They’re saying that a brokered Democrat convention is as likely as Bernie getting a first ballot majority – lots of excitement about that, but I’m still rating is a low probability…the Democrat machine will do all it can to slay the Bernie campaign (including outright cheating). But, we’ll see – the only way the Democrats keep Bernie off the ballot is to have someone go into Milwaukee with more delegates than he has. If they take it away from him after he comes in first, the Bernie Bros will revolt.
James Carville is watching his Democrat Party implode and he doesn’t like it. Too bad, James: you had your chance to save the party when Clinton was impeached…you and the rest pulled out all the stops to save him and this is the long-term result. By diligent effort humans can some times maintain a level of good…but you can’t maintain a level of bad. You keep going until you’re all the way down. How’s the bottom look to ya?
Coronavirus gets worse – I’m sure they’re not telling us the full truth; we can be certain, at least, that the Chinese are lying about it.
Barr gets a little testy about Trump’s Tweets – I don’t think there’s much to worry about here but a bit of advice for Barr: start arresting deep staters and your problem is solved.
Congressman fart-guy says Democrats are open to impeachment Trump again. Go for it, gassy.
Don Surber points out we elected Trump to run Justice. This does need to be hammered home – under the Constitution only the President is charged to see to it that the laws are faithfully enforced. No one else; just the President. He’s the guy who decides who gets investigated, who gets indicted, who gets pardoned. Now, we’ve set it up so that we have an Attorney General and Justice Department to handle the day to day of it all, but they only get their authority from the President. They are not independent of him. They aren’t supposed to be. They can’t be. Law enforcement must be subject to the will of the people.
The Roger Stone jury would make a Stalinist show trial blush. I don’t really know much about Stone – I’ve heard of the gay frogs thing, but outside that my only knowledge is that he’s a harmless kook who puts on a show. He was railroaded by Mueller in an attempt, from what I can tell, to force him to lie under oath about President Trump…and when that didn’t work (which indicates a sense of honor on Stone’s part), he was put in front of a kangaroo court. He should be pardoned.
Carville hasn’t realized that once you ‘pull out all of the stops’ it is very hard to put them back in again. You can’t call up the devil and ask him to behave. The ‘stops’ we’re there for a reason.
I don’t have much empathy for Roger Stone, he looks a like a complete con man to me but he was wrapped up into a fraudulent investigation to begin with and if lying to prosecutors is a 9 year sentence, then Brennan, Comey, and McCabe should be right there with him.
I would also like to know how the jury foreman was allowed on the jury considering her highly partisan background and this fact alone should be reason for a mistrial. But that’s not how the Left rolls. Remember these are not honorable people, they will never reveal their bias or culpability and in their world the end always justifies the means. Have you heard the Left complain about the admitted FISA abuses? Not at all yet these were fraudulent actions taken by career partisan bureaucrats in the FBI to spy on an innocent American citizen and yet not one word of condemnation. Instead, they are up in arms over Trump questioning their desire to throw someone they hate into prison for 9 years.
These are not people we want to share a country with. They are rabid dogs and need to be put down.
They are rabid dogs and need to be put down.
Bernie’s guys just want their opponents to be put into slave labor camps to be “reeducated”. They must not feel as strongly about their opposition as you do.
Exactly. Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.
Do you hear yourself? Do you realize that you are not only advocating for the mass killing of people on the Left but then trying to justify it by claiming it is a virtuous position to take? Of course, to get to that point one has to first define “liberty” as the violent imposition of a particular political philosophy and “justice” as making political dissent a capital crime calling for elimination without due process.
Hint: This attitude is what drove some really famous people to justify their own murderous philosophies—the Other was evil and therefore killing it was not just justifiable, it was noble, an act taken to protect the nation in question. Mass murder was always excused as an effort to accomplish a just cause.
How, exactly, would you implement this noble effort to cleanse the nation/world of people you find offensive? How would you round them up? How would you vet them to make sure you hadn’t accidentally caught some of the “right” people in your net, or would that matter? What process would you use to “put them down”? Individual firing squads, or the far more efficient gas chambers that can “put down” dozens at a time? (That was quite effective in the “putting down” of people deemed unworthy to live, a few decades ago, much more so than the forced starvation tactics used a few years before that, both in the stated interest of cleansing the involved nations of undesirables.)
Oh please … “do I hear myself” ?? No I am not advocating mass extermination
I am advocating fighting fire with fire and too never shrink when confronted by such dishonest people.
No, you quite clearly said that these political opponents should be “put down”—and then defended that with a quote implying that doing so would indicate virtue and failing to so would be a vice. When I said that forced relocation to gulags to endure slavery was less extreme than your suggestion, your response was Exactly. Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.
“Putting down” means euthanizing. When you put your dog down, you are having it killed.
If killing the opposition is not what you mean, then you have to be careful about how you say what you want to say, because comments like yours are what get quoted, circulated and used to define the Right.
When we post on conservative sites, representing conservative values, we have the responsibility to avoid hair-on-fire statements that sound so much, as yours did, like advocacy for killing the opposition.
I love you both, but I kind of have to agree with Amazona here. Knowing Cluster for a long time, I recognized his statement as hypebole, but some outsider coming here probably wouldn’t view it the same way. I agree the modern Left needs to be swept into the dustbin of history, but until such time as they decide to take up arms against us, we need to stick to legal and constitutional means. I think we compete pretty well on the field of ideas.
This is interesting but not surprising:
Another respondent agreed that Yang’s unifying message is what drew them to his campaign. The former Bernie voter said they will support Trump in the 2020 election “because of the way ‘the left’ and very liberal supporters dogged my man since day one cuz he doesn’t go with the grain when it comes to wokeness which we all know [is] bullsh*t.”
The person has turned against the current crop of Democratic candidates because they offer no real solutions.
I think the radical Democrats are losing more people than they are gaining.
But, we’ll see – the only way the Democrats keep Bernie off the ballot is to have someone go into Milwaukee with more delegates than he has. If they take it away from him after he comes in first, the Bernie Bros will revolt.
The last time they screwed Bernie out of the nomination nearly 10% of his followers voted for Trump. I don’t really see a down side either way. If he gets the nomination it’ll be McGovern part 2, and if he doesn’t and his followers even perceive that power brokers within the Democrat Party stole it from him a lot of them will stay home or vote for Trump. As Cluster alluded to in the previous thread, when your adversaries are engaged in self-immolation the best strategy is to hide the fire extinguishers and get the hell out of the way. Fun times!
Spook, that is exactly the way I look at it.
Former George Bush and John McCain advisor Nicole Wallace:
And I’m on the record. I will vote for whomever — I will, I will gladly and easily and handily vote for Bernie Sanders if he’s the nominee. This is not personal. But my political strategist is like, it’s a four-alarm fire in my political soul. I mean, how do you, how do you as a Democratic party tell everyone to get behind someone who is — and I don’t know, I have no frickin’ clue what democratic socialist means, but everyone thinks that’s what he is. And it sounds scary. And he’s got very little African-American support.
And she is one of the “smart ones” over at MSNBC
My first thought was, either she had Bush and McCain fooled, or Bush and McCain had all of us fooled.
I still think Bush was not a bad guy, just outplayed by the Left and the media (excuse the redundancy) but that McCain was at heart a pandering weasel.
I just can’t imagine how Wallace ever got to the position of being an advisor to anyone, about anything. There is nothing about her that conveys an impression of intelligence or competence, and I wonder about the nature or extent of her “advice” to either man. I think that term is often used to try to pump up an image or reputation of someone who actually, in real life, had little or no real influence on anyone.
I’m starting to have faith that even with the pressure to hide the truth it might eventually start to come out.
I have repeated my theory—that it was the mention of CrowdStrike that was the spark that lit the fuse on the impeachment effort—many times. I’ve been frustrated beyond belief at the refusal of anyone to even look at the CrowdStrike part of the Zelensky phone call, which to me was the “WOW!” part of the call. When I read the text of the call, I found the casual reference to Biden of secondary interest. It was the word CrowdStrike that I thought of as the grenade dropped into the conversation. And finally, there is an article about that—and it echoes my theory.
Starting with Elizabeth Vaughn’s story at https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/02/15/it-all-keeps-coming-back-to-crowdstrike we read:
By blaming Russia for the hacking, and putting out the story that they had done so to help Trump win the election, Democrats were able to deflect criticism for the damaging and embarrassing content of the emails.
The DNC and the Clinton campaign were assisted by The New York Times who published an article entitled, “Democrats Allege D.N.C. Hack Is Part of Russian Effort to Elect Donald Trump.” The Times, rather than naming “CrowdStrike,” wrote that “researchers” determined that “the DNC’s server had been breached by Russian intelligence agencies.” (The Times somehow forgot to mention that the “researchers” were hired by Clinton and the DNC, and from that point on never bothered to remind us that when the FBI made any reference to who “hacked” the DNC server this was based on the report they were given by the DNC operative, CrowdStrike.)
She goes on to quote Michael Thau, referring to his article titled Impeachment Was Cover for CrowdStrike and Democrats Got What They Wanted. …in which he focuses on the Democrats’ refusal to give oxygen to any discussion of the hacking of the DNC server prior to the 2016 presidential election which he sees as the most “crucial” question we should be asking. “Why did the DNC repeatedly reject FBI and Department of Homeland Security requests to examine their supposedly hacked machines?” https://amgreatness.com/2020/02/14/impeachment-was-cover-for-crowdstrike-and-democrats-got-what-they-wanted/
She also refers to a story in American Spectator: CrowdStrike and the Impeachment Frenzy with the sub-head of
No wonder the Dems are nervous: The alleged Russian hacking of the DNC’s computers is proving to be a Hillary campaign and DNC scam that went unchallenged by Messrs. Comey and Mueller.
As the old saying goes, the cover-up is frequently worse than the crime. That certainly appears to be the case with the Russian hacking story given that Comey’s FBI and Team Mueller appear to have deliberately declined to probe the Russian hacking claim purveyed by the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign with the assistance of CrowdStrike.
So it is that Trump’s reference to CrowdStrike had to have sent shockwaves through the Democrats and their media enablers.
FINALLY, this is being brought to light as, as I always thought, the threat that made the impeachment circus so important. With the reliable assistance of the always-compliant Agenda Media, the Dems mounted a frantic campaign to distract the public from that ominous hint in the Zelensky phone call that the CrowdStrike/Clinton unholy alliance would be made public.
Michael Thau, here, author of article you link to.
Was frustrating for me too that no one else seemed to realize they were getting away with sweeping CrowdStrike and fake Russian hack under rug via impeachment. Glad to hear others were in tune even if I didn’t know about them.
If you haven’t seen it, take a look at my column, “Julian Assange, CrowdStrike, and the Russian Hack that Wasn’t.” There’s a lot of demonstrable proof that DNC hack was faked, some but not all the which is covered in that article. If you don’t know about it, you will be shocked.
Wrote article in 2018 when I first came across evidence that DNC hack was a ruse. Got a lot of attention — Assange’s mom posted it on twitter among other things — but hardly anyone had heard of CrowdStrike then so was tough to keep momentum going. A few hours after it appeared Mueller indicted those 12 Russians for the fake DNC hack. So instead of a quick follow up to keep momentum going, spent months writing an enormous three part series on his lies. At that point had been working 24/7 on fake hack for like 8 months straight, so was burnt out and needed brake.
Anyway, re-posted it yesterday light of Thursday’s article getting lots of buzz and 60 Minutes shilling for CrowdStrike over the weekend. Substantially revised some sections to add some complexity that, when I was first researching this, I’d barely understood. Here’s version at my website. “American Greatness” version is also still up but it hasn’t been revised at all.
Read it when you get a chance. There’s a lot of devastating info in there hardly anyone knows about. If media weren’t rotten to the core, this would have been exposed on day one.
Wow. Thanks so much for dropping in, Michael. I’m really glad your excellent article is getting some traction. Please come back when you can.
Report: Bloomberg Considering Hillary Clinton as a Vice Presidential Running Mate
That immediately prompted the idea of a new nickname for Bloomberg—-Death Wish Mike. But then the author of the article topped that: New hashtag? #BloombergDidn’tKillHimself…
However, she (Hillary) stopped short of denying she was considering running for vice-president alongside one of the Democratic candidates earlier this month.
‘I never say never because I do believe in serving my country,
She is a tireless public servant. She has forsaken lucrative private sector jobs because of her desire to serve the American people and she has done that for decades without once thinking of the personal riches she was giving up. All she does is think of others /SARC
Maybe when Bloomberg is done with his apology tour which should take a while, he will rethink adding Hillary to the ticket. I do think though that Bloomberg got confused with Bill Clinton’s former policy “Stop and Feel” and that’s why he thought of Hillary.
What a fun campaign that would be! Mini “throw-em-up-against-the-wall” Mike and “When’s the plane taking off, Jeffrey?” Hillary on the campaign trail together.
If you think a Biden town hall meeting is fraught with land-mine questions, imagine one with Bloomberg (just when did you decide that maybe not all crimes are committed by black people who all look alike?) to Hillary’s (how many times did you visit Jeffrey’s sex island?) .
No matter how massive and voracious her ego, it’s still hard to imagine her putting herself in the position of having to answer questions about her server/her relationship with Epstein (or, rather, with his sex slaves), her pandering to Russia and its financial rewards, her relationship with Crowdstrike and Ukraine in general, etc. Right now those questions are being fielded by surrogates. That wouldn’t be true on the campaign trail.
Contrast this with Roger Stone’s 9 year sentence:
U.S. Attorney Robert Hur is recommending a nearly five-year prison sentence for former Baltimore mayor Catherine Pugh in the “Healthy Holly” scandal.
In documents filed with the court, Hur called Pugh’s actions in the scheme “a recurring pattern of well-executed steps that built on each other, becoming more audacious and complex leading up to the mayoral election.”
The former mayor pleaded guilty in November to four charges, including conspiracy to commit wire fraud, conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government and two counts of tax evasion.
Note how the Democrat party affiliation is hardly even mentioned in the article. Now add in the immunity given to Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin and the McCabe charges being dropped and you really get a sense of the banana republic Democrats thrive on. THIS HAS TO CHANGE.