Biden is getting older, and it shows. But he just got the worst news of his life.

And Joe Biden’s alarming test results just changed everything.

President Biden is the oldest sitting president in the history of this country.

His obvious decline has led many to question whether he can effectively lead.

Now even his own party is turning on him.

According to a recent poll, half of prospective Democratic primary voters want the party to nominate someone other than President Biden to compete for the White House in 2024.

Although Biden is almost certain to be nominated for a second term next summer, according to a New York Times/Siena College poll released Tuesday, only 45% of potential primary voters want the 80-year-old to be the party’s standard-bearer, while 50% prefer someone else.

A plurality of Democrats (39%) oppose Biden’s reelection because of his old age, while another 20% believe he hasn’t done enough to win a second term. Another 14% stated they would rather have someone new.

When asked how they would feel if Vice President Kamala Harris became the Democratic nominee, two-thirds (67%) said they would be “enthusiastic” or “satisfied” with the concept.

In comparison, more than seven in ten potential Democratic voters (71%) said they would be “enthusiastic” or “satisfied” if Biden was the party’s nominee, while Harris’ “enthusiastic” quotient was somewhat higher (26% vs. 20%).

Last year, only 26% of probable Democratic primary voters wanted Biden to be renominated, but over the next year, the president’s support among prospective Democratic voters 65 and older increased by 30%.

Biden has 64% support in the primary, while environmental lawyer and anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has 13% and spiritual guru Marianne Williamson has 10%.

In a rerun of the 2020 election, Biden and former President Donald Trump both gain 43% support, with 6% stating they were not going to vote at all or would not vote if those two major party candidates were the only ones running.

Another 4% said they would support someone else, while the other 4% stated they didn’t know or declined to answer.

Notably, Biden trails Trump by a slim margin among Hispanics (41%-38%) and self-described independents (42%-37%), while the former president leads the incumbent among those earning less than $50,000 per year (44%-40%) and $50,000 to $100,000 per year (44%-41%). Trump also has a 37% to 31% lead against Biden among those who did not vote in 2020.

In Tuesday’s poll, Biden’s job approval rating is 39%, but only 23% of respondents believe the US is on the right track (65% believe America is moving in the wrong direction). The president had a somewhat higher personal favorability rating of 43%, with 83% of his 2020 voters favoring him.

Meanwhile, 41% of those polled thought Trump was very or somewhat favorable. This figure rises to 83% among people who supported him in 2020.

Another red flag for the president: only 20% of respondents believe the economy is “excellent” (2%) or “good” (18%), while 78% say it is “fair” (29%) or “poor” (49%).

Biden has begun vigorously promoting “Bidenomics,” in an attempt to address Republican complaints about inflation and other monetary difficulties.

In the most recent RealClearPolitics poll, Biden leads Trump by 0.9 percentage points, and his average job approval rating is 42.1% approve to 54.1% disapprove.

The New York Times/Siena College poll was conducted July 23-27 among 1,329 registered voters, with a margin of error of 3.67 percentage points.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Highest Court in the land is under heavy assault. But it’s gone way too far.

Because the Supreme Court has been hit with jaw-dropping new attacks.

The Left has their eyes set on upending the institution of the Supreme Court because of their disagreements with the rulings that have been handed down in recent years.

Top, high-profile Democrats like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have said that we should no longer view the Supreme Court as a legitimate institution.

She literally screamed at the Supreme Court that they were “illegitimate” after they handed down a decision that effectively overturned Roe v. Wade.

AOC screams "ILLEGITIMATE!" and "INTO THE STREETS!" on the steps of the Supreme Court https://t.co/4DwIXltGGr

— Not the Bee (@Not_the_Bee) June 24, 2022

Or consider how the current Senate Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer (D-NY), basically threatened the Supreme Court saying that they wouldn’t “know what hit them” if they continue to hand down rulings that the Leftists disagree with.

Simply put, these attacks are unhinged.

But now the Leftists are going after the Supreme Court to delegitimize them in a new way, by arguing that the Supreme Court has been off the rails for decades.

The Democrats have recently been trying to pass legislation to place new arbitrary ethical standards on the Supreme Court as a way to control them.

Of course, anyone with just a little bit of foresight can see how bad of an idea that is as it would give the Congress and legislative branch as a whole a leg up on the other branches of government by being able to effectively control the Highest Court in the land.

But a New York Times editorial board member, Mara Gay, argued live on cable TV news that the Supreme Court should have had ethical standards passed by the Congress placed on the Justices a long time ago.

She even says that to argue otherwise is to be anti-Democratic and anti-Constitutional.

First, she parrots the idea that the Supreme Court has become a tool of the scary “far-right”.

“In this moment in American history the far-right in the country, which includes several members of the Supreme Court at this point, is far less interested I believe, unfortunately, in precedent and in democratic institutions and far more interested in raw power,” Gay said on MSNBC.

Then she attacked Samuel Alito for defending himself against the Left’s attacks on the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

“And I think what’s interesting about this op-ed to me is it’s straight out of the right-wing playbook at this point,” she continued.

“Throw out an extreme idea that is anathema to everything that any American who has been to a high school social studies class would recognize as the importance of the balance and checks of power, and then get Americans used to it so by the time you’ve decided that Congress, despite Section 3 of the Constitution, has absolutely no role in altering or regulating the court, then Americans will accept that, as though it was true all along.”

Talk about truly insane, right?

The Democrats are now trying to tell the American people that we have had it wrong all these years and that Congress should ultimately be controlling the Supreme Court because that is “true checks and balances.”

But where were these criticisms of the Supreme Court when the Court was handing down rulings that were more sympathetic to the radical Left?

Ah, that’s right. The Left just can’t stand losing on the political scene at all.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Left is willing to do anything to accomplish their agenda. Even the pushing for the ultimate price won’t stop them.

And these top Democrats were caught threatening Trump’s life.

Ever since Trump was indicted recently, many people have been talking about how much of a witch hunt all of these cases are.

That’s true, it’s obviously a way to make Trump’s campaign for re-election as difficult as possible.

But what people aren’t talking too much about is the reality of the charges that have been brought against him.

We aren’t talking about a slap on the wrist or a couple months in jail.

No, if Trump gets a bad judge or jury, they could even take his life.

The indictment issued by Special Counsel Jack Smith on Tuesday against former President Donald Trump for his participation in seeking to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election includes multiple serious offenses, including one punishable by death.

18 U.S.C. 241, “Conspiracy Against Rights,” carries a maximum sentence of ten years in federal prison. However, it adds that if the activities specified by this provision result in death, the perpetrator may be executed:

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Ashli Babbitt, a rioter shot by a law enforcement officer, died as a result of the Capitol riot on January 6, which Smith said Tuesday was caused by Trump’s election claims. Democrats, on the other hand, have blamed Trump for the deaths of multiple demonstrators and Capitol Police officers.

Democrats and some of Trump’s Republican opponents have also tried to blame him for apparent rioter attempts to kidnap then-Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Smith could make the same case.

Other alleged violations in Trump’s January 6 indictment carry significant jail sentences as penalties:

18 U.S.C. 371 – Conspiracy to Defraud the United States – the maximum penalty is five years in prison, though penalties can be reduced if the conspiracy is to conduct a misdemeanor; in such instance, the sentence cannot be more severe than the maximum for that felony.

18 U.S.C. 1512 (k) – Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding – Originally intended to penalize witness tampering, this statute carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison for anyone who “obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding.”

18 U.S.C. 1512 (c) – Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruction an Official Proceeding carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

If Trump is convicted of all four offenses and receives the maximum non-lethal penalty, he may face a 55-year prison sentence if the penalties are served consecutively.

This, along with the potential 460-year prison term in the “documents” case, which Smith is pursuing in federal court in Miami, raises Trump’s maximum federal prison term to 515 years, or more than half a millennium.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Biden’s DOJ believes they have Donald Trump dead to rights. But they’ve made a critical mistake.

Because a top lawyer has utterly demolished the latest indictment case against Trump.

It really does feel like the banana republic under the “leadership” of President (supreme leader) Biden is well underway, doesn’t it?

Donald Trump has been hit with indictment after indictment and charged with countless felonies, many of which are beyond bogus.

The latest indictment against Trump may be the most insanely unhinged charge yet.

Special Counsel Jack Smith announced the latest indictment against Donald Trump earlier this week, this time over the events that took place on January 6th, 2021 in the wake of the 2020 Presidential election.

Donald Trump, to this day, maintains that the election was fixed. But that is his own opinion that no one can strip away from him, or shouldn’t at least.

