While everything in our history has been disparaged, the fight against Nazism has been, so far, spared by the left. This is now being “corrected”, with the Washington Post noting that while the Allied leaders were anti-Nazi, they weren’t anti-racist. The left will erase every last bit of our history if we give them the chance.
Related: Professor says that whiteness is terrorism.
A radicalized Methodist plotted a terrorist attack in California. Oh wait: scratch that – it was a radicalized Muslim.
On this day in history, Saigon fell to the Communists. Never has any nation betrayed another as badly as we betrayed the Republic of Vietnam.
Interesting article on the Christian origins of Islam. Of course, people who know have always seen Islam as a Christian heresy. Mohammed apparently spent a lot of time in then-Christian Syria and he would have been surrounded there by a Christian society which hotly disputed just about every aspect of Christianity. No surprise that he picked up a version of it which allowed him to place himself at the head of the enterprise – he just had to deny the divinity of Christ and he was off to the races.
Hoaxers falsely accused Peter Buttigieg of sexual assault. Thing is, there was as much evidence against Buttigieg as there was against Kavanaugh. Now, note the difference: Kavanaugh was slandered by the national media in an orgy of hatred, none of which has been retracted or apologized for (indeed, they are giving Kavanaugh’s lying accuser awards), while it took just a few hours for the same national media to debunk the accusations against Buttigieg.
Brazil moves decidedly away from the left. This is a good thing. Brazil (population 208 million, 3.2 million square miles of territory) should be a Great Power nearly on par with the United States. If Brazil really can navigate away from the authortarian leftism which has plauged Latin America for a century, it would be great for Brazil and the world.
MSNBC unwittingly endorsed the Second Amendment:
“Not only hanging on but he appears to still control the military,” Kerry Sanders replied. “You have to understand, in Venezuela gun ownership is not something that’s open to everybody. So if the military have the guns, they have the power. And as long as Nicolas Maduro controls the military, he controls the country.”
Hugo Chavez ran to govern the once very successful country of Venezuela, and ran as a Democratic Socialist like ALL of our Democrat POTUS candidates are currently doing. After his election, the country began the slow descent into chaos and hell.
“Guns would have served as a vital pillar to remaining a free people, or at least able to put up a fight,” Javier Vanegas, 28, a Venezuelan teacher of English now exiled in Ecuador, told Fox News at the time. “The government security forces, at the beginning of this debacle, knew they had no real opposition to their force. Once things were this bad, it was a clear declaration of war against an unarmed population.”
KEEP YOUR GUNS FOLKS. You just may need them if a Democrat gets elected.
KEEP YOUR GUNS FOLKS. You just may need them if a Democrat gets elected.
I sure hope it doesn’t come to that, and that’s coming from someone who is trained and proficient with a variety of firearms. The guy who runs the tech end of Indiana Oath Keepers put on a power point presentation at our annual state convention last Saturday about civil wars of the last half century around the globe. He covered causes, the time span going from cold to warm to hot, the break down of casualties, and it’s just not something that anyone should wish for. The majority of casualties are ALWAYS civilians, the majority of which are women and children. All that said, I have almost zero confidence that elements of the Left won’t do something stupid, so we Conservatives will likely not have a choice in the matter. The famous quote that kicked off our own Revolutionary War should be our motto in the next:
It’s not just guns. I am waiting for a Leftist ban on assault bats.
Denver police have arrested a man suspected of beating four people with a baseball bat at a strip club on Sunday. One man died from his injuries and a woman remains hospitalized in critical condition. Another man and another woman sufferer blunt force injuries but have been released from the hospital.
If it would only save one life………..
And once baseball has been eliminated from American sports, it wouldn’t matter anyway. It is only a matter of time. It starts with banning hot dogs, which of course makes attending a baseball game a waste of time. And then we can expect Alyssa and Alexandria to be inspired by this, from what was supposed to be a parody of Leftist non-think but which has, as so often happens, started to approach prophecy:
Ms. Steinboxer-Mowgli issued a press release, stating “I have just attended a baseball game, and was appalled. I witnessed a huge—ugh!—man violently hitting a ball with a stick. Yes, you may say, it’s just a ball. But in his mind it is a woman. After he hits it, another player picks it up and throws it as hard as he can at the first-base person, who has to protect himself or herself with a sort of glove-thingy. It is worse than dodge ball. And children watch this, and imitate it.”
Sexual assault and unwanted touching is simply a matter of political party affiliation. When are you right wingers going to figure that one out?
Subjection of women is now celebrated by Sports Illustrated
With Venezuela in full blown civil war it’s time for a little blast from the past. There but for the grace of God go we.
Here is an idea so antithetical to current Leftist thinking it would, if widely published, lead Leftists into even more spasms of outrage and fury, and indictments of the author as vile and vicious racist. Yet he was the most prominent and respected African-American activist of his time. What the Left will never be able to forgive is that he was also honest and a clear thinker.
In his book “The Philadelphia Negro” (1899), W.E.B. Du Bois posed the question as to what would happen if white people lost their prejudices overnight. He said that it would make little difference to most blacks. He said: “Some few would be promoted, some few would get new places—the mass would remain as they are” until the younger generation began to “try harder” and the race “lost the omnipresent excuse for failure: prejudice.”
There is another Du Bois quote I like, that seems to refer to the current crop of Democrat freshmen Representatives and even more so to those who admire them:
To stimulate wildly weak and untrained minds is to play with mighty fires.”
LOL!! Here’s the guy CNN and MSNBC said had a spectacular campaign roll-out.
And they say Trump has trouble talking.
Here is a great example of a major difference between the Left and the Right. Can any of us imagine a conservative (1) verbally attacking a Liberal in public for showing support for a Liberal (2) doing so by yelling profanity and insults at him (3) then bragging about it on Twitter as if it is something to be proud of and (4) saying the target of her unhinged profane invective was the one being “hateful”?
Natalie Weiner raged on Twitter in three tweets, “just yelled at a prick with the audacity to wear a f****ng make america great again hat in the middle of a jazz festival … i don’t understand how people can be so hateful i really don’t … he was walking to see irma thomas and he doesn’t deserve to be within a 10 mile radius of irma Thomas.”
OK, take a step back and look at this as an example of a Leftist believing that no one with an opinion or position different from that of the radical rabid Left has a right to participate in a cultural event, and extrapolate that conviction to a wider scope. As Leftism always, when fully or nearly fully implemented, results in the State (that is, the Left) imposing its own value system, moral system and political system on everyone and enforcing that imposition, I see this as not just an example of a truly vile person but as of an escalation of the Left’s self-identification as justified in attacking anyone who is not part of the club.
We cannot but believe that this, if the Left were to gain more power, would be anything but a harbinger of what we could expect from an increasingly intolerant and tyrannical State and its foot soldiers.
Natalie is a product of our current educational system and is simply following the lead of Democrat elected representatives, ie; Hirono, Pelosi, Harris, Booker, Schiff etc. Their display again yesterday with Barr, on the heels of their display against Kavanaugh was wholly unbecoming to them, their party, and their legions of mobs.
They will not go down until we put them down.
Joey Scarborough just said that he thought the Democrats performed “really well” yesterday and showed America that they will hold “power accountable”. The problem is, they are speaking to a shrinking audience:
CNN’s prime-time ratings dropped a whopping 26 percent in April compared to last year, according to Nielsen Media Research.
MSNBC’s ratings were down 14 percent in April 2019 compared to April 2018, while Fox News’s ratings overall were flat.
Evidently a lot of other people are finding them to be really annoying and stupid too.
If you have an IQ over 80 and average memory retention, you are not a member of the Democrat base.
And Whoopi (it’s not rape rape) Goldberg is a gold standard member of that base:
“You have to answer the questions.This is not a game, this is not a TV show, man! This is our lives, this is America! You gotta answer these questions so we can figure out whether this guy need to be the president again!”
I find myself hoping that the Dem House will try to impeach Trump. Their hysteria now seems to be based on the idea that he wanted to fire Mueller, and I would love to see a big effort to impeach the president not on anything he did but on what he considered doing. Nothing could be a clearer example of the tyranny of the Left than its determination that people have to be punished for what they think, and an impeachment effort would provide the perfect foundation for a powerful speech by Trump in which he could explain to the public that the House had just shown America what would lie ahead of it if the Left were to be in power—-show trials of people for what they think.
And if wanting to fire Mueller were to constitute obstruction of justice—-setting aside the fact that obstruction of justice is dependent on first identifying an actual crime to be investigated—then surely wanting to burn down the White House (Madonna) would constitute arson and wanting to behead the president (Griffin) would constitute murder. We should at least demand consistency. And in true Leftist tradition we should encourage people to turn in their friends, family, neighbors and co-workers for saying they talked about doing something illegal.
No, I say to the Dems, “Go for it.” And then prepare a speech saying, among other things, that if the constituents of those who pushed for impeachment elected those people to waste the time and money of the United States government to pursue political agendas and mount a coup to unseat an elected president instead of to do the actual business of Congress they got what they wanted—but those who wanted to be represented in legislation and actual government were betrayed. A list of the few things these people actually accomplished, or even tried to accomplish, compared to the time they spent trying to overthrow a president to advance the agendas of their party, on the American dime, complete with breakdown of cost to the taxpayer, would be informative.
In other words, hand them shovels and stay out of their way
One part of the Barr inquisition struck me as funny.
“You accepted the [Mueller] report as evidence,” Harris, appearing angry, said. “You did not question or look at the underlying evidence that supports the conclusions of the report?”
“We accepted the statements in the report as the factual record,” Barr later answered. “We did not go underneath it to see whether or not they were accurate. We accepted it as accurate.”
Harris seemed to be stunned that Barr would accept the Mueller report at face value:
Here is where the theater aspect of the show trial kind of inquisition stood out. “STUNNED”. I can imagine her clutching at her pearls and nearly swooning in shock, playing to the cameras.
When I first read this, the account stopped here, and I imagined a continuation along the lines of “So what you are saying, Mr. Barr, is that you did not insult the intelligence or competence of Mr. Mueller by checking his work, so to speak, by going back over the entire two years of his investigation and re-investigating the matters he looked into, to make sure he did what he was supposed to do and did it correctly?”
But then I read more of her line of questioning and learned that she did, essentially, that very thing.
As the attorney general of the United States, you run the United States Department of Justice. If in any U.S. attorney’s office around the country, the head of that office, when being asked to make a critical decision—in this case, the person who holds the highest office in the land—on whether or not that person committed a crime, would you accept them recommending a charging decision to you if they had not reviewed the evidence?
Barr responded, accurately: emphasis mine
“Well, that’s a question for Bob Mueller. He’s the U.S. attorney [on this case]. He’s the one who presents the report.”
It’s not standard procedure, Barr explained to Harris, to reinvestigate what the investigators already have done.
“This is not a mysterious process and [at] the Department of Justice, we have [prosecution] memos and declination memos every day coming up,” Barr said. “And we don’t go and look at the underlying evidence. We take the characterization of the evidence as true.”
I have to think that this laid Harris open to some very pointed questioning in her efforts to be elected president of the United States—such as whether, as Chief Executive, she would personally go beyond recommendations made to her by her staff and personally dig into every piece of information and evidence to evaluate it all herself. More to the point, when she was an assistant district attorney in California and then the state DA, did she do this? Did she personally call for the evidence in every case so she could review it and re-investigate it?
Time to interview the attorneys who worked under her for statements about whether or not she accepted recommendations for prosecution or dropping cases. Call the b**ch out.
Call the b**ch out
Your characterization of Kamala is too kind.
Just a couple of comments on an article on RedState:
(1) the special counsel’s office wanted to wage warfare via leaks and innuendo, setting the stage for a Democratic House to act Exactly. These are people who know the law and know that there was never a crime, just an opportunity to churn up a lot of fragmented information that could be assembled by their propaganda committee into something vaguely resembling something legitimate—but never through an actual legitimate process, only through the tactics they employed.
(2) His 448 page report is a listing of ugly details about Trump’s internal administration behavior “Details” from whom? Corroborated by whom? This reeks of the kind of underhanded, very probably bogus, citations by hacks like Bernstein, quoting alleged “inside sources”. I suggest drilling down into this “listing of ugly details about Trump’s internal administration behavior” (to me, a key word as it refers to superficial appearances and not serious acts) and not just letting this sit there stinking up the room without ever questioning it.
We have to remember the underhanded tactics of the Left, which include sly insertions of words like “behavior” (which might have come from the author of the RedState piece and not the report itself) which IMPLY things that don’t really exist. For example, a CEO might have a personality of bombast in initial reactions to things and then when it comes time to act act in a calm and reasonable manner. If only the original venting of emotion is reported, the image of the CEO is quite distorted.
Another great Dennis Miller quote:
“Liberalism is like a nude beach. It sounds good until you get there.”
We also have to keep in mind the nature of grand jury testimony. Grand juries are not a two way street. People who testify before a grand jury are not allowed to have an attorney present in the court room and are not subject to cross examination by a potential defendant’s attorney. If someone lies to a grand jury, the prosecutor has a fiduciary responsibility to investigate and prosecute (Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury) if he/she thinks a witness has lied, but has no obligation to provide a rebuttal witness at the time of the testimony on the suspicion that a witness has lied, although knowingly allowing a witness to lie to a grand jury is grounds for charges of prosecutorial misconduct. If two witnesses present conflicting testimony it’s up to the grand jury to decide if one of them is telling the truth. New York State chief judge Sol Wachtler was famously quoted by Tom Wolfe in The Bonfire of the Vanities that “a grand jury would ‘indict a ham sandwich,’ if that’s what you wanted.”
Like Rush Limbaugh or hate him, IMO, he’s one of the most talented political analysts on the planet. His take on the Mueller Report and its aftermath is a good read.
Read the whole thing. In fact, every segment of his show today was dynamite.
Obama knew about Russian interference back in 2014, and in 2016 Obama chided Trump for even bringing up the possibility that Russia could interfere with our electoral process saying at the time:
Oct. 18, 2016
WASHINGTON — President Obama ridiculed Donald J. Trump on Tuesday for saying that the presidential election was rigged against him, telling Mr. Trump, the Republican nominee, to “stop whining and go try to make his case” to win more votes than Hillary Clinton.
Had Hillary Clinton won, there would have been no mention of what Russia did and this issue would have never been brought up. They fully expected Hillary to win and did not want to tarnish her presidency with the Russian interference issue, but it did serve well when they needed to fabricate a case against Trump. Think of it as an “insurance policy”
This next segment of Rush’s show is even better. I’m just going to copy the whole thing and save a step.
RUSH: During the busy broadcast today, folks, I’m gonna be going back to yesterday for audio sound bites. Attorney General Barr was spectacular later in the day yesterday when we had gone off the air, we had concluded our program, and I wanted to play also for you the second half of the Mazie Hirono slander assault on the attorney general. I want to mix that with things that happened this morning. They’re all interrelated.
RUSH: Now, let’s go back to yesterday. Here we are starting with audio sound bite number 26. I want you to hear this. I referenced this. This happened near the close of the program yesterday. As you know, I say now for what must be the 10,000th time, there is an ongoing body of thought that the investigation into Trump colluding with Russia began at the end of June or July in 2016 when George Papadopoulos, at a bar in London, told the Australian ambassador that the Russians had 30,000 emails. And then the Australian ambassador named Alexander Downer then called the FBI. “Hey, you guys might be interested to know that there’s this Trump guy here bragging about the fact that they all know at the Trump campaign the Russians have some Hillary Clinton emails.” And that supposedly is what triggered the investigation.
