"President Trump's recent executive order laying out his 'America-First Healthcare Plan' makes clear his continued commitment to the long-standing, bipartisan consensus that we should protect people with preexisting conditions. Unfortunately, the previous administration's attempt to make good on that consensus -- Obamacare -- has failed to deliver on its promises.

"Contrary to the prevailing media narrative, federal health insurance enrollment protections for preexisting conditions long predate Obamacare. Bipartisan legislation passed nearly 25 years ago protects people with preexisting conditions and prior health coverage from having to wait for their condition to be covered when they move to a new job. These protections apply to the 180 million Americans with job-based coverage, who represent roughly 90 percent of everyone with private health coverage.

"Obamacare attempted to deliver additional protections for people with preexisting conditions in need of health-insurance coverage. The reality is, however, the law's prohibitive costs placed coverage outside the reach of everyday Americans, including countless with preexisting conditions.

"After premiums doubled and even tripled in some states once Obamacare regulations took effect, individual-market coverage became unaffordable and unusable for millions of middle-class and self-employed Americans earning too much to qualify for subsidies. A 60-year-old couple living in Hannibal, Missouri, who earn $70,000 a year faces a $37,000 annual premium for the lowest-cost silver plan -- over half their income -- and that's before a staggering $12,000 deductible. For them, there are no protections if they have a preexisting condition. Sadly, Obamacare has failed to protect them.

"It's time the national debate over Obamacare finally confronts this reality. One can support maintaining formal preexisting protections in the individual market -- as President Trump has done repeatedly, and has done again in his recent executive order -- while honestly confronting the law's poor track record in making those protections meaningful for real people."

Read entire article here.

"Up to now, the Democrats' presidential nominee has gotten away with the fiction that he never talked to his son Hunter about Hunter's suspect business dealings in Ukraine, China and elsewhere. The repeated claim was never credible, especially when it was revealed that Hunter flew on Air Force Two with his father to Beijing and came home with a $1.5 billion commitment from a Chinese bank for a new investment firm.

"So they flew to China and back together and we're supposed to believe the father never asked the son who he was seeing in China and why.

"C'mon, man."

Read entire article here.

"Throughout 2016, the narrative put forth day in and day out by the media was that Donald Trump simply couldn't win. Sure, the final polls weren't off as dramatically as that narrative was, but the narrative is pushed at least in part because it advances the political agenda of the media. The wish frequently becomes reality. The media have pushed the same narrative this time as well, if a bit more angrily.

"Four years ago, pundits said the race was over because of how Trump was polling. According to those same polls in the same key battleground states, he's doing a bit better than he was doing four years ago."

"Hunter Biden pursued lucrative deals involving China's largest private energy company -- including one that he said would be 'interesting for me and my family,' emails obtained by The Post show.

"One email sent to Biden on May 13, 2017, with the subject line 'Expectations,' included details of 'remuneration packages' for six people involved in an unspecified business venture.

"Biden was identified as 'Chair / Vice Chair depending on agreement with CEFC,' an apparent reference to the former Shanghai-based conglomerate CEFC China Energy Co.

"His pay was pegged at '850' and the email also noted that 'Hunter has some office expectations he will elaborate.'"

Read entire article here.

"A majority of likely American voters believe the United States should not undergo another COVID-19 lockdown, according to a new Just the News Daily Poll with Scott Rasmussen.

"A full 57% of likely voters believe that 'it is better [for the U.S.] to find a way to move forward' without further lockdowns like the kinds that American governors imposed throughout the country in March and April.

"Just 33%, meanwhile, believe that 'it is better for America to lock down again.' The remaining 10% were unsure.

"In light of President Trump's continued trailing of Biden in the polls, Rasmussen noted: 'If there is to be a late comeback for the president, this question might provide a clue as to why.'"

"2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden appears to have forgotten what job he was nominated for this fall.

"'We have to come together, that's what I'm running,' the 77-year-old began during a Toledo drive-in rally Monday. 'I'm running as a proud Democrat for the Senate.' ...

"The former vice presidential candidate's Monday gaffes are likely to resurrect concerns about the candidate's age and aptitude to lead the White House for the next four to eight years. If elected, Biden would be the oldest president to be sworn in."

"It gets worse. For weeks, Joe Biden has refused to answer whether he intends to blow up the United States Supreme Court on the preposterous grounds that, if he does, journalists will write about it. Now, he adds that voters 'don't deserve' to know his position.This transmutes an untenable position into a downright nefarious one.

"Biden's defenders have been trying to draw some equivalency between the threat of his 'packing' (read: destroying) the Supreme Court and the Republicans' push to appoint Amy Coney Barrett to replace Justice Ginsburg. In and of itself, this is ridiculous: The Republicans are in control of the White House and the Senate, and, in acting now, are using a process that has been in place since 1789 and echoing a norm that has obtained throughout American history. But the equivalence also fails on its own terms, in that neither President Trump nor any of the 53 Republican senators are keeping any secrets about their plans. Trump has been open about his nomination from the start; so have the 51 Republicans who intend to vote yes; so has Susan Collins, who intends to vote no; and so has Lisa Murkowski, who opposes the process but says that she may vote yes if it comes to the floor. There is no parity here. One party is going about the business of government with the branches that it presently controls; the other party is threatening to smash those branches up."

"The presidential debate schedule was thrown into uncertainty on Thursday amid a fight between the Trump campaign and the Biden campaign after the Commission on Presidential Debates announced that the second showdown would take place in a virtual setting as President Trump recovers from coronavirus.

"Things unraveled Thursday after the commission released a morning statement saying that 'the second presidential debate will take the form of a town meeting, in which the candidates would participate from separate remote locations.'

"Shortly after that announcement, the president said he would not participate in a virtual format, calling it 'ridiculous.'

"The Biden campaign responded by seemingly acknowledging that the next debate -- a town hall scheduled for Oct. 15 in Miami -- would not happen and suggested that the previously scheduled debate on Oct. 22 become a town hall forum.

"But the Trump campaign said they still want two more debates -- and that the president wants to face off against former Vice President Joe Biden twice more before voters hit the polls on Nov. 3. They proposed the debate originally scheduled for Oct. 15 be pushed to Oct. 22 -- the date the final showdown was set to take place -- and the final debate be pushed a week later, to Oct. 29. But the Biden campaign is pushing back saying the president cannot dictate the debate schedule."

"Going into Wednesday's showdown, Mike Pence had two big jobs. One, to defend the Trump administration's record, especially its response to the pandemic. Two, convincingly paint the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris ticket as the most radical national nominees a major party has ever put forward.

"Mission accomplished. Pence is a skilled and disciplined debater, and his understated manner masks a killer instinct. He was always good, terrific at times and put on a clinic in how to methodically carve up an opponent. ...

"He did it by nailing the inconsistencies of Biden's varying positions on taxes, fracking and fossil fuels in ways that highlighted the ways the Democrats have created a fog about what they would do if they win. After Harris promised that on 'Day One, Joe will repeal' the Trump administration's 2017 tax cuts, Pence responded: 'She just told you, on Day One, Joe Biden's going to raise your taxes.'

"On China, he delivered the hammer, saying: 'Joe Biden's been a cheerleader for Communist China over the last several decades.'

"He also succeeded at laying out Harris' voting record as being 'more liberal than Bernie Sanders'.'"

Read entire article here.

"If I am sent a Stand Alone Bill for Stimulus Checks ($1,200), they will go out to our great people IMMEDIATELY. I am ready to sign right now. Are you listening Nancy?"