Advertisements
Open post

God Save us From Reliance on “Experts”

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

God save us from reliance on “experts”. – David Epstein has a fantastic piece in the June issue of the Atlantic, one which illustrates why we “normals” out here in Flyover Country should avoid listening to predictions made by “experts”.

Regular readers will know that I make fun of “experts” and their persistent wrongness all the time, especially those in the fields of politics, “climate change” and economics. Epstein’s piece doesn’t directly address those specific fields in any detail, but he does illustrate major reasons why media-recognized “experts” are so consistently-wrong about pretty much everything.

How many consecutive months do we have to read headlines like “Trump economy adds 263,000 jobs in April, far surpassing expert projections” before we stop listening to “experts” on the economy? How many times must we see headlines like “Australia’s conservative party shocks pollsters and pundits with easy victory” before we accept the reality that almost all pollsters and pundits suffer from a chronic anti-conservative bias? How many times must we reflect on predictions by climate “experts” that the polar ice caps would be gone by 2015, that snow would end by 2020, that New York City would be under water by 2025 before we realize that these people are just a bunch of politically-motivated scam artists?

Epstein’s piece is long but well worth reading in full, so I highly recommend you all do so. But here are some key snippets that tell us all we really need to know about “experts” in any field:

The integrators [those who had expertise in multiple fields] outperformed their colleagues in pretty much every way, but especially trounced them on long-term predictions. Eventually, Tetlock bestowed nicknames (borrowed from the philosopher Isaiah Berlin) on the experts he’d observed: The highly specialized hedgehogs knew “one big thing,” while the integrator foxes knew “many little things.”

Hedgehogs are deeply and tightly focused. Some have spent their career studying one problem. Like Ehrlich and Simon, they fashion tidy theories of how the world works based on observations through the single lens of their specialty. Foxes, meanwhile, “draw from an eclectic array of traditions, and accept ambiguity and contradiction,” Tetlock wrote. Where hedgehogs represent narrowness, foxes embody breadth.

Incredibly, the hedgehogs performed especially poorly on long-term predictions within their specialty. They got worse as they accumulated experience and credentials in their field. The more information they had to work with, the more easily they could fit any story into their worldview.

One study compiled a decade of annual dollar-to-euro exchange-rate predictions made by 22 international banks: Barclays, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, and others. Each year, every bank predicted the end-of-year exchange rate. The banks missed every single change of direction in the exchange rate. In six of the 10 years, the true exchange rate fell outside the entire range of all 22 bank forecasts.

Tetlock, along with his wife and collaborator, the psychologist Barbara Mellers, ran a team named the Good Judgment Project. Rather than recruit decorated experts, they issued an open call for volunteers. After a simple screening, they invited 3,200 people to start forecasting. Among those, they identified a small group of the foxiest forecasters—bright people with extremely wide-ranging interests and unusually expansive reading habits, but no particular relevant background—and weighted team forecasts toward their predictions. They destroyed the competition.

And here is the real killshot:

Tetlock and Mellers found that not only were the best forecasters foxy as individuals, but they tended to have qualities that made them particularly effective collaborators. They were “curious about, well, really everything,” as one of the top forecasters told me.

“Curious about…everything.” Think about that for a moment: My most persistent criticism of both pollsters and pundits is that they are singularly lacking in curiosity. They are stuck in their little New York City or Inside-the-Beltway echo chambers and never make any effort to venture out of them. They are comfortable; they are content; they love existing in a tiny, insulated world in which they are recognized as somehow being someone special. To venture out of that comfort zone is to risk that feeling of special-ness.

The average margin of error among pollsters in Wisconsin in 2016 was 6 percentage points. Yet, the conceit of every one of those “expert” pollsters is their methods produce results with only a 2-3 point “margin of error.” If you point that out to them, you invariably get some flippant insult or sarcastic retort, but never any sort of thoughtful, introspective admission that their methods are frankly crap.

The same is true of pundits and journalists.  Charles Krauthamer, who I admired throughout his career and life, was wrong about literally every aspect of the GOP’s 2015-16 nominating contest in general, and Donald Trump specifically. In that studious and stubborn wrongness, he had plenty of company. Pretty much every other recognized Inside-the-Beltway pundit was similarly wrong.

These folks were 180 degrees wrong because they never ventured outside of the Beltway to actually talk to some Trump supporters and try to figure out who they really were and what they were really thinking. That same refusal to learn was also shared by all pollsters except for Scott Rasmussen and pretty much every working reporter and editor in every national media outlet. They all hated being constantly proved wrong, hated the people who were responsible for their wrongness, and thus refused to make any effort to learn about them and understand how they think. They clung to their biases and preconceived misconceptions because are the very things that drive their own personal self-esteem.

To this day, in fact, two-and-a-half years after the 2016 election, almost none of these “experts” have ever made that effort. They remain ignorant, hived up in their echo chambers, and thus remain constantly wrong about pretty much everything.

So, why do the media-recognized “experts” seem to be consistently wrong about pretty much everything?

Because they are. It isn’t your imagination.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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

The Week in Review, Part II: William Barr Lays Down the Gauntlet

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

[The week just past as seen through the @GDBlackmon Twitter feed. This is the second of two parts. Part I can be viewed at this link.]

As Friday dawned, it was pure panic time for the Obama-era Deep State Cabal.

But no matter what else was happening, the Climate Scam never rests.

This happened, and literally no one in the American fake news media reported it. No surprise there, right? Right.

I took time out from watching the William Barr interview to talk a little Blackjack, because my attention span is shorter than a ferret’s.

It was the week when the most consistently-funny comedy in the history of television aired a pitch-perfect series finale, and this is what leftwing activists took away from it. What a sad and pathetic existence these people lead. 

This also happened.

Nobody does parody – on Twitter or anywhere else – better than the Babylon Bee. Nobody.

This huge bit of Friday news also went largely-unremarked by our fake news media.

This pretty well sums up Barr’s interview with Bill Hemmer.

The final season of Game of Thrones had turned into a raging, dragon-fueled dumpster fire.

Finally, we will close with my favorite Twitter meme of the week. Don’t know who came up with it, but I wish I did so I could give them credit.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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 Week in Review, PART I: More Beto Fails and Deep State Panic

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

[The week just past as seen through the @GDBlackmon Twitter feed.]

The week began with another Climate Scammer proving that Climate Change is nothing more or less than a global religious cult. Things got better – much, much better – from there.

Hey, y’all! The “world’s fastest bullet train” goes a whopping 224 mph, not even half the speed of the typical airliner. Note to @AOC and fans of her nitwitted Green New Deal: This is NOT a workable substitute for air travel. Full stop.

This was the week we got to meet the “new Beto.” We discovered that not much had changed. Not much at all.

It was the week that Michigan Democrat Rashida Tlaib told us how she really feels about the Holocaust, and boy was it revealing.

It was maybe more revealing about the true sympathies of the Democrat leadership than Tlaib, in fact, given that no thinking person could have held any doubts about Ms. Tlaib’s antisemitism. 

The disgrace who is Tlaib was so obvious that even CNN felt the need to be temporarily honest about it.

It was the week Tim Conway died, and America became a little less amusing.

John Nolte captured everyone’s true hopes and aspirations for the fate of National Teenage Drama Queen James Comey.

It was the week we found out that this guy had already been investigating the investigators for a period of weeks, and we were just fine with that.

Unsurprisingly, it did not take long for the Democrat/Media smear machine to kick things into gear. *sigh*

Who was the last president who had the balls to travel to Louisiana to celebrate the great strength and progress of our nation’s oil and gas industry with a bunch of guys wearing hard hats? Hint: There is no correct answer to this question.

Oh, hey, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said something incredibly ignorant again. In other news, water continued to freeze at 32 degrees Fahrenheit.

Not much to add here.

What do you mean, “as if”, Brent?

The folks at the Babylon Bee were on an epic roll this past week, which is just par for the course.

It was a week the Deep State skunks and snakes spent desperately trying – and failing – to secure favorable narratives for themselves as the wheels of justice at William Barr’s DOJ continue grinding.

And I’m going to have to cut this off right there, because WordPress has apparently run out of steam here. I’ll do the rest of the week in Part II to follow shortly.

 

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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

Comey Lashes Out as Another Nadler “Deadline” Comes and Goes

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

Jabba The Nadler keeps setting deadlines, and they just keep getting ignored. – House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler is very fond of “deadlines.” Unfortunately, he doesn’t appear to realize he has no authority to enforce most of them.

Oh, wait, before we get into this, watch Nadler smack his way through a breakfast interview with Democrat activist John Harwood, if you can stand it.:

For those of you who still like to read stuff, here is the transcript, courtesy of Rush Limbaugh:

NADLER: (restaurant noise) (lips smack) It’s… I mean, the right… (chewing) Ummm… (lips smack) Uh… (smacking lips) (unintelligible) That’s right. (lips smack) But, you know, we fought a — a — a Revolutionary War over that. (lips smack) It affects people’s lives ultimately. (lips smack) And, in fact, (lips smack) he may be… (lips smack) If he is destroying (lips smack) all the norms. (lips smack) and (lips smack) it’s a very different crisis. (lips smack) I think so. (lips smack) I mean, we have to hold hearings (lips smack) and not just on, (lips smack) you know, collusion with the — the Russians. (chewing) I believe that. (lips smack) I do believe that. (glasses clink) (lips smack) Donald Trump is a con man. (lips smack) He lies all the time. (lips smack) (swallows) Say, it’s down the road. I do. (glasses clink) (lips smack) Nixon (lips smack) never (chewing/swallows) never… (lips smack) …to the separation of powers. (lips smack) (glasses clink) I think that’s nonsense. (lips smack)

Ok, grossed out enough now? This man is at the tip of the Democrats’ entire “strategy” spear for 2019. How pathetic is that?

Back to the topic at hand: Thus far in 2019, Nadler has set deadlines on the production of President Donald Trump’s tax returns; on the production of the un-redacted Mueller Report; on the production of all supporting documents to the Mueller Report; on the production of documents from a vast array of Trump White House personnel and associates; on forcing Attorney General William Barr to testify; and twice now on forcing Robert Mueller to come testify live and in person before his Kangaroo Court Committee.

Pretty much all of these “deadlines” have passed without consequence. There is a good reason why that’s the case: Because Nadler is abusing his authority and attempting to assert powers he does not possess in his role as Chairman of the Kangaroo Court.

Nadler contends that all the subpoenas and deadlines and browbeating of potential witnesses through the media are all a part of his committee’s “oversight” authority. This is utter nonsense and he knows it. The Judiciary Committee has oversight authority to ensure the Department of Justice and all of its various arms are carrying out its duties under the law. The Judiciary Committee’s oversight authority does not give Nadler and his evil minions the right to do a re-boot of the entire 2-year, $35 million Mueller Investigation.

It is for this reason that Nadler’s subpoenas and deadlines are being ignored and will continue to be ignored. It is for this reason that Attorney General Barr ignored Nadler’s subpoena a couple of weeks ago, and will probably continue to do so.

It is for this reason that Mueller ignored Nadler’s initial May 15 deadline to testify, and it is for this reason that Nadler was forced to admit on Friday that Mueller will also most likely ignore his May 23 deadline to testify. In fact, it is for this reason that Mueller may never testify before Nadler’s Kangaroo Court at all.

Oh, yeah, there’s another reason why Mueller may never appear before Nadler’s committee, and it is buried all the way down in the last paragraph in the Politico story linked above:

Republicans eyeing a Mueller hearing see it as a chance to press the special counsel on the underlying motivations for the investigation and his reliance on FBI agents who shared anti-Trump text messages.

See, there are 17 Republicans on this Committee, and House rules require Nadler to let them question witnesses too. Does anyone really believe that Robert Mueller is going to voluntarily subject himself to questioning from the likes of Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Louie Gohmert and John Ratcliffe?

Not likely.

Skunk Alert! – You can always tell who’s feeling guilty by looking for who is protesting the loudest. James Comey, our National Teenage Drama Queen, just can’t help himself. Last night, he responded to William Barr’s interview on Fox News – in which Barr never even mentioned Comey’s name – with this tweet:

I titled my piece on Barr’s interview “It’s Panic Time for the Deep State” for a reason. Comey personifies it.

You have the right to remain silent, Mr. Comey. You might want to take advantage of it for awhile.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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

About That January 6 Meeting Barr Referred To…

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

In my rush to get a partial transcript of William Barr’s interview on Fox News this morning posted up, I failed to include any explanatory notes. I thought it was more important to get the information out there for those who don’t have access to a TV during a workday than to take time for an analysis, particularly since the great majority of what Barr had to say is self-explanatory. But this has created confusion with some readers, particularly related to the “January 6” meeting to which Mr. Barr refers in the passage below:

Hemmer: Republicans have said for months that Brennan, Clapper, maybe Comey have had it in for Trump. Do you believe that’s the case?

Barr: “Again, I’m not gonna speculate about their motives.”

Hemmer: In the period between election day and the inauguration, did anyone in government take action to justify their decisions?

Barr:I think there were some very strange developments during that period – that’s one of the things we want to look into. Such as the handling of the meeting on January 6 between the intelligence chiefs and the President and the leaking of information subsequent to that meeting.”

Hemmer: Was that meeting in New York City? In Trump Tower?

Barr: “Yes.”

Hemmer: What questions do you have about what happened that day?

Barr: [smiling] “Again, I’m not gonna get into that. It’s one of the things we need to look at.”

[End]

Here is a video of the full Barr Interview for your viewing pleasure:

 

Ok, so, what “January 6” meeting is he talking about, and why is it important? Well, it’s very important, and the fact that Mr. Barr is focused on that meeting to the extent that he gives it specific mention in this interview is very telling.

The meeting in question took place on January 6, 2017 at Trump Tower in New York City. The ostensible purpose of the meeting was to give the then-President-elect a full “intelligence briefing” from the Obama Administration’s senior intelligence advisors.

Backstory:

  • Less than a week before, either the New York Times or Washington Post – I forget which and does it really matter? – had run a hit piece claiming Trump was going to come into office unprepared because he had yet to accept this meeting. Trump famously stated that he did not need to be briefed by these skunks “because I’m smart.”
  • It is key to remember that by that time, Trump already knew that the Obama flunkies had been spying on his campaign and transition team, because NSA Director Mike Rogers had informed him of that reality shortly after Election Day. The briefing from Rogers prompted Trump to move his transition headquarters out of Trump Tower to a nearby resort property he owns.
  • This no doubt enraged James Comey, James Clapper and John Brennan, and they redoubled their efforts to press Trump for this “briefing” meeting. Trump finally relented and scheduled the meeting for January 6.
  • Present for the meeting were FBI Director Comey, CIA Director Brennan, Rogers and a representative the Office of Director of National Intelligence.  Clapper was then the DNI, but was not at the meeting personally. This is important, so remember it.
  • It was at this meeting that Comey informed Trump of the existence and basic content of the infamous Steele dossier, which by this time had already been used twice as the almost-sole justification for FISA warrants to spy on Trump officials.
  • Comey and Brennan have publicly argued in recent days about which of them insisted upon including this bogus dossier in this meeting – neither of them wants to accept responsibility for that decision, probably due to all the speculation that it was used in order to frighten and intimidate the incoming President.
  • Also remember that Trey Gowdy told Fox News last week that Comey and Brennan created an email trail leading up to this meeting that Gowdy believes will be incredibly damaging to both men once it is revealed.

Other key points here:

  • The January 6 meeting came a day after Comey, Brennan and Clapper, and reportedly Deputy AG Sally Yates as well, had briefed President Obama and AG Loretta Lynch. What do you suppose was discussed at that meeting?
  • Comey testified to congress that his “mission” – his word – for the Jan. 6 meeting was to let Trump know about the existence of the Steele Dossier. Who gave him that “mission”?
  • Comey testifed under oath that the reason he did not inform Trump that the dossier was – in Comey’s words – “salacious and unverified” in this meeting is because it was “not my mission for this meeting.”  Again, who gave him that “mission”?
  • Important to note here that above Comey in the Obama Administration’s pecking order sat Loretta Lynch, Brennan, Clapper, Yates and Barack Hussein Obama his own self. Any of those folks had the authority to assign Comey that “mission” for the Jan. 6 meeting.
  • We know that Comey left that meeting, called Clapper and said “Mission accomplished.”
  • Later that day, we know that someone leaked the contents of the Steele Dossier to CNN and CNN began reporting on its existence. Speculation here is that CNN actually already had the dossier in-hand well before that, but insisted it wasn’t news-worthy unless the incoming president had been informed of its existence. [“Mission Accomplished.”]
  • Shortly after that, Clapper was rewarded with a big contributor’s contract by CNN. CNN actually won awards for its fake reporting on the fake dossier.

