Showing posts with label Donald Trump. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Donald Trump. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 31, 2019

In WaPo Op-Ed, Doug Jones parrots Chuck Schumer


Providing proof beyond reasonable doubt that Doug Jones is a Chuck Schumer puppet, the doomed Democrat junior Senator from Alabama pleads with his colleagues in the upper chamber to "pursue the truth over all else."

This is insulting.

If there were any honest truth-seekers left in the Democrat Party, this impeachment circus would have folded its tents and left town before Halloween. Honest truth-seekers would have read the transcript of the phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky and said, "nothing to see here." Instead, Democrats and their media mouthpieces manufactured a no-no out of whole cloth and blatantly lied through their teeth about what the two heads of state said to each other.

They conducted closed-door hearings, hand-selected their own witnesses, conspired with a "whistleblower" to fabricate a second- and third-hand story, refused to allow Republicans to subpoena witnesses, leaked testimony and paraded a bunch of Deep State bureaucrats before the public who just didn't like how President Trump was exercising his Article II, Section 2 powers.

Democrats rushed the impeachment process. They issued subpoenas to everyone listed in Schumer-Jones Op-Ed. When the people summoned declined to testify, the Democrats failed to seek court orders to compel testimony. Why? Because they didn't have time to wait for a drawn-out court battle. No, in the age of the internet, 24-hour news cycles and the microwave Starbucks, the old fashioned way just would not due. So after a scant 84 days, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rammed two Articles of Impeachment through the House on a party-line vote.

That Chuck Schumer would cry about an impending Senate trial that lacks truth is insulting. This is a purely partisan attempt to fulfill a fantasy Democrats have held since November 2016. There hasn't been one iota of truth in this since Eric Ciaramella filed his complaint.

What Democrats demand is not the Senate's cross to bear. This is the political equivalent of empowering a courtroom jury to call witnesses and develop its own evidence. That was the House's job. They failed so miserably that neither of the two Articles of Impeachment even allege that the President has committed a crime. Fortunately, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his Republican majority are having none of this nonsense. A trial will be conducted and votes will be held based on the evidence developed by the House.

And that will be that.

Doug Jones is doomed. Unless Republicans crap the bed and nominate Creepy Uncle Roy to run against him, Jones' tour of the DC cocktail circuit ends January 2021 with the election of Jeff Sessions, Tommy Tuberville or Bradley Byrne. So, Jones will vote to convict-and-remove if the Articles ever come up for a vote in the Senate. He'll do it because Schumer has commanded him to do so. Even if he dares to defy his master and he votes to acquit, there's no chance that it saves his job.

Sunday, December 8, 2019

Impeachment, Democrats, and the 'Tinkerbell Effect'


Watching the impeachment hearings and listening to Democrats and the media on Sunday morning news shows, I couldn't get over the sense that I'd seen this play before. Then it came to me--this is all just like a scene from the stage adaptation of J.M. Barrie's Peter Pan. 

In the scene, Captain Hook has secretly poisoned Peter's 'medicine.' Wendy, her brothers and the Lost Boys are on their way back home from Neverland. But before Peter can drink the potion (thus sealing his demise as planned by Hook), Tinkerbell snatches the bottle, chugs it down and immediately falls out, dying. Peter leans close and Tink tells him what's happened.

"Captain... Hook... poison..." she whispers.

"Captain Hook?" Peter exclaims. "He poisoned my medicine? Tink! You took it to save me? Oh, Tinker Bell!" Then Peter starts crying as Tink's light slowly fades...

But then Peter jumps up, turns to the audience and says, "Tink says that she thinks she can get well again if children believed in fairies. Do you believe? Do you? If you believe clap your hands, don’t let Tink die!"

He starts clapping and the audience starts to clap with him. Tink slowly gets better but it's not enough! "Louder!" says the little brat. "Yes! Yes, that’s it! See? She’s getting better. Louder! Louder!"

Then, miraculously Tink sits up, stands, and gives a cute little curtsy.

Donald Trump is Captain Hook, of course. The wishful Democrats are the audience and Peter is promising Neverland, i.e., the socialist utopia in which the left thinks we can all live happily ever after. Remember: We never have to grow up in Neverland. It's all fairy dust and rainbows over there and grownups have to pay for it. Tinkerbell is impeachment and removal from office because as the play goes, Peter needs Tink to take care of the Trump problem. But don't forget that cute little Tinkerbell is a fairy, and she's ill-tempered, spoiled, undisciplined, jealous, vindictive and incorrigibly mischievous. She only loves Peter; the rest of us can rot.

Democrats are stuck at the part in this play where all they have to do is believe in impeachment and it will happen. But they don't want you happy-clappy hopeful. What they need is angry rancor. They believe that if their minority is angry enough, the socialist utopia can be brought about by resuscitating Tink. So they parade a bunch of angry deep staters before the people and their Congress, who all solemnly say that because Trump is “inconsistent with consensus views of the interagency”  he is evil; that only Trump stands between them and their Neverland Nirvana.

But in all proper stage adaptations of Barrie's masterpiece, Hook and Father are played by the same actor. At the end of the play, everyone grows up. They have to do what Father tells them, after all. And Neverland is just a stupid fairy tale that only children and Democrats ever believed in.

Extra point: This is the second failed political adaptation of Peter Pan. Remember this?


If you like this post, please share it to Facebook.

Friday, November 29, 2019

Hong Kong protesters stand together, sing OUR National Anthem after Trump signs support legislation


This is after their elections, and this is done in full knowledge that America has just celebrated an important national holiday of giving thanks. They're thanking us for the bipartisan law President Trump just signed.

The legislation passed earlier this month provides for more monitoring the independent status of the former British colony. It also allows for sanctions to be imposed if the Chinese government attempts to rein in the tiny island's liberties, which they agreed to respect in the treaty that the west negotiated in returning Hong Kong to Chinese control in 1999.

The island has been rocked with first peaceful, then violent protests over what was seen by residents as attempts to enforce communist rules and roll back legal rights.

Earlier this week, Hong Kong voters overwhelmingly rejected pro-Beijing legislators in the island's only means of official expression of displeasure over the changes Beijing wanted to move forward.

To have thousands of protesters singing a free country's national anthem must really stick in Beijing's craw.

This is beautiful beyond description.

Wednesday, November 27, 2019

Ouch: Former MSNBC anchor slams network, says it has abandoned Bernie, Tulsi and Yang


In an Op-Ed piece at The Hill, former MSNBC news presenter Krystal Ball unloads on her former employer, and makes it clear that the network isn't interested in hearing from the full spectrum of lefty office seekers:
They have gone all in on a fundamentally anti-progressive narrative that a). Spends all day every day fixated on excuses for why Hillary lost to the guy they promised would lose. That would be Comey excuses and Russiagate and Ukrainegate as an extension of Russiagate. b). Fixates on "Trump is bad" as the end all be all of political analysis. Everything that is going wrong in the country and the world is centered on him and him alone because to evaluate the underlying circumstances that brought us Trump would be to question the undying wisdom of that Democratic elite. The people who created the underlying conditions that brought us Trump definitely do not want to talk about those underlying conditions that brought us Trump. and c). They basically devoted the network to the lionization of Bush-era neo-con Republicans and the national security blob. Nicole Wallace, Steve Schmidt, John Brennan, Malcolm Nance etc.

Meanwhile, the network is absolutely shameless in the way that it covers the 3 anti-establishment candidates, Bernie, Tulsi, and Yang. Every interview with Tulsi must include the obligatory "Assad apologist" question and conspiracies about her running third party or being a Russian asset abound. In these times recently did an analysis of Bernie's primetime coverage on the network and found that he is mentioned 1/3 as often as Biden and far more negatively than any other candidate.
She also describes the network's atrocious treatment of Andrew Yang, explaining that they cut him out of debate advertising graphics and even referred to him as 'John Yang.'

So, having a major cable news network embark on an anti-progressive narrative is a good thing, right? After all, MSNBC has seen some growth in viewership with the 'Orange Man Bad' schtick. They're still deeply mired in a distant second place behind cable news king Fox News, but progress is progress, right? (Fox routinely has more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined.)

Ball is castigating MSNBC for simply being a capitalist-friendly mouthpiece for the Democrat establishment. It's helpful to realize that MSNBC started out as a joint venture between Microsoft Corporation and General Electric's NBC News (NBC is now owned by Comcast). The network veered left during the Iraq War and Microsoft disengaged with both the cable channel and the website in 2005.

The network as it is today doesn't want to hear from people like Bernie or Tulsi because they and candidates like them are doing what Donald Trump did in his 2016 campaign. He ran against the establishment, beat the establishment candidates for the nomination and then beat the establishment candidate offered by the Democrats. MSNBC seems to believe that all the country needs is the right establishment Democrat candidate. Hence their cozying up to establishment figures like Bush era spook John Brennan and former John McCain campaign adviser Steve Schmidt. Keep in mind that these establishment types are cut from the same cloth as the 2000's Democrats who were all for the 2003 invasion of Iraq before they were against it. MSNBC is the television home of the establishment Democrat message.

Krystal Ball is a doctrinaire progressive. She wants to see the Green New Deal, Medicare For All and a Billionaire Wealth Tax get every bit of air time and bandwidth possible. She was a vocal and persistent critic of W during the Iraq War too, so she's on board with Tulsi's anti-war stance. That MSNBC is squelching the dissent from Democrat anti-mainstreamers sticks in her craw.

She's right in one regard, though. The election of Donald Trump was at least in part due to the arrogance of the Democrat-Media complex, who thought that Hillary Clinton was the heir apparent to a festering swamp. MSNBC thinks, as she puts it, "that everything was fine before Trump and everything will be fine again after Trump."

Well, no and yes. No, everything was not fine before Trump but yes, everything will be fine after Trump because by the time he's done President-elect Mike Pence will have a fully drained swamp in cruise control.

It would still be helpful to the country if the Democrats' far left voices received the same coverage that their establishment types get. The radical left is taking over the Democrat party. The wackier the voices, the crazier the ideas and the better we all understand just how nutso they've become.

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Donald Trump SUCKS at being a racist


Donald Trump is good at a lot of things. One thing he's not good at all is advancing a racist agenda. In fact, he sucks at it, if that's what he was trying to do. If white supremacists thought they'd have a friend in the White House, they were stupid or weren't paying attention. If his opponents believe that he's a racist fascist Nazi meanie, they're just listening to the wrong people.

Within this post are 10 hyperlinks. Each link documents part of a pattern that Democrats don't want you to discern or understand for yourself. Each link takes you to a site that could never be mistaken as "Trump-friendly."

For starters, his son-in-law Jared Kushner is the grandson of Jewish Holocaust Survivors, who immigrated to the U.S. in 1949. What white nationalist Nazi racist scum lets his daughter marry a Jew? It gets worse for the Trump-is-a-Nazi crowd. Jared and Ivanka Trump were married in a Jewish ceremony in 2009.  Ivanka has converted to the Jewish faith, which means that the alleged Nazi has a Jew for a daughter. Trump's grandchildren were born Jewish, and they are being raised in a kosher Jewish household.

“Just because you’re a nationalist and you’re white doesn’t make you a white nationalist,” said Katrina Pierson, an African-American who was a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign. “Putting Americans first makes you a nationalist and in that case, I’m a nationalist. I think we should take care of our families and our children first.”

In the late 1990's, The Donald dated the drop dead gorgeous model Kara Young, a biracial beauty that white supremacists regard as a mongrel. No self-respecting racist would be caught dead in a romantic relationship with a black girl. “I never heard him say a disparaging comment towards any race of people,” she said.

Before that though, Trump established a rapport with Nelson Mandela, someone he has said he admired. In 1990, Mandela was preparing to embark on a tour of the United States. Legend has it that Trump "donated" a private jet to Mandela and his entourage but the truth is that he allowed his Trump Shuttle 727 to be used at cost: $130,000. Not bad for a grand tour of the States. Scoff if you want, but this is not the action of a racist.

Neither is appointing Ben Carson to be Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Dr. Carson doesn't hold back, either. "I have an advantage of knowing the President very well, and he’s not a racist. ... Look at his policies. Under this president you see the rising tide lifting all boats. You see low unemployment — record low — for blacks, for Hispanics, for all the demographics of our nation.

"When you have somebody spending this much time and this much effort trying to elevate those who are vulnerable and who are suffering in our society, I think we should pay a lot more attention to what they are doing than what anyone is saying," he added.

Working with Secretary Carlson, Trump established the Opportunity and Revitalization Council. The Council dovetails with the Opportunity Zone tax incentive in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and the Council are having dramatic impact. The effort is intended to un-Baltimore places like Baltimore, and it's working. Black and Hispanic unemployment is at an all-time low. 

White supremacists don't push policies that make black and brown folks better off. They're supposed to be making them miserable. Trump isn't. Why is that?

One of Trump's earliest grants of Clemency was to 64-year old Alice Johnson, the black grandmother who was serving a mandatory federal sentence for nonviolent drug offenses. That wasn't a one-time PR stunt. He also posthumously pardoned Jack Johnson, the first black heavyweight champion boxer who was convicted of transporting a white woman across state lines.

Last December, Trump signed a bipartisan criminal justice reform bill into law. This was important, and it's informative because son-in-law Kushner made it a priority before joining his father in-law's campaign. Kushner negotiated with Congress and shepherded the bill though both houses. Again, not the actions of a criminal racist enterprise.

Nazis also don't deport other Nazis. Donald Trump did just that, and he did it to bipartisan acclaim. George W. Bush didn't deport Jakiw Palij. Barack Obama had eight years to kick him out. Trump made it happen in the first half of his first term. He did it by pressuring Germany to take him back. Eli Rosenbaum, the former head of the U.S. office investigating accused Nazi war criminals, said Palij’s removal “is a landmark victory in the U.S. government’s decades-long quest to achieve a measure of justice and accountability on behalf of the victims of Nazi inhumanity.”

Here's the problem that Democrats and their mouthpieces in the media have with Donald Trump: He's completely colorblind. He doesn't seek or implement policies that chooses winners and losers based on ethnicity or religious background. He's brash. He's abrupt. He's unfiltered. He's uncouth. He's unpresidential, whatever the hell that means to the people who wouldn't give him credit for negotiating a Palestinian peace accord while curing cancer.

If President Trump actually was the white nationalist racist Nazi pig the left claims he is, the opposite of everything written above would be true. Trump would have forbidden Ivanka from marrying Jared. Jared never would have become a senior adviser and the criminal reform bill would never have passed. Nelson Mandela would have had to find his own ride and Alice Johnson would still be stuck in the federal pen.

If you want to hold on to the myth of Trump's racism, go ahead. Keep nodding your head in agreement when socialists Pete Buttigeig, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren accuse him of being a monster not seen since Adolf Hitler. Ignore the Jewish family under his roof. Listen instead to the people who really didn't want you to read what you just finished reading. They need you a lot more than we need them.

If you like the posts here, please share!

Wednesday, November 13, 2019

On the first day of public impeachmnt testimony... This exchange should be 'Game Over' for Democrats


It should be 'Game Over,' but it won't be. Democrats are all-in, now.

Expect this clip to become front and center during the 2020 Presidential Campaign.

Sunday, November 10, 2019

The Crimson Tide and some Tide fans both have some gettin' better to do


What a great day for college football. The two best football teams in the nation's best college football conference went toe-to-toe yesterday when Alabama hosted LSU in an epic slugfest. The President of the United States was in attendance. The 41 points Alabama scored against LSU was the most they'd scored in regulation since Florida and Georgia both hung 50+ points on them in 2008. Unfortunately for our side yesterday, LSU hung 46 on Bama, the most in series history.

Suffice it to say that both Alabama and some it its fans have a lot of gettin' better to do.

LSU and Bama are both the kind of team that can and do make you pay for you mistakes. Alabama made more mistakes and LSU made'em pay. Two critical first half turnovers led directly to two Tiger TD's. Both turnovers were quarterback Tua Tagovailoa mistakes. It would be too easy to second-guess Nick Saban's decision to start Tua; to claim that had he not started the two miscues wouldn't have happened.

Alabama has started four freshmen all season on defense and at many times yesterday there were five freshmen on the field. Freshmen make mistakes. They will get better at not being out of position. They will get better at recognizing what the offense is showing and getting into the right coverage, and they will get better at tackling. Experience is solid gold and we're a little short of specie this year.

The officials also made mistakes. Both teams were guilty of defensive holding and defensive pass interference and weren't flagged. Then there was the highly questionable sideline throw that should have been overturned (I call BS on the "forced out" excuse). LSU's offensive line held on every other pass play and never got called. Alabama was offsides at least a half-dozen times. But when thinking about officiating, it's best to remember that if your team just does what it's supposed to do, bad calls or no calls can't change the outcome.

LSU's offense is nothing short of jaw-dropping. They don't make many mistakes. A very good offensive line. A very good receiver corps. And a great quarterback with uncommon grit and toughness. LSU has a chance to win it all.

Coach Ed Orgeron of LSU is the real deal. He talks funny but he's building a formidable program through great recruiting, great coaching and a mutual love with the state of Louisiana.

Alabama fans welcomed President Donald Trump with warm hospitality. It's rare for the Commander in Chief to visit your house in a game with such magnitude, Greatness attracts greatness. Usually. It sometimes attracts the pettiest among us.

So it comes with great embarrassment to learn that some idiot decided to go full Antifa and vandalize the Baby Trump balloon that anti-Trump protesters had brought to pre-game activities. Protesting is the most American thing ever. There's a reason why freedom of expression is guaranteed in the very First Amendment to the Constitution.

Like it or not, ridicule is a protected form of free expression. The balloon, the people behind it and the message it sends are an affront to common decency. That's not surprising--the left's inability to accept the legitimacy of the Trump Administration is itself nothing more than a spoiled brat throwing a hissy fit over the 2016 election. The Baby Trump balloon couldn't be a better representation of today's left if you prayed for it. The whole left is a great big baby, throwing  a great big tantrum.

The man who slashed the balloon  is Hoyt Hutchinson. He is no better than that piece of shit Harvey Updyke, who poisoned Auburn University's famed 100+ year old oaks at Toomer's Corner. It is appalling and deeply embarrassing that Hutchinson, like Updyke, is being celebrated by some Bama fans as some kind of hero today. Consider that Antifa is a lawless and violent organization that routinely destroys historic landmarks and violently confronts peaceful marches and demonstrations they disagree with. To the left, Antifa is a bunch of heroes. To decent society, they are thugs. To some Bama conservatives, Hutchinson is the new Updyke. To me, he's not much better than Antifa.

Updyke. Hutchinson. The unnamed Tuscaloosa protest "organizers." Antifa. All cut from the same rotten cloth. Most Bama fans are better than this. Some, like the Tide they profess to love, have some gettin' better to do.

Saturday, November 9, 2019

Fox10tv's exclusive interview with Jeff Sessions on 2020 run


Bob Grip is a Titan in Gulf Coast journalism, so it's not surprising that the semi-retired legendary anchor scored an exclusive interview with former Senator and U.S. Attorney General.

Sessions talks about his decision to run for his old Senate seat, and also opens up a bit about his relationship with President Trump.


Fox 10 News promises more from this interview in the days ahead. This can't be better for Sessions, and can't be worse for either Sessions' primary opponents or more importantly Doug Jones. Grip can't be bought and can't be spun.

Democrats desperately need to hold this seat to have any hope of flipping the Senate and Sessions will obliterate Jones. Democrats know this, so they will go all out to kill his candidacy in the primary. They would rather take their chances with anyone else.

Believe absolutely nothing you hear from national media outlets in the next four months when it comes to this story. There are no "sources close to the matter" who would even take a call from CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, ad nauseum. If those folks tell you a story, believe the precise opposite to be the truth.

If the media says President Trump is torn over how to respond to this race, believe instead that he is indifferent. If they say Sessions is seeking Trump's endorsement, believe instead that they have not spoken about it.

Friday, November 8, 2019

Jeff Sessions has qualified for the U.S. Senate GOP primary

He's in. And he's hit the track running hard for his old spot as the Junior Senator from Alabama. He made his public announcement in very friendly territory, chatting it up with Fox's Tucker Carlson.


He's also gotten some very big guns from the upper chamber behind him, led by the Senior Senator from Alabama, Richard Shelby:
Fox News has learned that Alabama’s senior senator, Richard Shelby, is circulating an “open letter to conservatives” signed by at least 11 Republican senators who are endorsing Sessions’ candidacy. Sessions served in the Senate from 1997 to 2017 until he joined the Trump administration as attorney general.

“Each of us has served in the United States Senate with Jeff Sessions,” the letter, obtained by Fox News, states. “We have seen him work diligently in the public eye and behind closed doors, when things were both good and bad, under stress and in success.”

The letter is signed by Shelby, Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts, Wyoming Sen. Mike Enzi, Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson, Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt, Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson and Nebraska Sen. Deb Fischer.
Polling with an official Sessions campaign hasn't been done yet. But if the official polling tracks anywhere near the polling on a hypothetical race with Sessions in the mix, he's the new leader in the clubhouse:
In late June, Brent Buchanan’s firm Cygnal surveyed 612 likely Republican voters with a margin of error at +/-3.96%. His ballot test numbers – WITHOUT Sessions in the race – showed:

Tommy Tuberville 29%
Bradley Byrne 21%
Roy Moore 13%
John Merrill 12%
The ballot test – WITH Sessions in the race – showed:

Jeff Sessions 29%
Tommy Tuberville 21%
Bradley Byrne 13%
Roy Moore 9%
John Merrill 8%
Sessions is expected to draw votes from "establishment" lane dwellers, Byrne and Merrill, but also from the "outsider lane" candidates Tubs and creepy Roy Moore. If these numbers hold and Byrne or Merrill can't find a way to get past Tubs, Sessions will face Tubs in the ultimate establishment vs outsider battle.

One way Sessions can get Tubs to suffer a little is by showing up tomorrow with President Trump at the Alabama-LSU game. Tubs can't do that; Sessions can because he's a Capstone Alumnus.

The question is, would Trump do this? Washington Examiner indicates that he wouldn't. Remember folks, Trump is a showman. What better show could there be than having the President and Prodigal Senator reunited before 100,000+ potential Alabama voters and millions more on national TV?

How could Trump not have his heart of hearts warmed by this ad, and how does he resist?

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

The media's dance around the impeachment whistleblower's identity is laughable and embarrassing


With straight faces, the senior editorial staff of major media organizations are futilely trying to wear a cloak of respectability and pretending to struggle over the decision to say the name of someone whose identity has been known for weeks.

These alleged journalists would have you believe they are deeply troubled; exquisitely torn over this heart-pounding decision: Do they name a name, or not?

What a joke. Everyone already knows who he is.

The name Eric Ciaramella was finally and formally revealed last week by RealClearInvestigations, a branch of the RealClear media family.
More than two months after the official filed his complaint, pretty much all that’s known publicly about him is that he is a CIA analyst who at one point was detailed to the White House and is now back working at the CIA.

But the name of a government official fitting that description — Eric Ciaramella — has been raised privately in impeachment depositions, according to officials with direct knowledge of the proceedings, as well as in at least one open hearing held by a House committee not involved in the impeachment inquiry. Fearing their anonymous witness could be exposed, Democrats this week blocked Republicans from asking more questions about him and intend to redact his name from all deposition transcripts.
...

Federal documents reveal that the 33-year-old Ciaramella, a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia “collusion” investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

RealClear is so highly respected that every major media outlet has used their objective polling and political analyses in their own coverage of politics inside and outside the Beltway. It's been a reliable source for years and everyone should agree that RCI is a credible and creditable source. If RealClear material is good enough for USAToday--and Gannett is no friend of Republicans--it should be good enough for say, NBC News. Oh, wait. RealClear is good enough for the Peacock.

The reason why CNN, NyTimes, WashPo, et al are "agonizing" tonight is that Ciaramella's second- and third-hand whistleblower complaint has handed them and their Democrat allies in the swamp their most recent desperate attempt to be rid of President Donald Trump. They don't really want him to be known or known about. The less you know about Eric Ciaramella, the less likely you are to believe that this is just another fruitless fishing expedition. The more you learn about him, the more likely you are to realize that he's just a tool. He's a loyal, albeit disgruntled millennial pawn. Ciaramella is obsequiously playing a bit part in a purely partisan play to nullify an election.

Stormy Daniels couldn't do it. Creepy porn lawyer Michael Avenetti couldn't  hang. Robert Mueller fumbled and mumbled and bumbled and failed, too. But this lowly GS-13 bagel fetcher at the CIA might get him impeached, by Jove!

Wait, what? He's a prep school, Ivy League trust-funder? A millennial whose toughest decision is between the frappe and the espresso? How embarrassing to admit that the last chance you get to take down Trump hinges on a millennial's gossip memo.

If this scenario had played out eight years ago and a whistleblower had filed a complaint against Barack Obama's regime, who do you think would have named name(s) first? My money's on Rachel Maddow at MSNBC.

Ciaramella's name will eventually and officially come out on the air, in print or through the 'net. One of the alleged grownups in the media will soften the ground by naming him and citing RCI. Then the rest of the media mob will publish their own bits, citing their own sources who are "close to the whistleblower but granted anonymity to protect" something no one cares about protecting. Trust wrecked.

Ironically, it will be that wrecked trust that all but guarantees to help a landslide win for Donald Trump a year from now.


The Four Score

Monday, November 4, 2019

Washington Nationals' Kurt Suzuki dons #MAGA hat during White House ceremony


I've never been a big fan of Major League Baseball. I've followed an old family affinity for the Chicago Cubs, but I always lose interest in the playoffs once they're out (yeah, their 2016 World Series victory was nice). My interest in the game is best described as something that distracts me while waiting for football season.

So... I had no rooting interest in the 2019 World Series.

This however made me a fan of Kurt Suzuki. Anyone in the public eye brave enough to pull a stunt like this is one of the good guys. People like Suzuki are not supposed to be pro-Trump. Athletes and Actors are supposed to be vitriolic in expressing contempt for him.
Naturally, the reaction from the lefty Twitterati Bluecheckers was nasty. Go here to feel the outrage.

Thursday, October 31, 2019

RealClearInvestigations outs the impeachment whistleblower as a disgruntled millennial


RealClearInvestigations has revealed the name of the young man who filed the whistleblower report that has resulted in the ongoing impeachment inquiry. The man identified by RCI is Eric Ciaramella, a 2004 graduate of a Connecticut prep school and Yale University.
More than two months after the official filed his complaint, pretty much all that’s known publicly about him is that he is a CIA analyst who at one point was detailed to the White House and is now back working at the CIA.

But the name of a government official fitting that description — Eric Ciaramella — has been raised privately in impeachment depositions, according to officials with direct knowledge of the proceedings, as well as in at least one open hearing held by a House committee not involved in the impeachment inquiry. Fearing their anonymous witness could be exposed, Democrats this week blocked Republicans from asking more questions about him and intend to redact his name from all deposition transcripts.

RealClearInvestigations is disclosing the name because of the public’s interest in learning details of an effort to remove a sitting president from office. Further, the official's status as a “whistleblower” is complicated by his being a hearsay reporter of accusations against the president, one who has “some indicia of an arguable political bias … in favor of a rival political candidate" -- as the Intelligence Community Inspector General phrased it circumspectly in originally fielding his complaint.

Federal documents reveal that the 33-year-old Ciaramella, a registered Democrat held over from the Obama White House, previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan, a vocal critic of Trump who helped initiate the Russia “collusion” investigation of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.
Please take a few minutes and read the whole thing. RCI's Paul Sperry has done a very good job of getting the facts and timeline straight. He paints a very ugly partisan landscape.

Apparently, Ciaramella's name has been a very poorly kept secret inside the Beltway. Everyone on both sides of the aisle knows who he is. President Trump knows who he is. They've known for weeks. Why are we learning who he is just now? My opinion is that everyone is waiting for him to man up, own the hill he's willing to die on and take cross examination of his testimony like a man. Christine Blasey Ford did it. Why won't he? In fact...

He's not gonna have a choice, now. He can't retract his complaint and he's subject to subpoena. He will have to answer under oath.

RCI is no right-wing website. It's part of the RealClear family of web properties, headlined by RealClearPolitics. RCP is a highly regarded, middle-of-the-road news aggregator. Its "RCP Average" poll is the most frequently used indication of where public opinion really is on elections, current affairs and matters of controversy. It's where Americans can go to see a clear big picture and get views from all sides--Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green, ad infinitum. I write all this to persuade the reader that there is none of the bias in RealClear that pollutes mass media today. This site is right-leaning. I am biased. RealClear is neither.

It should come as no surprise that a generation mocked for impatience and lacking basic common sense would produce a Ciaramella.

Millennials are also pretty bad about not thinking things through. Lacking real life experience, they're often unable to "play the tape forward." Playing a tape at all is as about as familiar to millennials as a telephone with a cord or a manual transmission. Playing the tape forward is a metaphor used by competent adults to contemplate the consequences of one's actions. A good playing forward usually results in a pause.

Ciaramella is a GS-13 CIA Analyst. GS-13's aren't even high enough on the feeding chain to fetch coffee for assistant deputy undersecretaries in DC. They're nobodies. I was a GS-12 who was offered a "promotion" to GS-13 in 2003 if I relocated to the Washington Metro area. I played the tape forward, declined and left federal service in 2006.

Ciaramella. Pronounced char-a-MELL-ah, the word is sure to be immortalized. It will most likely be synonymous with what elder generations used to call a "tattletale."

Ciaramella didn't like the way Donald sang the National Anthem in Kindergarten, so he ran and told the teacher that Donald was un-American. Then he tried to hide behind the teacher's skirt so he wouldn't have to face Donald's classmates as they defended his honor and patriotism.

He's just a little Ciaramella.

Friday, October 25, 2019

DOJ's criminal probe is NOT news, and it's NOT a Trump counterattack on impeachment circus


Folks on the left are acting like last night's 'revelation' told us something new. It's news to them that a pair of seemingly oblique Department of Justice investigations may reveal possible criminal activities during the 2016 election and the months immediately following.

It's not news. Not new news, anyway. I wrote about the subject here, weeks ago:
Democrats and the media would have you believe that DOJ's work in the last few weeks is in response to the Ukraine affair. The reverse is true: The Ukraine affair is a preemptive strike against what Democrats rightly believe will be a very ugly account of their spying on the 2016 Trump campaign.

But wait, there's more. We'll examine what pulling up the Ukrainian floorboards revealed a bit later...
A little more than a week later, I wrote about it again:
The drumbeat started sounding way before President Donald Trump had a cordial, totally innocent telephone conversation with newly-elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky last summer.

Politico shows that the investigations started in 2018. Other news sources show that the release of Horowitz's report has been delayed more than once, meaning that it has resulted in a farther-reaching probe with lots of information that will be news to John O Public.

Other news sources show that as Horowitz's probe draws to its close, a second and seemingly oblique probe by John Durham is expanding. Durham is adding investigators and widening the scope of his investigation.
A week or so ago, I laid out a case that several highly respected liberals were sounding alarms over the events that have transpired since the dud of the Mueller Report fell flat last spring:
The Trump presidency is the first to reveal a full-blown schism between the intelligence community and the White House. Senior figures in the CIA, NSA, FBI and other agencies made an open break from their would-be boss before Trump’s inauguration, commencing a public war of leaks that has not stopped. 
Taibbi outlines a set of 10 different examples in which the intelligence elites selectively and salaciously leaked information designed to damage Trump's legitimacy and credibility. Then they offer "expert commentary" on their own manufactured press. They started almost the day after Trump's inauguration and continue to this day.

This is the stuff you'd expect from a spy thriller by John LeCarre or Robert Ludlum but with the technological proficiency of Tom Clancy. Only this isn't fiction. It's really happening.
Here's former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stammering, deflecting and worrying about the "timing" of yesterday's "news."
Don't fall for this deflection, folks. The left will try to frame the Horowitz-Durham probes as a desperate attempt by the Trump administration to fight back against impeachment. As you saw here back on October 1, the reverse is true: Impeachment proceedings are a desperate attempt by the left to get into the news stream before Horowitz and Durham drop their payloads on who did what to whom while trying to prevent Donald Trump from becoming your President.

When even well known and well respected liberals are telling you that something is wrong, listen up!

Extra point: What did Barack Obama know, and when did he know it?

Monday, October 21, 2019

President Donald Trump, unedited

Twenty-one minutes, thirty-five seconds of Your President, Donald Trump.

No edits. No interruptions. No interpretations from TV talking heads.


He should do more of this. Who needs the New York Times? Daily Beast? Axios?

Friday, October 18, 2019

Madam President-in-Exile says Tulsi Gabbard is Russian Asset


This is from the "You Can't Make This Up" Department. Hillary Clinton believes that a current candidate for the Democrat Party's nomination for President is a Russian puppet. Tulsi Gabbard, War Vet and Democrat Congresscritter from Hawaii is kompromat:
Gabbard won’t be happy to hear Hillary Clinton’s latest interview. Nor will President Trump or another of Clinton’s 2016 opponents, whom Clinton has now lodged similar accusations about.

In a conversation on former Obama campaign manager David Plouffe’s podcast, Clinton suggested the Russians are leveraging a number of top U.S. politicians. She suggested Russia had kompromat on Trump. She accused 2016 Green Party nominee Jill Stein of being a “Russian asset.” And she suggested Russia might back Gabbard as a third-party candidate.

“They’re also going to do third-party again,” Clinton said. “I’m not making any predictions, but I think they’ve got their eye on someone who’s currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate. She’s the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far.”
Don't believe it? Don't think Hillary is really batshit crazy enough to believe this? Think again:
What's really sad is that Madam President-in-Exile Clinton still can't accept the fact that she lost. The election wasn't stolen. The Russians didn't help Donald Trump in any meaningful way. It wasn't sexism or election fraud or voter suppression. She lost because she was a lousy candidate and treated 2016 the way Bob Dole treated 1996 and John McCain treated 2008.

No one is entitled to the White House and you don't take turns.

Thursday, October 17, 2019

If the press doesn't like being called "FAKE NEWS," they could maybe stop doing this...


Almost every gun nut in the U.S. of freakin' A knows what the Knob Creek Gun Range in Bullitt County Kentucky is. They all know what it's famous for.  A lot of'em have been there just for the opportunity to "oooh" and "ahh" at awesome displays of firepower like that displayed in the video that appeared and went viral Sunday night. Unfortunately for ABC, it went viral for the wrong reasons.

So why did ABC News think they could get away with hijacking a video of a Knob Creek show finale and pawn it off as footage of an attack half the world away from Knob Creek?

I have a theory that makes perfect sense. The producers, technical staff and copy editors at ABC have never been to Knob Creek, or any gun range anywhere in the country. They've never held a gun, much less fired one. Because they live, work and recreate in their little concrete bubble of the urban echo chamber, they think everyone living out here in the real world is just like them.

They all live in the same kind of apartments. They all ride the same trains, stop at the same Starbucks, eat at the same Chipotle, yack on the same phones, listen to the same music and hit the same websites and use the same apps. They all like the same pictures, downvote the same posts and block the same trolls. They're automatons.

So when they went to Youtube or Vimeo for some footage they could use in a story about how bad orange man was getting people killed in Syria, they ran across the Knob Creek Gun Shoot from 2017 and said "wow... I've never seen anything like this before. It only has a few thousand(!) views so no one we know will know what this really is!"

By doing so, they played right into the "FAKE NEWS!" narrative, thereby reinforcing everything Donald Trump and smart Republicans have been talking about since the media stopped worrying about objectivity during the Clintonista Regime of the 1990's.

The news media really, really dislike being called out with  the "FAKE NEWS!" rant. They are their own worst enemies when they make unforced errors like this. They're incapable of helping themselves. Their echo chamber is so tight that when Beto O'Rourke talks about confiscating semi-automatic rifles, all of the millennials in the room are shocked when the hunters and ranchers in Arizona, Iowa and Pennsylvania go berserk and turn red. When Pocahontas says "Medicare for All!" the retirees in Florida go red with rage at the prospect of a youngster jumping to the front of a line they worked decades to be the head of.

ABC has apologized online for running the segment, but not on the air, or during prime time. Even if they did an on-the-air mea culpa, they can't un-ring the bell. This will be coming to a small city/small town/farm community near you. It will live for a very long time.

As you may know, President Trump decided last weekend to pull U.S. Special Forces out of a hotly disputed area between Turkey and Syria that had also been fought over by Kurds. This group has long sought an independent homeland and have been willing to fight for it for a very long time. From time to time, they have been U.S. allies in the fight against Al Qaeda, ISIS and Syrian forces backed by Russia and Iran. Turkey, Syria and Iraq have all had their issues with the Kurds. Turkey in particular has had a long and violent history with ethnic Kurds--they were a major part of the old Ottoman Empire before and during World War I. The Ottomans used Kurds extensively as part of their irregular forces called the Bashi Bazouks. Modern Turkey emerged from that war as an independent state, and the Turkish people have long memories of atrocities committed by the Bash Bazouk "terrorists" during the centuries of Ottoman rule.

Asia Minor is a seething hotbed of conflict and has been that way for centuries. Peace has traditionally been maintained from the Levant up through The Dardanelles and over through the Caucasus region by brutal force. It's a mix of ethnic friction, tribal feuds and turmoil. It's the main corridor of commerce between western Europe and Asia proper since antiquity. And... there's lots of petroleum in the area. "Regime change" conflicts are not new. They're baked into the area's daily bread.

Was Trump right or wrong to get U.S. Special operators out of there? We don't know, but the area of concern was going to be fought over sooner or later, whether our guys were there or not. Keeping them as a buffer between people who have hated each other since before this country was even a good idea... maybe not a smart bet. The issues are much too complicated for a bunch of young, pampered and insulated American urbanites to even understand. No wonder this "FAKE NEWS!" video popped up.

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Dear Mr. President: Hewitt is right and you should REJECT the proposed 2020 debate plan


On the morning after a carefully choreographed and exquisitely scripted Democrat Presidential debate, Hugh Hewitt of the Salem Radio Network has a spot-on recommendation for the sitting President of the United States:
Last week, the Commission on Presidential Debates announced the schedule of 2020 presidential debates. President Trump should quickly dismiss that schedule as unacceptable and announce that if any debates will be held at all in 2020, it will be only after extensive, direct negotiations between him and the eventual nominee of the Democratic Party and their respective designated representatives. And those negotiations should begin from a premise that the Republicans will no longer play by the biased rules of a deeply unbalanced Manhattan-Beltway media elite. Explicitly articulating this declaration of intent now, along with the possibility that, as in 1968 and 1972, there won’t be any debates, would do both the public and the elite media a great service.

According to a recent Gallup survey, 13 percent of Americans “have a great deal of trust” in the mass media and 28 percent “a fair amount,” with “69% of Democrats [saying] they have trust and confidence in it, while 15% of Republicans and 36% of independents agree.” So more than half the country distrusts the media, and that suspicion is overwhelming among those on the center-right. And why shouldn’t they be suspicious, given incidents such as moderator Candy Crowley’s infamous intervention in the second debate in 2012?

...

Trump is the incumbent who can restore presidential debates to serious exercises in exploring the crucial differences between the two major-party candidates, but he has to begin by taking a wrecking ball to the perceived entitlement of a system begun before cellphones and the Internet and built on the thoroughly debunked belief in media “objectivity.” So start over. There are plenty of alternatives, and the best would involve open access and genuinely smart, diverse questioners who are not rehearsed to seek conflict, headlines or ratings. A lesser dose of media celebrity is a higher dose of fairness to the voters. (And please, no more idiotic “town halls.”)
He is absolutely right. President Trump cannot allow the Democrats and the media dictate the terrain on which the 2020 battle for the White House will be fought. Trump is the incumbent. He is the home team and the defending naational champion, if you want to use a sports analogy. He occupies conquered territory and he should defend it on terms in which he has at least equal input.

The moment it appears that the media and the Democrats are unwilling to meet his demands for truly fair and objective debates, he should walk away and refuse further negotiations until they fully understand that his terms will be met.

Democrats and the media seek to stack the jury, script both the prosecution and defense and set the terms so that the outcomes are most favorable to whatever numbskull emerges with the Democrat nomination.

One need only look at two recent events to see how the left always throws fits until they get their way--the Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS nomination and the current ersatz "impeachment inquiry."

With the Kavanaugh nomination, Democrats rushed in at the very end of the "advice and consent" process with scurrilous allegations against a well-respected jurist and attempted to derail the nomination. They tried to rewrite the script and force a fight on their own terms. President Trump and Senate Republicans were dead-nuts right to stay the course on the process and win the vote.

With the current impeachment circus, Democrats and the media are conducting  yet another witch hunt behind closed doors, selectively leaking and carefully massaging the testimony of alleged "witnesses" and giving House Republicans none of the rights granted the minority had in all three prior impeachment processes.

The left stacks the deck at every opportunity presented to them. President Trump should reject the proposed debate schedule and force the media to negotiate in good faith. If they refuse, just walk away.

Sunday, October 13, 2019

Liberals should listen to their own intellectuals about the impeachment witch hunt


As a virtual founding member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, there are precious few liberals whom I hold in high regard. These are men of principle but they are almost always wrong on policy because they are always wrong in philosophy. A few of the few are former Senator Joe Lieberman, constitutional scholars Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley and media members Geraldo Rivera and Matt Taibbi (see my footnote at the end).

With the exception of Lieberman (so far), all have been vocal in their alarm-sounding about the current push by Democrats and commercial media to impeach President Donald Trump and remove him from office.  Every one of those speaking out say that this is going too far too fast; that the people behind it are worse than the man they're targeting; that their motives are corrupt and that only great harm can come to this Republic if it isn't halted. The brinksmanship is dangerous and it has the potential to escalate into catastrophe no one can predict.

Dershowitz first, arguing that the Founding Fathers would refuse to impeach Trump:
[T]he case for impeaching President Trump based on the available evidence is extremely weak. The phone call to the president of Ukraine may have been ill advised, but that is a judgment for voters to make. There is nothing in the call that even approaches the constitutional criteria for impeachment and removal of a president. Nor does the special counsel report contain evidence that would justify impeachment. Democrats are seeking to weaponize the Constitution for partisan purposes.

