust. Instead of promoting transparency and accountability, the department has appeared more concerned with optics, bureaucracy, diversity, equity, and inclusion than effective foreign engagement. As a result, America’s diplomatic corps lost much of its credibility. 

Bottom line…

Between incompetents like National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and the ineffective Secretary of State, U.S. foreign policy was almost damaged beyond repair.

Their inability to anticipate global crises and provide consistent strategic messaging left allies uncertain and adversaries emboldened.

From the chaotic withdrawal in Afghanistan to the failure to deter aggression from Russia and manage escalating tensions in the Middle East, the administration’s diplomatic posture often appeared reactive and incoherent. As a result, America’s credibility on the world stage suffered, raising serious concerns about the competence of those steering its foreign affairs.

Under the Trump Administration, we are starting to see a reversal of the damage previously done to America by the progressive communist democrats.

However, we are still screwed as the Democrats attempt to destroy America from within and stymie Trump’s restorative efforts.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

AS RUSH LIMBAUGH MIGHT SAY: TRUMP'S TACTICS -- LESS "STRATERGERY," MORE PRAGMATISM

Rush-1-corners

Understanding Trump

In the political theater that defines modern American leadership, few figures have played their part with as much improvisation — or impact — as Donald J. Trump. While some critics paint his policy shifts as erratic or even reckless, a more nuanced interpretation — one Rush Limbaugh might’ve appreciated — is that Trump’s approach is less about long-winded “stratergery” and more about reactive pragmatism. He’s a man who watches markets, reads headlines, and adapts in real time.

Rush’s Lens: Pragmatism Over Policy Dogma

Rush Limbaugh, never shy about defending Trump while keeping a pulse on conservative populism, often brushed aside the criticism that Trump lacked a coherent ideological doctrine. Instead, he praised Trump for doing what works — a style that resonates more with business sensibility than political orthodoxy.

This isn’t to say Trump doesn’t hold strong views. However, when the rubber meets the road, particularly on issues that rattle Wall Street, Trump has shown a distinct willingness to shift. Call it flexibility. Call it volatility. But it’s not random.

Example 1: The China Trade War

Perhaps the clearest example came during the U.S.–China trade war. Trump launched it with bravado — tariffs, tough talk, and a promise to bring Beijing to heel. Markets panicked. Wall Street recoiled. The Dow shed points with every tweet that hinted at escalation.

What followed? A noticeable softening. Depending on how the markets reacted, Trump would strike a deal, pull back, then escalate again. When equities tanked in August 2019 after Trump announced new tariffs, he promptly delayed them. His stated reason? To “avoid hurting holiday shopping.” The subtext? The markets freaked out — and he listened.

Example 2: Federal Reserve Pressure

Trump repeatedly bashed the Federal Reserve and its then-chairman, Jerome Powell, for raising interest rates — a move he argued would stifle economic growth. Most presidents steer clear of directly criticizing the Fed. Not Trump. He saw how Wall Street reacted to tightening monetary policy and took it public, turning economic messaging into a battlefield.

This wasn’t ideology. It was dollars and cents. Every market dip elicited another tweet or jab at Powell. And when rate cuts eventually came, Trump took a victory lap — not because it fit a textbook conservative approach, but because it aligned with his gut instinct: growth wins elections.

Example 3: COVID-19 Stimulus

Initially downplaying the coronavirus in early 2020, Trump quickly pivoted as the stock market plunged. The CARES Act, laden with stimulus checks and corporate bailouts, was greenlit at breakneck speed. Traditional GOP orthodoxy would balk at trillion-dollar spending. Trump didn’t flinch. Why? Because Wall Street was cratering, and voters, particularly in battleground states, were scared.

As Limbaugh might’ve put it, this wasn’t about principles. It was about performance.

Bottom line…

While critics might label Trump’s flip-flops as inconsistent or self-serving, Rush Limbaugh understood the appeal — and the logic. Trump’s actions weren’t guided by ideological “stratergery” cooked up in think tanks. They were pragmatic responses to public reaction, especially from Wall Street, which serves as a real-time barometer of economic anxiety.

In a media age that demands instant results and rewards spectacle, Trump’s style of governance — reactive, market-aware, and driven by optics — may not satisfy policy wonks. But as Limbaugh might argue, it’s not about satisfying elites. It’s about delivering results that resonate with voters and investors alike.

So the next time Trump reverses course or sends a tweet that swings the market, remember: this isn’t chaos. It’s calculated pragmatism — in real time.

