Extortion of Process

Let me explain just one part of how the Democrats plan to use the impeachment process to serve their political ends. You know the masters of scamming the process.

It goes like this, as described by one Democrat Senator to CNN: first the Democrats put on their case. Then president’s team puts on the president’s defense.

But unlike in a regular trial, there is no opportunity for the House Managers’ rebuttal to Trump’s defense. What to do? Then the questions period closes out the process.

So — this is the great part — according to the Senator, Democrat Senators will use their super nifty questions period that follows to do that partisan rebuttal work against Trump. What part of this process is not politicized, hedged and schemed by Democrats?

And you know what that will look like. All the activist Democrats, House Managers and Senators, will operate at peak collective strength, using their corrupted and highly partisan process for maximum political benefit. All hands on the coup deck.

Yet all the while they chant the words “Trump is cheating in the next election.” You cannot even trust the results of the 2020 election with Trump in it. Wow, now they’re already undermining the next election 9 months ahead of it. Only to save quid-pro-quo Joe.

Our elections are very frail if just the inclusion of Donald Trump can destroy them.

After all they don’t care about the amount of damage they do to the country. not at all. The only thing that matters is their political objectives. Come hell or high water….and it will.

Right Ring | Bullright

The America Gets It Dems Don’t – Debate

While the whole world is not watching, Democrats continue to debate themselves over the finer points of buying votes. In this greater theme, it was more like a steel cage match of Socialism vs. Communism. So far it usually seems to end in a draw.

Some people may say “you seen one Democrat debate you seen them all.” I sort of disagree because they are always trying to up their ante with the public. These candidates are the vacuum cleaner salesmen of the 50’s, trying anything they can to get your attention, to sell you a product you probably don’t want and can’t afford.

All framed under the rubric of everyone needs it. Just pick your preferred delivery means to get it. Sorry, no other options are available now. But a full compliment of accessories for their machine is being planned and built. And can Democrat candidates accessorize?

I have a new name for Democrats: the “we’re all socialists now” party. We can dispense with all that nonsense from over the years that they are not socialists and do not endorse socialism. At least now they are transparent about what they are.

It’s only a question of Marxist socialism or unabashed communism. They know it is considered forbidden fruit but it is so appealing to them. The gentle nudge tactic has given way to what amount of force is necessary to bring it all about? They are open on that question though have decided that the quicker the better. Like global warming, the time for debate is over — that is if there ever was one.

Of course, within this series of debates, it always comes back to how to pay for all these votes — I mean things. To that end, there is one dominant answer lurking: we just need to take a little more. Then they rattle off a list of top targets they plan on taking it from, for starters. But eventually it will come from everyone else, too. Only they need you to think there is some magical mine from which they will harvest all this necessary money.

By the way, it’s time government takes over the manufacturing of drugs as well.

So these salespeople of socialism will be back knocking on your door, again and again, with a can of dirt in one hand and a collection cup in the other, telling you “we just need to take a little bit more and then we’ll be good. Promise!” But you’ll love all the attachments.

Right Ring | Bullright

Wicked this way comes

If Nancy Peloci uses Unconstitutional means to try to remove a president from office, then that is the same as the coup they have run for 3 years. It is not legal or legitimate.

That brings us right to treason, no matter how glamorous one tries to dress it up.

So just the fact that she tried to step in to further contaminate it by attempting to gain control over the Senate proces, is only more icing on the Unconstitutional cake.

And frankly, Madame Speaker, I’m sick of it! She obviously cares nothing about the Constitution and even less for the people of this country and our election process.

Right Ring | Bullright

Coming To Terms

I am trying to come to terms with some terms.

Actionable intelligence — what does that mean to Dems? We may never know.

Imagine not killing a terrorist because you may get attacked with terrorism.

That’s all, just trying to come to grips with those concepts.

I’m serious.

BTW: and would someone ask NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio what that pizza would cost if Democrat Socialists came to power? I bet 30 bucks would look like a steal.

Right Ring | Bullright

Intelligence Flip Flops

Trump was blamed for 3 years for not listening to intelligence. Now he responds to a real threat based on actionable intelligence and the Left goes berserk. In fact CNN’s byline now is question our intelligence first. Qassem Soleimani was killed in a Reaper Drone strike.

Indeed, all Democrats say they want to see the evidence and intelligence the president used in making the decision. They also dismissed killing Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

It turns out that there are suddenly a lot of arguments that can be made for not following our intelligence. Shall we say for NOT acting in real time to take out a major terrorist actor in the midst of rolling out attacks against the US.

Who thought that was possible?

It turns out there is so much to question about intelligence, much less what to do with it. I only wish everyone had the same interest in protecting US interests and in our national security. Wouldn’t that be nice? But they don’t; and let’s not deceive ourselves.

Our basic argument against Obama on Benghazi is that he didn’t do anything. In fact he did the opposite. He stood down any response to the attack. He should have had to explain it but he never did. Actually the whole thing was a cover up and lies by Susan Rice.

Incidentally, in the aftermath of the Qassem Soleimani strike, who was the top analyst CNN brought on to talk about it? Susan Rice. In a rational world of media coverage that would be irrational. And it would have no credibility.

Whom did CNN bring on next to talk about retaliation threats from Iran against the US? That would be FBI’s discredited former General Counsel, James Baker and Dep Director Andrew McCabe. Later, James Clapper rounded out their coverage of the experts.

Democrats are blinded by politics and their hatred for Trump. Those same people who never answered for the failures in Benghazi. Never mind that attacking our embassy is an act of war. They can ignore that.

How long till the left throws intelligence under the bus? But what a shame that Benghazi didn’t even merit a whisper campaign. That denial went on for years — same people.

Right Ring | Bullright

Personal Value VS. What Culture Says

I might try to explain a little about me and hopefully make some principled point along the way. Even if it seems consistently dull, there is a good reason for it.

Some people may wonder why I occasionally put up music on a pretty partisan political blog? The answer is a little complicated. But I confess both are personal interests.

No, besides interests, I also like to use music sometimes to make a political point. I confess to doing this. I know it doesn’t always go with the point very well. I prefer to think of it as punctuation like a period or exclamation point at the end of a good sentence.

This doesn’t mean the music goes exactly with the text. It is an aid. But it can accentuate the text. Some people would like to marry politics and music. That repulses me. However, there are times music can make a political point, if there is some deeper meaning to it. So I normally frown on conjoining the two.

The other issue is music and politics are both a part of our culture. I am not a creature of popular culture and do try, except for basic traditions, to avoid being sucked into the cesspool of popular culture. Some people prefer to swim in it or dive into it as a rule.

But I admit to succumbing to music, lots of kinds, even if it is seen as popular culture. That’s because I see it as an art-form or expression – not for cultural exploitation.

For example, you could be surprised how anti-culture I am. I still do not have a cell or mobile phone, which causes me problems anymore. I still use a PC computer instead of a laptop or a mobile device. In fact, normally I am among the last to join any trend, say on doing certain things. All of those may cause more problems than it avoids today.

I don’t particularly wear my politics on my sleeves or talk about them much in public. There are exceptions. I stay out of popular culture battles except where the social, political and principled points are on the line. I admit that can be frequent. So I am a bit of a counter-cultural warrior.

I believe in living out one’s faith as best he or she can against a tide of social and cultural woes or norms that make it unpleasant. And I will not let inconvenience or blowback for it deter my path. Actually that is society’s way of influencing one’s beliefs using popular criticism, culture, or political correctness.

With all those things, you can assume in many areas that is swimming against the tide today. But it should be a healthy swim rather than a reluctant, tiring one — else they are winning. ‘They’ meaning the left and their popular conceptions of current culture. I accept that, if objectively weighed, they do appear to be winning the battle in the short run, just as fake news seems to daily .

It is the closer look at things I am more concerned with. I hate the idea that knee-jerk reactions determine narratives or even events. I believe people should be, and generally are, smarter than that. And doing so is to fall into a trap.

I think and expect the right – whether it is a political side or moral principle – will eventually win. I think it is our job to pursue that right. So I believe a valiant effort is necessary in trying to achieve it. I think that effort also has a value.

I believe that the Declaration of Independence says eventually our battle is necessary to correct the current politics and an out of control system itself. Immediate correction cannot be practically expected. It did not happen overnight. It will take energy and effort to correct it, even if that is only a goal. It is still a noble one.

So I may be guilty of delving into the culture of music. But it is not cultural to me. There are still lessons to be learned by exploring it without falling prey to popular culture. I have seen one concert in my life. I am not a Grateful Dead, or any, groupie.

I am also not a movie buff. I haven’t seen many classics. I never had time to watch them. I appreciate comedies though also see those more as an art-form and not of popular culture.

Now those could all make me a boring person by some standards. Maybe it seems boring but makes a statement. I like to try to read intent or purpose into something as much as possible. Practicality can be a virtue.

Enough right there to put me at odds with most popular ideas today. Yet it is my retreat and sanctuary. I believe it has far greater value, at least to me, than following popular trends. But I do write about those trends to critique them. I find them funny and of little lasting value. Some are curious.

I believe one has to find and seize a (greater) value from not conforming to trends. Politics also appears littered with popular trends today. For instance, socialism uses popular trends like a tool to manipulate the mob. That makes it dangerous.

All this is why I detest mob mentality and rule so much. Our founders understood the threat in that. Does this often make me a loser, or at least seem like one? Yes. I would rather be considered a loser by others if a winner is being part of a socialist mob club.

And for these personal reasons, I believe that is what makes conservatives such a target because they have strong independent beliefs. But there is a great untapped power in the consensus of conservatives. We should all work harder to that end by joining our efforts.

Right Ring | Bullright

I’m not crazy, just following the rules

I sort of wonder what is going on and what is next on the list today, since everything is now politicized anyway? It’s interesting to see what stuff Leftists come up with and how fast.

I think I’d like to play the game the way the Left does. Every time they do something I don’t like, we tell them the ocean just rose another 1/4 inch because of it. And yes, we did not yet switch to the metric system and we are still getting by. Thank goodness.

So every time they do something I don’t like, wham, tell them they just shortened their own life expectancy. They are costing the planet a few months. Can we keep that up?

Trump announced the government will no longer continue an agenda against light bulbs. You can buy the light bulbs you want. Well that should be a problem for Leftists. I wonder what fear they will hold over us for that? That just shaved 50 years off the life of earth.

What will Trump think up or do next? No wonder he is dangerous. He makes the Left think up all these crazy new threats based on what he does. So maybe they will tax thoughts next? Stop people from creating new ideas and thereby extend the life of the planet.

And to protest that new tax, I have an idea. They say solar flares are our next big problem. We should fight fire with fire. We build a machine that shoots flames at the flares to burn them up before they can harm anything. We’ll need fuel for it. How about we use those same self-sacrificing leftists for the fuel? That way we cure two problems at the same time. They do say they don’t want to live in a world with all this new innovation and its freedom going on. We’re ruining the planet. Anyway, I see more than enough fuel for the job.

Well, it’s either that or we just scare them to death with what we are going to do next. It doesn’t seem to take much. How else could I assist them in solving problems?

That reminds me, the twitterverse has been shrieking for a week over Trump’s comments about flushing WH toilets too much. Who knew conserving water was a problem to the left? Only when Trump tries it. Then he is like some crazy uncle saying “stop flushing the toilets all the time.” They’d rather see him as nuts than making sense… whatever that takes.

Right Ring | Bullright

Last Word Against Impeachment

The speech not given. A parting shot.

Madam Speaker, I rise at this time to voice my opposition to this impeachment sham.

Irony is all around this sham. It is a dark irony.

I find great irony in the fact that the same body with the power to declare war was also given the power to impeach a sitting president, among its other solemn duties.

What if they use all those other powers designated to Congress the same way they are using this power to impeach? Rush to impeach. Fundraisers, storm the gates of the capitol. Impeachment rallies. “Impeach the MF-er!” What if the same hyper-partisanship was used in a rabid rush to war? Even for Democrats, this a new low.

Future voters, preserve our democracy, voting for children and posterity are their talking points. Nothing is further from the truth.

Do they tell their children in future generations that this was the day they stood up to overturn the election of the people? This was the day they had to act to subvert the will of the people. “We had to act.” This was the day the results of an election no longer mattered.

This was the opening salvo in the war on democracy.

You hear the same old tired Democrat platitudes “what is he hiding?”…”what is he afraid of?” Now it is time to ask them the same questions.

What are they afraid of…. what are they hiding? They are trying to hide this charade of a coup they’ve orchestrated and been engaged in since even before this president took his oath of office and assumed the office.

What they are afraid of is the will of the people. They keep on polling with the same results. Now they’ve just decided to go to war with democracy.

They are afraid the same president will be reelected again in 2020. This is only a partisan political hit job, like all the rest of their long drawn out plot, to either unseat the president or prevent him from getting reelected. So they’ve gone to war against democracy, again.

I find it ironic too that the organization founded in the aftermath of President Clinton’s impeachment screaming to “Move On” is the same group now organizing rallies lobbying the left to impeach this president. Isn’t that rich?

So Move On runs to the street organizing rallies with chants of “no one is above the law. The president is not above the law.” But what law; what law are they talking about?

Protecting democracy? They strategized this moment since the last presidential election to subvert democracy. Less than one year before the next election, they must take it out of the hands of the people to let them know Congress not the people will pick the president.

“We must act,” they say. They must act to prevent the president from using his power and getting reelected in 2020. They’ve moved up the date of the election to now.

And they trying to shroud this act of democratic defiance in an excuse that they are doing this for the people, to “protect democracy.” That they are doing it for national security? The only threat to our national security is this attempt to subvert the will of the people.

We all watched for years in the UK as countless lawmakers tried to tell people their votes didn’t matter. They do the same thing here.

But ask yourself, what are Democrats afraid of? What are they trying to hide? The answer is simple, they are afraid of we the people, us. They are hiding their entire anti-democratic agenda against the American people. They are hiding their coup and its fruition.

In fact, everything they have done is a part of the cover up for what Obama and our government did to interfere in the last election. Sure, they failed to prevent Trump from winning but they aren’t done. That cover up for what they did continues.

It is not about what did they know and when did they know it? They have known it all along. They were complicit in the biggest attack on our democracy in history, a bloodless coup. When? They started it from before he was even elected. They were so deep in it by election that even if they wanted to, they could not have stopped. It is a war against democracy. They planted the seeds, fertilized it, then weeded out anything that stood in their way of reaping the rewards of overthrowing the president. (by any means)

Hyper-politics and policy disagreements should not be the cause for impeachment.

But like its power to declare war, once used you cannot put that Genie back in the bottle. You can shout “we didn’t come here to impeach” from the roof of the Capitol. It doesn’t matter. You invoked it while feigning some Churchillian passion as you attempt to overturn an election. This is not what democracy looks like!

Democrats worry about foreign influence in elections. Say hello to your friend, Ukraine.

And so the Forgotten Man limps on still… in an all too real metaphor.

 

I yield back….

Right Ring | Bullright

Perennial Bias At Work

Our government used the pretext of Russia to spy on a presidential campaign. And it parlayed that “investigation” into the presidency after Trump entered office.

  • The IG Horowitz report declares it found no documented or admitted political bias in the cause of the investigation.
  • It found 16- 17 problems with how the investigation was handled.
  • Horowitz testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee that no one who touched this entire investigation should feel vindicated.
  • It found fraud committed in the FISA process.
  • The investigation used a dirty Russian-based dossier, paid for bu a political campaign, employing a foreign agent, as evidence in a FISA court for wiretapping + surveillance.

The question of political bias is almost moot now. Does it matter or is it relevant? An investigation has inherent bias, since the purpose is that someone probably did something wrong. But they qualify political bias as a possible concern.. I am concerned about both.

What matters is what they did, errors and all. The central reason political bias seems to matter is based on whether it should have started or not. And was it a basis for the investigation? Was it the purpose of it?

So did we really expect them to call the investigation unjustified? That would have been an automatic indictment on everything they did. It would be a glaring admission. It is doubtful even an Inspector General would be willing to do that.

Putting that bias question aside, the whole rest of the process which followed is an indictment on the cause of that investigation. Why break laws, use sinister conduct or act with malfeasance in investigating a justifiable cause?

And all that conduct happened to be against Trump.

So maybe too much emphasis is placed on whether there was provable political bias in the contamination of the decision to investigate? At least it was all around it. Shouldn’t there be a necessary attempt to eliminate bias? But that is not what we saw.

Back to what we citizen voters think. Much was made about our interpretation of inherent bias in the investigation. Though we had probable cause to suspect and confirm bias in the process. In fact, it almost screamed bias. That no one would have heard those screams would be irresponsible. How could we not see it?

All we heard since it began, and continued in its various forms, is that the FBI and its investigation is above reproach. But that is not what we saw. We saw a natural cause for bias alarm. Yet that we even questioned the FBI or basis of it was the problem.

The whole Russia meddling problem in the election had little to do with Trump. They did not seem as interested in investigating Russian meddling as they were in investigating Trump collaboration. Russia was the predicate to investigate Trump.

Now if we had fraud in the investigating itself, we certainly had it in spades in the media reporting all along. It amplified whatever government was doing, both publicly and behind closed doors. You could label the reason for it as political bias. But does it matter? The media were doing what they were doing. Do we have to prove what effect their political bias had in order to validate whether it existed? That would seem absurd.

Yet the entire cabal boils down to that one simple fact: our Government used Russia as a pretext to investigate Trump, in an election and after. Period. Nothing changes that.

But Cardinal Comey calls our fears, analysis, criticisms and conclusions “all made up.

Right Ring | Bullright

Slipshod Impeachment Phraseology

Phrases for slipshod impeachment echo through congress after weeks of impeachment inquiry. Then get repeated with stunning frequency

Democrats bandied about catch phrases in weeks of impeachment inquiry. Some are just cute and others even stupid. Here are a few of the classic gems or their paraphrases:

“We must save our democracy.”
“We must impeach the president to protect the 2020 election.”
“It’s about interference in our elections”
“We are defending the Constitution.”
“No one is above the law.” (what law?)
“This is not a rush to judgment, it is a rush to justice.”
“We must protect our national security and preserve our democracy.”
(a little late on that one)
We must impeach him for what he might do. We cannot take that chance.

But the cakemaker of them all is this one. First, adorn it with sober, somber, solemn, prayerful mood music. Then, self-righteously, they claim:

None of us came here to impeach the president.
“None of us came to Congress just to impeach this president.”

Wrong. Yes they did.

They all came there to impeach the president and that is what they are doing. Whatever reasons they thought or said they came to Congress for are in the past. Memo to Dems:

You are there now to impeach the president. So while you can claim that wasn’t your original intent, (even if it was true) you were hijacked once there into that agenda.

