Starting to see the hedge posts from the Pundit class – “although the Democrats stand a good chance in November, there are indicators that things may go badly”. This is just so that when their poll models come up short on November 8th, they’ll be able to refer back to these posts to show, “see? I told you it wasn’t in the bag!”. The grift must go on! And for each post injecting a little reality into the debate, they’ve got a hundred from fantasy-land.
The bottom line is that the fundamentals still favor the GOP – if it is just a normal first mid-term, the Democrats will certainly lose the House and will likely lose the Senate (the sleeper elections here, for me, are New Hampshire and Colorado: outside chance we can win them). When you add into these fundamentals still high prices (including for gas! They want us to be grateful that it went from, here in Las Vegas, $5.25 a gallon to $4.45 – gee, thanks Joe!), the recession, the border crisis, rising crime and a general sense of incompetence and failure at the top, we could see some very strange results on November 8th. It is hold on to your hats: let’s see what happens. But Joe Biden’s term ends on November 8th…with the House, if nothing else, his legislative agenda is finished.
What we’re not seeing from the GOP leadership is a full understanding of what the Base is expecting supposing the GOP wins both houses – we’re not looking for ways to work with Democrats. We want unrelenting war. Hearings. Investigations. Government shut-downs. If necessary, bust the filibuster and just send popular bill after popular bill to Joe’s desk for him to veto. McConnell, as I’ve noted before, is just not the man for this hour – and I honestly don’t think he wants to be the leader of a MAGA GOP. Hopefully, he can be eased out. McCarthy is on a little firmer ground…but if he gives us “compromise” on things like guns and border security, there will be a revolt in the GOP Caucus which will be more MAGA than ever before come January.
It is time for lines to be drawn – we’re the party of freedom and we’re going to prove it.
Youngsters are finding that hooking up with people on Tinder isn’t working out too well. We could have told them that – but, kids don’t listen much on that score. What will be cool is that those who survive this will carefully instruct their sons and daughters on right conduct.
Turns out that it has been Federal law since 1960 that election records – every last scrap of paper related to them – are supposed to be preserved by the election officials. This will not surprise you: of the 100 largest counties, 94 did not keep such records. As most large counties are Democrat-run, there ya go. It has been my contention really since about 2003 that in the deepest Blue areas, nobody has the foggiest notion of how many votes are cast and for who. Given what I’ve seen since then, I’m more and more of the conviction that the votes are just made up – whatever is needed to produce the desired results, that is what is announced. We’ve got to think about this: in the deepest Blue areas illiteracy is common as is welfare dependency…illiterate welfare bums do not have a high propensity to turn out. Especially as on the local level, the result is pre-determined (like there is any chance a GOPer – or even an anti-Establishment Democrat – can win in places like Chicago and San Francisco…no matter how bad things get). The attempted recount of Michigan in 2016 was another eye-opener. It was quickly shut down as they started opening ballot boxes marked “500 ballots” only to find, say, 20 or so in there: that is something which didn’t get a lot of MSM airplay!
What keeps us afloat right now is that Democrats don’t have total control of the process – and the reason they are trying to impose federal law on all voting is because they want that control. What we have to do is ensure that where we do get power, we implement Florida-style rules to ensure Democrats can’t cheat. And when we have federal power, send federal agents into the deep Blue areas to monitor the elections…the first step being to simply count how many people show up and compare that to reported votes. The Democrats have always cheated – and they never, not even once, cheated just a little bit. They are always looking to alter the result in their favor. They just put the cheating into overdrive in 2020 to get Trump out. They will continue to cheat, on an ever grander scale, unless we stop them.
I’ll leave this here. Things seem to be escalating. I’m just curious to know if and when this will ever be properly labeled as UnAmerican.
They are giddy with power, not realizing that they are shooting themselves in their collective feet. They are giving Republican candidates ammunition to destroy them—or would be, if the Republicans were capable of seeing beyond the Same Old Same Old of Identity Politics.
I think the specter of storm troopers pounding on doors in the middle of the night ought to shake up even a lot of Dems. Look at what they did to Bannon—he turned himself in but the next day they put him in chains to do a perp walk. CHAINS! They don’t put chains and shackles on violent criminals but on process crime conservatives, yes.
I think the mantra of all Republican candidates ought to be Do We Want A Nation Where Those In Power Can Silence The Opposition? The party has money—it should pay for big billboards and full page ads, showing various old Republicans in shackles next to murderers set free.
Yes, inflation’s bad, the border’s bad, we’re in a cascade of misery and crime—but none of it is as serious as having a government out of control and abusing its power to maintain that power. Without a strong Republican Congress we won’t be able to rein in election fraud and we will end up with another four years of Stalin 2.0.
And none of this is reported in the complicit media, who are equally to blame. There not only needs to be a purge of corrupt government officials, and but corrupt media propagandists as well.
I think the R’s are headed for big wins across the board in November, let’s just pray they do what’s right and dismantle and remove this Leftist cancer from our Republic.
If they don’t, it may be the last election they win in a while. My fear is that Kevin McCarthy is Paul Ryan 2.0.
I agree about McCarthy
“And none of this is reported in the complicit media…”
Actually, it is reported on by the media every single day.
Oh, yes, it IS “reported”, with glee. What is not reported is the increasing resemblance to Stasi raids on political opposition.
Starting to see the hedge posts from the Pundit class – “although the Democrats stand a good chance in November, there are indicators that things may go badly”. This is just so that when their poll models come up short on November 8th, they’ll be able to refer back to these posts to show, “see? I told you it wasn’t in the bag!”
The underlying data doesn’t support the polls that show Democrats are even or slightly ahead. Right track-wrong track – hovering around 70% wrong track, Republican voter registration surging, particularly in traditionally Democrat states, Biden’s approval rating up a bit in recent weeks, but still in the low 40s. I guess we’ll see when we see, but, if I were a betting man, I wouldn’t take Democrats and ten points.
Per Fox News, “[Lindsey] Graham introducing 15-week abortion ban, says bill may help GOP in midterms.”
I was told by conservatives that this was a states-rights issue. Hmmm.
You’ve come to the wrong place if you’re looking for Lindsey Graham supporters.
You’re intentionally missing the point. But since you brought it up, is there anyone you support other than Donald Trump?
Why would you care? Answer: You don’t. You’re just trying to stretch the finite amount of bandwidth you are going to get before you get bounced again.
But thanks for yet another spotlight on your utter dishonesty. We talk all the time about people we like and respect on our side of the aisle. It’s just that. being so deep in muck of Identity Politics you can’t understand that normal people aren’t like you.
You HAVE no point. And who I support is irrelevant. Who do you support? Wait — actually that’s irrelevant too.
The point is, you all assured us that Republicans in Congress would never introduce national legislation regarding abortion because it is a states rights issue per the Tenth Amendment. That is obviously not the case. Sorry if it feels like I’m putting you on the spot.
Oh, bullshit. None of us has the authority to “assure” anyone that Congress would or would not do anything. We offer our opinions here. We do not make policy. We do not make laws.
You’re not putting ME on the spot, and you’re not sorry for trying. You’re just making yourself look like an idiot, which I realize isn’t all that difficult.
What is idiotic is claiming that Republicans would never attempt to enact national legislation regarding abortion because they respect the Tenth Amendment so much.
You get to indulge in your twisted perspectives and we get to agree that they identify you as a moron.
Well, obviously some Republicans don’t respect the Tenth Amendment, but NO Democrats respect the Tenth Amendment, so whatever point you’re trying to make is falling flat.
Hmmmm. Ponder ponder ponder. Why, could it be that conservatives, unlike Democrats, do not all march in unison but actually think for themselves? Hmmmmm.
But to a collectivist, individualism is not only a foreign concept, it is unacceptable.
The complicit media is NOT covering the intimidation tactics and raids on Trump officials and supporters that is currently happening. Nor is the media covering the Democrat politician who killed the journalist the other day. What is very tiring are the lies and ignorance of Biden voters.
Additionally, Lindsey Graham is a ruling class, uni party, Democrat and is despised by MAGA. Also, REAL Americans would never support national legislation on abortion … that is a local issue. And what needs to be mentioned every time re: abortion, is that Democrats are singularly focused on a womans right to kill their unborn children. That’s a mental defect.
“Nor is the media covering the Democrat politician who killed the journalist the other day. ”
Is this the journalist who was stabbed to death in Nevada? The one you guys claimed was shot by a gun? I learned that he was stabbed through the media.
As for the media covering the subpoenas of individuals associated with Trump’s post-Jan. 6 fundraising, it’s been all over the media. You can’t miss it.
You’re such a useful brown shirt idiot. It’s amazing how so many Americans have devolved into government apparatchiks. So pathetic.
You forget, I watch complicit media and no they are not covering the Stalinesque tactics of your President.
See, you CAN bring new information to the blog. I had no idea German was “stabbed through the media”. Now that I think of it, my admittedly limited knowledge of anatomy means I’m not quite sure where that is, but I’m sure it hurt.
What the Agenda Media are avoiding discussing is that the killer is a Democrat politician.
A couple of weeks ago Forty, when asked why he/she was here, said to learn how Conservatives think, or something like that – LOL!!. How’s that workin’ out for you sport?
So why exactly does whether he was stabbed or shot matter really?
When a troll can’t cite facts he has to nitpick, trying to veer the conversation off into a different direction.
“So why exactly does whether he was stabbed or shot matter really?”
One of Cluster’s favorite tactics is to “report” something that occurred and claim that the mainstream media isn’t covering it. In this case, he has referred to the journalist who was killed in Nevada in this thread and past threads, claiming he was shot and that no one has heard about it.
The point is that the mainstream media has covered it, and accurately, which is how I know he was stabbed and not shot. Ask Cluster why he doesn’t know this from the sources he reads/listens to.
The point is who the person who did the killing was.
I’m speaking in the context of Cluster’s nonstop claims that the mainstream media never covers anything that Democrats do if it would portray them in a negative light, which of course isn’t true. Obviously it is possible to discuss this murder from a broader context, but you asked a specific question and I answered it.
They cover it .
Barely, just the absolute minimum to say it was mentioned and then sweep it under the rug. Unlike anything done(or not done but accused of) by the right, which is trumpeted 24/7.
Democrats are of the belief now that they can say literally anything and it’s true, in their small minds. “The border is secure”, they repeat this all the time and nothing could be further from the truth. Of course they know they have the media in their back pocket so the real truth will always be shaded, deflected, and hidden.
Forty reminds me of a North Korean singing the praises of dear leader. Defending the indefensible but there is always comfort in conforming to the mob. And it gives him license to lash out at the “others”, without ever having to think things through.
Case in point – the WH is currently celebrating their new inflation reduction act … as inflation surpassed expectations today and remains incredibly high while the stock market is tanking. They are so detached from reality.
“The complicit media is NOT covering the intimidation tactics and raids on Trump officials and supporters that is currently happening.”
Yes they are. They just don’t frame it as the conspiracy you wish it was. The latest subpoenas have to do with an investigation into Trump’s Save America PAC, which raised money for a “election defense fund,” but the fund never existed and the money was used for other purposes.
We know that Trump has engaged in fraudulent activities in the past. For example, his family charitable foundation was found to be so fraudulent and self-dealing that Trump and has family was banned from operating a charity by the State of New York. Similarly, we know that his so-called “university” was fraudulent and required to pay a $25 million settlement. His business CFO recently pleaded guilty to tax fraud and will testify against Trump’s business when it goes on trial this fall.
There’s an old human researches axiom, which goes, past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior.
If Trump were in violation of any laws, they would have him locked up right now. They have nee investigating every aspect of Trump for 6 years now, and they still have nothing. You are absolutely mind numbingly stupid and such a blind follower that it’s embarrassing to think someone raised in this country can turn out to be you.
You don’t even know what the fuck I am talking about – there are Trump “supporters” out in fly over country being “visited” by the armed FBI. A young mother and her daughter were recent examples of FBI intimidation when they visited and made her prove to them where she was on Jan. 6 based on an anonymous call. That’s who you are forty, and that’s who you support.
YOU. ARE. A. NAZI. And hopefully you eventually die like a Nazi. All y’all
“If Trump were in violation of any laws, they would have him locked up right now.”
The “lock him/her up” thing belongs to you all. You are the ones who want to lock people up without a trial.
You are the ones who want to lock people up without a trial.
Examples, please. On the other hand, we can point to people being accused informally of various crimes on January 6 who were not indicted for more than a year, if ever, yet imprisoned in solitary confinement. The chant “lock her up” referring to Hillary’s many crimes never had even the slightest reference to doing this without a trial.
The “lock him/her up” thing belongs to you all.
Well, locking people up certainly doesn’t belong to the Left—at least not when it comes to murderers, rapists etc. You only want to lock up people who think differently than you do. And that is a common belief of bullies and tyrants.
We, on the other hand, do think a lot of people should be locked up. Not for expressing opinions some don’t agree with, or daring to engage in their First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of wrongs, or any of the things you people think should be criminalized because they don’t fit your rigid narratives of acceptability, but for actually hurting people and killing people.
We just also think this must be done as part of a judicial system that includes due process—the right to a speedy trial being one of the rights guaranteed by our Constitution, yet denied to political prisoners since January 6.
Wrong again moron. If you would have noticed but you don’t , remember when Comey detailed the list of crimes Hillary committed and then said “but no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute” … pathetic. I’m not an attorney but I could have prosecuted that case
Go the fuck away. You’re boring
forty is the target audience for the constant claims of Trump Did This and Trump Did That. They are so riddled with blind hatred and so inherently malignant in their own lives that they are eager to believe anything bad about Trump. The Left knows these people, the Left loves these people, and the Left counts on these people, knowing that once the bovine excrement has been thrown they will salivate over the stain and the odor left behind and never question the accuracy or the factual basis of the shit. They are so primed to believe anything bad about him that they are easy marks.
They pretend they are trying to educate us about Trump’s flaws and mistakes, but in fact what they are doing is just stroking their own emotions by repeating all this stuff that has gotten them so stimulated. That’s why we find them so creepy, as we see them exalting in what Schilchter so aptly referred to as political onanism.
We look at Donald Trump as a human being, with flaws and a history of mistakes, but we respect the fact that he has been willing to put his personal life on hold and step up to be a target and punching bag for the irrational haters and the threatened Left to stand up for what most of us think is vitally important for the future of the nation. While the drooling mouthbreathers like forty focus so passionately on his mistakes, real and imagined, they ignore the work he did for this country.
Trump reminds me of the saying “If you’re getting flack it means you’re over the target”.
And BTW, we are also quite aware of the fact that turning the spotlights on Trump and getting you easily aroused haters howling about him means you are not paying attention to the increasing tyranny in this country. Once the Left established Trump as the almighty source of all that is bad, it has kept the attention of the short bus people focused on him. But the rest of the country is watching us teeter on the brink of the death spiral of out-of-control Leftist abuse of power.
Are you serious? Every single Trump rally since 2016.
Are you really claiming that in every single Trump rally since 2016 there have been demands that someone—-anyone—be jailed without a trial? You’re really going to try to pull that off?
Actually, you may think this is what you heard, as people like you tend to be very convinced that they have heard things that were never said. That’s what happens when the toxic and malignant voices in your head drown out reality.
Yes. Every single rally. “Lock her up.” Or sometimes “Lock him up” when the subject called for it.
And how often did any of these supposed demands say this locking up should be done without benefit of due process? Because that is the question.
Demanding justice means demanding justice, and justice includes due process. I know it is very important for you to justify your irrational loathing even if it means having to modify reality to cram it into your tight and distorted perspective, but face it, forty—-you’re going to keep running into those speed bumps of fact.
Fraud is a criminal charge. People found guilty of criminal acts are usually put in jail. Trump has never been found guilty of a criminal act, even in jurisdictions like New York which would do anything, absolutely ANYTHING, to hang this man. So far all they have been able to do is scold him, wag a finger at him, and tell him he can’t run his foundation in New York any more. Ditto for the kerfluffle about Trump University, which centered on the fact that there are standards for using the word “university” and his real estate education classes did not meet those criteria. And a few people thought they could just read the course material and get rich, and sued when they couldn’t. They never would have won a cent anywhere but in New York.
A man who worked for Trump cheated on his taxes. You speculate that he will testify against Trump this fall. Let me guess—-you think he will have a BOMBSHELL!
There you go trying to parse words. Regarding the Trump Foundation, for example, the State of New York filed a civil suit, the result of which was a settlement in which Trump was forced to pay $2 million in restitution, agree to shut down under court supervision, and required to distribute its remaining assets to court-approved charities. Parse it all you want. He settled a suit that alleged “a shocking pattern of illegality.” But I guess it wasn’t fraudulent.
It must not have been all that “shocking” or “illegal” or it would have been pursued in a criminal court.
Over there in Fantasyland, you people have no idea what life is like in the real world. A few years ago my company fired an officer for stealing. He sued us for breach of contract. We had the proof, but we got saddled with a corrupt judge (whose rulings were so blatantly biased we had lawyers from two counties dropping into see for themselves how outrageous he was) who did things like saying loudly enough for the jury to hear that we had not proved our case—when we hadn’t even gotten our chance to lay out the case. He insulted our lawyers, he volunteered objections for the plaintiff’s lawyer if he missed one, and he was almost a caricature of a rotten judge.
Anyway, after our time got cut by half so the plaintiff had more time to smear us, after being blatantly abused by the judge and then having 90% of our evidence thrown out by him, he informed our attorneys that no matter what the jury said he was going to direct the final verdict.
OK—we had spent nearly a million dollars in legal fees and though we knew we had more than enough to win an appeal that would just put us back in front of the same judge for the second trial. And in the meantime the possible judgment would be running up compound interest from the date the suit was filed. So we settled, for almost two million dollars, rather than risk it costing us more in the long run.
So when I hear that Trump settled for two million dollars in what was obviously a much bigger case than our piddly little one, that tells me he understood the system, understood that the state could drag it out for so long his expenses alone would be far more than $2 million and that when the system is rigged all you can do is try to cut your losses. Naturally, people like you, with so little experience in the real world and so easily directed about what to think, find a settlement so so very significant. But as I said, if Trump’s actions had REALLY been so “shockingly illegal” they would have tried him in criminal court. Because that’s what you do when something is shockingly illegal.
This is the reality of our “justice system”. Too often, when politically directed, it becomes a version of extortion. So when I hear of someone settling, I understand how that is probably totally irrelevant to actual guilt. Trump supporters (Page, Stone, Manafort, etc) have been bankrupted by corrupt judicial proceedings intended not to find justice but to send the message that supporting Trump can be very dangerous when the opposition controls the law enforcement and judicial branches. And that’s the message being sent out now by Stasi USA.
“So when I hear that Trump settled for two million dollars in what was obviously a much bigger case than our piddly little one, that tells me he understood the system…”
So now you are defending him on the basis that he was so clever at running a fake foundation that he got the State to settle for a piddly amount? Why cant’ you ever say his behavior was wrong, morally and ethically? This once again shows that you either have no ethical compass of your own or you are so infatuated by Donald Trump that you will make up any rationale in order to justify his behavior, no matter how unethical.
Oh, I forgot to mention that he and his children were also barred from running a foundation because they were so bad at it the first time.
So now you are defending him on the basis that he was so clever at running a fake foundation that he got the State to settle for a piddly amount?
See, this is what you people do. I never know if your brains are so strangely constructed that things just get scrambled when they get processed, or if you know you are lying but think your lies are clever enough to make whatever point you think you want to make. Not that it matters.
But my point was that there didn’t need to be any wrongdoing for the state of New York to go after him, given the state’s record of abuse of power and obsession with Trump, and this is borne out by the fact that the state was willing to settle for a token amount just so they could take a victory lap and claim he had admitted to something.
Why cant’ you ever say his behavior was wrong, morally and ethically?
In this case, because I don’t know that it was. I know that the state of New York claimed it was, but then agreed to a token settlement so they could claim a victory. I haven’t seen any of the “evidence”, much less “proof”, that anything you say is true.
This once again shows that you either have no ethical compass of your own
This is the second time you have tried to impugn my integrity, both times on the grounds that I don’t see things the way you do. This supports my oft-repeated theory that the main lure of the Left is not its ideology (which you people don’t know and don’t care about) but its promise of being a short cut to the Higher Moral Ground. It’s the appeal of being able to claim moral superiority, without ever actually doing anything moral. Wallowing in malignant obsession is not moral, not ethical, yet it is the foundation for your conviction that it qualifies you to judge the morality of others. It is also the foundation for your (plural your) passion for Thought Police and condemnation of opposing points of view as criminal and even as terrorism.
You telegraph another belief system of your kind—that the only reason people support others is because of some emotional connection. Again, you inadvertently reveal the core motivation of Leftists by projecting it onto others. You people are simply incapable of understanding that others can, and do, evaluate political choices analytically and not because of “infatuation”.
The more I see of people like you the more I admire the genius of Thomas Sowell, who explained the core differences in how people view the world in his brilliant “Conflict of Visions”. The core theory, extremely oversimplified here, is that one vision is that some people are just so special that they should be trusted with vast power and authority, while the other vision is that people are by definition flawed and subject to error so it is important to have processes to follow, to mitigate the natural human inclination to error. Those with the former vision tend to follow and support Central Authority types of government, and make their political choices based on emotion and conviction of superiority. The latter vision is more analytical, making political choices not on emotion but on examination of the abilities of certain people to enact desirable governmental processes.
The former are simply bumfuddled by the latter—being emotion-controlled, they just cannot understand that others are not the same, so they project their own often irrational but wholly emotion-based choices on others. The latter understand how the former function, just think it is unproductive and often dangerous—and, in the case of people like you, simply annoying.
In general I don’t like the tactic of “well, what about …..?” because I think an argument should stand on its own. But when I see someone going on, and on, and on, and on, indefinitely, obsessively, about the alleged sins and crimes of a political opponent (even though it is obvious that politics is a minor issue and it’s really just about picking a target and savaging it) I can’t help but think about the contradictions inherent in these attacks.
forty poses as an arbiter of morality and ethics—at least he doesn’t hesitate to judge me on those grounds. He lovingly strokes and fondles each and every detail of what he finds so offensive about Donald Trump with a Gollum-like passion. So one might, if one were inclined to give any credence to the assumption of moral authority of forty, assume that this extends to all who violate moral, ethical and even legal standards.
Yet there is nary a word about the blatant violation of legal ethical standards of the Clinton Foundation, which has taken in billions of dollars (much of it due to the selling of American interests by the then-Secretary of State) and spent the vast majority of those billions supporting the staff of the Foundation and their lavish lifestyles while giving a pittance to the alleged beneficiaries of the foundation.
Not a whisper of condemnation of the years of corruption and abuse of power by Joe Biden, well into his presidency.
Wrong is wrong. I am not excusing wrongdoing. But at the same time society in general and the law specifically acknowledge that there are some kinds of “wrong” that are worse than others. An example: Sexual abuse of a child is wrong. Sexual abuse of a child by someone in a position of trust is even worse.
So I suggest that while it is wrong to do certain things, even if they were actually done as the accusations claim Donald Trump did with his foundation and so on, he did them as a private citizen. Without making excuses or defending anything—because I don’t have enough actual, unbiased information to even guess at the accuracy of the claims—-if I apply the “in a position of trust” criterion to his actions I find it lacking.
But the two idols of the Left, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, blatantly used their positions of authority and status as high-ranking and powerful members of our government to enrich themselves. Their abuses of power are extreme, and they not only led to personal enrichment they endangered the national security of our country. They are blatant. Where is the outrage on the Left? If moral outrage is objective, and directed at wrongdoing instead of at individuals. where is the determination to examine and condemn the actions of these people?
This two-faced hypocrisy of the Left accounts for some of the attitude toward the constant hysterical attacks on Trump. An accuser has to have at least a semblance of credibility to be taken seriously, and so far not a single one of the howling mob of Trump attackers has shown even a modicum of credibility regarding an objective objection to corruption, fraud and criminal activity.
More on the New York State abuse of power in trying to use its authority to influence the next election(s)—with the taxpayers paying the bills, of course.
Either Letitia James has a slam-dunk case in the civil lawsuit she’s been building against Donald Trump and his company, or the trial is all she wants. The New York Times reports that the AG turned down at least one offer from Trump’s team to settle the civil suit, preferring instead to proceed to court over her fraud allegations.
So were the lenders and insurers defrauded? And if so, why aren’t they suing Trump? It’s because they weren’t defrauded at all, it seems:
They also might argue that the Trump Organization submitted the statements to sophisticated financial institutions that conducted their own due diligence. In recent months, he paid off some of those loans, an outcome that funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into the coffers of his banks, making them an unsympathetic victim.
Ahem. It doesn’t make them “an unsympathetic victim” (bad syntax aside), it makes them no victims at all. The lenders haven’t lost money on the transactions,
If the lender and insurers aren’t complaining, and the property taxes got paid as assessed, where is the fraud? And even more importantly, where is the standing of the AG’s office to act as a plaintiff in such matters?
Of course, these questions prompt another: why did Trump and his team offer to settle the case, if James doesn’t actually have one? The answer to both sets of questions is likely the same: politics. Trump wants to cut loose of all his legal liabilities ahead of a likely bid for the GOP presidential nomination. And James likely wants to handicap him to prevent that bid.
We keep seeing government trying to influence elections. Government agencies (FBI, DOJ, CIA) involved in fraud and perjury to spy on American citizens and promote the Russia Hoax to harm Trump’s chances of being elected in 2016, the FBI squashing publication of Biden corruption right before the 2020 election, the House of Representatives abusing its powers by sequential impeachment hearings and now the bogus J6 hearing, the AG of New York State using the power of the State to affect public perceptions of Trump, etc.
Add this to the increasing tendency of the nation to become a police state, and we have a lot more to worry about than how Trump did or did not manage his foundation.
Have y’all seen the latest Walgreens commercial about the vaccine??? Wow, hard to believe they continue to promote falsehoods. In the ad they claim that those who are boosted are protected and can not spread the virus which is patently false. How does the FCC allow this message to continue?
I am of the belief that Sept. 11, 2001 was the beginning of this shit storm. Bush was the first globalist president and I believe that America’s connected ruling class knew Sept. 11 was going to happen. The beginning of the reset. Bush cooperated by starting an endless war in Afghanistan and sending billions of dollars to the well connected. Followed by Obama who was hoping the “fundamental transformation” would be completed on his watch but it didn’t happen. That didn’t stop Obama from siphoning off billions of American tax dollars for the globalists though – remember the palette full of cash?? Obama was to be followed by Clinton who would have ushered in the final part of the reset, which Biden is doing now. Trump just got in the way and that’s why they want him in prison.
I go to Yuma often and can attest to this:
Sunniest city on earth? No longer! Nearly 250,000 migrants have flooded Yuma, Arizona in the past year – where medical services bill has topped $20M, tourism has declined, and locals are complaining of being SHOT AT by coyotes
Thanks forty for being a dumbfuck and voting for this piece of shit in the WH
So now Marco Rubio has signed on as a co-sponsor of Lindsey Graham’s nationwide abortion bill. I guess Rubio also isn’t aware of the Tenth Amendment.
Why do you care? I like Rubio on most things but not everything, like his run for the presidency because he is not a Natural Born Citizen. It’s so funny watching you peck around like some demented bird hoping for a kernel of something you can triumphantly rush onto the blog. But that’s what you people have to do, as you are so desperately trying to avoid the real problems in this country by obsessing about the trivial.
Once you get out of the lockstep of Leftist “thinking” it gets a little messy, as over on this side we believe in freedom of thought and expression and don’t demand absolute obedience to any one idea. No Thought Police over here.
You really are digging yourself into a hole, man. Your obsession with Trump and his various flaws (which we all acknowledge) is unhealthy in the extreme.
You know, Spook, what flies right over the heads of these fanatics is the fact that they have been led to assign massive power to a single man. They have made him the focal point of their lives.
And just look at poor deluded forty. Not a word about whether or not the 10th Amendment is a valid argument against federal legislation about abortion, because to the forties of the nation that doesn’t matter—–all they want to do is nitpick about inconsistencies. And he is so oblivious to the fact that his sniping just points out the dependence on collectivism.
He seems to think he is making a great point by pointing out that not all conservatives agree on all issues. Ooooh! But to a collectivist, that really does matter. The very concept of individuals reaching different conclusions is just incomprehensible to them, and offensive. That’s why they support Thought Police, and criminalizing freedom of speech. That’s why this one is so impressed by his ability to point at two conservatives who have different opinions than some of us here, like that’s a big deal.
And it’s all about people, never about ideas.
You know you are responding to a comment about Marco Rubio, right?
So now you are the Blog Police? Keep us in line, now, bossypants. I guess it’s not enough to rudely barge in and start lecturing us, now you think you should start organizing our thoughts as well? How too too authoritarian and collectivist of you.
“Why do you care?”
I care because it shows that the principle of limited government is not a conservative principle at all, based on the actions of conservatives themselves. Since you claim it is the conservative principle that guides your ideology, I would think you would be speaking out about this, rather than leaving it to me. Where is your objection? Instead, you merely respond with personal insults.
You recently castigated Casper for daring to suggest that Congress could attempt to pass a national abortion bill. Yet your conservative legislators are doing exactly that. In other words, Casper was right all along to think that Congress would take such action.
I care because it shows that the principle of limited government is not a conservative principle at all, based on the actions of conservatives themselves.
Spoken (written) as a true collectivist. In the hive of Leftism, what one believes all must believe. So the concept of large numbers of people sharing core political values but disagreeing on some aspects or interpretations is just so alien, so beyond comprehension, that the only way to deal with it is to try to hammer this round peg into the square hole of Groupthink.
Why should I “speak out” about what two or three people say, just because I don’t agree? Unlike you, I don’t have the smug sense of moral superiority that justifies (in my own mind, anyway) charging in and lecturing others on what they “should” believe. This smugness and assumption of moral and intellectual superiority, no matter how objectively unfounded, is what makes you and Casper, et al, feel justified in barging into a site like this to scold and lecture and harangue.
If you were evangelical regarding your ideology, it might be less offensive, but you are here only to attack PEOPLE—their ideas and their beliefs. You are the pseudo-political version of the village scold, peering through your curtains to find behaviors you can pick at, with the bland assumption not only of being “right” but of being entitled to lecture others.
I would think you would be speaking out about this, rather than leaving it to me.
And just who assigned this to YOU? What a massive ego trip! A couple of people say something that appears, on the surface, to contradict what others believe, and that calls for YOU to rush in and—-what? You actually admit that in your own mind, these comments call for some kind of response, and since no one else is doing what you think should be done, here on this little blog, it is up to you to—-what? Oh, yeah—to perch on your assumed High Ground and point out the defects in others so far below you.
You recently castigated Casper for daring to suggest that Congress could attempt to pass a national abortion bill. Yet your conservative legislators are doing exactly that.
Awwww, did I hurt someone’s delicate little feelz by pointing out that there is a Constitutional restriction on federal powers? “Castigated”. My oh my. I hope Casper has recovered, though this seems to have affected you more than him. But tell us, oh great Oracle of political thought, just how many conservative legislators are “doing exactly that”. Please describe, in detail as you pay so much attention, the efforts to pass such a bill. So far I have heard of a couple of them casually mention such an idea.
I thank the good Lord that my mind is not the murky, hostile, negative and malignant stew that yours appears to be.
Yesterday, Fox News ran a story headlined, “Ron Desantis Sends Two Planes Of Illegal Immigrants To Martha’s Vineyard.
Governor DeSantis’ communications director, Taryn Fenske, told Fox, “Yes, Florida can confirm the two planes with illegal immigrants that arrived in Martha’s Vineyard today were part of the state’s relocation program to transport illegal immigrants to sanctuary destinations.”
(emphasis – mine)
While the Useful Idiots are whining about the Trump Foundation, the Stasi USA are putting process crimes suspects through Humiliation Theater by putting them in shackles and dragging them past crowds and cameras, and this is what the American public is increasingly finding ominous and dangerous.
It was Sept. 13 afternoon in Mankato, Minnesota. Lindell and a friend were half way back from a duck hunting trip in Iowa.
As one car pulled up perpendicularly in front of his car, a second pulled up alongside; and a third then appeared from behind, sandwiching Lindell’s car in the middle.
Lindell stuck his head out of the car window. “Who are you guys?” he asked.
The agents identified themselves as the FBI. “We just wanted to talk to you,” they said, Lindell recounted in an interview with The Epoch Times.
This tactic is just a version of the dawn raid by a heavily armed militarized FBI. They could have gone to Lindell’s business. They could have called him and asked him come in for an interview. But no, they had to go with the melodramatic and threatening tactic of surrounding him on a public highway.
As for “just wanted to talk to you” they lied, and really wanted to execute a search warrant for his phone. Which, of course, had to be done in the middle of a highway, with blocking cars as if they feared he might MAKE A RUN FOR IT !!!!!
Among the questions that had to be asked there on the highway: the FBI agents questioned his proof to back up the election fraud allegations. Again, we see the government effort to criminalize free speech.
In a followup, An FBI review “does not necessarily result in the opening of a full investigation,” (FBI spokesperson Vikki ) Migoya told The Epoch Times.
Think about this. Lindell was driving, meaning he was probably going at least 55 MPH unless he was on a major highway and going faster. Then a vehicle cut in front of him, forcing him to stop. Why this tactic? Why the danger of an accident? Why all the melodrama of surrounding his car with FBI vehicles? For the intimidation factor is why.
Then there was the interrogation right there on the highway. And look at their questions—about who he had been talking to, naming names of some of those people. Again, why? And again, the intimidation factor. Sending a message, as Lindell pointed out, that talking to him might mean the same kind of Gestapo treatment for them. It’s the same message they are sending to people who support Trump.
The FBI finally admitted, in so many words, that it was just an exercise in intimidation, when their spokeswoman admitted that this kind of antic “does not necessarily mean they are going to open a full investigation”.
You have to look at this and think “WTH?” Why not contact Lindell, and/or his attorney, and say “We’d like to talk. Will you please come into the office?” That’s the way they USED to handle details like this, before public humiliation and intimidation became daily weapons. At least they didn’t surround him with heavily armed and armored SWAT types in a public place, put him in leg irons and make him walk past crowds of people—they just quizzed him on the highway, surrounded by FBI cars, with people seeing this as they drove past.
Inflation is serious. The open border is serious. Runaway crime and complicit DAs are serious. We have a lot of serious problems in this country. But I think the most serious of them all is the fast track to becoming a police state.
Addendum: Mike Lindell was in the drive-through at Hardee’s when the FBI surrounded and blocked his car, so at least he wasn’t at speed when they pulled this. However, they did manage to make it as public as they could, part of their pattern of trying to to humiliate and intimidate.
Ya gotta love The Babylon Bee.
As I’ve said before, conservative humor works because of the element of truth. You couldn’t turn this situation around 180 degrees and have it be funny. Conservatives can laugh at the outrageous things that Liberals do and say. Liberals can’t do the same because they’re too busy being offended.
“my favorite pronoun is ‘you’ ” Gotta love it.
They never stop trying, but at least now there is an effort to stop them before votes are cast:
Earlier this summer, Democrats in Delaware’s state legislature rushed a new law into the books ahead of the midterm elections that would have made universal mail-in voting available across the state. This was done over the objection of Republicans who cited a variety of reasons to oppose it. Chief among these was the fact that the state constitution specifically forbids voting by mail except under specific circumstances. But a little thing like the constitution didn’t stop John Carney from signing it into law. Now that law is back on ice after a judge agreed that absentee ballots can only be cast in specific instances spelled out in the state constitution and if the Democrats want to do this they will need to pass a constitutional amendment first.
Schlichter strikes again:
Here’s a test. Which of these will society – in the form of government, schools, the media, and the corporations, to the extent they differ – not harass:
Some dude who dresses up in leather bondage gear with a thong, puts a unicorn horn on his head, and dances for dollar bills before a kindergarten class at a public school;
An 18-year-old in a college class who disagrees with the professor that Christians are racists who are ruining America;
Some healthy mom who didn’t want to make her kids wear a mask outside;
A citizen who expresses concerns about the integrity of an election that is not the 2000 election, the 2004 election, the 2016 election, or the last Georgia governor’s election.
There’s the easiest quiz you’ll take all year. In fact, the only conformist among those examples is the dude trying so very hard to be special and unique, just like all his friends. And pardon me if I misgendered said being.
But if you refuse to conform, you risk everything and gain only trouble. They say conservatism is the new punk rock, and there’s much to that. We’re the ones who take risks. We’re the ones in danger of getting fired for wrong think, of getting banned from social media for dissenting, of having a rabid pack of useless goobers try to cancel us for refusing to comply.
In his unique way he rephrases much of what I said earlier today: That it is the Left that is totally in lockstep, demanding absolute conformity to its narrative, while the Right is engaged in individualist thinking and freedom of thought and expression.
Add this to the growing list of potential lawsuits and criminal actions. To the forties of the nation probably not as compelling as how the Trump Foundation was run, but still…..
This is something I’ve wondered about:
And just now from the NYT:
A drop in stocks capped one of Wall Street’s worst weeks of the year, as executives and fund managers warned of more pain to come.
I heard on the news yesterday that sales of new homes hit the lowest level since 1952. If the majority of people vote their wallets on November 8th, it’s going to be an ugly day for Democrats.
The Smugs and the Smirkers love to ask us “why do you defend Trump?” Eliot Resnick explains:
….Stalin didn’t care if his enemies – perceived or real – were Trotskyites or “counter-revolutionaries.” What mattered to him was that they were his enemies. And that’s why we call their legal proceedings “show trials.” They weren’t exercises in justice; they were facades for political suppression.
Did Trump commit a crime? I doubt it. Democrats have spent six years and tens of millions of dollars investigating virtually every step he’s taken in his life. So far, they’ve come up with nothing. Which means that although Trump seems impetuous, he evidently hires excellent lawyers who ensure he always remains within the bounds of the law.
But at the end of the day, the question of Trump’s innocence is irrelevant. Because what we’re witnessing is not a legal investigation but a political crusade – aided by the Justice Department – to crush a man it can’t stand. And if we allow the left to win this battle, we will have allowed it to cross a line from which there may be no turning back.
For this isn’t about Trump. It’s about the left doing whatever it takes to retain political and ideological control of this country. As one political commentator has pointed out, Trump represents everything the left hates, everything they’ve spent 50 years trying to eradicate.
And it’s precisely because the left so badly wants to crush him – and, more importantly, what he represents – that we need to defend him. For we mustn’t fool ourselves: If the left succeeds in indicting and arresting Trump, it will indict and arrest the next unapologetic Republican who appears on the scene too. And then the next one. And then the next one. The left won’t stop. It knows no boundaries. It recognizes no rules. Whatever it takes.