January 19, 2021 --

Once again, new Never-Trumpers (Ann Coulter), old Never-Trumpers (Sen. Ben Sasse), plain old Trump-loathers (Barack H. Obama - https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/barack-obama-blames-trump-for-mob-at-capitol-says-violent-crescendo-not-surprising/ar-BB1cxppH) are uniting to blame President Trump - this time on the occasion of the alleged storming of Capitol Hill, January 6.  And with the cries of blame, blame, blame, came the obligatory demands for the immediate removal of Mr. Trump from his presidency, by resignation or forced ouster via the 25th Amendment.

It is all too pat - and predictable, however, as if the hate-Trump mob has decided to make the president's life even more unbearable his last days in the Oval Office. Indeed, how can the irrational Trump-haters not spend the concluding two weeks of President Trump demanding his removal from office. To demand his ouster each day of the countdown to the installation of the pitiable Biden, the Trumpophobes, at noon of January 20, can finally send up the cheer: "free at last," etc., thereafter being denied the circumstances that would justify calls for the ouster of Donald J. Trump - or will we then hear the call: "Ban Trump from ever holding public office again"?

Thing is, after four years of media mendacity, rational people no longer take the reports of anti-Trump propagandists at face value.  And so, with that 93% of the media holding "Trump" responsible for the "assault" on the Nation's Capitol, the instant reaction will be: just who was it that raided the Hill? Was it in fact a Trump-incited mob, bent on insurrection?  Or was it more likely that,  reviewing the event with the opposite end of the looking glass,  certain agents provocateur will be observed in the throng?

Mark Levin, on his radio show, June 6, denounced the throng ("thugs" was the term applied to them by Senate Leader McConnell) for its violence (one woman was tragically shot and killed, the identity of the shooter not yet known.)  Levin also referred to calls from Sen, Rand Paul and former Rep. Trey Gowdy for new election law legislation.  Leviin then noted that there is no need for new legislation on election procedures; there is legislation already in state codes giving the legislatures  authority over elections. The problem, Levin went on to explain, was that governors or judges usurped the power over elections given to state legislatures and, Levin might have continued, the state legislatures did not push back.  Then again how does one push back against a judge's ruling, if not by appeal? Those appeals that were made, iplus the direct action by Texas to the Supreme Court, were for nought.

There is a line in the Constitution of the United States, in Article IV, Section 4, which has gotten, to the knowledge of this writer, no attention since Election-gate. It begins as follows:

"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government...." [Italics added.]  One would reflect that where the rightful power of a state legislature over election procedures is infringed by other state officials, the guarantee of a Republican form of government in any state should come to the rescue,  but with its rejection of the plea from the State of Texas to consider Election-gate, the Supreme Court has turned its back on that guarantee -- at least to "battleground" states.

And now to consider the high Court's Election-gate failure to act,  in conjunction with the curious conduct of other courts and state officials (even Republican officials) to rush to assert, in effect, that there was no Election-gate. All of this, arguably, does not pass the "let's get on with ending the Trump presidency" smell test.  Let's test the smell test by turning it upside down. Imagine allegations that Trump was lagging behind Biden in the voting, when the vote-counting in battleground sites was suddenly halted.  Add to this, reports that Biden vote-count observers were denied access to the vote counting. Add allegations that reams of ballots were driven from New York to Pennsylvania.  Plus -- the fact that "mail-in ballots" lacked signatures was publicly known. Just these irregularities would have had The New York Times screaming for Congress to block President Trump's re-election.

Parenthetical thought. With the current rage for name-changing, why haven't conservatives taken to calling the N.Y. Times - The New York Pravda? Clearly it practices the same form of journalism that Pravda practiced in the former Soviet Union: reality is what we say it is.

Now for the conclusion.  This is to posit: show me someone who denounces President Trump for the January 6 assault on Capitol Hill and I will show you a denizen of The Swamp.

Added thought on learning that Biden has picked Judge Merrick Garland to be his attorney general.  With Garland as AG, expect Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh,  and Chief Justice Roberts to come under pressure to step down (to avoid prosecution for hate-opinions), their places to be filled by B.H. Obama as chief justice and Garland to replace Gorsuch and H. Clinton to take Kavanaugh's seat.

Conservatives will be thrown a schadenfreude bone on news that Rep. A. Ocasio-Cortez will primary Sen, Majority Leader Schumer (and of course will defeat him, Biden then to send him to Israel as U.S. ambassador).

Onward to the Green New Deal and candles replacing the electric light bulb.