



















Erickson has a good point. President Donald Trump is a crowd pleaser and a man who loves connecting with people from the stage. His television persona gave Americans a familiarity with him long before he ran for president that made voters amenable to his brand of populism, and he played to that strength in “yuge” rallies across the nation in 2016. It will be a necessary part of his 2020 campaign, too.
He doesn’t speak like a polished politician, rattling off the same old list of policy proposals. Instead, he hits his opponents with broadsides that connect with supporters. For instance, in a Louisiana rally Friday, he declared, “[Democrats have been] trying to stop us for more than three years with a lot of crap. They know they can’t win on Election Day so they’re pursuing an illegal, invalid, and unconstitutional bulls—t impeachment.” That’s salty language, but somehow it works for Trump — because he’s right on the merits.
Not only do Trump’s rallies inspire his supporters, they infuriate his detractors. Gary Bauer writes of last Thursday’s rally in Minneapolis, “Sadly, there was violence after the rally ended. MAGA hats were burned. Trump supporters were assaulted. Leftists waved the flag of communist China. Police officers had to create a path for cars to leave because demonstrators were attacking vehicles in the parking garage. It was a striking contrast. Inside the Target Center, Trump praised our brave men and women in uniform, our soldiers, and police officers. He defended our flag and our country. Outside, the left-wing radicals, the activist base of the Democrat Party, were attacking cops, burning flags, yelling their hatred for America, and assaulting conservatives.”
Furthermore, for those paying attention, that highlights the gross double standard of the mainstream media. Bauer notes, “If, after any speech by a leading Democrat, a mob formed outside and began punching people and attacking cars, every network would be running the footage non-stop. Every Republican would be forced to condemn it on the record. But no elected Democrat … will be asked to condemn what happened on the streets of Minneapolis.”
The more Americans are exposed to the radicalism of the Left, the more Trump’s quirks and idiosyncrasies seem like the sane choice in 2020. ~The Patriot Post
National Review reports, “The provisions include China purchasing $40 billion to $50 billion worth of American agricultural products, along with agreeing to guidelines on how it manages its currency, and policies with intellectual property, including forced technology transfer.” On America’s part, Trump has agreed to suspend the implementation of another round of tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese goods that had been scheduled to go into effect on Oct. 15. Trump heralded the deal as “very substantial” while at the same time noting that this was merely the first step in negotiating a broader and more comprehensive deal.
News of the deal sent the markets climbing — the Dow closed nearly 320 points higher Friday. The deal is likely to temporarily settle economic concerns, especially with the possibility of a more comprehensive agreement coming as soon as December. However, this long-running trade war is far from over, as China has yet to agree to make any substantive changes to its abusive trade practices.
Update: Bloomberg reports Monday, “China wants to hold more talks this month to hammer out the details of the ‘phase one’ trade deal touted by Donald Trump before Xi Jinping agrees to sign it.” So stay tuned.
~The Patriot Post
Some well meaning individuals believe we are headed for another civil war; well, that war has already been fought and won by the Progressives/far left via mass indoctrination in all levels of education and generally in the academic and unionized world in our Nation.
The ecological/save the earth propaganda has made us the enemy and has mobilized and has taken control in all agencies in government, including the legal arena.
Just as Hitler named an enemy and controlled every agency/ making rules and regulations aside from the governing/legislative body. Yes, that civil war has been won right under our nose as we were waiting for a glorious armed conflict. It is over, and we are paying the price, and it is going to get even worse.
If we do not begin educating en masse our young people and prepare them intellectually; monetarily and with gusto we will not be the USA we thought.
Time is not on our side. It will take decades to make a dent into this endeavor. Our grandiose assumptions about freedom, liberty etc. is all but slipped away. We are finished if we think things will change with Trump or any President that favors our ideals. They are just fixtures that will be trashed before they finish their terms. They are hemmed into a network of socialist/marxist idealogy; no matter what they claim, otherwise. We cannot chance putting all our chips on him or them that come after.
We must take extreme measures and caution, without becoming them, to overcome this network that was so well planned long before we realized it was in place.
TURKEY SANCTIONED: According to Reuters, “President Donald Trump imposed sanctions on Turkey on Monday and demanded the NATO ally stop a military incursion in northeast Syria.” At the same time, “The Pentagon on Monday announced the official withdrawal of U.S. forces from northeastern Syria,” The Hill reports.
ABC’S FAKE NEWS: “ABC News aired footage claiming to show a Turkish attack on a Syrian border town that was actually from a 2017 video of an American shooting range,” The Washington Free Beacon reveals. Regardless of anyone’s position on Trump’s Syria policy, engineering a crisis is way beyond the pale.
QUASHING DISSENT: “Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., an ardent supporter of President Trump, got the boot on Monday when he tried to sit in on the testimony of a former top National Security Council expert on Russia who was appearing on Capitol Hill as part of the House impeachment inquiry into the president.” (Fox News)
CNN’S VENDETTA: CNN whistleblower reveals network “vendetta” against Trump, obsession with impeachment (The Federalist)
WHO’D A THUNK IT? Target cuts workers’ hours after vowing to raise minimum wage to $15 by 2020 (National Review)
HELPING THE LITTLE GUY: Blue-collar employment thriving under Trump — hits 50-year high (The New American)
FLYING WOKE: Air Canada to stop announcing “ladies and gentlemen” in recognition of gender fluidity (Washington Examiner)
SWING AND A MISS: Tribal chiefs urge Atlanta Braves to end the “tomahawk chop” (New York Post)
MORE DALLAS-AREA FALLOUT: Ex-Fort Worth police officer charged with murder after shooting black woman in her home; occurred less than two weeks after Amber Guyger’s sentencing (USA Today)
UPRIGHT: William Barr warns of “militant” secularism in speech about declining religious values (Washington Examiner)
POLICY: U.S.-China trade deal: What it is, is not, and may become (Hudson Institute)
POLICY: The painful realities of carbon tax-and-dividend schemes (Washington Examiner)
HUMOR: Elizabeth dinky/liar-Warren takes 1/1024th of the day off to celebrate Indigenous People’s Day (Genesius Times)
~The Patriot PostOn your “smart” device, your calendar might read, “Indigenous Peoples’ Day” or even “Columbus Day (regional holiday).” Originally, the special day aimed to recognize the landing in the Americas of the Italian-born explorer who approached Spanish King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella after rejection from the royalty of England, Portugal, and France, thinking a westward exploration would result in reaching the Indies and Asia. But, in recent years, those who have proven they can’t learn from history, much less honor it, are busy rewriting it in efforts to prove themselves and their anti-American narrative correct and have encouraged the toppling of statues of Christopher Columbus and ignoring the times, the context, and the truth in their efforts.
If you’re celebrating Columbus Day, you’re honoring a man who came from a simple raising in the home of a wool weaver in the seaport, Genoa, Italy. Cristoforo Columbo had no formal education or schooling. He was self-taught. His Italian heritage and his Catholic faith drove his passion along with much of his devotion to exploration.
The mapmaker and sailor lived in a day when the Turkish Empire controlled northern Africa and blocked the fastest trade routes to the Orient, or India and China. Most educated folks, and those who referenced Holy Scripture (see Isaiah 40:22 among other verses), believed the Earth to be round, but the disagreement was on the size of the planet. Columbus believed some of the earliest calculations were too large and argued that the westward route would lead to their trading partners without the hassle and fight of the Muslim enemies.
So, in September 1492, Columbus set sail. His journey was fraught with problems, but he landed, despite near mutiny of crews aboard the vessels in his charge, on Oct. 12, 1492, on modern-day San Salvador. Believing he had arrived at his intended destination of the Indies the natives of the island were deemed “Indians.” His travels continued through the Caribbean with several subsequent journeys to and from Spain to this land he believed to be Asia.
Now, here’s where the revision of history is greatest. Academia and those devoted to a narrative of oppression have declared that Columbus introduced slavery and was a murderous tyrant. He is depicted by those desiring to lift the alleged victims, the “Indians” or Indigenous Peoples, to the place of commemoration, not the inspired explorer.
Columbus is painted as greedy — typical for a guy of white privilege. He also believed in God and His Son Jesus Christ … uh oh. You see, the crew cried, “Blessed be the hour of our Savior’s birth, blessed be the Virgin Mary who bore him and blessed be John the Baptist who baptized him” as they turned the half-hour glass, along with other observances of the Christian faith. He named one of his ships the Santa Maria — Holy Mary. He even dared (get ready for the head explosions of the godless groupies) to set up the standard of the Cross when he first touched land and named it, San Salvador — Holy Savior.
But Columbus sought gold not for personal wealth but for the purpose of evangelism and to, in his own words penned in his journal, liberate Jerusalem from the Muslim captivity: “Thus, I protest to your Highness that all the profits of this my enterprise may be sent in conquest of Jerusalem.”
And, about that slavery of the Indians, you see, Columbus wrote that there were individuals in his crew who “did not deserve water in the sight of God” for selling native girls into slavery. He can’t stand blameless for the cultural acceptance of slavery at the time, but it was also practiced among the natives, as was cannibalism.
Among the Carib tribes, indigenous to the lands that Columbus first touched, not only was slavery practiced, but also mutilation and forced reproduction of children for the purpose of cannibalism.
But that doesn’t fit the narrative that, in the pre-Columbian world slavery, exploitation, evil nor any other type of oppression ever existed. Only once a white male motivated by wealth and raw power was able to establish dominance over a minority people was America born — hence everything about these United States is morally wrong and must be destroyed as part of the restitution to victims that span the line of time.
Currently, there are over 100 cities that have banned the observance of Columbus Day to now herald the Indigenous Peoples instead. Washington, DC, is the latest to join these municipal malcontents through its passage of “emergency legislation.” But shhhhhh, don’t tell — the District of Columbia, a territory that holds the seat of the government of our United States, is the feminine form of Columbus. The original 13 colonies were even referred to as Columbia.
Let’s let “progressive” leftists continue in their embarrassment of honoring Elizabeth dinky/liar-Warren as a Cherokee with high cheekbones dishing out her Pow Wow Chow while trying to take over the District of Columbia, which was named for Columbus, while making a mockery of everything great about America — her freedoms, our faith, and our families. While they’re busy rewriting history, let’s ensure that we write our future by defending America’s greatness and the truth. ~The Patriot Post
The year was 1972 and Americans wanted out of the Vietnam War; the right because it was not being won and the left because of the increasing body count and lies from generals and politicians about “progress” toward defeating the communists.
Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern’s slogan “Come Home, America” resonated with growing numbers of people. When Richard Nixon defeated McGovern in a landslide, even Nixon began planning for a U.S. withdrawal. “Peace with honor” was his slogan.
The late al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden cited that withdrawal as evidence that the U.S. had no stomach for long wars. He believed the U.S. would grow weary from the “war on terror,” ceding the killing field to the terrorists.
Now comes President Trump with another promise for a unilateral withdrawal of “between 50 and 100 troops,” from Syria. Many critics of the decision believe it is an invitation for Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan to slaughter Kurdish forces, America’s loyal ally in the region in the fight against terrorism. The Kurds have served as a buffer, preventing an attack by Turkey’s powerful military. Not surprisingly, it didn’t take Turkey long to press its advantage. Reuters reports, “Turkey’s military struck the Syrian-Iraqi border to prevent Kurdish forces using the route to reinforce northeast Syria, as Ankara prepares to launch an offensive there after a surprise U.S. troop pullback.”
Following backlash, the White House appeared to reverse its Syria decision. An administration official, speaking under the condition of anonymity, said, the U.S. is not removing its forces from Syria in the face of a Turkish incursion. Which decision will ultimately prevail?
But Trump has gone further than announcing a unilateral withdrawal of forces, he has threatened Erdogan that if he attacks the Kurds and mistreats ISIS prisoners and does anything the president considers “inhumane,” “they could suffer the wrath of an extremely decimated economy.”
Erdogan is an Islamist and it appears he’s trying to take Turkey back to the days when it was an Islamic state. Does the president seriously believe Erdogan will bow to threats from one he likely considers an “infidel” leader of the “great Satan,” as another Islamist state, Iran, has called us?
The president says he is merely fulfilling a campaign promise to stop involving America in “endless wars.” It is a noble pursuit, but just as it takes two to tango, it also takes two warring sides to declare a ceasefire, or peace. When only one side abandons the battlefield — and with terrorism the battlefield is everywhere — guess which side wins?
Even some usually supportive Capitol Hill Republicans are critical of the president’s decision because it betrays a lack of policy objectives in the region. No one knows, or can articulate, U.S. foreign policy anywhere. Another example: the administration supports the toppling of the Maduro regime in Venezuela, but it is no closer to achieving that stated goal.
Former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, who was praised by President Trump for her service when she announced her resignation, has joined the growing chorus of people alarmed by the president’s decision. Haley, a potential presidential candidate in the near future, has said that the new U.S. policy toward the Kurds (if one can call it a policy) amounts to “leaving them to die” and is “a mistake.”
Yes, the Middle East is a snake pit and the U.S. has spent a lot of money over many years trying to kill off the “snakes.” But stopping the killing of those who want to kill us almost guarantees they will return to the battle with renewed resolve and new recruits. What will the unilateral withdrawers say then?
Coming home is no guarantee the terrorists won’t come after us here. In fact, Iran has bragged of having their agents inside the U.S., awaiting instructions to inflict more death and destruction.
America’s withdrawal of troops from Vietnam ensured a communist victory, but that war was more about nationalism than communism. This war is different.
When he was president, George W. Bush said we are fighting terrorists over there, so we won’t have to fight them here. Withdrawing troops and risking the destruction of the Kurds is a step too far. ~The Patriot Post
Case in point would be the discovery of the 2018 scumbag-Durbin/scumbag-Leahy/scumbag-Menendez letter to Ukrainian officials, which I mentioned two weeks ago in “Democrat Obstruction 2.0.”
That column was a rebuttal to Demo Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi’s announcement of the Democrat Party’s 2020 campaign platform — a coup d'etat masquerading as an impeachment to overthrow the American people’s lawful election of Donald Trump — or at least to prevent his reelection.
After the colossal failure of their first coup attempt orchestrated by leftist deep-state operatives in the FBI and CIA, in August of this year, House Intelligence Committee Chairman scumbag-Adam Schiff used intermediaries to collude with a new group of CIA “whistleblowers” to set Trump up again.
scumbag-Schiff and his shills claim that last July, Trump requested that Ukrainian officials investigate the activities of loose lips liar-Joe Biden and his son Hunter in a quid-pro-quo exchange for the release of $391 million in American aid.
