If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. For some reason quietly‚ X has started enforcing revised rules‚ detailed in its platform guidelines for users – among other things‚ adding a section to the “Abuse and Harassment” that concerns the use of pronouns‚ and speech referring to persons “transitioning” (in terms of transgenderism). The “amended” rules came into force at some point between January 24 and 27 this year‚ and should an X user be found to “purposefully” address another using a pronoun different than what that user has chosen for themselves‚ they can expect to be (and they ostensibly already are) punished by having their posts’ visibility on the platform “reduced.” Related: Rep. Jim Banks criticizes Twitter for locking his official account It’s not entirely clear if this constitutes straight-forward shadowbanning‚ i.e.‚ if the supposed guidelines violator is immediately notified of this; but given the nebulous nature of any attempt to determine if someone is doing this “purposefully” – the revised rules spell out that those addressed using “the wrong pronouns” will be consulted. Some see this as a slow return to the policies and general trends in content moderation/censorship that once blossomed so wildly on Twitter. What is undeniable is that the “Abuse and Harassment” guidelines now go into the pronouns of it all‚ although they were not mentioned in the June 2023 version. But now they feature under the section‚ “Insults.” The January 2024 version includes a subtitle‚ “Use of Prior Names and Pronouns.” It reads as follows: “We will reduce the visibility of posts that purposefully use different pronouns to address someone other than what that person uses for themselves‚ or that use a previous name that someone no longer goes by as part of their transition.” But how does X‚ or anyone for that matter‚ decide that something of this kind is “purposeful”? The near impossibility of doing so is referred to as‚ “complexity.” “Given the complexity of determining whether such a violation has occurred‚ we must always hear from the target to determine if a violation has occurred‚” the new guidelines read‚ again – no word if X will also “hear” from those accused of making the offense. It seems that X has decided to expend a lot of time and energy‚ and no doubt money‚ in order to make this work. It remains to be seen (and evidence so far from users to be heard) about how the whole thing works‚ or doesn’t – but meantime‚ X looks dead set to torment itself – and its users – by trying to figure out what is done on purpose‚ what is accidental‚ what might be thoughtless‚ or just light-heated. Says one of the paragraphs added to the guidelines: “Some posts may appear to be harmful when viewed in isolation‚ but may not be when viewed in the context of a larger conversation. For example‚ friends may consensually use certain terms or phrases to engage with each other that could appear abusive without this context.” The post X Says It Will Reduce the Visibility of Posts That Purposely Ignore a Person’s Preferred Pronouns appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties‚ subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Sign Up To Keep Reading This post is for Reclaim The Net supporters. Gain access to the entire archive of features and supporters-only content. Help protect free speech‚ freedom from surveillance‚ and digital civil liberties. Join Already a supporter? Login here The post A Private‚ Open-Source‚ Self-Hosted Photo and Video Backup Solution appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Do Newly Released Documents Provide a Smoking Gun for the Lab Leak Theory?

