Forum

The secret is out. The whispers behind closed doors have just broken the sound barrier and are being openly talked about at cocktail parties across Washington, DC, and you won’t believe what they are saying.

Could the Democrat Party have successfully pulled off the largest fraud in history? Indeed, it appears to be the case! Was the 2024 election loss a complex plot to defraud the American people and steal billions of untraceable dollars? You betcha!

Brace yourself; it’s going to get bumpy. In what some are calling “the greatest heist in modern political history,” recent Senate hearings have uncovered a $93 billion outflow from the Department of Energy (DOE) in the brief 76-day window between the 2024 presidential election and President Joe Biden’s departure from office. The magnitude and timing of this alleged spending spree have reignited debates over whether the Democratic Party may have deliberately lost the election, not out of incompetence or miscalculation, but as part of a broader strategic exit.

Let’s face it. One of the Democratic candidates was perceived as old and dysfunctional; even during his first campaign, the Democrats kept Joe Biden largely out of public view by hiding him in the basement. The other candidate was incoherent, unable to communicate cogent thought, producing "word salads" instead of definitively structured sentences, and had a running mate who was a total disaster; even in one interview he said about himself, "I couldn't be more surprised if I woke up with my head stapled to the carpet." Just as the Democrat polls happily reported that their candidate was ahead, a bag of crack was found in the White House shortly after Kamala Harris finished one of her confused word salad speeches.

Unthinkable? Maybe. But let’s consider the implications.

The $93 billion question may not have an answer. The revelations came to light during a heated Senate Appropriations Committee hearing where Secretary of Energy Chris Wright testified that the DOE issued an unprecedented $93 billion in loans and commitments, more than double what the agency had spent in the prior 15 years combined.

What’s worse? Many recipients reportedly had no business plans, no financial documentation, and no real accountability.

Senator John Kennedy (R-La.) described the situation in stark terms: “It just sounds to me like there were a lot of people coming to the Department of Energy who had all four feet and their snout in the trough.”

And if the DOE wasn’t the only agency involved, as whistleblower accounts and Project Veritas undercover footage suggest, then the real number could be far higher.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) alone may have funneled up to $375 billion through unaccountable climate grants. OMG!

A strategic loss, or did stupidity accidentally pay off big? The notion that a major political party would intentionally lose a presidential election sounds like political fiction. But let’s examine what the Democrats may have gained:

• The Money Exit: If senior Democrats believed a second Trump term was inevitable, the priority might have shifted to securing resources and influence in the short window available. By distributing vast sums of money to NGOs, allies, and climate groups, they could have ensured a well-funded liberal infrastructure to outlast a hostile administration.
• Narrative Control: A chaotic financial exodus conveniently blamed on the incoming administration could serve as a long-term political weapon. “Look what Trump allowed to happen,” some might say, even if the timeline places responsibility squarely on Biden’s exit team.
• The Martyr Strategy: Losing to Trump again might reinforce the Democratic Party’s narrative of victimhood and resistance. “We were sabotaged, but we fought the good fight,” an emotionally resonant message to rally the base in 2028.
• Legacy Engineering: By directing billions to climate groups and left-leaning institutions, Biden’s administration may have cemented policy priorities that would be difficult to reverse, even under Trump. In other words, Biden's administration may have achieved regulatory capture through funding.

Is this the biggest political heist in U.S. history? That depends on what further investigations reveal. As more details emerge, Americans will demand answers: Who got the money? What were the real goals? Was this just incompetence, or a deliberate final act by an outgoing administration to secure power through indirect means?

If evidence confirms the worst suspicions, that public funds were laundered into ideological strongholds under the guise of last-minute “climate urgency,” then this may go down as the most audacious use of federal power for political self-preservation ever recorded.

And if the Democratic Party did see the 2024 loss not as a defeat but as a maneuver, a controlled demolition to protect legacy and assets, then we’re not looking at a collapse but a jackpot coup in reverse.

The hearings are still ongoing. Whistleblowers are still coming forward. But one thing is clear: the American people deserve transparency. Whether the breach was a strategic retreat or systemic rot, the stakes are far greater than partisan politics.

Final Word: Many have been laughing at the Democrats, but is the last laugh on us?