Apparently, young Hunter collected significant “cash benefits,” both from Ukraine and China, when the old man was Barack scumbag/liar-nObama’s vice president, and Democrats are crying foul that our nation’s current chief executive had the audacity to ask then-newly elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to look into that and other corruption matters. (We now know that five months before the call from Trump, Ukrainian prosecutors were already investigating Hunter Biden’s Burisma outfit.)
The most amusing correspondence in this latest Demo charade is a letter from liar-Pelosi to House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, in which she laughably cites her “solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” liar-Pelosi also insisted, “Our Founders were specifically intent on ensuring that foreign entities did not undermine the integrity of our elections.” As if her reference “to support and defend” our Constitution weren’t enough of an eye-roller, she concludes, “We hope you and other Republicans share our commitment to following the facts, upholding the Constitution, protecting our national security, and defending the integrity of our elections at such a serious moment in our nation’s history.”
Ah, yes, Democrats “upholding the Constitution.”
But the letter of reference exemplifying the Demos’ double standard in this dustup is a correspondence composed on official U.S. Senate letterhead, addressed to then-Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko and signed by Demo Sens. scumbag-Richard Durbin (IL), scumbag-Patrick Leahy (VT), and scumbag-Robert Menendez (NJ).
As political analyst Marc A. Thiessen pointedly asks, “It’s okay for Democratic senators to encourage Ukraine to investigate Trump, but it’s not okay for the president to allegedly encourage Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden?”
This Demo trio made clear that they were “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine” before strong-arming Lutsenko to do as they said. In regard to their fake Russian-collusion delusion to take down President Trump, the Demos complained, “We … are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump.” They then demanded that Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important [Mueller] investigation.”
In other words, these three senior Democrat senators were demanding that the Ukrainian government help find some shred of evidence to back up their “Russian collusion with Trump” investigation or risk the loss of U.S. support for Ukraine.
Or, in still other words, a “quid pro quo”! Sound familiar?
After that reference, I heard from an erstwhile Patriot reader that one of their colleagues had “investigated” my claim about the Demo letter and found it “FALSE.” And the source of that fact-check finding? You guessed it — Snopes.com.
Snopes, for those of you who aren’t familiar with it, is one of the earliest self-appointed “fact checkers” on the Web. It began life as the “Urban Legends” website and, frankly, 20 years ago, was an amusing stop for confirming or debunking folklore. But commercial ad-supported sites like Snopes are always at risk of becoming politicized and failing their own standards of objective assessment. The assessors aren’t machines and are therefore subject to the same human biases as the rest of us.
In its later iteration as Snopes, founders David and Barbara Mikkelson (before they divorced) teamed up to spin a lot of leftist yarn when pretending to fact-check hot-button political issues. D. Mikkelson and his “team” of checkers have ramped up their partisan advocacy since Trump’s election, riding the wake of leftist protagonists and their Leftmedia propaganda machines. Most of what the Leftmedia outlets run as “news” is steeped in leftist brew, and the same can be said for the Mikkelson crew. So, who checks the checkers?
Snopers are so intent in their quest to take on any and all things conservative that they recently went so far as to fact-check The Babylon Bee, a Christian satire website. That’s right — the Snopers are not only the self-appointed arbiters of truth on matters of great import, but now even matters of great humor.
The interesting thing about Snopes is that its leftist spin inadvertently exposes how Democrats spin reality into their own alternate universe. As a case in point, let’s go back to that arm-twisting Demo senatorial letter to Ukraine.
According to Mikkelson, the assertion that this letter constituted a quid pro quo is FALSE because the most leftist media source in the nation, The New York Times, says so.
But when reviewing the NYT’s own fact checkers regarding the clear double standard that it’s fair for Democrats to pressure Ukraine for dirt on Trump, but foul for Trump to ask questions about corruption, including that involving the loose lips liar-Bidens, there’s an interesting revelation.
Here’s how the Times spun it:
“The three Democratic senators did write a letter to Yuriy Lutsenko, then Ukraine’s prosecutor general, in May 2018. Mr. Trump’s claim of an implied ultimatum is a matter of interpretation but the letter does not include an overt threat of withholding foreign aid.”
But the Times does concede that “direct mention of foreign aid was in relation to … cooperation with Mr. Mueller’s investigation.” Which is the very definition of a quid pro quo!
Again, to be clear, The New York Times concluded that the “implied ultimatum” was “a matter of interpretation,” and that the Demos’ letter did mention foreign aid “in relation to” Mueller’s investigation, but that did not constitute an “overt threat of withholding aid.” Got that?
This does not make the assertions about the Democrat letter “FALSE,” as Snopes declared. At best, it makes them inconclusive.
As for Trump’s communication with his Ukrainian counterpart, there is no “overt threat” of withholding aid, and any “implied ultimatum” is “a matter of interpretation.” Thus, no quid pro quo.
But Democrats are using their “interpretation” of an “implied ultimatum” as the basis for impeaching Trump and, with the help of their MSM publicists, are rallying considerable public support.
A double standard? Not if you’re a Democrat! Democrats embrace hypocrisy as if it was the highest of political character traits.
Finally, while the scumbag-Durbin/scumbag-Leahy/ scumbag-Menendez letter is an interesting study in how leftists spin the truth, there is no dispute about another double standard — loose lips liar-Joe Biden’s 2016 threat to cut $1 billion in U.S. Ukrainian loan guarantees if they did not fire Viktor Shokin, a prosecutor whose investigations were getting dangerously close to Hunter Biden’s affairs. I say no dispute because, in Joe Biden’s own words, “I looked at [the Ukrainian leaders] and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b—. He got fired.”
As it stands today, President Trump has appropriately “declined” the Democrats’ invitation to participate in their impeachment hoax.
~The Patriot Post
“PUBLIC CHARGE” RULE BLOCKED: “Under the rule,” The Hill reports, “any immigrant who receives at least one designated public benefit — including Medicaid, food stamps, welfare or public housing vouchers — for more than 12 months within any three-year period will be considered a ‘public charge’ and will be more likely to be denied a green card by immigration officials.” Federal Judge George Daniels “said the Trump administration likely exceeded its authority.”
ACTING DHS SECRETARY OUT: “Kevin McAleenan,” Trump said Friday, “has done an outstanding job as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security. We have worked well together with Border Crossings being way down. Kevin now, after many years in Government, wants to spend more time with his family and go to the private sector. … I will be announcing the new Acting Secretary [this] week.”
GOWDY PRECLUDED: As a corollary of lobbying rules, “a deal that [Trump’s legal team] had reached with former South Carolina Republican Representative Trey Gowdy fell through,” The Daily Wire reports.
DUBIOUS TIMING: Hunter Biden stepping down from Chinese firm, vows no foreign work if father wins in 2020 (The Hill)
SYRIA UPDATE: “Defense Secretary Mark Esper confirmed Sunday that President Trump has ordered a larger withdrawal of U.S. forces from northeastern Syria than was previously indicated,” according to The Hill. Meanwhile, Fox News says, “Fresh airstrikes from Turkey reportedly targeted civilians and a group of foreign reporters in the Syrian border town of Ras al-Ayn.”
TALIBAN PEACE TALKS: “U.S. officials and representatives of the Afghan Taliban have begun discussing ways to revive a peace process after talks fell apart last month.” (The Wall Street Journal)
GETTING ITS ACT TOGETHER: Mexico halts caravan of 2,000 migrants bound for U.S. (Fox News)
STOMACH-CHURNING: Master Sgt. Mark Allen dies 10 years after being shot while searching for deserter Bowe Bergdahl (Fox News)
POWER RESTORED: “PG&E Corp. crews have restored power to more than 700,000 homes and businesses in California that had been subjected to a deliberate blackout,” The Sacramento Bee reports. Ironically, many Californians are discovering that solar panels don’t work in blackouts.
VILLAGE ACADEMIC CURRICULUM: Pointing a finger gun lands bullied 12-year-old student in handcuffs (The Kansas City Star)
POLICY: A new dark age: California’s blackouts are self-inflicted (The Daily Signal)
POLICY: Why price transparency can revolutionize healthcare (Tom Coburn)
HUMOR: Elizabeth dinky/liar-Warren recalls how she lost her teaching job when her fake mustache fell off revealing she’s a woman (The Babylon Bee)
~The Patriot PostFacebook recently stated that it will neither censor nor “fact-check” statements by politicians on their site. This is great for political speech but — apparently — unwelcome news to the leadership of at least one of the major political parties.
The Democratic National Committee slammed Facebook’s decision, arguing that “Trump has an utter disregard for the truth” and that “social media platforms have a responsibility to protect our democracy and counter disinformation online.”
This is only the most recent effort by leftist politicians to goad social-media companies into silencing conservative politicians and anyone else they disagree with.
Several weeks ago, we warned that Federal Election Commission chairwoman Ellen Weintraub (D) was convening representatives from Facebook, Twitter, and Google to pressure them into “fighting the disinformation that risks further corroding our democracy.” In other words, to appoint themselves as Big Brother — with her approval — to censor political speech and reporting on elections and hot-button issues.
It’s a heartening sign that at least one of those social-media platforms has wisely decided that less is more when it comes to policing and censoring political speech and the global Internet arena where so many Americans today gather information and news and debate, discuss, argue, and vigorously contest the public issues of the day. To its credit, Facebook seems to appreciate, much more than some progressive politicians, the value of robust political discourse and the danger of vague limitations on political speech.
“I know some people will say we should go further,” Facebook executive Nick Clegg said, seemingly referring to left-leaning critics. “But imagine the reverse. Would it be acceptable to society at large to have a private company in effect become a self-appointed referee for everything that politicians say?” Clegg asked rhetorically. “I don’t believe it would be.”
Clegg went on to clarify how Facebook views its role vis-à-vis political speech: “To use tennis as an analogy, our job is to make sure the court is ready — the surface is flat, the lines painted, the net at the correct height. But we don’t pick up a racket and start playing. How the players play the game is up to them, not us.”
With political discourse, as with sports, Facebook’s “let ‘em play” approach is for the best. Attempts to tightly referee political discourse often devolve into partisan point-scoring.
As peer-reviewed academic studies show, so-called media “fact-checkers” have a strong track record of partisan bias. Indeed, one very popular fact-checker, Politifact, rated Republicans as more deceptive than Democrats at a rate of about 3 to 1, with no rational justification explaining that discrepancy.
Even the most well-meaning effort to fact-check political statements is likely to be hamstrung by subjectivity. When researchers look at the way mainstream fact-checkers rated the exact same statements by politicians, they found very low agreement. It is difficult to explain that disagreement as due to anything other than the differing personal political opinions and biases of the fact-checkers.
This is especially true with statements and stories deemed to be partially true. Too often, so-called fact-checkers use ambiguous, in-between categories for stories and statements that get the facts right, but that they nonetheless find misleading because the targets of their fact-checking leave out some supposedly “relevant” information.
Politicians sometimes exaggerate, flub the numbers, or even lie intentionally to deceive the public. When they do, it’s fair to call them out on it. But it’s not fair to keep them from speaking at all. The thorniest political battles are usually not between truth-tellers and liars, but between rival camps who disagree about which facts are most relevant.
Kellyanne Conway’s phrase “alternative facts” may be ripe for parody, but it is not Orwellian double-speak. Very often one side is armed with facts, and the other side is armed with a different set of facts. Their political disagreement usually focuses on which set of facts is most important to the issue at hand.
For instance, where progressives point to rising income inequality and the rising cost of health care, conservatives emphasize the importance of improved material conditions at every income level and the rapid pace of medical innovation that is making us a healthier society. Neither side’s facts may be wrong, but opposing sides often disagree on the relevance, meaning, and importance of those facts.
Too often, fact-checkers mislabel as a lie any statement that does not emphasize the facts supporting their own biases and opinions about an issue.
Facebook is right to recognize the vagaries of so-called “fact-checking” and its profound, potentially misleading influence on our public discourse. It correctly perceives the danger of appointing itself as the all-seeing Big Brother who will regulate, censor, and decide what information and what political speech is acceptable.
While Facebook has taken heat from both the right and the left of late, its hands-off approach is praiseworthy and should be followed by all the social-media platforms that dominate the Internet and are used by the public.
Nick Clegg got it exactly right when he said it isn’t Facebook’s job to “prevent a politician’s speech from reaching its audience and being subject to public debate and scrutiny.” “In open democracies,” he added, “voters rightly believe … they should be able to judge what politicians say themselves.”
Too bad the DNC and FEC commissioner Weintraub don’t have the same faith in the ability of the American public to make their own decisions. ~The Patriot Post
There have so far been two hearings in the House Democrats’ effort to impeach President Donald Trump over the Ukraine matter. Both have been held in secret. One was last Thursday, the other Friday, and the public does not know what was said in either. Two more are scheduled for this week, and they will be held behind closed doors, too.
The hearings are part of an effort to remove the president from office. There could not be a matter of more pressing public concern. There could not be a matter in which the American people have a greater stake. And yet the public has no idea what is being discovered.
Last week’s sessions weren’t just secret. They were super-secret. The first hearing, in which the witness was former Ukraine special envoy Kurt Volker, was held in what is known as a SCIF, which stands for sensitive compartmented information facility. It is a room in the Capitol, built to be impervious to electronic surveillance so that lawmakers can discuss the nation’s most important secrets without fear of discovery.
The second hearing, in which intelligence community inspector general Michael Atkinson testified, was also held in the SCIF.
Were highly classified matters discussed at the Volker and Atkinson hearings? Apparently not. Neither interview was classified. And even if some classified information were involved, it would be astonishing for Democrats to believe they could attempt to remove the president on the basis of information that is not available to the public.
The secrecy, decreed by House Intelligence Committee Chairman scumbag-Adam Schiff, has taken Republicans by surprise. Some are now speaking out about it.
“scumbag-Adam Schiff is running an impeachment inquiry secretly, behind closed doors, and he’s making up the rules as he goes along,” said Republican Rep. John Ratcliffe.
“These proceedings should be public,” added Republican Rep. Jim Jordan. “Democrats are trying to remove the president 13 months before an election based on an anonymous whistleblower … and they’re doing it all in a closed-door process.”
“This is nothing more or less than a show trial for the media,” said Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee, noting that with secrecy rules in place, the public knows only what is leaked to the press. “The Democrats leak what they want to leak to build narratives.”
