Monday's Final Word

CNN’s live coverage of Congress’s election certification on Monday included panel after panel of hosts and commentators bizarrely reminiscing about the dramatic events of January 6, 2021. Amid the faux hysterics, sympathy for Vice President Kamala Harris, and somber attitudes, senior political commentator Scott Jennings prevailed as a voice of reason, providing some much-needed reality checks to his fellow panelists. Inside Politics and State of the Union co-host Dana Bash started off with a supportive nod to Harris, who was “steeling herself” for “presiding over her own loss,” before turning to Jake Tapper, whose ego had him harkening back to a prediction he made four years ago.  He declared his 2021 remark “really required no great prescience” and was “very easy to predict,” referring to his expectation of the attempt to whitewash the riot. Tapper further insisted that “for millions of Americans, it worked,” while Kaitlan Collins quickly agreed that “anyone would argue” the alleged whitewashing “was very successful.” Such utter pompousness. CNN's Jake Tapper played video of himself from four years ago during the January 6 riot and lamenting he was right Americans don't care so deeply about that day like he and his CNN colleagues do. A cavernous disconnect between reality. pic.twitter.com/FBMq62RqC7 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 6, 2025 Jennings, on the other hand, proposed that the event would be remembered in its proper context, namely within the last eight years since President Trump’s first term in 2016. However, he pointed out the significance of Trump’s reelection and the fact that “the American people went scrambling back to Donald Trump.” Highlighting the positivity of this year’s certification process going uninterrupted by a Democratic challenge, which had occurred in the case of every Republican win since 1988, Jennings suggested that “maybe we’ve gotten off the slippery slope of one side or the other not accepting the outcome of an election.” CNN's @ScottJenningsKY bringing some clarity to the table: "I think [January 6] will be remembered, but I don't think it's going to be remembered singularly. I think it's going to be remembered in the context of the last eight years. Four years of Trump, four years of Biden. I… pic.twitter.com/kNBrb8NB3y — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 6, 2025 Former Congressman Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) pushed back, distinguishing between the resistance from the Democratic Party in past years and the “terrible leadership and convincing people of lies” coming from Republicans. Needless to say, CNN's Adam Kinzinger wasn't a fan of Scott Jennings pointing out it's a good thing the country has collectively moved past objecting to election results, violence is abd, and that Dems have objected every time to a GOP win since 1988. pic.twitter.com/k54sRkK6ir — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 6, 2025 He further justified himself by adding that “if I believed an election was stolen, I would have been on the steps of the Capitol that day because we're a country that believes we should have a voice heard.” Later, Tapper emphasized Harris’s apparently incredible integrity because she was not “pushing forward deranged conspiracy theories” like the ones he found on a progressive social media site he was exploring “against [his] better judgment.” John King proceeded to fangirl over Harris in what he must have hoped was a stirring tribute to her evidently vast accomplishment:  She just won 75 million votes. She just got 48.4% of the vote in the country. She just raised a billion dollars. She's a black woman, popular with the foundational base of the Democratic party, which is black women…The question I have about politicians is do they learn from their mistakes and their environment. She did not lose because of her mistakes. She made some. She also had 100 plus days to do something that normally people spend four, five, six, ten years preparing for. Clearly, Jake Tapper has not fully realized the terrible mistake of flirting with potentially damaging false claims since he falsely accused Texas Senator Ted Cruz (R) of being “one of the main individuals who helped cause what happened four years ago by putting forward the falsehood that the vice president could somehow do something to stop the electoral count.” His spokesman had this retort: Unreal. Because everyone seems to forget what exactly Cruz, Lummis, and others were doing, here's the reminder: "Congress should immediately appoint an Electoral Commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election… https://t.co/VmRhBNiMAB — Darin Miller (@DarinBMiller) January 6, 2025 Of course, that could not be further from the truth since Cruz had actually proposed the appointment of an electoral commission to investigate the significant claims of fraud following the results of the 2020 election. No doubt Tapper forgot to do his research on CNN’s own reporting of Cruz’s initiative. For his part, Jennings maintained the importance of “arrang[ing]our feelings and control[ing] ourselves accordingly here,” adding that “we have heard some people in other venues say extraordinarily unhinged and vile things, comparing January 6th to the Holocaust, to slavery, to World War II” in reference to moments like this one from ABC’s The View.     Jennings concluded that Democrats had stalled their own progress as a party by putting “most of their eggs in the January 6th basket” while Republicans had moved on from that event to realize their plans for a better future. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN January 6th: Congress Certifies the Election 01/06/2025 12:00:40 PM EST DANA BASH: Right, I was told by a source familiar with her thinking – Jake, I'm gonna throw it back to you–that she is steeling herself for this moment where she is going to be presiding over her own loss. (...) 12:02:53 PM EST JAKE TAPPER: It’s really difficult to think about the majesty of this day without reflecting upon what happened four years ago. Jeff talked about whitewashing. I want to run a little clip from four years ago–which really required no great prescience by me–but it was ongoing when it was very–and very easy to predict. If we can run that clip. This is four years ago. [Cuts to video] [from 01/06/21] I want people to remember how they feel watching these images of the United States Capitol being taken over, and this–these clear acts of sedition and violence and terrorism by Trump supporters, because there's going to be an attempt to whitewash and pretend this didn't happen. [Cuts back to live] There’s gonna be an attempt to whitewash and pretend this didn't happen, and in fact, there was. And for millions of Americans, it worked. KAITLAN COLLINS: It was very successful, I think anyone would argue if you're a critic of Trump's or a fan of his. And I was thinking, you know, as you look at the contrast of four years ago and today, it really could not be clearer especially how Trump himself and those around him view it. (...) 12:23:12 PM EST SCOTT JENNINGS: Yeah, I think it’ll be remembered but I don't think it's going to be remembered singularly. I think it's going to be remembered in the context of the last eight years: four years of Trump, four years of Biden. I mean, the fact is it happened. It was a terrible day. Violence, political violence should never be condoned. And then we live through four years of Biden's presidency, and the American people went scrambling back to Donald Trump. They chose to analyze two presidencies, which included one day and a whole bunch of other policy decisions, and they went back to Trump.  The other thing about this day, and about this election, that I think is noteworthy and actually positive is this. It's not been since 1988 that Democrats have not challenged a Republican win on the floor of the House when trying to count the votes. I have never had an election in my adult professional career in which both sides basically accepted it without too much grumbling. Obviously, '00 and '04, Democrats didn't accept Bush. There were Republicans who didn't accept Obama. We know Democrats still think Russia stole the election in ‘16. We know what happened in 2020.  This time around, it seems to me most people have accepted the results of the election. Also, the Electoral Reform Count Act passed in 2022, clarifying that the vice president only has ministerial duty, so that’s gonna go off without a hitch today. it feels like maybe we’ve gotten off the slippery slope of one side or the other not accepting the outcome of an election. So, in its totality over the last quarter-century, I tend to think that's a good thing. (...) 12:24:43 PM EST FORMER REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R): I was just gonna say, you know, look, I get it and I agree that in the long run–I think that the days of, you know, January 6th fights are probably going to be over. We did a great thing with the Electoral Count Act Reform, but we have to be very careful. We can't put Democrats–and I was against them doing it when they did it, obviously, against Democrats opposing the election–we can't put that on the same level as what happened on January 6th.  It's one thing for a few people to say we're going to vote against certification of this election. Once it hit critical mass in the Democrats, I'm pretty sure if it hit critical mass, the leadership would have come out and said, “No, we can't do this.” Instead, Republican leadership, like Kevin McCarthy, shocked us all on January 1st on a phone call when he said he as well is going to object to the certification of this election. And when he did that, that's when I predicted that day there’ll be violence on the 6th because you're convincing half the country an election was stolen.  And by the way, Scott, if I believed an election was stolen, I would have been on the steps of the Capitol that day because we're a country that believes we should have a voice heard. And that's the danger of terrible leadership and convincing people of lies. (...) 12:46:55 PM EST TAPPER: And just to underline that point, in 2004, there were all sorts of conspiracy theories on the left, led by Robert Kennedy Jr. for one, that Ohio had been stolen. And against my better judgment, I went onto a progressive social media site last night, and they're out there about this election too, that this was a hacked election. I mean, the difference is, of course, that Kamala Harris is not leading the charge in pushing forward these deranged conspiracy theories. JOHN KING: No, she will ignore the fringe and the conspiracy, where Donald Trump has invited them from the edge to the middle of his world, actually. His orbit is full of people who peddle conspiracy theories.  (...) 12:47:43 PM EST KING: What next for Kamala Harris? If you talk to people in this town, most Democrats say, “Oh, you know, go away, if you want to run for governor of California, fine. Please don't run for president again.” I would remind you, and you made the point earlier, on this day four years ago, everyone said Donald Trump was done. So discount her as a potential nominee four years from now, or at least a player in that, at your peril.  She just won 75 million votes. She just got 48.4% of the vote in the country. She just raised a billion dollars. She's a black woman, popular with the foundational base of the Democratic party, which is black women. She has giant problems. She has giant problems. She did not learn to speak to working class Americans about their cost of living and about their disaffection with this town. She's viewed by many as a quote unquote “coastal elite.”  She has a lot of problems. Donald Trump had more when he left this town four years ago. The question I have about politicians is do they learn from their mistakes and their environment. She did not lose because of her mistakes. She made some. She also had 100 plus days to do something that normally people spend four, five, six, ten years preparing for. JAMIE GANGEL: It’s obviou–losing is not fun, and that's what is going, you know, she's going to certify today, but she's not alone. You made the point in Al Gore had to do it with a very bitter race, with George W. Bush. And Richard Nixon lost to JFK. So she's not the first vice president to lose. (...) 