Not the party of Trump

 

The GOP is not the party of Trump

Actually, they're not a party at all. Nobody in their right mind should ever vote for them again.

But folks are likely to regard this as crazy talk. The only GOP candidates that can actually have a chance to win might as well be Democrats. But even John McCain lost.

Nobody on the GOP side can hold conservatives and have a chance in an election.

The reason is that the "RINOS" will do what they just did to Trump. They did the same to Goldwater. Reagan was an exception that will not likely be repeated. Bush won because he feigned conservatism, but governed more like a Democrat.

The people that Trump got won't be back. This bunch has no chance of a repeat without Trump, but they won't support Trump. The support he has is just window-dressing. It is as fake as this party is.

Calling it Trump's party means nothing. The never-Trumpers still control this party, and they want it for themselves. But the never-Trumpers are like the Beatles "Nowhere Man". This party is nowhere. It isn't the Party of Trump, it is the party of Nobody.

For what it is worth

 First hand account of what happened at the Capitol on January 6th.

Comment:

People might say that the opinion that this was a false flag op at the Capitol was obtained by reading stuff like I just posted. But I just now came across. I didn't know who this author was, but I put up the link after reading what he said he saw on that day.

But all of that was out there almost immediately after it happened.

I based my opinion, which was expressed early on in the aftermath of the tragic event, upon my own impressions without reading very much on the net other than the reportage of what happened.

Nothing has changed my mind that it was false-flag, but the opposite has been confirmed.

The people who attended the protest were not troublemakers. The people causing the trouble were the troublemakers.

The politicians are looking about for someone to blame. Responsibility for security of the capitol grounds belongs to the Congress. Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker.

If a GOP had one of its own as Speaker, the Democrats would be after his gavel.

Once again I asked ---Who benefited from this? Who suffered?

If this was an insurrection, it was the most poorly planned and executed insurrection in the history of insurrection. The American Civil War lasted 4 years. This insurrection lasted less than 4 hours.

More than half of a million died in the Civil War. Fewer than a dozen died in this one.

Even coups are more bloody than this was. This was so easy it was like taking candy from a baby.

The Communists once said that they planned on taking the USA without firing a shot. Well, it looks like they were wrong. But not by much.

An old argument

 

Parler

On the Bongino show yesterday, there was a reference to two links to stories about the hatchet job done on Parler. Bongino is an investor in Parler, and his investment just took a big hit.

Since it came from other big businesses, it is anti-competitive by nature. Interesting to note who the anti-competitive forces support in the political arena. It wasn't Trump.

Anyway, the two links are from "opposite" sides of the aisle. One of them was from the  Wall Street Journal and the other from Glenn Greenwald. I say "opposite" because that is the Marxist paradigm being referred to--- the left-right axis.

I use left because that is how they label themselves. I do not label myself as "right" because I do not subscribe to Marxist analysis. Unfortunately, there are many on the conservative side that do---Ronald Reagan was NOT one of them.

Bongino links to them and so I looked them over a bit. I suppose they are both okay stories, but once again, I think when you argue with the wolf, the wolf will do whatever he wants in any case.

Like Forrest Gump said, "that's all I have to say about that". 

Vote with your feet

 This is not likely possible with this blog, as it is a free platform.  I won't get another one that costs money, and the free ones won't solve anything.  They'll probably be just like Google.

However, where feasible, I'll divest myself of Big Tech.  That means as a user.  In the old days, when I had money, I could divest my stocks.  If enough people sold their stocks in these outfits, a little pain might get their attention.

This has been my strategy for months.  I got out of my too big to fail bank.  A move like that could be a good idea.  They are practicing monopolistic practices.  That should be a big no-no, but we no longer have rule of law from those who preached rule of law to us not long ago.

This is a practice recommended by Dan Bongino.  He is an investor in Parler, upon which has been a victim of anti-competitive practices of Big Tech, and it appears to be a coordinated attack.

Nobody elected these corporations to be Sheriff.  They shouldn't be acting like the Sheriff of Nottingham.

Know what I mean, Vern?

Impeachment is so wrong

 More evidence showing that shooting was not MAGA led.

No refuge for sanity

 Timeline for those who haven't lost their marbles yet.

Our government is insane

 Get a grip you wackos.

Your favorite toe-sucker has spoken

Your favorite toe-sucker has spoken

Sometimes I get irritated with Dick Morris. His latest is about a "backlash" against a re-impeachment of Trump.

If you subscribe to the notion that the election was stolen, then what friggin' difference does it make anymore what the public thinks? They can do ANYTHING and it won't matter.

You cannot be right about both. If a backlash matters, then the election wasn't stolen. If the election WAS stolen, then the backlash doesn't matter because they can always fake an election victory. You can't "get 'me next time" because that ship has sailed.

That is the source of my irritation. So I call him my favorite "toe-sucker". Seems like there was something like that in his past.

Message

 

To any liberals out there

People come and go here to this blog. There aren't many. Hardly anybody ever identifies themselves. For all I know, enemies could be monitoring this blog. I won't spend the money to find out who. People can lurk here as they please.

So, if any of you are liberals, be careful what you wish for.

Take heed about doing things that cannot be undone.

This also goes for Never-Trump GOP types. Those who are thinking of getting rid of Trump for good had best do it for valid reasons. Not for the heat of the moment. Not in the sense of gratifying yourselves for whatever grievance you think you have. You may alienate people you will need later. Things can come back to bite you that you cannot foresee right now.

Things that are done that cannot be undone are forever. Be careful what you wish for. That is all.

Terrifying Video of Trapped Capitol Police Officer Blasts Hole in Media Narrative

https://www.westernjournal.com/terrifying-video-trapped-capitol-police-officer-blasts-hole-media-narrative/

 

Video of cops letting "rioters" in

I didn't watch the video on the website here. It loaded much too slowly and I don't have time for that.

I include it as an FYI video. According to the article, it looks like it has been around enough that both sides have commented upon it. Yet many have not seen it.

Could there be a REASON WHY people have not seen it? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM?

More about banned shooting video

More on that shooting video that Big Tech does not want you to see

The late Vincent Bugliosi, the prosector and author, once said that you have to "spoon-feed" people. He said that with respect to juries. No stone should be left unturned, he seems to have said.

I've left some stones unturned. So I return to the video that they don't want you to see. A few observations and questions.

First the observation from the shooting itself. The shooting was at the end of a plus- forty minute long video. Frankly, it was the part of the video that really made the biggest impression. When somebody pulls and gun and shoots, I think that gets your attention.

Whoever made this video while in that area when it happened sure seems CALM. You know what? That makes me suspicious. If someone brandishes a gun, it gets your attention. Something happened like that in my view only a few times. I definitely remember those times. This shouldn't take too much convincing that what I say is TRUE with respect to be eerily CALM.

Besides the person taking the video there were many others in the immediate area. That includes some police officers who were behind the woman who was shot. They weren't that far away from her when it happened. Nobody said anything about a man with a gun. NOBODY. Rather curious in my opinion. Now that the video is GONE, I cannot go back and examine if these observations are correct. But I feel very confident that there was more than just two people in that area. Why shoot that one person?

The thing that grabs me is that there were people in that area besides the woman. None of them seem to notice the gun, nor react to it. It is visible to the person taking the video, but that person is strangely calm. My reaction during those times when a gun was brandished was the feeling that I needed to get the hell out of the area QUICK.

And it all makes me suspicious. Especially since the video is now unavailable on VIMEO. It was also taken down on YouTube prior to being taken down on VIMEO. Why wouldn't they want people to see this?

No illusions

 

About the Giuiani video that was suppressed

The video was a challenge to the narrative that this was a Trump-instigated riot. It is clear why the video was taken down, then.

I put it up as supportive of his attempts to get out the other side of the story. Those who suppressed it do not care about that, or are hostile towards it. This can mean only one thing. Vimeo is in on an attempt to take down the Trump Presidency.

I can make no other conclusion. There was no justification for taking down that video. The effort at suppressing valid information is EVIL.

Consequently, I think our worst fears may be upon us.

How to respond? I will continue as long as Google allows me to post here. I don't think I have any illusions about what their intentions are.

Know what I mean, Vern?

Brief commentary upon the shooting on Jan 6th

Included in this post are three screen grabs of the Giuliani video just above, dated today, Jan. 10th 2021 on this blog.

The reason for this is to demonstrate to anybody who wishes or is interested in this, but has of yet to view the video, or to have any impression from the heretofore commentary upon it elsewhere.

As for what I've seen before on other commentary differs somewhat from what is shown on this video. The screen grabs show a few details that clear up my own misconception, so perhaps it may clear up anybody else's who may be interested.

What I read about before, which didn't include any pics nor videos, was that the woman shot, was that she was climbing in through a window. This video does not show any such thing. She may have been trying to force her way through the door, which has a window in it.

The video does not show the woman at all, but the shooter, which is shown here in the first screen grab. The first shows only the shooters hand with a gun drawn and aimed at the door. The second shows the shooter's full body with gun aimed. This second screen grab may have been taken either directly before or after the fatal shot was taken.

The final screen grab, which is the third of three thus labeled, show an officer or man in a uniform, tending to the fallen woman. This is mere seconds after the shot.

Others came up directly after, which says that officers where very close nearby and directly behind the woman.

The shot came from the other side of the door. The officers behind the woman were on the same side of the door as she was.

If the woman was that big of a threat, then why didn't the officers behind tell her to stop? They were armed and this can be seen in the video.

The video leaves a strong impression that this was not a justifiable act to shoot this woman. Some may think that this is an inappopriate remark, but other evidence that can be seen on the web seems to indicate that charges may be filed on the shooter.

I include this so that there could be a counter to the efforts at waving the bloody shirt as an excuse to impeach and remove the President.

I take this impeachment effort and/or removal very seriously. This would be a grave injustice to the President as well as the country.

The other side of the story

Will they permit it to be told?

 Update:  The answer was no.   The video was taken down.   Plain and simple totalitarianism.