Saturday, September 28, 2019

Whistleblower blows

Comment:

A couple remarks to the following tweet.  One, it is a pinned tweet.  The author "Undercover Huber" must think this is pretty important.  Alrighty.  What he is saying here is that the so-called whistleblower is lying.  

He seems to have a point because this is confidential information at the very least.  The disclosure of this information will have national security ramifications.  That event was brought about by the so-called whistleblower's actions.  To put it another way, this individual put politics ahead of national interest.  Democrats and their allies in the GOP are really worried about the disclosures that could result from this.  ( By the way, this is an internal Ukrainian matter.  They're going to look into this regardless of what Trump asks of them. )

Secondly, I point out that John Brennan is egging all of this on.

Question:  Since when does the CIA get involved in national politics?  Wasn't this supposed to be a forbidden area to them?  Policy is not their turf.  At least, I would think not.  Why should the CIA give a hoop what happens to Biden?  It's not their job to worry about Biden.  Who runs this country--- the CIA or elected officials?



10 Reasons Democrats’ Impeachment Argument Is Falling Apart

Comment:

Why they are nuts.  Even though their argument is falling apart, they are going to proceed anyway.

That is, unless public opinion rapidly turns against them.  Unfortunately, that may not be happening.

Time is of the essence.  Either this is refuted quickly and in a big way, or it is going to at least partially succeed.  It is like the blitz in football.  You have to burn it so as to stop it.  This is a major, major PR blitz in order to politically damage the POTUS regardless of its success or failure.

The POTUS' Rassmussen poll numbers were at 53 percent and rising before this started to bite.  Now at 48 and falling.  This is a red alert for you people who keep citing rising poll numbers for Trump.  That was true BEFORE this scatstorm started.  It is no longer true NOW.  Wake the hell up.

The worst that they can say is that Trump is faithfully executed the law, and for this he must be punished.

Comment:

To borrow a phrase, "nothing to see here, move along."

That's what the Dems like to say, ya know?  But there really isn't any "there", there.  With Rice and Obama though...

That is why the Dems are in full attack mode now.  Trump went right over the target, and now is receiving maximum flak.

Yes, he could be shot down.  That's the risk.

Look, if Trump played it safe, he wouldn't have touched the Biden and Crowdstrike things with a ten foot pole.  That is what the left wanted him to do.  Since he did go there, here we go...

Biden did do it, and there are those on the left who admit it.  But they are holding to their story that he didn't do anything wrong.

Well, if he didn't do anything wrong, he sure as hell looks like he did  That is what you call "probable cause", which did not exist in the Russian collusion hoax.  This is what Crowdstrike involves.



Twitter thread: "Shaping the battlefield in order to win without a shot"

Comment:

You've got to pay very close attention to this stuff.  Otherwise, the fraudsters will be able pull off a fast one.  This thread shows how they are attempting to do it.

Mind you, it is not according to law.  We are going to hear a lot of -- "nobody is above the law "--sanctimoniously preached to us by the left in the coming days.  That claim is a blatant lie.

It is asserted here in detail in this thread, that they are circumventing the law in order to take out Trump.

Key point.  A change was made, and the change was covered up with misleading footnotes.  All of this done RECENTLY.  Very suspicious.


Not only are they crazy, they are criminally insane

The last post I said DC was in cloud cuckoo land.

After reading CTH recent posts, all of this was set up ahead of time.  If the Mueller thing didn't work, they would just cook up something later.  Well, later has arrived.

This is like a criminal cartel taking over the government.  Or should I say, they had control of it all along, but now it is quite blatant.  A blind man could see it.

Trump could have changed all this, but they cannot allow that.  For if they did, they would be in jail.

Instead of the malefactors getting punished, the rest of us will be.  The punishment will likely be severe. You people will rue the day you put the Dems back into control.

Not that the GOP is much better.  They have to at least PRETEND that they favor the rule of law.

Everything that is happening now is surreal.  I haven't much confidence in these GOP senators.  Even if they were to acquit Trump, they'll make sure that the maximum damage is done.

The only thing standing in the way of totalitarianism now is the public.  But the public isn't mindful as they should be.  Moreover, they may be indifferent.  That is what these crooks are counting on.  They may be right.