In fact, it is now your only objective. Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler have determined the most important priority for this congress and before next election is to impeach the president.

So those pitiful words “I didn’t come here to impeach the president” ring so hollow after we’ve all seen the impeachment road show. Rides available daily.

Even one congressman, Hank Johnson, said representatives should be willing to impeach the president even if it means losing their elections. Sacrifice themselves. He said he would gladly impeach the president if it cost him his seat, and so should everyone else.

Impeachment fever, once they have it they can never turn back.

(*Prof. Jonathan Turley referred to it as slipshod impeachment in his testimony.)

Right Ring | Bullright

Here and Now in Whateverland

In asking serious questions, one has to be prepared for the inevitable: people answering those questions armed with their own opinions like stilettos. If one is really interested in what people think, it could be a rewarding even educational exercise.

Recently, Charlie Daniels had a column laying out particular grievances on impeachment fever running wild, then asked a series of questions. That is always a good format. Asking questions can be a tool on a blog. It’s nice to care what others think.

However, what it really does is open the door for naysayers and critics to offer pungent rebukes from their lofty perches. That is what happened with Charlie’s Soap Box piece. Maybe no more critics than usual though a bit more descriptive than usual. One suggested he was now a former fan.

I’m sure Charlie was ready for that reaction when he posed the questions. The questions were important and consequential. But it showed there are enough people out there who will fully embrace any criticism of Trump, and who see — in their minds anyway — lots of reasons to impeach our 45th president.

But here we are with impeachers having their way. They were eager for this moment from the beginning. It could not come fast enough for them and now it is finally here.

Trump haters will jump at any chance to express their discontent with him. Even Christmas decorations have become a symbol of their disdain for the Trump family. And they don’t despise just him but the entire family. At one impeachment hearing, a Stanford professor made a rotten joke using Trump’s son Baron’s name. She later apologized only while demanding an apology from Trump.

Congress subpoenaed all Trump family financial documents from Deutsche Bank prompting Ginsburg to slap a stay on it until SCOTUS can hold a vote. Nothing seems off limits to these critics. Hopefully SCOTUS will provide clarity on the matter and for future presidents. Should Congress have unbridled power to impound any personal documents from a sitting president it wants? That can hardly be a good thing or precedent for the future. What about Barry Soetoro having all his personal records sealed? But that was not a problem for the Democrats. Plus, Trump documents have a habit of leaking.

That deep document dive brings the issue into focus. What do Democrats care about future precedents they are setting, both on impeachment and records? They don’t. So this is what I call the politics of here and now — the only thing they care about. As if the future will take care of itself regardless what they do today, with little or no effect on the future. But that is not the case. They don’t care. Nor do they really care what effect it has.

The politics of “here an now” determine now is everything, the future is of no concern. Whatever happens as a result is of no consequence and certainly will not matter later to them. Now is where they live, in hatred, but it is also the incubator for the future. Democrats and incubators don’t get along so well. If they can believe in aborting a baby in the 9th month, then they will do just about anything out of convenience for the moment.

Instead, they will try to shift blame and the argument back on Trump. But it is not him setting the future precedent here. Democrats are oblivious to our posterity and future. Rather than impeachment being caused by a scandal, impeachment has become the scandal. And now investigating corruption becomes an impeachable offense.

Subsequently, any defense of President Trump is then seen as incompetence, even legal malpractice, such as with Professor  Jonathan Turley delivering a defense against impeaching Trump.  He was the outlier to the tar and feather scholars.

Think about the other three witnesses. All tenured professors from Ivory Towered institutions calling on impeaching and removing a president at the drop of a hat.

“Slipshod impeachment” is the tonic, but what is the illness?
 

Right Ring | Bullright

Impossible Impeachment Pie

Much as I hate to give away award-winning recipes, I jotted it down from memory.
Have at it. (*Does require some special tools and equipment)

1 part presidential Ukraine phone call (or suitable substitute)
1 keg of loser’s spite
2 parts resistance.
Equal measures of Deep State CYA and cover up

1 non-existent or invisible whistle blower (flexible)
1 heavily strained gnat
1 bag of DNC lies
1 wooden stake

1 part phony intentions
Liberal amounts of political influence
1 dramatic screenwriter
Generous fundraising
1 part foreign interference
1 president, preferably skinned — if possible but not necessary.
2 parts Deep State testimony

Mix all ingredients (except stake) well and fold in anything else handy that might go with ingredients. Wear mask if needed — fumes are toxic.

Purée and dump into suitable greased pan over wooden stake, in front of rabid spectators.

Preheat blast furnace to 950. Cram aforementioned product into it – without burning your ass. Do this as fast as you can before fire dep. arrives.

Bake until either it explodes or stinks up the entire house – or as long as possible.

Abruptly remove. Season liberally with MSM for taste. Serve it up to 65 million people who don’t trust you. Convince them it’s real and important. (this could take some time.)

Hold your noses!

House favorite. Umm-umm, bad to the bones.

(Caution: some chaser may be necessary. They don’t call it impossible for nothing!
)

Book On Recipes With Emotion , © 2019

Right Ring | Bullright

Shades of Impeachment Politics

When Nancy Pelosi took their spin-filled deceitful vote over the impeachment process, there were two standout Democrats who disagreed and voted against it.

(CNN) “Reps. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey and Collin Peterson of Minnesota both voted “nay” on the historic resolution.”

Post Schiff Show, one Democrat came out to say she does not support impeachment. It was Michigan Rep Brenda Lawrence. She would prefer a censure of some kind.

Fox News reports:

“”We are so close to an election,” Lawrence said Sunday on a Michigan radio program, noting that Trump stands little chance of being convicted by the GOP-controlled Senate. “I will tell you, sitting here knowing how divided this country is, I don’t see the value of taking him out of office. But I do see the value of putting down a marker saying his behavior is not acceptable. It’s in violation of the oath of office of a president of the United States, and we have to be clear that you cannot use your power of the presidency to withhold funds to get a foreign country to investigate an American citizen for your own personal gain. There’s no way around that.”

Lawrence continued: “I want him censured. I want it on the record that the House of Representatives did their job and they told this president and any president coming behind him that this is unacceptable behavior and, under our Constitution, we will not allow it. … I am a Democrat, but I am an independent United States of America citizen.””

But that is just it, isn’t it? That demonstrates what is wrong with this whole process. If Democrats in the House majority found something objectionable, there are many ways to handle that disagreement. Censure is one. I don’t agree with it, yet it’s a possibility.

They could have done a basic resolution condemning what he did. Face it, they don’t like so much of what he does. A vote and resolution would still be on the record. They couldn’t do that or anything else. No. They had to reach for the ultimate: to impeach Trump.

They were set on doing that before he took office. They were determined to impeach him, or try, since he came into office. They were obsessed by it.

If Pelosi really cared about her legacy then she has to realize it goes up in flames with such a divisive move as impeachment. Especially when her majority did nothing else in the year. Nothing for the people, just impeach their president. And on the eve of an election.

Then send articles of impeachment, which they were determined to do, over to the Senate and airdrop the highly partisan maneuver right into the middle of a presidential election.

So Speaker Pelosi and 2020 will go down in the books as the year Democrats bet their entire legacy, and a presidential election, on impeachment. The two shall forever be joined – though both are about the same thing. It is pure election politics and about overturning the results of the last one. Democrats never looked so petty or radical as now.

And that shall be Democrats’ legacy, and Pelosi’s legacy as speaker.

Now Democrats are resolved even in their blue strongholds, knowing if Trump is not removed from office, to carry out their impeachment distraction anyway. They don’t care.

Happy Thanksgiving, America, enjoy that turkey… they are impeaching your president.

Right Ring | Bullright

Bloomberg Bust

As Michael Bloomberg divests, purges all his assets and swears to a vow of poverty, he enters the Democrat primaries. Headline alert. Bye bye, Bloomberg News.

Not really, but isn’t that what new Democrat rules demand? This may get very interesting very fast. Goodie! I’m sure AOC and Bernie could help him redistribute his wealth.

And who will be the lucky recipients of all his extra cash? Just asking for a friend.

What an exciting time in politics! When will the festive de-wealthing begin? I think the giveaways should be live on TV. (that’s just me)

Let’s see how this banner of the Big Gulp cleanses his vast fortune.

Right Ring | Bullright

Dems Had Their Cake And Impeachment Too

The Democrats have had their way and now an impeachment inquiry too. (I don’t know why they call it an inquiry, it is an impeachment) I trust anyone seeing this has likely seen Mark Levin on Fox lay out his excellent summary of the show trial.over Ukraine – or faux trial. So I won’t try to relate it all here.

Just that Levin blew a hole in Democrats’ partisan prosecution the size of the Titanic. He walked through the testimonies that somehow did not add up to any quid pro quo, let alone the bribery they now assert happened. And all their hearsay crapola.

Well, anyone who watched any of the so-called “required” American Impeachment viewing saw the deflation of their entire argument case against President Trump.

But leave it to Levin to drive the case home. He said stunningly that Obama did nothing as former President Poroshenko pleaded with him for arms against Russia’s invasion and aggression. Surely, Obama happy to accommodate the requests? No, he refused in 2014 and throughout to provide weapons. Among Democrat allies, no one held his or Joe’s feet to the Ukrainian fire.

And that happened, too, as Russia was cranking up its meddling campaign in our 2016 election. Well, was Obama actively opposing that Russian political interference? No, he wasn’t. Intelligence was lobbying him, with other countries, to do something. MIA.

Then Joe was delegated to handle Ukraine. (Obama kept his hands clean yet was his administration’s position) Joe does the famous quid proquo threat when the prosecutor was on Burisma, while his son was on the board. Injecting, “call Obama and ask him.”

Funny about that: now the word Burisma is suddenly a synonym for Joe Biden or Biden investigation. Any mention of Burisma is an instant political attack on Joe Biden. How do Democrats do this shit, and get away with it? Joe was VP at the time, not close to running. Yet he is somehow immune from investigation or criticism. Reminds me of Hillary too.

So Democrats had their cake, boy did they. When at the time we were under cyber interference from Russia, which we knew, Obama was refusing aid to Ukraine. This actually helped empower Russia’s aggression. Even at the same time, Ukraine officials were actively involved in opposing Trump. And there was collusion between Ukraine, the DNC, and the administration.

But there is more in the way of facts. ISIS got more arms and equipment from Obama’s administration than Ukraine. ISIS got weaponry from US om Obama’s watch. And remember the 100’s of millions of lost aid in Iraq. (or billions) In fact, Obama armed Libyan rebels more than Ukraine. Leading up to what? Benghazi.

Democrats have played these shell games and now want to blame Trump for everything. In fact, so impeach him for trying to withhold aid from Ukraine. He only wanted that corruption investigated as required by law. Was Joe Biden part of that past corruption? That is not our fault. Running for president does not whitewash what he did.

Then it goes further. Biden does an interview with CNN where he was asked about Lindsey Graham’s doc request from State Dep. on his Ukraine operation. Joe admits he is angry and says Lindsey is going to regret doing this. Now he threatens Lindsey Graham, chair of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, which also will handle the impeachment.

Then Joe Biden suggested of course Trump should be pushed aside for being totally corrupt. Get that? So now the new definition of corruption is investigating corruption.

So it appears Democrats have had their way all along, playing election politics, and now are having their impeachment too. But they are using it in their political dirt-digging operation. They are doing Joey’s and DNC’s dirty work for him.(much like 2016) And he is only too happy to receive the help. What a tangled web.

Of course Joe Biden’s other big problem is that he has to campaign. He doesn’t think he should have to do that. Sounds familiar. The government should help him.

Then there are still questions as to what Sen. Lindsey Graham will do. Are we seeing another faux investigation we have become so used to getting? Here’s an interview with Graham for his opinion of Biden. It’s very descriptive. I smell a soap opera theme.

Right Ring | Bullright

RBG Explained

In the absence of any detailed information about the health of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, I’ve taken it upon myself, as explainer of all things, to provide what I’m sure is a perfectly plausible explanation. No problemo.

Here’s the report from SCOTUS

There, we have the symptoms: fever and chills sparked hospital visit. IV treatment.

1)First of all, it is now late fall and she has finally realized this. Even in DC near winter, people get chills. It’s quite natural. Chills will remain among us throughout the season.

2)Then there is the fever thing. Well, this was impeachment week, after all. Most Democrats in the country have Impeachment Fever right now. That’s no secret.

So I think we can definitely see the rational cause and effect here.

On the other hand, while we are at it, the “fear” conspiracy theories of the left, based on what SCOTUS would be like if she left, are completely unsubstantiated. I’m still looking for the source of those.

I’m glad to be of assistance.
Yours Truly

BTW: I haven’t determined a rational explanation for Epstein’s death yet.

Still Outraged After All These Years

One thing I could always count on through the years is that there was no shortage of things to be outraged over, or about. Off the cuff.

You could go back to the 80’s or the 90’s, even the 70’s, there has been plenty of reasons to be outraged. But I suppose the numero uno has always been government malfeasance or sheer abuse of power. Probably because it seems a consistent staple in the fabric in all the discontent we see playing out. The left and right both have their use for that blame.

By blame I am referring to the scapegoating of all problems to government’s door. There is a good case to be made for that blame.

However, what amazes me is the amount of fodder for outrage that can be found everywhere. I suppose I may be guilty for seeing and looking for it.

Any outrage meter I had was broken years ago.

But I refuse to give in and just laugh at it all in ignorance. No, there is a rightful place for humor and jokes on government, politics and agendas. Though there is something to be said for seriousness about it, too. One cannot and should not lose all seriousness at the price of a good laugh.

That has been another pet concern. Humor is great tool as well. But everything should not be seen only through that filter. Humor has limits.

So when you come down to the seriousness of all the problems, then outrage is the logical emotion to have about it. Not making a case for it, just that it has its benefits.

When people get outraged they do things like open a window and scream into the night that “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.” What that exercise can spawn, beyond quick relief, is another matter.

Often problems are not seriously addressed until enough outrage has been generated by them. In other words, it serves a purpose.

Outrage can lead to finding solutions and doing things a different way. Moral outrage is an additional component. You’ve heard of righteous anger. These are added components which can justify those outrage emotions.

Sure outrage can lead to more outrageous acts too. So discipline is needed about how we channel it. We certainly don’t want to turn into reactionary victims of our own outrage. That would seem pointless.

So in the political sphere, it seems that outrage can be very useful. We tend to react to what offends us. There is nothing wrong with that. Though being offended can become a crutch. For instance, the left is offended by everything and then they justify an entire counter political agenda based on their superb ability to be offended — by anything.

But astonishingly, as bad as all that sounds, they manage to be fairly effective by being offended. And what they are offended by mostly is anything or anyone that disagrees with them. It becomes very easy then to turn those offenses into power. That begets addiction.

We should probably develop the same skill at turning our outrage into something useful. As long as that outrage is reasonable and justified that is. But in general, most of our outrage is justified where much of Leftists’ sense of being offended is not. Theirs is fabricated or exaggerated for the purpose of weaponinizing it in their political agenda. The rest of us just don’t think and operate the same way.

If I only saw my outrage as a means to some political ends, I’d be chasing my tail. It seems like circular logic; meaning you desire to be outraged to accomplish your political objectives. That can get very dicey. Though that is what the left does with their ability to be offended. They seek it, use it, extort it and benefit from it. Therefore, it becomes as desirable and useful to them as a fork to eat a salad. It also creates an ego the size of Manhattan.

If safe spaces were the solution to their being offended, then there could not be enough of them, or enough room for them, in the world. But they aren’t. Safe spaces become just another tool in their arsenal to agitate and outrage the rest of us, which in turn feeds their pompous ability to be offended, which in turn feeds their political agenda, which in turn feeds their lust for more power. But that outcome was always their destination and goal.

As much as I actually do not want to be outraged, I really resent my justified outrage being turned into a cudgel and tool used against me. I resent my outrage being weaponized against me. That offends me. Get it?

I would much rather find real useful ways to channel my outrage into useful purposes, like solutions. Not just a political agenda. Lord knows we have enough moral and righteous outrage out there to build a Tower of Babel. But that is not the goal of outrage. Nor should it become only a means.

Remember years ago when Bill Bennett coined the phrase “where’s the outrage?” He had a point. When we lose our ability or no longer become outraged, then something is wrong with us, and society. His point is that people were not outraged by what was happening. They were becoming desensitized to what they were seeing. And that cannot be good. We shouldn’t say “that’s just the times” and ignore it. (or just laugh at it) We cannot lose our outrage, yet we cannot misplace it either.

So remember first that we are justified to be outraged, and two that we should not dismiss or waste it. It is of value. When outrage is gone, all sorts of bad things can happen. But when we fail to properly acknowledge or place it, the same effects can follow.

Instead we should see our outrage as a teaching aid. It is telling us that things aren’t right and not what they should be. It is telling us that a course correction is needed. To dismiss or ignore our outrage is to become an accomplice to its source – wittingly or unwittingly.

And if the Left at large is offended by our outrage, so be it.

Right Ring | Bullright

Impeachment Ground Zero: narratives and lies

A cartoon needs to be drawn of today’s events, and the caption should read

“This is your government on politics.”

In the media, historian Jon Meacham on MSNBC certified that Republicans are a Jonestown Cult. Pelosi has called Trump an imposter. Media are far from finished on this day of revision and government radicalized by politics – made to MSNBC’s order.

Fiona Hill, another Dem star witness, posits how it must be impossible for two nations to interfere or meddle in our elections at the same time. So the Russian hoax theme is on full display. And the people that push it are again on the world stage.

Somewhere in the near background of Moscow, is a laughing Putin that Democrats are impeaching Trump over Ukraine. He couldn’t have written a better script.

Speaking of scripts and writers, Democrats’ lousy drama is bad enough but their screenwriting is even worse.

Right Ring | Bullright

Restorative Injustice

In keeping with the question theme lately, I’ll toss another one out there.

When did US policy become protecting corruption and the corrupt?

I could probably write a whole paper on that one, but it is self-evident.
Think about that one the next time you hear of “restorative justice.”

Along with this asinine jackknife of justice, when before in history has impeachment actually been the “cover up,” instead of the consequence for corruption?

Hey hey, ho ho…….

Right Ring | Bullright

Coup In Process

Attention:

We temporarily interrupt your regular anti-Trump
programming to bring you this coup in process.

We cannot tell you, the objective target, when that
regular programming will be returning at this time.

Thank you for your patience.
Management

[end of PSA message]

Right Ring | Bullright