Saturday, February 18, 2017

The Shadow Government---It’s Just a Conspiracy Theory, Right?

I was going to write a short “simi-satirical” piece this morning to poke a little fun at the frenzied mainstream media.  Here’s where I began: 

“In the spirit of liberal media’s “we’ll publish or post anything if it hurts President Trump”, my sources tell me that there’s a memo circulating that these same “Elite Media Journalist”, (who have actively campaigned against Trump over the past two years), are colluding with the Establishment Beltway Elites, (many who have been defeated or retired from their positions in recent election cycles), to destroy and absolve the current President from his elected duties.”

Of course, there is no memo, and I have no sources. Like the Associated Press’s reporting of a memo that never reached the higher levels of Homeland Security, and, was NEVER SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED (claiming the President planned to call out the National Guard to round up illegal immigrants), AP chose to report this story as news.  

This is how today’s mainstream liberal media works: 1) find a document or a recording, 2) throw in a few unnamed sources to add “corroboration”/meat to the story, 3) produce an outrageous headline, and presto---instant anti-Trump.  And, when the AP produces the story, media outlets across the nation publish this crap.  Why fact-check an association with impeccable credibility and unquestionable journalism standards?

But, while attempting to describe the current intentions of our 4th Estate, I’ve gotten off the path of “the real story”---This ridiculous story of a SHADOW GOVERNMENT.

Low and behold, (while visiting my Facebook account), I came across this startling opinion piece in THE WALL STREET JOURNAL by David Roberts---a senior adviser to the Vietnam Group at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government---calling for a formation of a Shadow Cabinet:

A ‘Shadow Cabinet’ to Restrain Trump

Sharp critiques of extreme policies from eminent ex-officials.  

“We need to make America great again, and for that Donald Trump might be our man. For all the anxiety the White House has caused, brewing constitutional crises at home and anger abroad, Mr. Trump has opened a path to reunify this politically divided nation.

A “team of rivals” that transcends party lines, composed of eminent men and women, could rein in the administration. This bipartisan group, preferably endorsed by past U.S. presidents, would be made up of former cabinet members and heads of independent federal agencies. Inspired by the British Shadow Cabinet, it would be structured to mirror the official cabinet and would issue rapid, sharp critiques and cogent alternatives to the administration’s most dangerous policies.

By becoming a recognizable public fixture, the group would wield the clout necessary to compete with the White House’s megaphone, offering the disgruntled public a clear opposing stance rather than the disparate, and sometimes desperate, efforts today. The group would provide the opposition much-needed focus by identifying the most destructive policies and pronouncements: some examples from the first few weeks include antagonizing our allies, forcing through an ill-considered immigrant ban, undermining the judicial system, and politicizing the National Security Council……….”  (more at the link above, but there may be a pay wall)

Surprisingly impressive is the commentary (provided by the WSJ), where most responded with everything from “are you nuts” to “this is how dangerously far our left-wing academics have come to.”  I’ve supplied a few choice comments from the article:

“Mr. Roberts, you don't need a shadow cabinet! Just win the house/senate in 2018 and the presidency in 2020. That's how democracy works. It does not work by the diktats and the ukases of the elite.

What a bunch of baloney and blatherskite and waste of newsprint.

Mr. Roberts and the MSM have zero credibility given their utter silence and duplicity during the radical transformation during 8 years of Obama. For God's sake, this is a man who won the election convincingly and has not even been at his job 1 month. Today's press conference was epic in his takedown and exposure of MSM as tools of the left and carrying water for the left. Trump said what millions of conservatives have been afraid to say about the press.” ~ Manish Umarwadia

********************************** 

“And, this is from a "senior advisor" at the Kennedy School! Imagine, teaching sedition as a class at Harvard. Is it an elective, or a mandatory course? The "shadow government" suggested is the bi-partisan elite about which Trump spoke in his Inaugural Address. The Progressive/Administrative Statists have gone mad; they are in a deranged frenzy. (One good thing, we wouldn't have to look around or wonder who the cabal elitist are, they would be self-identified.) How sad it that we have wandered so far from allegiance to our Constitution and constitutional government.” ~ Nevin Mindlin

******************************* 

“A shadow cabinet with a large megaphone already exists in the opposition.  It consists of : New York Times, Washington Post, ABC, NBC and CBS.” ~ Steve Bragg

************************** 

Of course, Mr. Bragg left out numerous “other contributors” in this Shadow Government designed to thwart our current CONSTITUTIONALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT.  

The next time some one on the left makes the claim that the thought of a Shadow Government is just conspiracy fodder for the right-wing zealots, be sure to point them to this disturbing and intentional “idea".

Update:  Talk of removing President Trump, (by an undefined body), is not a conspiracy:


Byron York: 25th Amendment chatter: Dems, pundits mull ways to remove Trump

"The amendment allows Congress to select some 'other body' other than the cabinet to determine whether the president is capable of discharging the duties required, and remove him or her if necessary," the statement said. "Yet, this body is undefined, and there is no guidance for how it should operate. After examining the issue, Blumenauer believes living former presidents and vice presidents could constitute the body."

Gee, I wonder where Blumenauer got this idea?

Note: Commenting system provided here by Disqus. Feel free to leave one.

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

GENERAL FLYNN OUT, DEMOCRATS, MSM GOT THEIR POUND OF FLESH

The controversial National Security position in the Trump Administration came to an abrupt end Monday night, as Michael Flynn resigned.  Flynn had not properly explained his conversations with Russian diplomats before President Trump was sworn in as the 45th President, and it became apparent his position might be compromised going forward.  Via NBC news:

"Michael Flynn abruptly quit as President Donald Trump's national security adviser Monday night, hours after it emerged that the Justice Department informed the White House that it believed he could be subject to blackmail.

The resignation also came after previous disclosures that Flynn had misled Vice President Mike Pence and other senior officials about his communications with Sergey Kislyak, Russia's ambassador to the United States. Pence repeated the misinformation in television appearances.

"Unfortunately, because of the fast pace of events, I inadvertently briefed the Vice President Elect and others with incomplete information regarding my phone calls with the Russian Ambassador. I have sincerely apologized to the President and the Vice President, and they have accepted my apology," Flynn said in his resignation letter."

Ever since it was acknowledged that Flynn had indeed had a conversation with the Russian Ambassador---before Trump took office---the Liberal anti-Trump Media has smelled blood in the water.

"If it wasn't for the investigative journalism of the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the CNN's of the world, this story would have never came to light" ~ CNN's Brian Stelter  Other "journalist" are claiming this is the end of Fake News, believing their credibility has been completely absolved.

Democrats are calling for a full investigation on who else knew, (and when), Flynn had the conversations about Russian sanctions.  The rest of the Liberal Media can't believe Flynn acted alone, and must have worked "in concert" with other Trump officials, a theory the Media will certainly explore.  

But, the Media also believes they've revived the "Russian's are responsible for Trump's victory", providing fodder for the President's legitimacy.  Of course, to the mainstream liberal media, the sky is falling:

David Frum: "We need to know how much money flowed into this, [Trump Organization], and how much it influenced this election".  (paraphrased)

Chris Cuomo: "Who else knew about this "campaign of appeasement" with the Russians". (paraphrased)

Joe and Mika: "The World in Disarray"

Make no mistake, the Media's got their pound of flesh and they'll be whipping themselves into a frenzy of scurrilous innuendos and conspiracy theories in the days ahead.  And, the vampire's are hungry.

More ahead.............  

Saturday, February 11, 2017

Democrats, Their Complicit Media, Liberal Courts, and D.C. Establishment in a Full-Throated Anti-Trump Mode

Just three weeks into the Donald Trump Presidency, and it's all hands on deck to thwart the Commander in Chief from getting his government formed, or even off the ground.  

Senate Democrats have done everything in their weakened powers to obstruct and dismantle the process of confirming Trump's cabinet appointments, unprecedented in modern times of forming a functioning government.  And, make no mistake, it's 100% political.  In fact, if not for "Harry's Nuke Option" so generously handed to the Republicans, President Trump would most likely have only 3-4 positions filled.

To make matters worse, the Mainstream Liberal Media is cheering on the Democrat's every obstructionist move---so much for the "peaceful transition of power" afforded all Presidents, except President Trump.