'Three-Alarm Fire': Marianne Williamson Unsuspends Campaign

Former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan‚ who is launching his own media company‚ traveled to CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip on Thursday to discuss the conflicting narratives behind the deaths of several Gazans who were gathered around an aid truck. While Hasan had no problems relying on Hamas-supplied statistics‚ he condemned the media for trusting the Israeli military while comparing it to Russian and Syrian dictators and war criminals Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad. At the same time‚ Hasan demanded the U.S. let Hamas off the hook by forcing Israel to end the war now. Phillip asked‚ “Look‚ Israel‚ as we just laid out in the last few hours‚ have tried to frame this as a tragedy‚ but just not one that is their fault. The IDF says it fired warning shots to try to disperse the crowd around that convoy. Do you lend any credibility to that explanation? And from the eyes of the world‚ does it matter what the explanation is for what we saw unfold?”     The IDF also states that the warning shots came about as the crowd moved towards Israeli soldiers after armed looters opened fire at the aid convoy. However‚ for Hasan‚ the IDF should be treated like the police in America‚ “In terms of believing the Israelis‚ I would say that it took multiple innocent black people to die at the hands of police in this country‚ whether it's Breonna Taylor‚ whether it's Freddie Gray‚ whether it's George Floyd‚ for people in our industry‚ Abby‚ to start saying‚ well‚ maybe we shouldn't just blindly believe police statements after shootings happen.” Even if one were to grant that point‚ it doesn’t follow that whatever the Palestinians say is accurate. For instance‚ Hasan condemned the IDF for saying there was “a command and control center under the Al-Shifa Hospital‚” when we know that there were tunnels and weapons found there despite all the claims to the contrary. Phillip’s omission of the IDF’s claim that armed looters were present was important because absent that information‚ Hasan’s claims look more plausible than they are “Doctors say that the bodies they got at the hospital‚ you showed the pictures of people on donkeys‚ were mostly bullet wounds‚ not stampede wounds. The Israelis opened fire on hungry people trying to get flour‚ it's being called a flour massacre for that reason.” Moving from the local incident to the bigger picture‚ Hasan added‚ “And you asked‚ is it a tipping point? I mean‚ in any normal world‚ it should be. In any other conflict‚ it would be‚ Abby. When Putin did stuff like this in Ukraine‚ we condemned him. When Assad did stuff like this in Syria‚ we condemned him.” Israel is fighting because it is defending itself after being attacked in the most brutal way on October 7. Vladimir Putin is fighting Ukraine because he thinks he’s the heir to Catherine the Great’s imperial legacy. Speaking of Putin and Assad‚ there have been more people killed‚ according to the U.N. in specific Syrian cities than in all of Gaza. Later‚ Hasan turned his ire to the U.S. and after claiming the media should not treat IDF statements as fact‚ he treated Hamas statistics as fact‚ “Joe Biden has the power to pick up the phone and end this war. He can ring the Israeli prime minister and say‚ we're cutting you off. We're cutting off aid. We're cutting off armaments. Israel‚ Israelis themselves‚ Israeli generals‚ say we can't do this war without America. He hasn't done it. He didn't do it after 10‚000 dead. He didn't do it after 20‚000 dead. Today‚ we crossed 30‚000 dead.” An end to the war now means Hamas survives and lives to violate whatever ceasefire Hasan demands‚ but he doesn’t care “How on earth has he not stopped the war until now? How on earth are we still debating this?” Hasan would also claim‚ “It simply is get a ceasefire and it is within his power to get a ceasefire. It's within the power of the U.N. Security Council to get a ceasefire. Remember‚ the rest of the world wants a ceasefire. It's America that has blocked us at the U.N. Security Council. Even other Western nations have backed a ceasefire. It's Biden blocking it.” As shocking as it may be for Hasan to believe‚ what is right is not determined by roll call votes at the United Nations. Here is a transcript for the February 29 show: CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip 2/29/2024 10:05 PM ET ABBY PHILLIP: Look‚ Israel‚ as we just laid out in the last few hours‚ have tried to frame this as a tragedy‚ but just not one that is their fault. The IDF says it fired warning shots to try to disperse the crowd around that convoy. Do you lend any credibility to that explanation? And from the eyes of the world‚ does it matter what the explanation is for what we saw unfold? MEHDI HASAN: Well‚ Abby‚ thanks so much for having me on the show‚ and thank you for that very important‚ very powerful intro you did just there. In terms of believing the Israelis‚ I would say that it took multiple innocent black people to die at the hands of police in this country‚ whether it's Breonna Taylor‚ whether it's Freddie Gray‚ whether it's George Floyd‚ for people in our industry‚ Abby‚ to start saying‚ well‚ maybe we shouldn't just blindly believe police statements after shootings happen. And I feel that we still haven't quite reached that point in the Middle East with the Israeli military. The Israeli military tend to say things that turn out not to be true‚ both before Gaza‚ when they killed Shireen Abu Akhle‚ a U.S. citizen‚ and lied about it‚ or during this conflict‚ so many lies the Israeli military has told about‚ you know‚ a terrorist guard list under the Rantisi Hospital‚ a command and control center under the Al-Shifa Hospital‚ a documentary in Lebanon that they claimed was Palestinians faking their own wounds‚ so many‚ you can't even count. And now we are told today‚ well‚ actually‚ it was just a stampede‚ even though eyewitnesses‚ Abby‚ say that the Israelis opened fire‚ Israeli tanks opened fire‚ without warning‚ according to one eyewitness in the Washington Post. Doctors say that the bodies they got at the hospital‚ you showed the pictures of people on donkeys‚ were mostly bullet wounds‚ not stampede wounds. The Israelis opened fire on hungry people trying to get flour‚ it's being called a flour massacre for that reason. And you asked‚ is it a tipping point? I mean‚ in any normal world‚ it should be. In any other conflict‚ it would be‚ Abby. When Putin did stuff like this in Ukraine‚ we condemned him. When Assad did stuff like this in Syria‚ we condemned him. Then Israel starves hundreds of thousands of people and then shoots people who go to get flour‚ where's the condemnation from the United States government? The State Department spokesman would not condemn Israel today. So‚ it's a tragedy. Is it a tipping point? I wish it was. I suspect it isn't. PHILLIP: What President Biden has said is that he has acknowledged the events that happened and says it will likely complicate the negotiations that they've been working on for a temporary ceasefire. From Biden's perspective‚ do you think this could be the incident that pushes him to actually rethink how he approaches this relationship with this particular Israeli government and this war? HASAN: As I argued in a Guardian piece recently‚ Joe Biden has the power to pick up the phone and end this war. He can ring the Israeli prime minister and say‚ we're cutting you off. We're cutting off aid. We're cutting off armaments. Israel‚ Israelis themselves‚ Israeli generals‚ say we can't do this war without America. He hasn't done it. He didn't do it after 10‚000 dead. He didn't do it after 20‚000 dead. Today‚ we crossed 30‚000 dead. You have to ask the question why this is a man who's seen as the great comforter-in-chief‚ the great empath‚ has had huge personal tragedy in his own family and yet 30‚000 Palestinians‚ according to his own Defense secretary today‚ 25‚000 women and children. How on earth has he not stopped the war until now? How on earth are we still debating this? And‚ Abby‚ on the situation on aid‚ I've just got to point out here‚ four out of five of the hungriest people in the world are in Gaza right now. Even with or without those aid trucks‚ people are starving. A two- month-old baby called Mahmoud Fatou (ph) starved to death earlier this week in Gaza. This is not a natural disaster. This is a man-made famine. Food is plentiful. It's available. It's a few miles away‚ and yet it's being blocked. In fact‚ at the Israeli crossing‚ I don't know how many CNN viewers know‚ people are putting up bouncy castles‚ Israeli protesters‚ and eating popcorn and candy-- cotton candy and blocking the aid. That is crazy. PHILLIP: Do you think‚ Mehdi‚ that there is -- look‚ I think you understand that President -- you say President Biden can just pick up the phone and cut it all off. You also understand he probably won't do that. So‚ if you were to give him advice today‚ knowing what he is likely to be able to get to a yes on‚ what is the one thing that you think he should do today that would make this better‚ marginally better tomorrow for Gazans? HASAN: It simply is get a ceasefire and it is within his power to get a ceasefire. It's within the power of the U.N. Security Council to get a ceasefire. Remember‚ the rest of the world wants a ceasefire. It's America that has blocked us at the U.N. Security Council. Even other Western nations have backed a ceasefire. It's Biden blocking it.

America has made tremendous progress on race relations and we’re a long way from the eras of slavery and segregation; we’ve even had a black president. But the anti-American narrative CBS Mornings pushed on Friday would have viewers believe that America was only worth a pathetic letter grade of “C+” and that it would take a frightening “180 years” for there to be true “parity” between white and black Americans. That was... unless we enacted sweeping socialist policies. CBS welcomed Marc Morial‚ president of the left-wing National Urban League and husband to CBS reporter Michelle Miller (which they did disclose)‚ who brought with him the “State of Black America” report his organization published just that morning. Convenient‚ right? “Now‚ this report assesses how black Americans are faring economically and socially compared to white Americans. They gave it a score of just under 76 percent. 100 percent would be full equality‚” co-anchor Gayle King announced. Chiding: “76 percent when I was in school was a C+‚ never great. I used to get in trouble for getting a grade of C+.” Morial explained how the actual number crunchers at the National Urban League came to their determination that America was awful: So‚ thanks for having me‚ and good morning. We look at 300 data sets‚ and those data sets include everything from unemployment rates‚ death rates‚ health insurance pickup rates‚ capital formation rates‚ and when we put them all together they are an index. And so‚ the status of white Americans is at one‚ and black Americans is a percentage of one. So‚ the comparative would be –let's look at family income‚ median family income for blacks. Maybe $45‚000‚ maybe for whites‚ $75‚000. So that's a fundamental idea with the comparison is.     “And so‚ that 75 percent represents‚ Gayle‚ a little bit of a change over the last three or four years‚ but at that rate‚ we're 180 years away from parity‚” he warned. “That's the number that drew my attention. 180 years. Why‚ Marc? How?” she implored him to explain. Morial started throwing out liberal talking points hinting at Jim Crow 2.0 and whining about pushback to racist DEI programs: I think one of the reasons is is because while there are those who push for progress‚ there have also been those who push against progress. Witnessed today‚ the over 1‚000 bills that have been introduced at state legislatures to make it more difficult for people to vote. Witness today the effort to‚ in effect‚ push back on DEI which is simply an effort to push back on equal economic opportunity. “I mean‚ there is a resistance movement to the kinds of change that the nation needs. And there was one in 1964‚ and there's one in 2024‚ and it’s intensified‚” he lamented. Then came the policy solution. “Yeah. 180 years seems like a daunting number to look at…Is there a way for us to narrow that gap in those areas quicker than that?” co-anchor Nate Burleson wanted to know. In addition to the liberal talking points about voting‚ he wanted policies that would take “a hard‚ hard line to address the issues of economics‚ poverty‚ the economic divide‚ and the racial wealth divide.” He wanted something akin to President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society and the War on Poverty; socialist spending programs which only served to make things worse. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CBS Mornings March 1‚ 2024 7:30:22 a.m. Eastern (…) GAYLE KING: That‚ of course‚ was addressing the country right before he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 into law. That landmark piece of legislation made it illegal to discriminate based on race and color‚ religion‚ sex‚ and national origin. 60 years later‚ the National Urban League says there's still work to be done. It is all outlined in his 2024 state of black America report that comes out today. Now‚ this report assesses how black Americans are faring economically and socially compared to white Americans. They gave it a score of just under 76 percent. 100 percent would be full equality. The president of the National Urban League‚ Marc Morial‚ joins us at the table. Good morning to you. MARC MORIAL:  Good morning. Great to be with you all. KING: You're well-known in this building. Also known as Michelle Miller’s better half. MORIAL: Mrs. Michelle Miller. KING: Mr. Michelle Miller‚ if you please. We’re very glad to have you. MORIAL: Appreciate it. KING: 76 percent when I was in school was a C+‚ never great. I used to get in trouble for getting a grade of C+. How did you come up with this score? What exactly does it mean? MORIAL: So‚ thanks for having me‚ and good morning. We look at 300 data sets‚ and those data sets include everything from unemployment rates‚ death rates‚ health insurance pickup rates‚ capital formation rates‚ and when we put them all together they are an index. And so‚ the status of white Americans is at one‚ and black Americans is a percentage of one. So‚ the comparative would be –let's look at family income‚ median family income for blacks. Maybe $45‚000‚ maybe for whites‚ $75‚000. So that's a fundamental idea with the comparison is. And so‚ that 75 percent represents‚ Gayle‚ a little bit of a change over the last three or four years‚ but at that rate we're 180 years away from parity. KING: That's the number that drew my attention. 180 years. Why‚ Marc? How? MORIAL: Let's say this‚ the Civil Rights Act of '64 that President Johnson signed has had a dramatic impact on America. Look at you and Nate. Look at others who work here at CBS. It's just an example. There were no blacks‚ there were no women sitting at any anchor desk in 1964. I think one of the reasons is is because while there are those who push for progress‚ there have also been those who push against progress. Witnessed today‚ the over 1‚000 bills that have been introduced at state legislatures to make it more difficult for people to vote. Witness today the effort to‚ in effect‚ push back on DEI which is simply an effort to push back on equal economic opportunity. KING: Yeah. MORIAL: I mean‚ there is a resistance movement to the kinds of change that the nation needs. And there was one in 1964‚ and there's one in 2024‚ and it’s intensified. NATE BURLESON: Yeah. 180 years seems like a daunting number to look at. MORIAL: Yes. KING: Because none of us will be here. BURLESON: Right. KING: In this room. BURLESON: Right. Is there a way for us to narrow that gap in those areas quicker than that? MORIAL: I think we could accelerate by‚ number one‚ ensuring that the access to the right to vote and democracy is unfettered. Number two‚ by taking a hard‚ hard line to address the issues of economics‚ poverty‚ the economic divide‚ and the racial wealth divide. I think we also can make a difference if we focus on children. For example‚ the child tax credit‚ which passed in the early days of the Biden administration but then expired‚ cut child poverty by one half in a short period of time. Are there things that we can do? Look‚ what's dramatic is that the Civil Rights Act of '64‚ the Voting Rights Act of '65‚ the great society programs in the middle 1960s probably cut the American poverty rate in half in a 15-year period. So can we? Yes. BURLESON: There are ways. MORIAL: There are ways. (…)

Alabama lawmakers passed Republican-proposed bills Thursday that would grant legal protections to in-vitro fertilization clinics following a state Supreme Court ruling that declared embryos are children.Senate Bill 159 provides "civil and criminal immunity for death or damage to an embryo to any individual or entity when providing or receiving goods or services related to in vitro fertilization.""This section is intended to apply retroactively‚" the proposed legislation stated.House Bill 237 similarly states that "no action‚ suit‚ or criminal prosecution for the damage to or death of an embryo shall be brought or maintained against any individual or entity when providing or receiving goods or services related to in vitro fertilization."While both sides of the aisle presented objections‚ the bills passed in the Senate and the House with bipartisan support.Democrats raised concerns that the legislation did not clarify whether an embryo created by IVF should be treated as a child‚ NBC News reported. Additionally‚ both parties questioned whether the "immunity" provided by the bills was too broad and would fail to protect women injured during IVF care.The Alabama House and Senate need to vote on a unified version of the bills before a bill can be sent to Republican Governor Kay Ivey's desk for a signature. The legislature is slated to vote on the legal protections on Wednesday. Following the full vote‚ Ivey is expected to sign it into law.Democratic Representative Adline Clarke stated that there are "major parts" of the legislation that "are still missing."Republican Representative Terri Collins‚ HB 237's chief sponsor‚ explained that the bill was created as a quick fix that would allow IVF clinics to reopen after some abruptly closed in response to the Supreme Court's ruling."We want the clinics to be open‚" Collins said. "This is what this is trying to accomplish."Jaylen Black‚ a spokesperson for Planned Parenthood Southeast‚ accused the lawmakers of failing to address the bigger issue of the Supreme Court's ruling.Black told NBC News‚ "While these bills aim to establish legal safeguards for IVF providers‚ it's important to recognize their limited effectiveness in addressing the full scope of the recent Alabama Supreme Court ruling‚ which deems embryos created through IVF to be 'minor children.'"Last month‚ several Alabama clinics paused IVF treatments after the court's ruling over fears that patients or staff could face criminal charges or damages.United States Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) recently introduced a resolution to "protect IVF." The proposed legislation condemns "any judicial ruling that would result in restricted access to fertility care." The bill currently has six cosponsors‚ all of whom are Republican.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Donald Trump is currently embroiled in four different criminal cases‚ one of which involves the question of presidential immunity. On Wednesday this week‚ the Supreme Court agreed to hear Trump’s case regarding whether or not he has presidential immunity when it comes to his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. “I think this is good news‚” says Glenn Beck. “Can Donald Trump be held now in a criminal case for his acts as president? The answer has always been no.” “That should have been stopped by Congress or the Supreme Court … as an official act‚” he explains. According to Glenn‚ if the justices rule that a president can do “an official act and then be held in criminal court‚” it will allow opponents “to prosecute any president that's running a second term.” Further‚ such a ruling would “completely gut our president.” The sitting president has full immunity as the chief executive‚ but in order to be imprisoned‚ “he would need to be impeached first and then removed from office‚” explains Stu Burguiere‚ adding that this isn’t in the Constitution but has long been the “guideline.” The SCOTUS hearing is set to take place in April‚ which at least would “slow down the Jack Smith trial on Donald Trump.” “I think Donald Trump is in the best position he’s been in since all this started‚” says Stu. To hear more‚ watch the clip below. Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling‚ thought-provoking analysis‚ and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

An illegal alien from Guatemala was arrested in Utah and charged with raping an 11-year-old girl‚ according to reports. Jonathan Estuardo Ruano Garcia‚ 26‚ was arrested early on Monday morning by Provo Police. Ruano Garcia was hit with felony charges of rape of a child‚ enticing a minor‚ and forgery.The forgery charge stemmed from Ruano Garcia reportedly possessing a Social Security card in his wallet at the time of being booked into the Utah County Jail that authorities said "did not appear to be authentic.""When asked about the Social Security card‚ Ruano Garcia admitted that it was fake and that he paid money for it when he came to the United States‚" police said. Around 11:15 p.m. on Sunday‚ a mother returned to her apartment in Provo‚ Utah. She reportedly saw an adult male leaving the apartment and made eye contact with the man before he "quickly walked away."According to arrest documents‚ the mother found her 11-year-old daughter completely naked in the hallway. "The 11-year-old girl told her mother that a male she met on the internet came to the apartment and had sex with her‚" the police report said‚ according to KSL. The Guatemalan national allegedly told police that he had sex with the girl for 20 to 30 minutes. Ruano Garcia claimed to have believed that the girl was 13 or 14 years of age. The illegal immigrant reportedly met the victim at a soccer game and continued communicating with the minor on social media‚ the Lehi Free Press reported. "Ruano Garcia admitted that the chats he had with the victim turned sexual and he sent naked photos of his penis on multiple occasions‚" the police report stated. Investigators used the social media interactions to help them quickly track down Ruano Garcia at his home in the nearby town of Lehi. Ruano Garcia is currently being held without bail at the Utah County Jail along with an Immigration and Customs Enforcement hold.ICE recently announced a staggering number of illegal immigrants who were arrested for sex crimes last month. Between Feb. 5 and 16‚ 2024‚ ICE arrested "275 unlawfully present noncitizen sex offenders during a nationwide law enforcement effort.""ICE is committed to protecting America through the arrest and removal of those who undermine public safety and disregard our laws‚" said ICE Deputy Director and Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Director Patrick J. Lechleitner. "Thanks to the around-the-clock efforts of our Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) officers‚ our communities are safe from 275 individuals who have demonstrated their willingness to commit sex crimes against innocent people‚ including children."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

I am as close to being black-pilled as maybe I have ever been‚ or at least since the darkest days of the COVID lockdowns.I want to be wrong about Donald Trump’s pending visit to the U.S. Supreme Court in April. I want to be wrong about the court’s likely decision‚ expected by the end of June. People whose opinions I respect think I am wrong. I will explain why I disagree with them.This is a political assassination through other means. We are not a nation of laws‚ and we never have been. We are a nation of political will‚ and we always will be. Laws do not enforce themselves. Rules do not enforce themselves.Some of the headlines you are seeing are making it sound as if the court is granting Trump's appeal in special counsel Jack Smith’s criminal case against the former president. In reality‚ the court granted Smith’s request “to treat the stay application as a petition for a writ of certiorari” concerning “whether and if so‚ to what extent‚ does a former president enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.”This means Trump's defense strategy of running out the clock through appeals has been circumvented by the Supreme Court. Recall that Smith at the end of last year tried to go to the Supreme Court for an immediate decision on whether a president has total immunity‚ essentially forever‚ no matter what‚ for whatever he did in office. I thought for sure Smith would not have made that motion unless he was confident how it would go. That’s why I was stunned on December 23 when the court told him it would not expedite a decision on the matter.Then Trump appealed the question of his perpetual immunity rendered by trial Judge Tanya Chutkan‚ the Obama acolyte who ruled against him‚ to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The panel of three judges unanimously ruled against Trump‚ noting that Bill Clinton faced penalties once he was out of office for the act of committing perjury while in the White House. In citing that precedent‚ they also told Trump not to even bother trying to appeal to the full court‚ and they only gave him six days to file an appeal. Clearly‚ they were trying to speed up the ultimate outcome‚ yet Trump appealed to the full court nonetheless to stretch out the clock.Moves and countermoves. That left Smith to file a motion once again on February 14 to go directly to the Supreme Court to answer the immunity question. And this time‚ the motion was granted. Oral arguments will take place April 22‚ and a ruling can happen in time to hang around Trump’s neck before Election Day. That will come no later than June 30‚ the end of the court's session. That still leaves the Spirit of the Age at least 128 days to put Trump in front of its D.C. star chamber.When the Supreme Court took up the Dobbs case in Mississippi‚ none of us seriously thought the eventual decision would be made only to mandate the status quo on baby murder. Something was going to be clarified‚ and so it will be with Trump and expediting the immunity decision at the request of his would-be hangman.Trump is likely going to lose.Most of the people I’ve talked to or whose opinions I respect agree with what I’ve laid out so far. But here’s where I diverge‚ and things are even worse for Trump than many people believe. Let's say the court doesn’t issue a ruling on this until June 30. Does that still make it too difficult for Trump’s enemies to bring him to trial on specific charges before Election Day?That’s a question you ask only if you are thinking of all this as a buttoned-down legal proceeding conducted with the intent of having a political outcome‚ when in fact it is a political proceeding with the intent of having a legal outcome. In other words‚ this is a political assassination through other means. The legal proceeding is only being used to make it look “official” to the normies. And if that is the case‚ there is no way that the people who have dreamed of putting Trump in prison for years will be given the green light to do so‚ only to not follow up because the so-called process has run out of time.Do we even believe our own talking points about who the left is and how it operates? Do you mean to tell me the folks who actually followed through with trying to take Trump off the ballot in multiple states are suddenly going to tuck tail and give up because of clerical overload? No‚ they're not going to do that. Especially with a “permission slip” in hand from the Supreme Court. They don't care if they need to gavel in the trial the morning of the election if that’s the direction Chief Justice John Roberts lets this go — and it appears that he will with this expedited process. Just like when he saved Obamacare not once but twice by redefining taxation and state exchanges beyond the definitions Obama’s own lawyers used to make their case. Just like when the leaker in the Dobbs case failed to surface despite his “investigation.” Roberts is in the process of putting his thumb on this scale‚ too‚ and it is highly unlikely that he would be wasting such an effort unless‚ as in the past‚ somebody on the right was about to get royally screwed.I predict Roberts will ultimately concoct the proverbial splitting of the baby. His court will pimp-slap Colorado harshly for attempting to take Trump off the ballot without any due process‚ and then he’ll have his quorum turn right around and do the same to Trump’s immunity case. All to make the case‚ like the institutionalist swamp creature he is‚ that America was “saved” from the worst instincts of both sides. Except one will have far greater political consequences than the other. Can you guess which one?