Left’s dirty ‘lawfare’ against Trump

by DAVID FLINT – WITH a presidential election this year, polls are suggesting the return of Donald Trump, the greatest US president since Ronald Reagan. 

Such an event would be of singular importance to the free world, which desperately needs a real leader. 

In the face of unprecedented prosecutorial persecution Trump is demonstrating once again that he is a great fighter.

This is especially crucial to Australia which is probably at its most fragile, at least since the fall of Singapore.

Forget the Establishment commentariat view that Trump is “crazy”, or a “threat to democracy”.


The last thing we need is the apparent alternative ─ another term for the Manchurian president. Just consider Trump’s record.

During his first term, the Beijing-Moscow-Tehran-Pyongyang axis, and its terrorist clients, were on their very best behaviour.

The US border was secure against massive waves of crime-gang-controlled unverified illegal immigration that Biden has unconstitutionally imposed on the US. (A Stuart King was beheaded for less.)

Beijing was forced to abandon its breaches of trade law and massive theft of intellectual property.

In the face of climate catastrophism ideology that only enriches Beijing, Trump was the first global leader with the courage not only to declare that the climate emperor has no clothes, he withdrew the US from the Paris Accords.

In addition, not only did Trump stand out as a president who started no new wars, he destroyed ISIS, and brought peace to the Middle East through the Abraham Accords between Israel and Muslim States.

All this was achieved while he was undermined, as no president has ever been, by both an extraordinarily delinquent mainstream media, and an unscrupulous opposition that abandoned the civilised conventions that make the American Constitution work.

Now, in the face of unprecedented prosecutorial persecution, the weaponisation of the FBI and the Department of Justice, and politicised judges attempting to ban him from the ballot paper, Trump is demonstrating once again that he is a great fighter.

In brief, he is exactly the leader the free world needs. No previous president, at least since Reagan, and no likely candidate comes even close to him.


Sadly these days, the more likely a leader is to defend the fundamental principles of Western society, the more likely it is that he or she will attract the displeasure of the mainstream media.

The opposite is also true, which no doubt explains the record honeymoon accorded to the most incompetent and disastrous governments in Australian and US history.

Yet while media bias can have a short-term effect, this wears away over time. Thus Rasmussen, one of the more reliable US pollsters, finds that 60 per cent of likely voters think US news media bias is getting worse, up from 56 per cent in March.

They do not believe the media is giving enough coverage to the legal problems of President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter.

This is important, given that the presidential campaign now centres on plotting by the media and other elites to distract attention from Trump’s impressive record.

Instead, they have calculated that Trump can only be defeated by undermining him and criminalising his claim that the 2020 election was rigged.

But the finding in a recent, authoritative Heartland/Rasmussen poll that one in five mail-in voters admit to committing at least one kind of voter fraud during the 2020 election, Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was rigged is being vindicated.

It is crucial that the legal action brought by Texas, and supported by 17 States, is not forgotten as Trump’s enemies hope.


It centred on an irrefutable argument that radical changes to the electoral laws of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin were in breach of Article 1 of the US Constitution which expressly provides that such changes can only be made by the State legislature, or by Congress.

Even if these changes were not designed to make fraud easier (which clearly they were) they would still be unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court did not hear the case. In my opinion, the majority, understandably, hid behind the legal technicality that Texas did not have “standing” because it did not have sufficient legal interest to bring the case.

I believe that the true reason however was that Supreme Court had been terrorised by the grossest act of contempt ever recorded against the high court of a democratic country.

It is important to note that this contempt was not committed by a minor backbencher. It was committed by the person holding the office that is the equivalent in the UK, Canada, Australia or New Zealand to Her Majesty’s Leader of the Opposition.

The judges were terrorised, as anyone would be, by the threats enunciated with hate on the very steps of the Supreme Court by Democrat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price,” Schumer screamed before a baying mob.

And if the judges did not appreciate what he meant, he spelled it out: “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”


Could he have been clearer? Schumer was calling for the rule of law to be replaced by violent mob rule.

That no action was taken for contempt of court, as well as subsequent events, indicates that the judges were right to be wary.

In 2022, just as the abortion case, Roe vs Wade, was being reconsidered, mobs gathered threateningly, and with impunity, outside the homes of some of the judges. The authorities did not move to protect the judges, such has been the breakdown of law and order under the Biden administration.

While the judges’ timidity was understandable then, it will be impossible for them not to rule on attempts now to remove Trump from the ballot. If they do not, there would be a massive loss of confidence in the Court and in American institutions.

The American people, through the electoral process, must be left free to choose the president.

A failure to ensure this could well rank with the Court’s hitherto worst decision, Dred Scott vs Sandford (1857), which many believe to be the principal cause of the Civil War.PC

David Flint

Schumer’s violence-inducing rant…

MAIN PHOTOGRAPH: Democratic Party Senate Leader Chuck Schumer. (courtesy National Review)
RE-PUBLISHED: This article was originally published by The Spectator Australia on January 6, 2024. Re-used with permission.

3 thoughts on “Left’s dirty ‘lawfare’ against Trump

  1. “Donald Trump, the greatest US president since Ronald Reagan.”

    I know exactly how Donald feels: I’m the best actor since Mickey Mouse.

  2. US industry engaged Chinese business enterprise beforehand to produce product which the US regulated as below their stations in life, and by the way Chinese IP laws were firmer than the Wests. Alas spying and all those looking for commercial advantage to fill their R&D, education vacuous safe spaces now blame those who want to work. Competition is thick as thieves. Will Ai sort them out?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *