Join the fight and contribute to our war chest.

Ditch the ads for $5 per month or $49 per year.

Unless you live under a rock, you know by now that President Trump was “convicted” of a “felony.” You also know that his conviction was part of the Deep State’s master plan, concocted the moment Trump announced he was running in 2024. The court, including the prosecutors, judge, and jury, was all hand-picked—the entire setup and outcome were prearranged from the moment they cooked up the plot to make Donald Trump as “unelectable” as possible. They used sham trials that made a mockery of our entire justice system, all to block one man—who isn’t a corrupt, bought-and-sold politician—from returning to the White House to work for free for the people of America. That’s how much our government hates you.

Of course, trumped-up charges, sham trials, and kangaroo courts are nothing new, sadly. One Twitter user, Stephen McIntyre, a Canadian mining exploration company director and consultant, decided to dig deep into the US judicial past. He went all the way back to Alabama in the 1960s, during the height of segregation, to compare the trial against Martin Luther King Jr. to what President Donald Trump went through. And guess what? Surprise, surprise—he found that MLK, back in 1960s Alabama, actually received a fairer trial than Donald Trump did in liberal-run Manhattan in 2024.

Stephen McIntyre:

one important difference between the felony trial of Martin Luther King in all-white segregationist Alabama in 1960 and the felony trial of Donald Trump in 2024: even a segregationist judge permitted King to present expert evidence on tax accounting, whereas the Democrat judge in 2024 prevented Trump defense from presenting highly exculpatory expert evidence on election finance law.

So today’s Democrat courts exercised modes of unfairness that even a segregationist Alabama court in 1960 didn’t attempt.

https://repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1064&context=ijlse#page=19.22…

article is worth reading in full. The intent of segregationist Democrat lawfare against Martin Luther King was “to harm Dr King as much as possible”. Just as the intent of modern Democrat lawfare is to harm Trump as much as possible. Joe Biden, of course, was a protege of arch-segregationist Robert Byrd and modern practitioner of the same tactics.

It’s a fascinating comparison. Here’s what folks online are saying about it:

“This is two cases 2 cases where a “jury of your peers” failed the Defendant. I think SCOTUS needs to define peers because many people have been found guilty by jury’s that truly were not peers.”

“So Trump is getting the MLK Jr treatment? That won’t backfire …”

“They have completely Crossed the Rubicon.”

“Wonder why the establishment would try and sabotage both men? Could it be that each could not be controlled and therefore threatened the establishment’s power?”

“This is the rule of lawfare”

Lawfare, indeed.

The Democrats’ latest abuse of power isn’t just a recent trend but part of a longstanding historical narrative of injustice going back to the beginning of time. These modern-day Democrats incessantly project their own wrongdoings onto their political enemies, crafting a cycle of blame to distract from their actions. It’s a strategic deflection that keeps the spotlight off themselves and maintains their grip on whatever narrative they’re pushing or trying to control. Their goal is to make sure that the American people’s scrutiny and attention are always directed somewhere else, other than on them. Corrupt, worldly rulers have been playing these games for ages, and unless the Democrats are stopped this November, they’ll keep doing it for decades to come.

History repeats itself.

JOIN THE FIGHT — DITCH THE ADS — READ THE NEWSFEED — FOLLOW ON X — GAB — GETTR — TRUTH SOCIAL