Advertisements
Open post

How Pete Buttigieg is Triangulating His Way to the Top of the Democrat Heap

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Has Pete Buttigieg found the fairway for getting to the Democrat 2020 nomination? – It’s beginning to look as if he might just have stumbled into it. Or a better way to say might be that he has, to borrow a Clintonian term, ‘triangulated’ his way into it.

With new polls showing Preacher Pete, the middling mayor of a mid-size, racially-torn city in the mid-size mid-western state of Indiana, suddenly jumping out to strong leads in polls in both Iowa and New Hampshire, it has become time to take the 37 year-old seriously. Readers will remember that, way back in March I predicted that Buttigieg would become one of two media-created “rising stars” in the Democrat field, with the other being Andrew Yang. Ok, so far I’m just one for two, but there’s still time for Yang and his blatant $1,000 per month effort to outright buy votes to catch fire at some point.

The interesting thing about Preacher Pete is that he has wiggled his way up to the top of the field in the first two caucus/primary states by channeling Bill Clinton and his 1992 campaign strategy of being all things to all people. While Elizabeth Warren has been out there going as far to the left as Fidel Castro in order to steal the Party’s very sizable communist vote away The Commie, and Joe Biden has been focusing on securing the African American vote by telling South Carolinians that Republicans really just want to go back to Jim Crow laws that Democrats in fact created and getting the senior citizen vote with the 1968 tactic of claiming marijuana is a “gateway drug,” Buttigieg has managed to thread his way right in between them to capture the Party’s “middle.”

Just as Bill Clinton understood 27 years ago, Preacher Pete understands that, in the Democrat voter base, a “moderate” is someone who really favors all of the radical leftist nostrums that have utterly failed an murdered hundreds of millions of human beings over the last century, but wants to be able to pretend to their non-crazy friends that they’re really just “open-minded.” These people want a candidate who is radical but doesn’t look or sound radical.

That’s what Bill Clinton delivered to them in 1992 and what Barack Obama gave them in 2008: a radical leftist who’s going to nationalize healthcare and destroy the economy with a raft of Soviet-style command-and-control regulations over the “environment” and pretty much every other facet of our lives, but who looks and sounds like just a guy who you’d like to have a drink with at the local bar or, as in Preacher Pete’s case, the harmless Jehovah’s Witness who knocks on your door and wants to talk to you about his vision of what God actually is.

Preacher Pete is delivering all of that, right down to the starched white shirt and black pants uniform and scripture-quoting (and often mis-quoting) of your local missionary. When radical leftism is packaged like this, you hardly notice how radical it all really is until it’s too late and the harmless missionary is implementing a $2500 penalty on you for not signing up with the medical non-coverage mandated by the bill he just signed into law.

This Clintonian triangulation approach of adopting pretty much all of his opponents’ most radical ideas, but doing so with the demeanor and talking points of moderation has suddenly landed Preacher Pete with a 9-point lead in the new Des Moines Register poll in Iowa, and a whopping 10 point lead in a new St. Anselm poll in New Hampshire. Yes, these are just single polls in each state, but every other poll taken recently in these two crucial kickoff contests have shown Buttigieg’s fortunes rapidly rising.

Supporters of Quid Pro Joe point to their guy’s leads in South Carolina and Nevada, the next two states that will be contested before Super Tuesday rolls around, but history is filled with the rotting carcasses of presidential candidates who thought they could lose Iowa and New Hampshire and then build firewalls around later states and still be the nominee. Reality dictates that if any candidate can win both Iowa and New Hampshire, they will immediately become the odds-on favorite to be the nominee as the momentum from those victories carries over into other states.

Just as in the game of football, momentum is a very real factor in presidential politics. Right now, Preacher Pete, through his strategy of channeling the 1992 version of Bill Clinton, definitely has it. Whether or not it can last is anyone’s guess, but he is proving to be a very formidable presence in this race.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Advertisements
Open post

In the Business World, This Impeachment Circus Would be an HR Dispute

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Anyone who has ever spent any time in the business world has been in this meeting: You’re running a project, and you get your 20-member project team together in the main conference room for a meeting. You’ve prepared an agenda for the meeting, assigned whatever speaking roles need to be performed, distributed whatever pre-read documents are necessary for the meeting to produce its desired result.

You have done your job as the team lead. And the meeting goes just as planned. The discussion points were all covered, the various speakers all added well to the conversation. The meeting ended with heads nodding all around the table, and everyone seemed happy.

And yet, within hours you discover that the 20 team members left your well-planned and executed meeting with 20 different perceptions of what was said and what was supposed to happen going forward. In fact, one of the participants in the meeting turned out to be so upset because his priorities weren’t addressed that he actually decided to go lodge a formal complaint with Human Resources, and then gossiped about it with anyone who would listen in the break room.

You discover all of this because a few hours after the meeting ended, you got a call from HR demanding that you come explain why employee X’s personal priorities weren’t addressed in your carefully-planned and executed meeting.

Anyone who has been in a team lead and/or management position in the business world for any extended period of time has found themselves in this position. It happens every day in every sizable company in America.

This is exactly what happened in the wake of the July 25 call between President Donald Trump and his counterpart in Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky.  You had a bunch of diplomats/bureaucrats/spies listening in on that call on the “American” side – although, given that he was offered the job of Ukraine Defense Minister no fewer than three times, it is questionable how “American” Alexander Vindman actually is – and every one of those career government employees left the call with their own unique impressions of what just happened.

One of those people – Vindman – was so upset that his own personal priorities for the call had not been met that he decided to go file a complaint, not with HR, but with the NSC counsel, and then went around gossiping about it to apparently anyone who would listen to him. One of those people was CIA plant Eric Ciaramella, who became the fake “whistleblower” who kicked off this whole affair after consulting with Bug-eyes Schiff and his staff.

In essence, that is what all of this has now boiled down to after three mind-numbing days of he-said, she-said, we-said, they-said, I-was-told, I-heard, I-thought, I-felt and I-was-upset nonsense from these “public servants.”

The big difference is that, in the business world, each and every one of these self-important jackasses would be fired by any competent boss. But in the government world, the worst that will happen to any of them will be getting reassigned to some cushy teaching job at Georgetown University.

These are exactly, precisely the very people 63 million pissed-off Americans hired Donald J. Trump in 2016 to get rid of.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Swalwell’s Live MSNBC Fart Upstages Prince Andrew’s BBC Brain Fart

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Tired of all this #WINNING yet? No? What’s it gonna take? – For the second straight trading day, every major U.S. stock market set a new record high close on Monday. This Trump economy is so resilient that all the Democrats and their toadies in the corrupt news media have essentially stopped trying to talk it into a recession at this point. It’s so bad for the economic news-fakers that MarketWatch ran a story with this headline: “The record stock-market run enters a new phase when beaten-down bears turn bullish.”  Cool.

This really happened. I swear I do not make this stuff up. – In an appearance on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews Monday evening, California’s dimwitted congressman Eric Swalwell let loose with what can only be described as a big ol’ rocket fart on live national television. I kid you not, it was like something you get the morning after eating an extra large order of plastic cheese nachos at a baseball game. Here’s the video clip – watch as he actually pauses between words in order to trumpet his presence.:

You could never make these Democrats up. Not in a million years.

Speaking of televised gaseous emissions, how about that Prince Andrew interview? – There appears to be a global consensus forming that convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein did not kill himself, and that has his former clients and associates very, very worried indeed.

No former pal of Epstein has a higher public profile than Prince Andrew of England’s ridiculous royal family. Andrew’s proclivity for hitting on underage girls has been a very public “secret” for so long that Johnny Carson was telling jokes about it on the Tonight Show as far back as 1984:

Faced with persistent rumors about his long friendship with Epstein and accusations of one of Epstien’s sex slaves that he had been one of her abusers, Prince Andrew decided it would just be a boffo idea to do an interview on BBC to put the whole kerfuffle to rest, and amazingly, the normally fairly sensible Queen Elizabeth apparently agreed.  The disaster that ensued is so epic that the royal family may never recover.

Andrew comes across in the interview as an obvious liar, with all the body language and nervous tics regularly displayed by obvious liars during questioning. The rapid eye-blinking, the shaking of the head while giving affirmative answers, the looking down to the left or up to the right while trying to think up a believable narrative, all of those nervous tics and more are ubiquitous throughout the Prince’s ordeal.