01:01:39 PM EST TAPPER: Right now you're looking at images from the floor of the House of Representatives. Members of the House and Senate are gathering in what is their–and there is the Speaker, Mike Johnson, and Vice President Kamala Harris. It's obviously a bipartisan or even nonpartisan event, where the leaders of this country come together to count the electoral votes.  There's Ted Cruz, a senator from Texas, who was one of the main individuals who helped cause what happened four years ago by putting forward the falsehood that the vice president could somehow do something to stop the electoral count. There's Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries with Katherine Clark, his number two. What are your thoughts as you watch this in action? COLLINS: Ted Cruz obviously was the first senator to object, and obviously, just looking back on this, what the vice president maintained at the time, as Marc knows well, is he did not have the power to block the certification on this day four years ago. TAPPER: And he didn't. COLLINS: What we have seen is the Electoral Count Act that was passed reaffirming that interpretation of the law so people like John Eastman, who Pence later referred to as a crackpot of attorneys, that Trump was listening to at the time, could not make that argument. But also it changed the threshold for how many people have to object to lead to that moment. Even if we were in the exact same situation as four years ago, had this law been passed, the threshold would have had to have been much higher than what it was four years ago for that to happen. TAPPER: Marc Short, are you able to look at Ted Cruz without thinking about January 6th? MARC SHORT: Sure. Jake, because honestly, I think what Ted Cruz is doing was advocating, I may not agree there was evident of any sort of theft in that election, but it is their right to raise an objection. That's different than coming forth with the suggestion the vice president has this unilateral authority to reject certificates. So even though they passed the new legislation in 2022, I think the vice president's role has been black and white clear for 250 years of our republic. So I don't think there's really that much question of what the vice president's role was on that day, and that's the same role vice presidents have executed since the beginning of our republic. (...) 01:14:09 PM EST JENNINGS: In light of all the rhetoric and things we're going to hear people say today is that ultimately, it was the American people that got to decide, ultimately, how we feel collectively as a country about January 6th. And already today, we have heard some people in other venues say extraordinarily unhinged and vile things, comparing January 6th to the Holocaust, to slavery, to World War II. I think we need to arrange our feelings and control ourselves accordingly here, and not go off the deep end. It was not a good day. Political violence cannot be condoned, but we can also be measured in how we view it in light of the rest of American and world history. What's happening today is ultimately a good thing because both parties, for the first time in my adult life, are accepting the results of an election. And that is ultimately putting this country on the right tracks. I just think people oughta really take stock of our feelings and not get out over our skis too much today and minimizing other world events and comparing them to January the 6th. KINZINGER: Just a quick point. Both parties have always accepted the presidential election until one… JENNINGS: False. KENZINGER: …four years ago. No! JENNINGS: They have not. KENZINGER: No! Scott… JENNINGS: They have not. KENZINGER: Members of some of the Democratic Party, yes, I agree with that, but saying the party? I have never seen the speaker or the leaders of the Democrats object to a presidential election. There is a massive difference, and don't try to put these on the same thing. Look, I agree they shouldn't have done it, but to say… [Crosstalk] JENNINGS: But they did object. You admit they objected. ASHLEY ALLISON: I think, though, this is why we are where we are in this country. I think we're drawing false parallels to things that are happening in history. Look, in 2000, that was the first election. I was in Ohio, the place–ground zero of people questioning. It was the first election I ever got to vote in. I was greatly disappointed and I thought what happened in Florida with hanging chads was wrong.  But I didn't storm the Capitol because I was an adult that accepted the results of the election and the will of the people, whether I thought that some things had gone a little awry. That's not what happened on January 6th and I don't think it's fair to draw the parallels that it was. I also think that showing this is really important–I used to be a former school teacher–and I think that we're in a moment right now in our country where information is being disseminated in ways where we do sometimes draw false parallels.  And so showing what actually happens, showing the checks and balances and explaining why January 6th is not the same as when other times in history people have asked questions about the election is really important for this upcoming generation that may have questions about the fragility of our democracy. (...) 01:29:37 PM EST JENNINGS: It's possible for voters to take in lots of different information, whether it's about what they saw on January 6th or what they lived there for the next four years and synthesize all of that and make decisions. Ultimately, the Democrats in this election put all of their eggs, or most of their eggs, in the January 6th basket and Republicans put all their eggs into the future, that we get control the economy and get things back in order in your life. (...)

The Jan. 1 atrocity in New Orleans, carried out by an ISIS sympathizer who plowed a vehicle into a Bourbon Street crowd, killed at least 14 pedestrians and wounded dozens more. The attack reminded me of a recent post on the Chronicles website, where regular columnist Tom Piatak explained why “Americans voted against suicide” by re-electing Donald Trump. Piatak argued that if Trump had not won, the country would have leaped from the frying pan into the fire, trading the so-called “senile tool of the woke left” still in the Oval Office for an even more leftist Kamala Harris. Both President Joe Biden and Harris appeared comfortable with their party’s open-borders policy, aimed at creating a permanent Democratic majority by allowing waves of illegal immigrants to cross the border. Piatak questioned why a newly elected Democratic president would abandon that policy. Harris not only embraced the estimated 10 million to 12 million unidentified and unvetted illegal aliens who entered the country, she celebrated them. It is impossible to dissociate this terrorist act from the Democrats’ policy on illegal immigration and the accompanying cultural radicalism unleashed by the American left. Kamala Harris and her party believe we should stop calling illegal aliens what they plainly are, provide them with homes and money, and even offer “sex reassignment” for those undocumented residents who request it. The fact that this immense population includes in its ranks drug hustlers, violent gangs, and Islamist terrorists should matter less to us than their enriching presence as we work to overcome our “systemic racist” past. When asked about the New Orleans attack, FBI officials waited hours before using the word “terrorist” to describe what happened. After all, the Biden-Harris administration has applied that term to “truly evil people” such as anti-abortion demonstrators and parents in Northern Virginia who objected to trans-themed instruction in public schools. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has complained that whenever he raises terrorism with the White House, he is lectured on “racially motivated extremism.” Allow me to adapt my colleague’s argument: Not all Americans voted against suicide — more than 75 million supported it, in fact. Donald Trump won this pivotal election by fewer than 2 million votes, which means almost half of the electorate was willing to grant another mandate to a leadership that opened our borders to more terrorism, along with countless murders and rapes. Some may object that the New Orleans attacker was, as Biden emphasized, “an American citizen.” Legacy media outlets note that he was “American-born,” implying that this detail outweighs his Islamist fervor or the copy of the Quran in his Houston home, opened to a page calling for the slaying of Allah’s enemies. They want us to believe he represents an indigenous problem, unrelated to the broader cultural shifts accelerated by Biden’s immigration policy. The Washington Post berated Trump for even hinting at a connection between the crime and immigration. Yet it is impossible to dissociate this terrorist act from the Democratic Party’s policy on illegal immigration and the accompanying cultural radicalism unleashed by the American left. The Islamic fundamentalism that the New Orleans mass murderer absorbed has become increasingly common in this country with both the importation of Muslim extremists and the anti-Western indoctrination in our institutions of learning. As mass rallies for Hamas terrorists become alarmingly commonplace in our cities, we might note that what influenced the terrorist’s mindset is becoming more and more acceptable in our transformed country. Stressing the killer’s “mother-and-apple-pie” American identity bolsters one leftist claim: that those crossing the southern border illegally are somehow superior to the citizens who have lived here for generations. These newcomers are deemed free of the “Christian, white racist” baggage critics assign to earlier arrivals, so we should therefore value their salvific arrival. In 2024, New York City’s government published a report it called “factual,” asserting that undocumented immigrants provided an enormous benefit — particularly when they supposedly saved “our largest asylum city” after COVID-19 struck, rescuing it from a looming financial crisis. That seems dubious, considering the federal aid poured into food, shelter, and living expenses for these unwelcome intruders. It also excludes the government-funded travel to whichever destination they preferred, as well as the social and financial toll of crimes they committed. But if it’s true, as our cultural elites tell us, that the newcomers are even more beneficial than older residents, then the New Orleans terrorist may be the living proof of that. Consistent with the leftist narrative, it took someone born in this racist, morally defective country to have acted as badly as he did.

A year ago, Democrats claimed their campaign was all about “defending democracy.” Instead, they sabotaged it. Repeatedly. No party has done more to contradict its own stated mission. Speaking on Jan. 5, 2024, in Pennsylvania, Joe Biden asked, “Is democracy still America’s sacred cause? ... This is not rhetorical, academic, or hypothetical. Whether democracy is still America’s sacred cause is the most urgent question of our time, and it’s what the 2024 election is all about.” In the end, Democrats pushed Biden aside, despite his uncontested path to the nomination. They argued their coup was necessary to save democracy. Democrats would soon answer that question, but in the wrong way. Their sabotage of democracy began long before 2024. In 2019, they launched investigations into President Donald Trump and continued even after they knew the charges were false. Never mind. They would defend democracy later. Then in 2023, Democratic prosecutors unleashed four indictments against Trump. The timing, so close to an election, was surely a coincidence. But that was OK because they promised to defend democracy again soon. Meanwhile, Democrats campaigned to protect democracy by concealing Joe Biden’s cognitive decline. They had done so for four years, but in 2024 they failed, especially after some allies admitted the cover-up. It was necessary, they insisted, to defend democracy. Democrats also shut down their 2024 nomination process to protect Biden. Any would-be challengers, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., were discredited. That, they claimed, was how to defend democracy. For six months, Democrats kept Joe Biden out of sight and denied any obvious signs of his impairment — even when they were glaring. When Biden stumbled in his debate with Donald Trump before a national audience — no worse than what attentive viewers had already seen — they orchestrated a media pile-on to force him out of the race. One by one, party figures turned against him. In the end, Democrats pushed Biden aside, despite his uncontested path to the nomination. They argued their coup was necessary to save democracy. Democrats then handed the nomination to Kamala Harris without a campaign or contest — just a rubber stamp. They deemed a traditional convention vote too risky, arguing it would slow their larger defense of democracy. Democrats shielded Harris from serious press engagement during the contest they appointed her to lead. Rather than provide answers that could inform the public about a candidate nobody voted for, she focused on “defending democracy.” Instead of appearing before the people, Harris appeared before her people: the elite. By their account, defending democracy meant letting self-proclaimed leaders instruct the public on what to do, what to think, and how to vote. In a true democracy, they argued, the “demos” must follow guidance from its leaders. Later, reports revealed that many of Harris’ elite endorsers were paid to appear with her. Like a child wearing a pork chop to draw the attention of a dog, this tactic was just fine. Passing money among elites, they reasoned, merely fortified democracy. Harris had plenty of money to buy friends if necessary. She outspent Trump, insisting that defending democracy doesn’t come cheap. Democrats also pushed for third-party candidates to undermine Republicans in various races. They refused to remove RFK Jr. from the ballot, even though he had withdrawn and endorsed Trump. Apparently, ballot integrity mattered less than protecting democracy. Democrats fought voter ID laws, despite broad public support. That’s what it takes to protect democracy. They took a similar approach to counting ballots. In Pennsylvania, Democratic leaders allowed invalid ballots when they deemed it vital to defending democracy. Democratic officials vow to oppose the new Trump administration, even though he won both the Electoral College and the popular vote. They insist they are still defending democracy and can’t help themselves. In a single year, Americans learned much about how Democrats “defend” democracy. They revealed that democracy is too important to be practiced without limits — sometimes it must be protected from itself. We also learned that when Democrats say “democracy,” they really mean “power.”

White House Tries to Post a Snow Pic but the Internet Roasts Them Like a Marshmallow on a Winter's Night

Leader of Britain's Liberal Dems Says Incoming US Official Is Suggesting UK Be Overthrown

President-elect Donald Trump said Monday he is nominating Joseph Nocella Jr., a Nassau County District Court and Family Court judge, to be the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

When Newsmax announced our plan to go public, we also announced our plan to raise $150 million in Preferred Shares before we became listed. Newsmax hit the $150 million mark over the Christmas-New Year's holiday. In fact, Newsmax raised ...

The world's largest fast food chain has decided to walk back some of its DEI commitments just a few days after Robby Starbuck let them know he was looking into them. Back in 2021, McDonald's jumped on…

@media (max-width: 1200px) { }.ns-inline:not(.ns-columns) .ns-buttons-wrapper { justify-content: center; }body .ns-inline:not(.ns-columns) a.ns-button, body .ns-inline .ns-total-share-count { margin:…