No comment - speaks for itself!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In defense of Trump vis a vis Hillary's Mr. Khan! Not sure Mr. Khan just happened by the Democrat Convention. He obviously was hand picked and is very well connected. (See 1 and 1a below.)
===
Steve Wynn knows something about gambling. He believes politicians, policy wonks and bureaucrats are gambling that America can continue on its fiscal path without a day of reckoning. Wynn believes they are nuts. So do I!(See 2 below.)
===
+++
He's making land mines that look like prayer mats.
It's doing well.HE SAYS PROPHETS ARE GOING THROUGH THE ROOF.
I attended a Town Hall meeting today hosted by my Congressman Buddy Carter. He began by reciting and discussing the 6 legislative initiatives Ryan and Republicans are going to emphasize.
Buddy did a great job of answering questions, promising those who had specific problems that his staff , many of whom were there, would look into their issues etc. I give Buddy credit for subjecting himself to the negativity directed at him by some. Being a public servant Buddy did what he needs to and he asked those who served their country to stand and he appealed to everyone in the audience to vote because their ability to speak their minds was because of the efforts of veterans.
One of the attendees was a veteran , had stage 4 cancer, went to the VA for many years and they never detected he had cancer. Another wife and care giver of her wounded and disabled husband told her horror story about how they had to drive to Charleston , 100 miles from Savannah, for a 15 minute appointment and the VA doctor said he could not help them.
Others talked about the murder of their children and appealed to Buddy to do something about illegal guns as if we do not have all the laws in the world already outlawing certain types of guns.
The meeting ,which lasted more than 2 hours so everyone got a chance to get what was on their minds off their chests, was an eye opener. The meeting re-enforced my view that liberals have to be stupid for wanting government to get bigger and believing it can solve more problems created by government. Liberals must believe people who weight 400 pounds can run run faster than those weighing 100 pounds. It is insane. Everything government touches ends in disaster. Buddy said DC is broken. He admitted the VA was in terrible shape and would take a long time to get to where it could do better. Yet, today Obama went before a Veteran's Convention and talked about how improved the VA was and how much money his administration had spent on upgrades. Then this was followed by reports pertaining to millions of dollars spent on art and art objects for the new hospitals but wait times were still long because there was not enough money to hire more doctors.
As I wrote a few days ago for the want of a buck a nation died. In liberal parlance it is always the lack of money that is the reason the problem is not solved.
===
Now let's hear it for law enforcement:
+++POLK COUNTY FLORIDA SHERIFF, GRADY JUDD
An illegal alien, in Polk County , Florida , who got pulled over in a routine traffic stop, ended up"executing" the deputy who stopped him. The deputy was shot eight times, including once behind his right ear at close range. Another deputy was wounded and a police dog killed.The murderer was found hiding in a wooded area. As soon as he took a shot at the SWAT team, officers opened fire on him. They hit the guy 68 times.Naturally, the liberal media went nuts and asked why they had to shoot the poor, undocumented immigrant 68 times.Sheriff Grady Judd told the Orlando Sentinel: "Because that's all the ammunition we had."
Now, is that just about the all-time greatest answer or what??
The Coroner also reported that the illegal alien died of natural causes. When asked by a reporter how that could be, since there were 68 bullet wounds in his body, he simply replied: (BEST QUOTE ever) . . .."When you are shot 68 times you are naturally gonna die."
A surprising article from the New Yorker Magazine. This magazine has always been a left wing apologizer so this article is even more amazing. (See 3 below.)
===
Russia and Iran drawing closer? (See 4 below.)
+++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Khizr Khan was tricked into smearing Donald Trump
By Charles Hurt
Khizr Khan is a fine American and the father of a true American patriot. But now he is also everything that is wrong with American politics today.
It is not entirely his fault, though he has only himself to blame for allowing his dead son to be used for the most hideous of purposes and dragged through the gutter of nasty and dishonest partisan politics.
Khan and his wife took to the stage at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia last week to deliver an impassioned rebuke of Donald J.Trump that was universally celebrated by the media. Even Republican politicos swooned at the gambit. The Clinton campaign trotted out the Muslim couple because their son, Captain Humayun Khan, was killed by a car bomb in 2004 while guarding a base in Iraq.
“If it was up to Donald Trump, he never would have been in America,” said Khan, sliding easily into the political tradition of lying and distorting the position of one’s opponent.
“Donald Trump consistently smears the character of Muslims,” he went on. “He disrespects other minorities, women, judges, even his own party leadership. He vows to build walls and ban us from this country.”
Despite all efforts by the media to distort Trump’s position about “banning” Muslims, he has made perfectly clear time and again that he does not want to ban all Muslims. He wants to simply perform thorough and complete background checks on all immigrants coming from countries presently in the grips of violent Islamic terrorism.
Yes, that means if you are a Muslim who wants to immigrate from Syria or Afghanistan, you are going to get a lot more scrutiny than if you are a Jew trying to immigrate from Canada. That is most unfortunate, but not nearly as unfortunate as innocents getting slaughtered by 10th Century savages killing in the name of Allah.
Anyway, this higher scrutiny should be no obstacle for the likes of Khizr Khan and his family, except for the additional hassle.
So, why would Khizr Khan choose to insert himself into politics and demean his son’s sacrifice by lying at a political convention on national television?
The answer is simple: He allowed himself to be tricked into it. And the Clinton campaign was all too eager to take advantage of him and his family and Capt. Khan and use them for their own political partisan purposes.
Stop for a moment and ask yourself how exactly the Clinton campaign arrived at the decision to trot out the Khan family in the middle of their highly-choreographed, exhaustively produced convention?
Were they just looking to give voice to the parents of a soldier? That would be a first. Did they want parents of anyone who had died abroad in the defense of their country? Gee, why not pick the parents of one of the fallen warriors who died defending the U.S. consulate in Benghazi? Oh, that’s right. They would have called Hillary Clinton a liar. Can’t have that.
No. Politicians like Hillary Clinton do not see people like Capt. Humayun Khan as a soldier who made the ultimate sacrifice on a foreign battlefield in defense of his country.
Politicians like Hillary Clinton see him only a demographic, a dispensable political pawn to be scooted around an electoral map, the way generals used to move armies across giant maps of the lands they were invading.
But instead of liberating Europe from evil fascists, politicians like Hillary Clinton use their long, worn croupier rakes to move their pawns about with the singular goal of advancing their own personal political careers.
To her, Capt. Khan is not a just soldier who died defending his country in a foreign land. First and foremost, to her, he is a Muslim of Pakistani heritage and therefore is a perfect political pawn for just the right situation.
For just about every American alive, Capt. Khan is an inspiring and unifying figure. To Hillary Clinton, he is a tool to be used to divide people. In her false promise of unifying America, she creates a national political Babylon. Her avaricious greed for more and more power knows no bounds.
It is an open secret in Washington that politics is the last bastion of rampant racial profiling. Both parties do it, but Democrats have taken it to a whole new scientific level.
Politicians like Hillary Clinton slice and dice people into racial and gender groups. Then they toot on all their little “dog whistles” to send all their little demographic pawns scurrying in various directions. That is how you wind up with Khizr Khan standing on stage beside his head-scarved wife, waving around the U.S. Constitution and distorting Donald Trump’s position on keeping radical Islamic terrorism at bay.
Perhaps a better testimony from Khizr Khan would have been for him to talk about how Hillary Clinton was in the U.S. Senate when she voted to invade Iraq. Years later, after that position became politically unpopular, she changed her mind and joined new political forces to vacate all the land across Iraq that so many great American patriots like Capt. Humayun Khan had died for.
It was her vote that sent Capt. Khan to his death. And then it was her decisions later to render that sacrifice worthless.
Try sticking that into your dog whistle and blowing it.
Hurt writes the "Nuclear Option" column for The Washington Times. A former D.C. bureau chief for the New York Post, he has covered the White House, Congress and presidential campaigns since 2001. Follow him on Twitter @charleshurt.
1a)
Clinton Cash: Khizr Khan’s Deep Legal, Financial Connections to Saudi Arabia, Hillary’s Clinton Foundation Tie Terror, Immigration, Email Scandals Together
Khizr Khan, the Muslim Gold Star father that the mainstream media and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been using to criticize Donald J. Trump, has deep ties to the government of Saudi Arabia—and to international Islamist investors through his own law firm. In addition to those ties to the wealthy Islamist nation, Khan also has ties to controversial immigration programs that wealthy foreigners can use to essentially buy their way into the United States—and has deep ties to the “Clinton Cash” narrative through the Clinton Foundation.
Khan and his wife Ghazala Khan both appeared on stage at the Democratic National Convention to attack, on Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s behalf, Donald Trump—the Republican nominee for president. Their son, U.S. Army Captain Humayun Khan, was killed in Iraq in 2004. Khizr Khan, in his speech to the DNC, lambasted Donald Trump for wanting to temporarily halt Islamic migration to America from countries with a proven history of exporting terrorists.
Since then, Clinton operative George Stephanopoulos—who served as a senior adviser to the president in Bill Clinton’s White House and is a Clinton Foundation donor as well as a host on the ABC network—pushed Trump on the matter in an interview. Trump’s comments in that interview have sparked the same mini-rebellion inside his party, in the media and across the aisle that has happened many times before. The usual suspects inside the GOP, from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to House Speaker Paul Ryan to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to Ohio Gov. John Kasich, have condemned Trump in one way or another. The media condemnation has been swift and Democrats, as well their friends throughout media, are driving the train as fast as they can.
But until now, it looked like the Khans were just Gold Star parents who the big bad Donald Trump attacked. It turns out, however, in addition to being Gold Star parents, the Khans are financially and legally tied deeply to the industry of Muslim migration–and to the government of Saudi Arabia and to the Clintons themselves.
Khan, according to Intelius as also reported by Walid Shoebat, used to work at the law firm Hogan Lovells, LLP, a major D.C. law firm that has been on retainer as the law firm representing the government of Saudi Arabia in the United States for years. Citing federal government disclosure forms, the Washington Free Beacon reported the connection between Saudi Arabia and Hogan Lovells a couple weeks ago.
“Hogan Lovells LLP, another U.S. firm hired by the Saudis, is registered to work for the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia through 2016, disclosures show,” Joe Schoffstall of the Free Beacon reported.
The federal form filed with the Department of Justice is a requirement under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, which makes lobbyists and lawyers working on behalf of foreign governments and other agents from abroad with interests in the United States register with the federal government.
The government of Saudi Arabia, of course, has donated heavily to the Clinton Foundation.
“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has given between $10 and $25 million to the foundation while Friends of Saudi Arabia has contributed between $1 and $5 million,” Schoffstall wrote.
Trump, of course, has called on Hillary Clinton to have the Clinton Foundation return the money.
“Saudi Arabia and many of the countries that gave vast amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation want women as slaves and to kill gays,” Trump wrote in a Facebook post back in June, according to Politico. “Hillary must return all money from such countries!”
“Crooked Hillary says we must call on Saudi Arabia and other countries to stop funding hate,” Trump posted in a separate Facebook posting at the time. “I am calling on her to immediately return the $25 million plus she got from them for the Clinton Foundation!”
Of course, to this day, Hillary Clinton and her Clinton Foundation has kept the money from the Saudi Arabian government.
Schoffstall’s piece in the Washington Free Beacon also notes how Hogan Lovells lobbyist Robert Kyle, per Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, has bundled more than $50,000 in donations for Clinton’s campaign this year.
Khan’s connections with the Hogan Lovells firm run deep, according to a report from Law.com written by Katelyn Polantz.
“Many lawyers at Hogan Lovells remember the week in 2004 when U.S. Army Capt. Humayun Khan lost his life to a suicide bomber,” Polantz wrote. “Then-Hogan & Hartson attorneys mourned the death because the soldier’s father, Khizr Khan, a Muslim American immigrant, was among their beloved colleagues.”
Polantz wrote that Khan worked at the mega-D.C. law firm for years.
“Khan spent seven years, from 2000 to 2007, in the Washington, D.C., office of then-Hogan & Hartson,” Polantz wrote. “He served as the firm’s manager of litigation technology. Although he did not practice law while at Hogan, Khan was well versed in understanding the American courts system. On Thursday night, he described his late son dreaming of becoming a military lawyer.”
But representing the Clinton Foundation backing Saudi Arabian government and having one of its lobbyists bundle $50,000-plus for Clinton’s campaign are hardly the only places where the Khan-connected Hogan Lovells D.C. mega-firm brush elbows with Clinton Cash.
The firm also handles Hillary Clinton’s taxes and is deeply connected with the email scandal whereby when she was Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton set up a home-brew email server system that jeopardized classified information handling and was “extremely careless” according to FBI director James Comey.
“A lawyer at Hogan & Hartson [Howard Topaz] has been Bill and Hillary Clinton’s go-to guy for tax advice since 2004, according to documents released Friday by Hillary Clinton’s campaign,” The American Lawyer’s Nate Raymond wrote in 2008, as Hillary Clinton ran for president that year. “The Clintons’ tax returns for 2000-07 show combined earnings of $109 million, on which they paid $33 million in taxes. New York-based tax partner Howard Topaz has a broad tax practice, and also regularly advises corporations on M&A and executive compensation.”
Breitbart News’ Patrick Howley, in a deep investigative piece on Hillary Clinton’s email scandal, late last year uncovered how Topaz’s firm—which employed Khan while Topaz did Hillary Clinton’s taxes—is also connected to the email scandal.
“Topaz was a partner at Hogan & Hartson, which later merged to become known as Hogan Lovells, where Topaz continues to practice. The firm’s lawyers were major donors to Hillary Clinton’s first presidential campaign,” Howley wrote.
For her private email system, Clinton used a spam filtering program MX Logic.
“Hogan & Hartson handled the patent for MX Logic’s email-filtering program, which McAfee bought the small company for $140 million in 2009 in order to acquire,” Howley wrote. “The MX Logic company’s application for a trademark for its SPAMTRAQ program was filed in 2004 on Hogan & Hartson stationery and signed by a Hogan & Hartson attorney. Hogan & Hartson has been responsible for MX Logic annual reports. The email company’s Clinton links present more evidence that Clinton’s political and legal establishment was monitoring her private email use.”
If that all isn’t enough, that same Hogan & Hartson law firm—now Hogan Lovells—employed Loretta Lynch, the current Attorney General of the United States. Lynch infamously just a few weeks ago met with Bill Clinton, Hillary’s husband and the former president, on her private jet in Phoenix just before clearing Hillary Clinton of any wrongdoing when it came to her illicit private email server system.
Khan’s own website for his own personal law firm KM Khan Law Office shows he represents clients in the business of buying visas to enter the United States. One of his specific areas of practice, according to the website, is “E2 Treaty Investors, EB5 Investments & Related Immigration Services.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the U.S. Senate’s Judiciary Committee, has detailed how the EB5 immigration program is “riddled with flaws and corruption.”
“Maybe it is only here on Capitol Hill—on this island surrounded by reality—that we can choose to plug our ears and refuse to listen to commonly accepted facts,” Grassley said in a statement earlier this year. “The Government Accountability Office, the media, industry experts, members of congress, and federal agency officials, have concurred that the program is a serious problem with serious vulnerabilities. Allow me to mention a few of the flaws.”
From there, Sen. Grassley listed out several of the “flaws” with the EB5 immigration program that Khan works in:
– Investments can be spent before business plans are approved.– Regional Center operators can charge exorbitant fees of foreign nationals in addition to their required investments.– Jobs created are not “direct” or verifiable jobs but rather are “indirect” and based on estimates and economic modeling.– Jobs created by U.S. investors are counted by the foreign national when obtaining a green card, even if EB-5 money is only a fraction of the total invested.– Investment funds are not adequately vetted.– Gifts and loans are acceptable sources of funds from foreign nationals.– The investment level has been stagnant for nearly 25 years.– There’s no prohibition against foreign governments owning or operating regional centers or projects.– Regional centers can be rented or sold without government oversight or approval.– Regional centers don’t have to certify that they comply with securities laws.– There’s no oversight of promoters who work overseas for the regional centers.– There’s no set of sanctions for violations, no recourse for bad actors.– There are no required background checks on anyone associated with a regional center.– Regional centers draw Targeted Employment Area boundaries around poor areas in order to come in at a lower investment level, yet the jobs created are not actually created in those areas.– Every Targeted Employment Area designation is rubberstamped by the agency.– Adjudicators are pressured to get to a yes, especially for those politically connected.– Visas are not properly scrutinized.– Visas are pushed through despite security warnings.– Files and applications lack basic and necessary information to monitor compliance.– The agency does not do site visits for each and every project.– There’s no transparency on how funds are spent, who is paid, and what investors are told about the projects they invest in.
That’s not to mention the fact that, according to Sen. Grassley, there have been serious national security violations in connection with the EB5 program that Khan works in and around already. In fact, the program—according to Grassley—was used by Middle Eastern operatives from Iran to attempt to illicitly enter the United States.
“There are also classified reports that detail the national security, fraud and abuse. Our committee has received numerous briefings and classified documents to show this side of the story,” Grassley said in the early February 2016 statement. “The enforcement arm of the Department of Homeland Security wrote an internal memo that raises significant concerns about the program. One section of the memo outlines concerns that it could be used by Iranian operatives to infiltrate the United States. The memo identifies seven main areas of program vulnerability, including the export of sensitive technology, economic espionage, use by foreign government agents and terrorists, investment fraud, illicit finance and money laundering.”
Maybe all of this is why–as Breitbart News has previously noted–the Democratic National Convention made absolutely no mention of the Clinton Foundation or Clinton Global Initiative. Hillary Clinton’s coronation ceremony spent exactly zero minutes of the four nights of official DNC programming talking about anything to do with perhaps one of the biggest parts of her biography.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) STEVE WYNN: There's more to this election than just Trump versus Clinton
Billionaire casino magnate Steve Wynn, the CEO and chairman of Wynn Resorts (WYNN), went on a tirade about the US presidential election during his company’s second quarter earnings call.
During the Thursday call, the outspoken 74-year-old was asked by an analyst “how the US election may impact business in Vegas.”
It’s not about Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, he argued. Instead, it’s about “self-destructive” monetary and fiscal policy that needs to be stopped.
“The election in the United States, I think we’re all in the same position. It’s almost impossible to predict exactly what effect that will have. Without getting into an economics discussion, we have – sooner or later, our political establishment is going to be forced, regardless of party affiliation, to deal with $19 trillion in debt that’s climbing by around $1.6 billion a day,” Wynn said, according to a transcript posted by SeekingAlpha.
He noted that the growing deficit and the Federal Reserve printing money at its current rate is “directly impacting the living standard or the buying power of the US dollar.” However, this is not “well understood” by Americans, he added.
Inflation, taken to the extreme, could result in another Weimar Republic, where people paid for food using wheelbarrows of currency in the early 1920s, he said.
“So this deficit issue impacts the mental health, the frustration, the positive sense of tomorrow that working people feel in America. It hasn’t got to do with rich folks. It’s got to do with government, fiscal and monetary policy,” Wynn said.
He continued: “We have $14 trillion in public debt and $5 trillion in intergovernmental debt. The coupon on that $19-trillion-and-climbing is around 2.3%, and that’s with short-term interest rates at zero virtually. Now, the current Fed, the lady is going to keep interest rates where they are. That, of course, protects all of the credit card debt of $1 trillion that’s out there. And so, we don’t have mass panic on the credit card interest. But I know that the government is in a quandary as to what to do about this.”
As for the upcoming election, he said both sides of the aisle are missing the point.
“Now, the issue about what’s going to happen with the election isn’t so much an issue of Trump versus Clinton at the moment. It’s a question of whether the House and the Senate and the Executive branch can get together and make Americans feel safer and have a fiscal and monetary policy that isn’t self-destructive, which currently it is.”
He added that both sides are “making all kinds of promises and declarations” that will only exacerbate the “problems that are currently plaguing the country.”
“What is lamentable is that the public discourse today on both sides misses the point entirely. We’re in the ‘chicken for every pot’ season where everybody is promising the moon,” he said.
He used the example of student loans as one of the big themes of the 2016 election. It started with Bernie Sanders who wanted to offer free college tuition. In early July, Clinton amended her platform so it would eliminate college tuition for working families. Specifically, the platform states that “families with income up to $125,000 will pay no tuition at in-state public colleges and universities.” The plan would start with families making $85,000 or less, and then the income threshold will increase by $10,000 every year over the next four years.
Wynn believes that such promises can have negative consequences.
“Well, when the Affordable Care Act was passed and it was going to have a negative impact on the deficit, which its sponsors had promised it wouldn’t, the sponsors went looking for a way to offset $8 billion or so in additional deficit and they came up with the kind of a stunt that we did with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when we eliminated mortgage brokers and we just took the loans directly into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that led to the collapse of $5 trillion off the system. Well, they did the same thing with the Department of Education. They gave the student loans directly from the Department of Education and eliminated any middle people. And then they charged 6.5 points or 650 basis points for student loans instead of passing the savings because the Department of Education doesn’t really have a cost of money. But they’re making the student loans direct since the Affordable Care Act. Bernie Sanders didn’t talk about that. But that 650 basis points, that carry is being made by the government to offset what would have been an even greater impact on the deficit by the Affordable Care Act. Well, if you really were sincere about making a better life for the kids, you would have passed the loans from the Department of Education to the kids at cost, which would have been interest free,” Wynn said.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)A surprising article from the New Yorker Magazine. This magazine has always been a left wing apologizer so this article is even more amazing. Don’t pass it up.
NEW YORKER on Trump
No matter who your favorite candidate might be … the article is an interesting read.
The author is the political correspondent for Bloomberg and wrote extensively about Obama even before he was nominated.
"Who is Donald Trump?" The better question may be, "What is Donald Trump?"
The answer? A giant middle finger from average Americans to the political and media establishment.
Some Trump supporters are like the 60s white girls who dated black guys just to annoy their parents. But most Trump supporters have simply had it with the Demo-socialists and the "Republicans In Name Only." They know there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Hillary Rodham and Jeb Bush, and only a few cents worth between Rodham and the other GOP candidates.
