Our Top 10 Queen Albums list looks at the best Queen albums released during the band’s spectacular but short career. Before we begin‚ let’s just look at the band’s studio album discography. Queen’s first album‚ entitled Queen‚ was released in 1973. The band’s debut album was followed by Queen II in 1974. Queen’s third album‚ Sheer Heart Attack‚ was released in the same year. The album that turned Queen into a household name was released in 1975 and was entitled A Night at the Opera. Queen followed that magnificent record one year later‚ in 1976‚ with the cleverly titled album The post Top 10 Queen Albums appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

Catching and fighting Pal in the wild can be exciting. However‚ nothing compares to a cake slice and some appropriate lightning. Here is how to breed Relaxaurus Lux in Palworld. Palworld: How to breed Relaxaurus Lux Breeding Relaxaurus Lux‚ one of the most sought-after Pals in Palworld will require you a bit of exploring and catching. Don’t worry‚ though‚ you won’t need to walk too far from your original spawn point. First off‚ you will need to unlock and build a Breeding Farm. It will cost you 100 Wood‚ 20 Stone‚ and 50 Fiber and will be unlocked at level 19. Chop down trees and either pick up or mine Stones on the ground. To breed Relaxaurus Lux‚ you will need one Relaxaurus and one Sparkit. Remember that one needs to be male and the other female. Image: Pocketpair Relaxaurus Location in Palworld Image: Map Genie Relaxaurus can be found across the Sealed Realm of the Thunder Dragon region as well as the Ascetic Falls. Since Rela...

The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database‚ the only such database in existence‚ now contains over 1‚500 proven cases of election fraud. The sampling of cases vary from lone wolves stealing one vote to conspiracies that stole many votes‚ defrauding citizens and candidates of honest elections and sometimes changing the outcome of an election. (The Daily Signal is Heritage’s news and commentary outlet.) As the website states: The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database presents a sampling of recent proven instances of election fraud from across the country. Each and every one of the cases in this database represents an instance in which a public official‚ usually a prosecutor‚ thought it serious enough to act upon it. And each and every one ended in a finding that the individual had engaged in wrongdoing in connection with an election hoping to affect its outcome—or that the results of an election were sufficiently in question and had to be overturned. This database is not an exhaustive or comprehensive list. This database is intended to demonstrate the vulnerabilities in the election system and the many ways in which fraud is committed. We launched the database in 2017 with 1‚071 entries. We added 98 cases to the database in 2023 alone and are following several hundred other cases that are being investigated by local authorities. No case is added until and unless there is a conviction or a judicial or official finding that an individual or group of individuals engaged in wrongdoing in connection with an election. Here are some of the most recent cases that pushed the database above the 1‚500 mark: Let’s start with a local Democratic primary election in Bridgeport‚ Connecticut‚ between Joseph Ganim (the incumbent mayor and the party-endorsed candidate) and John Gomes (the challenger)‚ which was decided by 251 votes. Following the September 2023 election‚ videos surfaced showing Ganim supporters Wanda Geter-Pataky (a Democratic town committee member and the leader of Voting District 136) and Eneida Martinez (a candidate for City Council) illegally dropping off stacks of votes into various drop boxes. In overturning the election and ordering a new one‚ Superior Court Judge William Clark concluded that “the number of ballots at issue‚ brings the reliability of the primary into serious doubt.” He added‚ “The videos are shocking to the court and should be shocking to all the parties. To disregard the significant mishandling of ballots by partisans that were caught on video flouting the provisions of Connecticut law … endorse(s) this blatant practice of ballot harvesting.” A new primary election was held on Jan. 23‚ which Ganim won‚ and a new general election will be held Feb. 27. This is not the only example of ballot trafficking that was recently added to the database. In Arizona‚ Gloria Lopez Torres (a San Luis city councilwoman) and Nadia Lizarraga-Mayorquin were charged with illegally trafficking absentee ballots during the August 2020 primary election. Arizona law only permits family members and close relatives to return ballots. They both pleaded guilty to one count of ballot abuse‚ were sentenced to 24 months of probation‚ and were fined $2‚500 each. The violation of the law was so serious that Torres was barred from running for or being appointed to public office again.   