The New York Times appears to be setting the stage for the Democrats to kill the filibuster, pack the Supreme Court, alter the Senate by admitting DC and Puerto Rico as new states, and effectively alter the operation of the Electoral College if they end up with 52 senators and control of the House following the midterms. A Senate majority not dependent on the votes of Senators Manchin and Sinema would enable them to pass legislation to accomplish this.

David Leonhardt, whom the Times proudly identifies as a Pulitzer Prize winner, writes what is a news, not an opinion, article. Somehow, he seems to have missed the lesson that founders had no interest in power associated only with numbers -- hence the Senate, 2 for each state regardless of population, and the Electoral College and separation of powers. Since the left believes it is meant to control, these annoying idiosyncrasies of the constitution need to be updated.

Leonhardt writes:

…the United States today finds itself in a situation with little historical precedent. American democracy is facing two distinct threats, which together represent the most serious challenge to the country’s governing ideals in decades.

The first threat is acute: a growing movement inside one of the country’s two major parties — the Republican Party — to refuse to accept defeat in an election.(snip)

The second threat to democracy is chronic but also growing: The power to set government policy is becoming increasingly disconnected from public opinion.

The run of recent Supreme Court decisions — both sweeping and, according to polls, unpopular — highlight this disconnect. Although the Democratic Party has won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections, a Supreme Court dominated by Republican appointees seems poised to shape American politics for years, if not decades. And the court is only one of the means through which policy outcomes are becoming less closely tied to the popular will.

Two of the past four presidents have taken office despite losing the popular vote. Senators representing a majority of Americans are often unable to pass bills, partly because of the increasing use of the filibuster. Even the House, intended as the branch of the government that most reflects the popular will, does not always do so, because of the way districts are drawn.

This article itself reflects a threat to our Republic and to the operation of democratic elections. It is further evidence that the New York Times, like the rest of the mainstream media, are apparatchiks of the Democratic party. The article claims that the Republicans are a threat to democracy because they refuse to accept the 2020 election. It’s pretty obvious that the Democrats did not accept the 2016 election. And if Trump had won the 2020 election does anyone really believe that the Democrats and their media allies would have accepted it?

When Trump won in 2016, They started a “resistance” the day the results came in. The Washington Post and some Democrats immediately called for impeachment. Democrats claimed then, and they continue to claim he was an illegitimate president. Many refused to attend the inauguration which is a long-standing tradition and one of our “democratic norms“ that they talk so much about. It is also a critical component of the peaceful transition of power.

With the assistance of the media, the Democrats concocted a Trump-Russian collusion story. (Anybody who doesn’t believe this was a Democratic concoction with the support of the FBI and the Obama administration should read some of the Durham indictments which are available online. But no Democrat supporters are interested in it because it doesn’t conform to what they want to believe.)  

When Trump said the Obama administration was spying on his campaign it was outright rejected by the mainstream media and the Democrats as unthinkable. But the FBI inspector general’s report, which was not accurately reported by the mainstream media,  proves that it was true.

And the Democrats and their mainstream media allies go on about free and fair elections. But a free and fair election cannot be based on fraud. And the New York Times and the Democratic Party’s promotion of the story that Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation and that Joe Biden Was not involved and did not benefit from Hunter’s corrupt activities was a major fraud that impacted the 2020 election and was intended for that purpose. In fact, the data shows that many millions of people would not have voted for Joe Biden if the truth were known. It also shows that many people believe the laptop was Russian disinformation to this day because the media when it finally got around to verifying the laptop emails, a year and a half after the election, buried the corrections.

And the really shocking thing is that that laptop and the bank records show that Joe and Hunter shared bank accounts. That could have been easily verified. The media not only refused to verify the emails before the election but they also rejected the reports of those who had -- and those reports were suppressed by the Democrats’ allies in the tech industry. They also rejected the statements of Hunter Biden’s business partners. And we now know the FBI participated in this fraud because they had the laptop long before the election and suppressed it.

Can anybody in their right mind believe that if the situation were reversed and there was a laptop containing highly incriminating information about Trump and his family that the actors I have described would have suppressed it? We all know it would have been widely promoted. This was only possible because the Democrats have the support of the government bureaucracy, the media, and the tech giants, all of whom are able to put their thumbs on the scales by suppressing important information in elections.

And if that isn’t a threat to our democracy, I don’t know what it is.

By the way, fascism involves an alliance between the major industries and the state government.  This combination enables one party to suppress election information and control the state. It strikes me that the alliance between the Democrat party, the tech giants, and the major media companies to control information smacks of fascism. And it’s an enormous threat to our democracy. But you never know it from reading the mainstream media. And Nancy Pelosi‘s January 6 Commission isn’t covering it either.