In September 2018 while giving a speech at the United Nations, President Trump pointed to the German delegation and noted their on their reliance on Russian energy; their response was to laugh and afterwards take the president to task for making such an outrageous statement. At the same time, President Trump openly questioned why the U.S. was providing at least seventy-five percent of the budget for NATO while only three countries were meeting their promised military contribution of two percent of GDP.

Fast forward to 2023 and with a commanding lead in the Republican race for the presidential nomination, reports from Europe focus on the danger of a Trump presidency. Will Trump pull the U.S. from NATO? Will he cut U.S. aid to Ukraine? Magazines in the U.S. and talk shows spend their entire time proclaiming the dangers of a second term for Trump.

The reality is that the Europeans and others should thank Trump for his hard-liner stance as it forced the Europeans to face the reality of their failures with their own militaries. From minimal maintenance of equipment, to discarding technologies needed to supply their own militaries to having to rent tanks from a neighboring nation as the borrowing nation does not have a single tank of their own, the Europeans have spent over seventy-five years living under the security umbrella provided at huge expense by the American public. Their slow response to his prodding at least gave them a small start when their world collapsed under the cut from Russian energy and the third invasion of Ukraine.

The linked article outlines the failure of the Western European states to face their primary responsibility to their citizens; to ensure national security. Central and Eastern European states who suffered under half a century of Soviet brutality applauded Trump as they had experienced the nightmare of Communism. At the same time Western European states built up a welfare system that discouraged work and cemented in place programs which are not sustainable. In fact, at the current pace, it will be Poland which will provide the protection for a weak Germany for the foreseeable future.

Will Trump still question the need for the U.S. to stay in NATO? No one knows for sure, but if the Europeans, especially the Western nations, do not break their word again and fulfill their promises, then perhaps Trump will see that the U.S. is not involved in another of our terrible foreign policy deals. The addition of responsible states such as Finland and Sweden will help to keep the Western European states in line during the struggles ahead not only with Russia, but with China and Iran.

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/alarm-nato-weak-military-empty-arsenals-europe-a72b23f4?page=1

The attached link takes you to an interview with Sam Corcos, former DOGE employee, and current Chief Information Officer for the Treasury Department. I bet you did not know that DOGE is still alive and well, fighting the good fight against the bureaucratic deep state and often, poor management throughout the Federal government, 

That there is a huge amount of fraud in the largess handed out by the Federal government is no secret. Estimates put as much as twenty percent of Medicare is fraudulent, and fraud can be found in every section of the government. The real question is “how is it allowed to happen”? Is there a lack of checks and balances? Does anyone care in bureaucracy about fraud? Do not forget, if there are serious successes in catching fraud, the government may not need so many bureaucrats. What tools are available to eliminate fraud (you know, like common sense)?

With the fraud uncovered in Minnesota, California, and other states, it may seem that the only people not involved in fraudulent activity are the U.S. taxpayers. Regardless of your political leanings, we all have a personal stake in making sure that funds are available for real problems and are not syphoned off by criminals. After all, it is your money about which we are talking.

https://americanmind.org/salvo/what-the-hell-happened-to-doge/?_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9B4kFn1fTBZHUgDEIynU0QgyQKe9pP19nzrNiRTSfFNNe9qQYpE1qxjAdYE-8m9Ndd-6_mKJO06XD8RgiJVy0SSAC-dA&_hsmi=409858060

Catherine Austin Fitts has had an exceptional career. From being the Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under George H. Bush, to starting up her own investment brokerage firm and managing a five-hundred-billion-dollar investment portfolio, she is an internationally recognized investment banker.

After years of research, she has raised significant questions about the government’s handling of money, claiming that over twenty-one trillion dollars is unaccounted for and has been siphoned off by various agencies to fund international operations, both military and non-military “off the books.”  She claims these actions are detrimental to the well-being of the public.

The interview with Fitts by Tucker Carlson is amazing in the breath of topics covered and the information provided to the general public. One key area is her concern about the push by governments towards the elimination of a cash economy. Such a move will all but eliminate the mobility and freedom we have today as it will be easy for any government to simply freeze anyone out of the economy. Think back to the action by the Canadian government during the truckers strikes during Covid. By the “flip of a switch,” the Canadian government made sure the protesting truckers lost access to their funds in banks, use of credit cards: they could not get gas, purchase food, etc. That is the end result of the elimination of a cash economy.

