Defending the Indefensible

I’m almost amused by the political dialogue — to use the term loosely — of the left these days but if one thing sums it up, it would be defending the indefensible.

They apply those talents to Obamacare. What is there to defend? It is a total mess even for doctors and healthcare professionals, and prices are going through the roof. But if anyone can defend that it would be Democrats or the liberal left. Calling that a success is sort of like calling the burnig of Rome a strategic victory.

It isn’t the only place they’ve applied their expertise.They defend Obama’s sham legacy, his leading from behind foreign policy. He doubled the national debt….. “winning!”

Finally, Trump has taken the opportunity to say he was left a big mess all over. That was a strange way of securing Obama’s legacy. Now that Trump elegantly points that out, shrieks come from thhe heckler section. Dare he say that? Mess is an understatement.

Remember Obama’s doctrine was “don’t do stupid shit!” Apparently they didn’t follow their own doctrine. Unless fertilized evil was their idea of smart?

The Democrat party is in a scorched-earth campaign to deny the effects of the last 8 years, and to defend the entire scandalous, evil hole called Obama’s legacy. But it was a pretty big giveaway how bad it is when their biggest claim was Obama had a scandal-free administration for eight years. And Valerie Jarrett echoed that across liberaldom.

Leading from behind and “don’t do stupid shit” being pillars of that tenure. If it looks like and quacks like a duck, guess what? It ain’t a pig. Besides, there isn’t enough lipstick to cover this mess. But who’s trying? How quick their perspective changed from a yellow brick road under a rainbow; to a black plague in every corner with red-alert problems everywhere, just as he leaves. They can complain about leadership now.

On one hand they’ll be defending, on the other they’ll be condemning everything, everywhere. Their hope and change turned to Mope and Complain.

RightRing | Bullright

Ying and Yang on Obama vs. Trump

At this point, all reporting by mainstream media must be questioned. There is no benefit of belief. Disbelief is the instinctive reaction for much of the public.

No wonder Trump took a pass on the WH Correspondents’ Dinner. Good move.

Just over a week ago McCabe told Reince Priebus that reporting on Russia was wrong. Remember they raised questions about Priebus even asking the FBI or Comey to help correct the record about the claims.

But James Comey and the FBI said they could not or would not do anything to correct those reports. And they said they would have no comment about it.

Here is a subsequent NYT report (Feb 23) on the details

WASHINGTON — White House chief of staff Reince Priebus asked a top FBI official to dispute media reports that President Donald Trump’s campaign advisers were frequently in touch with Russian intelligence agents during the election, a White House official said late Thursday.

The official said Priebus’ request came after the FBI told the White House it believed a New York Times report last week describing those contacts was not accurate. As of Thursday, the FBI had not stated that position publicly and there was no indication it planned to.

The New York Times reported that U.S. agencies had intercepted phone calls last year between Russian intelligence officials and members of Trump’s 2016 campaign team.

Priebus’ discussion with FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe sparked outrage among some Democrats, who said he was violating policies intended to limit communications between the law enforcement agency and the White House on pending investigations.

“The White House is simply not permitted to pressure the FBI to make public statements about a pending investigation of the president and his advisers,” said Michigan Rep. John Conyers, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. …/

The FBI would not say whether it had contacted the White House about the veracity of the Times report.

Forward to Trump’s accusations of Obama’s administration wiretapping the Trump Tower. The president suggests it, then they demand proof in unison. Yawn.

So they have no proof of collusion with Russia over hacking into emails, ostensibly to “influence our election.” But they go on talking about it as if it were so.

Then we have these reports on the surveillance and investigation of Trump over many months now. Yet as soon as Trump questions that it is dismissed as if there is nothing there. We know it was going on. There was an ongoing investigation, right?

For media, how can they complain that there is no wiretapping surveillance issue at the very time they don’t question the existence on the Russian claims. Now Clapper goes out to say there was no FISA warrant and no evidence of collusion, of Trump’s campaign, with the Russians. Why are we still investigating and taking the collusion as if it were established? Yet they decline to take seriously the wiretap, surveillance claims. Really?

As to Comey, he cannot correct media reports about the collusion claims. But as soon as wiretap claims were leveled, he demands DOJ correct them, then does it himself. His reason was to protect the integrity of the FBI. Again, really? He says he is “incredulous” at the accusation. Within weeks he does two completely opposite things.

Apparently he doesn’t care about the integrity of the presidency. I can’t imagine that going on under Obama. I suppose, in that case, the public would have a right to know. He did come out to make statements clearing Hillary. Now, we don’t have a reason to know that a presidential campaign or members of it were under surveillance. When is it illegal to speak to Russians or their diplomat anyway?

In NRO Andrew McCarthy states about wiretaps that:

A traditional wiretap requires evidence amounting to probable cause of commission of a crime. A FISA wiretap requires no showing of a crime, just evidence amounting to probable cause that the target of the wiretap is an agent of a foreign power. (A foreign power can be another country or a foreign terrorist organization.) Read more

All right, how would they investigate the Russian connections (or lack thereof) without some sort of surveillance? Couple that with a former CIA chief back in August endorsing Hillary Clinton. He used his intelligence credentials to brandish this op-ed claim:

“In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”

Coincidentally, that is the same definition used in a FISA court that a person is either a foreign power or agent of a foreign power.

He closed with this prescient note: “My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the C.I.A. This is what I am doing now.”

He lent his expertise and experience as the justification for saying this about Trump and endorsing Hillary. Using that word “agent” of Russian Federation is significant. When have you ever heard a candidate called that, with no proof? All based on his professional career, so he claimed. That was a few months before the supposed wiretap.

They use the bio: “Michael J. Morell was the acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2010 to 2013.”

The same Mike Morell equated the Russian hacking with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. And as Breitbart reported, he now works for Philip Reines, longtime Clinton aide and loyalist. Let’s also remember that Morell was involved in the writing of the Benghazi talking points.

The investigation report on Benghazi determined, in contradiction to Morell’s and Obama officials’ claims, “the talking points were “deliberately” edited to “protect the State Department” — whatever Morell claimed.

“These allegations accuse me of taking these actions for the political benefit of President Obama and then secretary of state Clinton. These allegations are false,” Morell said.

So the report directly contradicts what he said in testimony.

He recently told a reporter in December that:

“To me, and this is to me not an overstatement, this [Russia hacking] is the political equivalent of 9/11. It is huge and the fact that it hasn’t gotten more attention from the Obama administration, Congress, and the mainstream media, is just shocking to me.”

Then they also injected the story about a dossier of BS that threw in all kinds of claims. That made its way into presidential briefings, of Obama and Trump, claiming it involved blackmailable info. So they back fed an unsubstantiated report (political op-research) into intelligence, with the help of McCain dropping it on FBI’s doorstep. Then it was surfaced to the top of intelligence, into the PDB.

Think, the Obama administration had wiretapped (*correction: subpoenaed phone records) James Rosen and his family’s phones. So far, many officials have said there is nothing showing proof Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians. Yet nothing prevents Democrats and some in the media from saying that Russia hacked or interfered with the election, when there is no proof of either. Then insinuating that it is connected to Trump.

RightRing | Bullright

Wolves in the midst, Islamic cleric at Inaugural prayer service

One thousand chapters strong across America with 400 thousand members, ACT has been speaking out on the issues of Islamic Radicalism within our borders and beyond.

So it is only natural they had a curious eye on the inaugural events. Guess what they found at one of the services?

Radical Islamic Cleric Poisons Inaugural Prayer Service

(ACT)On January 21st, the noble occasion of Interfaith National Prayer Service at the Washington National cathedral was poisoned by the presence of a radical Islamic cleric named Mohamed Magid.

The attendance of Magid at this occasion to honor President Trump and Vice President Pence, clarifies with absolute precision, how close the tentacles of radical Islam can stretch towards those with the very task of eradicating them.

Magid serves as the executive director of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center and is the former executive director of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which according to declassified FBI memos, acted as a Muslim Brotherhood front group as early as 1987.

Magid has endorsed sharia governance, and the establishment of an Islamic caliphate. To advance his dream of a caliphate, Magid believes in incremental infiltration of both government, and the media.

A 1991 document from ISNA’s mothership, the Muslim Brotherhood, stated “its work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.”

The Muslim Brotherhood also considered Magid’s ISNA as “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”

Given these facts, a man as dangerous and radical as Magid should not be allowed anywhere near the President of the United States.

Magid, and many others like him, are crafty characters who understand that by attending this noteworthy event, they can now claim innocence from radical ties since they were seen attending an interfaith prayer service with the President of the United States.

This is why eradicating the stealth jihad is one of the most critical aspects of the war on terror. While combatting ISIS is paramount, we must open our eyes to the infiltration taking place within our own borders.

Always trying to innoculate themselves against the boilerplate of radical Islam. If they wanted to try so hard not to represent themselves as radicals, then why are they engaged in proliferation of radicalism, as radicals? Of course truth and honesty are also their enemies, so it figures they would try to represent their real cause as harmless.

My friend, Pepp, recently reminded me of a scripture I think also apples here.

1 Peter 5:8
“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.

I thought ACT explained Islamists’ rationale very well. Just being seen at events is an attempt to normalize the very type of people who mean us harm.

This is all part of the greater problem I have tried, very hard, to write about. That is they are opportunists, in the same form of other radicals in our country. And they seek to extort every opportunity they can find. It is what they do.

Boycotting America: the infertile resistance breeds

The week of hypocrisy and double standards, and here we go.

The hearings were one thing, emphasis on race and Russia – not necessarily in that order — but dialogue and media are another which got progressively worse, right on script.

We finished the week by having the self-anointed civil rights leader, John Lewis call Trump’s election and his presidency illegitimate. Anyone NOT see that coming? These people certainly are predictable, if nothing else.

“I don’t see this President-elect as a legitimate president,” Lewis told NBC News Friday. “I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected. And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.” – NBC

No, unfortunately, Lewis was not a lone voice. Predictable. He did it intentionally on Friday before MLK Day — which I guess is now ensconced as the day of hate.

Now you would think that Lewis making this statement would be like a bomb going off, and the shock of it from a sitting senior Congressman would outrage people. You would think immediately people would distance themselves from his remarks, en masse. The condemnation would be fierce. And you would think a media outcry would demand every single Democrat condemn his remarks or be condemned. Nope.

Actually, Michelle Obama kicked it off on Oprah saying “we’re feeling what not having hope feels like.” She was praised for saying we have no hope. They cheered her on.

One Democrat pundit said on Sunday, “this is the resistance; this is just what it looks like now.” Ah, “what it looks like now” is short for this is the way it’s going to be. No, it’s actually going to be worse. They know it and so do we. And then their shadow Obama government will be adding to the resistance.

What you would think should be a normal response, in their racist political correctness, now is reversed. Rather than blanket condemnation, the praises for John Lewis came from everywhere: media, Congress, the black community, the public. Hard to find anyone who does condemn his statements.

Remember Joe Wilson, the SOTUS “heckler”? He had the audacity to make a public disagreement with Obama. He got a good talking to from the Republican leadership. And Mitch McConnell, all he said was that job #1 was to make Obama a one-term president. Democrats turned that into a giant insult and classic racism. Justice Alito shook his head. People were called racists for asking questions about Obama’s birth certificate or records — since he really had no trail. Just questioning Obama was blatant racism.

So it was way more than Obama ever received, even before Trump takes office. Now resistance is celebrated. Calls for obstruction ring from every corner of the Left. Respect is out, Resistance is in.(lockstep of course) In fact, the Left even says, proudly, it is following the model that worked so well for Republicans. (choke, gag) Get that, they even blame us for their radical resistance. They blame Russia for the election results. And they blame Trump for the condition of America which preceded any thought of his to run. Now they are trying to even make us own Obamacare.

Well, the total fallout of John Lewis is wide agreement with him. In fact, 23 members of Congress are boycotting the inauguration. It’s the cool thing now to join the resistance. They will institutionalize it, celebrate it, take it into schools and claim it as righteous.

All this deception won’t work. The people have been awakened and are not going to take their eyes off this, We survived their decade of decadence and aren’t happy. Sorry, Dems, don’t even try to out anger us. It ain’t happening. The blame projection won’t work. But they have the towers of media carrying their water, and soon will have every one of their shadow operatives opposing Trump. Exactly the way they did in the general election. Almost as if the election never happened because, to them, it didn’t.

Protests are highly overrated. Respectful protests were fashionable toward Obama, disrespectful protests toward Trump are now in. When Tea Party protests were born, the IRS and media assailed “speaking truth to power” using their big-gov firehouses, under a black president. It was Democrats in the sixties who opposed Lewis and their ‘civil rights’ agenda. Now they blame Republicans but no one is supposed to know the truth.

Now their resistance stuff is all the rage. Resisting what? – doesn’t matter. On the IRS Tea Party scandal, blacks and Democrats stood on the side of big government fire hoses. They stood up and walked out. Eric Holder was in contempt and they stood up for him, who was standing up for Obama. But now they see illegitimacy as the cause de jure.

So the answer, my friend, ain’t blowing in the wind. No, their answer to nothing is to boycott Trump and whatever he does. Take that Mitch McConnell. He let them beat him up for eight years for a benign statement. Then people bent over backwards for Obama. Republicans stood there like deer in the headlights, as radicals ruled the White House and administration. That really worked?

The boycott of Trump takes full shape before the parade or swearing in. What will they do when he’s in office? I think we know. (whatever was not done to Obama) Can’t you smell what the boycott is cooking? It means de facto protesting America and what it stands for, the rule of law. So civil rights or justice are excuses, the real boycott is against America.

And happy MLK Day, for what that’s worth.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama Exits To Go Nowhere

So what do you call a Farewell Address when you don’t actually leave? Just asking.

No, it’s not a trick question.

Obama has said he is sticking around Washington and not going anywhere, and may be frequently speaking out. Yet he had the need to have a farewell address.

Do traitors make a farewell address now? Times, they are a changin’ I think. What if Benedict Arnold had got to make a farewell address. What would he would have said? Would it top Obama’s self-centered soliloquy? He even quoted a fictional character.

I’ve already heard now that Obama — the great orator he is was — is leaving, we won’t hear anything like this for a long time. I sure hope not, or ever hear BS piled that high.

His exit is just as radical as his two terms in office was. He’s not leaving, you morons out there drinking Obama juice. He’s ousted from the Oval Office — not gone.

Lay off the stuff… it will kill you if it doesn’t eat you from the inside first.

Not gone, not forgotten… just ____________ (there)

RightRing | Bullright

The man of No Hope n No Change reflects on his factor of “Me”

“The next phase and this is part of what I’m interested in doing, after I get out of the presidency, is to make sure that I’m working with that next generation so that they understand you can’t just rely on inspiration,” Obama said.

Washington Examiner

Taking “some responsibility” for the losses suffered by the Democratic Party during his eight years in the White House, President Obama suggested that his lack of presence on the campaign trail was a decisive factor.

I think it is high time. Obama clearly needs an intervention to stop him. Will he get one?

So “you can’t just rely on inspiration.” This guy makes me sick. Don’t tell that to all the drones who got you to the White House. Obama didn’t even have much inspiration either.

The real problem is Obama did show up… boy did he — in 2008-2016, everywhere.

Obama’s lease expired

Obama fashioned a new stump speech to campaign for Hillary in which he talks about himself. But he’s campaigning for Hillary, on his questionable approval ratings.

As the mantra goes, his “lease is up” and he is leaving the White house. Boo-hoo. Then he tells people that he is looking around to make sure he didn’t break anything so the Obama’s can get back their deposit.

Well, it is a little hard to compare the White House to the typical lease agreement many people have. But that is what he does. The terms cause the outrage.

It is not the deposit part that got me, it is the idea of him looking around to make sure he didn’t break something. What a metaphor to work with. Rich, “Break something?”

Let’s see what Obama broke. How about the Justice Department for starters? Then the IRS targeted political opponents. He politicized every department in government, even politicized the military. Politics is always in the air in DC, but he took it to new lows.

Nothing was beyond politicization to Obama. In fact, he acted as if that was the cure for everything, just what it needed. Sure, he complained about the politics. Yet he politicized the EPA, the borders, immigration. He expanded the Executive Order and process. He even politicized national security. He made “Global Warming” his ideological agenda. He substituted politics for dialogue. He lied to us about a terrorist attack.

He announced to our enemies what he will not do and downplayed their strategy and threats. He broke our government. Then he ran up the tab and stuck us with the bill. That’s what he did. Now he is making darn sure he didn’t break anything?

How about breaking our healthcare system? But he is not done, just out of time.

So Obama wants his deposit back. Well, we want our place back. But after what he has done, it’s hard to even recognize the place. It has depreciated rather than increased in value. Like Hillary, he used the office for his own personal benefit.

Now he is looking for his security but what about ours? He also broke the public trust and divided the country more than it’s been in modern times. The people want a change election and he is opposing that. We choose our tenant and leaders not him. He wants to get his deposit back and tell us who to lease to. Obama is only worried about his security.

RightRing | Bullright

ISIS and Democrats: apples to apples

Of all the comparisons I have, the one I come back to time and again is comparing Democrats to ISIS, or more directly to Islamic radical terrorists. It works. Some people would say that is a bit extreme. But I think it applies and not in a forced way.

Why? First of all, because radicalism is big part of their strategy. And because terrorizing to influence people is, by nature, their goal. Political objectives of both may be murky at times but it drives their strategy.

Radicalism is the central connection. When I think about the Democrats, and party in particular, the term that always comes up is radicals. Obama confirmed that. After the last 8 years, it is hard to deny Democrats are radical. It’s their M/O and in their DNA.

Now that leaked emails about the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary’s campaign came out, it only confirms what we knew by their own words. Democrats’ talk amongst themselves exposes their mindset.

This could be a very long post…but it’s not. Or as Rep. Ted Poe from Texas says:
… “and that’s just the way it is.

All radicals all the time — Clintonistas

Welcome to the truth inside the Hillary campaign. (video)

What about the protest at the Chicago Trump rally? Well, surprise. (which is no surprise)

It doesn’t matter about legal… or ethics, we need to win this M-Fer.

We knew they were behind all this radicalism, but it is what they do.

Ever heard of Democracy Partners? Oh, the dark Hillary campaign that no media dares report on. Alive and thriving via Hillary’s campaign.

Sometimes the crazies bite…. sometimes they don’t. Portraying people as psychotic…. all sinister dark creatures of Hillary’s campaign.

“We want it coming from the people, not the Party.”

“We’re starting anarchy here.”

War on Christians is real… coming to your neighborhood

Hillary Clinton is a threat to religious liberty

By Marc A. Thiessen — Washington Post

Speaking to the 2015 Women in the World Summit, Clinton declared that “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Religious beliefs have to be changed? This is perhaps the most radical statement against religious liberty ever uttered by someone seeking the presidency. It is also deeply revealing. Clinton believes that, as president, it is her job not to respect the views of religious conservatives but to force them to change their beliefs and bend to her radical agenda favoring taxpayer-funded abortion on demand.

This is the context in which we must read a recently released trove of emails — which, according to WikiLeaks, come from the accounts of Clinton staff — showing the rampant anti-Catholic bigotry that permeates Clinton World.

In a 2012 email that WikiLeaks says was sent to John Podesta, now chairman of the Clinton campaign, Voices for Progress president Sandy Newman writes that “there needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic church” and proposed that the Clinton team “plant the seeds of the revolution” to change Catholic teaching. Podesta replies, “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this . . . Likewise Catholics United.” He adds, “I’ll discuss with Tara. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend is the other person to consult.”

So members of the Clinton’s inner circle created front groups to foment a “Catholic Spring” — because, as their dear leader had announced, “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.” […/]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-is-a-threat-to-religious-liberty/2016/10/13/878cdc36-9150-11e6-a6a3-d50061aa9fae_story.html/

Yes, folks, the war on Christians and there faith is on but hardly new. Podesta seemed to validate that, they are working within the RCC to change their views.

Of course we knew that. So ending up with Pople Francis, then the press touting his liberal views, is right on schedule. We’re well aware of that. When have the press and media been absolutely giddy about a Pope?

It’s Just what the doctor ordered, if you are in the Posesta or Hillary camp.

Couple that with a past statement of Chuck Schumer during a confirmation hearing about people with “deeply held beliefs” — i.e. religious beliefs. (can you say dog whistle?)

Catholic League — in 2003

At the hearing on his nomination held by the Senate Judiciary Committee in June, [nominee William Pryor] was sharply questioned, notably by New York Democratic Senator Charles E. Schumer, about whether his “deeply held beliefs” would not prevent him from impartially upholding the laws. The word “Catholic” was never mentioned, just his “deeply held beliefs.” But the implication in all this questioning was strong and clear that any Catholic who took seriously the teachings of the Catholic Church would necessarily have to be pro-life, against so-called “gay marriage,” and so on; and thus in the opinion of these hostile senators would be unable to uphold the law as they expect to see it upheld, i.e., by affirming such court-imposed jurisprudence as legalized abortion.

And that was despite Pryor giving a defense for his positions based on the law.

Yet it is those recent bold admissions that should light your hair on fire about where the front is in the war on Christians. The boldness that Hillary declares it is just as insulting.

Townhall.com reports

Last week, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that pro-life pregnancy centers are required to promote abortion, meaning, that if a pregnant woman comes to them not knowing what to do about her pregnancy, along with counseling her about adoption or keeping her own baby, they must also refer her to a local abortion clinic. /…

What an absolute outrage, and what an infringement on religious liberties, since these pro-life centers, which are invariably run by conservative Christians, are being forced to violate their sacredly held beliefs.

Hillary Clinton supports legislation like this, and she would absolutely appoint Supreme Court justices who would support this as well.

While not new, it is the culmination of years of work. But of course the thought of any such war on Christians, and their beliefs, is roundly ridiculed from their secularist silos.

Poo-pooed as ‘crazy talk’ and we’re crazy.

That is nothing but just another baseless denial. … coming to a ‘spring’ near you.

Guy is right, Obama finds him insulting

One man speaking out on Democrat plantation politics.

They or Hillary “put us in a basket,” he says. Yep, they put everyone in a basket, and that’s where we are all supposed to stay. (or else…)

Obama says it is a personal insult to him if the blacks don’t line up to vote for Hillary. Bell finds Obama disrespectful. Well, that’s what critical listening (thinking) will do.

Someone calls it like it is. The guy is A.D. Bell and I don’t think we heard the last of him.

And Hillary doesn’t mind calling us all deplorable — who’s quibbling on the number? We’re irredeemable, she claims. Somehow it makes me proud to be “irredeemable” in her eyes — as opposed to a lockstep conformist.

Hillary can’t hide from the truth

Hillary is like the first female ambassador of ISIS. She aided in creating ISIS. Now she claims they are rooting for Trump to win. Why would they do that, when no one did more for their efforts than Obama and Hillary?

Counter Jihad

The result was that the western part of Iraq once again became fertile ground for an Islamist insurgency. ISIS swept western Iraq because of the failures of Hillary Clinton and her boss, President Barack Obama.

But that is only half the story. ISIS also exists in Syria. How is it that the United States allowed it to survive there? Lee Smith, at Tablet magazine, points out that letting Syria fester was the intentional policy of the Obama administration — in order to cosy up to Iran.

Audacity: Clinton Claims ISIS ‘Praying to Allah’ to Elect Trump

Probably the scariest part is that she falls for propaganda and apparently gave up critical thinking some years ago. Now she says trust her to protect America’s interests.

For someone who will not say ISIS terrorists are Muslim or Islamic, she claims they are praying to Allah over Trump. I bet they are secretly hoping for Hillary — in their Islamic way — who’s been very, very good for them.

Conclusion: Hillary needs to be put out to permanent pasture with her hubby, Bubba and fenced off from public service, ever.

Polls, Hillary, and Goldman Sachs

Polls are up in Trump’s favor, email problems plague Hillary, she has endless coughing fits, she’s hoarse, she leaves her campaign for extended periods, she has a record she can’t run or hide from, she can’t be trusted, she lies, she doesn’t have press conferences and she’s obsessed with Donald Trumps taxes. Which one of those does not fit in the picture?

Hillary’s real 3am phone call came in 2013. Probably a conference call with Goldman Sachs, hedgefunders and George Soros on the red line…. offering her 225 thousand dollars for a speech. She took the call, set up the speech — mission accomplished.

The call from Benghazi and Chris Stevens, not so much. Maybe that line was busy?

Newsflash: now Goldman Sachs forbids its top 1% of employees from donating “to “any federal candidate who is a sitting state or local official,” which also applies to donating to Trump — or “governor running for president or vice president, such as the Trump/Pence ticket.” (those speeches must have been worth it)

But now I wonder what their policy is on paid speeches?

Aside from the politics of it all, I smell a big First Amendment case here.

Cooked Books on ISIS and beyond

Yet another symptom of the national disease rears its ugly head.

Scathing House Intel Report on ISIS Fuels Trump’s Attack

Foreign Policy Magazine
A new report showing the Pentagon exaggerated its battlefield successes gives the GOP nominee fresh ammunition in the political fight over the terror group’s rise.

A new congressional investigation has concluded that senior military officials presented an overly positive spin on the progress of the U.S. fight against the Islamic State, but its initial findings stopped short of explicitly charging the Obama administration with cooking the books.

The White House shouldn’t break out the champagne: The findings could still be a lose-lose proposition for both the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton just as Donald Trump appeared to be on the ropes amid plunging poll numbers and sharp attacks from members of his own party. […./]

Read more

Funny how media always stops short of accusing Obama or Hillary of cooking the books. Where else does the direction come from? Well, FBI Dir Comey stopped short of saying Hillary should be prosecuted. However, Hillary and Obama are the two people most in need of prosecution in America. But that has been turned into a taboo.

A new area of investigation of Hillary’s Clinton Fundation corruption popped up and what happened? Loretta Lynch said it was more political so a case is not warranted. But the media can come out afterward to (1)clean up the news damage and (2)to say they did cover and talk about it, to say there was not much there. See that is the racket: no one can say MSM actually buried it, they just buried the truth about it.

The next step is Hillary and Bill will try to claim that DoJ’s failure to open the investigation was a validation that they did nothing wrong. (they’ve played that game for years) Who else could use a taxpayer-funded investigation failure as a political victory? Can you say Clintons? Look how much time and money these two cretins cost taxpayers.

Now we have the confirmation of cooking the books with false intelligence on ISIS progress. Nothing to see there for media. Except when the US uses phony intelligence to make policy it is very dangerous. Trump’s statement about Obama and Hillary being honorary founders of ISIS is a serious, egregious charge. Cooking our intelligence, because the C-in-C does not want bad news about ISIS, is no big problem to media. Imagine a Republican doing that? It must go to the President because he is in charge. We knew this was going on but when confirmation comes out it gets whisked away, like ISIS, as if it didn’t exist.

What scares many people is we know how important intelligence is. To have that cooked is akin to aiding and abetting the enemy.It puts our nation and military at risk because our policy and strategy is based on that intelligence. A foreign agent would like to taint our intelligence to compromise our mission. What is Obama doing then?

Obama vacations in style at Martha’s Vineyard preparing for his exit with faulty intelligence at his fingertips, which could jeopardize our country and future missions. He’s the Margaretta Commander in Chief. We even have an enemy he cannot name.

Accountability means nothing to Obama or the perfumed heiress Hillary. So he’s with her, she’s with him, Dems are with her and we are screwed. Where do they get off calling Trump a risk? Where are military, CIA, national security spokesmen who politically attacked Trump as unqualified? …It makes me sick.

RightRing | Bullright

Hillary’s long train of abuses

Newsflash:
Lines were blurred between Clinton Fundation and the State Department.

What lines? Was that like a laser line or something?

Clinton’s campaign response: “The idea that this was a conflict of interest is absurd.”

Oh, that fixes it. But what they really care about was Trump calling Obama and Hillary founders of ISIS. That’s serious stuff. Pay to play, not so much.

Or like David Gergen said defending it, that’s just the way politics works.

Those blurred lines will get you every time. Sneaky little things those lines.

Standing truth on its head for Hillary

Former CIA Dir Mike Morell put out a scathing op-ed declaring Trump is turned an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.

That happens at the same time Media and Dems (as if there were a difference) are hell bent in collaboration to demonize Trump. The intentional lying and muddying campaign continue from Hillary. That is Hillary muddying her own record and actions because she cannot explain her record of lies. Then there’s her smear campaign on Trump by any means possible, Morell being the latest attempt.

Yet it continues against Trump. Its a scary thing when the DNC media, and all the establishment and their lackeys team up on one person. Had to know it was coming but to this level I’ve never seen before. There’s a genuine, massive conspiracy for you.

Morell could have just endorsed Hillary, but he wanted to harpoon him. That’s what he should have done. But he had to try to turn him into a Russian agent.

“On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure she is elected as our 45th president,” Morell wrote.

Isn’t that wonderful? Obviously he already is doing everything he can do, including label Trump a Russian agent. Actually, it only makes me wonder more about Hillary and Morell.

But there must be something really wrong with his eyesight.

“Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.”

“My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the CIA. This is what I am doing now. Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.”

Okay, add to that the recent statements from Obama in his official press conference. He labels Trump unfit and a risk to national security or to be trusted. What hogwash. Obama has been the greatest threat America has had. He’s done more damage than anyone too.

Now here is the problem, if there was anything in question about Trump, he shouldn’t have been putting it out that way. I doubt op-eds are the prescribed method or procedure.

It does open the can of worms though. Obama was caught on a national stage being a dupe to Putin’s henchman telling him that he would have more flexibility after his election. Where was Morell on that? Where was Morell over the past eight years as Obama compromised our security? Oh, sorry, he helped push the phony video narrative on Benghazi, which the rest of us call Lying. What about Muslim Brotherhood ties?

Now he is warning us about a threat when we’ve been living with this growing threat from within for eight years. But you can always count on Leftists to stand truth on its head. Its a natural thing to progressives.

Remember it was Obama who laughed and mocked the Russian threat. He also minimized the threat of Iran too.

“And the 1980’s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back — because the Cold War has been over for 20 years.”

But it is Obama’s failed leadership and foreign policy from Clinton through, that caused the current crisis. He more less put his stamp of approval on ISIS. He set the stage for Libya’s failed state. He encouraged mass illegal invasion on our border. Now he is engaged in bringing Syrian (and who knows from where) refugees into our country and spreading them across the states. Then sanctuary cities. Trump complains and is called an agent?

The leaked DNC memos caused a reaction from Dems. Then Trump made a simple comment about her missing emails. See how quick they jumped on Trump saying he was inviting Russia to hack? (like they need our invitation) Then they said Russia was trying to influence our elections. But when they start to put stories in media about Trump being an unwitting agent, it is they who are trying to influence the election with scare tactics, undermining our election with Russia’s help. That a former CIA director is doing it is way beyond the pale. But then there are no limits.

I used to just see the hypocrisy on a massive scale. Yes but I didn’t realize how intentional it was. It’s not that the Left doesn’t care about being hypocritical, and they don’t. It is that they have so many reasons they need to be hypocritical for their agenda. It’s part of the job. To that end, Mike Morell gladly cooperates in this charade illusion.

Of course the ones we have to watch out for are Hillary and Obama commies, with all the related DC allies, cohorts and operatives. But they don’t want us looking at them. And media doesn’t want to talk about that.

RightRing | Bullright

Crooked pols and cooked polls

Cooked books and cooked polls, is there anything the left is not willing to do in pursuit of their agenda? No but it was rhetorical. Cooked numbers, cooked jobs reports, cooked economic data and information fed to media. Then there are the fact checkers trotted out to continue bolster their case on issues from Global Warming agenda to fracking and the war on coal or energy. Throw on top their cooked up speeches pandering to the greens, socialists, progressives. It all gives us a toxic soup of headlines, opinion and polls.

Media does their part. I have never seen the kind of bias agenda driven news as over the last months. Is it so hard to believe with all these weights on the scale that polls are reflecting their phony reality? Then media touts them as Hillary’s wide success. Well, with all that help it would be hard to believe she didn’t have some upswing. If, for instance, with all their effort Hillary’s numbers did not budge, then that would be hard to believe.

Probably among my worst observations of the effects of all this spin and manipulation comes from listening to random people. I hear the back-fed talking points of media coming from the mouths of regular Americans. And almost word for word I hear the views of the media and political elite regurgitated.

Last week there was a letter from a bunch of Democrats sent to Paul Ryan demanding he withdraw all support from Trump. This week, people are sending a letter to John McCain insisiting he withdraw all support from Trump. Folks, have you ever seen anything like this on this level? I urge people pull their support from Hillary, considering her record.Duh.

Maybe all this effort will have a reversed effect to consolidate support for Trump rather than erode it? I can’t be sure. But when a large percentage of people in this country are smeared, branded, marginalized and mocked, who knows what the results could be?

Now the latest offensive is Barack Obama’s rise in approval ratings. No one explains why his poll numbers should be up. But then because his approval numbers are up, that is supposed to be a glowing positive push for Hillary. Just because it is built on fabrication doesn’t make a great case for her foundation of lies.

Here’s another random observation. When have we heard this much official consternation about a President and access to the military codes and arsenal? I don’t ever remember it. All this is fear mongering about nukes in the hands of Trump. What about the likelihood of Iran or others getting nukes in the hands of Terrorists? Not so much.

Obama made his comments now, following Hillary’s, suggesting doubt Obama can be trusted with nuclear codes and repeating his distrust a day later. Now he is asked whether Trump can be trusted with the Nuclear weapons? He says people should really think about it. Hyperbole. However, we cannot trust Obama with an Executive Pen.

But then much of this election is not standard fare. Maybe that is because Trump is not a standard candidate and maybe it is because of the threat Trump really poses to the establishment status quo? You decide. But we are so far out of the universe of what is standard with the way everyone treats Trump. Hillary is the poster child for the establishment political elite — unfortunately, even for the estabo’s status quo.

RightRing | Bullright

Beating Hillary is Job Numero Uno

Defeating Hillary is the first priority now in everything because nothing else will be likely without doing that first. Its a very simple script.

No, that is not over simplification and not a duh moment. But the forces that be in resistance are just as unwavering, or more so. Their motives should be self-evident.

Take a snap shot of the current landscape.

DNC in turmoil — shakeup continues When was the last time a party chair had to resign literally on the exe of their convention?

Liberals have a gaint fracture over Hillary.

Breaking leaks and mass replacements in the DNC, in the height of an election, with more bad news coming. Corruption reigns on the Left.

Obama trying his damnedest to run interference, campaign for Hillary’s anointing. Even if he has to put his own international policy on pause to lauch a cruise missile at Trump. He declared Obama unfit behind the Presidential Seal. That from this Executive Pen President with his record?

The pay for Iranian hostages is verified. That’s a giant I told you so from America, and more proof of the failed deal and embedded corruption. Remember they claimed hostages could not be made part of the Deal.

Hillary not quite through with investigations. It turns out there is no proof of her taking the required courses for handling information. And there is no verification of her aides taking them either. The relative questions of that, with her campaign, are enormous.

Hillary comes out to publicly lie again in an interview with seeming impunity. But the media is preoccupied — by design.

Clinton has so much establishment pay-to-play baggage and scandal in her closet that they had to install a compacter. It’s so toxic no one wants to go near it. Stories of Democrat unification are grossly exaggerated. But who cares about that?

Now I mention all this to say, with all that going on, the biggest question was Trump’s comment on a Gold Star mother curiously quiet as her husband launched a full-blown personal and political attack on Trump at DNC’s convention. .

If all that does not tell the tale, then all you have to do is turn to the media. (pick whatever source you want.) All guns and microphones on deck, aimed at Trump.

But reports are only that the GOP is so divided; stricken by total disunity. That narrative started before the convention and hasn’t tamped down. Now there are media stories that key people in the Trump campaign are totally frustrated. “Turmoil within” as CNN reports it. Then there are stories they are trying to do an intervention with Trump. Come on. What we need is an intervention in Washington and nothing short of that will stop the addiction.

Do you see any questions asked of Hillary on her campaign or her problems and the DNC, or its great divide? Nope, all is good over there — wink wink.

After the RNC convention, Hillary compared it to the Wizard Of Oz. I would compare the DNC convention to Fantasy Island, where everything plays out according to a pre-written fantasy. A script and all star cast it had. That doesn’t make it more believable. But for the moment, at least, just accept it for reality. Never mind the consequences of it all.

Hillary has to go or the show never ends.

RightRing | Bullright

Mixed messages at DNC smearing bitter America

Now wait a minute, Obama, you’re always talking about “that’s not the America that I know.” Then there is always the “that’s not who we are” criticism.

Well if we, a large percentage of America, are not the “America that [he] knows” then I wonder what America Obama knows? I don’t think I’d recognize it. I don’t recognize the America he keeps talking about, foisting on us, and pointing to — or his faux reality.

Obama’s DNC speech aimed at Republicans painting his dim picture of us.

But what we heard in Cleveland last week wasn’t particularly Republican – and it sure wasn’t conservative. What we heard was a deeply pessimistic vision of a country where we turn against each other, and turn away from the rest of the world. There were no serious solutions to pressing problems – just the fanning of resentment, and blame, and anger, and hate.

And that is not the America I know.

So America, you’ve been broadsided again by Obama and labeled haters.

A week ago, at his White House Summit on Global Development, Obama claimed that America has never been more respected and the world never been more tolerant than now. Anything other than that is a figment of our flawed perception.

CNS News Summit on Global Development

And all of this creates legitimate fears and anxieties that have to be addressed, and at least a feeling, a perception that people don’t have full control over a rapidly changing world. So it is worth reminding ourselves of how lucky we are to be living in the most peaceful, most prosperous, most progressive era in human history.

Once againn, we have a perception problem. We are in the middle of a peace surge. Enjoy. Travel at your own risk. He said that is hard to absorb. I guess it is for us dummies who, you know, don’t have the right perspective. The problems always seems to come down to our flawed perspective. If we could only fix that?

Like we were told the border has never been more secure and our perspective was the problem. You have to wonder if he’d be saying that if he wasn’t in office? His perspective would be much different. We know the way he campaigned against Bush.

Here’s more from his Global Development speech:

Now, that’s hard to absorb if we’re watching the newscasts every night, because there’s heartbreak and terrible things taking place at any given moment across the globe. But it’s important for us to remember, not so that we become complacent but so that we understand that good works can make a difference. Think about it. It has been decades since a war between major powers. More people live in democracies. More people are linked by technology.

And sometimes when I’m talking to young interns at the White House who are still immunizing themselves from the cynicism that’s so chronic in this town–I remind them, if you had to choose a moment in history to be born, and you didn’t know ahead of time who you were going to be, you’d choose now. Because the world has never been less violent, healthier, better educated, more tolerant, with more opportunity for more people, and more connected than it is today….

Well look, American dummies, we haven’t had a nuclear bomb go off anywhere. Okay, so anything short of war of major powers and losing democracies is a good thing. Be happy, people. Though Islamists have waged war against the civilized world, and it is spreading even through these democracies. But fear not, our perception is the real problem. Like Neville Chamerlain, never mind what you see, ignore that because we have “peace in our time.” It tells us something about the America Obama knows, like us always blowing things out of proper perspective. When America disagrees with him, we just don’t get it. We’re dumb and ignorant. That must be the America Obama knows that he is talking about.

He never misses an opportunity to criticize or lecture us. Sorry, Obama, but the America we know is not dependent on your perspective adjustment. We get it.

Obama mocked that we don’t have a single ruler or dictator. Wow, look in mirror. We have a perpetual ruling class elite– that are above the law — who must be kept in power to keep us from hurting ourselves with our flawed perception and all.

Then he went on at the DNC to try to identify with the problems we are facing. Talk about a conflicted message, less than a week later.

There are pockets of America that never recovered from factory closures; men who took pride in hard work and providing for their families who now feel forgotten; parents who wonder whether their kids will have the same opportunities we had.

All that is real. We’re challenged to do better; to be better. But as I’ve traveled this country, through all fifty states; as I’ve rejoiced with you and mourned with you, what I’ve also seen, more than anything, is what is right with America.

“Pockets,” is that what we are? Then he tries to validate our concerns saying “all that is real.” I don’t need him to validate it. Then he asserts what we need to do is continue the status quo by making sure Hillary gets elected, to continue this legacy of malaise.

Bill called Hillary a great change agent, and Obama talked about Hillary continuing his legacy. Then he talks about “not the America I know.” Well, talk about conflicted.

Keep this legacy of failure going. Keep the same people in power that have not done anything to fix the problems for 8 years. The most divisive duo in politics.

Talk about fear: there is so much fear mongering and demagoguery about Trump you can’t miss it. For people who claim to want change, they are awful fearful of those bringing it or anyone who represents it. No, the status quo establishment must rule.

Obama seems to have a lot of problems with this America he knows so well.

RightRing | Bullright