Joe Biden has been notably silent since he decided not to accept the Democrat nomination. But no one was expecting this discovery.

And new Joe Biden rumors have many Americans wondering what’s really going on.

In a surprising revelation, former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi admitted on CNN’s “OutFront” that she has not spoken to President Joe Biden since he decided to step aside from the presidential race.

This lack of communication between two prominent figures in the Democratic Party raises serious questions about the party’s unity and leadership during a critical time for the nation.

During an interview with guest host Dana Bash, Pelosi was asked about her communication with Biden following his decision to pass the torch. When asked if she had spoken with the President, Pelosi’s response was a stark, “No, I have not.” This admission was followed by an almost dismissive comment about the busy schedules of both leaders.

Bash pressed further, asking if Pelosi hoped to speak with Biden soon. Pelosi’s reply, “Yes, I hope to. We’re all busy,” did little to reassure those concerned about the apparent rift. When asked about the state of her relationship with Biden, Pelosi suggested that Bash should ask Biden, adding, “But I hope so.”

This lack of communication is not just a minor oversight; it’s a glaring issue that reflects poorly on both Pelosi and Biden. For a former Speaker and a sitting President to have no dialogue during such a pivotal moment in the party’s history is not only concerning but also ridiculous.

It suggests a level of disorganization and disconnect that should alarm every American who expects competent and cohesive leadership from their elected officials.

Pelosi’s allies, including Adam Schiff, Jamie Raskin, and Zoe Lofgren, have publicly stated their belief that it was time for Biden to step aside.

Despite Pelosi’s claims of having “hundreds of allies in Congress” and her insistence that these figures made their own judgments, the lack of communication with Biden casts doubt on her influence and the cohesiveness of the party’s leadership.

This situation is just another example of President Biden’s troubling leadership style. From the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan to the ongoing crisis at the southern border, Biden’s presidency has been marred by missteps and a lack of clear direction.

The fact that he hasn’t reached out to Pelosi, one of the most influential Democrats in recent history, is indicative of a broader problem: Biden’s inability to foster unity and communicate effectively within his own party.

Biden’s decision to step aside from the presidential race was itself a controversial move. Many saw it as a tacit admission of his dwindling support and inability to effectively lead the nation.

For Pelosi, a key figure in the Democratic establishment, to be left out of the loop on such a critical decision is not only disrespectful but also strategically unsound.

Nancy Pelosi, despite stepping down as Speaker, remains a powerful and influential figure within the Democratic Party. Her experience and political acumen are invaluable within her own party, yet Biden’s disregard for her input is baffling.

Pelosi’s public admission of not having spoken to Biden not only diminishes her stature but also raises questions about her effectiveness and relevance in the current political landscape.

Pelosi’s handling of this situation has also been less than impressive. By admitting she has not spoken to Biden and offering no substantial explanation, she appears out of touch and sidelined.

This is a stark contrast to the Pelosi of the past, who was known for her strategic acumen and ability to navigate complex political landscapes.

The Democratic Party is facing numerous challenges, both domestically and internationally. In such times, unity and strong leadership are paramount.

The lack of communication between Biden and Pelosi is a glaring example of the disarray within the party’s upper echelons. It’s time for both leaders to put aside their differences and prioritize the nation’s well-being.

For Biden, this means reaching out to key figures like Pelosi and ensuring that there is a cohesive strategy moving forward.

For Pelosi, it means asserting her influence and demanding a seat at the table in critical discussions.

The American people deserve leaders who can communicate, collaborate, and lead effectively.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Radical left knows that a Trump election is inevitable. But they are terrified at the prospect.

And now, a top Democrat leader has been caught on camera plotting to overthrow Trump.

In a recently resurfaced video from a February 2024 panel discussion, Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD) speculated that Congress might have to invalidate a potential election victory by former President Donald Trump, even at the risk of inciting “civil war.”

Raskin’s comments have raised serious concerns among Trump supporters, Americans, and advocates of democratic fairness, highlighting a disturbing trend of political maneuvering aimed at undermining Trump’s candidacy.

The video, recorded at the Politics and Prose bookstore in Washington, D.C., captures Raskin predicting that the Supreme Court would block efforts by Democrats to exclude Trump from the ballot in several states using Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

This section was originally adopted after the Civil War to prevent former Confederates from holding federal office. Radicals have tried to argue that Trump’s actions constituted “insurrection” under this section, barring him from running for president again.

In March, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled against these exclusion attempts, stating that it is Congress, not the states, responsible for enforcing Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

This ruling prompted Raskin to suggest that Congress would need to act if Trump won the election, a notion that raises the specter of “civil war conditions” due to potential backlash from Trump supporters.

Raskin’s history of political opposition to Trump is well-documented. He led the House impeachment managers during Trump’s second impeachment trial and served on the January 6 Committee.

Yet, Raskin himself objected to the 2017 election results, showcasing a blatant double standard. His willingness to entertain the idea of invalidating an election result if Trump wins is deeply troubling and suggests a disregard for democratic principles.

In his remarks, Raskin criticized the Supreme Court for what he perceived as its failure to support progressive causes. He pointed to historical decisions like Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson to argue that the Court has often been on the wrong side of justice.

However, his comments ignore the Court’s crucial role in upholding the Constitution and providing checks and balances within the government.

Raskin’s suggestion that the Supreme Court justices are shirking their duties is both misleading and dangerous. His reference to the justices having “great protection” is particularly disingenuous, given the assassination attempt on Justice Brett Kavanaugh in June 2022 and the continued protests outside his home.

The Department of Justice’s refusal to enforce laws prohibiting protests outside justices’ residences only adds to the concerning climate of intimidation against the judiciary.

Raskin’s comments reveal a broader strategy among some Democrats to use every possible tactic to prevent Trump from returning to office. By invoking the threat of “civil war” and suggesting that Congress might need to invalidate an election result, Raskin is undermining the democratic process and the rule of law. This approach is not only reckless but also a direct assault on the fundamental principles of American democracy.

Trump supporters see these moves as a desperate attempt to silence a candidate who has consistently challenged the political establishment.

The attempts to bar Trump from the ballot and the discussions of invalidating his potential victory are viewed as transparent efforts to rig the 2024 election. Instead of engaging in a fair electoral contest, some Democrats are resorting to underhanded tactics that threaten the integrity of the democratic process.

In response to Raskin’s alarming comments, it is crucial for Americans to stand up for the principles of democracy and ensure that every candidate has a fair chance to run for office.

This means rejecting efforts to exclude candidates from the ballot based on politically motivated interpretations of the law and standing against any moves to invalidate election results.

The American people deserve a transparent and fair electoral process, free from interference and manipulation. It is vital that Congress respects the Supreme Court’s rulings and upholds the Constitution, rather than succumbing to partisan pressures.

Raskin’s remarks are a stark reminder of the lengths to which some will go to undermine Trump and disrupt the democratic process.

As the 2024 election approaches, it is essential to remain vigilant and defend the principles of democracy. Trump supporters and advocates for electoral fairness must continue to demand justice and ensure that the American people can participate in a free and fair election.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Radical Left has their hand in the media, and many people are concerned by that fact. Especially because recent discoveries have made fears a reality.

And a liberal tech giant has been caught violating the Constitution in an attempt to push a Radical agenda.

The controversy surrounding Google’s manipulation of search results to censor information about former President Donald Trump has raised serious concerns about the role of big tech companies in influencing public opinion and political outcomes. Recent revelations suggest that Google’s actions are part of a broader trend of big tech companies pushing a radical agenda while suppressing conservative viewpoints.

House Republicans, led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), have taken Google to task over what they perceive as deliberate interference in the 2024 presidential election. The House Judiciary Committee has launched an investigation into why Google’s search engine failed to auto-complete searches related to Donald Trump, even returning results about Vice President Kamala Harris instead.

Google attributed these discrepancies to various “bugs” in their system. The company claimed that these bugs prevented information about Trump from appearing in auto-complete suggestions and that searches for Trump generated articles about Harris due to outdated protections against political violence. While Google has assured that these issues have been fixed, the timing and nature of these “errors” have left many skeptical.

The issue at hand is not just a technical glitch but part of a worrying pattern of behavior by Google and other big tech companies.

This latest incident comes on the heels of numerous reports and accusations that tech giants are systematically silencing conservative voices while amplifying liberal ones.

Rep. Jordan has rightfully questioned the credibility of Google’s explanations, labeling them as “vague excuses” and demanding more specific answers.

Jordan’s concerns are echoed by many who fear that big tech companies like Google are actively working to influence political discourse.

The fact that manual searches for Trump frequently returned results about Kamala Harris suggests a deliberate attempt to divert attention away from Trump and towards a preferred candidate. This kind of manipulation is not just an issue of technical failure but raises serious ethical and legal questions.

The potential consequences of such actions by Google are far-reaching. Search engines play a crucial role in shaping public perception and access to information.

When a company as powerful as Google manipulates search results, it can significantly impact voter behavior and election outcomes.

By prioritizing liberal news outlets and suppressing conservative viewpoints, Google is effectively skewing the democratic process in favor of one political party.

Rep. Jordan’s investigation into Google’s practices is a crucial step in holding big tech accountable. The Judiciary Committee’s letter to Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai demands transparency and accountability, seeking to ensure that such issues do not occur again.

The committee’s ongoing investigation into political bias among big tech companies and digital advertisers highlights the need for stricter regulations and oversight to prevent further manipulation.

The actions of Google and other tech giants reflect a broader agenda that extends beyond mere search result manipulation. These companies have consistently shown a bias towards liberal viewpoints, often under the guise of combating misinformation or hate speech.

However, the selective enforcement of these policies disproportionately affects conservative voices, leading to accusations of censorship and political bias.

The Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), an advertising association, has also come under scrutiny for allegedly violating anti-trust laws by discouraging companies from advertising with conservative media sources.

By purporting to speak with one voice on behalf of advertisers, GARM has leveraged changes in tech platforms that favor Democrats. This kind of collusion further exacerbates the problem of media bias and the suppression of conservative viewpoints.

The suppression of conservative voices by big tech companies is a direct attack on free speech and the democratic process. It is imperative that lawmakers and regulators take action to ensure that these companies are held accountable for their actions.

The need for transparency, fairness, and accountability in how information is disseminated cannot be overstated.

Former President Donald Trump and the Republican Party have consistently championed “America First” policies that prioritize the interests of American citizens. In contrast, the Biden-Harris administration and its allies in big tech seem more focused on pushing a radical agenda that undermines the principles of free speech and fair play.

It is time for Americans to demand better and hold these powerful entities accountable for their actions.

The investigation led by Rep. Jim Jordan and the House Judiciary Committee is a crucial step in addressing this issue and ensuring that the democratic process is not undermined by the bias and manipulation of powerful tech giants.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Donald Trump has been battling the Radical Left for years. And they seem bent on locking him up.

And now, the Supreme Court has handed Donald Trump a massive trial loss that will change everything.

In a move that has stirred controversy and disbelief, the Supreme Court on Monday rejected an effort to delay the sentencing of 2024 GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump in a case that many see as a blatant attempt to sabotage his campaign.

The decision, stemming from a case brought forth by Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, is seen by Trump supporters as yet another example of the political persecution he has faced.

In a brief and somewhat dismissive order, the court stated, “Missouri’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied, and its motion for preliminary relief or a stay is dismissed as moot.”

Justices Thomas and Alito showed some dissent, indicating they would have allowed the motion to proceed but stopped short of granting other relief.

This ruling follows a Manhattan jury’s May decision to find Trump guilty of 34 counts of falsified business records, a case spearheaded by District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Trump’s sentencing is set for September, a timing many believe is deliberately chosen to disrupt his presidential campaign.

On July 3, Attorney General Bailey filed a lawsuit against New York, accusing the state of violating the First Amendment rights of Missouri residents.

The lawsuit argued that the prosecution, gag order, and impending sentencing of Trump hinder his ability to communicate with voters, thus infringing on their right to an informed vote.

Bailey’s lawsuit called on the Supreme Court to declare New York’s actions unlawful, arguing that they constitute blatant election interference. The lawsuit demanded the removal of any gag orders on Trump and a delay of his sentencing until after the 2024 election.

“Right now, Missouri has a huge problem with New York. Instead of letting presidential candidates campaign on their own merit, radical progressives in New York are trying to rig the 2024 election by waging a direct attack on our democratic process,” Bailey declared.

The charges against Trump, brought by Alvin Bragg, a known progressive and backed by George Soros, are seen by many as a farce. The allegations of falsified business records are, at best, minor infractions that are being blown out of proportion to discredit Trump.

This is not about justice; it’s about stopping a political opponent who represents a threat to the liberal agenda.

Bailey pointed out the absurdity of the situation: “I will not sit idly by while Soros-backed prosecutors hold Missouri voters hostage in this presidential election. I am filing suit to ensure every Missourian can exercise their right to hear from and vote for their preferred presidential candidate.”

The term “lawfare” has become increasingly relevant in the context of Trump’s legal battles. This tactic, which involves using legal systems and principles to achieve political ends, is dangerous and corrosive to the foundations of American democracy.

Bailey’s remarks echo a sentiment shared by many: “This lawfare is poisonous to American democracy. The American people ought to be able to participate in a presidential election free from New York’s interference. Any gag order and sentence should be stayed until after the election.”

What’s truly at stake here is the right of the American people to hear from all presidential candidates and make an informed choice.

The timing of Trump’s trial and sentencing is no coincidence. It’s a calculated move to silence one of the most influential political figures in modern history, a man who has consistently challenged the status quo and given voice to millions of Americans who feel ignored by the political elite.

The progressive left’s efforts to sideline Trump through these legal maneuvers are transparent and desperate. Instead of engaging in a fair electoral battle, they are resorting to underhanded tactics that undermine the very principles of democracy they claim to uphold.

Trump supporters and advocates for democratic fairness must remain vigilant and vocal in their opposition to this blatant misuse of the legal system.

The fight is not just about one man; it’s about preserving the integrity of the electoral process and ensuring that every American has the right to hear from and vote for their chosen candidate without undue interference.

The Supreme Court’s decision to reject the delay in Trump’s sentencing is a disappointing yet telling indication of the lengths to which his opponents will go to stifle his influence.

As Trump faces these unprecedented challenges, his supporters must rally around him, demand justice, and insist on a fair and transparent electoral process.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Ever since the attempt on Trump’s life, the Secret Service has come under mass scrutiny. But no one could have been prepared for what was discovered.

Because a horrific secret has been revealed about the former Secret Service head’s past.

it has been revealed that former US Secret Service (USSS) head Kimberly Cheatle, along with other top officials in the Biden administration, sought to destroy a bag of cocaine found in the White House during President Joe Biden’s third year in office.

This information comes from a new report following Cheatle’s resignation after security failures led to an assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.

Three sources within the Secret Service community told Real Clear Politics that Cheatle and other top agency officials wanted to get rid of the cocaine when it was discovered.

However, members of the USSS Forensics and Uniformed Divisions resisted these efforts, refusing to participate in the destruction of the illicit drugs.

The bag of cocaine was found on a Sunday in early July 2023, while President Joe Biden and his family were at Camp David. Multiple disagreements reportedly took place over how to handle the discovery.

When a Uniformed Division officer, who was assigned to the case, attempted to treat it with crime scene protocol, he informed his supervisors, including Cheatle and now-acting USSS Director Ron Rowe. Subsequently, he was removed from the assignment.

While neither Joe Biden nor his son Hunter were at the White House when the cocaine was found, the incident followed a period during which Hunter Biden, known for his long-standing struggle with cocaine addiction, had been staying at the White House.

This connection prompted many Americans to speculate that the bag of cocaine might belong to Hunter.

Cheatle was reportedly concerned about the media storm that the discovery would create around the Biden administration. The USSS issued a press statement at the time, claiming, “There was no surveillance video footage found that provided investigative leads or any other means for investigators to identify who may have deposited the found substance in this area.”

An official stated that it would be nearly impossible to determine the original owner of the drugs, given the high traffic in the area where they were found—the West Exec basement entryway of the West Wing.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre disclosed during a briefing that the cocaine had been found in a heavily trafficked area frequented by politicians, their families, staff, and tourists alike.

The lack of accountability and transparency in this incident raises serious concerns about the integrity and priorities of the Biden administration.

The attempts by Cheatle and others to cover up the discovery of cocaine in the White House reflect a troubling pattern of behavior that seems aimed at protecting the Biden family’s image rather than upholding the rule of law.

Cheatle’s resignation, following the security failures that led to an assassination attempt on Donald Trump, adds another layer of concern.

The former president’s safety was compromised, and the ensuing attempt to cover up a drug scandal within the Biden White House further erodes public trust in the Secret Service and the current administration.

For many, this incident is a glaring example of the double standards that seem to favor the Bidens. If a similar scandal had occurred during the Trump administration, the media and political opponents would have likely called for immediate investigations and accountability.

The attempts to brush this incident under the rug are viewed as an effort to shield the Biden family from scrutiny and maintain a facade of propriety.

The American people deserve transparency and accountability from their leaders and the institutions that serve them. The Secret Service’s integrity has been called into question, and the Biden administration’s attempts to cover up the cocaine discovery cannot be ignored.

It is essential to demand a thorough investigation into this incident to ensure that those in power are held accountable for their actions.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.