|
Sunday, February 2, 2020
Mike Bloomberg Offers ’60 Million’ Latinos: $15 Per Hour Plus Mass Migration
Who will we vote for in a post-Trump America? (If Democrats ever get into Power once again, they will surly cause The Death of America as a free nation. A nation at War within its self leading to many deaths and Civil War)
Exclusive: Erik Rush isn't optimistic the swamp won't return to White House in the future
By Erik Rush Published January 29, 2020 at 7:25pm
In my column four weeks ago, I admonished the reader to take into account the recent deportment of liberal Democrats and the deteriorating political climate over the last 12 years and then consider what things might look like in a post-Trump America, whether President Donald Trump leaves office in 2021 or 2025.
It's very easy to presume that the Senate impeachment trial currently in progress against the president will result in an acquittal and that he will go on to accomplish fabulous things. While this may indeed be the case, anyone who plans to go on living past 2025 or who cares for the welfare of their descendants probably ought to be thinking a little further down the line.
For my part, I don't see how any informed person who is not a firebreathing leftist could consider voting for a Democrat ever again after having witnessed the behavior of liberal Democrats at large and Democrat lawmakers in particular over the last several years. Given history and the rhetoric of leftists, whether speaking for Congress or antifa, it has become quite clear that their intended destination for this nation is a dystopia to rival anything we've seen in literature or films.
Regarding the last paragraph, there are two catches: One is that in light of the left having completely co-opted the press and entertainment media, there are a lot of non-ideological voters who aren't very well-informed. Two is that many conservatives and libertarians are so cowed by leftists' accusatory rhetoric and invective that they aren't even willing to meet harsh language with harsh language, lest they "validate" the left's characterization of those on the right.
This not only projects weakness, but effectively places our side in a position of weakness, because it causes the gravity of our situation to escape millions of our citizens.
TRENDING: 'Dog the Bounty Hunter' proposes to son's reported ex-girlfriend 7 months after wife Beth's death
To put this all into perspective – and I realize some of this will be preaching to the choir – all of the 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls support some form of the communistic Green New Deal, which would be the equivalent of putting a large caliber revolver to the head of our economy and pulling the trigger. They all support little or no enforcement of our immigration laws, and are all willing to get behind every twisted policy the sexual deviance lobby lobs over the transom.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has said that he doesn't believe Christians are fit to hold public office, but he supports the subversion and anti-Semitism of Islamist lawmakers like Reps. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.
I could go on, of course, and these are just representations of those leftists who are directly involved in the political process. The establishment press has become nothing more than a vehicle for socialist ascendancy, shamelessly parroting the furthest-left talking points 24 hours a day.
Last weekend, CNN's resident homosexual black hack Don Lemon hosted a panel that mercilessly excoriated the president and his supporters. It wasn't so much that Lemon and his two guests engaged in such action that raised eyebrows, but the fact that they did so in completely classless fashion, cracking tasteless, lowbrow jokes and tittering like little schoolgirls throughout.
This is what has come to represent journalism in America, and it is truly heartbreaking.
To address the social engineering side of this phenomenon: Hollywood celebrities have never been more vocal – or venomous – than at this point in time, and I think that Donald Trump's presence in the White House has only given them an excuse to be more vocal and venomous. Movies and television have never been more blatantly left-leaning and morally ambivalent. Pretty much anything that is produced for children, pre-teens and teens is straight-up indoctrination into LGBTQ sensibilities, and in the prime-time TV world, we're clearly in desperate need of regime change.
The hatred of the left is almost palpable, and anyone who believes that this hatred is reserved for Donald Trump alone is kidding themselves. While those left-of-center accuse the opposition of being bigots and fascists, the surrogates of a wildly-popular leftist presidential candidate openly advocate for putting members of the opposition into reeducation camps.
And then there are the Republicans.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record (for those who remember what records are), the majority of GOP lawmakers in Washington either are swamp creatures, or they're aligned with them. We can't look at the abominable deportment of Democratic lawmakers during the House impeachment process, who are now scrambling to gain considerations agreeable to them for the Senate trial, and presume they are the only villains. While there's nothing currently in the mix that would bring this about, rest assured that inquiries into Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's business dealings would terrify the senator every bit as much as the prospect of bringing Hunter Biden's business dealings to light terrifies his father, former Vice President Joe Biden.
As the Senate impeachment trial grew closer, we began to see opinion pieces that scrutinized certain GOP senators with a jaded eye. Why? Because a lot of us know they can't be trusted. The efforts of those using the trial to maneuver themselves into positions of greater power on the Hill have been transparent as well as craven and disgusting.
The bottom line is that the power of lawmakers both Republican and Democrat, as well as their future lofty ambitions came under direct threat when Donald Trump came into office. They hate him because he's a political outsider, but they fear him because in 2016 he ran on politically disenfranchising them.
Thus, they hate Trump's supporters because they represent a far bigger threat to them than he does.
So in light of the above, the question becomes not one of how liberty-loving Americans will fend off the next far-left Democrat who has a decent shot at the presidency in a post-Trump America, but whether there will be anyone for them to vote for at all.
Rand Paul: The only people here making money off politics are John Bolton and the Bidens (Democrats cover there Own. Only until they are no longer needed)
Rand Paul: The only people here making money off politics are John Bolton and the Bidens (Democrats cover there Own. Only until they are no longer needed)
By C. Douglas Golden, The Western Journal Published January 29, 2020 at 3:23pm
Sen. Rand Paul is not happy about impeachment, particularly when it comes to rhetoric involving who's making money off of access to power.
The libertarian-leaning Republican from Kentucky appeared Tuesday on Fox News, the same day that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer held a news conference in which he accused both Donald Trump and his children of making money off of the presidency.
The accusations had to do with former National Security Advisor John Bolton'supcoming tell-all in which he reportedly claims he was concerned about the president granting favors to leaders in China and Turkey, countries not known for their dedication to democracy.
The book isn't out yet and the accusations, while serious, still seem a bit more like a promotional campaign than something the Democrats ought to be basing their hopes on.
Schumer was willing to extrapolate much further, however, speculating that the president and his family had used the deals to profit from the office.
TRENDING: 'Dog the Bounty Hunter' proposes to son's reported ex-girlfriend 7 months after wife Beth's death
"Now, just look at the other New York Times report last night about Ambassador Bolton's book," Schumer said at the news conference. "Several members of the administration had concerns about the president's dealings with autocrats."
As Fox News reported, Bolton's new book "claims the former adviser wrote that the president told him in August that he wanted to continue to freeze almost $400 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats, including the Biden family."
"However, the Department of Justice said in a statement Monday night that the Times report 'grossly' mischaracterized the exchange."
On one hand, nobody expected Schumer to buy the DOJ's claim. On the other hand, nobody expected him to insinuate the president and his family were somehow making money off of despots.
"Did the president have financial interests at stake when he was talking to [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan or ... [Chinese President] Xi [Jinping] and others?" Schumer said.
"Maybe his kids had some economic interest at stake. And, did it impact our nation's foreign policy with those countries?" he added. "Those questions are not the subject of the president's impeachment trial, but this report should be a warning sign to any Republican."
Given the strangeness of certain aspects of the statement, it was difficult to tell what one was to infer about Schumer's remarks.
If the line about Trump's kids was partially sarcasm designed to minimize Hunter Biden's Burisma connections, it fell flat with the same kind of leaden thud that Adam Schiff's "parody" version of President Trump's phone call with the Ukrainian president did.
If it wasn't sarcasm, this is indeed a curious charge, given the fact that no one has yet accused Trump or his children of doing this.
That makes this seem a bit less like spitballing and a bit more like defamation of character.
Whatever the case, Paul has a slightly more plausible theory of who's making money off of politics, at least in this situation: Bolton and the Bidens:
“You know, I’m offended and shocked that Schumer would be so scurrilous as to accuse the president and his children of making money illegally off of politics when the only people we know who have actually made money off this have been Hunter Biden and Joe Biden,” a visibly irritated Paul said on "America's Newsroom."
“So Hunter Biden makes a million dollars a year, that’s documented, but Schumer simply creates and makes up and says, ‘Oh, maybe the president’s kids are making money,’" he continued.
This is indeed an interesting point inasmuch as Hunter Biden would be nigh unemployable if he didn't share a last name with one of the most powerful individuals in American politics.
It's not just Ukrainian natural gas concerns that have curiously offered Hunter Biden employment despite the fact his qualifications were dubious at best. In fact, plenty of his jobs seemed curiously tied to interests close to Joe Biden's career.
I'm not writing a non-fiction novella here so I can't possibly include every single instance of suspicious synchronicity between Hunter Biden's employment history and Joe Biden's legislative interests, but consider the fact that Hunter was on the payrollof credit card giant MBNA at the same time Joe Biden, in his role as a Democratic senator from Delaware, was aggressively promoting legislation which would make it more difficult to discharge credit card debt in bankruptcy.
(In fact, Joe Biden's fealty to the Delaware-based banking titan was so notorious he was derisively known for many years as "the senator from MBNA," meaning Hunter could perhaps have been considered a legislative assistant.)
Another person making money from politics, according to Paul, is Trump's former national security advisor.
"Look, a month ago, he didn't want to testify in the House. Why? Maybe his book wasn't finished. Now his book is finished. He wants to testify," he said.
"John Bolton is making money as we speak. He's probably already gotten a several million dollar advance for this book. He’s making money by testifying against the president," Paul said.
"The only people we know that have actually made money: Hunter Biden and now John Bolton. And, they're not objective. John Bolton's not objective in any way now that he's been cashing million-dollar checks. To have Schumer come up and say out of the blue, ‘Maybe the president’s kids are making money,’ with no evidence at all, that’s defamation and they ought to sue him," Paul added.
“There's nothing in the record about the president’s kids," the Kentucky Republican said.
“So Schumer just has created this whole thing out of whole cloth and said, ‘Oh, well why don’t we go after the president’s kids? We don’t know yet whether or not the president’s dealings with the Chinese president have something to do with the Trumps making money.’ He just made it up. Completely made it up! That is defamation of character, and he ought to go to court and be sued for it.”
There's zero chance of that happening -- although, quite frankly, if Trump decided to go with that strategy, I think we might finally have some evidence he used his office to get some money.
Instead of getting it from Xi or Erdogan, however, he'd be getting it from Chuck Schumer.
Hunter Biden and Burisma might not be the most egregious example of corruption in Ukraine, but give any Democrat a polygraph and ask them a) whether they thought Hunter Biden had any qualifications to serve on the board of Burisma and b) whether Joe Biden had a clear conflict of interest in calling for the firing of a Ukrainian prosecutor who once investigated Burisma, however corrupt said prosecutor may be, and you'd either have a demonstrably lying Democrat or a demonstrably faulty polygraph machine.
As for John Bolton, there are plenty of conservatives who have held him in high respect, including this writer.
He's had an admirable career.
He also left the Trump administration under the saltiest of circumstances and is currently promoting an inside-the-Beltway tell-all with a very felicitous release date.
As these tell-alls go, the most salacious allegations are always leaked in the vaguest of terms to the publications most inclined to make the biggest deal out of them.
Are the accusations inaccurate or exaggerated? Nobody can be sure, but they're certainly making John Bolton money.
Considering cui bono, one might be well advised to engage in a bit of caveat lector.
But that's the great thing about Schumer's remarks.
Is there any evidence Hunter Biden benefited financially from his surname?
Of course!
Is there any evidence John Bolton is benefiting from the controversy surrounding his book? ¡Por supuesto!
Is there any evidence the Trump family is benefiting from politics.
Um, nope.
Guess which one of these Schumer decided to accuse of abusing their office to make money?
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To The New Under Ground Church
Posts
All Comments