The Democrats believe that Donald Trump should be silenced and face the consequences of daring to question the accepted narrative about the 2020 Presidential election.

It’s obvious that at the core of this new charge against Donald Trump for allegedly trying to overturn the election results is whether or not Trump’s First Amendment rights apply.

Well, a top attorney and legal expert believes that is going to be the undoing of the Department of Justice in their case against Trump.

Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University’s Law School, says that the vast majority of the case against Trump is protected by Trump’s First Amendment rights. And when you take all that out of the picture, there’s almost nothing left for the DOJ to charge Trump with.

Turley put Jack Smith on blast for trying to bring forward the “first criminal indictment” of disinformation.

“Special Counsel Jack Smith just issued the first criminal indictment of alleged disinformation in my view. If you take a red pen to all of the material presumptively protected by the First Amendment, you can reduce much of the indictment to haiku…” Turley shared on Twitter after the news of the Trump indictment was released.

Special Counsel Jack Smith just issued the first criminal indictment of alleged disinformation in my view. If you take a red pen to all of the material presumptively protected by the First Amendment, you can reduce much of the indictment to haiku…

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 1, 2023

Turley says that while he believes the case against Trump in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents indictment is fairly strong, he thinks this new indictment is the opposite.

He likens this new charge to the case when Virginia’s former Governor Bob McDonnell had his charge thrown out by the U.S. Supreme Court, a charge that was prosecuted by Jack Smith.

…I felt that the Mar-a-Lago indictment was strong. This is the inverse. This is closer to the case against former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell where Smith was overturned by an unanimous Supreme Court…

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 1, 2023

Finally, the law professor highlighted how deeply disturbing the Jack Smith indictment announcement was because his own signals were crossed.

…The press conference held by Smith only deepened the unease for some of us. Smith railed against the January 6th riot and made it sound like he was indicting Trump on incitement. He didn't. The disconnect was glaring and concerning.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 1, 2023

Be sure to stay tuned to Prudent Politics for more updates on the Trump legal cases that will be unfolding in the next few months.

The Left isn’t too concerned with ensuring safety and prosperity in America. Nothing is more important to them than their agenda.

And this top Democrat threatened American lives with just one stroke of a pen.

Take a look around you. Do you see the toll the Biden administration has taken on this country.

Inflation is still high, interest rates are increasingly high, and the dollar is getting weaker.

That’s just the economic side of it. There’s also the fact that Biden has effectively disarmed the American military by sending billions of dollars in ammunition to Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia.

And who can forget the millions of illegal immigrants that have poured across the border in recent years?

Well, guess what…now those illegal immigrants can arrest you – at least in Illinois.

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, D., signed legislation allowing non-US citizens to work as police officers in the state, infuriating critics who called the prospect of foreigners arresting American residents “a fundamentally bad idea.”

Under Illinois House Bill 3751, being a police officer in the state will no longer require US citizenship.

Despite strong opposition from Republican MPs and notable police organizations, the bill was passed by the Democratic governor on Friday and will take effect on January 1, 2024.

The bill “provides that an individual who is not a citizen but is legally authorized to work in the United States under federal law is authorized to apply for the position of police officer, subject to all requirements and limitations, other than citizenship, to which other applicants are subject,” according to HB3751. Non-US citizens must also be able to obtain, carry, purchase, or otherwise possess a firearm under federal law in order to apply for the job.

According to the measure, immigrants who remain in the nation under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Act are also eligible to seek for a career in law enforcement.

Non-US citizens are currently prohibited from serving as police officers or deputies under federal law.

Over the weekend, Republican Illinois Rep. Mary Miller took to Twitter to express her displeasure over the new rule, stating that “no sane state would allow foreign nationals to arrest their citizens.”

“At 5 p.m. yesterday, when no one was paying attention, Pritzker signed a bill to allow illegal immigrants to become police officers, giving non-citizens the power to arrest citizens in our state,” she tweeted. “No sane state would allow foreign nationals to arrest their citizens, this is madness!”

Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., tweeted following news of the bill’s passing, “In the state of Illinois, illegals can now become police officers. Yes, you heard that right.”

“People who are breaking the law by their presence here can now arrest American citizens. You know the other blue states are watching and getting ready to implement this idea as soon as they can!” she continued. “We either address this border crisis or allow our country to descend further into a Leftist dystopia.”

The bill was also slammed by the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) after it passed in the Democratic-controlled state House earlier this month.

“What message does this legislation send when it allows people who do not have legal status to become the enforcers of our laws?” the group said in a statement to ABC20. “This is a potential crisis of confidence in law enforcement at a time when our officers need all the public confidence they can get.”

This is banana republic stuff.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Former President Donald Trump has his eyes on the White House. But that could easily be derailed.

Because this District Attorney is preparing to do the unthinkable to Donald Trump.

If you thought the political targeting of Donald Trump with countless criminal charges was over, you would be wrong.

Special Counsel Jack Smith just hit Trump with additional charges in the classified documents case, simply adding salt to the wound and making Trump’s legal defense that much more difficult.

Jack Smith is allegedly also preparing charges against Trump as it relates to the 2020 election and the events of January 6th, 2021. They say he’s responsible for some underground scheme to overthrow the government and should be charged as a result.

Of course, most Americans believe that’s a bunch of nonsense and just want to move on from the 2020 election because there’s more pressing issues facing our country today like the crisis at the southern border.

But Jack Smith doesn’t care and it seems like he’s going to have more of a reason to go after Trump with another indictment because a different District Attorney is preparing to do the same.

The Georgia Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis shared with the media recently that she is finalizing her plans to announce charges against Donald Trump for allegedly attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia.

She said that the “work is accomplished” and added that they are “ready to go” with the legal prosecution.

NBC reports:

In a letter to the chief judge of the Fulton County courthouse in May, Willis signaled in a scheduling request that charging decisions stemming from an investigation into “possible criminal interference in the administration of Georgia’s 2020 general election” could come in early August. She asked the judge to not schedule in-person trials or hearings the weeks of Aug. 7 and 14.

The announcement of the decision from the Georgia District Attorney is expected in the first half of this month of August.

Willis also shared with the media that she believes there’s a possibility that people will be “unhappy” with decision enough to “create harm.”

“Some people may not be happy with the decisions that I’m making,” Willis claimed. “And sometimes, when people are unhappy, they act in a way that could create harm.”

Donald Trump has called this case from District Attorney Willis a “witch hunt” and said that they have no evidence of him conducting any wrongdoing.

Trump’s legal team had attempted to get Willis to be dismissed from this case and prevent her from being able to eventually charge him, but was unsuccessful.

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that she would be able to continue the probe and bring charges if necessary.

So far, Trump’s legal woes have not had an impact on his stature in the Republican primary race as he still tops the national polls.

But it will be interesting to see if that starts to change with the announcement of further indictments and charges.

It’s entirely possible that the American people simply grow more annoyed by these rogue District Attorneys going out of their way to target a former President who, in their eyes, is innocent.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The race for the Republican nomination is heating up. Major players are starting to get burned.

And top Republican candidate smacked with a sobering reality.

If you’ve been following the race to the White House, you know that the main fight has been between Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis.

DeSantis, the conservative Governor of Florida, made waves after winning a sweeping victory in the 2022 midterms.

Meanwhile, Trump has been punching down at DeSantis to squash any threat of him taking his nomination. Trump, unsurprisingly, has been very successful.

And now it’s reflecting in the poll numbers.

According to a poll released Monday, the majority of Republican primary voters indicated they would not support a GOP presidential candidate who waged a fight against “woke” ideas.

The New York Times/Siena College poll indicated that “wokeism” was not a top priority for voters in the 2024 election, which largely affects Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL).

Only 24% said they’d vote for someone “who focuses on defeating radical ‘woke’ ideology in our schools, media, and culture,” while 65% said they’d vote for someone “who focuses on restoring law and order in our streets and at the border.”

Furthermore, 38% of possible Republican primary voters stated they want a candidate “to fight corporations that promote ‘woke’ left ideology.”

I know my feed is all this NYT poll, but cannot stop finding 👀 highlights. Fighting woke corporations, probably DeSantis’ top issue, is somehow a loser among Republicans — via @besttrousers pic.twitter.com/oFResL5mfE

— Benjy Sarlin (@BenjySarlin) July 31, 2023

52%, on the other side, feel the Republican candidate “should stay out of deciding what corporations can support.”

According to the poll’s results, it seems like one of DeSantis’s major issues may hurt his chances in the primary election.

In the last two years, Florida’s governor has built a reputation for himself by battling “wokeism” in the state’s public education system and the Walt Disney World Resort.

DeSantis introduced legislation in Florida to demolish the doctrine, namely the Stop WOKE Act, which prohibited schools and corporations from endorsing critical race theory.

He also chastised Disney for opposing the state’s Parental Rights in Education Act, which prohibits public school instructors from discussing children’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

In the midst of its fight with the state government, Disney sued DeSantis earlier this year, prompting Florida to file a countersuit.

DeSantis has recently struggled to connect with Republican voters. As a result, in order to compete with former President Donald Trump in 2024, he has had to alter his campaign plan.

It remains to be seen whether DeSantis can persuade voters in the first presidential debate of the Republican primary season next month. The debate will take place on August 23 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

From July 23 to 27, the New York Times and Siena College polled 1,329 registered voters, with an oversample of 818 probable Republican primary voters. The margin of error for all registered voters is 3.67 percentage points, while among GOP voters it is 3.96 percentage points.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul hates the D.C. Swamp. He’s going after it with a vengeance.

And this Democrat is headed to prison after this bombshell from Rand Paul.

Rand Paul has been floating around the conservative movement for years trying to find his place.

Early on, he was known for his multi-hour filibusters against government spending and his attempt at the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

But where he really shined was in Congressional hearings questioning Dr. Anthony Fauci during the height of the COVID scare.

In those moments, Paul pressed Fauci on his knowledge of “gain-of-function” research done in tandem with the Chinese government.

And now Senator Paul is slapping Fauci with a major accusation.

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has issued a “official criminal referral” to the Department of Justice for Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Paul cited an email dated February 2020 in which Fauci described a call with British medical researcher Jeremy Farrar, then-director of the Wellcome Trust.

According to Fauci, those on the task force call, including Francis Collins, former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, and other “highly credible” scientists with expertise in evolutionary biology, expressed concern about the “fact upon viewing the sequences of several isolates of the nCoV, there were mutations in the virus that would be most unusual to have evolved naturally in the bats and that there was a suspicion that this mutation was intentionally inserted.”

“The suspicion was heightened by the fact that scientists in Wuhan University are known to have been working on gain-of-function experiments to determine the molecular mechanisms associated with bat viruses adapting to human infection, and the outbreak originated in Wuhan,” Fauci wrote, according to a screenshot of the newly unredacted email shared by RealClearPolitics White House reporter Philip Wegmann.

“This directly contradicts everything he said in committee hearing to me, denying absolutely that they funded any gain of function, and it’s absolutely a lie. That’s why I sent an official criminal referral to the DOJ,” Paul wrote on “X,” formerly known as Twitter, on Saturday.

This directly contradicts everything he said in committee hearing to me, denying absolutely that they funded any gain of function, and it’s absolutely a lie. That’s why I sent an official criminal referral to the DOJ. https://t.co/Y191SmMiIr

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) July 29, 2023

In July 2021, Paul reminded Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and president’s medical adviser, that lying to Congress is a federal crime, implying that the NIAID director had done so in relation to COVID-19 gain-of-function research conducted at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Fauci argued during a heated exchange that he had “never lied before Congress” during previous testimony in May, telling Paul that “you don’t know what you’re talking about.”

Fauci also denied that the NIH financed gain-of-function research, despite Paul’s citation of a scientific paper headlined “Discovery of a rich gene pool of bat SARS-related coronaviruses.”

Before being elected to Congress, Paul graduated from Duke University School of Medicine and worked as a doctor. He highlighted how the paper’s author recognizes the NIH and specifies the precise number of the grant awarded by the NIH.

According to Fauci, the article alluded to by Paul “was judged by qualified staff up and down the chain as not being gain of function.”

“Let’s read from the NIH definition of ‘gain of function,’” Paul said.

Paul concluded:

“This is your definition that you guys wrote. It says that ‘scientific research that increases the transmissibility among mammals is gain of function.’ They took animal viruses that only occur in animals, and they increased their transmissibility to humans. How you can say that’s not gain of function — it’s a dance, and you’re dancing around this because you’re trying to obscure responsibility for 4 million people dying around the world from a pandemic.”

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

President Biden has always been shady. But now the walls are crumbling down around him.

And Joe Biden was forced to admit to having secret family.

The Biden family has been in a constant state of damage control for years.

Not only did Hunter Biden’s laptop play center stage during the 2020 presidential election, but Joe’s own bribery scandals and habit for collapsing on stage has too.

One odd installment in the Biden saga has been Joe and Jill’s refusal to acknowledge one of their own grandchildren.

Navy Jones Roberts, the estranged child of Hunter Biden, was brushed aside by the Biden’s for years.

Biden even listed all of his grandchildren – minus Navy during a speech a few months ago.

Conservatives prodded Biden on being so heartless to a small child that is his own flesh and blood.

Now, President Biden is speaking out for the first time publicly about his granddaughter, Navy Joan Roberts, the estranged daughter of his son Hunter Biden, whom he had previously denied knowing.

“Our son Hunter and Navy’s mother, Lunden, are working together to foster a relationship that is in the best interests of their daughter, preserving her privacy as much as possible going forward,” Biden said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

“This is not a political issue, it’s a family matter,” he added.

“Jill and I only want what is best for all of our grandchildren, including Navy.”

The White House left Navy out of a Christmas stocking display for the second Christmas season in a row in December 2022, and before that, in 2020, Biden incorrectly stated that he and First Lady Jill Biden had five grandchildren, forgetting about then-newborn Beau Biden but completely ignoring Navy.

Biden claimed to have only six grandchildren at a White House “take your child to work day” event in April. “I have six grandchildren, and I’m crazy about them. And I speak to them every single day. Not a joke,” he said.

Earlier previous month, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre refused to answer a reporter’s Navy question, stating she didn’t “have anything to share.”

Hunter finalized his Arkansas child support lawsuit with Roberts’ mother, Lunden Alexis Roberts, in June, putting an end to a years-long paternity dispute.

According to a court filing, Hunter promised to give his daughter some of his paintings, and the child’s mother agreed to abandon her counterclaim to alter their child’s surname to “Biden.”

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Texas Governor Abbott’s claim to fame is his hardline and principled policies in the lone star state. His reign could come to an end.

And Greg Abbott got blindsided with a massive lawsuit.

A sad truth of politics is that it doesn’t matter if you play by the rules, your enemies will find a way to shut you down.

And a favorite of Democrats is to stomp and scream when duly elected representatives pass popular bills into law.

That’s right, it never is about “Democracy” or “giving the people a voice.” It’s only ever those good things if the laws and opinions just so happen to coincide with liberal orthodoxy.

If they don’t, then it’s a “threat to Democracy” and must be overturned immediately.

Now Texas is in the crosshairs for standing up against the Democrats.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which once supported free speech, is now in favor of child sex changes across the country.

The organization is suing the state of Texas, as it has done in other states, to protect children from the harmful effects of medicines and surgeries used in gender swapping.

The ACLU’s suit is based on the promise of parental liberty in the Texas constitution.

The idea is that sex modifications are medically required for children and adolescents suffering from gender dysphoria, and that parents should not be barred from making decisions regarding medical services to treat that condition.

However, the medical treatment of gender dysphoria in minors is not a proven science. The Worth Professional Association for Transgender Health promotes for its medical necessity, saying that medical sex transition therapies should have no age restrictions.

They also state that “eunuch” is a gender identity with which youngsters can identify.

Many clinicians in Europe and the United States believe that the best way to treat children and teenagers with gender uncertainty or dysphoria is to wait and see, rather than making permanent, life-changing alterations before the child is of consenting age.

The Texas measure prevents state medical insurance from covering child sex modifications, including those that “are intended to transition a child’s biological sex as determined by the child’s sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles.”

According to the bill, a physician or health care practitioner cannot “knowingly perform a sterilizing surgery on the child” or offer medications that “induce transient or permanent infertility.”

The bill is slated to take effect on September 1, but the ACLU is hoping for a repeat victory in their efforts to repeal similar laws in Florida.

They have brought suit, as have five families from the state. The lawsuit does not name the families, although their children vary in age from 9 to 16.

“This law would ban necessary and life-saving medical care for Texas’ transgender youth,” the ACLU says, “cut off access to care for adolescent minors already receiving treatment, and require the state to revoke the medical licenses of physicians providing the best standard of care to their trans patients.”

The ACLU has been successful in forcing states to allow minors to change their gender. They have victories in Florida, Arkansas, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Utah.