To further add insult to this Presidency, our liberal progressive courts, (specifically, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals---that has historically had their decisions over-turned 80% of the time by the Supreme Court), are politically playing a dangerous game by rejecting Trump's temporary ban on unstable and potentially deadly regions that could be importing terrorist onto our soil.  Despite the fact that 1) the President has the constitutional right to ban any alien/non-U.S. Citizen from entering our country, and 2) the previous President, [Obama], had listed these same nations as unstable, potentially dangerous, and in need of improvised vetting procedures, the liberal Ninth ruled unanimously against the Trump ban.

Right on cue, the Democrats and the Liberal Media cheered the setback, (to properly vet these dangerous regions), as a Victory for the left and their open border ideology.  Just days ago, in an interview with Yahoo News, Syrian President Bashar Assad said there are "definitely" refugees fleeing his country that are "aligned with terrorist", yet our belligerent Courts, the Media, and Democrats refuse to acknowledge this reality---seriously putting American citizens in a dangerous situation.

The left-wing site Politco wrote about this story and inserted these two interesting paragraphs:

“The United Nations refugee agency has said as recently as late January that refugees from Syria pose no threat to the U.S. or other nations.”

“Of those seeking to enter the U.S. or other nations around the world, Assad said it is impossible to know how many might be terrorists, but that only a small number would be required to execute a large-scale attack.”

Yet the Democrats and the Courts would rather play political games with the lives of Americans.  And YOUR Mainstream Liberal Media heartily endorses this "game", as long as it can defeat President Trump's intentions to keep this nation safe.

Please tell me, who do YOU trust?  

More importantly, who will YOU blame if this happens again?




"Since 9/11, 72 individuals from the seven mostly Muslim countries covered by President Trump's "extreme vetting" executive order have been convicted of terrorism, a finding that clashes sharply with claims from an appeals court that there is "no evidence" those countries have produced a terrorist.

According to a report out Saturday, at least 17 claimed to be refugees from those nations, three came in as "students," and 25 eventually became U.S. citizens."

So much for the Ninth's claim of "there is no evidence".

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

UNITED STATES SENATE DECORUM BREAKS DOWN, DEMOCRATS GET UGLY

Last night, during the Senate debate over the confirmation of Senator Jeff Sessions, (for attorney general), Senate Democrats took their vitriolic disdain to a new level when Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren began reading text that basically called Sessions a racist: 

"Massachusetts Democrat Sen. Elizabeth Warren received a stunning monition Tuesday evening from her fellow senators after she quoted from a letter that accused Attorney General-designate Sen. Jeff Sessions (R.-Ala.) of racism during his tenure as a federal prosecutor.

Warren may have thought she could skirt the rules if she quoted someone else speaking about Sessions, but instead she was forced to end her remarks because of her breach of Senate protocol.

First, she quoted Sen. Edward Kennedy Sr., from 1986 when the Massachusetts Democrat led the opposition to Sessions joining the federal bench: “Mr. Sessions is a throwback to a shameful era, which I know both black and White Americans thought was in our past. It is inconceivable to me that a person of this attitude is qualified to be a U.S. Attorney, let alone a U.S. federal judge, he is I believe a disgrace to the Justice Department and he should withdraw his nomination and resign his position.”  link

At this point, the presiding officer, Sen. Steven Daines (R.-Mont.), warned Warren that her comments were a violation of Senate Rule XIX, and with the help of a Senate aid, explained to Warren where she was running amok:

“The rule applies to impugning conduct or motive through any form or voice to a sitting senator–form or voice includes quotes, articles or other materials.”

When told she could proceed, Warren began reading from documents written in a 1986 letter by Coretta Scott King:

Warren also included lines from the cover letter: “Mr. Sessions has used the awesome powers of his office in a shabby attempt to intimidate and frighten elderly black voters. For this reprehensible conduct, he should not be rewarded with a federal judgeship.”

At this point Daines objected again, that she was impugning the character of a fellow Senator.  Not long after, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell took the floor to complete the admonishment: 

"McConnell told Daines, “The senator has impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama as warned by the chair. Senator Warren, quote-said, ‘Sessions has used the awesome power of his office to chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens.’ I call the Senate to order under the provisions of Rule XIX.”

After several procedural votes, Warren was ruled out of order, and then told she could not continue.  In other words, she was done for the night.

"After quorum call, the Senate voted 49-to-43 to sustain the ruling of the chair and then 50-to-43 that Warren could not continue in her floor speech."

But, that wasn't the end of this story.  In not accepting the results of the Senate's decision, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer took to the floor in defense of Warren by accusing Republicans of silencing a fellow colleague, while insisting the articles Warren was reading be submitted into the record.  That "request" was objected to, leaving the article out of the record, which further infuriated the Democrats.

Schumer and the Democrats have been deliberately "slow-walking" every Trump appointment to his cabinet, (which totaled five, when Education Nominee Betsy DeVos was confirmed earlier in the day on a vote that required Vice President Pence's vote to break a 50-50 tie.)

Liberal Pundits took to the twitter airwaves to declare Warren #Persisted, bragging about the Massachusetts Senator's vile and undistinguished actions on the floor.

Both Marco Rubio and Orin Hatch then took to the floor to remind Senate Democrats that while they understood tensions were running high, (because the Democrats had just suffered a devastating election), but there was/is a level of decorum expected from their fellow colleagues.  Hatch took several minutes addressing the body, saying that he'd never heard---in all his years in the Senate---this level of animosity directed at Senator Sessions or any other Senator, calling Warren's actions a “constant diatribe”:

“I listened to her for quite a while and she didn’t have a good thing to say about a fellow senator here, and I frankly don’t think that’s right. If we don’t respect each other, we’re going down a very steep path to oblivion.”

Hatch also said "All of us need to take stock and need to start thinking about the people on the other side of the aisle and need to start thinking about how we might bring each other together", yet it seemed to have fallen of deaf ears on the other side. 

"We have become a society incapable of having debates anymore" said Rubio, while claiming chairs aren't getting thrown yet, but this body is "flirting with it".

Moments later, as the confirmation debate continued, Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse started right back in with a diatribe of his own spewing the typical Democrat talking points, accusing Sessions disparaging immigrant groups and prominent civil rights organizations.

In a defiance of decorum or civility, the Democrats, (and by extension, the Democrat Party), has certainly not gotten over the fact that their Presidential candidate lost this election, or that the people spoke loudly at the polls that they'd have had far enough of the liberal progressive direction.  

While the Liberal Pundits do not concur, or even face this reality with any level of civility, President Trump, this current Senate and the House, will provide the much needed change our electorate has demanded.

Snowflakes, (and the vile likes of Elizabeth Warren), need not apply.

Saturday, February 4, 2017

LIBERAL ANTI-TRUMP MEDIA AT IT AGAIN----FAKE POLLS PRODUCE DESIRED NARRATIVES

One would have thought the Mainstream Liberal Media might have learned a lesson in producing polling that can't be trusted after the embarrassing job the pollsters did in this last election.

Yet, right on cue, CNN commissions a poll on President Trump's "travel ban" where they convince their readers it's really a Muslim Ban.  


"As you may know, Donald Trump signed an executive order which prohibits travel to the U.S. for the next three months by citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries, and suspends the U.S. refugee program for four months while reducing the total number of refugees the U.S. will accept this year. Overall, do you favor or oppose this executive order?"

Of course, the question is leading, assumptive, and, oh yeah, over-weighted.

Pollsters don't provide information that might be relevant to the question, like "did you know Barack Obama listed these same seven countries as "unstable regions"?  Or, that any U.S. President has the legal right to impose restrictions on any alien, (non-citizen) attempting to enter this country.  Or, that Muslims who practice their Islamic faith literally, (according to their "bible", the Koran), their Sharia Law demands a complete submission to Islam.



With no advance information, and a completely deceptive/fallacious question, CNN got the results they needed to produce a false narrative:

Jan. 31-Feb. 2 2017

Favor 47%  Oppose 53%

A total of 1,002 adults were interviewed by telephone nationwide by live interviewers calling both landline and cell phones.  Among the entire sample, 29% described themselves as Democrats, 25% described themselves as Republicans, and 45% described themselves as independents or members of another party.  (link)

So, CNN got their 6% margin of an "unfavorable" result, (crosstabs at the link show an 8.5 +/- "possible error"), before they provide down in their article how polarized the two parties are when it comes to our President's decisions:

"Across all these questions, opinions are sharply divided by party. Democrats are just as apt to oppose the executive order (88%) as Republicans are to support it (88%); independents tilt against, with 54% opposed. Republicans are 10 times as likely as Democrats to say the order makes the US safer (83% of Republicans vs. 8% of Democrats), and their opinions are again 180 degrees apart when asked about its impact on American values (80% of Republicans say it protects them while 81% of Democrats say it harms them).  (link)

You won't have to look up any poll to find over 90% of CNN's articles, polls, and opinions are 100% anti-Trump---they just flat out hate the man, and they're not afraid to admit it.  If CNN had provided the information I listed above previous to their bogus question, my conservative guess would be most American's would favor Trump's temporary actions by 10%-15% over the unfavorables.  CNN is literally providing a false narrative without any regard to this nation's safety and security from our enemies---Radical Islamic Terrorist.

There has to come a point where Americans ask how far CNN, (and much of the liberal media), plans to plot against the best interest of our country.  Or, how far will they go to destroy a United State's President?


Wednesday, February 1, 2017

PRESIDENT TRUMP SELECTS JUDGE NEIL M. GORSUCH FOR SUPREME COURT


Last night, President Trump selected Neil M. Gorsuch as the nominee for the, [Scalia's] Supreme Court. 

The following conversations/statements were recorded along with my personal responses:

On the Nomination of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch: (unanimously confirmed by the Senate to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals)

Mainstream Media: “Stolen Nomination”

Mara Liasson last night: “This is why elections have consequences.”

Protesting Liberals out in front of the courthouse chanting: “This is what America Looks Like”.   Well, no, check the electoral map snowflakes, and take a serious look outside of your bubbles. (my words)

Pelosi, House and Senate Democrats:  “This is a man who is outside the mainstream.”

Pelosi: “A very hostile appointment”

CNN: “Dems Furious over Merrick Garland, but odds favor confirmation”

CNN:  Yeah, but what about the travel ban and the bungled rollout? No one in leadership knew what was about to happen. (paraphrased)  

Two words: Extreme Vetting.  (notice how the “Muslim Ban” has faded from the media’s rhetoric)

Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly:  Despite the media’s bullshit narrative that leadership was not in the loop, he was well aware and helped develop the rollout of the executive order. (my words)

“Kelly, though, said Tuesday he knew the ban could be coming as far back as 18 months ago when Trump was making it a campaign promise.”

“We knew it was coming. It wasn’t a surprise,” Kelly said, in his first press conference since the order on Friday suspended refugee admissions and temporarily restricted immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries.  “We knew Friday morning that it was going to be signed." 

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough:  “Trump hit it out of the park last night among his conservative base.” “Chuck Schumer’s life just became a lot more difficult”  (cue the tears)

Willie Geist: He, [Trump], certainly looked comfortable last night.  On Trump’s Supreme Court selection: This is why so many held their noses and voted for Trump.

Marc Halprin:  Senate Democrats up for election in “Trump-won” states (in 2018), are going to have a hard time on deciding how to vote on this nominee.

It’s ANOTHER GREAT DAY IN TRUMP’S AMERICA!!!


Monday, January 30, 2017

President Trump’s Immigration and Travel Bans Are Being Met With Political Dissension, Not Practical Realities.

Facts don't seem to matter.  The Democrats and the Liberal Media have yet to come to terms that Donald J. Trump is our President. Our President is putting the safety of every American above these dangerous political games the Democrats are playing.

This “protest” isn’t about a temporary, (ninety day), ban to implement a vetting process to help prevent people coming into the U.S. from known terrorist areas around the world. Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Barack Obama, all implemented similar bans and vetting processes during their times in office.

And, there were NO PROTEST!

The butt-hurt liberals, (including the Hollywood left), are attempting to make this issue about race and religion, AND PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP.  Their hypocritical resolve is not about keeping this nation safe, (they don’t seem to care if unvetted terrorist enter our country), it’s still about an election---AN ELECTION THEY LOST.

This issue is about keeping terrorist out of our country.  It is not about a ban on Muslims or Islam. Read the executive orders---you will not find the word Muslim or Islam in the documents.  It's about properly vetting people who wish to enter this country from dangerous areas around the world.

The Democrats and the Liberal Media are Lying!

This is about attacking President Trump.  Period.