The Biden-Harris administration has made undermining trust in institutions a central tactic. While they claim to fight authoritarianism, their real battle is against the checks and balances that limit their power. For them, separation of powers, Article III, and the First Amendment are affronts to their quest for centralized authority.
Leaks, once a tool for exposing corruption, are now wielded as political weapons — not to uncover wrongdoing but to sow chaos and erode public confidence in the courts. This is not about transparency; it’s about controlling the narrative.
Their goal is to destabilize the judiciary, not to reform it, but to load it with activist judges who legislate from behind the bench.
Vice President Kamala Harris portrays former President Donald Trump as a “fascist,” but her rhetoric serves as a smokescreen for the administration’s own anti-democratic actions.
Consider President Joe Biden’s attempt to bypass the Supreme Court on student loan forgiveness. Along with the blatant lawlessness of lawfare that attempted to remove Trump from the ballot in Colorado or cases designed and contrived to imprison their political opponent.
This isn’t a defense of democracy — it’s an assault on it. Harris celebrates these moves as efforts to help the American people, but they reveal a deeper intent: to circumvent constitutional limits and consolidate power.
Harris’ plan to eliminate the filibuster is particularly revealing. The filibuster is more than a procedural tool; it is the cornerstone of the Senate’s deliberative process, ensuring that legislation must withstand debate and compromise. Yet, to Harris, it is merely an obstacle to be obliterated.
Without the filibuster, her radical agenda could advance unchecked. This desire to dismantle a fundamental norm reveals a push to transform the Senate into a rubber stamp for whichever party holds power.
Ironically, the same Harris who warns about Trump eroding institutions is eager to demolish the processes that prevent legislative overreach.
Calls for court-packing and judicial term limits follow the same logic: when the existing system doesn’t yield desired outcomes, tear it down and build something more politically convenient.
Harris and her allies want Americans looking for monsters under the bed — when the real danger lies within her policies.
Harris’s evolution on policies devoid of any plausible explanation demonstrates a drought of integrity in favor of placating voters.
Meanwhile, Trump’s carnival barker approach to politics is undeniably entertaining. His hyperbolic language captivates audiences and sparks curiosity about the issues. If Trump were to declare he was so hungry he could “eat a horse,” the media would be scouring the stables.
This disconnect underscores a divide; Trump’s supporters distinguish between his policy proposals and the entertainment he provides.
In contrast, Harris’ rhetoric often fails to resonate with authenticity. Her words ring hollow, leading to skepticism about her leadership and vision for the country.
Harris paints Trump as an existential threat to democracy, yet the true menace is a political strategy aimed at dismantling checks and balances, sowing distrust and attacking great justices like Clarence Thomas.
The Biden-Harris administration’s approach is clear: when they lose in court, they attack the courts; when they face opposition in the Senate, they seek to eliminate the filibuster.
Their endgame isn’t reform — it’s a complete overhaul of institutions to fit their agenda — to be able to achieve through the courts what they can’t achieve through legislation alone.
The real threat to democracy isn’t from former President Trump or those who question power, but from those determined to redefine it.
Harris’ rhetoric may masquerade as a defense of democracy, but her actions unveil a chilling reality: she is actively dismantling the very institutions she claims to uphold. This administration seeks not merely to govern but to reshape the fabric of our republic, trading away liberty for control.
In their quest for power, they are laying waste to accountability, leaving a landscape where trust is shattered, and the very essence of democracy hangs in the balance. The true peril lies not in those who question authority but in those who redefine its boundaries to suit their agenda.
Frank Ricci was the lead plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case Ricci v Destefano. He retired as a Battalion Chief in New Haven CT. He has testified before Congress and is the author of the book, Command Presence.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
(Featured Image Media Credit: Screen Capture/CSPAN)
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
