• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Yes, I’m Rooting for Roy Moore to Win in Alabama

“Our American democracy bears a concept that one is innocent until proved guilty….”beyond a shadow of doubt” some add on.

There is much noise these days from the feminist-feminazi circles of American politics.  Many, especially those who don’t crave for children,  claim female superiority to the human male.   Nearly all belong to leftists political gangs and groups of one kind or another.  Many hang inside and out of  schools, colleges, and universities doing what today’s  Democrats, fascists and communists do, make trouble and noise.  They program to disrupt our United States in any and every manner possible….in the name and doings of freedom by making it  disappear as a free nation.    Feminists need special care and allowance to do their feminist deeds.

Feminists need fascism to rule their way  to strengthen their day.    They are rallying for their revolution in Washington  to begin this December, with the election of the very leftist Democrat candidate………in order to elevate the devious, dishonest  Charles Schumer to rule the Senate to disrupt the people’s  election of Donald J. Trump as our nation’s President.

Roy Moore was recently accused  by leftist Democrats who collared a middle aged gal who claimed that 38 years ago  when she was 14,  a 32 year old man, Roy Moore, had been rather casual with her…..and now, but never before  even  when he was a judge, suddenly was directed to appear and cry on  television   to keep him, a conservative,  from going to Washington by helping creepy, deviate leftist,  Chuck Schumer gain control of the US Senate and begin proceedings to remove OUR DONALD from the White House. ”   ghr

Why I’m voting for Roy Moore

by Jon Guertin  at American Thinker

As a transplant to Alabama and the American South, I’m surprised when events here make their way into the national dialogue.  For reasons other than college football, the coastal media writes off Southerners and the culture here as too tinged with Confederate-inspired non-sophistication to be taken seriously.  For my part, I happily moved here from a blue state where everyone thinks he’s sophisticated, and I haven’t seriously looked back in nearly ten years.  We certainly have problems, but people here can spot phony, and they hate it.  The accusations against Roy Moore have a strong whiff of phoniness in their telling and retelling that will likely fail to block his election to the Senate next month.

With that said, Moore mismanaged this from his end.  He is an ideal candidate for hypocrisy-hunters and should have been ready for this attack.  It could have been anticipated with a planned set of talking points and an army of credible responders ready to pounce on the story when it came out.  The left is predictable in its tactics and willingness to launch a barrage of innuendo and nastiness if these will help the leftist candidate win.

Perhaps Moore’s portrayal of naïveté is one reason he’s a popular figure with many in this state.  I suspect that fair-minded people will have a hard time using accusations, especially concerning alleged behavior 40 years ago, as sufficiently compelling to switch their vote.

In my view, this election will likely come down to turnout.

Should he win, Moore’s election will test two important principles for Republicans.  The first is, who decides how voters in each state should chose their representatives in Congress, and the second is, how seriously does our elected leadership view the opportunities inherent in holding majorities in each chamber along with the White House?…….”    Please continue reading below:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/11/why_im_voting_for_roy_moore.html

 

 

Advertisements

Hillary Goes Bananas With Her Insanity about Her Enemies in WHAT HAPPENED

Hillary’s Version

by Conrad Black  at  National Review

“The American political community has not taken adequate notice of Hillary Clinton’s book What Happened (the title is not posed as a question). It was generally panned when it came out a couple of months ago for blaming everyone but herself for her defeat. I have never been a Clinton-basher, and I was astonished by the venom, untruthfulness, and zealotry of her account. Mrs. Clinton writes persuasively of seeking “grace” after her defeat, and concluded most of her speeches throughout the 2016 campaign calling for “love and kindness,” yet she is unrelievedly ungracious. She describes her opponent as a clear and present danger to the country, . . . an unqualified bully [whose] towering self-regard blotted out all hope of learning or growing, . . . a charlatan . . . [who is] sexist, misogynist, [who] appealed to the ugliest impulses of our national character, . . . [is] on the wrong side of justice, history, and basic human decency, . . . [is] hostile to civil rights and voting rights across the board, is for nuclear proliferation, against NATO, and for torturing prisoners, . . . lacks character, values, and experience, [and] will be the most reckless president in American history, and put at risk our country’s national security and well-being. She claims that Trump implied she would be assassinated by “the Second Amendment people,” when he was referring to their talent at lobbying the Congress; and implies that he called the Sandy Hook school massacre in 2012, where 27 people were killed, including many children, “a hoax” (an outrageous falsehood). She calls Trump “an America-bashing misogynist,” like Vladimir Putin and Julian Assange (of WikiLeaks), really thinks he might have been conspiring with Russian intelligence and WikiLeaks, and even attaches some credence to the “golden shower” rumor that Trump organized a group of prostitutes to do unsanitary things on a bed in a Moscow hotel where the Obamas once slept. In sum, she declares Donald Trump to be “the least experienced, least knowledgeable, least competent president our country has ever had, . . . who doesn’t think in terms of morality or human rights, he only thinks in terms of power and dominance.” Her opponents are always “the extreme right,” though Trump is in fact a centrist on most issues except law enforcement, well to the left of the Ted Cruz Republicans. “He dreams of Moscow on the Potomac.” She writes that Trump has “an affection for tyrants, hostility toward allies, and alleged financial ties to shady Russian actors.” He has “degraded national life” and “is a tumor on the American soul,” and comes to the very edge of an accusation of outright treason. There’s not much “grace, love, and kindness” here.

Previous narrowly defeated presidential candidates have been almost uniformly civilized. It never seems to have occurred to Hillary Clinton that Trump won because the previous 20 years of government had been utterly and bipartisanly incompetent, in the White House and the Congress. Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama produced the housing bubble and the Great Recession, endless and fruitless war in the Mideast and an immense humanitarian tragedy, mountainous budgetary, current-account, and trade deficits, and, under Obama, serious increases in poverty and violence, a shrinking work force, and a foreign policy of telling America’s allies and enemies to change roles and places. (Clinton proudly claims that the surrender to Iran’s nuclear military ambitions avoided an arms race in the Middle East, and fears what a mess Trump might make of North Korea, oblivious to her own and her husband’s bungling of the issue.) She somewhat grasps that tens of millions of voters don’t enjoy being called “deplorables” (though she thinks they are anyway), but doesn’t grasp that Trump was running as much against the Bushes and Obama as against the Clintons. She seems not to realize that he and his supporters concluded that the entire political class, including its national-media launderers, Wall Street paymasters, greasy lobbyists, and Hollywood cheerleaders, all had to go when the swamp is drained. Mrs. Clinton attributes her defeat to the malice of James Comey (the former FBI director), popular misogyny, the Russians, Republican chicanery, the Electoral College, and the near impossibility of a party’s winning three straight terms. She saluted Comey when he vastly exceeded his authority as a senior police official by announcing that she would not be prosecuted, but he subsequently (very clumsily) reopened and then closed the investigation of the email controversy. Mrs. Clinton describes this sequence as being “shivved by Jim Comey three times.” It was an eruption of Comey’s egotism and poor judgment, but he exonerated her twice, while admitting that she had lied to federal investigators — Martha Stewart went to prison for less — and he merely said some new emails were being examined on the third occasion. Not much of a shivving. Then comes the misogyny of the American electorate, which did not prevent them from giving her more votes than Trump (albeit not as usefully distributed). Five previous presidents were elected with fewer votes than their chief opponent, because the United States is a federation where all the adhering states entered with the same level of jurisdictional sovereignty, regardless of population. If it were a straight matter of popular plurality, Trump would have campaigned in California, New York, and Illinois, where Clinton racked up big majorities; and if it were like the French system, where a second ballot is required between the two leading candidates where there is no majority on the first vote, Trump would have won anyway, as he would have picked up most of the Libertarian vote (4 million), while Clinton would have got most of the Greens (1 million). Party control of administrations has lately tended to change after two terms, but the Republicans had three straight terms in the 1920s, followed by five straight Democratic terms, and the Republicans had three terms in a row under Reagan and Bush. It can be done, with a popular retiring president and a strong successor, but neither was the case in 2016. There was no argument to reelect the Democrats after the general policy fiasco of the Obama tenure, and the whole Democratic campaign was to pillory Trump as a gangster, a traitor, and a buffoon. Hillary also thinks she was a victim of the disenfranchisement of non-white and youthful voters, though there is no evidence that this happened, and neither Trump nor the Republican party would have had any ability to do it.

More alarming than Mrs. Clinton’s ungraciousness is her dishonesty. She all but accuses Trump of treasonable collusion with Russia, and Russian interference in the election looms even larger than misogyny and Comey’s skullduggery in her demonology of causes of the national tragedy of her defeat. But all the “evidence” she cites of Trump–Kremlin collusion is taken from the now-infamous Christopher Steele dossier. Since the publication of this book, it has come to light that the Clinton campaign paid $10 million for Steele’s unverifiable pastiche of defamatory gossip and fabrications against Trump. The entire case against Trump has, after 16 months of FBI investigation, turned up no evidence. The Clinton campaign denied, until the facts came to light, that it had any knowledge of the origins of the Steele dossier, and now says that it doesn’t matter who paid for it; and she now refers to it as “campaign information.” The bipartisan leadership of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee has confirmed that this dossier is the sole basis for the continuation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. Mrs. Clinton professes to believe that she faced a hostile press throughout the campaign, an unimaginable liberty with the facts to anyone who saw the relentless sandbag-job the press conducted against Trump. She writes that, on October 31, 2016, the New York Times, which she thinks was hostile to her, ran “one of the worst stories of the entire election, claiming the FBI saw no link between the Trump campaign and Russia.” It is nearly 13 months later and the Mueller leak machine has confirmed the same finding. The outright dishonesty of her citing a smear campaign she had commissioned and paid for as evidence of her opponent’s perfidy is a historic pathfinder in electoral dirty tricks, vastly surpassing anything from hardballers like FDR, LBJ, or Richard Nixon (whom she falsely accuses of “crimes,” though no serious evidence of any has been produced against him, though members of his entourage certainly were guilty of crimes). “Even if no direct ties ever come to light, we need to know how the right-wing war on truth opened the door to Russian attack,” she writes. Yet everyone agrees that though the Russians meddled in the election, they had no impact on the result. The Russians took only $6,500 worth of Facebook advertisements, without endorsing a candidate, in an election in which Trump and Clinton spent $1.85 billion, most of it being spent by Clinton. She has an unblemished record, she implies, and the fact that the majority of Americans don’t trust her is due to the “viciousness of the Republican smear merchants.” She says that the timely release of the Billy Bush tape of Trump’s verbal indiscretions eleven years before (about the ease for a celebrity of groping women), though it was clearly fired as an intended game-ender, came as a surprise to her, and that she was heroic in “winning” the second presidential debate two days later, given the pressure she was under. In fact, Trump, with his campaign apparently in shambles and principal figures deserting or taking their distance, was under more pressure than anyone in the history of those debates going back to Kennedy and Nixon in 1960, and he won the debate. Trump’s production, earlier in the day, of a trio of women who alleged sexual assault against her husband was, in Mrs. Clinton’s view, a tawdry and outrageous resurrection of those she memorably described in the past as “the bimbos.” Trump’s coarse locker-room reflections are apparently disqualifying, but Bill Clinton’s scandalous and possibly criminal sexual assaults on various women when he was governor and president do not alter the Norman Rockwell marriage of Bill and Hillary. The author is a relentless partisan: Republicans are under-educated pessimists, “the deplorables,” as she called them last year.

Reagan “sapped the spirit of the country,” though he restored the country’s confidence. (He also led the greatest economic boom in modern U.S. history and won the Cold War, but she doesn’t mention that.) Dwight Eisenhower isn’t mentioned at all, apart from having been Adlai Stevenson’s opponent, and Richard Nixon was a criminal, never mind that Nixon ended school segregation and conscription, extracted the country from the Democrats’ war in Vietnam while preserving a non-Communist government in Saigon, opened relations with China and the Mideast peace process, signed the greatest arms-control agreement in history with the USSR, founded the Environmental Protection Agency, reduced the crime rate, and stopped the endless rioting in American cities.

Since the publication of this book, former party chairman Donna Brazile has written that Mrs. Clinton rigged a number of primaries in her struggle with Senator Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination, and may have violated the Federal Election Campaign Act. Mrs. Clinton dismisses Whitewater (which led, circuitously, to the impeachment of her husband), Travelgate, the Benghazi tragedy (where the American ambassador to Libya was murdered by terrorists and she and Obama pretended that it was mob anger provoked by an anti-Islamic video produced by a private American citizen), and the email controversy that “amounted to precisely nothing” (I think not). She does not mention her speech of apology to the world’s Muslims, a toe-curling embarrassment to the entire Western world, nor her inability to utter or write the words “Islamic terrorism or extremism,” nor the very disconcerting pay-to-play activities of the Clinton Foundation, including the payment or pledge of $145 million and a $500,000 speech fee for Bill Clinton at a time when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s agreement was required to approve a sale of uranium assets in the U.S. to Russian interests. Democratic senators whom she praises in comradeship have turned on the Clintons: Elizabeth Warren accuses her of cheating Bernie Sanders, and Kirsten Gillibrand says that Bill Clinton, because of his peccadilloes, should have resigned. They may be unjust, but this is what the Clintons’ allies now think of them. Her righteousness is moth-eaten and threadbare. Mrs. Clinton believes she is a good and sincere Christian, though she makes it clear that joining a church and being a communicant in it should be with the purpose of turning that church into an agency for leftward political action, what she calls “progressive reform.” By this, we are left in no doubt, she means rounding up all those who are beneath the average in prosperity or acceptability in mainstream-majority society, or if not, at least highly dissatisfied with the lot of those who are, and mobilizing them as a democratic majority to impose transfers of wealth and status from those who have earned or inherited it to the less fortunate or successful. This is a constant process of evaluating where the electoral majorities are, pitching to them as victims in the name of a benign state, and representing to those who pay for these transfers that it is their Christian and social duty and that they should rejoice in their opportunity to better the quality and stability of American life and society. More alarming than Mrs. Clinton’s ungraciousness is her dishonesty.

In Mrs. Clinton’s America, spiritual inspiration exists to pursue redistributive materialism, all “progress” apart from a little doughty self-help is the result of state intervention, the state has a practically unlimited right and duty to correct meritocratic as well as inherited or exploitive socioeconomic imbalances, and the U.S. Democratic party must be a secular church militant where those who oppose abortions (about half the American public) are, along with many other large groups, unwelcome. All politics is a constant process of “reform,” in which, miraculously, the majority gain at the expense of the more accomplished (as well as more fortunate) minority. This isn’t really Christianity or democracy; it easily slips into rank acquisition of votes with the money of part of the electorate in a cynical and corrupt manner, and Mrs. Clinton convicts herself of such attitudes with this astonishing display of rage, affected humility, idealism, and myth-making. It is a sobering and a disturbing read…..”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453933/hillary-clinton-what-happened-false-history-bad-policies

What if the Human Female Animal Were Born to be Rational?

She’d be more male.    So, she is born DITSY as is her nature.   The more communication she professionally spends  with normal males, the more likely she can become unditsied, more lucid and rational.

Two and two often don’t make four, in the feminist mind.   She prefers to express feelings rather than explore.   She seeks security and comfort, by Nature or Nature’s God, I prefer, security is required by the human female because she is the bearer of the human  animal’s off spring.   If she is “in the mood”, she, in a free society, has or feels she has a right to feel about things any way she pleases rather than to measure or adjust or explore or be driven to problem solve as is the human animal born male.    Hence, our current  feminized, feelings driven United States of America is collapsing as a unit into a suicidal abyss.

In today’s Obamaling era of the Left, at university, and among political mouths in the foolish traditional Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and other such ‘Synods’ of today’s fading  JudeoChristian life,  have become feminized with feelings and are made to feel they are as man as men.

What would happen to America if our leftist feminized peoples continued to form a dictatorship to force the entire adult population to be man as me?   Most women don’t think along those lines.   Their imagination by birth is directed to follow other avenues of dreams and accomplishment.   (No living entity is perfect.  Without imperfection living matter would never pass its “amoeba” stage of existence.   I WAS TAUGHT THAT IN THE SMALL UNITED LUTHERAN CHURCH OF THE ASCENSION in 1947 in St. Paul, Minnesota I attended by force by  Mother and love of learning!

I did teach Senior High School Social Studies for twelve years, was married for 34 years, and am a father of two boys and one girl, now adults.    My two sons explore every day of their lives which includes, demands,  problem solving.  They are also Donald Trump Republicans, like their problem solving father.

My daughter prefers security, dreams, dancing, attention and is well married to a fine Jewish fellow who seems to love her very much.   They  live out East on the island of Manhattan, are  leftists who believed in  Hillary.

Female difficulties with the human male have again made headlines this past month and a half….at first in the leftist entertainment world with a  Harvey Weinstein becoming the center of feminist fury.  Hundreds, even leftist  Hanoi Jane Fonda claimed victim to support the feminism scream, a leftist unraveling defying this caste’s catechism that  there is no difference among human animals except feelings.

Feminist leftists sell the story of one human sex these days….via the Democrat Party and its rule in government and law, in school,  at university, of the press ….and in some churches and synagogues….perhaps even at Amazon, but that would be kept hush-hush by Amazon management….while countless human guys spend time out in the streets  noted for their raping, killing,  pillaging, burning, and lying about nearly everything.

This past week the name Roy Moore came to surface, a man in his seventies who won the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Alabama a seat made vacant when then Alabama U.S. Senator, Jeff Sessions became Attorney General in the Trump administration.   Noted fascist news center, the Washington Post, soon came up with accusations against this former Judge, Roy Moore,charging him with sexual misconduct with a fourteen and two sixteen year olds nearly forty years ago.

A television scene demonstrated one alleged victim now in her fifties, crying over his touchings of nearly four decades ago.  No more recent calls have been dug up by the Post.

At my distance I assumed and still assume this Judge Moore did commit these four or five indecencies.  But, there was and still is, no proof…..only charges from a world long ago.    We Americans, however, are supposed to  by law remember  that a person is innocent until proven guilty beyond doubt.

Politically motivated males and females of Congress insist Judge Moore, still innocent, be removed from his candidacy…..which will make it certain the DISHONEST LEFTISTS IN CONGRESS WILL SECURE ANOTHER SEAT TO DESTROY OUR AMERICAN DREAM of equal opportunity for all citizens,  with fascist bigotry being established as the new American Way.

Our Nation’s future depends upon a Conservative American Congress to survive the FEMINISTS’ Party, its criminality, dishonesty, fascistic, feminized leftist-antiAmericans racists now in control of the Democrat Party…..and their Sanctuary Cities owned by the urban left to weaken and  destroy the nation’s unity.

Guys are born to problem solve….gals to bear children to continue the existence of the human species by the laws of Nature, “God”, I prefer!

Judge Moore has apparently demonstrated decades of civility and responsibility over the past 38 years.

It’s our Democrats who have changed during that time period….the Obamalings, both political and urban street savages, the Clinton world, have become racist and fascist in their politics.   These leftists demand  we continue opening our borders to millions of racial and political foreigners demanding comfort and security at our American citizen expense in exchange for their fascism’s one Party vote.

Leftists have already gained one party fascist control over the social sciences taught at university and public schools  ignoring truth and freedom to study beyond feminazi, racist, and class hate programs of the NEW RACIST, SEXIST LEFT  to destroy traditional  America raise by its forefathers’ founding of our Great Human Republic UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL”

Knowledge needs to be taught in order to conquer the unknown.  THIS IS A MALE DEMAND.   Accumulating knowledge is best accomplished by a population craving to seek Truth….that is, to grasp more and more knowledge.

Dear Feminists….both Republican and Democrat, of all sexes, colors, shapes and sizes still interested, at least somewhat,  in a Free America…….

What if Roy Moore did commit these five discretions thirty eight years ago, but  has ever since  been an honorable citizen with a conservative persuasion in his politics?

What if our once honorable Democrat Party needs just one more  vote in the Senate to guarantee its present fascist and feminist  goal to  eliminate forever!  Feminists of all sexes, colors, shapes and sizes are now committed to destroy  TRADITIONALLY DEMOCRATIC AMERICA and all  other  freedom oriented,  truth-seeking  opposition organizations , to secure their racist, sexist, economic fascist-socialist one party (totalitarian) future.

Let us assume our American, Roy Moore,  skilled as a Judge, honorable,  outside of his unproved, alleged sins of 38 years ago, is THE ONLY CANDIDATE TO SAVE AMERICA FROM THIS  DICTATORSHIP FUTURE…let’s say a paid off Al Sharpton  type, noted creepy criminal, racist,  habitual liar, devoted to sell dishonesty, racism, an obedient crook and  fascist for fame and fortune who, IF HE WINS PUTS AN END TO DEMOCRATIC AMERICA FOREVER…..(ALA SOUTH AMERICA’S ONCE DEMOCRATIC NOW FASCIST NATION, VENEZUELA.)

White American males would vote 68%, blacks males about 22% for slightly damaged, but freedom oriented devoted American, Judge Roy Moore to save the nation for democracy…..

By 2020 if  our nation’s  Democrats strengthen their   fascistic control of news, education, social-political agencies, and are funded as usual by  big businesses,  single American white  females would probably vote 99% for profoundly, forever damaged, the crooked, Al Sharpton, and black females of all backgrounds about 97%.

Feminists do not care much about honesty,  inquiry, search for knowledge, nor are they freedom oriented.    They demand security as they did in Nazi Germany in the 1930s….and as a mass, never rebelled in any fascist, communist nation…ever, ever.

They demand security, not freedom or search for the unknown…..as a mass.  Al Sharpton would win big time….because Roy Moore “done a female a slight male naughty” 42 years ago in 2020.

 

 

 

 

 

 

GOP in Danger of Losing the “Stupid Party” Title?

GOP is in serious danger of losing the title ‘Stupid Party’

by Thomas Lifson  at American Thinker:

‘I have gotten accustomed to, if not comfortable with, the GOP’s label as the “Stupid Party.”  After all, it gave us permission to ridicule the GOP establishment before Trump.  And besides, the alternative label worn by the Democrats is the “Evil Party,” and I’ll take stupid over evil any time.

With Donna Brazile ratting out her former comrades and scandal threatening to engulf the party, chaos reigns among the donks.  Amid the recriminations comes a moment of surpassing stupidity.  Yesterday, DNC Chairman Tom Perez actually refused to answer when asked on Meet the Press if he thinks all pickup truck drivers are racist (transcript):

CHUCK TODD:

I’m sure you’ve been familiar with the ad itself and the controversy around the ad. And the Republican party’s response, that it was basically, Democrats don’t like it when, you know, when Republicans stereotype. Aren’t you stereotyping? Are all pickup trucks–I drive a pickup truck. I mean, are all pickup truck drivers racist? That’s what the ad–do you understand why some people think the ad implies that?

TOM PEREZ:

Well, Chuck, let’s be clear about what’s happening in the race in Virginia and in all too many races, dog-whistle politics. Steve Bannon just endorsed Ed Gillespie in Virginia this morning. And throughout this campaign, Ed Gillespie has been fear mongering. He’s been doing the same thing Donald Trump did. That’s not fair. That’s not right. Virginia, under Ralph Northam’s leadership, under Justin Fairfax leadership, they’re looking for a way to unite people. And Ed Gillespie, throughout the campaign, has been dividing people. And when you, when you hit the bully back, and the bully starts crying, those are crocodile tears to me.