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

WHEN JUSTICE FAILS: THE TRAGEDY OF LENIENCY IN JUVENILE SENTENCING

Juvenile justice

There is something profoundly wrong—morally, ethically, and legally—when a juvenile, especially an illegal alien, who causes the death of an innocent person walks away with nothing more than probation and community service.

For the grieving family, justice becomes a hollow word. For society, it sends a chilling message: if you’re young enough, you can take a life and still sleep in your own bed that night. The outrage is not rooted in a thirst for vengeance, but in the gaping hole left in our justice system—a hole that fails to balance accountability with rehabilitation. More and more, failure is being exploited by those who know exactly how to game the system.

This is unconscionable…

Colorado prosecutor offers unlicensed and undocumented teen probation after deadly crash

The Arapahoe District Attorney’s Office is defending its decision to give probation and community service to a teenager who was driving illegally and, in the country illegally, when he killed a woman.  

The accident happened last July in Aurora. The victim, Kaitlyn Weaver, was headed home from work when a Jeep, barreling through a residential neighborhood, slammed into her car. The speed limit in the area was 45 mph. Investigators say the driver was doing more than 90 mph.

She was 24 years old. The suspect was 15 years old and had other kids in the car with him. He was charged with vehicular homicide. Due to his age, state law shields him from being publicly identified in court records.

Weaver’s father says the prosecutor initially promised to pursue the maximum sentence of two years in youth corrections: “The DA’s office said this would be a ‘no plea deal’ case, so they were not going to offer anything; any concession.”

That changed, he says, when the Arapahoe County District Attorney’s Office changed hands a few months later.

Under the new District Attorney Amy Padden, John Weaver says the teen was offered two years’ probation if he pleaded guilty.

“Why the change? If he had taken a firearm and recklessly just shot it and killed someone, this would be a different case. They would be pushing it completely differently,” Weaver said. “There’s no deterrence.”

There’s also no financial liability, he says, despite his daughter’s medical bills, which came to nearly $1 million.

The Jeep was uninsured, and the juvenile’s mom says he took it without permission, so she isn’t responsible either.

Weaver says the system is broken: “Immigration and the criminal justice system and all these things landed together one day in Aurora and now I sit here today without a daughter.” <Source>

This is especially tragic as this person should never have been in our country. A sad case of shoulda, woulda, coulda. 

The False Promise of Rehabilitation vs. Accountability

Critics of juvenile justice reform argue that teenagers’ brains are still developing—that they are impulsive, easily manipulated, and more capable of rehabilitation than adults. This is true. But it’s a dangerous oversimplification to suggest that all youth offenders are equally naïve or deserving of leniency.

Some are repeat offenders. Some are knowingly involved in criminal networks. Some are given multiple opportunities to course-correct, but instead escalate their behaviors to violence. We must stop pretending that age alone is an adequate indicator of character, culpability, or the need for incarceration.

True reform should not mean harsher sentences for every juvenile. It should mean smarter sentencing. It should mean empowering judges to weigh the full context of the crime, including premeditation, gang affiliation, and repeat offenses, regardless of the defendant’s age.

The Weaponization of Children: How Criminals Exploit the Juvenile Justice System

Drug trafficking organizations, violent gangs, and criminal enterprises have long recognized a loophole in the legal system: juveniles are treated differently. In many jurisdictions, they cannot be tried as adults unless under extreme circumstances. This has created a perverse incentive for crime bosses to recruit younger members—not just to sell drugs or run messages, but to carry weapons, enforce turf, and even carry out murders.

In cities across the United States, juveniles have been caught with large amounts of narcotics, high-powered firearms, or directly linked to violent crimes, only to be released within days or handed light sentences. These aren’t misguided teens shoplifting from a convenience store. These are trained operatives, sometimes barely into puberty, tasked with doing the dirty work that older criminals know will carry lighter consequences if done by someone under 18.

Take, for example, the tragic case of a 15-year-old boy in Chicago who gunned down a rival gang member in broad daylight. Arrested with the murder weapon in hand, he was charged as a juvenile and sentenced to just a few years in a youth facility—if that. By the time he’s 21, his record will be sealed, and his past erased, even though the family of the victim will carry the scars forever.

Or look at Los Angeles, where authorities discovered that a local gang was using 13- and 14-year-olds as heroin couriers. When caught, the minors received minimal sentences, often just probation. Meanwhile, the adults who orchestrated the entire operation remained largely untouched, shielded by their expendable and unprosecutable pawns.

A Call for Reform...

LOOKSDECEIVING

The juvenile justice system must evolve to provide:

  • Clearer pathways to try juveniles as adults when the crime involves murder, rape, or other grievous bodily harm.
  • Special provisions for gang-affiliated crimes that account for the organized exploitation of minors.
  • Mandatory rehabilitation alongside accountability, ensuring that a 16-year-old who commits a serious crime does not walk free without meaningful correction.
  • Transparency for victims’ families, so they are not blindsided by plea deals or sealed juvenile records.
  • Most of all, we need to end the culture of impunity that currently enables gangs to treat children like disposable assets.

Bottom line…

Every time a life is lost to juvenile violence, and the system responds with a slap on the wrist, we are complicit in sending the message that age excuses atrocity.

We can—and must—do better.

Justice isn’t about age. It’s about impact.

We are so screwed when the scales of justice remain unbalanced and innocent people continue to pay the price for a system too lenient to protect them.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

QATAR'S MODERN-DAY TROJAN HORSE: BUYING INFLUENCE IN THE U.S.

Qatar-aircraftBeware of Qataris Bearing Gifts

Trump administration poised to accept ‘palace in the sky’ as a gift for Trump from Qatar

In what may be the most valuable gift ever extended to the United States from a foreign government, the Trump administration is preparing to accept a super luxury Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from the royal family of Qatar -- a gift that is to be available for use by President Donald Trump as the new Air Force One until shortly before he leaves office, at which timeownership of the plane will be transferred to the Trump presidential library foundation, sources familiar with the proposed arrangement told ABC News.

[OCS: Since the United States Air Force will spend additional tens of millions outfitting the aircraft with communications and protective devices, one might ask why the aircraft, designated as “Air Force One” when the President is aboard will not be used for the next President and possibly turned over to the foundation after it is retired after its useful life and replacement?]

The gift is expected to be announced next week, when Trump visits Qatar on the first foreign trip of his second term, according to sources familiar with the plans.

Trump toured the plane, which is so opulently configured it is known as “a flying palace,” while it was parked at the West Palm Beach International Airport in February.

The highly unusual -- unprecedented -- arrangement is sure to raise questions about whether it is legal for the Trump administration, and ultimately, the Trump presidential library foundation, to accept such a valuable gift from a foreign power.

Anticipating those questions, sources told ABC News that lawyers for the White House counsel’s office and the Department of Justice drafted an analysis for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth concluding that is legal for the Department of Defense to accept the aircraft as a gift and later turn it over to the Trump library, and that it does not violate laws against bribery or the Constitution’s prohibition (the emoluments clause) of any U.S. government official accepting gifts “from any King, Prince or foreign State.”

[OCS: This is a gift to the American people – not the Trump library!]

Sources told ABC News that Attorney General Pam Bondi and Trump’s top White House lawyer David Warrington concluded it would be “legally permissible” for the donation of the aircraft to be conditioned on transferring its ownership to Trump’s presidential library before the end of his term, according to sources familiar with their determination.

[OCS: Pam Bondi was previously registered as a foreign agent representing Qatar. In 2019, she joined Ballard Partners, a lobbying firm with close ties to Trump, and registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) to lobby on behalf of the Qatari government. In 2020, Bondi briefly left her lobbying position to serve as a Trump's defense team member during the first impeachment proceedings. Afterward, she returned to Ballard Partners and continued lobbying for Qatar until her confirmation as Attorney General in 2025. ]

The sources said Bondi provided a legal memorandum addressed to the White House counsel’s office last week after Warrington asked her for advice on the legality of the Pentagon accepting such a donation. <Source>

Money as a Weapon.

Qatar is a small yet wealthy country on the northeastern coast of the Arabian Peninsula, bordered by Saudi Arabia to the south and the Persian Gulf to the north, east, and west. Covering an area of approximately 11,581 square kilometers (4,467 square miles), it ranks 158th globally in size. Despite its modest land area, Qatar boasts one of the world’s highest GDPs per capita, driven by its vast natural gas and oil reserves. The Al Thani family has ruled Qatar since the 19th century, with Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani currently serving as the head of state. Under his leadership, Qatar has maintained a semi-constitutional monarchy, where the Emir holds substantial executive, legislative, and judicial authority. Islam is the official religion, with most of the population adhering to Sunni Islam, and Arabic is the official language.

However, Qatar’s foreign policy is marked by a duplicitous blend of strategic alliances and support for groups hostile to the United States and Western interests. While hosting the U.S. military’s largest Middle East base and investing heavily in American institutions, Qatar has also been a significant financial backer of Hamas, funneling over $1.8 billion to the group over the years. Despite U.S. sanctions and international condemnation, Qatar has allowed terrorist financiers to operate freely within its borders, undermining global counterterrorism efforts. Its state-funded media outlet, Al Jazeera, has been accused of amplifying extremist narratives and providing a platform for anti-American rhetoric. This dual approach—simultaneously courting Western partnerships and supporting adversarial groups—positions Qatar as a self-serving actor whose actions often contradict its professed alliances.

Qatar’s foreign policy has long been a subject of scrutiny due to its complex relationships with various actors in the Middle East. While the country positions itself as a mediator and advocate for peace, several actions and affiliations have raised concerns among U.S. policymakers and analysts.

1. Al Jazeera’s Role in Promoting Extremist Ideologies

Al Jazeera, Qatar’s state-funded media network, has been accused of providing a platform for extremist ideologies. Critics argue that the network has aired content sympathetic to groups like the Taliban and Hamas, and has provided a platform for individuals with radical views. While Al Jazeera has also been praised for its independent journalism, its coverage has sometimes been seen as aligning with Qatar’s foreign policy objectives, which include engaging with groups that are considered terrorist organizations by the U.S.

2. Support for Hamas and Taliban

Qatar has maintained diplomatic relations with Hamas and the Taliban, both of which are designated as terrorist organizations by the U.S. Department of State. In 2013, Qatar hosted a political office for the Taliban, facilitating dialogue between the group and international actors. Additionally, Qatar has provided financial aid to Gaza, where Hamas is the de facto governing authority. While Qatar asserts that its engagement with these groups is aimed at fostering peace and stability, critics contend that such relationships undermine U.S. counterterrorism efforts and embolden groups hostile to American interests.

3. Funding of Extremist Groups

There have been persistent allegations that Qatari individuals and entities have provided financial support to extremist groups operating in Syria, Libya, and other regions. While the Qatari government officially denies these accusations, reports from various sources, including U.S. intelligence agencies, suggest that private donations from Qatar have flowed to groups affiliated with al-Qaeda and other jihadist organizations. The Qatari government has taken steps to curb such financing, but critics argue that enforcement remains inconsistent.

4. Funding of U.S. Institutions

Qatar has strategically utilized its substantial financial resources to influence American educational institutions, think tanks, and non-governmental organizations, enhancing its global standing and advancing its political objectives. Between 2001 and 2021, Qatar contributed at least $4.7 billion to U.S. universities, making it the most significant foreign donor. Qatar’s investments include over $1.95 billion to Cornell University for its Doha campus and $76 million annually to Texas A&M University at Qatar. These financial engagements have raised concerns about potential compromises in academic independence and the propagation of narratives aligning with Qatari interests. Furthermore, Qatar has extended its influence to think tanks such as the Brookings Institution, which received $14.8 million for its Doha Center. While Qatar asserts that these investments foster educational collaboration, critics argue that they serve as tools for political leverage, potentially undermining U.S. interests and values.

5. Ambiguous Counterterrorism Measures

Despite being a partner in the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS, Qatar has faced criticism for not fully aligning with international counterterrorism standards. The U.S. State Department’s annual Country Reports on Terrorism have highlighted concerns about Qatar’s enforcement of anti-money laundering and counterterrorism financing laws. While Qatar has made progress in strengthening its legal framework, some analysts believe that the country’s policies are still insufficient to prevent the flow of funds to terrorist groups.

6. Strategic Use of Soft Power

Qatar employs a soft power strategy to influence the Middle East and beyond. This includes hosting international conferences, providing humanitarian aid, and investing in media outlets. While these actions are often framed as efforts to promote peace and development, they also enhance Qatar’s geopolitical standing and foster relationships with groups and governments that may not align with U.S. interests.

Bottom line…

It's not so much the aircraft itself, but the donor's expectations of influence. And, if the plane is retired to the Presidential Library--no problem. 

Qatar’s foreign policy has often been characterized by a pragmatic approach to enhance its regional influence and secure its strategic interests. However, this approach has led to complex relationships with groups and entities considered adversaries by the United States. The following points provide a detailed examination of Qatar’s actions that have raised concerns regarding its support for groups hostile to U.S. interests.

We are so screwed when our deep state actors play footsie with our enemies.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

HOW BIG PHARMA BEATS THE GOVERNMENT'S PRICE RULES BEHIND YOUR BACK

TRUMP-DRUGS

When the government attempts to control drug costs, one tool they often reach for is the “favored nations” rule.

This policy mandates that the government, usually through its public healthcare programs like Medicare, must pay no more for a drug than the lowest price paid by any other wealthy country. While this may sound like a common-sense approach to curbing exorbitant pharmaceutical costs, the ripple effects on the broader healthcare market, particularly on private insurers and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), are far more complex.

What Does the Favored Nations Rule Actually Do?

Under a favored nations pricing scheme, the government pegs its payments for certain drugs to the lowest price available among a set of peer countries. This is designed to drive down costs for public payers, who often overpay relative to their international counterparts. But here’s the catch: the rule typically applies only to government purchases, not to private insurers or employer-sponsored plans.

Donald Trump to the Rescue, or not!

Eqhdr

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Purpose. 

The United States has less than five percent of the world’s population and yet funds around three quarters of global pharmaceutical profits.  This egregious imbalance is orchestrated through a purposeful scheme in which drug manufacturers deeply discount their products to access foreign markets, and subsidize that decrease through enormously high prices in the United States.

     The United States has for too long turned its back on Americans, who unwittingly sponsor both drug manufacturers and other countries.  These entities today rely on price markups on American consumers, generous public subsidies for research and development primarily through the National Institutes of Health, and robust public financing of prescription drug consumption through Federal and State healthcare programs.  Drug manufacturers, rather than seeking to equalize evident price discrimination, agree to other countries’ demands for low prices, and simultaneously fight against the ability for public and private payers in the United States to negotiate the best prices for patients.  The inflated prices in the United States fuel global innovation while foreign health systems get a free ride.

     This abuse of Americans’ generosity, who deserve low-cost pharmaceuticals on the same terms as other developed nations, must end.  Americans will no longer be forced to pay almost three times more for the exact same medicines, often made in the exact same factories.  As the largest purchaser of pharmaceuticals, Americans should get the best deal. 

Sec. 2.  Policy. 

Americans should not be forced to subsidize low-cost prescription drugs and biologics in other developed countries, and face overcharges for the same products in the United States.  Americans must therefore have access to the most-favored-nation price for these products. 
     My Administration will take immediate steps to end global freeloading and, should drug manufacturers fail to offer American consumers the most-favored-nation lowest price, my Administration will take additional aggressive action.

Sec. 3.  Addressing Foreign Nations Freeloading on American-Financed Innovation. 

The Secretary of Commerce and the United States Trade Representative shall take all necessary and appropriate action to ensure foreign countries are not engaged in any act, policy, or practice that may be unreasonable or discriminatory or that may impair United States national security and that has the effect of forcing American patients to pay for a disproportionate amount of global pharmaceutical research and development, including by suppressing the price of pharmaceutical products below fair market value in foreign countries.

Sec. 4.  Enabling Direct-to-Consumer Sales to American Patients at the Most-Favored-Nation Price. 

To the extent consistent with law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) shall facilitate direct-to-consumer purchasing programs for pharmaceutical manufacturers that sell their products to American patients at the most-favored-nation price.

Sec. 5.  Establishing Most-Favored-Nation Pricing. 

(a)  Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, the Administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and other relevant executive department and agency (agency) officials, communicate most-favored-nation price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers to bring prices for American patients in line with comparably developed nations.

(b)  If, following the action described in subsection (a) of this section, significant progress towards most-favored-nation pricing for American patients is not delivered, to the extent consistent with law: 

       (i)    the Secretary shall propose a rulemaking plan to impose most-favored-nation pricing; 

       (ii)   the Secretary shall consider certification to the Congress that importation under section 804(j) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) will pose no additional risk to the public’s health and safety and result in a significant reduction in the cost of prescription drugs to the American consumer; and if the Secretary so certifies, then the Commissioner of Food and Drugs shall take action under section 804(j)(2)(B) of the FDCA to describe circumstances under which waivers will be consistently granted to import prescription drugs on a case-by-case basis from developed nations with low-cost prescription drugs;  

       (iii)  following the report issued under section 13 of Executive Order 14273 of April 15, 2025 (Lowering Drug Prices by Once Again Putting Americans First), the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission shall, to the extent consistent with law, undertake enforcement action against any anti-competitive practices identified within such report, including through use of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act and section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as appropriate;

       (iv)   the Secretary of Commerce, and the heads of other relevant agencies as necessary, shall review and consider all necessary action regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or precursor material that may be fueling the global price discrimination;
       (v)    the Commissioner of Food and Drugs shall review and potentially modify or revoke approvals granted for drugs, for those drugs that maybe be unsafe, ineffective, or improperly marketed; and

       (vi)   the heads of agencies shall take all action available, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, to address global freeloading and price discrimination against American patients.

Sec. 6.  General Provisions. 

(a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

       (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

       (ii.) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The Department of Health and Human Services shall provide funding for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

DONALD J. TRUMP

<Source>

So, How Do Insurers and PBMs Protect the Bottom Line When the Government Moves The Goalposts?

Insurers and PBMs are profit-driven entities operating in a highly consolidated market. When a policy such as favored nations pricing narrows margins for drug manufacturers on the public side, the manufacturers often respond by adjusting their pricing strategies elsewhere—namely, in the commercial and employer markets. Here’s how the cascade typically unfolds:

  1. Cost Shifting
    Pharmaceutical companies may raise prices on commercial plans to offset revenue losses from the government side. This is especially easy when only a small fraction of the market is affected by price controls. Insurers and PBMs, recognizing this, often prepare for the shift by adjusting premiums, copay structures, or formulary tiers to push more of the cost burden onto consumers or employers.

  2. Rebate Restructuring
    PBMs derive significant income from negotiating rebates with drug manufacturers. If government price caps reduce list prices or overall margins on a class of drugs, manufacturers may have less room to offer generous rebates. PBMs may then pivot to emphasize high-rebate products unaffected by the rule or restructure agreements to focus on volume or market-share guarantees.

  3. Tiering and Access Limitations
    Drugs impacted by favored nations pricing may become less profitable for PBMs and insurers. In response, they may push these drugs to higher tiers on their formularies, requiring higher patient cost-sharing. Alternatively, they may restrict access through prior authorizations or step therapy requirements, steering patients toward drugs with better profit margins.

  4. Network Narrowing or Carve-Out Strategies
    Some insurers may attempt to reduce their exposure to unfavorable pricing by narrowing their pharmacy networks or carving out high-cost specialty drugs to third-party vendors. This allows them to negotiate separate contracts that may avoid the unfavorable dynamics of government-imposed pricing.

The Efficiency Paradox

Ironically, one of the criticisms of such government-imposed pricing mechanisms is their limited reach. Because public healthcare programs often have inefficient procurement and distribution systems, the savings may not be fully realized in practice. This leaves a patchwork system where only certain transactions are subject to the lower pricing, leading drug makers to offset losses through untouched and often less efficient channels.

Moreover, since the favored nations rule typically doesn’t force transparency in private negotiations, it can also reduce pricing clarity and further entrench the rebate-driven model that PBMs benefit from.

This Isn’t the First Time.

Under the Biden Administration’s drug policies, independent pharmacies have been adversely affected. Some have been forced to accept unfavorable terms or risk losing Medicare customers to larger PBM-affiliated chains. For instance, Express Scripts offered contracts with reimbursement rates approximately 10% below standard wholesale prices, prompting some pharmacies to refuse and potentially lose patients.

Moreover, implementing the new rule has led to patients overpaying at the pharmacy counter. Since copayments were based on the initial, higher reimbursement rates, patients have been paying a larger share of the final, lower price, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in overpayments.

While the Biden administration’s PBM regulations aimed to curb drug costs, the execution has inadvertently introduced new challenges, leading to higher out-of-pocket expenses for some consumers and financial strain on independent pharmacies.

Bottom line...

Believe it when you see it in the form of lowered drug prices, or in the case of those with drug-related insurance policies, more drugs shifted into the free or low-cost tiers and a decrease in the more expensive drugs in the higher tiers.

While the favored nations rule can indeed pressure drug makers to reduce prices in public programs, it rarely occurs in a vacuum as insurers and PBMs adapt quickly to maintain profitability, often in ways that push costs back onto consumers or employers.

Until pricing reform addresses the incentives throughout the entire supply chain—from manufacturer to patient—the effects of these rules may be more symbolic than systemic. Real reform will require transparency, competition, and alignment of incentives, not just government edicts.

Unitil then, we are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

Previous Next