Torres is also‚ unfortunately‚ not the only public official engaging in election fraud in our latest batch of cases. David Cole‚ a Republican member of the Alabama House of Representatives‚ was charged with falsely claiming he resided in Alabama’s 10th State House District during the 2022 primary and general elections despite living in District 4. To disguise his ineligibility‚ Cole entered into a $5-per-month lease at a home in District 10‚ which he never occupied‚ although he registered it as his voting address and had mail sent there. He also falsely claimed he had sold his District 4 house. While Cole’s crime came to light during his campaign‚ he was not charged until after the election‚ which he won by 973 votes. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 60 days in jail and three years of probation; agreed to resign from his legislative seat; and was ordered to pay $52‚885.79 in restitution‚ the salary he was paid as a state legislator. A judge ordered a new election to fill his seat. Christopher Coyle‚ the former Democratic candidate for Clark County‚ Indiana‚ clerk‚ and a former chairman of the Clark County Democratic Party‚ was charged with falsely claiming his residency in Clark County and voting there during the 2022 election. He filed a false report with the Clark County Clerk’s Office claiming he lived in Memphis‚ Indiana‚ despite having sold his home and having not updated his driver’s license or voter registration to reflect the fact that he was living in Louisville‚ Kentucky. He then voted in person in Sellersburg‚ Indiana‚ on Election Day. He admitted the conduct and entered into a pretrial diversion agreement. The charges were dropped once he successfully completed the program. We also added our first cases from the District of Columbia‚ which has not shown much interest in investigating allegations of election fraud. Five individuals—Renee Diggs‚ Jessica Miser‚ Eddie Bishop‚ Margaretta Sibert-Dean‚ and D.C. Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner Vanessa Rubio—were all fined by the D.C. Board of Elections for voting twice in the 2020 general election. Diggs‚ Miser‚ Sibert-Dean‚ and Rubio all voted in person both in Washington and Maryland‚ while Bishop voted in person in Washington and by absentee ballot in Maryland. Laughably‚ Rubio‚ an elected public official‚ claimed she thought her duplicate voting wouldn’t count because the district is not a state.   We also added 16 cases from North Carolina of aliens charged with falsely claiming to be citizens when registering to vote. George Ian Richardson‚ Soraya Paktiawal‚ Lurbyn Chirinos-Castro‚ Miriam Perez Robledo‚ Faustin Ngaruyinka‚ Jeffrey Hamilton‚ Miguel Angel Dominguez Martinez‚ Gessyca Eyene Jeaspautine Misse‚ Gloria Lopez‚ Odalinda Mondragon-Arroyo‚ Byron Benavides-Campos‚ Ikechukwu Augustine Okeke‚ Denis Javier Miranda‚ Fathy Ahmed Nasser‚ Jose Abraham Navarro‚ and Gabriela Guzman-Miguel all made false claims of citizenship. Despite the fact that such a violation of the law is a federal felony and grounds for an alien to be denied citizenship‚ each was given the opportunity to enter a pretrial diversion program for 12 months after admitting their conduct‚ and the charges were dropped upon successful completion of their respective programs. As the 2024 election draws near‚ let’s hope states prioritize implementing election reforms—like requiring an ID to vote and effectively maintaining accurate voter registration rolls—that are needed to ensure fair and honest elections‚ and then vigorously enforcing them‚ so Americans can feel confident casting their votes in the polls. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post Heritage’s One-of-a-Kind Election Fraud Database Hits 1‚500 Cases appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees has finally admitted what has been obvious for years: at least some of its employees support or are members of terrorist groups such as Hamas. Evidence provided by the Israeli government that show the relief agency’s employees participated in the horrific Oct. 7 terrorist attacks in Israel led the organization to “immediately terminate the contracts of these staff members and launch an investigation.” The evidence also forced the U.S. State Department to temporarily pause “additional funding” for the agency as well. This is largely symbolic‚ as current commitments will remain in effect. Moreover‚ simply delaying America’s generous payments to the agency will not send the strong signal needed to pressure it to reform.   There also might not be much money to pause. Knowing that the House of Representatives is skeptical of its funding and that the weight of evidence against the organization was growing‚ the Biden administration prioritized speeding its money out the door. Much of the money available for the relief agency is probably already in its bank accounts. The announced pause is likely designed to mollify Congress until attention shifts elsewhere. The State Department has a long history of tolerating the U.N. agency’s malfeasance. And this administration’s track record suggests that‚ once the news fades‚ efforts to “unpause” funding will begin—even if the problems continue. These problems are nothing new. The Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees has a history of employing individuals affiliated with Hamas. Over and over‚ the agency’s schools in the Middle East have used textbooks with extremist and antisemitic content. Photos and reports have repeatedly shown its classrooms displaying other materials that delegitimize Israel‚ denigrate Jews‚ and venerate martyrdom.   Such manifest bias was a key reason behind the Trump administration’s decision to suspend U.S. funding in 2018. Notwithstanding the agency’s tolerance for extremism—and despite clear evidence that some of its employees were members of Hamas and supported its goals—one of the Biden administration’s first decisions was to restore its funding. Big time. According to the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations‚ “In 2023 alone‚ the United States has contributed more than $296 million to UNRWA [the agency]. And the Biden administration has contributed nearly $1 billion since 2021.” Of course‚ Biden’s State Department said the renewed funding was contingent on the U.N. agency’s policing its employees and classrooms. But it did not enforce this expectation. Dollars continued to flow in the face of numerous reports of the agency’s violations by journalists‚ nongovernmental organizations‚ and even the European Union. Last year‚ the Geneva-based nongovernmental organization U.N. Watch reported numerous examples of “UNRWA’s gross and systematic violations of neutrality and other U.N. rules in their hiring of teachers and in their use of curricula inside UNRWA schools that constitute incitement to hatred‚ antisemitism‚ and terrorism.” Numerous reports over the years indicated that Hamas would place weapons and tunnels in or near agency schools and hospitals and even launch attacks from its facilities. Nonetheless‚ the organization would always profess surprise and condemn these revelations. The current conflict in Gaza has revealed the extent of the relief agency’s corrupt relationship with Hamas. According to Israeli Col. Elad Shushan‚ “There is not a UNRWA site—school‚ mosque‚ or kindergarten—in which we didn’t find weapons. None. One hundred percent.” There is no conceivable way that the vast majority of the agency’s employees did not know about this pervasive misuse of its schools and hospitals by Hamas. By failing to report such violations of its obligation to neutrality‚ these employees made the organization complicit. During the recent conflict‚ advocates have excused the agency‚ asserting that it is the best option to support Gazan civilians harmed by the war. But there is mounting evidence that Hamas is stealing aid meant to help civilians. Moreover‚ the relief agency has been accused of covering it up. And now‚ worst of all‚ its employees are accused of directly participating in the horrific terrorist attacks of Oct. 7 that murdered‚ raped‚ and tortured innocents—Americans as well as Israelis. As the recent announcement of a temporary funding pause implicitly admits‚ the Biden administration was wrong to resume funding. However‚ a temporary pause is woefully inadequate. The agency has a long record of sympathy for Hamas; employment of Hamas members; and vulnerability to extremism‚ antisemitism‚ and politicization. But the depth of this problem is only now becoming clear. This is not a situation of a few bad apples within the organization. According to The Wall Street Journal: Intelligence estimates shared with the U.S. conclude that around 1‚200 of UNRWA’s roughly 12‚000 employees in Gaza have links to Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad. … Two officials familiar with the intelligence said the UNRWA employees considered to have ties with militant groups were deemed to be “operatives‚” indicating they took active part in the organization’s military or political framework. The report said 23% of UNRWA’s male employees had ties to Hamas‚ a higher percentage than the average of 15% for adult males in Gaza‚ indicating a higher politicization of the agency than the population at large. Nearly half of all UNRWA employees—an estimated 49%—also had close relatives who also had official ties to the militant groups‚ especially Hamas‚ the intelligence reports said. Quite simply‚ this U.N. agency is fundamentally compromised and cannot be trusted to serve as a neutral humanitarian actor. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees is not part of the solution. It instead has contributed to the problem. Congress should ensure that all U.S. funding for this hopelessly compromised agency is ended immediately and permanently. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post US Should End‚ Not Pause‚ Funding for UN Aid Agency Tied to Hamas appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Defense Department’s latest annual “China Military Power Report” gets a lot right. It accurately identifies the scope of China’s global ambitions and many of the structural changes being implemented by Chinese leader Xi Jinping to make China the preeminent military power in Asia and the Pacific. Even so‚ the report appears to undersell the threat posed by China and what will be required from the U.S. to counter it. What the Report Gets Right The report focuses correctly on the extent of China’s military buildup and modernization program. In 2022‚ the Chinese navy continued to beef up what is already the world’s largest fleet‚ working on delivering its third aircraft carrier and third amphibious assault ship‚ as well as additional guided missile destroyers‚ cruisers‚ and frigates. Beijing’s navy will soon be able to conduct long-range precision strikes against land targets from both its submarine and surface combatants. The Chinese air force continues to modernize and produce increasingly advanced‚ domestically built manned and unmanned aircraft. Together with the Chinese navy’s air assets‚ it now constitutes the largest aviation force in the Indo-Pacific. Led by its fifth-generation fighter‚ the Ju-20‚ Beijing’s air force is on its way to becoming the largest in the world. Perhaps most worrying‚ the report documents that‚ over the last 12 months‚ China built 100 new nuclear weapons—making it the fastest growing nuclear power on the planet. Beijing is on track to numerically match the U.S. nuclear arsenal by 2032. The report also notes that China is deploying its growing military power in increasingly provocative ways. Over the last two years‚ it conducted over 280 coercive and risky air intercepts against the United States and its allies. Finally‚ the report documents the growing use of Chinese naval assets to intimidate and coerce fishing fleets operating in international waters—not only in the Western Pacific but as far afield as Latin America. All of this is done against the backdrop of an unprecedented number of air and maritime exercises in the waters and skies around Taiwan. What the Report Gets Wrong While these developments are all legitimate cause for concern‚ particularly for defense planners seeking to bolster America’s capabilities‚ the report errs by relying on China’s official defense budget topline of $230 billion. On its face‚ this number is a fraction of the $886 billion Congress just authorized for the U.S. defense budget. This comparison will invariably lead some observers to claim the U.S. military is three to four times more capable than China’s‚ but that isn’t necessarily true. As the paper acknowledges‚ China’s real defense budget is likely far higher: European think tanks have estimated that real Chinese defense spending is at least 30%-40% higher than the official budget. Numerous analyses have concluded the Chinese government excludes significant sums from the official figures to hide the extent of its military buildup. At the very least‚ we know that China’s budget does not include details on research and development spending—a spending bucket that accounts for more than $140 billion in the U.S. defense budget. To its credit‚ the Pentagon report does consider Beijing’s military-civil fusion development strategy‚ in which China leverages its civilian technology and industrial base to massively enhance the capabilities of its defense industrial base. Confusingly‚ the report does not attempt to account for either of these significant considerations in its treatment of China’s defense budget topline. The report also fails to account for differences in American and Chinese purchasing power. Simply put‚ defense spending goes a lot further in China than it does in the United States‚ because labor and material costs are lower in China. For example‚ Chinese military personnel earn only about one-fourth what American service members do. Confusingly‚ the report states that “Economic forecasters project that China’s economic growth will slow during the next 10 years‚ from about 3 percent in 2022 to around 4 percent in 2025.” Leaving aside the obvious math issue‚ economic growth of around 4 percent is more than enough for the world’s second-largest economy to continue growing its military spending. Earlier this year‚ Sen. Dan Sullivan‚ R-Alaska‚ revealed that an internal U.S. government estimate put the Chinese defense budget at roughly $700 billion. If this number is accurate‚ the Department of Defense should have included it in its report. Internally estimating the Chinese budget to be around $700 billion while telling Congress and the public that it is only $230 billion will create a massive disconnect between the U.S. government’s sense of the threat posed by China’s military spending and the public perception of it. During the Cold War‚ the Defense Department drew on its enormous quantitative and intelligence resources to accurately assess the Soviet defense budget. It should do so now‚ to better understand the actual Chinese defense budget and how it spends its financial resources in comparison with the United States. Because as worrying as this report is—it almost certainly underestimates the threat posed by China. This article was originally published by RealClearDefense and made available via RealClearWire. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post The Defense Department’s China Military Power Report: The Threat Is Worse Than Advertised appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Insanity Everywhere: Law and Order SVU Edition

This Mark Cuban Story is Too Good Not to Share

Austin Designer's Collaboration with Wrangler Takes Slings and Arrows over Cultural Appropriation

On Monday‚ the border crisis and Sunday’s Iranian proxy attack that killed three American soldiers dominated the White House press briefing and‚ amid over a dozen liberal reporters asking process questions on Iran and open-ended questions on the Senate border deal‚ there were a rare few who actually pressed the administration on their weakness in the Middle East and the border deal that has conservatives and the far-left incensed. Starting with the crisis at our doorstep‚ Franco Ordoñez of taxpayer-funded NPR chose Monday would be one of the rare days he’d make himself useful with this astute question to the National Security Council’s John Kirby: NPR's @FrancoOrdonez: “I want to ask about the border. Um‚ President Biden talked about shutting down the border on the basis of national security. Are there not steps that he could use under executive authority‚ to some measures‚ to kind of seal some of the border efforts?”… pic.twitter.com/bn2PQl9S1D — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 29‚ 2024 Kirby fumbled his way in much the same way his colleague Karine Jean-Pierre might: “He has said he’s — he’s willing to use executive measures and‚ um — and if he gets he gets the bill passed‚ if he gets border funding and — and — and — and includes those authorities‚ he’ll use those authorities.” Ordoñez tried again and asked‚ “why not‚” but all Kirby would commit to was the deal must pass to give Biden “the funding to be able to put in place border security measures that the President can utilize.” Far more reliable of a probing questioner‚ Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich picked up the baton from Ordoñez JACQUI TIME: “John‚ I just want to clarify two of your previous answers in this briefing. Are you suggesting‚ in response to the border question‚ that the President is withholding executive action on the border until he gets the money that is part of this supplemental?” John… pic.twitter.com/5ctBfI4g3t — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 29‚ 2024 Real Clear Politics’s Philip Wegmann was also locked and loaded with a simple yes or no question: “The terms of the Senate deal that are under discussion would give DHS expulsion authority if border encounters head an average of 4‚000 a day over the course of a week. Does the President consider that threshold of daily encounters a crisis?” “I’m not going to negotiate in public....You’re asking me about a specific provision that the — that you allege in the deal...We’re not going to negotiate here...what’s in and what’s not in this in this deal‚” he replied. Wegmann zoomed out to see if there would be “a number...with regard to border great crossings that the President would see as a crisis‚” but Kirby again punted other than to say Biden believes “there’s a crisis going on at the border and the numbers are too high”. During Jean-Pierre’s rotation‚ ABC’s Selina Wang pressed her from the left on “immigration advocates” (read: illegal immigration advocates) being “anger[ed]” by this “callous” and “unworkable” Senate deal about the border (click “expand”): WANG: This deal is angering immigration advocates. What’s being negotiated does not include anything to address the root problems of migration. It has nothing included to provide a pathway to citizenship for DREAMers‚ which is something that President Biden called for legislation proposed on his first day. So‚ why is the President okay with this? JEAN-PIERRE: So‚ we don’t — we don’t even have the text yet to what’s being‚ you know‚ what the bipartisan agreement is going to be‚ right? So‚ I don’t want to get ahead of that. I’m not going to dive into what’s in it and what’s not in it. Let’s see what the senators put forward in the text. I think that’s important to see. And one — once it’s out there‚ folks will take a look. We believe it’s going to be — it’s going to be tough but fair and it’s going to provide new enforcement tools. Obviously‚ that’s going to be important. Policy changes‚ it’s going to be important‚ but also resources. That’s what that’s what we believe. But we’re not going to get into what’s in it‚ what’s not in it? Let’s let the senators continue to do their negotiations and put forward this — the text. WANG: But we’re already seeing immigration advocates slam what’s being proposed —  JEAN-PIERRE: I understand. WANG: — as callous‚ as unworkable. So. how does the President respond to the message from some people that he’s going back on his campaign promise? JEAN-PIERRE: I understand. What I’m saying to you is that let’s see what the Senate bipartisan agreement is. Let’s let them put out the text. And then we can have that discussion on whatever it is that they — they want to look through and discuss. But right now‚ we believe this is the best way forward. A bipartisan agreement is the way forward in dealing with this immigration system and bipartisan agreement is what we need to deal with. What’s the challenges that we’re seeing at the border? That’s what we want to see‚ and that’s what the Senate is working towards.  