For months, you or a friend you know has been saying that the charges against Trump were politically motivated and not legit. Now, you get to say, “I told you so.”

The DOJ Chief of Public Affairs has admitted that the indictments against President Trump were, in fact, politically motivated, and that Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan District Attorney, was motivated by personal ambition in bringing charges against the President.

And it was all caught on camera.

This fine act of investigative journalism was made possible by the Steven Crowder team. And if you’re only just now hearing about Steven Crowder, he’s someone who does what investigative journalists used to do.

Crowder’s presentation can be viewed here:

Crowder has also made the complete recording available.

Leftists are some of the most smug and self-righteous pompous assholes that I’ve ever seen, and I’d take great relish in seeing their carefully constructed denial of reality come crashing down. And now, it’s become harder than it ever has for them to deny the blatant corruption that is evident to anyone outside of leftism’s hermetically-sealed echo chamber.

Whether they’ve had fun or not as they’ve enabled the castration of children, the delusions of perverts, the murder of infants before they could breathe a breath outside their own mothers, and numerous wars to make the wealthiest among their own just a bit wealthier, and far more than these, the time has come for them to be knocked off their high horses.

It doesn’t matter whether it’s against a former President or some guy who does not have the means to resist, a DA that brings charges against anyone while motivated by either politics or personal ambition is not a legit DA, and is a disgraceful individual on top of that.

Alvin Bragg is an absolute disgrace.

It’s apparent to me the only permissible course to remedy this injustice. For one thing, Alvin Bragg should be promptly dismissed from his duties, and permanently barred from any office with any connection to the administration of justice. Also, all charges against Donald Trump should be dismissed, an act which is necessary to restore confidence in the legal system.

The next course of action would be more extensive, but also necessary. A commission must be formed to thoroughly examine every case Alvin Bragg has been involved in, in the interest of finding every instance of his mishandling of justice. This is necessary, as people may be in prison on likewise illegitimate charges. In fact, if Bragg is bombastic enough to bring illegitimate changes against a former President, it’s almost certain that he’s brought wrongful condemnation against many others.

I understand that the last course of action suggested would take a substantial expenditure of resources. But it’s called for, as the nature of Alvin Bragg’s failure is catastrophic to the justice system, and to confidence in it.

If you’ve been following the developments involving the illegitimate trial of Donald Trump, either as a Trump supporter or from a position of impartiality, the only thing surprising about this development is that an explicit profession from the DOJ Chief of Public Affairs was added to all the evidence and proof that the trial is not legitimate.

The people that I expect to be surprised would be centrists or the relatively-uninitiated who weren’t following closely, or those left-leaning who weren’t paying attention. But as for the dead-enders, we know that they’re going to divert their attention away, unable to face the reality that they’ve already been laboring diligently to avoid. They wouldn’t be able to spin this as anything other than what it is, and if made to face it, any honest assessment would be to interpret it as an undeniable defeat for their tribe.

I’ll leave this with one more thought: This isn’t football. It’s not soccer, and it’s not even women’s tennis. This is no game. Leftists literally are ruining this country, and the dead-enders among them are deliberately doing it because they hate one man who, among the current choices, stands the best chance of making things any better.

While this video is several years old, it caught my attention because it was trending. It has to do with Marxist Richard Wolff answering a softball question for his fellow socialists about how to debunk capitalists who say that they earn their money.

The video is about four minutes long, and here it is, so shields up:

I’ll point out, first of all, the tone with which Wolff speaks: he comes off as a mustache-twirler. He knows that he’s villainous, and he’s embracing it.

He doesn’t believe what he’s saying, he just understands the potential to profit off the economically naive who only understand Marxism because it’s the only economic school of thought that they studied, and their interest mainly stemmed from having heard a one-sided argument in favor of it.

But try asking these kids what the difference is between Austrian economics and Chicago economics, and you’ll usually just be treated to a thousand-yard stare. They’ll just lump it all together with laissez-faire classical economics and just call it “capitalism”, because like typical Marxist cultists, they just split the world in two.

But eventually, these kids are going to grow up, and realize that while the Keynesian economic system we currently have is not perfect, it’s still vastly superior to Marxism, and that a person of reasonable ability can thrive when given the opportunities presented in the current economic system. Until then, they’re going to have the kinds of minds that people like Wolff continue to prey upon.

With that out of the way, let’s get into deconstructing Wolff’s Bolshevik.

The conclusion that Richard Wolff is trying to lead you to is that because you’re not coming away with 100% of the value that you produce, you’re not actually “earning” your money, because capitalism is ripping you off.

He speaks like a man who never owned a business. Or, at least, he speaks as though he’s trying to appeal specifically to those for whom running a business is some great mystery, like a form of magic known only to rich people.

Suppose you earned commission for bicycles that you sell at a bike store, and you get $20 for each $200 bike that you sold. In a fair world, wouldn’t you get the full $200 for the $200 bike you sold?

Sure, that would be a great deal for you, but it wouldn’t work for the business that had to buy the bikes from the manufacturer to sell in the first place, or pay the taxes, rent, and other various overhead costs of running the business which includes utility costs. What’s more, the store manager would also require compensation for his own work of managing the finances, ordering merchandise, and making decisions that the staff counts on to be spot-on because they want the business to succeed so they can remain gainfully employed.

Or, suppose that you worked on the production line that produced those bicycles that have an MSRP of $200. If each person on the production line made $20 per hour, how many bikes must be produced per day to cover the wages of factory staff, such as yourself, and cover the overhead costs of running the factory? Perhaps the bikes must be sold to stores for as much as $120 just to pick an arbitrary but perhaps realistic number.

You might be getting the idea that the profit margins for running a business are razor-thin. They usually are, and many of the businesses that fail, fail by inches. Business ownership is no walk in the park.

And what’s more, the idea that a person is being ripped off because they’re getting paid what they agreed to be paid is intellectually destitute.

The next sentiment that Wolff could be dragged across rusty nails over is his implication that shareholding is some sport that rich people engage in, in an effort to extract value from the system without producing value, themselves. As though there’s no connotation of risk in trusting someone else with some of your value in the hopes that they’ll increase their value, and share some of that increased value with you. Nope, in the minds of the typical soy-cialist, the stock market is some mysterious box that goes “brrrrrrr”, and then rich people get richer.

I’m going to let you in on a little something: I’m a shareholder in my own employer. It wasn’t hard, either. All I had to do was opt into it, and a part of my paycheck is automatically invested. Does that make me some kind of wizard in the eyes of soy-cialists?

Here’s another one: if you’re reading this on a smartphone, odds are, you can download a crypto exchange app from your respective app store, then drop some of your fiat currency into a crypto of your choice. If you did, then you just invested.

Just, you know, do your research, first. Don’t be dumb about it.

To those who have not, those who have are a mystery. Where such differences exist, the gap is often filled with a combination of ignorance and resentment. Socialism is about appealing to that ignorance and resentment. It’s the main reason why it attempts to divide the world between the haves and the have-nots. Where understanding exists, ignorance and resentment dissipates, and often, the difference between the haves and have-nots begins to shrink.

It’s amazing how many people want money as badly as they do, but they’d have more if they simply spent less of their money on things they don’t need. I suppose that listening to influencers peddle divisive bullshit is more attractive than self-development.

Let’s not kid ourselves: socialist influencing is a capitalist enterprise. The lives and minds it destroys is out-of-sight of the influencers who profit from their endeavor.

It’s now been over three years since the riot that took place at the U.S. Capitol building on Jan 6, 2021. Since then, the left has taken to memorializing the event as a threat to democracy, and Biden himself has incessantly referenced it, including in his latest campaign ad.

No wonder Trump was such an effective real estate mogul, what with his ability to live rent-free in people’s heads.

It’s obvious that to the Biden administration the Capitol riot was no ordinary riot, even if all evidence points to it not being the deliberate insurrection that the left has made it out to be, but instead a demonstration that escalated to a level that was not originally intended.

What is it about the Jan 6 Capitol riot that gets under Biden’s skin? What follows is speculation about what might be happening with Biden’s thinking.

When a person would become President of the United States, they undergo a slight change in their thinking. They’ll begin comparing themselves to previous presidents.

While it’s true that there have been protests against the policy positions of previous American presidents, the Capitol riot was the first of its kind, in that people showed up in the thousands to resist the very certification of a man who supposedly had the support of the majority. While it’s true that the protesters don’t represent everybody, they acted on the frustrations of a significant portion of the electorate who believed that they weren’t being represented.

Again, this type of protest was unprecedented in its kind, and grand in scale. What’s more, it was a direct challenge to the Biden administration.

It seems as though a vast majority of people who would run for public office has at least a slight amount of narcissism. Seeing as though Biden has held office for roughly five decades, there’s higher potential for narcissism. In the eyes of a narcissist, they must be loved by most reasonable people, and anyone who would not love them must be unreasonable. This may be playing into how Biden has been coping with the Capitol riot: by making Democracy itself out to be in danger, and making himself out to be a hero, fighting the good fight. In this narcissistic fantasy, the people who don’t accept him must be acting out of malice or ignorance.

After all, to know a narcissist is to love one.

However, an American president doesn’t just compare himself to other American presidents, he compares himself to other world leaders, particularly other influential leaders like those who lead countries such as China, Russia, India, Japan, Germany, and the U.K., just to name a few examples. And, as it so happens, it’s rare for leaders of those countries to see such strong opposition to their leadership, particularly on a day as significant as the certification (or respective ceremony) of their particular appointments.

When you understand this, you understand why Joe Biden and his administration are as insecure as they are.

And, as a further blow to his pride, the candidate that serves as the spiritual representative of the frustrations against the Biden administration is the current frontrunner of the opposing political party, and it’s not even close. And this has occurred in spite of every petty legal obstruction that’s been waged against him, and every attempt to make him out to be an enemy of democracy.

In fact, if the upcoming election were to be held tomorrow, it’s likely that Donald Trump would win. If this were to happen, Joe Biden’s pride would be dealt the cruelest stroke. This would mean that the public, after hearing everything that he had to say about his opponent and his constituency, still sided against Biden. At that point, what would he have left?

While this was speculation, I think it’s reasonable to consider when pondering just what it is about the Jan 6 Capitol riot that Joe Biden seems to take so personally. I’m a bit concerned, because as history has shown us abundantly, when men of power are insecure, they tend to turn to desperate methods.

Personally, I think that this election year is going to be interesting. It’s obvious that there’s a whole lot of pride at stake. I’ve said before that in order for democracy to work, each side needs to see their opposition as legitimate. Both major factions have room to develop as far as that goes, and it doesn’t help that there are people all over who wouldn’t make that easy.

While people ascribe huge significance to the presidency, as I see it, his power should be limited to the point that it shouldn’t make much difference who he is. People should care more about local government, as that can make a far bigger impact on their lives. What’s more, other representatives are significant, considering that if one political party does not control all branches of government, they can’t just push through whatever they want.

Here’s hoping that cooler heads prevail, but to be honest, it’s hard to tell which ones those would be.