Wry humor

Reject Kyrsten Sinema

Kyrsten Sinema is the proverbial fish-out-of-water. She would be a perfect candidate for any political position in the state of California, but she is unqualified to represent Arizona in the U.S. Senate. She is an advocate for sanctuary cities and sanctuary states, which is perfect for the anarchist environment of California, but is dead wrong for Arizona. She is opposed to protecting our southern border, insisting instead that criminals, illegal drugs, human trafficking, MS13 gang members, and illegal aliens all crossing into Arizona really is not a problem. Apparently, her goal is to have Arizona experience the “California effect” of city streets being used as open sewers and used drug syringes lying around on the sidewalks. She expresses the total disdain of our military and our policemen that is so prevalent in current “liberal” attitudes. She even supports enlisting with the Taliban to wage war against and kill American soldiers. She has mocked Arizona residents in the past, and it is ludicrous to pretend that she shares any kinship with the majority of Arizona residents. It is time for the “fish out of water” to be mercifully placed in a nice socialistic society such as Venezuela where her ideas can die a natural death.  

An ideal senator

I don't know if you watched the news broadcast which gave the entire speech by Susan Collins in which she painstakingly outlined her reasons for voting for the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh. It was a beautiful example of the use of logic and meticulous ethical dedication to determine the right and proper conclusion. I had never heard of her before the speech, but I am grateful to have been privileged to witness such an example of dedication to truth and moral standards. I came across the link below, and I highly recommend it. Just click on the link to read the article.

Susan Collins Has ‘Clear Eyes, Full Heart’

Why I vote.

Get out and vote! Be sure to vote in this extremely important upcoming election! We need your vote! This message is repeated over and over. Voting is important. Elections have consequences, and other similar statements. But I feel the need to illuminate why I personally desire to vote.

 

            I hear some people make statements like, “I am a democrat, so I vote for the democrat”, or conversely “I am a republican.”, or “I vote for the best candidate”. However, these statements have little meaning to me. Instead, I want to vote for the candidates that I think support my beliefs, and in my opinion will do what is best for this country. Instead, our political system wants to present me with a choice of supporting a political agenda, and I have to search beyond the simpleton stereotypes being expounded by most of the candidates.

 

            Today, I want to talk about the innocent-appearing concept of political correctness. It is a little difficult to define exactly, but a famous quote helps. The author of the quote was speaking about pornography, and he said that writing a legal definition of pornography was very difficult, but he could certainly identify it when he saw it. In my opinion, political correctness is a tool used to force others to behave or think a certain way based on the use of public shaming. It has little or nothing to do with the moral or logical results of the thought or action. The central theme is to control other people. It is the forerunner of developing a dictatorial society where individual thinking or freedom of speech are outlawed. I believe in the values expressed in our constitution, which includes freedom of speech. Attempting to curtail freedom of thought and freedom of speech therefore violates my beliefs, and I think it also undermines the welfare and health of our nation. I am compelled to oppose political correctness.

 

            What are the consequences of political correctness? What should you expect to happen when a group of people have succeeded in implementing political correctness? In my opinion, one offshoot is intolerance of divergent opinions. Additionally, another is the grouping of people with non-complying opinions into the general class of “enemies”. This leads to a society based on divisiveness where there are no mutual goals for the common good expounded. Instead, an aura of suspicion and hatred develops fueled by the group expounding political correctness. This is further exacerbated by the smugness and self-proclaimed moral superiority of the “PC” enforcers. They then claim that the “enemies” can be subjected to any kind of treatment because their dissent must be destroyed at any cost. At that point, you have the emergence of the “Maxine Watters” type of individual and the Antifa-type organizations who claim that assaulting the “enemies” with violence, threats and any manner of insults is permissible. All of this is thoroughly distasteful and extremely destructive to keeping a free society. It violates the very foundation of my principles, and I vehemently oppose it.

 

            Therefore, I am opposed to any group or organization who advocates or supports the concept of political correctness. How does this relate to why I vote? Obviously, if I vote for candidates who advocate or support this, then I am undermining my core values. Political correctness, the current undercurrent of hatred by the democratic leaders, the endorsement of assaulting GOP leaders in public, the destruction of free speech, and the corrosive win-at-any-cost attitude of the democratic leaders all are abhorrent to me. I have heard the leaders of the Democratic Party repeatedly advocate or endorse some or all of these “PC” concepts. The most prevalent of the “PC” attitudes is “you must hate everything and everyone related to Trump”. I cannot and will not hate anyone based on “orders” from anyone. Why do I vote? I vote to defeat the current destructive agenda of the Democratic Party!   

 

Political slander

For me, the actions and attitudes of the democratic senators before and during the confirmation process for Brett Kavanaugh can only be described as worse than reprehensible and it seriously discredits their position as senators. The confirmation process is not supposed to be comprised of a multitude of unsupported allegations directly from the sewer. The confirmation process is not supposed to be a hateful attempt to destroy the nominee’s reputation and his life. The democrats stated that they intended to stop the confirmation of any nominee proposed by President Trump even before the nominee’s name was known. When they were unable to discredit him in their initial attempt, they organized a slime ball campaign of lies and proceeded to transform the entire process into a disgusting travesty for the sole purpose of destroying Brett Kavanaugh. As an aside, Diane Feinstein should be referred to the ethics committee for hiding information from the confirmation process. This was definitely unethical behavior.

This is not the first time that the democrats have used gutter tactics to attempt to derail a Supreme Court nominee’s confirmation. This needs to be stopped. First of all, the purposeful disruptions of paid agitators in the gallery should not be permitted in the future. There is really only one way to stop it. There should only be senators of the committee and the nominee present in the hearings. In addition, the obvious posturing by the democratic senators for the cameras only provides a means for the democrats to corrupt the process. The news media should not be allowed to film the hearing, but should be provided a written transcript of the proceedings instead. However, the written transcript should be available for the general public in an easily accessed format to ensure that the biased reporting by the media can be discerned by the public. These changes should help to diminish the corruption of the process.

However, the slanderous allegations must be stopped, and the only way to accomplish this is to provide for severe punishment for politically based slander. Politically based slander should incur an aggravated sentence at least 5 times as severe as regular slander charges. In addition, politically based slander should also incur criminal felony perjury charges based on the attempt to lie to or mislead the senate. To prove politically based slander, one should have to prove the slander as in current slander cases plus one more fact. That fact should be that the allegation was made public after the person was nominated as a Supreme Court justice. The alleged date of the incident should not be considered in determining if the slander is politically based, only the date that the allegation was made public. Once the offender is convicted in civil court of politically based slander, then the case should automatically be referred to the proper law enforcement agency for the criminal prosecution.

Is American democracy dying

Click on link below to read the article:

Kerik: Kavanaugh and the Decline and Death of Democracy

Investigate the Dimms

The senate must stop the democrats abuse of the system

Click above to read the article

Another Trump attaboy - Another win for America

Click the link below to read the article:

Canada to Stay in Revamped NAFTA

Article by Pat Buchanan

Click the link to read the article.

Kavanaugh Lynching Prelude to Trump Impeachment

Your hatred and bias is showing

_{I would like to respond to the obviously biased and carefully demeaning Ny Times article written by Mr. Adam Uptak designed to impart a totally misleading interpretation of the most recent chapter of the medieval inquisition (read that as lynching) of Mr. Brett Kavanaugh. Before any of the democratic senators even spoke to Mr. Kavenaugh, they clearly expressed their hatred for him and all conservative judges by declaring that they would never confirm him as a Supreme Court justice. There has been zero attempt by the democratic senators in the hearing to ascertain if Mr. Kavenaugh has the qualifications to be a Supreme Court justice. Instead, the entire hearing has been used by the democratic senators to demean or attack Mr. Kavenaugh. They even participated in the employment of paid agitators to disrupt the earliest hearings. In short the democratic senators hands are filthy with hatred and hypocrisy displayed by total disrespect for Mr. Kavenaugh during the whole confirmation process, which they have turned into a sham. I am convinced that the democratic senators have also been trolling for anyone willing to accuse Mr. Kavenaugh of sexual misconduct because THAT IS WHAT THE DEMOCRATS DO!}

_{Mr Adam Uptak took great pleasure in demeaning Brett Kavenaugh for stating the truth regarding what is being done to him. I am surprised that Mr. Adam Uptak and his cohorts did not find some way to imply that Brett Kavenaugh was known to wear diapers when he was six months old and that surely should disqualify him for the position of Supreme Court justice. If Mr Adam Uptak were subjected to a fraction of the hatred, or a fraction of the slander that Brett Kavenaugh has been subjected to I am sure that the only words coming out of his mouth would be four-letter expletives, and I am sure that there are plenty of "instances" in Mr Adam Uptak's juvenile days that he could be persecuted for. As I read his article, I could smell the stink of his self-righteousness and smugness as he attempted to put the final touches on the slanderous character assassination of Mr. Kavenaugh.}

_{Watching the progress of the dedicated character assassination of a man who has probably lived an exemplary life is disgusting, especially when one realizes that one of the principal reasons that he is being destroyed is because he supports the right to life of an unborn child.}

Used, abused, and discarded

I have to confess that on first hearing about Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation against Brett Kavenaugh, the lack of details, and the 36 year age of the accusation, my initial reaction was to lump Christine in with the hate-mongering democratic leaders as a co-conspirator in an orchestrated smear campaign. However, after listening to the entire senate hearing today, I have modified my belief.

I believe that Christine Ford is a very troubled woman who appears to have experienced something traumatic. I believe that the democratic leaders have used her as an expendable pawn in their ongoing hate-campaign. All of the democrats who were aware of Christine’s letter plotted to release it at the most politically advantageous time, just before the planned confirmation vote. They did not care about Christine’s desires at all. They used her as a tool of destruction, and if she got hurt in the process, well that is just collateral damage. As an aside, they flat did not give a damn what happened to Brett Kavenaugh and his family, or the destruction of their constitutional duty to affirm that a Supreme Court nominee is competent. Constitutional duty be damned, death and destruction to anyone whose ideas are not in step with democratic group-think. The only thing which is important to the democratic leadership is power, power, and more power.

In the process of their smear-and-destroy campaign, they have demonstrated a total lack of ethics, zero respect for law and order, a willingness to destroy anyone or anything that blocks their quest for power, and zero empathy for the feelings and needs of anyone that they cannot manipulate.

give Trump credit

Click on the link to read the article:

Ken Langone: Give Trump Credit for 'Booming Economy'

 

The push toward anarchy

The late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark once wrote, “This nation was dedicated to freedom under law, not under mobs.” His comment is very appropriate to the current standard of conduct being encouraged by the left-wing democratic leadership. You have Maxine Watters telling her followers to assault conservative leaders in public. You have the left-wing liberal media claiming that the violence of the antifa organization is somehow justified. What kind of fantasy world do they live in where one group of people are “permitted” to attack someone because they have a different opinion. The left-wing hate groups are trying to institute lawlessness and anarchy into America to destroy the right to free speech and freedom for anyone who disagrees with them. This is the attitude typical of every dictatorship that has ever existed. Public assault of people is not free speech. It is a criminal act, and it should be treated as such.

The conservatives being publically assaulted should exercise their right to equal justice and protection under the law. Those who are publically assaulting them should be arrested and charged with felony assault. If the police refuse to provide the lawful enforcement of their right to protection from assault, then the leaders of the police department should be charged with every possible charge available to force them to enforce the law. This is not a third-world country with a caste system where one set of people can be persecuted legally with no legal recourse.

If this does not stop the public assaults, then perhaps it might be necessary to resort to an old saying, “What is good for the goose is good for the gander.” To be explicit, if the democrats can break the law, and established law enforcement agencies do nothing, then it may be time for the conservatives to organize a campaign of public harassment of every liberal politician every time they go to church, to dinner, to a movie, or anywhere else they can be cornered. Maybe a very real dose of liberal-like hate-mongering may open the liberals’ eyes.

Treason must not be tolerated

Treason:  the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.

 

I began this article by stating the definition of treason for good reason. The Democratic leaders have now drafted a letter to the heads of the FBI, the DOJ and several other agencies demanding that they disobey the direct orders of the lawfully-elected and legal President of the United States. This is nothing short of an attempt to overthrow the head of our executive branch of government. The act of overthrowing a president is defined as illegally removing him from power by a coup. Clearly, this action by the democratic leaders is an attempt of a coup of a sitting president.

The federal penalty for treason is spelled out in U.S. Code title 18 to be either:

a.     Death or

b.     Not less than 5 years imprisonment or more than life imprisonment without the possibility of parole and minimum fine of $10,000 if not sentenced to death, and loss of the right to ever run for or hold public office.

This is a clear statement of my analysis of the current situation. Do you agree? If so, write to the DOJ, write to your senator, write to your congressman and last of all write to the president expressing your support for him. This is America, not a third-world country. Mob rule must not be permitted in America!

character assassination

I feel compelled to address the ongoing attempted character assassination of the Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. First of all, the alledged incident is supposed to have occurred more than 35 years ago. What we have here is an incident which was never mentioned by the alleged victim for more than 30 years. However, as a last-ditch effort to derail Mr. Kavanaugh’s appointment as a Supreme Court justice, the alleged victim, Christine Blasey Ford suddenly decides that she must make the accusation public. The timing of the accusation is planned to have the maximum negative effect on Mr. Kavanaugh’s appointment. To illuminate this, it is necessary to note that the accusation in not made until after all of the senate confirmation process is completed, just a couple of days before the planned confirmation vote. This is intentional so that the scheduled vote will be delayed. However, the alleged victim purposely misleads the senate leaders to believe that she will testify if a special senate hearing is scheduled. Once she knows that the senate has scheduled the special hearing, she immediately acts to scuttle the hearing by adding requirements that the senate “must comply with” before she will grace them with her presence. In doing so, she has managed to scuttle the confirmation vote, delay any further action until the “special hearing”, and then, if she is successful in scuttling the special hearing, the new requirement will take weeks to comply with. What is the purpose of all of this delaying tactic? It is obviously intended to ensure that Mr. Kavanaugh’s appointment will not occur before the Supreme Court reconvenes on Oct 1^st. Why would an alleged victim never make an accusation for more than 30 years and then plan the public accusation for purely political purposes?

Now to some of the “facts” of the allegation. When asked when the incident allegedly occurred, the “victim” can’t identify the time of year or even what year it occurred. When asked where the incident occurred, the “victim” can’t recall where the incident occurred. If I experienced anything similar to what she claims happened, you can be sure that I would know when and where it happened.  As a matter of fact, she can’t remember anything about the incident that can be used to confirm that it actually happened. However, after more than 35 years, the “victim” with the foggy memory demands that we accept her statement that she still remembers his name. However, the only other person who she claims was a witness to the incident states that “It never happened”. Given the extensive amount of time that the “victim” remained silent, the timeliness of the accusation, the sparseness of confirming details, and the denials of both the “accused” and the “witness”, her accusation is not believable.

In addition, her new “requirement” that she not be required to testify in a senate hearing until the FBI investigates her accusation is ludicrous. Her intention is plainly obvious to simply delay the confirmation vote until at least after the Oct 1^st convening of the Supreme Court. In my opinion, it is her hope and the hope of her democratic compadres that the FBI investigation can be extended for years in the same manner that the Meuller special council is a never-ending, open-ended investigation of a person in search of an imaginary crime.

In conclusion, her actions are not the actions I would expect from a victim. However, this whole scenario of last minute character assassination, followed by a dedicated trial of the accused by the liberal media, pronouncement of guilt by the liberal media, and attacking anyone who expresses a different opinion than the liberal media is a classic example of how the left-wing radicals and their liberal media cohorts collude to destroy the accused person.

Comment on D. Feinstein

Click the link below to read the article:

Judicial Crisis Network: Democrats Doubling Down on Kavanaugh ‘Character Assassination’

filth from Diane Feinstein

What can you say about Diane Feinstein? I know that she has made some outlandish statements in the past. I know that she has held her position for way too long. I guess that you can now add that she has demonstrated no regard for decency in her latest attempt to sully the reputation of the nominee for the Supreme Court position. In case you are not aware of the details of her preposterous attempt, here is the nutshell description. She claims to have a letter from an anonymous source that accuses Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct that allegedly occurred more than 35 years ago when he was in high school. She claims that the anonymous source’s name cannot be revealed to protect their reputation. In my opinion, either she or someone she knew fabricated the accusation, and the whole thing is a total lie. It is just another disgusting example of the filthy methods being employed by the “liberal left” in their ongoing hate campaign. I don’t believe that there is a level too low or too disgusting for them to employ because they have no shame or ethics.

Another "low" for the democrats

Once again the democratic leadership and their senseless followers have taken the lowest road possible in their hateful “resistance” to anything related to Trump. The senate hearing regarding the Supreme Court nominee should be a respectfully orchestrated process to permit the members of the committee to ascertain if the nominee is qualified for the appointment. It should not be a slash-and-burn campaign of destruction. The democratic senators were shamefully attempting to entrap, tarnish or otherwise demean the nominee. It was a mockery of a real hearing and an attempt by the democratic leaders to turn the entire proceeding into a travesty. They should be ashamed of their obvious misuse of what should be a dignified and honorable proceeding. In addition, their acceptance of and participation in the ongoing attempts to disrupt the proceeding by idiotic self-serving outbursts from paid agitators simply underscores their contempt for law and order. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can plainly see that the democratic leaders were participating in a program based on self-centered hatred predicated on “win at any cost”. If I were a democrat, I would have been mortified to see “my representatives” conduct themselves in such a reprehensible manner.

Obama would have needed more than a "magic wand"

Click on the link below to read the article:

Trump Claps Back at Obama With 'Magic Wand' Tweet

The "Dems" don't care if it is illegal

click on the link below to read the article:

Sen. Collins ‘Bribed’ to Vote Against Kavanaugh With $1.3 Million Threat

Real facts about the "Trump" economy

Click on the links below to read the articles:

Stephen Moore: Trump Deserves Nobel Prize for Economics

WashPost: Blue-Collar Job Growth at 30-Year High

search for truth

The DOJ and the FBI have been stonewalling congressional requests for documents for months and months. The few documents which have been provided have been so heavily redacted as to be almost useless in the ongoing effort by the DOJ and FBI to cover up their corrupt actions. The claim being used by them in their refusal to comply has been that there are "security" reasons preventing their compliance with congressional requests. Thank God that President Trump is finally going to help congress to see those documents.

Click on the link below to read about this.

Trump Expected to Declassify Carter Page, Bruce Ohr DOJ Docs

Requiem for a tyrant

Today, Obama sullied a noble tradition of all previous presidents to demonstrate a respect for their successors. Even if a previous president did not agree with the current president’s policies, he still spoke with respect for the current president. Instead, today Obama spewed nothing but hatred for the current president. Repeatedly, Obama tried to take credit for the successes of the Trump administration. In doing this, he consistently lied and lied and lied. Facts are facts. The failures of the Obama administration have been repeatedly revealed. The economy during Obama’s administration SUCKED! He was the only president to never have economic growth greater than 3% for any year. The stifling business-killing regulations of his administration were a major contribution to the dismal economy. The entire eight years of Obama’s administration was an abysmal failure riddled with corruption. It is disgusting to see an abject failure such as Obama try to take credit for President Trump’s success.

Good News for Trump supporters

Are you getting tired of all the constant lies being circulated about President Trump? Are you also getting tired of the constant harassment of Trump supporters and officials in his administration? Are you getting tired of the constant twisting of the facts and the bogus wrong-headed statements by the fake news liberal propaganda? Are you sick and tired of the far-left leaders of high tech attempting to destroy your right to speak your opinion? There are some conservatives working to combat the attempts of the far-left to dictate group-think. Click on the link below to check out an effort to provide the "real" facts and a "real" effort to combat the far-left propaganda.

Check out conservative viewpoint

Mueller and Weissman: their history

 Click on the link below to read the article.

Support Grows for Trump to Pardon John Kiriakou

More good news: another atta boy for Trump

The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment aid fell to near a 49-year low last week and private payrolls rose steadily in August, pointing to sustained labor market strength that should continue to underpin economic growth.

The economy so far appears to be weathering an escalating trade war between the United States and China as well as tensions with other trade partners, including Canada, the European Union and Mexico, which have rattled financial markets.

This likely keeps the Federal Reserve on track to raise interest rates this month for the third time this year.

“The economy is in overdrive with jobless claims at lows not seen since the 1960s, and this gives the Fed the green light to raise interest rates later this month and take away some of the economy’s punch,” said Chris Rupkey, chief economist at MUFG in New York.

The Labor Department said on Thursday initial claims for state unemployment benefits dropped 10,000 to a seasonally adjusted 203,000 for the week ended Sept. 1, the lowest level since December 1969.

atta boy for Trump

An excerpt from a Newsmax article:

 

Median household income reportedly has soared more than 4 percent since President Donald Trump took office amid overall brisk economic growth and robust optimism.

Inflation-adjusted median household incomes in July hit $62,450, Investor’s Business Daily reported, citing the latest release from Sentier Research.

“That's the highest level since Sentier started tracking this more than 18 years ago. And if you combine Sentier's numbers with annual Census data, median household income is at all-time highs,” IBD reported.

“More interesting is the fact that median household income has shot up more than 4% in the 19 months since Trump took office. It had been flat over the previous year and a half. Over the course of President Obama's entire eight years in office, median household income climbed a mere 0.3%, Sentier data show,” IBD reported.

To be sure, U.S. economic growth was a bit stronger than initially thought in the second quarter, notching its best performance in nearly four years, as businesses boosted spending on software and imports declined, Reuters reported.

Gross domestic product increased at a 4.2 percent annualized rate, the Commerce Department said on Wednesday in its second estimate of GDP growth for the April-June quarter. That was slightly up from the 4.1 percent pace of expansion it reported in July and was the fastest rate since the third quarter of 2014.

Businesses spent more on software than previously estimated in the second quarter and the nation also imported less petroleum. Stronger business spending and a smaller import bill offset a small downward revision to consumer spending.

Meanwhile, Americans' consumer confidence rose in August to the highest level in nearly 18 years as their assessment of current conditions improved further and their expectations about the future rebounded, the Associated Press reported.

The Conference Board reported Tuesday that its consumer confidence index rose to 133.4 in August, up from a reading 127.9 in July. It was the highest reading since confidence stood at 135.8 in October 2000.

To become a left-wing democrat

I find myself intrigued by the idea of defining what one must do and think in today’s society to qualify as a proper left-wing democrat. Since I have not seen anyone else stepping up to the challenge, I will try to provide some insight on the subject.

First of all, as Deputy Democratic National Committee Chair Representative Keith Ellison said in April 2017, all democrats must support a woman’s right to an abortion. He did not suggest that a democrat should support this right, he demanded that all democrats must support this right. I have heard all of the rhetoric to support women’s rights attached to abortion, but there is one undeniable fact. Before the abortion, there is a living human being in the mother’s womb, and after the abortion, the baby is dead. The death is not accidental, it is a planned execution, which fits the legal definition of first-degree murder. A person who claims to be a Christian most certainly knows that the sixth commandment states “Thou shall not murder.” If support of committing abortion is required to be a democrat, then how can any Christian be a democrat? In addition, our founding fathers stated that everyone has the God-given right to Life, Liberty and pursuit of happiness. Denying an unborn child the right to life is a violation of this concept. So, it follows that to be a democrat one must also oppose the rights that our founding fathers fought and died for.