As for the Civil War 2.0?  As I have been saying, no such thing will occur.  It will be a coup.  If not a coup now, then maybe one later.  If the coup fails, assassinations may be next.

I'm sure I will be labelled nuts for writing all this.  But I think events have borne me out.  I called them wolves, and that is exactly how they are behaving.  You can argue all you want with the wolf, but in the end, like the sheep in Aesop's Fable, he will do exactly what he pleases.  You people are on the menu.


DC is in cloud cuckoo land

Comment:

Let's see.  Phony whistleblower.  Phony complaint.  Phony whistleblower couldn't be the origin of complaint because the dates don't line up.  All of this is manufactured out of thin air.  Sort of like the Russian collusion.

But the Dems look like they will impeach because it was "confirmed" and "against the law".  But no law has been cited.   No confirmation, but the opposite.  What's more, even if the worst happened, the POTUS was only seeing to it that the laws were faithfully executed, according to his oath of office.

Makes sense to me!  /sarc



Friday, September 27, 2019

Kurt Volker resigns

Comment:

I was wondering why.  The tweet below may not be why, and Wikipedia probably has some faulty information.  The information in my tweet corrects Wikipedia's entry on the matter.  Wikipedia says it occurred the day after Trump-Zelensky call, but the text shows otherwise.

date of text jul 19, date of call jul 25


Greta Thunberg

Comment:

It has been said that she has a mental problem.  That would seem to be true.  Something doesn't seem right about her.

Her parents allowed this.

I tweeted something a bit snippy about what she's been saying.  Of course, it would be hard to be critical of the girl personally after one finds out something like this, but I think it might be best for me to down throttle on it for now.  No intention to get personal from yours truly.  

You step out on the stage, and you give other a lot of heat, you have to take some yourself.  Doesn't matter who you are.  If the girl takes a lot of heat personally, that would be unfortunate.  Still, someone should know better than to put her in that situation.



Of course

Comment:

Joe Biden is one arrogant SOB.

Can I back that up?  Well, all you have to do is watch a couple videos of the guy.  

But I suspect that people like this arrogance for some strange reason.

It may be belaboring the obvious, but he is guilty.



Worth mentioning

Comment:

The people in Ukraine voted 3 to 1 for the current president, who assumed office just a few months ago.  His platform?  ANTI-CORRUPTION.

Now this tweet should be evaluated in that context.



Sedition from the "intelligence" community

Comment:

The gang who can't shoot straight keeps right on going.



In an age of universal deceit...

... telling the truth is a revolutionary act.  That's not necessarily an accurate quote from Orwell.  But it seems to fit the age we live in.

Trump's recent pseudo-scandal involved the possibility, not necessarily the probability, of an avalanche of truth that could be about to tumble down the slopes of deceit.  The deceit has been been piled higher and higher over decades of our history.  Eventually something must fall.  Either the Republic or the huge pile of deceit upon which most of our society has fallen prey to.

Can the public stand to hear it?

Allow me to segue into what really caused this post.  Recently, I ran an experiment on this blog to see if there was a way to get more interaction with the audience here.  There is an audience, but the audience rarely comments, so I really don't know what people's reactions are to what I write here.  Maybe I can tell from the number of pageviews, but maybe not.  It is not much to go on.

Lately I have been getting the "Bathhouse Barry" reference.  There was a post to that effect here.  Maybe more than one, but not a whole lot of them.  Frankly this charge of homosexuality is a bit of a two edged sword.  Innocent men could be brought down by such a charge.  There was a story about that in The Rise and Fall of Adolf Hitler, you see.  Hitler and his Nazi henchmen wanted to get rid of an old school general who was in their way.  So they manufactured a phony story about homosexuality, which was a big taboo in the traditional German officer tradition.

Unless you have iron-clad proof, I think that should be used with the greatest care in making such an accusation against any man.  I don't like Obama, but I always treated this accusation with a great deal of skepticism.

So I am not going to go far with this.  But the claim is out there that there is abundant proof of his homosexuality. 

With respect to Trump, the reason I believed that there was no collusion is that no secrets can be kept in DC.  Except for secrets involving the Democrats and their GOP enablers.  Even the GOP enablers can be betrayed from time to time.  Witness George W Bush, and his DUI incident.  It was unsealed just prior to the 2000 election.  The point being that Democrats love to do this kind of thing for political advantage.

