The anti-Trump spin machine is in full swing. It’s difficult to believe that 47% of Americans want him impeached by trusting only one pollster—Fox News, which wrongly predicted his non-election. It’s even more difficult to believe that polls, in general, aren’t being doctored when someone managed to anonymously change the presidential seal on a background screen into a Russian eagle that golfs. These things suggest a concerted effort to undermine the president. But, we already knew about that, didn’t we?
Trump can’t be labeled as the only source of drama in America. The economy is up, but so are spending and debt. Jobs are returning to America while manufacturing flees China as fast as peace is fleeing Hong Kong—which China blames on the US. The UK has a new prime minister who is just as opposed by the outgoing administration as Trump is opposed by Washington’s still outstanding swamp.
The contrived Russianewsgategate fiasco wasn’t a bombshell, it was more of a fizzle and pop, and its biggest explosion may be its backfire. Now that the fizzling and popping are finished popping and fizzling, the investigation investigations are starting up; Comey is the lead person of great interest.
Like bad habits, bad people don’t go away easily. It takes time and effort. Bad people lie just because they know they can’t win any other way. And, it takes having a head in the right place to know when that’s happening.
Washington is all excited because this week Mueller is scheduled to testify, again, about a report he already handed in. If the report had said enough on its own then there would be no need for him to testify, again. Democrats are all excited, but not as excited as Senator Graham, who plans to launch his own investigation investigation. While Washington is distracted with theatrics of Russians and the “fab four”, a much deeper problem is swelling, one which will not escape Trump’s tenure unchanged: social media.
Social media giants are out of control. One current argument on the table is to make Google’s “index” public.
This “index” is Google’s inside stockpile of information that a “Google search” queries. Right now, it’s on lockdown and no one can access it without going through Google. Making it public would allow anyone to use it—if they know the right code, which code monkeys could learn. And, that’s where the trouble is…
Publicizing Google’s search index would be difficult to prove because it would need a new computer language—or API—to access. What’s to keep Google from making that API language too difficult to use? And, what’s to ensure the same idiots in Washington who tried to ram SOPA & PIPA down everyone’s throats—or wondered if Hillary wiped her server “with a cloth”—would know whether Google is making the API too difficult to use?
It could be done. It would need oversight. It should apply to Yahoo, Microsoft, and any other publicly traded tech giant with a search index. And, it would be a game changer.
According to Bloomberg, Google gets over 90% of all search traffic; Microsoft’s Bing at second place gets under 3%. That’s a lot of power to be in just one place.
While the current thinkers have “thunk” up this as the way to regulate Google under laws governing “public utilities”, there’s another important argument to consider. Google’s search index isn’t an index about Google’s own intellectual property—Google’s search index is an index about private information owned by everyone. So, the real question is whether it should be legal to “index the public”, which is essentially what Google does. If it’s legal to “index the public”, then of course the public should have access to that index, duh.
The US could be looking at war on at least three fronts—as if things heating up in the Far East weren’t enough. Two oil tankers were bombed in the Middle East and the Arab Prince blames Iran. The US claims to have evidence. Now, Senator Lindsey Graham is calling for war in Cuba to curb war with Venezuela.
All this international conflict is outshining the Left’s ever weakening calls against Trump. But, the Left doesn’t give up easily.
The summary of Robert Mueller’s argument against Trump is that Trump tried to stop an investigation known to be fake. A group of people started a fake investigation against Trump, they broke the law, along with customary rules and ethical precedent. Mueller thinks Trump tried to stop this lawless, no-rules, fake investigation. Because of that, Trump “interfered with justice”?
Financially, the term for Mueller’s side of the argument is called a “hostile takeover”. That happens when one company wants to buy another company. The buying company just lies and makes false accusations until the other company is weak, then everyone says, “Well, I guess there is no choice except for the one company to get what it wants and buy the other.”
If Trump had a kind of “technical foul” in stopping Mueller’s fraudulent investigation, it would be Mueller, not Trump, who would have obstructed justice for creating the unlawful situation in the first place.
Democrats want the documents, hoping that the people won’t see the deeper matters of justice and who started the baseless fight, rather than honoring the man who ended a fight that never should have started to begin with.
The twelve Senators who voted to continue the mess at the border included the soon-to-be notorious “three amigos”—Paul, Romney, and Rubio. The other Senator from Utah, Mike Lee, also voted with Mitt. Of the other eight, two are up for re-election in 2020—Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Susan Collins of Maine. It will be interesting to see if they get re-elected.
Opposition to Trump only makes him stronger—and the office of the president along with him. Once again, it seems Democrats and “never-Trump” Republicans, like the three amigos, are part of some conspiracy too obvious to recognize. Even the Mueller fiasco helps Trump amass his army of voters.
Congressional Democrats want to make the Mueller situation partially public by making Mueller’s report public—while keeping silent the dark beginnings of the “Russianewsgategate” scandal that started it all. Mueller’s so-called “investigation” is more akin to something between a chicken randomly running circles with its head cut off and a headless horseman—maybe more of a headless horseman riding a headless chicken. The so-called “investigation’s” new nickname could be “the headless chickenman.”
Senator Lindsey “Grahamnesty” sure is coming out of his shell! He was formerly known as the senator who got along. But, ever since the Kavanaugh witch trial in the Senate, something in Senator Graham seems to have snapped—and it isn’t unsnapping. He was most outspoken in blocking the biased release of Mueller’s “headless chickenman” report.
Now, the State of Washington thinks that a State can over-ride the Constitutional requirements for Federal elections. Here we go…
Pelosi and Schumer seem to be playing the Washington Generals, acting as if they are sincere, but not putting forward a formidable and convincing effort. Their resistance is a show and, by contrast to Trump, seems pathetic. It perfectly follows the tactic of “appearing to put up a fight”. The most pathetic part is that they are probably sincere.
By standing side-by-side in their televised address, they appear to show unity between them, but the impression is that of weakness: it takes two legislators in order to respond to the president. More importantly, their rhetoric was weak. By mentioning that they would make a statement after his own address, the president positioned himself as the MC who facilitates discussion from all sides. For Democrats, the dual-address to the nation was a botched failure revealing no impression of the playbook sabotage it employed.
Trump is winning the government shutdown for one reason: he set a record. Senator Graham’s desire to temporarily re-open the government was not a cave-in; it was proof of his desire to attempt cooperation of any kind. But, cooperation from Congressional Democrats doesn’t seem likely since they are vacationing in Puerto Rico during the shutdown.
Trump’s efforts to smooth relations with Russia can be interpreted from two perspectives: The first is from the one half of the masses who are suspicious of anyone who creates jobs without government. Those who don’t understand how to create revenue see big and powerful people talking and—for that reason alone—presume themselves to be victims of some malevolent plot that may not even exist. The second perspective from which we may interpret the White House’s policy with Russia is from the standpoint of the approaching conflict with China. The last thing the American people should want is Russia helping China takeover the Western Pacific. Thanks to Trump, that is unlikely. But, it’s difficult to consider the Pacific factor for the narrow-thinking breed of voters whose primary political ambition is to vote themselves money from the Treasury.
In the words of Tyrion Lannister, “Making honest feelings do dishonest work is one of her many gifts.” Something is very wrong about the testimony against SCOTUS nominee Judge Kavanaugh. But, that doesn’t matter. The odd smiles and giggles from both the witness and her attorney, the “crying” voice without shedding one single tear, many frequent flights from someone afraid to fly when it came time to testify in a matter she wanted investigated, refusing to be interviewed in her home state while demanding an investigation, heavy use of “attorney-client privilege” from an accuser who could prove her case better by not exercising that privilege on key questions whose answers could support her case, a lie detector test administered between flights after a funeral paid for by no one knows who—none of that matters.
For the attorney blocking a question about whether Dr. Ford was informed that she could be questioned per her request, in her own state, he should be subpoenaed or Dr. Ford, her attorney, and her allegations should be dismissed—since Democrats think unusually high standards are so vital. Even Republican Senator Lindsey “Gramnesty”, who voted for Obama’s justices, adamantly defends Kavanaugh, arguing that, as a former judge himself, not so much as a warrant could be issued with such little information Dr. Ford provided at this suspiciously and conveniently late hour.
When Kavanaugh admitted to drinking in high school, he lowered his odds of Republican favor more than any accusation could. If that doesn’t take his name out, nothing will. Democrats don’t oppose him because they have a shred of belief in the witness against him, but because they know he would vote as a supreme court justice in agreement with the Declaration of Independence—that life is an unalienable human right—because they don’t want any judge who upholds the nation’s founding documents. If Democrats wanted credibility for their emotional appeal in grandstanding, they would vow before the nation to approve the next pro-Life judge appointed before the November election. But, that is just what they hope to prevent.
Even if true, these accusations shouldn’t matter. The “boys will be boys” defense is false and no one credible is making that argument, though Democrats rebut the wind. Kavanaugh has become a better person and done good and honest things since high school, so it seems anyway. He knows how to grow up. Bill Clinton doesn’t. That’s what matters. But, none of what matters seems to matter to Democrats. Where was Senator Feinstein during the Clinton years?
There could be some shred of truth to the allegations, but the manner and circumstances in which it has been presented has many predictable and craftable conveniences that just so happen to line up with Democrat party politics. If one single Democratic senator cared about these harassment charges, that senator would have voted to impeach Clinton. By Democrat standards—politician and voter alike—Kavanaugh almost qualifies as enough of a “bad boy” for the presidency.
Regardless of the senate committee’s decision, Republican voters will be furious. This could trigger a cascade turnout in November that tips the Republican favor even more than speculated thus far.