It isn’t. It’s made up. Papadopoulos was set up by the FBI. The investigation began long before Papadopoulos had all this happen to him. As you who are regular listeners here know, Durbin tried to run the Papadopoulos story by Barr, and he didn’t get very far.
DURBIN: The Australian government had told our FBI the Trump foreign policy aid, George Papadopoulos, said he’d been contacted by a person on Russia’s behalf offering to assist the Trump campaign by releasing information damaging to Hillary Clinton. That was all in the Mueller report. Do you believe that it was an appropriate predicate for opening a counterintelligence investigation to determine whether Russia had targeted people in the Trump campaign to offer hacked information that might impact a presidential election?
RUSH: I’m sitting here in utter awe of the stupidity or arrogance of Durbin thinking that he’s gonna outsmart Barr on this. Barr knows the Papadopoulos story, and he knows that it has nothing to do with triggering an FBI investigation into collusion. Barr knows everything. His answer to Durbin was fabulous.
BARR: I’d have to see exactly what the report was for Downer, the Australian Downer, and exactly what he quoted Papadopoulos as saying. But from what you just read, I’m not sure what the correlation was between the Russians having dirt and jumping to the conclusion that that suggested foreknowledge of the hacking.
RUSH: He just slices and dices it. This is what happened. These people on the left, they believe the crap that they’re fed by their media or by their own sources and staff. So they’ve got someone out there who believes that this whole thing began when Papadopoulos, on the Trump foreign policy advisory team, was running around bragging that he knew that the Russians had a bunch of Hillary Clinton emails. So Durbin’s question is, “Don’t you think that’s a legitimate reason to start investigating Trump? Don’t you think that’s a legitimate reason to launch a counterintelligence investigation?”
Barr says, “Well, you know, I’d have to actually see what the report was from Downer, the Australian,” see, he knows who he is, “and exactly what he quoted Papadopoulos.” This is Barr’s way of saying, “You’re not telling this story accurately, Senator. You’re trying to get away with setting me up, Senator, but you’re not telling this story accurately, and I’m not gonna fall for your premise.” And then the double slice:
“But for what you just read, Senator, I’m not sure what the correlation was between the Russians having dirt (i.e., Hillary’s emails) and then jumping to the conclusion that that suggested foreknowledge of the hacking.” I’m sure Durbin’s sitting there with his head exploding. “What do you mean, hacking? I didn’t ask you about hacking.” Yeah, but what Barr knows is that the hacking of the DNC servers happened long before this Papadopoulos stuff did and at about the same time.
There’s no correlation between the two. The Democrats, one day, think that it’s the hacking of their servers that required this investigation to begin. That Trump might have known about it! It’s just convoluted and all over the place, and it’s like they know 30% of something while thinking they know 100% of it, and they’re asking somebody who does know the full story, thinking they’re smarter than he is.
RUSH: By the way, Durbin’s Papadopoulos story — well, their Papadopoulos story — also doesn’t jibe with the claim that the Russians only tried for the first time to hack Hillary’s emails after Trump’s joke. Remember we had that yesterday. (impression) “The Russians, five hours after Trump’s joke, made their first effort — made their first effort — to hack Hillary’s email.” Her server had been shut down for a year. Mueller’s report is full of so much BS and so much incorrect information, it’s hard to know whether it’s purposeful or not.
Trump’s joke was in July 2017. Papadopoulos was told the Russians had her emails in April of 2016, and started telling other people about it that summer. Something here doesn’t compute. None of this makes any sense, because there’s so many people involved in setting up this scam that not everybody knows the timeline and details. You’ve got different people who think they know what happened telling different stories, and it’s gonna fall apart.
Here, grab sound bite number 29 next. This is Barr. We didn’t see this. This is where all of this is going. This is why the Democrats are desperate to ruin Barr’s reputation. This is why they’re assaulting him. This is why they’re impugning. This is why they’re slandering him and calling him a liar. This is the question here from Senator Mike Crapo, the Republican from Idaho, asking Barr about the Steele dossier.
CRAPO: When did the DOJ and the FBI…? If you know, when did the DOJ and the FBI know that the Democratic Party paid for Christopher Steele’s dossier, which then served as the foundation for the Carter Page FISA application?
BARR: I don’t know the answer to that.
CRAPO: Are you investigating to determine that?
CRAPO: Did the Department of Justice, the FBI, and other federal agencies engage in investigative activities before an official investigation was launched in July 2016?
BARR: I don’t know the answer to that, but that’s one of the —
CRAPO: You’re also investigating that?
CRAPO: All right. Thank you very much, Attorney General.
RUSH: Their heads were exploding. That was, again, yesterday afternoon. So Barr telegraphs, “Yeah, we’re looking into this dossier. We’re looking into the FISA warrant process. We’re gonna find out who paid for that dossier. We’re gonna find out where it got started and what’s in it, and we’re gonna find out where this investigation began, because we know it began before July of 2016.” Barr has already begun the investigation, is what he has admitted to here yesterday.
And their heads are exploding for the rest of the day, all night, and continuing into this morning. Go back to sound bite 28. This is Barr during a Q&A during the Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday. Barr is talking about allegations of obstruction of justice against Trump. Remember, they want to know, “Why didn’t Mueller find any obstruction? Why didn’t you find any obstruction? There was plenty of obstruction. It’s all over the report. Why didn’t you find it?”
Listen to Barr’s explanation. This is brilliant.
BARR: In the situation of the president, who has constitutional authority to supervise proceedings: If, in fact, a proceeding was not well founded — if it was a groundless proceeding, if it was based on false allegations — the president does not have to sit there, constitutionally, and allow it to run its course. The president could terminate that proceeding, and it would not be a corrupt intent because he was being falsely accused and he would be worried about the impact on his administration. That’s important, because most of the obstruction claims that are being made here or episodes, do involve the exercise of the president’s constitutional authority. And we now know that he was being falsely accused.
RUSH: I mean, the explosion that happened on this sound bite! When he said this, these people, their heads had to explode. In this sound bite of 48 seconds, Barr is saying everybody knows the president was falsely accused. Therefore, if he’s falsely accused and he knows he didn’t do it and there’s an investigation into what he didn’t do, he cannot obstruct it, especially when he is exercising constitutional authority.
The president doesn’t have to sit there and allow a bunch of lies to be told about things he did not do that would result in harm to his administration. He doesn’t have to sit there and put up with it! If he knows that he is falsely accused — and we all know now that he was, Barr said — the fact that he is trying to stop an unfair and unjust process does not mean he obstructed. Folks, I guarantee you, this one bite there is the reason they are losing their minds last night and continuing into today.
I got this in an email this afternoon, and it’s just too hilarious not to share.
Preview of 2020 Election Choices…
Written by George S. Bardmesser who is an attorney in private practice in the Washington, DC area.
George wrote this article in the March 13, 2019 issue of “The Federalist” which is an on-line magazine relating issues on politics, religion and culture. George makes good sense.
It’s a damn shame I have to wait another 20 months to vote for President Trump. I wish I could do it now. Twice. Or better yet, in as many jurisdictions as I can. Preferably in every swing district and every swing state.
Yeah, yeah, I know — sadly, I can’t. It’s been a hell of a ride these past couple of years, and I sure hope it doesn’t end next November.
I am a middle-of-the-road Republican who voted for Trump with the utmost reluctance in 2016. He sure wasn’t perfect. He was no Cicero, either––though he can give a decent speech when the chips are down. He had a few extra skeletons rattling in his closet, especially compared to colorless non-entities like Jeb. So yeah, I was queasy about voting for an ex-registered-Democrat-from-New-York-and-possible-liberal-now-turned-Republican.
Was I worried? Hell, yeah! Was I depressed? You bet. But, really, what options were there? Hillary? Jill Stein? Seriously? Trump wasn’t my first choice or my second choice or my third choice, but by the time November 2016 rolled around, Trump was the only choice on the menu. So I swallowed hard, took a leap of faith, and pulled the lever for the Donald.
And let me tell ya, every time one of these newly minted Democratic “stars” opens their mouth, the same thought goes through my mind: Thank God for Trump. Trump is my last line of defense. Trump is the only thing that stands between me and these hallucinogenic socialist nut jobs. Trump is what’s keeping chaos and left-wing insanity at bay.
Maybe I am not a gettable voter for the Democrats. Certainly not easily gettable, but had Trump turned out to be a closet Nelson Rockefeller, and the Democrats were to nominate a genuine centrist, who knows what could’ve happened? Isn’t that what politicians running for president are supposed to do––spend a few months promoting themselves as the reasonable choice, and the other guy as unacceptable?
But today, every single Democrat I can name is working overtime to make damn certain that I will pull the lever for Trump again, and with both hands this time. Trump need not worry about locking down my vote––the Democrats are doing all the heavy lifting.
Every time the Democrats and their media allies peddle yet another “end of the Trump presidency bombshell,” I laugh hysterically. If I laughed any harder, people would think I was having an epileptic seizure.
I can’t even keep track of half the revelations that were supposed to bring Trump to an ignominious end. Even the Democrats forget most of them within days. Remember Papadopoulos? Flynn? Gates? Roger Stone? Some 77-year-old guy I’ve never heard of, getting a handjob at a Florida massage parlor?
Say what? This is a Trump scandal because apparently the former massage parlor owner posed with Trump and various Republicans who know or have spoken to Trump. Who? What? Huh? Democrats don’t just own crazy anymore; Democrats left crazy in their rearview mirror months ago.
Stormy Daniels? Right. Who gives two shits about Trump’s sex life 12 years ago? But, but, “Trump paid her off! It was hush money!” you say? Yeah, okay. He probably did. Oh, hell, who are we kidding here? I am certain that he did. And I care about all this why? I can see why Melania would care, but why do I care?
Heck, I’ll go even further––it wouldn’t surprise me if Trump paid off a bunch of other women over the years. In fact, and here I am really going out on a limb, there was some reason to suspect, even before the election, that Trump hasn’t always been a faithful husband to his various wives. But, dear Democrats: I just checked my Vanguard and Fidelity account balances, and I just don’t give a squat about Trump’s sex life or his ex-mistresses or how much they cost him.
Michael who, you say? Michael Cohen? Oh, yeah, the sleazeball who took Trump’s money for years and years, and then, once his taxicab schemes and assorted other shenanigans fell apart and prison time loomed, suddenly had an epiphany about Trump? The guy who plead guilty to lying to Congress? The guy who begged Trump for a pardon? That Michael Cohen? If Democrats think Michael Cohen’s pathetic drooling before some congressional committee will change my mind, they are beyond delusional.
Trump Organization, you say? Something about possible non-compliance with New York State health insurance purchasing regulations? Congress will investigate, you say? Uh huh. I am fatigued out with these investigations. You want me to vote for some Democrat because Andrew Cuomo says Trump didn’t follow his insurance regulations? Are you people for real?
What’s that? Russia? Mueller? Collusion? I am sick of Russia and I am sick of Mueller. I am sick of Comey, Rosenstein, Ohr, McCabe, Yates, Strzok, Page, Baker, and the rest of the gang. I am beyond sick of them. I am vomit-inducingly sick of them. (And, for the record, I was born in Russia, so I know Russia like these Democrat clowns can’t even imagine.) After years of nonstop investigations, all they actually have on the collusion front is Manafort’s tax evasion from 10 years ago. That’s it?
Remember that New York Times monster 15,000-word article about Trump’s inheritance taxes 30 years ago? Ask me if I care Jared Kushner? Next! Ivanka’s shoe line? Whatever. Trump Hotel in DC? Yawn. The Emoluments Clause? Puuuuhhhhlease. Obstruction? Here, I agree. Trump made a mistake. He should have fired Comey’s ass on day one instead of waiting two months to do it.
But then, this is all yesterday’s news. Who needs last year’s bombshells when we have today’s contestants! The Donkey Party has a new leader: someone called Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Every time her bright red lips form a sentence, I hear a clarion call: Must Vote For Trump! Unlike AOC, I actually know firsthand what socialism is. I don’t need to imagine the future that AOC is trying to shove down my throat––I lived in that future and I pray I’ll never have to live in that future again.
Every time AOC proposes to build trains to Europe, or wants butt plugs for cows to control their flatulence, or wants to spend $93 trillion on fairyland, I really, really want to vote for Trump. So make Ocasio-Cortez more visible! Make Ocasio-Cortez speaker of the House! Make her the keynote speaker at the convention!
All the CNN talking heads agree that Trump is an idiot? Maybe, but at least he isn’t planning to ban my car. Trump lies? Maybe, but with Trump, we’ll still have airplanes (and my 401(k) plan has been doing great since his election).
This gets us to the next installment of “Friday the 13th,” a.k.a. the Democratic presidential candidates. Kamala Harris, you say? You seriously want me to vote for Kamala Harris? And you say that Cory “Spartacus” Booker is just like Kamala, only better and balder? Are you kidding me? Pete Buttigieg? Ask me again when I stop laughing.
Bernie? Really? This grumpy near-octogenarian “public service” millionaire with three mansions is running for the presidency of the wrong country. All his best ideas have already been put into practice––in Venezuela.
This is a guy who pseudo-honeymooned in the USSR (two years before it collapsed!), and didn’t notice that people were waiting in mile-long lines for literally everything. This is a guy who has never met a paleo-Stalinist dictator he couldn’t be best pals with. Bernie doesn’t need to pretend he is a complete crank; he is a complete crank.
I will personally call every one of my friends, neighbors, and acquaintances, and beg them to vote for Trump. I will even offer to come and wash their cars while in the nude, if only they’d vote for Trump.
Did someone say Warren? Warren, the first Cherokee candidate — that Warren? Doesn’t she now want reparations not just for African-Americans, but also for Native Americans? Where, oh where, is that lever to pull for Trump?
Biden? The creepy old guy who likes to massage women and 13-year-old girls in public? That guy? I have a 19-year-old daughter, and I sure hope he never goes anywhere near her. But I do hope he runs. It feels like he’s been running for president in every election since Eisenhower. Can he lurch far enough to the left this time, to satisfy the woke police? I doubt it, but it will be fun to watch him try.
Ilhan Omar? Maybe she should run for president too. Nancy suggests that Omar is a good person who is simply too ignorant to understand what her words mean. I disagree. Omar is only saying what all the other Democrats are thinking. Yes, she is an anti-Semite. Yes, she is totally mainstream within the Democratic Party.
Throw that toxic Tlaib person into the mix, and we’ve got the triumvirate that truly runs the Democratic Party now––Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, and Tlaib. I see this nutterfest, and let me tell you, dear Democrats: I am motivated as hell. If ever given a choice (in this election or in other ones) between Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Tlaib, Pelosi, Warren, Harris, Booker, Biden, Sanders, or Trump, I will take Trump any day of the week.
I am a highly motivated Trump voter because the Democrats have motivated me up to my eyeballs. I have never been more motivated in my life, because the Democrats are terrifying me. I am locked, cocked, and ready to rock in that voting booth. I just wish I didn’t have to wait 20 months
Fantastic email …. loved it
Yeah, it kind made my day.