Democrat supporters are leaving the liberal party en masse. But now, this one defection might be the biggest one yet.

And a top Clinton advisor just betrayed the Harris campaign and accused her of something horrific.

In a striking condemnation of the media’s handling of the recent 2024 presidential debate, Mark Penn, a former top adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton, voiced serious concerns over what he described as a “rigged” debate in favor of Democratic candidate Kamala Harris.

Speaking on the John Solomon Reports podcast, Penn pointed a finger directly at ABC News, accusing them of skewing the debate against former President Donald Trump and showing blatant favoritism toward Vice President Harris. This revelation adds fuel to an already raging fire surrounding media bias in the 2024 election and highlights the growing distrust many Americans have in establishment news outlets.

During the debate, moderated by ABC’s David Muir and Linsey Davis, it became glaringly apparent to many observers that Trump was held to a different standard than his opponent. Trump, known for his no-nonsense and unapologetic style, was constantly interrupted, pressed, and “fact-checked” on many of his accusations and policy statements.

In contrast, Harris was allowed to skate through the evening with little to no scrutiny of her own statements. This stark imbalance left many wondering whether the moderators were truly impartial or if they were actively working to shield the Democratic candidate from tough questioning.

Penn did not mince words, calling for an internal investigation at ABC News to determine whether the debate was rigged from the outset. “I actually think they should do a full internal investigation, hire an outside law firm. I don’t know how much of this was planned in advance,” Penn said.

His comments reflect a deepening suspicion among political commentators and voters that mainstream media is working in concert with Democratic campaigns to undermine Trump’s chances in the 2024 election.

Trump has long been a vocal critic of the media, often labeling them the “enemy of the people” for their overt bias and unrelenting hostility toward his presidency and candidacy. The 2024 debate only reaffirmed what Trump and his supporters have been saying for years—that the mainstream media is working hand in hand with the Democratic establishment to block his return to the White House.

ABC News’ moderators were notably more aggressive in pressing Trump for answers while allowing Harris to evade critical questions, feeding the perception of a stacked deck. Trump made this clear in his post-debate remarks, declaring that he would not participate in any further debates if the format remained as lopsided as it was.

Even CNN’s Jake Tapper, hardly a Trump supporter, acknowledged that Kamala Harris dodged many of the debate’s most critical questions, further proving that Trump’s complaints about the debate’s unfairness were not unfounded.

Despite the seemingly “three against one” nature of the event, Trump emerged as the winner in the eyes of many, including undecided voters. A post-debate poll from Reuters showed that Trump had a stronger showing than Harris, gaining significant support from independents and those still on the fence.

This result flies in the face of the media’s clear attempt to cast Harris as the victor, illustrating the enduring strength of Trump’s message and his connection with the American people.

Penn’s call for an independent investigation into ABC News’ handling of the debate is not just about this one event. It speaks to a larger problem of media bias that has plagued American politics for years. As Penn explained, the suspicion surrounding the debate is “quite high,” and a thorough review of internal communications at ABC—texts, emails, and instructions given to moderators—should be conducted by an independent third party.

“What the situation demands is transparency and accountability,” Penn stated. “If the referees have their finger on the scale, it’s harder to break through and overcome.”

In a political environment where every decision matters, especially in the lead-up to an election as pivotal as 2024, media bias has the potential to dramatically alter the course of American democracy. When news organizations abandon their responsibility to remain neutral and instead become advocates for one side, the American people lose faith in the democratic process.

This erosion of trust in the media was a major theme during Trump’s first term, and it continues to be an issue in his second campaign. Trump’s supporters are no strangers to seeing their candidate unfairly maligned and attacked by the press, yet they remain resolute in their belief that Trump is the one leader capable of taking on the establishment and restoring fairness to the system.

Kamala Harris, currently Vice President under Joe Biden, has benefited immensely from a mainstream media that has treated her with kid gloves throughout her political career. Despite her lack of accomplishments and dubious record as California’s attorney general, Harris has been propped up as the future of the Democratic Party, with glowing profiles and puff pieces that would make any politician jealous.

As Penn pointed out, Harris has succeeded in convincing some Americans that she represents “change,” even though she’s been an integral part of an administration that has overseen unprecedented inflation, rising crime, and chaos at the southern border. The media has largely ignored her failures and missteps, choosing instead to focus on her identity and her role as a “historic” candidate.

But as Trump and his campaign have made clear, Harris is not the leader the country needs—and her policies, if ever fully enacted, would spell disaster for America’s working families.

Penn also highlighted one of Harris’s most radical positions: her support for taxpayer-funded s*x change operations for prisoners and her call to defund ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

These positions, documented in her response to an ACLU survey, expose just how out-of-touch Harris is with mainstream American values. As Penn advised, Trump’s campaign would do well to distribute this survey to every voter, showing just how extreme Harris’s positions truly are.

As the 2024 election draws nearer, the stakes couldn’t be higher. With a biased media openly working to undermine Trump and prop up Kamala Harris, the battle ahead will be fierce. But if there’s one thing Trump has proven, it’s that he’s a fighter. Despite the media’s best efforts to paint him as a villain, Trump remains the candidate of the people, and his message of economic prosperity, national security, and putting America first resonates across the country.

Mark Penn’s call for an investigation into ABC News should not be ignored. The American people deserve to know if their media is manipulating events to influence the outcome of an election. The media’s role is to report the news fairly, not to be a cheerleader for one candidate while tearing down another. As Penn said, “General media coverage has been fairly laughable,” but the consequences of that bias are no laughing matter.

The 2024 election will be a referendum not just on Biden and Harris’s failed policies, but on the integrity of the media and the entire political system. Trump’s supporters understand what’s at stake, and they’re prepared to stand with him, no matter how hard the establishment tries to stop him. The media may have their finger on the scale, but with Trump leading the charge, the American people have the power to restore balance and fairness to the country.

The media’s bias in the Trump-Harris debate is just the latest chapter in a long history of the establishment trying to block Trump’s path to the White House. But as Mark Penn rightly pointed out, this cannot go unanswered. The American people deserve transparency, and ABC News must be held accountable for its actions. Trump’s ability to fight through this bias and emerge stronger speaks volumes about his resilience and his deep connection with the American people.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics for all of your news needs.

Trump’s campaign is heating up while Harris’ is losing steam. And Trump might have just put the final nail in the coffin.

Because he made a bold promise in a swing state that could change the whole election.

During a recent campaign speech in Tucson, Arizona, Donald Trump laid out a transformative economic plan that could reshape the American workforce. And in a bold new campaign promise, he vowed to eliminate taxes on overtime pay if he wins the presidency in November, a pledge that has the potential to boost the take-home pay of millions of hardworking Americans.

With this initiative, Trump continues to position himself as the champion of the working class, standing in stark contrast to the Biden-Harris administration, which has burdened the country with excessive taxation and inflationary policies.

Speaking before an energized crowd, Trump made it clear that Washington has long ignored those who contribute extra hours to the economy—the men and women who work tirelessly through overtime.

“The people who work overtime are among the hardest working citizens in our country, and for too long, no one in Washington has been looking out for them,” Trump declared to thunderous applause. “As part of our additional tax cuts, we will end taxes on overtime.”

Trump: "I'm also announcing that as part of our additional tax cuts we will end all taxes on overtime." pic.twitter.com/Na0R6ZAerM

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) September 12, 2024

This policy proposal directly addresses a major concern for millions of Americans who rely on overtime to make ends meet, especially during times of economic hardship. Under the Biden administration, these workers have faced punitive taxes on their additional earnings, reducing the incentives to take on extra hours.

Trump’s plan would change that, allowing workers to keep more of what they earn, which would not only benefit families but could also stimulate economic growth by putting more money back into the pockets of consumers.

Trump’s economic policies have always centered around the belief that prosperity comes from empowering individuals rather than taxing them into submission. His tax cuts during his first term revitalized the economy, lowered unemployment, and increased wages across the board.

By eliminating taxes on overtime pay, Trump is reaffirming his commitment to a pro-worker agenda, one that values productivity and rewards hard work, rather than stifling it with burdensome taxes.

According to Trump, the proposed overtime tax cut has garnered strong approval from economists, many of whom believe it could help create an entirely new workforce. “That gives more people an incentive to work,” Trump stated confidently during his speech, outlining how the removal of taxes on overtime would encourage more Americans to seek additional employment or stay longer in their current roles.

In the midst of rising inflation, sluggish job growth, and economic uncertainty under Biden, this plan could offer a significant boost to both workers and businesses. Employers would likely see an increase in productivity, while workers would have more motivation to take on extra shifts or stay late, knowing that their efforts won’t be punished by Uncle Sam.