As are some of the most unbelievable “explanations” and Clintonian non-denial denials. When confronted by the BBC interviewer, Emily Maitlis, with the claim by former Epstein captive Virginia Roberts Giuffre that, on one of the several nights he abused her when she was underage, he sweated profusely while dancing with her, Andrew claims that he has, no wait, HAD a “peculiar disorder” in which “I didn’t sweat at the time because I had suffered what I would describe as an overdose of adrenaline in the Falklands War, when I was shot at … it was almost impossible for me to sweat.”

The Falklands War took place in 1982, more than 30 years before Andrew’s alleged dalliances with Giuffre. Pretty sure his adrenalin levels would have returned to normal by then.

As for the increasingly famous photo of the Prince with his arm around Giuffre’s waist and Epstein assistant Ghislaine Maxwell looking on with a smile, Andrew can’t bring himself to absolutely claim that the photo was faked, instead offering the Clinton-like explanation that “I don’t remember that photograph ever being taken … it’s me, but whether that’s my hand …”. Ah, yes, good man, the old faked hand in the photo caper, that’s it. Good show!

Image result for prince andrew giuffre photo

But the capper of all the cappers in this almost unbelievably disastrous interview came when Andrew attempted to explain why, after Epstein had already been convicted for his pedophile activities, he continued to visit his home in New York City, attending a party there as recently as 2010. Andrew’s answers there were that he continued his friendship with Epstein almost reluctantly, at one point saying that it was because he was just “too honorable.”

No kidding – he really said “too honorable.

As if to make it all intentionally more absurd, he claimed that he chose to continue staying at Epstein’s Manhattan lair because it was “convenient.” Yes, one of the most-undeservedly massively wealthy men on earth, a man who could easily afford to rent an entire floor at The Plaza, chose to shack up with a convicted pedophile simply due to its convenience.

The decision by Prince Andrew to conduct this interview has to qualify as the single biggest brain fart in British history.

If you can stand it, here is the full interview for your viewing enjoyment:

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Yovanovitch Ovation Signifies Everything That is Bad About the DC Swamp

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

The highlight of Marie Yovanovitch’s career illustrates everything that is wrong in the DC Swamp. – Those of you who watched last Friday’s fake “impeachment” clown show hearing all the way to the end – my condolences to all 6 of you – will be aware that those assembled in the hearing room’s audience gave ex-Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch a standing ovation as the hearing adjourned.

After all, she had given quite the performance, repeating over and over and over how her removal as the U.S. Ambassador to the Ukraine in April had made her “feel,” and how she had a big case of the sads over having to go to work at a cushy job at Georgetown University where she knocks down a couple hundred grand a year polluting the mushy minds of 18 year-olds with her globalist indoctrination propaganda. That’s a hard life by DC Swamp standards since it might require her to drive 30 minutes each way from and to the luxury townhome she no doubt occupies in Arlington, Alexandria or whatever enclave of like-minded “citizens of the world” she lives in.

Even worse, if her car’s in the shop, she might even have to – gasp! – take the nation’s cleanest and most efficient subway into work every once in awhile, which might cause her to have to mingle with some of the little people who don’t share her status as a part of America’s diplomatic corps. Oh, what a terrible lot in life she now must suffer through, all because of the Bad Orange Man in the White House.

Think about that standing ovation for a moment: Exactly who was present in that hearing room audience? The answer is obvious, isn’t it? The room was filled to the gills with Yovanovitch’s fellow DC Swamp rats, skunks and snakes. Lobbyists, political staffers, campaign advisors, fellow members of the Ivy League-educated “diplomatic corps.” Oh, and don’t forget the reporters and camera people – many of them were standing and applauding, too.

Toss in the corrupt Democrats – and a couple of Republicans as well – sitting on the Committee itself, and you had yourself a real microcosm of almost everything that is wrong with our national government today assembled right there in a single congressional hearing room. The only things missing were representatives from our still-corrupt dumpster fire of an FBI, or representatives from the CIA and other intelligence agencies. You know, someone like Eric Ciaramella.

That hearing room was basically populated by the same people who were in attendance at Nationals Park when President Trump was roundly booed during the 5th game of this year’s world series. Yovanovitch would not have received any similar treatment had her hearing been held in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, where the crowd assembled for the game between Alabama and LSU gave Trump a long standing ovation of his own just a few weeks ago. Nor would she have received a standing O anywhere else out here in Flyover Country, that vast, red 80% of the continental United States that lies between the elitist enclaves along our East and West coasts.

Yovanovitch’s resume is impressive. She has served her country for 33 years in the only way she knows how to do it. The problem is that the only way she knows how to do it is from the globalist mindset, a mindset that places America’s best interests below the interests of he rest of the world. It is the mindset that for the 28 years prior to Trump’s taking office led to the steady diminution of the United States as a global superpower, and to the transfer of many trillions of dollars in American wealth to every tinhorn dictator, Marxist strongman and EU corruptocrat on the planet.

It’s the mindset of the DC Swamp and the corrupt news media that serves as its loyal megaphone. It’s the mindset that leads media hacks like Chris Wallace to characterize Yovanovitch as a “compelling witness.” Because, inside the Beltway, she was totally compelling. But outside the Beltway and between the coasts, not compelling at all.

Ultimately, that disconnect between the mindset of our society’s self-annointed elites and the rest of America – the real America – is why this impeachment coup effort will end up just like the failed Mueller coup attempt: A miserable, epic failure.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Another Focus Group Produces Another Democrat Impeachment Talking Point

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

When you write 1500 words and completely miss the point. – The hacks over at Politico published a long piece about the implosion of the Kamala Harris campaign over the weekend. Harris, of course, was once the star of the Democrat field, the candidate many felt was the natural heir to the Party’s identity politics foundation.

The piece goes after Harris’s campaign manager, some guy named Juan Rodriguez, and her sister, Maya Harris, as the culprits in this disintegrating fairy tale, blaming their internal squabbling and inability to make decisions as the reason why Harris is currently polling around 3-4% in the national polls. But nowhere in all these words and sentences to the writers of the piece get to the real issue, which is that Kamala Harris is a horrible candidate.

She has no discipline, she has no core set of beliefs, she has no ability to communicate in a coherent manner outside of her scripted talking points and she has utterly failed to give voters any sort of compelling reason why they should vote for her over one of the other circus clowns in the field. She’s a terrible candidate, something no campaign manager or group of hangers-on can change.

At the end of the day, the California senator who was rumored to be Barack Obama’s chosen one for this race is no different than Kirsten Gillibrand, a vain politician running for the presidency because she thought she was somehow entitled to the office, and for no other real reason. The Politico piece should have been about 250 words long, which is about what I’ve just written.

Another set of focus groups, another new talking point. This is how the Democrats do “impeachment.” – Last Thursday, as chronicled here at the Campaign Update, San Fran Nan and Bug-eyes Schiff rolled out their “bribery” talking point after testing the word with polls and focus groups. It turned out that “quid pro quo” hit too close to “Quid Pro Joe,” and people just fall asleep whenever Pelosi or Schiff utter the whole “obstruction of congress” nonsense,” so the Democrats needed a new word to describe the fantasy they were trying to construct.

“Blackmail” being an actual English word that most Americans – even Democrats – actually understand the meaning of helped, plus it had all those negative connotations that the man on the street can relate back to episodes of Chicago Law and Law and Order, so it’s just awesome for this purpose.

But another problem came up after the first two days of mindless testimony from three gossips in the diplomatic corps: Everything they said was hearsay. None of the three witnesses actually witnessed anything remotely related to any supposed wrongdoing by the President. Faced with a group of GOP congress members who are actually organized around a set of core messages for once, the Democrats had no effective response to the GOP contention that this is all just gossip and hearsay, mainly because it is just all gossip and hearsay, with much more gossip and hearsay to come.

So, apparently San Fran Nan and Bug-eyes got a focus group or twelve together on Saturday and rolled out this question to them: “Hey, how would you respond if we taunted President Trump to come testify himself?” That apparently produced nodding heads around the rooms, and thus we had the spectacle of San Fran Nan and Chuck Schumer saying this on Sunday:

Pelosi: “If he has information that is exculpatory, that means ex, taking away, culpable, blame, then we look forward to seeing it,” she said in an interview that aired Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Trump “could come right before the committee and talk, speak all the truth that he wants if he wants.”

Schumer: “If Donald Trump doesn’t agree with what he’s hearing, doesn’t like what he’s hearing, he shouldn’t tweet. He should come to the committee and testify under oath. And he should allow all those around him to come to the committee and testify under oath,” Schumer told reporters. He said the White House’s insistence on blocking witnesses from cooperating begs the question: “What is he hiding?”

In other words, in the grand tradition of Democrat politicians trying to corrupt the American system of justice, they now want President Trump to come prove his innocence before their impeachment circus.

Sorry, but that’s not how this works, Nan and Chuck. That’s now any of this works.

But it obviously does well with focus groups, and that’s all any Democrat really cares about. All of which clearly demonstrates one more time how un-serious these people are, and how low their regard is for the health and survival of this country.

It’s despicable. It’s demented. It’s disgraceful and disgusting. But hey, it’s Democrats – you expected something else?

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

The Fake Impeachment Coup Effort Goes Back to at Least April

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Readers who watched Friday’s fake impeachment hearing will likely remember the moment when, after President Trump had released the full transcript of his first call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, Bug-eyes Schiff read the White House’s read-out summary of the call, prepared by staff of the National Security Council, into the record. You will also remember that Bug-eyes dramatically noted that, hey, this NSC summary of the call does not accurately reflect what was actually said on the call.

Specifically, Bug-eyes pointed to this passage from the NSC summary:

“[President Trump] underscored the unwavering support of the United States for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity – within its internationally recognized borders – and expressed his commitment to work together with President-elect Zelensky and the Ukrainian people to implement reforms that strengthen democracy, increase prosperity, and root out corruption.”

Bug-eyes then noted, as his eyes almost bugged right out of his pasty noggin, that the transcript of the call does not indicate that President Trump in fact said any of those things on the call. Naturally, Schiff wants the public to believe that this incorrect read-out summary of the call is somehow a part of a nefarious White House scheme to cover up the President’s “real” conversations with Zelensky.

But there’s a problem with the Democrats’ latest false narrative to frame President Trump: Guess who prepared that read-out summary of that April call? Why, as the Washington Examiner reported on Saturday, that job fell to the NSC’s “Ukraine expert.”‘

Guess who that happens to be? If you said retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who plays the role of the unassailable military guy in this whole charade, you win the prize. This would be the very same Alexander Vindman who tacitly admitted during his Capitol basement interrogation that he believed it was his job to actively undermine and countermand President Trump’s policy towards Ukraine, even as he laughably claimed he faithfully worked to execute that policy.

This would also be the very same Alexander Vindman who pretty much undoubtedly is one of the “sources” for the fake complaint filed by fake whistleblower Eric Ciaramella, the CIA leaker/spy who went right back to the CIA once his role in this fantasy play had been executed and remains gainfully employed there today. Vindman himself remains embedded at the NSC with the apparent full backing of the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who could recall him from his posting at the White House at any time for any reason.

In fact, a good case can be made that it is the Pentagon’s duty to the Commander-in-Chief to act to reassign Vindman to some clerk job in the Pentagon basement, since it is politically impossible for the President to make that happen at this time. Yet, the generals do nothing to remove this human cancer. Think about the implications of that inaction in this whole scenario.

So as we see clearly now, this latest coup plot to remove the President via this impeachment circus did not begin with Bug-eyes and his staff coordinating the complaint with Ciaramella. It began at least in April with Vindman constructing the read-out summary of that call in a way that supports the Democrat/media “coverup” narrative.

It would be a great next step if the Examiner could endeavor to find out who else at the NSC was in the chain of approval for Vindman’s summary. Let’s all remember that President Trump’s National Security Advisor at that time was this guy named John Bolton, who the President got rid of in August.

Oh.

This is not an impeachment, folks. This is a slow-rolling coup d’etat, one that has been moving since at least April, and likely earlier than that. It’s the “back-up plan” to the Mueller “back-up plan.”

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

William Barr Gives a Grand Speech – Now, About that Investigation…

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Attorney General William Barr delivered a hard-hitting speech at the Federalist Society’s National Lawyers Convention on Friday evening. – In the speech, the AG presented a vigorous defense of President Trump and his administration, and a pointed take-down of the Democrat-funded “resistance” and its repugnant, ongoing efforts to destroy the country from within.

It’s more than an hour long, but well worth your time to watch. Below is a video of the speech, followed by key outtakes from the transcript:

Outtakes (full transcript can be read here):

Unfortunately, over the past several decades, we have seen steady encroachment on Presidential authority by the other branches of government.  This process I think has substantially weakened the functioning of the Executive Branch, to the detriment of the Nation.  This evening, I would like to expand a bit on these themes.

One of the more amusing aspects of modern progressive polemic is their breathless attacks on the “unitary executive theory.”  They portray this as some new-fangled “theory” to justify Executive power of sweeping scope. In reality, the idea of the unitary executive does not go so much to the breadth of Presidential power.  Rather, the idea is that, whatever the Executive powers may be, they must be exercised under the President’s supervision.  This is not “new,” and it is not a “theory.”  It is a description of what the Framers unquestionably did in Article II of the Constitution.

So let me turn now to how the Executive is presently faring in these interbranch battles. I am concerned that the deck has become stacked against the Executive.  Since the mid-60s, there has been a steady grinding down of the Executive branch’s authority, that accelerated after Watergate.  More and more, the President’s ability to act in areas in which he has discretion has become smothered by the encroachments of the other branches.

Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they called “The Resistance,” and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver available to sabotage the functioning of his Administration.  Now, “resistance” is the language used to describe insurgency against rule imposed by an occupying military power.  It obviously connotes that the government is not legitimate.  This is a very dangerous – indeed incendiary – notion to import into the politics of a democratic republic.  What it means is that, instead of viewing themselves as the “loyal opposition,” as opposing parties have done in the past, they essentially see themselves as engaged in a war to cripple, by any means necessary, a duly elected government.  

Congress has in recent years also largely abdicated its core function of legislating on the most pressing issues facing the national government.  They either decline to legislate on major questions or, if they do, punt the most difficult and critical issues by making broad delegations to a modern administrative state that they increasingly seek to insulate from Presidential control.

Of course, Congress’s effective withdrawal from the business of legislating leaves it with a lot of time for other pursuits.  And the pursuit of choice, particularly for the opposition party, has been to drown the Executive Branch with “oversight” demands for testimony and documents.  I do not deny that Congress has some implied authority to conduct oversight as an incident to its Legislative Power.  But the sheer volume of what we see today – the pursuit of scores of parallel “investigations” through an avalanche of subpoenas – is plainly designed to incapacitate the Executive Branch, and indeed is touted as such.

In recent years, we have seen substantial encroachment by Congress in the area of executive privilege.  The Executive Branch and the Supreme Court have long recognized that the need for confidentiality in Executive Branch decision-making necessarily means that some communications must remain off limits to Congress and the public.   There was a time when Congress respected this important principle as well.  But today, Congress is increasingly quick to dismiss good-faith attempts to protect Executive Branch equities, labeling such efforts “obstruction of Congress” and holding Cabinet Secretaries in contempt.

In recent years, we have seen substantial encroachment by Congress in the area of executive privilege.  The Executive Branch and the Supreme Court have long recognized that the need for confidentiality in Executive Branch decision-making necessarily means that some communications must remain off limits to Congress and the public.   There was a time when Congress respected this important principle as well.  But today, Congress is increasingly quick to dismiss good-faith attempts to protect Executive Branch equities, labeling such efforts “obstruction of Congress” and holding Cabinet Secretaries in contempt.

One of the ironies of today is that those who oppose this President constantly accuse this Administration of “shredding” constitutional norms and waging a war on the rule of law.  When I ask my friends on the other side, what exactly are you referring to?  I get vacuous stares, followed by sputtering about the Travel Ban or some such thing.  While the President has certainly thrown out the traditional Beltway playbook, he was upfront about that beforehand, and the people voted for him.  What I am talking about today are fundamental constitutional precepts.  The fact is that this Administration’s policy initiatives and proposed rules, including the Travel Ban, have transgressed neither constitutional, nor traditional, norms, and have been amply supported by the law and patiently litigated through the Court system to vindication.

Indeed, measures undertaken by this Administration seem a bit tame when compared to some of the unprecedented steps taken by the Obama Administration’s aggressive exercises of Executive power – such as, under its DACA program, refusing to enforce broad swathes of immigration law.

Conservatives, on the other hand, do not seek an earthly paradise.  We are interested in preserving over the long run the proper balance of freedom and order necessary for healthy development of natural civil society and individual human flourishing.  This means that we naturally test the propriety and wisdom of action under a “rule of law” standard.  The essence of this standard is to ask what the overall impact on society over the long run if the action we are taking, or principle we are applying, in a given circumstance was universalized – that is, would it be good for society over the long haul if this was done in all like circumstances?

For these reasons, conservatives tend to have more scruple over their political tactics and rarely feel that the ends justify the means.  And this is as it should be, but there is no getting around the fact that this puts conservatives at a disadvantage when facing progressive holy far, especially when doing so under the weight of a hyper-partisan media.

In essence, the Court has taken the rules that govern our domestic criminal justice process and carried them over and superimposed them on the Nation’s activities when it is engaged in armed conflict with foreign enemies.  This rides roughshod over a fundamental distinction that is integral to the Constitution and integral to the role played by the President in our system.

This is a very dangerous and indeed incendiary notion to import into the politics of a Democratic republic. The fact is, that, yes, while the president has certainly thrown out the traditional beltway playbook and punctilio, he was upfront about what he was going to do and the people decided that he was going to serve as president.

[End of Outtakes]

There is much, much more, but these outtakes highlight the essence of the speech, which is powerful, incredibly well-thought and well-drafted, and shows without doubt that Barr has a clear-eyed understanding of the war the disloyal, seditious left is waging on the foundations of the American Republic.

But at the end of the day, this is just a speech and these words, while great, are just words. They only will ultimately have real meaning if they are intended to serve as the prelude for the long-delayed Horowitz Report to be finally issued and for the investigation of U.S. Attorney John Durham to start bearing fruit in terms of public perp walks, indictments and most importantly of all, convictions involving the high Obama officials who created and led this ongoing coup d’etat.

How about it, Mr. Barr?

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Marie Yovanovitch Just Wants to Live in a Hallmark Movie – Is That too Much to Ask?

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Tired of all this #WINNING yet? Not even close. – Every stock market index set a new record-high close on Friday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average closing above 28,000 for the first time, a level that no Democrat on the face of the earth could have imagined just three short years ago. Media outlets like CNBC of course attributed the weeks astonishing gains to good news on the trade front, which is partially valid.

But let’s not kid ourselves here: Traders keep up with politics very closely, and they were also reacting to the confirmation that, in their ongoing three-ring fake impeachment circus, Bug-eyes Schiff and San Fran Nan are holding a big bag filled with nothing. Or maybe San Francisco sidewalk poop. Either way, this game – and sadly, this very serious abuse of our system is just a game to the Democrats – is not going well for the bad guys.

It isn’t going well even though they got some unanticipated help from President Donald Trump himself on Friday morning, when he stupidly intervened in the pointless, overwrought testimony by ex-Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch with this:

Dear Mr. President: We love you, but man, your role model Sun Tzu would have definitely advised against that particular move. That’s not 4-D chess, that’s a Jason Garrett 4th-down call with the game on the line. When your opponent is in the process of destroying itself, just get out of the way.

It wasn’t so much the content of the tweet, but the timing. Sure, Yovanovitch was coming across as a sympathetic witness, but mainly to those who wanted to be sympathetic to her in the first place. Plus, she was at that moment in time being questioned by Bug-eyes, the most notorious pathological liar and least sympathetic figure in the entire U.S. congress. Why interfere with that?

Schiff’s eyes damn near popped right out of his pasty face as he read the tweet to the national TV audience, knowing that the President had just handed him and his corrupt media toadies what will become the narrative for this entire weekend.

Other than that single moment, Yovanovitch’s entire day boiled down to essentially this:

Yovanovitch:

“I was told…”

“I heard that…”

“It was my understanding…”

“I felt…”

“I was concerned…”

Question from Democrat lawyer and Schiff and every other Democrat on the Commitee:

“How did that make you feel?”

Yovanovitch:

“I don’t know…”

“It made me feel terrible…”

“I felt intimidated…”

“Why did they say mean things about me…”

“I’m brave, just like the diplomats at Benghazi (seriously, she compared herself to those who came back in body bags thanks to Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s mendacity)…”

Question from Democrat lawyer and Schiff and every other Democrat on the Commitee:

“How did that make you feel?”

The entire day boiled down to how Ms. Yovanovitch feels. She was there for no reason other than a pathetic attempt to garner sympathy from the public.

Illinois Congressman Mike Quigley, the simpleton who told us on Wednesday that hearsay evidence is all like, superior to first-hand evidence and stuff, or something, actually boiled Yovanovitch’s day right down to its very essence in his questioning, which amounted to:

– It’s a Hallmark movie (yes, he actually said this, too)
– The ambassador’s feelings have been hurt
– It was not her preference to be fired.

Oh. Okay. Cue the bad Christmas music, someone.

Image may contain: 2 people, people standing and text

The day will do no lasting damage to President Trump, even with Bret Baier and Chris Wallace urging the Democrats to somehow turn the tweet into an article of impeachment claiming “witness tampering” (yes, they both actually said that, too). But the tweet did throw the committee Republicans off their game. It was a needless interruption into a day that was destined to go just like Wednesday had gone, with a witness who came off as “sympathetic” to corrupt media hacks and other DC swamp skunks, but who would do nothing to move American public opinion, which, again, IS WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT.

No summation of the day’s events would be complete without including a couple of clips from Republican Cong. Elise Stefanik, who is quickly turning into a major force with her questioning in this process.

First, Stefanik gets Yovanovitch to admit that she was prepped by the Obama Administration to answer questions about Joe and Hunter Biden’s influence racket related to corrupt Ukrainian gas company Burisma:

Second, watch as Sefanik almost literally undresses Bug-eyes before the nation’s eyes. It is a true tour de force for the ages:

Beautiful.

One last word here: The Republicans have got to replace their staff lawyer, Steve Castor, with someone who knows what he or she is doing. I’m sure Castor is a fine committee counsel, but he is just god-awful on television. This guy has more rabbit holes to run down than Bugs Bunny, and he is clearly not at all comfortable in this role. The Democrats had the foresight to hire contract counsel, Lawfare attorney Daniel Goldman, just for this impeachment process. Goldman hasn’t been great, but he has been more effective than Castor.

Devin Nunes has this entire weekend to go find an attorney who actually knows how to question a witness in a live hearing. There are about 10,000 of them practicing in Washington, DC. I’d bet dozens of them have been knocking down his door the past few days. Hire one of them, Mr. Chairman.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

New Democrat Polling Gives us a New Impeachment Narrative

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Now  the Democrats’ handy poll-tested and focus-grouped word is “bribery.” – “Quid pro quo” never did work: It was too clumsy and all in Latin and stuff. And nobody was buying “obstruction of congress,” which is not even a real thing. So, San Fran Nan and Bug-eyes Schiff got their pollsters out on the job making calls and convened some focus groups to find them a handy new word to describe exactly what it is they’re accusing the President of the United States of doing.

This is how the Democrats really do this stuff, folks. No kidding. Everything they do, every word San Fran Nan utters in public, is based on data from polls and focus groups. They literally never do anything real anymore – haven’t for about 27 years now, in fact, since the Clintons rose to power.

The problem for them, though, is that polling and focus-grouping is a fool’s game, the most completely inexact science this side of global warming. You would think they might have learned that lesson back in 2016, when they had to eat the cost of all those pre-planned Hillary Clinton victory parties that all the polls and focus groups told them to go ahead and pay for.

But here they are, still buying in to their failed process, even after the implosion of “Russia collusion” and “obstruction of justice” and the Stormy Daniels payoff and all the myriad smears of Brett Kavanaugh and every other poll-and-focus-group-tested tactic they’ve deployed over the past four years.

Armed with her latest poll and focus group data, San Fran Nan put on her red dress and held another stammering, doddering presser at the capital last night, during which she revealed her fancy new word:
“Bribery.”

Here’s a clip:

Yes, friends, now we are supposed to believe that Donald Trump, on that July 25 call – the transcript of which we have all had the ability to actually read for ourselves for the last 6 weeks – actually “bribed” Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky. Never mind that that literally is nowhere to be found or even remotely implied in the transcript of that call – San Fran Nan and her little pathologically-lying toady Adam Schiff say it’s bribery, so hey, it’s bribery. Plus, they have a parade of non-witnesses who are, like Bill Taylor and dapper dandy George Kent, going to testify about their third-and-fourth-hand hearsay gossip to back up the Democrats’ latest big, meaningless word.

You want to know who really did commit real, actual, by-the-book bribery of Ukrainian officials? Joe Biden. You don’t have to believe me, you can watch him brag about outright, unabashed bribery with $1 billion of American taxpayer money right here:

That’s real, true, unabashed bribery, committed by a sitting Vice President in order to protect his ne’er-do-well son, Hunter, who was getting massive payoffs by an utterly corrupt Ukrainian natural gas company called Burisma.

This, of course, is the Democrats’ favorite Saul Alinsky tactic of “projection” – accusing your enemies of doing all the bad things you in fact have done. It’s despicable, it’s demented, it’s disgusting. But hey, these are Democrats we’re talking about here. Did you really expect anything else?

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Posts navigation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 119 120 121
Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: