If you heard a commentator state that the reason why Special Counsel Jack Smith appears to be so desperate for his J6 trial of Donald Trump to proceed as speedily as possible on March 4‚ 2024 is because he want to obtain a conviction of Trump before the election for purely political reasons‚ it would be safe to assume that this analysis was given on NewsMax or perhaps OANN. However‚ what is shocking is the commentator in this case was CNN's legal analyst‚ Elie Honig‚ on Saturday's Smerconish. CNN has treated him as Eliot Ness who buys lunch at Subway like an everyday hero. Here is what Honig said to Michael Smerconish that casts strong aspersions upon the integrity of Jack Smith who has been treated by liberals‚ at least until recently‚ as some sort of no-nonsense nonpartisan: CNN’s @eliehonig: Jack Smith wants “Donald Trump convicted before the election” pic.twitter.com/I05htw5OmG — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) December 16‚ 2023 MICHAEL SMERCONISH: Do you agree with me that Smith and Judge Chutkan are acting based on the election schedule? ELIE HONIG: I do agree with you‚ Michael. And I think any fair-minded observer has to agree with that as well. Just look at Jack Smith's conduct in this case‚ the motivating principle behind every procedural request he's made has been speed‚ has been getting this trial in before the election. Let's take a couple examples. The trial date‚ the average federal conspiracy and fraud trial takes about a year and a half to two years between indictment and trial. In this case‚ we have dozens‚ hundreds of January 6 rioters caught on video straightforward cases they two were given about a year and a half to two years between indictment and trial. Jack Smith originally requested a trial date for Donald Trump a far more complex case five months out‚ he wanted a January trial it was set for two months later. So Donald Trump was being given far less time to prepare than other defendants. And the actions this week‚ Jack Smith won an argument on immunity in the district court and then went right to the Supreme Court. I think the right move‚ I think the smart move. The only reason you ask the Supreme Court to do that on an expedited basis is if you're racing against the clock and Jack Smith clearly is doing that here. Honig suggested Smith's "position really as a practical matter is I want Donald Trump convicted before the election." SMERCONISH: OK. I referred to the election as the Voldemort of the petition that he filed. Why not say that? Why not simply say there's an election on the horizon‚ and I'm afraid this guy's going to get away. HONIG: You will never hear either Jack Smith or Judge Chutkan utter the E word‚ election. They will not specifically say it. Instead they use this sort of euphemistic language about the need for resolution‚ that kind of thing. Here's why I think Jack Smith is not willing to do it. Two reasons‚ first of all‚ DOJ rules unwritten and written both say you are not supposed to do anything that could impact an election. In fact‚ you're supposed to affirmatively try not to take steps that might impact an election. And the second thing and I think Jack Smith is right about this is if he is to say‚ OK‚ judge‚ we really need to try this case before the election. Donald Trump is going to seize on that aggressively. He's going to say‚ see‚ folks‚ when I tell you this is political‚ Jack Smith is now admitted that he wants me tried before the election and that's political. So I think he's very wary of that. SMERCONISH: OK. So then evaluate the -- we agree‚ we agree that he is acting‚ Judge Chutkan is acting with an eye toward the election calendar. Now I want to hear Elie Honig assess the propriety of him doing exactly what he's doing. Because on one hand‚ you could say‚ well‚ he's being political. On the other hand‚ I guess you would say‚ Elie‚ like you probably back in the day‚ he's an aggressive prosecutor. He's worked the case up‚ he wants to get before a jury. HONIG: Right. I don't like the artifice here. I don't like the game playing the wordsmanship that we're seeing. I think Jack Smith ought to just come out and say it or not. Here's the arguments both ways. First of all‚ if Jack Smith is trying to get this case tried before the election‚ and he clearly is‚ look that is political. I mean‚ the counter argument would be‚ well‚ Jack Smith just wants the American voters to have resolution before they go to the ballot box. And I understand that. As a voter I would like to know. But here's the problem with that argument‚ Michael. Jack Smith doesn't just want to get this trial done and let the chips fall where they may and let the consequences be what they can be‚ he's the prosecutor. He believes this case. He wants this case‚ to result in conviction. And so‚ his position isn't just‚ well‚ I want this case tried before the election. His position really as a practical matter is I want Donald Trump convicted before the election. I have no problem with the first part of that it's his job to want and try to convict Donald Trump now that he's indicted. But the second part of that before the election‚ that's where it crosses the line to the political in my view. Smerconish himself at the conclusion of his show agreed with Honig that Jack Smith's desperation for speed reveals his political motivation: "Seven months from indictment to trial for Trump‚ two years for January 6th‚ other defendants‚ does that seem fair and equitable?"

