Gay Patriot Header Image

The New Civil War

For the last 100 years – and, especially for the last 8 years under President Obama – more and more Americans have become feckless dependents of government.

They may be rich, middle class or poor. They may depend on government benefits, or on special favors written into our laws and regulations. Or they may be politicians and bureaucrats and government workers, deciding the fates of other people and taking paychecks a good deal larger than what most of them could get in the private sector. They may be journalists taking cash payments from the CIA, or billionaires with extensive government contracts.

And they are indeed feckless. They gladly believe and spread the most ridiculous things on zero evidence. For example, they choose a criminally dishonest politician (Hillary Clinton) to be president. When she doesn’t quite win the election, they gladly believe and spread rumors that the guy who did win is a Russian spy – on zero evidence, again – and chant “F*ck [him]!” at important political conventions.

On the other side are ordinary Americans who more-or-less believe in God, common sense, and supporting themselves through work. Again, they may be rich, middle class or poor. They choose 2 business people in a row to be president. The most recent one might not be a great role model in some ways, but at least he says sensible things in a forthright, unafraid manner. When he wins the election, he sets himself to the task of reviving America’s economy and manufacturing base – only to be undermined by the vast army and bureaucracy of the feckless government dependents, spreading their nonsense.

It’s a mortal conflict. And one side knows it: the feckless government dependents. Because America is fast reaching the point where it can’t afford to support them any longer. They, the cancer, are about to kill the host. They, the cancer, must be controlled and cut back – so that the rest of America can survive, and perhaps revive a little.

They, the feckless government dependents, know it deep-down. And, being out-of-control like any late-stage cancer, they are desperate to deny it and to continue a system – their own system – that promises to extract every last drop of life and treasure that can be extracted from normal Americans.

It’s Producers vs. Looters. Understand that the Producers are people of all classes and walks of life. Likewise, the Looters are people of all classes and walks of life.

And so we arrive at the political struggles of the last seven months. President Trump isn’t perfect. I did not support him. I still don’t support him, whenever and wherever I may disagree with him. But, somehow (and although I never wanted it), he became a leader for the Producers – or at least for the opponents of America’s looting, criminal Establishment. Imperfect Mr. Trump is the president we’ve got. And the vast army and bureaucracy of the feckless government dependents are determined to destroy him.

Thus the endless, utter nonsense they spew each day. I’m not sure what to do about it. I know that supporting Trump blindly will not help. But tolerating nonsense will also not help.

The only thing I know how to do, that might help in some tiny way, is to keep telling the truth as I see it unfolding around me.

Or posting links.

Schlichter sums it up well: “Someone came to Washington who wasn’t part of the club, and that’s intolerable. So they are desperate to expel him, and by extension, us. Every day will be a crisis, every action he takes will be the worst thing that has ever happened, and every step towards keeping his promises a crime.”

Each day, let us dedicate ourselves anew to rejecting the nonsense. And to offering truth, in its place.

And, that Russia investigation…

Obviously, we had news that former FBI Director Mueller will be a special counsel to investigate the Trump-Russia allegations. Provided that his investigation is honest, it will be a good thing. Given that people are so hysterical, let them play detective until they burn themselves out.

Slightly more interesting is this morning’s Reuters article, Trump campaign had at least 18 undisclosed contacts with Russians.

Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump’s campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race…

Conversations between Flynn and Kislyak accelerated after the Nov. 8 vote as the two discussed establishing a back channel for communication between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that could bypass the U.S. national security bureaucracy, which both sides considered hostile to improved relations… [ed: Really? ya think?]

The people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia in the communications reviewed so far…

Members of the Senate and House intelligence committees have gone to the CIA and the National Security Agency to review transcripts and other documents related to contacts between Trump campaign advisers and associates and Russian officials…

Translation: Yes, the Obama administration surveilled the living crap out of its domestic political opponents. When will we get a special counsel for that?

But hey – At least the surveillance will let us know for sure if Trump improperly colluded with Russians. Assuming, again, an honest report from Mueller.

My prediction for the result is that

  1. Trump and his aides didn’t collude
  2. Their not disclosing these 18 contacts was fairly innocent (as in, minor text messages that easy to forget when you’re asked about an area where you did nothing wrong)
  3. all the same, the Left and the Controlled Media are going to start a “Trump Lied!!” thing.

But hey, that’s just a guess and I could be wrong. We shall see.

How do you think it ends?

At least some people are noticing that the Controlled Media witch hunts against Trump are an attempted coup d’etat against a lawfully-elected president.

What’s the endgame? Does President Trump resign in disgrace? Or does he triumph, as the hysteria is exposed and burns itself out? Or does he allow himself to be neutered, governing from now on as a captive of the Democrats? I don’t know.

Nobody’s perfect, and the Controlled Media is great at keeping up drumbeats; so yes, they will find something real or semi-real against Trump eventually. Let’s face it.

I could dismiss the Controlled Media as an irrelevant province of old people, and to a large extent that would be true. But they have ongoing relevance to the extent that they can scare the Congressional Republicans into rejecting (or at least unsupporting) Trump.

To get his appointees in office (including judges), to build a wall, to pass his desired infrastructure spending or tax reform, etc., Trump needs Republican unity. The purpose of the manufactured hysteria is to destroy intra-Republican unity and so to derail Trump’s appointees, criminal investigations (of the Left) and legislative agenda.

I could see a scenario where Trump resigns in contemptuous frustration. He denounces the hysteria (rightly) as he does so, and his Tweets remain a force in American politics. What happens next?

Do the Deep State and Controlled Media play the same game on President Pence? Will it work again, so soon? If it does work again so soon, does America slide into civil war at some point?

Whom does President Pence choose, as his Vice President? Does he let the Deep State run wild, taking us into another war? Questions, questions. Please let us know your thoughts, in the comments.

Cernovich on the intel leaks

This refers to Monday’s drama where The Washington Post alleged that President Trump had inappropriately leaked intelligence to the Russians.

First, why should anyone care what Mike Cernovich thinks? Because lately, he’s been breaking stories. He seems to have sources. His claims are outlandish; and then they turn out to be on the right track (though not 100% on all details).

So, here he is on the WaPo story. It’s a long video. Listening at 1.5x speed helps. Or I can just tell you his key points. Disclaimer – take this as his opinion and speculation. I’m interested mainly to see if it’s going to come true again?

  • Whoever leaked the story to WaPo, leaked way more classified information than Trump did.
  • At most, Trump revealed a location where some intelligence had happened. But WaPo was given far more detailed classified information, by its source(s).
  • As such, the leaks to WaPo were highly illegal, and have done far more damage to American security.
    • Because WaPo computers/networks can be hacked (and probably are).
  • White House and NSC staff have been on lockdown while they figure out who is the leaker. Cernovich’s top candidates:
    1. David Laufman, chief of counter-intelligence at the FBI. Obama donor. Was in charge of investigating Hillary’s emails; i.e., helped whitewash her. Has been involved in previous leaks. Fits the profile of someone who was not present at the meeting with Russians, but who nonetheless saw the meeting notes and all kinds of other classified info.
    2. NSA McMaster. Has a troubled relationship with Trump; potential motive would be to create a disaster, then be the hero who gets Trump out of it.
    3. Kris Bauman, a pro-Hamas / anti-Israel hire of McMaster’s; potential motive would be to disrupt the U.S. relationship with Israel.
  • One way or another, people will be going to prison over this episode.

As to Seth Rich: Per Cernovich,

  • Rich was the DNC leaker. (again Mike’s opinion/speculation – although I agree)
  • He was one of that rare breed: a Democrat staffer who was an American patriot. He was outraged by the Democrats’ rigged primary.
  • The Rich family spokesperson who denies all this (Bauman) is a political consultant paid by the DNC (not the Rich family).
  • When the DNC reported the hacking, FBI agents asked to look at the hacked servers – and the DNC refused. DNC hired CrowdStrike to concoct the narrative that DNC wanted (Russia hacking).

I do recall that former FBI Director Comey has been a strong supporter of CrowdStrike and their report; for example in his testimony before Congress. It is remarkable how many different actions of Comey’s over the years have helped Democrats and/or Clintons.