In this case, Mr. Carlson wisely allows Fitts to do the overwhelming majority of the talking as he is clearly dealing with an individual who is his superior intellectually.

Be sure to visit www.Solari.com, Fitt’s foundation/website for weekly news that very well may change your perspective on the world.

https://tuckercarlson.com/tucker-show-catherine-fitts

In every personal, national, political, or corporate negotiation, there is a bottom line beyond which communication or the opportunity to successfully interact becomes impossible. That point may be one of morality, ideology, self-interest, or philosophy. Finding and understanding that point can be difficult and often clouded by one’s own prejudices, mood, etc. I believe, however, that Europe has reached a great divide in one especially important matter: immigration.

There is an ongoing struggle across much of the world caused by waves of Muslim immigrants and their impact on the European nations to which they flock. Some are drawn by the opportunity for a better life financially and educationally, others are drawn by the generous welfare programs which were set up after World War II.  There can be no doubt that there are others who see the European nations as targets for their long-term goal of conquering through the cradle. In this, they emulate the cry from Quebec decades ago when the French-Canadians envisioned change through a demographic war known as the revenge of the cradle. It sought to overturn the English power in the province and replace with a French culture orientation. Finally, there are others who see the European nations with their lack luster leaders as weak reeds who cannot stand up to Muslim power using the cradle, refusal to integrate and by sapping the financial strength of their hosts. The great question can the West reach an accommodation with the immigrants whose basic core beliefs, whose moral outlook are clearly opposed to those of the West? In fact, the question is really will Muslim immigrants accept and integrate Western values. In short, the answer is a strong no!

Why do I say there is no manner to reconcile the majority of Muslim immigrants and the natives of those European nations? There are two very simple reasons, and they serve as a great divide which cannot be bridged.

The first is fundamental and obvious: how women are viewed and treated in many of the most conservative Muslim countries, specifically the thirty-one where female genital mutilation is practiced and is practiced in those communities in Western nations. I recently read an article in the Daily Mail by Dr. Renee Hoenderkamp (12/16/2025, pp.15) in which she describes the real horrors of FMG going on even today, in Great Britain. She worked in a London hospital in a largely Muslim community, and she describes the time as “the most harrowing medical experiences of my career….”  Women regularly entered the hospital victims of FGM, unable to “urinate properly and crushed each month by period pains so excruciating they were bent double.” And childbirth brought with it even greater pains as well as a greater chance of death. How can any culture or religion mandate such horrors on women who are fifty percent of that population? Certainly not in the name of protecting them. For those women living in those populations where FGM is the norm, Islam truly does mean submission.

We also see the outward manifestations of outlandish religious laws on women when we see women walking around totally covered with only their eyes showing. The human form must be covered so as not to inflame impure thoughts and actions. The males of that same religion are not subject to the same tyranny as they wear any clothing they wish. We should not object, for least that woman was outside; she had her father, uncle, or brother to chaperone her. Those who are without a male family member are not allowed to go shopping on their own, go for a walk, drive, take a bus, etc. Must they be “protected” because the average Muslim man is unable to control himself unless a woman is in a burka. And of course, women do not need to have an education as they have a limited role in life. Thank goodness those women did not receive an education past the age of ten or they might ask why they are subjected to such a course, degrading life. No, not all women in Islam are treated in this manner, but for too many they are denied the option to be free and to create their own lives.

Secondly, conservative Islam, in particular the Shia version of Islam, is at its heart a totalitarian system. The religious leaders are divinely guided and not politically chosen. Additionally, the mullahs or religious leaders have the sole authority to interpret the rules and laws of the religion. The Sunni version sees its leaders as political figures chosen through consensus. This divide is huge and has been a matter of wars between the two camps. But the divide between the Shia vision of Islam and the basic ideals of the West are even greater. It is a fundamental chasm.

The Shia version is closer to communism than to a religion, for every action is guided by the “party line” as interpreted by a divinely chosen leader. This has been devastating to the followers of Islam; an example is the Ottoman Empire. Since the end of the seventeenth-century, Islam has been retreating. Even the Sultans in Istanbul could not change the decay of the Empire. Attempts at reforms such as with the military which was the power foundation holding up the edifice of the Ottomans were defeated time and again. The religious conservatives went so far as to massacre any troops trying to emulate the West. When you are divinely chosen and have the authority to interpret the very laws under which all must obey, what are the chances of smoothly integrating into societies which believe in ideals that are totally anathema to your own personal whims?

Is there hope that the conservative Muslim population can be integrated into Western values? Many Muslims want our conveniences, our fancy gym shoes, computers, clean water, abundant food and all the rest the West has to offer. They do not realize their very mindset blocks them from creating those items themselves. Instead, they must be like beggars, waiting for the West to give them what they desire.

 All the while, our “leaders” continue to appease the worse of the immigrants in order to avoid the violence that is a very real danger and which is spreading through our lands. No, it is better to keep quiet as churches are burned, no go zones created, gang wars over drugs explore in our cities, women raped and the assailants released because “they just don’t understand our culture.” Do not worry, the citizens are docile so they will continue to work and pay for the “freebies” given to the immigrants. Why can’t the West just admit that the gap between those who prefer a mindset from the Middle Ages and the modern West is too great to bridge? They will take what is given to them with no string and live off the generosity of those who act like fools. It appears our “leaders” will continue to appease the immigrants in the clearly mistaken belief that the majority will turn into useful citizens. How long do we wait, how long before we see any indication that there is even a bit of interest in assimilation?

The basic tenants of a religion will provide the guidelines of a society and how fifty percent of the population is treated will determine if a society will be successful or fail. The prime function of an immigration policy is that it must benefit the receiving nation. No sane immigration policy welcomes individuals who are inherently hostile to the core values of the admitting state. Dare anyone point to any of the Western nations that are better, more productive, or safer after a period of unrestricted illegal immigration?

If you feel that all societies are equal, that we just have to “understand” them, that their values are equal to ours, then go live in that society and see how long you hold onto your illusions. Experience it, embrace it. Especially if you are a woman. But remember, it is much easier to get into that society than out.

The recent movie, Nuremberg, centers around two characters; Dr. Douglas Kelley, who spent many hours interviewing and interacting with the twenty-two defendants during the first Nuremberg trial and Reichsmarschall Hermann Goring.

Dr. Kelley in 1945 was 35 years old at the time of his work at Nuremberg, upon which the movie is based. He was a U.S. Army psychiatrist with an excellent reputation. His goal was to understand the mind set of the defendants in terms of how they viewed the war crimes they faced and how they could participate in the conducting of those terrible crimes. He interacted with those individuals for only one month, but that month changed his life forever. After those interviews, he gradually became more introverted, subject to flare ups of anger, and more argumentative. His career which held so much promise became short-circuited as he disagreed with fellow doctors and administrators; he was no longer invited for interviews; his scholarly papers were ignored and not published and he became a pariah. In 1958, he died by suicide.

What was it that changed the course of Kelley’s life? It was that month when he spoke with the twenty-two defendants and found a secret that he believed was totally opposed to the image that most people had of those defendants. It is a secret that has haunted generations as they studied the horrors of the Third Reich.

Dr. Kelley concluded, contrary to popular opinion, that the defendants were ordinary individuals; some brighter than others, some more vain, but all profoundly human. They were not devils or demons, they were not mad; in most cases they could be your next store neighbors until the right conditions were created. Dr. Kelley believed that it was not madness that enabled those men to participate in such crimes, but rather from a moral decay disguised as duty. We must remember that numerous commanders of the Nazi killing squads (the Einsatzgruppen) were medical and legal doctors and others possessing the finest intellectual educations in their fields. In their minds, their “work” was noble and ridding the earth of unhealthy and deadly enemies of their race.

In this book, 22 Cells, he saw that the “gradual process of moral desensitization, in which obedience and ambition eroded empathy” enabled those men (and so many others), to commit war crimes on a scale previously unknown. His belief in that process led him to believe that in any society, if the conditions were right, those actions could be repeated and that knowing that society had to take steps to safeguard such a recurrence. Naturally, such a view was not very popular in the victor nations who saw themselves as being not only the physical but also the moral victors of the war.

Long before Hannah Arendt went public with the phrase, the banality of evil, Dr. Kelley had spoken that way of what he had learned in Nuremberg. Like Kelley, Arendt paid a price using that phrase, yet there has never been any evidence to the truth of those words. They paid the price for staring into the darkest portion of the human mind. Will we learn from what they found? Try asking the average teenager of today who fought who in World War II. Ask them who fought in our Civil War. Some may say that Nazi Germany was an aberration, a fluke of history. If that is to be believed, what about the Armenian genocide, the Ukraine famine of the 1930’s, the intentional famine in China under Mao, the muti-year war in the Congo, the slaughter in Rwanda. Need I go on? Their ignorance is not their fault, but someone will have to pay the price for that ignorance. Perhaps not in this decade, perhaps not in the next, but there is always a price to pay for such ignorance.

There can be no finer example of the banality of evil than the book written by the commandant of Auschwitz and one of the greatest mass murders in history, Rudolph Hoss. Written while awaiting trial, he does not attempt to deflect blame or plead some sort of extraordinary circumstances for his actions. Instead, he paints a picture of a very bland, ordinary man simply doing his duty as he was ordered. A good family man, loving father, his main concern was to please his superiors everyday. He was the perfect face of the banality of evil.

For further reading, please consider The Nazi Conscience by Claudia Koonz, The Nuremberg Interviews by Leon Goldensohn, The Mind Doctor of Nuremberg by Kendrick D. Erasmus, and Marriage & Fatherhood in the Nazi SS by Amy Carney, Death Dealer by Rudolph Hoss.

Numerous times over the past year ( e.g., Jan.2, Jan.23, Feb. 5, March 8, June 6, Oct. 10), I have written and posted articles concerning the disaster that is befalling much of the E.U., but especially Germany in its’ quest to go green. 

Tens of thousands of jobs lost, leading technical companies relocating, soaring energy prices, expanded welfare rolls, mounting national debt and decreasing individual liberty has been the reward for a decade of pie in the sky social and energy policies. Government leaders in western Europe are acting like teenagers who refuse to believe that tomorrow will never come and the bills they are creating will never come due.

The link below will take you to an article which provides facts and figures that should shock and dismay European leaders, yet somehow those leaders continue on a path of proven failure. While those same leaders express concern about the “American First” direction of President Trump, they have no qualms about continuing their, “Our Citizens Last” policies.

The nations of eastern Europe are on growth paths as they battle the bureaucrats of the E.U. Instead of asking how those nations are able to grow their economies without the flood of immigrants from third world “nations,” the E.U. like a spoiled child continues to stamp its’ feet and demand that those nations adhere to the E.U.’s failed policies.

Is there still time for nations such as Germany to change their course, reverse their belief in fairy tale economic and energy polices and play upon their traditional strengths to build a better future?

Please copy this link to the article: https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/walpurgis-night-of-madness-germany-in-the-grip-of-climate-socialism/

It has been about a year and a half since I last visited London and from the news I have seen here in the States, I wanted to see what the mood in the city regarding their politics was, economy, immigration, etc. While having breakfast I was able to read several British papers and what particularly struck me were the first pages of The Daily Mail (12/19/2025), which has the highest circulation but is not considered to be on par with the Times of London (which is further to the Left in its reporting). So let me present three stories which I believe indicate where the U.K. is at currently:

1. Phillipson blocks safe spaces for women: Bridget Phillipson is the Women and Equalities Secretary (a position specifically aimed at protecting Women and bettering their lot).  In response to the recent decision by the High Court, she has released a statement that their recent ruling is “trans-exclusive” and refuses to release (enforce) them after the court ruling three months ago. The guideline was created after the British Supreme Court ruled that banned “transgender women-biological males-from women’s lavatories.  According to Ms. Phillipson, the court ruling would ban women from taking their infant sons into changing rooms and pools. She has already missed the deadline for presenting guidelines to Parliament. Apparently “woke” is alive and well in the U.K. and is defiance of the law of the land. Here is the woman who is charged with protecting women and she refuses to enforce the law which specifically protects women. Your government at work for your benefit?
2. British boys don’t need misogyny lessons-migrants do: The Labour government has decided that British school boys need to be taught about misogyny in response to a dramatic increase of violence against women. The goal is to reduce sexual violence by half within a decade.  The leader of the Conservative party, Kemi Badenoch has said that “if you tell boys that they are the problem, you don’t create respect, you create resentment, you create backlash…”. The current effort by Labour seems to have been based on a BBC TV drama Adolescence which tells the story of a 13-year-old-boy who was arrested on suspicion of murdering a female classmate. Ms. Badenoch has urged the Labour government to publish data on the nationality and immigration status of sexual offenders, which the government has refused to do. It is interesting that the “sexual grooming” which has plagued the U.K. for more than ten years and resulted in tens of thousands of female victims was due to be discussed openly in Parliament, but at the last moment the Labour government cancelled the discussion as it might upset Pakistani voters. Your government at work, protecting it’s citizens?
3. The Cost of Welfare: Projections are that one in eight Brits will be claiming disability benefits by 2030, up from the current one in ten. At the same time, new guidelines mean that by 2030, four million Brits will be on disability with absolutely no need to look for work or prove their sickness continues. The government claims that they are working on reforms which will save about two billion pounds (about $2.7 billion) in the next four years (hardly a brilliant success). This “savings” is part of the total cost of over one-hundred-ninety billion currently.

Those three stories from one day’s news show a nation with major problems. OK, every country has its’ problems and, on the whole, the attitude in Mayfair and the money sections of the city was positive.  It was great seeing and feeling the power that some of the young Brits had as they hit the pubs after work.  They were positive and you could feel their excitement.  Fantastic! On the other hand, from the taxi drivers to bar tenders to some everyday Brits, there were more cautious comments, ranging from “we are broke” to” there is no money”, to complaints of their National Health Service (need a cancer consultation? You get a lottery ticket-not kidding- and then the NHS tells you when your consultation will be; one person got a phone consultation in thirteen months’ time). Then there is the underlying problem of the migrants.  A local council was upset as a local building was being refurbished to house five-hundred immigrants, which was more than lived in the village. That same day over five hundred immigrants were caught coming over from France. The immigrants are coming faster than the government can build houses for them, when there is a housing shortage already for native Brits.

I have to admit, I love the U.K. and I am aware of how much has changed over the thirty plus years that I have been visiting.  Gone are the carts selling fruits having been replaced by falafel stands.  And East London?  It is a different country all together, and only time will tell what will happen. London is no different than any U.S. city; it is still safe unless you wander into a section that you know if trouble. Added to this is the current policy under the Labour government of thought control such as arresting an individual for silently praying in a public space, or the seventy-year-old Grandmother who was arrested for criticizing the local government on Facebook.  There is a feeling of national malaise in the air and the current government is holding on with every tool at it’s disposal.

The changes are plain to see and like the rest of Western Europe, the British government is stuck in doing the same things which have failed, hoping for a different result. Fortunately, at least the government is not locking up or shutting out rival political parties as we have seen in the EU.  If the Brits continue down their current failing road, I believe there is little hope for national renewal. It is a shame, as there is so much good to see that that wonderful land.

Much is being made of the Trump administration’s new national security strategy. In the thirty-three-page report, the administration seems to take aim at Europe, which is facing numerous serious challenges.  These include “civilization erasure” from high immigration as well as economic decline and actions by the EU which “undermine political liberty and sovereignty.”  This report echoes comments made by Vice President Vance in March when he spoke before the Munich Security Forum. Additionally, European leaders are criticized for standing in the way of a U.S. brokered end to the Ukraine war while they cannot supply the Ukrainians with the support it needs to continue the war. China and Europe need to “stand on its own feet” while Russia is not seen as a threat.

Controversial stuff to say the least but hardly anything new to anyone who has watched as Western Europe nations enabled little if any economic growth while neglecting their own defense. Additionally their lack of capital all but insures that the explosion in technology (especially AI), will leave Europe in the dust  Finally, unstable governments seem to take aim more at their citizens rights and liberties rather than address the huge welfare cost of millions of migrants who refuse to assimilate and want the goodies of the west but are a net loser to each nation.

Western Europe’s obsession with going “Green” has led to hugely inflated energy prices which in turn has led to a loss in manufacturing jobs and an inability to provide enough energy for the challenges of AI. In the U.K., about fifty percent of the cost of energy is to cover the production and delivery of domestic energy, while the other fifty percent is made up of taxes and levies to cover subsidies for renewables and system upgrades. With waiting times of up to a decade for new, reliable energy, Europe is seriously in danger of being left out of the AI movement. At the same time, much of the EU is still committed to shutting down reliable fossil energy production even though “green” energy continues to increase the cost of energy.

Along with the serious failures of green energy policies, the EU has committed to a five-percent budget for its own defense. The great question is where the Western Europeans plan to get the capital to fulfil their promise? Between the spiraling cost of welfare thanks to illegal immigrants, the lost of manufacturing jobs, ever increasing energy costs, an old and failing infrastructure and a failing public health system, Europe simply does not have enough capital to coverall all of its bases or promises.  German Chancellor has said that the German welfare system must be overhauled, but can it be done against the bureaucrats of the EU who are accountable to no one and who continue to believe in their starry dreams and economic genius?

Trump’s national security strategy may sound rough, but it should not be news to any European leaders. They know full well that they face serious problems but few in the West of Europe seem to be ready to break away from the “business as usual” mentality which has developed since the fall of the Soviet Union. Those few politicians who offer alternative ideas which appeal to a small but growing segment of the population are either outrightly banned from any coalition government, charged with various crimes or face being buried under verbal attacks which all but accuse them of being extremists beyond the pale. Hopefully, the Trump document will make more Western European leaders start to act like leaders and less like the politicians who got their countries into the fine mess they are today.

There is an old stereotype of a typical Southern Senator; he is a bit loose in his dressing, has a southern accent with a definite drawl and a mind like a steel trap. Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana fills the bill perfectly. One of the most enjoyable ways to take a break during the day is to go to You Tube and view him questioning judicial nominees. He shuffles through papers pulling up quotes or writings of the nominees and he has a way of reading them that often makes the nominee look as foolish as possible. Try it.

His writes a book of stories; him growing up in a small village, his first political job, the step-by-step advancement and even the fact that it was only on his third run for the United States Senate that he achieved his goal. Then came the hard part: learning the real job of being a politician when you work in an atmosphere where many of your ninety-nine compatriots each believe that they are the burning bush before Moses. He learns but has a problem in that he, for some strange reason, seems to believe that honesty is the best policy. How quaint!

This short book of just over two hundred pages gives us a glimpse behind the curtain of life in the Senate. In the last chapter, “Speed Round,” he lays out clearly, with facts and logic his core set of political views. Transgenderism and women’s sports, China, crime, the media, and more are covered and it would be such fun to have an individual who disagrees with him, read and answer his beliefs on a one to one, face to face discussion.

This is a quick, easy to read book, but I believe you will come away respecting an individual who may not share your view or ideas of the world; that is if you can put up with honesty.

The recent “No Kings” demonstrations have brought to mind the last time a President truly acted like a King, and no, it was not the current occupant of the Oral Office. Rather it was President Biden who exercised the one power that is unrestricted, unpoliced, and total in the hands of the President: the power to pardon.

While all Presidents have this unique power, none in the history of the United States has pardoned his siblings, siblings-in-law, son, twenty-five hundred convicted drug convictions, and unindicted government officials for unmentioned crimes. Additionally, he overrode the federal judicial system, ignored the decisions of juries, and granted clemency to nearly every federal death row inmate. His decision was based on his personal moral view of the death penalty and went against the stated federal law. All of these actions took place just hours before he left office and in spite of a promise not to pardon his own son.

The power to pardon is not limited in the United States to the President; Governors of states also hold such power, but their power is limited by each State’s Constitution. Abuses have occurred, such as Virginia’s Governor Terry McAuliffe. In order in 2016, he allowed by fiat 206,000 convicted felons who had completed their terms to regain the ability to vote, hold public office, serve on a jury and function as a notary. There was moral outrage across the state and the state Supreme Court stated that such a blanket action was beyond the scope of his ability. In the end, the outgoing governor McAuliffe got around the state Supreme Court by issuing “individual grants of clemency.”      Finally, we have the question of should any President have so much power and what are the options for any attempt to limit his pardoning power.

The attached article gives us a fascinating look into the thinking of the Founding Fathers when they gave such unlimited power to the President. Although not in the Constitution, there were discussions as to a recourse should any President abuse his pardon power to such a degree that it went beyond all norms, and that recourse was impeachment. Yet President Biden in issuing his pardons just hours before he left office avoided even a discussion of impeachment. Imagine if a future President should decide to empty all the Federal prisons of their inmates, or “only those inmates who supported his own political party?.”  Given the actions of President Biden, we may all look with trepidation as each future President is about to leave office.

https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/unpardonable