NBC News has decided to join the NCAA‚ academia‚ and corporate retailers among the many institutions now complicit in the intentional erasure of women. Among the panel of Democratic women in Macomb County‚ Michigan featured on Meet The Press convened to discuss their reluctant support of Joe Biden‚ a trans woman.  Watch as the panel’s trans woman is coached into saying he’ll vote for Joe Biden‚ despite having deep reservations: ASHLEY MITSCH: I'm not going to vote for a Republican. I'm trans. I feel like that's almost‚ like -- it's almost like a death sentence. But when it comes to Democrats‚ I just don't really see anyone who really feels like they'll be a strong pick who is running.  KRISTEN WELKER: So are you saying that you at this point are planning to vote for president Biden‚ but reluctantly?  MITSCH: Very reluctantly.  It’s very subtle. No warning‚ Kristen Welker doesn’t make a big deal out of it- it’s just there. Dude in a women’s panel like it’s a normal thing.  I love everyone but I am not compelled to indulge everyone's psychoses‚ nor will I become a co-participant in the intentional erasure of women. We’re a few weeks removed from a Miss Universe which featured two confused men as contestants‚ one of which was placed in the Top 20‚ and nine months removed from an NCAA women’s swimming final won by someone who less than a year prior had competed as a man for the same university. And now‚ we get the trickle into an innocuous voter panel on a Sunday news show the week before Christmas- when‚ perhaps‚ fewer people are watching. Perhaps that was the intent all along. There are many who will point to conservative (or sane) reaction to this segment as the broader stoking of an ongoing culture war‚ but the fact is that we did not seek this culture war. And now NBC is complicit in foisting this culture war upon us. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned segment as aired on NBC’s Meet The Press on Sunday‚ December 17th‚ 2023: KRISTEN WELKER: As you just heard from Congresswoman Debbie Dingell‚ there are startling new warning signs for President Biden from Democratic voters in battleground Michigan. We went to Macomb County and spoke to a group of women who supported Mr. Biden in the last election‚ but are now reluctant to commit to supporting him again. The question for these Democrats is not Trump versus Biden- it’s will they show up or stay home?  A show of hands‚ who is decided on who they'll vote for in 2024?  (HANDS RAISE) Okay. So three out of five of you. Why are you still undecided?  JESSIE KELLY: Because I want the candidate that I vote for to earn my vote.  TERI BAZZI: I will probably agonize again once I'm in the ballot box about what to do‚ how do I do this?  ASHLEY MITSCH: I'm not going to vote for a Republican. I'm trans. I feel like that's almost‚ like -- it's almost like a death sentence. But when it comes to Democrats‚ I just don't really see anyone who really feels like they'll be a strong pick who is running.  WELKER: So are you saying that you at this point are planning to vote for president Biden‚ but reluctantly?  MITSCH: Very reluctantly.  WELKER: Are you going to vote for president Biden again? JACKIE KELLY-SMITH: Yes.  WELKER: Why?  KELLY-SMITH: I may not be as enthusiastic about him as a candidate‚ but I am by some of the things that he's done. Reducing insulin to $39. Also‚ finally repairing our infrastructure‚ and the American Care Act. I mean‚ it’s a lot of things he’s done.  SHELLY WHITEHEAD: There's no way that I'm going to vote Republican‚ but reluctantly‚ yes‚ I will vote Biden‚ because...  WELKER: Why reluctantly?  WHITEHEAD: I don't -- I really don't agree with his dealings with the Middle East right now. Also his age.  WELKER: Jessie‚ what about you? Would you support a third-party candidate or consider supporting a third-party candidate?  KELLY: It would depend on who that candidate is. However‚ I don't think that a two-party system is working for America anymore.  WELKER: And Teri‚ would you consider working for a third party?  BAZZI: I don't know. I don’t know. I feel as- I feel compelled to‚ but I really feel as though my vote will be just wasted and my vote counts.  WELKER: Shelly‚ what about you?  WHITEHEAD: The power. Yeah. That’s the problem. WELKER: How do you see a third party?  WHITEHEAD: As a dream‚ but not a reality. I mean‚ in my ideal world I see it as -- as a party that is truly for the people‚ by the people‚ and I don't see people having that power-  that respect.  WELKER: Let me follow up with you on that‚ Jackie. Are you concerned that people are going to stay at home and not vote in 2024? What are you hearing from the community around you?  KELLY-SMITH: Pretty much what I said. That they're not enthusiastic about either candidate‚ but they don't want one or the other to get in. So they’re gonna vote against someone more so than voting for someone.  WELKER: Shelly‚ what are you hearing? Are you concerned that people are going to stay home?  WHITEHEAD: I am concerned people are going to stay home.  MITSCH: There are a lot of people who I know who are just completely checked out of the game. It feels like it's already lost. It doesn't feel like we're getting the progressive change that we were all sort of promised.  WELKER: Where does the economy fit into how you are viewing 2024? How do you feel about the economy?  WHITEHEAD: I mean‚ I don't feel great. I was -- today even more shocked because sometimes I think I put my head in the sand with the economy. Um. I don't like my car. So I was like‚ oh‚ maybe I'll just get a new car and I saw these car rates and I’m like‚ okay. I'm not getting a new car.  KELLY-SMITH: Our economy‚ I think‚ is better than what it has been. Is everything affordable? No. Everything is going up quicker than our checks are.  Right WELKER: If you could come up with one word to describe President Biden what would it be? And I'll start with you.  BAZZI: Tired.  MITSCH: One word‚ he just seems out of it‚ honestly.  KELLY: Status quo.  KELLY-SMITH: Caring.  WHITEHEAD: Honestly‚ it doesn't have to do with politics‚ family. I think he cares a lot about his family.  

The ice world is revealing its secrets.

Welcome to the second video in my series comparing the Royal Enfield Interceptor 650‚ vs the Triumph Bonneville‚ vs the Moto Guzzi V7. A couple years ago I made a video of my first impressions riding an Interceptor 650. Now that I own one‚ I realize that I got a few things wrong! Today I want ... The post Royal Enfield Interceptor 650: What I Got WRONG appeared first on YouMotorcycle.