Ben Carson is not an "establishment" candidate, but the Clinton machine would pulverize Carson ; and the somewhat rebellious Ted Cruz will (justifiably so) be tied up with natural born citizen lawsuits (as might Marco Rubio). The Trump supporters figure they may as well have some fun tossing Molotov cocktails at Wall Street and Georgetown while they watch the nation collapse. Besides - lightning might strike, Trump might get elected, and he might actually fix a few things. Stranger things have happened (the nation elected an[islamo-]Marxist in 2008 and Bruce Jenner now wears designer dresses.)
Millions of conservatives are justifiably furious. They gave the Republicans control of the House in 2010 and control of the Senate in 2014, and have seen them govern no differently than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Yet those same voters are supposed to trust the GOP in 2016? Why?
Trump did not come from out of nowhere. His candidacy was created by the last six years of Republican failures.
No reasonable person can believe that any of the establishment candidates [dems or reps] will slash federal spending, rein in the Federal Reserve, cut burdensome business regulations, reform the tax code, or eliminate useless federal departments (the Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Energy, etc.). Even Ronald Reagan was unable to eliminate the Department of Education. (Of course, getting shot at tends to make a person less of a risk-taker.) No reasonable person can believe that any of the nation's major problems will be solved by Rodham, Bush, and the other dishers of donkey fazoo now eagerly eating corn in Iowa and pancakes in New Hampshire .
Many Americans, and especially Trump supporters, have had it with:
Anyone named Bush
Anyone named Clinton
Anyone who's held political office
Political correctness
Illegal immigration
Massive unemployment
Phony "official" unemployment and inflation figures
Welfare waste and fraud
People faking disabilities to go on the dole
VA waiting lists
TSA airport groping
Obama Care
The Federal Reserve's money-printing schemes
Wall Street crooks like Jon Corzine
Michelle Obama's vacations
Michelle Obama's food police
Barack Obama's golf
Barack Obama's arrogant and condescending lectures
Barack Obama's criticism/hatred of America
Valerie Jarrett
" Holiday trees"
Hollywood hypocrites
Global warming nonsense
Cop killers
Gun confiscation threats
Stagnant wages
Boys in girls' bathrooms
Whiny, spoiled college students who can't even place the Civil War in the correct century... and that's just the short list.
Trump supporters believe that no Democrat wants to address these issues, and that few Republicans have the courage to address these issues. They certainly know that none of the establishment candidates are better than barely listening to them, and Trump is their way of saying, "Screw you, Hillary Rodham Rove Bush!" The more the talking head political pundits insult the Trump supporters, the more supporters he gains. (The only pundits who seem to understand what is going on are Democrats Doug Schoen and Pat Caddell and Republican John LeBoutillier. All the others argue that the voters will eventually "come to their senses" and support an establishment candidate.)
But America does not need a tune-up at the same old garage. It needs a new engine installed by experts - and neither Rodham nor Bush are mechanics with the skills or experience to install it. Hillary Rodham is not a mechanic; she merely manages a garage her philandering husband abandoned. Jeb Bush is not a mechanic; he merely inherited a garage. Granted, Trump is also not a mechanic, but he knows where to find the best ones to work in his garage. He won't hire his brother-in-law or someone to whom he owes a favor; he will hire someone who lives and breathes cars.
"How dare they revolt!" the "elites" are bellowing. Well, the citizens are daring to revolt, and the RINOs had better get used to it. "But Trump will hand the election to Clinton !" That is what the Karl Rove-types want people to believe, just as the leftist media eagerly shoved "Maverick" McCain down GOP throats in 2008 - knowing he would lose to Obama. But even if Trump loses and Rodham wins, she would not be dramatically different than Bush or most of his fellow candidates. They would be nothing more than caretakers, not working to restore America 's greatness but merely presiding over the collapse of a massively in-debt nation. A nation can perhaps survive open borders; a nation can perhaps survive a generous welfare system. But no nation can survive both - and there is little evidence that the establishment candidates of either party understand that. The United States cannot forever continue on the path it is on. At some point it will be destroyed by its debt.
Yes, Trump speaks like a bull wander[ing] through a china shop, but the truth is that the borders do need to be sealed; we cannot afford to feed, house, and clothe 200,000 Syrian immigrants for decades (even if we get inordinately lucky and none of them are ISIS infiltrators or Syed Farook wannabes); the world is at war with radical Islamists; all the world's glaciers are not melting; and Rosie O'Donnell is a fat pig.
Is Trump the perfect candidate? Of course not. Neither was Ronald Reagan. But unless we close our borders and restrict immigration, all the other issues are irrelevant. One terrorist blowing up a bridge or a tunnel could kill thousands. One jihadist poisoning a city's water supply could kill tens of thousands. One electromagnetic pulse attack from a single Iranian nuclear device could kill tens of millions. Faced with those possibilities, most Americans probably don't care that Trump relied on eminent domain to grab up a final quarter acre of property for a hotel, or that he boils the blood of the Muslim Brotherhood thugs running the Council on American-Islamic Relations. While Attorney General Loretta Lynch's greatest fear is someone giving a Muslim a dirty look, most Americans are more worried about being gunned down at a shopping mall by a crazed [islamic] lunatic who treats his prayer mat better than his three wives and who thinks 72 virgins are waiting for him in paradise.
The establishment is frightened to death that Trump will win, but not because they believe he will harm the nation. They are afraid he will upset their taxpayer-subsidized apple carts. While Obama threatens to veto legislation that spends too little, they worry that Trump will veto legislation that spends too much.
You can be certain that if an establishment candidate wins in November 2016 … [their] cabinet positions will be filled with the same people we've seen before. The washed-up has-beens of the Clinton and Bush administrations will be back in charge. The hacks from Goldman Sachs will continue to call the shots. Whether it is Bush's Karl Rove or Clinton 's John Podesta, who makes the decisions in the White House will matter little.
If the establishment wins, America loses.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++4) RUSSIA, IRAN DISCUSS POSSIBILITIES TO BROADEN MILITARY COOPERATION
By SPUTNIKNEWS.COM
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and commander of the Iranian forces taking part in the 2016 International Army Games Brigadier General Vali Madani discussed ways to expand military cooperation between the two countries, Iranian media reported Sunday.
3)A surprising article from the New Yorker Magazine. This magazine has always been a left wing apologizer so this article is even more amazing. Don’t pass it up.
NEW YORKER on Trump
No matter who your favorite candidate might be … the article is an interesting read.
The author is the political correspondent for Bloomberg and wrote extensively about Obama even before he was nominated.
"Who is Donald Trump?" The better question may be, "What is Donald Trump?"
The answer? A giant middle finger from average Americans to the political and media establishment.
Some Trump supporters are like the 60s white girls who dated black guys just to annoy their parents. But most Trump supporters have simply had it with the Demo-socialists and the "Republicans In Name Only." They know there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Hillary Rodham and Jeb Bush, and only a few cents worth between Rodham and the other GOP candidates.
Ben Carson is not an "establishment" candidate, but the Clinton machine would pulverize Carson ; and the somewhat rebellious Ted Cruz will (justifiably so) be tied up with natural born citizen lawsuits (as might Marco Rubio). The Trump supporters figure they may as well have some fun tossing Molotov cocktails at Wall Street and Georgetown while they watch the nation collapse. Besides - lightning might strike, Trump might get elected, and he might actually fix a few things. Stranger things have happened (the nation elected an[islamo-]Marxist in 2008 and Bruce Jenner now wears designer dresses.)
Millions of conservatives are justifiably furious. They gave the Republicans control of the House in 2010 and control of the Senate in 2014, and have seen them govern no differently than Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Yet those same voters are supposed to trust the GOP in 2016? Why?
Trump did not come from out of nowhere. His candidacy was created by the last six years of Republican failures.
No reasonable person can believe that any of the establishment candidates [dems or reps] will slash federal spending, rein in the Federal Reserve, cut burdensome business regulations, reform the tax code, or eliminate useless federal departments (the Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Energy, etc.). Even Ronald Reagan was unable to eliminate the Department of Education. (Of course, getting shot at tends to make a person less of a risk-taker.) No reasonable person can believe that any of the nation's major problems will be solved by Rodham, Bush, and the other dishers of donkey fazoo now eagerly eating corn in Iowa and pancakes in New Hampshire .
Many Americans, and especially Trump supporters, have had it with:
Anyone named Bush
Anyone named Clinton
Anyone who's held political office
Political correctness
Illegal immigration
Massive unemployment
Phony "official" unemployment and inflation figures
Welfare waste and fraud
People faking disabilities to go on the dole
VA waiting lists
TSA airport groping
Obama Care
The Federal Reserve's money-printing schemes
Wall Street crooks like Jon Corzine
Michelle Obama's vacations
Michelle Obama's food police
Barack Obama's golf
Barack Obama's arrogant and condescending lectures
Barack Obama's criticism/hatred of America
Valerie Jarrett
" Holiday trees"
Hollywood hypocrites
Global warming nonsense
Cop killers
Gun confiscation threats
Stagnant wages
Boys in girls' bathrooms
Whiny, spoiled college students who can't even place the Civil War in the correct century... and that's just the short list.
Trump supporters believe that no Democrat wants to address these issues, and that few Republicans have the courage to address these issues. They certainly know that none of the establishment candidates are better than barely listening to them, and Trump is their way of saying, "Screw you, Hillary Rodham Rove Bush!" The more the talking head political pundits insult the Trump supporters, the more supporters he gains. (The only pundits who seem to understand what is going on are Democrats Doug Schoen and Pat Caddell and Republican John LeBoutillier. All the others argue that the voters will eventually "come to their senses" and support an establishment candidate.)
But America does not need a tune-up at the same old garage. It needs a new engine installed by experts - and neither Rodham nor Bush are mechanics with the skills or experience to install it. Hillary Rodham is not a mechanic; she merely manages a garage her philandering husband abandoned. Jeb Bush is not a mechanic; he merely inherited a garage. Granted, Trump is also not a mechanic, but he knows where to find the best ones to work in his garage. He won't hire his brother-in-law or someone to whom he owes a favor; he will hire someone who lives and breathes cars.
"How dare they revolt!" the "elites" are bellowing. Well, the citizens are daring to revolt, and the RINOs had better get used to it. "But Trump will hand the election to Clinton !" That is what the Karl Rove-types want people to believe, just as the leftist media eagerly shoved "Maverick" McCain down GOP throats in 2008 - knowing he would lose to Obama. But even if Trump loses and Rodham wins, she would not be dramatically different than Bush or most of his fellow candidates. They would be nothing more than caretakers, not working to restore America 's greatness but merely presiding over the collapse of a massively in-debt nation. A nation can perhaps survive open borders; a nation can perhaps survive a generous welfare system. But no nation can survive both - and there is little evidence that the establishment candidates of either party understand that. The United States cannot forever continue on the path it is on. At some point it will be destroyed by its debt.
Yes, Trump speaks like a bull wander[ing] through a china shop, but the truth is that the borders do need to be sealed; we cannot afford to feed, house, and clothe 200,000 Syrian immigrants for decades (even if we get inordinately lucky and none of them are ISIS infiltrators or Syed Farook wannabes); the world is at war with radical Islamists; all the world's glaciers are not melting; and Rosie O'Donnell is a fat pig.
Is Trump the perfect candidate? Of course not. Neither was Ronald Reagan. But unless we close our borders and restrict immigration, all the other issues are irrelevant. One terrorist blowing up a bridge or a tunnel could kill thousands. One jihadist poisoning a city's water supply could kill tens of thousands. One electromagnetic pulse attack from a single Iranian nuclear device could kill tens of millions. Faced with those possibilities, most Americans probably don't care that Trump relied on eminent domain to grab up a final quarter acre of property for a hotel, or that he boils the blood of the Muslim Brotherhood thugs running the Council on American-Islamic Relations. While Attorney General Loretta Lynch's greatest fear is someone giving a Muslim a dirty look, most Americans are more worried about being gunned down at a shopping mall by a crazed [islamic] lunatic who treats his prayer mat better than his three wives and who thinks 72 virgins are waiting for him in paradise.
The establishment is frightened to death that Trump will win, but not because they believe he will harm the nation. They are afraid he will upset their taxpayer-subsidized apple carts. While Obama threatens to veto legislation that spends too little, they worry that Trump will veto legislation that spends too much.
You can be certain that if an establishment candidate wins in November 2016 … [their] cabinet positions will be filled with the same people we've seen before. The washed-up has-beens of the Clinton and Bush administrations will be back in charge. The hacks from Goldman Sachs will continue to call the shots. Whether it is Bush's Karl Rove or Clinton 's John Podesta, who makes the decisions in the White House will matter little.
If the establishment wins, America loses.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++4) RUSSIA, IRAN DISCUSS POSSIBILITIES TO BROADEN MILITARY COOPERATION
By SPUTNIKNEWS.COM
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and commander of the Iranian forces taking part in the 2016 International Army Games Brigadier General Vali Madani discussed ways to expand military cooperation between the two countries, Iranian media reported Sunday.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) – “Iran and Russia have the needed capacities to broaden their mutual cooperation in the defense field,” Madani said as quoted by the Fars news agency
The meeting was held after the opening ceremony of the 2016 Army Games.
“Iran’s Armed Forces have good relations with Russia. We are sure the competitions will strengthen them more… The competitions are held at a very high level. We are grateful to Russia for holding these very significant competitions. We are looking forward to winning them,” Madani added.
Russia is currently hosting the International Army Games on Saturday. The Games feature the competitions in 23 disciplines. A total of 121 teams from 19 countries across the world participate in the Games monitored by observers from 11 countries.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment