Democrats Attack on Free Speech

Increasingly, Democrats are attempt to squelch speech that they do not like.

Biden Campaign Urges TV Networks to Stop Booking Giuliani

Kamala Harris’ Crusade To De-Platform Trump On Twitter Is Emblematic Of A Larger Problem

Protesters force DHS chief to cancel speech

Particularly troubling is this article: Rep. Maxine Waters: Trump 'setting some of us up to be killed' as Ms Waters repeatedly called for violence against Republicans. So here we have an irresponsible person calling for violence against Republicans demanding that she be "protected" from the consequences of her feckless actions that are a loathsome affront to free speech.

Every Democrat in the Senate Supports a Constitutional Amendment That Would Radically Curtail Freedom of Speech

Free Speech Defenders Warn Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez That She Is Violating the Constitution by Blocking Critics on Twitter

Mueller Investigation Implodes

About time. Mueller, on July 24, 2019 appeared before Congress to testify concerning his report. Things did not go well. The headline on the Washington Times was: "Mueller, befuddled by own report, stumbles through testimony". 

Even some on the left were upset by the quality of Mueller's testimony. Fox News reported: "Liberal activist and filmaker Michael Moore delivered a scathing review of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's testimony on Wednesday, suggesting Democrats should reconsider why they trusted him in the first place."

Moore had tweeted: 

A frail old man, unable to remember things, stumbling, refusing to answer basic questions...I said it in 2017 and Mueller confirmed it today — All you pundits and moderates and lame Dems who told the public to put their faith in the esteemed Robert Mueller — just STFU from now on

The Washington Times reported: "Former top Obama strategist David Axelrod said Mr. Mueller didn’t appear to be very “sharp,” and liberal star filmmaker Michael Moore called him “stumbling.”"

The New York Times reported in the article: The Blockbuster That Wasn’t: Mueller Disappoints the Democrats. The Times wrote:

"In the days leading up to the special counsel’s much-anticipated appearance before Congress, Democrats argued that hearing from Robert S. Mueller III on television could transform the impeachment debate. While Americans might not read the book, the argument went, they would watch the movie.

If so, the movie Americans tuned into on Wednesday was not the blockbuster Democrats had sought nor was Mr. Mueller the action star they had cast. Dignified but shaky, and at times struggling to keep up, he largely stuck to “yes” and “no” and “refer you to the report” answers, steadfastly refusing to dramatize his conclusions as President Trump’s critics wanted him to do.

By the time he finished nearly seven hours later, Democrats were disappointed they did not get the made-for-TV accusatory moment they wanted, and the prospect for impeachment appeared far more difficult. Although the president’s critics vowed to persist, a gleeful Mr. Trump claimed he was completely cleared while shouting angry insults at reporters on the South Lawn."

Since posting, I ran across Newt Gingrich's take on the Mueller testimony. Of special note, Newt Gingrich points out the even the rabidly partisan Democratic prosecutors were unable to dig-up enough dirt to find that the Trump Campaign had colluded with Russia. Gingrich quote below:

However, the more I watched him, the more I came to the conclusion that he had been a figurehead. The tough younger Trump-hating Democrats had networked with each other and assembled a legal team dedicated to destroying Trump and protecting the Clintons.

Seen from this perspective, it is a tribute to President Trump that despite their best efforts these deeply hostile prosecutors simply could not find any evidence of serious wrongdoing. They could write innuendo -- and huff and puff -- but in the end the Trump wall of obeying the law withstood the best these smart, tough widely-experienced Democratic prosecutors could do.

An additional update (July 31, 2019). Another attempt by Democrats, parallel to the Mueller investigation, has been derailed by the judicial system. Judge tosses Democrat's case against Trump 2016 campaign. The illegitimate fragile house of cards built by the Democrats is crumbling.

Though the Democrats publicly pumped up Mueller's anticipated testimony in hopes of hitting a home run with the public, the reality was that the Democrats had built a frail house of cards, in the form of the Mueller investigation. That house of cards was exposed to the American public on national TV. The winds of public opinion have now blown that house of cards into oblivion

 

Picture above from Gary Varvel in the Washington Times

The Mueller Report - The Failed Attempt to Implement a Coup in the US

Lavrentiy Beria infamously boasted: “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime”. Mueller was appointed, as a special counsel, by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to find crimes by the Trump campaign. On the surface, if an apparent crime has occurred, there may justification for investigating that crime. But it became quickly apparent, that the Trump campaign was specifically targeted for examination. The apparent purpose of this action was to establish, by the Democrats, an impeachment narrative. To be more blunt, the Democrats were advocating a coup.

1. The Obama administration was in charge of the government at the time Trump ran for President. The new "red scare" today, pushed by Democrats and even some Republicans is that the Russian somehow interfered in the US electoral process. Should the threat of Russian interference into the US electoral process be legitimate, Mueller should have been investigating the failure of the Obama administration to act on this possible threat. (Trump at the time was a private citizen who had no governmental authority to investigate this issue.) Mueller, apparently, did not look into the failure of the Obama administration to protect the US electoral process from this type of abuse.
2. Hillary Clinton (HRC) was also campaigning to become President. One can assume that if the Trump campaign was being approached by Russian agents seeking to manipulate the US electoral process, that the HRC campaign would also have been approached in some manner by the Russians. The Mueller investigation side stepped looking into this possibility.
3. The appointment of Mueller to lead the investigation into supposed Russian collusion by Rosenstein was suspicious for a variety of reasons. One reason was the use of the debunked Steele dossier as a reason for opening an investigation. Adding to the mystery have been the persistent claims by Adam Schiff: "Look, you can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion”. Seems that no one else has be able to view and verify the supposed evidence. So were is Schiff's evidence? Not to mention that the Mueller report concluded in March 2019 that no collusion occurred. Of course the claim can be made that an investigation was still necessary even-though, the investigation in-the-end failed to document its need. However, emerging evidence seems to demonstrate that the evidence used to authorize the Mueller investigation was not properly vetted. Should that be true, the Mueller investigation was illegitimate.
4. As the Mueller investigation progressed, just into the Trump campaign, some people were charged and convicted of with "crimes". But these "crimes" had nothing to do with Mueller's mandate of finding collusion. The people were either charged with  "process crimes" or crimes having nothing to do with the Trump campaign. So, some people were found guilty of something, but the Mueller team's investigation was unable to find evidence of collusion, which was their mandate.

In reviewing each of these distinct threads, it becomes discernible that the Trump campaign was specifically targeted as a political hit-job. A man was found, Donald Trump. Then a special counsel was appointed, to show us a crime either by hook or by crook. In the end, no crime was found. We should consider ourselves fortunate that the Mueller team had at least enough ethical integrity to acknowledge that the Trump campaign did not collude with the Russians. 

 

 Picture above by Michael Ramirez from the Washington Times

Hillary Clinton - The Threat to Democracy

Hillary Clinton, expecting to win the 2016 US presidential election, smugly with an air of moral superiority arrogantly proclaimed that challenging the validity of the election results would be a threat to democracy.




Guess what she lost and is now questioning the validity of the election results. Hillary has unveiled herself as being the threat to democracy.

The Washington Times, on September 18, 2017,  wrote: "Hillary mulls challenging legitimacy of 2016 election, cites Russian influence". This was followed up by another article:  "Hillary Clinton slams Trump, Russians during appearance at Warner Theatre".  What is particularly detestable is that Hillary's assertions of supposed Russian influence appear to be nothing but hot-air innuendo. The Democrats have been pushing the empty Russian influence assertion for months, but have yet to provide any concrete evidence. Given the lack of evidence, one has to wonder about the validity of these assertions.

It is quite unfortunate that the media, in the face of all this smoke and mirrors by Hillary and the Democrats, have failed to write articles exposing Hillary's deceit. The media lamely regurgitates Hillary's misleading disinformation. Where is the media's quest for the truth and critical thinking's skills?

Time for the media, assuming that they have any integrity left, to expose Hillary's disingenuous hateful rumor-mill as a case of sour grapes. Hillary, by endlessly churning this deceitful narrative in the elusive hope of finding a "hook" is the threat to democracy. Hillary is pathetic. Hillary lost the election.

Republicans, Democrats, and the Helath Care Debacle

Its been a bad week for the Republicans. Their attempts to repeal the ACA (AKA Obamacare) went down to ignominious failure. In part, the Republicans failed due to a lack of party discipline as a consequence of unrelenting acrimonious squabbling amongst themselves.

The Republicans have failed to govern.  They had seven years to formulate the repeal of the ACA and they "blew it". One would have thought, given their seven year lead time, that the Republicans would have had their act together. Guess not. Criticism of the Republican efforts is justified.

But, there is another view point to the health care debacle. Like the Republicans, the Democrats also had seven years to propose a fix to the ACA. They have failed to do so.

Both the media and the Republicans have been silent on raising the issue that the Democrats have avoided, over seven years, to propose legislative fixes to the ACA. Surprising since this would provide the Republicans with the opportunity to shift blame for the health care debacle to the Democrats.

The Democrats and the media have been mocking the Republicans for their inability to put forward a coherent plan to repeal the ACA. While these derisions of Republicans by the Democrats may seem appropriate they actually point to a major difference between how the Republicans and Democrats approach governance.

From the perspective of a democratic process, the squabbling of the Republicans is actually a good thing. They are openly discussing in a public forum how to get a piece of legislation passed. Unfortunately it did not turn out well.

From the perspective of a democratic process, the Democrats are an autocratic organization. No dissension is allowed. (Three Republican Senators cited their conscience as the reason not to go along with the rest of the party, but not one Democrat was willing to break with the party line even-though the ACA is a failing abomination.)  Essentially each Democratic Congressperson seems to be a mindless robot implementing the dictates of the party leadership. That is not good, in terms of the democratic process and resulted in the passage of the abomination known as the ACA back in 2010.

The health care issue is not dead, but note the dynamics. The Democrats ridicule the Republican efforts but never actually suggest their own solution. The reason is obvious, dirty politics by the Democrats. The Democrats know that the Republicans have failed so they (Democrats) will sit back and do nothing hoping that the Republicans will come crawling to them. The Democrats have no interest in compromising with the Republicans, even if that means letting their prized piece of legislation (the ACA) fail. The Democrats are deplorable.

Casual Observations on Military Equipment/Deployment II

The recent election of Trump as the next US President has re-awakened the issue of military spending.  Back in December 2010, I wrote: Casual Observations on Military Equipment/Deployment. Since the issue is once again current, I will re-summarize my casual observations.

My casual thoughts concerning the design and deployment of military equipment:

1. expendable
2. rapidly reproduced
3. easily maintained
4. can be repaired in the field
5. cheap

When will Democrats denounce Hillary?

I've been wondering why Democrats fail to speak out against Hillary's corruption and lying. The Republicans certainly don't have a problem attacking Trump and descending into a civil-war.

Good to observe that the Washington Times finally wrote an article on this concern. When will Democrats denounce Hillary? Other newspapers, such as the Washington Post, seem to dismiss Hillary's corruption, incompetence, and lying as a nonissue.

My perspective is that the Democrats won't denounce Hillary because their mindset is stuck in the feudal ages. They owe their uncompromising fealty to the Democratic party. Supporting the party takes a precedence over everything, such as being ethical or working in benefit of the national interest. In short, the means justify the end for the Democrats. Hillary is the current Democratic feudal "Queen". As such she deserves total devotion by the Democrats no matter what her character flaws are or how great her incompetence. 

This mindless devotion approaches unbelievable psychotic behavior by Democrats. I can just imagine all Democrats, like lemmings, gladly racing to jump off a cliff to their deaths in mindless impassioned devotion to Hillary.

-----------------------

Since posting there has been some breaking news. Longtime Clinton Ally Stuns Fox News Host, Withdraws Support of Hillary on Live Television. Doug Schoen, the long time supporter of Hillary withdrew his support of Hillary.  I have heard Doug speak many times, and he seemed like one of the few rationale Democrats. He was not a rabid partisan as most Democratic pundits seem to be. I heard it in passing and I was not sure that I heard it correctly. Guess I did. Maybe be Democratic "dam" is starting to develop cracks. Shoen's withdrawal of support for Hillary may be the first "drip" of many that will eventually develop into a "flood". Only time will tell.

Hillary Clinton's US Supreme Court Will Obsolete the Rule-Of-law

Be afraid, very afraid of Hillary Clinton's possible justice appointments to the US Supreme Court. Hillary, based on her remarks, will propose to nominate justices who will not use the Constitution as the legal standard of review for making decisions. Note, in the video below, the absence any reference to the Constitution by Hillary. What she does (falsely) claim is that the Court is supposed to "stand on the side of the American" people whatever that means.  For a politician, such as Hillary, this is just disingenuous "smoke and mirrors".



The implication of Hillary's response is that she would nominate justices who would not make legal decisions based on the US Constitution. Instead, a Hillary Clinton Supreme Court would; on her subjective assertion that she desires a Court that represents "all Americans", that she will nominate justices who will simply issue decisions based on the political objectives of the Democratic party.

The Reprehensible Sanctimonious Behavior of the Democrats

George Will: Trump has a point about rigged elections

Exceptionally perceptive summary by George Will concerning how the Democrats underhandedly work to "tilt" the election in their favor.

Since originally posted, I ran across Project Veritas that supposedly documents Democratic dirty tricks. Below are the links to the video.

Rigging the Election - Video I: Clinton Campaign and DNC Incite Violence at Trump Rallies.

Rigging the Election - Video II: Mass Voter Fraud

I'll leave it up to you to contemplate the truthfulness of the Project Veritas videos.

 Another relevant article has since surfaced.

Undercover video shows Democrats admitting they hire agitators for Trump events

The Washington Times writes: "Those supposedly spontaneous protesters disrupting events for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump actually may be professionals trained by operatives working with the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

A yearlong undercover investigation by the conservative group Project Veritas Action shows Democratic strategists discussing how they hire agitators — including union members, homeless people and the mentally ill — to incite violence by provoking Trump supporters on camera at campaign stops."

The Washington Times has issued an updated article:

Democratic heads roll after video shows agitators planted at Trump rallies

 According to the Times: "Two top Democratic strategists have exited the presidential campaign after explosive undercover videos showed them discussing voter fraud and their roles in planting paid agitators at campaign events for Republican candidate Donald Trump."

Well at this stage of the election process the resignation of any staff for bad behavior is pretty much meaningless. The damage has already been done and can't be undone by November 8, 2016, election day.

Again, any readers to this article are encouraged to do their own research on this apparent attempt to sabotage the election process by the Democratic party.

George Will: Trump has a point about rigged elections

George Will: Trump has a point about rigged elections

Exceptionally perceptive summary by George Will concerning how the Democrats underhandedly work to "tilt" the election in their favor.
-------------------------------------

Since originally posted, I ran across Project Veritas that supposedly documents Democratic dirty tricks. Below are the links to the video.

Rigging the Election - Video I: Clinton Campaign and DNC Incite Violence at Trump Rallies.

Rigging the Election - Video II: Mass Voter Fraud

I'll leave it up to you to contemplate the truthfulness of the Project Veritas videos.

 Another relevant article has since surfaced.

Undercover video shows Democrats admitting they hire agitators for Trump events

The Washington Times writes: "Those supposedly spontaneous protesters disrupting events for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump actually may be professionals trained by operatives working with the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

A yearlong undercover investigation by the conservative group Project Veritas Action shows Democratic strategists discussing how they hire agitators — including union members, homeless people and the mentally ill — to incite violence by provoking Trump supporters on camera at campaign stops."

The Washington Times has issued an updated article:

Democratic heads roll after video shows agitators planted at Trump rallies

 According to the Times: "Two top Democratic strategists have exited the presidential campaign after explosive undercover videos showed them discussing voter fraud and their roles in planting paid agitators at campaign events for Republican candidate Donald Trump."

Well at this stage of the election process the resignation of any staff for bad behavior is pretty much meaningless. The damage has already been done and can't be undone by November 8, 2016, election day.

Again, any readers to this post are encouraged to do their own research on this apparent attempt to sabotage the election process by the Democratic party.
 -------------------------------------

Another update (10/31/2016). Evidently a Democratic operative has been feeding Hillary questions prior to her debates. Donna Brazile out at CNN after WikiLeaks reveals she leaked more debate questions to Clinton.  Seems that Hillary's unethical behavior is slowly being unmasked to the public.