Given all of that, does it make more sense to you when you see William Barr say this?:

I think there were some very strange developments during that period – that’s one of the things we want to look into. Such as the handling of the meeting on January 6 between the intelligence chiefs and the President and the leaking of information subsequent to that meeting.”

That’s why the Jan. 6, 2017 meeting at Trump Tower is a very, very important event in all of this. You unwind the discussions within the Obama Administration cabal that took place in advance of and right after that meeting, you have the key to the entire scheme.

Image may contain: David Keane, smiling, meme and eyeglasses, text that says 'I'M HERE TO INDICT THE DEEP STATE AND CHEW BUBBLEGUM ....AND I'M ALL OUTTA BUBBLEGUM'

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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

Read the Key Quotes From William Barr Interview on Fox News

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

Here are the highlights from AG William Barr’s interview with Bill Hemmer on Fox News Friday morning. This is a big deal.:

“This [The FBI spying on the Trump Campaign] was handled at the very senior levels of these agencies. It wasn’t handled in the ordinary way.”

“We have a number of investigations underway.”

“I’ve been trying to get answers to the questions, and I’ve found that a lot of the answers have been inadequate and some of the explanations I’ve gotten don’t hang together. In a sense, I have more questions today than when I first started.”

“People have to find out what the government was doing during that period. If we’re worried about foreign influence, for the very same reason we should be worried about whether government officials abuse their power and put their thumb on the scale. . . . I’m not saying that happened, but it’s something we have to look at.”

Cutaway to Devin Nunes:

“What you’re seeing is a real attorney general who is not going to take this nonsense that the Clinton Campaign started.” – Devin Nunes, in a cutaway from the interview.

“This is all about narrative-building by the left to cover up what they did. The media is culpable for this nonsense.” – Devin Nunes

“Bob Mueller knew the day he walked in the door that there was no evidence of Trump/Russia collusion.” – Devin Nunes

Back to Barr:

“Well, I think it’s a laughable charge, and it’s being made to discredit me, partly because they may be concerned about the outcome of the review. Obviously, you can look at my testimony and can see on its face that there is nothing inaccurate about it.”  William Barr, on San Fran Nan’s absurd charge that he lied to congress.

Hemmer: “When you took this job, did you think Democrats would make you a target?”

Barr: “Yes…but I felt I was in a position where this kind of criticism wouldn’t bother me much.”

Hemmer: What about the contempt charge from Congress?

Barr: Well, that’s part of the political game, the political circus that’s being played out. it doesn’t surprise me.”

Hemmer: You called it a circus. Do you feel threatened?

Barr: “No, I don’t feel threatened.

Hemmer: How do you think Brennan and Clapper handled the Russia investigation?

Barr: “I don’t want to speculate…I know some of the facts, but it’s premature to be discussing them.”

Hemmer: Can you tell us what the Steel Dossier had to do with their investigation?

Barr: “That’s one of the questions we’re going to have to look at. It’s a very unusual situation to have opposition research like that – especially one that on its face had a number of clear mistakes and a somewhat jejune analysis – and to use that to conduct counterintelligence against an American political campaign is a strange development. I’m not sure what role it played, but that’s something we’ll have to look at.”

Hemmer: Do you smell a rat in this?

Barr: “I don’t know if I’d describe it as a rat. I would just say that the answers I’m getting are not sufficient.

Hemmer: Republicans have said for months that Brennan, Clapper, maybe Comey have had it in for Trump. Do you believe that’s the case?

Barr: “Again, I’m not gonna speculate about their motives.”

Hemmer: In the period between election day and the inauguration, did anyone in government take action to justify their decisions?

Barr: “I think there were some very strange developments during that period – that’s one of the things we want to look into. Such as the handling of the meeting on January 6 between the intelligence chiefs and the President and the leaking of information subsequent to that meeting.”

Hemmer: Was that meeting in New York City? In Trump Tower?

Barr: “Yes.”

Hemmer: What questions do you have about what happened that day?

Barr: [smiling] “Again, I’m not gonna get into that. It’s one of the things we need to look at.”

Hemmer: Can you characterize how far advanced you are in looking into that meeting?

Barr: “We’re still in the stage of gathering all the information.”

Hemmer: Did you consider possible witness tampering on the part of President Trump once you got the Mueller Report?

Barr: “That’s a misconception. He [Don McGann] was not asked to change his testimony. That was a reaction to a press story in the New York Times that claimed that Trump had told him to fire Mueller. Trump was mad at the word “fire” and claimed he had never directed McGann to fire Mueller. And in fact, elsewhere the report does say that McGann was told by Trump to talk to Rosenstein to complain about conflicts of interest Mueller had and have Mueller removed for conflicts of interest.”

[Interview ends]

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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

It’s Panic Time for the Deep State

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

Someone needs to tell her the definition of the word “punish”. – Emily Ratajkowski, who is I guess a model, posted nude photos of herself on social media yesterday. Which apparently is not an uncommon thing for this particular individual. But this time, she says she has a reason.  That reason is…wait for it…oh, you gotta wait for this one…TO PUNISH OLD WHITE MEN in Alabama who passed the anti-abortion bill that was signed into law this week.  I swear I do not make this stuff up.

What is it about being a radical leftist celebrity that makes a person hopelessly stupid? Or does the stupid come first? It’s one of life’s eternal mysteries.

In other stupid leftist celebrity news… – Actor Jason Bateman swore on Thursday that he would never work in Georgia again if the so-called “Heartbeat Bill” now being considered in the legislature there becomes law. No Jason Bateman? No Alyssa Milano? No Chelsea Handler? NO CHER???? Hey, these Georgians have figured out the secret to happiness.

True, whether you agree with the policy or not. – Alabama just became a sanctuary state for babies.

Don’t expect the Supreme Court to weigh in. – Alabama Republicans are hoping this law will make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court to become the vehicle that leads to the reversal of the Roe v. Wade decision. Don’t expect that to happen.

The most likely scenario is that this law will be ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge, that decision will be upheld by a court of appeals, and the John Roberts Court will refuse to hear the case.Even if the Supreme Court were to hear the case, you should expect John Roberts to do what he did with Obamacare, which is to twist himself into a tight little pretzel of illogic to side with the court’s four leftist judges.

John Roberts is not who everyone thought he was when he was nominated by President George W. Bush.

President Trump just tweeted this while I was typing this piece up this morning.:

Perhaps he had just seen Attorney General William Barr’s interview with Fox News’s Bill Hemmer, which airs this morning at 9:00 ET. Here is a passage from that interview released by Fox last night [emphasis added]:

“I’ve been trying to get answers to the questions, and I’ve found that a lot of the answers have been inadequate and some of the explanations I’ve gotten don’t hang together,” Barr told Fox News’ Bill Hemmer in an interview set to air Friday on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom.” “In a sense, I have more questions today than when I first started.”

When asked by Hemmer what does not hang together, Barr responded: “Some of the explanations of what occurred.”

“Why does that matter?” Hemmer asked.

“People have to find out what the government was doing during that period,” Barr responded. “If we’re worried about foreign influence, for the very same reason we should be worried about whether government officials abuse their power and put their thumb on the scale. . . . I’m not saying that happened, but it’s something we have to look at.”

Expect emergency narrative-setting sessions with John Brennan on MSNBC and James Clapper on CNN later today. Also expect America’s National Teenage Drama Queen James Comey to post something odd on Twitter.

We should probably also expect the New York Times to reach into its bag of negative stuff about President Trump and belch it out this evening. It’s panic time.

High-powered defense lawyers in Washington, DC will be doing a land office business today.

RIP, Grumpy Cat.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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

Trump Cancels California Rail Boondoggle Funding

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

In a move that is certain to enrage the perpetually-enraged political left and our fake news media, the Trump Administration today moved to rescind a portion of the $3.5 billion in federal funds previously dedicated to California’s disastrous high-speed rail boondoggle.  In a letter to Brian Kelly, Director of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, Federal Railroad Administration Director Ronald Batory had this to say:

“This letter provides notice to the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) intends to terminate Cooperative Agreement No. FR­ HSR-0118-12-01-01 (Agreement) effective March 5, 2019. Following termination, FRA also intends to promptly de-obligate the full $928,620,000 obligated under the Agreement.

FRA has determined that CHSRA has materially failed to comply with the terms of the Agreement and has failed to make reasonable progress on the Project (as defined in the Agreement), significantly endangering substantial performance . Considering this determination, FRA intends to exercise its right to terminate the Agreement, consistent with Section 23 of the Agreement.”

A link to the full document can be found here, but you get the drift.

In a February 19 tweet, President Trump made it clear, when California Governor Gavin Newsom canceled 2/3rds of the planned project, that he intends to rescind the entire $3.5 billion:

California has been forced to cancel the massive bullet train project after having spent and wasted many billions of dollars. They owe the Federal Government three and a half billion dollars. We want that money back now. Whole project is a “green” disaster!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 14, 2019

Newsom responded to the threat in typical haughty fashion with a tweet of his own:

Fake news. We’re building high-speed rail, connecting the Central Valley and beyond. This is CA’s money, allocated by Congress for this project. We’re not giving it back. The train is leaving the station — better get on board! (Also, desperately searching for some wall $$??) https://t.co/9hxEfEX8Vm

— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) February 14, 2019

Well, the ball is now in the Governor’s court. We can be sure the wailing will be loud, dishonest and totally coordinated with our fake news media. Because that’s how Democrats operate in America today.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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

Watch Loser Stacey Abrams Self-Identify as a Viable Presidential Candidate

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

Democrat Stacey Abrams, who still self-identifies herself as Georgia’s governor despite her 55,000-vote loss last November to Republican Brian Kemp, now self-identifies as a viable presidential candidate, despite not even being in the race.

Watch this clip of her interview on MSNBC from earlier today:

As a service to those of you who still like to read stuff, I spent 20 minutes of my own life compiling a verbatim transcript of this 52-second clip. I’ve also included another minute or so of dialogue from a longer version of the interview with MSNBC host Hallie Jackson, in order to give you a more, ummm, fullsome flavor of the self-absorbed also-ran’s thinking.

You gluttons for punishment can review the longer clip here. Warning: Most of the interview is all kinds of nonsense about Abrams’ current project to ensure that non-citizens of our nation are counted in next year’s census. If you’re interested in that, fine. If you aren’t, fast-forward to the 4:50 mark to focus on Ms. Abrams’ fantasy-based presidential aspirations.

Here’s the transcript:

=======================================

Hallie Jackson here. I want to ask you about another big issue. Are you prepared to shut the door on a presidential run right now?

Abrams: No, I’m not. Again, as I’ve said before, I’m watching to see what happens, I think we’ve got a robust crop of candidates and I think they’re having important conversations, but my mission is to make certain that we are keeping that attention focused all the way through the campaign. And so I’m gonna keep watching and decide if I need to jump in.

Jackson: You’ve said before that you’ll be willing to wait until September. Is that still the operative time line in your view? That’s late – you’ll miss out on talking to some people, some debates…

Abrams: Well I think the debates are an important part of the process, but the debates are new [huh?]. And while I think it’s a critical piece that can happen, I think that the, I can enter the conversation as late as the Fall and still have a real chance to…win.

Jackson: So this talk that continues – and I know you’ve spoken about it before – about being a potential vice presidential candidate, Beto O’Rourke for example is the most recent one who has floated your name, has anyone reached out to you about that?

Abrams: No one has reached out to me. And as I have said before, right now we should be focused on the presidential nominees and if I should decide to join the fray, then I look forward to being a robust competitor. After the determination has been made about who the Democratic nominee is, if I’m not that person for one reason or the other, I’m open to the conversation, but I think we need to have our conversations in sequential order, not at the same time.

=======================================

Ok, to sum up:

  • Abrams is not a candidate and is not planning to become one before at least September, by which time several debates will have already been held;
  • But she’s keeping an eye on those nasty real, actual candidates to make sure they are focused on her own priorities, which she doesn’t really identify here, but which most likely have to do with the “voter suppression” fantasy that she uses as her excuse for last year’s loss;
  • Despite the well-known fact that Joe Biden already tried to make a deal with her to be his running mate several weeks back, she is claiming that “no one has reached out to me” about that possibility yet;
  • But she’ll be interested in having that conversation once the Democrat nominee has been determined, assuming it isn’t her, and she’s not a candidate, at least not yet and maybe never but who knows? Or something.

Honestly, is there a more self-absorbed and self-deluded self-identifying leftist in the entire country?  My goodness.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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
Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: