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

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

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

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

Pre-rebuttal of the IG Report

Leaks, lies, coups and liars’ legacies = just some procedural Bullshit?

Incidentally, if you don’t like the word bullshit then you may elect to skip this piece.

When is enough enough? Let me start by writing backwards, the way government usually does things. (in reverse) Starting with a premise and working backward to origination.

Synopsis: media has broken their cone of silence to actually talk about the upcoming IG Horowitz. Until now that has been a forbidden topic of conversation. Now, armed with numerous leaks, I presume they’re trying to manipulate our expectations for the report.

At first it seemed like they were just trying to get out ahead of it for damage control, to spin the outcome and temper our expectations. But now it looks like there may be something to what they are saying. (even if they’ve been in denial for 3 years.)

Then this report only becomes part of the cover-up.

Cut the bullshit:: This is a government report justifying what government did.

We should be clear on that. It’s what government does. And when government covers up for itself, it is doing what government does. When regular people do that, it is called a cover-up – considered worse than the crime in many cases.

All definitions from here on go into the trashcan – other than for bullshit. They, government, can alter or rewrite definitions as they go. The word ™*They in this form shall stand for government… or big, Deep State government.

Let me say this is not about the why *They did what *They did — other than the original investigation — but about what *They did. I think the motives are self-evident. *They, as in government, includes the head of the administration apparatus at the time, Obama.

Leaks of the document are flowing out daily.

They come from somewhere. You have to assume from within the *They apparatus. Reporters and MSM are only to happy to put them out there. (apparently sanctioned) Something about toning down or lowering expectations, I presume.

The conclusions of the report leaked out basically say the Trump investigation was justified from the onset. That the Carter Page probe was justified. But that there were some departmental problems, which he is going to point out, including how the “lower level” lawyer under James Baker altered FISA documents. Nevertheless, it did not change the outcome of this justifiable investigation, or its merits. Chew that slowly.

Yet there is no underlying problem with the integrity of the investigation itself, only some processes of it. Gee, and downhill from there on it goes. This starts to sound like every other “report” that has come out prior. But look at the accusations flying about everything Trump does. Put common sense aside.

In other words, what they are saying – if the report verifies it — is that the report is basically inconsequential as to the outcome of this Hoax. It is only relevant so far as procedural errors it quibbles with. But if it validates that the cooked up investigation and subsequent deep state coup was justified, then it becomes a part of the substantiation of the whole thing. See how this works? This IG look-see validates what *They did.

So unofficially, this IG Report could be called the cleanup detail of DOJ. One of the major problems it has is being released smack in the middle of an impeachment process. Whatever you think of the latter… and what a long winding road that has been: filled with innuendo, lies, dirt-digging politics and conspiracy theories etc. (dirt digging on Trump)

Maybe all we have witnessed to now is a natural byproduct of the “fundamental change” Obama promised. It certainly appears that way.

Now that they know *They can operate this way and have sweeping influence, it sets a precedent for future coups or phony investigations. Proof that it all works and can be very effective – even using CIA sources. Do you really think it is only Trump who would be subject to this radical insurrection of an interconnected cabal? Think again.

Imagine the extreme irony of Democrats doing a major investigation and impeachment process over digging dirt on a political opponent… while what they have done for 4 years was a political dirt-digging operation on a candidate and then a president.

This whole thing combined is nothing more than an effort to bring down the President, and all it has ever been for three years. Now they bring in the IG of itself, to justify itself, by posing as an independent critic of itself. And all predicated on grade-A BS.

Of, by, and for Deep State

Our government was weaponized against a political opponent. Obama politicized it entirely and then it naturally became weaponized. The problem for Democrats is that it was not politicized or weaponized by Trump. We know the beginning, the means, and the desired outcome — none of which aligns with Trump’s objectives.

Isn’t it extremely odd that no one would pay any attention to Ukraine before? You could not force media/coverage to talk about Ukraine. Why? The many tentacles DNC and Democrats had working in Ukraine. To even mention Ukraine was labeled a conspiracy theory. Ukraine itself was branded as a conspiracy. Now Ukraine is elevated to the most important place at the intersection of corruption and politics, at the most critical time in national politics. But Trump didn’t do all that.

Isn’t it also funny that after the Trump rally in Florida, the media is squealing like stuffed pigs about the president’s use of the word Bullshit? Yet it is the one word in our language that could possibly encompass all *They and their media allies have done to him and our last election. That word cuts through the smoke and mirrors.

And still the only thing that matters to these people is the next election, and defeating Trump. That government is still politicized and weaponized, ready and available. Media is still *Its biggest ally. Democrats are still engaged in election politics against their political opponent – and wiling to use any means at their disposal against it. (that opponent has also become the people, as it always does!)

Then came the IG report that media spins as an expected barn-burner that isn’t. Apparently they got their way. The report they refused to acknowledge as necessary or meaningful before, suddenly now becomes a central asset to knock down any “conspiracies” about what really took place in the 2016 election. (the truth)

According to these media reports: the Counterintelligence investigation on Trump was properly predicated and properly launched. So the rest is justified history.

That means it is 4-500 pages of meaningless procedural minutia that did not generally affect the overall investigation. Thus, the investigation was credible while there are outstanding procedural, process problems. That concept needs some explaining.

Message: nothing to see here. Move along. Government was justified in its overreaching investigation which turned into a full-blown bloodless coup. More CYA for the cover-up.

Even the Bullshit is getting old — calling a spade what it is, and an IG Report what it is.

Right Ring | Bullright

List Of Lies

Remember the days when Democrats ran in the midterm elections? They claimed they had a legit agenda. They claimed it was not all about Trump.

So many of the Democrats dismissed themselves from partisan politics. They just wanted to work for the people and get things done. So they said.

McCaskill said I’m not one of those crazy Democrats. Guess what? Call her MSNBC crazy just like the rest of the triggered Dem freaks.

They were not running on an impeachment agenda, they said. Guess what? It’s their only agenda. They did not want open borders. Guess what? That’s exactly what they want.

Remember these old lines in their greatest hits:

We don’t want socialism
We don’t want to take your guns
We don’t want to raise taxes on working families
We don’t want late term or partial birth abortions.
We don’t want to force government to pay for abortions.
We don’t want to destroy the economy.
We don’t want to raise taxes on working people.
We don’t want to eliminate jobs.
We don’t want to hurt the middle class.
We don’t want to eliminate fossil fuels.
We are not socialists.
We don’t want open borders.
We don’t want single-payer. we only want to fix Obamacare.
We don’t want to cut the military.
We believe in the rule of law.
We are not trying to do a coup.
We are defending democracy
We just want to work together.
We are not running on impeachment.
We don’t want to shut down government.
Democrats don’t want to eliminate private insurance.
There is no Deep State conspiracy against Trump.
We don’t support violence.
We will call out any hateful rhetoric, no matter which side.
We accept the results of elections.

Let’s just call it like it is, virtually everything they tell us is a lie. Dems supprt:

Open borders
Impeaching Trump
Medicare for All
Eliminating private insurance
Giving free healthcare to illegal aliens
Free College for illegals
Welfare for illegals
Socialism
Abolishing ICE
Sanctuary cities.
Lawlessness
Supporting Crime
Late term and partial birth abortion
Government funding of abortion
Expanding and stacking the Supreme Court
Judicial activism and judicial tyranny
No separation of powers
Destroying the economy
Eliminating private insurance
Undermining national security and the miliatary
Raising taxes
Restorative Justice (you know what that is)
Gun control
Confiscating guns
Destroying the 1st and 2nd amendments, stomping on the 5th and 14th
Abuse of power
Politicizing the DOJ and FBI
Mobocracy
Supporting domestic terrorists
Resisting democracy — or democratic results

Right Ring | Bullright

At His Own Risk

Could investigating the origins of the 2016 corruption cabal, and the subsequent coup, cost President Trump the election? Could it be detrimental to his presidential health?

I don’t know but if Donald Trump were a creature of politics and a Washington player, he might have declined to investigate at the great risk to his own presidency. But that is just not the way Trump operates.

So he does want it investigated. I think we know most presidents would have repelled that notion out of fear that it could hurt them. And maybe, just maybe, they would have thought it would be a net plus for them to forego looking into it. (and a case could be made that it may be good not to have it investigated.) In other words, a personal gain.

I don’t think Trump gets enough credit for doing what is not attractive in spite of personal consequences. Now it definitely seems to be all negative and an uphill battle having his administration investigate corruption — even Biden’s corruption. In the interim it is all negative. Any positives only come in the results and we don’t know when those will be.

Yet according to the oath of office, any president would be obligated to investigate it. Remember Democrats kept claiming there were grounds to investigate Trump when there were none. Then they tried to create the justification for their witch hunt. That’s what Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation was all about — justifying itself.

Now if this investigation should somehow result in the loss of the 2020 election, it would still be worth it. Those are not chances most politicians want to take. That is why we had so many phony investigations, like Hillary’s, before that ended in nothing more than “there is no there there.” They were picture shows creating only the illusion of an investigation, even if the fix was in right from its conception.

Not getting justice was the polite way of saying but we investigated it. But none of them was ever so consequential as this seditious coup investigation. Trump is the one for it.

Right Ring | Bullright

Ukraine On The Brain

One thing that American people should be outraged about is any idea that the success of the current US president – indeed future of the US – should be determined by Ukraine. Not to mention our election of a president and the next one.

But this is the exact situation the Democrats have put America in. Ukraine is now at the center of all that. We should be appalled but many people are cheering this on.

We just annexed the future of America to a former satellite country of the USSR. One that has had its share of corruption and is engaged in its own sovereign preservation. Something Trump wanted to look into.

But back in 2016, radical Democrats put Ukraine smack into the center of their conspiracy theory (coup in the making) by DNC’s and Democrat operatives’ collusion with it in US election politics. Ever since they have been covering for that fact. Now they have brought Ukraine straightforward into their current goal of trying to impeach the POTUS.

I can’t believe this is anything the people would care about, with regard to choosing our president, except for remote hopes of working with Ukraine to eliminate corruption. But that corruption in Ukraine is where Americans’ concern stops.

It is hard for me to believe that people want Ulraine to determine our present president or our future one. That would seem absurd. But apparently that is the road Democrats are going down and what they believe. Their whole impeachment now rests on a corrupt country waging a battle to protect itself from Russia’s covetous hand.

If Democrats do not want foreign meddling or interference in our elections, they sure have a real funny way of showing it. If successful, it is hard to imagine there will not be some heavy consequences for that. Imagine the people who were obsessed for two and and a half years with a myth of foreign influence in our elections, now are determined to once again inject foreign interference into our politics.

Do Americans fall for such a cheap plot? I don’t believe so. But radicalized Democrats are determined and invested in making that case for it.

Then they put an acting ambassador to that country at the center of their “resistance” case. So while Ukraine is resisting Russia’s military overtures, Democrats put that whole issue into the center of their seditious resistance against a sitting US president – even in congress. And they are etching Ukraine into US history by doing so. They have entered Ukraine into the congressional record in one of the most serious things congress can undertake in America, the impeachment of a president.

But make no mistake; they had put Ukraine in the center of election politics since the 2016 election. They continue to build on that plot right into their current seditious coup mission.

Right Ring | Bullright

Narratives Demean Motives

On a serious note, I’m going to do something I never like or want to do but in the interest of critical understanding, I think I must do. It is a shame that circumstances should require that someone say these things. Yet those are the times we are in.

It is important to know why and I think that in itself is the reason to do it. I don’t do it out of animus for the country or what US stands for. It is for perspective in fighting the narratives radical leftists have foisted on us. We must know the enemy.

So with all the outrage about what happened with (A) a phone call to Ukraine and now (B) a report on what Trump told Kislyak in the famous White House meeting after Comey was fired and (C)Pelosi’s unilateral “official impeachment inquiry” started; there are a few loose ends and statements that need to be examined further.

Most of this is not new, but what is new is the level of the Left’s frenzy surrounding it all. Media is doing their level best to roll this into one big mud pie to fuel their impeachment efforts. Almost on cue as expected. They have no real concern or loyalty to the nation, nor do they care about the damage it does. They are willing to sacrifice everything about our country to try to get Donald Trump.

They have already referred to Trump recently in choreographed mobster terms. (Aka Don Corleone) When have we ever seen this before? Never. And they have their other favorite tool used to attack Trump, our intelligence — however they can use it and say whatever against a sitting president to hurt him. Another narrative is that Trump is somehow green-lighting the Russians to meddle in other countries’ elections. The idea Trump would have equated or admitted to Russia that, essentially, we meddled in elections and was not upset by what Russia did in our elections sounds damning. (the gaining media narrative)

Leftists are offended saying we don’t meddle in elections. Well, let’s just take Obama for example. He meddled in Egypt, Israel, and even his team in Canadian elections. He also basically intervened in the Brexit vote. I’m sure that is only scratching the surface. If it is one thing Obama liked to do, it was intervene in elections. I’m sure there is much to Putin’s claims of Hillary meddling in Russia’s election. At least most people in Russia believe State and Hillary did. And we know how some of that meddling turned out – not well.

We meddled in the control of the dictator, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, in Libya by sanctioning his killing. To hell with elections, there’s always Plan B.

Let me cut the chase here with a bigger narrative yet to roll out. Whenever there are skirmishes or deep disagreements anywhere in the world, Russia is plotting on how it can extort the situation for their gain. Putin as I noted before is the consummate opportunist. Years back he took on an aura of a conservative leader causing people, like Pat Buchanan, to compliment what seemed a more traditional domestic approach. What’s not to like?

But not to be fooled, he was not the Harley-riding conservative fellow conservatives here may have envisioned, but only an opportunist who was carefully feeding people what they wanted to see and hear. He had family plans with incentives for having more children and a friendlier outreach toward Christians. Welcome changes one would think, in contrast with what we saw from Obama. The Planned Parenthood saint of death with an anti-Christian bigotry. He was happily riding a Sherman Tank over American traditions.

Now in the present situation, we are presenting more opportunities to Putin. The Left has brought impeachment, Trump hatred, controversy and a slice of corruption to the Ukraine. What better place for it? You might say controversy and corruption are no strangers there. And all is within Putin’s operating realm in the last few years. For people to get so choked up on corruption or domestic politics there, then be thrust in with a scandal involving the US, is made to order fodder for the opportunist Putin.

Just days ago the word spread that Putin has Russians dispatched in Libya operating in that current conflict where ISIS or terrorists are gaining a foothold and vying for political power. Sound familiar? Russia parlayed Syria into a net gain over humanitarianism, and the ISIS crisis into a greater strategic plan for Russia. Thanks John Kerry.

Now their attention is back on Ukraine, his long time nemesis. A new president taking office on an anti-corruption plan offers yet more opportunity for Putin’s insatiable appetite. In so many ways Democrats are once again playing right into the hands of a conniving Putin, with little restraint for involvement. As the smoke of controversy rises in the Ukraine, the cloud of Putin will gravitate to it like bees to honey. Cleaning up corruption, you say? We shall see what eats away at that agenda.

For the worst part in it all: what does Putin think, or what talking points might we expect to hear from the Kremlin on the subject? (it pains me to think it) You don’t have to worry about giving them ideas because they are old experts on propaganda. He might simply inject himself as a level mediator to all sides. He might propose some sort of deal to get the ball rolling, and emphasis off fixing corruption. He might make some offer to volunteer some help or guidance. But all those would be open holes created by zealous Democrats who’s only interest is attacking Trump. Putin doesn’t have to worry, because Democrats will provide him more opportunities than he could ever create for himself.

That’s what they did for him from the 2016 elections. To this day, Hillary and Democrats credit Russia — and particularly Putin — with achieving the outcome of our election. They credit Putin with more influence than he could have hoped for.

Not to ever leave out the king of corruption and influence in countries and elections, George Soros. In Ukraine, there have to be many connections along with the DNC. Soros and the orgs he supports are certainly not non-political either. More Soros influence will ooze out. A corrupt political system, what a fertile ground for Soros to operate? He can do a lot of damage there. So the Soros effect on Ukraine probably cannot be overstated.

Then there is the glaring takeaway lesson we gave to Russia on the 2016 election: that we don’t really care about or respect elections. When it comes down to it that is just talk. Actually Hillary just reminded us, once again, in the media that the 2016 election was illegitimate. How can you have more contempt for the electoral system than that?

Further troubling is the movement afoot to throw out the electoral college process — an inherent blueprint in the Constitution. Well, who really cares about the Constitution anyway? So the election did provide many benefits to a meddling Russia. If you have people in America who don’t even accept their own election process, or final results of it, then one serial meddler in Russia would have a whole lot to work with.

There remains a lot of space to fill by Russia’s narratives. And they are the masters at saturating the air with them and diverting public scrutiny. First off: is this an example of how America operates in other countries? See how they enrich themselves while really caring nothing for democracy they claim to love. That’s a great narrative.

And there are pleny more narratives the Russians can plug into current circumstances, custom created by the left, and our political feuds here. Just like all the foreign interference the left dabbled in with our last election. Call that a meddlers stew.

What really undermines our national security and credibility are Democrats. Everywhere you look they compromise our security. The claim that a phone call with Ukraine threatens our national security is ludicrous. But they want to impeach Trump over a foreign call, which is way too much foreign interference over our elections for me.

Imagine that — just as domestic policies at home are finally going in the right direction — they try to take Trump down over a foreign phone call. Do people care about it?

Right Ring | Bullright

Catch a Wave of a Coup

From the time President Trump came into office, he was surrounded by snakes.

Comey admitted he “just sent over a couple people” to talk to Flynn. Oh “you don’t need an attorney.” He chuckled that he could never get away with it on another president

Now we see Dep. AG Rod Rosenstein did the equivalent to Trump;. After Comey;s firing, Roseenstein was in talks with Mueller. So Mueller went over to the White House as if he were interviewing for FBI Director. Actually, it was an information gathering mission to interview the president, unbeknownst to Trump. Rosenstein told Mueller the boss doesn’t know about our talks. (AG Sessions….and in effect President Trump)

What better way to try to get some information from the White House than roll in there like you are interested in the job? Speak to the president just to find out what you can. Anything you say can and will be used against you, but what the hey. Oops, forgot that.

The next day Mueller is appointed as a Special Counsel to open an investigation. Per plan. Well, the investigation was supposedly about Russia interference but seemed primarily obsessed with the person in the Oval Office.

They were out for Trump from even before he was in office. Rosenstein was another key player. And it wasn’t one or two snakes but what became clear was the snakes were all around him, everywhere. And they all had just one thing on their minds.

No nothing to see here at all people, move along. We have an impeachment to run now.

Why do we not have Brennan’s emails? I sure hope someone is looking into those.

(Thanks to Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch once again for getting them.)

See More of the story: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/oct/7/rod-rosenstein-robert-mueller-emails-reveal-trump-/

Washington Times

“Mr. Trump has claimed that the purpose of Mr. Mueller’s May 16 White House visit was to interview him for the vacant FBI director post. Mr. Mueller, a former FBI director, has said the meeting’s purpose was to discuss the bureau in general.

Whatever the purpose, John Dowd, Mr. Trump’s attorney during the ensuing 22-month probe, said Mr. Mueller had a duty not to meet with the president knowing he was likely to be investigating the Trump “

Catch a wave and you’re sittin’ on top of a coup. (has a jingle to it)

Right Ring | Bullright

Ghosts, Ghouls And Government

Ghosts, Ghouls And Everything Scary

Is it Halloween yet, when all the ghosts and goblins come out to scare us and tickle our fears? No. It is starting to look and feel like it though.

Trying to keep up with news, I learned something this week that did surprise me. I am a little embarrassed not to know we had four branches in our government. They are the Legislative, Executive, Judicial and the Whistle Blower Branch. Times change.

I do not yet know exactly what this Whistle Blower Branch does but I can see it has enormous powers – granted to it, or however it gets them. It seems like it could even trump all the other branches. I assume it was created by the Legislative branch though it has taken on a sovereignty of its own.

This is a murky area, what with definitions and powers constantly changing, so I want to understand as much as I can about it. That is not easy easy when they seem to rewrite rules and law on the fly the way Congress does. Or they just make it up to suite them.

I do know one thing, expect to hear more from this branch of government in the next year, say, before the election. It seems to have a lot to say about things.

On CNN, I heard David Gergen, who is the elf-anointed expert on Nixon, say what he thought should be done with whistle blowers. He thinks they should be put in the witness protection program and when testifying, they should do so only from behind a curtain in secret closed-door session.

We must take the utmost care and responsibility to protect them. (naturally reminding me of the old mob bosses) So they need protections from the government they are supposedly blowing the whistle on? And we know how scary that government really is and the mob tactics they use. Are there a few insinuations here that seem slightly disturbing?

Well, mainstream media has been comparing the Trump administration to the Mafia a lot recently. They might be a little late to that party. I was drawing direct parallels between the mob and Obama’s administration for eight years to deaf ears. All that was considered conspiracy stuff.

But now they have an actual mob boss in the White House, according to media, and everyone seems so hyper-concerned about it. Yes, it sends chills down my spine just thinking of Trump controlling the White House. Shutter the thought. I knew it would come to this haunting place as soon as Donald Corleone was elected president. It was a given.

Now we need this Whistle Blower branch, which I was completely unaware of, more than we ever needed it, so we can find out what the mobsters are doing and rat them out. Get the goods on them.

About those protections.

So David Gergen floats the protection idea with the super-secret model. That would certainly add even more to the drama in Congress right now. You know, the Whistle Blower as the ultimate hero, able to swoop in and out to catch the dirty guys red handed to protect the public from the unscrupulous…. big bad federal government. And, again, in secrecy, to swoop back out to private life. All the while protected by G-men.

Whew hoo, the left never saw that much danger from the federal government before. But then we never had someone like Donald Corleone to fear in the White House before. (Clintons and Obama didn’t trip their trigger but Trump is the prototype of a mobster)

They found a statute from 1778 that was the first whistle blower statute. which says anyone who knows about any government malfeasance must come forward to report it. Well that would be interesting to see today.

With all the protections possible that Gergen talks about, it presents a new scenario to consider. Congress has taken this whistle blower over a presidential phone call with Ukraine to a new level. They started an impeachment process right away, defining it as a smoking gun. We are at the intersection and the Impeachment light is green.

Theatrics and Drama

Two things you can always count on from Congress are theatrics and drama, especially when the subject matter involves any other branch of government but their own. Just once, I would like to see them on truth serum, or like at an AA meeting, where they have to admit what they have done to get a fix for their power addiction, in open session to the public. Oh, that would be ripe for drama.

So with all this emphasis on the Whistle Blower – and his/her protections – it is now conceivable how a whistle blower can potentially take down a sitting president or even the government. And do it from behind the viel of a curtain, under witness protection, in a secret session. And on second-hand information too. Under oath adds legitimacy.

A whistle blower has a lot of power then. Is it responsible to give them all that power? You know, individuals, like members of congress, can operate with their own motives and agenda. But what are the people supposed to think of such an arrangement?

For years I have wondered where any whistle blowers were under Obama. We didn’t have them. Where were they under Hillary in the State Department? What about in the Justice Department Obama politicized?

Out of that severe vacuum now comes a whistle blower, apparently a CIA employee, to come out and finally must blow the whistle over a phone call Trump had to Ukraine. Seems to me there is a whole lot more going on with this Whistle Blower than a phone call. And a lot more he/she is worried about.

Have we come this far that we can have a whistle blower step in to prevent an investigation? Is that what whistle blowers are supposed to do? So by blowing the whistle they can participate in the massive Deep State cover up that has been going on for years.

Of course that means that we do have this fourth branch of government. The whistle blowers can then collaborate as well with media and congress. Can they shape our policies, government or its actions, even from outside of it, while hiding under anonymity as a Whistle Blower?

Right Ring | Bullright

Rules of Engagement for Politics

Suppose an alien from Mars landed and asked you to describe the rules in our presidential American election process. What would you tell him/her/it? How could you explain it?

First, there is the constitutional process. There are a bunch of regulations and election laws. There are regulations regarding the basic process of “running for president.”

Then there are the default rules of the road, which can change. The latest iteration contains the double standard rules, like ‘what applies to thee does not apply to me’ and so on.

Those rules are distinguished by who you are and what Party you are in. Not everyone lives under the same rules. Some people can ignore the rules while others are harassed by every rule, even as they are made up to suite present circumstances.

A republican candidate or successful president has the strictest rules. You cannot look into an opponent’s record or past experience in government. That is a no-no. Candidates cannot call for investigating an opponent, ex-opponent, or the person who held the job before. Even if there is the off chance a person may be running against you, it is forbidden.

Democrats have a saying: “in this country, we do not investigate our political opponents.” Actually, the accurate translation is we don’t investigate Democrat opponents.

The Democrat candidates are exempt from being scrutinized for their past experiences or record in office. Democrats shall not be investigated. They are exempt from accountability, particularly for their time in office. The past is considered irrelevant to a present race.

Democrats time in office is public service and Republicans’ time is mobster activity.

However, any Democrats running can demand the investigations of Republicans. But it is frowned on to call for investigating other Democrats. In fact, it is taboo for a Democrat to criticize fellow Democrats. But inter-party criticism is encouraged for Republicans.

Republicans shall have no privileges of any kind. But Democrats shall enjoy limitless special privileges Those will be made up as fast as needed. Republicans must adhere to very strict guidelines on everything, including what you can say. If you are a Democrat, you can say or do almost anything and not be held accountable. If you are a Republican you must be held accountable for every possible thing, even for what someone else did.

If you are a Democrat, you are accountable for nothing, zero, But you can claim to be accountable and responsible for everything — if you choose. It really means nothing.

Now along with these rules and particulars, there is a reality of precedent to consider. A Republican is always under the burden of inquisition, for anything at any time. For instance what you did in high school and, for that matter, anything you or your family ever did. (remember those arguments, family disputes or sealed court papers…) Another rule is all records are relevant for Republicans, records can be expunged or sealed for Democrats.

So in real practice, Democrats can open an investigation on a Republican candidate before primaries and keep it going through his term in office. It is called an “insurance policy.” That investigation can use the entire apparatus of federal government and intelligence agencies. It can enlist help from foreign governments, agents of foreign governments, be run through the DNC and coordinate with the Democrat’s campaign. It can use the Department of Justice to conceal and orchestrate the entire inquisition. Such investigation can then be rolled into a Special Counsel investigation to further investigate. A Special Counsel can be enacted by a call from a bureaucrat or official in the government. Congress itself can also take up similar investigations on a Republican.

Naturally, the scenario above would be against all rules and ethics to apply it to Democrat candidates. (that rule was enacted after the pretend Hillary probe of nothingness) Republicans trying to resist these rules or complaining about them is severely frowned on. Basically, a Democrat is exempt from those extraneous rules. Democrats are entitled to any protections or privileges from such investigation(s).

As I explained to my Martian friend, it is nice to know what the rules are anyway.

(This column may be revised later – as rules evolve further.)

Right Ring | Bullright

Biden’s Night Out

Looks like Biden was going out for the prom. So he got himself all spiffed up, after a nude swim in front of secret service, shined up the Benz, then combed his plugs for a take off.

But he forgot to check the air in the tires, which all seem to have slow leaks. He’s about to have a very bad night even before getting to the florist.

It’s not looking good for ol’ Joe, and the clock is ticking. Plus Cinderella has strict orders.

He’s going to have to fake it to make it now. The sendoff wasn’t so golden after all.

PJ Media — By Tyler O’Neil | March 2018

In 2013 and 2014, China embarked on an aggressive air and island campaign to dominate the South China Sea, much to the dismay of Japan and other countries in the region. When Vice President Joe Biden visited the country in 2013, he emphasized trade between the U.S. and China and did not focus on the South China Sea. Secretary of State John Kerry did the same in 2014.

Meanwhile, Biden’s son Hunter and Kerry’s stepson Chris Heinz carried out massive business deals with Chinese officials and the state-owned Bank of China. Worse, Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz even invested in a Chinese nuclear company under FBI investigation.

“During a critical eighteen-month period of diplomatic negotiations between Washington and Beijing, the Biden and Kerry families and friends pocketed major cash from companies connected to the Chinese government,” Peter Schweizer writes in his new book “Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends.”

Schweizer’s book delves into the ways in which “American Princelings” profit at home and abroad from the economic and diplomatic policies of high-ranking U.S. officials. With former Vice President Biden rumored to be considering a 2020 presidential run, the scandals surrounding how his diplomatic efforts enriched his son take on renewed importance. His role in abetting China’s aggression for family gain seems particularly damning.

When Biden became the vice president in 2009, his son Hunter Biden “became a social fixture in Washington,” Schweizer explains. In the summer of 2009, the VP’s son joined forces with Chris Heinz, a wealthy heir to the late Senator John Heinz, whose wife Teresa married Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.). The two formed Rosemont Capital, an alternative investment firm “positioned to strike profitable deals overseas with foreign governments and officials with whom the U.S. government was negotiating.”

Devon Archer, Chris Heinz’s roommate at Yale and star fundraiser for John Kerry’s 2004 presidential run, joined the American Princelings at Rosemont. Federal agents would later arrest Archer in May 2016 for defrauding a Native American tribe in an effort to enrich a branch of Rosemont Capital, Rosemont Seneca Bohai.

