Good article on the Democrat-created collapse of California into Third World status. My only quibble is whether or not the voters of California are really that stupid – I do believe a great deal of the Democrat’s continued power there in spite of obvious failure is due to voter fraud on a grand scale.
Adam Schiff – a completely garbage person – is essentially witness tampering. He has to: if there aren’t lies, then he won’t even have a garbage reason to impeach Trump.
Meanwhile, the latest savior for impeachment – Lt. Colonel Vindman – is going to prove as a much a dud as the previous saviors. The real problem here, of course, is that Trump hasn’t done anything wrong. Had he explicitly told the Ukrainians that they’d get nothing unless they specifically investigated Hunter Biden, that still wouldn’t be a violation of law. In fact, it would be Trump merely going his job as the sole man with Constitutional authority to enforce federal law. To put it in really clear terms: once Trump became aware of what the Bidens were up to, it would have been an impeachable offense had he not done all he could to have the matter investigated as he is commanded by the Constitution to see to it that the laws are faithfully enforced. Anyways, back to Vindman: my bet is that he’s the guy who told the “whistleblower”…and if so, he broke the law…and so running to Congress may be a mere means to protect himself against prosecution by Barr.
Taylor Swift, who has been going increasingly SJW, is going to perform like a trained dog for the Chinese Communists. This does lend credence to a theory I’ve heard that it is the Chi-Coms who are pushing the SJW crap as a means to weaken the United States. Say bad things about America, get a Chinese contract.
Related: China’s economic problems could make for more aggression. Could be: a little known aspect of the timing of the start of WWII was that Hitler was informed in early 1939 that Germany was close to bankruptcy and it was either stop the military build up and have a recession, or conquer resources. The original German plan to attack was moved up from 1942 to 1939.
Blogs For Victory 
…. whether or not the voters of California are really that stupid
And it’s really come down to just that basic question hasn’t it? The Left destroys everything it touches and yet people still keep voting for it. In fact, they move away from it and then vote for it again in their new community, as Amazona has spoke of in CO. California is on fire with no power and people living in tents because of leftist ideologies, identity politics, political correctness and the rest of the sewage Democrats wade in so you really have to scratch your head and ask … are you really this f****ng stupid?
“… a theory I’ve heard that it is the Chi-Coms who are pushing the SJW crap as a means to weaken the United States…”
Well, DUH! The Left, no matter what flag it flies, has been focused on destabilizing this country for decades, and every step to the Left means the next one can be bigger. Russia stirred the Collusion Pot a little, just to keep the Leftist heads exploding and generate more internal conflict and chaos, no doubt laughing all the while.
It used to be pretty limited to Class Warfare, with a side trip into Gender Warfare but that was just man vs woman. They had a hard time pushing racism till they got Obama in power, and then he developed that meme till it became the psychodrama it is now. Now they have a firm enough foundation to expand their divisive and fragmenting tactics. Now it’s so many subcategories of gender, so many bizarre definitions of race, the whole nation is splintered into subgroups.
No—I take that back. Most of the nation just looks at this insanity and shakes its collective heads. WTH? Out in the Heartland, nobody cares. The freak shows on the coasts and Leftist enclaves like Chicago are ignored.
If most of America is racist and hates black people, why do money-grubbing capitalists focused on nothing but the almighty dollar risk alienating tens of millions of people by creating so many ads for so many products that feature not just black people but mixed-race couples? In a truly racist nation, wouldn’t this turn off customers and hurt the bottom line? No—clearly, market research has said that no one cares. Mental health issues like thinking you are the other gender, or some combination of invented genders, are treated with kindness and tolerance but not celebrated as courageous or admirable. Most women who do have abortions are rightly ashamed, not going on television to brag about their “favorite abortions”. Most people work, and are married if they have children, and go to church or at least believe in God.
If we believe the Complicit Agenda Media, the whole country is batshit crazy, but in real life that’s almost entirely reserved for the Left. An example: In California, where the state and local governments have pretty much destroyed a once-great state, people now want PG&E turned over to the state to run. It’s like they are saying “It’s not falling apart fast enough—let’s put the state in charge to speed up the disaster”.
But yes, the Left is fomenting chaos and conflict. They have to. A stable nation is just not vulnerable to the insanity of Leftism/
Mark Steyn said something really good the other night. He was talking about delayed adulthood in this country, the phenomenon of people in their late 20s and early 30s still living at home with their parents, and he said when you are stuck in adolescence you are going to be attracted to adolescent political philosophies. I thought it was a great point.
Speaking with Fox News host Laura Ingraham earlier this month, Papadopoulos alleged that the Obama administration’s actions against him and the president, not to mention the other “beautiful” lives affected by the Russia probe, are tantamount to treason.
“Basically how I would summarize this, the grand statesman under Rome, Cicero, you know what he said? He said a nation can survive the ambitious and the fools, but it can’t survive the treason from within,” he boldly stated.
What are your thoughts on Ben Rhodes?
Why do you ask?
Do you mean THIS Ben Rhodes, who said:
When asked if Trump was white supremacist, Rhodes said, “Well, I certainly agree. Check the videotape. This is a man who built the program where my old boss wasn’t born in the United States. Would he possibly be saying that if Barack Obama was white? No. In his first speech, he calls Mexicans rapists and on and on. The fact the massive uptick in white supremacy violence is somehow just coincidental that they say the same things the white supremacists say on message boards, you know beggar’s (sic) belief here, Nicolle. We have to call a thing what’s they are.”
He continued, “This is a national security crisis I would say, Nicolle. The number one threat to the American people in terms of their personal security is a threat of white supremacist terrorism. That’s not just my view, that’s the view of the director of the FBI. A normal president would be running meetings on this in the White House. A normal president would be putting more resources on this challenge. A normal president would have Department of Justice and Homeland Security trying to figure out what the radicalization process that is leading to these shootings. If you look at Donald Trump, what we hear from the reporting is the Department of Homeland Security scrubbed mentions of white supremacist terrorism in favor of just focusing on Islamic terrorism because they don’t want to upset Trump.
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/08/09/ben-rhodes-trump-absolutely-a-threat-to-national-security/
It’s hard to sort out the insanity from the purposeful lying from the paranoia from the blind hatred and did I mention the purposeful lying?
Back in the day, Obama claimed to be born in Kenya. His grandmother swore up and down she had been present at his birth in Kenya. His publisher’s bio said he was from Kenya. His wife said he had been born in Kenya. His whole publicity schtick said he was born in Kenya. Then anyone who had paid attention to any of that was a liar, a “birther” and a conspiracy theorist. Oh, and a RACIST !!!!
Trump never said “Mexicans (are) rapists”. When a claim has to be based on a lie, it;’s a pretty good indication the claim is false.
There is no “massive uptick in white supremacy”. The number of white supremacists is still tiny, though in the era of “Let’s Get Trump” their presence has been elevated by the Complicit Agenda Media to huge proportions.
He bleats “The number one threat to the American people in terms of their personal security is a threat of white supremacist terrorism. ” Well, that’s just plain stupid—stupid to a phenomenal degree. There is no such threat.
So what is the significance of Ben Rhodes? Aside from being just another contemptible hate-driven lying hysteric, that is.
Last night Glenn Beck cleared up a number of discrepancies between what we thought we knew and what the media says really happened. Suffice it to say, the media has lied to us — repeatedly. I know, I was shocked too.
The video is still available on demand.
He started out with the the Five Principles of Ethical Journalism. To be honest, I didn’t know there was such a thing, and to be even more honest, it doesn’t appear that they still exist in practice.
House Democrats’ second in command, Steny Hoyer (D-MD) refused to commit to putting the Democrats’ impeachment plan to a floor vote and told reporters he had not yet read the piece of draft legislation that Demcorats released Tuesday night.
Maybe he has to vote for it to find out what is in it. But let’s not forget, he is #2 in the Dem House.
………
Then again, reading it might not clear it up much for Hoyer:
“This is not an impeachment resolution,” Hoyer continued. “I don’t know what an impeachment resolution is.”
Okey dokey. So the Dems are being so transparent that their #2 doesn’t know what is going on, or even what it is they are trying to accomplish, and they want to run the country?
https://www.dailywire.com/news/house-dem-leaders-wont-commit-to-impeachment-resolution-table-thursday-vote
The truth is out there. If Glenn Beck can put it all together with documentation and sworn affidavits, then so can the President’s defenders should it come down to a trial in the Senate. And I’m guessing that Pelosi knows it’s all going to be down hill from here, which is likely why she pulled the trigger — sort of — on the impeachment inquiry. I’ll defer to my long held belief that when your adversary is engaged in self-immolation, the best strategy is to hide the fire extinguishers and get the hell out of the way.
How long can they ignore this?
“CBS News is reporting that Tim Morrison, the National Security Council’s Senior Director for European Affairs, testified before Congress on Thursday that he heard nothing illegal on the phone call between President Donald J. Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Morrison also reportedly testified that the transcript released by the White House was accurate. … “I want to be clear, I was not concerned that anything illegal was discussed,”
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothymeads/2019/10/31/breaking-nsc-witness-on-trumpzelensky-reportedly-told-congress-he-heard-nothing-illegal-transcript-accurate-n2555688/?fbclid=IwAR1e0HchdCXB3y9xrhNgrrDcJedQduNHnUY3n2qrehVRaHwJRnCXlHLojbk
Bring the thunder
“Come to the Judiciary Committee and take every question asked of you [Schiff]. Be the first witness and take every question asked of you, starting with your own involvement with the whistleblower. Folks, this ain’t over. Get ready. The cloud that is dropping will be dropping on their heads because process matters and substance will always win out in the end and this president has nothing to worry about on substance,” Collins said.
And the only person caught on tape trying to get dirt on a political opponent is …. Adam Schiff.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/adam-schiff-pranked-by-russians-who-offered-nude-photos-of-trump/
Schiff needs to be on the witness stand answering these questions and what his relationship is with the whistle blower. Then followed on the witness stand by Clapper, Brennan, Susan Rice, Samantha Powell, Peter Strozk, and then finally star witness James Comey. That would be a fun day.
An interesting smackdown of “the
squadpack” which illustrates their ignorance as well as the future of America they are advocating, which I have highlighted.Nine Cuban democratic socialists wrote a blistering open letter condemning American democratic socialists such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), blasting the Democratic Socialists of America, a group both women belong to, for their support of Cuba’s Communist government.
………………..
You have been in solidarity with a regime maintained by force of arms, murder, imprisonment, repression and compulsory exile of the opponents, which has not held free and democratic elections for more than 60 years, which systematically violates massive and blatantly the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Cuban people and is sustained by the repression and monopoly of the economy, information, education and public health.
They have supported a regime that appropriated by force all lands, industries, factories and large, medium and small companies, private or associated and made them the property of a bureaucratic state, which exploits the Cuban workers in slavery and it blocks the economic development of the country, of independent companies of the state of all sizes, whether private or cooperative and the welfare of Cubans.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/cuban-democratic-socialists-rip-aocs-democratic-socialists-for-supporting-cuban-regime-youre-either-ignorant-not-socialist-or-not-democratic
Here is an example of the advocacy journalism of the NYT. It is quite experienced in inserting sly innuendo and commentary designed to lead the reader to certain conclusions. On the surface, what seems to be a simple “news” story is really an effort to herd the reader into a certain area of conclusion. Emphasis mine, indicating assumptions and assertions of fact.
WASHINGTON — A senior National Security Council aide on Thursday confirmed a key episode at the center of the impeachment inquiry, testifying that a top diplomat working with President Trump told him that a package of military assistance for Ukraine would not be released until the country committed to investigations the president sought. That is, testifying to hearsay. But even so, although it refers to a third-person alleged comment, the original comment would have been based on an interpretation of what the president said by the person speaking with the president —that the assistance release was predicated on the investigation.
In a closed-door deposition, the aide, Timothy Morrison, also said he had been told of a September call between Mr. Trump and the diplomat, Gordon D. Sondland. In that conversation, the president said he was not looking for a quid pro quo with Ukraine, but then went on to “insist” that the country’s president publicly announce investigations into Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son and other Democrats.
ALSO ? This implies more than one conversation between the president and “the diplomat”. This implies that there were repeated efforts by the president to pressure “the diplomat” to do—–what? One conversation between “the diplomat” and then related to Morrison, or two? Or more? Is Trump telling “the diplomat” that he wants him—“the diplomat”—to assist in pressuring the Ukrainian president into publicly announcing “…investigations into Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son and other Democrats.”? Or just informing “the diplomat” of his personal pressuring of the Ukrainian president to do this? What was the context of this conversation? Did the president actually SAY something like “You know, Gordon, I’m not withholding our promise of aid to Ukraine till they announce an investigation into Joe Biden and his son, but I INSIST that they publicly announce that they are doing this”? The president either did or did not relate the release of the funds to the announcement of an investigation. He said they were not related, according to the recollection of the third party’s conversation about the recollection of the involved party in the conversation. So why not take that declarative statement as a stand-alone statement and not try to then morph it into relating to a separate stand-alone statement about initiating investigations into (1) Ukrainian interference in our election, and (2) corruption within Ukraine resulting in the disappearance of billions of dollars, involving a company which was connected to Joe Biden’s son?
OK, he said he was not looking for a quid pro quo. I doubt that he said those words, but in any case the testimony is that the president did NOT predicate the release of the assistance on the announcement of an investigation. It actually states that he specifically did NOT connect the two. That is the important part, buried in the subsequent assertion that the president specifically demanded investigation INTO “Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son and other Democrats. ”
This is really quite clever of the writer, if by “clever” you mean skillfully devious. The president ASKED FOR (which is then morphed into “demanded”) an investigation into the participation of Ukraine in the 2016 election, which, if taken on its own, would be no more or less than an extension of the investigations demanded by the Left and illustrated by the support for the Mueller investigation. But, knowing that the investigation would uncover misdeeds by the DNC and the Clinton campaign, the NYT writer just blended the facts—the Dem involvement and the request for an investigation—into a demand for an investigation into Democrats. It is that lateral sidestep from objective fact that tries to make the request sinister and even illegal.
A publicly available, reconstructed transcript already shows that Mr. Trump pressed President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine during a July 25 phone call to undertake the investigations of Democrats. Here the writer doubles down on his effort to convert an investigation into two things—-election interference and corruption involving the disappearance of billions of dollars of American financial aid—–into nothing more than a partisan investigation INTO DEMOCRATS. It’s a de facto admission that any investigation into either the Ukrainian involvement in our election or the disappearance of billions of dollars will, inevitably, lead to Democrats, and an effort to deflect attention away from this by asserting that it was the political affiliation of the participants that underlay the investigations, not the corruption and interference themselves.
Mr. Taylor also testified that, a few days later, Mr. Morrison told him that he had learned of a conversation between Mr. Sondland and Mr. Trump that Mr. Morrison had said gave him a “sinking feeling.” In it, Mr. Trump had told Mr. Sondland that he was not asking for a “quid pro quo” from Ukraine, but then went on to “insist” that Mr. Zelensky publicly announce an investigation into both the Bidens and an unproven theory that Democrats had colluded with Ukraine in the 2016 elections. In this graph, there is a lie by omission—that the “sinking feeling” was not concern over the meaning or intent of the comments in the conversation but that it would be leaked in an effort to damage the president—-and the bald-faced lie that Democrat collusion with Ukraine in the 2016 elections is nothing but an unproven theory.
Now we are past third-party hearsay into fourth-party hearsay. Now we are talking about what Taylor said Morrison said about what Sonderland said that Trump said. And this fourth-party hearsay about the conversation claims that Trump’s request in this referenced conversation included a demand that Joe Biden himself be investigated —“… an investigation into both the Bidens …” Without a verbatim transcript of that conversation to prove that the conclusion cited was actually stated and not just an assumption either by the other party to the conversation or the third party recalling what he had been told or the fourth party recalling what the third party told him this is still just personal attribution of motive or intent by someone along that line of repeated recollections.
But it is all cleverly interwoven into a deceptive account then presented as “news”. And it sucks in millions of people who don’t bother to sort out the “he said that he was told that someone else said that someone else said such-and-such”.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/us/politics/morrison-testimony-impeachment
The lies and manipulation of facts are coming so fast and furious, it’s getting hard to keep up.
I don’t think we can overestimate the impact of personal bias in how a statement that is obvious to one person can be seen as something totally different by another. I am not talking about purposeful misstatements about what is said but an unconscious application of personal perception.
An example I think of is back when it was a fad for people to put those “Baby On Board” stickers on their car windows. To me, at least, this was nothing more than a statement to first responders in case of an accident that they should look for children or infants in the wreckage. But then I heard someone call into a radio show complaining about how vicious and hateful these stickers were, because, according to the caller, they were really just efforts to hurt the feelings of people who were not parents, were really a cruel taunt of “I have a baby and you don’t, loser”.
I don’t think this person consciously thought “I am going to find the most hateful and negative way to view these placards”. No, I think the interpretation and response came from a deep seated combination of several emotions, including envy and resentment and a tendency to put the worst spin on anything.
So if a person has a deep well of hatred, resentment and hostility to President Trump, anything that has the slightest element of possible interpretation is going to trip that trigger of seeing it in the most hateful and negative way. And from that point, the perception is “BUT THAT’S WHAT HE SAID !!! and the actual words, no matter how often they are repeated, won’t be able to overcome that conviction.
I’m not talking about the complicit agenda media—these people purposely, knowingly, lie. They quite consciously make stuff up, twist the truth and work very hard to be deceptive. And I think we are seeing politicians doing this, purposely and with the desire to advance an agenda even if it has to be supported by lies. But I think most who snap to the default judgment that whatever Trump says has a sinister or malignant meaning or motive are not consciously plotting to distort what he says or does—it’s just that their internal filters do this for them.
So when Taylor, et al, give their opinions on what Trump said, I think they truly believe this is what he really said and can’t accept the fact that their perception is tainted by their personal biases. But what has to happen in cases like this is that the words have to stand only for what they are, with no allowance for personal interpretation or application of what has made it through lenses or filters. If there is a question about the motive or intent of the speaker, the only person whose word matters is the person who made the statement.
And the passionate determination of some to impose their personal perceptions on the rest of us as actual, incontrovertible, FACT is part of the overall pattern of Leftism—that people can and even should be punished not just for what they do but for what they think and say, even when this is filtered through personal lenses and filters and interpreted to mean and say what the speaker claims was not said and not intended to convey. This is one of the biggest dangers of Leftism. It leads to Thought Crimes and Thought Police, it leads to penalties for “wrongthink” that does not comply, or can be said to fail to comply, with State-approved terms and ideas.
We all have filters. But we can’t let laws, or penalties, be based on anything but pure objective analysis of what can be seen without the application of any filters. Once we stray into the territory of “But that’s what he MEANT” we are on dangerous ground.
It leads to Thought Crimes and Thought Police, it leads to penalties for “wrongthink” that does not comply, or can be said to fail to comply, with State-approved terms and ideas.
I think it was back in 2000 when Gore lost to Bush that the Democrats began to openly discuss changing the language of their campaigns and redefining words and perceptions. They thought Gore’s losss was mainly due to his rhetoric and not running on “universally accepted” terms. Fast forward to 2009 and here is Michelle obama on the campaign trail:
MICHELLE OBAMA: “Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we’re going to have to change our traditions, our history; we’re going to have to move into a different place as a nation.”
And in the last 10 yers, that’s exactly what the Democrats have been doing – change the conversation by redefining terms and what is and isn’t acceptable. In NY now you can be fined $500 or 6 months in jail for saying the word bitch in a derogatory manner. It has begun. Fast forward to 2018 now and the far left publication The Nation:
But the point of a political party is to recognize the challenges posed by a dysfunctional system, strategize about how to overcome them, and implement those strategies at election time. If a party cannot do this, what possible point is there for its continued existence?
They think our Constitutional Republic is inherently dysfunctional. How can we share a country with people who think we are inherently evil???
https://www.thenation.com/article/we-must-transform-the-democratic-party/
There are elements of our system that are dysfunctional. I don’t think anyone can argue with that. My argument is that these dysfunctional elements are due to failure to apply the system, though, not to defects OF the system.
Things are going well in NY:
Nearly a thousand protesters took to the streets of Brooklyn to demonstrate against the NYPD’s recent actions and planned cracking down on New York City subway fare evaders. The protesters started gathering in Downtown Brooklyn near Barclays Center at about 7pm Friday, with their signs reflecting the dual nature of the march. While flashier banners bore slogans such as ‘Don’t let these pigs touch us,’ ‘F**k the police,’ ‘Punch that cop’ and ‘NYPD out of MTA,’ other signs read ‘Free transit,’ ‘Poverty is not a crime’ and ‘Our subways need more $ for elevators, not for cops.’ The demonstration was said to have been brought on by two headline-grabbing incidents that occurred on October 25, which drew accusations of excessive force by police, as well as Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s recent decision to add 500 new officers to NYPD’s force to patrol the transit system and root out fare evaders.
So let’s briefly recap the governance of Democrat controlled areas; gang violence is claiming many lives in Chicago and Baltimore, people are defecating on the streets and living in tents in Seattle, San Francisco, and LA and Antifa is assaulting people in Portland.
Folks we have to save the Republic and that will require destroying the professional lives of most current Democrats and their puppets in the media. I just heard some mindless pundit on MSNBC say that he is concerned that these diplomats lives are being destroyed for speaking out against Trump. Really? I wonder how he feels about Gen. Mike Flynn’s life. Or Roger Stone. Or Sarah Sanders.
Also an impeachment requires bribery, treason, or high crimes and misdemeanors and these actions are discernible and easily defined. What impeachment is not is a probe, or an inquiry. Congress is not permitted to go fishing for a crime. That’s how they act in Banana Republics.
I wonder how he feels about Gen. Mike Flynn’s life. Or Roger Stone. Or Sarah Sanders.
Obviously they don’t count because they’re wrong thinkers.
Going back to your post above this one, Cluster—these riots in NYC are the dysfunctional aspects of our society, not efforts to resolve dysfunctional aspects of our society.
And just an observation—-Cuomo is willing to add police officers to help gather revenue, just not to deal with serious crime. How too too Leftist of him.
I wish it was possible to say to the mob: “You have two choices—–a subway system run by the rules and policed by law enforcement officers or no subway system at all. You choose.” And then shut the trains down and flood the tunnels with noxious gas to drive out the mole people. Clean it all up and then go back to a safe public transit system.
I kid you not …. MSNBC is currently attacking Fox News as being the sole network that doesn’t share the “same facts” that other networks do and how dangerous that is to our “democracy”. They are glorifying the days of Nixon impeachment when all three networks shared the “same set of facts”. Oh and deep state officials are the “true patriots”
Wow, YCMTSU
Groupthink in the media: what could go wrong?
They want Trump to apologize for not adhering to DC orthodoxy:
In l’affaire Ukraine, the president is guilty as charged. And the best strategy for him to avoid impeachment by the House and perhaps even removal by the Senate is to admit it, apologize, and let voters make their own judgment. It’s also the best way to fend off a disaster for Senate Republicans.
Trump is guilty. Guilty of not being a weak and ineffective conservative like Goldberg who prefers to apologize to the mob. We need to start a new party because honestly, I don’t want to be a member of any political party that weak people like Goldberg, Kristol, and Michel Steele belong to. And voters will make their own judgment next November and it won’t go well for the establishment.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/trump-best-option-for-avoiding-impeachment-an-apology/
If the link had shown the author—Jonah Goldberg—I would have known that linking to it would be a waste of time.
It appears Goldberg can no longer experience shame, but I am ashamed for him. To see the man who wrote a couple of really good books descending to petty snarling based solely on the voices in his head or how he read the tea leaves or what he saw in a crystal ball is sad. I didn’t wade through the mess of that article but what I did read was exclusively based on the acceptance of assigned motive and intent.
Goldberg misses a couple of salient points: One is that being impeached will add to the support for the president, and the other is that the voters will not only make their own judgment anyway they are already telegraphing what that judgment will be. And this is all before the indictments and revelations pending from the Durham investigation.
As for: In l’affaire Ukraine, the president is guilty as charged it looks like TDS has driven Goldberg so far to the Left that he has abandoned any allegiance he may have had in the past to the basic concepts of American justice, which include innocent until proven guilty. There is a reason this concept no longer has any support from the TDS mob—-it is impossible to prove that an attributed motive is actually the intent of the speaker when the actual words spoken do not support that interpretation. So the mob has to convict based on attribution of motives not in evidence, on innuendo and on wishful thinking.
Seriously—I am ashamed FOR Jonah, as he seems to be so deeply invested in his blind hatred that he has abandoned any sense of personal dignity he may have had in the past.
And Michael Steele who has proven himself to be complete fraud. Trump is putting the same policies and prescriptions into place that both Goldberg and Steele spent a lifetime advocating for, but we are to believe that somehow those policies are not worthy anymore because of the person who put them into practice? No, that’s not it. The real reason is because Steele and Goldberg were never true advocates of those policies. They were simply charlatans profiting off their false pretenses.
This is the first I have heard of this and it is so bizarre my first reaction was to assume it was an online prank kind of article. What do you think? When I have more time I might look into this.
https://www.leagueofpower.com/news/about-that-weird-sovietrussian-sex-cult-tulsi-gabbard-pledged-her-allegiance-to/
I’m interested because to me, Gabbard seems like most threatening of all the people in the Dem Clown Car.
I like Tulsi too, but this story is a bridge too far for me to buy into. Could her parents have belonged to a Hindu cult? Possibly. Does Tulsi subscribe to the teachings of Buddhism? Possibly. But was she raised in a highly sexualized cult with secret allegiances to a “master” …. uh no. I don’t buy it.
I did watch the video, which I found disturbing. I haven’t looked into other sources of information on the cult leader or the teachings of the cult itself. But I watched other videos and am sure she is the one speaking on the video linked in the story.
She also seems to have an allegiance to communism, though this is buried in the fawning coverage of her. As an Identity Politics candidate she is dangerous. As a political philosophy candidate I think she would prove herself to be as radically Leftist as her opponents, just with a different demeanor and presentation of her identity. Her videos seem to be brilliantly presented collections of platitudes with no real substance.
If, as a major in the Army Reserves she does believe in allegiance to our Constitution then why is she a Democrat?
An overview of Gabbard’s actual political positions: what I think are most alarming are noted by me.
Gabbard received the Sierra Club Hawaii Chapter’s endorsement in the 2012 Democratic primary election for Congress and in her 2014 reelection campaign.
In December 2016, Gabbard, along with approximately 2,000 U.S. military veterans dubbed “The Veterans Stand for Standing Rock,” traveled to North Dakota to join the protests against the construction of the final leg of the Dakota Access Pipeline near the Standing Rock and Cheyenne River Indian Reservations.
In September 2017 Gabbard introduced legislation seeking to transition the United States to clean renewable energy. The bill would require electric utilities to transition to 80% renewable energy resources by 2027 and 100% renewable by 2035, while setting similar vehicle emission standards goals and banning hydraulic fracturing.
In November 2018 Gabbard spoke in favor of a Green New Deal, which was at the time a draft resolution to task a special House committee with coming up with legislation to eliminate fossil fuel use from the economy within a decade. In February 2019 expressed concerns about vagueness in the version of the Green New Deal proposed by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey, and so did not co-sponsor the legislation.
Gabbard has an F-rating from the NRA, a 0% rating by the Hawaii Rifle Association and a 100% rating by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. According to an editorial in The Hill, “Gabbard has advocated for sensible gun control similar to the positions Bernie Sanders has taken” and cites Gabbard’s website for this explanation: “She is focused on building bipartisan solutions that can actually be passed into law, rather than using the issue as a partisan political football.”
Gabbard supports an Assault Weapons Ban, and universal background checks.
The New York Times has quoted Gabbard as saying, “In an ideal world, we would listen to people instead of political action committees and the gun lobby and the N.R.A.”
Gabbard supports universal health care. In 2017, she co-sponsored the Expanded & Improved Medicare For All Act to create a national health insurance program that covers uninsured as well as underinsured people; allows for private insurance supplemental to but not duplicative of benefits provided under the program; and paid for in part by raising taxes on the wealthy and taxing financial transactions. Gabbard called the Republican-sponsored American Health Care Act of 2017 “really a handout to insurance and pharmaceutical companies that will further exacerbate the burden on American families.”
In Gabbard’s view, “If you look at other countries in the world who have universal health care, every one of them has some form of a role for private insurance.” In 2019, she cosponsored House Resolution 1384, Medicare for All Act of 2019[ (a similar but more detailed version of the bill by the same name introduced in the Senate by Bernie Sanders that would provide universal healthcare to all Americans.
Gabbard is a member of the House LGBT Equality Caucus, and has a 100% record in Congress for pro-LGBT legislation from the Human Rights Campaign, a group that advocates for LGBT rights.[ Gabbard’s position on LGBT issues has changed over the course of her lifetime. In 1998, at age 17, she campaigned for an anti-gay rights organization founded by her father. She continued to oppose gay rights after becoming a state representative, when she testified at a Hawaii legislative hearing in opposition to civil unions. Since then, Gabbard has apologized for her previous stances, and has said that her views were changed by her experience in the military “with LGBTQ service members both here at home and while deployed” as well as seeing “the destructive effect of having governments … act as moral arbiters for their people.”
Since joining Congress in 2013, Gabbard has co-sponsored pro-LGBT legislation, signed an amicus brief supporting Edith Windsor’s challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, and supported the Equality Act (a bill to amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to protect LGBT individuals), and other efforts to promote LGBT equality, including the repeal of DOMA, the Restore Honor to Service members Act, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Safe Schools Improvement Act and the Equality for All Resolution.
She is very good at presenting radical beliefs in a calm and rational way, or more often simply not talking about them very much.
She is very good at presenting radical beliefs in a calm and rational way, or more often simply not talking about them very much.
It sounds like she and Mayor Pete are cut from the same piece of cloth.
Yup, and keep in mind Tulsi endorsed Bernie in 2016 so her political leanings are too far left for most Americans … it’s just packaged nicer as you mentioned. And I think St. Pete is just a whiter Barack Obama. Photogenic and speaks well but zero substance.
Watch the video linked in the article I linked. I have known cult members—–working in Denver and Santa Fe in the restaurant industry, I had several servers and busboys who were in cults in the 80s—-and I immediately recognized that same spacey blissed-out look, glassy eyes and dreamy voice of Gabbard as she talked about her “master”. It was creepy.
I won’t go as far as claiming a soviet relationship to the cult, but then the Soviets have been leaders in psy-ops for decades now so who knows? I keep coming back to the fact that anything that has a disruptive effect on our society, anything that will help fragment or destabilize our society, is a weapon Russia will use. Anything.
Derek Hunter has another great article out today assessing the 2020 Democrat field of candidates:
… they’ve promised to spend multiples of all the money on the planet all in an attempt to placate a spun-up mob they created to torment Republicans.
So true. The Democrats have created a generation or two of poorly educated, angry, young, identity based, and politically correct people who were suppose to carry them to power for generations to come but may instead turn around and devour them. They eat their own.
https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2019/11/03/liberals-just-cant-help-themselves-n2555786
MSNBC is actively engaging in deception this morning which means it’s another day that ends in Y. The panel on AM Joy is claiming that Trump’s “obsession” with Ukraine and their attempt to assist the Hillary campaign and their involvement with the 2016 election is more evidence of his attempts to help RUSSIA and to promote Russia’s disinformation campaign. For those of you with short attention spans (which includes every single Democrat) I present the following reminder from Politico in January 2017:
Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.
They are dirty to the core and we really need to start calling out Barack Obama as a plant and a traitor to this country. All roads lead back to him, and I think Brennan was his point person in their effort to “fundamentally transform” this country into a Banana Republic.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
All roads DO lead back to Obama, which is the real reason the Left is pulling out all the stops in this massive assault on All That Is Trump.
The accepted wisdom on the Right is that the Dems “hate Trump”. No argument there. But what matters is why their hatred of Trump is so much deeper and violent and panicky than, say, their hatred of Bush. I think they hated Bush just because he was a Republican and therefore had to be brought down, even though few of his policies were in much contrast to Dem policies. With Bush, it was pure identity.
But I think with Trump it is a lot deeper than that, because Trump is a threat to the carefully constructed platform of Leftist dominance put together by the Left over the past decade. Clinton didn’t do much to build that platform. All he wanted was to get attention, get admired and get laid. I don’t think true political ideology had much appeal for him, and he was never willing to give up his popularity to pursue it even if he did. In that scenario, it was Hillary who was the ideologue.
It was Obama who was put in place to establish the ground game for the Left, and it was Obama who placed the subversives deep into the agencies (and military) where they could burrow in and do the most harm when the time came. In public he fomented the racial hatreds that are still simmering, with the constant feeding of the flames by complicit Leftists, and he planted the two most unqualified and embarrassing SCOTUS justices on the Court. But I think it is the placement of the deep cover agents that mattered most, and it is the discovery, unmasking and removing of them that has the Left so freaked out.
“Obsession”? The Left spoke of nothing BUT their fantasy of “Russian Collusion” for about three years. We heard nothing BUT “Russian Collusion” from them, echoing they tried to change lanes to “obstruction of justice”, even after their lapdog Mueller chickened out at the last minute and refused to say Trump was guilty of obstruction. Then Trump mentions the Ukrainian investigation in one phone call—which only came to the attention of the press and the public because the Left made the mistake of trying to use it against him, which spotlighted it and set up the attention that followed—and they define THIS as “obsession”?
Poor babies–they set up the target of FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN AN AMERICAN ELECTION as the worst of all possible crimes, a crime deserving of the term “treason” and all its possible penalties, a crime that certainly called for unseating an elected president, a crime that justified focusing the nation, millions of dollars and the energies of Congress and several intelligence agencies on it nearly to the exclusion of everything else,, and then when it toppled there behind it was the proven Dem use of foreign interference in an American election.
Ouch.
So all they can do is sent out more of the expendable intellectual cannon fodder of the likes of Joy, to continue braying about RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA, hoping that they can still deflect a little attention away from the very awful seriously bad news perched above them and ready to cascade down in a torrent of real investigations, indictments, criminal charges, people turning on other people to try to avoid prosecution, and general dismantling of their plans.
I said all along that it was Trump’s reference to Crowdstrike that was the spark that lit the fuse of the effort to make the Biden comment the focal point of the conversation. That was just a convenient hook upon which to hang a loud, strident, attention-grabbing three ring circus of informants, fake whistleblowers, fake impeachment inquiries designed to fool the stupid into thinking they are really an impeachment hearing, press conferences and so on. But the real threat is a deep investigation into not just Crowdstrike but what Crowdstrike represents, and that is a path that leads to and then through the DNC and Hillary directly to the White House.
Which would be bad enough, but there is also Trump’s pincer movement, approaching Obama from the other side, that of the collusion to weaponize American intelligence agencies to spy on citizens, persecute citizens and use trickery, perjury and conspiracy to commit fraud upon the FISA court.
It all comes back to Trump. And this is all while he has to focus on winning a second term. They know that what he has started here will blow up into a conflagration that will mimic the California wildfires once he is sworn in for another four years with this background of information, affidavits and evidence sitting there waiting to be implemented. At that point he will have two years to dismantle the American Left and another two to let things settle down a little and pave the way for his Republican successor.
It was Obama who was put in place to establish the ground game for the Left, and it was Obama who placed the subversives deep into the agencies (and military) where they could burrow in and do the most harm when the time came. In public he fomented the racial hatreds that are still simmering, with the constant feeding of the flames by complicit Leftists, and he planted the two most unqualified and embarrassing SCOTUS justices on the Court. But I think it is the placement of the deep cover agents that mattered most, and it is the discovery, unmasking and removing of them that has the Left so freaked out.
100% correct and if Trump hadn’t won, Hillary would have continued planting subversive operatives into the bureaucracies and the Russia collusion story would have never been mentioned. From Obama weaponizing the IRS and Lois Lerner to invoking executive privilege on Fast & Furious, the Obama administration was actively engaged every single day in weaponizing the federal bureaucracies against their political opponents. They are traitors to this country and I pray we see some of them in shackles before 2020 is over. It’s important to the integrity of our Republic that they are indicted, prosecuted, and imprisoned.
Speaking of embedded subversives, let’s not forget the subversive embedded programs put in place by the Left:
https://www.leagueofpower.com/news/trump-nixes-u-n-s-islamic-refugee-resettlement-scheme-with-an-executive-order/
And it’s important to note that “Republicans” like McCain, Ryan, Romney, etc. were all for this. No questions asked. Just let the UN decide who comes into the US and if Americans objected … well they were just racist. That’s what our ruling class wants – permanent power for themselves regardless of what they have to do to the country to achieve it. Well unfortunately for them, this is our country, our freedoms, and our choice so to Democrats I say good luck on trying to remove our President. You will be met with a resistance that you are wholly unprepared to take on.
MOLON LABE