This is not the first time in our history this has happened. Both President Johnson and President Clinton were improperly impeached. Johnson committed no crime, and if Clinton committed a crime, it was not a high crime. It was a low crime involving his personal conduct. Only President Nixon was properly subjected to impeachment and the prospect of removal because he had committed high crimes.
I disagreed with Dershowitz in 1998 and I still do, now. It was proper to impeach Clinton. In my view, lying under oath about anything is a high crime. But in retrospect it was proper for the Senate to acquit him and that the shame of impeachment was punishment enough.

To our knowledge, President Trump hasn't been untruthful about the call with President Zelensky. You may find it improper, but Trump has been blatantly open and honest about it, and we have to take Zelensky's word that he felt no pressure from his American counterpart.

Taibbi next, who says that while he finds Trump to be detestable, he holds those driving this train in even worse regard.
My discomfort in the last few years, first with Russiagate and now with Ukrainegate and impeachment, stems from the belief that the people pushing hardest for Trump’s early removal are more dangerous than Trump. Many Americans don’t see this because they’re not used to waking up in a country where you’re not sure who the president will be by nightfall. They don’t understand that this predicament is worse than having a bad president.

The Trump presidency is the first to reveal a full-blown schism between the intelligence community and the White House. Senior figures in the CIA, NSA, FBI and other agencies made an open break from their would-be boss before Trump’s inauguration, commencing a public war of leaks that has not stopped.
Taibbi outlines a set of 10 different examples in which the intelligence elites selectively and salaciously leaked information designed to damage Trump's legitimacy and credibility. Then they offer "expert commentary" on their own manufactured press. They started almost the day after Trump's inauguration and continue to this day.

This is the stuff you'd expect from a spy thriller by John Le Carre or Robert Ludlum but with the technological proficiency of Tom Clancy. Only this isn't fiction. It's really happening.

Rivera says that this is a railroad job, and it's running over due process afforded by all three of the Presidents who faced impeachment before Trump:
RIVERA: Well the Democrats have an adoring media, the drumbeat has been incessant. The president hasn't adequately confronted -- I think the addition of Trey Gowdy will be helpful to have some -- a strong, experienced, former prosecutor, former congressperson, you know, taking some of the, some of the public heat from the president. And keep steering it back to the fundamental, the fundamental question. You cannot allow the Democrats to proceed with any kind of righteousness unless they abide by constitutional due process. 
My God, it is simple. Unless this Congress votes, unless the House votes -- they'll probably win the vote if they have the vote, but unless they do vote, then the Republicans have no rights, they subpoena, can subpoena no one. Where is the fairness in this? At some point the American people will see through the propaganda and demand the vote, as the president does, whether they love him or loathe him -- as I said, it doesn't matter pro-Trump, anti-Trump, that doesn't matter. What matters is, he's the president of the United States, and the historic precedent in the 20 and 21st Century, the person accused in this most profound, distressing experience for any president deserves to have fairness. Just as any defendant in any court. I know it's a political process, but even politics has to depend in some measure on precedent. Precedent here is clear. Nixon, they voted in '74. Clinton, they voted in '98. Why is Nancy Pelosi not allowing this Congress to vote?
The answer until October 15 is that Pelosi announced the beginning of this game on the eve of a two-week recess. Congress hasn't been in session since September 27, 2019 and Pelosi refused to cancel the recess period. Pelosi has no excuse beginning from the opening gavel on Tuesday.

Rivera has said that while he considers Donald Trump a personal friend, he thinks Hillary Clinton should have been elected President and that he opposes almost everything Trump stands for, from tax cuts to immigration and all policy points in between. But even a staunch liberal knows a due process rat when he smells one.

Lastly is Turley's wondering aloud about the lack of Oxygen given to the possibility that Trump's alleged illegal behavior uncovered actual criminal wrong-doing by well-connected Democrats, namely the Bidens:
For those brave enough to read on, I wish to dispense with one threshold issue: I was critical of claims over the last three years of “proven” crimes and impeachable offenses in the Russia investigation. However, the first day that Trump’s Ukraine call was disclosed, I stated that — if a quid pro quo were proved — the alleged self-dealing with military aid would be an impeachable offense. My point: Raising concerns over Hunter Biden does not mean you are excusing Trump’s actions.

What is most remarkable about the paucity of coverage of Hunter Biden’s dealings is the conclusory mantra that “this has all been investigated.” Many TV hosts prefer to focus on President Trump’s dubious claim that former Vice President Joe Biden forced the firing of Ukraine’s chief prosecutor to protect his son. I, too, fail to see compelling evidence to support Trump’s charge. ...

All of this should be of some interest to the media, which has exhaustively — and rightfully — pursued foreign deals by the Trump family. And there is no reason why the media cannot pursue allegations against both the Trumps and the Bidens.

That, however, would counter the narrative that there’s “nothing wrong” with Hunter Biden’s dealings and that it’s all a “lie” that’s best to ignore.
The four distinct points made here are:

  1. This is an impeachment that is at best no more justifiable than either Johnson's or Clinton's.
  2. The people pushing it are a bigger threat to democratic government than the man they're after.
  3. The absence of due process is un-American.
  4. All eyes are only and unfairly skewed against the President and the bias taints the whole process.

These four people are not wild-eyed conspiracy theorists. Absolutely no one with a straight face can label them Trump supporters. Rudy Guiliani is a Trump mouthpiece. These gentlemen are diametric opposites.

Dershowitz argued forcefully against Bill Clinton's impeachment, as did Rivera. Turley also argued against Clinton's impeachment. Two years later, Turley angered both liberals and conservatives when he argued that the 2000 election was botched in Florida but that the U.S. Supreme Court was right that the recounts in that state were unconstitutional.

Taibbi was only 29 when Clinton was impeached and didn't launch his "gonzo" style of journalism until 2002, but he's the author of the controversial book Insane Clown President. When Taibbi says he's more scared of the intelligence elites than he is President Trump, you should pay attention to him. A Trump victory in this confrontation only gets him to the next election. A win for the intelligence elites puts this country on a path where no public light will ever be allowed to shine.

---
I include Taibbi because of his principled opposition to conservatism but also his keen insight into the social and cultural environment that gave us President Trump. It's my belief that President Trump's election is a symptom, not the cause of our problems. His belief is very similar. Unlike Taibbi though, I believe Trump is actually doing what his voters thought they were getting and he could actually correct some of the problems that led to his ascendancy. 

Thursday, October 10, 2019

The U.S. Economy has never been better


If your chief concern is how the poor and middle class are doing in the Trump Economy, it's hard not to like the latest figures from the U.S. Census Bureau (PDF).

A few highlights from the report:
  • Real median family income rose 1.2% and real non-family median income rose 2.4%.
  • Real median wages and salaries (most important to lower income families) rose 3.4%.
  • Full-time gainfully employed labor rose 2.3 million.
  • The poverty rate dropped 4% and 1.2 million people left poverty.
  • In 2018, for the first time in 11 years, the official poverty rate was significantly lower than 2007, the year before the most recent recession.
  • Conditions improved for all Americans regardless of race, gender national origin or age.
Regardless of who you are or where you live in this country, you are better off today than you were this time in 2017 or 2016. 

A modest sum of $1,000 invested in October 2016 a 401(k) or IRA that tracks the growth of the S&P 500 Index is worth approximately $1,410 today. Financial markets are historically stable, historically healthy and are in a long term trend of gentle and healthy growth. Interest rates are historically low as well, meaning that families just starting out today face very good chances of securing a mortgage and owning a home (outside major metropolitan areas). 

Middle and lower income Americans still face a few challenges. An aging population and rising demand for medical services have healthcare costs rising faster than inflation. Unsecured/personal and student loan debt is uncomfortably high. But these are not insurmountable or panic-inducing problems for an economy growing healthily like this. 

You would think that good news like this would be major headlines. It's not, and Aaron Brown at Real Clear Markets talks about this, too.
However, 2018 worked for everyone. The economy did well, all the real measures of economic well-being were improved, and the Gini coefficient went down. More money, more equality. But you wouldn’t know it from the headlines.

· Ben Holland wrote at Bloomberg under the headline, “Census Says U.S. Income Inequality Grew ‘Significantly’ in 2018” and suggested the culprit was, “the impact of President Donald Trump’s end-2017 tax bill, which was reckoned by many economists to be skewed in favor of the wealthy.”

· Business Insider’s take was “US income inequality jumps to highest level ever recorded” , and quoted Professor Timothy Smeeding, "Wages remain low, there is a lack of childcare for single-parent families, and so on."

· Mike Schneider’s AP headline was “Census: US inequality grew”.

These are just three examples, the sentiments were echoed in many other news outlets, and chewed over by many opinion columnists. How did people get things so wrong? I can’t explain overlooking all the good news in the report except perhaps by the old newspaper adage, “If it bleeds, it leads,” meaning bad news sells more papers (or collects more clicks) than good. Or perhaps reporting good economic news would be considered support for Trump and might reduce enthusiasm for anti-poverty spending.
Brown goes into some detail on the Gini Index, which is a heavily cooked statistical distribution that attempts to measure how wealth is distributed within a country. It was developed in 1912 by Italian demographer, statistician and sociologist Corrado Gini (1884-1965).

Today's Gini Index is 0.486, which fell a three thousandths of a point from 0.489. In the U.S. the number has risen about 0.14 points since 1979. Since 1998, it has risen about 0.08.

The Gini Index has its uses in getting a big picture view of how poor people fare vis-a-vis the wealthy. An index reading of zero is the leftist utopia of perfect distribution of wealth. An index of 1.0 is perfect inequality, which is where the left thinks we are today. A relatively stable Gini indicates less economic uncertainty and less turmoil. A wildly fluctuating Gini indicates broad uncertainty and unrest.

A key takeaway from using Gini to gauge economic well-being is that it is independent of total economic wealth and output. A very wealthy nation with a high Gini number would likely see everyone living comfortably. A very poor nation with a low Gini would likely mean nobody has anything.

A slowly rising Gini Index has been a long time favorite tool of the left, and they've used it for decades in arguing for more spending to combat poverty and income inequality. Never mind that total wealth has grown faster over the same period. Never mind the glacial pace of its rise. That it's rising at all is cause for action!

But the drop in the Gini Index confounded them, so they chose arbitrary starting and ending points to cover up the fact that things are pretty good and getting better. Hence the headlines Brown lists above. 

Another key takeaway about the Gini Index is that its father was a fascist. He was a celebrated friend of Italian Dictator Benito Mussolini and a professed eugenicist. It was his intent to use his Index to measure the economic performance of genetically managed populations over time and to compare the performance of a pure race to the populations of less desirable or mongrel nations. He fervently supported Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. How's that for irony?

Wednesday, October 9, 2019

In investigations under way at DOJ, an ominous drumbeat draws ever closer


This is not a "Fox News conspiracy theory." This has not been "already debunked." It is as real as Robert Mueller's collusion investigation but it is unlike that quixotic probe in two very ominous ways:

  1. It has a near 100% chance of showing demonstrable collusion by federal officials with foreign governments, and
  2. It can result in actual indictments of yuuge names.
That link above takes you to a Politico article. Politico has been the tip of the Democrats' media spear since November 2016. That "newsroom" is about as unbiased as MSNBC. The article was originally (and perhaps blindly) put together to provide cover for Congressional Democrats' pumping up expectations of the special counsel's report.

Again, this is no wild right wing conspiracy theory.

The drumbeat started sounding way before President Donald Trump had a cordial, totally innocent telephone conversation with newly-elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky last summer. 

Politico shows that the investigations started in 2018. Other news sources show that the release of Horowitz's report has been delayed more than once, meaning that it has resulted in a farther-reaching probe with lots of information that will be news to John O Public.

Other news sources show that as Horowitz's probe draws to its close, a second and seemingly oblique probe by John Durham is expanding. Durham is adding investigators and widening the scope of his investigation.
It could be related to the length of time it is taking Inspector General Michael Horowitz to deliver his more limited report that has been repeatedly promised for some months now. Previously, Horowitz was criticized for pulling his punches on the Hillary Clinton investigation. This will not be so easy now with Barr and Durham going over the same material. Horowitz is not able to interview those no longer working for the government--most of the potential miscreants having slipped away--but Barr and Durham have no such restriction. They can follow leads anywhere.

Recently that has taken them to Italy to speak with intelligence officials. They have also apparently spoken with their peers in Australia and the UK. Did something come of that? It would be strange if it didn't, especially now that we have learned that Durham's mission has expanded, "adding agents and resources.".

This indeed should strike fear in the hearts of the Democrats. The Department of Justice holds the whip hand. They can indict people. Yes, the Democratic Congress can impeach. And no wonder they are trying their best to do that now. They are riding high--or some of them may think they are--because of polls and the nonstop outrage of the media.

But most of the public doesn't know the full story or anything close. ...
Last week in this space, I argued that the Democrats' seizure of Trump's innocent phone call with President Zelensky is a panicked attempt to get in front of Horowitz's findings and paint his investigation as a partisan response to the fake, unauthorized "impeachment inquiry."

He is not naive,” says [former U.S. Attorney Stephen] Robinson. “He understands the political implications of the work that he’s been asked to do and the potential impact it could have. He’s not going to wilt under that.”

It's not hard to predict how the increasingly panicked Democrats and their media sycophants will react when John Durham impanels a grand jury and starts indicting a few big names like Robert Mueller, James Comey, John Brenner and James Clapper. All of these people left large fingerprints all over an attempt to frame and impeach an honestly elected President of the United States and broke the law and destroyed the trust of the American people.

They never thought this would happen. They fully expected Hillary Clinton to win in 2016. She would have quickly moved to bury the Fusion GPS affair, the Steele Dossier and any evidence of collusion to get dirt on then candidate Trump. We would never have heard about Joe Biden's blatant attempt to extort Ukrainian officials to end an investigation into his son's dealings with a corrupt natural gas company because no video of him bragging about his extortion.

In fact, it would come as no surprise if Mrs. Clinton decides to jump into the 2020 Democrat primary and immediately start whining about a partisan witch hunt against her.

The drum is beating, and it's only going to get louder as the truth finally gets closer.