One Thing that Putin Did Get Right: After January 6, "Over 400 Americans had criminal charges places against them, face prison sentences up to maybe even 25 years; they're being called domestic terrorists"

Even Vladimir Putin, of all people, sees what is going on in America.

When asked in June 2021 (the year before the Kremlin invaded Ukraine), "If all of your political opponents are dead, in prison, poisoned, doesn't that send a message that you do not want a fair political fight?", he responded as follows below.

While we do not agree with daniel's (rosy?) portrait of Putin (especially in the aftermath of the Ukraine war), nobody can deny that Russia's president did provide a reply that unexpectedly brought January 6 into the debate:

"As for who is killing whom or throwing whom in jail, people came to the US Congress for political demands. 400 people. Over 400 people had criminal charges places against them, face prison sentences up to maybe even 25 years. They're being called domestic terrorists. They're being accused of a number of their crimes. Some of them were arrested right away after the events and 30 of them are still under arrest. It's unclear on what grounds. And as for the [unclear] authorities have informed us about it. Some people died and one of the people that died was simply shot on the spot by the police although they weren't threatening the police with any weapons. In many counties, the same thing happens that happens in our country. I'd like to stress once more that we sympathize with what happened in the United States but we have no desire to let the same thing to happen in our country."

The whole affair recently led the Babylon Bee go for the tongue-in-cheek headlines, Putin Impressed With American System Of Prosecuting Political Opponents and Democrats Vow To Arrest As Many Political Opponents As It Takes To Defeat Fascism.

Related: When satire becomes reality by Kassy Dillon of Fox News: Nearly 100 Babylon Bee joke stories have come true 

Civil Deadline quotes Fox News: 

During the segment, [Tucker] Carlson explained, “While stipulating that all riots are bad because precision matters, facts matter. The truth matters. Here’s the truth: More cops were injured by Kamala Harris’s favorite mob, BLM, at the White House than were injured by Trump voters at the Capitol on January 6. A lot more!”

But the highest-rated Primetime news anchor went on to explain why January 6 is part of a much bigger plan. Carlson said, “So, again, to be clear, both events are bad. But here’s the key: we only remember one of them. Why? The people in charge of history are liars, liars. And lying is bad. And on a national scale, it’s deadly.”

“It’s corrosive of everything that is good in the country, including trust and your grasp on reality itself. And that’s where they try to make you lie. Men can become women. Climate change is an existential threat, or whatever the lie is they’re making you tell, they don’t believe it. They know you don’t believe it. But by forcing you to repeat it, they degrade and control you. They make you less of a person.”

The lies and scams perpetrated by the radical left are destroying our nation. But their biggest lie may well be what actually happened on January 6. However, it could prove to be their undoing. Video doesn’t lie. The footage from the Capitol's surveillance cameras on January 6 tells a very different story than what the left claims happened.

"It's Only Sex!" Isn't the Looming Trump Indictment Reminiscent of Bill Clinton's Monicagate Scandal?

As the consensus — even among Trump critics — seems to be that the looming indictment against Donald Trump is "nonsense" and a “blatantly partisan exercise of raw power”, I am reminded that anytime I see any kind of debate online about Donald Trump's time in office, there will always be some leftist spewing out that the proof that POTUS45 is a conman/a criminal/a traitor/a disaster is that he is the only president to be impeached twice. (Or is it three times? I can't remember anymore.)

Isn't this proof, rather, that, in its desire to create a one-party state, the Democratic Party is turning the country into a banana republic?

As it happens, the Democrat Party's incessant attempts to demonize and bring down Donald Trump, along with the entire GOP, for over half a decade remind me of the Ministry of Truth's Two Minutes' Hate program against Emmanuel Goldstein, Big Brother's "enemy of the people" in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.

It continues to amaze me that mainstream media outlets like CNN can "report" (sic) on "Hush money, Mar-a-Lago docs, 2020 election aftermath: Notable investigations, lawsuits and controversies continue to surround the former president" — without giving notice to what Joe Biden has been involved in, both before and after becoming president (sniff sniff, anyone?).

In that perspective, Wikipedia reveals that in the George Orwell novel, the economy department, aka the Ministry of Plenty, is in fact "responsible for maintaining a state of perpetual poverty, scarcity and financial shortages" (thanks to Ed Driscoll for the Instalink).

One thing that surprises me about the indictment in which Stormy Daniels is the central element is that so far nobody, either on the right or on the left, seems to have made what seems to me to be the correct comparison: it is reminiscent of the Bill Clinton scandal known as Monicagate and the impeachment trial of 1998-1999.

Back then, the Clinton defenders then held (hardly wrongly) that the affair with Monica Lewinsky (or with anybody else) should remain private and not be used in politics — "It's only sex!" (with which I agreed, by the way — although I also now recognize that my viewpoint back then was almost entirely formed by the left-leaning mainstream media).

Doesn't this prove that the Democrats, and their MSM allies, will say whatever, depending on who is in office? Their guy or the other guy?

1998: Sex is a private matter and it should be nobody's business who the President (Bill Clinton) fools around with.

2023: The President or former President (Donald Trump), who we were delighted to break a story about making a comment about grabbing women by the pussy, had the audacity to cheat on his wife, and he needs to be punished.

2016: In the meantime, we had 2016: not only were there not a single scandal, not one (sic), during the president's (during Barack Obama's) tenure, but the President was an upright family man.

2020: The President or future President {Joe Biden) touches children and holds them close to him while sniffing their hair, and this is not anything that we think is worthy to write a news story about.

They jump from one argument to the other, to the very opposite, 180º, depending on what party the commander-in-chief belongs to.

Breitbart's Kristina Wong:

Alan Dershowitz, who is also not a fan of Trump’s but has slammed politicized investigations and impeachments of the former president, wrote recently in the New York Sun:

All decent people, whether politically opposed to Mr. Trump (as I am) or supportive of his candidacy, should be concerned about this weaponizing of the prosecutor’s office for the political purpose of preventing a potential candidate from running for office.

Even some of the president’s potential 2024 rivals are calling the potential indictment political persecution.

Megyn Kelly's Show also had an interview with Alan Dershowitz, the author of the book, Get Trump, the publication of which could hardly be more appropriate (0:56-23:00, thanks to Paul Reen). 

We don't want to — ever — weaponize our criminal justice system! It's the glory — it's the glory! — of our Constitution, that we have a Fifth Amendment, and a Fourth Amendment, and a First Amendment.  And all these amendments … one after the other … that the people on the other side are so anxious to get Trump, they're willing to sacrifice the entire Constitution [ca. 15:15]

Update: on Instapundit, Philip Nolan writes:

True, but the scandal this most resembles -- without the actual love-child -- is the [John] Edwards affair. 

Surprisingly, Edwards was prosecuted, but even with an actual out-of-wedlock birth and evidence of payments, the jury wouldn't convict.

Combined with Jim Comey's "no reasonable prosecutor" standard (oh, wait, he wasn't a prosecutor then?), seems like a reasonable course of action is to just "move on." Yet one of Soros's minions won't -- why is that?

Update 2: If the Trump Arrest Means Anything, It Is the Fact That It Confirms the Millionaire's Charges Against the Deep State 

Back in the Clinton days, a quarter century ago, during Monicagate, the response was always "It's only sex!" 

We can all go back and forth about various similarities or differences between the two cases (which I wrote about in more detail two weeks ago), it all comes down to this: Leftists turned to Trump's alleged sexcapades, real or imagined (before their target was even in the White House), only when, and only because, they exhausted everything else — every single charge over six-seven years failing miserably.