The Swamp Strikes Back

Via HotAir: Yet another media football we are supposed to care about.

Former FBI Director Comey, who in 2016 usurped authority most improperly and to the advantage of one political party (their presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, not being indicted), and who was justly fired last week, is dishing dirt on the man who fired him.

First, some key details:

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey, according to [Comey’s account]. “He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey that Mr. Flynn had done nothing wrong, according to [Comey’s account]. Mr. Comey did not say anything to Mr. Trump about curtailing the investigation, replying only: “I agree he is a good guy.”

In a statement, the White House denied the version of events…

“While the president has repeatedly expressed his view that General Flynn is a decent man who served and protected our country, the president has never asked Mr. Comey or anyone else to end any investigation, including any investigation involving General Flynn,” the statement said. “The president has the utmost respect for our law enforcement agencies, and all investigations. This is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and Mr. Comey.”

…The Feb. 14 meeting took place just a day after Mr. Flynn was forced out of his job…

To review:

  • Even Comey agrees that former NSA Flynn is well-meaning and patriotic.
  • All the same, President Trump fired Flynn.
  • After he did that, and according to only one side of the story, Trump then wondered out loud why Flynn would still be a matter for investigation.

But this is what the New York Times put in the lede:

President Trump asked the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, to shut down the federal investigation into [Flynn]…

That’s taking sides, rather a lot.

I can see why Trump’s opponents think they’re onto something. POTUS should never discuss ongoing investigations with the FBI, lest their be any hint of improper influence. If Comey’s account is true, Trump made a mistake.

But that is no small “if”. Even apart from this incident, Comey has a recent track record of showboating, misunderstanding situations and improper behavior. And he was just fired. Narcissistic, Disgruntled And Disgraced Ex-Employee Dishing Whatever Dirt He Thinks He Has #1,499,503,777. Yawn, yawn, yawn.

The larger picture is this. President Trump wants to Drain The Swamp and Make America Great Again. That’s why half of America elected him. Also, the fact that Trump is an amateur politician, NOT a professional. People thought it would be refreshing.

The Swamp, naturally, doesn’t want to be drained. And it owns the Controlled Media: for example, it owns the New York Times via Carlos Slim, an immigration activist and Trump opponent (and alleged corrupt businessperson and/or drug lord). And so we’re treated to these accounts, which are then picked up by The Swamp’s many representatives in Congress.

There are going to be a lot of these kerfuffles to come. Trump is a sloppy, amateur politician. And The Swamp is determined to derail his reform agenda, by making a mountain of every mistake that they would gladly cover up for one of their own (Obama or Hillary).

In the end, either The Swamp will win, or Trump will. It’s out of my hands.

UPDATE: Mark Steyn (via commenter KCRob):

if this partially read memo is as the Times characterized it (“Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation”), that would be a very serious matter. Comey had several options:

1) He could have reported Trump’s attempted interference to the Department of Justice (as he was obliged to do);

2) He could have disclosed it to the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr;

3) He could have resigned on principle.

Instead, he did nothing…

In other words: More Comey impropriety! Either the man or his story (at least) is belied by the fact that he did nothing at the time, except write a Note to Self.

UPDATE: Rush has a point: Whatever Trump is alleged to have done in the Flynn investigation is far less than what Obama did in the Hillary investigation.

In my view: that wouldn’t make it OK, but double standards aren’t OK either.

UPDATE: Yes, Comey has a track record as a Democrat agent who lies to promote himself and help Clintons escape justice. I wondered. Sigh.

Another media football

The Washington Post claims that President Trump leaked classified info in a meeting with Russians.

NSA McMaster then denied the story. “The story that came out tonight, as reported, is false.”

I’m not sure what to make of this. (So, feel free to tell me in the comments.)

From what I can gather, Trump was discussing a particular threat posed by ISIS. He is accused – by anonymous, off-the-record sources – of letting slip a certain city name that, in Allahpundit’s words, would “let the Russians figure out how a U.S. ally was getting its information on ISIS. He didn’t reveal who the source was or how that info was obtained and WaPo isn’t claiming that he did.”

Legally (and again following Allahpundit), leaking even such a small detail would be a big deal for anyone else in the government, “but because the president has the power to declassify classified information, he can blab all he wants…” If that’s true, then there’s no legal issue. But that does not answer the substantive questions:

  • Did Trump let something slip, that he shouldn’t have?
  • Or is The Washington Post merely extending its campaign of “Russia!” innuendo in trying to destroy a constitutionally-elected President?
  • Or perhaps both? (Picture every President being prone to an occasional indiscretion; and then The Washington Post choosing to bury the story if it’s Obama, but make a huge story if it’s Trump. I mean, for political reasons. What were Obama’s slips, that they never told us about?)

IF this story reflects something that really happened: Is McMaster now saving Trump’s rear end? Would McMaster, reportedly a proponent of the U.S. invading Syria, then gain an upper hand in the Trump administration?

UPDATE: Yes, for the Left to fuss is hypocritical. In the past, CIA Director Leon Panetta and Vice President Joe Biden have blurted out classified information, resulting in deaths.

… it was [Panetta’s] loose talk after the Osama bin Laden raid that exposed a Pakistani doctor, Shakil Afridi, who helped locate the Al Qaeda leader. As a result, Afridi was imprisoned on fabricated charges and will live under fear of assassination for the rest of his life…

Panetta did not reveal that critical intelligence in a private meeting with a foreign emissary, but to the entire world, on CBS News’ 60 Minutes.

Even worse was the Obama White House’s decision to reveal that it was U.S. Navy SEAL Team 6 that carried out the bin Laden raid.

As Jeffrey Kushner recalled in the Washington Times: “On May 3, at an event in Washington, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. did the unthinkable: He publicly revealed the identity of the special-operations unit responsible for bin Laden’s killing…”

The response came on August 6, 2011, when the Taliban shot down a Chinook helicopter in Afghanistan, killing 30 soldiers. Among the dead: 15 members of SEAL Team 6. Years later, the fallen heroes’ families remain outraged at the Obama administration: “In releasing their identity, they put a target on their backs,” one of the fathers told U.S. News and World Report in 2013.

When people can’t admit the truth

HILLARY SHOULD HAVE BEEN INDICTED.

You can find out a lot about where someone is coming from, if you ask that as a yes/no question. “Can we agree that Hillary should have been indicted?”

For people who can admit it, a mindset follows naturally:

  1. It’s OK that she lost the election. (Indeed, she shouldn’t have been running.)
  2. Which means there’s no unusual or particular reason to suspect President Trump.
  3. Of course we should look at Trump objectively, and nail him for any wrongdoing. But let’s not drag it out forever. Because he may be fine; see points 1 and 2.
  4. Comey did a bad job in 2016. He grandstanded for the cameras and usurped authority that wasn’t his, in a way that ended with Hillary not being indicted. He should have been fired sooner.
  5. It’s deeply wrong and disturbing that the Obama administration was spying on its domestic opponents, such as Trump.

For people who can’t admit it:

  1. OMG, the election was STOLEN from her!!!1!!1!!
  2. Which means Trump must be something horrible, like a Nazi Russian spy!! who secretly loves Vladimir Putin!!
  3. If we haven’t caught Trump doing anything wrong, it’s because we haven’t looked enough! Keep looking! As long as it takes to come up with it!
  4. Comey must have been fired because he was getting too close to it! Crisis!!!!1!
  5. Thank Gaia the Obama administration was spying on its domestic opponents, such as Trump!

All those toxic contortions, because the person can’t admit the key truth – that Hillary should have been indicted.

Maybe Trump should calm down?

He keeps tweeting things which are true or at least defensible, but add fuel to the fire.

Russia must be laughing up their sleeves watching as the U.S. tears itself apart over a Democrat EXCUSE for losing the election.

As a very active President with lots of things happening, it is not possible for my surrogates to stand at podium with perfect accuracy!….

James Comey better hope that there are no “tapes” of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!

Again, the story that there was collusion between the Russians & Trump campaign was fabricated by Dems as an excuse for losing the election.

When James Clapper himself, and virtually everyone else with knowledge of the witch hunt, says there is no collusion, when does it end?

Apparently, President Trump had some dinner with Comey which is going to become a football, now. Maybe he has a recording of it. If he does,

  • what will it reveal? will it shed more light, or more heat?
  • and how will it come out?
  • and was it legal?
  • and has he been recording everything, creating a Pandora’s Box of new stuff for Democrats to pick over?

Either Trump is doing some brilliant PR strategy (brand-building? distracting people from something more important?) or a dumb one. Sigh.

IN OTHER NEWS: A Third World, brown-skinned woman (automatically credible to you lefties out there, right?) political leader alleges that Hillary Clinton ‘Personally Pressured’ Her to Aid Foundation Donor Despite Ethics Laws.

I don’t know if these particular charges are true, but a large number of these “pay for play” influence-peddling charges have swirled around the Clinton Foundation / Clinton Global Initiative. And continue to.

I think the Democrats have been corrupt for years, and the reason our current political debates are so high-stakes for them – the reason they keep hoping to score a knockout blow on Trump – is because they need to control the Justice Department and FBI. If Democrats can’t control them, the next couple of years will see some huge investigations / prosecutions of Democrat corruption.

And they know it. Hence, Robby Mook being “terrified” if Trump can de-politicize the FBI and DOJ (i.e., remove key Democrat appointees, restore normal practices). My theory.

Democrats: Before and After

Hat tip Stefan Molyneux. Hillary’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, on March 2:

It’s time for [FBI Director James] Comey to remove himself from this [Russia investigation] too. His credibility is gone.

But then, later on May 9:

Twilight zone. I was as disappointed and frustrated as anyone at how the email investigation was handled. But this [President Trump firing Comey] terrifies me.

So, Comey should be gone from the Russia investigation…until he is gone? And *then* it’s suddenly terrifying?

There’s more. Hillary’s creepy campaign chair, John Podesta, on May 9:

The American public is getting mildly nauseous listening to Jim Comey

But later on May 9 (the same day):

@realDonaldTrump Didn’t you know you’re supposed to wait til Saturday night to massacre people investigating you?

It’s supposed to be a Watergate reference but, as Daily Caller notes, “President Nixon did not fire the FBI Director. The only other president to fire a head of the FBI was Bill Clinton in July of 1993…”

Molyneux lists equally drastic, sudden turnabouts from Bernie Sanders, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer and still others. By the way:

I think the Democrats continue to hit new lows.

UPDATE:

The man can tweet


UPDATE: A commenter has made a reasonable challenge in another thread: (more…)

“Shattered” gets it half-right

I just finished Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign. We’ve been commenting on excerpts from it for weeks. This is my take on the book as a whole.

On the plus side: The subject is delicious. (Reading the story of Election Night was pure Schadenfreude.) Allen and Parnes, the authors, write fairly well. And they don’t blame “Russia, Comey and misogyny” non-stop. They report on actual flaws of the candidate and her staff, and how those flaws kept her from closing the deal with Middle America.

On the minus side: The book is overly-detailed. The authors do blame “Russia, Comey and misogyny” some of the time. In the end, they are liberals writing for liberals. They don’t admit the depth of Hillary’s flaws. For example, they never admit the genuineness of the scandals dogging her: the fact that she broke laws for which other Americans are serving jail time, that she obstructed justice, that FBI Director Comey really gave her kid-glove treatment, etc.

In short, Allen and Parnes miss the larger story of the Clintons’ corruption – and how, in 2016, half of America finally stood up to it and beat it back. Instead, they bury the reader in details about Hillary’s innumerable aides and the in-fighting that she encouraged.

Overall, I enjoyed the book. Some key ideas (probably known to you already): (more…)

Sometimes it’s fun to watch, part II

The unimportant Stephen Colbert makes a fact-free slam about President Trump fellating Vladimir Putin. Nothing worth mentioning, there.

He imagines that he’s being relevant or edgy or manly. Still nothing worth mentioning.

People ask what would happen if any comedian made such a slam on President Obama (who, in a most embarrassing moment in 2012, promised the Russians to be nicer than he was letting on with American voters). Example #1,234,511,998 to point out the Left’s double standards. True, but still not much to mention.

Then #FireColbert becomes a thing as people start noticing that Colbert’s slur was essentially, um, homophobic.

Taking double standards to a new low, left-wing celebrities defend Colbert’s slur. (Among them, the execrable George Takei.)

Predictably, Colbert claims the devil made him do it (Trump).

What happens next?

Sometimes it’s fun to watch

Has Oliver Stone, the conspiracy-minded filmmaker, committed high crimes of HERESY and TREASON by questioning the Russia narrative?

“Mr. Putin is one of the most important leaders in the world and in so far as the United States has declared him an enemy – a great enemy – I think it’s very important we hear what he has to say.”

“[Stone’s new Putin documentary] opens up a whole viewpoint that we as Americans haven’t heard,” Stone said. “We went to see him four different times over two years.”

When questioned about allegations made by Democrats and the political left that President Trump has direct connections to Russia, Stone replied: “That’s a path that leads nowhere to my mind.”

“That’s an internal war of politics in the US in which the Democratic party has taken a suicide pact or something to blow him up; in other words, to completely de-legitimise him and in so doing blow up the US essentially,” he said. “What they’re doing is destroying the trust that exists between people and government. It’s a very dangerous position to make accusations you cannot prove.”

I’m old enough to remember when the Left stood for peace (or thought it did) and “understanding the Russians” was mandatory, as was “respecting the results of elections”. Stone is old enough, too. It will be fun to see if they’re going to turn on him.

The Left Actively Seeks Violence

It’s last year’s news, but worth remembering. George Soros, Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid (and probably still pay) protestors, not only to turn out and carry signs or chant slogans, but also to instigate violence.

YouTube Preview Image

Via Rush.

It’s on people’s radar in the last day or so because The Washington Post now says, who cares if these left-wing protestors are paid shills? So, what? Which is a shift: the Controlled Media used to simply deny that these left-wing protestors were paid shills.

What Deceit and Malice Look Like

First, some stuff that sounds almost reasonable (if a bit histrionic). From Hillary’s Twitter stream on Oct. 24, 2016:

Donald Trump refused to say that he’d respect the results of this election. That’s a direct threat to our democracy.

Per the Daily Caller link above, she went on to say:

That’s not the way our democracy works. We’ve been around 240 years. We’ve had free and fair elections and we’ve accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them and that is what must be expected of anyone standing on a debate stage [ed: like herself]…

[Trump is] denigrating—he’s talking down our democracy. I for one am appalled that somebody who is the nominee of one of our major two parties would take that kind of position.

And this is from Hillary’s concession speech on Nov 9, 2016:

Last night, I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans…

We have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought. But I still believe in America and I always will. And if you do, then we must accept this result and then look to the future. Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead…

…if we stand together and work together with respect for our differences, strength in our convictions and love for this nation, our best days are still ahead of us.

So far so good, right? But now from the new book “Shattered”:

That strategy [of blaming Russia, thus de-legitimizing the election – or trying to] had been set within twenty-four hours of her concession speech. Mook and Podesta assembled her communications team at the Brooklyn headquarters to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up. For a couple of hours, with Shake Shack containers littering the room, they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.

I added the emphasis – so that those who have eyes, may see.

Democrats’ Psychotic Desire for War with Russia

I never thought I’d live in a world where Democrats – having been “peace loving” shills for the old Soviet Union, for so many decades – are eager for bellicose confrontation with Russia. But, here we are.

When Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D – HI), an Iraq war veteran, cautioned her fellow Democrats to slow down and remember the Iraq-WMD situation (such as the Left remembers it), Howard Dean called her a “disgrace” who “should not be in Congress”. So much for the Democrats’ brrrrave fight against misogyny.

Or, as Tucker Carlson put it last night:

Democrats are now the reflexive party of war — all wars, except those with an obvious benefit to us here in the United States. If there is a humanitarian quagmire on the other side of the globe, they are all for committing troops. And you better be for it, too, or they will denounce you.

One of Tucker’s guests was a Democrat strategist, Alfred Mottur. Video, some here and some here. After Mottur claims to be “heartened” by the rising tensions and that Russia “undoubtedly” or “aggressively” “interfered with our elections”, this exchange:

[Carlson] In what sense does this confrontation with Russia now ongoing make our country safer or more prosperous?

[Mottur] With respect to our elections, it makes us safer in our democratic processes to make sure that their integrity is preserved.

Got it? We must destroy American democracy in a potentially-nuclear conflict with Russia, in order to save it.

But note that when China, Saudi Arabia, or our own Deep State “interfere with our elections”, we don’t need to be confrontational with them. Or even talk about them. Oh no, don’t talk about their interference! Only Russia.

Some Democrats’ desire for war with Russia is as bad as some Republicans’ desire for war in Syria (that would likely lead to war with Russia).

The sad irony is that, as I posted a few days ago, Russia didn’t interfere with anything.

  1. Whoever hacked the DNC and Podesta e-mails did us all a favor. (Given that it resulted in 100% true and relevant information coming to the voters.)
  2. Plus, it probably wasn’t Russia. (See the links in that post.)

It seems that today’s Democrats are such psychotic babies that they would rather take us into confrontation with Russia than admit that they lost the 2016 election fairly, after they ran an awful candidate.

And IMO, it appears also as though Deep State’s “intelligence” leaks – all those NothingBurgers meant to make people think that Russia attacked our election, Russia colluded with President Trump who is Putin’s agent, etc. – could have been intentional War propaganda.

NB: I just corrected the spelling of Mottur’s name and improved the video links & transcript.

As the Narrative Turns

Posted by V the K at 2:43 pm - April 5, 2017.
Filed under: Democratic demagoguery

The Left Last Week: “OMG! Are you really claiming Obama was spying on Trump? Is that accusation merely insane or actively treasonous?”

The Left This Week: “Of course, Obama was spying on Trump. It’s called ‘National Security.’ Ever hear of it?

Andy McCarthy at NRO says that while technically legal, Susan Rice’s use of the National Intelligence Apparatus (You know, the people who were watching Donald Trump’s every move but couldn’t be bothered to keep an eye on the Tsarnev Brothers, Tashfyn Maleek, or Omar Mateen) to attack Donald Trump was an abuse of power. I don’t think the left sees it that way. I think they view the use of State Assets to attack Republicans as quite legitimate. You know, because Republicans are Hitler. Whereas Nadal Hassan was just an innocent Muslim guy; how dare you profile him! Racist!

Democrats Are the Antifa Party

Posted by V the K at 3:45 pm - April 1, 2017.
Filed under: Democratic demagoguery

The Democrats look to have every intention of filibustering the nomination of the eminently qualified Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.

Is any more proof necessary that the Democrat Party is now fully controlled by its irrational, hard left flank?

The Honest Leftist

I could do with more honest candor like this from the Democrat Left.

Senate Democrats Prove They Aren’t Worthy to Wash Neil Gorsuch’s Socks

The Democrats have turned the Neil Gorsuch confirmation hearings into a clown show. It’s a foregone conclusion that none of these idiots are going to vote to confirm. So, they devoted their entire time giving long pontifications followed by what they thought were ‘Gotcha’ questions (prepared by their staffs) that tended to blow up in their aging, decrepit faces.

But the two biggest clowns were the distinguished senators from Minnesota. WTF is wrong with Minnesota? SRSLY. The state inflicted us with both Jesse Ventura and Al Franken. Do the long winters freeze their synapses or something? Stewart Smalley – already posturing to the Democrats’ stupid, angry, and ill-informed base for his 2020 presidential run – asked several stupid, angry, ill-informed questions, including an assertion (not so much a question) that he personally had a “very different Constitution” than the one that Governs our (former) Republic.

But Franken’s co-senator Amy Klobuchar — a dingbat on her very best day — managed to outclown even Al Franken (an achievement in itself).

“So when the Constitution refers, like, 30-some times to ‘his’ or ‘he’ when describing the president of the United States, you would see that as, well back then, they thought a woman actually could be president of the United States even though women couldn’t vote?”

Who does she employ on her senate staff to write these questions? That sounds like something a high school sophomore girl would come up with.

And, of course, the Democrat-Media Complex dutifully report the Preferred Narrative that Gorsuch got a “Tough Grilling” in the Confirmation Hearings.