This policy aligns with Trump’s long-standing focus on reducing government interference in the lives of everyday Americans. As he continues to draw sharp contrasts between his economic vision and that of the current administration, it is clear that Trump’s plan would provide much-needed relief for working families who have been suffocated by Biden’s high-tax agenda.

Trump’s choice to announce this major policy in Arizona was no coincidence. Arizona has been a crucial battleground state, and Trump is keen to reclaim it after Biden’s narrow victory in 2020. Historically, Arizona has leaned Republican in almost every presidential election since World War II.

However, demographic changes in recent years, fueled by an influx of transplants from blue states and shifting suburban voting patterns, have complicated the GOP’s dominance.

Still, Republicans outnumber Democrats in the state, and a third of voters are registered as independents, making Arizona a critical battleground for both parties. Trump’s decision to focus on policies that directly benefit the working class is a smart play to win over these independent voters, many of whom are disillusioned with the economic mismanagement of the current administration.

His running mate, Ohio Senator JD Vance, recently visited Phoenix, joining Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, at a major event in a predominantly Republican area. The GOP’s ability to energize voters in key states like Arizona will be pivotal in determining the outcome of the election.

In addition to his promise to eliminate taxes on overtime pay, Trump has also vowed to eliminate taxes on tips. This policy is aimed at service industry workers who often rely on tips to make a living but see their hard-earned income siphoned away by federal and state tax collectors. By ending this practice, Trump is sending a clear message: He stands with those who work hard for every dollar they earn.

The Harris campaign, clearly feeling the pressure, was quick to copy Trump’s promise to eliminate tip taxes, but the reality is that Harris’s record on tax policy speaks volumes. As vice president, she has supported and enabled an administration that has done nothing but raise taxes and increase regulations on businesses and individuals alike. The Harris-Walz team may talk a good game now, but their credibility on tax relief is paper-thin.

The contrast between Trump’s tax policies and the disastrous economic stewardship of the Biden-Harris administration could not be starker. Since taking office, the Biden administration has overseen record inflation, skyrocketing gas prices, and economic stagnation that has hurt working families across the country.

The administration’s obsession with climate change regulations, along with its failure to address rising energy costs, has made life harder for average Americans, all while pushing for tax increases that have crippled small businesses.

Under Biden’s leadership, the economy has been in freefall, and working-class Americans have borne the brunt of this mismanagement. By targeting overtime and tips, Biden’s tax policies have hit the very people who can least afford it. And let’s not forget the disastrous spending bills, laden with pork and progressive pet projects, which have only worsened the national debt.

The Harris-Walz ticket has done little to distance itself from these catastrophic policies. Despite their sudden claims of support for tax cuts on tips, their economic plans remain deeply rooted in the same big-government, high-tax philosophy that has crippled the American economy for the past several years.

Donald Trump’s promise to end taxes on overtime and tips is part of a larger vision for restoring economic prosperity to the country. His first term was marked by record economic growth, low unemployment, and tax cuts that benefited businesses and workers alike. Trump’s policies provided the foundation for a booming economy, only to be undone by the reckless spending and mismanagement of the Biden administration.

Trump understands that hard work should be rewarded, not penalized, and his new tax plans reflect that belief. He continues to champion policies that benefit everyday Americans, especially those in blue-collar industries and service jobs.

With this new initiative, Trump is positioning himself as the leader who will rebuild the American economy from the damage inflicted by the current administration.

Donald Trump’s latest policy proposal to eliminate taxes on overtime pay is a game-changer for the American worker. It underscores his commitment to empowering everyday citizens and putting more money into the pockets of those who earn it.

As the 2024 election draws nearer, the contrast between Trump’s pro-worker, pro-growth agenda and the failed economic policies of the Biden-Harris administration will be a central issue for voters.

Arizona, a key battleground state, could play a crucial role in deciding the future of the nation. Trump’s focus on economic policies that benefit working families, alongside his steadfast commitment to lower taxes and less government interference, positions him as the candidate who will restore America’s economic might.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Radical Left hates Trump and wants to see him locked up. That’s why they are prosecuting him with everything they can.

But now, Trump has received a massive court win that has shaken the Democrat party.

In yet another blow to the left’s ongoing crusade against former President Donald Trump, a Fulton County judge in Georgia dismissed two criminal charges against Trump on Thursday, ruling that state prosecutors overstepped their legal authority.

This ruling, handed down by Judge Scott McAfee, is a significant victory for Trump, as it marks the defeat of five of the original 13 charges brought against him in the highly controversial indictment filed by District Attorney Fani Willis in August 2023.

Judge McAfee’s decision struck down two key charges—Count 15, Conspiracy to commit filing false documents, and Count 27, Filing false documents—both of which were leveled against Trump in a case that has been plagued with overreach, political motivations, and legal loopholes from the start.

In his ruling, Judge McAfee emphasized that state prosecutors lacked the authority to file the charges against Trump. He cited a U.S. Supreme Court decision that “preempts the State’s ability to prosecute perjury and false filings in a federal district court.”

This constitutional principle protects individuals from state overreach in cases where federal jurisdiction takes precedence, and the dismissal of these counts serves as a reminder that state prosecutors, particularly politically motivated ones like Fani Willis, cannot simply run roughshod over the law.

BREAKING: Judge Scott McAfee strikes three counts from the Fulton election interference case, citing the Supremacy clause to the Constitution. The counts relate to alleged false statements made in federal court pic.twitter.com/7PRRdaEdys

— Tamar Hallerman (@TamarHallerman) September 12, 2024

Judge McAfee ruled that “Counts 14, 15, and 27 must be quashed.” While Trump was not personally charged with Count 14, Criminal attempt to commit filing false documents, the dismissal of Counts 15 and 27 represents a major win for the former president.

These counts were central to the narrative Willis attempted to craft, one that painted Trump as engaging in a so-called conspiracy to file false documents—a charge that has now been thoroughly debunked in court.

This ruling means that Trump has now successfully defeated five of the original 13 charges, including three earlier counts that were dismissed: Count 5, Solicitation of violation of oath by public officer; Count 28, Solicitation of violation of oath by public officer; and Count 38, Solicitation of violation of oath by public officer. In short, the case against Trump is falling apart.

From the beginning, it was clear that Fani Willis’s indictment of Trump was not about justice—it was about politics. The timing of the charges, the nature of the accusations, and the fact that they have now been dismissed one by one all point to the same conclusion: this was a coordinated effort to target Trump in the hopes of derailing his political future.

Willis, a known Democrat, filed the charges against Trump in August 2023, just as the former president was gearing up for another potential run for office. The charges were clearly intended to weaken Trump’s standing in the eyes of the American public, but this recent ruling by Judge McAfee proves that the legal case against Trump was built on shaky ground from the start.

The indictment itself, which included charges of racketeering under Georgia’s RICO Act, as well as various counts of conspiracy and false statements, was overly ambitious and reflected Willis’s willingness to stretch the law in order to ensnare Trump. The fact that five of these charges have already been quashed raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the entire case.

Steve Sadow, Trump’s lead attorney in Georgia, underscored the importance of this victory, stating, “President Trump and his legal team in Georgia have prevailed once again. The trial court has decided that counts 15 and 27 in the indictment must be quashed/dismissed.”

This is just the latest example of Trump’s legal team successfully defending against the relentless and often frivolous legal attacks that have been launched against him since he left office.

Of course, the mainstream media has been complicit in this witch hunt from the beginning. Rather than report on the legal facts, media outlets like CNN, MSNBC, and The Washington Post have gleefully spread misinformation about Trump’s legal battles, portraying him as guilty before the facts were even established.

This recent victory in Georgia, however, is unlikely to get the same breathless coverage from these outlets as the initial indictment did. The media’s obsession with tearing Trump down at every turn has been evident for years. They have played a key role in amplifying every baseless accusation and overblown narrative crafted by Trump’s political enemies.

Despite their best efforts, Trump continues to fight back. The dismissal of these charges in Georgia is not just a victory for Trump, but a victory for the rule of law and a reminder that political prosecutions should never be tolerated in America.

The establishment media and the radical left may want to see Trump fail, but time and again, the courts are proving that their baseless legal attacks are crumbling under scrutiny.

Though Trump has now defeated five of the original charges, several charges still remain. These include:

Count 1: Violation of the Georgia RICO Act
Count 9: Conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer
Count 11: Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
Count 13: Conspiracy to commit false statements and writings
Count 17: Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
Count 19: Conspiracy to commit false statements and writings
Count 29: False statements and writings
Count 39: False statements and writings

While the remaining charges are still pending, the collapse of five counts demonstrates that Willis’s indictment is deeply flawed. The remaining charges are similarly built on shaky legal grounds, and Trump’s legal team is confident that they, too, will be defeated.