Of course, that is not how Democrats would describe it. For his part, scumbag-Schiff has said that secrecy is needed to protect the identity of the CIA whistleblower who started the entire process. “The whistleblower has the right in the statute to remain anonymous,” scumbag-Schiff said recently, referring to the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, which lays out the process through which intelligence community whistleblowers can file complaints.
In fact, the law says: “The inspector general shall not disclose the identity of the employee without the consent of the employee, unless the inspector general determines that such disclosure is unavoidable during the course of the investigation.”
First, the inspector general is the only official specifically prohibited from disclosing the identity. And second, even if the statute’s use of “investigation” refers to the inspector general’s probe, the fact is, the whistleblower is now part of an impeachment proceeding. Disclosure is, in fact, unavoidable; Democrats cannot keep entire hearings secret, keep vital information away from the American people, in the name of preserving the anonymity of a whistleblower.
Yet that appears to be what scumbag-Schiff and his Democratic colleagues are doing. This week the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, was scheduled to be interviewed, but the State Department nixed his appearance at the last minute. That session was set to be held behind closed doors. Also this week, lawmakers will interview former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovich — behind closed doors. Republicans can complain, but Democrats, in firm control of the House, can do as they like. (An inquiry to scumbag-Schiff’s office went unanswered.)
The Democratic drive to impeach President Trump over Ukraine is the first impeachment proceeding solely about foreign policy. The exercise of foreign policy sometimes involves secrecy. The imposition of secrecy was an enormous problem in public understanding of the Trump-Russia affair, which ended with the special counsel unable to establish that there had been any conspiracy or coordination involving Russia and the Trump 2016 campaign. In that investigation, the public would have been better served by more disclosure, more quickly.
Now, the American people deserve to know precisely why one party in the House proposes to remove the president. They deserve to know the facts behind the Ukraine matter. It is simply inconceivable that a party could seek to remove a president but say to the American people, in essence, “Trust us, we’ve got good reason.”
The impeachment proceedings should be opened up — now.
~The Patriot Post
Be sure to Click LIKE at the bottom of this article, and share it everywhere!!
By Craig Andresen – Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio
Last week, the political party tolerance, peace, free speech and equality was at it again as they sent their ambassadors and moral guardians into the streets of Minneapolis to welcome Republicans and Conservatives who were arriving, and departing a Trump rally in the Target Center.
Typically, things got ugly, as they often do when democrats gather, and the hateful mob of liberals attacked Trump supporters as they arrived, and again as they left after the rally.
Reports stated that there was the customary pushing and shoving, the requisite punching of Trump supporters, arson…always a must at any given democrat-led protest, the throwing of urine at Trump supporters, and of course, the always relied upon shouts calling individual Trump supporters…Nazis.
Congressional Republican, Mark Meadows from North Carolina immediately called the typical display of hatred by democrats lawlessness.
Meadows said…
Former vice president loose lips liar-Joe Biden has said that in holding up vital military assistance to Ukraine, President Trump “used the power and resources of the United States to pressure a sovereign nation, a partner that is still under direct assault from Russia … to subvert the rule of law in the express hope of extracting a political favor.”
That’s rich. The aid in question is lethal military assistance that the swcumbag/liar-nObama/loose lips liar-Biden administration refused to give Ukraine.
In 2014, after Russia annexed Crimea and began arming separatists in eastern Ukraine with tanks, armored vehicles and rocket launchers, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko came to Washington to plead for weapons to defend his country. In an impassioned address to a joint session of Congress — with loose lips liar-Biden sitting directly behind him — Poroshenko said his country appreciated the nonlethal assistance he was getting, but declared “one cannot win a war with blankets.”
The scumbag/liar-nObama/loose lips liar-Biden administration was unmoved. The Wall Street Journal reported at the time that “President Barack scumbag/liar-nObama stuck to his refusal to provide weapons or other lethal military gear to Ukraine, despite a passionate appeal Thursday for help in fighting pro-Russian rebels by Ukraine’s president.” Why? The administration feared that lethal aid would provoke Moscow.
So what did the administration give him? Instead of RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades), we provided MREs (meals ready to eat) — food rations. As one frustrated former Pentagon official put it at the time, “What kind of message does that send anyway? We are sending MREs while they are being invaded by an aggressor.”
Answer: a message of weakness.
When Trump took office, he delivered a message of strength. In December 2017, the new administration announced that the United States would send the lethal aid to Ukraine that Poroshenko requested and scumbag/liar-nObama and Biden refused — the sale of $47 million worth of Javelin antitank missiles. In May 2018, after Ukraine tested its new Javelin missiles, Poroshenko exulted on Twitter, “Finally this day has come!” and personally thanked Trump “for supporting Ukraine and adopting a decision to provide Javelin antitank missile systems.”
For loose lips liar-Biden to now attack Trump for a temporary delay in a new round of lethal military aid reeks of hypocrisy. It was on loose lips liar-Biden’s watch that the United States refused to deliver military aid at all. Yet the same vice president who sat there impassively while Ukraine’s president begged for weapons now dares to cite the Russian threat to Ukraine in castigating Trump? Talk about chutzpah.
And since loose lips liar-Biden raised the Russian threat, let’s recall that the scumbag/liar-nObama/loose lips liar-Biden administration bears much responsibility for the annexation of Crimea that necessitated the delivery of lethal aid to Ukraine in the first place. Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine came in the aftermath of the scumbag/liar-nObama/loose lips liar-Biden administration’s failure to enforce its red line against Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons by Syria. In March 2013, loose lips liar-Biden declared, “Because we recognize the great danger Assad’s chemical and biological arsenals pose to Israel and the United States, to the whole world, we’ve set a clear red line against the use or the transfer of those weapons.”
Assad responded by using chemical weapons on innocent civilians not once, but 16 times. And yet scumbag/liar-nObama and loose lips liar-Biden did nothing, failing to carry out even “unbelievably small” military strikes — a decision loose lips liar-Biden publicly defended. “We can easily say we should have bombed and gone in and taken out their air defense system,” loose lips liar-Biden said, “Well, you know, big nations can’t bluff.”
Bluff is what scumbag/liar-nObama and loose lips liar-Biden did — and Assad called their bluff. Not only that, they turned to Russia for a face-saving way out, letting Russian President Vladimir Putin broker a phony deal to have Syria disarm. It was one of the most embarrassing foreign policy debacles of the post-Cold War era. So it should come as no surprise that, when scumbag/liar-nObama threatened to impose costs on Putin if he invaded Ukraine, the Kremlin called his bluff, too. Putin knew scumbag/liar-nObama and loose lips liar-Biden did not have the will to stand up to him in Ukraine. And he was proved right when they refused to give Ukraine lethal aid for fear of further provoking him.
None of this excuses Trump’s delaying a new round of lethal military aid to Ukraine. But if this military assistance was as vital to countering the Russian threat as loose lips liar-Biden says, then it’s fair to ask: Why didn’t the United States provide it when loose lips liar-Biden was the scumbag/liar-nObama administration’s point man on Ukraine?
~The Patriot Post
According to Fox News, “Durham has expanded his investigation [by] adding agents and resources… The timeline has grown from the beginning of the probe through the election and now has included a post-election timeline through the spring of 2017, up to when Robert Mueller was named special counsel.”
Why is Mueller important? Well, in another Fox News report, we learn “that when Robert Mueller met with President Trump in May of 2017, Mueller was indeed pursuing the open post as the director of the FBI — something the former Russia probe special counsel denied under oath during congressional testimony this summer.” Thanks to now-revealed private conversations with then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Mueller “knew there was a real possibility he could be named special counsel if he wasn’t chosen as the next FBI director.”
Talk about a conflict of interest. President Donald Trump pointed this out before, and now we see that another “outrageous” Trump statement has proven true. If Trump tends to obsess about how The Swamp is out to get him, well, it is.
Meanwhile, a report from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz is expected soon. His effort will detail almost certain corruption in securing FISA warrants to surveil Trump’s presidential campaign. That corruption is what kicked off the entire Russia-collusion fiasco, which in turn provided the template for the present impeachment coup attempt. ~The Patriot Post
However, now it has come to light that the whistleblower’s political bias runs much deeper than merely being a registered Democrat. During his closed-door testimony last Friday, Atkinson noted that the whistleblower had significant ties to a 2020 Democrat candidate. The Washington Examiner reports that three individuals with knowledge of Atkinson’s testimony stated that he said the whistleblower had “a professional relationship” with a current 2020 Democrat candidate, but Atkinson did not disclose who the candidate was.
So, here’s what we know about this whole “whistleblower” charade so far. The original form the whistleblower submitted had previously only accepted first-hand information to meet the “urgent concern” criteria in order to trigger a congressional alert, but it was mysteriously changed to eliminate the first-hand knowledge criteria. And we still have no answer as to when or why this change occurred. Later, we learn that the whistleblower contacted Rep. scumbag-Adam Schiff’s office weeks before submitting the complaint. scumbag-Schiff lied about having no prior knowledge of the complaint. Now we find out that the whistleblower had a “professional relationship” with a 2020 Democrat candidate. This is the real scandal, not President Donald Trump’s Ukrainian phone call.
~The Patriot Post
Even more troubling is that as the price of health insurance has steadily increased, the percentage of employers who offer insurance coverage has been decreasing. “Fewer Americans under 65 had employer coverage in 2017 than in 1999,” observed Bloomberg. “That’s despite the fact that the U.S. economy employed 17 million more people in 2017 than in 1999.”
Wasn’t scumbag/liar-nObamaCare supposed to “solve” this problem? After all, Barack scumbag/liar-nObama promised that the average family could expect to save $2,500 in insurance premiums per year. In reality, scumbag/liar-nObamaCare has proven to do just the opposite, rapidly increasing the cost of insurance. And the reasons for the increase can largely be attributed to scumbag/liar-nObamaCare’s mandating coverage of pre-existing conditions and the consolidation of the healthcare sector. The Federalist notes, “While providers claim their mergers will provide better care to patients, they also represent a way for doctors and hospitals to demand higher payments from insurers. Reporting has shown how hospitals’ monopolistic practices drive up prices, raising rates for patients and employers alike.” In short, scumbag/liar-nObamaCare worked to limit the free market, which by nature constrains costs.
The problem is everything the Democrat presidential candidates are proposing would only make the problem of healthcare costs even worse. More regulations and more government spending is a recipe for higher taxes and higher healthcare costs. scumbag/liar-nObamaCare proved the government cannot make healthcare cost less. Americans need to avoid making this mistake a second time. ~The Patriot Post
Put simply, you seek to overturn the results of the 2016 election and deprive the American people of the President they have freely chosen. Many Democrats now apparently view impeachment not only as a means to undo the democratic results of the last election, but as a strategy to influence the next election, which is barely more than a year away. As one member of Congress explained, he is “concerned that if we don’t impeach the President, he will get reelected.” Your highly partisan and unconstitutional effort threatens grave and lasting damage to our democratic institutions, to our system of free elections, and to the American people.
Cipollone asserts that liar-Pelosi and company’s impeachment inquiry is invalid because no vote was held in the House or even in a House committee to initiate the current inquiry. Instead, liar-Pelosi unilaterally “announced an ‘official impeachment inquiry.’” Cipollone writes, “Your contrived process is unprecedented in the history of the Nation, and lacks the necessary authorization for a valid impeachment proceeding.”
As a result of liar-Pelosi’s invalid initiation of an impeachment inquiry, Cipollone points out that Trump’s due-process rights have been violated. While Democrat-led committees subpoena White House officials demanding compliance under threats of obstruction charges, Trump on the other hand is denied the right to confront witnesses against him, to call his own witnesses, and “to have the assistance of counsel.” All of those things would be afforded him if liar-Pelosi were to actually hold a House vote to officially launch an impeachment inquiry.
The letter concludes, “The President cannot allow your constitutionally illegitimate proceedings to distract him and those in the Executive Branch from their work on behalf of the American people.”
Predictably, liar-Pelosi responded with her own letter alleging that Trump is the one guilty of trying “to normalize lawlessness,” ridiculously adding that “he is trying to make lawlessness a virtue.” And once again liar-Pelosi vacuously asserts that Trump’s “actions threaten our national security, violate our Constitution and undermine the integrity of our elections.” She further asserts that the White House is engaged in a “cover-up” of Trump’s “betrayal of our democracy.” It will be interesting to see if liar-Pelosi moves forward with an impeachment vote, or if she continues to drag out her lawless charade. ~The Patriot Post
A 1961 “Twilight Zone” episode starred Peter Falk as a Central American revolutionary whose paranoia eventually leads to his destruction. The dictator he has deposed tells him about a mirror given to him by “an old woman,” a mirror that will show him who’s plotting to assassinate him. The revolutionary soon sees enemies everywhere and begins to unravel, picking off his comrades one by one, believing they are out to get him.
Fantasy, sure. But President Trump and Vice President Pence could use such a mirror to reveal those partisan forces attempting to carry out political assassination on the entire Trump administration.
The latest assault comes from another anonymous “whistleblower,” who told The Washington Post a Treasury Department official appointed by Trump sought to interfere with an audit of the tax returns of the president “or” vice president. Doesn’t that sound vague? On Sunday, the attorney for the first whistleblower told ABC News he is representing a second whistleblower who has “firsthand” knowledge of the president’s call to the president of Ukraine.
The first anonymous whistleblower has tentatively agreed to meet with congressional lawmakers, according to CNN, on the condition that his or her legal counsel is cleared to accompany the whistleblower to the meeting. No word yet on the second whistleblower’s conditions.
This is all political theater and bad theater at that. Democrats are going through the motions of impeachment, hoping to thwart the president’s re-election. They know the Senate is unlikely to convict him should impeachment articles be approved. It’s all about pleasing their base and fundraising, which both sides are doing. This is one of many reasons Congress’ approval ratings remain low.
Ruslan Ryaboshapka, Ukraine’s new general prosecutor, told Reuters that he was not aware of any evidence of wrongdoing by the son of former U.S. Vice President loose lips liar-Joe Biden, but would be reviewing criminal cases opened by his predecessor, including some that could relate to the Ukrainian gas company, Burisma, a natural gas company that paid Hunter Biden.
If John Durham, the Connecticut prosecutor tapped by Attorney General William Barr to look into the origin of the phony Russian collusion probe, comes up with facts that lead to the indictment of anti-Trump Democrats, will that make any difference to those smearing the president? It might in public opinion, which Democrats are trying to shape against the president, but probably not to the real conspirators and colluders, except perhaps some lower-level types. The Establishment always protects its own. Could it be possible that Democrats are rapidly pursuing the impeachment inquiry to soften any blows that might come from Durham’s report?
That the president had to suggest Ukrainian and even Chinese leaders look into Hunter Biden’s possible corrupt activity is its own indictment of the anti-Trump media, scumbag/liar-nObama administration holdovers and career prosecutors.
The conservative organization Judicial Watch has been relentless in its pursuit of collusion by anti-Trump actors. It has released 145 pages of communications between former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and others which it says include a one-line email to special counsel Robert Mueller. It said, “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions.” The communication included “off the record” emails with major media outlets (collusion?) around the time of Mueller’s appointment and “show that Rosenstein did not dispassionately go along with the fraudulent probe in an attempt to get at the truth, but was an active participant in the deep state coup, secretly plotting with other FBI and DOJ officials against the president of the United States.”
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said, “the astonishing emails further confirm the dishonest corruption behind Rosenstein’s appointment of Robert Mueller. The emails also show a shockingly cozy relationship between Mr. Rosenstein and anti-Trump media reporters.”
If true, why is that shocking, given the nonstop media assault on Donald Trump even before he took office? Their goal has been to impeach, or damage him sufficiently so a Democrat will win the White House next November. Consider the one-sided “coverage” in major newspapers, the broadcast and at least two cable networks.
More facts will emerge that undermine the Democrats’ narrative, but it won’t matter to anti-Trumpers. They live in the Twilight Zone.
~The Patriot Post
WILD, INDEED: loose lips liar-Joe Biden worked with whistleblower when he was vice president, officials reveal (Washington Examiner)
JUST TAKE MY WORD FOR IT: “Lawyers for the CIA officer whose whistleblower complaint helped ignite an impeachment inquiry into President Trump have asked Congress whether their client could submit testimony in writing instead of appearing in person.” (The Wall Street Journal)
FELON VOTES: The Hill reports that 22,000 felony convicts have had their voting rights restored by Gov. Ralph Northam, which Democrats hope will turn the state supremely blue.
MORE PLANNED PARENTHOOD DECEPTION: “An arson attack on a Planned Parenthood facility that was reported as a hate crime inspired by undercover videos was actually an incident of domestic violence, a senior executive of the organization has been forced to admit in a San Francisco court room.” (The Daily Wire)
PRIORITIES: California Gov. scumbag-Gavin Newsom signs ban on small plastic bottles in hotels — as blackouts batter that state’s economy (National Review)
TEXAS SHOOTER DEFIANT: Suspected assailant in El Paso Walmart shooting pleads not guilty to attack that killed 22 (NBC News)
MIDDLE EAST AGGRESSION: Iranian oil tanker near Saudi Arabia coast hit by missiles (Fox News)
NANNY-STATE COURTS — COMING SOON TO AMERICA? Canadian court strips father of rights, allowing teen to transition against his wishes (The Daily Signal)
“NEXT!” “Democratic House committee chairmen scumbag-Elijah Cummings, scumbag-Eliot Engel, and scumbag-Adam Schiff sent a letter Thursday to Energy Secretary Rick Perry alerting him to a subpoena demanding documents related to their impeachment inquiry into President Trump’s dealings in Ukraine — the ninth subpoena issued so far.” (National Review)
BIRDS OF A FEATHER: Ronan Farrow book claims scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton pressured Farrow to drop Harvey Weinstein investigation (The Daily Wire)
POLICY: The electric grid in the digital age (National Review)
POLICY: Preparing for the next economic recession (InsideSources)
HUMOR: Nike updates Kaepernick slogan: “Believe in something, unless it upsets the Chinese government” (Genesius Times)
~The Patriot Post“The Turkish military began an offensive in Syria to seize territory held by U.S.-backed Kurdish forces,” reports The Wall Street Journal. “Turkish authorities kicked off the operation on Wednesday despite U.S. warnings that it would punish Turkey if it attacked the Kurdish militants, Washington’s partner in the fight against Islamic State in northeastern Syria.” The Journal then explains, “Turkish officials said their twin goals in the offensive, Turkey’s third in Syria since 2016, were to drive armed Kurdish groups it views as terrorists back from its border and to create a safe zone to relocate millions of Syrians who have fled the eight-year conflict.”
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned the European Union, “If you try to frame our operation there as an invasion, our task is simple: We will open the doors and send 3.6 million migrants to you.”
For his part, President Trump offered, well, indefensible comments. While he called Turkey’s incursion “a bad idea,” he didn’t threaten much more than “tougher sanctions.” Regarding the Kurds, he says they “are fighting for their land,” but “they didn’t help us in the second World War, they didn’t help us with Normandy as an example.” That’s after he explained we didn’t owe the Kurds any continued alliance because we have previously paid them and will continue to help them financially and with weapons. His transactional view of alliances is problematic to say the least, and it will cause other U.S. allies to rethink how much partnership they’re willing to offer. That’s especially true given how critical the Kurds were in defeating the Islamic State — and they gave 11,000 lives to do it. Now, it seems Trump got what he wanted, so he’s dropped the Kurds like… well, fill in your own analogy from Trump’s previous dealings.
Memo to the president: Normandy wasn’t our land either. And notably, the only land we’ve taken in foreign wars over the last century was that needed to bury our dead.
Because of the way Trump speaks about his decisions, they seem impetuous. We’re not convinced that was the case here. After all, the U.S. has been debating troop presence in Syria for the better part of the last decade. And it was disagreement over strategy there that led to the departure of former Secretary of Defense James Mattis in December. Trump obviously hasn’t listened to his advisers, but that doesn’t mean he’s acted impetuously.
We’ll reiterate a strategic point we made Tuesday: The U.S. is not withdrawing from Syria entirely. The shift of a relative handful of U.S. troops from one part of northeastern Syria is nowhere near as significant a move as Barack scumbag/liar-nObama’s total abandonment of Iraq also a campaign promise, which led directly to the creation of the Islamic State.
But that also leads to another problem with Trump’s move. The Kurds currently hold about 12,000 ISIS fighters and 70,000 members of their families, but are redirecting personnel toward fighting Turkey, prompting concerns over what happens to those prisoners. Trump bizarrely argued, “They’re going to be escaping to Europe. That’s where they want to go. They want to go back to their homes.” He also says those detainees are Turkey’s responsibility. Maybe he should review Erdogan’s threat about refugees to see how seriously Turkey will take that responsibility — particularly given Turkey’s ties to ISIS. ~The Patriot Post
Sunday marked the anniversary of the Senate vote confirming Brett Kavanaugh as a justice of the Supreme Court. The left still hasn’t gotten over that loss. There were protests at the Supreme Court Sunday.
I was thinking about how terrible the Kavanaugh confirmation process was. It was clear then that the left’s strategy was to produce one accuser after another. And then it hit me: The left is recycling its strategy in the Ukraine hoax.
As you may recall, Brett Kavanaugh breezed through his confirmation hearing, answering all the left’s questions without breaking a sweat. They just couldn’t trip him up.
President Trump fully cooperated in the Russia investigation. Robert Mueller couldn’t find evidence of collusion. The left failed to trip Trump up.
Then, all of a sudden, a senator says she has in her possession a letter from a “whistleblower” — a woman claiming Kavanaugh did something terrible.
