Why are the Democrats choosing to align with criminals?
Isn’t that a losing game? Don’t the vast majority of US voters want to be safe from crime?
And after all, didn’t Democrats learn their lesson about this during the election of 1988, when one of the reasons Dukakis lost is that he was perceived to have been responsible for a prisoner furlough program that let a convicted murderer out for the weekend and the man then proceeded to commit assault and rape?
Well, 1988 was a long time ago and some things have changed – although not, I think, the fact that most people want to be free from violent crime. However, my guess – and it’s only a guess – is that Democrats are aligning with criminals for a reason, and the reason is that their constituency has boiled down to the following: actual criminals, aspirational criminals, the women who love criminals, rich people who have enough money to set up enclaves to protect themselves from criminals, people who hate the police for whatever reason, and virtue signalers for whom the perceived virtue of being forgiving towards criminals is more important than other considerations and whose own safety has never been seriously compromised (that is, they’ve never been mugged by reality).
Those groups added together may constitute the majority of the people in blue cities, and so this may be perceived by the left as a winning platform in such places. At the moment, Democrats seem to be concentrating on consolidating their power in blue blue areas and then hoping to fan out from there.
That’s the only explanation I can come up with right now.
Because the Democrats are crimials! Duh.
In a word – ideology. I think back to Reagan’s old saw about how liberals know so many things that just aren’t so.
In lefty land, Dukakis didn’t lose because he was weak on crime. Dukakis lost because Lee Atwater was a dirty racist who used Willie Horton to weaponize the latent racism of the electorate.
Some Democrats were somewhat reality-based on crime and other issues during the Clinton years, but since then, they’ve won quite a few elections with a base that lives in the neighborhood of make believe on crime and other issues and candidates who either share their fervor or are afraid of it – – so the old-time ideology is back in the saddle.
So we can pin it on Destutt de Tracy, and Thomas Jefferson his champion and translator. Might work.
Why ask why? Are you a lumper or a spliter? I’m boringly in the middle. I see three groups 1) Those who truly want to burn it down; 2) Those who seek power and prestige within their tribe/group; and 3) the useful idiots. Sadly, my sister is a classic useful idiot. She hates what is going on with the country and at the very same time slaveishly supports the Democrats. What’s a brother to do?
Neo may have hit on a combination; those who hate the way things are organized, about any number of things. Traffic lights, criminal justice, have to pay for food, show up to school, can’t throw trash around, and any time one of those (with no doubt dozens more) is successfully transgressed as in letting criminals out is sticking it to The Man. Any time, any one.
A thesis
==
Bourgeois Democrats are highly status-conscious. And offended when people they regard as low status exercise authority over themselves or over their client populations (e.g. slum blacks). NB, an antagonism to street crime and a view that street crime should be met with punishment are unremarkable viewpoints, the sort of thing bourgeois Democrats of my mother’s generation derided as simplistic. Their disposition toward school disorder is much the same. Teachers and school administrators at all levels, the bulk of the legal profession, and the media all have the same attitudes.
==
Add to this a large slice of the black population, who have persuaded themselves they are an aristocratic stratum who should not be subject to the authority of their social inferiors (e.g. police officers). Bourgeois Democrats feed this mentality.
==
Add to this a large corps of unmarried young people who harbor a stew of resentments and personal dysfunction. Most of their indignation is unmerited. To the extent it is not, the apposite targets are people who sold them a bill of goods in re tertiary schooling.
==
And there are others who simply do not care. The Democratic Party is their preferred instrument for injuring people to whom they are hostile. There isn’t any reason to it.
I’m getting boring: Power
I’m fairly pessimistic inasmuch as I think the stance of the Democrats on 80-20 issues costs them a small population of swing voters they figure they can make up by stuffing the ballot boxes. North of 45% of the electorate will vote Democratic no matter how awful their behavior.
Chuck S. just said “What Crime, I don’t see no crime here in DC”. One wishes that he, his staffers, would be mugged. Mugged for real, a painful mugging, to remind them of reality.
That party went from supporting the concept of women’s sports to supporting males in women’s sports in just a few years. Even NOW is for the transgenders.
At a fundamental level there is something off with that party..
The explanation is that they oppose anything Trump favors. It’s like Groucho Marx’s song, Whatever it is, I’m against it!
I think it means the Democrats have given up on winning elections fairly. Their goal is to transfer as much power as possible to “professionals” who can’t be removed by an election – the judiciary and civil service, mainly – and shield those officials as much as possible from public reprisal, because the “professionals” are morally superior to the common voter. Compassion for criminals, to the point of allowing crime to flourish unchecked, is evidence of moral superiority because the people don’t have it.
The Democratic Party has thought this way ever since the Progressives took charge of it under Wilson, but as long as they had hopes of winning elections they didn’t say it that bluntly. (Their usual line was that leniency for criminals would lower crime by giving them chances to reform.) And the more practical Democrats were willing to crack down on crime when it got bad enough that the voters might turn them out of office. But now that the voters are rejecting the party’s main goal, the Democrats are using their claim of moral superiority as a flag to rally to. While they have the civil service, they don’t need votes, but they do need solidarity with each other.
It would be interesting to go back and look at what the now fairly well known actresses who played in that movie ” A League of Their Own” said about women’s sports when that movie was released and what they are saying now about transgenders in women’s sports.
Something has radically changed in the Democrats.
Oh, the Dems are pretty tough on any law-breaking from the middle class, while letting the lower class terrorize the middle class. That’s Oligarchy 101 right there. Same thing in the UK, but much farther along, and pretty well described in A Clockwork Orange published in 1962–that book is almost old enough to collect Social Security. Also a feature of the Gulag, where the “socially friendly elements”–i. e. Russian mafia–were given positions of trust in the camps where they could exploit and terrorize the political prisoners.
Even NOW is for the transgenders.
==
NOW is an inconsequential organization in our time. Liberal culture is exceedingly faddish. Just another outcropping of that.
Is Big Pharma playing a role in what appears to be a major increase of Trump hatred?
Big Pharma has a huge lobbyist base and Trump is trying to change an amazingly out of balance pricing structure which may hit them hard.
I check Drudge several times a week to keep up with what the Trump haters are obsessing over, and it has changed to a level of hatred I have never seen before. Something new has been added.
The Democrat Party consists of: criminals, people that feel sorry for criminals, and people that can’t approve of anything Trump does.
Of course Schumer doesn’t see any crime; he’s one of the few members of Congress with a 24/7 protection detail.
“Why are the Democrats choosing to align with criminals?” Professional courtesy.
“That’s the only explanation I can come up with right now.”
Well, I’m going to go full tin-foil hat conspirator and come up with another explanation: the Democrats are being paid off big time by the cartels and other criminal enterprises which are in turn being aided by the Chinese and Iranians.
Think about it: what’s one of the major structural problems with the Left? They are horrible with money. They need gobs and gobs of it to keep buying their support and they never have enough of it (see the Kamala campaign’s blow-out spending to what end of $1.5 billion in 103 days!).
Now pretend to be a good Lefty and imagine this scenario: a nation-wide political organization is taking a position that is terribly unpopular with the American electorate. This political organization is repeatedly taking hits for its support of these unpopular policies, yet they stick to them ferociously. These policies, however, make foreign multi-national corporations billions of dollars annually at the expense of the American populace. Now, why would a Lefty say that this organization supports these policies? They would say: because this organization is in the pay of the multi-national corporations.
Now, what is a cartel? It’s a multi-billion dollar multi-national corporation by another name. The Democrats’ policies were making the cartels billions in giving them access to the American market and now Trump is shutting that access down. What you do if you were running the cartels? Who would you find as allies in the US?
Do I have proof? Nope. Do I suspect that the CIA and FBI has proof? Yes, I do. But, boy, does it explain what we’re seeing.
The Dems’ Old Testament is by Antonio Gramsci, the New by Saul Alinsky.
Neo, I do like reading you, but sometimes it does feel like a big echo chamber in here, and I’m including the comments.
My best guess is that the Democrats aren’t “aligning with criminals”. They dispute the necessity of federalizing the Washington police force, usually by pointing to statistics that show falling crime rates, and by also pointing out that the militarization of US police has, well, not been an unmitigated success. (Remember Waco?)
Of course one can then start discussing whether crime statistics have been tampered with. Fair enough. But a discussion about whether statistics are correct is a completely different conversation than “aligning with criminals”.
Seriously, it seems to me like nobody here is even making an effort to understand how the “other side” thinks. Yes, I’m sure that this kind of non-empathy is also virulent on the “other side”. But nevertheless, I happen to think that trying to at least understand the other’s position is the absolute least one should aspire to in a functioning democracy.
Maybe I’m hopelessly old-fashioned.
The Dems may not all be violent criminals, but they are all thieves at heart. They want to take what you have and give it to themselves and their friends.
The Democrats read the New York Times, watch MSNBC and listen to NPR. All their friends are deep blue. In the cloistered world where many D’s live they don’t see the people you discuss as really criminals.
Now Trump supporters, those they can see as criminals.
George Floyd. Told about all anyone needs.
The hard core Marxists were always pagans (Rousseau). Having debased society, academia, and culture for 3 generations – they no longer see the need to pretend to be Judeo-Christian Westerners…. they are probably correct in their assessment that they will not lose many younger voters.
The followers – like the members of the UK police force – may not have gotten there as intentionally as the Marxists, but they no longer retain enough cultural memory for Western values to direct or check their behavior. They are pagans through atrophy, rather than rebellion.
A lot of people thought that we could retain the historical-political developments of the Enlightenment without reaffirming the monotheistic religious faith and personal responsibility that undergirded them.
This is now disproven – you can’t have the fruits without the roots.
The bobbies rounding up wrongthinkers – breaking the eggs for the Marxist omelet – are not merely postmodern. They are post-Christian.
I think there’s a couple of things going on.
1) An overwhelming hatred of all things Trump is driving them to reflexively oppose everything he does. It’s not rational. They’re being driven by their emotions.
2) Cloward-Piven on a societal scale. The original Cloward-Piven scheme was to overwhelm and crash the welfare system. Now, however, it has grown into one to overwhelm and crash our entire society. Immigration, crime, and social dysfunction such as transgenderism all play into that.
When you peel away the onion and get to the core, it’s because the left isn’t really *for* anything anymore. What started off as a revolution to remake society has descended into a counter-revolution against modern Western civilization. When you are for something you usually have a self-consistent set of beliefs and actions leading to your preferred outcome. But when you are against something you can hold multiple mutually exclusive views simultaneously as long as each one opposes the status quo (e.g. arresting men for catcalling but not for rape).
I’ve become convinced that if you could go back in time and bring a bunch of 1960s flower children into the present age they’d be horrified by the modern left, as long as they skipped over the intervening 60 years. The flower children were *for* a better society (Their vision of society could never work because it ignored human nature, but being for something was what drove them.). Today’s left is driven by what they’re against. That leads them to some bizarre and dangerous places.
Like this insane woman here: https://x.com/fleming_benn/status/1956036776360915029?s=46
Illegal has 3 DUIs in 6 months, kills a mother and 11yo daughter on his third one, but this “journalist” says he had a “largely clean driving record.”
I don’t understand how one can type that, think “yeah, this is a banger post with which the masses will feel empathy for him,” and then hit post with such confidence.
Gorgasal:
No, I really see them as aligning with criminals. The “crime rates are falling” arguments seem to me to be transparent and unconvincing excuses. The alignment with criminals is not just recently to oppose Trump in DC. It’s the number of Soeros-type DAs in so many blue cities.
That’s what they may claim, anyway. The issue here is why they claim these things. Sure, many of them no doubt truly believe that crime isn’t really much of a problem in DC, or at least not enough of one to justify what Trump is doing I suppose. But it’s also true that those people don’t actually live in the areas that are directly effected by said crime. That is, they don’t live in DC at all or even if they do they live in the more affluent areas of the city. What’s more, they’ll likely dismiss any contradicting information coming from sources they don’t trust anyway, instead choosing to believe the flawed narratives crafted by legacy media.
They pushed for cashless bail they failed to prosecute prohibited possessors they went after simple tresspassers on capitol grounds with a vengeance and expunged the ranks of ‘summer of love” rioters collectively they are for chaos rape and murder in our major cities
In milwaukee you havd chisholm who was full on lawfare against walker but when it came to the waukesha mauler he let him go time and again we have seen this in every blue municipality
Schumer
https://x.com/Breaking911/status/1955981358943089122
Who did Waco? It wasn’t any Republicans.
It was the clintons as part of a budger exercise for the atf
Who were the adjunct advisers general wesley clark and shoomaker fmrly delta force later deputy chief of staff
From my readings it’s Cultural Marxism, just as the Bolsheviks jumped into crimes and Marx blamed criminals actions to society forcing them into crimes to get out of the bottom dwelling.
“Seriously, it seems to me like nobody here is even making an effort to understand how the “other side” thinks.” -Gorgasal
We understand how the other side thinks. That’s not the problem.
1. Misplaced/undo/misunderstanding of the motivations of criminals. The majority of crime isn’t committed by people trying to avoid starvation, or bank foreclosures. The majority of crime isn’t committed by misguided youngsters that don’t understand the consequences of their crimes.
They just don’t think they’ll be caught and, if caught, don’t think the punishment will be consequential.
2. Think that whitey deserves payback. It’s just righting the scales where minorities have been under the thumb of their “masters”.
3. Do want to create enough chaos that their revolution can be completed– where the criminal chaos can by cast as the haves and have nots and moving to a socialism could cure those ills.
All of this is hogwash and flies in the face of reality– but we’re in an age of narrative and reality is optional.
So whether you say the democrats are choosing to align with criminals or enable criminality, that’s what is happening.
By the way, since you have a heightened sense of understanding, what is the primary motivation for removing/reducing criminal penalties for serious crimes?
This has been going on for some time and predates Donald Trump.
Case in point. In academic circles “punishment” is verboten as a tool to handle unruly/out of control students. So it has infected nearly every function of society. All done under democrat control.
Likewise
https://x.com/BillMelugin_/status/1956083039576129635
Seriously, it seems to me like nobody here is even making an effort to understand how the “other side” thinks.
==
I have a family full of ‘the other side’. They’re not doing much thinking. They have attitudes, not thoughts.
Looking back years ago it should have been evident to me that the left will irrationally oppose anything Trump is for. Case in point: Trump criticized Colin Kaepernick for his contempt for the American flag. How in the name of all that is Holy can you defend a man like that? At a minimum, they should have given no opinion about the matter. But no, Trump said that so …… TDS is a real thing.
@Gorgasal:it seems to me like nobody here is even making an effort to understand how the “other side” thinks.
I think that does happen here on some issues, but when it comes to this specific issue, there’s a lot of facts that the “other side” here just refuses to look at, and an endless straining of gnats and swallowing camels to come to a predetermined conclusion. Taking their statements at face value, their narrative about crime and punishment makes no sense. It’s clearly created to serve a pre-existing agenda.
For example, on Instapundit today there’s a post about an illegal with a long record of DUI who is being tried for killing people in a DUI. The journalist writing about him says his driving record is “mostly clean” and presents him as somehow being treated unfairly.
Put yourself in that journalist’s place. Maybe you have priors, that most illegal immigrants don’t commit much crime (not true but let’s go with it). So you plan to write a story on how this guy is being overcharged and harshly treated. To write that story, you have to look up his criminal record. You do, and you see DUI, DUI, DUI, DUI. How then, as an honest person trying to fairly represent the stituation, do you describe that as a “mostly clean” driving record?
You can’t, and that’s why the comments here are not “trying to understand how the other side thinks”. The “other side” cannot possibly be being honest about what they actually think, when they go to these lengths to deceive us.
The message to the donkeys is…
Your vile criminal party is being ripped out by its roots. You will never control any branch of government again no matter what it takes. The Trumpians are on a crusade.
Gorgasal
Each day I look at Drudge. CNN, and MSNBC. How many leftists look at fox, townhall, etc?
Second, I spent 38 years in academia. I’m well- versed in how “they” think.
why do they do it, because a certain faction are evil, as with the other thread,
Drudge was once sane then he sold out to some hacks which turned his bulletin into a mirror of retort
MSNBC was once reasonably close to sane, then it became
Osama’s favorite network, one notes in the Marvel films,
which have lost the thread themselves, how they often had some of the more bizarre takes, around the time of the avengers,
“Statistics”. More “mostly peaceful” crime. 100 murders in D.C. this year already.
The fact that so many commenters have professed explanations for the democrat idiocratic ideology is encouraging. It means that thinking people are concerned, which presages action, i.e., voting! If enough of the thinking population votes in accordance with their thoughts, we should be able to rebuff the democrat/socialist/idiot onslaught that has been assailing our fair republic these past few electoral cycles. If I might volunteer one more explanation, I think that democrats have been epatting les bourgeoisie for so long, they are running out of things with which to epatter and are forced to resort to more and more outrageous stunts to get a reaction.
this is what a local paper offers, gannett tributary,
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/
there isn’t a sacred cow touched,
I confess to a fondness for old episodes of West Wing. It’s such a wish-fulfillment fantasy about what government could be like if the Deep State were chock full of brilliant, principled, idealistic people. It’s also amazing to see what was orthodox liberalism not that long ago, 1999-2006. Political commonplaces fall from the mouths of our favorite characters that would send a progressive to the gulag these days.
@Steve (retired/recovering lawyer):which presages action, i.e., voting!
Let’s not confuse voting with action. You can vote for people who promise action, but if you fail to hold them accountable when they don’t act, then nothing happens. That’s been more or less what’s been going on in this country for fifty years.
The anti-Trump DC policing issue doesn’t show the dems aligning with criminals. Not any more than a thousand other items over the last decade, at least. Just one more.
I’m going to vote with BenDavid on this one…
Marxists are pagans at heart. They reject the very idea of God & are therefore untethered to anything but the destruction of everything the Christian West built in pursuit of their self-styled pagan self-elevating glory…and by heavens I’m going to steal the two-edged “pagan by atrophy versus pagan by revolution.” (Thank you BD)
Their “long march through the institutions” (Dutschke/Gramsci) is bearing (if I may borrow BenDavid again here) the fruit of the poisoned root…They side with the destroyers of every stripe. They are incapable of aligning with the good, the beautiful, or the true.
A perhaps more familiar quote is applicable: “For you are the children of your father the devil, and you love to do the evil things he does. He was a murderer from the beginning. He has always hated the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies.” – John 8:44 (Jesus)
If Trump is successful in turning the tide, crime-wise, in DC, then the Democrats will be exposed to the country as highly unsuited to be in charge. They also have to align with the Black community no matter what. And Democrats have always had a soft spot for criminals.
I heard Mayor Bowser left town, which is odd. It was reported she went to Martha’s Vineyard. I wonder who she’s staying with?
My take is that it’s a three-way gun fight.
The globalist elites have allied with the radical left and dissatisfied minorities against the conservative Western middle- and working-classes in order to achieve global domination.
Given their power and resistance to the globalist agenda, America and Israel are particularly dangerous to the globalists, so destroying their societies is a high priority.
The Democrat leadership is part of the globalist elites.
QED.
miguel cervantes, on August 14, 2025 at 7:11 pm:
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/ “there isn’t a sacred cow touched”
Yes, but this story still has some relevance to this discussion today: Record number of snakes removed in 2025 Florida Python Challenge
physicsguy on August 14, 2025 at 6:32 pm said:
“Each day I look at Drudge. CNN, and MSNBC. How many leftists look at fox, townhall, etc?”
Those of us who don’t have the stomach for that thank you for doing so and reporting on what you find. We (of weak stomachs) may remain in our own info bubble, but it does have translucent boundaries thanks to you and others who provide such feedback. [not snark]
Every now and then, I stop to ask, “am I so marinated in Republican/conservative viewpoints that perhaps I am over exposed and not seeing or appreciating the full ‘objective truth’.” But it doesn’t take long to believe I am still getting a generally sound view of things, even if there are still “unknowns” at the edges, or an application of the 48 hour rule would be sound. The obvious absurdity of much of the MSM output (via commission or omission) helps support that orientation.
But, for example, Project Veritas is now out with some claims of working with a whistle blower for the last year or two, a young woman who kept notes, stole burner phones, and has credible evidence linking her media mogul boss and (even or especially) Bill Barr to efforts to explicitly undermine Trump or pursue other corruption via foreign money sources (Turkey, Qatar). PV asserts some of their supporting or confirmatory evidence comes from contacts they have in the DOJ. The whistle blower eventually went to the FBI but is now (supposedly?) hiding out in a foreign country out of fear that her former boss might try to kill her.
Presumably the PV folks are treading carefully and believe they have the goods, but it might even be possible they are being played or ??? So I (we?) wait.
@R2L: Every now and then, I stop to ask, “am I so marinated in Republican/conservative viewpoints that perhaps I am over exposed and not seeing or appreciating the full ‘objective truth’.”
Good on you for asking that question! No, leftists don’t ask that question of themselves much. (I did and look where that got me. 🙂 )
According to studies Jonathan Haidt cites, conservatives know liberal positions better than visa-versa. Our media and culture are so saturated with liberalism, that conservatives absorb much liberalism without even trying.
After Trump’s first win Soros changed his emphasis from the presidential elections to bank rolling local DA’s and state Attorney General’s, judges, county commissioners and city council members. His money went a long way toward putting leftist and incompetent people in those positions. Their soft on crime attitudes has helped to lead us to where we are now.
And you can’t overlook the democrats disagreement with everything Trump does.
As for the “crime rates are falling” arguments. Crime rates decreasing from previous very high rates is not an honest assessment.
If a man or woman weighs 350 pounds and loses 10 pounds, they can claim to be trending in the right direction. But it’s really just a start.
Young Hegelian,
I don’t think that’s a tin foil hat theory at all. Cartel political influence in New Mexico and Arizona is an open secret and probably extends all the way to D.C.
Lots of immigrant – legal and illegal – mobs. Organized crime has a very ‘diverse’ face these days.
I’m hoping once Trump has cleaned the traitors out of the FBI they can get started on going after the corruption.
Isn’t that supposed to be their job?
Over 50 comments! What can I add? No one reakky gers this insight, but a fewcreplies circle the real issues, as skip does briefly by blaming cultural Marxism — SO CLOSE, but no cigar.
Here’s The Cigar: Because law and order is RACIST!
There is a long scholarly tradition in criminology that went for broke with Woke, holding that punishing offenders is ipsi facto racist oppression.
It’s the whole “getting at root causes of crime” thinking, devolving into virtue signaling, and ala Woke, the racist law abiders deserve their punishment.
Welcome to radical insanity.
Remember a Minneapolis story of a crime victim, post George Floyde. A man who was a well-off far-leftist got carjacked and beaten up, then offered to give the thug his money and keys to his home, and then refused to sign a complaint to charge the thug!
Blatant self-sacrifice — I gather that religions now teach this gruesome self-flagellation as just penance for RACISM!
Without trying to make too much of what may just be a coincidence of phrasing, I was intrigued by the congruence of (1) a quote about the Nazi’s murder of Jews, in Neo’s Lenin post, and (2) this observation by BobS.
(1) “Browning notes three categories of potential perpetrators: those who were eager to participate right from the start, those who participated in spite of moral qualms because they were ordered to do so, and a significant minority who refused to take part.”
(2) I see three groups 1) Those who truly want to burn it down; 2) Those who seek power and prestige within their tribe/group; and 3) the useful idiots.
The useful idiots presumably might also refuse to take part in actions that rise to the level of killing civilians of a demonized group, but recent news stories are showing a lot of people willing to take part in actions below that bar if the targets are Republicans, conservatives, or law enforcement personnel.
Another interesting parallel, arising from Gorgasol’s “Remember Waco?” (implying that Trump’s “militarization of US police” might have as bad an outcome as Clinton’s — although I don’t think the situations are nearly as analogous as he does).
“British historian Hugh Trevor-Roper noted that although Himmler had forbidden photographs of the killings, it was common for both the men of the Einsatzgruppen and for bystanders to take pictures to send to their loved ones, which he felt suggested widespread approval of the massacres.”
https://accordingtohoyt.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/1760715044284276736.jpg?w=1024
They need to eat. And they need an apartment.
So they get on Disability.
This is a part of our everyday society that most Americans are oblivious to.
….. ….. ….. …..
The overt street crime that makes headlines is just supplemental income.
The overt street crime is just a side hustle. Opportunistic.
If you look at where these folks get their everyday financing, you’ll find it is mostly from “Social Services.”
And this also explains why huge numbers of Americans can reside in areas with almost zero businesses. Where by all outward appearances, there are no places to work, no jobs. Because they’re all surviving on “Clinical Dpression” disability or “Chronic Back Pain” disability, whatever. The government-paid case workers and government-paid doctors are making legal salaries supporting the grift.
They don’t really have a choice.
Any case-worker or doctor who might suggest that “Come on, you know that if you wanted to, you could find a job, maybe move out-of-state…” that is, any case-worker or doctor who might try to decline to participate in this charade would lose their job.
So, it just continues.
And expands.
Once someone gets on Disability, it’s near-impossible to get them off.
…. …. …. ….
This is the Democrat voting base.
This is the voting base that the Dems (and other enemies of the U.S.) seek to expand.
Clever. Not complicated.
They need to eat. And they need an apartment. So they get on Disability. This is a part of our everyday society that most Americans are oblivious to.
==
The median age of those awarded Social Security Disability each year is 49.0 years. You need sufficient work history and sufficient recent work history to qualify. There are a lot of awards which should not be made (starting with the 25% of the caseload granted benefits for ‘anxiety disorders’ and ‘mood disorders’), but you’re still looking at a client population with a median age of 56 of whom 87% are not black and half are female. That is not the demographic profile of the criminal population. Some people collecting benefits have dependents, but dependents make up < 20% of the beneficiary population.
==
To receive Supplemental Security Income, you have to be over 65 or to have been adjudicated disabled. It does not have a work history requirement. Currently, the benefit level is about $750 a month on average. For about 1/4 of the beneficiaries, the SSI benefit supplements the Social Security Disability benefit they receive. For most SSI is what they have. It helps families defray part of the cost of maintaining a hopeless relation. The median age of SSI beneficiaries is north of 40.
Once someone gets on Disability, it’s near-impossible to get them off.
==
The median age of a disabled worker collecting SSDI is 59 years. Shy of 892,000 saw their benefits terminated in 2020. Of these 30% died, 60% aged out of the program, and 8.5% were determined to not meet standards.
A 21-year-old with a well-established intravenous heroin addiction…
who has been injecting several times daily for years…
can and does get Disability.
Easily.
It happens everywhere in the U.S.
With zero work history.
They claim Depression, or Schizophrenia, or Chronic Intractable Pain, or Migraines, or any of other ailments.
This happens everywhere in the U.S. — especially in areas with low conventional employment opportunities. In these areas, “Getting On Disability Benefits” is a standard, accepted part of life. The dollars goes to support the local food store, it helps with rents, the local gas station, etc. And it also keeps the local illicit drug distribution networks in business. Basically, everyone benefits.
This is going on everywhere throughout the U.S., and it has been going on for decades. And getting worse. Because it is virtually impossible to stop.
Anyone who claims you cannot obtain Benefits without a work history is not telling the truth.
Anyone who claims you cannot obtain Benefits as a young adult, say, age 21, is not telling the truth.
“their constituency has boiled down to the following:”
You left out “they hate America and want to soften it up in preparation for a Marxist takeover”.
Alexander Fraser Tytler
A very good friend of mine, who had experience both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney, became a judge about 15 years ago. Although she is somewhat more lenient towards criminals than I am, in this blue city she is regarded as leaning towards the prosecution. But that’s only because she follows the evidence and the law and she has “heard it all before.”
When the city elected a progressive District Attorney who proceeded to decline to prosecute all kinds of crime and who instituted a policy of only rarely charging first degree murder (instead giving an automatic plea deal to third degree murder and no more than 20 years in prison), crime got worse. A lot of people noticed and were outraged.
Nevertheless, he was re-elected by a comfortable margin. I asked my friend WHY people in bad neighborhoods weren’t angry that the streets were way more dangerous and theft was rampant and she said that, in summary, too many were not upset because all they focused on was that their son/brother/friend was getting out of jail.
Transgender (e.g. grooming, corruption) progress.
Push women to the back of the bus, girls under the bus, and sequestering the “burden” of evidence in sanctuary states.
Shared/shifted responsibility.
[Catastrophic] [anthropogenic] climate change.
Nondiscrimination of queer sexual orientations (e.g. pedophilia).
Ethnic Springs.
DEIsm (e.g. racism, sexism, ageism, etc).
All’s fair in lust and abortion is a religious commandment and no ethical vice.
Alexander Fraser Tytler
==
And you’re pushing his hooey in our face just why?
cicero is said to stated it first,
it is the cycle from oligarchy to republic to democracy to oligarchy, the circle of life or death, as it were, same with Rome from monarchy to republic to empire, to conquered state,
and we see this pattern in the delian states to our
east and even south toward Australia, it’s a toss up which power will take them
China is the closest,
I’ve been thinking about a dichotomy for a while. I can’t claim to have dreamed it up myself; I must have read it somewhere, but it stuck.
Two type of people in the world: those who value process, and those who value outcomes.
Those who value process will accept negative outcomes so long as the process was fairly implemented and followed. Those who value outcomes don’t care what process is followed so long as the outcomes come to pass.
You can see where I’m going, yes? Those on the right value the processes, like court trials, investigations, elections. The guilty may go free, the truth may come out, our preferred candidate may not win, but the process was followed, and the process is what keeps us a free and decent people.
Those on the left value the outcomes, defined as: how they want society to be, amassing power, gaining status, hurting enemies. juries may be bribed, prosecutors may refuse to charge, judges may refuse to sentence. Reporters may obscure the truth, refuse to report on issues the public cares about. Voters may be bribed, illegals may be imported and persuaded to vote, poll watchers may be persuaded to count or not count votes. Lawyers may initiate suits to harass or impoverish. So long as the outcome is achieved.
With the outcomes the left prefers seemingly receding from their power to realize, they see that more and more extreme methods to achieve them must be employed. They’ve come this far; it’s not a long journey to violence, and if the outcome is portrayed as absolutely essential, then violence is essential, too.
So Bondi has replaced the police chief in DC, and now the AG and mayor are suing the government over the whole federal takeover. I guess that was inevitable. The Democrats love their criminals.
How the Home Rule act is interpreted I assume will be the crux of the legal arguments.
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/dc-home-rule-madhouses-and-choices
A 21-year-old with a well-established intravenous heroin addiction…who has been injecting several times daily for years…can and does get Disability. Easily.
==
Most people who apply for disability benefits of any kind are turned down. So, not ‘easily’.
==
As for Social Security Disability, fewer than 10% of those on benefits as ‘disabled workers’ (as opposed to being on the rolls as a dependent) are under the age of 42. Those on the SSI rolls are younger, in part because the program captures people who have been disabled all their lives (e.g. as those with abnormally low IQs).
If a Community Health Clinic in the U.S. insists on Urine Drug Screening as part of the basic evaluation for all patients — along with other basics like height, weight, blood pressure — what do you think happens?
People stop coming. Not all, but many.
People know that they cannot be truthfully diagnosed with a mental illness/disability if they’re using cocaine opiates etc.
So, they go elsewhere.
When the Federal Disability system has tried to insist on clean urine as a prerequisite for receiving monthly cash , the uproar is deafening.
And so in the U.S. for decades now, effectively, you have the right to use illegal addictive drugs … after obtaining them illegally … and then you can easy-peazy obtain Disability payments illegally … in order to continue to feed your illegal addiction lifestyle.
Every day, this goes on everywhere in America.
Every day.
Easy peazy.
….. ….. ….. …..
To a stranger, an addict is usually perceived as a nuisance or a criminal.
To a family member, an addict is often perceived as “a good kid who may have made some mistakes, but deep down has a really good heart.”
………….
Almost anybody can get Disability in the U.S. You just need to shop around a bit for the right lawyer, who will get you in with right doctor(s).
If someone tells you otherwise, you are not being told the truth.
There are 3.8 million “disabled” people on SSI under 65 at the moment, and 6.3 million “disabled” people on SS under age 65 (these overlap slightly).
Regardless of the percentages under whatever age or the median ages, we’re talking about 11 million people, so there’s still room for a lot of fraudulent drawing of benefits, potentially on the order of a million people.
There is a small industry based on helping people qualify for benefits. Health insurance companies sometimes hire them, which is one reason I know about them. I don’t doubt that most of those who just fill out the paperwork are turned down, but the ones who are much more likely to get in are the ones who get professional help.
But my guess is that if there’s widespread government subsidy of a non-working drug-addicted or criminal lifestyle, it’s not mostly found with Social Security but with SNAP and TANF and any number of state programs.
Miquel is right about a cycle nations go through, China no, the US is still too strong. As a guess the conquerer will come from Africa.I think we’re looking at 150+ yrs.This doesn’t take into account the political situation in the US.
The Dems’ Old Testament is by Antonio Gramsci, the New by Saul Alinsky. — Cicero
This. You have to appreciate that Hillary Clinton practically worshiped Alinsky. And that Alinsky’s mentor was Francesco Nitto, aka Frank Nitti. A mobster captain and later boss. Nitti was the guy who first conceived of organized crime taking over big labor unions. And Alinsky championed community organizing, which in many cases is about unionizing businesses. Obama studied and taught in Alinsky’s Chicago School.
Now, as to the exact mind set of these people… I still don’t get it or understand it. Unless it is as simple as predators and prey. When asked why he robbed banks, Dillinger said, “Because that’s where the money is.”
I reject the “open-mindedness” argument advanced by a few posters here (i.e., Gorgasal). Most of us have reached the age of reason and can process information without having to refer to the New York Times, or the Drudge Report to understand how the other side thinks. My frames of reference are Plato, Aristotle, wisdom literature, and yes, the Bible.
I maintain that political differences originate in metaphysics. Liberals and conservatives have different understandings of the nature of reality. Thus, if you start with different premises about the nature of reality, you reach different conclusions.
We conservatives believe that there is such a thing as truth, and that it corresponds to reality. Liberals, on the other hand, tend to be relativists. Reality to them is more material-based, which is why they constantly appeal to the authority of SCIENCE. Conservatives have a more broad understanding of reality which encompasses the immaterial (faith, love, God). Of course I believe that conservatives have the stronger argument. The fallacy of liberal thought is self-evident and on full-display.
@ R2L > “Project Veritas is now out with some claims of working with a whistle blower for the last year or two, a young woman who kept notes, stole burner phones, and has credible evidence linking her media mogul boss and (even or especially) Bill Barr to efforts to explicitly undermine Trump or pursue other corruption via foreign money sources (Turkey, Qatar). PV asserts some of their supporting or confirmatory evidence comes from contacts they have in the DOJ. The whistle blower eventually went to the FBI but is now (supposedly?) hiding out in a foreign country out of fear that her former boss might try to kill her.
Presumably the PV folks are treading carefully and believe they have the goods, but it might even be possible they are being played or ??? So I (we?) wait.”
These are links to the Project Veritas posts.
They are the stuff of a John Grisham thriller, but we’ve seen enough conspiracy theories getting validated that I wouldn’t rule them out yet either.
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/whistleblower-bill-barr-running-illegal-visa-scheme
Episode 1: Whistleblower: Former Attorney General Bill Barr and Media Figure Armstrong Williams are Running Illegal Immigration Visa Fraud Scheme for Billionaires
published on August 5, 2025
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/part-2-former-attorney-general-bill-barr-bill-barr-held-secret-meetings-to
Episode 2: Former Attorney General Bill Barr Held Secret Meetings to Plot Prosecutions of Trump Block His Political Comeback
published on August 7, 2025
As the old detective story writers say, if you want to know whodunnit, follow the money.
Remember, [Democrats are] not afraid that Trump will fail to negotiate a peace [in Ukraine]. They’re terrified that he will.
–Kurt Schlichter
https://x.com/KurtSchlichter/status/1956454026159301116
________________________
I’d say this applies to the Democrat opposition to Trump’s efforts against criminals as well.
Given Democrats’ lack of interest in or outright support for criminals, they are terrified Trump’s efforts to reduce crime will succeed.
Voters might notice.
Almost anybody can get Disability in the U.S. You just need to shop around a bit for the right lawyer, who will get you in with right doctor(s).
==
You don’t know what you’re talking about.
AesopFan on August 15, 2025 at 5:45 pm:
Thank you for supplying links to Episodes 1 and 2 – I should have done that.
This appears to be Episode 3 (from 8/12/25?):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZITYEfzjf0
Bribes and Burner Phones: Whistleblower Exposes Foreign Influence Over America! | Shadow Gov Ep 3
This X.COM, from an email PV sends me, might be an intro summary.
https://x.com/Project_Veritas/status/1956141457074536634
I don’t much care for the “serial thriller” format of PV’s exposes. But it does keep the interest up.
I hope if what they have is true and valid, then real indictments and applicable convictions follow. I suppose it could take beyond 2028 to reach that point, if initiating investigations now.
And I hope if it turns out this story is flawed in some way, and does not lead to responsible court action, that there is a good reason PV had for believing otherwise.