The second requirement to be a qualified democrat is to oppose the enforcement of law in America. Contained within this is also the requirement to oppose the law enforcement officers. There are multiple examples which I can use to demonstrate the truthfulness of this requirement. The sheer volume of examples prevents me from elaborating on all of them, but I will address a few. Do you remember the chant “What do you want? Dead Cops! When do you want it? Now!” The chant was initiated by Black Lives Matter. What was the reaction of the democrat leaders? They fell all over themselves trying to outdo one another in their approval of Black Lives Matter. President Obama even went out of his way to extend a special invitation to meet with them in the White House to applaud them. Surely you have heard that N.Y. Governor Cuomo referred to the law enforcement officers in ICE as thugs, and other democratic leaders are calling for punishment for ICE officers. The crime committed by the ICE officers – enforcing the law. Sanctuary cities are simply defiance of federal law by anarchists disguised as democratic leaders. The conclusion is obvious and simply stated is “Democrats leaders have no respect for law”. You as a democrat must also have no respect of law and order. It almost becomes possible to further conclude that a good democrat must hate law enforcement officers, but that may not be an absolute requirement.

The third requirement to be a good democrat is to view everyone within the framework of “identity politics”. It is not permissible to think of anyone as a unique individual. Instead, the person must be classified totally by the “identity” assigned to the person by the currently approved “group think” dogma. For instance, if the person is black, then by group-think dogma, he/she must be treated as and convinced that he/she is a “victim”, and as a victim the person is unable to fend for himself/herself, but instead must be convinced that only the democrats can provide for him/her. I am sure that you noticed my effort to be gender/neutral which is the currently “PC acceptable” group-speak permitted. I am sure that you have heard all of the names attached to “Conservatives” by the “Liberal Left”. The list of names are all based on “identity politics”, and they are repetitive and boring, and rarely have any resemblance to reality, but they do serve the democrat’s purposes to engender unreasoning hatred, suspicion and fear. If you are unable to distill a person down into a list of adjectives based on group-think “identity politics”, then you will certainly have difficulty fulfilling your role as a qualified democrat.

The next requirement is that you must develop a God-complex to function as a proper left-wing democrat. I am sure that I need to clarify what I mean by “God-Complex”. Simply stated, you must be totally convinced that only you have the “true enlightenment” in every aspect of life. If someone disagrees with you or even questions your beliefs, then not only are they wrong, but they are defined as the devil incarnate. Since they are the devil incarnate, then you are justified to do anything to punish them for their “evil thoughts” or to stop them in their “evil intents”. The logical conclusion to this line of thought is that only you have the right to free speech, and anyone who holds beliefs different from yours must be prevented from exercising any free speech rights. The right to free speech belongs exclusively to only you and your fellow “Group-Thinkers”! This God-complex is demonstrated perfectly by Maxine Watters. She carries the idea to its ultimate extreme conclusion. In her mind, it is epitomized by President Trump who she has defined as “evil” and herself, who she has associated with “perfect”. She has openly declared her intent as follows: “I can assemble a bigger and more vicious gang of thugs than Trump can, and I will organize public assaults upon anyone who supports Trump. The person who can be more violent and lawless will win because ‘might makes right’, and I will be more violent and lawless”

There are several more “requirements”, but in order to keep this article from getting too long, I will only mention one more requirement. It is that you must become totally committed to complying with the dictated group-think that is the current norm for any idea, group of people, etc being endorsed by the democrat leaders at any time. Further, you must be flexible enough to totally reverse your mindset if the current group-think requires it. As an example, group think states that providing economic assistance for blacks is a good thing. However, group think requires that you ignore the fact that black unemployment is at the lowest level in history, because group-think also states that you must hate everything related to President Trump. It can be difficult because the basic premise of group-think is that you (the average democrat) cannot and must not think for yourself. If a “leader” demeans someone, you must be in total agreement with the “leader”

If you think you can comply with all of these “requirements”, then you may be able to qualify as a democrat. But who knows, group-think may change tomorrow and all of the qualification requirements may change.

Total insanity from the democrats

The following is part of the legal definition of extortion.

 

Virtually all extortion statutes require that a threat must be made to the person or property of the victim. Threats to harm the victim's friends or relatives may also be included. It is not necessary for a threat to involve physical injury. It may be sufficient to threaten to accuse another person of a crime or to expose a secret that would result in public embarrassment or ridicule. The threat does not have to relate to an unlawful act. Extortion may be carried out by a threat to tell the victim's spouse that the victim is having an illicit sexual affair with another.

Other types of threats sufficient to constitute extortion include those to harm the victim's business, and many statutes also provide that any threat to harm another person in his or her career or reputation is extortion.

 

Please reread the definition of extortion above before continuing.

 

Stormy Daniels and her lowlife lawyer threatened to make it known that Trump had been involved with Stormy in some kind  of sexual affair for the express purpose of extorting money from him in the form of “hush money”. Clearly, Trump was the victim of an extortion scheme by Stormy Daniels and her lawyer. The extortion demand was paid by Trump’s lawyer, who was reimbursed by Trump from his own money. To clarify this, the extortion payment was paid by money which ultimately came from Trump’s personal wealth. Trump committed no crime. His lawyer committed no crime. Stormy Daniels and her lawyer committed an act of extortion. According to the democrats, Stormy Daniels past as a prostitute and her extortion activities make her a hero to be applauded, and Trump (the victim of the extortion) should be punished. Does any of this make any sense at all?

Now they are trying to claim that Trump cannot spend his own money during his presidential campaign to further his own campaign’s success! They are claiming that in addition to being a victim of extortion (which the democrats are applauding), the extortion payment must be considered a campaign expense (really??!!), and in addition they are claiming that Trump cannot spend his own money for “campaign expenses! Have you ever heard such a crock before?  

Democrats are overreacting to the Michael Cohen guilty plea

An Article by Jenna Ellis

While Democrats got excited that Michael Cohen, former personal attorney to Donald Trump, pleaded guilty to eight counts of bank fraud, tax fraud, and campaign finance violations, here’s why Cohen’s plea isn’t the Left’s ticket to the end of the Trump administration.
1. Plea agreements are often, by definition, legal fiction.
In the criminal law world, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that of the felony cases that reached conviction, more than 95 percent of these convictions occurred through a guilty plea rather than trial and verdict. This varies by jurisdiction, but the numbers are high.
Often, plea agreements (also called plea bargains) are reached because the defendant wants to take a lesser, known sentence, rather than risk going to trial, where juries and verdicts are not predictable. Because of the nature of a “lesser” sentence, it is standard practice for a defendant to plead guilty to a crime he or she did not commit simply to benefit from the agreement.
This is known as a legal fiction and happens every day in every jurisdiction in the country. Some argue the practice is rife with problems, but that’s a policy issue for another day. Legal fiction plea bargains do happen and they happen in a majority of cases that end in plea deals. I personally have handled hundreds of cases as a prosecutor and defense attorney where plea bargains were involved.
Why does this happen? Let's say, for example, you’re charged with speeding. You don’t think you were speeding and question the officer’s radar, but really don’t want your insurance to go up, so you accept the prosecutor’s offer to plead guilty to a broken headlight. In exchange for the plea, the prosecutor will drop the charge of speeding, your insurance won’t go up, and you’ll just have to pay a small fine.
So, you stand in front of a judge and say, yes, you signed the agreement stating you’re guilty of a broken headlight on your car. Is that true? Nope. Everyone in court knows that, but everyone also knows that you’re agreeing to plead guilty in exchange for the benefit of the agreement.
Is Cohen benefiting from this plea? Absolutely. And even if he says in front of a judge in open court and under oath and recites the nursery rhyme “cross my fingers,” it doesn’t make his plea any more than an exchange for a pretty sweet deal, considering what he was facing.
2. Plea agreements are not confessions.
Stating guilt in the context of a plea agreement is not the same thing as a confession. Pleading guilty is a legal conclusion where the defendant may “waive a factual basis” — meaning, it’s fine with the court if the charge the defendant is pleading to doesn’t match the reality of what happened. Your headlight wasn’t actually broken, but you still pleaded guilty to the charge of a broken headlight.
A confession is a factual account of what the person remembers happening. Sometimes during the sentencing hearing, a defendant will choose to make a statement about what actually happened, regardless of whatever charge they pleaded guilty to and were convicted of, usually to try to convince the judge of remorse or mitigating reasons why the person should receive a lesser sentence. In the context of a sentencing hearing, this is called an allocution.
Cohen’s sentencing hearing is set for Dec. 12, and at that time he may or may not make a statement. Even if he does and in some way implicates Trump, consider the context. He’s benefiting from the plea agreement and his credibility at this point is a big zero. Any statements would still have to be properly weighed for veracity, be admissible in court, and even if he was at some point called to testify, it’s common to be cross-examined on the motive and benefit for accepting a plea bargain and making such statements.
In any other context that wasn’t so politically charged, most juries see right through this. How many crime dramas and movies depict the all-too-common “jailhouse snitch” that is a star witness for the prosecution, and then his story falls apart because he’s doing it just for his own benefit?
Cohen’s plea, standing alone, is nothing short of a self-interested deal. And that’s pretty much what he’s known for outside the courtroom too, which is how he got into this whole mess.
3. Plea agreements are not evidence of crimes or verdicts of guilt.
Plea bargains happen instead of trials. There is no jury, no testimony, no evidence, and no verdict. There are no 12 angry men in a room weighing the facts and determining what really happened.
Mark Levin expressed it well on Fox News to Sean Hannity: “Just because a prosecutor says that somebody violated a campaign law doesn’t make it so. He’s not the judge, he’s not the jury,” Levin said. “We didn’t adjudicate anything. It never went to court.” He’s right.
Because plea bargains are not confessions and are often legal fiction, they shouldn’t be used as evidence of someone else’s possible guilt. It’s very possible that part of the reason this particular plea agreement was offered to Cohen was for the optics of “implicating” Trump, as some media coverage has suggested.
So really, who cares what Michael Cohen pleaded to? Those who are politically biased against Trump and self-interested care, sure. But no one who really understands the legal system is excited about this. In the emotional fervor of the media reports, we should not forget that the rule of law and constitutional protections are in place for very good reasons; namely, so that justice, not politics, happens in a court of law.

Former CIA director Brennan is NOT one of the good guys

Brennan is not a victim, and his effort to portray himself as a victim is sickening. Brennan lied to congress in his testimony. He should be prosecuted for his lying. Brennan orchestrated an illegal surveillance effort, including wiretapping against GOP members of congress in an obvious misuse of power. He has cooperated in activity that is at least unethical in his efforts to use his office as a weapon against his political foes, just like a third-world dictator. Also, this nonsense about Trump denying him free speech rights is a downright lie. No one who is or was in the executive branch of government has the right to attempt to overthrow the current sitting president, and Brennan is breaking the CIA directives regarding how he is conducting himself. Last of all, just how did an avowed Communist ever get appointed as the director of the CIA. Oh yes, he was appointed by the real Dictator-Want-To-Be, Barack Obama.

A Short story

_{Once there was a mountain climber who had competed his conquest of an unnamed mountain and was on his way back down the mountain. Although it had taken several days to climb to the top, the journey back down was much quicker, and he was very happy that he would be below the snow line in just a few hours as he could feel the possibility of fresh snow in the air. His breath was forming small clouds as he expelled each breath, and as he stopped to rest on the precarious slope, he heard a soft voice speak to him asking, “Sir could you help me?”}

 _{He looked around and seeing nothing asked “Where are you?”}

_{“Down here” came the reply.}

 _{So he began to inspect the ground near where he was standing. A movement on the ground a few feet away caught his attention. He was dismayed to see a beautiful multi-colored snake coiled on the ground which was apparently watching him. Recovering his composure, he asked “Is it you speaking to me?” The same unmistakable soft voice replied “Yes, I am.”}

_{The man warily took a step backwards and asked, “How can I help you?}

_{The snake replied, “I have stayed too long on the high slope, and I can feel snow in the air. If I am caught in the snow then I may die, and I can’t get down the mountainside quickly by myself. Could you be kind enough to carry me down the mountainside below the snow line? I would be very grateful. Also, since I know this mountain terrain very well, I may be able to help you find an easier path down.”}

_{The man was taken aback by the request, and since he had a fear of snakes, he was very disinclined to get any closer to the snake. However, the plaintive request gave him much pity for the snake’s predicament. He really wanted to help, but was in a quandary about how to do it. Then he had an idea. He did not want to hurt the snake’s feelings by implying that he distrusted it, but he did not want to pick it up. So he said, “I have to have my hands free to be able to climb down, so I can’t carry you in my hand. However, I have a pocket in my backpack that I can unzip, and you can craw in, and I can zip it up. You can’t fall out after I zip it closed, and I will have my hands free for climbing. How does that sound?”}

_{“It sounds a little uncomfortable, but if you will stop often to let me get out of the pocket for fresh air, I can do that.” The snake replied.}

_{“OK, then it is agreed.” The man concluded. At that, the man removed his backpack, unzipped it, and allowed the snake to crawl in. He then proceeded with his descent. After a short time, the two of them began to talk back and forth, and the man became more relaxed with the idea that he had a snake in his backpack. But as time passed, the snake began to note that it was quite stuffy in the pocket, and mentioned it to the man several times. Each time the man would stop, unzip the backpack, and the snake would crawl out for a breath of fresh air. Finally, during one of these stops, the snake asked if the man could leave a small opening in the zipper to make it more comfortable, and although he had some misgivings, the man agreed. Each time that they stopped, the man became less apprehensive, and he began to leave the zipper open even more. After a while, the man decided that there was no real reason to keep the zipper closed at all, and from that point on, the snake would simply poke its head out when it wanted fresh air. Many times as they descended the mountain, the snake suggested routes to the man which were easier to descend. Finally, the snake told the man that they were well below the snow line and noted a large boulder with ample room beneath it for the snake to safely reside. “You can just put me down at the base of the boulder” the snake said to the man.}

_{The man realized that he had never even asked the snake its name, and it seemed reasonable to ask as he was placing the snake on the ground. The snake replied “My name is Omarosa” as it was placed on the ground, and then it turned and bite the man viciously before quickly slithering under the boulder.}

_{“Why did you do that?” the man cried out, “I thought we were friends.”}

_{“You foolish old man.” The snake laughed. “What did you expect? After all I am a snake!”}

Do you think President Trump should hear this story?

Some goals of democratic leaders

As we approach the upcoming mid-term elections, I find myself intrigued by the question, “What are the goals of the democratic leaders?” This is just the first of many upcoming articles discussing this. First of all, the single overwhelming purpose of the democrats for the entire Trump administration has been crystal-clear. Oppose and obstruct anything that Trump proposes! The second goal has been to demean or deny anything that the Trump administration accomplishes. The third leg of their actions has been to misquote, misinterpret, or question everything that Trump says. The key point is that the democrats have had absolutely zero concern for doing anything that is good for America, and they have contributed nothing to improving our economy. Every improvement to the economy during Trump’s presidency is due only to Trump’s efforts, and the GOP who have supported him. The historic low unemployment figures being reported have been accomplished in spite of total obstinate opposition by the democrats.  

            It is a completely unarguable statement that the function of our police to enforce the law and to protect American citizens is clearly good for America. Are there some policemen that are no good? Absolutely! Are the overwhelming majority of law enforcement doing a good job? Again absolutely! The only conclusion that can be reached is that government officials must support law enforcement for the good of our country, and be vigilant to weed out corrupt law enforcement. The only realistic measure to use for evaluating law enforcement is, “Are they enforcing the law?” They don’t write the laws, and they don’t have the right to pretend that they are judges. Do the democratic leaders support our law enforcement? The answer is a resounding “NO!!!!!” The examples of non-support are too numerous to detail, but the point is proven by simply looking at some of the actions of the democratic leaders. Do you remember the chant, “What do you want?, Dead Cops. When do you want it? Now!” Do you remember Obama’s reaction to the group who led that chant? He invited them to the White House to show his overwhelming approval. The more recent mistreatment of our ICE officers by the democratic leaders by calling them every despicable name possible, and demanding that ICE be abolished is another example. ICE was guilty of only one thing, ENFORCING THE LAW! What is the democratic leaders’ response, PUNISH THEM! Conclusion, the Democratic leaders want to destroy our law enforcement agencies. Further conclusion, the Democratic leaders want to encourage rampant criminal activity. Further conclusion, the Democratic leaders do not care at all about providing protection for American citizens against criminals!

            This if further illuminated by the “Sanctuary cities/states” that the democratic leaders are clamoring for. In reality, what is the function of a “Sanctuary city or state?” It is really quite simple. It is an effort by certain democratic leaders to oppose the lawful enforcement of federal immigration law to ensure that illegal aliens living unlawfully in America will not have to comply with the laws of our country. In addition, the democratic leaders fight any and all efforts to prosecute illegal aliens who have committed felonies in America. The basis of this effort is actually an offspring of what I stated at the beginning of this article. The democratic leaders have consistently and repeated pursued actions which are intended to undermine the lawful activities of law enforcement in America. There is no legal right for cities or states to establish “Sanctuaries” where the city or state breaks federal law. It is total anarchy. Constitutional law is quite clear and indisputable in stating that the federal laws regarding immigration are supreme. What is the result of the democratic anarchy regarding illegal aliens? First of all, there is a grave inability for us to prevent alien criminals from entering America. I can only conclude that either the democratic leaders want to increase the inflow of criminals into America, or they simply don’t care about the dire negative consequences of the resulting explosion of criminal activity. The ongoing efforts of the democratic leaders to place illegal aliens’ desires above the rights of the people who are trying to LEGALLY immigrate is surely intended to destroy legal immigration into America! Why should anyone spend the time, effort and money required to legally immigrate when the democrats will put all of the illegal aliens ahead of the legal immigrants. I have already addressed the covert democratic aspirations to corrupt our election processes using illegal aliens in previous posts.

            So, it appears that there are several democratic goals which I have identified in this post. First, democrats are opposed to supporting our law enforcement agencies. Second. Democrats are opposed to protecting American citizens from criminal activity by illegal aliens. Third, since Trump’s election, the democrats have been vehemently opposed to Trump even when that opposition has harmed Americans. Contrary to what the democratic leaders say, they have no interest or intention of improving the finances of American citizens because that is the express goal that Trump is trying to accomplish. The democratic leaders have repeatedly stated that they will immediately rescind the tax cuts as soon as they regain power. If you are one of the millions of Americans who has obtained a better job (or maybe you were unemployed before Trump’s help), do you really support the democrat’s aspiration to return to a putrid economy with little or no chance for improvement? Do you really support their intention to move us backwards into stagnation AGAIN? These goals being pursued by the democratic leaders will harm American citizens, cripple America, support anarchy in America, and enable the only logical conclusion, the destruction of America.

Strzok finally fired!!!

Last Friday FBI Deputy Director David L. Bowdich ordered the firing of FBI agent Peter Strzok, FINALLY. This represents a beginning of justice, but it certainly should not be the end of the story. It is crystal-clear that Strzok abused his power in his position in the FBI to conduct a sham investigation of Hillary Clinton for the sole purpose of protecting her from any prosecution of the multiple crimes which she committed. His hated of Trump, and his devotion to Hillary are amply documented in the plethora of text messages which he wrote. He should be prosecuted for the obstruction of justice regarding the Hillary sham investigation, and I am sure that there has been multiple crimes committed by him in the ongoing witch hunt against Trump. 

This follows the firing of FBI agent McCabe for multiple perjury instances related  to the witch hunt regarding President Trump. That was also a beginning of justice. But firing does not provide adequate justice in this instance either. WHEN WILL McCabe BE PROSECUTED FOR PERJURY!

While we are talking about justice, when is Comey going to be charged for the multiple crimes he committed, including abuse of power. His firing was just the beginning of justice also. Likewise, when will we see justice regarding the blatant misuse of power and bias shown by Bruce Orr and his wife Nellie in their efforts to frame President Trump using Russian lies and propaganda? Bruce has been demoted, but when will he finally be fired, and when will he and Nellie be charged?

Last of all, when will the blatantly biased 'liberal media' and the leaders of the Democratic party finally quit sticking their head in the sand and pretending that all of the firings, demotions, and ongoing FBI scandals are simply normal FBI activities. As much as the media and the Democrats try to hide the fact that the FBI leadership is corrupt and constantly abusing their power for political purposes, the truth will win out. 

It is obvious that the FBI will not bring charges against "their own", and it is also obvious that the same corruption and abuse of power is present in the DOJ leadership. So do you really think that the DOJ or the FBI will clean up their rampant corruption? It seems to be certain that the only way to clean up the mess is to initiate an Internal Affairs organization for the FBI with both the authority and the power to subpoena, conduct investigations, convene grand juries, and issue indictments against FBI personnel who have possibly committed crimes, including and especially looking for abuse of power. Every citizen should be able to expect equal treatment under the law. In the present day FBI, a ranking democrat who commits a crime is purposely not prosecuted, while any Republican can and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, even if no crime can be proven.

More NFL Garbage

Well, the spoiled, over-paid and over-indulged NFL players are at it again. Although they all should confess that they could never find another country which would provide the possibility of receiving their grossly over-inflated salaries, they still have to express their hatred for our flag. To repeat, only in America can so many athletes command such outrageous salaries for performing an activity which really has no intrinsic value! They really can’t see that they are insulting the values and beliefs of the very people who are paying their salaries. Although I have been a committed and fervent fan of pro-football for many years, I have had enough. I refuse to donate even one more penny to these NFL players and their outlandish salaries. Either love America or get out! NFL football has no place in my home, on my television, and certainly deserves zero money out of my wallet. If you are sick and tired of contributing to these inconsiderate, spoiled leeches, I hope that you make a similar decision!

Surely you have caught on!!!

Have you been one of the “astute”? If so, then this will probably not be news to you, but I would like to hear your comments.

It has been going on for more than a year now, and many readers have not yet caught on. The “liberal” media and the Democratic Party are working hand-in-hand to destroy the Trump presidency. Of course, I would not insult your intelligence by stating the obvious without a little more information. 

The way that they are conducting this campaign is what I am speaking about.

It is a two-step dance which they are repeating every week, and it is really getting boring to watch. The Democrats find some issue that can be exploited to demean or diminish Trump at the beginning of each week. It does not have to be anything new, but it usually is begun with a fresh lie. Then, the “liberal” media all line up to expound on the new lie or the “new revelation”. The media scream about the “current week’s disaster” for at least 4 or 5 days. Then they wait for the next “catastrophe” to be pushed by the Democratic Trump-deranged mob, and start the next week’s idiocy. The key point is that the predicted disaster never happens? Do you think the democrats will ever catch on?