Do we really need a male lap dancer for president when we could have such an intellectual powerhouse? https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=9kI7j_1547475848 and https://youtu.be/1h5iv6sECGU
And:
I am hearing reports Chris Matthews' "leg tingle" is recurring and this time over BETO. Nothing pleases me more because Chris lives in his own dream world based on bias and hope. He drinks the Kool Ade served him by the commissary staff at CNN.
It is far too early to predict the 2020 winner. After all, our "Accidental" President could have us at war with N Korea and/or Iran or both, the world economic order could be in the deepest depression ever, Trump could have called for Marshal Law, thousands of illegal immigrants could have been massacred by ICE as they tried to penetrate newly built walls. Trade wars could be rampant, NATO could have been disbanded.
Accidents don't just happen, they are generally the consequence and reaction to a stimuli and we all know the fearful predictions of what would happen were Trump to become president and there is still time.
The op ed below, by a Democrat operative, is worth reading because the mass media has thrown all the dirt they can at Trump and he is still standing. The Democrats have also done everything they can to thwart the Trump Juggernaut from succeeding but so far the statistics show otherwise.
I have several liberal friends who constantly remind me how Trump's tax cut was for the rich yet, are unable to explain the serious negative effect of limiting real estate and tax deductions to $10,000 etc. I suspect Donald wanted to force everyone out of New York and drive them to Florida (the no tax state) so he could destroy the value of his real estate holdings in The Big Apple.
As the article points out, Trump has vulnerabilities which we all knew about but he was still elected. We also know these vulnerabilities have been emphasized time and again since his election and yet his favor-ability ratings,among Hispanics and Black voters, has either held steady or improved. Perhaps job creation and employment has something to do with this phenomenon.
Meanwhile, The Democrat Party and Hillary have done everything they can to drive the "deplorables" into the arms of waiting Republicans. And then we have the radical element, that Pelosi cuddles, making it uncomfortable for those slavish Liberal Jews to hang around waiting for more verbal sucker punch black eyes and anti-Semitic insults.
I remember when my liberal friends were gloating over the 16 dwarfs running for the Republican nomination plus Trump and how that was an indication of a self-destructing party and when Trump was nominated that was the final nail in the coffin.
Perhaps the same scenario will play out for Democrats. They will muddle through, select a winning combination like Biden and BETO and yank victory from the jaws of apparent defeat or construct another combination. Anything is possible and matters are fluid.
October 27-29, I have Salena Zito coming to speak both in Savannah and Atlanta. Salena is an op ed writer for The Washington Examiner and was one of the few to correctly predict Trump's 2016 victory and why. Salena is a native of Pittsburgh and, like my old friend Jack Germond, lives in a different world called The United States than those in the mass media who basically live on two opposite coasts and believe everything in between is a vast wasteland inhabited by gun totting, bible thumping, flag waving, beer drinking vicious homophobic racists and every other "ist" known to mankind. Salena will discuss trends in populism.
As I always say - time will tell and the enemy is us! (See 1 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mueller report commentary.(See 2 below.)
Long but very important: https://www.theepochtimes.com/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1)
Democrats May Blow It in 2020
General national opinion doesn’t conform to that of party activists. Ask President McGovern.
By Ted Van Dyk
In their fever to dispense with President Trump immediately, Democrats are losing sight of what Marxists called the “objective conditions” in the country and the fundamentals of presidential politics. Unless they take care, they will forfeit their chance to regain the White House in 2020 and could return congressional control to Republicans as well.
Begin with the objective conditions. The first is continuing public disenchantment with political, media, financial and cultural establishments. It is this disenchantment that brought Mr. Trump to the White House in the first place and, additionally, almost brought Sen. Bernie Sanders, not even a Democrat, the Democratic presidential nomination.
In Mr. Trump’s case, voters knew he was boorish, narcissistic, a business and financial freewheeler, a womanizer, and largely ignorant of governance and public policy. His election was wholly about disillusion with the alternatives. His former personal lawyer was no doubt right in asserting that Mr. Trump never expected to be taken seriously as a presidential candidate but ran simply to burnish his brand. Similar populist disenchantment, by the way, is plaguing establishment politicians in the U.K., France, Germany and elsewhere.
The other objective conditions—the two most important in a national general election—are those relating to national security and the economy. Ordinary voters see that Mr. Trump has destroyed the ISIS caliphate in the Middle East, has plans for phased withdrawals of American forces from Syria and Afghanistan, has challenged Russia and Iran, and is making an effort to denuclearize North Korea. They also see him attempting to confront China for its dishonest trading practices.
They may not support his Mexican wall as first proposed, but they recognize the need for border security. They also support American citizenship for immigrants who proceed lawfully. They puzzle that Democrats, rather than focusing on means to legalization, instead are attacking Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol as child torturers. They do not see or comprehend the damage Mr. Trump has done to multilateralism, alliances, carefully built international institutions, or thoughtful internal policy-making processes. They see only the externals.
The economy remains strong and unemployment at record lows, including for minorities. This growth will not last forever but may continue through the 2020 electoral cycle. The longer-term outlook is overshadowed by $22 trillion in federal debt, expanding by some $1 trillion annually, and additional debt and liabilities at state and local level. Neither political party is addressing this slow-motion crisis.
Now about the political fundamentals. When voters consider changing presidents, they usually focus on the weaknesses of the incumbent and vote for a replacement they perceive as his opposite. That has been the case in every president-changing election from 1932 until the present day. An optimistic, upbeat Franklin D. Roosevelt replacing a dour, bureaucratic Herbert Hoover; an energetic, charismatic John F. Kennedy replacing Richard Nixon, vice president in a tired outgoing administration; a thoughtful and bold-talking Nixon succeeding Lyndon B. Johnson, associated with grinding and divisive war; a morally upstanding outsider, Jimmy Carter, replacing Gerald Ford, who had pardoned the discredited Nixon; an upbeat Ronald Reagan replacing Mr. Carter, who blamed the American people for their “malaise”; and a young, vigorous Bill Clinton defeating an older, tired George H.W. Bush. Voters thus will be looking for a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate who is reflective, experienced, a unifier rather than divider, and demonstrably capable of serious governance. In other words, not just another pugnacious self-seeker.
How many of the announced Democratic aspirants fit that description? Most thus far appear to be appealing mainly to diehard anti-Trumpers important in early primary and caucus contests. But it’s a mistake to believe that general national opinion conforms to that of party activists. You could ask Presidents Goldwater and McGovern about that mistake.
House Democrats are doing Mr. Trump a favor with their Jacobin attacks on him. The Robert Mueller report is forthcoming. It will or will not provide a basis for actions against Mr. Trump via due process and the rule of law. In the meantime, Democrats should presume nothing about its content. They should instead get on with contesting the election the way we did back in the day. That means asking: What are the country’s big problems? What are our proposed sol
utions to those problems? How can we persuade a majority of the country and Congress to accept our solutions?
Thinking of running for president? Consider those questions now—before declaring your candidacy.
Mr. Van Dyk was active in Democratic national policy and politics for 40 years. He is author of “Heroes, Hacks and Fools” (University of Washington Press, 2007).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)Releasing the Mueller Report
Disclosure should include the FBI and FISA documents too. The Editorial Board
Even the media’s Mueller obsessives aren’t sure what the special counsel will report, or if he will report anything at all. He could simply list his indictment decisions to date and say he’s wrapping things up. That would be the honorable path if he lacks evidence to bring other indictments, since prosecutors shouldn’t malign people they don’t intend to charge.
Or Mr. Mueller could write up a capacious account of what he’s discovered about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign. This is what the House is anticipating, and certainly what Democrats are hoping for. But Congress doesn’t know whether Mr. Mueller will disclose new information beyond what has been in his indictments and court filings.
Mr. Mueller’s charges against former Trump associates have been for crimes unrelated to the Russian investigation or for lying to the FBI. But his indictments and sentencing memos have been littered with Russian names and extensive redactions, and Democrats hope he will provide a narrative that connects the disparate facts into a story that warrants impeachment.
Justice Department rules require only that Mr. Mueller file a “confidential report explaining [his] prosecution or declination decisions.” And while Mr. Barr in his recent confirmation hearings committed to transparency, the same rules require only that he notify Congress of instances when he overruled Mr. Mueller.
As the House vote shows, Mr. Barr probably has no choice but to release nearly all of the report. Congressional Democrats have already threatened subpoenas, and while the Administration might have a legal case to resist them, that would feed charges of a cover-up. Once Congress has the report, it is sure to leak, perhaps selectively without proper context.
The better course is for Mr. Barr to release the report and everything else that is relevant to the Russia probe. That includes investigative materials that accompany the report, and all documents related to the FBI counterintelligence investigation that began in 2016.
This means applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for warrants to eavesdrop on Trump advisers such as Carter Page; documents showing the extent to which the FBI verified (or didn’t) the Steele dossier and other evidence it presented to the FISA court; the FBI’s 302 summaries of interviews it conducted during its probe; and the FBI’s 1023 debriefs of informants and sources.
In September President Trump ordered Justice to declassify these documents, only to back down for reasons he has never explained. Once the Mueller probe is over, there is no excuse for not giving the public a full accounting of the Trump-Russia collusion story well before the 2020 campaign is at full speed.
Mr. Barr should release as much as possible, with the fewest redactions necessary to protect the innocent and intelligence sources and methods. After two years of selective leaking and speculation, it’s time to see the entire story.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment