davidl on May 12th, 2019

The former actress, known as Alyssa Milano, is leading a sex strike to protest Georgia’s new fetal heartbeat abortion law, from from Deadline:

Alyssa Milano, one of the leaders of the #MeToo movement, is taking a different approach to battling the so-called “Heartbeat Bill” anti-abortion bill recently codified in Georgia, with similar measures under consideration in other states.

In this case, Milano has advocated a #NoMas approach, calling on women to refrain from sex while their rights to their own bodies are at issue by state legislatures.

“Our reproductive rights are being erased,” Milano said via Twitter. “Until women have legal control over our bodies we just cannot risk pregnancy. JOIN ME by not having sex until we get bodily autonomy back. I’m calling for a #SexStrike. Pass it on.”

Just as the former singer known was Cher endorsed common sense conservative values by calling city sponsored homelessness a problem, Milano has adopted a similar common sense proposition that abstinence precludes pregnancy. Milly, you can count me in. I too will abstain from sex with Alyssa Milano.  I implore all readers to do the same.

When you lose Jonathan Turley…

As someone who has represented the House of Representatives, my concern is that this one violates a legal version of the Hippocratic oath to “first do no harm.” This could do great harm, not to Barr, but to the House. It is the weakest possible case to bring against the administration, and likely to be an example of a bad case making bad law for the House.

House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) laid out the case for contempt. He raised three often repeated complaints against Barr in that he failed to release an unredacted report by special counsel Robert Mueller, allegedly lied twice to Congress, and refused to appear before the committee. Yet, notably, the only claim the committee seeks to put before a federal court is the redaction of the report. That seems rather curious since, if Barr lied or refused a subpoena as House leaders claim, it normally would be an easy case of contempt. The reason for this move is that House Democrats know both claims would not withstand even a cursory judicial review.

Yeah, well let’s go a step further.

In the time since the Mueller report came out, the entirety of the report…. unredacted… has been available to Democrats. In all that time, not a one of them has gone to actually read it. Not one.

Maybe they’re not interested in what the Mueller report actually contains, and this is all showboating?

In any event, Jonathan Turley is hardly a Trump supporter. What do you suppose the under/ over is on him being attacked by Democrats for his position?

There’s some history behind this thing that very few people are mentioning:

Eric Holder was the first sitting cabinet member ever to be cited for contempt of congress, incidental to the Obama gun running scam “fast and furious“.

And just where did that accusation by Congress go? Absolutely nowhere.

Reason?

Because contempt of congress charges are referred directly to the Department of Justice which of course is run by the Attorney General. Essentially, Eric Holder decided not to prosecute himself.

This was less than a decade ago. It amazes me that the Democrats don’t recall this, or perhaps more accurately, they hope you and I don’t. Oh, and of course Nadler was one of the people that were defending Holder in his actions.

Hypocritical much, Jerry?

Attorney General Barr

But here’s the thing, does anybody consider that this contempt of congress charge against Barr is going anywhere beyond the headlines?

The answer is no, this is nothing more than a political stunt, specifically designed to keep the confusion in the minds of the voters…. And to keep hoax alive. (No, that’s not a typo.)

The Democrats are desperate to keep their own hijinx out of the limelight so they’re putting up as much smoke as possible to cover it. They know full well that Barr intends to fully investigate the origins of the Russia hoax. There’s a lot of very powerful people who will be in an immense amount of hot water when the results of that investigation start coming out. There’s the inspector General’s report which is due out at the end of the month. That, too, is likely to be the mother of all bomb shells.

And once that happens, does anybody truly believe that the American public is going to vote Democrat in anything resembling large numbers for the foreseeable future?

Then, we have the spectre of Donald Trump’s tax returns showing up in the New York Times the other day….a clearly illegal act on the part of somebody, which ended up revealing essentially nothing at all that we didn’t already know.

I’ve been saying all along that the Democrats have had these documents in their hip pockets. That the call for their release was mere showboating.

Still, the act of revealing those documents was illegal. As is what they are demanding that the Attorney General do when they call for the complete unredacted Mueller report to be released.

Democrats supporting illegal Acts in support of their own power. The Democrats and their contempt for the American people is on full display here.

The questions that are now before us, and probably have been all along…

Will the Democrats accept any evidence (or lack of it) that does not support their efforts to overturn a legitimate election? Therefore can any of their claims be taken seriously? Is there anything that they can do or say that will not be tainted?

The Democrats are obviously willing to support any illegal acts.. Illegal immigration and allowing those illegal immigrants to vote. Encouraging felons devote from their jail cells. The illegal actions listed above. Anything, anything at all that will enhance Democrat Party power.

And therefore, can they be trusted with anything? Anything at all?

The rabid Barack Obama supporter, one Devon Erickson, who shot up a Denver area school seemed to be looking for love, but was looking for it in all the wrong places, from Daily Caller:

The motive of the Colorado shooting suspects “went beyond bullying and involved revenge and anger towards others at the school,” sources close to the investigation told the Denver Channel.
The shooting resulted in one death with eight other students wounded.

[…]

Facebook posts reveal that 18-year-old Devon Erickson previously expressed hatred for Christians, according to Heavy.
“You know what I hate? All these Christians who hate gays, yet in the bible, it says in Deuteronomy 17:12-13, if someone doesn’t do what their priest tells them to do, they are supposed to die. It has plenty of crazy stuff like that,” Erickson wrote in one Facebook post several years ago. “But all they get out of it is ‘ewwwwww gays.’”

Erickson claims to want to loved by Christians, but rejects Christian love.

Eric Adds:

Meanwhile, we see the anti-gun groups, and their pet politicians, politicizing the memorial service, and students getting up and walking out in the middle of it in protest.

The anti-gunners have offered up a lame apology. Shameless, these people, absolutely shameless.

Eric Florack on May 8th, 2019

My memory may be a little short on this one. But I seem to recall not so very long ago the Democrats were all worried about people being disconnected from the Public square.

So, where is that overwhelming concern now that’s anyone right-of-center can be disconnected from the Public square at will, by such as Twitter and Facebook?

Eric Florack on May 7th, 2019

The slow-motion implosion at CNN continues.

Far-left CNN announced Monday that more than 100 jobs have been axed at the ratings-challenged cable network.
These job cuts are being spun by Brian Stelter, CNN’s left-wing media reporter (who regularly spreads fake news and conspiracy theories), as “no layoffs” but rather “voluntary buyouts throughout the organization, and about 100 people opted for it.”

Translation: Iceberg, Captain Smith? What iceberg?

As with the New York Times in the post earlier today, these people will never never admit why they are in trouble.

And here, dear reader, is one of the few times that I will ever quote from the New York Times.

I do so now because when the Times finally gets around to admitting Trump actually knows what he’s doing, that point alone is newsworthy…. Even though they don’t directly say so.

The endgame in the trade war between China and the United States seems near. President Trump, betting with real currency — American strength — apparently has the upper hand, and the concessions President Xi Jinping is likely to make won’t be mere tokens. When — if? — an agreement is finally announced,Mr. Trump will surely fire off bragging tweets, partly to shore up his credentials for a second term, amid personal and policy troubles. For Mr. Xi, almost any deal could mean a very serious loss of face.

The article goes to some extremes to point out the weaknesses in the Chinese position, and is a surprisingly worthy read given who printed it.

The funny part is, these are points that Gordon Chang has been making all along, who got ignored or derided by such outlets as the times for his trouble. After all, it couldn’t possibly be that Trump understands what he’s doing.

Certainly, it is true that China’s troubles come from two sources. The first of course being their dedication to socialism.. appoint the New York Times will never admit to… and within that context a historic level of ineptitude on the part of Xi, a point the article goes into intense detail on.

The difference now is that we have a president who is smart enough to recognize both those situations and take advantage of them. The result of that is that China wasn’t ready for a trade war, and will lose.

It’s a quality that the Obama Administration never did possess… First because like Xi, they’re not very smart and as an extension of that, they think socialism is a worthy system of government.

So it is, China got caught flat-footed by Trump. The long-term trade ramifications of this are going to be more positive than the left in this country and the Times among them, will ever admit to until decades after it’s happened… which in turn is precisely why the article I’m linking to here never bothers to mention Donald Trump in any significant way… And when they do it’s certainly not complimentary.

You would be hard-pressed to find a better example of anti Trump bias in the mainstream media then this.

Eric Florack on May 7th, 2019

The DSCC started a Twitter poll over the weekend. Then they took it down once it started getting out of control.

Don’t don’t bother looking for it, it’s gone. As soon as they realized they weren’t getting the response they wanted, they deleted it.

davidl on May 7th, 2019

Sleepy Joe, a/k/a Slow Joe, b/k/a Joseph Biden, is the leading ‘rat contender for ‘Twenty.  Slow Joe is also a moron.  It would normally be poor taste to pick on a person as stupid as Slow Joe, but somehow the man imagines himself presidential, from Fox News:

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden reportedly had to correct himself over the weekend after telling donors Margaret Thatcher is concerned about the United States under President Trump.

Thatcher, the former prime minister of Britain, died in 2013 – nearly two years before Trump launched his first campaign for president.

According to Bloomberg News, Biden eventually corrected himself, explaining to the donors he meant to say British Prime Minister Theresa May instead of Thatcher, blaming the mix-up on a “Freudian slip.”

This Slow Joe from last year on why he imagines himself to be presidential:

“I think I’m the most qualified person in the country to be president. The issues that we face as a country today are the issues that I’ve worked on my whole life — the plight of the middle class and foreign policy,”

Note that rather than cite any foreign achievement, much like Slow Joe cites his efforts(what making his sons rich?)


The first rule of holes is stop digging. Slow tried to say he meant to refer to current UK PM Theresa May, rather than the late Lady Margaret Thatcher. Sadly for Slow Joe, Lady Thatcher was never Head of State. The UK Head of State was and is, Queen Elizabeth II. Bless your heart Joe, but called a deceased Prime Minister as the Head of State is not a Freudian slip. Rather it is what we call a senior moment.

The Washington Times this morning is indicating stuff is about to get real.

“The SCO Report suffers from an extraordinary legal defect: It quite deliberately fails to comply with the requirements of governing law,” Mr. Flood wrote to Attorney General William Barr in a hand-delivered letter.

Mr. Mueller punted to Mr. Barr a decision on whether to find that Mr. Trump obstructed justice. Mr. Barr concluded he did not.

Mr. Muller said he couldn’t conclude that “no criminal conduct occurred.” Mr. Flood said that is not a federal prosecutor’s job.

“In closing its investigation,” Mr. Flood said, quoting the regulation, “the SCO had only one job to ‘provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.’ Yet the one thing the SCO was obligated to do is the very thing the SCO — intentionally and unapologetically — refused to do.”

“The SCO’s inverted-proof standard and ‘exoneration’ statements can be understood only as political statements, issuing from persons (federal prosecutors) who in our system of government are rightly expected never to be political in the performance of their duties,” he said. “The inverted burden of proof knowingly embedded in the SCO’s conclusion shows that the Special Counsel and his staff failed in their duty to act as prosecutors and only as prosecutors.”

It’s interesting that this is precisely the argument that I’ve been making since the redacted version of the report came out:

Ponder…. if this was the outcome, we can’t tell if it was a crime created or not, what in the world did we need a special counsel for in the first place? What was required here both in terms of the law and in terms of the public interest was somebody saying yay or nay. The Mueller report, as presented, fails to do so.

It will be interesting now to see whether or not the Democrats try to discredit Flood, as they have everybody else it gets in their way. Flood is a particularly interesting case in that regard, given his history in the Clinton administration during the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

My take is that this is the opening salvo against the Democrats. following that of course, will be the Inspector General’s report, which should be out by the end of this month, along with whatever else Bill Barr has in the pipeline.

Hey, Facebook;

Orwell wrote 1984 as a warning, not as a how -to guide.

So before we believe the left, that the right are the fascists, and that Trump is the fascist overlord, I dare you to point to ANYBODY on the left who’s been de-platformed, de-banked, shadow banned, outright banned, kicked off college campuses, and so on.

Any takers?

No?

Well, then, I have a question for you. Who is it again that’s acting like fascists?

davidl on May 2nd, 2019

Is the People Republic of China the new Russia.  Just as Joe Biden’s old boss denied Russia was our enemy. while they were interfering with out election, Slow Joe is now denying that the Peoples Republic of China is our competitor, from Washington Free Beacon:

Former vice president and Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden expressed skepticism that China is a competitive threat to the United States during an Iowa event Wednesday.
“China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man,” Biden reportedly said. “They’re not bad folks, folks. But guess what? They’re not competition for us.”
The comments were first reported by the Washington Examiner‘s Joe Gabriel Simonson and the Des Moines Register‘s Stephen Gruber-Miller.

Slow Joe has bragged some foreign leaders practically begging for him to run for President.  So Mr. Biden, what governments besides the People Republic of China are also supporting your bid?  Fearless Leader, b/k/a Robert Mueller, III is currently available.  Do we need an investigation potential collusion between the Biden campaign and the PRC?

Eric Florack on May 2nd, 2019

That was more or less the question posed to me in this format:

There seems to be this overwhelming negative stigma attached to the millennial generation or generation y. Depending on where you look and what article you read the millennial generation starts as early as 1976 to 1982 and ends 1996 to 2004. Most common is 81-96. Some groupings also include the microgeneration called xennial which is 76-83, not quite gen x, not quite gen y. The following generation is called the i-gen or generation z and currently we are in generation alpha. However we have lumped everyone after gen x as a millennial and this is where the issue lies. While as millennials we have done our fair share of stupid things there is a vast world of difference between older millenials and younger millenials. It is the i gens and young millenials that have no life skills because mommy and daddy decided that they didnt want their child to know what it meant to fail. Had to be given a trophy for participating, encouraged and taught to whine about how unfair life is. Cant iron, cook, sew, balance a check book let alone write a check, do their own laundry. They are the ones eating tide pods, bath salts, snorting condoms, thinking the world revolves around them.

It isn’t a matter of the parents not wanting to deal with that issue. Mostly it has to do with their being subject to 12 years of indoctrination in an education system run by leftists.

I suggest most parents would have a conniption fit if they actually understood what their kids were being taught in such places…. And not taught.

That is, for example, how they know so much about global warming, and the evils of capitalism and not so much about how to read a map, do basic math, spell, manage their finances, or understand world history.

I will say this again, the worst mistake we ever made as a country, a culture, a people was to turn the responsibility for the education of our young over to the government.

Eric Florack on May 1st, 2019

OMG

Cher is still touring.

Playing NYC 5/3.
In the name of sanity, Why?

UNC

Eric Florack on May 1st, 2019

There’s a lesson in the UNC shooting that very few people have bothered to mention.

The trend has always been that these mass shootings occur in gun-free zones. UNC is just one more, and the trend remains unbroken.

The abject stupidity of gun-free zones must be challenged.

Eric Florack on April 30th, 2019


Didn’t we just spend the last two years, listening to the Democrats complaining about foreign influence in our elections?