In case you are tempted to use that expression, this guy doesn't like it.
You have to work at producing a better cliche. Work, work, work!
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Saturday, October 27, 2018
Lee Smith Investigates: Rosenstein DOJ Threatens "Obstruction" Over Declassification Directive.
This links up the GOP Establishment with the Democrats in an attempt to remove Trump from office.
The article also deeply implies that the investigation was a hoax to begin with, and the point is to protect corrupt officials within the DOJ and elsewhere--- not to find "collusion". The way to protect the "investigation" is to charge obstruction. This is what I said from the very beginning of this sham.
It should be clear that Pelosi's attempt to downplay impeachment is just a ruse. If you support Trump, you must vote for the GOP to remain in both Houses of Congress, or otherwise, there will be an impeachment attempt. Since Rosenstein is supposedly a Republican, and since never Trumpers are in that group, it should not be relied upon just to keep the Senate. That is not good enough. For if you have enough never Trumpers in the Senate, they could still remove Trump.
Once again, if you support Trump, you must get out and vote GOP. Don't be fooled by these games.
The article also deeply implies that the investigation was a hoax to begin with, and the point is to protect corrupt officials within the DOJ and elsewhere--- not to find "collusion". The way to protect the "investigation" is to charge obstruction. This is what I said from the very beginning of this sham.
It should be clear that Pelosi's attempt to downplay impeachment is just a ruse. If you support Trump, you must vote for the GOP to remain in both Houses of Congress, or otherwise, there will be an impeachment attempt. Since Rosenstein is supposedly a Republican, and since never Trumpers are in that group, it should not be relied upon just to keep the Senate. That is not good enough. For if you have enough never Trumpers in the Senate, they could still remove Trump.
Once again, if you support Trump, you must get out and vote GOP. Don't be fooled by these games.
Lee Smith Investigates: Rosenstein DOJ Threatens "Obstruction" Over Declassification Directive... https://t.co/SsXtbaajqZ via @thelastrefuge2— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) October 27, 2018
Reichstag Fire during Hitler regime in Germany
Some folks are out there comparing the "bomb" threat as another Reichstag Fire. Let's review that historical incident for a moment, shall we?
The Reichstag Fire was said to have been arranged by the Nazis so that they could consolidate power around Adolf Hitler, who was just previously made chancellor. However, Hitler was not absolutely in charge yet. He could have been easily deposed by President Hindenberg.
The Nazis, in turn, accused a communist of starting the fire. The man they found was said to have been a patsy. Whether he was guilty of not isn't the point. The point is that the Nazis found a scapegoat for what was used as a pretext to suspend civil liberties. That is indeed what happened.
The suspension of civil liberties is what helped Hitler consolidate power, and to continue doing so over the next year or so, until Hindenberg died. When Hindenberg died, there was nobody left to oppose Hitler.
Now, let's turn to the modern situation here. If you are going to compare this to the Reichstag Fire, then let's be consistent. To do so, you would have to say that this suspect for the "bomb" scare, was the guy responsible. You have to claim a political connection to the act, and an intention to gain politically from it. On the basis of that, you would call for the suspension of civil liberties in order to consolidate your power. In other words, you have to blame the GOP and claim that the GOP had something to do with it. Or vice versa.
Is this the Reichstag Fire redux? Well, no. This isn't Weimar Germany, and the President isn't the Chancellor. There is nothing in the Constitution that allows for the suspension of civil liberties, unless it is martial law. Nothing like that has been proposed, nor is likely to be.
If anything, the ones who want to suspend any civil liberties are the Democrats. They want Trump to shut up! This "bomb" scare should not be a pretext for ending freedom of expression. I am quite sure Trump has no such intention, but I am not so sure about the Democrats. The Democrats seem to be using this for political advantage.
The guy who did this was the one responsible. Nobody made him do it. If you claim incitement because of legitimate political speech, you are getting close to what the Nazis did. If you are going to make the accusation, then you are going to have to prove the connections and intentions. That proof does not exist as of this time.
However, there is some attempts to gain politically from it before the election. That needs to stop.
The Reichstag Fire was said to have been arranged by the Nazis so that they could consolidate power around Adolf Hitler, who was just previously made chancellor. However, Hitler was not absolutely in charge yet. He could have been easily deposed by President Hindenberg.
The Nazis, in turn, accused a communist of starting the fire. The man they found was said to have been a patsy. Whether he was guilty of not isn't the point. The point is that the Nazis found a scapegoat for what was used as a pretext to suspend civil liberties. That is indeed what happened.
The suspension of civil liberties is what helped Hitler consolidate power, and to continue doing so over the next year or so, until Hindenberg died. When Hindenberg died, there was nobody left to oppose Hitler.
Now, let's turn to the modern situation here. If you are going to compare this to the Reichstag Fire, then let's be consistent. To do so, you would have to say that this suspect for the "bomb" scare, was the guy responsible. You have to claim a political connection to the act, and an intention to gain politically from it. On the basis of that, you would call for the suspension of civil liberties in order to consolidate your power. In other words, you have to blame the GOP and claim that the GOP had something to do with it. Or vice versa.
Is this the Reichstag Fire redux? Well, no. This isn't Weimar Germany, and the President isn't the Chancellor. There is nothing in the Constitution that allows for the suspension of civil liberties, unless it is martial law. Nothing like that has been proposed, nor is likely to be.
If anything, the ones who want to suspend any civil liberties are the Democrats. They want Trump to shut up! This "bomb" scare should not be a pretext for ending freedom of expression. I am quite sure Trump has no such intention, but I am not so sure about the Democrats. The Democrats seem to be using this for political advantage.
The guy who did this was the one responsible. Nobody made him do it. If you claim incitement because of legitimate political speech, you are getting close to what the Nazis did. If you are going to make the accusation, then you are going to have to prove the connections and intentions. That proof does not exist as of this time.
However, there is some attempts to gain politically from it before the election. That needs to stop.
"Bombs" weren't bombs
Updated:
10.27.18:
6:00 am:
After reading a bit about the suspect, just one comment: that this guy cannot be dismissed as a mere nutcase. That is all. More than that would be speculation, and I would rather not do that.
5:00 am:
The "bomber" has been apprehended. There has been only a limited amount of information about the guy as of yesterday, which was the last time I read the news on him. With limited information, there should be limited commentary, so for now, there won't be a lot to say about him. There is too much that we still don't know.
10:26.18:
The stuff in the bombs won't explode. The "devices" didn't have exploders. Therefore, they weren't bombs. Heck, you cannot even call them a device. It is just a prop that looks like a bomb.
You don't call a toy gun a gun. Don't call a fake bomb a bomb.
If it is a false flag deal, then will the Democrats apologize? Don't bet on it.
10.27.18:
6:00 am:
After reading a bit about the suspect, just one comment: that this guy cannot be dismissed as a mere nutcase. That is all. More than that would be speculation, and I would rather not do that.
5:00 am:
The "bomber" has been apprehended. There has been only a limited amount of information about the guy as of yesterday, which was the last time I read the news on him. With limited information, there should be limited commentary, so for now, there won't be a lot to say about him. There is too much that we still don't know.
10:26.18:
The stuff in the bombs won't explode. The "devices" didn't have exploders. Therefore, they weren't bombs. Heck, you cannot even call them a device. It is just a prop that looks like a bomb.
You don't call a toy gun a gun. Don't call a fake bomb a bomb.
If it is a false flag deal, then will the Democrats apologize? Don't bet on it.
Getting Close! FBI Has Images of the Bomb COURIER https://t.co/fYIqkE77ey— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) October 26, 2018
Thursday, October 25, 2018
Dire Straits: Water of Love
Forty years ago. Wow. I remember well when this came out. It really doesn't seem like it was that long ago.
This is rather well done, I must say.
Troops to border?
My trailer is parked close to a east west highway that is no more than 50 miles as the crow flies from a big base.
Last night I heard a lot of traffic that lasted for a while. It may have been enough to wake me up for a little while. It was maybe about 3 am.
What could that noise have been? Could it have been the deployment of US troops to the border?
Go west from here, and it is a long way. But it is long way south too. Texas is big, don't ya know.
Anyway, maybe it wasn't all that significant even if that is what it was. It wouldn't take much of a military strike to stop this, but then I don't think this is what it appears to be anyway. Nobody is actually walking the 1200 mile or so distance. Nope. It is a bunch of people taking a picture, and the media running with it. The mob gathers each day, and is probably a prearranged photo op. They take the picture each day a little closer to the border. Nobody is walking the whole time. If they were, they have to sleep outdoors? Ain't happening.
It is all a big circus for you to watch. The latest circus is the fake bombs. Fake bombs, fake crowds, fake rape accusations. Fake everything. Also Fake news. I hear CNN doesn't want to be called Fake news. Well, here's yours truly calling CNN fake news just because they don't like it. Fake news CNN. Nya, nya, nya-nya, nya!
We got soldier boys going to the border, yessiree Bob. Sorry to sound so cynical, but all of this fake stuff has that tendency.
Last night I heard a lot of traffic that lasted for a while. It may have been enough to wake me up for a little while. It was maybe about 3 am.
What could that noise have been? Could it have been the deployment of US troops to the border?
Go west from here, and it is a long way. But it is long way south too. Texas is big, don't ya know.
Anyway, maybe it wasn't all that significant even if that is what it was. It wouldn't take much of a military strike to stop this, but then I don't think this is what it appears to be anyway. Nobody is actually walking the 1200 mile or so distance. Nope. It is a bunch of people taking a picture, and the media running with it. The mob gathers each day, and is probably a prearranged photo op. They take the picture each day a little closer to the border. Nobody is walking the whole time. If they were, they have to sleep outdoors? Ain't happening.
It is all a big circus for you to watch. The latest circus is the fake bombs. Fake bombs, fake crowds, fake rape accusations. Fake everything. Also Fake news. I hear CNN doesn't want to be called Fake news. Well, here's yours truly calling CNN fake news just because they don't like it. Fake news CNN. Nya, nya, nya-nya, nya!
We got soldier boys going to the border, yessiree Bob. Sorry to sound so cynical, but all of this fake stuff has that tendency.
Everybody loves kumbaya, but we live in a real world. Wake up cupcake.
Once again, I am somewhat displeased to read Betsy's Page. A supposed conservative, or shall we say, a "moderate".
Of course we would all like everybody to get along. But there are people who need to be confronted.
It seems that many on the so-called "right" liked Ronald Reagan when he stood up to the Soviet Union. Yet, many of these same people cannot bring themselves to seeing that there is a principle involved. When someone acts aggressively, there is a need to respond.
You don't act like Dan Quayle, who said "that's was uncalled for, Senator", when Bentsen took a cheap shot at him. Frankly, it would have been satisfying to watch Dan Quayle walk across to Bentsen and punch him in the nose. Quayle was a gentleman, but that didn't cause him to win the debate. The Democrats made a mockery of Quayle from that point on.
But to punch out Bentsen would have been so uncivilized. When somebody breaks the bond of mutual consent that we need to live in a civilized society, and acts aggressively like Bentsen did, and which liberals do a lot of, then an aggressive response is necessary. Otherwise, you look weak. Weak people do not assume leadership positions. That is the real world.
But if everybody is nice, that sure would be nice. Yes, it would! But not everybody is nice. When the other side gets mean, you better be ready to defend yourself.
If Trump didn't defend himself, he would have been dismissed as a light weight, just like Quayle. It is necessary for him to do what he does because the left makes it necessary. Evidently, people like Betsy Newmark just don't get it.
The left uses aggression because they profit from it. Until there is a penalty for them, they will continue to do it. There is only one way to make them stop, and that is to respond in kind to their aggression.
That is why Trump is necessary.
Of course we would all like everybody to get along. But there are people who need to be confronted.
It seems that many on the so-called "right" liked Ronald Reagan when he stood up to the Soviet Union. Yet, many of these same people cannot bring themselves to seeing that there is a principle involved. When someone acts aggressively, there is a need to respond.
You don't act like Dan Quayle, who said "that's was uncalled for, Senator", when Bentsen took a cheap shot at him. Frankly, it would have been satisfying to watch Dan Quayle walk across to Bentsen and punch him in the nose. Quayle was a gentleman, but that didn't cause him to win the debate. The Democrats made a mockery of Quayle from that point on.
But to punch out Bentsen would have been so uncivilized. When somebody breaks the bond of mutual consent that we need to live in a civilized society, and acts aggressively like Bentsen did, and which liberals do a lot of, then an aggressive response is necessary. Otherwise, you look weak. Weak people do not assume leadership positions. That is the real world.
But if everybody is nice, that sure would be nice. Yes, it would! But not everybody is nice. When the other side gets mean, you better be ready to defend yourself.
If Trump didn't defend himself, he would have been dismissed as a light weight, just like Quayle. It is necessary for him to do what he does because the left makes it necessary. Evidently, people like Betsy Newmark just don't get it.
The left uses aggression because they profit from it. Until there is a penalty for them, they will continue to do it. There is only one way to make them stop, and that is to respond in kind to their aggression.
That is why Trump is necessary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)