However, they could be the most vulnerable to it themselves.  Hence the reaction to Trump and his mention of Crowdstrike and the Bidens.  This fact is directly traceable to the Bamster himself.  It is all on video for everyone to see.

But thou deplorables are forbidden to talk against the "Lightbringer".  The first black POTUS.  This is a taboo subject for thou.  If anybody gets too close to doing this mortal sin, the left will scream bloody murder, and bring fire and brimstone down upon your heads.  Right scared they should because they are corrupt as hell itself. 

As they say, when you are over the target, you take the most flack.


Thursday, September 26, 2019

Solomon: US Embassy said not to prosecute in 2016

Comment:

Soros group includes Biden's son.  Yes, Biden did a quid pro quo. 

This is complicated stuff.  You really have to dig down deep to get this.  IMO, the reason this stuff works for the left is that it is indeed as complicated as it is.  

In the end, you have to be clear on the major points.  Biden is done.  Stick a fork in him.  However, the left doesn't mind this at all.  Furthermore, they can blame Trump for it all.  This keeps their own people from getting mad at them.

By the way, people often get confused by complex subjects like nuclear energy.  It is a prime avenue for mischief makers, such as these types of people, to confuse others with respect to these subjects.  They win by sowing confusion.

Schiff happens

Updated,

9.26.19:

There is some speculation that Schiff might have orchestrated the pseudo scandal. You might say definite Schiff at that.



9.22.19:

slow Joe gets dumped by the hard left.  What they always wanted.  Cui bono?  Lizzie Borden Warren.

"Whistleblower" Broke ‘Circle of Trust’

Updated,

9.26.19:

Fred Fleitz gives a rundown of just exactly what happened with this phony whistleblower faux scandal.  It damaged trust vis-a-vis the White House and the Intelligence Community.  The whole thing was way the hell out of line.





9.21.19:

Comment:

Lots of intrigue in DC.   This could go very badly or spectacularly well.  A lot depends upon your preference.

I did see Biden saying what sounded like a quid pro quo with respect to an investigation of his son.  How many people will ever see that?  How many will care even if they do see it?

Did Trump do a quid pro quo?  That's the claim, but I am suspicious of the media and the Democrats.  They are not truthful people.

If the maneuver is to get Biden out of the way so that Warren can win the nomination, it looks corrupt in and of itself.  I hear even DiFi is getting in on the anti-Trump angle.  She has no credibility though.  That is, no credibility with anybody who cares anything about the concept.

Something could break very badly for someone.  What if the Dems had something on Trump that could hold up?  Not that they do, just asking "what if".  However, there is evidence of a real crime here in the case of Biden.  There's your "probable cause" du jour.  Something the Democrats never had on Trump with respect to Russia.  Trump would be justified in going after Biden on legal grounds.  Odd how they would try to spin this the other way around.

If Obama is behind getting rid of Biden, it may expose himself to hazard.  Then things could get really hairy.

Incidentally, this is precisely the reason why there was never any Trump collusion with Russia.  For if there were, everybody would have known about it.  In order to believe collusion, you have to believe that all these people could keep a secret.  This shows that if an advantage could be gained, the Dems would do anything in order to get it.  If it means violating a sacred trust, the leftists wouldn't hesitate to do so.



Democrats:"Don't look at this."

Update:

2 pm:

A question here:  Why this now?  The conversation is nearly 2 months old.  Why now?  Could it be that this is totally driven by politics?

Trump's poll numbers were rising.  Now they are falling.  Was that the intent of this?  Perhaps this intention as well as others.

The long delay of two months suggests that this was part of a plan.  This just didn't happen all of a sudden out of thin air.  Somebody decided to make this happen.  Who?

update a short while later:

My first post on it on the 21st.  Evidently, it started on the 19th.

The last Democrat debate was about week before this pseudo scandal broke.

10:00 am:

Comment:

Which guarantees that a lot of people WILL be looking.

Like I have been saying:  the Dems do not exude the quality of competence.  They're not even good crooks.  The last thing that they would want is for people to be looking at this stuff.

Prime example:

VP Joe Biden was in charge of energy policy for Ukraine.  Question:  Then how could he NOT know about his son's sweetheart deal with Burisma?  Of course, there's more.  It only gets worse.

Can you say quid pro quo?  Geez.

DOJ: Pelosi's fake impeachment announcement

Comment:

This is yesterday's news, but I didn't post about it.

The Democrats are going to go on another fishing expedition.  They may try to use this non-story in order to justify their demands for additional information.  That would mean tax returns and so forth.

There's no probable cause of a crime, and that is according to the DOJ.  Why would the Congress justify an impeachment resolution?

But it isn't really an impeachment resolution.  It is fake, just like so much of what they do.






DOJ: "We may have to investigate Biden"

Comment:

Remember this:  only Democrats want to punish an office holder for seeking justice due to corruption.  Why would POTUS need to go to Ukraine for that, anyway?   Dare to ask that question.

(One more thing... Why the hell is the DNC server in Ukraine!?!  The FBI never did get to look at it.)

There's not a whole lot of doubt about something not being right about Biden.  Always has been.

Getting Biden out of the race is a feature not a bug for the Dems.  Don't believe their crocodile tears for Biden.  He's a burden for them.

RealClearInvestigations: "CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller's Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russian-Meddling Claims"

Updated,

9.26.19:

7:18 am:

Hmmm!  A copy is provided here of a comment on CTH with respect to the recently released xcript.

Trump mentions a server that the Ukrainians had.  I thought:  what server?  It could be this one:

source

Not looking good for the Dems!  They aimed at their feet and scored a bullseye!  lol


5:30 am:

It's a curious thing...  The more the Democrats talk about this, the more interested I get.  The more interested I get, the more I see that they are wrong yet again...

I wouldn't have studied the transcript if it weren't for the Democrats making such a big deal out of this.  It looks innocent enough to me.

It also looks like the Democrat media is spinning this like crazy.  This will not go well for them.


9.25.19:

The Dems and their supporters talking about Crowdstrike now.   How many people out there know about Crowdstrike?

I can bet you that the Dems don't really want to talk about Crowdstrike.

You will probably hear what the Dems want you to hear about Crowdstrike.  But if there's an impeachment trial in the Senate, they will have to talk about Crowdstrike.  Plus everything else about the phony Mueller investigation.

Pelosi only wants them to talk about the so-called Whistleblower thing.  But this is a lot bigger than that.  This goes to all the Democrat corruption of the Obama years.

I think they want to panic the Democrats and the weak kneed GOP members, like Romney, into moving fast on this.  

It looks a lot like the rehash of the Russian collusion thing.  As a matter of fact, they are talking exactly like this is a confirmation of that.  It is anything but.

It is a Hail Mary pass.  But sometimes Hail Mary passes work.  We'll see.


7.10.19:

Mate is the author of the RealClearInvestigation piece.  There's some more news related to this, but first, here's Mate's tweet:




So, here's the news from yesterday:


You might say that the other shoe dropped.


7.6.19:

Seen on Insty, this is a confirmation of the embarrassing failure of the Mueller Investigation.

It is a lengthy article, but well worth the read.  Indeed, it would be embarrassing for Mueller to have to go before Congress and defend this report that he says speaks for itself.  It may well "speak for itself" in a way that Mueller may not anticipate.

If there is any justice, it will "live in infamy".


Wednesday, September 25, 2019

National Popular Vote Aggregate post

Updated,

9.25.19:

Evidently, the argument in favor of popular election of the POTUS is back, as Bongino is talking about it on his latest show.

Perhaps not the Compact itself, which is failing.  These people may try to eliminate it by fiat.  Of course, that in itself is against the law, but why should this stop them?

I don't know if Bongino mentioned this, as I shifted immediately into this post, and failed to watch all of what he said.  Here's the thought I had.  If there were a popular vote scenario in effect in 1860, Abraham Lincoln would not have been elected.  Why?

The Democrats of that time split up, and that is how Abraham Lincoln won.  Lincoln did not win a majority.  If you have a popular vote setup, then there is going to be some type of runoff that would have produced a winner of the majority of the votes cast.  In such a scenario, it would have resulted in a runoff between Lincoln and the Democrats with the most votes.  Southern voters would have united with the Northern Democrats, and voted Stephen A. Douglas as POTUS.

That would have meant no Emancipation Proclamation.  No freedom for the slaves.

Mention this bit of history to the lefties, and let's see them argue their way around that one.


5.29.19:

This poll might be more useful if it were to be held in each of the 50 states, as opposed to what they have done here.  It is irrelevant what the people overall think of the matter, as the states' legislatures are the sole decision-makers of any POTUS election.

In order to change this, there needs to be an amendment to the Constitution, which takes 2/3rd of the Congress to propose and submit to the states for ratification.  Otherwise, 3/4ths of the states can apply to Congress for a Constitutional Convention.

Rule of law my ass.  National Popular Vote is a compact between states, which is against the CONUS.

The National Popular Vote is ILLEGAL.



5.22.19:

Honestly, nothing is changing you people.  The same causes, the same effects.

The Democrats are acting as if they have a grievance, which they do not.

The Democrats knew the law going into the election.  Change the law, by the appropriate and lawful means, and there's no problem.

They have to know full well that this is illegal.  For instance, how is it not a compact if it only goes into effect if 270 electoral votes are obtained this way???

You cannot count on the Supreme Court, either.  Remember what John Roberts did?

I tell you what the problem is.  The left thinks that they can do this because nobody will do a thing about it.  If you allow this to happen, GOP, then you have no credibility whatsoever as an opposition party.

I see no effort to stomp this into the ground.  Yes, I know how that sounds, but the left is giving us a stark choice here.  Surrender or fight.


5.7.19:

As has been written many times before, this movement is gravely flawed.  Not only that, as it is being considered now in state houses across the USA, it is unlawful.  This post will aggregate all the links to posts already made on the subject.

Besides that, there will be another argument against it.  That is, the right of states to regulate their own voting processes that will lead to a flawed national outcome based upon flawed internal processes.

If a totally blue state rigs its elections, so that no GOP candidate can campaign there, then how can that vote be counted amongst the national popular vote?  In other words, if you have a national popular vote, then the states can no longer be responsible for the regulation of their own votes in their own jurisdictions.  A national election, as opposed to a federal system that now exists, will entail the use of national regulations.  Local regulations will have to be swept aside for a national standard of how the votes will be counted.  But the National Popular Vote Compact wants to use local standards to decide national outcomes.

Under the current system, if a state wants a rigged election, they can have one.  After all, California is a one party state.  Nothing illegal about that under the federal system.  For many years, the "solid south" voted Democrat.  Now, the "solid south" has morphed into a solid blue state model.  This blue state model wants to impose itself upon the entire country through this national popular vote proposition.  For that to happen legally, they have to get a majority of the electoral votes under the current system.  Or they have to abolish the Electoral College system, which maintains a federal character to the US system.  The national popular vote proposition seeks to amass enough electoral votes in order to make the current electoral system obsolete.  This will destroy the federal system that now exists, and make it a national one instead.

In order to get a legal system, they have to rig election outcomes to such an extent that the national popular vote will never be competitive again.  For example, many states want to exclude Trump from the ballot if he does not turn over his tax returns.  However, if Trump is not allowed to run on these states' ballots, he cannot get the votes of those people in that state who would like to vote for him.  His vote totals will suffer accordingly.  How then can a GOP candidate ever win?  The partisans in each of these blue states will exclude a candidate from the ballot, and even if he could win a fair national election, he won't be allowed to.

Under the present system, a state legislature can award its electors however it chooses.  But it cannot have a fair election without precautions against rigged outcomes.  In other words, the blue state model wants to pretend to hold elections without actual having one.  Even if a states citizens prefer Trump, the national popular vote compact would require that state to ignore the will of the people in that state, and award it to the winner of the national popular vote.  May sound fair to some, but if the rules of counting votes are rigged in the various solid blue states, how can a fair vote be tallied nationwide?

The only way to have a truly fair national election is to remove the Electoral College system.  But to do so will come at the cost of having a federally organized government.  For this, you need a constitutional amendment.  This is very unlikely to pass, and these activists in favor of the national popular vote know it.   That is why they are trying an end run around the law, and are trying to impose an inherently undemocratic process upon the rest of the nation.  It is unlawful, and should be declared unconstitutional.

Now, for the rest of the links on the arguments against this flawed compact.


  1.  Trump could be excluded from ballots of 18 states 
  2.  A flaw in the National Popular Vote Compact  
  3.  National Vote Compact disenfranchises voters  
  4. A republic not a democracy  
  5. Electoral College promotes issue oriented campaigns, popular vote will destroy that
  6. Ruling class v. country class and how self hatred is at the helm  


The Disturbing Reason Why the Dems Really Want to Impeach Trump

Comment:

The truth is a sword and a shield.  The sword and shield can wound and can protect.  Those who take it up can expect to have it take them down as well.

That goes for everybody.  Here's the catch.  The left is counting on their lies succeeding.

Is the left-wing exclusively dishonest?  I would say no, but they are quite willful about it and do not do mind it at all.  In fact, they ADMIRE it.

If you want to be ruled by liars, then by all means, let the liars take over.  I think it better to establish who the liars really are.  It should be obvious.  But some people need a lot of convincing. 

A side of me does not fear this at all but welcomes the coming fight.  But victory is not certain.  However, if we cannot beat this, then we don't deserve any better.  Bring it on, I say.


Stunning Rebuke - Federal Judge Throws Out Guilty Verdict for Flynn Partner and Acquits

Comment:

This would seem to point in the direction of clearing Flynn as well.   I would not rush to judgment on that just yet.

Judges seem to move slowly.  However, politicians move a lot more quickly.  The point being that political damage can be done a lot easier than legal damage.  By the time the legal damage gets untangled, the politicians have moved on.

That's where the real trouble lies.  Something has to be done about politicians who abuse the legal system in this manner.



Satire bites a bit hard

Comment:

This seems pretty light-hearted, but it worries me a bit.  Not worried in the sense that there will be something that could hurt Trump, but something that may destabilize the country.

Politics has overrun sanity.  Pelosi caves-in so that she could remain as Speaker.  Trump caves-in as he sacrifices confidentiality so he can avoid political trouble.  He does appear innocent, but anybody should have been able to see that this accusation was politically motivated.

Will Democrats come to their senses at long last?  I doubt it.  They'll insist that they had to do this.  All the while, they'll deny that an investigation of Biden is definitely warranted.



Tuesday, September 24, 2019

Hunter Biden

Comment:

Looks pretty fishy!



Knife control?

Seriously.

Maybe rocks will be next.  Or is it scissors?  If you eliminate paper too, does that end all crime?


Rule of Law? Who are they trying to kid?

Comment:

Get this.  There is NO interest in the obvious corruption of Biden.  Nope.  The Dem's interest is in ( supposedly ) that Trump may gain an advantage in going after Biden.

In other words, in order to avoid trouble with Congress, Trump has to ignore the obvious corruption.

Who the hell is corrupt here?  The Democrats and their enablers in the GOP are shielding Biden for heaven's sake.

That's the news here.  




Obligatory, 9.24.19

Two things I thought I would mention.

First, the Feedback feature has been discontinued.  There isn't enough variation in order to make it interesting.

Second, impeachment is back in the news.  Odd logic in their arguments.  Their argument is that it is impeachable because Trump is trying to gain political advantage with respect to military aid to Ukraine, but impeachment is necessary because Trump may win re-election.  Talking about hypocrisy on a legendary level.


Monday, September 23, 2019

Parents Allow 6-Year-Old Son To Begin Transitioning Into A Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle Per His Wishes


Comment:

Truth is stranger than fiction, but this is pretty strange.  Ooops!  Can't back it up.  Never mind.




Judicial Watch: McCabe Memo Details How DOJ’s Rosenstein Proposed Wearing a Wire into Oval Office to Record President Trump

Comment:

A couple sugar observations here:

  1. Rosenstein denied it pretty strongly, if memory serves.   It was claimed to be a joke, but this story appears to debunk that.
  2. It is a McCabe memo.  Who was in the news recently?  In other words, why was this memo released NOW?  Something could be going on behind the scenes.


A sense of competence v the opposite

Update:

9.23.19:

Why keep hammering on the pseudo scandal with respect to Biden and Ukraine?  It doesn't help Biden.

It also invite comparisons like this:


8.26.19:

Comment:

With Trump, I get the sense that he knows what he is doing.  With respect to Democrats, I don't get that sense, but I do get a sense that they don't.

Demonstrated competence wins over demonstrated incompetence.

Democrats use demonstrated incompetence as a selling point.  They call it unfair, but somebody has to win.  The winner is going to be the one who demonstrates a superior sense of competence.

Call that the BNO theory.  We'll see how that plays out.


Pat Paulsen still running for POTUS

Comment:

It was a running joke for the longest time.  Pat Paulsen for President.  Yep.  A joke.  It reminds me of something.  It seems that this Weld character has been running for POTUS forever.  So he's the new Pat Paulsen.

He has about as much credibility as Paulsen, so he has that going for him.

Those on the never-Trump side appear about as serious as Paulsen.  In other words, they have no clue what a joke they are.

If they really understood the joke, and if the people caught on to how big of a joke this guy is, he would be afraid.  Why?  Because the traitors are the people he is encouraging.  If what he advocates were serious, he might be in jeopardy himself.  For he is aiding and abetting a criminal conspiracy to overthrow the lawful authority of the United States.  That is treason itself.


Scooter Libbey Redux

Comment:

Seems like I posted that before...

Now the CTH shows how true that really is...


Updated a little while later:

Why can't the conservatives get out in front of this instead of letting themselves be overtaken by it?

Rules don't matter anymore?

Comment:

Put it to the test to see if the rules matter anymore.  Maybe only "their rules" matter.  But that is so only if we let ourselves be ruled by "their" rules.

Out of the mouth of babes...

Comment:





From the New Testament, a lesson for today as well.  You have this youngster who is there to teach us about AGW, but she teaches something else much greater.  Not by design, though.  The "wise ones" of today in their insane quest for absolute power, reveal who they really are through this little girl.

How?  Look carefully at these words and understand.

Quote:

"We can't save the world by playing by the rules because the rules have to change."

So cheating is okayMaybe murder too! Whatever it takes.  It's war.  Nothing is forbidden anymore.  Why then should anybody believe you if you talk like that?  It is precisely what I've been trying to tell people here.   These people are wolves.  Sheep do not bargain with wolves   A wolf takes from the sheep without conscience.

Consequently, you cannot preach rule of law if you don't abide by it.  But that doesn't stop them because their hearts are FALSE.  While preaching the "rule of law" they break it without compunction, because the ends justifies the means.


Update:

You can preach a sermon, but if nobody listens, what good is it?  Hmm?  Yet I don't want to preach.  The way I look at it, it is persuasion.  But nobody wants to be persuaded, then you have a situation in which everyone has been corrupted beyond redemption.  Then it won't matter anymore.  Have we reached that point?  Consider that they have been at this for decades, and the momentum is definitely with them.  Still, as the article mentions, giving up is not an option.




Sunday, September 22, 2019

Climate Alarmists Debunked

Comment:

The alarmists cherry-pick the data in order to try to fool the public.  Btw, the video title is a gag, it isn't a "gift".  ( "You pull my leg, and I'll pull yours", I suppose.)



What have the Dems been talking about for the last 3 years?

Comment:

The Dems seek foreign help against an opposition candidate during and after an election, and now that is treason????

Who'd a thunk it?  Trump didn't do it, but they did.  Now they say that Trump is doing it, but again, he didn't.  But they did.



Ends justifies the means

Comment:

The sheep cannot argue with the wolf and win since the wolf is all about winning through the use of force.





Ban the NRA? Why not the Democrats?

Comment:

The same logic applied to those you disagree with would enable a ban on political parties.  So the question should be asked: "should the Democrat Party be banned?"


The incongruity of it all

Comment:

Democrat presidential candidates that want to ban beef descend upon Steak Fry for votes.

Reminds me of Chick-Fil-A advertisement.  The cow is saying "eat more chickin".  I got an idea for one of their billboards.  Oldtimers might remember the Rowan and Martin Laugh-in gag in which Richard Nixon asked: "Sock it to me?"   Maybe the board could have the cow do the same thing, but with a big smile, since nobody will be eating beef anymore.