The New York Times’s Michael Shear came next and also whacked the administration from the left‚ nothing that‚ “[b]ack in the winter of 2018 and the spring of 2019‚ President Trump vowed to shut down the border with Mexico using almost the identical language that the President used on Friday” and‚ back then‚ “[m]any‚ many‚ if not most‚ if not practically all Democrats called that xenophobic and even racist.” “Why shouldn’t people make the same conclusion about this President’s threat to shut down the entire border with Mexico‚” he asked. Jean-Pierre fumbled her way through in describing the “tough‚ but...fair” “agreement” that will have “new enforcement tools” (so‚ nothing to do with his question).  This led Shear to press even harder from the left‚ bemoaning that shutting down the border as Biden said this weekend would be “a total rejection of all people attempting to cross the border without — without a visa or without — without proper authorization‚ which you know‚ stands in contravention to decades of international and U.S. law that — that governs the movement of people around the globe and the refugees and asylum system.” Incredibly‚ this went on and on with the entire bout going on for more than four minutes. Shifting to Iran‚ USA Today’s Francesca Chambers gently stated the obvious seeing as how there had been over 160 prior drone and missile attacks on U.S. troops by Iranian-backed proxies: .@USAToday's @Fran_Chambers: “[D]oes the White House acknowledge that the previous retaliatory strikes that has taken in the region have been ineffective at protecting American troops?” John Kirby: “The strikes that we have taken in the past have definitely had an impact on… pic.twitter.com/uTdp1d03Eg — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 29‚ 2024 As for Heinrich‚ she had a litany of questions‚ including this zinger about Biden having previously muttered “don’t” to encapsulate the U.S.’s message to Iran and their proxies using drones to attack our soldiers: “So if it’s clear obviously‚ that ‘don’t’ didn’t work‚ does the President have any regret over not pushing‚ punching back harder in any of the prior responses that he’s taken to these proxy attacks on U.S. forces?” Kirby comically said he’d “push back on the idea that we didn’t push back harder” because “we have taken significant action against Iran‚ economically” and “additional and more aggressive steps to go after these groups” such as the Houthis in Yemen. “I mean‚ this idea that somehow we just‚ you know‚ whistle past the graveyard here and — and — and walked away from the challenge that Iran poses is — just isn’t borne out by the facts‚” he huffed. Heinrich had one last question‚ citing Congressman Michael Waltz (R-FL) as believing the administration’s weakness toward Iran has led to American “blood” being “on” their “hands”. For his part‚ Wegmann brought up comments from Congressman Michael McCaul (R-TX): .@PhilipWegmann: “You touched on this briefly in response‚ I think‚ to Jacqui’s question. But what is the President’s response to Republican critics who are of the mind that this attack was the result of perceived weakness? For instance‚ the chairman of the House Armed Services… pic.twitter.com/jzZgNoVDBz — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 29‚ 2024 To see the relevant transcript from the January 29 briefing (including Newsmax’s James Rosen calling out Jean-Pierre’s waffling on the border)‚ click here.

Trump’s unparalleled success in the polls has Democrats panicking‚ especially considering Biden’s support is waning by the day. Rumors have been circulating that Michelle Obama might take Grandpa Joe’s place in the upcoming election‚ but thus far‚ that’s all we’ve had to go on — rumors. However‚ the New York Post recently reported that there is indeed a plan afoot for Michelle to take over for Biden in the 2024 presidential race. Dave Rubin shares a post from Valuetainment: The article went on to say that “there is a plan to have Biden announce in May that he is not running and have the former first lady take the nomination without a primary vote during the Democratic National Convention in August.” Allegedly‚ this has been the plan for quite some time. According to an article written by New York columnist Cindy Adams‚ “In the summer of 2022‚ Michelle held a meeting in New York City with major hedge fund CEOs and told them‚ ‘I am running‚ and I am asking for your support.”’ “The Democrats know they have to do something‚ whether it's Gavin Newsom or Michelle Obama. They know they cannot run this walking potato for another four years‚” Sara Gonzales tells Dave‚ admitting that the prospect of Michelle running in the election “scares the hell out of [her].” Author and podcaster Michael Malice‚ however‚ is confident that Michelle 2024 is simply a “boomer fantasy.” “The idea that if Biden is incapacitated that she'd be the plan B is crazy‚” he says‚ adding that “she's never won any elected office‚ she has no political resume ... and the claim that everyone in the Democratic party who has paid their dues would just step aside for her is nuts.” If there were an actual plan for Michelle to take Biden’s place‚ “it wouldn't have leaked through Cindy Adams‚” he says. To hear more of Dave‚ Sara‚ and Michael’s conversation‚ watch the clip below. Want more from Dave Rubin?To enjoy more honest conversations‚ free speech‚ and big ideas with Dave Rubin‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.