The Georgia RICO charge, for instance, is the centerpiece of Willis’s indictment, but it is an incredibly broad and aggressive charge that is often used to prosecute organized crime—not political disputes. Applying such a charge in this case is a massive overreach that demonstrates the extent to which Willis is willing to stretch the law in order to target Trump.

While Trump’s legal battles may dominate the headlines, the bigger picture is that these politically motivated prosecutions are part of a broader effort to stop him from running for office again. The radical left and their allies in the media know that Trump remains incredibly popular with everyday Americans, and they will stop at nothing to try to prevent him from returning to the White House.

But Trump’s victories in court show that the American legal system still has safeguards against political overreach. As these baseless charges fall apart one by one, it becomes clearer that Trump has been the target of a coordinated smear campaign designed to take him down, not based on facts or the law, but on political ideology.

The establishment fears Trump because he represents the will of the people. He is not beholden to the swamp, and that makes him a threat to the entrenched interests in Washington, D.C. That is why they are trying so hard to block him, but their efforts are failing.

Thursday’s ruling is a major victory for Donald Trump and a devastating blow to the politically motivated prosecution being spearheaded by Fani Willis. The dismissal of two more charges proves that the case against Trump is unraveling, and his legal team is continuing to expose the overreach and hypocrisy of the left.

As the legal battles rage on, one thing is clear: Trump remains resilient, and the American people are watching closely as the truth continues to come to light.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Kamala Harris lies all the time when addressing America. But this time, she has taken it too far.

And Harris was caught in a shocking lie that has left even her supporters stunned.

During Tuesday night’s debate, Vice President Kamala Harris blatantly lied about her position on gun confiscation, yet the establishment media — with ABC News moderator David Muir at the helm — allowed her to get away with it.

Harris claimed she has no intention of taking away Americans’ firearms, but her record shows otherwise. The fact that she was not challenged on this deceitful claim exposes the media’s clear bias against Donald Trump and their determination to protect Harris at all costs.

When pressed by former President Donald Trump, who correctly pointed out her past support for gun confiscation through mandatory buyback programs, Harris tried to cover her tracks. She responded, “Tim Walz and I are both gun owners. We’re not taking anybody’s guns away.” But this is the same Kamala Harris who, during her 2019 presidential campaign, openly supported the idea of mandatory gun buybacks. Back then, she stated, “I would support a mandatory buyback of assault weapons. This is what the American people want.”

In 2020, ABC's David Muir & Joe Biden called Kamala Harris out for wanting to issue an Executive Order to take away people's guns.

Last night, Muir sat there and let Kamala lie and say that she wasn't going to take anyone's guns away. pic.twitter.com/aDt2ZN3spu

— Media Research Center (@theMRC) September 11, 2024

Harris’s sudden change in rhetoric during the debate — claiming to be a staunch defender of gun rights because she owns a firearm — is a transparent political ploy. Harris’s ownership of a gun is not the issue; her support for taking guns away from law-abiding Americans is. She can’t claim to protect Second Amendment rights while advocating for policies that directly infringe upon them.

Trump, as always, cut to the heart of the matter when he responded, “She is destroying our country. She has a plan to defund the police. She has a plan to confiscate everybody’s guns. She has a plan to not allow fracking in Pennsylvania or anywhere else.” He accurately exposed Harris’s true agenda — an agenda that the establishment media refuses to report on truthfully.

The media’s treatment of Kamala Harris during the debate is just another example of how the mainstream press is actively working to shield her and other Democrats from scrutiny. When Harris claimed Trump was “lying” about her gun confiscation position, moderator David Muir didn’t bother to fact-check her or challenge her statement. This blatant media bias isn’t a one-off occurrence — it’s a pattern that has persisted throughout Trump’s political career.

From the moment Donald Trump entered the political arena, the media has been obsessed with smearing his name, downplaying his accomplishments, and amplifying every misstep of his administration.

In contrast, they have bent over backward to protect Kamala Harris, despite her clear policy failures and inconsistencies. Harris’s dishonesty about her stance on gun confiscation is a prime example of how the media covers for her.

Had Trump or any other conservative made such a blatant lie on the debate stage, the media would be up in arms, running 24/7 coverage on how this is “yet another example” of the supposed dishonesty of Republicans. But when Harris lies — particularly about an issue as important as gun rights — the media remains silent.

Harris’s attempt to claim that she doesn’t support gun confiscation contradicts her previous statements on the matter. During the 2019 Democratic primary debates, Harris was pressed on her support for a mandatory gun buyback program, a policy that would effectively amount to gun confiscation.

Former Vice President Joe Biden even pushed back against her at the time, pointing out that such a program would be unconstitutional. Harris’s response? “Yes, we can,” she said, brushing off Biden’s concerns with her characteristic flippant attitude.

Let’s be clear: a mandatory buyback program is not voluntary. It’s government-sanctioned confiscation, plain and simple. The idea that the federal government can force American citizens to give up their lawfully owned firearms should be alarming to anyone who values the Second Amendment. Harris’s attempts to dance around her past statements show her willingness to say anything to gain political favor, even if it means lying to the American people.

This isn’t just a political issue — it’s a fundamental constitutional issue. The right to bear arms is enshrined in the Second Amendment of the Constitution, and any attempt to undermine that right should be taken seriously. Yet Harris and her allies in the media continue to downplay the significance of her past support for gun confiscation.

Unlike Kamala Harris, Donald Trump has been a staunch defender of Americans’ Second Amendment rights throughout his presidency. Under Trump’s leadership, we saw an administration committed to protecting law-abiding gun owners from overreaching government mandates.

Trump understands what Harris and the Democrats fail to grasp — that gun ownership is not just a right, but a fundamental safeguard of personal freedom.

Trump’s criticism of Harris during the debate was spot on. He rightly pointed out her plans to defund the police, her desire to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights, and her hostility toward energy independence, including fracking. Harris represents the worst of Democratic overreach, and her policies would only lead to further erosion of American freedoms.

The difference between Trump and Harris could not be more stark. While Trump fights for the rights of everyday Americans, Harris is more concerned with pandering to the far-left wing of her party. She may own a gun herself, but she has no problem supporting policies that would make it harder for law-abiding citizens to exercise their constitutional rights. The establishment media, predictably, refuses to call her out on this hypocrisy.

The media’s failure to hold Harris accountable for her statements is part of a broader effort to discredit Trump at every turn. The establishment media despises Trump because he refuses to play by their rules. They cannot control him, and that terrifies them. From day one, they have done everything in their power to undermine his presidency, twist his words, and downplay his achievements. Meanwhile, they prop up flawed candidates like Harris, turning a blind eye to their policy failures and inconsistencies.

But the American people see through the media’s bias. They know that Trump represents a movement that values freedom, personal responsibility, and limited government. They also know that Harris and the Democrats are pushing a radical agenda that seeks to dismantle those very principles.

The establishment media’s constant attacks on Trump are not just about him — they’re about what he represents. Trump is a threat to the status quo, and the media will stop at nothing to hinder him. Harris, on the other hand, is a product of that status quo, and the media will do everything they can to protect her, even if it means ignoring her lies and pretending her policies aren’t a threat to the American way of life.

Kamala Harris’s lie about her position on gun confiscation during the debate is just the latest example of her dishonesty and the media’s complicity in covering for her. The establishment media hates Trump because he stands up to them, and they will do everything in their power to block him from returning to the White House.

But despite their efforts, Trump continues to resonate with the American people because he fights for their freedoms, including their Second Amendment rights.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Democrats across the nation continue to make the lives of their constituents worse. But now, people are pushing back.

And a Democrat representative has been betrayed by his own supporters because of horrific liberal policies.

Rep. Jonathan Jackson (D-IL), son of civil rights icon Jesse Jackson, recently found himself at the center of a heated town hall meeting, where black residents from his district delivered a stark message: enough is enough. The frustration and anger from the community came to a boiling point as constituents blasted Jackson for his support of the tens of thousands of illegal migrants flooding into Chicago.

The once-reliable Democratic voters are now questioning the direction of their leadership as their neighborhoods are overrun with migrants and resources meant for American citizens are siphoned off to care for those who entered the country illegally.

The town hall was intended to be a routine meeting, but the issue of illegal immigration dominated the conversation, with one resident’s fiery response encapsulating the discontent that many in the room clearly shared. When Jackson asked the audience member what solution he would propose, the man didn’t hesitate: “Send them back, that’s the only solution,” he said, prompting thunderous applause from the crowd.

The straightforward answer resonated deeply with attendees who are tired of seeing their neighborhoods overwhelmed and underfunded while taxpayer dollars are used to accommodate illegal immigrants.

The conversation didn’t end there. The resident passionately continued his remarks, stating, “They will overtake us in numbers at the rate that they have kids. They cannot be U.S. citizens. You are dooming our next generation to sub-servitude.” This hard-hitting statement struck a chord with the crowd, who understood the basic math of the situation.

More illegal migrants mean more strain on public services, more overcrowded schools, and a larger voting bloc in future generations that will further push African Americans to the margins of political influence.

For decades, black Americans have been the backbone of the Democratic Party, but now, they feel as if they are being displaced in their own communities by new groups who are given preferential treatment. It’s not just about sheer numbers—it’s about what those numbers mean for the future.

As the resident pointed out, “All we have to do now is look at the Hispanic voting bloc they have now. They get everything they want. Look at our communities. You should see the schools that they have as compared to the schools we have.”

The reality is that black neighborhoods in Chicago have seen a significant deterioration in the quality of life, with poorly funded schools, limited job opportunities, and high crime rates. Meanwhile, migrants are placed in shelters, receive government assistance, and are poised to take advantage of services that should be reserved for American citizens.

This blatant favoritism has left black Americans feeling abandoned by the very party they have supported for generations.

In an attempt to defuse the situation, Rep. Jackson claimed that many of the migrants arriving in Chicago don’t qualify for asylum and won’t become U.S. citizens. But the resident wasn’t buying it, responding, “I’m not concerned about that, I’m concerned about the children that they have. They will be U.S. citizens and they will have a voting bloc.”

The crowd’s reaction made it clear that this was the crux of the issue—the future political implications of an ever-growing migrant population. The people of Chicago are not just worried about the present but about what lies ahead for their children and grandchildren.

Jackson’s dismissal of these concerns only added fuel to the fire. For many in the black community, it feels as though their elected representatives are prioritizing illegal migrants over the very people they were elected to serve. Jackson’s response was a classic example of the Democratic establishment’s tone-deaf approach to illegal immigration: ignore the concerns of working-class Americans while pushing policies that favor those who break the law to enter the country.

One of the most egregious aspects of the current situation in Chicago is that the overwhelming majority of taxpayer-funded migrant shelters have been placed in black neighborhoods. These communities, already struggling with crime, poverty, and underfunded schools, are now expected to shoulder the additional burden of providing for tens of thousands of illegal immigrants.

The irony is not lost on these residents. After years of promises from Democratic leaders about improving their quality of life, they are now watching those same resources be redirected to migrants who haven’t contributed to the city.

As one resident succinctly put it, “Look at our communities. You should see the schools that they have as compared to the schools we have.” Black Americans in Chicago are no longer willing to sit by quietly as their neighborhoods are overrun and neglected. They are starting to organize, with grassroots black organizations now pledging to “vote red” in an effort to throw black Democrats out of office.

This is a significant shift in the political landscape, as black voters have historically been a loyal voting bloc for the Democratic Party. But with illegal immigration threatening their communities and livelihoods, many are beginning to see that the party no longer represents their best interests.

As black communities in Chicago and other cities across the country feel the brunt of illegal immigration, many are turning their attention to the one leader who made securing the border a top priority: Donald Trump. Under President Trump’s leadership, the border was more secure, illegal immigration was declining, and the focus was on putting American citizens first.

Trump’s “America First” agenda resonates with black Americans who feel left behind by a Democratic Party more concerned with pandering to migrants than addressing the needs of its own citizens.

Trump’s strong stance on border security, his efforts to reduce illegal immigration, and his focus on job creation for all Americans—including black Americans—are in stark contrast to the open-borders policies of the Biden-Harris administration.

Under Biden and Harris, the southern border is wide open, allowing millions of migrants to flood into the country with little to no oversight. The result has been chaos in cities like Chicago, where black residents are now realizing that their votes for Democratic leaders have come at a steep price.

The Biden-Harris administration’s handling of illegal immigration has been nothing short of a disaster. Their refusal to enforce border security, coupled with their encouragement of migrants to enter the country illegally, has led to a tidal wave of migrants overwhelming cities across America.

And while they may claim to care about working-class Americans, their actions speak louder than words. Black Americans, in particular, are feeling the effects of these policies as their neighborhoods become ground zero for migrant shelters and taxpayer-funded programs designed to support illegal immigrants.

The backlash against Biden and Harris is growing, and it’s not just coming from Republicans. Black Americans, once a reliable voting bloc for the Democratic Party, are beginning to question whether their loyalty has been misplaced. They see their communities being neglected while illegal immigrants are given preferential treatment, and they are starting to organize in opposition to their own elected officials.

As grassroots black organizations in Chicago pledge to “vote red” in the next election, it’s clear that the tide is turning. The Democratic Party can no longer take the black vote for granted, especially when their policies are actively harming the very communities they claim to represent.

The frustration and anger expressed at Rep. Jonathan Jackson’s town hall meeting are indicative of a larger movement brewing across America. Black Americans are tired of being taken for granted by a party that prioritizes illegal immigrants over its own citizens. They are tired of watching their neighborhoods deteriorate while resources are funneled to support those who broke the law to enter the country.

The solution, as that passionate resident said, is simple: “Send them back.” It’s time for the Biden-Harris administration to stop ignoring the concerns of everyday Americans and start putting the needs of its citizens first. Illegal immigration is not just a border issue—it’s an American issue. And it’s one that the people of Chicago, and the rest of the country, are no longer willing to ignore.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics for all of your news needs.

The mainstream media is doing everything they can to cover up the truth. But the situation is extreme.

And a shocking story out of Ohio has revealed a troubling truth about the immigration crisis.

The shocking story of an Ohio family forced to pull their child out of preschool because he was the only English-speaking student in the class has sent ripples through communities across the country. What should have been a simple meet-and-greet turned into a nightmare when a mother learned that her son, enrolled in a state preschool in Tuscarawas County, Ohio, would be the only child in the class who spoke English.

Even worse, the school told her she would have to hire a translator at her own expense if her son was to attend. This is the sad reality of a nation overwhelmed by mass illegal immigration under the Biden-Harris administration.

In a video that quickly went viral, the boy’s grandfather expressed his frustration: “My daughter enrolled my four-year-old grandson into preschool last week and they have a little meet-and-greet… They tell her she has to hire a translator with her own money in order to send him to preschool because he is the only student that doesn’t speak Spanish.”

The incredulity and disbelief in his voice reflect the deep sense of betrayal felt by many Americans as they watch their communities buckle under the strain of an unchecked influx of illegal immigrants.

This story is far from an isolated incident. In cities across Ohio and the nation, small towns are being transformed overnight by the flood of illegal immigrants—people who are arriving without any preparation or plan to integrate into local society.

These immigrants bring with them different languages, customs, and in many cases, no understanding of English. The results are devastating for American families who are now faced with the challenge of adapting to a new reality that they neither asked for nor voted for.

And who’s to blame for this chaos? The Biden-Harris administration. Since day one, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have embraced policies that not only encourage illegal immigration but actively facilitate it.

Their refusal to secure the southern border has unleashed waves of migrants into towns like New Philadelphia, Ohio, where American children are being sidelined and pushed out of the very schools their families fund through taxes.

The story of the Ohio man’s grandson is the perfect illustration of how mass immigration is not just a border issue—it’s a national one. The media and Democratic leadership try to frame illegal immigration as a problem that only affects southern states, but as this family in small-town Ohio discovered, the reality is much different.

No longer is this a red-state or blue-state issue. The floodgates have been opened, and communities in every corner of the country are being forced to deal with the consequences.

The situation in Springfield, Ohio, further underscores the devastating effects of mass immigration. In just a few short years, Springfield has been overwhelmed by an estimated 20,000 Haitian immigrants.

This small Ohio community, unprepared for such an influx, is now grappling with the fallout of the Biden-Harris administration’s reckless policies. Residents have reported shocking incidents, including Haitians beheading ducks in public parks—a scene that would have been unimaginable in the once peaceful city. Yet, the mainstream media has largely turned a blind eye to these realities.

Ohio Governor Mike DeWine has stepped up to do what the Biden-Harris administration refuses to—send support to communities like Springfield. DeWine recently announced the deployment of the Ohio State Highway Patrol to help local law enforcement manage the growing crisis, particularly as the community faces a surge in traffic accidents caused by drivers unfamiliar with American road laws.

However, even with DeWine’s $2.5 million emergency fund to assist these communities, there’s only so much that can be done at the state level when the federal government is so derelict in its duties.

Illegal immigration isn’t just about numbers; it’s about culture, language, and the fabric of American society. The Biden-Harris administration, by refusing to enforce immigration laws and encouraging unchecked migration, has initiated nothing short of an invasion.

Communities like Springfield, New Philadelphia, and countless others across the country are being overwhelmed by the sheer number of immigrants who are arriving without any plan or means to support themselves.

The radical left and open-borders advocates may claim that America is a melting pot, but this isn’t what a melting pot looks like. This is chaos. When American children like that boy in New Philadelphia can’t attend preschool without their parents footing the bill for a translator because the class is filled with non-English-speaking students, we are witnessing the unraveling of our shared national identity. And it’s all being done under the guise of compassion.

Let’s not forget that this isn’t compassion—it’s exploitation. The Biden-Harris administration has actively encouraged people from impoverished and dangerous countries to flood across our borders with promises of free healthcare, education, and housing. The end result? American citizens are left paying the price.

Contrast this catastrophe with the Trump administration’s approach to immigration. Under President Trump, illegal immigration was declining, border security was a top priority, and communities across the country were safer as a result. Trump understood that a nation without borders is not a nation at all. He built the border wall, enforced immigration laws, and made it clear that illegal immigrants would not be rewarded for breaking the law.

Trump’s “America First” policies were not anti-immigrant—they were pro-law, pro-sovereignty, and pro-America. He worked to create a system that allowed legal immigrants to thrive while protecting the rights and safety of American citizens. Biden and Harris, on the other hand, have torn down those policies, leaving America vulnerable to the unprecedented surge of illegal immigrants we’re seeing today.

The consequences of Biden and Harris’s open-borders agenda are not theoretical—they are happening now, in real time, across America. Communities are being overrun, schools are being overwhelmed, and hardworking Americans are left to fend for themselves in a country they no longer recognize.

The American dream—once the hope of prosperity, safety, and opportunity—is slipping away for many, replaced by overcrowded classrooms, strained healthcare systems, and deteriorating neighborhoods.

The Biden-Harris administration, in their blind pursuit of progressive policies, has chosen to abandon American families in favor of appeasing radical left-wing groups who want to see the U.S. turn into a borderless nation. But the people of Ohio—and Americans everywhere—are waking up to the damage being done. As that Ohio grandfather said, “This migrant problem is not a red state, blue state thing… It’s our whole government. It’s all of them.”

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Radical Left is continuously trying to claim that the news coming out of Springfield is fake. But the immigration crisis is very real.

And the Ohio Governor has spoken out and revealed what is really going on in Springfield.

As the radical left continues to claim that there is no problem in Springfield, Ohio, the reality on the ground is far different. Governor Mike DeWine’s recent announcement to send the Ohio State Highway Patrol and allocate $2.5 million to the beleaguered community highlights just how out of touch the Biden-Harris administration is with the chaos their open-border policies have created.

🚨BREAKING: Ohio Governor Mike DeWine is now sending State Troopers into Springfield, OH along with millions in funding to address the Haitian migrant crisis there, saying:

"The federal government has not demonstrated that they have any kind of plan to deal with the issue."… pic.twitter.com/Bewr4tH6g5

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) September 11, 2024

Springfield, once a quiet community, has seen its streets transformed by a flood of 20,000 Haitian immigrants since 2020. Local residents have faced an alarming rise in issues that range from overcrowded hospitals and schools to dangerous driving on the roads.

DeWine’s move, while necessary, is a stopgap measure to address a much larger issue that Washington refuses to acknowledge.

The Biden-Harris administration’s Cuba-Haiti-Nicaragua-Venezuela (CHNV) parole program, under which many of the migrants arrived, is a glaring example of their reckless immigration policies. Under this program, thousands of migrants have entered communities like Springfield with no real plan for assimilation or assistance.

The Department of Homeland Security briefly paused the program after concerns over fraud arose, but the damage had already been done.

Instead of facing the consequences of their decisions, Biden and Harris continue to push their failed narrative that open borders strengthen the country. They’ve left local communities like Springfield to fend for themselves, all while pretending that the chaos and disruption these policies bring are mere figments of conservative imagination. This is the same administration that has repeatedly turned a blind eye to the suffering of everyday Americans while touting their so-called ‘progressive’ values.

Governor DeWine, in sharp contrast to the federal government’s inaction, has taken swift and decisive steps to mitigate the disaster unfolding in Springfield. While DeWine made it clear that he doesn’t oppose legal immigration, he criticized the lack of support from Washington in dealing with the consequences of their failed immigration policies.

As he stated, “The federal government has not demonstrated that they have any kind of plan to deal with the issue. We will not walk away.”

DeWine’s decision to send Ohio State Highway Patrol officers to Springfield addresses a critical safety concern. Local law enforcement has struggled to manage the influx of drivers unfamiliar with U.S. road rules.

In a press release, DeWine made it clear that the troopers will patrol the roads with the highest crash rates, ensuring that erratic drivers who pose risks to others will be held accountable. This stands in stark contrast to the Biden-Harris administration’s hands-off approach to enforcing the law.

DeWine has also allocated $2.5 million over the next two years to address healthcare needs and provide resources to the community. The funding will go toward driver education, translation services, and more vaccines for children, reflecting the strain that this influx of migrants has placed on local infrastructure.

Yet, even with this effort, DeWine acknowledges that more needs to be done. As he noted, “These dramatic surges impact every citizen of the community, every citizen.”

Springfield is not the only community feeling the pressure. DeWine warned that other Ohio cities, such as Findlay and Lima, will soon face similar challenges as more migrants arrive. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost echoed these concerns, instructing his office to explore legal options to prevent the federal government from dumping unlimited numbers of migrants into Ohio communities.

The left’s refusal to acknowledge the detrimental effects of their policies is infuriating to many Ohioans. Moms wait for hours in emergency rooms with sick children due to overcrowding, drivers face increased dangers on the road, and children attend schools where classrooms are becoming more crowded by the day.

Yet the Biden-Harris administration remains silent, unwilling to step in and provide the support needed to alleviate these issues.

Instead of addressing these legitimate concerns, left-wing pundits and politicians continue to gaslight the American public, pretending that the surge of migrants is nothing more than a minor inconvenience. The reality is that it’s far worse than that. Springfield, like so many other American cities, is being overwhelmed, and the Biden administration is sitting idly by as the problem festers.

Let’s not forget that Kamala Harris, who has been tasked with handling immigration policy since day one of this administration, has been nothing short of a disaster. While Harris claims to be “tough” on immigration, her actions tell a different story. The border crisis has only worsened under her watch, and the surge of illegal immigration continues to spiral out of control.

Harris has consistently flip-flopped on immigration policy, lacking a coherent strategy to tackle the border crisis. She touts compassion and humane treatment but ignores the harsh reality faced by communities like Springfield that bear the brunt of the administration’s weak border enforcement. Under the Biden-Harris regime, illegal immigration has surged, and it’s local governments and taxpayers who are left picking up the pieces.

The radical left continues to gaslight the American people, insisting that there is no crisis in Springfield or other communities experiencing similar surges. But as Governor DeWine, Attorney General Yost, and local residents can attest, the situation is dire.

While the left dismisses concerns as fearmongering, the reality is that communities are being torn apart by the consequences of Biden-Harris policies.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The media has been trying to convince us that something is wrong between Melania and Donald Trump. But now the truth is out.

And Melania Trump has spoken out and the people are horrified.

In a deeply unsettling revelation, former First Lady Melania Trump has raised serious questions about the assassination attempt on her husband, former President Donald Trump, during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania on July 13.

In a video posted to X (formerly Twitter), Melania Trump spoke about the harrowing incident, expressing her frustration with the lack of transparency and calling for answers.

“The attempt to end my husband’s life was a horrible, distressing experience,” Melania said in the video, which also promoted her upcoming book. “Now, the silence around it feels heavy. I can’t help but wonder, why didn’t law enforcement officials arrest the shooter before the speech? There is definitely more to the story, and we need to uncover the truth.”

https://t.co/ZCTwZSqZND pic.twitter.com/KKA6anTEYC

— MELANIA TRUMP (@MELANIATRUMP) September 10, 2024

Melania’s words reflect the growing sentiment among many Americans that the media and government officials are not being forthcoming about what transpired that day. How could such an attempt on the life of a former president occur with so many apparent security failures? Who is responsible, and why haven’t more questions been answered?

The details of the assassination attempt are chilling. On July 13, 2023, during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks opened fire from the rooftop of a nearby building. Crooks had a direct line of sight on Trump, and in a horrifying moment, a bullet grazed the former president’s right ear. Trump was moments away from suffering a potentially fatal injury.

While President Trump survived, the attack was not without tragedy. Corey Comperatore, a former Pennsylvania fire chief, was shot and killed after Crooks began firing. In an act of selfless bravery, Comperatore threw himself over his daughter and wife, shielding them from the gunfire. Two other men, James Copenhaver and David Dutch, were also injured in the shooting.

The loss of life and the injuries sustained are heartbreaking, but what makes this incident even more disturbing are the revelations that have come to light since the attack—revelations that suggest the shooting could have been prevented.

One of the most shocking aspects of this assassination attempt is the growing evidence of security failures that occurred before and during the rally. As reports have revealed, Crooks was spotted on the rooftop by law enforcement and security personnel well before the shooting took place. Yet, no action was taken to remove him or neutralize the threat.

According to former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle, agents were not stationed on the rooftop where Crooks positioned himself due to a “safety factor” associated with the roof’s slope. However, prior to the rally, the Secret Service had reportedly identified the rooftop as a security risk.

The obvious question arises: If the rooftop was deemed a risk, why wasn’t it more thoroughly secured? Why weren’t agents positioned there, or why wasn’t access to the rooftop restricted?

In addition, law enforcement officers reportedly encountered Crooks before the shooting and even photographed him twice. Officers reportedly radioed in that Crooks was acting suspiciously, yet no action was taken to prevent the tragedy. It wasn’t just one missed opportunity—there were multiple chances to stop Crooks before he opened fire. Why were these warnings ignored?

The questions surrounding this incident only deepen when you consider the shocking whistleblower claims revealed by Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO). According to these allegations, the majority of the Secret Service agents assigned to protect Trump during the rally weren’t even trained agents—they were from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and had only undergone a “two-hour online webinar” for preparation.

This revelation is nothing short of alarming. How could DHS agents with minimal training be tasked with the critical responsibility of protecting a former president? Why weren’t seasoned Secret Service agents in charge of securing the rally and ensuring Trump’s safety? The decision to rely on poorly trained personnel reeks of negligence, and it raises serious questions about the leadership and priorities of those overseeing the security detail.

Senator Hawley has called for a full investigation into the matter, and rightfully so. The American people deserve to know why these security failures occurred and who is responsible. The attempt on Trump’s life wasn’t just an isolated incident—it was the culmination of a series of mistakes and oversights that could have cost the former president his life.

Despite the gravity of the situation, coverage of the assassination attempt in the mainstream media has been surprisingly muted. The lack of thorough investigation and follow-up reporting has left many Americans wondering: Is the media deliberately downplaying this incident to protect certain individuals or agencies?

The media’s silence has only fueled speculation that there may be more to the story. Was this an isolated act by a lone gunman, or is there a deeper conspiracy at play? Why haven’t we seen a thorough investigation into how this could have happened, and why aren’t more people in positions of power demanding answers?

President Trump has long warned about the dangers of a biased media and a Deep State working against him. In this case, his warnings seem more relevant than ever. The assassination attempt and the subsequent lack of accountability suggest that there are forces working behind the scenes to suppress the truth and prevent a full reckoning of what happened.

Melania Trump’s demand for answers is not just a personal plea—it’s a reflection of what millions of Americans are feeling. How could this have happened? How could a gunman get so close to a former president without being stopped? And why aren’t law enforcement and government officials doing more to investigate the failures that led to this tragedy?

The American people deserve transparency. They deserve to know what went wrong and who is responsible. The lack of accountability in the aftermath of the assassination attempt is troubling, to say the least. Melania Trump is right to demand the truth, and the American people should join her in calling for a full investigation.

Despite the horrifying experience and the glaring security failures, President Trump remains undeterred. He continues to speak out on behalf of the American people, fighting for their rights and their future. His resilience in the face of danger is a testament to his strength and determination.

But this incident should serve as a wake-up call. The threats against Trump are real, and the failure to take them seriously puts not just him, but the entire nation, at risk. As Melania said in her video, “The silence around it feels heavy.” The truth must come out, and those responsible must be held accountable.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Americans on both sides of the aisle were hoping for a clean and fair debate on Tuesday. But it seems that this was never meant to be.

As a shocking and disgraceful move during the ABC debate has Americans shocked.

Tuesday night’s presidential debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris was not just a battle of ideas—it was a blatant showcase of media bias.

With ABC News moderators Linsey Davis and David Muir leading the charge, it became crystal clear that the media, once again, is doing everything in its power to prevent Trump’s return to the White House. The moderation wasn’t just skewed; it was an outright assault on Trump and a shield for Kamala Harris, as Davis and Muir interrupted and “fact-checked” Trump at least seven times while Harris walked away without a single challenge to her many falsehoods.

From the moment ABC News was announced as the debate host, Americans knew what to expect. The network’s history of anti-Trump reporting, coupled with its close alignment with the Democratic Party, left little room for neutrality.

It wasn’t just Trump’s supporters who anticipated this; even moderate and independent voices raised concerns about how fair this debate would be. Many, including Trump himself, voiced their frustrations, calling for a more balanced panel of moderators who would actually facilitate a fair and honest discussion.

But ABC, as expected, refused to listen. They went ahead with their biased selection of moderators, ignoring widespread calls for fairness. Trump, who knew exactly what he was up against, still took the stage to face both his opponent and the moderators who were hell-bent on fact-checking him, even when their so-called “facts” were wrong or incomplete.

Throughout the night, Davis and Muir bombarded Trump with numerous interruptions under the guise of “fact-checking.” Yet, each of these so-called corrections seemed more like attempts to derail Trump’s momentum and protect Harris from having to answer tough questions. Let’s break down the most obvious examples of this biased moderation:

During a discussion on abortion, Trump raised the issue of Democrats supporting extreme policies, including late-term abortions and infanticide. Linsey Davis quickly interrupted, asserting, “There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it’s born.” While technically true in a legal sense, Davis completely ignored the context of Trump’s argument.

Trump was referring to extreme cases like those proposed by former Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, where a baby born alive could be left to die if the mother so chose. Davis ignored this, allowing Harris to escape scrutiny on her radical abortion stance.

When Trump brought up the issue of crime in Springfield, Ohio, Muir jumped in with his own “fact-check,” stating that ABC News had reached out to the city manager, who claimed there were no credible reports of immigrant-related crimes against pets.

This, of course, ignored the larger context of rising crime rates in cities across America, particularly in communities overwhelmed by illegal immigration. Once again, Muir’s selective fact-checking served to downplay the very real concerns Trump was raising.

David Muir also interrupted Trump to claim that the FBI says “overall violent crime is coming down in this country.” This was not only misleading but also an attempt to obscure the alarming spikes in violent crime in major Democratic-run cities.

Yes, overall crime rates may fluctuate, but Americans know all too well the reality of rising homicides, assaults, and thefts in their communities, many of which are directly linked to lax policies pushed by Democrats like Kamala Harris.

When Trump discussed his concerns about the 2020 election, Muir couldn’t resist jumping in to challenge him. Rather than allowing Trump to present his case, Muir lectured him on the results of “60 cases in front of many judges” and repeatedly tried to steer the conversation toward Harris’s narrative of a fair election.

But when Harris invoked the debunked Charlottesville “very fine people” hoax—claiming Trump supported white supremacists—neither moderator stepped in to correct her. This is a hoax that has been factually debunked multiple times, yet it was left unchallenged by Muir and Davis. Why? Because it fit their anti-Trump agenda.

During a discussion on foreign policy, Trump referenced Harris’s failed leadership and her nonexistent diplomatic experience with world leaders like Vladimir Putin. Instead of pressing Harris on her lack of qualifications, Muir jumped in to “fact-check” Trump by asking Harris if she had ever met Putin. Of course, she hadn’t, but Muir’s interjection served as nothing more than a distraction, giving Harris a pass on answering questions about her dismal foreign policy record.

The moderators’ actions during the debate were not just a series of unfortunate interruptions. They were part of a broader, more sinister effort to prevent Trump from returning to power. The left-wing media has long played a crucial role in shaping public opinion against Trump, and this debate was yet another chapter in their ongoing campaign to smear him at every turn.

By repeatedly “fact-checking” Trump—often incorrectly or with incomplete information—while giving Harris a free pass, Davis and Muir demonstrated their willingness to do whatever it takes to stop Trump from being re-elected.

The American people are not blind to this. They know that the mainstream media, including networks like ABC, will go to any length to protect the Democratic establishment. Trump has been saying this for years, and once again, the debate proved him right.

The moderators’ biased behavior only confirmed what Trump and his supporters have known all along: the media is not interested in truth or fairness; they are only interested in ensuring that Trump stays out of the White House.

Trump, like many Americans, has long called for debates to be moderated by individuals who are willing to be impartial. The former president has suggested a number of alternatives—debate moderators who could ask tough questions without turning the debate into a one-sided attack.

Many in the country, especially those who have seen firsthand the manipulation by the media, agree. Why not bring in figures like Joe Rogan, who offered to moderate debates with no agenda, or independent journalists who could ask hard-hitting questions without bias?

But the left-leaning media wouldn’t allow it. They fear losing control of the narrative, and they know that a fair debate would expose the glaring weaknesses of candidates like Kamala Harris. That’s why ABC News, with its clear bias, was chosen to moderate this debate, and that’s why Davis and Muir intervened every time Trump began to gain momentum.

The horrific moderation during Tuesday night’s debate was yet another reminder that the media will stop at nothing to protect their chosen candidates and prevent Trump from winning in 2024. Their selective fact-checking, constant interruptions, and refusal to challenge Harris reveal their desperation. They know that if the American people see the truth, Harris and the Democrats have no chance.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics for all of your news needs.

This election cycle has been full of major endorsements. And the Radical Left is trying to do everything they can to convince America that they have the support of the people.

But now, a major celebrity endorsement has shaken up the 2024 election.

In an election season full of high-profile endorsements and celebrity opinions, pop star Taylor Swift’s decision to throw her support behind Vice President Kamala Harris following Tuesday night’s presidential debate has raised more questions than answers.

While Swift’s endorsement may excite some of her younger fan base, her reasoning contradicts itself and underscores a deep disconnect between Hollywood elites and the everyday struggles facing average Americans. Once again, Harris and her backers like Swift are pushing a vision for America that promises little more than more of the same: higher taxes, fewer freedoms, and the continued decline of American prosperity.

In a lengthy Instagram post, Swift held a cat — a possible nod to J.D. Vance’s famous “childless cat lady” comment aimed at liberal elites — and encouraged her followers to “do their own research.” This might seem like sound advice, but then Swift immediately contradicts herself by announcing she’s already made her choice: Kamala Harris.

The pop star gushes about Harris’s supposed advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights, women’s reproductive rights, and IVF, offering these as reasons for her endorsement.

Yet Swift fails to address one glaring fact: if her followers were to do their own research, they’d discover the disastrous track record of Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party. Harris has not only failed to deliver meaningful change on these issues but has actively contributed to policies that have harmed Americans in almost every aspect of their lives. So why is Taylor Swift telling her fans to “do their research,” only to promote one of the most divisive and ineffective politicians of our time?

Kamala Harris’s record as vice president is marred by countless failures. Under her watch, the Biden-Harris administration has overseen the highest inflation rates in decades, skyrocketing gas prices, and an out-of-control southern border.

Her incompetence as the “border czar” has left the U.S. vulnerable to unchecked illegal immigration, which has increased dramatically since she took office. These failures disproportionately affect working-class Americans, who are now struggling to afford basic necessities thanks to the Biden-Harris policies.

Even on the social issues Swift claims to care about, Harris has failed to deliver. Her pandering to LGBTQ+ activists and pro-abortion lobbyists has done little to address the core issues affecting Americans.

The so-called “rights” she champions have come at the expense of real, measurable economic improvements. Harris and her administration prioritize divisive social issues over the economic health and stability of the American people, and Swift’s endorsement only highlights her own ignorance of these facts.

Taylor Swift’s praise for Harris’s vice-presidential pick, Tim Walz, is equally bewildering. Walz, as governor of Minnesota, presided over one of the most disastrous responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, imposing draconian lockdowns that crushed small businesses and wreaked havoc on his state’s economy.

Walz’s embrace of these heavy-handed restrictions aligns perfectly with Harris’s vision for America: a nation where government overreach and control stifle personal freedom and prosperity.

Endorsing this ticket is essentially endorsing more of what Americans have had to endure under Biden and Harris. For Swift to claim that Harris “stands up” for Americans while ignoring the economic and social destruction caused by their policies is nothing short of hypocritical.

Swift also mentioned her fear of AI, spurred by a fake AI-generated endorsement of Trump that circulated online. This, she claims, brought her to the conclusion that “the simplest way to combat misinformation is with the truth.”

It’s ironic that Swift would point to a manufactured controversy while completely ignoring the very real lies and misinformation propagated by Kamala Harris and the Democrats.

Harris’s administration has lied to the American people about inflation, crime, and the state of the economy. They’ve repeatedly claimed that the country is on the right track, despite the fact that a majority of Americans feel worse off today than they did four years ago. If Swift is truly concerned about “misinformation,” she should start by examining the falsehoods coming from the very candidate she’s endorsing.

While Swift and her Hollywood peers are busy backing an out-of-touch, failing administration, Donald Trump continues to resonate with everyday Americans. As the debate polls show, despite the celebrity endorsements and media bias against him, Trump remains a strong candidate with clear momentum heading into the 2024 election.

Polls conducted before the debate found that voters trust Trump more than Harris on critical issues like foreign policy, where Harris has proven ineffective and unprepared. As vice president, Harris has struggled to handle even the simplest diplomatic tasks, and the world has taken note of America’s weakened position on the global stage under her leadership.

Trump, on the other hand, delivered a strong economy, a secure border, and stability in foreign relations during his time in office.

In a recent poll from September 3-5, Trump and Harris were neck-and-neck with registered voters, but the momentum clearly favors Trump. Americans are waking up to the reality that Trump’s policies worked. His America First agenda led to record-low unemployment, rising wages, and energy independence. Under Harris and Biden, those gains have been wiped away, leaving Americans worse off.

Swift’s endorsement of Harris reflects a broader trend of Hollywood celebrities aligning themselves with left-wing, progressive policies that do nothing to help the average American. While Taylor Swift and her peers enjoy the luxury of million-dollar homes and secure gated communities, everyday Americans are grappling with rising crime, inflation, and deteriorating quality of life under Democratic leadership.

It’s easy for celebrities like Swift to champion politicians like Kamala Harris, whose failed policies don’t affect their daily lives. But for millions of Americans, the consequences of Harris’s leadership have been disastrous. Working-class families don’t have the luxury of ignoring skyrocketing prices at the grocery store or at the gas pump. They can’t escape the rising crime in their communities or the flood of illegal immigration that has overwhelmed border towns.

The Hollywood elite, including Taylor Swift, are entirely out of touch with these realities, which is why their political endorsements should be taken with a grain of salt. Swift’s endorsement of Harris is nothing more than virtue signaling from a celebrity who is far removed from the real struggles facing most Americans.

As we head into the 2024 election, the choice for Americans is clear. On one side, you have Kamala Harris and Tim Walz — two politicians who have consistently failed to address the real issues facing the country. On the other side, you have Donald Trump, a candidate who has proven time and again that he can deliver results for the American people.

While Taylor Swift might be content endorsing more of the same failed policies, everyday Americans are looking for real change. And that change can only come from a leader like Donald Trump, who understands the struggles of ordinary Americans and has a proven track record of putting America first.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Kamala Harris has been doing everything she can to make Americans forget how radical she is. But Donald Trump won’t allow that.

And Trump trapped Harris on the debate stage and forced her to admit this horrific truth.

In the heated debate on Tuesday night, former President Donald Trump zeroed in on an issue that has long divided Americans — abortion. Pro-lifers have made it a cornerstone of their strategy to highlight the extremism of Democrats on the issue, and Trump’s approach on stage was no different.

Trump pressed Vice President Kamala Harris on her stance, repeatedly asking whether she would allow abortion in the final months of pregnancy — a question that Harris pointedly refused to answer.

This interaction underscores a larger, growing divide between Republicans and Democrats on the topic of abortion. On one side, Republicans, led by figures like Trump, aim to protect life, with some pushing for restrictions at various stages of pregnancy.

On the other, Democrats have largely adopted a stance that champions unrestricted access to abortion, even in the late stages of pregnancy. The debate showcased just how stark the contrast is between these two perspectives, and Trump masterfully exploited Harris’s refusal to provide clarity on her position.

During the debate, Harris attempted to paint Trump as a proponent of a national abortion ban, a claim Trump swiftly denied. In fact, Trump countered by stating that no such ban would ever reach his desk and reaffirmed his support for in vitro fertilization (IVF), a point often misconstrued by his critics.

But Trump wasn’t content with merely defending his position. He pivoted and posed a direct, cutting question to Harris: “Will she allow abortion in the ninth month, eighth month, seventh month?”

It was a query designed to force Harris into a corner — a strategy pro-lifers have advocated to expose the radical positions some Democrats hold on abortion. Harris, appearing visibly uncomfortable, responded with disapproval but notably did not provide a direct answer. “Come on,” she remarked, hoping to deflect the question.

Trump pressed further, pushing Harris to clarify her stance on late-term abortions, particularly in the final trimesters. “Would you do it?” he asked, referring to abortions in the seventh, eighth, or ninth months of pregnancy. Then, in one of the more memorable lines of the night, Trump took aim at former Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s controversial remarks on late-term abortion.

Northam had once described a scenario where a baby, born alive after a failed abortion attempt, could be left to die depending on the wishes of the mother and the physician. Trump reminded the audience of this disturbing endorsement, claiming Democrats had gone so far as to support abortion even after birth.

“So in this particular example, if the mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Trump quoted Northam. “The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if this is what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physician and the mother.”

This chilling description of post-birth decision-making left the nation shocked, and Harris’s failure to denounce such extremism spoke volumes.

Harris’s refusal to answer Trump’s question on late-term abortions is not only telling but also reflective of a broader problem within the Democratic Party. While many Americans support some level of abortion access, the idea of aborting viable babies in the final months of pregnancy is something most find morally repugnant.

Yet Democrats like Harris continue to avoid condemning the practice, likely out of fear of alienating their most extreme supporters.

Polling consistently shows that the vast majority of Americans oppose abortion in the third trimester, with many viewing it as unnecessary and inhumane. These sentiments are reflected even among those who generally support abortion rights.

However, Democrats have largely aligned themselves with organizations like Planned Parenthood, which advocate for unrestricted access to abortion — even in the latest stages of pregnancy.

Trump capitalized on this disconnect between the Democratic platform and public opinion, leaving Harris floundering on stage. By repeatedly pressing her on this issue, Trump underscored the extremism of Harris’s position without her even needing to confirm it. Her silence spoke louder than any words she could have mustered.

Ralph Northam’s comments about late-term abortion and infanticide have haunted the Democratic Party since he uttered them in 2019. His remarks about letting infants die after birth struck a chord with pro-lifers and moderate voters alike, who saw this as a horrifying endorsement of infanticide. It remains one of the most controversial moments in the ongoing abortion debate.

Trump’s decision to bring up Northam’s comments was not only a clever debate tactic but also a reminder of how far left the Democratic Party has shifted on abortion. What was once an argument about “safe, legal, and rare” has now morphed into an all-out defense of abortion at any stage, for any reason.

For Republicans, this shift presents a golden opportunity to corner Democrats on an issue where they are increasingly out of step with the American people.

Northam’s remarks, and Harris’s failure to distance herself from them, reveal the Democratic Party’s uncomfortable relationship with the abortion issue. While Democrats like to frame themselves as champions of women’s rights, their refusal to acknowledge the humanity of a baby in the late stages of pregnancy exposes a darker, more extreme agenda that voters are beginning to notice.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics for all of your news needs.

Kamala Harris is one of the most radical politicians America has ever seen. But no one knew how bad it really was.

And now, Harris has accidentally exposed her secret Radical plan to the whole world.

As Vice President Kamala Harris officially launches her policy plans on her campaign website, it’s clear that the American people are facing an unprecedented assault on their freedoms, security, and economic stability.

Harris, who waited over a month after becoming the Democratic nominee to unveil her vision for the country, has finally made her radical agenda public just ahead of her first and potentially only debate with Donald Trump. The policies she has laid out are nothing short of a direct threat to the Constitution and the foundational principles that have made America the greatest nation in the world.

One of the most alarming aspects of Harris’ policy platform is her endorsement of federal price controls on food and groceries. Labeling this as a “federal ban on corporate price gouging,” Harris is doubling down on a proposal that has been universally condemned by economists as a disastrous and unconstitutional approach to economic management.

The reality is that grocers in America operate on razor-thin profit margins, typically between 1-3 percent. The prices of goods in grocery stores are determined by supply and demand, not by some mythical corporate greed.

Harris’ plan to impose government-mandated price controls is eerily reminiscent of failed socialist policies in countries like the Soviet Union, Venezuela, and Argentina. These nations tried to manipulate markets through price controls, leading to massive shortages, economic collapse, and widespread suffering.

The idea that the federal government can centrally plan grocery prices better than the free market is a dangerous delusion, one that history has repeatedly proven wrong. Yet, Harris seems intent on dragging the United States down the same failed path, with little regard for the consequences.

Harris’ support for the border bill that would allow at least 1.4 million illegal immigrants into the country each year is another clear example of how her policies are not just misguided, but downright dangerous.

This bill, which Senate Democrats attempted to push through Congress earlier this year, is a thinly veiled attempt to open America’s borders and flood the country with illegal immigrants.

Harris has made it clear that she supports this bill, which would expedite the processing of illegal immigrants rather than prevent them from entering the country in the first place. The measure would essentially codify into law the Biden-Harris administration’s disastrous executive actions from April, allowing nearly any illegal immigrant to cross into the United States as long as they jump through a few bureaucratic hoops.

What’s even more alarming is the inclusion of the CBP One app as a form of identification under this bill. This app would allow individuals to enter the U.S. without any real documentation of their identity, creating a massive security risk.

The idea that our nation’s borders could be thrown open to anyone with a smartphone is not just irresponsible; it’s a betrayal of the American people and the rule of law.

Harris’ attack on the Second Amendment is perhaps one of the most glaring examples of her disdain for the Constitution. Her campaign website proudly states that she plans to ban so-called “assault weapons” and high-capacity magazines, a move that would strip law-abiding Americans of their right to defend themselves and their families.

This is not just about banning a specific type of firearm; it is about undermining the very foundation of the Second Amendment. Harris has previously supported a “mandatory buyback program” for certain types of guns, which is nothing less than government-sanctioned gun confiscation.

The Left’s obsession with disarming Americans is not about safety—it’s about control. Harris’ proposals are designed to weaken the ability of ordinary citizens to protect themselves, while the government amasses more power over their lives.

Harris also promises to advance so-called “environmental justice,” a term that is essentially code for the Green New Deal, the Left’s radical environmental agenda. Under the guise of combating climate change, Harris and her allies want to impose crippling regulations on American businesses, destroy jobs, and force the country into a dependence on unreliable and expensive green energy sources.

This is not just bad policy; it is economic suicide. The Inflation Reduction Act, which Harris touts as one of her key achievements, has been widely criticized as a green energy boondoggle that does nothing to actually reduce inflation.

Instead, it funnels billions of taxpayer dollars into the pockets of green energy companies and special interest groups while driving up costs for ordinary Americans. Harris’ environmental policies are designed to serve the interests of the radical Left, not the American people.

Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of Harris’ foreign policy platform is her promise to “end the suffering in Gaza” while subtly suggesting that there could be “consequences” for Israel if the Israeli Defense Forces take decisive action to root out Hamas terrorists. This is a stunning betrayal of one of America’s closest allies, Israel, and a capitulation to terrorist organizations that have openly declared their intent to destroy the Jewish state.

Harris’ approach to the Middle East is not just naive; it is dangerous. By signaling that the United States might punish Israel for defending itself, Harris is emboldening the very forces that seek to destabilize the region and threaten global security.

The fact that she is willing to use American taxpayer dollars to subsidize the so-called “right to dignity, security, freedom, and self-determination” for the Palestinian people, while ignoring the terrorist activities of Hamas, is a disgraceful display of appeasement.

On the domestic front, Harris’ economic policies are a recipe for disaster. Her plan to subsidize first-time homebuyers with up to $25,000 in down payments is yet another example of her belief that the government should control every aspect of our lives. This kind of government intervention distorts the housing market, creates artificial demand, and ultimately leads to higher home prices for everyone.

Furthermore, Harris’ promise to “end the unreasonable burden of student loan debt” is nothing more than a bailout for the irresponsible at the expense of hardworking taxpayers. Instead of promoting personal responsibility and financial literacy, Harris wants to reward those who have made poor financial decisions by forcing others to foot the bill.

Harris’ record on economic issues is equally abysmal. She proudly touts her tie-breaking vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, a piece of legislation that has been widely criticized as doing nothing to reduce inflation. Instead, it represents a massive redistribution of wealth from American taxpayers to green energy companies and other special interests. This is not economic leadership; it is economic insanity.

Kamala Harris’ policy platform is a direct threat to the Constitution, the rule of law, and the freedoms that Americans hold dear. Her radical agenda, which includes socialist price controls, open borders, gun bans, and environmental extremism, would undermine the very fabric of American society.

Kamala Harris may have finally unveiled her policy plans, but the American people are not fooled. Her agenda is clear: to transform America into a socialist dystopia where the government controls every aspect of our lives. It is up to us to stand up, speak out, and defend the Constitution from those who seek to destroy it.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics for all of your news needs.