The American Princelings set up Rosemont Capital as an alternative investment fund of the Heinz Family Office, and attached several branches to it, including Rosemont Seneca Partners and Rosemont Realty.

When Vice President Biden went to China in December 2013 amid the South China Sea aggression, his son Hunter went with him. Hunter Biden was negotiating a major deal between Rosemont Seneca and the state-owned Bank of China. As the vice president discussed China’s trade with the United States, his son was putting these economic ties into practice, and the U.S. effectively caved in the conflict over the South China Sea.

Ten days after the Bidens visited China, the Bank of China — which is embedded in a complex network involving state ministries, security forces, and the Communist Party, and which provides capital for China’s economic statecraft — created an investment fund with Rosemont Seneca called Bohai Harvest RST (BHR). “In short, the Chinese government was literally funding a business that it co-owned along with the sons of two of America’s most powerful decision makers,” Schweizer explains.

Rosemont Seneca received a benefit no other Western firm had in China — “a private equity cross-border investment fund formed in the Chinese government’s Shanghai Free-Trade Zone.” With this privilege, Rosemont Seneca could take Chinese government funds and invest them in China or outside the country, even in the U.S. …../

MORE: https://pjmedia.com/trending/as-biden-and-kerry-went-soft-on-china-sons-made-nuclear-military-business-deals-with-chinese-govt/

So John Kerry appears to have some questions to answer, too. Funny how the privileged princelings sucked up the cash like vacuums.

Seems like Biden is about to endure some severe vetting. Poor guy never was exposed to it in all those years before; it wasn’t in the program. You know that only happens to the other guys. While he is supposed to be the big player on the team who always gets the girl in the end and everything else.

Joe, Joe, they got a saying where I come from: “you dance all night, someone has to pay the fiddler.” But it’s going to take more than a lot of cash this time, Joe. You might be feeling a headache coming on about now, Joe. And Cinderella doesn’t look like she’s going to make her curfew. What a drag.

In retrospect, it sure looks funny seeing Biden pleading for all that campaign cash now while the princelings lined their pockets real good. It’s a tough ask… and a tough sell.

Right Ring | Bullright

9-11 The Infamy Wears Off

It is that important national day of 9-11, once again, with all that it entangles. I find myself still in a constant state of mourning for all the families and great loss of that day, 18 years ago today — feeling more like it’s been 18 months. The kind of loss so big that it always leaves a lump in my throat.

But now, on this day, I am also in mourning for something else. I mourn the loss of CNN, too. Yes, you heard me right, grief not grievance.

I remember back in the early 90’s when CNN was a fledgling news channel as it covered the first Iraq war, Dessert Storm. I recall C-130 Hercules transport planes flying non-stop overhead 24 hours a day in a perpetual pattern. I was told that’s what they were.

For the up to date information, you could turn to CNN as a source for news. Wolf Blitzer was on location there somewhere reporting what was going on. It was called the first televised war — even if that was a distortion. CNN was one voice in a vacuum demanding real-time information. We needed to know what was happening in a country finding its war and defensive posture. CNN was there. Maybe reports were not complete or up to the second but it is all we had. In fact, before it started we were well aware of circumstances via media reports. No internet to rely on either.

Contrast that with the menu of cable news we have now, with Internet and social media compliments. It’s almost hard to imagine that CNN was so prominent of a news source then. But those days are gone, and so is CNN as a credible news source.

So today I am mourning that loss as well as 9-11. Back on 9-11, 2001, CNN tried to keep up with a slurry of news. They tried, at least temporarily, to provide unbiased coverage. I have to say, by then, Fox did a better job. Cable went commercial free for days in wall-to-wall coverage. We were mostly a unified nation, even if George Bush was the President. (Not Al Gore)

The bad guys were in the deserts and mountains of Afghanistan. A new area we didn’t know that much about. So much to do and say. Before a military response, there were debates in Congress and they lined up supporting force. Only a few outliers.

Well, with all the mourning today, there are a number of things regarding 9-11 that can anger me like almost nothing else. Those are: lack of respecting or accepting the attack for what it was, trivializing the sanctity of the day; drawing unreasonable parallels or equating other acts of violence to it; using that historical event to promote other partisan political agendas; giving short shrift to victims of that day that continue to mount; or depriving those victims of dialogue and justice that still evades them all these years later. Or, basically misusing the memory or sacred observance of the day. (even 18 years after)

But CNN manages to do about all those, on the day it is memorialized in 2019. And they did it as a matter of programming, which reveals planning. I could list endless poof and examples but that is more writing than I care to do now. I shouldn’t have to that is obvious. It is not only CNN but the entire left does the same. It is not nit-picking.

So cable news chose to talk about gun control, the impeachment agenda and normal partisan gotcha politics. There are 364 other days in the year and that is not enough, they have to corrupt this one too, like everything else?

No, they could not even be bothered to respect the memory and events of the day. They must defile the day’s memory and its significant importance. Nothing is sacred.

Congratulations, CNN, because today you earned the “enemy of the people” title anew!

Right Ring | Bullright

Justice Denied

The IG Report on Comey came out. What did we learn? Not much that we didn’t know. It only chronicled most of what was already reported. And DOJ declines to prosecute.

It determined that Comey ‘violated department and FBI policies’.

How are we in a different position than we were before? Comey struts around and we see that nothing has changed. Any wonder people are disgusted?

There are at least several ways for Comey to spin this, while the public gets the middle finger. At least this time it is on AG Barr but what difference does even he make?

So we have eighty pages along with a DOJ statement that it will do nothing about it. Once again, do we even have a justice system in America? The answer is not for some people.

I think the worst part will be Comey’s gloating.

I read between the lines that the IG did what he had to do to assuage the questions. Case dismissed, I guess. The lesson is if you are in the right position, you can do what he did and have no accountability for it. The only speck of justice was him getting fired, But in return for that we got the ballyhooed Mueller Report. Is that a fair trade, is that justice?

Sure this whole thing may dog Comey into the future but aside from that we ended up with a goose egg. Sounds and looks just like Hillary Clinton’s ordeal. So what does violated department and FBI policies really mean? Not much!

Right Ring | Bullright

Give Me A Break

Give me a freaking break is one of my favorite lines I repeat to myself lately. No one hears me. It just flows out of my mouth more frequently than any other phrase. There are hosts of reasons for it.

The main one is outrage, mostly at Democrat talking points or narratives. It seems almost every time you turn on the TV news or read something, there is that reaction in there. Someone is trying to con someone or twists something completely wrong. Show me any subject and I’ll have a “give me a break” moment somewhere about it.

Why is partly the way politics has become. And in part because of how low down the ladder we have gotten, or in many cases how backwards everything now is.

Judging by what I see on Twitter and media, I’d say a lot of people probably think the same thing and feel the same way. I also think most people see what is going on and understand it. They wouldn’t need anyone to explain it to them because they know what this movie is about and where it is going. In short, they are not dummies.

Now the media might think people are dumb, that they can spoon feed people along to believe what they want about issues. Whoa, do they underestimate the knowledge of regular informed people? Maybe at one time, years ago, they could get away with that but not today. I see it in focus groups and in conversations on social media. They’re in no mood to be bullied around on politics either. They know too much and have too much experience to be duped. All that said, those are not everyone.

Now I say this because these are the parameters for my conclusions. Others, like media, have different parameters that lead them to believe people are impressionable and pliable on their central basic opinions, based on information and narratives they selectively curate to give them. The media may be right about some percentage of voters on the Left. But I know that theory does not hold up on the conservative right. Here on the right people have preformed opinions for a reason.

 

Another idea I have given lots of thought to is conspiracy theories in general and people that hold them. I have concluded some people prefer to dabble in them. And we have had a lot of reason these days to give rise to conspiracies. Maybe they’re trendy and cool? The JFK thing, while decades old, is still a viable high water mark.

But for the last several years, there is another big one on the horizon. The moon landing. I might have been surprised at hearing that one many years ago. But it has a following. Of course there is now the 911 conspiracies, too. So there are many of them and they range from environment to government. But I have noticed a trend that for some people, if they carry one conspiracy they likely have several.

Now we saw the media for 2 and a half years promote the Russia Trump collusion conspiracy with little to base it on. And that there was no push back on it, even from some media, was astounding. But these are the same media people who lectured us about anything we said about Obama for the previous eight years that we were crazy. Actually, the truth was much crazier than fiction. Now it turns out some of those conspiracies were not so crazy after all. They have now been validated by the facts.

Suffice it to say that if you traveled off of the central narratives the media was carrying in the Obama years, you were labeled a conspiracy nut. It was their enforcement mechanism to try to coral people on their main narrative — constructed also in tandem with the White House and West Wing. They, the media, didn’t mind doing it either. They were as heavily invested in creating the narrative as the Obama administration was. But anyone who ventured outside that narrative was the enemy, and they usually let you know it, using all the tools of the mainstream media.

You were mocked, ridiculed, ostracized and marginalized, attacked, humiliated, ruined, and robbed of your good reputation and character. In other words, you were destroyed if you were not on their bandwagon of misinformation. To call that a conspiracy theory was, well, Orwellian. It was 1984-ish. To think in terms of questioning Obama or their carefully crafted narrative was sedition and treasonous. It was as if we completely lost the press. And we did, though it was right from the beginning.

I don’t know if conspiracies represent a threat, given the amount of people that buy into them? But the moon one sort of stunned me. It sneaked up over the last 20 years. If it is cool or whatever that still puzzles me. Though now the left has demonstrated the real danger of a conspiracy with the Russia thing. They’ve shown how you can push a narrative whether it is believable or not. And they showed what mainstreaming conspiracy theories looks like.

You know, it is normally those on the margins who buy into a conspiracy. Now I am back to thinking about what the real point of them is. This Russia one was a matter of convenience and extreme importance, cooked up for convenience and served to masses as established fact. (Intelligence agencies like CIA know how to do that) If it is possible to push a fake narrative until it is mainstream, then what about skeptics who don’t believe in it?. Those who require proof or evidence… or doesn’t that even matter anymore?

Can a conspiracy theory be totally false, yet who cares that it is not true? And what would it take to rupture that huge conspiracy? It went on for over 2 and half years and still goes on. We are in a whole new realm. The Moon landing might have been an achievement for conspiracies but we have gone way past the dark side of the moon now.

Maybe the only point that matters is who believes in it and who doesn’t? To say nothing about the scenario of media and government teaming up on a conspiracy theory.

You can now call me conspiratorial but that is where we are at now. Who exactly believes in it? You would have been considered a wacko-bird for saying Obama was not born in America. But if you want to think the President is a Russian agent, then you would be welcomed by mainstream media and elites alike. It might help your career.

Strange how this conspiracy thing really works, isn’t it? In fact, lets go out of our way to avoid all the evidence to the contrary. And let’s go way out to block real facts and truth as it comes out. No need for that! Which one will write history? I think I know.

Right Ring | Bullright

Susan Rice Steps In It

Let me rephrase that: Susan Rice has become a victim of Obama Leftology

(I should define Leftology as the radical politics rampant today, most exemplified by Obama’s anti-American rhetoric.)

A few weeks ago, former National Security Advisor and Ambassador under Obama, Susan Rice, had a rival exchange on Twitter with a Chinese diplomat. It proved revealing.

It showed how the Chinese argue and critique America with the same rhetoric they see in leftsrtream press and media in the US. We have long been saying Leftists only provide fodder to America’s critics and enemies.

He (Diplomat-apologist-defender of China, Lijian Zhao) tried to unload that rhetorical hubris at Susan Rice. She seemed baffled by it, but I don’t know why she would be?

That is how leftists themselves argue. Racist accusations – should we say pleasantries – were exchanged between them. Then Rice dropped the line that ‘he should be sent back’ or recalled to China. What Rice didn’t know is he was not based in DC but in Pakistan.

That doesn’t really matter for the purposes of argument. Rice was stirred. She was trying to talk about humanitarian woes of Musllim Uighurs held in northern China. He rattled off a list of conditions in US, including DC. His tweets have since been deleted.

My guess is she didn’t realize that all this division, escalated under Obama, and constant liberal media, just fed his nasty response on our country. They are only taking the press’s critique and hurling it back at America. She should have been better prepared for that.

Rice shifted, after calling him a racist, to address the Chinese Ambassador: “I expect better of you and your team. Please do the right thing and send him home.”

But it did demonstrate Rice’s abilities and reactionary Leftist rhetoric.
She is out hawking a new book. And as Forbes said regarding social media:

Tangent: Although Twitter, like other Western social media platforms, is banned in China, diplomats use the platform abroad and have amassed some large followings as a result. Zhao, for example, gained over 190,000 followers over the three years he’s had a Twitter account.

See: https://thehill.com/policy/international/453098-susan-rice-chinese-diplomat-a-racist-disgrace
And: https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2019/07/15/ex-national-security-adviser-rice-calls-chinese-diplomat-racist-for-tirade/#4397ecc45dbe

Besides Rice and race, China is a much larger concern for discussion. Certainly much broader and more important than the Uighurs issue. But that’s all Leftinista’s care about.

It spans Hong Kong, the China Sea and Taiwan, as well as all the economic disparities. Though Rice touches none of that, probably as a matter of choice. Obama’s administration didn’t touch the major issues with China in eight years. Why would she start now?

After all, Obama gave us the national policy of Omission (among others). He ignored the biggest and most dangerous threats to America, while placating his apologist base of anti-American zealots — both political and religious.

Instead, he lent his voice to give aid and comfort to enemies of America. That it now comes full circle in Susan Rice’s tweets is ironic. Rice and Obama demonstrated incompetence in government for eight years, now she illustrates it on Twitter just in case we forgot!

Right Ring | Bullright

Memorable Lines

“We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” Those were the days, weren’t they?

“Not Even A Smidgen Of Corruption” in the IRS targeting operation.

No such thing as “rigged elections” in the US. Don’t worry about that.

Or in Obama’s own words: [skip to 2:24 mark]

Keep in mind Obama gave that Rose Garden Denial in mid October, 2016. At which time the FBI, Steele and Fusion GPS had already been hard at work, under the guise of counterintelligence investigation, meddling up to their necks in the election.

At that point they were well into creating their insurance policy. And where National Security Adviser Susan Rice handled unmasking at Obama’s White House.

Monitoring had already been issued on Trump campaign associates, including Flynn and Manafort, Page, Papadopoulos. Page alone had 4 FISA warrants prying into him. Steele was already working on his dossier — paid for by Hillary’s campaign — then hand delivered back to the FBI later, on December, 9. by McCain.

Yes, their “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation was fully under way as Obama gave that sharp, deceptively smirky denial in the Rose Garden. As if no one knew or would know what was going on in the bowels of Obama’s administration. He had to know it all.

Only months before, Hillary had been cleared in Servergate by James Comey. After which those resources immediately shifted to investigate the Trump campaign.

In any event, the no-scandal Obama struck again. But of course now Democrats don’t mind calling it a rigged election. The denial runs deep.

“Betraying those basic American traditions?”…. just soak that in.

Additional Ref: see more at The Hill – 5/23/18

Right Ring | Bullright

See, Say, Pile On The Blame

We’ve now heard Trump blamed for almost everything since he took office, and even for things before he took office like Russia election meddling. To accept some part of it all would be virtually impossible for one man to accomplish. It strains any credulity.

They tried this with Bush and they never did it to Obama. But now they took it to such staggering heights that everything by default is Trump’s fault, going back 8 years.

It makes me wonder what the Left would do without their Scapegoat in Chief? This could be dismissed if it were from the fringes of the Left, but it isn’t. The blame fest has come from lamestream media. It comes from top tiers of the Democrat party and all their candidates, too. Is there a Democrat running who hasn’t blamed Trump for everything?

I am going to leave this right here, though in the hands of our enemies that is a dangerous tool for them to have access to. As if that has not occurred to the Left how it could be used? But they probably think anything bad that comes from their blame campaign can also be blamed on Trump – the more the better. They don’t care about the damage.

Surely shady people in dark places are fascinated by this playing out on a public stage, in this reactional way. And it has been very public. It encourages others, like even the Mayor of London, to chime in. He has his own low approval turmoils but that doesn’t stop him from lashing out in defiance at Trump. For what, when did Trump do anything to him?

No, that is beside the point. It seems to be open season. Get into any trouble or political problems, just blame Trump to score political points. Then use them, save them, collect and trade them with others; blame Trump has become the new currency. Even an international one. It attracts support and is used to raise money, and spent like capital.

About the only thing coming even close to this phenomena is the blame Mitch McConnell campaign. The Left is having a field day tying Mitch’s name to every problem and issue, from Russia to the latest shootings. The left cleverly (I shouldn’t call it clever) attaches cute hashtags to every event using Mitch. Fill in the blank so they can get it trending.

This creates another new phenomena in the social media age for trolls, Leftists, or hashtag architects. Their personal net-value at a given time — politically and socially — is only determined by what is trending on Twitter. These titans of social media are hashtag warriors, radicalized with whatever groups of others they are connected.

Against these blue waves of fascism stands one man, armed with his Twitter account. Instead of president, I’ll call Trump the Pope of Twitter. Not every foe of Trump is worthy of his Twitter arsenal, but when they are singled out they feel the sting of social media themselves. Their fifteen minuets of fame turns into fifteen minutes of flames.

Many of them can’t take the pressure or heat. Some of them have a hard time going back into the hole they came out of after the fact. It is the equalizer. Hashtag that.

Some of those hashtag warriors would accuse Trump of weaponizing Twitter or social media. But no, that is exactly what they’ve done. Trump is only engaging on their terms. They politicize and weaponize every platform they touch. It is the nature of radicals. It is who they are. But they cry when the social media winds are not in their favor.

Right Ring | Bullright