Fast-forward to today. The president was rising in the polls and headed to the UN to deliver a historic speech on religious liberty. All of a sudden, a member of Congress says there’s a complaint from a Deep State operative, an intelligence community “whistleblower,” that could take the president down.
Kavanaugh’s friends and supporters were indignant. “How dare you! He’s never done anything like this,” they said. "No anonymous smears. The accuser must testify,“ they insisted. The left replied, "Well, we’re talking to her. She’s afraid for her life.”
Fast-forward to now. The president and his supporters demand to know who the Deep State leaker is. “Well, he’s afraid for his life. He must remain anonymous,” the left says.
Eventually, Christine Blasey Ford did testify. She had no evidence and no corroboration, and there were inconsistencies in her story. But wait… another accuser has come forward! And another! The left insists there’s a disturbing pattern about Kavanaugh’s behavior.
Back to Trump. The CIA leaker’s complaint turns out to be based on hearsay, and there are inconsistencies in the complaint. The transcript proves the central premise of the complaint is false.
So what happened this weekend? Another so-called “whistleblower” came forward, and this one supposedly has firsthand experience of the president’s phone call. I guarantee you, my friends, there will be additional “whistleblowers,” just like Kavanaugh’s accusers.
In both battles, the real target is the Republican Party. In the Kavanaugh controversy, the left believed that if it could turn the heat up high enough, it could peel off three or four GOP senators. Women are supposed to be believed in all cases, right? They got rino-Murkowski and almost got rino-Flake and Collins.
In case of the Ukraine call hoax, they’ve got Romney, Collins, and maybe Sasse. The left is also trying to confuse the public and convince them that there is something wrong with this president. Intelligence agents are good people who we’re supposed to believe protect us, right?
Of course, there’s another obvious link: The courts. The left can’t stand Trump’s success in restoring balance to the federal courts, and it can’t stand the fact that every day he remains in office is another day that he could nominate another justice of the caliber of Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.
The Cover-Up Continues
Rep. scumbag-Adam Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, refuses to release the 10 hours of testimony from Kurt Volker, the former envoy to Ukraine. As we reported last week, Volker’s testimony supports President Trump and undermines the complaint filed by a disgruntled Deep State operative.
Rep. Jim Jordan, the ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is so confident that he is daring Rep. scumbag-Schiff to release Volker’s testimony.
Yet all weekend long, all we got from the media was breathless reporting of a second “whistleblower,” supposedly with direct knowledge of the president’s phone call.
This is absurd! We already have direct knowledge of the call. We have the transcript. The president voluntarily released it.
This is like someone saying, “I have direct knowledge of the score of the Washington Redskins/New England Patriots game!” I should hope so — we all watched it Sunday. How can this be news?
Meanwhile, it is being reported that the Deep State operative who filed the complaint is a registered Democrat who “had a prior working relationship with a prominent Democratic politician.” And we know that the law firm representing him has deep ties to far-left activists.
dinky-liar-Warren’s Truth Troubles
Sen. Elizabeth dinky-liar-Warren seems to have trouble telling the truth. Everyone is familiar with her claim of indigenous heritage. But now we’re learning of yet another bogus claim.
In telling her biography, dinky-liar-Warren has suggested multiple times that she was the victim of sex discrimination. She claims that she was fired from a special education teaching position because she was pregnant. She said this last week in Nevada and during her closing statement in last month’s Democrat debate.
But in a 2008 interview, dinky-liar-Warren tells a very different story. She acknowledges not having all the necessary credits for the job, so she went back to graduate school. dinky-liar-Warren said:
I went back to graduate school and took a couple of courses in education and said, “I don’t think this is going to work out for me.” I was pregnant with my first baby, so I had a baby and stayed home for a couple of years…
There’s nothing in this 11-year-old interview that remotely suggests she was fired. But dinky-liar-Warren seems so eager to claim the mantle of victimhood, whether as a Native American or a fired pregnant woman.
And here’s another example that has fallen through the memory hole: dinky-liar-Warren has also claimed to have been the victim of sexual harassment, claiming that an older male colleague once “lunged at her” in his office and then chased her around his desk.
But in telling this story, she neglected to mention that the man had polio, which limited his mobility, and that she later spoke at his funeral!
Craven Appeasement
Friday night, Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey expressed his support for the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong. Morey tweeted, “Fight for Freedom. Stand with Hong Kong.” Within hours, the roof caved in on him.
The Chinese consulate in Houston expressed its “strong dissatisfaction.” The team’s owner rebuffed Morey, making it clear that Morey did not speak for the team. The NBA issued a statement calling Morey’s tweet “deeply offensive” and “regrettable.” And yesterday, Morey was tweeting his apologies.
Morey did the right thing, but the NBA is scrambling because of its big investment in China. Just the latest example of how trade with China has changed us more than it has changed China.
Better Late Than Never
Last week, news broke that four people were stabbed to death inside the Paris police headquarters. Initially, French authorities treated the attack as just a workplace dispute involving a disgruntled employee who had been reprimanded by his supervisor.
It took them a while, but French authorities have finally acknowledged what we all knew days ago — Michael Harpon was a radicalized Muslim. The alleged “workplace dispute” involved his refusal to work with women. ~The Patriot Post
In that ideal world, the People’s Republic of China would be swayed by a simple reminder that governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed, and that cracking down on peaceful demonstrators or forcibly returning Taiwan to the fold is wrong. In an ideal world, senior leaders of Iran would not be voicing a desire to wipe Israel off the map.
As you are well aware, we are not in an ideal world. We’re nowhere close to one. So, why isn’t China trying to force Taiwan under the rule of the butchers of Beijing? The answer is very simple: If they were to try, they know that the United States Navy has the capability to sweep the People’s Liberation Army Navy from the seas. China would be at the mercy of the United States as a result. That is something that the Chinese are rational enough to want to avoid.
As The Patriot Post team has pointed out during coverage of the U.S. Navy’s issues, navies take a lot of time to build — or rebuild. Could China’s leaders survive such a setback, especially given the situation in Hong Kong? They’re not going to want to take that chance.
In essence, American strength deters hostile action. The same dynamic largely works with Iran. Yes, it shot down a MQ-4C Triton UAV, but its direct acts of aggression and belligerence haven’t caused any American fatalities. Well, no recent fatalities is the more honest way to put it — America still owes Iran for that theocratic regime’s provision of IED components to Iraqi insurgents. But the reason Iran hasn’t moved much beyond talk is that the mullahs know full well that America is willing to deliver a major butt-kicking if they push things too far.
So, from these two examples, we should understand that deterrence, in order to work correctly, has two components. First, there is the ability to deliver a devastating blow, and second, the willingness to deliver said blow should a country cross certain lines. If either of these is missing, then deterrence will inevitably fail.
Prior to President Donald Trump taking office, Barack scumbag/liar-nObama had reduced America’s deterrence capabilities in both ways. His defense cuts severely limited America’s ability to bring the pain, and he also was singularly unwilling to deal with Iran in the decisive manner needed. In short, BO gave the message that America could be a global doormat.
The fact is, if America is to avoid war, it never hurts to have a strong military in all facets. But it is also equally important to ensure that when a foreign country does something along the lines of firing missiles at a Navy destroyer, then we are able and willing to make them pay. Otherwise, we may very well find ourselves again in an armed conflict in the Middle East. Or elsewhere. ~The Patriot Post