Wake up America, you are missing a presidency

Imagine when a president says I hope he, a special counsel, is “going to be fair.” Well, something odd about that. This was Trump’s message in his latest NYT interview.

When a president has to hope that someone who is uprooting your current presidency and legitimacy in the office will be fair, we are in strange times. Expectations for fairness?

You get elected and then half the country tries to either oust you — drive you out in one way or another — or ruin your entire presidency and stop it from the first day. It’s a real shame which should disgust every person in the county.

Okay, if they oppose his policies or agenda that is one thing. But when it is an orchestrated coup and a shadow government forms, what place are we in? Trump was right to hope it is over soon that it is bad for the country. It certainly isn’t good in any way. When you just have to hope, it is more a matter of survival. Who will pay the tab?

Then the powers that be immediately concentrate on the next election as they destroy the here and now. Do you get the irony of that? They don’t care about the the present but only about the next election. So now they ignore the current presidency so they can elevate the mid-term congressional ones. Will they care about those results?

Right Ring | Bullright

Advertisements

Trump a go-go

Whether you like Trump or not, there are a few things that are hard to deny about him. I just wish the other candidates could learn and use some of the same stuff Trump uses. I don’t have a lot of confidence in that happening but it would be a good place to start.

Trump is not politically correct, and in a good way. They could all take a page from that book. He is not beholden to special interests. Well, few might be able to finance their own election but they could start with not pandering to the politically correct crowd. America has some respect for not getting bogged down. Run like the anti-politician or insurgent.

But then there is the final point or lesson from Trump. One needs to play to win. That seems like a moot point, but is it? After John McCain, and after Mitt Romney. We certainly know the Clintons, and Hillary particularly, play to win. Haven’t we come a long way to have to remind the candidate to play to win? It seems funny to have to say it.

Sure Trump has an ego, so what? Hillary doesn’t? It is not enough to run to place. No, I am not asking the candidates to turn themselves into a bombastic Lance Armstrong hybrid. But can’t they really want to win and defeat the opponent?

Not like we don’t have enough ammunition to use against Hillary, or Democrats for that matter. Why not run like you mean it? If they don’t believe in themselves, how is the rest of the country going to get behind them? It’s fundraising, cha ching.

The arguments are: ‘let’s not turn this into a sideshow.’ You mean it isn’t already? After Obama disgraced the office and after our pols let all this happen under their watch. ‘Let’s be serious and smart about this election.’ Let’s be smart enough to know what doesn’t work. And stop listening to Dems in choosing a candidate.

‘You cannot go out and offend people.’ No, that is not the objective. But this is the presidency, and under the circumstances we are strapped in. Face it, you are going to offend some people. Get over it. Some people are naturally offended… particularly the establishment type RNC or DNC and their kingmakers. Who among us is not offended by everything hoisted on us in the last 6-8 years, especially by Obama? The truth can be offensive.

RightRing | Bullright

Flash from Nixon’s past

From the Articles of Impeachment for Nixon:

The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan included one or more of the following:

  1. making false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
  2. withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
  3.   approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counselling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;
  4.  interfering or endeavouring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees;
  5. approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payment of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry and other illegal activities;
  6. endeavouring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States;
  7. disseminating information received from officers of the Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States, for the purpose of aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid criminal liability;
  8. making or causing to be made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation had been conducted with respect to allegations of misconduct on the part of personnel of the executive branch of the United States and personnel of the Committee for the Re-election of the President, and that there was no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct: or
  9. endeavouring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favoured treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.

In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

My thought of the day.

Lance Armstrong is to cycling what Obama is to the presidency.

That’s my thought of the day.

Oh what about that Manti Te’o problem? Fictional woman… Obama has “composites” and the media says what’s the big deal — “SOOO WHAT?” But then who could separate fact from fiction with Obama; who would dare try?

And why is it when anyone criticizes Obama, libs number one response is “Look, the country is so polarized”? So is it the country’s fault that Obama acts the way he does, or that he has the dismal record he has? That’s like blaming the symptoms for the disease.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Update:Dems found a new target of opportunity. Tom Selleck, making him the spokesperson of the NRA and demanding he condemn or make statements. Well, the old Alinsky tactics again.

Now they’ll want to blackball him for his ties to the right and NRA. They want him to condemn the use of Obama’s children in their ad.

‘We question your humanity’, Tom Selleck drafting him into their gun-control anti-NRA mantra.

So the hypocritical Obama campaign is at it again. Obama stood there on national TV using kids as his backdrop, having them read letters to himself. “Very touching, and moving”.

But when the NRA mentions the security of Barry’s kids versus the security of other kids in school, “Off Sides! Where’s your humanity. Outrageous!” And that they can spin on a dime within hours is amazing. NRA must have touched a nerve. Maybe NRA’s problem is they didn’t have enough emotion in their ad?

See video (best @ about 8 min)