President Joe Biden is falling apart at the seams — and it couldn’t be more obvious. In a recent interview with NBC’s Lester Holt, the president got noticeably snippy before the questions even began. “Sometimes come and talk to me about what we should be talking about,” Biden said, directly after Holt simply thanked him for making time to talk. Pat Gray, Keith Malinak, and Jeffy of “Pat Gray Unleashed” are shocked at how quickly things went sour. “That was so awkward,” Malinak says, while Gray adds, “He’s pissed before the interview even begins. And he’s pissed at Lester Holt.” As the interview went on, it only got worse. “What happens if you have another episode like we saw during the debate?” Holt asks Biden, adding to clarify, “What happens if you have another performance on that par, on that level?” “I don’t plan on having another performance on that level,” Biden mumbles, nearly whispering. “In your last TV interview you were asked if you had watched the debate, your answer was ‘I don’t think so, no.’ Have you since seen it?” Holt asks Biden. “I’ve seen pieces of it,” Biden says angrily. “I’m not watching the whole debate.” “The reason I ask, because I guess the question is, are you all on the same page? Are you seeing what they saw, which was moments of frankly,” Holt goes on, “you appeared to be confused.” “Lester, look. Why don’t you guys ever talk about the 18 to 28 lies he told? Where are you on this? Why didn’t the press ever talk about that? Twenty-eight times it's confirmed he lied in that debate,” Biden says, adding, “I had a bad, bad night. I wasn’t feeling well at all.” When Holt tells Biden the media has reported extensively on their issues with Trump as well, Biden smiles creepily and leans in. “No you haven’t, no you haven’t,” Biden says with a terrifying smile. “God love you.” Holt then really hits a nerve when he asks the president whether he has any desire to “get back on the horse” and do the next debate sooner. “I’m on the horse, where have you been?” Biden says. “I’ve done 22 major events, and thousands of people, overwhelming crowds, a lot happening. I’m on the horse. What I’m doing is going out and demonstrating to the American people that I’m in command of all my faculties, that I don’t need notes, I don’t need teleprompters, I can go out and answer any questions at all.” “I stood there when NATO was in town. I stood there for an hour and answered questions,” he adds. “With notes, with teleprompter. All scripted,” Jeffy comments. “Knowing the questions in advance. That’s what he’s shown us. And he can’t handle that!” Gray adds. Want more from Pat Gray?To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Although Donald Trump may have hurt himself politically by proclaiming without convincing proof that he won the 2020 presidential election, the suspicion that the Democrats engaged in fraud is more than justified. The farther one moves away from holding elections on a single day, with paper ballots under bipartisan supervision, the easier it becomes for the dominant party to fix things. Moreover, evidence exists of powerful interests, including our surveillance agencies and the corporate media, collaborating to ensure the election of a Democrat to the White House in 2020. This has been amply shown, perhaps most convincingly, in Mollie Hemingway’s best-seller, “Rigged.” Efforts must be made to return elections to a single day, with paper ballots and adequate nonpartisan supervision. But such election-fixing may be a kindergarten exercise in comparison to what the Democrats, aided by the usual suspects, have planned for the coming election. Cheating this time may be more critical than in the past. Whether the presidential candidate is the seriously demented Biden or the cackling Kamala Harris, the Democrats will likely be coming from behind in the polls. It will therefore be necessary to pull out all stops to prevent the Republican “threat to democracy” from prevailing. Since the Democratic National Committee and the media push this narrative, election cheating, if allowed, will be either persistently ignored or grossly misrepresented. The media will claim that protesting Republicans are trying to "suppress minority votes," a charge Democrats make whenever election integrity is raised. If anyone has checked, Google references to information sources are becoming almost uniformly leftist, which will help cover up electoral dishonesty. The 10 or 11 or possibly 16 million illegal aliens whom the Democrats have imported and whom they are now feeding, housing, and subsidizing were brought here for an obvious reason: to expand the Democratic voter base. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia, all under Democratic control, allow illegal aliens to obtain driver’s licenses. Not coincidentally, these licenses can serve as a form of voter ID in many states. Joe Biden’s decision in June to grant legal status to 500,000 illegal alien spouses has created more voting opportunities for those who entered the country unlawfully. Given the tools Democrats have to facilitate cheating, the mainstream media’s claim that there have been at most only about 30 confirmed cases of electoral illegalities in recent years is laughable. Evidence shows that blue states have already added illegal aliens to voter rolls. In these states, proof of citizenship often involves only a signed attestation. Additionally, those who lied on the required forms have not faced deportation, despite a federal law stipulating such punishment for this offense. Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission who now oversees the Heritage Foundation’s Election Reform Initiative, views the situation of illegal aliens voting rather pessimistically. Spakovsky’s assessment: “It is difficult to predict the actual numbers of aliens that may vote because so many states do absolutely nothing to verify the citizenship of registered voters.” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who has supported a bill to ensure the citizenship of voters, makes this telling point: “Perhaps the Democratic Party would prefer that we only identify fraudulent voters after the fact, but after an election has already been decided and the new members are sworn in.” Yes, the Democrats would like that, as they play their customary game, enabling illegal voting by pushing for drop-box voting, banning voter identification as “racist,” and and insisting on the legality of improperly marked ballots. Any complaint against these practices once “the election has already been decided” will incur the corporate media’s wrath and charges of trying to overthrow “our democracy.” The only way Republicans address this predicament and possibly avoid the danger of forfeiting the presidential race (and many down-ballot contests) is by highlighting the question of electoral integrity. The GOP must do all it can to call public attention to this concern. The pledge of Lara Trump, as co-chair of the Republican National Committee, to oversee every drop box used in lieu of going to the polls and to have a slew of lawyers available to fight reported instances of Democratic fraud must be faithfully kept. The promise made by Elon Musk and other wealthy donors to provide $45 million monthly to facilitate new Republican registrations and outreach may also help level the playing field. But these measures are only temporary solutions. Efforts must be made to return elections to a single day, with paper ballots and adequate nonpartisan supervision. Any other form of voting should be discouraged and, as much as possible, excluded. The attempt on Donald Trump’s life in no way renders my suggestions inapplicable. This foul deed against our former president will not keep Democratic politicians from pulling out all stops, including illegal ones, to win this year’s elections.

