For over six years, the establishment media have set out to destroy Trump.  It's been nothing but lies about Russian collusion, accusations of racism, claims he is authoritarian, endless witch hunt investigations, and to top it off, they've labeled him an illegitimate president in efforts to mislead the public and actually interfere in elections.

Meanwhile, they intentionally bury the truth about Clinton and Biden corruption and the truly authoritarian actions of Obama and Biden.

Now, The New York Times puts out a garbage piece, regurgitated throughout the media, that Republicans are the great threat to our republic.  The title? "'A Crisis Coming': The Twin Threats to American Democracy."

Somehow, the authors of this campaign piece don't care that Democrats challenged elections in 2000, 2004, and 2016, when they lost.  Eventually, widespread violence erupted in response to President Trump's win.  The only time the media care about challenges to elections is when Democrats win.  From the above-referenced article:

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.

The media never cared that several states violated their election laws, nor did the stenographers in the media care when Soros and Zuckerberg spent massive amounts of money to influence elections, so it's a crock when they publish an opinion piece like this.

Then, The Washington Post furthered the Democrat Big Lie, saying, "The next big threat to democracy" is "under-the-radar election sabotage" and continued with this:

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

This threat is quite humorous.  For one thing, the government is not supposed to make laws based on public opinions, because if that was the case, minorities would rarely be protected (if ever). 

The second thing is that the policies of the leftists at NYT and the other media outlets are disconnected from public opinion, to an extreme and radical degree.

Here is a partial list of Democrat policies that are not popular:

1. Big government, higher taxes, and more regulations.
2. Abortion on demand, through all three trimesters, no matter how viable a child is.
3. Withholding life-saving care from babies born alive in botched abortions.
4. Open borders free-for-all.
5. Soft-on-crime prosecutors and no bail laws, which allow dangerous, career criminals to terrorize the rest of us.
6. The destruction of multiple energy industries, based on theories and computer models, instead of scientific data.
7. Forcing people to switch to inefficient, expensive, impractical, and unaffordable electric vehicles powered by the highly flammable pollutant lithium, all in the name of "climate change."
8. Teaching children in toddlerhood about deviant sexual lifestyles.
9. Champion school curricula that teach that Whites are inherently oppressive, racist, and privileged.
10. Unconstitutionally shifting student loan debt from the borrower to the taxpayer.
11. Forcing girls to compete with boys and share restrooms and locker rooms with them.
12. Shift toward socialist policies, instead of giving everyone equal opportunity to climb the economic ladder with capitalism.
13. Wanting to federalize elections and opposing common sense photo ID laws.
14.  Abolition of the Electoral College.

I have trouble finding the Democrat policies that the writer and other Democrats support that are popular with the public (probably because they don't exist).

The writer of this piece apparently believes that it is the Supreme Court's job to rule based on popular opinion, or popular will, instead of their defined role as interpreters of the law.  That shows a complete lack of knowledge of the Constitution and separation of powers. 

The current Court is the opposite of an activist court with their recent rulings on abortion and environmental regulations.  They sent the power back to the states and federal legislative bodies to make laws and stifling regulations.  That is where laws are supposed to be made, not in the courts, and not by unelected bureaucrats.  From the article: 

The run of recent Supreme Court decisions — both sweeping and, according to polls, unpopular — highlights 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.

It was the 1973 Court that was activist when it overrode the Constitution and legalized abortion nationwide.  Even Ginsburg believed that the ruling was "too sweeping," which made it "vulnerable to attacks."

John Roberts was an activist when he sided with the liberal judges to rewrite Obamacare to make it "constitutional."  Supreme Court judges should never rewrite laws if they're unconstitutional; rather, they should be overturned and nullified.  Public or personal opinion have no bearing on constitutionality.

The media and the Democrats love activist judges who rule as they like and tread on the separation of powers.

The elitist left paints Trump and "MAGA Republicans" as the threat to America, but the reality is, it's they.

Image: Free image, Pixabay license, no attribution required.