UPDATES ON EARLY VOTING FOR THE NEW YORK MAYORAL ELECTION

And now onto our main discussion, and to begin with, we ought to look at the New York Mayoral Election. Now, in the New York City mayor’s race, early voters are continuing to flock to the polls in record numbers.  Officials say over 223,000 people have already cast their ballot after three days. In this mayor’s race, incumbent Mayor Eric Adams joined independent candidate Andrew Cuomo on the campaign trail. Both men launched broadsides at Mamdani, attacking him for having little experience to handle the job. And for some context, while Andrew Cuomo is member of the Democratic Party, having even served as the 56th governor of New York from 2011 until his resignation in 2021, he is currently running for Mayor of New York City as an independent, because he lost the Democratic primary to Zohran Mamdani.

But, despite this seemingly technical reason for Cuomo’s running as an independent mayoral candidate, he is nevertheless trying to maximise the benefits of the “Independent’ title, especially in a world where the “Independent” stamp or association has become a new marker of credibility – in the same way we think of the independent media and press as being far more factual and accurate in their reporting, or in the same way that there is a war against activist judges who are bought by George Soros, as we advocate for more judicial independence. And so, being aware of the appeal of independence, Andrew Cuomo is seemingly trying to demonstrate his association with this word, and the political capital now it carries – in very interesting ways, seeing he is (afterall) a Democrat, he just happened to lose the primary to Mamdani.

And I say this because, for instance, while Cuomo campaigned alongside incumbent mayor Adams, both men tried to convince voters Mamdani is not a real Democrat. Adams said (quote) “We need a Democrat; We don’t need a socialist masquerading as a Democrat.” Meanwhile Cuomo notably said that (quote) “Mamdani is a socialist who happens to be on the Democratic line. I’m a Democrat who happens to be on the independent line.” In any case, Cuomo is said to be gaining on Mamdani, according to polls.

Then also in the mayoral race is Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa. Sliwa has been a figure of New York City politics since founding the Guardian Angels safety patrol group in the 1970s. The Republican considers himself a “law and order” candidate and says he wants to hire 7,000 additional police officers.

He previously told Kramer he hopes to be viewed as a combination of former Mayors Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg. Giuliani has since endorsed Sliwa in the race, after Bloomberg came forward to endorse Cuomo in the primary. By contrast, and as you would probably have imagined, in Mamdani’s camp is AOC and Bernie Sanders – who have endorsed his mayoral candidacy – with Senator Bernie Sanders even attacks Democratic leadership for refusing to endorse Mamdani, while he pledged to go all-out to help him win.

THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA IS ATTEMPTING A HOSTILE TAKEOVER OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY

This is what they want people to think: that Mamdani is a man of the people, with aspirations to represent the people, even in service of disillusioned plans to frustrate the works of the Trump administration. But, when you consider the fine print, and nuances, Mamdani’s campaign is not the product of grassroot support for a man who wants to tax the rich – it is a carefully curated anti-American agenda.

Now, for the most part, Americans value democracy, fairness and freedom of thought. Yet a movement has emerged that directly challenges those ideals — the Democratic Socialists of America (or the DSA). As its leaders repeatedly state, the DSA are NOT Democrats. They are an external force that has infiltrated the Democratic Party to reshape it in their own image. If successful, this project would transform one of America’s notable political parties (being the democrat party) into an unrecognisable entity hostile to the institutions that define America. In other words, think the democrat establishment that we already know to be diabolical – but worse!

And, so we’re clear: this narrative is not a product of exaggerated inferences or misguided deductionist reasoning. In fact, on the 1st of September this year, Canary Mission released its first report on the DSA. The findings revealed that the DSA is not only engaged in a hostile takeover of the Democratic Party, but has itself been further radicalised through its ties to the terror-linked Palestinian Youth Movement. These influences have created an organisation whose goals and alliances make it one of the most destabilising political forces in American history.

The combined goals of this alliance include: (1) To destroy Empire (the USA); (2) Replacing the market economy with state-controlled Marxism; (3) Defunding the police and using the funds for DEI programs; (4) Supporting terrorist groups and terrorist entities, i.e., Hamas and Hezbollah; (5) Normalising antisemitism and supporting violent extremist groups; and (6) Promoting foreign policies that align with authoritarian regimes. Here’s more on the predatory relationship between the DSA and the Democrat party – from the words of DSA members themselves – including how Zohran Mamdani features in their plans to infiltrate and destroy the Democrat party.

WHAT DOES THE DSA HOPE TO ACCOMPLISH FROM A TAKEOVER OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY?

Now, the NYC DSA wing is the entity responsible for building and leading Zohran Mamdani’s field operation, even organising roughly 50,000 volunteers who knocked on over 1.6 million doors and made 2.3 million calls citywide, which is said to be the most extensive grassroots canvassing effort in New York City politics. But, of course, this is not a product of organic grassroots support, it through the curation of an organisation that long planned to infiltrate the Democrat party, thus proving that the grassroot support that is associated with Mamdani is not a product of him having proven to be a man of the people, it is a product of a curated hostile takeover.

In any case, the DSA used a four-tier field organising model (that encompassed canvassers, field leads, field coordinators, and then staff) and this was to scale quickly, aid volunteers, and sustain a decentralised, volunteer-driven operation rooted in socialist organising principles.

Now, the question becomes, what does the DSA hope to accomplish from the takeover? Well, first, it is notable that DSA ranks and associations are riddled with “defund the police advocates” and it appears intrinsic to their model to try to replicate what they are doing with Mamdani in New York, in other parts of the US. For instance, Willie Burney Jr is a DSA-endorsed politician running for mayor of Somerville, Massachusetts – and even touted by the DSA run newsletter, Working Mass as “Somerville’s Zohran.” Burney Jr is also co-founder of the “Defund Somerville Police Department” campaign, which seeks (quote) an “abolitionist future … without police and prisons”. Following the fatal police shooting of Sayed Faisal, who advanced on an officer with a foot-long knife, Burnley Jr posted, “police have no business dealing with someone in crisis” and that such incidents require an “unarmed, alternative emergency response”.

If this sounds familiar, it is because Mamdani has actually articulated a similar position, before modifying it a bit close to the election date. Mamdani has previously promulgated the message that the NYPD is (quote) “racist, anti-queer and a major public safety threat”, even going on to call for defunding the police. But, recently he has modified this stance, stating that on crime and safety, he would create a Department of Community Safety, and this department would employ mental health outreach workers who would be deployed to subway stations. And just to give you an idea of how annoyingly out of touch and incommensurate this is, you would have to recall that Mamdani is proposing this response to the jarring problem of violent crime in New York, where people are being stabbed or thrown in front of moving trains in the subway.

In any case, when the DSA and Mamdani are not advocating for defunding the police, they are strengthening ties with terrorist organisations or associated persons. For instance, Imam Siraj Wahhaj is a Brooklyn-based imam listed as a potential conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Several people connected to the bombing attended Wahhaj’s mosque. Wahhaj himself even testified in support of the “Blind Sheikh,” who was sent to prison for life for his part in the bombing. In addition, Wahhaj says politics should be used “as a weapon in the cause of Islam”, and in light of this, Mamdani has appeared in public events with Wahhaj and describes him as (quote) “one of the nation’s foremost Muslim leaders”, while Wahhaj has endorsed Mamdani and donated to his campaign.

In addition, the DSA also just plainly endorses terroism. We see this in how DSA member and congresswoman from Michigan Rashida Tlaib, is virulently anti-Israel and regularly spreads lies about the Jewish state. On October 8, 2023, a day after the October 7 attack and while Hamas terrorists were still in Israel, Tlaib audaciously called the attack a form of “resistance”. In addition, Mahmood Mamdani, who is Zohran Mamdani’s father, and a professor at Columbia University, he participated in the pro-Hamas encampment, and promulgated the narrative that (quote) “Suicide bombing needs to be understood as a feature of modern political violence rather than stigmatized as a mark of barbarism”. These are just some of the tenets of the DSA, and what they seek to accomplish with the infiltration of the Democrat party through Mamdani.

This is a reminder of why we pray for leaders and nations, and so we ought to pray especially that New Yorkers receive leadership selected by God, who are moved to rule in righteousness, for Proverbs 29:2 teaches us that “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn”.

Now, let’s also talk about the slightly more comical implosion of the Democratic party; and to kick things off, let’s talk about Karine Jean Pierre’s press tour, and the unique contributions that her recent comments in media platforms add to the discourse on the implosion of the democrat party. So, in more detail, Former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre published a new book. Jean-Pierre, who served in the role for former President Biden from mid-2022 until he left office, writes in her book “Independent” about the shocking end to her boss’s reelection campaign, then-Vice President Harris’s unsuccessful bid for the White House, and the challenges she faced in the briefing room and behind the scenes. And by the way, the book’s title is a reference to Jean-Pierre’s shifting political identity, as she no longer considers herself a Democrat — which was an announcement that she made public prior to the book’s publication.

Now, in the book and the subsequent press tours, Jean-Pierre pushes back on reports of Biden’s cognitive decline. In particular, the former press secretary states the democrat party betrayed Joe Biden by removing him from the race, and she is adamant that she saw no evidence that Biden’s faculties were dimming — including at the disastrous TV debate with Trump that proved to be the beginning of the end. She blames Biden’s poor performance in that encounter on a cold and travel-related fatigue.

Jean-Pierre also takes issue with the book by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson that alleged Biden and his aides concealed his mental diminishment. She writes that she “saw Biden every day and saw no such decline,” adding that she has no intention of reading the Tapper and Thompson book, as its central thesis “does not track with what she saw in the White House.” Jean-Pierre also makes plain her frustration about what happened during the turbulent weeks when Biden was pushed out of the race — including the role played by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Here’s an excerpt from one of her press tours.

This excerpt and many others like it reveal two crucial points about the internal implosion of the Democrat party. First, the interview excerpt we just watched was from MSNBC – which is a known leftist media entity. And so, it is fairly unexpected that they would push Karine Jean Pierre to the extent that they did, seeing as she is part of the so-called protected class, (which is unmissable, given how she always manages to fit in the fact that she is a black and queer women into almost every sentence). BUT, then we would have to remember that she is now technically an independent (even though she stated on one occasion that she would never vote republican, which would mean she still leans left?) – but since she is a self-proclaimed independent, she no longer enjoys the loyalty and protections of the democrat establishment – which brings to mind something we’ve stated prior here on The War Room, which is that, the Democrat party will not hesitate to eat their own: they are vicious in their approach to politics.

And to KJP’s credit, yes: there was a collusion against Biden, after the Democrat party used him, and then saw him as a liability; this is why the likes of Nancy Pelosi instituted a coup to remove Biden, while completely undermining electoral precedent in placing Kamala Harris as a the democrat presidential candidate as opposed to having a primary. As you’d recall, Biden exited the presidential race through a letter (that was alleged to be from Biden), and which was posted on Biden’s X account, which stated that he was withdrawing from the race and endorsing Kamala Harris as his successor. However, the fact that the announcement was made via a letter on social media, rather than a live statement led to speculation that Biden may not have made the decision voluntarily. Secondly, many political commentators and social media users proceeded to suggest that the letter may have been put out on Biden’s behalf, forcing him to accept a fait accompli, being a situation that has already been completed and is therefore irreversible. In fact, some even went so far as to suggest that Biden may not have been cognitively aware of what was happening, due to his mental challenges.

But, what made that development interesting were also the remarks that came from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or AOC, regarding the agenda of those in the Democrat party. And while I do not agree with a lot of what she tends to say (or even her support for Mamdani), I think she was worth listening to in that respect. And this is especially because she has been a close ally of Bernie Sanders and saw previously what the Democrat establishment did to Bernie Sanders in favour of Hillary Clinton. In that, years ago now, Wikileaks released information that resulted in allegations of bias against Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign; where – in apparent contradiction with the DNC leadership’s publicly stated neutrality – several DNC operatives were found to have openly derided Sanders’s campaign and discussed ways to advance Hillary Clinton’s nomination.

And so, my problem with KJP’s remarks about the Democrat Party’s betrayal is that she is painting this as an issue that uniquely targeted Joe Biden (with subsequent fallout on voters). But, this is a misdiagnosis of the issues with the democrat party because it had long ceased to be a political party, and has been functioning as an establishment for years – that corrupts and infringes on democratic processes from the time they refused to give African Americans the right to vote, and then proceeded to curate plans to “have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years” as was said by Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson, in 1964, after signing the Civil Rights Act. And so, the correct diagnosis is that the Democrat party is a disloyal, vicious and establishment entity period – and not that it is bad because it betrayed Biden. The latter is a consequence of the former.

MEANWHILE, KAMALA HARRIS SOLD OUT THE BIDEN WHITE HOUSE… FOR HER BOOK

But, then the Democratic party internal implosion plot continues, because Kamala Harris also wrote her own book reflecting on the events leading to her running for president, and in which she blames everyone but herself for her failures as vice president. And as if that was not jarring enough, she proceeds to then sell out the Biden White House.

POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY: HUNTER BIDEN ADMITS WHY KAMALA HARRIS WAS PICKED

While all of this is happening: while KJP is trying to defend Biden and his White house, and while Kamala Harris is selling it out, Hunter Biden makes one of his fairly random media appearances that never fare well for his father’s legacy. But, in this one, Hunter Biden makes an incredible admission about why his father allegedly picked Kamala Harris, and he ties this to political expediency and loyalty – which frankly he questions.

The reason he questions this is seemingly tied to how Kamala Harris had made the Biden White House her scapegoat for her political failures. But, inadvertently, this questioning of political expediency by Hunter Biden also speaks to whether Kamala Harris was ever qualified to be Vice President outside of the identity politics optics of the “first female, Indian/Black vice president”.

And the fact is, there was nothing sensible or meritocratic about her appointment: If you remember the Democrat primaries and debates before the 2020 election, Joe Biden and Kamala Harirs were ripping at each other, before Kamala Harris dropped out of the race fairly early. She had accused Biden of being racist, and Joe Biden had accused her of unfairly incarcerating black men. Then suddenly, when Joe Biden was trying to win the black vote, he picked her for VP – it was incredibly inorganic!

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

According to the 178 page report, committee members claim Biden was “so impaired that he could not make his own decisions,” accusing senior White House staff of managing official actions on his behalf including the use of an autopen to sign pardons and executive orders.

Committee Chairman James Comer blasted the findings, asserting that pardons signed via autopen were “void,” and demanded a Department of Justice investigation into their legality.

The controversy deepened during testimony from former White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients, who faced tough questioning about the pardon granted to Hunter Biden, the former president’s son. Zients defended the administration’s actions, denying any wrongdoing and insisting all decisions were made in accordance with established legal procedures.

The White House has yet to issue an official response to the report.

This shocking story is a testament to the power of dogged investigative journalism in uncovering truths that powerful institutions desperately want to keep under wraps. It lays bare a pattern of deceit, where public posturing on corruption is merely a facade for private actions that enrich a political dynasty. The American people and the global community deserve a full and transparent accounting of these actions, and this declassified evidence provides a crucial piece of the puzzle, confirming that where there’s smoke, there’s indeed fire. Meanwhile, Representative James Comer has revealed that documents made public by CIA Director John Ratcliffe show that Joe Biden’s office, during his tenure as vice president under President Barack Obama, actively blocked the release of a sensitive intelligence memo from US officials stationed in Kyiv. The memo allegedly detailed Ukrainian leaders’ frustration with Biden’s 2015 visit to Kyiv and their concerns over Hunter Biden’s lucrative role at Burisma Holdings, an energy firm that paid him a staggering $1 million annually.

Declassified Documents and the Shadows of Influence in U.S.-Ukraine Relations

The recent declassification of CIA documents from 2015 sheds new light on a troubling chapter involving the Biden family, Ukrainian energy interests, and efforts to suppress unflattering intelligence. This revelation not only underscores perceived double standards in anti-corruption rhetoric but also vindicates former President Trump’s push for scrutiny—efforts that led to his 2019 impeachment.

The Biden Family’s Business Ties to Burisma: A Primer on the Alleged Corruption

At the heart of this story lies Burisma Holdings, Ukraine’s largest private natural gas producer, which faced persistent allegations of corruption and regulatory favouritism in the mid-2010s. In April 2014, Hunter Biden—son of then-Vice President Joe Biden—joined the board of Burisma, earning up to $50,000 per month despite lacking deep experience in the Ukrainian energy sector. This arrangement raised eyebrows, as it coincided with Joe Biden’s high-profile role in leading the U.S. anti-corruption push in Ukraine, including pressuring the country to reform its judiciary and energy oversight.

From a financial perspective, such board positions aren’t uncommon for well-connected individuals, but the optics here were problematic. Ukrainian officials and international watchdogs viewed Hunter’s involvement as a potential conflict of interest, especially given Burisma’s history of investigations into bribery and illicit payments. The company had been under scrutiny by Ukraine’s prosecutor general’s office for issues like money laundering and abuse of power, with founder Mykola Zlochevsky—a former environment minister—accused of amassing unexplained wealth during his tenure. Critics argued that the Biden name lent undue legitimacy to Burisma, potentially shielding it from deeper probes while the U.S. publicly condemned similar practices elsewhere. This wasn’t just a family side hustle; it symbolized a broader tension between personal gain and public duty, eroding the credibility of America’s anti-corruption stance abroad.

The 2015 Intelligence Report: Ukrainian Officials’ Stark View of a “Double Standard”

The declassified CIA memo, dated December 2015, captures raw intelligence from Biden’s official visit to Kyiv that month—a trip framed as a bold stand against Ukrainian graft. According to the report, multiple senior Ukrainian officials privately expressed dismay over the Biden family’s Burisma ties, describing them as emblematic of a U.S. “double standard” on corruption. One official reportedly quipped that while America lectured Ukraine on cleaning house, the Bidens’ involvement suggested selective blindness when it suited influential families.

This intel wasn’t speculative; it stemmed from direct debriefs with Ukrainian counterparts who felt betrayed by the hypocrisy. They noted how Hunter’s board seat persisted amid Burisma’s scandals, contrasting sharply with U.S. demands for firing corrupt prosecutors like Viktor Shokin. Financially, this double standard risked undermining investor confidence in Ukraine’s energy market, where foreign capital was already skittish due to perceived cronyism. The report’s blunt assessment—that such dealings “undermine U.S. policy objectives”—highlighted how personal entanglements could torpedo diplomatic goals, a lesson every finance executive knows from navigating conflicted transactions.

The Cover-Up: Biden’s Office Blocks Dissemination of Embarrassing Intel

What elevates this from eyebrow-raising to scandalous is the subsequent handling of the report. Newly surfaced emails and memos reveal that Biden’s national security team, upon learning of the intel, explicitly directed the CIA not to share it beyond a tight circle. The directive came from Biden’s chief Ukraine advisor, Colin Kahl, who argued that wider dissemination would be “politically problematic” and could “embarrass the vice president.” This suppression occurred in real time, just as Biden was delivering anti-corruption speeches in Kyiv, including a December 9, 2015, address where he boasted of U.S. commitment to rooting out graft. This mirrors a board burying adverse audit findings to protect executive reputations—a breach of fiduciary duty that invites regulatory backlash. By quashing the report, the administration prioritized image over integrity, potentially delaying accountability for Burisma’s issues and fuelling perceptions of elite impunity. The declassification, prompted by recent Freedom of Information Act requests, exposes how internal checks can be sidelined when political stakes rise, a cautionary tale for any overseer of corporate ethics.

Trump’s Call to Zelenskyy: A Principled Demand for Transparency

Fast-forward to July 2019, when President Trump spoke by phone with newly elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Trump urged Zelenskyy to investigate Burisma-related corruption, specifically mentioning the Bidens’ ties and the dismissal of prosecutor Shokin. From a vantage in finance, where due diligence is paramount, this wasn’t meddling—it was a legitimate call for forensic accounting on a deal that screamed conflict. Trump framed it as resuming probes halted under pressure, echoing the very anti-corruption reforms Biden himself had championed. Trump’s ask aligned with U.S. interests: ensuring taxpayer-funded aid to Ukraine (over $390 million in military support at the time) wasn’t tainted by unresolved scandals. He wasn’t inventing claims; public reports, including from the Senate Homeland Security Committee, had already flagged Hunter’s $3.5 million in 2014 earnings from Burisma as a red flag. In a world of opaque offshore dealings, Trump’s directness—asking a partner nation to “do the right thing”—was a bold stroke for accountability, much like demanding audited financials from a questionable merger partner. The Impeachment witnesses that outline Trump quid pro quo lied.

The Impeachment: A Bogus Quid Pro Quo Narrative Unravels

Trump’s overture triggered his first impeachment, with Democrats alleging a quid pro quo: withholding $391 million in U.S. security aid to Ukraine in exchange for dirt on political rivals. The House charged “abuse of power,” painting the call as extortion. Yet, the declassified documents retroactively bolster Trump’s defense—the aid was released shortly after the call, with no evidence of explicit linkage, and Zelenskyy himself later said he felt no pressure.

The “quid pro quo” charge was a partisan overreach, ignoring that Biden had openly bragged about withholding $1 billion in loan guarantees to oust Shokin—a move unchallenged at the time. Impeachment became a shield against scrutiny, diverting from Burisma’s shadows. This parallels to SEC probes derailed by influence peddling: the process prioritized narrative over facts, costing political capital and public trust without resolving the underlying issues. This revelation isn’t about gotchas; it’s a reminder that true leadership demands consistent standards, whether in boardrooms or the Situation Room. The Biden family’s Burisma saga, the suppressed report, and the impeachment saga illustrate how proximity to power can blur ethical lines, much like insider trading scandals that plague markets. It reaffirms the need for robust oversight— ethics reforms, and independent audits—to safeguard against such double standards. It’s important to understand the agenda and the ideology of the political left.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

“The Juxtaposition in US Politics: 2024 vs 2025”, and to begin with: July is usually a month of celebration in the US, particularly with celebrations beginning on the 4th of July – which is a federal holiday in the United States, commemorating the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, thus establishing the United States of America. But, July 2024 carried significant political shifts.

THE JULY 13TH ATTEMPTED ASSASSINATION OF DONALD TRUMP IN PENNSYLVANIA

Among the biggest was the assasination attempt of Donald Trump on July 13th, where Thomas Matthew Crooks fired eight shots from an AR15-style rifle at Trump while speaking at a rally near Butler, Pennsylvania. God literally moved Trump’s head by divine intervention – as was declared by God’s Prophet to the nations, the highly esteemed Rev. Dr Chris Oyakhilome DSc. DSc. DD. And as such, Trump’s chant to “Fight, fight, fight” reverberated in the hearts of many in a way that not only shifted political discourse, but made manifest the reality of God’s power and choice for the American election in November 2024.

But, furthermore, upon investigation, the events surrounding the assassination attempt on Trump began to unravel what was hidden about institutional rot in America – beginning with the Secret Service itself. For instance, the Secret Service is known for the duty to protect, with the quintessential black suits, earpieces and protective demeanour. But their failure to prevent the assassination attempt on Trump, not only raised questions, but further led to the exposure of scandals involving employee misconduct and security breaches that have tarnished its reputation. So much so that then US Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle resigned, one day after a contentious session with House lawmakers over security failures that facilitated the assassination attempt on Donald Trump on July 13. Her resignation came after a bipartisan grilling, with numerous Republicans and at least one Democrat lawmaker demanding she resign, as her agency fell short of its “zero-fail mission.”

Cheatle’s testimony also came after an announcement from then Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas that the DOJ was forming an independent review panel charged with examining the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. Here;s an excerpt from a House Oversight Committee hearing in which, Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) spoke about some of the obvious issues in the Secret Services execution of their duties, which included the height of agents assigned to physically cover President Trump at the Butler County rally – which was one of the contentious and eyebrow raising issues.

Nevertheless, I think one of the most significant developments that came from that assassination attempt, in addition to what we’ve just outlined, is the spiritual impact of president Trump himself – in fact, it is something that even he has highlighted. For instance, in reflecting on that day a year later, he praised God from the White House for being with him and saving his life on J13. stating that his time on earth was nearly ended but God was with him.

THE COUP AGAINST BIDEN, AND THE BEGINNING OF THE HARRIS CAMPAIGN

Then, came July 21st, and ironically, I do not think anyone was more surprised than Joe Biden when learning of the news of his alleged statement declaring his drop from the 2024 presidential race. And this is because by July 2024, Joe Bidden appeared adamant not to exit the presidential race. And this was despite the fact that following his poor performance at the first presidential debate on the 28th of June, pressure already began to mount over his physical and mental frailties, and whether he had the capacity to run for a second term – HOWEVER, he insisted he was fit and would continue to run for office. But, then he announced his resignation from the presidential campaign through a letter on social media. The announcement reportedly STUNNED White House and campaign aides who only discovered its contents hours later – especially since the letter was shared on social media. In fact, a few hours before the announcement was made, the Biden campaign co-chair Cedric Richmond was on media platforms emphasising Biden’s commitment to keep running.

Well based on the circumstances under which Biden left the presidential race, the suggestion that this was a coup proceeded to gain momentum – and this was with good reason. First, the letter (that was alleged to be from Biden), and which was posted on Biden’s X account, stated that he was withdrawing from the race and endorsing Kamala Harris as his successor. However, the fact that the announcement was made via a letter on social media, rather than a live statement led to speculation that Biden may not have made the decision voluntarily. Secondly, many political commentators and social media users proceeded to suggest that the letter may have been put out on Biden’s behalf, forcing him to accept a fait accompli, being a situation that has already been completed and is therefore irreversible. In fact, some even went so far as to suggest that Biden may not have been cognitively aware of what was happening, due to his then alleged dementia.

But, what made that development interesting are remarks that came from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, also known as AOC, regarding the agenda of those in the Democrat party. And while I do not agree with a lot of what she tends to say, I think she was worth listening to in that respect. And this is especially because she has been a close ally of Bernie Sanders and saw previously what the Democrat establishment did to him in favour of Hillary Clinton. In that, years ago now, Wikileaks released information that resulted in allegations of bias against Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign; where – in apparent contradiction with the DNC leadership’s publicly stated neutrality – several DNC operatives were found to have openly derided Sanders’s campaign and discussed ways to advance Hillary Clinton’s nomination.

Now, Democrats were obviously not conceding to the coup narrative, and were instead arguing that there was just a collective concern for Biden’s health, while they were simultaneously gaslighting Americans, claiming that Biden is sharp as a tack. But, first, collective concern for Biden’s health does not negate the fact that Biden seemed adamant to keep running for president until the letter on X suddenly claimed otherwise. Secondly, collective concern for Biden’s health also gives rise to the question of why he then still remained in office as the president if he and others were concerned about his capacity to run. In other words, Joe Biden was not supposed to have it both ways: in that, if he could run for re-election due to challenges in his health, then a parallel discussion needed to take place concerning his capacity to continue to sit in office. But, for the most part, Democrats tried to make Biden’s drop from the presidential race appear as a consequence of mutual concerns of his age and health, and nothing consequential.

THE NEWS OF BIDEN’S DECLINE HAVE PROMPTED MANY TO ASK WHO RAN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT

Fast forward to 2025, and the tides have shifted. First, in May 2025 there was an announcement that Joe Biden was diagnosed with prostate cancer, characterized by a Gleason score of 9 (being Grade Group 5) with metastasis to the bone. While this represents a more aggressive form of the disease, the cancer appears to be hormone- sensitive which allows for effective management. Now, firstly, I certainly hope that former US president Joe Biden recovers and lives in good health. Secondly, many of us are aware that this negatively implicates democrats and white house staffers because they have to have known – especially if there are supposed to be regular health checks and tests on the president. In fact, Dr Zeke Emanuel admitted on MSNBC that Joe Biden had cancer while serving as President, likely dating back to the start of his term in 2021, with no disagreement among experts on the timeline. Therefore, clearly Democrats knew, and were now attempting to use Joe Biden’s cancer diagnosis to obfuscate his cognitive decline and the fact that they hid it from the public for the four years of his stolen presidency.

Now, Hunter Biden appeared in a new interview (after being pardoned by his father six months ago), and he pulled back the curtain on his father’s health and medication use around the time he debated Donald Trump and then dropped out of the presidential race. Well, Representative James Comer (who is the chairman of the House Oversight committee, looking into Joe Biden’s closest aides and requesting they answer questions about Biden’s “mental and physical faculties” while he was in office)… he discusses what some of the revelations mean for ongoing investigations into those who might have covered up the reality of the former president’s health. He also touched on an interesting development to look forward to, which is that the committee scheduled former chief of staff Ron Klain to interview on July 24, and what is especially interesting about former chief of staff Ron Klain, is that he volunteered to come, and so will not have the option to plead the fifth – and so, it should be a revelatory interview.

WAS BIDEN’S PRESIDENCY BARACK OBAMA’S THIRD TERM IN OFFICE?

Well, it ‘s beginning to appear more and more as though Joe Biden’s presidency was nothing more than Barack Obama’s third term. The White House and agencies across the executive branch were staffed with Obama-era operatives including Susan Rice, Lisa Monaco, and others. And so, Barack Obama was seemingly running the show at the White House from behind the scenes (or at least was among those who were), all while Democrats paraded Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as the optically progressive duo.

In light of this, conservative commentator Stephen Philip said something quite apt: he said, “The nation-destroying problems afflicting America (in the Bide-Harris era) are not the mistakes of a senile president. They are the successes of a malevolent shadow president.” This is to say that Joe Biden was Obama’s “presidential avatar.” Yes, Biden became the congressionally certified president of the United States; his portrait is in the history books; he became the guest of honour at the events he attended – despite joking that he played second-fiddle to his wife, to Kamala Harris or to someone else. In addition, yes, in 2024 he technically became the one running for reelection, despite the fact that his campaign was essentially nonexistent.

But, it also became impossible to miss this man’s mental decline. He has spent 40 percent of his presidency on vacation. He often appeared tired or confused. Yet things were getting done at the White House. And by this I mean unpopular, self-destructive, immoral policies were getting ramrodded past constitutional separations of powers and checks and balances, not to mention tens of millions of concerned citizens who were finding themselves increasingly indebted and oppressed by someone with power to get those measures implemented.

Well, the man wielding this power was not the man in the White House during the previous administration whose mental, physical, political, and criminal vulnerabilities were on full display. RATHER, it was the man who was taking advantage of these vulnerabilities from behind the scenes – being Barack Obama.

Ironically, when Joe Biden was clearly not performing well, even Barack Obama shifted allegiance, with communication in dictating concerns about his health. Democrats are definitionally fickle! They will not hesitate to destroy their own, if they see a selfishly defined benefit. If they did it to Berie Sanders, the could do it to Biden, and they can do it to others going forward.

OBAMA-GATE: THE UNRAVELLING OF THE CREATION OF THE RUSSIA HOAX

Now, in 2025, the shifting tide is unrelenting on the Obama legacy – and necessarily so – which brings us to Obamagate. Tulsi Gabbard, as Director of National Intelligence, released a declassified report alleging that Obama administration officials manipulated intelligence related to Russian interference in the 2016 election to undermine President Trump. The report claims that senior Obama officials, including James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper, and Susan Rice, intentionally created a “manufactured, politicised piece of intelligence” to subvert the will of the American people who voted for Trump. Gabbard further details how there was a document drafted for President Obama in early December 2016, which affirmed that Russia DID NOT have the intent or capability to hack the election outcome, and yet that Document was pulled before publication. Then, the following day, then US president Obama called a National Security Council meeting to discuss Russian interference, leading to the creation of a document that falsely claimed Russia influenced the election.

Obama has orchestrated a lot of the institutional rot we see in America, that has even resulted in the weaponisation of institutions of justice against Trump!  In any case, Tulsi Gabbard has referred the documents to the Department of Justice for further investigation, emphasising the need for accountability to maintain trust in the integrity of the democratic republic. Meanwhile, this revelation comes after President Trump ordered the declassification of all files related to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, contradicting previous intelligence assessments that Russia sought to influence the 2016 election.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso