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?

Is China about to blink?

Excerpt from a news report today:

China may have to start buying U.S. soybeans again in coming weeks despite the trade war between the two countries as other regions cannot supply enough soybeans to meet China’s needs, Hamburg-based oilseeds analysts Oil World said on Tuesday.

In July, China imposed import tariffs on a list of U.S. goods, including soybeans, as part of the trade dispute with the United States. China is the world’s largest soybean importer and has been seeking alternative supplies, especially in South America, where supplies available for export are down.

“China has to resume purchases of U.S. soybeans,” Oil World said in its latest newsletter. “The South American supply shortage will make it necessary for China, in our opinion, to import 15 million tonnes of U.S. soybeans in October 2018/March 2019, even if the current trade war is not resolved.”

Chinese purchases of U.S. soybeans could re-start “in coming weeks,” Oil World added.

Have you heard about the pigs in Portland

Please look at the filth left behind at the Portland ICE office by the so-called demonstrators. They flew into the area, dumped crap all over everyone in the area, and left their pile of human waste for someone else to clean up, and they try to tell us that we should listen to ANYTHING THEY BELIEVE. Personally, I have no desire to emulate anything associated with a mob of pigs!

American uranium gone!

In 2013, a Russian company was permitted to purchase a Canadian company called Uranium One. Uranium One owned about 20% of the total American Uranium assets. Prior to the purchase, Bill Clinton met with Russian officials in Russia, the details of the meeting were not disclosed. However, Bill Clinton was subsequently paid a half million dollars to give a speech in Russia. That payment was significantly higher than his usual payment to give a speech. Why is this possibly significant? The Uranium One deal had to be approved by the U.S. State department. Guess who was head of the State department at that time? How about Hillary Clinton.

About the time that the Uranium One deal was done, there were many high-level Russian businessmen who were involved with the Uranium One deal who donated over 140 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. Now if you ask the leaders of the Democratic Party about this “coincidence”, they will tell you that the Russians donated all that money simply out of a desire to be charitable. However, it is really hard to swallow that these Russians would donate such a large sum to the Clinton Foundation without there being a reason. Oh, to reiterate, the donations came from Russians who would benefit from the completion of the Uranium Deal.

Then there is the fact that the FBI was investigating these same Russians for racketeering charges related to the Uranium One deal, including extortion, bribery, and kickbacks. It is interesting to note the fact that this ongoing FBI investigation was allegedly never disclosed to the persons involved in the approval of the Uranium One purchase. There has been an informant that testified that there were “lobbying fees” of 3 million dollars paid by Russians to ensure that the Clinton State department would not hinder the culmination of the Uranium One deal. It was very difficult to obtain this informant’s testimony because the FBI had forced him to sign a non-disclosure agreement to prevent him from giving his testimony. Another interesting fact, the head of the FBI at this time was none other than Robert Mueller. If Mueller had permitted the disclosure of the racketeering activities by the Russians, America might not have lost 20% of our uranium assets. If Robert Mueller had not stymied the testimony of the informant by forcing the signing of the non-disclosure, the truth could have surfaced much sooner. So who was heading the Uranium One investigation, Andrew McCabe and Ron Rosenstein, and it produced zero indictments despite plenty of suspicious facts.

To date there has been no charges brought against anyone in regards to the Uranium One deal, and they are still playing at another investigation. Iin my opinion the current Uranium One investigation is simply another sham investigation which will be terminated by the FBI without any indictments. Why do I believe this? Simple, any apparent or alleged criminal charges that may spill over onto the Clintons have a way of being swept under the carpet. If there were a serious investigation, the Clinton  Foundation "donations", and also the excessive speaking fee paid to Bill Clinton would be open to investigation. The leaders of the Democratic party will ensure that there will be no serious investigation conducted!