Pickup trucks account for over 15% of U.S. vehicle sales, and the Ford F-150 pickup has long been the most popular vehicle.  People who drive pickup trucks have lots of friends and family members.  Perez is actively driving these people away.  In their pickup trucks.  Volvo drivers elect few statewide majorities.

When you consider that the backup for Perez is Keith Ellison, I have to admit that the GOP’s hold on its title is shaky.

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/11/gop_is_in_serious_danger_of_losing_the_title_stupid_party.html

Trump Dossier not merely funded by Dems. It Was Commissioned by the HILLARY CAMPAIGN

by Scott Johnson at PowerLine:

INVESTIGATE THIS

Now we know that the Trump Dossier was not just a product funded by Democrats, but was commissioned by the general counsel of the Clinton presidential campaign. After the Trump campaign collusion hysteria fomented by Democrats and their media friends roughly since the election, we learn that Russian disinformation (as it seems to me) disseminated by the friends of Vladimir Putin (i.e., the Russian officials identified by alphabetic descriptors in the dossier) has come to us courtesy of Hillary Clinton herself. Yet John Podesta, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and campaign general counsel Marc Elias have all denied knowledge, either now or in the past. Whole lotta lyin’ goin’ on. As for Hillary herself, well, “she may or may not have been aware.”

But there is more. Rowan Scarborough has reported that the first of the dossier memos was circulated last year in late June. The first dossier memo is dated June 20, 2016, and cites Sources A (“a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure”) and B (“a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin”). Sources A and B tout the collusion scenario. Sources A and B were not out to help Donald Trump, were they? They were out to throw sand in our gears or to help Hillary Clinton.

Former CIA Director John Brennan was a key player in the collusion scenario, but he has left much to implication in his congressional testimony. Brennan has acknowledged, however, that “that there were efforts made by the [FBI] to try to understand whether or not any of the information in that [dossier] was valid.”

Following up on his comments yesterday, our friend with two decades of experience in counterintelligence as an FBI Special Agent writes to add “some additional context that may be be useful.” He writes:

Why was the “dossier” ultimately so important for the anti-Trump conspiracy (if you think of a better way of putting it, let me know)? The reason, I think, is that the use of standard political smears against Trump had proven ineffective. Therefore it became necessary to take it all a step further and to attempt to make some superficially credible allegations of action against the national interest (again, the vague allegations of Mafia ties had fallen flat).

We know that that effort began some time in the late Spring or early Summer of 2016 because an application was made to the FISC in June/July. That application mentioned Trump by name–and was rejected. Why FISA? Because a Title III “wiretap” would have required an actual investigation based on a violation of a real US criminal law and a quite high and specific standard in the application for a court order.

Why, you might ask, was that application even made? Why not rely on the flow of info coming from NSA, which notoriously scoops up virtually all electronic communications? The answer is that Trump and all those close to him were US Persons (USPERs). The NSA targets foreign powers and individuals. If those foreign powers and individuals of concern are in contact with USPERs and, in the judgment of NSA, US counterintelligence (basically, FBI) should know about those USPERs, then NSA informs the FBI.

In my own career, outside FBI headquarters, I only saw a handful of NSA referrals of that sort. They were mostly general in nature. They could perhaps be used to initiate a Preliminary Inquiry (PI) to gain a bit more insight into the nature of the relationship between the USPER and the foreign power or individual — if we judged that advisable based on our own knowledge and experience — meaning that typically the NSA info would not rise to the level needed in order to say that there was “reason to believe” (i.e., for practical purposes, probable cause) that the USPER was an actual agent of a foreign power. That means: no Full Investigation (FI), therefore no FISA.

But in the anti-Trump conspiracy that’s exactly what was needed: FISA coverage, “wiretaps.” There was no time to do the painstaking research on Trump and his associates–they needed FISA and they needed it NOW. They’d already been turned down at least once. The NSA info was essentially useless, because what they really wanted was to get conversations between Trump and his associates here in the US–all USPERs–not international conversations (those were either lacking or harmless). Yes, NSA probably scoops up internal US communications of USPERs, too, but to use it without a FI and without a FISA order would be illegal. Therefore, the “dossier.”

For the conspirators the significance of the “dossier” was that it provided supposed “reason to believe” that Trump or those close to him were “agents of a foreign power,” subject to blackmail or pressure by a foreign power, already cooperating with a foreign power. The ability to claim that most of this “information” was coming via friendly foreign intel services with contacts in Russia added a bit of verisimilitude.

A “dossier” that could provide that sort of “reason to believe” would justify a FI and then FISA coverage. And therefore access to Trump campaign related communications (the extent would be dependent on the nature of the FISA order, who were the USPERs listed as targets–Page for sure, Flynn maybe, etc.). NB: Although they were claiming Trump collusion with Russia, what they were really targeting was campaign communications. By claiming that key people were foreign agents they could collect ALL their domestic communications with anybody.

This is why I believe that the dossier took on added importance after the initial denial of a FISA order. We know, or think we do, that the FBI wanted Steele to do additional research. The focus of that research, however, would have to be to establish “reason to believe” that Trump or persons close to his campaign were “agents of a foreign power.” Only that would get them the FISA coverage they wanted. Lacking those, FISA was the quick route, but it required “reason to believe” that Trump or persons close to his campaign were “agents of a foreign power.” Voila the “dossier” as it apparently featured in the successful FISA application in October, the height of the campaign. And then it came to be used in the attempt to nullify the election (the attempted “coup”?).

Hillary and Her Podesta Group Are in DEEP TROUBLE!

Podesta Group now part of special counsel probe into Russian collusion: Report

by Sally Persons  at the Washington Times

“Tony Podesta and The Podesta Group are now being investigated as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into collusion claims between the Trump campaign and Russia, NBC News reported.

The group became part of the probe after Mr. Mueller’s team looked into former Trump campaign head Paul Manafort’s finances. Mr. Podesta is the brother to John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, although he is not part of Mr. Mueller’s investigation at this time.

According to the report, the group was connected to a public relations campaign for a nonprofit in Ukraine called European Centre for a Modern Ukraine. Tony Podesta’s group worked on the campaign, but now Mr. Mueller’s team is looking at possible criminal activity through violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, NBC News said. The Podesta Group apparently did not filed the necessary paperwork disclosing its work in Ukraine until after it was reported in the media.

The ECMU was reportedly supported by a pro-Russia political party in the Ukraine for which Mr. Manafort worked as a consultant.

In a statement to NBC News, the Podesta Group said it was “cooperating fully” with Mr. Mueller’s office.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/23/podesta-group-now-part-of-robert-muellers-probe-in/

Crooked Hillary Blames Russians, Comey for Loss to Donald, while Nesting on Her Rotten Russian Egg

HILLARY UNPLUGGED

by Steve Hayward at PowerLine

“So Hillary was over in Britain a couple weeks back flogging her book, perhaps hoping for a more sympathetic audience. The whole 19 minute video here is excruciating. It is beyond fingernails on the blackboard cringe-inducing. I wouldn’t blame anyone who gouged his eyes out and plugged his ears with cement. The non-stop excuses and rote-recitation of her career resume (does anyone not know by now that she was a senator and secretary of state?) are pathetic at this point.

But best of all is how she thinks the evil Rooskies shot American voters with some kind of mind ray (her account is almost this ludicrous). It is must-see TV. Start at the 6:30 mark (and you can quit around 7:45, so the pain will be short):

Please view the entire interview and each ten seconds remember this evil animal, this liar, this Madam DeFarge, this criminal was only DONALD J. TRUMP away from the White House!

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/10/hillary-unplugged.php