But for a quarter-inch — a providential turn of the head in a split second — you would not be reading this now. So thank God for that. Donald Trump’s assassination would not have delivered social peace, in case anybody thinks otherwise. It would have unleashed horrors unlike anything we’ve ever seen in this country. You would not be reading this because we would be at war. You would be at war. We do not want this. We cannot have it. We must not have it. Not for ourselves and not for our children and not for our children’s children. In the name of God, no. Not Civil War 2.0. No, no, nothing quite so civilized. We should hope for a mere 620,000 dead in the wake of such a conflict. Think Bosnia. Think Northern Ireland. Instead of armies on the battlefield, think of neighbors killing neighbors. Earlier this year, when Alex Garland’s film “Civil War” appeared, people debated. This can’t happen here, can it? Many critics complained that the film’s politics were thinly veiled or maybe not veiled enough. Some pointed out that Nick Offerman’s president was obviously and offensively Trumpian. Or maybe he was Bidenesque. Who knows? Blaze News' Matt Himes panned the movie, saying it “has nothing to say about our current political divisions.” Himes is a dear friend and a colleague, so we are free to disagree. I’m certain “Civil War” has plenty to say about our current political divisions, just not in a straightforward or cogent way — not unlike the conflict depicted in the film. My takeaway was essentially the same as the Brit who made the movie: Let’s not do this. It doesn’t matter how the thing started or why. I could conjure a thousand reasons — some plenty good ones, too. But the results would be the same. Death. Immiseration. Poverty. Famine. Rapine. Horror. Robbery. Torture. Terror. More death. More terror. Even more death. A war of all against all. Shortly before “Civil War” appeared in theaters, I asked another dear friend of mine if she would write a warning to Americans. She had reason to know. She was a refugee of the Bosnian genocide, now an American through and through. She replied, “Give me time to think about it.” About a week later she wrote: “I’m sorry, I can’t do it. It’s still too raw.” Bosnia was 30 years ago. It’s still too raw. Seems to me that’s warning enough. We do not want this. We cannot have it. We must not have it. Not for ourselves and not for our children and not for our children’s children. In the name of God, no. But we came close about a week ago. And we’re walking on a knife’s edge right now. It could happen in a split second, by inches. Please, let’s not do it.

Here's the Headline 14 Years After Biden and Dems Hailed Obama Signing the 'Affordable Care Act'

Rep. Zoe Lofgren Attempts to Honor Sheila Jackson Lee But Other Democrats Lose their Minds on Her

Judge Puts a Halt on Louisiana Law Requiring Ten Commandments in Each Public Classroom

JD Vance Stopped State Department Nominees Because of 'Woke' Policies and That's Supposed to Be Bad

Israeli Jets Make Direct Hit on Yemen After Houthis' Drone Attack on Tel Aviv

Wall Street's financial powerhouses are grappling with diminished influence in Washington, as former President Donald Trump's choice of a running mate, J.D. Vance, who is openly critical of corporate America, leaves them on the sidelines, The New York Times reported.

x Republish LibertyNation.com welcomes the republication of our content consistent with the following guidelines: We permit the republishing of up to 250 words of newly published LN articles (the day…